by
Damien F. Mackey
“Professor Triantafyllidis states that their
analysis indicated that
the arrival of these new people on Crete had coincided with a social and
cultural upsurge
that had led to the birth of the Minoan [sic] civilisation
around 7000 BC [sic]. Specifically, genetic researchers connected the source population of ancient
Crete to the well-known Neolithic sites in Anatolia”.
Gavin Menzies and Ian Hudson
Those whom Sir Arthur Evans fancifully named ‘the Minoans’, based on the popular
legend of King Minos, son of Zeus, are biblically and historically attested as
the Philistines.
Gavin Menzies has followed Arthur Evans in
labelling as “Minoans” the great sea-faring and trading nation that is the very
focal point of his fascinating book, The Lost Empire of Atlantis: History's Greatest Mystery Revealed (HarperCollins,
2011). Though the ex-submariner, Menzies, can sometimes ‘go a bit overboard’ -
or, should I say, he can become a bit ‘airborne’ (and don’t we all?) - he is
often highly informative and is always eminently readable.
According to the brief summary of the book that we
find at Menzies’ own site:
... the Minoans. It’s
long been known that this extraordinary civilisation, with its great palaces
and sea ports based in Crete and nearby Thera (now called Santorini), had a
level of sophistication that belied its place in the Bronze Age world but never
before has the extent of its reach been uncovered.
Through painstaking research, including recent DNA evidence,
Menzies has pieced together an incredible picture of a cultured people who
traded with India and Mesopotamia, Africa and Western Europe, including Britain
and Ireland, and even sailed to North America.
Menzies reveals that copper found at Minoan sites can only
have come from Lake Superior, and that it was copper, combined with tin from
Cornwall and elsewhere, to make bronze, that gave the Minoans their
wealth. He uses knowledge gleaned as a naval captain to explore ancient
shipbuilding and navigation techniques and explain how the Minoans were able to
travel so far. He looks at why the Minoan empire, which was 1500 years
ahead of China and Greece in terms of science, architecture, art and language,
disappeared so abruptly and what led to her destruction. ...
[End of quote]
The Philistines
Thanks to Dr. Donovan Courville (The Exodus Problem and its Ramifications, Loma
Linda CA, 1971), we can trace the Philistines - through their distinctive
pottery - all the way back to Neolithic Knossos (Crete). And this, despite J.
C. Greenfield’s assertion: “There is no evidence for a Philistine
occupation of Crete, nor do the facts about the Philistines, known from
archaeological and literary sources, betray any relationship between them and Crete”
(IDB, 1962, vol. 1, p. 534). The distinctive type of pottery that
Courville has identified as belonging to the biblical Philistines is well described
in this quote that he has taken from Kathleen Kenyon:
The pottery does in fact
provide very useful evidence about culture. The first interesting point is the
wealth of a particular class of painted pottery …. The decoration is bichrome,
nearly always red and black, and the most typical vessels have a combination of
metopes enclosing a bird or a fish with geometric
decoration such as a “Union Jack” pattern or a Catherine wheel. At Megiddo
the first bichrome pottery is attributed to Stratum X, but all the published
material comes from tombs intrusive into this level. It is in fact
characteristic of Stratum IX. Similar
pottery is found in great profusion in southern Palestine … Very similar
vessels are also found on the east coast
of Cyprus and on the coastal Syrian sites as far north as Ras Shamra.
[Emphasis Courville’s]
By contrast, the pottery of the ‘Sea Peoples’ - a
maritime confederation confusingly identified sometimes as the early biblical
Philistines, their pottery like, but not identical to the distinctive
Philistine pottery as described above - was Aegean (Late Helladic), not
Cretan.
The indispensable “Table of Nations” (Genesis 10),
informs us that the Philistines were a Hamitic people, descendants of Ham’s
“son”, Mizraim (or Egypt) (v. 6).
Genesis 10:13: “Mizraim was
the father of the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites, Kasluhites (from whom the Philistines came) and
Caphtorites”.
These earliest Philistines would be represented by
the users of this distinctive pottery at Neolithic I level Knossos (Dr.
Courville):
With the evidences thus far
noted before us, we are now in a position to examine the archaeological reports
from Crete for evidences of the early occupation of this site by the Caphtorim
(who are either identical to the Philistines of later Scripture or are closely
related to them culturally). We now have at least an approximate idea of the
nature of the culture for which we are looking ….
