Longobard DNA study [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Token

02-21-2018, 02:06 AM

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/02/20/268250

Despite centuries of research, much about the barbarian migrations that took place between the fourth and sixth centuries in Europe remains hotly debated. To better understand this key era that marks the dawn of modern European societies, we obtained ancient genomic DNA from 63 samples from two cemeteries (from Hungary and Northern Italy) that have been previously associated with the Longobards, a barbarian people that ruled large parts of Italy for over 200 years after invading from Pannonia in 568 CE. Our dense cemetery-based sampling revealed that each cemetery was primarily organized around one large pedigree, suggesting that biological relationships played an important role in these early Medieval societies. Moreover, we identified genetic structure in each cemetery involving at least two groups with different ancestry that were very distinct in terms of their funerary customs. Finally, our data was consistent with the proposed long-distance migration from Pannonia to Northern Italy.

Friends of Oliver Society

02-21-2018, 02:09 AM

Why is this news? We know there was migration. The question is how much of an effect it had on the population at large.

Dick

02-21-2018, 02:28 AM

Ydna of an Italian from Lombardy.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?207477-Y-dna-of-a-Lombard-Italian

Also, this is interesting. Seems quite high for a northern Italian I assume?:

I'm of full northern italian heritage........16% scandinavian. Is the latter a signal of "barbaric" (early Middle Ages) input in my family?

http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=386807&postcount=128

Token

02-21-2018, 04:42 PM

Why is this news? We know there was migration. The question is how much of an effect it had on the population at large.

They would need pos-Roman, pre-Langobard samples from all over Northern Italy to do that, something that we unfortunately don't have by now, for some unknown reason geneticists are not very interested in Italy. Anyway, considering nMonte/globe25 modelling and the ADMIXTURE results of the samples from this study, it would be something between 20-30% with a cline from northwest to northeast, similar to the Norwegian input in Ireland and Slavic input in mainland Greece.

Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas

02-21-2018, 05:05 PM

Scar

02-21-2018, 05:16 PM

How many native North Italians still exist in North Italy? I think their future is to cluster with South Italians again with all this immigration.

Token

02-21-2018, 05:21 PM

According to this study, North Italians during the Roman era were just like modern Tuscans.

Seems that original north italians received a strong genetic input from germanic\barbarian invasions. Inhabitants from Collegno (northwest italy) from that time used to cluster with southern italians and greeks.

Thanks for the observation. I didn't read the paper, focused more on the supplementary files and fucking missed the most important part. The southern input in the northern Italian Langobard samples seems to be pretty similar to Tuscans, so (most part?) of the northern deviation in modern Northern Italians compared to Tuscans can be probably attributed to Germanic input. It is weird that they didn't explicitly made this observation in the paper though.

PunhetaDeBacalhau

02-21-2018, 05:21 PM

According to this study, North Italians during the Roman era were just like modern Tuscans.

Seems that original north italians received a strong genetic input from germanic\barbarian invasions. Inhabitants from Collegno (northwest italy) from that time used to cluster with southern italians and greeks.

The original inhabitants of Collegno, in Northwest Italy, clustered with modern day South Italians and Greeks, not even Tuscans. So much for Nordic Romans lulz

The usual Nordicists, which is 60% of the genetics community, are all very quiet. I wonder why.

Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas

02-21-2018, 05:23 PM

The original inhabitants of Collegno clustered with modern day South Italians and Greeks, not even Tuscans. So much for Nordic Romans lulz

The usual Nordicists, which is 60% of the community, are all very quiet. I wonder why.

Yes, this is a full blown kick on the nuts on those who are found of theories like "all Roman elite was Nordic\Germanic" xD

Token

02-21-2018, 05:24 PM

Scar

02-21-2018, 05:56 PM

It is the end of the Nordic Romans wet dream.

They will manage to create some diversion or excuse like ''only peasants were tested'' or similar bullshit. They can't accept ''greasy'' Sicilian/South Italian Meds created the Roman Empire.

Rethel

02-21-2018, 06:00 PM

No sensable results? :confused:

Vid Flumina

02-21-2018, 07:08 PM

The southern input in the northern Italian Langobard samples seems to be pretty similar to Tuscans, so (most part?) of the northern deviation in modern Northern Italians compared to Tuscans can be probably attributed to Germanic input. It is weird that they didn't explicitly made this observation in the paper though.

Cause these weren't autochthonous people, just like the same Tuscan-like individuals found in Szolad aren't native Pannonians.

Token

02-21-2018, 07:11 PM

Ydna of an Italian from Lombardy.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?207477-Y-dna-of-a-Lombard-Italian

Also, this is interesting. Seems quite high for a northern Italian I assume?:

http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=386807&postcount=128
Among 37 Langobard samples, there were just two I1: one I1a3 and one I1a1b1. The great majority of the samples were R1b and Germanic I2a subclades. I think it is necessary to revise the common Germanic dispersion theory of modern I1 distribution.

Token

02-21-2018, 07:20 PM

Cause these weren't autochthonous people, just like the same Tuscan-like individuals found in Szolad aren't native Pannonians.

Interestingly predominantly southern European individuals that join the Tuscan cluster are minoritary in Hungary and overwhelmingly majoritary in Northern Italy, some of them with more than 70% Tuscan-like ancestry with the rest being CE and British-like. These ones would probably be genetically pretty similar to modern North Italians.

Southern input in the Szólád individuals seems to be pretty diverse but overall closer to southeastern Europeans.

Peterski

02-21-2018, 07:23 PM

Neither Etruscans nor the actual Roman-era clustered with South Italians:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

Between the Early Roman Era and the Late Roman Era, there was a significant influx of Middle Eastern and African immigrants to Italy. See Busby 2015:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4714572/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215009495

https://i.imgur.com/i7bsjCF.png

Massive immigration from Non-European provinces of the Roman Empire to Italy is also confirmed by written sources (there were also a lot of foreign slaves imported to Roman Italy - mostly from the Middle East and from North Africa):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-5223.1921.tb02635.x/pdf

https://www.toqonline.com/archives/v5n4/54-Frank.pdf

http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/home.html

About immigration to Italy in Roman times:

https://s4.postimg.org/jk7dfs73x/Rome_4.png

https://s23.postimg.org/ptmg37797/Rome_5.png

https://s10.postimg.org/yn6oleyqx/Rome_6.png

Cassius Dio (155 - 235 AD) wrote:

"(...) Yet not even so, by threatening or urging or postponing or entreating, have I accomplished anything. You see for yourselves how much larger a mass you constitute than the married men, when you ought by this time to have furnished us with as many more children, or rather with several times your number. How otherwise shall families continue? How can the commonwealth be preserved if we neither marry nor produce children? Surely you are not expecting some to spring up from the earth to succeed to your goods and to public affairs, as myths describe. It is neither pleasing to Heaven nor creditable that our race should cease and the name of Romans meet extinguishment in us, and the city be given up to foreigners, - Greeks or even barbarians. We liberate slaves chiefly for the purpose of making out of them as many citizens as possible; we give our allies a share in the government that our numbers may increase: yet you, Romans of the original stock, including Quintii, Valerii, Iulli, are eager that your families and names at once shall perish with you. (...)"

==============

I think that samples which cluster with South Italians were Illyrians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981114&viewfull=1#post4981114

==============

There is only one Roman-era sample and it clusters with North Italians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981062&viewfull=1#post4981062

See: https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

So much for Nordic Romans lulz

But there was a lot of MENA immigration to Italy during Roman times.

Edit:

SK is a Jew from Slovakia.

Samples from Collegno close to SK, were probably Jews from Roman times.

They were not native to North-West Italy just like SK is not native to Slovakia.

It is "amazing" that they are still using the PCA with the same old samples as that outdated study from the 1st decade of the 21st century. This Russian from Moscow (RU in the PCA, only one sample from entire Russia IIRC) is probably descended from Poles - which is why he plots closer to Poland than to Ukraine. And their only sample from Slovakia - SK - plots with South Italians because it is a Jew (or maybe a Romani).

Their Polish samples were exclusively from Mazovia.

And Mazovians - compared to the rest of Poles - are genetically like another nation. They plot much closer to Lithuanians and Latvians (LV in that PCA) than Lesser Poles or Greater Poles. So far all studies (including "Genetic History of Balto-Slavs" from 2015) are using only Polish samples from Mazovia and Estonia (Estonian Poles). The only dataset which includes also samples of Poles from other regions, is Harvard's Human Origins, which has samples from Lublin Region, Greater Poland, as well as Lusatian Sorbs:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2016/06/poles-in-new-human-origins-dataset.html

Mazovia was an independent duchy until 1526, yet Mazovians are used to represent all Poles in most studies. I just find it weird. They are neither the majority of Poles nor "the most Polish" region.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Masovia

Warsaw became the capital of Poland in 1609. Before that it was Cracow.

Bosniensis

02-21-2018, 07:24 PM

Among 37 Langobard samples, there were just two I1: one I1a3 and one I1a1b1. The great majority of the samples were R1b and Germanic I2a subclades. I think it is necessary to revise the common Germanic dispersion theory of modern I1 distribution.

All non-Italians are R1b

Italians were G, J2, I2

Celts I2

Anatolians J2

etc...

Greco*Roman world descended from Haplogroup IJ that mixed with E and G peoples.

But IE fanatics shall never believe.

Scar

02-21-2018, 07:27 PM

But there was a lot of MENA immigration to Italy during Roman times.

That means nothing. You probably is just a frustrated pussy boy Slav from Poland whose only achievements are stealing someone else history based on myths and phantasies of ''We wuz PIEs and shieet''. Suck it, faggot. Romans were greasy haired-jet black haired Meds with olive skin and bushy beards. What should be obvious considering the remaining statues and paintings (look at Pompeii, not a single individual would pass in Poland or Northern/Eastern Europe).

Nordicist scum, debunked again.

Dick

02-21-2018, 07:38 PM

Among 37 Langobard samples, there were just two I1: one I1a3 and one I1a1b1. The great majority of the samples were R1b and Germanic I2a subclades. I think it is necessary to revise the common Germanic dispersion theory of modern I1 distribution.

Which clades, if R1b- U106 then makes sense, and how could they have not picked up any R1a along the way? they migrated through heavy R1a territories

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Lombard_Migration.jpg

Peterski

02-21-2018, 07:55 PM

they migrated through heavy R1a territories

They are heavy R1a today, but not at that time.

Dick

02-21-2018, 07:58 PM

They are heavy R1a today, but not at that time.

Mecklenburg for example?

Vid Flumina

02-21-2018, 08:02 PM

Interestingly predominantly southern European individuals that join the Tuscan cluster are minoritary in Hungary and overwhelmingly majoritary in Northern Italy, some of them with more than 70% Tuscan-like ancestry with the rest being CE and British-like. These ones would probably be genetically pretty similar to modern North Italians.

Southern input in the Szólád individuals seems to be pretty diverse but overall closer to southeastern Europeans.

They look closer to Italians than to Greeks or Albanians.
Only SZ37/SZ1 appear somewhat east-shifted.

https://image.ibb.co/dkkdfx/Screen_Hunter_2223_Feb_21_09_18.jpg

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:03 PM

What about Celts in Northern Italy?

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:04 PM

https://image.ibb.co/dkkdfx/Screen_Hunter_2223_Feb_21_09_18.jpg

Collegno samples cluster with Slovaks (SK), not with South Italians!

So they were Central European genetically.

Dragoon

02-21-2018, 08:08 PM

Every single European country is mixed of ancestries.

I guess some of the "early" Italians: Would have come from Greece.
Etruscans would be there, latter Gauls.
Then the Germanics and Nordics.
Also North Africans.
Maybe Phoenicians?

Apparently most of Italian dna came before the Germanic invasion.
And Sicily has had tons of people living in.
But this is just a couple thousand years.

How about going even further back, people from Middle East/Caucasian...

Token

02-21-2018, 08:08 PM

Collegno samples cluster with Slovaks (SK), not with South Italians!

So they were Central European genetically.

Nope, just the ones heavily mixed with Lombards.

Dragoon

02-21-2018, 08:10 PM

Which clades, if R1b- U106 then makes sense, and how could they have not picked up any R1a along the way? they migrated through heavy R1a territories

If the R1bs went through R1a lands, that would be near the pontic steppe? and moving later to other areas?

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:12 PM

Nope, just the ones heavily mixed with Lombards.

They couldn't be mixed with Lombards because these samples are older.

I suppose that samples with cluster close to SK were Roman era Jews.

