The genetic history of the Southern Arc-Lazaridis et al

This whole Greekness thing of the Ancient Macedonians is overblown by modern political agenda's and competing nationalisms of modern Balkan nations.

I don't even care about the fact that they participated in the Olympics. Nor do I care about their rivalry with the Athenians. The Macedonians were part of the greater Greek cultural mainframe. They believed in the Greek gods, spoke some language which clearly stems from the same proto-Greek source and they eventually ended up spreading Greek culture on a global scale. Not to mention that they standardised the Greek language, eventually resulting to what is today modern Greek.

Now the ball is being played on a gentic level. If the Ohrid samples are Illyrian. Then they are simply a South Illyrians, with whatever difference they have from North Illyrians. Who cares? If they are Molossian, then this is where the North Greeks plot at that time. They had a little bit more steppe than Mycenaeans. However, if they are Macedonians, then hold your horses. We have evidence that they are not Greeks, because they do not completely overlap with Myceneans.

If other modern Balkan people's want to claim some paleo-balkan kinship with them. That's absolutely fine. The problem in the Balkans is that people emphasize differences, rather than similarities. As Milan.M correctly argues, Alexander's conquest started off as a pan-Balkan expedition. Under the Hellenic banner.
 
This whole Greekness thing of the Ancient Macedonians is overblown by modern political agenda's and competing nationalisms of modern Balkan nations.

I don't even care about the fact that they participated in the Olympics. Nor do I care about their rivalry with the Athenians. The Macedonians were part of the greater Greek cultural mainframe. They believed in the Greek gods, spoke some language which clearly stems from the same proto-Greek source and they eventually ended up spreading Greek culture on a global scale. Not to mention that they standardised the Greek language, eventually resulting to what is today modern Greek.

Now the ball is being played on a gentic level. If the Ohrid samples are Illyrian. Then they are simply a South Illyrians, with whatever difference they have from North Illyrians. Who cares? If they are Molossian, then this is where the North Greeks plot at that time. They had a little bit more steppe than Mycenaeans. However, if they are Macedonians, then hold your horses. We have evidence that they are not Greeks, because they do not completely overlap with Myceneans.

If other modern Balkan people's want to claim some paleo-balkan kinship with them. That's absolutely fine. The problem in the Balkans is that people emphasize differences, rather than similarities. As Milan.M correctly argues, Alexander's conquest started off as a pan-Balkan expedition. Under the Hellenic banner.

I don't think from Southern arch paper the samples from modern South-West/Lake Ohrid of modern North Macedonia was part of Ancient Macedonia, especially not in Iron Age. Perhaps we can argue about the samples of Isar-Marvinci, Idomenae which is approximately part of the southernmost city of Gevgelija of Northern Macedonia. That's it.
 
Speaking of Macedonians, I am pretty confident that the Korca medieval(I13834) sample is actually a Late Bronze Age or IA indivdual and behaves strongly like the MKD samples, it shows strong thirst for Cetina BA as well. It models very badly as a Albanian ancestor, shows no direct relationship despite allegedly being 1400 AD.

DcDGcoj.png

MGv3Ujh.png

iLSMgJi.png

B4EyFCm.png
 
This whole Greekness thing of the Ancient Macedonians is overblown by modern political agenda's and competing nationalisms of modern Balkan nations.

I don't even care about the fact that they participated in the Olympics. Nor do I care about their rivalry with the Athenians. The Macedonians were part of the greater Greek cultural mainframe. They believed in the Greek gods, spoke some language which clearly stems from the same proto-Greek source and they eventually ended up spreading Greek culture on a global scale. Not to mention that they standardised the Greek language, eventually resulting to what is today modern Greek.

Now the ball is being played on a gentic level. If the Ohrid samples are Illyrian. Then they are simply a South Illyrians, with whatever difference they have from North Illyrians. Who cares? If they are Molossian, then this is where the North Greeks plot at that time. They had a little bit more steppe than Mycenaeans. However, if they are Macedonians, then hold your horses. We have evidence that they are not Greeks, because they do not completely overlap with Myceneans.

If other modern Balkan people's want to claim some paleo-balkan kinship with them. That's absolutely fine. The problem in the Balkans is that people emphasize differences, rather than similarities. As Milan.M correctly argues, Alexander's conquest started off as a pan-Balkan expedition. Under the Hellenic banner.


which are the other Illyrian tribes around Lake Ohrid ................I have no idea when the The Enchelei/Sesarethii arrived in Lake Ohrid from Budva Montenegro as this place ( Montenegro ) is where they where ruled by Cadmus and Harmonia before moving centuries later around lake Ohrid

The Enchelei or Sesarethii ( what Strabo called them ) were an Illyrian tribe.
 
