Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
These were the formative migrations that spawned modern Northern and Southern Europeans:
IA Sicily, these averages? What does it really prove? Again, Fernandes modeled Sicily EBA with Minoan. The same could be done with Daunians, as Aneli showed. Lazaridis showed that many Balkanites could be modeled with the Northern model.
We also know that Minoans had some various percentages of CHG/Levant_PPN.
Also, I do think there was some impact from the Eastern Mediterranean people in the Imperial era, but not to a major extent. I do think some of the extra levant could have come from the Greek Colonies too by the way. But whole sale population replacement is preposterous.
Southern Italy is an amalgamation of this BA Balkan continuum, but also influenced from the continuum adjacent of Latins/Etruscans.
It is really not a hard concept to comprehend. It is Iron clade in terms of history. I find it stunning that some people deny reality. Even when academic analysis insists it to be true.
Southern Italy is an amalgamation of this BA Balkan continuum, but also influenced from the continuum adjacent of Latins/Etruscans.
It is really not a hard concept to comprehend. It is Iron clade in terms of history. I find it stunning that some people deny reality. Even when academic analysis insists it to be true.
I do not think we should discard Logkas. Back when everyone was saying Logkas was just an outlier, a dead end, having nothing to do with modern people, before Southern Arc even came out, a Greek friend on discords, DFST was pointing out to me that using Logkas for modern Greeks and Albanians was giving viable runs. To be honest, we were trying every sample we could. But the point is that everyone was discarding those samples a priori, because their profile at the time was a total outlier, even in the paper they came out in they were described as such IIRC.
Ps. I understand that nationalism is very strong in the wider region, and Greeks hold history with pride, as they should. But what I fail to grasp is why everything has to immediately be covered with the label Greek even on semi serious fora. Greek Minoans, Greek Myceneans, Greek Logkas, Greek Anatolians, lol. I mean this in a reasonable way, although I obviously find it funny. How can Logkas, Anatolians, as well as Myceneans be simultaneously Greek despite their differences in culture and genetics... seems contradictory.
I am not even an expert in any of these fields, but a contradiction is a contradiction.
Edit: I also think this very paper will try to answer the questions you raised, and clarify what synthesis of peoples and cultures took place in Greece. Is it known how many samples it contains?
I would argue that there is also the other side of the coin. Some argue that Greeks are only truly Greek if they genetically overlap with Mycenaens. While the habitat of the Greek people has expanded since the Bronze Age. Somehow though, ancient people from areas like Epirus and Thessaly are not truly Greek because they do not overlap with Mycenaeans further South. Even though proto-Greek came from that exact area. I understand that genetic signature of Logkas type people might have disolved somewhat. But I doubt the people from Thessaly were identical to Mycenaenas during that era.
And what about Greek speaking people living in Western Anatolia in antiquity. Some calculate that they are Mycenaean + something else. So by these standards many ancient Greeks were not Greek because they were not fully Mycenaean? Even though the Ancient Greeks who are most known to us lived in the Classical Age or the Hellenistic Age.So Homer, Herodotus, Diogenes etc. were not fully Mycenaean and therefore not truly Greek?
Should we perhaps instead argue that the Ancient Greeks are the biological product of their environment which is centered along the Aegean? And that they encompassed Mycenaean, Balkanic and Anatolian elements.
First, J2a what? The J2a-M410 samples from ancient Greece are very diverse many clades having a most recent common ancestor in the upper Paleolithic and late Mesolithic even. Also a lot of dead end Anatolian CA/BA derived branches come solely from Minoan sites in Crete, these are absolutely absent in the Balkan Neolithics. I have talked about this in the Balkan BA thread.So far J2a branches seem to predate IE peoples, Myceneans etc, and to be spread from Greece to Croatia to Moldova already in the Neolithic.
Where would Sal 003 and Sal 010 samples plot in a PCA?