Dick

02-21-2018, 08:14 PM

If the R1bs went through R1a lands, that would be near the pontic steppe? and moving later to other areas?

I thought there were already Slav tribes living in those areas they passed through.

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:14 PM

SK is a Jew from Slovakia.

Samples from Collegno close to SK, were probably Jews from Roman times.

They were not native to North-West Italy just like SK is not native to Slovakia.

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:23 PM

It is "amazing" that they are still using the PCA with the same old samples as that outdated study from the 1st decade of the 21st century. This Russian from Moscow (RU in the PCA, only one sample from entire Russia IIRC) is probably descended from Poles - which is why he plots closer to Poland than to Ukraine. And their only sample from Slovakia - SK - plots with South Italians because it is a Jew (or maybe a Romani).

Their Polish samples were exclusively from Mazovia.

And Mazovians - compared to the rest of Poles - are genetically like another nation. They plot much closer to Lithuanians and Latvians (LV in that PCA) than Lesser Poles or Greater Poles. So far all studies (including "Genetic History of Balto-Slavs" from 2015) are using only Polish samples from Mazovia and Estonia (Estonian Poles). The only dataset which includes also samples of Poles from other regions, is Harvard's Human Origins, which has samples from Lublin Region, Greater Poland, as well as Lusatian Sorbs:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2016/06/poles-in-new-human-origins-dataset.html

Mazovia was an independent duchy until 1526, yet Mazovians are used to represent all Poles in most studies. I just find it weird. They are neither the majority of Poles nor "the most Polish" region.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Masovia

Warsaw became the capital of Poland in 1609. Before that it was Cracow.

Sampling Poles from Cracow would give a more representative sample of Poles. Even Poles from Lublin in east Poland, or Rzeszów in south-east Poland, are much less Baltic-shifted than Mazovians.

Peterski

02-21-2018, 08:32 PM

Southern Poland has the highest population density per 1 km2. So if you are too lazy to sample all Polish regions, but want as representative sample as possible, you should probably go to Cracow, or another southern Polish city. Of course sampling all regions is preferable.

Sampling Southern Poles is just the "lazy option".

So far all genetic studies were lazy when it comes to sampling Poles. The "Genetic History of Balto-Slavs" from 2015 used mostly Estonian Poles (ethnic Poles from Estonia) because it was a study by scientists from the Estonian Biocentre, and they were too lazy to visit Poland.

The problem with that is, that Estonian Poles are mixed with Estonians and Russians.

Bobby Martnen

02-21-2018, 08:39 PM

Bobby Martnen

02-21-2018, 08:40 PM

Their Polish samples were exclusively from Mazovia.

So the Polish sample is basically just a Rethelite sample?

Ajeje Brazorf

02-21-2018, 09:23 PM

this is weird as fuck

XenophobicPrussian

02-21-2018, 11:48 PM

Interesting how the two Pannonian Avars in Hungary were NE Europeans. I also thought the Germanic tribes who invaded Italy would've already been mixed Bavarian/Austrian like by then, but they were mostly still pure Scandinavians.

Seems like the native Italians in NW Italy and Roman settlers in Pannonia ranged from South Italian to south Tuscan, more so South Italian. This ofc implies the opposite of what some of the ecstatic southern Euros want it to(more German admixture = more successful region of Italy today), along with them having to admit Middle-Eastern superiourity because this great civilization didn't come before extra MENA admixture from the Middle-East invading the Sardinian-like farmers(same story with the Minoans in Greece), but yeah, in terms of who was responsible for the Roman Empire, historic Nordicism seems highly unlikely now(but Nordicists probably won't shut up without Roman Republic or atleast early empire genomes, these are all late and post Roman decline).

Peterski

02-22-2018, 12:37 AM

ISeems like the native Italians in NW Italy and Roman settlers in Pannonia ranged from South Italian to south Tuscan

I don't see any reason why would people living in the same area have such a huge range of autosomal profiles (unless they belonged to two different endogamous ethno-religious communities). Obviously the ones clustering with South Italians were simply immigrants from the south, not natives to Collegno for many generations. The ones clustering with Tuscans were natives to the area.

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 12:44 AM

Peterski

02-22-2018, 12:47 AM

I always just thought that Slovaks plotting near S. Italians on that map was just some sort of typo

That's a from the 2000s (before 2010) and their samples were terrible for some countries. If I remember correctly entire Russia was represented by one sample from Moscow. Maybe a few.

Slovakia was represented by one sample and it was a Jew.

This PCA is much better:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/nkf-VPgdPb974vQqDLSdA8Z1SBMO7F8qfwnd3cYhtOGbm0xfosqI0g UdvpGvbbl45ib1bxugFXWbIOE=w1326-h631-rw

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 12:48 AM

Slovakia was represented by one sample and it was a Jew.

:jew:

Peterski

02-22-2018, 12:50 AM

(...)

There is also a problem called projection bias and we don't know if their PCA suffers from it or not:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/plink2-users/0W--8A31asM

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/pca-projection-bias-in-ancient-dna.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/pca-projection-bias-fix.html

Megil

02-22-2018, 12:52 AM

Ya soy capaz de postear¡

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 12:56 AM

Surname Grimoaldo tested at Ftdna. I1-L22

GRI1MOALDO NORTH I1TALIANS!!!

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:05 AM

I already started a thread about this study long ago, before the final version was published:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?228562-Longobard-DNA-from-Italy-amp-Pannonia&p=4806707&viewfull=1#post4806707

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

Can someone merge these threads?

Danaan

02-22-2018, 01:07 AM

They look closer to Italians than to Greeks or Albanians.
Only SZ37/SZ1 appear somewhat east-shifted.

https://image.ibb.co/dkkdfx/Screen_Hunter_2223_Feb_21_09_18.jpg

I don't say you are wrong but based on that one CL38 and CL25 are probably very close to Greeks from Aegean or Crete.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:10 AM

CL94 or CL24 is from Roman times (Pre-Langobard).

He was included already in this first PCA as "Roman":

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

Carlito's Way

02-22-2018, 01:11 AM

i thought longobards with northern euros who migrated down to northern italy
at least from what i read in the wiki page
also I1 is where this haplogroup in Italy is mostly found

Dick

02-22-2018, 01:16 AM

i thought longobards with northern euros who migrated down to northern italy
at least from what i read in the wiki page
also I1 is where this haplogroup in Italy is mostly found

Also, this is interesting. Seems quite high for a northern Italian I assume? Have you seen other northern Italian results?

I'm of full northern italian heritage........16% scandinavian. Is the latter a signal of "barbaric" (early Middle Ages) input in my family?

http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=386807&postcount=128

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:17 AM

My thread about this was first.

Please merge Token's thread with my thread (attach it to my thread):

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study

I doubt that those very southern-plotting samples were descendants of original Romans or Celts from North Italy. They could even be Jews (there were Jewish communities in Italy at that time).

XenophobicPrussian

02-22-2018, 01:44 AM

I don't see any reason why would people living in the same area have such a huge range of autosomal profiles (unless they belonged to two different endogamous ethno-religious communities). Obviously the ones clustering with South Italians were simply immigrants from the south, not natives to Collegno for many generations. The ones clustering with Tuscans were natives to the area.
lol, all of these ancient DNA papers show very genetically diverse people lived in one area(atleast in central/South Europe). Look at the Hungarian/Central Euro Bell Beakers in the other new paper, ranging from NW Euro(like British/Dutch/German BB) to modern Balkan people. Indo-Europeans had a caste system in India, maybe they had one in Europe too. Look how Scandinavian most of the Longobard samples still are even travelling down through Germany/Austria/etc, which would've had people with high farmer admixture and only later did they mix to become modern Germans. Most DNA papers have shown Indo-European groups with pure or only slightly mixed farmers in the same area.

There is also a problem called projection bias and we don't know if their PCA suffers from it or not:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/plink2-users/0W--8A31asM

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/pca-projection-bias-in-ancient-dna.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/pca-projection-bias-fix.html
True, this one doesn't have it though. Most stuff clusters around where it should, such as Hungarian Bronze Age on page 25 of the preview PDF, and if it had projection bias the normal PCA would put the Longobards NW of Irish people and overbloated WHG admixture. Doesn't make sense. The PCA from the Genetic History of South East Europe last year was an example of one with projection bias, this one and the Beaker paper are fine.

CL94 or CL24 is from Roman times (Pre-Langobard).

He was included already in this first PCA as "Roman":

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png
Maybe you're right, the North Italian Bell Beakers also clustered around Iberians and North Italians(and South French right beside north Italy were the exact same as British/Dutch/German BBs), but given there are so many South Italian like samples in both Pannonia and a small North Italian town, to me it seems more likely the Tuscan shifted samples were mixes of Langobards and native Romans.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:46 AM

Look how Scandinavian most of the Longobard samples still are even travelling down through Germany/Austria/etc, which would've had people with high farmer admixture and only later did they mix to become modern Germans.

But those Langobards were recent immigrants... I was talking about native Roman citizens.

Those who plot with South Italians were probably also immigrants, just like Longobards.

They could even be Greeks or Illyrians who came with Longobards from Pannonia / Balkans.

Maybe these who plot with South Italians were Illyrian slaves brought by Longobards.

Dick

02-22-2018, 01:47 AM

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:49 AM

Maybe you're right, the North Italian Bell Beakers also clustered around Iberians and North Italians(and South French right beside north Italy were the exact same as British/Dutch/German BBs), but given there are so many South Italian like samples in both Pannonia and a small North Italian town, to me it seems more likely the Tuscan shifted samples were mixes of Langobards and native Romans.

South Italian samples in Pannonia could just be Illyrians. And in Collegno, they could also be Illyrians - who came with Longobards (perhaps as their slaves).

Remember that modern South Italians plot close to modern Greeks (except for Slavic-admixed ones). Ancient Illyrians wouldn't be very different from Greeks and Albanians.

Perhaps Illyrians were slightly more western than modern Greeks and Albanians. Which means that they were like... YEAH, exactly - like modern South Italians.

It is just imposible that Ancient North Italy - which was not only inhabited by Italic Romans, but also by Romanized Celts - clustered with modern South Italians.

Dick

02-22-2018, 01:50 AM

Perhaps Illyrians were slightly more western than modern Greeks and Albanians. Which means that they were like... YEAH, exactly - like modern South Italians.

WHAAAAT!?

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:52 AM

WHAAAAT!?

Mycenaeans also plot closer to modern South Italians than to modern Greeks.

So the I2a-Din that the OP mentioned could be from Illyrians?

He didn't mention I2a-Din but some Germanic subclade of I2a.

XenophobicPrussian

02-22-2018, 01:52 AM

Actually scratch that, the PCA may very well have projection bias depending which Hungary BA samples are used in this paper's PCA.

https://j2-m172.info/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2016/06/PCAtest2_Eurogenes_2016-06-23_detail-Levant.png

Some Hungary BA samples from Davidski's PCA(which doesn't have projection bias) are where the ones in this paper's PCA are(https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/02/20/268250.full.pdf+html page 25), but it doesn't include either of the most WHG shifted ones in a proper position, below Roman Brits on Davidski's PCA. Not sure what to think. If it has projection bias you're right and none of them would cluster with South Italians, but an Iberian-Tuscan cline.

Dick

02-22-2018, 01:53 AM

Mycenaeans also plot closer to modern South Italians than to modern Greeks.

So what migrations changed that?

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 01:54 AM

South Italian samples in Pannonia could just be Illyrians. And in Collegno, they could also be Illyrians - who came with Longobards (perhaps as their slaves).

Remember that modern South Italians plot close to modern Greeks (except for Slavic-admixed ones). Ancient Illyrians wouldn't be very different from Greeks and Albanians.

Perhaps Illyrians were slightly more western than modern Greeks and Albanians. Which means that they were like... YEAH, exactly - like modern South Italians.

It is just imposible that Ancient North Italy - which was not only inhabited by Italic Romans, but also by Romanized Celts - clustered with modern South Italians.South Italians don't plot west of Greeks and Albanians, that would be Tuscans.

XenophobicPrussian

02-22-2018, 01:56 AM

But those Langobards were recent immigrants... I was talking about native Roman citizens.

Those who plot with South Italians were probably also immigrants, just like Longobards.

They could even be Greeks or Illyrians who came with Longobards from Pannonia / Balkans.