Some people here, must realize 2 things,

1, Minoans, major Myceneans, what we called Helladic civilizations, may not be 'pure IE'
2, IE came to Helladic space from North, from Vucocar,
3, comcerning the Mycenean world, and the Hellenic non Mycenean we understand the exact migrations,
4, the Northern points of Myceneans are mt Olymp, and Dodone sacred grounds,
5, The Northern areas of Proto-Greek is lake lychinitis today Ohrid,
6, the pass of Greco-Brygian to Proto-Greek to Classical Greek, has a lot of changes, one basic is Dias to Theos,
that means when primitive Greek pass to Minoan-Minyan-Mycenean etc world, linguistic changes happened,
same happens after Roman occupation, Christianity, and Slavic entrance, changes like Basilice to Vasilike needs milleniums to become Lingua Franca, and may not happen if there is no starter,

Now considering the complex co-existance of Makedonians with Brygians, and all what today scientists found, develop and apply,
Major Makedonians and Epirotes were more from the stuff that was closer to Greco-Brygian, than the older Minoan-Minyan-Mycenean stuff.

220px-Proto_Greek_Area_reconstruction.png




Mycenaean_world_empty.png

d1d46db1f69d0521891799bcab8ebc62.jpg


Still dreaming for Vucovar, the route of Hellenes passes was from Easter Thrace not Vucovar per Lazaridis at al. So Έλληνe δεν θα γίνεις Ιλλυρo ποτέ’.

In addition Albanian becomes a sister language for Greek from a genetic prospective. Who would have thought that, Lazaridis wants to make us Greeks, it seem the Armenian brothers are not that close after all even though initially they are though to be very close and went to Anatolia from the Balkans.

Also note that the arrival of the Greek in the Balkans now is around 1600 BC. Late comers it seems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don't think from Southern arch paper the samples from modern South-West/Lake Ohrid of modern North Macedonia was part of Ancient Macedonia, especially not in Iron Age. Perhaps we can argue about the samples of Isar-Marvinci, Idomenae which is approximately part of the southernmost city of Gevgelija of Northern Macedonia. That's it.

Do you believe that samples from Lake Ohrid will be very different from the ones that will come from Ancient Macedonia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Do you believe that samples from Lake Ohrid will be very different from the ones that will come from Ancient Macedonia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Blevins, we already have samples from Ohrid, this is how they can be modeled, a compromise between south Illyrians and Paeonians. Take note, the sample from Korca also belongs to this exact group. The Ohrid group forms it's own cluster.

uUIrHGb.png
 
Blevins, we already have samples from Ohrid, this is how they can be modeled, a compromise between south Illyrians and Paeonians. Take note, the sample from Korca also belongs to this exact group. The Ohrid group forms it's own cluster.

uUIrHGb.png

My question relates to Ancient Macedonian. Do you believe they will be different from the ones from Lake Ohrid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My question relates to Ancient Macedonian. Do you believe they will be different from the ones from Lake Ohrid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Based on Y-haplogroup(J2a) association of the Ohrid series, they are the ones most likely related to the proper Macedonians. Also the Korca sample which is clearly missdated points to R-PF7563 being present in Epirus and Macedonia as well. One of the Cinamak samples was R-PF7562, don't know if that is certain and negative for the downstream to R-PF7563.

Korca misdated MKD and Alb Cinamak 14688, both might carry the same haplgroup, somewhat similar profile too.

nLsD5Oq.png
 
Last edited:
d1d46db1f69d0521891799bcab8ebc62.jpg


Still dreaming for Vucovar, the route of Hellenes passes was from Easter Thrace not Vucovar per Lazaridis at al. So Έλληνe δεν θα γίνεις Ιλλυρo ποτέ’.

In addition Albanian becomes a sister language for Greek from a genetic prospective. Who would have thought that, Lazaridis wants to make us Greeks, it seem the Armenian brothers are not that close after all even though initially they are though to be very close and went to Anatolia from the Balkans.o

Also note that the arrival of the Greek in the Balkans now is around 1600 BC. Late comers it seems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


By 1700BCE “Greeks” were already in Greece, that’s the academic consensus. And by Greeks I mean the yamnaya-Minoan mix. We do have radiocarbon methods and archaeological material you know. The yamnaya branch that spoke protogreek has obviously been in the general Balkan area for longer. And no lazaridis isn’t trying to “make you Greek”, it is the data that points towards Greeks and Albanians and maybe Armenians having a direct common yamnaya ancestral population (wouldn’t be surprised if Armenians are one step removed and there is a grecoalbanian yamnaya sister group to them that went to Balkans). I can’t even begin to fathom why you find any of that controversial.
 
