Southern Illyrians & Mycenean Greeks on a PCA plot

[mount123]

One E-V13 was found in Neolithic Dalmatia and Daunians are clearly shifted towards Tuscans.

Two Daunian samples as per example:


Distance to: ITA_Daunian:SGR002
0.04822567 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.04977726 ITA_Daunian:ORD009
0.04986320 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ004
0.05235255 ITA_Etruscan_PoggioRenzoRZ001
0.05281908 CHE_IA:SX18
0.05351022 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN001
0.05459409 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN013
0.05501516 HUN_LBA:I25504
0.05582612 SVN_EIA:I5692
0.05653730 ITA_Etruscan_Chiostraccio:UDC_P
0.05683961 SVN_EIA:I23978
0.05722009 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ006
0.05730353 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ008
0.05735746 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.05747687 Bell_Beaker_ITA:I1979
0.05771377 SRB_BA_Maros:I23209
0.05786989 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I25510
0.05805128 ITA_Villanovan:RMPR1015
0.05813587 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18531
0.05831200 ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.05840398 ITA_Etruscan_Magliano:MAG001
0.05856106 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN009
0.05857096 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK20
0.05883529 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ013
0.05891547 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I25512


Distance to: ITA_Daunian:ORD009
0.02981895 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:I23208
0.03083687 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.03313425 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.03375870 HRV_EIA:I26742
0.03378740 ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.03450379 HRV_MBA:I4331
0.03479787 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o:I4998
0.03606988 HRV_Pop_CAOP39
0.03617607 SRB_BA_Maros:I23209
0.03618780 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ43
0.03626469 HUN_IA_Syrmian_SremGroup:I18259
0.03647183 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN009
0.03711918 Bell_Beaker_CZE_lateRU001.A0101
0.03823249 SVK_IA_Vekerzug:I11721
0.03842457 ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR33
0.03856108 SVN_EIA:I5692
0.03857368 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK13
0.03893338 HRV_LIA_La_Tene:I26735
0.03899771 ITA_Tarquinia_EMA:TAQ022
0.03916572 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18529
0.03918999 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK20
0.03976882 HRV_EIA:I24882
0.03991316 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN013
0.03992100 ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR55
0.04017425 HUN_BA:I7043

 

[Illyria]

That's understandable, his tone sucks sometimes lol

So you're saying the east med shift in modern Albanians Greeks and Italians is from the Roman period and not from antiquity? Maybe some of it is from ancient times as well, early Greece was EEF heavy so I would imagine the Balkan lands just north of them would have been EEF heavy, until the arrival of Northern-shifted J2b2 and E-V13 into the southern Balkans at about the LBA? Bronze Age collapse comes to mind. Migrations from the north destroying Mycenaean cities in Greece, and mixing with the locals. Not arguing, just wondering if that's true, or if the data points against that/ or if that can't be answered yet..

Thanks for mentioning those papers, didn't know about some of them.

 

[ihype02]

Croats are overwhelmingly Slavic in auDNA so your non sense is very much off. The E1b-V13 clades in Croats pretty much show a clear pattern: most of them were picked up by Slavs on their way to the Balkans mainly in Central-East Europe as in the Panonnian Plain, Dacia proper, much of it is Scythian, Central Balkan or Thracian derived.

Illyrians were IE not neolithic so putting a "E1b neolithic" sample in relation with IE Illyrians is ridiculous.

E1b-V13 has a very Eastern-/Central pathway when it comes to the Balkans. E1b-V13 is absent in IA Illyrians if there will be found any in the future than it will most likely be Scythian or (West-)Thracian derived. The Hungarian paper showed some of the E1b-V13 Avars had Illyrian mtDNA so there was definitely mixing.

Last but not least: You are not Illyrian not by paternal nor by maternal lines and most likely also not by auDNA. Deal with it and cope somewhere else.

You are talking nonsense. Nowhere did I imply Croats are mostly Illyrians, I said most of their Paleo-Ballkanic ancestry (which is around 20%-30%) comes from a HRV_IA source mixed with some BGR_IA elements. Read it again.

The Slavic ancestry of Croats is around 65% (+-5%) from a Polish-like source.

If E-V13 in Slavs is mostly of Slavic migration that it means that Croatia had 80% replacement due to Slavic migration.

As for E-V13, you do release that it outweighs J2b in Albanians? And in Tosks it's not even close, 25% vs 8%.

So if what you are saying it's true about E-V13 that means most of our ancestry is not Illyrian.

 

[Illyria]

I find it rather intriguing, that I am modeled as mostly Minoan, about a quarter Steppe, and have a haplogroup that is found in the Balkans during the bronze age. Frankly, I think I look similar to a pre-Slavic Balkanite/Greek.

