Did the ancient Greeks genocide, or assimilate, the Siculi of Sicily?

[Sikeliot]

Ever since I began researching Sicilian history and studying the DNA results of Sicilians, I have come across a persistent historical footnote in nearly all online sources, and even across anthrofora, and it always goes something like this:

Sicily and Malta were inhabited by an ancient people called the Sicanians, the people who built the Malta's Megalithic Temples. It is unknown what they would have been like genetically, but my best guess is they would have been similar to Minoans. The Minoans were, according to mythology, in contact with them, such as in stories like Daedalus and Icarus, and while we cannot treat ancient mythology as a historical source, it does suggest that they were in contact with the Aegean.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JiIIjSTDCM4/UZEfVCaTlGI/AAAAAAAAIyY/RBvpCG7a_kY/s1600/7a753cbd2417521537a3469abe8ccea92667737087-1367955467-5189580b-620x348.jpg

The arrival of the Siculi in eastern Sicily and the arrival of the Elymians in western Sicily pushed the Sicanians toward the center of the island.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/Sicily_prehellenic_topographic_map.svg/1200px-Sicily_prehellenic_topographic_map.svg.png

The Phoenicians/Carthaginians merged with the Elymians in western Sicily. The Elymians sided with the Phoenicians over the Greeks.

Some of the Sicanians, whose territory overlapped both with the Greek and Phoenician settlements, being a more advanced culture who had been receiving Aegean influences even before the Greek colonists arrived, were peacefully Hellenized and others are believed to have assimilated into Punic culture. Any remaining descendants of the Sicanians would have been overridden by later waves of migration: Arab era settlement from the Middle East, Byzantine Greek settlement, and so on.

The Siculi on the other hand fought vigorously against the Greeks and were pushed further and further inland, into the region that is now Enna, the eastern part of Palermo, and the inland east. They were eventually defeated by the Greek colonies and ceased to exist as a distinct identity.

The question becomes, were the Siculi mostly Hellenized, or were they pushed out of Sicily and/or killed? If we believe the commonly cited history, we would believe that, at least, coastal Sicilians have almost no ancestry from the Siculi.

Based on genetics, the people in the region inhabited by the Siculi in ancient times, today are very close to Cretan and Dodecanese Greeks, and are much less similar to central Italians, where the Siculi were believed to come from. Haplogroup R1b is common in eastern Sicily but is often R1b-L23 which is of West Asian origins. I do not see any strong evidence of their presence in our DNA today.

[Livin]

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.

[Sikeliot]

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.


I would agree with this in general, but the Siculi were resistant to Greek colonization and tried many times (unsuccessfully) to drive the Greeks out of Sicily. It is known that, at least, they lost entire control of coastal Sicily, and the reason for this is often stated that the Greeks pushed them inland and simply drove them out.

We eventually ended up with this (and that empty inland area is where the native populations ended up):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg/1200px-Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg.png

[Livin]

I would agree with this in general, but the Siculi were resistant to Greek colonization and tried many times (unsuccessfully) to drive the Greeks out of Sicily. It is known that, at least, they lost entire control of coastal Sicily, and the reason for this is often stated that the Greeks pushed them inland and simply drove them out.

We eventually ended up with this (and that empty inland area is where the native populations ended up):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg/1200px-Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg.png


And some of them moved to sardinia right?

[FinalFlash]

I dont think they were active in committing genocides. If anything, history shows us that they've preferred to assimilate the natives into Greek culture and religion. Sure you can argue this to be cultural genocide but as far as indiscriminantly wiping out entire populations through organized killings? Probably a bit of a stretch.

[catgeorge]

There were migrations to Italy they didn't go there en masse. Even under Ottoman occupation Greeks existed and large portions of mainland Greece was self ruled.

[Proto-Shaman]

Google Tyrsennoi / Teresh / Tursha, they were ancient seafarers, and settled in Anatolia, Sicily, Lebanon and North Africa.

[Proto-Shaman]

Interesting, Sikeloi sounds like Szekely, which basically means "Sak land".

[Sikeliot]

I definitely think there is some truth to the notion that the coasts of Sicily saw a reduction in the indigenous populations, and that to some degree they were in fact pushed inland. I do not think they were entirely genocided, but I would say their ancestry definitely does not contribute to the majority of ours today. Though the inland was subject to heavy waves of MENA migration later so it would have eroded the original populations, too.