… we can hardly be wrong in
recognizing the earliest occupants of
Crete as the people who represented the beginnings of the people later known in
Scripture as the Philistines, by virtue of the stated origin of the Philistines
in Crete. This concept holds regardless of the name that may be applied to this
early era by scholars.
The only site at which Cretan
archaeology has been examined for its earliest occupants is at the site of the
palace at Knossos. At this site deep test pits were dug into the earlier
occupation levels. If there is any archaeological evidence available from Crete
for its earliest period, it should then be found from the archaeology of these
test pits. The pottery found there is described by Dr. Furness, who is cited by
Hutchinson.
“Dr. Furness divides the
early Neolithic I fabrics into (a) coarse unburnished ware and (b) fine
burnished ware, only differing from the former in that the pot walls are
thinner, the clay better mixed, and the burnish more carefully executed. The
surface colour is usually black, but examples also occur of red, buff or
yellow, sometimes brilliant red or orange, and sometimes highly variegated
sherds”.
A relation was observed
between the decoration of some of this pottery from early Neolithic I in Crete
with that at the site of Alalakh ….
Continuing to cite Dr.
Furness, Hutchinson commented:
Dr. Furness justly observes
that “as the pottery of the late Neolithic phases seems to have developed at
Knossos without a break, it is to the earliest that one must look for evidence
of origin of foreign connections”, and she therefore stresses the importance of
a small group with plastic decoration that seems mainly confined to the Early Neolithic I levels, consisting of
rows of pellets immediately under the rim (paralleled on burnished pottery of Chalcolithic [predynastic] date from Gullucek in the Alaca [Alalakh]
district of Asia Minor). [Emphasis
Courville’s]
While the Archaeological Ages
of early Crete cannot with certainty be correlated with the corresponding eras
on the mainland, it would seem that Chalcolithic on the mainland is later than
Early Neolithic in Crete; hence any influence of one culture on the other is
more probably an influence of early Cretan culture on that of the mainland.
This is in agreement with Scripture to the effect that the Philistines migrated
from Crete to what is now the mainland at some point prior to the time of
Abraham.[[1]]
[End of quotes]
Late
Chalcolithic, we have already learned, pertains to the era of Abram (Abraham), when
the Philistines were apparently in southern Canaan:
Better archaeological model for Abraham
We next find the Philistines in the land of
Palestine (the Gaza region) at the time of Joshua. Was there a Philistine
migration out of Crete (“Caphtor”) at the time of the Exodus migration out of
Egypt? (Amos 9:7): “Did I not bring Israel up from Egypt, the
Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?”
Dr. John Bimson becomes interesting at this point,
as previously I have written:
Here I take up Bimson’s
account of this biblical tradition:[2]
There is a tradition
preserved in Joshua 13:2-3 and Judges 3:3 that the Philistines were established
in Canaan by the end of the Conquest, and that the Israelites had been unable
to oust them from the coastal plain …. There is also an indication that the
main Philistine influx had not occurred very much prior to the Conquest. As we
shall see below, the Philistines are the people referred to as “the Caphtorim,
who came from Caphtor” in Deuteronomy 2:23 … where it is said that a people called
the Avvim originally occupied the region around Gaza, and that the Caphtorim
“destroyed them and settled in their stead”. Josh. 13:2-3 mentions Philistines
and Avvim together as peoples whom the Israelites had failed to dislodge from
southern Canaan. This suggests that the Philistines had not completely replaced
the Avvim by the end of Joshua’s life. I would suggest, in fact, that the war
referred to in Ex. 13:17, which was apparently taking place in “the land of the
Philistines” at the time of the Exodus, was the war of the Avvim against the
newly arrived Philistines.
As conventionally viewed, the
end of MB II C coincides with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt. Bimson
however, in his efforts to provide a revised stratigraphy for the revision of
history, has synchronised MB II C instead with the start of Hyksos rule. He will argue here in some detail that the
building and refortifying of cities at this time was the work of the Avvim
against the invading Philistines, with some of the new settlements, however,
likely having been built by the Philistines themselves.
