Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

[Demetrios]

However if we are talking about Greek genetics and relation with Mycenaeans and Minoans then we cannot exclude Albanian genetics also because they have the closest match rather identical with all the other close neighbors, I would also not exclude Bulgarian nor North Macedonian genetics.

Havent Lazaridis concluded in his study that the Mycenaeans genetically are closest to the current location of Greece Albania North Macedonia etc?
if so then why not talk about also Albanian North Macedonian and Bulgarian genetics?

The paper actually referred to modern populations from Greece, Cyprus, Albania, and Italy, not North Macedonia and Bulgaria. Specifically, "We estimated FST of Bronze Age populations with present-day West Eurasians, finding that Mycenaeans are least differentiated from populations from Greece, Cyprus, Albania, and Italy (Fig. 2), part of a general pattern in which Bronze Age populations broadly resemble present-day inhabitants from the same region (Extended Data Fig. 7).". Anyway, he isn't trying to exclude Albanians or anyone else for that matter from the conversation. He simply emphasized that this thread is for Minoans/Mycenaeans. It's easy to diverge from a thread's original subject, i know since i have done it also in the past quite unintended.

 

[Demetrios]

Not really sure about Lazaridis but I would not be surprised. (The 3 links I followed were all paywalled, don't have the patience to find the paper right now)
However based on the data I have seen from "amateur" calculators (from the first pages of this thread) I think South-West Italians were the top matches to the Mycenaeans. So I would be surprised if he did not mention them in the same breath.

Here you go, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/. Yes, the modern populations who have the closest autosomal affinity to Mycenaeans (and Aegean populations in general) are southern Italians and Ashkenazim Jews.

 

[Archetype0ne]

The paper actually referred to modern populations from Greece, Cyprus, Albania, and Italy, not North Macedonia and Bulgaria. Specifically, "We estimated FST of Bronze Age populations with present-day West Eurasians, finding that Mycenaeans are least differentiated from populations from Greece, Cyprus, Albania, and Italy (Fig. 2), part of a general pattern in which Bronze Age populations broadly resemble present-day inhabitants from the same region (Extended Data Fig. 7).". Anyway, he isn't trying to exclude Albanians or anyone else for that matter from the conversation. He simply emphasized that this thread is for Minoans/Mycenaeans. It's easy to diverge from a thread's original subject, i know since i have done it also in the past quite unintended.

Thanks for sharing. If the PCA-s I posted are reliable at all:

It seems Sicilians West and East are the closest among modern populations to Myceneans.
Among modern Greeks it seems Greek Islanders: Kos, Crete and /Izmir(not an island obvs) are the closest modern populations to Myceneans.

This might have something to do with Hellenic colonies.
But it might even predate them.
The islands mentioned having the closest proximity makes a lot of sense due to less likely migratory contributions from mainland.

 

[Demetrios]

Thanks for sharing. If the PCA-s I posted are reliable at all:

It seems Sicilians West and East are the closest among modern populations to Myceneans.
Among modern Greeks it seems Greek Islanders: Kos, Crete and /Izmir(not an island obvs) are the closest modern populations to Myceneans.

This might have something to do with Hellenic colonies.
But it might even predate them.
The islands mentioned having the closest proximity makes a lot of sense due to less likely migratory contributions from mainland.

I wouldn't just limit it to Sicily though. I would include much of southern Italy in general, including Calabria and other regions. Then again, Italy in general, from north to south, seems to project the highest autosomal affinity with the ancient Balkans as a whole. Let me also remind the affinity of the Iron Age Bulgarian and Dalmatian samples that relate. As for the Greek islands, i don't know exactly which ones can be included in that high affinity category, but Crete would be in them from what i have seen in the past. Also, some months ago i ran the Dodecad K7b coordinates of a Greek woman who was half from the island of Melos and half from western Crete, and compared her to the ancient Aegean samples. She did have some relatively close distances for two of the Mycenaean samples (I9006 and I9041). I also include below it her Eurogenes K13 coordinates in comparison to modern populations (list of 25 closest populations).

