Talk:Middle Bronze Age migrations (ancient Near East)

References - non mainstream view??

I am not an expert, but this seems like a controversial theory presented as fact. The lack of references (only two papers from 50 years ago) seems to imply that, as does the recent provenance of the article. Unless this is corrected with either more references or with noting that the theory is a minority view, I will tag the article for inadequate citations and being unbalanced. Causantin (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

yes, this article is mostly original research. Trying to fix it or at least insert some caveats. --dab (𒁳) 12:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate determination.

"For reasons unknown, the Hittites moved into Khattian Central Anatolia (Central Turkey), conquering the Hattians and later adopting their culture and name." Hittites, didnt adobt name of hatti, they called themselves Nesali. They just didnt change the name of region they conquered "lands of hatti". Which Biblical writers erroneously took as if it was their name. A modern example to the same phenomenon is Hungarians, although they call themselves Magyars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.100.165.143 (talk) 01:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hittite migration

"However, newer theories contradict the notion of supposed migration of the Hittites, suggesting that a Proto-Indo-Hittite languages dates back to fourth or eight millennium BC.[3]" < One book is not "newer theories". It seems the authors fell prey to the computations of Bouckaert et al., which are demonstrably mistaken and widely not accepted by archaeologists and linguists. At least a minimum abstract of the line of arguments is required instead of empty phrases. HJJHolm (talk) 16:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete theory

The article deals with a completely obsolete theory, needless to say that it should be written from scratch.Alexikoua (talk) 19:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Anatolian languages and peoples

In pp. 7f. of this paper, Melchert dates Proto-Anatolian to about 3000–2500 BC, but cautions that Proto-Anatolian could have been spoken outside of Anatolia. The possibility that it was spoken in the Balkans (Ezero culture?) instead should not be ruled out. Although there is evidence of Hittite and Luwian speech in Kültepe by the early second millennium BC, this does not contradict the possibility of a migration into Anatolia by about 2000–1900 BC, and Hittites#Origins suggests this as well. Admittedly, I cannot judge the material archaeological evidence for such a migration. But since a migration from the west (or anywhere else) into Anatolia does not seem to be supported for earlier times (like the fourth millennium BC), and the alternative possibility of indigenous origin of the Anatolian Indo-European languages is now disfavoured again, this looks like the best candidate for archaeological traces of the entry of the Anatolian languages into Anatolia. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Lazaridis et al. (2017)

It seems to me that Lazaridis et al. (2017) was misrepresented. I've made some corrections. This edit, edit-summary

Lazaridis et al. page 54-55: "Our results highlight the importance of haplogroup J chromosomes during the Bronze Age in mainland Greece, Crete, and Anatolia, in contrast to the earlier Neolithic populations that were dominated by haplogroup G2a2. [..] Our results suggest a later westward dispersal than the Neolithic farming expansion.

changed

This has revealed that the ancient Mycenaean and Minoan populations were highly similar, but not identical, and that their ancestors had migrated from Anatolia thousands of years before the Bronze Age, during the Neolithic.

into

This has revealed that the ancient Mycenaean and Minoan populations were highly similar, but not identical, and that their ancestors had migrated from the Caucasus and Iran in the Bronze Age.

Is this an intentional distortion? Or just a misunderstanding? What Lazaridis et al. give as a possible explanation (p.55 suppl. info):

...the presence (and frequency) of haplogroup J in the Aegean and neighboring regions [...] may have accompanied the genetic admixture (Neolithic Iran/Caucasus-hunter-gatherer related) that seems to have affected all populations in our study (Supplementary Information, section 2). Thus, the Y-chromosome turnover that occurred in central Europe during the Bronze Age may also have occurred in the Aegean, with a different set of incoming lineages.

Not a hint of a migration from Iran. In the main article they state:

Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus and Iran. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe or Armenia.

And further:

Ancient DNA research has traced the principal ancestors of early European farmers to highly similar Neolithic populations of Greece and western Anatolia, beginning in the seventh millennium bc (refs 1, 2); however, the later history of these regions down to the Bronze Age, a transformational period in the history of Eurasia, is less clear. There is limited genetic evidence suggesting migrations from both the east (the area of Iran and the Caucasus), reaching Anatolia by at least ~ 3800 bc (ref. 4), and the north (eastern Europe and Siberia) contributing ‘Ancient North Eurasian’ ancestry to all modern Europeans. The timing and impact of these migrations in the Aegean is, however, unknown.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I removed it but it was added again, what does it mean? 10,000 years ago? Mycenaeans were certainly an Indo-European people, Proto-Indo-Europeans themselves didn't exist thousands of years prior to the Bronze Age. MojtabaShahmiri (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

You removed it indeed; please read the quotes above carefully. Lazaridis et al. (2017) there was some gemtic contribution from steppe-related peoples, but the large bulk of Greek genes derives from neolithic farmers. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)