[End of quote]
I have further written on Dr. Bimson’s laudable
effort to bring some archaeological sanity to this era:
Bimson has grappled with
trying to distinguish between what might have been archaeological evidence for
the Philistines and evidence for the Hyksos, though in actual fact it may be
fruitless to try to discern a clear distinction in this case. Thus he writes:[3]
Finds at Tell el-Ajjul, in
the Philistine plain, about 5 miles SW of Gaza, present a particularly
interesting situation. As I have shown elsewhere, the “Palace I” city (City
III) at Tell el-Ajjul was destroyed at the end of the MBA, the following phase
of occupation (City II) belonging to LB I …. There is some uncertainty as to
exactly when bichrome ware first appeared at Tell el-Ajjul.
Fragments have been found in
the courtyard area of Palace I, but some writers suggest that this area
remained in use into the period of Palace II, and that the bichrome ware should
therefore be regarded as intrusive in the Palace I level ….
It seems feasible to suggest
that the invading Philistines were responsible for the destruction of City III,
though it is also possible that its destruction was the work of Amalekites
occupying the Negeb (where we find them settled a short while after the Exodus;
cf. Num. 13:29); in view of Velikovsky’s identification of the biblical
Amalekites with the Hyksos … the Amalekite occupation of the Negeb could
plausibly be dated, like the Hyksos invasion of Egypt, to roughly the time of
the Exodus …. But if our arguments have been correct thus far, the evidence of
the bichrome ware favours the Philistines as the newcomers to the site, and as the
builders of City II.
[End of quotes]
Next we come to the Philistines in the era of King
Saul, for a proper appreciation of which I return to Dr. Courville’s thesis.
He, initially contrasting the Aegean ware with that of the distinctive
Philistine type, has written:
The new pottery found at
Askelon [Ashkelon] at the opening of Iron I, and correlated with the invasion
of the Sea Peoples, was identified as of Aegean origin. A similar, but not
identical, pottery has been found in the territory north of Palestine belonging
to the much earlier era of late Middle Bronze. By popular views, this is prior
to the Israelite occupation of Palestine. By the altered chronology, this is
the period of the late judges and the era of Saul.
… That the similar pottery of
late Middle Bronze, occurring both in the north and in the south, is related to
the culture found only in the south at the later date is apparent from the
descriptions of the two cultures. Of this earlier culture, which should be
dated to the time of Saul, Miss Kenyon commented:
The pottery does in fact
provide very useful evidence about culture. The first interesting point is the
wealth of a particular class of painted pottery …. The decoration is bichrome,
nearly always red and black, and the most typical vessels have a combination of
metopes enclosing a bird or a fish with geometric
decoration such as a “Union Jack” pattern or a Catherine wheel. At Megiddo
the first bichrome pottery is attributed to Stratum X, but all the published
material comes from tombs intrusive into this level. It is in fact
characteristic of Stratum IX. Similar
pottery is found in great profusion in southern Palestine … Very similar
vessels are also found on the east coast
of Cyprus and on the coastal Syrian sites as far north as Ras Shamra.
[Emphasis Courville’s]
Drawings of typical examples
of this pottery show the same stylized bird with back-turned head that
characterized the pottery centuries later at Askelon.
… The anachronisms and
anomalies in the current views on the interpretation of this invasion and its
effects on Palestine are replaced by a consistent picture, and one that is in
agreement with the background provided by Scripture for the later era in the
very late [sic] 8th century B.C.
[End
of quotes]
“Dr. Wood’s article ["The Genesis Philistines", 2006] provides the evidence
that supports Crete as the ancient home of the Philistines”.
It
occurred to me during a recent re-reading of Gavin Menzies’ book, The Lost
Empire of Atlantis, that those peoples he - following Sir Arthur Evans -
termed ‘the Minoans’, must really have been the Philistines. And thus I wrote Part
One of this series:
So-called
"Minoans" were the Philistines
Previously,
I had devoted Chapter 2 (of Volume One) of my university thesis:
A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah
and its Background
AMAIC_Final_Thesis_2009.pdf
to
a consideration of “The Philistines and their Allies”, the Philistines
being relevant to any serious study of King Hezekiah of Judah. This chapter was
heavily reliant upon the fine research into the subject by Dr. Donovan Courville
(The Exodus Problem and its Ramifications,
1971).