Maybe these who plot with South Italians were Illyrian slaves brought by Longobards.
The Longobards were not recent immigrants from Scandinavia though. They had been in Central Europe for awhile, and most seem to be unmixed. Was just countering your claim that all areas should be autosomally uniform when this did not happen in Germany until later, as an example. I think you may be right about the PCA having projection bias though, we probably won't know forsure until Davidski releases a PCA.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 01:59 AM

Check my post here:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4980361&viewfull=1#post4980361

Neither Etruscans nor the actual Roman-era clustered with South Italians:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

Between the Early Roman Era and the Late Roman Era, there was a significant influx of Middle Eastern and African immigrants to Italy. See Busby 2015:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4714572/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215009495

https://i.imgur.com/i7bsjCF.png

Massive immigration from Non-European provinces of the Roman Empire to Italy is also confirmed by written sources (there were also a lot of foreign slaves imported to Roman Italy - mostly from the Middle East and from North Africa):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-5223.1921.tb02635.x/pdf

https://www.toqonline.com/archives/v5n4/54-Frank.pdf

http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/home.html

About immigration to Italy in Roman times:

https://s4.postimg.org/jk7dfs73x/Rome_4.png

https://s23.postimg.org/ptmg37797/Rome_5.png

https://s10.postimg.org/yn6oleyqx/Rome_6.png

Cassius Dio (155 - 235 AD) wrote:

"(...) Yet not even so, by threatening or urging or postponing or entreating, have I accomplished anything. You see for yourselves how much larger a mass you constitute than the married men, when you ought by this time to have furnished us with as many more children, or rather with several times your number. How otherwise shall families continue? How can the commonwealth be preserved if we neither marry nor produce children? Surely you are not expecting some to spring up from the earth to succeed to your goods and to public affairs, as myths describe. It is neither pleasing to Heaven nor creditable that our race should cease and the name of Romans meet extinguishment in us, and the city be given up to foreigners, - Greeks or even barbarians. We liberate slaves chiefly for the purpose of making out of them as many citizens as possible; we give our allies a share in the government that our numbers may increase: yet you, Romans of the original stock, including Quintii, Valerii, Iulli, are eager that your families and names at once shall perish with you. (...)"

==============

I think that samples which cluster with South Italians were Illyrians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981114&viewfull=1#post4981114

==============

There is only one Roman-era sample and it clusters with North Italians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981062&viewfull=1#post4981062

See: https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

So much for Nordic Romans lulz

But there was a lot of MENA immigration to Italy during Roman times.

Edit:

SK is a Jew from Slovakia.

Samples from Collegno close to SK, were probably Jews from Roman times.

They were not native to North-West Italy just like SK is not native to Slovakia.

It is "amazing" that they are still using the PCA with the same old samples as that outdated study from the 1st decade of the 21st century. This Russian from Moscow (RU in the PCA, only one sample from entire Russia IIRC) is probably descended from Poles - which is why he plots closer to Poland than to Ukraine. And their only sample from Slovakia - SK - plots with South Italians because it is a Jew (or maybe a Romani).

Their Polish samples were exclusively from Mazovia.

And Mazovians - compared to the rest of Poles - are genetically like another nation. They plot much closer to Lithuanians and Latvians (LV in that PCA) than Lesser Poles or Greater Poles. So far all studies (including "Genetic History of Balto-Slavs" from 2015) are using only Polish samples from Mazovia and Estonia (Estonian Poles). The only dataset which includes also samples of Poles from other regions, is Harvard's Human Origins, which has samples from Lublin Region, Greater Poland, as well as Lusatian Sorbs:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2016/06/poles-in-new-human-origins-dataset.html

Mazovia was an independent duchy until 1526, yet Mazovians are used to represent all Poles in most studies. I just find it weird. They are neither the majority of Poles nor "the most Polish" region.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Masovia

Warsaw became the capital of Poland in 1609. Before that it was Cracow.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:02 AM

The Longobards were not recent immigrants from Scandinavia though. They had been in Central Europe for awhile, and most seem to be unmixed. Was just countering your claim that all areas should be autosomally uniform when this did not happen in Germany until later, as an example. I think you may be right about the PCA having projection bias though, we probably won't know forsure until Davidski releases a PCA.Wait a while, he's probably trying to wrap his head around 90% of his theories being bullshit.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:03 AM

South Italian samples in Pannonia could just be Illyrians. And in Collegno, they could also be Illyrians - who came with Longobards (perhaps as their slaves).

Remember that modern South Italians plot close to modern Greeks (except for Slavic-admixed ones). Ancient Illyrians wouldn't be very different from Greeks and Albanians.

Perhaps Illyrians were slightly more western than modern Greeks and Albanians. Which means that they were like... YEAH, exactly - like modern South Italians.

It is just imposible that Ancient North Italy - which was not only inhabited by Italic Romans, but also by Romanized Celts - clustered with modern South Italians.

Which region of southern Italy are they close to? The samples.

There is distance between modern Albanians and Sicilians/Calabrese produced by the presence of Levantine influence in the latter, but there is a smaller distance between Apulians, Abruzzese, and even Campanians to Albanians. Illyrians would have been similar to the Italians directly across the Adriatic from Albania.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:05 AM

Mycenaeans also plot closer to modern South Italians than to modern Greeks.

Mycenaeans were like modern day southern Italians but shifted toward Sardinia/Iberia. But still closer to southern Italians than to modern Greeks, because Greece has undergone more admixture from North and Northeast Europe.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:08 AM

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:09 AM

I think that samples which plot close to South Italians were Illyrians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981114&viewfull=1#post4981114

For that to be true we have to believe that modern day Greeks and Albanians would plot exactly like Calabrese and Sicilians if not for having some Slavic admixture, and while I think they would be closer than today if they did not have any Slavic, I do not think they'd be exactly alike.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:15 AM

We 've had a supposed Illyrian sample in the past. It was from Souther Croatia iirc and plotted with Southern Balkanites.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:17 AM

We 've had a supposed Illyrian sample in the past. It was from Souther Croatia iirc and plotted with Southern Balkanites.

So it is more likely to me that the sample plotting near southern Italians may have been southern Italian.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:20 AM

Mycenaeans didn't share much genetic ancestry with South Italians, in fact they shared much more with Greeks/Albanians even though they appear closer to the former on pca. Pcas don't tell the whole story.

South Italians, I believe, using the Mycenaean sample could be modeled as 50% Mycenaean (versus 70% in Greeks and Albanians), 30% Levantine, and the rest was WHG type stuff.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:20 AM

So it is more likely to me that the sample plotting near southern Italians may have been southern Italian.I don't know about that but Illyrians from Southern Croatia don't need to be identical to those of say Albania.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:21 AM

I don't know about that but Illyrians from Southern Croatia don't need to be identical to those of say Albania.

Albanians have very little Slavic input, so it is unlikely to me they changed much since Illyrian times. And Albanians plot close to, but not with, southern Italians.

My other thought is the sample plotting with southern Italians could have been an Aegean islander.

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:22 AM

We 've had a supposed Illyrian sample in the past. It was from Souther Croatia iirc and plotted with Southern Balkanites.

No. there was only y-dna results.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:23 AM

Albanians don't have very little Slavic input, especially Southern Albanians.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:23 AM

Albanians have very little Slavic input, so it is unlikely to me they changed much since Illyrian times. And Albanians plot close to, but not with, southern Italians.

My other thought is the sample plotting with southern Italians could have been an Aegean islander.

But Albanians are descended from eastern Illyrians. Western Illyrians could be closer to South Italians.

BTW, some Illyrians actually settled in Apulia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapygians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapians#Origins

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~klio/maps/rr/colonies.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Illyrian_colonies_in_Italy_550_BC_%28English%29_%2 8simple_map%29.svg/675px-Illyrian_colonies_in_Italy_550_BC_%28English%29_%2 8simple_map%29.svg.png

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:23 AM

No. there was only y-dna results.There was a pca plot.

Token

02-22-2018, 02:25 AM

They couldn't be mixed with Lombards because these samples are older.

I suppose that samples with cluster close to SK were Roman era Jews.
Read the paper. All the samples from Collegno comes from early Longobard Kingdom cemeteries and are dated between 580-630CE. Native, pre-Lombard Northern Italians were Tuscan and Southern Italian-like.

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:26 AM

There was a pca plot.

Where?

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:27 AM

But Albanians are descended from eastern Illyrians.

Western Illyrians could be closer to South Italians.

BTW, some Illyrians actually settled in Apulia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapygians

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~klio/maps/rr/colonies.jpg

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~klio/maps/rr/colonies.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Illyrian_colonies_in_Italy_550_BC_%28English%29_%2 8simple_map%29.svg/675px-Illyrian_colonies_in_Italy_550_BC_%28English%29_%2 8simple_map%29.svg.png

Yes but what I am saying is that there is some amount of excess Levantine input in parts of modern southern Italy, about 20%. I doubt this was ever the case for Albania or mainland Greece, so I doubt ancient Illyrians would have plotted exactly like modern southern Italians.

Apulians are closer because they have less Near Eastern input, but even still, there is some difference.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:27 AM

Read the paper. All the samples from Collegno comes from early Longobard Kingdom cemeteries and are dated between 580-630CE. Native, pre-Lombard Northern Italians were Tuscan and Southern Italian-like.

Both Tuscans and South Italians have higher Near Eastern input than modern North Italians. So, why did North Italians have this reduced?

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:29 AM

Where?https://s32.postimg.org/s3yba4u6t/PCA_JAZ1.png

Jaz1 is bronze age

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:29 AM

Native, pre-Lombard Northern Italians were Tuscan and Southern Italian-like.

Which samples are Pre-Lombard?

Some time ago they released a "teaser" and there was a PCA with only Roman-era sample.

I posted it in the OP of my thread.

Token

02-22-2018, 02:30 AM

Both Tuscans and South Italians have higher Near Eastern input than modern North Italians. So, why did North Italians have this reduced?

Based on the results from this paper, some population replacement happened in Northern Italy.

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:30 AM

Native, pre-Lombard Northern Italians were Tuscan and Southern Italian-like.

I smell political bs a la Davidski. They must've been mixed with celts since R1b-U152 was most common in north Italy before the Longobards.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:32 AM

Only one Collegno sample is actually radiocarbon dated to the Roman era:

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

And it plots to the north-west of some of Longobard-era Collegno samples.

Which makes me think that those Southerners were also immigrants (from Pannonia?) to Collegno. The paper claims that not all migrants from Pannonia were genetically Northern Euro:

https://i.imgur.com/uGBjLGp.png

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:32 AM

https://s32.postimg.org/s3yba4u6t/PCA_JAZ1.png

Jaz1 is bronze age

So Albanians are not Illyrians but Bulgarians are?

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:34 AM

Those were probably Illyrian servants or slaves who migrated from Pannonia to Collegno.

Analysis of isotopes suggests that genetically different individuals migrated together.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:35 AM

So Albanians are not Illyrians but Bulgarians are?Logic says that the more to the South, the closer to Mycenaeans they'd be if you ask me.

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:38 AM

Those were probably Illyrian servants or slaves who migrated from Pannonia to Collegno.

Analysis of isotopes suggests that genetically different individuals migrated together.

Do you have their y-dna results? R1b and I2a do not point to Germanic tribes unless it's R1b-U106 and I2a2, not i2a-Din or the I2a subclade in Sardinia.

Dick

02-22-2018, 02:41 AM

Logic says that the more to the South, the closer to Mycenaeans they'd be if you ask me.

Who?

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 02:42 AM

Who?The bronze age western balkanites obviously, if you can call them illyrians.

Sebastianus Rex

02-22-2018, 02:46 AM

Yes, this is a full blown kick on the nuts on those who are found of theories like "all Roman elite was Nordic\Germanic" xD

It is the end of the Nordic Romans wet dream.

just uncultured lunatics could say similar nonsense, one just has to read a bit of Tacitus "Germania"...

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:47 AM

Based on the results from this paper, some population replacement happened in Northern Italy.

But the paper also says the Bronze Age south Italians were Sardinian-like, so clearly it would be impossible for north Italians to have all of this south-Italian like DNA if southern Italians did not yet plot where they do today.

Token

02-22-2018, 02:54 AM

Do you have their y-dna results? R1b and I2a do not point to Germanic tribes unless it's R1b-U106 and I2a2, not i2a-Din or the I2a subclade in Sardinia.
Look at the supplementary tables. Most R1b and I2a were central and northern European subclades.

But the paper also says the Bronze Age south Italians were Sardinian-like, so clearly it would be impossible for north Italians to have all of this south-Italian like DNA if southern Italians did not yet plot where they do today.
There are absolutely none Bronze Age Italian samples published yet.

