Genetics of the Greek Peleponessus

[Bergin]

Great to know that old greeks are still playing around!

It sounds to me that geography and climate, on the long term, dictate most genetic correlations.

 

[Yetos]

I don't have access in this Venetian census. If you can post a link this can be helpful. Tbh, i don't agree with you when you call this populations greeks. We know from many sources, starting from Ottoman defter, etc, who was the dominant population in Peloponnesus and Attica at the moment when Greece was invaded by Ottomans and at the moment when Greece was liberated, but i don't want to debate about this.
Seems that you are talking about the Kingdom of the Morea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_the_Morea
Large part of the article of Wiki is based in the work of a greek historian Apostolos Vakalopoulos. According to this article of Wiki, we learn that

According to the article of Wiki, in less than thirty years, according to your source, we have a replacement of more than half of the population. And this is just one case. During the medieval history, large part of Greece and of course Peloponnese was literally emptied of its population and was refilled again. How we can prove through this genetic study that the Slavs have not replaced the ancient Greeks and then the Byzantines on their side didn't replaced the same Slavs with populations from Asia Minor, etc?
This is like you want to make a study about the natives of America and use as a sample the European emigrants in America.

I wonder
before it was Anatolians, and Bulgarians,
now are Greeks from other parts of Greece,
yet by history we know from where the Duchy of Athens repopulate the area,
but still on the Anti-Hellenic agenda should we move, right?

although the moon is there, we still see the finger.

 

[spartan owl]

I don't have access in this Venetian census. If you can post a link this can be helpful. Tbh, i don't agree with you when you call this populations greeks. We know from many sources, starting from Ottoman defter, etc, who was the dominant population in Peloponnesus and Attica at the moment when Greece was invaded by Ottomans and at the moment when Greece was liberated, but i don't want to debate about this.
Seems that you are talking about the Kingdom of the Morea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_the_Morea
Large part of the article of Wiki is based in the work of a greek historian Apostolos Vakalopoulos. According to this article of Wiki, we learn that

According to the article of Wiki, in less than thirty years, according to your source, we have a replacement of more than half of the population. And this is just one case. During the medieval history, large part of Greece and of course Peloponnese was literally emptied of its population and was refilled again. How we can prove through this genetic study that the Slavs have not replaced the ancient Greeks and then the Byzantines on their side didn't replaced the same Slavs with populations from Asia Minor, etc?
This is like you want to make a study about the natives of America and use as a sample the European emigrants in America.

if you read the study you will understand how it is prooved.The study also compares peloponneseans with greeks of asia minor.

 

[spartan owl]

I asked in a previous post if by Slavic admixture the authors mean NE European shared IBD or simply the levels of R1a and I2a, because they were being mentioned as to what event elevated their levels. In the end I went ahead with the idea that Slavic admixture meant NE European shared IBD.

I dont know how much shared IBD Albanians have with NE Europeans, but since we're way more North than Peloponnese and appearance wise probably in between Poland and Peloponnese, I believed Albanians should have higher shared IBD.

If anyone has data about the shared IBD, please share as I am interested to see the results.


Yes its strange how we're very similar genetically but phenotipically not so much, although I believe not at all if we take away some populations that serve as a bridge between the 2 nations. And I believe Fallmerayer was wrong, this research was a waste of time and money, Peloponneseans are Peloponneseans and just like every region in the whole world changed and will continue to change with time.

For sure when you talk about slavs you can not exclude the russians and poles, so n.e european admixture should be the major fact. Also R1a and I2a are usefull but some people argue that I2a shouldn't be consider as it could be just the haplogroup of slavisized dinarics, while others disagree claiming that the differnce between I2a and R1a in the serbs and the russians for example are explained by a founder effect. R1a on the other hand is high in all slavic populations but you can not claim that R1a=slavs because the haplogroup is much older than the slavic expansion.
I do not have data about albanian IBD. In theory because of geography albania should be more close to the slavs, but as albania is a mountainous region i would not bet on it especialy because eupedias maps showing lower n.e european admixture for north albania.
An albania guy in the apricity gave this numbers for albanian haplogroups based in this study
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v24/n4/full/ejhg2015138a.html
Gheg Albanians:
E-V13: 38%
J2b: 25%
R1b-L51 xP311: 12%
R1b-M269 xL51: 4.2%
I2a-xM26,M223: 3.3%
R1a-M17: 2.5%
I1-M253: 3.3%

Tosk Albanians:
E-V13: 29%
J2b: 12%
R1b-L51 xP311: 8%
R1b-M269 xL51: 6%
I2a-xM26,M223: 11.5%
I2a-M223: 5%
R1a-M17: 6%
I1-M253: 3.8%
i do not know if they are wright but they seem so as the kosovars who are ghegs are the ones with the highest E-V13 in europe.
That for me is only the proof that albanians are a very strang case genetically speaking and is also a proof that they are an autochtonous nation like the greeks are.But as this is not a thread about albanians if you want to continue to talk about it text me personaly if we are both willing to keep it civilized.

