Pontic Greek Gedmatch results

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hahns

Sorry to bust your bubble but the Greek government already recognized the Macedonian language via Prespa agreement. Even in 1977 with Karamanlis government

---

They might as well recognize ouga-bouga as a language, doesn`t mean it is true. If I declare myself an alien doesn`t make me one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catgeorge

Pay attention to he is responding to and knowing the history of the person who he is responding to.

One of Zeus greatest strengths is driving his opponents insane. Straight from Mt Olympus.

---

Is there an option we have no trolling between us? That`s my preference.

We have here RabbitHole 2.0, Turks and Skopjans trolling us and we are infighting. Spot the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Konstantinos

We have here RabbitHole 2.0, Turks and Skopjans trolling us and we are infighting. Spot the problem.

---

Who is the RabbitHole2.0?

So, about Pontic Greeks.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hudayar

This is quite strange. You lack any East Asian/Siberian contribution, usually for Turks it's between 5-15%, can go up to 22% depending on the person, yet you score close to Turks and even to Azeris.

I'm assuming this is because of noticeable European contribution combined with East Mediterranean heritage. Compared to Armenians/Anatolian-Greeks, Turks score higher European due to Yamnaya heritage. You might not be fully Pontian though since your results are wildly different from others.

The European admixture can't be described with Greek heritage since Greeks themselves are around 30% at best. A fully Pontic person having 20% doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The average there is literally 1%

---

I am full Pontian having russian great grandmother. So 1/8 Russia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vojnik

Why is it that Greeks think they invented the world, but could not invent something as simple as the sounds ‘sh’ and ‘ch’?

---

World wasn't invented by Greeks it was our dear God who did

But Greeks were the first who figured out that the world is round :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperDorian

Who is the RabbitHole2.0?

---

Substitute HittitoPhoenician with GrecoCarian and your eyes shall open.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Konstantinos

Ok here me out.

Greeks have a lot of variety. Pontic Greeks are the most outlying in the sense that they are the closest to Lazs and Armenians but they are distinct from them in the sense that they show "Mediterranean" shift. This situation is to be expected since Pontus is the farthest Greek region from the core and doesn't have land borders with any other Greek region, so the initial Greek colonizers couldn't be a lot since they have to have traveled by sea(as we also know through history). These colonizers quickly Hellenized the local population and developed the modern Pontic Greek profile.

Now so far the Pontic Greek results that floated around were much closer to Lazs and Armenians than yours. Essentially that means you show much more Mainland Greek shift. Since genetics is underdeveloped in Greece most results are provided by "barbarians" ;) It is my personal opinion(and only that, so I may well be wrong) that there's a big agenda towards Greeks. Your results are illuminating in that they are both very Mainland Greek shifted and at the same time show a Steppe affinity that is supposed to have been mostly introduced to Greeks through Slavic invasions. I have my strong doubts about that and am long in search of Asia Minor, and other non-core Greek areas' results to investigate that.

Be prepared to here stories how a "Slavic-influenced Mainlander Greek village" decided to migrate to your Pontic Greek villages and influence your results. If you have any questions I'm very happy to answer.

---

Ok lets put things in historical perspective. Peloponnesian Greeks were essentially Mycenean like until the 6th century when Slavs entered the Western Peloponnese without any notable contention from the Anatolian Byzantines who ruled the Eastern Peloponnese. From the 6th century on there was an intermittent influx of Albanians, Slavs, Bulgars, Avars, Franks, Venetians, etc. So if we try to analyze Greek mainlanders we must consider these various historical influences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Markos

A true Greek. Welcome file

---

So are you suggesting that us mainland Greeks are mixed Greek/Albanian/Slavs mutts because if you are I'm ok with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleenex

Ok lets put things in historical perspective. Peloponnesian Greeks were essentially Mycenean like until the 6th century when Slavs entered the Western Peloponnese without any notable contention from the Anatolian Byzantines who ruled the Eastern Peloponnese. From the 6th century on there was an intermittent influx of Albanians, Slavs, Bulgars, Avars, Franks, Venetians, etc. So if we try to analyze Greek mainlanders we must consider these various historical influences.