Dick

02-22-2018, 03:01 AM

Look at the supplementary tables. Most R1b and I2a were central and northern European subclades.
I dont see it. Tell me what are the subclades?

Token

02-22-2018, 03:07 AM

I dont see it. Tell me what are the subclades?

I uploaded part of it for you.

https://i.imgur.com/5w2kiXS.png?1

Dick

02-22-2018, 03:11 AM

I uploaded part of it for you.

https://i.imgur.com/5w2kiXS.png?1

Celts mostly.

Percivalle

02-22-2018, 03:11 AM

Which samples are Pre-Lombard?

In fact there is no pre-Lombard sample in this study.

From the paper "Concerning the invasions of Italy, he states that Alboin's invading army included not only Longobards but Gepids, Bulgars, Sarmatians, Pannonians, Suevi, Noricans, and others".

To be honest there is no certainty there are native northern Italians in the sample, let alone if they can represent the entire native population, which is an assumption without any proof. And actually those from Collegno are very varied. And Tuscan-like people there were also among those from Hungary.

Dick

02-22-2018, 03:15 AM

Alboin's invading army included not only Longobards but Gepids, Bulgars, Sarmatians, Pannonians, Suevi, Noricans, and others".

Obviously.

And Tuscan-like people there were also among those from Hungary.

Why would this be?

Peterski

02-22-2018, 03:17 AM

Samples with Germanic R1b-U106, mainly in Szolad (apparently a lot of R1b in CL was local):

SZ16: R1b-U106>Z381

SZ23: R1b-U106>Z381

SZ2: R1b-U106>Z381>Z301>L48>Z9>Z8

SZ11: R1b-U106>Z381>Z301>L48>Z9>Z326>CTS2509

SZ4: R1b-U106>Z18

So at least six samples of U106 in Szolad. And in Collegno only one is undoubtedly (?) U106:

CL84: R1b-U106>Z381

Peterski

02-22-2018, 03:19 AM

Why would this be?

Bronze Age sample from Szolad - SZ1 - is also autosomally Tuscan-like.

Dick

02-22-2018, 03:23 AM

Germanic R1b-U106 among the samples:

SZ16: R1b-U106>Z381

SZ23: R1b-U106>Z381

SZ2: R1b-U106>Z381>Z301> L48> Z9>Z8

SZ11: R1b-U106>Z381>Z301> L48> Z9> Z326>CTS2509

SZ4: R1b-U106> Z18

CL84:R1b-U106> Z381

Suebic. So the Longobards weren't a uniform tribe which isn't surprising.

In the 1st century AD, they formed part of the Suebi, in northwestern Germany. By the end of the 5th century, they had moved into the area roughly coinciding with modern Austria and Slovakia north of the Danube river, where they subdued the Heruls and later fought frequent wars with the Gepids. The Lombard king Audoin defeated the Gepid leader Thurisind in 551 or 552; his successor Alboin eventually destroyed the Gepids in 567.

Following this victory, Alboin decided to lead his people to Italy, which had become severely depopulated and devastated after the long Gothic War (535–554) between the Byzantine Empire and the Ostrogothic Kingdom there. The Lombards were joined by numerous Saxons, Heruls, Gepids, Bulgars, Thuringians, and Ostrogoths, and their invasion of Italy was almost unopposed.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 03:27 AM

Autosomally Tuscan-like samples in Pannonia could also be Roman settlers.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:28 AM

This thread just shows many Apricity agendas united in one place; those who want Ancient Romans to be Nordics cannot accept them as Southern Italian-like because it breaks their dreams, those who want South Italians to be Levantines try to deny any possibility of ancient North Italians being like modern South Italians (it would destroy their theories of recent migration/influence from the Levant to South Italy and consequently any substantial connection); and finally some Italians who cannot accept North Italians are Germanic admixed (they would try to explain the high northern of affinity of NI as being ''Indo-European Roman ancestry, haha) and try to come with many fucking bullshits to justify the data.

But for everyone who researchead a bit about ancient Roman culture, this just attests the obvious. It's no surprise at all.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:29 AM

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:34 AM

Well if ancient north Italians were like modern southern Italians, then it would represent Levantine admixture into northern Italy that has since been diluted by Germanic input.

Or perhaps the supposed ''Levantine'' admixture came through other sources; ancient DNA isn't fully comprehended yet. The affinity between South Italians and Levantines could just be a coincidence, like in the case of Ashkenazi Jews. We need to wait before being so cathegoric.

I admit that those South Italian and even South Tuscan-like samples from North Italy could be exceptions or atypical people, we don't know for sure (specially considering Celtic migrations in North Italy). What we know is that many people try to project their agendas in genetic data in most anthroforums.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:35 AM

Or perhaps the supposed ''Levantine'' admixture came through other sources

And what would those be? Prehistoric? I think it is unlikely, because if it was prehistoric, all of SE Europe would have it.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:39 AM

And what would those be? Prehistoric? I think it is unlikely, because if it was prehistoric, all of SE Europe would have it.

I don't know. As I said these individuals could very well be atypical too. We need to wait for more ancient DNA to be analized before making general assumptions.
I would say some recent Levantine/Near Eastern/North African ancestry in Sicily is certain (Phoenicians and Arabs/Berbers) but the extent of this influence and specially it's influence in mainland Italy is very debatable. There's no sign of large scale migrations to South Italy in historic times (post -Bronze Age).

Peterski

02-22-2018, 03:41 AM

(...)

Nobody claims that Northern Italians are 100% Roman. In fact entire North Italy was Celtic before Rome conquered it.

Celtic people such as the Irish would likely score close to 100% CEU in this autosomal analysis.

So how do they distinguish Celtic CEU admixture from Langobard CEU admixture in this study?

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:41 AM

I don't know. As I said these individuals could very well be atypical too. We need to wait for more ancient DNA to be analized before making general assumptions.
I would say some recent Levantine/Near Eastern/North African ancestry in Sicily is certain (Phoenicians and Arabs/Berbers) but the extent of this influence and specially it's influence in mainland Italy is very debatable. There's no sign of large scale migrations to South Italy in historic times (post -Bronze Age).

I always assumed the migrations affected Sicily and Calabria and then branched out from there. There has been a lot of migration from one part of southern Italy to another.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:43 AM

Btw, Phoenicians and Berbers were also present in Iberia but for some reason this genetic influence isn't that strong there. If they were more present in Iberia than in Sicily in historic times and the influence there isn't that big I think it pretty much discards the possibility of a post-Bronze Age large scale influence in Sicily too. The admixture comes from other sources. Likely pre-historic.

Most Phoenician colonies were basically merchant warehouses and most Arab colonization never involved large scale migration. Specially in places very far from the Arab world.

Dick

02-22-2018, 03:44 AM

I always assumed the migrations affected Sicily and Calabria and then branched out from there. There has been a lot of migration from one part of southern Italy to another.

It obviously affected them more than say Sardinia or Corsica. Sicily is the largest island in the Mediterranean Sea. Even the Normans had a thirst to conquer it.

Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin

02-22-2018, 03:45 AM

Id like them to take samples of ancient corsicans and ligurians remains for haplogroups

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:47 AM

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:49 AM

I always assumed the migrations affected Sicily and Calabria and then branched out from there. There has been a lot of migration from one part of southern Italy to another.

Look at my subsequent post, I don't think a ''historical period'' migration is likely tbh. We would have to explain why Iberia ''skipped'' this genetic influence even having MORE of concrete influence (political, economical, even demographical) from all North African and Near Eastern groups that affected Sicily. And, no, the North African Iberians score did not come from the Moors, it's mostly neolithic.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:50 AM

Look at my subsequent post, I don't think a ''historical period'' migration is likely tbh. We would have to explain why Iberia ''skipped'' this genetic influence even having MORE of concrete influence (political, economical, even demographical) from all North African and Near Eastern groups that affected Sicily. And, no, the North Africans Iberians score did not come from the Moors, it's mostly neolithic.

What is clear about southern Italy is there is no genetic divide between Calabria and Sicily (with the exception of Trapani being an outlier and likely Syracuse too), but Calabria and Apulia, both on the mainland, differ because Apulia has much less Near Eastern input and almost no North African. Not sure what this tells us, but it is the case.

I do agree with you though. 800 years of Muslim rule in Iberia did leave some impact genetically but much less than one might expect.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:51 AM

Sicily was less densely populated than Iberia.

Maybe (I'm not sure, do you have some data to prove it?), but it still doesn't show how some warehouses and generals/Emirs would be able to change the genetic structure of a whole island, the biggest one in the mediterranean.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 03:53 AM

Or perhaps the supposed ''Levantine'' admixture came through other sources; ancient DNA isn't fully comprehended yet. The affinity between South Italians and Levantines could just be a coincidence, like in the case of Ashkenazi Jews. We need to wait before being so cathegoric.

I admit that those South Italian and even South Tuscan-like samples from North Italy could be exceptions or atypical people, we don't know for sure (specially considering Celtic migrations in North Italy). What we know is that many people try to project their agendas in genetic data in most anthroforums.

Well you are just trying to project your agendas. There is no evidence that Germanic invasions significantly altered DNA of North Italians, just like they did not alter their language. That's not the same scale as Anglo-Saxon influence in Eastern England, where language changed to Germanic and 30-40% of autosomal DNA as well as ca. 50% of Y-DNA is Germanic. Nothing even close to that can be seen in Northern Italy.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:53 AM

Maybe (I'm not sure, do you have some data to prove it?), but it still doesn't show how some warehouses and generals/Emirs would be able to change the genetic structure of a whole island, the biggest one in the mediterranean.

The Sarno study shows all of Sicily except Trapani is fairly homogenous, but the historical settlements differed in each part of the island so you might be right. For instance, Palermo had almost no Greek input, but Ragusa had supposedly a lot, but both regions cluster almost identically in the study.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:55 AM

Well you are just trying to project your agendas here.

There is no evidence that Germanic invasions significantly altered DNA of North Italians, just like they did not alter their language. That's just not the same scale as Anglo-Saxon influence in Eastern England, where language changed to Germanic and 30-40% of autosomal DNA as well as around 50% of Y-DNA is Germanic.

Nothing even close to that can be seen in Northern Italy.

How I'm projecting an agenda when I admit the samples that are South Italian-like can be atypical individuals? LOL

Don't accuse me of doing what you do. I have no reason to defend any position in that debate. I'm just stating what I think is more likely.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 03:59 AM

Well you are just trying to project your agendas. There is no evidence that Germanic invasions significantly altered DNA of North Italians, just like they did not alter their language. That's not the same scale as Anglo-Saxon influence in Eastern England, where language changed to Germanic and 30-40% of autosomal DNA as well as ca. 50% of Y-DNA is Germanic. Nothing even close to that can be seen in Northern Italy.

Even if Germanic influences altered north Italy and Slavic altered Greece/Albania I don't think any of them were ever wholly like modern southern Italians, because they would not have had as much Near Eastern. Don't you think?

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:07 AM

The Sarno study shows all of Sicily except Trapani is fairly homogenous, but the historical settlements differed in each part of the island so you might be right. For instance, Palermo had almost no Greek input, but Ragusa had supposedly a lot, but both regions cluster almost identically in the study.

Arab colonization cannot be a good source for this Levantine affinity in some South Italian populations. Arabs never migrated en masse to most places they colonized (even modern Lebanese who speak Arabic, are part of the ''Arab world'', have Arabic culture are mostly non-Arab genetically), how Sicilians would acquire any admixture through an Arab colonization that was very short (supposing Arabs would have sended Levantines instead of true Arabs to Sicily)?

Phoenicians never were significant in number in Sicily too. The only explanation would be conversos (Jews) but even them weren't enough to change the genetic structure of Sicilians. I would say even all these populations combined contributed very little to modern Sicilian gene pool.

The explanation lies somewhere else, most likely.

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:08 AM

Dick

02-22-2018, 04:16 AM

Well you are just trying to project your agendas. There is no evidence that Germanic invasions significantly altered DNA of North Italians, just like they did not alter their language. That's not the same scale as Anglo-Saxon influence in Eastern England, where language changed to Germanic and 30-40% of autosomal DNA as well as ca. 50% of Y-DNA is Germanic. Nothing even close to that can be seen in Northern Italy.

Or france and Iberia. the reason for the brutality of the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain is due to the opposition from the local population. in Italy, Iberia and France the Germanics(Lombards, Franks, Goths) were welcome with open arms. They even adopted their language and religion.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:18 AM

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:20 AM

Dick

02-22-2018, 04:25 AM

Even Non-Indo-European Etruscans did not plot with South Italians:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

Come on. They were part of the Urnfield culture. Why they did not speak "indo-European" is due to the women they bred with in the region. You learn to speak from your mother. Deal with it, patriarchal Indo-European.

