Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72

Thread: Pontic Greek Results

  1. #21
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,380
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    Indeed, modern Central Anatolian Greeks plot between Cretans and Pontics in the Global25 PCA, but the gaps between the groups in question aren't trivial. There are, of course, many modern Turkish populations situated between the traditional territories of the Asiatic Greeks being discussed, and all but the Trabzon Turks have Central Asian admixture. It is no wonder then that a medieval continuum connecting European Greeks to West Asian Greeks would cease to exist with the arrival of the Seljuks and subsequent segmentation of relict Greeks in Anatolia. That's just my opinion, of course, but it seems reasonable. Maybe there were big gaps between these Greeks even before the Turks, but I just can't see what barriers would've existed to prevent admixture between Byzantines in Asia Minor who directly neighbored each other. There's structure in North, Central, and Southern Italians, but they still blend together at their edges. I think this was almost certainly the case in the medieval Greek world, too. It might have existed long before the Byzantines, too, since these areas had all been Hellenized well before the Middle Ages.
    Just one more point I'd like to address. I completely agree with your opinion on this. I'd like to emphasize that IMO though, the cline between Aegean Greeks and Anatolian Greeks was probably much less segmented than between North and South Italians. If anything, as I think it is now abundantly clear, South Italians (excluding perhaps the most northern Abruzzo Italians) should and could be considered genetically mostly Hellenic with some Italic and West Asian admixture.

    Also, I believe the Slavic admixture which entered mainland Southern Greeks beginning with the 7th century AD arrival of the first Slavic people to the Peloponnesus, and further Balkan Albanian-like geneflow which arrived from the native pre-Slavic Balkan people that were probably pushed south by the subsequent arrival of more Slavs was one process that segmented mainland Greeks from the rest of the Hellenic world, and the process that finished this segmentation was the Turkic geneflow coming with the Seljuk and subsequent Turkish people migrating into Asia Minor.
    Check out my Hidden Content
    My Y-DNA: Q-M242 -> Q-L232 -> Q-L275 -> Q-M378 -> Q-Y2016 -> Q-L245 -> Q-FGC1904 -> Q-Y2209 -> Q-Y2225 -> Q-Y2197 -> Q-Y2750 -> Q-YP1004 -> Q-YP3924;
    My mtDNA: K1a1b1a;

    My dad's mtDNA: K2a2a;

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Erikl86 For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

  3. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,549
    Sex
    Location
    USA
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    H

    United States of America
    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    Also, I believe the Slavic admixture which entered mainland Southern Greeks beginning with the 7th century AD arrival of the first Slavic people to the Peloponnesus, and further Balkan Albanian-like geneflow which arrived from the native pre-Slavic Balkan people that were probably pushed south by the subsequent arrival of more Slavs was one process that segmented mainland Greeks from the rest of the Hellenic world, and the process that finished this segmentation was the Turkic geneflow coming with the Seljuk and subsequent Turkish people migrating into Asia Minor.
    Also going to add, mainland Greek admixture in some islands also created a bridge between Aegean islands and the mainland, meaning you have Crete/Dodecanese/South Italy plotting together, then a bunch of lightly Slavicized islanders who are still less Slavic than the mainland (Chios, Samos, Cyclades, etc.) and then you have Peloponnese and so on. It gives the impression of a gradient.

    This is someone with ancestry from Samos going back hundreds of years. She comes out like 7/8 Sicily, 1/8 NE Europe which must mean the trickling of Slavic ancestry from the mainland.

    K15
    # Population Percent
    1 East_Med 27.2
    2 West_Med 15.58
    3 West_Asian 14.18
    4 Atlantic 12.85
    5 Baltic 10.26
    6 North_Sea 10
    7 Red_Sea 5.35
    8 Eastern_Euro 2.24
    9 Northeast_African 1.38
    10 Siberian 0.37
    11 South_Asian 0.34
    12 Southeast_Asian 0.25

    Single Population Sharing:

    # Population (source) Distance
    1 Central_Greek 3.87
    2 East_Sicilian 4.09
    3 Ashkenazi 5.35
    4 South_Italian 5.84
    5 Italian_Abruzzo 6.33
    6 Greek 6.73
    7 Greek_Thessaly 6.97
    8 West_Sicilian 7.81
    9 Italian_Jewish 10.08
    10 Sephardic_Jewish 10.74
    11 Tuscan 11.04
    12 Algerian_Jewish 11.56
    13 Bulgarian 13.42
    14 Tunisian_Jewish 14.26
    15 Romanian 15.68
    16 Libyan_Jewish 15.69
    17 Cyprian 16.11
    18 North_Italian 17.2
    19 Turkish 18.64
    20 Lebanese_Muslim 18.75

    Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

    # Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
    1 88.4% South_Italian + 11.6% Lithuanian @ 2.39
    2 87.8% South_Italian + 12.2% Belorussian @ 2.65
    3 87.1% South_Italian + 12.9% Ukrainian_Belgorod @ 2.67
    4 86% South_Italian + 14% Ukrainian_Lviv @ 2.7
    5 87.3% South_Italian + 12.7% Southwest_Russian @ 2.7
    6 88.6% South_Italian + 11.4% Estonian @ 2.76
    7 87.3% South_Italian + 12.7% Russian_Smolensk @ 2.79
    8 88% South_Italian + 12% Estonian_Polish @ 2.82
    9 86.6% South_Italian + 13.4% Ukrainian @ 2.83
    10 86.6% South_Italian + 13.4% South_Polish @ 2.88
    11 87.5% South_Italian + 12.5% Polish @ 2.96
    12 83% South_Italian + 17% Moldavian @ 3.04
    13 93.7% East_Sicilian + 6.3% Lithuanian @ 3.04
    14 88.7% South_Italian + 11.3% Erzya @ 3.04
    15 72.5% South_Italian + 27.5% Bulgarian @ 3.11
    16 84.2% South_Italian + 15.8% Croatian @ 3.14
    17 69.1% Greek_Thessaly + 30.9% Tunisian_Jewish @ 3.14
    18 88.6% South_Italian + 11.4% Kargopol_Russian @ 3.16
    19 75.8% South_Italian + 24.2% Romanian @ 3.17
    20 93.6% East_Sicilian + 6.4% Belorussian @ 3.18

    K23b
    # Population Percent
    1 Caucasian 38.84
    2 European_Early_Farmers 19.13
    3 European_Hunters_Gatherers 16.95
    4 Near_East 11.14
    5 North_African 5.23
    6 South_Central_Asian 4.59
    7 South_Indian 1.65
    8 Ancestral_Altaic 0.88
    9 Austronesian 0.86
    10 Paleo_Siberian 0.21
    11 South_East_Asian 0.21
    12 Archaic_Human 0.15
    13 Australoid 0.12
    14 Khoisan 0.04

    Single Population Sharing:

    # Population (source) Distance
    1 Romanian_Jew ( ) 4.32
    2 Ashkenazi ( ) 4.54
    3 Ashkenazi_Jew ( ) 5.29
    4 Cretan ( ) 5.35
    5 Greek_Peloponnesos ( ) 5.48
    6 Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) 5.66
    7 Sicilian_East ( ) 6.16
    8 Greek ( ) 6.36
    9 Gagauz ( ) 6.66
    10 Central_Greek ( ) 6.67
    11 Greek_Phokaia ( ) 6.72
    12 Greek_Macedonia ( ) 6.76
    13 Greek_Thessaly ( ) 6.89
    14 Sicilian_Siracusa ( ) 6.91
    15 Italian_Jew ( ) 6.95
    16 Turk_Jew ( ) 7.09
    17 French_Jew ( ) 7.24
    18 Albanian_Tirana ( ) 7.65
    19 Greek_Athens ( ) 7.67
    20 Sicilian_Center ( ) 7.74

    Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

    # Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
    1 51.7% Gagauz ( ) + 48.3% Turk_Jew ( ) @ 1.83
    2 54.5% Gagauz ( ) + 45.5% Sephardic_Jew ( ) @ 1.9
    3 77.4% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) + 22.6% Palestinian ( ) @ 1.94
    4 76.7% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) + 23.3% Samaritian ( ) @ 2.04
    5 73.9% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) + 26.1% Lebanese ( ) @ 2.05
    6 84.8% Ashkenazi ( ) + 15.2% Iraki ( ) @ 2.07
    7 83.1% Ashkenazi ( ) + 16.9% Syrian ( ) @ 2.07
    8 91.1% Greek ( ) + 8.9% Moroccan ( ) @ 2.16
    9 51.2% Gagauz ( ) + 48.8% Italian_Jew ( ) @ 2.2
    10 90.2% Greek ( ) + 9.8% Tunisian ( ) @ 2.2
    11 85.9% Romanian_Jew ( ) + 14.1% Iraki ( ) @ 2.28
    12 79.2% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) + 20.8% Syrian ( ) @ 2.28
    13 63.9% Cypriot ( ) + 36.1% Austrian ( ) @ 2.28
    14 69.7% Greek_Thessaly ( ) + 30.3% Lebanese ( ) @ 2.34
    15 83.5% Ashkenazi_Jew ( ) + 16.5% Druze ( ) @ 2.35
    16 80.7% Central_Greek ( ) + 19.3% BedouinA ( ) @ 2.36
    17 90.6% Romanian_Jew ( ) + 9.4% Yemen ( ) @ 2.38
    18 60.5% Cypriot ( ) + 39.5% Slovenian ( ) @ 2.4
    19 67.3% Albanian_Tirana ( ) + 32.7% Lebanese ( ) @ 2.4
    20 57.3% Ashkenazi_Jew ( ) + 42.7% Greek_Macedonia ( ) @ 2.41

