>Turks were whiter than Byzantines

Greek bros... How do we recover from this?

>>14904564 (OP)

What study is this from and these aren't modern Turks

>>14904564 (OP)

It's the spiritual content that matters. Most ancient people are darker than their modern counterparts anyway

>were

>>14904564 (OP)

more of them have dark skin. Steppe ancestry is a lot higher in the medieval samples interestingly, I'm not sure if they have slavic admixture or if turks brought more of it into the region than greeks did.

You'd have to look at them more closely.

Those are samples from the Southern Arc papers.

Bros....

>>14904564 (OP)

i unironically like turks more than greeks



it would be epic if turks were accepted christianity instead of islam

>>14904564 (OP)

Do we have Ionian Greek samples? I know we have three samples from a Carian city, anything else?

We have 750-500 BC Mugla samples. Everything before during the historical era is poorly sampled outside of south-eastern anatolia.

What do we know about them both? Are we sure they're Greeks?

>>14904564 (OP)

What Twitter autist is posting these? Is it spacemarine or something?

I have no clue. The site descriptions in the supplement are more clear about the Bodrum set. Which has more historical greek contact (Halicarnassus made by Greeks). They seem to have varying levels of levantine, greek and carian ancestry.

The Mugla set has less site information, has less steppe (so probably less Greek) but also less levantine. I looked at the HGs but it's difficult to determine which are native and which are minoan/greek because the two regions are interconnected (recent ChL anatolian geneflow in Minoans).



We also don't know how representative the Yassitepe samples are of Luwics, or if there is any regional substructure further south.

The Anatolian samples are pulled towards Aegean compared to Bronze Age samples. I think many of them are genuine Greeks.

>carian

Do we know what this one is supposed to look like?

>varying levels

Yeah, it's actually Greek mixed with Levantines, I thought it will be more Anatolian. 

>of Luwics

Aren't those Hittites? Anyway it's early enough to be any and looks exactly like the native Anatolians should.

Though with Mycenaeans it looks as it should. What's the reason?

>Do we know what this one is supposed to look like?

>Aren't those Hittites? Anyway it's early enough to be any and looks exactly like the native Anatolians should.

Carians (and most other Anatolian speakers on the coast except Lydians and maybe Trojans) are Luwic.

The Yassitepe MBA sample is almost surely Anatolian speaking, and the profile between it and the EBA samples stays similar (if not becoming slightly more Aegean).

But we have no clue whether the entirety of the coast looked like that, for how long etc. Maybe further north looked more Balkan, further south looked more levantine/ANF.

Do you have a clue what's the reason for this - >>14905058? Is it just an Ionian admixture?

Grim. Should we use Mycenaean or Himera samples then?

Himera is slightly more western than the Mycenaeans (this doesn't even include Crete samples). It's also possible Dorians are just very slightly more Balkan, or there's some other substructure at play. Any small amount can cause a big shift if you're comparing very similar populations.

what site is this from?

the higher steppe ones have darker skin

>>14904564 (OP)

Greeks have always been tanned, even during the bronze age. Why is having pale bitch skin seen as positive to you incel fags? Being jacked and tanned is way better anyway.