Now,
the intriguing “Dr Platypus” has referred to the findings of Dr. Bryant Wood in
his post: “Philistines, Cypriots, and Minoans”, at:
....
If the Philistines came most
immediately from Cyprus, and Cyprus was within the Minoan sphere of influence,
is it possible to place Philistines on Crete itself? Amazingly, the answer seems
to be yes. The evidence for this has recently been advanced by Bryan[t] G. Wood
in “The Genesis Philistines” .... According to Wood, the famous Phaistos Disk, a 6.5 inch diameter, half-inch think
baked clay disk with undecipherable inscriptions on both sides, makes possible
a Cretan-Philistine connection. This artifact dates from about 1700 BC in
conventional chronology. Among its many symbols, the disk has a depiction of a
warrior in a feathered headdress, which Wood claims is very similar to the
depiction of the later Philistines in reliefs on the walls of Rameses III’s
mortuary temple in Medinet Habu, Egypt (T. Dothan 1982: 22; T.and M. Dothan
1992: 35-36). This is not an isolated find, as identical signs, including
frontal views of the feathered warrior, have been found inscribed on an axe
found in a cave in Crete (Robinson 2002: 306-307).
To the presence of this seemingly
Philistine figure on Crete, Wood adds evidence of an early Cretan presence at
Gerar (identified as Tell Haror, 17 miles east of Gaza). He states,
Of particular interest is a Minoan
graffito found in the sacred precinct dating to ca. 1600 BC. Analyses of the
sherd determined that it originated in Crete, most likely the south coast.
There are four Minoan signs on the graffito, inscribed prior to firing, which
represent a bull’s head, cloth, branch and figs. In addition to the graffito,
an unusual chalice of Canaanite shape and fabric was found in a room on the
east side of the sacred area. What makes the chalice unusual is its high
arching handles, a well-known feature of Minoan chalices, but not of Canaanite.
This find suggests that the Minoans
were living in Gerar‚ the city in which Abraham and Isaac encountered
Philistines in Genesis 21 and 26‚ and had possibly been for a significant time
prior to 1600 BC. Painting Minoan-style reliefs would hardly be among the first
tasks undertaken by settlers. It would probably only be done after the city had
been firmly established. (I should note here that I favor a lower chronology
for the ancient world which would place the Tell Haror graffito at several
centuries greater distance from Abraham. I’ll address the issues of chronology
and possible anachronisms in the next installment.)
Finally, although the language of
Linear A has yet to be deciphered, the phonetic values of many of the signs can
be determined by comparison with later Linear B.
Interpreted in these terms, there are a
couple of well-attested Philistine names (Padi, Ikausu) found in Linear A
inscriptions from Crete.
Crete: An
African Connection?
Is it possible to link Cretan culture
with Egypt? If the Philistines are to be associated with Minoan culture and if
Genesis 10 is taken to be in any sense an accurate representation of the
ethnography of the ancient world, this question must be addressed.
Report this ad
Very little is known of Cretan history
before the beginning of the Early Minoan period, conventionally dated to ca.
2600 BC, although several reputable scholars hazard a guess that there were
early migrations from North Africa. Crete has been inhabited as far back as the
Neolithic period, ca. 6000 BC. Apparently, most of the early settlement was
from Anatolia, but there is also evidence that Crete had a racially diverse
population. Differing skull-types discovered at Cretan excavations suggest that
such diversity existed. From a later period, Homer (Odyssey 17:175-177)
noted at least five different tribes or ethnic groups on the island with each
of them speaking a different language. It is possible that Crete was made up of
many or at least several separate states at an early stage in its history. In
Homer’s day, Crete was
a fair, rich land, begirt with water,
and therein are many men, past counting, and ninety cities. They have not all
the same speech, but their tongues are mixed. There dwell Achaeans, there
great-hearted native Cretans, there Kydonians, and Dorians of waving plumes,
and goodly Pelasgians.
Of the five tribes Homer mentions two
are late Greek-speaking arrivals: the Achaeans and the Dorians. Native Cretans
(or “Eteocretans”), Kydonians, and Pelasgians were likely all present on Crete
before the arrival of the Greeks in the Late Helladic period. Eteocretans and Kydonians
may have been related groups (in mythology, Kydon was the son of Minos, Crete’s
founder and first king). The Pelasgians were also to be found throughout the
Aegean and on the Greek mainland. They apparently originated in Anatolia and
may have been Crete’s original Anatolian ethnic stock.