I've always seen "myself" in the faces of Italians and Greeks, and thought we all looked similar with slight differences. Even Bulgarians and Montenegrins to an extent. Autosomally, Albanians are practically in between North Italians and Mainland Greeks, with a slight NE pull, in-line with our phenotypical similarities

 

[mount123]

You are talking nonsense. Nowhere did I imply Croats are mostly Illyrians, I said most of their Paleo-Ballkanic ancestry (which is around 20%-30%) comes from a HRV_IA source mixed with some BGR_IA elements. Read it again.

The Slavic ancestry of Croats is around 65% (+-5%) from a Polish-like source.

If E-V13 in Slavs is mostly of Slavic migration that it means that Croatia had 80% replacement due to Slavic migration.

As for E-V13, you do release that it outweighs J2b in Albanians? And in Tosks it's not even close, 25% vs 8%.

So if what you are saying it's true about E-V13 that means most of our ancestry is not Illyrian.

You refuse the certainty of scientific papers because it is not in line with your pseudoscientific nationalistic propaganda. That is your problem not mine.

Croats being 30% IA Illyrian?

Ever wondered why J2b-L283 peaks in Northern Albania and Kosovo? Ever wondered why the Illyrian auDNA component is bigger in us whilst almost neglible in mainstream Albanians?

Yes. Most are not Illyrian including you. Deal with it.

 

[ihype02]

You refuse the certainty of scientific papers because it is not in line with your pseudoscientific nationalistic propaganda. That is your problem not mine.

Croats being 30% IA Illyrian?

Ever wondered why J2b-L283 peaks in Northern Albania and Kosovo? Ever wondered why the Illyrian auDNA component is bigger in us whilst almost neglible in mainstream Albanians?

Yes. Most are not Illyrian including you. Deal with it.

Croats can be modelled as 20-30% HRV_IA+BGR_IA using a pure Polish-like source. If E-V13 is mostly of Slavic then their Illyrians ancestry is way lower than that.

E-V13 outweighs J2b-L283 in Kosovo Albanians and other Ghegs too expect for Malsors too so what does that mean to you? Most of our Paleo-Balkanic ancestry is not Illyrian?

 

[torzio]

Two Daunian samples as per example:


Distance to: ITA_Daunian:SGR002
0.04822567 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.04977726 ITA_Daunian:ORD009
0.04986320 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ004
0.05235255 ITA_Etruscan_PoggioRenzoRZ001
0.05281908 CHE_IA:SX18
0.05351022 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN001
0.05459409 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN013
0.05501516 HUN_LBA:I25504
0.05582612 SVN_EIA:I5692
0.05653730 ITA_Etruscan_Chiostraccio:UDC_P
0.05683961 SVN_EIA:I23978
0.05722009 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ006
0.05730353 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ008
0.05735746 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.05747687 Bell_Beaker_ITA:I1979
0.05771377 SRB_BA_Maros:I23209
0.05786989 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I25510
0.05805128 ITA_Villanovan:RMPR1015
0.05813587 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18531
0.05831200 ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.05840398 ITA_Etruscan_Magliano:MAG001
0.05856106 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN009
0.05857096 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK20
0.05883529 ITA_Etruscan_Tarquinia:TAQ013
0.05891547 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I25512


Distance to: ITA_Daunian:ORD009
0.02981895 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:I23208
0.03083687 HRV_MBA:I4332
0.03313425 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.03375870 HRV_EIA:I26742
0.03378740 ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.03450379 HRV_MBA:I4331
0.03479787 HUN_IA_La_Tene_o:I4998
0.03606988 HRV_Pop_CAOP39
0.03617607 SRB_BA_Maros:I23209
0.03618780 HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ43
0.03626469 HUN_IA_Syrmian_SremGroup:I18259
0.03647183 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN009
0.03711918 Bell_Beaker_CZE_lateRU001.A0101
0.03823249 SVK_IA_Vekerzug:I11721
0.03842457 ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR33
0.03856108 SVN_EIA:I5692
0.03857368 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK13
0.03893338 HRV_LIA_La_Tene:I26735
0.03899771 ITA_Tarquinia_EMA:TAQ022
0.03916572 HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18529
0.03918999 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:MOK20
0.03976882 HRV_EIA:I24882
0.03991316 ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN013
0.03992100 ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR55
0.04017425 HUN_BA:I7043

as expected......Daunians and Dalmatians are very similar

 

[Ralphie Boy]

That's understandable, his tone sucks sometimes lol

So you're saying the east med shift in modern Albanians Greeks and Italians is from the Roman period and not from antiquity? Maybe some of it is from ancient times as well, early Greece was EEF heavy so I would imagine the Balkan lands just north of them would have been EEF heavy, until the arrival of Northern-shifted J2b2 and E-V13 into the southern Balkans at about the LBA? Bronze Age collapse comes to mind. Migrations from the north destroying Mycenaean cities in Greece, and mixing with the locals. Not arguing, just wondering if that's true, or if the data points against that/ or if that can't be answered yet..