---

Until we have samples later than Mycenaeans we don`t know how Peloponnesians were just before Slavs. They were surely similar but let`s first account for Dorians and internal migrations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleenex

So are you suggesting that us mainland Greeks are mixed Greek/Albanian/Slavs mutts because if you are I'm ok with that.

---

No. The Greek ethnogene is diverse and beautiful, but all connected and related to each other. It's a representation of our amazing history.

But okay........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Konstantinos

Substitute HittitoPhoenician with GrecoCarian and your eyes shall open.

---

Stop trolling the poor girl, you subhuman!
I am reporting you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Konstantinos

They might as well recognize ouga-bouga as a language, doesn`t mean it is true. If I declare myself an alien doesn`t make me one.

---

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/ital...a-a-t1064.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleenex

Ok lets put things in historical perspective. Peloponnesian Greeks were essentially Mycenean like until the 6th century when Slavs entered the Western Peloponnese without any notable contention from the Anatolian Byzantines who ruled the Eastern Peloponnese. From the 6th century on there was an intermittent influx of Albanians, Slavs, Bulgars, Avars, Franks, Venetians, etc. So if we try to analyze Greek mainlanders we must consider these various historical influences.

---

Bulgars never invaded peloponnese and most of central Greece, and avars didn't make permanent settlements.

The people who really created settlements in southern Greece (peloponnese included) and interacted with natives were mainly Slavs and Franks (see gasmuloi), meanwhile Albanians did this in specific parts of the country and the same goes for Venetians (in coastal cities)

Now of course the more north and more inland you go in the mainland the more slavic admixture you should expect, meanwhile franks were limited to southern mainland

But like kostantinos correctly said, mycaeneans were very likely somewhat more "neolithic" and less steppe than later Greeks (Dorians Ionians etc) so probably peloponnese wasn't exactly like mycaeneans from 10th century BC to 6th century AD but a little more steppe after Dorian invasion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Bulgars never invaded peloponnese and most of central Greece, and avars didn't make permanent settlements.

The people who really created settlements in southern Greece (peloponnese included) and interacted with natives were mainly Slavs and Franks (see gasmuloi), meanwhile Albanians did this in specific parts of the country and the same goes for Venetians (in coastal cities)

Now of course the more north and more inland you go in the mainland the more slavic admixture you should expect, meanwhile franks were limited to southern mainland

But like kostantinos correctly said, mycaeneans were very likely somewhat more "neolithic" and less steppe than later Greeks (Dorians Ionians etc) so probably peloponnese wasn't exactly like mycaeneans from 10th century BC to 6th century AD but a little more steppe after Dorian invasion

---

I am sorry to burst your bubble but the Frankish and Venetian contribution is very miminal compared to Slavic one.
Peloponnesians can be modelled as 65% Myceaneans and 35% Medieval Slavic. Early Slavs were similar to northern Slavs but not indentical because Northern Slavs have some Baltic and Germanic Admixture.
Given the fact that Albanians were 90% similar to Peloponnesians Greeks before entering Peloponnese it safe to assume that most of that 35% comes from Slavs themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coolguy1

Unfortunately, 95% of the people here are absolutely retarded, and come up with their own baseless numbers for Slavic admixture in Greece. If you want to get an accurate picture of the aforementioned admixture, using G25 would be your best bet. Below is a simple and precise model that works for mainland Greeks, using Slovakians as the group representing early Slavs. The addition of Syrian represents near eastern admixture that entered Greece. I am using them because I am suspecting that the original group were Greek speaking Christians from the Antioch area. UKR_Cimmerian represents any post Mycenaean native Balkan like stuff (Illyrian, Thracian, Dorian)

[1] "distance%=1.6568"

Greek_Central_Macedonia

Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2,49.2
Slovakian,38.4
UKR_Cimmerian,10.8
Pulliyar,1.6

---

Using severall populations is not very accurate, IMO. One vs one would be better, if one wants to dected the northern ancestry specifically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Scar-

I am sorry to burst your bubble but the Frankish and Venetian contribution is very miminal compared to Slavic one.
Peloponnesians can be modelled as 65% Myceaneans and 35% Medieval Slavic. Early Slavs were similar to northern Slavs but not indentical because Northern Slavs have some Baltic and Germanic Admixture.
Given the fact that Albanians were 90% similar to Peloponnesians Greeks before entering Peloponnese it safe to assume that most of that 35% comes from Slavs themselves.