Known in later Greek literature as Pelasgoi,
they were originally called Pelastoi (Iliad 16:233; the earliest
attested form of the word has “t,” not “g”)‚ a likely origin for the Egyptian
term Peleset and the Hebrew Pelishtim. Since many believe that
the indigenous population of Crete had both Anatolian and North African
roots, this leaves Eteocretans and Kydonians as possible candidates for
descendancy from Mizraim (Ge 10:13-14).
What else can be known?
There are Greek traditions that the
Libyans originally came from Crete and/or settled in Crete, although I must
hasten to state that the historicity of these traditions is strenuously
contested by some, who see them as resulting from a linguistic confusion between
Mat Libu, the Assyrian name for the Lycians of Asia Minor, and Libya. At
any rate, one of these Libyan groups was the Garamantes, whom Robert Graves (The
Greek Myths, vol. 1, pp. 33-35) states originally lived in the Fezzan
region of Libya, south of Cyrene. In other words, the Garamantes lived just
south of the region of Africa associated with the Casluchim, the ancestors of
the Philistines according to the Genesis Table of Nations.
All of this, it must be emphasized, is
purely speculation. No one can say for sure that the Eteocretans came from
North Africa or were somehow culturally connected with Egypt. There is,
however, an abundance of circumstantial evidence for a Cretan-Egyptian
connection that has been noted since Sir Arthur Evans first excavated Knossos. Redmond notes several symbols shared by the
two cultures:
1. The ankh.
2. Hathor-like images such as cows
suckling calves.
3. The resemblance between the Minoan “Snake Goddess” figures and Wadjet, the Egyptian Nile
goddess represented as a snake. (For a fuller explanation, see Christopher L.
C. E. Witcombe, Minoan Snake Goddess. Witcombe states, “It is clear that
the Minoans borrowed much their culture and various cult practices from Egypt.
Numerous Egyptian objects of one kind or another were found by Evans at
Knossos. The most spectacular discovery was the lower part of a diorite statue
of a seated Egyptian figure identified from the hieroglyphic inscriptions as a
priest of Wadjyt.”)
4. The orientation of the palaces on Crete
was determined in relation to Sirius, as was the position of Hathor’s temple on
the Nile.
5. Both cultures celebrated the New Year
at the early rising of Sirius in July.
Additional features might be noted,
including:
1. Donald A. MacKenzie, Myths of Crete and Pre-Hellenic Europe, cites the affinities between the
Cretan Zeus and Egyptian Osiris.
3. Evidence from Cretan murals indicates
that the costumes the Minoans wore were similar to those of the
Egyptians.
These connections led Evans to speculate
that during the unsettling time of the military unification of Upper and Lower
Egypt, refugees from Lower Egypt may have immigrated to Crete. ....
Neolithic Cretan Origins in Anatolia
“... genetic researchers connected the source population of
ancient Crete
to the well-known Neolitihic sites in Anatolia ...”.
Gavin Menzies and Ian Hudson
Gavin
Menzies and Ian Hudson, in The Lost Empire of Atlantis: History's Greatest Mystery Revealed, introduce us to
professor Constantinos Triantafyllidis of Thessaloniki’s Aristotle
University and his important DNA studies of the Cretan so-called ‘Minoans’ (ch.
7):
Now that
scientists are able to test genetic theories with rigour, I was here because of the new
study reported
by The Times. New work by an
international group of geneticists showed that a section of Crete's Neolithic population (i.e. pre-Bronze Age) did indeed go there by sea from Anatolia – modern-day Turkey. Professor Constantinos Triantafyllidis of Thessaloniki’s Aristotle University had
published the findings of a research group led by geneticists from Greece, the United States, Canada, Russia and
Turkey. Professor Triantafyllidis states that their analysis indicated that the arrival of these new people on Crete had coincided with a social and cultural upsurge that had led to the
birth of the Minoan
civilisation around 7000 BC. Specifically, genetic researchers connected the source
population of ancient Crete to the well-known Neolithic sites in Anatolia:
The earliest Neolithic sites of Europe are located in Crete and mainland Greece. A debate
persists concerning
whether these farmers originated in neighbouring Anatolia and over the role of maritime colonisation. To address this issue 171 samples were collected from areas near three known early Neolithic settlement areas in Greece
together with 193 samples from
Crete. An analysis
of Y-chromosome hectographs determined that the samples from the
Greek sites
showed strong affinity to Balkan data, while Crete shows affinity with central/Mediterranean Anatolia. Haplogroup J2b–M12 was frequent in Thessaly and Greek Macedonia while haplogroup J2a–M410 was scarce. Alternatively, Crete, like
Anatolia showed a high frequency of J2a-M410 and a low frequency of J2b-M12.