 

[Pax Augusta]

You can clearly see some overlap between Albanians, Tuscans and Greeks.

Not in any decent peer reviewed PCA that has all possible populations.

But even in the G25 itself when as many populations as possible are added there is no real overlap.

 

[Jovialis]

@Archetype0ne

You're right, it was a mental lapse on my part, I actually meant to say stop discussing Slavic-ness of other ethnic groups, and I wasn't referring to you.

Albanians do have an affinity to Mycenaeans, though I think the South Greeks that cluster with South Italians would be the closest. Especially in terms of actual lineage, rather than just similarity.

 

[Archetype0ne]

@Archetype0ne

You're right, it was a mental lapse on my part, I actually meant to say stop discussing Slavic-ness of other ethnic groups, and I wasn't referring to you.

Albanians do have an affinity to Mycenaeans, though I think the South Greeks that cluster with South Italians would be the closest. Especially in terms of actual lineage, rather than just similarity.

No worries Jovialis. Being part of this forum long enough I know your intentions are good. It must be super hard to moderate a forum that deals with such topics as genetics and anthropology. And yeah, I try not to derail threads, it just becomes that much harder when directly quoted from other members, hence the Turkic Anatolia / South Slavic Balkans derailment in the previous posts.

Not in any decent peer reviewed PCA that has all possible populations.

But even in the G25 itself when as many populations as possible are added there is no real overlap.

Thanks for providing the legit PCA-s Pax. I have posted the zoomed in version of the second one some months ago in this thread. And you are right there is no "overlap" in more legit PCA-s as far as Tuscans go. Maybe a bit of overlap between outlier Tuscan and Greek in the second one if I interpreted it correctly.

As for the Greek Albanian overlap, I think it is obvious in both PCA-s you provided.

PS: Is it me or does Italy look like a boot in the academic PCA?
Also, do you happen to know the sample size for the Tuscan cluster as opposed to the Albanian number of samples in that academic study? That would be revealing of some implications IMO.

 

[Jovialis]

Here you go, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/. Yes, the modern populations who have the closest autosomal affinity to Mycenaeans (and Aegean populations in general) are southern Italians and Ashkenazim Jews.

I would discount Ashkenazi Jews being close to Ancient Greeks. Yes, they do have some Greek-like ancestry, but their position on the PCA is due to the fact that the numerical value interpreted by the PCAs of amateur calculators just happens to plot them there. Just like the way South Asians, and Mestizos just happen to plot with each other.

Just as an aside, Ashkenazi Jews are almost half Middle Eastern, idk who some of these people are on that other site. But I would strongly assume that most Jews want to have a connection to their own ancestors. Jewish people want to be connected to the ancient Jews of the middle east. Which is why I think some of the members of that other site are imposters, pretending to be Jews.

Two North Africans happen to plot with some Minoans, but we know they have absolutely nothing to do with each other:

 

[Demetrios]

Also, do you happen to know the sample size for the Tuscan cluster as opposed to the Albanian number of samples in that academic study? That would be revealing of some implications IMO.

Tuscan samples in this paper (Population structure of modern-day Italians reveals patterns of ancient and archaic ancestries in Southern Europe - 2019) are from three sources i believe. One would be the "The Italian genome reflects the history of Europe and the Mediterranean basin" (2015) which provided 21 samples (2 from Arezzo, 19 from Siena). The second is the TSI (Toscani in Italia) collection of 117 samples from the Coriell repository (https://www.coriell.org/1/NHGRI/Collections/HapMap-Collections/Toscani-in-Italia-TSI), that are from a small town near Florence (Tuscany). Third would be the 129 new Italian samples that were part of this (the one from 2019) study, but i don't know how many of those were from Tuscany. There were also 6 new Albanian samples in this paper as well.

 

[Jovialis]

I would discount Ashkenazi Jews being close to Ancient Greeks. Yes, they do have some Greek-like ancestry, but their position on the PCA is due to the fact that the numerical value interpreted by the PCAs of amateur calculators just happens to plot them there. Just like the way South Asians, and Mestizos just happen to plot with each other.