It amazes me that some people can still be so clueless that they don't get that the EVERYBODY in the Balkans was Anatolian/European farmer like, present in the area since at least 4000 B.C., who then got some ADDITIONAL Anatolian, but more Iranian Neo like ancestry, and then some Yamnaya like or Corded Ware like ancestry.

The ancient Greeks didn't have an OLDER presence than anyone else, and neither did the ancient Albanians.

The last major folk migration was that of the Slavic speaking peoples. EVERYONE also got some part of that, but some less than others. So, if someone wanted to look at it in a nonsensical, which population is older way, the populations with more "Slavic" would be "younger". It's a stupid exercise, however, imo.
 
The ancient Greeks didn't have an OLDER presence than anyone else, and neither did the ancient Albanians.

The last major folk migration was that of the Slavic speaking peoples. EVERYONE also got some part of that, but some less than others. So, if someone wanted to look at it in a nonsensical, which population is older way, the populations with more "Slavic" would be "younger". It's a stupid exercise, however, imo.

I don’t think that Greek and Albanians arrived in the Balkans at the same time. The one that branched later from Armenian is the late arrival. In this case would be Greeks. As for who get more new recent immigrant or invaders become “younger” and who has less remains “older” is something that makes no sense to me. The arrival of a certain people in a certain place that speak a certain language doesn’t depends from who them absorb subsequently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
By 1700BCE “Greeks” were already in Greece, that’s the academic consensus. And by Greeks I mean the yamnaya-Minoan mix. We do have radiocarbon methods and archaeological material you know. The yamnaya branch that spoke protogreek has obviously been in the general Balkan area for longer. And no lazaridis isn’t trying to “make you Greek”, it is the data that points towards Greeks and Albanians and maybe Armenians having a direct common yamnaya ancestral population (wouldn’t be surprised if Armenians are one step removed and there is a grecoalbanian yamnaya sister group to them that went to Balkans). I can’t even begin to fathom why you find any of that controversial.

So why Lazaridis shows 1500 BC in the map for the yamnaya intrusion into Mycenaean culture?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don’t think that Greek and Albanians arrived in the Balkans at the same time. The one that branched later from Armenian is the late arrival. In this case would be Greeks. As for who get more new recent immigrant or invaders become “younger” and who has less remains “older” is something that makes no sense to me. The arrival of a certain people in a certain place that speak a certain language doesn’t depends from who them absorb subsequently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have no freaking idea when Albanian speakers arrived in the Balkans and neither does anyone else.
 
So why Lazaridis shows 1500 BC in the map for the yamnaya intrusion into Mycenaean culture?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was no “yamnaya intrusion into Mycenean culture”. There were no Myceneans before yamnaya merged with what we presume (and dna seems to concur) “minoan-like”’ populations of the area that became known as Greece. There are several Mycenean chamber tombs all around Greece (even in Messenia in the extreme southwest, total opposite from their entry point to Greece) dated from 1600BCE already. Yamnaya didn’t teleport from Ukraine to Peloponnesus you know, it took centuries to get there.
What I understand from the map and the pie charts above is what Lazaridis gives as a rough genome approximation in Greece after the first stage of Greek ethnogenesis was completed.
At that point Myceneans were a nation and a political power, strong enough that after Minoan Knossos (probably the last bastion of the minoan like people) got destroyed in 1450BCE they swept in and conquered crete. There is ample evidence of change in burial structures and administration at that exact point.
https://academia.edu/resource/work/30141476

There is no way in hell yamnaya appeared in 1500BCE and within 50 years, although grossly outnumbered they spread their language to everyone, created a nation and mounted and offensive to Crete.
 
There was no “yamnaya intrusion into Mycenean culture”. There were no Myceneans before yamnaya merged with what we presume (and dna seems to concur) “minoan-like”’ populations of the area that became known as Greece. There are several Mycenean chamber tombs all around Greece (even in Messenia in the extreme southwest, total opposite from their entry point to Greece) dated from 1600BCE already. Yamnaya didn’t teleport from Ukraine to Peloponnesus you know, it took centuries to get there.
What I understand from the map and the pie charts above is what Lazaridis gives as a rough genome approximation in Greece after the first stage of Greek ethnogenesis was completed.
At that point Myceneans were a nation and a political power, strong enough that after Minoan Knossos (probably the last bastion of the minoan like people) got destroyed in 1450BCE they swept in and conquered crete. There is ample evidence of change in burial structures and administration at that exact point.
https://academia.edu/resource/work/30141476

There is no way in hell yamnaya appeared in 1500BCE and within 50 years, although grossly outnumbered they spread their language to everyone, created a nation and mounted and offensive to Crete.