Dick

02-22-2018, 04:25 AM

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:27 AM

You learn to speak from your mother.

No, I don't think so.

My mother didn't teach me the words I use most often, like fuck, bitch, scrotum, shithole, and tampon.

I learned to speak from the internet and South Park lol

Dick

02-22-2018, 04:27 AM

No, I don't think so.

My mother didn't teach me the words I use most often, like fuck, bitch, scrotum, shithole, and tampon.

I learned to speak from the internet and South Park lol

I dont remember the last time i said the word tampon.

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:28 AM

I don't speak my mother tongue, which had nice, friendly, words anymore.

I only know words like "go fuck yourself", and "you fucking dumbass bitch", and also "R1E1b1bTARD"

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:29 AM

I dont remember the last time i said the word tampon.

The last time I said it was when I was making fun of physics for being goofy.

Physicists say that everything is made out of protons, electrons, and neutrons, so I said, "why not protons, strapons, and tampons?"

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:30 AM

Even Non-Indo-European Etruscans did not plot with South Italians:

Man, you're looking pathetic trying to enforce your opinion at all costs. You could just assume South Italian-like samples are atypical (they could be typical too, but that's another story) or something instead of saying they are Illyrians. The latter most likely were similar to modern Balkanites with less NE European input. You even created another thread to enforce your opinion. I don't even know why a fucking Pole care so much about that subject.

The answer is that this study showed that many things some people thought previously could just be wrong.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:30 AM

Even if Germanic influences altered north Italy and Slavic altered Greece/Albania I don't think any of them were ever wholly like modern southern Italians, because they would not have had as much Near Eastern. Don't you think?

I agree. Just look at Etruscans (Dienekes posted that PCA on his blog). They are more northern than South Italians despite speaking a Non-IE language. But they most likely had some IE admixture, just like Basques have it. Also they seem to be a bit Finnic-shifted, judging from that PCA. So maybe they had a Non-IE type of northern admixture as well.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:33 AM

You even created another thread to enforce your opinion.

ROTFL. My thread is older than this thread.

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:36 AM

ROTFL. My thread is older than this thread.

You probably bumped it, big difference, wow.

EDIT: My bad, actually the retard ''Bobby'' bumped that thread.

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:50 AM

My bad, actually the retard ''Bobby'' bumped that thread.

The only retard on this forum is you.

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:52 AM

The only retard on this forum is you.

Don't be so angry due to a provocative comment, boy.

Bobby Martnen

02-22-2018, 04:53 AM

Don't be so angry due to a provocative comment, boy.

Go back to Bosnia, al-Bosni.

Jana

02-22-2018, 09:39 AM

I think that samples which plot close to South Italians were Illyrians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981114&viewfull=1#post4981114

No way.

Illyrians were surely bit more northern shifted than Greeks, not to mention south Italians. They also looked nothing alike, Illyrians were described as tall and not much darker than Celts by Romans.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 11:31 AM

I agree. Just look at Etruscans (Dienekes posted that PCA on his blog). They are more northern than South Italians despite speaking a Non-IE language. But they most likely had some IE admixture, just like Basques have it. Also they seem to be a bit Finnic-shifted, judging from that PCA. So maybe they had a Non-IE type of northern admixture as well.

This is my understanding, you can tell me if you agree.

Before Slavic admixture in Albania/Greece, these populations would have been similar to Sicilians, but without the additional Levantine/North African influences in Sicily. Slavic ancestry being acquired brought the populations further than they were, even though there was always a difference.

North Italians were the southernmost part of a Celtic European spectrum, being similar to southern French but with more Caucasus-like DNA. Both north Italians AND southern French have since acquired Germanic admixture.

Tuscans have changed over the millennia by becoming more Near Eastern, though not as much as southern Italians. Tuscans are like a "western" version of mainland Greeks.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 11:34 AM

You people never get tired of making false assumptions. No matter how many times you ridicule yourselves.

Scar

02-22-2018, 01:10 PM

This is my understanding, you can tell me if you agree.

Before Slavic admixture in Albania/Greece, these populations would have been similar to Sicilians, but without the additional Levantine/North African influences in Sicily. Slavic ancestry being acquired brought the populations further than they were, even though there was always a difference.

North Italians were the southernmost part of a Celtic European spectrum, being similar to southern French but with more Caucasus-like DNA. Both north Italians AND southern French have since acquired Germanic admixture.

Tuscans have changed over the millennia by becoming more Near Eastern, though not as much as southern Italians. Tuscans are like a "western" version of mainland Greeks.

Basically everything you said here contradicts the conclusions we could make based in the study OP posted. But who knows, the individuals sampled in the study could very well be atypical or non-local. In that case you may be right.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 01:19 PM

Scar

02-22-2018, 01:20 PM

Stop talking bullshit.

That was my thought too, all of these conclusions are nonsense based in the most recent data.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 01:23 PM

That was my thought too, all of these conclusions are nonsense based in the most recent data.

I respect Sikeliot, but seriously he should stop with his obsession of Levantinizing southern Italians.

Scar

02-22-2018, 01:26 PM

I respect Sikeliot, but seriously he should stop with his obsession of Levantinizing southern Italians.

Yes, he posts valid data/studies and sometimes make some interesting analysis. But he does have a Levantine obsession. The way some people are talking in this thread makes South Italians look like if they were full blown Middle Easterners (lol) when most of their MENA ancestry almost never exceeds 20%. And even that 20% is likely from pre-historic times.

This forum created a cognitive dissonance on South Italians if we compare Apricity with reality. They are almost Lebanese here, lol.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 01:34 PM

I respect Sikeliot, but seriously he should stop with his obsession of Levantinizing southern Italians.

But they have more of such affinity than Albanians, Greeks and central Italians overall. Why can't that be discussed?

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 01:34 PM

Yes, he posts valid data/studies and sometimes make some interesting analysis. But he does have a Levantine obsession. The way some people are talking in this thread makes South Italians look like if they were full blown Middle Easterners (lol) when most of their MENA ancestry almost never exceeds 20%. And even that 20% is likely from pre-historic times.

This forum created a cognitive dissonance on South Italians if we compare Apricity with reality. They are almost Lebanese here, lol.

"Levantine" influence in places like Calabria? He didn't study much history then. We need fu**ing ancient DNA from south Italy before making retarded conclusions.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 01:34 PM

That was my thought too, all of these conclusions are nonsense based in the most recent data.

So how do you explain southern Italians not plotting with Albania and Greece today? Why would they differ?

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 01:35 PM

"Levantine" influence in places like Calabria? He didn't study much history then. We need fu**ing ancient DNA from south Italy before making retarded conclusions.

Why don't calabrese plot with Greece then except outlying islands in the south Aegean?

Token

02-22-2018, 01:35 PM

I agree. Just look at Etruscans (Dienekes posted that PCA on his blog). They are more northern than South Italians despite speaking a Non-IE language. But they most likely had some IE admixture, just like Basques have it. Also they seem to be a bit Finnic-shifted, judging from that PCA. So maybe they had a Non-IE type of northern admixture as well.

Peterski, it is becoming embarassing for you. Firstly, all Tuscan and SI like samples had local strontium signatures, so yes, they were locals. Secondly, there were absolutely no motives to migrate north at this time, actually even its own inhabitants wanted distance from there. Finally, every single sample that didn't joined the southern cluster also showed foreign signatures, including CL23 who plot with modern Bergamo_HGDP and CL92, who had only little CEU input but was still buried together with northern individuals. Also, there are no Etruscan samples avaiable so stop babbling about it. North Italians Romans were wogs, end of story.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 01:35 PM

Scar

02-22-2018, 01:37 PM

So how do you explain southern Italians not plotting with Albania and Greece today? Why would they differ?

I'm not sure, but as said many posts ago we would need ancient DNA from South Italy to know exactly the answer. Like we have now this ancient DNA from North Italians showing they changed significantly from antiquity to now. Without ancient DNA we can't say anything for sure.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 01:39 PM

Getting back on topic, I think that it's impossible and absurd that in northwest Italy people were like Tuscans or like southerners, those people were not native for sure.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 01:45 PM

Getting back on topic, I think that it's impossible and absurd that in northwest Italy people were like Tuscans or like southerners, those people were not native for sure.

True or not, what exactly is so absurd? Tuscany is right next to NW Italy.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 01:46 PM

I'm not sure, but as said many posts ago we would need ancient DNA from South Italy to know exactly the answer. Like we have now this ancient DNA from North Italians showing they changed significantly from antiquity to now. Without ancient DNA we can't say anything for sure.

When I say Levantine DNA I don't mean historical, rather that Calabria and Sicily have elevated genetic affinity to there compared to other south Euro people. Even if it's prehistoric and 20 percent only. I'm not putting a time table on it or assuming when it arrived. You are all assuming I am. I'm not.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 01:50 PM

Why don't calabrese plot with Greece then except outlying islands in the south Aegean?

Calabria is still closer to Thessaly than to Cyprus.

Scar

02-22-2018, 01:55 PM

When I say Levantine DNA I don't mean historical, rather that Calabria and Sicily have elevated genetic affinity to there compared to other south Euro people. Even if it's prehistoric and 20 percent only. I'm not putting a time table on it or assuming when it arrived. You are all assuming I am. I'm not.

I have the impression you want to overemphasize that affinity (that certainly exists from a genetic POV) creating some inexistent connections. But I may be wrong.

Anyway, backing to the topic, I don't think native ancient North Italians being (South) Tuscan-like is impossible at all and even that no one expected that fact , what is an amazing discovery is the South Italian-like samples that were certainly locals, as Token explained above. But we shouldn't be surprised with the genetic shift of North Italy from South Italian and South Tuscan-like to now if we take into consideration Longobards were basically Scandinavian-like, not even Bavarian or Austrian types of Germanic tribes.

It seems most of these Germanic tribes from Roman period were still very Scandinavian-like rather than (modern) Germans and Austrians.

Sebastianus Rex

02-22-2018, 01:59 PM

What is clear about southern Italy is there is no genetic divide between Calabria and Sicily (with the exception of Trapani being an outlier and likely Syracuse too), but Calabria and Apulia, both on the mainland, differ because Apulia has much less Near Eastern input and almost no North African. Not sure what this tells us, but it is the case.

I do agree with you though. 800 years of Muslim rule in Iberia did leave some impact genetically but much less than one might expect.

How many times do we have to wrote that 800 years was only in Granada? Not even in most part of Andalusia (by far the region in Iberia with more Moorish influence) wich was mostly reconquested during the 1200's . Northern Spain and most of Portugal were not even permanently settled by the Moors.

Token

02-22-2018, 01:59 PM

Getting back on topic, I think that it's impossible and absurd that in northwest Italy people were like Tuscans or like southerners, those people were not native for sure.

Yes, they were. All SI and Tuscan like samples had local strontium signatures and this is certainly not a coincidence. There is nothing impossible and absurd about that, a similar situation can be observable in the Balkans, where the entire north-south cline was established in early medieval times by Slavic settlements.

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:01 PM

How many times do we have to wrote that 800 years was only in Granada? Not even in most part of Andalusia (by far the region in Iberia with more Moorish influence) wich was mostly reconquested during the 1200's . Northern Spain and most of Portugal were not even permanently settled by the Moors.

Well, even Andalusians, the supposed more Moorish influenced Iberians, still have very little if none North African or ME influence from the Moorish period. That is what he was trying to say.

Sebastianus Rex

02-22-2018, 02:05 PM

Well, even Andalusians, the supposed more Moorish influenced Iberians, still have very little if none North African or ME influence from the Moorish period. That is what he was trying to say.

What people should stop writing was that Iberia was 800 years under Moorish rule, wich is a complete fallacy. It's almost as ridiculous as saying that Iberia/Spain is occupied by the British for 300 years because of Gibraltar...

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:11 PM

Calabria is still closer to Thessaly than to Cyprus.

They're intermediate. More Near Eastern shifted than Thessaly and less than Cyprus.

Sebastianus Rex

02-22-2018, 02:12 PM

Well, even Andalusians, the supposed more Moorish influenced Iberians, still have very little if none North African or ME influence from the Moorish period. That is what he was trying to say.