    K12b
    # Population Percent
    1 Caucasus 34.16
    2 Atlantic_Med 25.69
    3 North_European 17.51
    4 Southwest_Asian 11.57
    5 Gedrosia 6.95
    6 Northwest_African 3.03
    7 Siberian 0.75
    8 South_Asian 0.33

    Single Population Sharing:

    # Population (source) Distance
    1 Greek (Dodecad) 6.11
    2 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 7.14
    3 Ashkenazy_Jews (Behar) 7.27
    4 Sicilian (Dodecad) 7.39
    5 Ashkenazi (Dodecad) 7.63
    6 C_Italian (Dodecad) 9.4
    7 O_Italian (Dodecad) 10.59
    8 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 12.33
    9 Tuscan (HGDP) 13.06
    10 TSI30 (Metspalu) 14.14
    11 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 14.71
    12 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 17.57
    13 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 18.09
    14 Romanians (Behar) 19.12
    15 Turkish (Dodecad) 19.14
    16 N_Italian (Dodecad) 19.48
    17 Cypriots (Behar) 19.57
    18 North_Italian (HGDP) 21.2
    19 Turks (Behar) 21.54
    20 Lebanese (Behar) 22.79

    Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

    # Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
    1 66.3% Cypriots (Behar) + 33.7% Mixed_Germanic (Dodecad) @ 2.11
    2 67.4% Cypriots (Behar) + 32.6% Dutch (Dodecad) @ 2.11
    3 69.6% Cypriots (Behar) + 30.4% Orkney (1000Genomes) @ 2.3
    4 68.1% Cypriots (Behar) + 31.9% CEU30 (1000Genomes) @ 2.33
    5 68.1% Cypriots (Behar) + 31.9% English (Dodecad) @ 2.36
    6 69.2% Cypriots (Behar) + 30.8% Argyll (1000Genomes) @ 2.4
    7 68.9% Cypriots (Behar) + 31.1% British_Isles (Dodecad) @ 2.43
    8 69.5% Cypriots (Behar) + 30.5% Orcadian (HGDP) @ 2.44
    9 67.8% Cypriots (Behar) + 32.2% Kent (1000Genomes) @ 2.46
    10 61.1% Sephardic_Jews (Behar) + 38.9% Romanians (Behar) @ 2.47
    11 59% Sephardic_Jews (Behar) + 41% Bulgarian (Dodecad) @ 2.49
    12 69.4% Cypriots (Behar) + 30.6% Irish (Dodecad) @ 2.52
    13 71.1% Cypriots (Behar) + 28.9% Norwegian (Dodecad) @ 2.55
    14 88.3% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 11.7% Mordovians (Yunusbayev) @ 2.69
    15 68.8% Cypriots (Behar) + 31.2% British (Dodecad) @ 2.77
    16 68.5% Cypriots (Behar) + 31.5% Cornwall (1000Genomes) @ 2.9
    17 88.9% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 11.1% Russian (HGDP) @ 2.96
    18 72% O_Italian (Dodecad) + 28% Druze (HGDP) @ 2.97
    19 59.9% Sephardic_Jews (Behar) + 40.1% Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) @ 3.01
    20 69% O_Italian (Dodecad) + 31% Lebanese (Behar) @ 3.08

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sikeliot For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-26-2018),  Andrewid (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

  5. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    190
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    Just one more point I'd like to address. I completely agree with your opinion on this. I'd like to emphasize that IMO though, the cline between Aegean Greeks and Anatolian Greeks was probably much less segmented than between North and South Italians. If anything, as I think it is now abundantly clear, South Italians (excluding perhaps the most northern Abruzzo Italians) should and could be considered genetically mostly Hellenic with some Italic and West Asian admixture.