Just as an aside, Ashkenazi Jews are almost half Middle Eastern, idk who some of these people are on that other site. But I would strongly assume that most Jews want to have a connection to their own ancestors. Jewish people want to be connected to the ancient Jews of the middle east. Which is why I think some of the members of that other site are imposters, pretending to be Jews.

Two North Africans happen to plot with some Minoans, but we know they have absolutely nothing to do with each other:

Like some of the Imperial Romans-to-present day Italy, as well as Greece, the Mycenaeans were a (central) Mediterranean people. Some of them were pulled a bit towards the Eastern Mediterranean cluster, (i.e. I9006), some pulled towards earlier Neolithic people (i.e. I9010). Ashkenazi Jews are the percentage in the chart posted above; they're a different people with a different history.

 

[Archetype0ne]

Tuscan samples in this paper (Population structure of modern-day Italians reveals patterns of ancient and archaic ancestries in Southern Europe - 2019) are from three sources i believe. One would be the "The Italian genome reflects the history of Europe and the Mediterranean basin" (2015) which provided 21 samples (2 from Arezzo, 19 from Siena). The second is the TSI (Toscani in Italia) collection of 117 samples from the Coriell repository (https://www.coriell.org/1/NHGRI/Collections/HapMap-Collections/Toscani-in-Italia-TSI), that are from a small town near Florence (Tuscany). Third would be the 129 new Italian samples that were part of this (the one from 2019) study, but i don't know how many of those were from Tuscany. There were also 6 new Albanian samples in this paper as well.

So 138 confirmed Tuscan samples with potentially more from the 129 new Italian samples?
Lets hope I did got this wrong... but do you mean 6 Albanian samples "total"? Or 6 additional new ones? If so what was the initial number of samples?

 

[Jovialis]

Like some of the Imperial Romans-to-present day Italy, as well as Greece, the Mycenaeans were a (central) Mediterranean people. Some of them were pulled a bit towards the Eastern Mediterranean cluster, (i.e. I9006), some pulled towards earlier Neolithic people (i.e. I9010). Ashkenazi Jews are the percentage in the chart posted above; they're a different people with a different history.

I guess you can say, Albanians are a central Mediterranean people pulled towards Slavs.

 

[Pax Augusta]

Thanks for providing the legit PCA-s Pax. I have posted the zoomed in version of the second one some months ago in this thread. And you are right there is no "overlap" in more legit PCA-s as far as Tuscans go. Maybe a bit of overlap between outlier Tuscan and Greek in the second one if I interpreted it correctly.

In the second one, the G25 PCA, there is one Greek (NA17373) that goes very close to Italians, not just Tuscans. While in the academic one there are some mainland Greeks that join one of the clusters of southern Italy.

Unclear where in Greece NA17373 comes from. It should be checked in the studies what results it shows.

https://catalog.coriell.org/0/Sections/Search/Sample_Detail.aspx?Ref=NA17373&Product=DNA

As for the Greek Albanian overlap, I think it is obvious in both PCA-s you provided.

True, an overlap between Albanians and northern Greeks seems true.

PS: Is it me or does Italy look like a boot in the academic PCA?

Indeed.

Also, do you happen to know the sample size for the Tuscan cluster as opposed to the Albanian number of samples in that academic study? That would be revealing of some implications IMO.

The Tuscan samples are obviously many more than the Albanians (Tuscans are circa 138 in the academic study, mostly from central, southern and the eastern part of Tuscany), on the other hand it is a study on Italy not on the Balkans. I understand what you mean, but if other Albanian samples were added the result would not change in the academic PCA. The Albanians would continue to fill the gap between the Macedonians and the Greeks, and it's really unlikely that Albanians would all go in the direction of Italy in that PCA or would join one of the clusters where the Tuscan samples are found.
.

So 138 confirmed Tuscan samples with potentially more from the 129 new Italian samples?
Lets hope I did got this wrong... but do you mean 6 Albanian samples "total"? Or 6 additional new ones? If so what was the initial number of samples?

