- This topic has 91 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Tell me about the ‘dorian invasion’?
How did Greece change from bronze age collapse to the classical period? -
Were the Mycenae Indo European speakers?
-
Yes.
[…]
Never happened, the ancestors of the later Classical Dorians already lived in the Peloponesse during the Bronze age.
Mycenean Greece was wrecked by the Bronze age collapse.-
>already lived in the Peloponesse during the Bronze age.
No reason to believe that
-
-
Never happened
Throw this in translate
https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9A%CE%AC%CE%B8%CE%BF%CE%B4%CE%BF%CF%82_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CE%94%CF%89%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%AD%CF%89%CE%BD
TLDR "dorian invasion" was coined to describe a decline but there are no proof supporting an invasion of any kind and nothing adds up in general. Dorians were Achaeans who moved to the north and then came back down hence the term "return of the Heraclids"Bilingual
-
What do you mean bilingual? Also did classical greeks speak the exact same language as myceneans?
-
there have been inscriptions from the mycenaean era that were in linear b as well as a
>Also did classical greeks speak the exact same language as myceneans?
Same language yes, just not the exact same. It changed a bit over timezero evidence, all evidence points otherwise, term was coined to describe things that can’t be explained by an invasion, dorians were achaeans…
need I go on?
>People don’t just change their entire material culture on their own.
Whatever caused it (assuming it’s not blown out of proportions) it wasn’t an invasion. There are simply no evidence
find another theory-
what’s your theory then?
-
I have none nor I care construct one. It could be something as idiotic a hipster king enforcing it just because
Coming up with a theory is not my problemLinear A was the minoan language
and there are records (I think in herodotus? can’t recall) where people speaking eteocretan are mentioned. Those were old anatolian languages and didn’t disappear
-
-
>in linear b
That is just a script they borrowed and changed making into their own
That doesn’t make them bilingual-
[…]
Linear A was the minoan language
and there are records (I think in herodotus? can’t recall) where people speaking eteocretan are mentioned. Those were old anatolian languages and didn’t disappearhere’s some stuff, even older than linear a although linear a existed since the first anatolian colonization in some form probably. The Greek alphabet that was used for classical greek existed as far back as 5000BC and was adapted
>Cretan hieroglyphs are a hieroglyphic writing system used in early Bronze Age Crete, during the Minoan era. They predate Linear A by about a century, but the two writing systems continued to be used in parallel for most of their history.[1] As of 2021, they are undeciphered.-
>In eastern Crete, about half a dozen inscriptions have been found, which, though written in Greek alphabets, are clearly not Greek.[citation needed] These inscriptions date from the late 7th or early 6th century down to the 3rd century BC. The language, which so far cannot be translated, is probably a survival of a language spoken on Crete before the arrival of proto-Greek language and is probably derived from the Minoan language preserved in the Linear A inscriptions of a millennium earlier. Since that language remains undeciphered, it is not certain that Eteocretan and Minoan are related, although this is very likely.
>Eteocypriot was a pre-Indo-European language spoken in Iron Age Cyprus. The name means "true" or "original Cypriot" parallel to Eteocretan, both of which names are used by modern scholarship to mean the pre-Greek languages of those places.[2] Eteocypriot was written in the Cypriot syllabary, a syllabic script derived from Linear A (via the Cypro-Minoan variant Linear C). The language was under pressure from Arcadocypriot Greek from about the 10th century BC and finally became extinct in about the 4th century BC.
-
You aren’t making any sense
Cretan hieroglyphs appear around 1800 BC possibly representing minoan language followed by linear a script-
ah shit read "A" in linear a as "B"
this>Eteocypriot was a pre-Indo-European language spoken in Iron Age Cyprus. The name means "true" or "original Cypriot" parallel to Eteocretan, both of which names are used by modern scholarship to mean the pre-Greek languages of those places.[2] Eteocypriot was written in the Cypriot syllabary, a syllabic script derived from Linear A (via the Cypro-Minoan variant Linear C). The language was under pressure from Arcadocypriot Greek from about the 10th century BC and finally became extinct in about the 4th century BC.
is what I was talking about originally (bilingual)
-
-
-
-
-
-
False
What do you mean bilingual? Also did classical greeks speak the exact same language as myceneans?
They spoke Greek, and the first people to do so in the region. Subsequent Greek speakers were their descendants and offshoots.
-
-
Yes, Linear B is an Indo European language.