 

[last-resort]

Those people are Meds anthropologically, if not Dinaric, which is not the phenotype of your average Slav or German. Period. Get over it.

All that gibberish from the 19th and early 20th century about how "Germanic" the ancient Greeks and Romans looked is a crock. The "scholars" who posited that from looking at classical statuary must have been blind. Use your common sense and just look at them, for goodness sakes. Look at Pericles while you're at it.

Look at Cleopatra, pure inbred Macedonian:

Why do people lose their common sense when these topics are discussed?

This is from #372 for those following along. Your question may be rhetorical, but there is a great tendency in humankind to associate oneself/one's peoples with winners/achievers, etc. In doing so, there is a readiness to discount differences and other things that spoil the association.

Getting personal, I was surprised to see George Washington in the same 'group' as me (R-L2). Now George W. had a beak (prominent nose). I have a beak too. Some artists tried to hide this, but there are enough extant portraits from various angles that it is clear that he had a honker - a big nose. A main difference (there are others) is that my coloration is Med, while his is northern European. (I actually said, 'son of a *****' when I saw his being there in 'my' line as I knew of the nose similarity for some time.) And it is clear that George W. was viewed (thought of, but also visage) as somewhat of an odd personage. It was likely his early success in the American war of independence, his intelligence, his integrity and his cunning (he was quite skilled at espionage arts) that sustained him from being removed as the war dragged out and his results flagged. I'm saying that appearance matters (especially in the USA), but that success matters more. Therefore his 'oddness' was overlooked so that all could associate themselves with him and his success. It is what we are.

If you cannot identify with this, think of casual sports fans who become rabid fans when a team/their team is on the cusp of winning or have won a championship - same thing.

As a Greek lineage person, I see the effect in the interwwebz discussion from several racial/ethnic groups which I won't name who repeatedly want to associate this person/tribe/entire Greek lineage to their own, even carrying over into at least the 20th century Greek persons. I should be flattered for my people but I think about the ignorance of so many that will believe this crap.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/famous_y-dna_by_haplogroup.shtml#R1b-U152

 

[Angela]

This is from #372 for those following along. Your question may be rhetorical, but there is a great tendency in humankind to associate oneself/one's peoples with winners/achievers, etc. In doing so, there is a readiness to discount differences and other things that spoil the association.

Getting personal, I was surprised to see George Washington in the same 'group' as me (R-L2). Now George W. had a beak (prominent nose). I have a beak too. Some artists tried to hide this, but there are enough extant portraits from various angles that it is clear that he had a honker - a big nose. A main difference (there are others) is that my coloration is Med, while his is northern European. (I actually said, 'son of a *****' when I saw his being there in 'my' line as I knew of the nose similarity for some time.) And it is clear that George W. was viewed (thought of, but also visage) as somewhat of an odd personage. It was likely his early success in the American war of independence, his intelligence, his integrity and his cunning (he was quite skilled at espionage arts) that sustained him from being removed as the war dragged out and his results flagged. I'm saying that appearance matters (especially in the USA), but that success matters more. Therefore his 'oddness' was overlooked so that all could associate themselves with him and his success. It is what we are.

If you cannot identify with this, think of casual sports fans who become rabid fans when a team/their team is on the cusp of winning or have won a championship - same thing.

As a Greek lineage person, I see the effect in the interwwebz discussion from several racial/ethnic groups which I won't name who repeatedly want to associate this person/tribe/entire Greek lineage to their own, even carrying over into at least the 20th century Greek persons. I should be flattered for my people but I think about the ignorance of so many that will believe this crap.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/famous_y-dna_by_haplogroup.shtml#R1b-U152

It is difficult for me to understand. I'm just not that kind of person. I'm satisfied with my own people's achievements; I don't need to appropriate those of others in order to have a sense of self-esteem. Indeed, my sense of self-esteem comes first and foremost from what I have done in my own life, and I don't mean only or primarily in terms of my profession or financial success. Although no longer a believer, I was educated by nuns and priests. Like it or not, they had a profound influence on my life. One of them, whenever she heard one of us bragging about one thing or another, or competing, would say: "Remember, you're only great if you're great in the eyes of God." By your character and your deeds shall you be judged.