Among the new Italian samples collected for this study I don't think there are any Tuscans, as they were already present in large numbers. The Italian samples, including the 138 Tuscans, are over 1500 in this study.

Albanians are 6 in the study, the Greeks are around 55/56, Bulgarians are circa 35, Macedonians are 14.

 

[Demetrios]

I would discount Ashkenazi Jews being close to Ancient Greeks. Yes, they do have some Greek-like ancestry, but their position on the PCA is due to the fact that the numerical value interpreted by the PCAs of amateur calculators just happens to plot them there. Just like the way South Asians, and Mestizos just happen to plot with each other.

Just as an aside, Ashkenazi Jews are almost half Middle Eastern, idk who some of these people are on that other site. But I would strongly assume that most Jews want to have a connection to their own ancestors. Jewish people want to be connected to the ancient Jews of the middle east. Which is why I think some of the members of that other site are imposters, pretending to be Jews.

Two North Africans happen to plot with some Minoans, but we know they have absolutely nothing to do with each other:

There is also that other PCA i shared some months ago from the "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus" (2018) which shows them clustering with southern Italians, Sicilians, and Mycenaeans (the orange colored triangles looking right). You could be right in part, but at least autosomally they do project a similarity with southern Italians and certain Greek islanders. Also, their mtDNA seems to be mostly European not Middle Eastern, as described in this paper, "A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages" (2013). I don't know much about their Y-DNA though other than the fact that my Y-DNA subclade happens to be mostly comprised of Greek and Ashkenazim Jewish members, but in their case it probably only accounts for some 0.5% of their total male population.

 

[Demetrios]

So 138 confirmed Tuscan samples with potentially more from the 129 new Italian samples?
Lets hope I did got this wrong... but do you mean 6 Albanian samples "total"? Or 6 additional new ones? If so what was the initial number of samples?

From a quick review, i believe it was only those 6 new Albanian samples, could be wrong though.

 

[Jovialis]

There is also that other PCA i shared some months ago from the "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus" (2018) which shows them clustering with southern Italians, Sicilians, and Mycenaeans (the orange colored triangles looking right). You could be right in part, but at least autosomally they do project a similarity with southern Italians and certain Greek islanders. Also, their mtDNA seems to be mostly European not Middle Eastern, as described in this paper, "A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages" (2013). I don't know much about their Y-DNA though other than the fact that my Y-DNA subclade happens to be mostly comprised of Greek and Ashkenazim Jewish members, but in their case it probably only accounts for some 0.5% of their total male population.

There was also some Greek-like admixture into the Levant, prior to the dispersal of the Jews from Israel. For example the Philistines were originally Greeks, who conquered, enslaved, and mixed with Levantines in the Levant. So that may explain part of that. Also, there was some South-Eastern European admixture into the Levant during the classical era. That being said, again, where they project on the PCA, is irrelevant as South Asians plotting with Mestizos. There is no way nearly half middle-eastern people/ half South European people are going to plot with southern Europeans, without Northern/North Eastern European admixture. They are a mix that happens to plot there, nothing more. A German with a Korean great-great grandfather could plot with a Fin, it doesn't mean they have a similar history.

 

[Demetrios]

There was also some Greek-like admixture into the Levant, prior to the dispersal of the Jews from Israel. For example the Philistines were originally Greeks, who conquered, enslaved, and mixed with Levantines in the Levant. So that may explain part of that. Also, there was some South-Eastern European admixture into the Levant during the classical era. That being said, again, where they project on the PCA, is irrelevant as South Asians plotting with Mestizos. There is no way nearly half middle-eastern people/ half South European people are going to plot with southern Europeans, without Northern/North Eastern European admixture. They are a mix that happens to plot there, nothing more. A German with a Korean great-great grandfather could plot with a Fin, it doesn't mean they have a similar history.