-
-
I’m very surprised to see people saying there was no Dorian invasion. There is very significant discontinuity in Greece during the bronze age collapse. People don’t just change their entire material culture on their own.
-
Greeks want to pretend like they are the autochthonous people of the region, when they are the invaders from the north.
-
Gemetics have shown modern Greeks to be the nearest match to those ancient populations. A 2017 study I believe
-
yeah this one
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature23310
Fst aside, admixture-wise the genetic composure is very similar as well (this from a 2021 study)
That study ran a qpAdm for southern greeks and found something like 80% mycenaean in the supplemental but it wasn’t in the original study so I guess we’ll have to wait for a study on classical greece compared to their predecessors (Mycenaeans)-
Learn to read
> Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1,2, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus3 and Iran4,5. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6,7,8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1,6,9 or Armenia4,9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.Mycenaeans were already mutts but still had a large CWC origin Nordic descent.
-
Seethe harder
-
I’m sorry? What do you imagine this says?
Mycenaeans were descended from CWC, which is 50% Anatolian, 50% Steppe, on average.
Mycenaeans in Peloponnesus we’re about 10-14% Steppe.
Most Greeks today in south Greece, Crete, and the islands are Minoan/Pelasgian with some Siberian.
Most Greeks in the north are Slavic with some Anatolian , and some Siberian.
-
Showing 12% pure steppe means 30% admixture or something
Because people who brought it certainly weren’t pure yamnaya-
Yeah, qpAdm in the 2021 study about Aegeans and MBA samples in northern Greece puts it at around 66-33 or 70-30
Either from bronze age balkans or from armenia (or some area below armenia probably)
Both admixture models fit just as well -
Yea or even higher, 40-50%.
-
Only if you’re talking about armenia (38%)
if you’re talking about balkans it’s 30% and if you’re talking about steppe_MLBA which is around 60-65% steppe and the rest is anatolian and whg then it’s 20% at best-
It’s difficult to say. The Anatolian that shows up in Mycenaeans is not all from locals. Some of it is from Anatolians who left 2-3000 years prior and went up to Poland.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
That’s not true.
It was reported all over the place but here are the facts:
> The ancient DNA comes from the teeth of 19 people, including 10 Minoans from Crete dating to 2900 B.C.E. to 1700 BCE, four Mycenaeans from the archaeological site at Mycenae and other cemeteries on the Greek mainland dating from 1700 B.C.E. to 1200 B.C.E., and five people from other early farming or Bronze Age (5400 B.C.E. to 1340 B.C.E.) cultures in Greece and Turkey. By comparing 1.2 million letters of genetic code across these genomes to those of 334 other ancient people from around the world and 30 modern Greeks, the researchers were able to plot how the individuals were related to each otherBasically they found that 30 people in Crete were 60-70% Minoan DNA. As expected. Cretans are majority Anatolian to this day.
-
yeah this one
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature23310
Fst aside, admixture-wise the genetic composure is very similar as well (this from a 2021 study)
That study ran a qpAdm for southern greeks and found something like 80% mycenaean in the supplemental but it wasn’t in the original study so I guess we’ll have to wait for a study on classical greece compared to their predecessors (Mycenaeans)They aren’t the closest match
Even southern greeks have 20+% increase in yamnaya related admixture which in the most optimistic scenario means ~40% new admixture plus other ~10% Levant PPNB which means 20+% levant iron age admixture-
Seethe harder
>20% yamnaya
It doesn’t exceed 18% in north greece which has the highest steppe %
what causes you to be this delusional?-
How does your image supposedly refute this:
Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 2.2455% / 0.02245537
51.4 TUR_Barcin_N
33.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
10.2 Levant_PPNB
4.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.6 WHG
0.2 GEO_CHGTarget: GRC_Mycenaean
Distance: 1.8191% / 0.01819109
73.2 TUR_Barcin_N
11.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
7.2 GEO_CHG
6.2 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
2.2 Levant_PPNB-
>how does an academic study supposedly refute my meme statistics
Are you mentally challenged?-
Are you? Your entire claim is that oh modern Greeks are brainwashed Anatolians to a large extent so I guess that they really do resemble ancient Mycenaeans who were 70% Anatolian.
-
I have made no claims in this thread
>already lived in the Peloponesse during the Bronze age.