Andalusians are not the supposed more Moorish influenced Iberians, they ARE INDEED the most (or should I say only) relatively Moorish influenced Iberians in every sense, even if it is on a low degree. Genetic tests on Spanish populations so far are trash imo, one just has to go to Andalucia and Galicia to realize that it is impossible that Andalucians have lower north African DNA than Galicia & other regions (whatever it means northwestern african component).

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:12 PM

What people should stop writing was that Iberia was 800 years under Moorish rule, wich is a complete fallacy. It's almost as ridiculous as saying that Iberia/Spain is occupied by the British for 300 years because of Gibraltar...

Some parts have been occupied for less time but the entire struggle to free Iberia from the Moors lasted for 800 years. Most of Southern Spain remained Moorish for 800 years. But, yeah, some parts of Iberia weren't even settled by the Moors, never.

What I think that is fascinating about the study OP posted is how Northern-shifted early Germanic tribes were. If we could extrapolate Longobards to other Germanic tribes (I'm not sure if we can do that) it could explain the northern-shift of many modern European populations in modern times, or post-Roman and even post-Medieval times.

Most Germanics being Scandinavian shifted rather than German shifted would show that the ''barrier'' between Ancient Mediterranean Europe and and the North and even Central and Eastern parts of Europe in antiquity was bigger than many people like to admit. And, honestly, that would make sense considering the historical data we have from Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines etc.

Sikeliot

02-22-2018, 02:15 PM

I have the impression you want to overemphasize that affinity (that certainly exists from a genetic POV) creating some inexistent connections. But I may be wrong.

.

I have no idea when that affinity arrived but that far south Italy shifts somewhat to the Levant genetically when compared to central Italy, Greece or Albania. That's all I was saying. I have no idea why this is and hopefully ancient samples will enlighten us.

If you agree with all this then we don't disagree so much at all.

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:18 PM

Genetic tests on Spanish populations so far are trash imo, one just has to go to Andalucia and Galicia to realize that it is impossible that Andalucians have lower north African DNA than Galicia & other regions (whatever it means northwestern african component).

I think that's a case of modern prejudices blinding our view. I don't think the Northwestern African component makes someone ''darker'', it's a Caucasoid component and probably peaks in non-mixed Berbers who are more or less very light skinned and some light haired and light eyed. Given the fact most North Africans are SSA admixed today we associate them with darkness, but they were known for being fair in antiquity, even more than mediterranean European groups.

The Northwestern African component suffer from the same prejudice the West Asian component. It actually can make someone lighter if DEVOID of influences like Red Sea, SSA, SW Asian, South Asian etc. The reason populations with high NW African and West Asian are generally dark is the other components they have, not these ones.

West Asian peaks in Georgians and Abkhazians, for example, who are overall a very light pigmented people.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:33 PM

^^^ So in your opinion Albanians are not descended from Illyrians?

Jana

02-22-2018, 02:37 PM

^^^ So in your opinion Albanians are not descended from Illyrians?

They are, but not completely. Gheg highlanders match these description, I think.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:40 PM

All "barbarians" were described as tall by Romans. It was probably some convention.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 02:40 PM

When I say Levantine DNA I don't mean historical, rather that Calabria and Sicily have elevated genetic affinity to there compared to other south Euro people. Even if it's prehistoric and 20 percent only. I'm not putting a time table on it or assuming when it arrived. You are all assuming I am. I'm not.

Yes, you did. On the other thread you said that the affinity towards the Levant is owed to recent migrations. Then you edited the thread and deleted that part.

How many times do we have to wrote that 800 years was only in Granada? Not even in most part of Andalusia (by far the region in Iberia with more Moorish influence) wich was mostly reconquested during the 1200's . Northern Spain and most of Portugal were not even permanently settled by the Moors.

Imagine if that happened in Italy, which excuses would trolls be using now... Greece and Iberia are both more northern shifted than southern Italy which had none of Ottoman or Moorish rule. Nations remained mostly as they were before.

Yes, they were. All SI and Tuscan like samples had local strontium signatures and this is certainly not a coincidence. There is nothing impossible and absurd about that, a similar situation can be observable in the Balkans, where the entire north-south cline was established in early medieval times by Slavic settlements.

Well, on second thought, a similarity with Tuscans seems more plausible. The ancient peoples of Collegno were Celto-Ligures.

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:46 PM

Imagine if that happened in Italy, which excuses would trolls be using now... Greece and Iberia are both more northern shifted than southern Italy which had none of Ottoman or Moorish rule. Nations remained mostly as they were before.

I disagree in that point. I think nations from the Mediterranean basin have been significantly north-shifted due to Germanic/Slavic invasions, look at this example from North Italy and the example from medieval Balkans and the Slavic migrations. Also, I also think North Africans were considerably lighter and less SSA admixed in the past.

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:51 PM

All "barbarians" were described as tall by Romans. It was probably some convention.

I don't remember reading Romans describing Ethiopians or Arabs as ''tall''. And, yes, they were considered ''barbarians'' too.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 02:54 PM

I agree. Just look at Etruscans (Dienekes posted that PCA on his blog). They are more northern than South Italians despite speaking a Non-IE language. But they most likely had some IE admixture, just like Basques have it. Also they seem to be a bit Finnic-shifted, judging from that PCA. So maybe they had a Non-IE type of northern admixture as well.

Etruria was a geographical term. There was never a tribe or a people called ”Etruscans”. Not single Roman hostorian mentions them. A dozen of different tribes inhabited Etruria among them the Tyrrhenians who came from Lydia and were related to Phrygians, (and this is stated by every Roman and Greek historian and is corroborated by the Tyrsenoi themselves), the Tuscans a native Italian tribe, even the Pelasgoi who conquered the Tyrrhenians and lived above Tyrrhenians. Several other native Italian tribes lived there as well as Colchians.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 02:55 PM

I don't remember reading Romans describing Ethiopians or Arabs as ''tall''. And, yes, they were considered ''barbarians'' too.

I mean European barbarians.

I don't remember the Romans writing anything about average height of Arabs or Ethiopians, tbh.

Scar

02-22-2018, 02:56 PM

I mean European barbarians.

I don't remember the Romans writing anything about average height of Arabs or Ethiopians, tbh.

Well, ancient Roman and Greek ethnographers/historians/proto-anthropologists wrote about many things you couldn't even imagine.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 02:56 PM

Ancient sources are to take with a large dose of salt.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 03:01 PM

Etruria was a geographical term. There was never a tribe or a people called ”Etruscans”. Not single Roman hostorian mentions them. A dozen of different tribes inhabited Etruria among them the Tyrrhenians who came from Lydia and were related to Phrygians, (and this is stated by every Roman and Greek historian and is corroborated by the Tyrsenoi themselves), the Tuscans a native Italian tribe, even the Pelasgoi who conquered the Tyrrhenians and lived above Tyrrhenians. Several other native Italian tribes lived there as well as Colchians.

Mythology should not be mixed with reality. Many Romans regarded their origins as Greek becuase they wanted to ennoble themselves.

Kelmendasi

02-22-2018, 03:10 PM

^^^ So in your opinion Albanians are not descended from Illyrians?
Height wise we aren’t short, although we aren’t exactly as light as Celts.

Kelmendasi

02-22-2018, 03:12 PM

Albanians don't have very little Slavic input, especially Southern Albanians.
Autosomally Albanians do have very little amounts of Slavic admix on average

Sebastianus Rex

02-22-2018, 03:20 PM

Some parts have been occupied for less time but the entire struggle to free Iberia from the Moors lasted for 800 years. Most of Southern Spain remained Moorish for 800 years. But, yeah, some parts of Iberia weren't even settled by the Moors, never.

"Some parts" ? Be more precise please, almost 95% of the Iberian Penisula was reconquested centuries earlier, the Kingdom of Granada was roughly 5% of the Iberian landmass. Like I wrote before even most of Andalucia was reconquered during the 1200's...very far from 800 years.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 03:26 PM

Mythology should not be mixed with reality. Many Romans regarded their origins as Greek becuase they wanted to ennoble themselves.

That is not mythology but a historical fact, the historical consensus of Roman and Greek historians, also corroborated by the people who were actually there. The Roman historians all acknowledged that the tribes of Rome included Arcadians from the time of Evender and thats why the worship of Herakles was included in the Roman religion. When the Aenead was written the Trojan, and Trojan-Achaean tribes of Italy were all still extant and their accounts were varifiable.

The Greek colonisation of Italy is completely corroborated by the archaeology as is the foundation and development of Rome from the time of Aeneas. There is not one shred of archaeological evidence that contradicts Roman historians like Livy.

If the texts say the Greek colonised Italy and there are Greek artefact in the places they colonised like wot there are then the texts are 100% accurate and nothing you can say will change that. Why would someone make up such a store about Trojans, Arcadians, Messenians, Spartans, Maeonians colonising Italy if they were not there. Don't you think someone would have challenged it like the entire civilised world is laughing at the FYROMians lies about Macedonians.

Read Livy and look at the archaeological record.

Arcadian colonisation of Italy c.1460 BC
Colonisation of Italy by Hyllus c.1240 BC
Achaean migration to Italy and Cyprus 1183 BC
Messenian and Lacedaemonian colonisation of Italy c.730 BC and 665 BC

And there were many others as well such as the reign of Kronos in c.1673 BC.
And don't forget that the God Julius Caesar claimed Greek decent via Aeneas.

With regards to Tyrrhenians they were one of many Etrurian tribes and another tribe that settled in Etruria in Creston above the Tyrsenoi according to Herodotus were the Pelasgi who came from Thessaliotis. All the ancient historians, every last of them say the Pelasgians colonised Tyrrhenia.

Herodotus says the Maeonians migrated to Italy 18 years after the Thera Eruption of 1628 BC and named themseves Tyrsenoi after the son of Atys the son of Manes who was the first king of Lydia. The 12th century kings of Lydia were the Heraklids descended form Omphale who ruled up until Gyges and before them the kings inclded Tmolus and Tantalus.

The Romans used Tuscum to refer to the Tuscans and Tyrrhenum to refer to the Tyrhennians. Herodotus says Tyrrhenus (1435 BC) was the son of Atys (1485) the son of Manes (1525 BC) who was king over the Maeonians. Jerome states that the Phrygians and Lydians were originally called Maeonians. That again is not an hypothesis, but a historical fact a historical accepted by every ancient and medieval historian without any question and which is confirmed by peer review and the Tyrsenoi themselves.

Jana

02-22-2018, 03:29 PM

Very interesting!

This shows that all the Paleo-Balkan populations weren't the same as the Aegean islanders!

This also shows that Bulgarians and especially Macedonians are largely of Paleo-Balkan stock!
I guess that this Illyrian could have been a Thracian or that the Thracians and Illyrians were very similar.

Of course, as you go south, the people will be Mycenaean like, which are Greeks.

I wonder, when will we have a dna from a Macedonian!
That would be interesting as well!

He can't be Thracian, in Dalmatia lived only Illyrian tribes! :)

But I supose Illyrians/Thracians/Dacians were very smilar genetically.

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:31 PM

"Some parts" ? Be more precise please, almost 98% of the Iberian Penisula was reconquested centuries earlier, the province of Granada (roughly correspondent to the ancient Caliphate) makes up just a bit more than 2% of the Iberian landmass. Like I wrote before even Andalucia was mostly reconquested during the 1200's...very far from 800 years.

Man, even Portugal was finally reconquered from the Moors at least 400 years after moorish domination, 711-1147 (Lisbon reconquest), I think some other parts of Portugal remained in Moorish hands for at least one century or more. 400 or 800 years doesn't make much difference, it's still a lot considering my initial argument Iberians exhibit very few moorish influence from a GENETIC POV considering the large period of Muslm domination. Sicily or Crete weren't part of Moorish or Arab empires even for 100 years, that's what I meant.

The picture of 2% of Iberia being Moorish for 800 years maybe is accurate, but other parts were moorish for 700, 600, 500, 400, 300 years, not a big difference. It still a lot, iirc correctly Portugal probably spend more time on moorish hands than in Roman hands.

Jana

02-22-2018, 03:36 PM

I think that the Thracians were in the Balkans before the illyrians and they lived much further, even in Dalmatia:

https://s9.postimg.org/hpbzh51sv/diadochi.png (https://postimages.org/)

Arey you sure it's real map ?

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 03:37 PM

I disagree in that point. I think nations from the Mediterranean basin have been significantly north-shifted due to Germanic/Slavic invasions, look at this example from North Italy and the example from medieval Balkans and the Slavic migrations. Also, I also think North Africans were considerably lighter and less SSA admixed in the past.