If you use Lasithi, Perta or Zakros minoans, you would see a lot of the extra CHG get eaten up. I don't think Daunians are native to Apulia. I believe they came from the Balkans in the LBA.All the samples that have Caucasus ( red ) do not match the ancient samples that where also found .............seems like two different waves
If you use Lasithi, Perta or Zakros minoans, you would see a lot of the extra CHG get eaten up. I don't think Daunians are native to Apulia. I believe they came from the Balkans in the LBA.
So, basically SAL010 it's already in the C6 cluster, isn't it?The other plots with samples like R437.
Yes, I think that would be illuminating to see in a model. Eastern Peloponnesians as shown on Raveane et al. 2022, like Apulians, have a very high affinity to Neolithic Greece. Which would make them the closest of all, considering they're actually Greeks in the Peloponnese.Perhaps the comparisons using ancient samples should be done with the Peloponnesian samples used in George Stamatoyannopouloset al, given that...
"Subjects were includedin the study if all four grandparents originated from the same village or fromvillages that were o10 kilometers apart. The ages of most participants rangedbetween 70 and 90 years (the oldest subject was 107 years old); hence theirgrandparents were born between 1860 and 1880. In the 1861 census thepopulation of Peloponnese was 578 598 individuals. At that time the economyof Peloponnese was exclusively agricultural and over 85% of the population wasliving in small villages and hamlets. We sampled all the districts of Peloponnese(Figure 1a and Supplementary Table 1) and also focused on two culturallydistinct subpopulations, the Tsacones and the Maniots."
One can thus be assured that the "modern" samples are not from Athens, and certainly are not from people admixed with refugees arriving in the 20th century.
See: Genetics of the peloponnesean populations and the theory of extinction of the medieval peloponnesean Greeks (purdue.edu)
So, basically SAL010 it's already in the C6 cluster, isn't it?
These were the formative migrations that spawned modern Northern and Southern Europeans:
IA Sicily, these averages? What does it really prove? Again, Fernandes modeled Sicily EBA with Minoan. The same could be done with Daunians, as Aneli showed. Lazaridis showed that many Balkanites could be modeled with the Northern model.
We also know that Minoans had some various percentages of CHG/Levant_PPN.
Also, I do think there was some impact from the Eastern Mediterranean people in the Imperial era, but not to a major extent. I do think some of the extra levant could have come from the Greek Colonies too by the way. But whole sale population replacement is preposterous.
Perhaps the comparisons using ancient samples should be done with the Peloponnesian samples used in George Stamatoyannopouloset al, given that...
This wouldn't be representative of the Northern Greeks, before or after the population exchange.
In my opinion, if we want to compare ancient Greeks with modern Greeks, we should take in to account two considerations: a chronological and a geographical one.Perhaps the comparisons using ancient samples should be done with the Peloponnesian samples used in George Stamatoyannopouloset al, given that...
You will never have published samples from ancient South Macedonia and ancient South Epirus. All that pileus (plis in Albanian) in those coins that is still used in Albania shows a little bit of what the DNA could hold. Too riskyIn my opinion, if we want to compare ancient Greeks with modern Greeks, we should take in to account two considerations: a chronological and a geographical one.
Speaking of the chronological consideration, we have to keep in mind that archaic era and classical Greeks may have been pretty similar to Myceneans, but they also might show some differences. So far we have very few samples from Iron age Greeks and some of them seem a little bit more pulled towards the current east med cline. This could be due to interaction both with the northern regions and with the poleis of the anatolian coast.
This brings us to the geographical consideration: unless I missed them, we still have very few samples from Northern Greece (we have samples from north Macedonia, but if I remember correctly it's contemporary Republic of North Macedonia and not ancient Macedonia) and we should not assume they could have looked the same as bronze age myceneans from Southern Greece. At the same time, we already know that Greek colonies on the anatolian coast experience significant amount of admixture with the autoctonous elements.
I believe all this points should be taken in to account of we want to speculate the degree of continuity between modern and classical Greeks.
This thread has been viewed 131013 times.