No reason to believe thatAncient Greeks confirm it themselves, see
Never happened
Throw this in translate
https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9A%CE%AC%CE%B8%CE%BF%CE%B4%CE%BF%CF%82_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CE%94%CF%89%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%AD%CF%89%CE%BD
TLDR "dorian invasion" was coined to describe a decline but there are no proof supporting an invasion of any kind and nothing adds up in general. Dorians were Achaeans who moved to the north and then came back down hence the term "return of the Heraclids"Bilingual
-
Woke af as fuck, the return of dorians to Greece was an important part of hellenic history.
I still wonder how much time before greeks start counter all those whites and MENAs claiming their history.
-
So is this how spartans looked like?
-
-
-
What’s special and “Greek” about the Mycenaeans is their CWC part, not their Anatolian part.
-
That is some shitty Fst map that lazaridis put it at the end as if it proves continuity it’s irrelevant
He doesn’t even go over the differences between ancient and modern not even admixture analysis-
I always find literal nobodies on LULZ seething at academic papers because they don’t like the results funny
Please provide your own academic paper-
>Please provide your own academic paper
What do you think these samples are from? You think i sequenced them in my own lab?How does your image supposedly refute this:
Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 2.2455% / 0.02245537
51.4 TUR_Barcin_N
33.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
10.2 Levant_PPNB
4.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.6 WHG
0.2 GEO_CHGTarget: GRC_Mycenaean
Distance: 1.8191% / 0.01819109
73.2 TUR_Barcin_N
11.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
7.2 GEO_CHG
6.2 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
2.2 Levant_PPNBThe author of the paper is greek he can manipulate the impression people get from reading the study but cant change the genomes which we have and can analyze with these basic calculators
-
>noooo I don’t like that evidence therefore they aren’t true
>here see this totally not meme numbers
Oh noes I guess the public discourse will now consider your larpery over official papers -
>muh basic components breakdown is a meme
Lol live your fantasy dreams then
Whatever helps you sleep -
see
picrel is a basic component breakdown from an academic paper. There is no more shift than 20% in total, and yamnaya component in the north, the most yamnaya-rich area, has less than 20% yamnaya (it’s 18%)
Furthermore the Fst disproves your meme claim that modern meds aren’t the closest match for mycenaeans (or minoans for that matter) -
paper is here https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33930288/
-
Your paper (by biased greeks too) agrees with G25 (why would it even not!)
You have way more HG related admixture yamnaya is made up of + CHG, and way less Anatolia neolithic. Basically the same conclusion
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8127963/figure/fig3/?report=objectonly -
that’s in k=3
see page 41 for k=6
why are you coping this hard? Please provide a paper that proves both of these papers wrong -
K=6 you have the component high in other slavic admixed balkans and almost absent in the 4 myceneans. Literally no difference plus k=3 is lowest error but no difference either way
-
-
What component? We’re talking about how Yamnaya DNA doesn’t exceed 20% anywhere in Greece and how the closest relatives of Mycenaeans (and not just "distant relatives") are modern meds
Both of these are confirmed by multiple studies, see picrel for example
You have not provided a single study refuting these findings -
>Yamnaya DNA doesn’t exceed 20% anywhere in Greece
OFC it does even in freaking crete, don’t know about your height graph
Here are the samples with different regionsTarget: Greek_Crete
Distance: 2.0498% / 0.02049850
44.8 TUR_Barcin_N
22.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
17.0 Levant_PPNB
8.6 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
7.0 GEO_CHGTarget: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 2.2455% / 0.02245537
51.4 TUR_Barcin_N
33.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
10.2 Levant_PPNB
4.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.6 WHG
0.2 GEO_CHGTarget: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 3.0782% / 0.03078216
53.2 TUR_Barcin_N
35.8 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
5.0 Levant_PPNB
2.8 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
2.0 WHG
1.2 GEO_CHG -
>still doesn’t post a study but resorts to meme stats
Holy pathetic cope -
The dude who conducted the study is Swiss if I remember correctly
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Also they didn’t look like that. This armor is not Greek armor. It’s Carian-Anatolian armor that classical era Greeks copied/stole.
Pic related is Mycenaean Greek armor.
-
That helmet is strictly Mycenaean.
-
-
If you speak Greek, you speak the language of a northern Siberian descended “Nordic” people.
-
PIE werent nordic.
-
No, but CWC were, and the Greeks are not archaic IE— but CWC IE.
-
CWC weren’t too, most of them had dark hair and eyes.
>Greeks are not archaic IE— but CWC IE.
Nevermind, the original IE were Yamnayas.
CWC, sintashta, greeks, celts, germanics, slavs and others are rapebabies.
-
-
-
-
What most Greeks have in common with Mycenaeans is their Minoan/Pelasgian/Anatolian DNA.