The population of ancient Italy has been worked out to have been some 4,000,000 million. The invading germanic tribes of the period (be they Visigoths, Vandals or Langobards) were no more than 20,000 at a time. I find it pretty hard to believe that such numbers could affect the genetic make-up of the italians. Subsequent invasions, up to the modern peiod, could account for such genetic variation, but in ancient times such documented numbers could not have had such a dire effect. Hence why the Lombards assumed the Latin language of their subjects so quickly. They were obviously the minority.

Percivalle

02-22-2018, 03:37 PM

Why would this be?

Dunno, there is likely something difficult to grasp. Unfortunately, too many try to jump to hasty conclusions.

Among samples from Szolad, Hungary, there are 3 who are Tuscan-like, 1 or 2 who are north-Italian like, and 3 who are Sicilian-like. Plus a couple who are Bulgarian-like.

A two methods PPA been used but not always the two results match. So you can have a sample who can be both French-like and Tuscan-like or Romanian-like and North-Italian like.

Suebic. So the Longobards weren't a uniform tribe which isn't surprising.

Indeed. Anyway Collegno are considered both Gothic and Longobard burials.

https://www.academia.edu/774780/Goths_and_Lombards_in_Italy_the_potential_of_archa eology_with_respect_to_ethnocultural_identificatio n

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:41 PM

The population of ancient Italy has been worked out to have been some 4,000,000 million. The invading germanic tribes of the period (be they Visigoths, Vandals or Langobards) were no more than 20,000 at a time. I find it pretty hard to believe that such numbers could affect the genetic make-up of the italians. Subsequent invasions, up to the modern peiod, could account for such genetic variation, but in ancient times such documented numbers could not have had such a dire effect. Hence why the Lombards assumed the Latin language of their subjects so quickly. They were obviously the minority.

That's not what genetic data is showing us though. Most Germanic migrations were exactly that: MIGRATIONS, not just colonization by few elites. The impact of Germanic/Slavic populations in North Italy, Balkans and Iberia is very underrated IMO.

They call it in Germany Völkerwanderung, the great migration of the people. And we also need to consider Ancient Germanics were mostly Scandinavian/North German-like, not South German/Bavarian/Austrian-like.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 03:43 PM

Here’s what the Roman historians said about Tuscans. Tuscan =/= Tyrrhenians

[33.7] The Tuscan sway, down to the rise of the Roman domination, stretched over a wide expanse of land and sea. How great their power was on the upper and the lower seas, by which Italy is surrounded like an island, is apparent from the names, since the Italian races have called one of them Tuscan, the general designation of the race, and the other Hadriatic, from Hatria, a Tuscan colony; and the Greeks know the same seas as Tyrrhenian and Adriatic.

[9] In the lands which slope on either side [117] towards one of these seas, they had twice twelve2 cities; first the twelve on this side the Apennines, towards the lower sea;

[10] to which afterwards they added the same number beyond the Apennines, sending over as many colonies as there were original cities, and taking possession of all the transpadane region (except the angle belonging to the Veneti who dwell about the gulf) as far as the Alps.

[11] The Alpine tribes have also, no doubt, the same origin, especially the Raetians; who have been rendered so savage by the very nature of the country as to retain nothing of their ancient character save the sound of their speech, and even that is corrupted.

And the Latin reads thus.

[7] Tuscorum ante Romanum imperium late terra marique opes patuere. mari supero inferoque, quibus Italia insulae modo cingitur, quantum potuerint nomina sunt argumento, quod alterum Tuscum communi vocabulo gentis, [8?] alterum Hadriaticum ab Hatria,4 Tuscorum colonia, vocavere Italicae gentes; Graeci eadem Tyrrhenum atque Adriaticum vocant. [9] ei in utrumque mare vergentes incoluere urbibus [116] duodenis terras, prius cis Appenninum ad inferum6 mare, postea trans Appenninum totidem, quot capita originis erant, [10] coloniis missis, quae trans Padum omnia loca, excepto Venetorum angulo qui sinum circumcolunt maris...

Scar

02-22-2018, 03:45 PM

Here’s what the Roman historians said about Tuscans. Tuscan =/= Tyrrhenians

Are you mentally challenged? Why are you polluting an interesting thread with such rubbish? Leave the discussion for the ones who know what they are talking about.

Principe Azzurro

02-22-2018, 03:45 PM

Hold up, this thread needs help. Principe Azzurro to the rescue

Jana

02-22-2018, 03:49 PM

More about that you can read here:

https://paganmeltingpot.wordpress.com/tag/thracian-mythology/

But I am quite sure that the Thracians lived in Dalmatia, only to be pushed out from the Illyrians later on.

I wonder why it was never mentioned in our school books.

Token

02-22-2018, 03:50 PM

It seems that Sikeliot's MENA Sicilians wet dream was broken in pieces.

Jana

02-22-2018, 03:52 PM

The ''Avar'' burials have been obviously biologically Slavic.

Principe Azzurro

02-22-2018, 04:03 PM

There was 3 Sicilian Bell Beakers in the large Bell Beaker paper.

Autosomally over 90% Farmer like

https://media.nature.com/original/nature-assets/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nature25738-s2.pdf

pg. 167 under BK_Italy_Per

No impact from Phoenicians, Carthaginians or Moors in Iberia? LOL sick joke. There are many tested samples from Iberia from Neolithic to Bronze Age, and all Iberians belonged to I2, H, R1b and Farmer G lines which means all the J2, J1, T, E and non Farmer lineages of G came from the MENA world and of course some being Roman, Andalusia was filled with Roman colonies.

Who would have ever thought the Romans were Germanic? The Romans are exactly what they should be Central Italians, which exists in the paper like samples CL 23 and CL 94 amongst others. The Southern Italian like samples are indeed strange at the moment but they can easily be migrants from the South. Y dna E-V13 was found amongst the Southern samples and not U152. U152 makes up 55-70% of Northern Italian Y DNA its impossible the original inhabitants got almost completely replaced during the Lombard period. Collegno was a trading post village during the Roman times and was probably filled with Merchants from all over the Empire before Lombard period.

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:08 PM

No impact from Phoenicians, Carthaginians or Moors in Iberia? LOL sick joke. There are many tested samples from Iberia from Neolithic to Bronze Age, and all Iberians belonged to I2, H, R1b and Farmer G lines which means all the J2, J1, T, E and non Farmer lineages

I was talking about autosomal admixture, and I'm right. From an autosomal POV Iberians didn't received significant influence from Phoenicians, Moors or Carthaginians.

Principe Azzurro

02-22-2018, 04:14 PM

I was talking about autosomal admixture, and I'm right. From an autosomal POV Iberians didn't received significant influence from Phoenicians, Moors or Carthaginians.

Uniparental markers are more telling than autosomal in my opinion, until there is a precise algorithm that exists for autosomal, Y and Mtdna remain superior.

Also it wasn't only Emirs and generals who settled in Sicily during the Emirate period, there was quite a few Berbers who came to the island to work the land, Tunisia is not all that far from Sicily.

Token

02-22-2018, 04:15 PM

I think that samples which plot close to South Italians were Illyrians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236240-Longobard-DNA-study&p=4981114&viewfull=1#post4981114

Nope, the authors explicitly stated that they were local and native North Italians. This was proven via strontium analysis.

Your theories are quite funny by the way.

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:19 PM

Uniparental markers are more telling than autosomal in my opinion, until there is a precise algorithm that exists for autosomal, Y and Mtdna remain superior.

No way. Y and Mtdna can only say who were your first ancestors thousands of years ago, they don't say a lot about your whole genetic composition. But I do think many genetic conclusions people from anthrofums take based on few studied aspects of autosomal results must be taken with a grain of salt.

It may be possible that Iberians have been substantially changed by the Moors, but we don't have any data or hint to affirm something like that yet. Rather the contrary, we don't have many indications of moorish influence in Iberian genetics. Ofc these Spanish OWDers from anthroforums are also ridiculous. Today I read here that Alhambra looks like an example of ''Christian architecture'' instead of Moorish, haha.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:26 PM

Neither Etruscans nor the actual Roman-era sample clustered with South Italians:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/bNj82Cc.png

Between the Early Roman Era and the Late Roman Era, there was a significant influx of Middle Eastern and African immigrants to Italy. See Busby 2015:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4714572/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215009495

https://i.imgur.com/i7bsjCF.png

Massive immigration from Non-European provinces of the Roman Empire to Italy is also confirmed by written sources (there were also a lot of foreign slaves imported to Roman Italy - mostly from the Middle East and from North Africa):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-5223.1921.tb02635.x/pdf

https://www.toqonline.com/archives/v5n4/54-Frank.pdf

http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/home.html

About immigration to Italy in Roman times:

https://s4.postimg.org/jk7dfs73x/Rome_4.png

https://s23.postimg.org/ptmg37797/Rome_5.png

https://s10.postimg.org/yn6oleyqx/Rome_6.png

Cassius Dio (155 - 235 AD) wrote:

"(...) Yet not even so, by threatening or urging or postponing or entreating, have I accomplished anything. You see for yourselves how much larger a mass you constitute than the married men, when you ought by this time to have furnished us with as many more children, or rather with several times your number. How otherwise shall families continue? How can the commonwealth be preserved if we neither marry nor produce children? Surely you are not expecting some to spring up from the earth to succeed to your goods and to public affairs, as myths describe. It is neither pleasing to Heaven nor creditable that our race should cease and the name of Romans meet extinguishment in us, and the city be given up to foreigners, - Greeks or even barbarians. We liberate slaves chiefly for the purpose of making out of them as many citizens as possible; we give our allies a share in the government that our numbers may increase: yet you, Romans of the original stock, including Quintii, Valerii, Iulli, are eager that your families and names at once shall perish with you. (...)"

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:32 PM

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:35 PM

RUBBISH
"

hahahahahah

Man, you are really ridiculous. Most slaves present in Italy during Roman times were from regions up north, what makes sense if we consider that northern regions had more tribal-like people who could be enslaved easily compared to the Near East or North Africa who were substantially more settled, urban and ''developed''. As we know, slaves in all times came mostly from less developed, tribal-like regions (like Poland at that time).

This nordicist farse ''South Italians'' have slave blood is becoming hardly to maintain everyday. You could be a reasonable debater and more rational loser like XenophobicPrussian and accept some facts instead of being a whiny bitch, cherrypicking some bullshit sources to support your claims.

I repeat: there isn't a single one documented large-scale migration for regions like Calabria in the post-Bronze Age period. But we do have data showing North Italians received Germanic (Scandinavian-like) influx. What does this mean? hmmmm

An actual descendant of Slaves (a Pole) a conquered, humiliated, hammered people through all times trying to downgrade one of the most preserved populations of Europe is a pathetic loser.

Principe Azzurro

02-22-2018, 04:36 PM

No way. Y and Mtdna can only say who were your first ancestors thousands of years ago, they don't say a lot about your whole genetic composition. But I do think many genetic conclusions people from anthrofums take based on few studied aspects of autosomal results must be taken with a grain of salt.

It may be possible that Iberians have been substantially changed by the Moors, but we don't have any data or hint to affirm something like that yet. Rather the contrary, we don't have many indications of moorish influence in Iberian genetics. Ofc these Spanish OWDers from anthroforums are also ridiculous. Today I read here that Alhambra looks like an example of ''Christian architecture'' instead of Moorish, haha.

Listen good points, but here's the issue with autosomal, let's first take the example for dna testing companies no company will give you the exact same results and in the case with the Triplets (I don't know if yo saw it, identical triplets got different results) we should not fully accept autosomal what it is today, especially when modern populations are concerned. Ancient dna is better with using Farmer, CHG, Steppe, etc... but again the problem is not every ancient population has been tested so again it creates bias. That's why Y and mt are superior at the moment because these are more absolute, though like you said and are 100% right, not telling of the whole situation but instead offer good projections.

Don't Iberians on average score over 10% North African? Also ancient Berbers carried some Neolithic Farmer ancestry which might also not be picked up as Moorish? You see the issues that can occur. Of course OWDers exist in all ethnicities, that will never change.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:37 PM

all Tuscan and SI like samples had local strontium signatures, so yes, they were locals.

Just like a White American born in Jamestown in 1650 AD will have a local strontium signature. It doesn't mean that he was native there for many generations. His parents came from Europe.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 04:38 PM

The word Slave had a totally different meaning back then. The ”Slaves” were not slaves in the modern sense of the word but workers. Slave or Sklavos is a Byzantine word referring to the Slavs as servants and agricultural workers. The Latin form is Servus.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:39 PM

Busby 2015 shows that Italians have recent MENA and African admixtures. Deal with it.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 04:39 PM

Between the Early Roman Era and the Late Roman Era, there was a significant influx of Middle Eastern and African immigrants to Italy.