[Joso]

I don't know anything about that but i voted in the third option, that all populations where reduced

[MinervaItalica]

Genocide is a big word. I don't think so. The Greeks who came to colonize the coasts of South Italy were poors fleeing from famine, poverty and some expelled from their country.

"Ours"? :confused:


There were migrations to Italy they didn't go there en masse. Even under Ottoman occupation Greeks existed and large portions of mainland Greece was self ruled.

^This

Unfortunately some stupid users preferred to call it "invasion". :picard1:

[Tauromachos]

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.

This^

[Tauromachos]

I definitely think there is some truth to the notion that the coasts of Sicily saw a reduction in the indigenous populations, and that to some degree they were in fact pushed inland. I do not think they were entirely genocided, but I would say their ancestry definitely does not contribute to the majority of ours today. Though the inland was subject to heavy waves of MENA migration later so it would have eroded the original populations, too.

First how can we determine what the DNA of the Siculi was.

Like which haplogroups.

Since it seems to be studied based on Sicilians DNA which immagration movements from Greek Mainland,Greek Islands and Near East took place in Sicily it should
be possible to determine then if some of Sicilians with Greek ancestry have also Siculi ancestry.
If yes then it gives a hint at assimilation.

[Sikeliot]

First how can we determine what the DNA of the Siculi was.

Like which haplogroups.

Since it seems to be studied based on Sicilians DNA which immagration movements from Greek Mainland,Greek Islands and Near East took place in Sicily it should
be possible to determine then if some of Sicilians with Greek ancestry have also Siculi ancestry.
If yes then it gives a hint at assimilation.

Different parts of east Sicily plot with different parts of Greece.

NE Sicily is genetically the same as Crete/Dodecanese while SE Sicily is intermediate to mainland Greece.

Greeks had, whether in ancient times or Byzantine, a presence in all Sicily but western Sicily displays more recent MENA with in some cases possible West European input in minor amounts.

I personally don't see Eastern Sicilians shifting toward central Italy but we don't know if Siculi were even comparable to today's central Italians.

[StonyArabia]

The Greeks just did hellenization and assimilated others to their culture. The only exception would probably the Greek invasion of Persia

[Tauromachos]

Different parts of east Sicily plot with different parts of Greece.

NE Sicily is genetically the same as Crete/Dodecanese while SE Sicily is intermediate to mainland Greece.

Greeks had, whether in ancient times or Byzantine, a presence in all Sicily but western Sicily displays more recent MENA with in some cases possible West European input in minor amounts.

I personally don't see Eastern Sicilians shifting toward central Italy but we don't know if Siculi were even comparable to today's central Italians.

If we don't have DNA samples from ancient Sicanians as we have from ancient Mycaneaens and Minoans how can we tell.

Maybe they were West Med"Sardinian like"

[Bosniensis]

Greeks colonized Sicily (when there was nobody there), as well as the rest of Italy (along with Anatolians).
Why would Greece genocide their own people?

[Ajeje Brazorf]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JiIIjSTDCM4/UZEfVCaTlGI/AAAAAAAAIyY/RBvpCG7a_kY/s1600/7a753cbd2417521537a3469abe8ccea92667737087-1367955467-5189580b-620x348.jpg

Wtf? Why this 5,600 year old Neolithic Maltese woman? Sicanians had nothing to do with Malta.

[Tauromachos]

Wtf? Why this 5,600 year old Neolithic Maltese woman? Sicanians had nothing to do with Malta.

This woman looks like Pontid with just brown skincolor

[Ajeje Brazorf]

This woman looks like Pontid with just brown skincolor

I don't find these reconstructions very reliable.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

The Phoenicians/Carthaginians merged with the Elymians in western Sicily. The Elymians sided with the Phoenicians over the Greeks.

Some of the Sicanians, whose territory overlapped both with the Greek and Phoenician settlements, being a more advanced culture who had been receiving Aegean influences even before the Greek colonists arrived, were peacefully Hellenized and others are believed to have assimilated into Punic culture. Any remaining descendants of the Sicanians would have been overridden by later waves of migration: Arab era settlement from the Middle East, Byzantine Greek settlement, and so on.

