Ancient genomes from a Roca Vecchia, Apulia, shed light on Minoan modes of colonisation

Jovialis

Jovialis

Advisor
Messages
9,313
Reaction score
5,876
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
Y-DNA haplogroup
R-PF7566 (R-Y227216)
mtDNA haplogroup
H6a1b7
Jovialis: Is this a conference presentation and only the Abstract is available?
 
Last edited:
Honestly just two samples to characterise a population is not enough, especially not for the later Bronze to Iron Age contexts. Many of the EAA 2024 papers provide much more samples for a more conclusive evidence.
 
Riverman said:
Honestly just two samples to characterise a population is not enough, especially not for the later Bronze to Iron Age contexts. Many of the EAA 2024 papers provide much more samples for a more conclusive evidence.
Click to expand...
Riverman: 2 Samples is not ideal but it is better than nothing. It does provide 2 Late Bronze Age/early Iron samples from Puglia, which off the top of my head, I don't think any are in the published literature. I am curious how these samples are related to other published samples in Iron Age Italy from the Roman study (Antonio et al 2019) and the Etruscan study by Posth et al 2021.

There are 4 or 5 Bronze Age samples published from Sicily by Fernandes et al 2019 and at least 1 in Yu et al 2022. I don't think the Antonio et al 2019 or Posth et al had any Bronze Age samples.
 
Last edited:
I just wanted to express that its kind of a missed opportunity, if so many human remains were found, to just sample 2 successfully. Its like the standard from some years ago. The better EAA papers now work with dozens of samples and try to reconstruct complex migration patterns and family structures.
Sure, any new sample is great. But to conclude from just two samples that there was no stronger Minoan presence in the area seems to be premature to me.
 
Riverman:

I think the authors stated at the time of the Minoan siege, the local population there was autochthonous. The 2 samples are from 1400 BC so what this is showing is that Minoans started coming into at least Puglia at this time. After the Minoan invasion, and as more Greeks moved into Puglia along with Campania, Sicily, Calabria and Basilicata, that genetic component likely increased.
 
Sicilian bronze age samples recovered from the western corner of the island already show considerable Aegean introgression. It is not surprising to me that Apulia would have experienced some as well. Archaeology shows us that Italics and Greeks had quite extensive relationships during the bronze age so this falls in line with what is already broadly known.
 
"Aegean population component probably increased in the following centuries."

Considering this was in the 15th century, and Magna Graecia began in the 8th century; it leaves 7 centuries of increasing Aegean ancestry before Greek colonization.
 
Jovialis said:
"Aegean population component probably increased in the following centuries."

Considering this was in the 15th century, and Magna Graecia began in the 8th century; it leaves 7 centuries of increasing Aegean ancestry before Greek colonization.
Click to expand...
I feed the abstract and the quoted statement into ChatGPT 4.0 to elaborate.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    90.2 KB · Views: 79
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 1289 times.

Back
Top