Thanks for mentioning those papers, didn't know about some of them.

According to Eurogenes the unpublished heterogenous Classical Greek samples are partially Cyprus/Anatolia-like. The unpublished Campania ancient Greek migrants from Euboea homeland were reportedly Aegean/east Mediterranean-like. The ancestry seems to have been present at least since the Archaic or Classical era.

It’s good also that we have a first look into medieval impact of the Slavic migrations in the Balkans, with the Roman Balkans paper showing new ancestry coming from the northeast and mixing with, but not replacing, the indigenous people. In that study, Greek Empuries was a better fit to model modern mainland Greeks than the Balkan IA used to model other Balkan populations, and Roman Greek was a better fit for the Aegean islands than Empuries.

 

[Jovialis]

According to Eurogenes the unpublished heterogenous Classical Greek samples are partially Cyprus/Anatolia-like. The unpublished Campania ancient Greek migrants from Euboea homeland were reportedly Aegean/east Mediterranean-like. The ancestry seems to have been present at least since the Archaic or Classical era.

It’s good also that we have a first look into medieval impact of the Slavic migrations in the Balkans, with the Roman Balkans paper showing new ancestry coming from the northeast and mixing with, but not replacing, the indigenous people. In that study, Greek Empuries was a better fit to model modern mainland Greeks than the Balkan IA used to model other Balkan populations, and Roman Greek was a better fit for the Aegean islands than Empuries.

There is certainly something Anatolia_BA-like about Aegean Islanders, and there is certainly something Aegean Islander about pretty much all of the Balkans (they all seem to get at least some Anatolia_BA. The Roman_Greek sample was Levantine influenced, this is evident with the small Iberomaurusian they have. However, I don't think the Levantine was that substantive, considering they only get a very small amount of Iberomaurusian.

 

[mount123]

E-V13 outweighs J2b-L283 in Kosovo Albanians and other Ghegs too expect for Malsors too so what does that mean to you? Most of our Paleo-Balkanic ancestry is not Illyrian?

This is my last reply to your non sense and misinformation spread: paternal, maternal and auDNA vary A LOT according to what region we are talking about.

As per Rrenjet some J2b-L283 heavy regions: Malesia 42.6 %, Prishtina Valley 29.3%, Malesia e Gjakoves 25% etc.
Strong variations in regions apply also to Illyrian mtDNA. Same applies to Illyrian auDNA.

The MBA to IA Western Balkans show a clear pattern.

No one cares what a science refuser like you wants to fabricate. You nationalists can keep dreaming about your "Mycenean like" Southern Illyrians as much as you want but that is far from reality.

 

[ihype02]

This is my last reply to your non sense and misinformation spread: paternal, maternal and auDNA vary A LOT according to what region we are talking about.

As per Rrenjet some J2b-L283 heavy regions: Malesia 42.6 %, Prishtina Valley 29.3%, Malesia e Gjakoves 25% etc.
Strong variations in regions apply also to Illyrian mtDNA. Same applies to Illyrian auDNA.

The MBA to IA Western Balkans show a clear pattern.

No one cares what a science refuser like you wants to fabricate. You nationalists can keep dreaming about your "Mycenean like" Southern Illyrians as much as you want but that is far from reality.

I said E-V13 outweighs J2b in Kosovo Albanians and if E-V13 is entirely Daco-Thracian (according to you) then the Daco-Thracian ancestry outweighs the Illyrian ancestry. Your data does not answer my question.


Why are you screaming like a sociopath? First you misunderstood me saying that Croats are mostly Illyrian and started boasting about those REAL scientific papers. You know nothing how more southern and Eastern Illyrians were like genetically.z
My belief is that Illyrians of Montenegro were intermediate between HRV_IA and Bulgaria IA.

 

[Archetype0ne]

That's understandable, his tone sucks sometimes lol

So you're saying the east med shift in modern Albanians Greeks and Italians is from the Roman period and not from antiquity? Maybe some of it is from ancient times as well, early Greece was EEF heavy so I would imagine the Balkan lands just north of them would have been EEF heavy, until the arrival of Northern-shifted J2b2 and E-V13 into the southern Balkans at about the LBA? Bronze Age collapse comes to mind. Migrations from the north destroying Mycenaean cities in Greece, and mixing with the locals. Not arguing, just wondering if that's true, or if the data points against that/ or if that can't be answered yet..