    Also, I believe the Slavic admixture which entered mainland Southern Greeks beginning with the 7th century AD arrival of the first Slavic people to the Peloponnesus, and further Balkan Albanian-like geneflow which arrived from the native pre-Slavic Balkan people that were probably pushed south by the subsequent arrival of more Slavs was one process that segmented mainland Greeks from the rest of the Hellenic world, and the process that finished this segmentation was the Turkic geneflow coming with the Seljuk and subsequent Turkish people migrating into Asia Minor.
    I would agree with you and Mihalis that everything we are witnessing (global25 PCAs and similarity maps; K36 similarity maps) would probably indicate that there was less of a geographical cline in late antiquity between western and eastern Greeks. Historically, we have spoken at length about the Slavic invasions into Greece proper from late antiquity, but also about the movement of Arvanite-speakers. In Anatolia, the arrival of the Turkic tribes probably added about 15% to the genetic gene pool, though it didn't seem to affect the Cappadocian Rum and the Anatolian northwest coast populations, both Greek and Turkish. Continua are just that, they flow into each other. Where one starts and another ends is a moot point. However, it's interesting to look out for ethnoreligious groups which are rather endogamous, as they provide a continuum bridge linking populations and which highlight certain historical realities. Cappadocian Greeks don't have significant Turkic admixture and would, as Erik says, have been subject to an osmosis with other Byzantine and Ottoman Greeks. The Greek-speaking areas were not traditionally completely isolated in east central Asia Minor but came down as far as the coast in the Adana/Mersin area. This is just opposite Cyprus- a mere 60km away. Their affinity to Cypriots and Aegean Greeks is obvious from a genetic perspective. A common Anatolian Bronze Age substratum seems more than likely as well as other common Aegean-like additions.

    Here is a map of Greek-speaking areas of Anatolia around 1910. Some people dispute the map and say it underestimates the Greek concentration. In the late 19thc, the Ottomans tried to conduct their own censuses but many Greeks avoided registration. Conscription had become an issue after the Tanzimat reforms but also the extra taxes on dhimmi such as the cizye. The Greek Government attempted its own census in 1910-1912, which I mentioned on another thread. These numbers had reduced by 75% in 1924.



    Btw, the map is unsatisfactory vis a vis the Levant as it ignores the heterodox communities there. But it claims to be looking more at Anatolia than neighbouring regions.

    The Alawites provide a continuum bridge to the Levant. They are another endogamous ethnoreligious group which did not absorb a great Arabian influence from late Antiquity. Another such group is the Assyrians. They are interesting because they display affinities to eastern Greeks and Greek Cypriots. Moreover, Erik's Global 25 maps show graphically how the Levant itself is subject to that continuum theory, where the Lebanese reach out to Cyprus and the Syrian Jews and are very much on the western fringes of their own continuum. Sikeliot does have a point on this, though, as usual, it's a matter of degree. It also helps us to deconstruct the tendency in some quarters to see the Levant as a genetic monolith, tying in nicely with what Mihalis has said.
    Last edited by Andrewid; 11-26-2018 at 08:33 PM.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Andrewid For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-26-2018),  Erikl86 (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-26-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

  7. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    170
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    English & Greek
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    J2a-L397
    mtDNA
    H2a2a1

    United Kingdom Greece Byzantine Empire
    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    For some inexplicable reason, Sarno forwent including any Lebanese samples in her paper, so the gap in her PCA between the Greek islands and the Levant looks bigger than it actually is.
    I think that is likely because Lebanese are not strictly viewed as a Mediterranean population, but rather a Near Eastern one. To my eye, what Sarno was trying to measure was the degree of both the relatedness, and diversity, across the Balkan to Southeastern Mediterranean axis with a particular focus on European and western Jewish ethnic groups. Considering the geographical location and ethnic origins of Lebanese people, and taking into account that the gap between the Mediterranean and Levant can only be bridged by a single Greek Cypriot outlier, it's reason enough to assume Cyprus marks the end of the Mediterranean and Lebanon marks the beginning of the Near East/Levant. I think that is a fair and honest distinction to make on Sarno's part. That is not to say that Lebanese are not arguably the buffer zone because they absolutely are, they themselves appear to have a considerable amount of extra Greco-Roman/Aegean and Steppe type admixture that pulls them quite a bit north and away from Samaritans - who are the quintessential Levantine population to my eye (clear Levant_N/Iran_ChL split). For that reason, I would say that East Mediterraneans appear to be Near Eastern shifted Europeans, and the Lebanese appear to be European shifted Near Easterners. A visual example of my reasoning using the Cypriot average and two other samples, alongside the Lebanese average:

    [1] "distance%=2.7181"

    Cypriot

    Greek_Crete,62.4
    Samaritan,37.6

    [1] "distance%=2.997"

    Cypriot:Cyprus22AJ19

    Greek_Crete,74
    Samaritan,26

    [1] "distance%=2.1962"

    Cypriot:Cyprus13AJ19

    Greek_Crete,93.4
    Samaritan,6.6

    [1] "distance%=1.6567"

    Lebanese_Christian

    Samaritan,74.8
    Greek_Crete,25.2

    In the future if we were to get access to more Aegean Greek samples, I think we would see the gap between Crete and Cyprus bridged with Dodecanese. This would probably present a very clear continuum all the way from the Balkans to Cyprus and reinforce Sarno's perspective on the Mediterranean, with the gap to Lebanese still bridged by one or two outliers - but still there nonetheless. I say this as Dodecanese would increase Cyprus' membership of Mediterranean and decrease it's membership of Levant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    I'd like to see how they fare on a generic West Eurasian PCA with Cypriots, Lebanese, Armenians, etc., instead of just an intra-Greek PCA.
    Probably between Cretans, Cypriots and Central Anatolian Greeks on the Global 25.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    I have previously conveyed my hypothesis that medieval Greek populations in the west of Anatolia probably blended smoothly into the Greek populations living in more easterly parts of the peninsula.
    I think that it is likely that mainland, Aegean, West Anatolian Greeks and Central Anatolian Greeks have always formed a cline of sorts but not necessarily how you are thinking. In my view, Central Anatolian Greeks appear to be the best proxy or representation of what the Byzantine Greeks looked like from a genetic standpoint, and would therefore be how most of the core Greco-Roman populace of Anatolia would have looked like - not taking into account peoples who were clearly not of Roman stock (Greek or Italian) like Slavs and such. I feel this way quite simply because the continuity between the various ancient Anatolian samples and Central Anatolian Greeks is so strong that it hard to ignore, they were a quintessential EEF/CHG/Steppe mix that has always been present in Southeastern European and Anatolian populations. The western Anatolian coast and Aegean was likely home to a more traditionally South Italian like Greek population as we see today, but no doubt it would have acted as a buffer zone and cultural epicentre for the entire Greek world at that point so considerable genetic crossover would have occurred. This is why I imagine today's West Anatolian Greeks resemble Cretans, just with a bit of an Anatolian shift.

    I do not believe that there was a continuous cline from the Aegean to Armenian-like Greek groups from the Black Sea, not for a very long time anyway. There is simply too much Armenia_EBA type admixture in that region, interestingly it appears to be homogeneous across both the Greeks and Turks. That alone is enough to dispel notions of any continuous Medieval cline because in order for that to have been possible then we would have had to have seen some sort of pure Georgian-like West Asian population invade the area and mix heavily with the Greeks and Turks. We know this population cannot have been the Turks pulling the Pontians away from Aegean and Central Anatolian Greeks, because Pontians show no Turkic admixture. They are just Caucasian like, in my view that area has always consisted of strongly Armenian like peoples - they are a relic of a Bronze Age Armenian like population, whose later Greek admixture causes them to cluster with Armenians and Assyrians by proxy. A visual representation:

    [1] "distance%=2.0229"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Greek_Crete,73.2
    Armenia_EBA,26.8

    [1] "distance%=2.6791"

    Greek_Trabzon

    Armenia_EBA,67.6
    Greek_Crete,32.4

    These models were run with a Central Asian population, but it did not select any of that admixture.