That is absolute nonsense.

nightrider+

02-22-2018, 04:40 PM

To sum up, I doubt that those very southern-plotting samples were descendants of original Romans or Celts from North Italy. They could even be Jews (there were Jewish communities in Italy at that time).

Yes, they could be anything that fits your agenda. The Mycenaean samples could be Jews too.

Aren't you tired of shitposting in every related thread? We don't care about your coulds, woulds, hypotheses or whatever. Post facts, comment on them and that's it.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:40 PM

Busby 2015 shows that Italians have recent MENA and African admixtures. Deal with it.

Vid Flumina

02-22-2018, 04:40 PM

Nope, the authors explicitly stated that they were local and native North Italians. This was proven via strontium analysis.

Do you reckon all these blue dots were "local North Italians" as well? (hint: they plot with modern scandos..)

https://i.imgur.com/KQC3I5z.png

You also have 2 iberian-like individuals and a central european within that range.

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:47 PM

Don't Iberians on average score over 10% North African? Also ancient Berbers carried some Neolithic Farmer ancestry which might also not be picked up as Moorish? You see the issues that can occur. Of course OWDers exist in all ethnicities, that will never change.

I think only NW Iberians score 10% North African, but it's likely neolithic because these regions were never settled by the Moors. Btw, as I said in a previous post, no one knows how original NW Africans looked like, but they were very likely light pigmented populations. If we take into accout the ones scoring it are the lightest Iberians, that makes sense.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:51 PM

This was proven via strontium analysis.

Strontium analysis shows where you were born and grew up.

It does not show where your ancestors came from.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 04:54 PM

That is absolute nonsense.

Too bad that Busby 2015 disagrees with you.

As for strontium isotopes, genetically Scandinavian Longobards also had local values:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?228562-Longobard-DNA-from-Italy-amp-Pannonia&p=4982354&viewfull=1#post4982354

Percivalle

02-22-2018, 04:54 PM

Do you reckon all these blue dots were "local North Italians" as well? (hint: they plot with modern scandos..)

https://i.imgur.com/KQC3I5z.png

You also have 2 iberian-like individuals and a central european within that range.

So according to the strontium isotope values also the Scandinavian-like people were local and native north Italians.

Jana

02-22-2018, 04:57 PM

So according to the strontium isotope values also the Scandinavian-like people were local and native north Italians.

Romans were nordic :ranger

Scar

02-22-2018, 04:58 PM

Quoting here what I said in the other thread because it suits amazingly the reactions:

This thread just shows many Apricity agendas united in one place; those who want Ancient Romans to be Nordics cannot accept them as Southern Italian-like because it breaks their dreams, those who want South Italians to be Levantines try to deny any possibility of ancient North Italians being like modern South Italians (it would destroy their theories of recent migration/influence from the Levant to South Italy and consequently any substantial connection); and finally some Italians who cannot accept North Italians are Germanic admixed (they would try to explain the high northern of affinity of NI as being ''Indo-European Roman ancestry, haha) and try to come with many fucking bullshits to justify the data.

But for everyone who researchead a bit about ancient Roman culture, this just attests the obvious. It's no surprise at all.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 04:58 PM

Yes, they could be anything that fits your agenda. The Mycenaean samples could be Jews too.

Aren't you tired of shitposting in every related thread? We don't care about your coulds, woulds, hypotheses or whatever. Post facts, comment on them and that's it.

Also Greeks had settlements in Western Illyria too

The important ancient Greek colonies of Adriatic Sea and Illyrian coast
http://greekhistoryandprehistory.blogspot.gr/2017/02/the-important-ancient-greek-colonies-of.html

A good book to read is Grecita Adriatica by Lorenzo Braccesi
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?182838-Grecita-Adriatica-Hellenikos-Kolpos

Scar

02-22-2018, 05:00 PM

Romans were nordic :ranger

Actually in his case and Vid Flumina it's more related to the discomfort of admiting modern North Italians are substantially Germanic admixed and different than they were in antiquity than defending Romans were Nordics (I guess they are Italians).

Jana

02-22-2018, 05:02 PM

Actually in his case and Vid Flumina it's more related to the discomfort of admiting modern North Italians are substantially Germanic admixed and different than they were in antiquity than defending Romans were Nordics (I guess they are Italians).

I think he tries to say that these very southern shifted north Italians aren't necessary representative for the region (which was suposed to have lot of Celtic ancestry) and that isotope values aren't ultimate proof for their nativity.

Scar

02-22-2018, 05:04 PM

I think he tries to say that these very southern shifted north Italians aren't necessary representative for the region (which was suposed to have lot of Celtic ancestry) and that isotope values aren't ultimate proof for their nativity.

Yes, and I guessed why he tries to say this in my post (the discomfort stuff...). I agree they could be atypical, I just think the reactions are funny from exactly the type of people that generally have agendas.

Percivalle

02-22-2018, 05:06 PM

Romans were nordic :ranger

Romans were the inhabitants of Rome.

Actually in his case and Vid Flumina it's more related to the discomfort of admiting modern North Italians are substantially Germanic admixed and different than they were in antiquity than defending Romans were Nordics (I guess they are Italians).

Thinking that the north-south cline in Italy is due to Germanic settlers is not less dumb that thinking Romans were Nordics.

Jana

02-22-2018, 05:07 PM

Romans were the inhabitants of Rome .

It was sarcastic comment.

wvwvw

02-22-2018, 05:17 PM

Too bad that Busby 2015 disagrees with you.

As for strontium isotopes, genetically Scandinavian Longobards also had local values:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?228562-Longobard-DNA-from-Italy-amp-Pannonia&p=4982354&viewfull=1#post4982354

Keep in mind that Northern Africa in Roman times was white with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the Levant as recent DNA research has proven. It was populated by Greeks Romans and Phoenicians, and the same is true for large parts of Egypt, Syria and Palestine.

Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens only. Therefore the Ninth Legion for example would have not contained a single black African soldier let alone any northern Europeans.

Auxilia were recruited from existing city states that were part of the empire and would have been completely homogeneous in ethnicity.

Black Africans if there were any, would have come under Numeri who were mercenaries recruited from outside the empire, classified as barbarians and under the command of their own aristocrats and officers.

Scar

02-22-2018, 05:29 PM

Why are you so butthurted?
He just having an opinion based on the facts that the ancient samples don't cluster with the modern South Italian population.

Actually it's the contrary and he is trying to find excuses to this, not me. I don't know if you are familiar with him but member Peterski (Litvin) is known for doing everything he can and trying every kind of sophistry to sustain his agendas. I admited since the beggining that the South Italian-like samples could be atypical, I am not the one crying all around here. I'm just discussing normally.

I just needed to clarify why a fucking Pole care so much about it. Not that I expect something better from Slav Fyromians who call themselves ''Macedonians'' (hahaha).

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:36 PM

Better tell me what a fucking Abkhaz is doing on a European forum.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 05:39 PM

Slaves in Italy were mostly native Italians, by the end of the 1st century BC something like 40% of Italy's population was made up by slaves.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:41 PM

CEU+GBR is not a Germanic admixture. Celts and Proto-Italics will also score mostly CEU+GBR in this analysis. Even Slavic "Avars" - AV1 and AV2 - score mostly CEU+GBR, as you can see:

https://image.ibb.co/meh27c/Screen_Hunter_2221_Feb_21_09_04.jpg

Berlko2

02-22-2018, 05:43 PM

Is there any thread/site with Northern Italian DNA results? I'm curious. A bunch of people I see in Northwestern Italy have nordic traits. My grandma was light blond with blue eyes, she was tall and had a nordic nose.

I wonder how many Scandinavian have random northern Italian who got their DNA tested.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:45 PM

Slaves in Italy were mostly native Italians, by the end of the 1st century BC something like 40% of Italy's population was made up by slaves.

Yeah and they were mostly from Middle Eastern and North African provinces of the empire. :)

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:45 PM

Scar

02-22-2018, 05:47 PM

Yeah and they were mostly from Middle Eastern and North African provinces of the empire. :)

hahahahahaha

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:47 PM

So according to the strontium isotope values also the Scandinavian-like people were local and native north Italians.

Of course. Strontium isotopes accumulate in your teeth during childhood.

It shows where you were growing up, not where your parents came from.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:53 PM

Was there a Jewish community in Collegno in Roman times? As we know, Jews plot close to South Italy. Jews were a large percent of the population of the Roman Empire at that time. Check this website:

http://www.theopavlidis.com/MidEast/part10.htm

"Not only the number of Greeks peaked during the Hellenistic period, so did the number of Jews. According to the article on Proselytes of the Encyclopedia Judaica [EJ2007, vol. 16, pp. 587-594] there was active proselytization in ancient times and even a case of "mass and forced conversion to Judaism of the Edomites by John Hyrcanus". Josephus has written that "the inhabitants of both Greek and barbarian cities evinced a great zeal for Judaism" (Contra Apion, 2:39 as quoted in Encyclopedia Judaica [ibid]). As a result Jews were far more numerous in proportion to the population than they are today. There are estimates that "Jews (were) one tenth of the population of the empire as a whole" [EJ2007, article on Europe, vol. 6, pp. 554-555] and in Greece and Asia Minor the proportion may have been as high as one fifth (according to the historian Salo W. Baron)."

Peterski

02-22-2018, 05:58 PM

They could also be Christians.

A lot of Early Christians in Italy were descended from immigrants from Eastern Provinces, rather than being local converts.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 06:02 PM

Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens only.

Percentage of Non-Romans was increasing also in the army, which started to employ a lot of "barbarians". At the beginning ethnically Italic people were 4/5 of all soldiers, later % of foreigners in the army was increasing. In 212 AD all free inhabitants of the Empire regardless of their origin were granted Roman Citizenship. This is what I found on Roman Army Talk forum:

https://www.romanarmytalk.com

"Based on Epigraphics (Keppie 2000 / Birley 1979) concerning the early Imperial era from Augustus to Claudius (27BC-41AD) the Legion ratio was 2/3 - 4/5 Italian Legionaries; By Claudius/Nero (41AD-69AD) the ratio dropped to 1/2 of Italian Legionaries and in the era (69AD-117AD) Italian Legionaries were 1/5 in the West and 1/10 in the East (Alston 1995); Keeping in mind however that the "provincial" Legionaries were often of Italic stock (that is Veterans/Citizens), and Roman Italica (post 117AD) still provided the single largest contingent of any province in the Empire (Yann Le Bohec 1989), Centurions were still overwhelmingly Italic (Yann Le Bohec 1989) and the Praetorians were exclusively Italic (until Septimus Severus) and Mark Aurel even raised two complete/exclusive Italic Legions (Italica II/Italica III) for the Marcomannic-wars; In 212 AD Constitutio Antoniniana granted all peoples of the Roman world Citizenship (except slaves) and this century was marked by civil-wars, usurpators, secessionist empires and ended with the Tetrarchy and Rome no longer being the Capitol."

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 06:03 PM

Yeah and they were mostly from Middle Eastern and North African provinces of the empire. :)

you wuz not kangz n shiet, nordicist retard :)
It was normal back then when a people was conquered, its population was enslaved, in Italy most of them were Italians. Slaves were captured from all over the empire: Gaul, Hispania, North Africa, Syria, Germany, Britannia, the Balkans, Greece etc. in a society like that slaves didn't last for long.

Peterski

02-22-2018, 06:06 PM

Peterski

02-22-2018, 06:09 PM

We have Early Bronze Age Bell Beaker samples from North Italy.

They were R1b and autosomally similar to modern North Italians.

Ajeje Brazorf

02-22-2018, 06:13 PM

So 40% of the population didn't last for long ??? :)

Do you know, that most of slaves were eventually freed? Especially as Christianity was spreading throughout the Empire, people were granting freedom to their slaves. Because slavery was not in agreement with Christian teachings. Jesus told people to love each other, not to enslave each other.

Most of those slaves became free citizens eventually.

BTW - Christianity was initially spreading with migrations of Christians, not with conversions.

Most of Early Christians were autosomally Levantine people. And they migrated to Italy.

It depends, those who worked in the latifundia, in caves or in galleys didn't procreate for sure. Slaves were mostly from the enslaved populations of Italy, modern-day central Italians do not descend from that mass of imperial slaves. Keep talking bullshit, nothing strange for a nordicist.