This dichotomy
parallels archaeobotanical evidence,
specifically that white bread wheat (Triticum
aestivum) is
known from Neolithic Anatolia, Crete and southern Italy; [yet] it is
absent from earliest Neolithic Greece ....
[End of quote]
From
a biblical point of view, I think, the estimated date for “the birth of the Minoan civilisation around 7000 BC” would be
very roughly 5000 years too early.
But the origin of
the Neolithic ‘Minoans’ in Anatolia would be perfectly in order, considering
that post-Flood man must have spread out from ancient Urartu (Kurdistan):
Mountain of landing for the Ark of Noah
and
on to “Shinar” (NE Syria and northern Mesopotamia), and to “central/Mediterranean Anatolia”.
Along
the same lines, we read at:
The Minoans, DNA and all.
Posted on April 14, 2008 | ....
....
Starting
with the breaking DNA news, and this rather sinks the ‘Black
Athena’ theory from Bernal…
....
Crete’s fabled Minoan civilization was
built by people from Anatolia, according to a new study by Greek and foreign
scientists that disputes an earlier theory that said the Minoans’ forefathers
had come from Africa.
The new study – a collaboration by experts
in Greece, the USA, Canada, Russia and Turkey – drew its conclusions from the
DNA analysis of 193 men from Crete and another 171 from former neolithic
colonies in central and northern Greece.
The results show that the country’s
neolithic population came to Greece by sea from Anatolia – modern-day Iran,
Iraq and Syria – and not from Africa as maintained by US scholar Martin Bernal.
The DNA analysis indicates that the
arrival of neolithic man in Greece from Anatolia coincided with the social and
cultural upsurge that led to the birth of the Minoan civilization, Constantinos
Triantafyllidis of Thessaloniki’s Aristotle University told Kathimerini.
“Until now we only had the archaeological
evidence – now we have genetic data too and we can date the DNA,” he said.
Archeological dates for the colonisation
of Crete are about 7,000 BC.
In more detail
The most frequent haplogroups among the current
population on Crete were: R1b3-M269 (17%), G2-P15 (11%), J2a1-DYS413 (9.0%),
and J2a1h-M319 (9.0%). They identified J2a parent haplogroup J2a-M410 (Crete:
25.9%) with the first ancient residents of Crete during the Neolithic (8500 BCE
– 4300 BCE) suggesting Crete was founded by a Neolithic population expansion
from ancient Turkey/Anatolia. Specifically, the researchers connected the
source population of ancient Crete to well known Neolithic sites of ancient
Anatolia: Asıklı Höyük, Çatalhöyük, Hacılar, Mersin/Yumuktepe, and Tarsus.
Haplogroup J2b-M12 (Crete: 3.1%; Greece: 5.9%) was associated with Neolithic
Greece. Haplogroups J2a1h-M319 (8.8%) and J2a1b1-M92 (2.6%) were associated
with the Minoan culture linked to a late Neolithic/ Early Bronze Age migration
to Crete ca. 3100 BCE from North-Western/Western Anatolia and Syro-Palestine
(ancient Canaan, Levant, and pre-Akkadian Anatolia); Aegean prehistorians link
the date 3100 BCE to the origins of the Minoan culture on Crete. Haplogroup
E3b1a2-V13 (Crete: 6.7%; Greece: 28%) was suggested to reflect a migration to
Crete from the mainland Greece Mycenaean population during the late Bronze Age
(1600 BCE – 1100 BCE). Haplogroup J1 was also reported to be found in both
Crete and Greece (Crete: 8.3%; Greece: 5.2%), as well as haplogroups E3b3, I1,
I2, I2a, I21b, K2, L, and R1a1. No ancient DNA was included in this study of
YDNA ….
No comments:
Post a Comment