The Siculi on the other hand fought vigorously against the Greeks and were pushed further and further inland, into the region that is now Enna, the eastern part of Palermo, and the inland east. They were eventually defeated by the Greek colonies and ceased to exist as a distinct identity.

The question becomes, were the Siculi mostly Hellenized, or were they pushed out of Sicily and/or killed? If we believe the commonly cited history, we would believe that, at least, coastal Sicilians have almost no ancestry from the Siculi.

Based on genetics, the people in the region inhabited by the Siculi in ancient times, today are very close to Cretan and Dodecanese Greeks, and are much less similar to central Italians, where the Siculi were believed to come from. Haplogroup R1b is common in eastern Sicily but is often R1b-L23 which is of West Asian origins. I do not see any strong evidence of their presence in our DNA today.

The Phoenicians had 4 cities in Sicily and their genetic footprint is therefore insignificant, the Carthaginians were present not only in Sicily but also in Iberia, Sardinia and Corsica, in these places genetically they left nothing as in Sicily.
The Muslim presence in Sicily did not last long, and had no settlements from the Middle East at that time.
R-M269 (R-L23) has been found in Yamna culture and is also common in the Balkans and in Russia, so it is not exactly West Asian.

[Tauromachos]

The Phoenicians had 4 cities in Sicily and their genetic footprint is therefore insignificant, the Carthaginians were present not only in Sicily but also in Iberia, Sardinia and Corsica, in these places genetically they left nothing as in Sicily.
The Muslim presence in Sicily did not last long, and had no settlements from the Middle East at that time.
R-M269 (R-L23) has been found in Yamna culture and is also common in the Balkans and in Russia, so it is not exactly West Asian.

I also don't understand why he thinks the Phoenicians merged with the locals and assimilated them and the bad Greeks allegedly genocided them.

The Phoenicians were not peacefull people they were pretty warlike and brutal.

[Tacitus]

The Phoenicians had 4 cities in Sicily and their genetic footprint is therefore insignificant, the Carthaginians were present not only in Sicily but also in Iberia, Sardinia and Corsica, in these places genetically they left nothing as in Sicily.
The Muslim presence in Sicily did not last long, and had no settlements from the Middle East at that time.
R-M269 (R-L23) has been found in Yamna culture and is also common in the Balkans and in Russia, so it is not exactly West Asian.

IMO R-L23 in Sicily is likely connected to Magna Graecia and possibly earlier movements from the Balkans and Anatolia.


I also don't understand why he thinks the Phoenicians merged with the locals and assimilated them and the bad Greeks allegedly genocided them.

The Phoenicians were not peacefull people they were pretty warlike and brutal.

Phoenicians were mostly interested in trade rather than conquest and their settlements were primarily used as ports of call for their ships as they traded throughout the Mediterranean (the Sicilian ones being no exception); these trade routes even went as far as modern-day Britain IIRC.

[Tauromachos]

IMO R-L23 in Sicily is likely connected to Magna Graecia and possibly earlier movements from the Balkans and Anatolia.



Phoenicians were mostly interested in trade rather than conquest and their settlements were primarily used as ports of call for their ships as they traded throughout the Mediterranean (the Sicilian ones being no exception); these trade routes even went as far as modern-day Britain IIRC.

Nevertheless they were violent and brutal as well there were also Phoenicians attacking Greeks settlements and also the people in the Levant today are not that peaceful.

And being occupied with trade doesn mean you are not violent.
Most of todays wars are fought because of trade.

[Hylates]

Was Sicily colonized by the Greeks during the ''Dark Ages'' ? I mean was it colonized after Mycenaean civilization ?

[Tauromachos]

Was Sicily colonized by the Greeks during the ''Dark Ages'' ? I mean was it colonized after Mycenaean civilization ?

Yes

Both Dorian and Ionian Greeks founded colonies in Sicily

[Hylates]

Yes

Both Dorian and Ionian Greeks founded colonies in Sicily

Hmmm . If the Dorians forced their expansion on Peloponnese they could have done the same in Sicily too . I mean we don't have to call it a genocide but there is a chance they killed a number of the local population . As far as i remember most of the Achaeans/Mycenaeans fled their lands due to the Dorians . The Sicilians could have done the same .