Hell or no hell read the graph explanations
Nr.2 Arrow- Beginning ~5000 (3,000 BCE) years ago,Yamnaya expansions introduced Eastern European ancestry (red) west into the Balkans and Greece and east across the Caucasus into Armenia.

Balkans: 3000–1000 BCE
Armenia: 2000–1000 BCE
Greece: 1500 - 1000 BCE

18aa33a6ddc1e340ce79f3267eaab13d.jpg


Notice the presumed proto- Greek as a separate migration path and their estimated appearance in Greece.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You have no freaking idea when Albanian speakers arrived in the Balkans and neither does anyone else.

d6cb569d923174c9ebd0bb4f70376b7a.jpg


This is what we know from the paper.

Beginning ~5000 (3,000 BCE) years ago,Yamnaya expansions introduced
Eastern European ancestry (red)
west into the Balkans and Greece
and east across the Caucasus into
Armenia.

Balkans: 3000–1000 BCE
Armenia: 2000–1000 BCE
Greece: 1500 - 1000 BCE

And this is what can be inferred from Linguistics. Armenian and Greek languages are closer between each other than with Albanian. So logically Albanian should have split from them first with the group of Paleo Balkans, either wise will be closer to Greek or to Armenian.

P.S. I am going to enjoy so much going forward all the new theories of how close Albanian and Greek languages are from the same people that denied that in the past.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Hell or no hell read the graph explanations
Nr.2 Arrow- Beginning ~5000 (3,000 BCE) years ago,Yamnaya expansions introduced Eastern European ancestry (red) west into the Balkans and Greece and east across the Caucasus into Armenia.
Balkans: 3000–1000 BCE
Armenia: 2000–1000 BCE
Greece: 1500 - 1000 BCE
18aa33a6ddc1e340ce79f3267eaab13d.jpg

Notice the presumed proto- Greek as a separate migration path and their estimated appearance in Greece.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I answered to all that. Yamnaya are in Ukraine in 3000BCE, they spread from there and by 1500BCE Greeks exist. There is nothing in this map that alludes to yamnaya arriving to Greece in 1500BCE and we know for a fact their presence to be earlier than that. As I said academic consensus places the first Mycenean presence as far back as 1750BCE. Don’t take my word, have a peer reviewed work from 2021.

https://i.ibb.co/hcdSSTT/E0882-D5-D-E4-C3-401-D-BB9-A-0373765268-C2.jpg

https://www.luminosoa.org/site/books/10.1525/luminos.101/read/?loc=001.xhtml

That’s the birth certificate of Greeks.
 
I answered to all that. Yamnaya are in Ukraine in 3000BCE, they spread from there and by 1500BCE Greeks exist. There is nothing in this map that alludes to yamnaya arriving to Greece in 1500BCE and we know for a fact their presence to be earlier than that. As I said academic consensus places the first Mycenean presence as far back as 1750BCE. Don’t take my word, have a peer reviewed work from 2021.

https://i.ibb.co/hcdSSTT/E0882-D5-D-E4-C3-401-D-BB9-A-0373765268-C2.jpg

https://www.luminosoa.org/site/books/10.1525/luminos.101/read/?loc=001.xhtml

That’s the birth certificate of Greeks.

1750 BCE or 1,500 BCE makes a little difference. Per Lazaridis, Yamnaya languages were used as lingua Franka. There was no drastic change on the Minionian - like population.

For me this scenario is hard to buy at this stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1750 BCE or 1,500 BCE makes a little difference. Per Lazaridis, Yamnaya languages were used as lingua Franka. There was no drastic change on the Minionian - like population.

For me this scenario is hard to buy at this stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So are you suggesting that the yamnaya picked up more EEF/CHG or whatnot ancestry on their way to what today is Greece, their numbers were big but their steppe already diluted? Or that they arrived even earlier in small undiluted numbers and took them a while to spread their language without affecting the autosomal character that much? Because we know for a fact that in the 1700s there is a culture change, we know that by 1450 a complete language shift across the whole Helladic world was concluded with Crete switching last, and we know all these changes coincide with the introduction of steppe ancestry in the area. If you have another interpretation of the data I am willing to listen.
 

This thread has been viewed 78247 times.

Back
Top