-
Hey lads I just let a transvestite ejaculate inside my ass and now my ass is leaking semen everywhere
Should I go see a doctor?
-
Cope. Not me.
This is me
Mycenaeans were already mutts but still had a large CWC origin Nordic descent.
It was reported all over the place but here are the facts:
> The ancient DNA comes from the teeth of 19 people, including 10 Minoans from Crete dating to 2900 B.C.E. to 1700 BCE, four Mycenaeans from the archaeological site at Mycenae and other cemeteries on the Greek mainland dating from 1700 B.C.E. to 1200 B.C.E., and five people from other early farming or Bronze Age (5400 B.C.E. to 1340 B.C.E.) cultures in Greece and Turkey. By comparing 1.2 million letters of genetic code across these genomes to those of 334 other ancient people from around the world and 30 modern Greeks, the researchers were able to plot how the individuals were related to each otherBasically they found that 30 people in Crete were 60-70% Minoan DNA. As expected. Cretans are majority Anatolian to this day.
If you speak Greek, you speak the language of a northern Siberian descended “Nordic” people.
What most Greeks have in common with Mycenaeans is their Minoan/Pelasgian/Anatolian DNA.
I’m sorry? What do you imagine this says?
Mycenaeans were descended from CWC, which is 50% Anatolian, 50% Steppe, on average.
Mycenaeans in Peloponnesus we’re about 10-14% Steppe.
Most Greeks today in south Greece, Crete, and the islands are Minoan/Pelasgian with some Siberian.
Most Greeks in the north are Slavic with some Anatolian , and some Siberian.
-
-
Here we go. Back to it boys.
-
-myceneans are not the same as classical greeks
-mycebeans are not the same as minoans at all
-modern greeks are slav arab rapebabies/thread
-
The only relation between greeks and germutts is the massive disgust greeks felt over those barbaric tribes.
You will never be mediterraneans, no history up there until 1000 AD.
End of thr story. -
You need to fuck off already you deranged schizo
-
once read a theory that said that the Dorian invasions were actually slave revolts. pretty crackpot though.
-
Dorian invaders came form the north though didn’t they?
-
there’s the theory that they were in the Dorida area which is just above Peloponnese, to the west of athens
Yeah I don’t think they were slaves, the ancients say that they were just achaeans who moved northwards
Dorida is right above Achaea
-
-
-
I know classical greeks believed it happened. They claimed dorians invaded the Peloponnesus and enslaved the previous inhabitans (Ilotes)
According to their myths, the Dorians were the descendants of the hundreds of son of Heracles than moved north of greece under the promise of some horale that one thay they would had been allowed to return south and rule over the countless cities that surrended to Heracles and promised to recognize him and his descendants as king
Their armies invaded proper Greece somewhere after the War of Troy, Destroyed cities like Mycene and Tyrinth (old Corinth) and occupied Pelopponesus. The two kings of Sparta were considered direct descendants of these Eraklidis-
He’s talking about the "Dorian invasion" as in the theory to explain the bronze age collapse (which doesn’t take into account the classical sources besides a basic "people named dorians move downwards")
-
-
>the same slimy cherrypicking of low K meme admixture that specifically doesn’t distinguish mesolithic/neolithic CHG in the steppe and neolithic Iran in the middle east
*yaaaaawn*, every single time
you’d think after getting demolished by what has been shown in Italy they’d learn their lesson but nope, we’d have to wait for the soon to be published equivalent study on Greece to maybe hope for a 1% chance they’ll stop the cope(extremely unlikely)
there is already a hint in the Balkans paper from few weeks ago that Roman era Greece also got shifted towards MENA just like Italy, and they too find that much of Greece, especially islanders, cannot at all be modeled as simply Slav+Mycenaean but need a specifically MENA shifted Roman era source from mainland Greece
and for Peloponnese Greeks too the 2-way simple model is borderline fail(p-value of 0.015), because they too obviously would better fit as 3-way mix of Mycenaean+MENA+Slav
even simple uniparentals would be enough to completely demolish any great idea of continuity but whatever-
Modern Slav does doesn’t work either because they have too much WHG which will underestimate their northern admixture
-
obviously it’s not a direct Russian or Polish source that went straight to Greece, but some source mixed with WHG-poor Balkanites, which means even bigger Balkan slav medieval ancestry
-
how can a modern population have higher WHG than an older population?