Thanks for mentioning those papers, didn't know about some of them.

The thing is no one is quite sure. We have few Minoan Samples, a few Myceneans samples, two Logkas samples, couple Bulgaria BA, one Bulgarian IA, and pretty much nothing else from the related Southern Balkans regions. There is almost more ancient peoples in the region than sample we have to show for them.

This is why the upcoming Lazaridis paper might be the final word on the topic (not that it wont be contested on fora as usual, but Lazaridis usually does things a la carte). Also the (I think it was a Max Plank paper) with a lot of Bulgarian samples but also rumored to have more samples from the region. I am not entirely sure where the Albanian samples will be published, there is a possibility the North and South Albanian samples will be part of different publications. Then I heard rumors about a bunch of other Balkans samples, some 80+ more from Croatia, a dozen or so from Serbia, and a couple from Montenegro and Bosnia, not sure which paper they will be part of.

When we have all these samples I have a feeling a lot of questions will be answered. I just pray that unlike the Daunian paper the samples are not like 10% coverage, and we can actually get good data from them.

 

[Jovialis]

The thing is no one is quite sure. We have few Minoan Samples, a few Myceneans samples, two Logkas samples, couple Bulgaria BA, one Bulgarian IA, and pretty much nothing else from the related Southern Balkans regions. There is almost more ancient peoples in the region than sample we have to show for them.
This is why the upcoming Lazaridis paper might be the final word on the topic (not that it wont be contested on fora as usual, but Lazaridis usually does things a la carte). Also the (I think it was a Max Plank paper) with a lot of Bulgarian samples but also rumored to have more samples from the region. I am not entirely sure where the Albanian samples will be published, there is a possibility the North and South Albanian samples will be part of different publications. Then I heard rumors about a bunch of other Balkans samples, some 80+ more from Croatia, a dozen or so from Serbia, and a couple from Montenegro and Bosnia, not sure which paper they will be part of.
When we have all these samples I have a feeling a lot of questions will be answered. I just pray that unlike the Daunian paper the samples are not like 10% coverage, and we can actually get good data from them.

To my knowledge we have 10 Minoan samples and they're homogenous. To me, that seems pretty definitive.

 

[Jovialis]

Also, earliest Helladic sample from Clemente et al 2021, was basically Minoan-like genetically. The "Minoans" are very similar to Greece_N. Based on all this, their autosomal profile is undisputable.

 

[Archetype0ne]

To my knowledge we have 10 Minoan samples and they're homogenous. To me, that seems pretty definitive.

Certainly for Minoans and Myceneans its a bit more definitive, namely due to the Lazaridis paper. But the overall picture right now for the rest of South-Eastern Europe is very lacking. We have no samples from ancient Macedon, Epirus, Sparta, Southern Illyria (Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia). So people are stuck modeling everything in the Balkans with BG_IA and HRV_BA. Which in itself is an assumption wether these samples are representative components of modern SE Europe. This is besides the fact that for Bulgaria and Romania, hubs of large demographics in the ancient world we have few samples to show for. Why I am hoping Lazaridis can do the same for the rest of Southern Balkans. Which some people on anthrofora have rumored his study might be the holy grail on the topic. I hope I am not jinxing his work...

 

[mount123]

The thing is no one is quite sure. We have few Minoan Samples, a few Myceneans samples, two Logkas samples, couple Bulgaria BA, one Bulgarian IA, and pretty much nothing else from the related Southern Balkans regions. There is almost more ancient peoples in the region than sample we have to show for them.

This is why the upcoming Lazaridis paper might be the final word on the topic (not that it wont be contested on fora as usual, but Lazaridis usually does things a la carte). Also the (I think it was a Max Plank paper) with a lot of Bulgarian samples but also rumored to have more samples from the region. I am not entirely sure where the Albanian samples will be published, there is a possibility the North and South Albanian samples will be part of different publications. Then I heard rumors about a bunch of other Balkans samples, some 80+ more from Croatia, a dozen or so from Serbia, and a couple from Montenegro and Bosnia, not sure which paper they will be part of.

When we have all these samples I have a feeling a lot of questions will be answered. I just pray that unlike the Daunian paper the samples are not like 10% coverage, and we can actually get good data from them.

Is there any info as to what timeframe most of the ones from Croatia are going to cover? Aspurg said that there is supposedly two or three coming IA samples from Vratnica.

