Northeast Sicily by y-dna: entirely lacking historical "northern" inputs? Chart provided.

[Sikeliot]

I have seen people wonder, given that the area never saw heavy Arab or Phoenician colonization, why the Messina/Catania/Enna area seems to have the highest affinity to the Near East and is on par with only the most outlying Greek islands in genes, and are so Near Eastern that the "half Spanish half Lebanese" model fails for them.

I have long proposed that these regions have changed comparatively little over the last 3000 years, while other neighboring regions changed much more. Therefore, we should reevaluate what we know of the history.

Here is what I see, explaining the low Northern affinity:

1. I1 and I2a2, which would arrive by the Normans, are lacking entirely.
2. R1b is very low, for Italian standards, implying a smaller impact from the Italian mainland and Western Europe.
3. R1a (which could be either from Normans, Greeks, or even older Indo-European settlement) is lower than the rest of the island.

And they also do not have much historical MENA input either, implying that which they have is very, very ancient:

1. Haplogroups T and J1, which would have been brought from actual Arabs or indirectly via North Africa, are much lower than on the southern coast.
2. J2 and E1b1b, which would have been more common in a pre-Arab Middle East, are high.

So while it is said the original people of eastern Sicily were Siculi and were an Italic group, the genes do not bear out a mass migration from mainland Italy to there.

[Kelmendasi]

I have seen people wonder, given that the area never saw heavy Arab or Phoenician colonization, why the Messina/Catania/Enna area seems to have the highest affinity to the Near East and is on par with only the most outlying Greek islands in genes, and are so Near Eastern that the "half Spanish half Lebanese" model fails for them.

I have long proposed that these regions have changed comparatively little over the last 3000 years, while other neighboring regions changed much more. Therefore, we should reevaluate what we know of the history.

Here is what I see, explaining the low Northern affinity:

1. I1 and I2a2, which would arrive by the Normans, are lacking entirely.
2. R1b is very low, for Italian standards, implying a smaller impact from the Italian mainland and Western Europe.
3. R1a (which could be either from Normans, Greeks, or even older Indo-European settlement) is lower than the rest of the island.

And they also do not have much historical MENA input either, implying that which they have is very, very ancient:

1. Haplogroups T and J1, which would have been brought from actual Arabs or indirectly via North Africa, are much lower than on the southern coast.
2. J2 and E1b1b, which would have been more common in a pre-Arab Middle East, are high.

So while it is said the original people of eastern Sicily were Siculi and were an Italic group, the genes do not bear out a mass migration from mainland Italy to there.

[IG]http://i65.tinypic.com/f4368y.jpg[/IMG]

J1 is also from the Phoenicians/Carthaginians not only Arabs as it pre-dates the Arabs but they did absorb it and did spread it with their raids in Sicily but still a good amount I would say is from the Phoenicians/Carthaginians. Etruscans could of carried it as well but I doubt the J1 in Sicily is from them

[Sikeliot]

J1 is also from the Phoenicians/Carthaginians not only Arabs as it pre-dates the Arabs but they did absorb it and did spread it with their raids in Sicily but still a good amount I would say is from the Phoenicians/Carthaginians. Etruscans could of carried it as well but I doubt the J1 in Sicily is from them

J1 in Sicily should be Arab, I think.

What the maps show is the most recent "Arab" input on the southern coast (architecture and culture shows this, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out), higher northern input along the northwest coast (though this seems more in Trapani than Palermo also judging by higher R1b), and the northeast has little to no foreign input at all of any kind. Palermo province should be taken by town and area since they vary so much.

[Kelmendasi]

J1 in Sicily should be Arab, I think.

What the maps show is the most recent "Arab" input on the southern coast (architecture and culture shows this, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out), higher northern input along the northwest coast (though this seems more in Trapani than Palermo also judging by higher R1b), and the northeast has little to no foreign input at all of any kind. Palermo province should be taken by town and area since they vary so much.

Yh I agree that majority of it should be of "Arab" input in Sicily but Phoenicians did carry this. Bet yet again every J in the Middle east such as J1 and J2 isn't Arab they are native in the fertile crescent but Arabs/Semites absorbed it, original Semites/Arabs were E1b1b-M34 but J1 and J2 got absorbed by the Arabs/Semites

[Sikeliot]

Yh I agree that majority of it should be of "Arab" input in Sicily but Phoenicians did carry this. Bet yet again every J in the Middle east such as J1 and J2 isn't Arab they are native in the fertile crescent but Arabs/Semites absorbed it, original Semites/Arabs were E1b1b-M34 but J1 and J2 got absorbed by the Arabs/Semites

I mean it could have been Carthaginian too. But the point remains that for being so highly shifted to the Near East, northeast Sicily likely has no historical input from there. Autosomally what we get are people on the southern coast who are shifted to North Africa and Levant, people in the northwest who vary tremendously with some being northern shifted and others very exotic (almost like Moroccan Jews), people in the southeast who shift toward Greece, and then the northeast which, like Calabria, are more or less like Cypriots with minor West European input.

[Kelmendasi]

I mean it could have been Carthaginian too. But the point remains that for being so highly shifted to the Near East, northeast Sicily likely has no historical input from there. Autosomally what we get are people on the southern coast who are shifted to North Africa and Levant, people in the northwest who vary tremendously with some being northern shifted and others very exotic (almost like Moroccan Jews), people in the southeast who shift toward Greece, and then the northeast which, like Calabria, are more or less like Cypriots with minor West European input.

True most of it is of Arab raids in the medieval period this is shown by how shifted they are to the Middle East as you have just said

[Deymark]

Yh I agree that majority of it should be of "Arab" input in Sicily but Phoenicians did carry this. Bet yet again every J in the Middle east such as J1 and J2 isn't Arab they are native in the fertile crescent but Arabs/Semites absorbed it, original Semites/Arabs were E1b1b-M34 but J1 and J2 got absorbed by the Arabs/Semites

Arab.

[Sikeliot]

True most of it is of Arab raids in the medieval period this is shown by how shifted they are to the Middle East as you have just said

My thought is the original Sicilian population would have been like Cyprus.

[Kelmendasi]

My thought is the original Sicilian population would have been like Cyprus.

What ancient group do most Sicilians descend from?

[Sikeliot]

What ancient group do most Sicilians descend from?

Probably the original natives of the island who would have probably been of Neolithic descent. Or related to Minoans and Cypriots.