George Washington was considered a rather unattractive man, but it wasn't primarily because he had a large nose. I think the biggest issue was because they had to pull all his teeth and he had to wear these big yellow dentures. My favorite American president, Abraham Lincoln, was also considered unattractive, but again, it wasn't about his nose; it was about his coloring, his gauntness, his extreme height and thinness, his heavy eye-brow ridges and deep set eyes.

From everything I've read about the history and sociology of Britain and other parts of Europe, a large nose on a man was considered a sign of strength, dominance, and masculinity, and nothing to cause concern.

https://books.google.com/books?id=V...Q6AEITzAJ#v=onepage&q=large nose &f=falseJust a few examples:

Perhaps the most popular French king: Henri IV of Navarre

Francois I had an even more extreme nose.

Sir Thomas More:

Robert Peel:

Wordsworth:

They may not have been the majority, but they weren't described as unattractive.

A modern example is Richard Armitage, whom I consider extremely attractive. His nose is described in the British press as "elegant". I agree.

 

[last-resort]

George Washington was considered a rather unattractive man, but it wasn't primarily because he had a large nose. I think the biggest issue was because they had to pull all his teeth and he had to wear these big yellow dentures. My favorite American president, Abraham Lincoln, was also considered unattractive, but again, it wasn't about his nose; it was about his coloring, his gauntness, his extreme height and thinness, his heavy eye-brow ridges and deep set eyes.

This is from #406. The phenotype issue wasn't my point as you may note. And, I do not agree with the 'same face, same race' viewpoint. Greeks in particular have a range of skin, hair, and face color/conformations. And though we are mostly average to tall in height, there are some shorties too. I have two 1st cousins with fair skin and blue eyes (average to tall height and 'normal' noses) and they can trace their lineage to the late 18th century. I have darker skin and hazel eyes (tall with a honker nose) and can trace my lineage on my mother's side to the late 18th century, and on my father's side to roughly the early 19th century.

As to George Washington, the wooden teeth is no longer fully accepted. He had some sophistication, imported European goods, socialized in the upper circles of the colonies, married well, etc. It is very unlikely that the teeth shown at Mount Vernon were his 'Sunday go to meeting' teeth. Lincoln likely had a disease, Marfan syndrome, which affects generally everything odd about him.

As to noses, I do not disagree regarding large noses being common in Europe. I was surprised to see film of German troops during WW2 and how large the noses were on so many of them. I suppose Paul Joseph Goebbels and others may have looked down their noses at others, but didn't look into the mirror thoroughly. It is the aspect of ignoring what disagrees with your beliefs.

 

[Odysseus]

Very Interesting , thank you for sharing.

 

[Nik]

This is from #406. The phenotype issue wasn't my point as you may note. And, I do not agree with the 'same face, same race' viewpoint. Greeks in particular have a range of skin, hair, and face color/conformations. And though we are mostly average to tall in height, there are some shorties too. I have two 1st cousins with fair skin and blue eyes (average to tall height and 'normal' noses) and they can trace their lineage to the late 18th century. I have darker skin and hazel eyes (tall with a honker nose) and can trace my lineage on my mother's side to the late 18th century, and on my father's side to roughly the early 19th century.

Then u must be some sort of Dinaroid + East Med like the Cypriots.

 

[Angela]

Then u must be some sort of Dinaroid + East Med like the Cypriots.

Is that supposed to be a pejorative description? My husband's paternal grandfather (from Calabria) had a "Dinaric" type skull and nose (although he was light brown haired and light eyed). I always thought that the pictures of him as a man in his prime showed a quite handsome, dignified man.

It seems to me there's an awful lot of "Dinaric" skulls and noses throughout the upper Balkans, and particularly in Albania. No? You can, in fact, find them throughout western Europe, in particular, perhaps a relic of Bell Beaker?

Can you guys ever have a civil conversation?

 

[Nik]

Is that supposed to be a pejorative description? My husband's paternal grandfather (from Calabria) had a "Dinaric" type skull and nose (although he was light brown haired and light eyed). I always thought that the pictures of him as a man in his prime showed a quite handsome, dignified man.

It seems to me there's an awful lot of "Dinaric" skulls and noses throughout the upper Balkans, and particularly in Albania. No? You can, in fact, find them throughout western Europe, in particular, perhaps a relic of Bell Beaker?

Can you guys ever have a civil conversation?

Take a sit, Angela. I am a Dinaroid myself just like almost everyone in the region I come from. Was that a paranoia induced reaction, assuming everything an ethnic Albanian says must be some sort of personal attack as we lack the ability to have a civil conversation?

 

[Hauteville]

A lot of Southern Italians are Dinaricized Mediterranean, and many Greeks I know too.