    Is it possible Central Anatolian Greeks used to be more like Pontic Greeks, but got pulled towards the Aegean by mixing with more western shifted Greeks? I doubt it, but we will come to that in the next comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    Turkification of the tableland and maybe even Aegean gene flow into western Anatolia have obscured what I predict was a continuous cline of Aegean-like to Armenian-like Greeks in the Middle Ages.
    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    Indeed, modern Central Anatolian Greeks plot between Cretans and Pontics in the Global25 PCA, but the gaps between the groups in question aren't trivial. There are, of course, many modern Turkish populations situated between the traditional territories of the Asiatic Greeks being discussed, and all but the Trabzon Turks have Central Asian admixture. It is no wonder then that a medieval continuum connecting European Greeks to West Asian Greeks would cease to exist with the arrival of the Seljuks and subsequent segmentation of relict Greeks in Anatolia. That's just my opinion, of course, but it seems reasonable. Maybe there were big gaps between these Greeks even before the Turks, but I just can't see what barriers would've existed to prevent admixture between Byzantines in Asia Minor who directly neighbored each other. There's structure in North, Central, and Southern Italians, but they still blend together at their edges. I think this was almost certainly the case in the medieval Greek world, too. It might have existed long before the Byzantines, too, since these areas had all been Hellenized well before the Middle Ages.
    The thing is Michalis, the clines do exist they're just not as pretty as we would like. Just because they lived alongside one another as Greeks in Roman times and before does not necessarily mean there was large scale mixing, we're talking about vast mountainous swaths of land, the villages of the Black Sea and Constantinople would have been entirely different ways of life. Of course they are still made up of the same type of components, it's just that Pontians are pretty overwhelmingly of West Asian origin. There are no Turkish individuals, either Turkic or Anatolian Turkish, that can explain the admixture in Pontic Greeks - it is too Armenia_EBA like, it appears before the Greek colonisation Pontic Greeks and Turks would have literally clustered with Kura-Araxes. I admit it is strange, but that's what the models and clustering tell me. I do not believe the Turkification argument, as the invading Turks would have resembled Central Asians and there is no East Eurasian admixture in Pontic Greeks or Central Anatolian Greeks to any great degree, certainly not enough to suggest a sizeable Turkish input. Instead, I think it is likely that Pontic Greeks are the descendants of a Kura-Araxes transplanted population migration from the Caucasus, who were then Hellenized and absorbed Greek genetic input - only it simply wasn't enough to change their fundamental clustering. Both West and Central Anatolian Greeks are Greek settlers, who absorbed a West Asian input from the local women who were Hellenized before hand - but they are fundamentally of overwhelming Aegean Greek origin and Pontian's are not.

    There was, however, signification Byzantification :

    [1] "distance%=1.5891"

    Turkish_Adana

    Greek_Central_Anatolia,67.2
    Turkmen,32.8

    [1] "distance%=1.2628"

    Turkish_Aydin

    Greek_Central_Anatolia,64
    Turkmen,36


    Quote Originally Posted by Michalis Moriopoulos View Post
    Really amazing stuff. Alawites were a completely unknown quantity until those samples were posted. Erik has also done a fantastic job getting us Romaniote and Syrian Jew samples to look over. Not to mention a few samples of Levantine Christian minorities like Melkites and so on. I'm proud to be part of a forum that beats the academic papers to the punch on a lot of interesting populations.

    It would be nice to have the raw genotype data from Sarno and Stamatoyannopoulos, if it's even useable for our purposes. I assume Sikeliot has already asked the authors. Western Anatolian Greeks, Grikos, and other inappreciable populations probably aren't high on the list of priorities for most labs, so we have to be proactive in requesting data from scientists who do study niche groups but don't have a policy of automatically sharing their data publicly.
    One day I hope we get the samples but I'm not holding my breath, developing an interest in genetics is both a blessing and a curse. An entire world you didn't know about before opens up to you, but you also have to endure the long wait for samples... if they even arrive at all.

    This forum is amazing though, not only because it is full of intelligent and mature individuals but also because of the creativity of the community on here. Lukasz with his K36, Davidski with the G25, Poi's runner, Erik's map correlation and so on.

    This post is strictly my personal and amateur opinion.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LTG For This Useful Post:

     Anabasis (11-28-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018)

  9. #25
    Registered Users
    Posts
    279
    Sex

    Greece
    East of Trabzon at least there were Kolchians and related peoples before the Greek colonization. It is not easy to say if Kolchians were really Kartvelian or something else imo, but the possibility should be considered.

    The elites of the ancient kingdoms of Pontus would have had a Greek and Persian (or in general West Iranian) element.

    Armenian admixture, if it exists it can be more modern. I don't believe significant Armenian admixture in Pontic Greeks is necessary to explain the similarities in PCAs. I don't know why people seem to forget historical facts.

    Most of Anatolia proper apart from the NE part was likely Indo-European speaking during the Bronze Age. I have said that the core Hattian area was likely within the bend of Kizilirmak river. The NE part could have had a Kolchian related element (maybe Kartvelian but I'm against considering that a given)

    In the South-East of Anatolia proper (Adana for example) there was the Assyrian influence too. Indo-European speakers were there before the Semites of course.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Kanenas For This Useful Post:

     Anabasis (11-28-2018)

  11. #26
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,569
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Sikeliot View Post
    Also going to add, mainland Greek admixture in some islands also created a bridge between Aegean islands and the mainland, meaning you have Crete/Dodecanese/South Italy plotting together, then a bunch of lightly Slavicized islanders who are still less Slavic than the mainland (Chios, Samos, Cyclades, etc.) and then you have Peloponnese and so on. It gives the impression of a gradient.