---

Correct

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Scar-

I am sorry to burst your bubble but the Frankish and Venetian contribution is very miminal compared to Slavic one.

---

There is no bubble to burst Slavs didn't have a huge impact or genetic influence in Peloponnese 14% is the maximum of Slavic admixture Peloponnesians can have and in many of them its significantly lower if you go to Peloponnese in alot of places you can observe by phenotype alone that these people are not Slavs except of if you want to cherrypick and focus on a handfull individuals who might resemble Slavs

Quote:

---

Peloponnesians can be modelled as 65% Myceaneans and 35% Medieval Slavic. Early Slavs were similar to northern Slavs but not indentical because Northern Slavs have some Baltic and Germanic Admixture.
Given the fact that Albanians were 90% similar to Peloponnesians Greeks before entering Peloponnese it safe to assume that most of that 35% comes from Slavs themselves.

---

I don't know if they can modelled that way but according to the known studies they are about 65%-70% Mycanaean like plus 30% other
I don't think that the 30% all of it is from medieval Slavs if you think that then i think you are an Idiot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperDorian

There is no bubble to burst Slavs didn't have a huge impact or genetic influence in Peloponnese 14% is the maximum of Slavic admixture Peloponnesians can have and in many of them its significantly lower if you go to Peloponnese in alot of places you can observe by phenotype alone that these people are not Slavs except of if you want to cherrypick and focus on a handfull indivuals who might resemble Slavs




I don't know if they can modelled that way but according to the known studies they are about 65%-70% Mycanaean like plus 30% other
I don't think that the 30% all of it is from medieval Slavs if you think that then i think you are an Idiot

---

The contribution of Venetians, Goths and Franks is one digit percentage so most of the 35% comes from Slavs. On the other hand what is considered Myceaneans is actually Paleo-Ballakanic to large extend, even though Thracians had their own differences they were still more similar to Ionian Greeks than most modern population expect for Sicilians, but most of it comes from ancient Greeks at least in Peloponnese.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Scar-

The contribution of Venetians, Goths and Franks is one digit percentage so most of the 35% comes from Slavs.

---

Dude even if Franks,Goths and Venetians would have left only low admixture it doesn't prove that the 35%-30% is from Slavs
There is more to Greece and its history than only Slavs and som Franks,Venetians,Goths
I personally don't mind Slavic influence in Greeks or try to claim that it doesn't exist but its the most overrated thing here on anthroboards
i have seen.

Quote:

---

On the other hand what is considered Myceaneans is actually Paleo-Ballakanic to large extend, even though Thracians had their own differences they were still more similar to Ionian Greeks than most modern population expect for Sicilians, but most of it comes from ancient Greeks at least in Peloponnese.

---

Dude i don't know what you are talking about or want to prove to me, Greeks are much older entity than you Albos if Albanians plot so close to Greeks and Mycanaeans maybe you should ask how much influence or ancestry you may have from Greeks because there were no such people as Albos who spoke Albanian in your region prior to the Medieval

Note that you don't plot only close to Greeks but also to various Italians for that matter
Even Sicilians are not that much far off from you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperDorian

Dude even if Franks,Goths and Venetians would have left only low admixture it doesn't prove that the 35%-30% is from Slavs
There is more to Greece and its history than only Slavs and som Franks,Venetians,Goths
I personally don't mind Slavic influence in Greeks or try to claim that it doesn't exist but its the most overrated thing here on anthroboards
i have seen.





Dude i don't know what you are talking about or want to prove to me, Greeks are much older entity than you Albos if Albanians plot so close to Greeks and Mycanaeans maybe you should ask how much influence or ancestry you may have from Greeks because there were no such people as Albos who spoke Albanian in your region prior to the Medieval

Note that you don't plot only close to Greeks but also to various Italians for that matter
Even Sicilians are not that much far off from you

---

In my opinion most of that 35% comes from Slavs I could be wrong. Simple as that.

The peoples living today around the Mediterranean Sea are all related, after thousands of years of intermittently attacking and loving each other, a new genetic study has unsurprisingly shown. However, the data from the international team of scientists found a startling exception: mainland Greeks, who seem to be genetically closer to Albanians than to their brethren in the Greek islands.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.haa...ages-1.5489323

Its Albanians who are close to Greeks and Italians not the other way around

Albanians are closest to Tuscans and Central Italians
Most Mainland Greeks to Central till South Italians and Greek Islanders to South Italians and Sicilians

The Sarno study to which the article this clown posted refers doesn't contradict what i have said here^

Why would the mainland Greeks have gained such strong genetic affiliation with the Balkans? Population expansions during the Middle Ages, suggest the scientists, noting the Slavic migrations.

Its bullshit Albos are the only Balkan group which is noteable close to the Mainland Greeks now why
are both so close to Italians?

Whats true is that before the Medieval and some additional migrations of Balkan people into Greece Mainland Greeks would have been
even much closer to Greek Islanders but not all Balkan people who came to Greece were Slavs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperDorian

Its Albanians who are close to Greeks and Italians not the other way around

Albanians are closest to Tuscans and Central Italians
Most Mainland Greeks to Central till South Italians and Greek Islanders to South Italians and Sicilians

The Sarno study to which the article this clown posted refers doesn't contradict what i have said here^

---

But having similar admixture is not good evidence of being related in the way that you are saying. If that was the case then European Jews, who cluster with southern Italians, are actually closely related to southern Italians? It's not necessarily true, genetic distance is a great tool but the issue in this region is that for all of us our major component is Early European Farmer, and exists in similar %, and that's why our distance to eachother is still low, no matter how we are shifted in various ways.

The study shows that through IBD sharing, which shows which groups share actual DNA with other groups (thus if there's actual recent genetic relationship), mainland Greeks and Albanians are relatives to each other, and not relatives to Greek islanders. Meanwhile, southern Italians, Greek islanders and Cypriots all IBD share with each other, which show they are related genetically.

Unfortunately, there aren't many possible other reasons for why this is the case, other than recent demographic events, which are highly likely as shown in scientific studies such as this one.

Now, you have people here denying reality, and coming up with conspiracies like they were shifted by Dorians much earlier. As I said before, Cretans and Dodecanese were both Dorian, and we don't have this high steppe admixture, and our major haplogroup is J2, not E-V13. So how do you explain those facts if the genetic shift occured earlier than Slavic invasion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Scar-

I am sorry to burst your bubble but the Frankish and Venetian contribution is very miminal compared to Slavic one.
Peloponnesians can be modelled as 65% Myceaneans and 35% Medieval Slavic. Early Slavs were similar to northern Slavs but not indentical because Northern Slavs have some Baltic and Germanic Admixture.
Given the fact that Albanians were 90% similar to Peloponnesians Greeks before entering Peloponnese it safe to assume that most of that 35% comes from Slavs themselves.

---

You don't burst any bubble as you obviously have no idea about the specific issue. At least one official published study has not spotted more than 15% Slavic admixture in peloponnese, so posting 30% and other similar percentages which hardly apply for northern Greece won't change reality

And where did i say that Frankish was above Slavic? Even if northwestern components are higher than northeastern components in most of Greece unlike balkans where noetheastern components dominates (let alone autosomal distances, with peloponnese being closer to central Italy than ANY Balkan region or country) i will give to slavs the most admixture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

But having similar admixture is not good evidence of being related in the way that you are saying. If that was the case then European Jews, who cluster with southern Italians, are actually closely related to southern Italians? It's not necessarily true, genetic distance is a great tool but the issue in this region is that for all of us our major component is Early European Farmer, and exists in similar %, and that's why our distance to eachother is still low, no matter how we are shifted in various ways.

The study shows that through IBD sharing, which shows which groups share actual DNA with other groups (thus if there's actual recent genetic relationship), mainland Greeks and Albanians are relatives to each other, and not relatives to Greek islanders. Meanwhile, southern Italians, Greek islanders and Cypriots all IBD share with each other, which show they are related genetically.

Unfortunately, there aren't many possible other reasons for why this is the case, other than recent demographic events, which are highly likely as shown in scientific studies such as this one.

Now, you have people here denying reality, and coming up with conspiracies like they were shifted by Dorians much earlier. As I said before, Cretans and Dodecanese were both Dorian, and we don't have this high steppe admixture, and our major haplogroup is J2, not E-V13. So how do you explain those facts if the genetic shift occured earlier than Slavic invasion?

---

Ev13 is not Slavic nor Dorian, both Slavs and dorians and all indoeuropeans were STEPPE people autistic dumb, their non ie admixture comes from native people assimilation and steppe people COULD NOT be ev13, only R1 subclades are related to indoeuropean people

Nobody here denies the slavic among other (this other unavoidably includes later steppe Hellenic immigrations like dorians who brought fresh steppe admixture) contributions to mainland Greek dna (southern half of which is closer to central Italy than to albania or balkans, after all) this slavic contribution makes the difference between mainland Greece and northern shifted islands like lesvos, Cyclades, southern Ionian islands etc and if anybody denied the Slavic impact you could at least quote him

It's rather you the one who denies the fact that also an EXTRA levantine input that never existed in the mainland has always existed in dodecanese and is reflected in the difference between dodecanese and more northern shifted islands, at least that's all i say so far, otherwise Rhodes wouldn't have a single difference from lesvos, samothraki, naxos paros etc, but as you likely know it does plot southeast of them, even all of these islands dont have any recent exchange with the mainland recorded.

And also the one who tries to convince us that original dorians were j2 as if the came right from the middle east, and that north African originated ev13 is Slavic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Ev13 is not Slavic nor Dorian, both Slavs and dorians and all indoeuropeans were STEPPE people autistic dumb, their non ie admixture comes from native people assimilation and steppe people COULD NOT be ev13, only R1 subclades are related to indoeuropean people

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Ev13 is not Slavic nor Dorian, both Slavs and dorians and all indoeuropeans were STEPPE people autistic dumb, their non ie admixture comes from native people assimilation and steppe people COULD NOT be ev13, only R1 subclades are related to indoeuropean people

---

No the Dorians were Greek people and most probably a genetic mix of Neolithic-Paleolithic Greek-some Caucasus/North Iran and some Steppe/Yamnaya like the other Greeks they were not Steppe people themselves.

I agree Slavs were not EV13 but he is referring to South Slavs who would have had already EV13 admixture
He claims there was a mass intrusion or invasion of South Slavs into Mainland Greece lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

But having similar admixture is not good evidence of being related in the way that you are saying. If that was the case then European Jews, who cluster with southern Italians, are actually closely related to southern Italians? It's not necessarily true, genetic distance is a great tool but the issue in this region is that for all of us our major component is Early European Farmer, and exists in similar %, and that's why our distance to eachother is still low, no matter how we are shifted in various ways.

---

Allow me to think that Greek Islanders and Mainlanders have more in common than Jews and Sicilians

Other than similar genetics they have common language,religion,culture,foods,history and ethnic identity as both were Greeks or Hellenic at least since the times of Homer.

Also history of Greek Islands and Mainland is closely interwoven from Ancient times throughout Byzantine till times of the revolutions and uprisings against the Ottoman empire

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Ev13 is not Slavic nor Dorian, both Slavs and dorians and all indoeuropeans were STEPPE people autistic dumb, their non ie admixture comes from native people assimilation and steppe people COULD NOT be ev13, only R1 subclades are related to indoeuropean people

Nobody here denies the slavic among other (this other unavoidably includes later steppe Hellenic immigrations like dorians who brought fresh steppe admixture) contributions to mainland Greek dna (southern half of which is closer to central Italy than to albania or balkans, after all) this slavic contribution makes the difference between mainland Greece and northern shifted islands like lesvos, Cyclades, southern Ionian islands etc and if anybody denied the Slavic impact you could at least quote him

It's rather you the one who denies the fact that also an EXTRA levantine input that never existed in the mainland has always existed in dodecanese and is reflected in the difference between dodecanese and more northern shifted islands, at least that's all i say so far, otherwise Rhodes wouldn't have a single difference from lesvos, samothraki, naxos paros etc, but as you likely know it does plot southeast of them, even all of these islands dont have any recent exchange with the mainland recorded.

And also the one who tries to convince us that original dorians were j2 as if the came right from the middle east, and that north African originated ev13 is Slavic

---

Do I have to show you again?

https://i.imgur.com/our5MNM.png

E-V13 peaks in Albania and northern parts of Greece, thus I am suggesting it is related to Illyrians and maybe possibly Thracians. I never said it is related Slavs, but even Slavs (e.g. Ukrainians) have more E-V13 than Cretans, Dodecanese islanders and even southern Italians!

Also, where is your proof that Dorians came from the steppe? This is another conspiracy theory with zero evidence. Not to mention, the most common haplogroup amongst southern Pelapponese (for example, Maniots), is again J2! Are you saying that Maniots are not the closest thing we have to a Doric people? :wink

Also, your racism is pretty apparent every single post you make. You claimed earlier I am an assimilated Levantine, and keep making random stuff about Cretans and Dodecanese being extremely Levantine while you claim Greeks from antiquity came mostly from the steppe, which is absolutely false. Just like Indo-European Anatolians, Indo-European Greeks had hardly any steppe admixture! If you have any evidence this was the case, show it, but you can't because no such evidence exists!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperDorian

Allow me to think that Greek Islanders and Mainlanders have more in common than Jews and Sicilians

Other than similar genetics they have common language,religion,culture,foods,history and ethnic identity as both were Greeks or Hellenic at least since the times of Homer.

Also history of Greek Islands and Mainland is closely interwoven from Ancient times throughout Byzantine till times of the revolutions and uprisings against the Ottoman empire

---

We're clearly related, just that in more recent times mainlanders are closer to their northern neighbours as proven by IBD sharing. That doesn't mean we aren't related at all, it's more about recent relations. The main thing is also culture, I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

We're clearly related, just that in more recent times mainlanders are closer to their northern neighbours as proven by IBD sharing. That doesn't mean we aren't related at all, it's more about recent relations. The main thing is also culture, I agree.

---

Fuck their Northern neighbours!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

Do I have to show you again?

https://i.imgur.com/our5MNM.png

E-V13 peaks in Albania and northern parts of Greece, thus I am suggesting it is related to Illyrians and maybe possibly Thracians. I never said it is related Slavs, but even Slavs (e.g. Ukrainians) have more E-V13 than Cretans, Dodecanese islanders and even southern Italians!

Also, where is your proof that Dorians came from the steppe? This is another conspiracy theory with zero evidence. Not to mention, the most common haplogroup amongst southern Pelapponese (for example, Maniots), is again J2! Are you saying that Maniots are not the closest thing we have to a Doric people? :wink

Also, your racism is pretty apparent every single post you make. You claimed earlier I am an assimilated Levantine, and keep making random stuff about Cretans and Dodecanese being extremely Levantine while you claim Greeks from antiquity came mostly from the steppe, which is absolutely false. Just like Indo-European Anatolians, Indo-European Greeks had hardly any steppe admixture! If you have any evidence this was the case, show it, but you can't because no such evidence exists!

---

The land of my grandfather is 5.56% of E-V13, nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

Do I have to show you again?

https://i.imgur.com/our5MNM.png

E-V13 peaks in Albania and northern parts of Greece, thus I am suggesting it is related to Illyrians and maybe possibly Thracians. I never said it is related Slavs, but even Slavs (e.g. Ukrainians) have more E-V13 than Cretans, Dodecanese islanders and even southern Italians!

Also, where is your proof that Dorians came from the steppe? This is another conspiracy theory with zero evidence. Not to mention, the most common haplogroup amongst southern Pelapponese (for example, Maniots), is again J2! Are you saying that Maniots are not the closest thing we have to a Doric people? :wink

Also, your racism is pretty apparent every single post you make. You claimed earlier I am an assimilated Levantine, and keep making random stuff about Cretans and Dodecanese being extremely Levantine while you claim Greeks from antiquity came mostly from the steppe, which is absolutely false. Just like Indo-European Anatolians, Indo-European Greeks had hardly any steppe admixture! If you have any evidence this was the case, show it, but you can't because no such evidence exists!

---

Ok you are officially insane, right :D

Dorians and illyrians like all indoeuropeans came FROM UKRAINIAN STEPPES, and ALL linguists accept this theory and user fiechy had posted a study which proved that r1b and r1a were the only indoeuropean haplgroups in steppes, now if you see cpnsiparcy theories behind these facts like any scientist gives a f*ck about a dodecanese ta user it's your problem. Not to mention that northern Greece is dominated by r1a and most of south r1b not ev13, the latter is most common in central Greece

Regardless from being illyrians Greeks Iberians italics etc all indoeuropeans assimilated people with ev13 and j2 to different proportions depending upon how much of each haplogroup existed in an area before their invasions, and like you said DUMB only dodecanese has that low ev13, meanwhile other islands with equally zero contacts with slavs and zero recent mainland immigrations like lesbos naxos etc have higher ev13, which automatically debunks your already clueless by studies theories.

Yes mainland has slavic admixture but that is depicted on their difference with Cyclades, Ionian islands and north aegean in terms of northeast European autosomal components and higher slavic r1a than them, not in the difference with the already extra levantine mixed Rhodes due to extra geographical distance with mainland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Ok you are officially insane, right :D

Dorians and illyrians like all indoeuropeans came FROM UKRAINIAN STEPPES, and ALL linguists accept this theory and user fiechy had posted a study which proved that r1b and r1a were the only indoeuropean haplgroups in steppes, now if you see cpnsiparcy theories behind these facts like any scientist gives a f*ck about a dodecanese ta user it's your problem. Not to mention that northern Greece is dominated by r1a and most of south r1b not ev13, the latter is most common in central Greece

Regardless from being illyrians Greeks Iberians italics etc all indoeuropeans assimilated people with ev13 and j2 to different proportions depending upon how much of each haplogroup existed in an area before their invasions, and like you said DUMB only dodecanese has that low ev13, meanwhile other islands with equally zero contacts with slavs and zero recent mainland immigrations like lesbos naxos etc have higher ev13, which automatically debunks your already clueless by studies theories.

Yes mainland has slavic admixture but that is depicted on their difference with Cyclades, Ionian islands and north aegean in terms of northeast European autosomal components and higher slavic r1a than them, not in the difference with the already extra levantine mixed Rhodes

---

You must be confusing the origin of language with genetic admixture. It really doesn't matter if Indo-European languages originated in the steppe, what matters is the impact they made to genetics (not as much as you keep saying), and that's why you're talking conspiracy theories. You also have no proof about Dodecanese always having 'extra levantine', firstly it would be extra Anatolian, secondly we had migrations from south west Anatolia so the admixture is not 100% the same as before. In fact, some of my distant relatives came from Anatolia, as you saw listed in my ancestry. So, you have no idea what you're talking about, because it doesn't matter if Slavs never went to islands, mainlanders who had already mixed did, it doesn't need to be through major migrations, any time a mainlander moved to an island he brought over extra steppe admixture. Over time, this can lead to the increase of steppe in all islands, no island is so disconnected that it recieved zero migration!

Lastly, there is a simple reason 23andme/AncestryDNA cannot tell the difference between Rhodians and southern Italians (both of us get ITALIAN on AncestryDNA and 23andme) and there is a simple reason mainlanders get BALKAN. According to the website, southern Italians share a rich genetic history with Greek islanders, meanwhile Greek mainlanders share genetic history with Balkans. But, these websites only look at last 500 years, as you know, so please mr. smarty tell me what this means? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientGreek

You must be confusing the origin of language with genetic admixture. It really doesn't matter if Indo-European languages originated in the steppe, what matters is the impact they made to genetics (not as much as you keep saying), and that's why you're talking conspiracy theories. You also have no proof about Dodecanese always having 'extra levantine', firstly it would be extra Anatolian, secondly we had migrations from south west Anatolia so the admixture is not 100% the same as before. In fact, some of my distant relatives came from Anatolia, as you saw listed in my ancestry. So, you have no idea what you're talking about, because it doesn't matter if Slavs never went to islands, mainlanders who had already mixed did, it doesn't need to be through major migrations, any time a mainlander moved to an island he brought over extra steppe admixture. Over time, this can lead to the increase of steppe in all islands, no island is so disconnected that it recieved zero migration!

Lastly, there is a simple reason 23andme/AncestryDNA cannot tell the difference between Rhodians and southern Italians (both of us get ITALIAN on AncestryDNA and 23andme) and there is a simple reason mainlanders get BALKAN. According to the website, southern Italians share a rich genetic history with Greek islanders, meanwhile Greek mainlanders share genetic history with Balkans. But, these websites only look at last 500 years, as you know, so please mr. smarty tell me what this means? :rolleyes:

---

Completely clueless, as always :D

The people who brought indoeuropean language to Greece were r1b and r1a, the people they assimilated were the neolithic farmers (j and e and i), logic says that the more south these indoeuropeans travelled the more neolithics and other natives they assimilated, until they arrived in the BOTTOM of their colonies which is Rhodes

23andme is a company, in myheritage on the other hand which as a company is even more popular Greek mainland is grouped with ITALY, NOT BALKANS, but even if we go by 23andme Cyclades and north Aegean are also BALKAN with extra southern Italian imput, meanwhile Ionian islands which were equally never affected by Slavs score almost as Balkan as mainland does. And at least Cyclades and north Aegean islands do not have any common genetic history with mainland, not in the last 500 but in the last 2500 years, except if for the first time you will being some evidence that these islands were really colonized by recent mainlanders instead of talking out of your a**

You keep putting all islanders into the same basket with Rhodes and kalymnos, if you knew a sit Sicily was a major colony of phoenecias

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Completely clueless, as always :D

The people who brought indoeuropean language to Greece were r1b and r1a, the people they assimilated were the neolithic farmers (j and e and i), logic says that the more south these indoeuropeans travelled the more neolithics and other natives they assimilated, until they arrived in the BOTTOM of their colonies which is Rhodes

23andme is a company, in myheritage on the other hand which as a company is even more popular Greek mainland is grouped with ITALY, NOT BALKANS, but even if we go by 23andme Cyclades and north Aegean are also BALKAN with extra southern Italian imput, meanwhile Ionian islands which were equally never affected by Slavs score almost as Balkan as mainland does. And at least Cyclades and north Aegean islands do not have any common genetic history with mainland, not in the last 500 but in the last 2500 years, except if for the first time you will being some evidence that these islands were really colonized by recent mainlanders instead of talking out of your a**

You keep putting all islanders into the same basket with Rhodes and kalymnos

---

Clearly they do, as they would not score BALKAN if they were disconnected since 600 AD. Also, I get matches from many different islands, so you don't know what you're talking about. Chios has even more west Asian than Dodecanese, but at same time score low Italian compared to Dodecanese. It's pretty clear to me ITALIAN score on 23andme/AncestryDNA is related to J2, while BALKAN score on 23andme is related to E-V13, as I see this pattern in all my matches. Now I do not understand why you can't understand how admixture can change in 1400 years, but if you believe that nothing has changed, I will just have to wait for ancient samples from correct time periods to shut you up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brennus dux gallorum

Completely clueless, as always :D

The people who brought indoeuropean language to Greece were r1b and r1a, the people they assimilated were the neolithic farmers (j and e and i), logic says that the more south these indoeuropeans travelled the more neolithics and other natives they assimilated, until they arrived in the BOTTOM of their colonies which is Rhodes

---

Greek language wasn't brought to Greece but was created or developed in Greece itself(and the Aegean)
I support Colin Renfrew and his theory an this matter

The oldest Greek language was Mycanaean,Mycanaeans had some Steppe ancestry but only a little it was a minority of their ancestry not
the main source

The more North the Greeks traveled the more Non Greek Northern Barbarian people they assimilated