 

[last-resort]

Then u must be some sort of Dinaroid + East Med like the Cypriots.

from #409 Actually some of the wiki description of Dinaric fits - tall, long arms, large nose; but my nose is neither narrow nor convex. As to the skull shape, I have no idea as I won't take the time to learn the technical specs. But my skull isn't round. Also, as to rosy color of skin, mine is there in spades (obvious) as my diet has increased with Omega 3 oil (fish and flax seed meal) in spite of the olive tone. My 1st cousins (maternal) had it from first memory of them. As to East Med? define it and I'll comment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinaric_race

 

[last-resort]

A lot of Southern Italians are Dinaricized Mediterranean, and many Greeks I know too.

Glad to see you are still living. You owe me and others a response to my #245 in which I noted that your #216 comment was not based on the study, but in fact asserted that the Tsakones had Albanian etc admixture, directly in conflict with the study findings. I challenged you to support your assertions.

Nik in his #159 provided a language map that showed no Albanian communities in or near the Tsakones nor the 'Deep Mani' populations.
I must conclude that you are a provocateur and otherwise, reckless and unreliable.

 

[Angela]

Glad to see you are still living. You owe me and others a response to my #245 in which I noted that your #216 comment was not based on the study, but in fact asserted that the Tsakones had Albanian etc admixture, directly in conflict with the study findings. I challenged you to support your assertions.

Nik in his #159 provided a language map that showed no Albanian communities in or near the Tsakones nor the 'Deep Mani' populations.
I must conclude that you are a provocateur and otherwise, reckless and unreliable.

Keep a civil tongue in your mouth or you can take a hiatus as well.

Why do I have to keep repeating myself? The Albanians were not studied by these researchers. How could anyone say how they fit in genetically? PLUS, SINCE THEY WEREN'T STUDIED, THEY ARE OFF TOPIC! GET IT?


PROLONGED discussions of anthropology and head shapes is also off topic. We're getting too far off topic.Take it to the anthropology section.

@Nik,
You can never go wrong underestimating all of you apparently.

@Christos,
That's all very interesting, but the genetics has spoken. These Greeks are different from mainland Greeks. Now, the admixture may be very ancient. That's a different issue.

 

[Nik]

from #409 Actually some of the wiki description of Dinaric fits - tall, long arms, large nose; but my nose is neither narrow nor convex. As to the skull shape, I have no idea as I won't take the time to learn the technical specs. But my skull isn't round. Also, as to rosy color of skin, mine is there in spades (obvious) as my diet has increased with Omega 3 oil (fish and flax seed meal) in spite of the olive tone. My 1st cousins (maternal) had it from first memory of them. As to East Med? define it and I'll comment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinaric_race

Since you're Greek I assumed it would be hard to find full Dinarics nowadays unless you're mostly from some remote fully Arvanite/Epirote/Acarnanian mountainous community. So just a guess. And since your nose is not narrow, then that's not a Dinaric trait. I dont have a convex nose either, and according to Coon, more than 70% of my region's ppl have straight noses and still fully Dinaric, so the big nosed Dinaric guy is just an exaggeration and a feature that develops with age. I assumed East Med since you said you're darker (I guess olive skin tone) and Dinarics are quite pale if not mixed, and green-hazel eyes are a rule for up to 70% of the group.

@Angela
You can simply ask me and I'll answer very honestly for any doubt that you might have, and make your life easier

Since we're here, I'll admit that I'm a Dinaricist or whatever you can call a person who is proud of being a Dinaroid. So no need to accuse me of nationalism, Nordicism, etc., as that's the only thing I kind of care.

 

[Angela]

The next person who posts anything that is part of these unending Balkan grudge matches is going to get an infraction. I already gave one out today and I'll happily give out more. I don't care who it is.

You people can't be given even a little lee way or you'll turn this into a symbolic Balkan war.

Post on the paper or don't post at all.

 

[LABERIA]

The next person who posts anything that is part of these unending Balkan grudge matches is going to get an infraction. I already gave one out today and I'll happily give out more. I don't care who it is.

You people can't be given even a little lee way or you'll turn this into a symbolic Balkan war.

Post on the paper or don't post at all.

Why my post was deleted? I am talking about the post where i explained to christo that it is not true that christian Albanians didn't married with muslim Albanians. So, someone who post something off topic and totally inaccurate is allowed to do this. Meanwhile when someone try to explain what is wrong, this post is deleted.
You think this is normal?

 

[Angela]

The whole series of posts was deleted, including the one to which you responded.

One more attempt to resist moderation and you get another infraction.

 

[Diomedes]

Interesting article indeed. I do not understand the hate some people have though. It is well known that the peoples around the Mediterranean sea have many commonalities. This is expected, even the ancient Greek mythology talks about this.