Also those North Albanian samples are on the edge of becoming a myth I hope we will see the results this year...archeogenetics pretty much sucks in Albania and Kosovo or basically is non existent. Is there a general explanation as to why? Is the reason lack of funding or are there just generally no Albanian/Kosovan Universities or other institutions with professorships specializing in population genetics.

 

[Archetype0ne]

Is there any info as to what timeframe most of the ones from Croatia are going to cover? Aspurg said that there is supposedly two or three coming IA samples from Vratnica.

Also those North Albanian samples are on the edge of becoming a myth I hope we will see the results this year...archeogenetics pretty much sucks in Albania and Kosovo or basically is non existent. Is there a general explanation as to why? Is the reason lack of funding or are there just generally no Albanian/Kosovan Universities or other institutions with professorships specializing in population genetics.

20 years ago sequencing a genome required billions, up to 10 years ago it was very financially prohibitive still to sequence genomes. With the price of sequencing going down population genomics took off. Albanian thus could not create a tradition and gather experience in archeogenomics, thus they have to collaborate with world class labs on such projects as parts of bigger scientific articles that cover a wider region / timeframe, as on their own the samples would be almost useless analysis wise.

Trust me when I say this, this myth is nothing compared to some other papers I have been waiting for 4+ years. In fact its been less than a year since the tease about the Northern samples(for which we even got YDNA!). They were supposed to be published last December, that's like ~6 months after the rumor. This is lightning fast in archeogenetics. The Bulgarian paper was leaked like two years ago, and last I checked due to the high number of samples, not all samples have even been tested yet. On top of that, after the results are produced by the labs, comes the analysis part, then the peer review, then a bunch of stuff from the paper might have to change, as from what I understand these world class labs collaborate so their theses are not abrasive to each other. One example is Danubian Limes paper having in their analysis yet unpublished East Med samples, while at the same time 3-4 papers last year being along a similar narrative bringing previously controversial East Med ancestry as a fact... This is quite common from what I have noticed.

 

[mount123]

20 years ago sequencing a genome required billions, up to 10 years ago it was very financially prohibitive still to sequence genomes. With the price of sequencing going down population genomics took off. Albanian thus could not create a tradition and gather experience in archeogenomics, thus they have to collaborate with world class labs on such projects as parts of bigger scientific articles that cover a wider region / timeframe, as on their own the samples would be almost useless analysis wise.

Trust me when I say this, this myth is nothing compared to some other papers I have been waiting for 4+ years. In fact its been less than a year since the tease about the Northern samples(for which we even got YDNA!). They were supposed to be published last December, that's like ~6 months after the rumor. This is lightning fast in archeogenetics. The Bulgarian paper was leaked like two years ago, and last I checked due to the high number of samples, not all samples have even been tested yet. On top of that, after the results are produced by the labs, comes the analysis part, then the peer review, then a bunch of stuff from the paper might have to change, as from what I understand these world class labs collaborate so their theses are not abrasive to each other. One example is Danubian Limes paper having in their analysis yet unpublished East Med samples, while at the same time 3-4 papers last year being along a similar narrative bringing previously controversial East Med ancestry as a fact... This is quite common from what I have noticed.

Damn. That's a long time. I am sure things will get better as technology evolves and archaeogenetics establishes itself more overall (being especially hopeful for AL/KS).

 

[Archetype0ne]

Damn. That's a long time. I am sure things will get better as technology evolves and archaeogenetics establishes itself more overall (being especially hopeful for AL/KS).

As long as they keep collaborating with world class labs I will be happy. Just send over ancient samples and collaborate to gain experience in the field. That's a good start, very long overdue.

PS: I wish I had more upvotes tbh... I always run out too soon. Already wanted to upvote you, Illyria and Jovialis and Ralphine but out of

 

[Jovialis]

Certainly for Minoans and Myceneans its a bit more definitive, namely due to the Lazaridis paper. But the overall picture right now for the rest of South-Eastern Europe is very lacking. We have no samples from ancient Macedon, Epirus, Sparta, Southern Illyria (Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia). So people are stuck modeling everything in the Balkans with BG_IA and HRV_BA. Which in itself is an assumption wether these samples are representative components of modern SE Europe. This is besides the fact that for Bulgaria and Romania, hubs of large demographics in the ancient world we have few samples to show for. Why I am hoping Lazaridis can do the same for the rest of Southern Balkans. Which some people on anthrofora have rumored his study might be the holy grail on the topic. I hope I am not jinxing his work...

More data is always welcome, for sure, for more substantive analysis. I can empathize with your desire to see more representative samples for regions salient for making these type of determinations.