    This is someone with ancestry from Samos going back hundreds of years. She comes out like 7/8 Sicily, 1/8 NE Europe which must mean the trickling of Slavic ancestry from the mainland.
    There was a time when I would've said you shouldn't take such fits literally, however considering how close to South Italians the Mycenaeans turn out to be this can't be a coincidence.

    Edit: I also recall using Eastern Mediterraneans to quantify the amount of Greek ancestry in the Pontian reference, that was shortly before Lazaridis et al.'s paper on the Mycenaeans and the Minoans, back then I concluded that they derived between 25% and 30% (approximately) of their ancestry from an Aegean-like source while the rest was from a Kartvelian-like source. Would be interesting to see how the Central Anatolian/Cappadocian Greeks fare with models involving the Mycenaeans (and whether this has any bearing on the Pontic results), I might try this out when I have the time.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 11-26-2018 at 09:45 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Andrewid (11-27-2018),  Erikl86 (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018),  Principe (12-01-2018)

  13. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    170
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    English & Greek
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    J2a-L397
    mtDNA
    H2a2a1

    United Kingdom Greece Byzantine Empire
    Following Agamemnon's comment above, some basic models for Pontic Greeks and Central Anatolian Greeks using Mycenaean as a reference.

    Pontic Greeks:

    [1] "distance%=2.405"

    Armenia_EBA,73.2
    Mycenaean,26.8

    [1] "distance%=1.3538"

    Georgian_Laz,89.2
    Mycenaean,10.8

    With moderns out of curiosity.

    [1] "distance%=1.2835"

    Georgian_Laz,83
    Greek_Crete,17

    Central Anatolian Greeks:

    [1] "distance%=1.3819"

    Armenia_EBA,47.8
    Mycenaean,30.6
    Tepecik_Ciftlik_N,21.6


    [1] "distance%=1.3411"

    Armenia_EBA,48.2
    Mycenaean,43.2
    Levant_N,8.6

    With moderns out of curiosity.

    [1] "distance%=1.7179"

    Greek_Crete,58
    Georgian_Laz,42

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to LTG For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-26-2018),  Andrewid (11-27-2018),  Erikl86 (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

  15. #28
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,549
    Sex
    Location
    USA
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    R1a1a
    mtDNA
    H

    United States of America
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    There was a time when I would've said you shouldn't take such fits literally, however considering how close to South Italians the Mycenaeans turn out to be this can't be a coincidence.

    Edit: I also recall using Eastern Mediterraneans to quantify the amount of Greek ancestry in the Pontian reference, that was shortly before Lazaridis et al.'s paper on the Mycenaeans and the Minoans, back then I concluded that they derived between 25% and 30% (approximately) of their ancestry from an Aegean-like source while the rest was from a Kartvelian-like source. Would be interesting to see how the Central Anatolian/Cappadocian Greeks fare with models involving the Mycenaeans (and whether this has any bearing on the Pontic results), I might try this out when I have the time.
    I think that Sicily in that fit is a stand in for the East Mediterranean substrate of the Aegean and Near East, and that in the absence of Slavic input we would expect her to be modeled as 95%+ Sicilian. It isn't to be taken literally but it shows Sicilians represent one of the most ancient ancestral layers of Greeks that has to various extents been overridden, but best preserved on the Aegean islands.

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sikeliot For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-26-2018),  Erikl86 (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

  17. #29
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,569
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Looks like I wasn't too far off with that ~25% to ~30% estimate (this is all w/o pen=0):

    [1] "distance%=2.4938"

    Greek_Trabzon

    Armenia_EBA,70.4
    Mycenaean,29.6

    [1] "distance%=3.615"

    Greek_Trabzon

    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,74.4
    Mycenaean,25.6


    Greek_Central_Anatolia looks like a roughly equal two-way mixture between the Mycenaeans and Armenia_EBA/Hajji_Firuz_ChL here, which is pretty neat (though not entirely realistic IMO):

    [1] "distance%=1.9694"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Mycenaean,50.4
    Armenia_EBA,49.6

    [1] "distance%=2.3763"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,53
    Mycenaean,47




    I'm reluctant to throw ancient and modern population together at this stage.