I am not saying that they have a similar history, or that they are descendants of ancient Greeks. The aforementioned autosomal similarity could also be due to having a bit more northern European admixture compared to other Levantine populations, and thus this mix would place them close to Southern Italy and the Mediterranean Greek-islands. Can't recall their admixture results though. But their mtDNA results at least do suggest considerable European ancestry. Then again, i am not negating the possibility that some could have an Aegean origin, not speaking of all of course. For example, take note of the fact that in the past Judaism used to be very proselytist (actually the word proselytism originally referred to Judaism conversion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism). If i recall correctly, Judaism only ceased proselytizing under imposition by its relative sects and the Roman Empire. Along these lines have a look at the following map showing that in the 1st-2nd centuries CE, the Jewish diaspora was mainly concentrated in Greek-inhabited areas.

 

[Jovialis]

I am not saying that they have a similar history, or that they are descendants of ancient Greeks. The aforementioned autosomal similarity could also be due to having a bit more northern European admixture compared to other Levantine populations, and thus this mix would place them close to Southern Italy and the Mediterranean Greek-islands. Can't recall their admixture results though. But their mtDNA results at least do suggest considerable European ancestry. Then again, i am not negating the possibility that some could have an Aegean origin, not speaking of all of course. For example, take note of the fact that in the past Judaism used to be very proselytist (actually the word proselytism originally referred to Judaism conversion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism). If i recall correctly, Judaism only ceased proselytizing under imposition by its relative sects and the Roman Empire. Along these lines have a look at the following map showing that in the 1st-2nd centuries CE, the Jewish diaspora was mainly concentrated in Greek-inhabited areas.

Only 35%-60% of their autsomal DNA would be similar to southern Europeans.

 

[Archetype0ne]

In the second one, the G25 PCA, there is one Greek (NA17373) that goes very close to Italians, not just Tuscans. While in the academic one there are some mainland Greeks that join one of the clusters of southern Italy.

Unclear where in Greece NA17373 comes from. It should be checked in the studies what results it shows.

https://catalog.coriell.org/0/Sections/Search/Sample_Detail.aspx?Ref=NA17373&Product=DNA




True, an overlap between Albanians and northern Greeks seems true.




Indeed.





The Tuscan samples are obviously many more than the Albanians (Tuscans more than 100, mostly from central, southern and the eastern part of Tuscany), on the other hand it is a study on Italy not on the Balkans. I understand what you mean, but if other Albanian samples were added the result would not change in the academic PCA. The Albanians would continue to fill the gap between the Macedonians and the Greeks, and it's really unlikely that Albanians would go in the direction of Italy in that PCA.




Among the new Italian samples collected for this study I don't think there are any Tuscans, as they were already present in large numbers. The Italian samples, including the 138 Tuscans, are over 1500 in this study.

Albanians are 6 in the study, the Greeks are around 55/56, Bulgarians are circa 35, Macedonians are 14.

I also doubt more samples would change the fact they don't overlap. It would still be nice to have them for comparison though.
As you said this paper focuses on Italians so I get the discrepancy. But considering Tuscany has some 3.8 million population, and Albania proper ~3.6 million I would say the PCA is not really representative. Would love to see a paper focusing on Southern Europe in the future with representative sampling. A few old academic papers I have seen ~10 years+ even omit Albanians in the PCAs so I guess this is a good start.

I guess you can say, Albanians are a central Mediterranean people pulled towards Slavs.

I personally think the North-Western shift in Albanians predates Slavic expansion, especially in Northern Albania and Kosovo. Not sure about the numbers but the autosomal effect of Slavic migrations is minimal in Kosovo, and still not that great in Tosks.

Battaglia et al, and Pericic et al are quite outdated (2004,2005) but even those studies I think proved this. R1a and I2-Din are quite underepresented, not sure if any study focused on autosomal contribution of Slavs in Albania but I would bet <10%.

http://www.gjenetika.com/statistikat/

2.2% I2 Din and 6.2% R1a when you look at all tested. 8.4%

1.4% and 4.5% When you look at Ghegs only. 5.9%

I seriously doubt the Slavic input is the main factor pulling Albanians North-West autosomally.

 

[Demetrios]

Only 35%-60% of their autsomal DNA would be similar to southern Europeans.

That seems like a rational estimate.