-
I don’t know but using modern slavs with too much WHG understimates their northern admixture less than the yamnaya increase implies
For example a population like hungarian with high yamnaya but less WHG results in more admixture so this too much WHG In the reference population restricts the models
> post a study
These samples are from the studies and you posted your greek studies and got BTFO already[…]
Your paper (by biased greeks too) agrees with G25 (why would it even not!)
You have way more HG related admixture yamnaya is made up of + CHG, and way less Anatolia neolithic. Basically the same conclusion
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8127963/figure/fig3/?report=objectonly*Forgot the link
https://els-jbs-prod-cdn.jbs.elsevierhealth.com/cms/attachment/b2e378e0-baf5-461c-a859-cc2ada5cbcea/figs5_lrg.jpg-
>discredits studies because he doesn’t like the authors (some aren’t even greeks) but he can’t refute the studies one bit
>doesn’t post another study
>does his own meme calculations with his own meme calculators and expects people to actually give a shit about his schizo ramblings and not the published studies
yeah I’m thinking cope -
>a population like hungarian with high yamnaya
high in relation to what? Russians? or the Yamnaya themselves?-
I just mean any reference population to be used instead of slavs that has high yamnaya but less WHG
Such a reference would results in higher admixture than using modern skavs-
Where does the claim that medieval slavs had less WHG but modern slavs have more WHG derive from?
Hungarians carry increased med and even some Hun ancestry at 5-20% too thought so they’re hardly a good example of slavs. They don’t even speak a slavic language.-
Nowhere
you missed the point
Using slavs results in some 30% admixture but if you do the math the yamnaya increase doesn’t check out with just 30% slav because their high WHG restricts the model-
scrote you’re saying that the claim that modern slavs have higher WHG than past populations derives from nowhere but then you use it again?
-
Well i have tried many times to explain it to you but you are too low iq
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
continuity between modern meds and mycenaeans is the same as continuity between modern NW europeans and sintashta or corded ware
embarassing cope -
Doesn’t this mean that Romanians and Bulgarians are half EEF farmers from the Balkans and half Sintashta?
-
no?
it just means that, broadly speaking(because that’s all a simple 2-way mix can show, which obviously is quite a simplification of reality), these Balkanites fit as an EEF-rich source and a steppe-rich one WITH SLAVIC drift; last is uppercase because it’s important, as when they check for simple continuity with iron age Balkan sources(who did have steppe ancestry), all p-values fail to demonstrate simple continuity-
I didn’t mention continuity anywhere though. I’m asking if they consist of Balkan EEF-derived populations and Sintashta-derived populations if we are to assume Sintashta are similar to Russians.
Or it could be Mycenaeans first moving northwards and then some slavs moving southwards. It would explain the Yamnaya not being lower than 25% but not higher than 40%-
>Sintashta-derived populations if we are to assume Sintashta are similar to Russians
well first of all, they aren’t, or in any case, Sintashta has too much steppe(~75% vs Russians with maybe 50%) plus Slavic specific drift is important to understand the dynamics involved
the rest is ultimately also composed of some form of Balkan EEF, yes, but indeed, they find that e.g Romanians, Albanians and Bulgarians fit better if the local Balkan source is more southern, like Mycenaeans, rather than other iron age Balkans; in practice, the picture will be more complex than just two sources
it’s not too helpful anyway to speak of EEF and Sintashta if we are dealing with antiquity<->medieval population shifts s much of these populations would already be somewhat mixed-
I use ancient populations because referring to modern ones kind of nullifies the concept of mixing. It would be like South Italians moving to the north and most north Italians being south Italian-derived. However their admix composure could be very similar to an ancient one in northern Italy (this is an example off the top of my head) and it wouldn’t really change anything because the difference would be big if you focus on modern populations, but very small if you view the genetic composition in relation to ancient sources
-
-
-
-
-
that’s weird
greeks score very low fsts with italians
do italians have slav admixture too?-
well for one, the non-Slavic, non-Germanic/Italic part is very similar in the first place and broadly derives from the Hellenistic period pops
but too in practice I think south Italians when analyzed in detail would show to have minor Slavic related ancestry, not from direct Slavic migrants of course, but from medieval population movements within the Byzantine sphere after southern Balkans and mainland Greece had already been occupied
if you project samples on a PCA that distinguishes NW from NE(Slavic) type ancestry, the difference in the two clines becomes apparent the more you go north
-
-
-
>schizo diaspora pole russian rapebaby (((davidski))) is itt
Have sex man, it will help you a lot
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.