    Quote Originally Posted by LTG View Post
    Following Agamemnon's comment above, some basic models for Pontic Greeks and Central Anatolian Greeks using Mycenaean as a reference.

    Pontic Greeks:

    [1] "distance%=2.405"

    Armenia_EBA,73.2
    Mycenaean,26.8

    [1] "distance%=1.3538"

    Georgian_Laz,89.2
    Mycenaean,10.8

    With moderns out of curiosity.

    [1] "distance%=1.2835"

    Georgian_Laz,83
    Greek_Crete,17

    Central Anatolian Greeks:

    [1] "distance%=1.3819"

    Armenia_EBA,47.8
    Mycenaean,30.6
    Tepecik_Ciftlik_N,21.6


    [1] "distance%=1.3411"

    Armenia_EBA,48.2
    Mycenaean,43.2
    Levant_N,8.6

    With moderns out of curiosity.

    [1] "distance%=1.7179"

    Greek_Crete,58
    Georgian_Laz,42
    Seems you beat me to it. Again, this is pretty consistent with the 25% to 30% estimate I obtained last year. Regarding the Cappadocian Greeks, I think the inclusion of Neolithic populations such as Tepecik and Levant_N is unwarranted, a more realistic model would include some of the Bronze Age Anatolian samples we have, so for example:

    [1] "distance%=1.7476"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_EBA,41.8
    Armenia_EBA,31.2
    Mycenaean,27

    [1] "distance%=1.9532"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_BA,33.6
    Mycenaean,33.4
    Armenia_EBA,33

    [1] "distance%=2.4711"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_BA,37.8
    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,36.4
    Mycenaean,25.8

    [1] "distance%=2.5688"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,34.8
    Mycenaean,33.2
    Anatolia_EBA,32


    ^^This seems much more plausible quite frankly.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 11-26-2018 at 11:44 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Andrewid (11-27-2018),  Erikl86 (11-27-2018),  LTG (11-26-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018),  Principe (12-01-2018)

  19. #30
    Registered Users
    Posts
    170
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    English & Greek
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    J2a-L397
    mtDNA
    H2a2a1

    United Kingdom Greece Byzantine Empire
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    Seems you beat me to it. Again, this is pretty consistent with the 25% to 30% estimate I obtained last year. Regarding the Cappadocian Greeks, I think the inclusion of Neolithic populations such as Tepecik and Levant_N is unwarranted, a more realistic model would include some of the Bronze Age Anatolian samples were have, so for example:

    [1] "distance%=1.7476"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_EBA,41.8
    Armenia_EBA,31.2
    Mycenaean,27

    [1] "distance%=1.9532"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_BA,33.6
    Mycenaean,33.4
    Armenia_EBA,33

    [1] "distance%=2.4711"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Anatolia_BA,37.8
    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,36.4
    Mycenaean,25.8

    [1] "distance%=2.5688"

    Greek_Central_Anatolia

    Hajji_Firuz_ChL,34.8
    Mycenaean,33.2
    Anatolia_EBA,32


    ^^This seems much more plausible quite frankly.
    I was going to use some of the ancient Anatolian samples, but I felt they had the potential to artificially detract from the Mycenaean % due to their proximity with Central Anatolian Greeks on the PCA. Those models however are very nice and make a lot of sense.

    Pontic Greeks do not remain as steadfast with the inclusion of Anatolia_EBA:

    [1] "distance%=1.8667"

    Greek_Trabzon

    Armenia_EBA,56
    Anatolia_EBA,42
    Mycenaean,2

    Edit: That was using pen=0, here they are without:

    [1] "distance%=2.0392"

    Greek_Trabzon

    Armenia_EBA,62.6
    Anatolia_EBA,27.4
    Mycenaean,10
    Last edited by LTG; 11-26-2018 at 11:58 PM.

  20. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LTG For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (11-27-2018),  Anabasis (11-28-2018),  Andrewid (11-27-2018),  Erikl86 (11-27-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (11-28-2018),  Power77 (11-27-2018)

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-06-2018, 05:18 PM
  2. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 04-26-2018, 07:08 PM
  3. Pontic Greek DNA Results
    By GiourkasNinisiadis in forum AncestryDNA
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-30-2018, 05:05 PM
  4. Greek DNA results.
    By terrakis in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-14-2017, 02:16 PM
  5. Operation Antioch: Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholic Levantines
    By wandering_amorite in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-02-2016, 08:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •