Germanic Dorian Invasion of Greece.

[Tauromachos]

Kseroume apo pou einai autos o malakas?

Den kseroume

Ti mporei na einai?

Kanenas Albanos h Ebraios h Slavo Makedonas mallon?

H Turkos

[SharpFork]

The conclusion is not made by me but by the genetists here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/
Maybe it doesn't like you but we can't change the facts according to your preferences.

Nowhere does the article support your main assertion

Dorians were speaking a Greek dialect which belonged to the low social class of Mycenaean Greece. The sources from Herodotus and other ancient Greeks historians and the findings of modern historians indicate that they were just part of the Greek tribes that were marginalized during the Mycenaean era.

Herodotus and ancient historians doesn't claim that, indicate me where they do.

The "internal revolution" is one of many, not particularly supported by evidence than the "arcahic" Dorian invasion theory(although the internal revolution is also old).

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pape...b4b6a09332ccec

Spoiler!

The work of John Chadwick, most notably in defense of his assertion that the Dorians were the lower class of Mycenaean culture,2 has done much to challenge the traditional view, but has by no means settled the matter. Chadwick’s thesis, motivated by the lack of material evidence for a large-scale Dorian invasion,3 is attractive from an archaeological standpoint.4 The linguistic evidence, however, suggests a contrary position, and it is from the standpoint of linguistics that I will examine the issue of Doric identity. We may frame the issue as a question: does dialectal evidence suggest that the Dorians were a relatively homogenous linguistic group distinct from other Greek-speakers, or does the linguistic evidence corroborate the view (promoted by Chadwick) that the Dorians were highly integrated with the speakers of what became the so-calledSouth Greek dialects? As I will show, the historical development of the Doric dialects suggests the former. That is, the Dorians of the late Mycenaean era were for possible archaeological evidence suggesting the intrusion of a foreign element in Mycenaean Greece in the Late Helladic IIIC period.

This also addresses Chadwik's theory, relevant part starts in page 181:

http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/6880/1/6880_4185.PDF?UkUDh:CyT

And now except these data we also have the genetic analysis of the Iron Age Greeks who left Greece for Iberia centuries after the Dorian domination in Greece where every group was mixing and moving and as a result any different input would be visible after so many centuries(at least to an extent).

Dorians did not dominate all of Greece, plus those colonies there were from Phocaea in Ionian Anatolia I believe.

It is obvious that there is very little to no chance Dorians were different than Mycenaeans in genetic terms.

Again, it's not me making wild claims based on cherrypicking from an array of theories, just wait for the evidence instead of making wild claims. Regardless the "historical truth" that you claim to hold doesn't mean anything for genetics, like I said historical events and genetics don't always go hand in hand, nobody would suggest the English have a lot of Norman ancestry despite the linguistic and historical evidence of their invasion and presence. On the other hand I don't believe you are able to explain how modern Greek genetics happened accurately by being able to weight which historical event did what, you need more samples inbetween.

The dorian invasion could have happened and the Dorians could have been exactly like the Myceneans, or the Dorians invasion could have not happened and some other change happened with the collapse of the Mycenean world through internal migration. We are working blindly.

Furthermore if we don't have enough samples to say how Iron Age Greeks were then we don't have enough samples for most people ancient or modern and there is no sense to discuss.

We generally don't, we don't always have good genetic evidence as we do for Iberia, Central Asia or other regions, we have to live with it.

[xripkan]

Den kseroume

Ti mporei na einai?

Kanenas Albanos h Ebraios h Slavo Makedonas mallon?

H Turkos

Mporei kai tourkos. H mporei apla kanas varemenos asxetos.

[SharpFork]

Den kseroume

Ti mporei na einai?

Kanenas Albanos h Ebraios h Slavo Makedonas mallon?

H Turkos

I already told you what I am, I have been accused so far of being so many nationalities, I guess I should add Albanians and Macedonian to that.

[Tauromachos]

Nowhere does the article support your main assertion

"Dorians were speaking a Greek dialect which belonged to the low social class of Mycenaean Greece. The sources from Herodotus and other ancient Greeks historians and the findings of modern historians indicate that they were just part of the Greek tribes that were marginalized during the Mycenaean era."

Herodotus and ancient historians doesn't claim that, indicate me where they do.

The "internal revolution" is one of many, not particularly supported by evidence than the "arcahic" Dorian invasion theory(although the internal revolution is also old).

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

[xripkan]

Nowhere does the article support your main assertion

It indicates that Minoans + Steppe=Mycenaeans. This Steppe is the Proto-Greeks. Iosif Lazaridis who was the main author of the article gave this interpretation as the most possible by far.
Maybe you want to believe it was not the Proto-Greeks but something else and the Greek language came here by the aliens. It is your right to do so.
Herodotus claims that Dorians were Greeks from Northern parts of Greece. Other ancient Greeks historians mention that they were Greeks that left the Mycenaean wrld an they come back some generations later. Maybe they were natives to Northern Greece but again they were very similar to Myceneanas and this is why they don't seem to change genetically Greek world.
The Greek samples were from Ionia but this does not mean they were pure Ionians without Dorian admixture. Do you really believe that? Do you have any idea about the history of the country you are talking about?
You are wrong about historical sources they can be combined and enlighten us. Of course genetics can do the same. Genetics of 21st century can enrich our knowledge and verify the valiity historical sources. For example historical sources mention that just 30000 Normans settled England which had a much larger population and as a result it affected very ;ittle in genetic terms.
Study history and you will understand better the genetic results.
I am able to explain most of the foreign input modern Greeks have. You can also find these information.
On the other hand you can believe that historical sources mean nothing and the possible consistency with genetic results is random. I can't force you to learn history and to think rationally. Everyone can make a crazy hypothesis, you can also claim that humans are aliens in fact. Under these circumstances any discussion is pointless.

[Tauromachos]

Herodotus claims that Dorians were Greeks from Northern parts of Greece. Other ancient Greeks historians mention that they were Greeks that left the Mycenaean wrld an they come back some generations later. Maybe they were natives to Northern Greece but again they were very similar to Myceneanas and this is why they don't seem to change genetically Greek world.

This^

[catgeorge]

Modern Greeks are on average 70% to Mycenean samples genetically - end of story.

[SharpFork]

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

Ok?

It indicates that Minoans + Steppe=Mycenaeans. This Steppe is the Proto-Greeks. Iosif Lazaridis who was the main author of the article gave this interpretation as the most possible by far.
Maybe you want to believe it was not the Proto-Greeks but something else and the Greek language came here by the aliens. It is your right to do so.

We discussed this for pages and know for some reason you think I said that the Dorians brought the Greek language? What? We never discussed how Greek came into Greece, why are you coming up with this?

Herodotus claims that Dorians were Greeks from Northern parts of Greece. Other ancient Greeks historians mention that they were Greeks that left the Mycenaean wrld an they come back some generations later. Maybe they were natives to Northern Greece but again they were very similar to Myceneanas and this is why they don't seem to change genetically Greek world.

We will know in the future.

The Greek samples were from Ionia but this does not mean they were pure Ionians without Dorian admixture. Do you really believe that? Do you have any idea about the history of the country you are talking about?

We don't know, again if Dorians were merely 25% Steppe vs Mycenean 15% then 25% Dorian admixture would mean very little. We don't know, that's the point.

I am able to explain most of the foreign input modern Greeks have. You can also find these information.

Down to every single event, sure.

On the other hand you can believe that historical sources mean nothing and the possible consistency with genetic results is random. I can't force you to learn history and to think rationally. Everyone can make a crazy hypothesis, you can also claim that humans are aliens in fact. Under these circumstances any discussion is pointless.

It's not random, but who would have thought that such a big genetic shift happened in Italy during the expansion of Rome? Who would have thought that a 90% replacement happened through Bell Beakers in England through merely archeolgy? Who would have thought for sure that Slavs would have had such a big impact in the Balkans genetically? Who would have thought that Pontic Greeks and Turks had so little outside admixture?

If you did, good for you, you should lend that crystal balls to others.

[xripkan]

Ok?



We discussed this for pages and know for some reason you think I said that the Dorians brought the Greek language? What? We never discussed how Greek came into Greece, why are you coming up with this?


We will know in the future.


We don't know, again if Dorians were merely 25% Steppe vs Mycenean 15% then 25% Dorian admixture would mean very little. We don't know, that's the point.


Down to every single event, sure.


It's not random, but who would have thought that such a big genetic shift happened in Italy during the expansion of Rome? Who would have thought that a 90% replacement happened through Bell Beakers in England through merely archeolgy? Who would have thought for sure that Slavs would have had such a big impact in the Balkans genetically? Who would have thought that Pontic Greeks and Turks had so little outside admixture?

If you did, good for you, you should lend that crystal balls to others.

I din't say that Dorians brought the Greek language. Anyway all this makes no sense. We have samples,complete genetic research and rich historical sources by great historians such as Herodotus. Take it or leave it. I have nothing else to say.