[Tauromachos]

Hmmm . If the Dorians forced their expansion on Peloponnese they could have done the same in Sicily too . I mean we don't have to call it a genocide but there is a chance they killed a number of the local population . As far as i remember most of the Achaeans/Mycenaeans fled their lands due to the Dorians . The Sicilians could have done the same .

First of all i don't buy that the Dorians were responsible for all bad things or did everything by force.
This is the superstitous singleminded blame it all on one strawman or black sheep mentality.



In Sicily the Dorian colonies flourished and also had alot of cultural contributions.

For example Archimidis was born in Syracuse which was Dorian.
Archytas was from Tarent which was a Spartan colony in Apulia.

Now tell me about any contributions to Math,Philosophy and Science in ancient Sicily coming from the parts that were Phoenician.

Actually concerning genocides and Greeks i agree with him

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.

Whereas in general the Romans were much more imperialist than the Greeks and about them its known
that they genocided or almost genocided certain people.

Don't forget that Phoenicians weren't faint hearted or peaceful people neither just as they aren't today

The old Testament is filled with stories of wars,invasions,slaughters and tribal conflicts between Near Eastern
Groups

Lebanese gangs in Australia are known for violent thug behaviour and in the crime statistics far ahead of
Greek immigrants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwnlgE1GPjk

[Sturmgewehr]

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyqDxa2k3w

[Tauromachos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyqDxa2k3w

Ade gamisu

[Hylates]

First of all i don't buy that the Dorians were responsible for all bad things or did everything by force.
This is the superstitous singleminded blame it all on one strawman or black sheep mentality.



In Sicily the Dorian colonies flourished and also had alot of cultural contributions.

For example Archimidis was born in Syracuse which was Dorian.
Archytas was from Tarent which was a Spartan colony in Apulia.

Now tell me about any contributions to Math,Philosophy and Science in ancient Sicily coming from the parts that were Phoenician.

Actually concerning genocides and Greeks i agree with him


Whereas in general the Romans were much more imperialist than the Greeks and about them its known
that they genocided or almost genocided certain people.

Don't forget that Phoenicians weren't faint hearted or peaceful people neither just as they aren't today

The old Testament is filled with stories of wars,invasions,slaughters and tribal conflicts between Near Eastern
Groups

Lebanese gangs in Australia or known for violent thug behaviour and in the crime statistics far ahead of
Greek immigrants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwnlgE1GPjk

Well yes , colonies there could have flourished , but that doesn't mean the Dorians did not force their way in at the beginning . The Dorians did Not annihilate civilization but they applied their one with their ways . Phoenicians were traders and their Colonies were made for trading . They were playing another type of a game . For them ..... Wealth = Power ;)

[Tauromachos]

Well yes , colonies there could have flourished , but that doesn't mean the Dorians did not force their way in at the beginning . The Dorians did Not annihilate civilization but they applied their one with their ways . Phoenicians were traders and their Colonies were made for trading . They were playing another type of a game . For them ..... Wealth = Power ;)

Well i don't believe there was something in particular about the Dorians that makes it more likely to believe that they genocided these people.
;)

[Hylates]

Well i don't believe there was something in particular about the Dorians that makes it more likely to believe that they genocided these people.
;)

I Don't think they committed any genocide _ but there is a high chance they enslaved the locals..Just like they did it to the remaining Achaeans in Peloponnese . The so called helots ...

[Tauromachos]

I Don't think they committed any genocide _ but there is a high chance they enslaved the locals..Just like they did it to the remaining Achaeans in Peloponnese . The so called helots ...

Maybe

But this was practised not only by the Dorians but a common practice by alot of Ancient people.

Also trade of Phoenicians involved Slave trade.

Maybe the Phoenicians bought some of these enslaved Sicanians and traded them out of Sicily

[Sikeliot]

Wtf? Why this 5,600 year old Neolithic Maltese woman? Sicanians had nothing to do with Malta.

The only people in Malta in that era were Sicanians from Sicily...

[Ajeje Brazorf]

The only people in Malta in that era were Sicanians from Sicily...

The only thing we know is that apparently in Malta there were settlers from Sicily.
The few and fragmented historical informations on the "Sicanians" come mainly from Greek historiographers (which obviously can not be accurate), and according to them they were people from Iberia.

[Tauromachos]

The only thing we know is that apparently in Malta there were settlers from Sicily.
The few and fragmented historical informations on the "Sicanians" come mainly from Greek historiographers (which obviously can not be accurate), and according to them they were people from Iberia.

Why can't they be accurate

Is it impossible that they came from Iberia.?

[Ajeje Brazorf]

Why can't they be accurate? Is it impossible that they came from Iberia?

Because we know nothing about them and we have little information, there were different opinions about their origin, not just the Iberian one.

[Tauromachos]

Because we know nothing about them and we have little information, there were different opinions about their origin, not just the Iberian one.

Whats your thought about Sicanians being West Med"Sardinian like"?

In this case it might be hard to determine their contribution to the Sicilian genepole or if they mixed with Greek settlers or not though since West Med
was a significant part of Greeks ancestry as well.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

Whats your thought about Sicanians being West Med"Sardinian like"?

In this case it might be hard to determine their contribution to the Sicilian genepole or if the mixed with Greek settlers or not since West Med
was a significant part of Greeks ancestry as well.

Unfortunately, I have no idea what the ancient peoples of Sicily were like. Without ancient DNA one can only make speculations.

[Tauromachos]

Unfortunately, I have no idea what the ancient peoples of Sicily were like. Without ancient DNA one can only make speculations.


This is what i think as well

The same is also the problem for Ancient Greeks concerning the Dorians,Ionians e.c.t

The officialy known samples that have been studied well are from Mycanaeans and Minoans

[Tacitus]

Nevertheless they were violent and brutal as well there were also Phoenicians attacking Greeks settlements and also the people in the Levant today are not that peaceful.

And being occupied with trade doesn mean you are not violent.
Most of todays wars are fought because of trade.

Well yeah, but the point I was trying to make was that there probably weren't enough of them to totally displace and/or wipe out the indigenous groups they came into contact with in Sicily and alter the genepool in any significant way (nor it seems were they interested in doing so).

[Tauromachos]

Well yeah, but the point I was trying to make was that there probably weren't enough of them to totally displace and/or wipe out the indigenous groups they came into contact with in Sicily and alter the genepool in any significant way.

Displacement and altering the genepool are two different things though

The latter would mean assimilation of these people by the Greek settlers.

[Arjana]

There is a myth created in this forum, especially by Sikeliot ( that will continue to bump this threads until this forum exists it seems) that entire Sicily and southern Italy was colonised by ancient hellens.
.Ancient hellens were not warlike populations and they settled with permission from locals.

In this case they colonised just the shores of Sicily and southern Italy and didn't actually play a huge genetic role.

People because of their ignorance tend to forget that most of southern Italy was colonised by Illyrian Messapian tribes and Sambrian italic tribes.

For some reasons they are not mentioned much.

The reason why southern italians don't look similar to Albanians is because a part of southern italians are genetically influenced by levantine slaves brought by roman empire

[Ajeje Brazorf]

The officialy known samples that have been studied well are from Mycanaeans and Minoans

It's even difficult to say how Mycenaeans were specifically, since our observations are based only on 4 samples that varied genetically. We need dozens and dozens of samples from each historical period, and this also applies to southern Italy.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

The reason why southern italians don't look similar to Albanians is because a part of southern italians are genetically influenced by levantine slaves brought by roman empire

This is just another myth.

[Arjana]

There were migrations to Italy they didn't go there en masse. Even under Ottoman occupation Greeks existed and large portions of mainland Greece was self ruled.

The only regions that were granted semi independence and self governance By law by the Ottoman Empire were Nothern Albanian Highlands, Drenica valley in western Kosovo, Laberia region in southern Albania (including Himara) and north montenegro Highlands.

If you are talking about some mountain regions of Thesally, most of them were Vlachs ( thesaly was called Great wllahia) and they had to pay taxes to Ali Pashe Tepelena for 35 years ( to him and not to the Sultan).

maybe mani region was some how self governed

[Arjana]

This is just another myth.

They have the highest genetic affinity with Levantines , together with some Greeks out of All populations in Europe.

[Tacitus]

They have the highest genetic affinity with Levantines , together with some Greeks out of All populations in Europe.

The "affinity" is really more towards Anatolia and the Caucasus, and these large east-west migrations ended with the Magna Graecia colonization.


While the contribution of the pre-Neolithic European hunter-gatherers—which is relevant in other European countries (Skoglund et al., 2012 Skoglund P, Malmström H, Raghavan M, Storå J, Hall P, Willerslev E, Gilbert MT, et al. 2012. Origins and genetic legacy of Neolithic farmers and hunter-gatherers in Europe. Science 336:466–469.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar])—is only moderate in Southern Italy and Sicily, the most important layers of the ‘continuum’ seem to refer to later events. They are (1) a huge Neolithic-like genetic component (∼50%) and (2) a Bronze Age component incorporating a significant Caucasus-related ancestry (∼24%). If the former is obviously related to migrations that spread Neolithic technologies towards the West, the second one suggests a less known net of Bronze-Age population movements along the Eastern Mediterranean shores through Anatolia.
...

The ‘Mediterranean genetic continuum’, shared between Sicily, Southern Italy and a wider Mediterranean area, traces its origins to Neolithic and Bronze Age layers. It took shape along thousands of years of East–West migrations, of which the Greek conquest of the area (Magna Graecia) was probably only the last of a long series. On the other hand, the differentiation identified by surnames took place later, probably starting from the late Middle Ages and continuing until recent times, without erasing the underlying genetic homogeneity. Since the surname structure is clearly shaped by geography, we may hypothesise that it mainly originated from low-rate, short-distance population mobility, which finally resulted in an isolation-by-distance-like pattern.

[Sikeliot]

The "affinity" is towards Anatolia and the Caucasus, and these large east-west migrations ended with the Magna Graecia colonization.

So why do mainland Greeks fall outside of this cluster then? I mean, I think we know the answer. But clearly there is some post-neolithic Levantine and North African admixture in south Italy and the Aegean islands that is not/was never present on mainland Greece even before the Slavs.

[Sikeliot]

They have the highest genetic affinity with Levantines , together with some Greeks out of All populations in Europe.

What is important to note is the Levantine affinity is not part of the ancient core, simply it exists because Sicily, far south Italy, and some Aegean islands received a secondary wave of migration that did not reach mainland Greece nor extend to far north into Italy.

But some people here want to paint it as Neolithic Anatolian migration. They can think whatever they wish.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

They have the highest genetic affinity with Levantines , together with some Greeks out of All populations in Europe.

If I differ from you, it does not mean that I'm descended from the sperm of freed Syrian slaves, dear "Arjana". That of the Levantine slaves is a bullshit invented two centuries ago without any foundation in reality, and as far as I am concerned the Romans took slaves from any part of their empire, not just from the east. Then in the south there were no Roman colonies so strategic and numerous to be filled with slaves from distant areas. Most of the slaves as well as in the various cities were concentrated in Rome which was the heart of the empire. If the people of central Italy do not descend from slaves, why should I do?


People because of their ignorance tend to forget that most of southern Italy was colonised by Illyrian Messapian tribes and Sambrian italic tribes.

You are no less ignorant, you should know in reality that Iapygians were only in Apulia and in a small part of Lucania (where I am originally from), and therefore did not cover the whole south. It's not even completely sure if they came from Illyria. Lol who are the "Sambrians"?

[Tauromachos]

If I differ from you, it does not mean that I'm descended from the sperm of freed Syrian slaves, dear "Arjana". That of the Levantine slaves is a bullshit invented two centuries ago without any foundation in reality, and as far as I am concerned the Romans took slaves from any part of their empire, not just from the east.

The Romans had alot of slaves from the Balkans as well.

The famous Roman slave Spartacus who later revolted against the Romans was a Thracian.

Also alot of native people from Germany and Britain were enslaved by the Romans when they conquered these areas.

[Tacitus]

So why do mainland Greeks fall outside of this cluster then? I mean, I think we know the answer. But clearly there is some post-neolithic Levantine and North African admixture in south Italy and the Aegean islands that is not/was never present on mainland Greece even before the Slavs.

Because mainland Greeks have higher amounts of "Northern" influences, whether it's straight-up Indo-European or it's from the later Slavic migrations. If there was a significant Bronze Age Levantine pulse, the author I quoted would've mentioned it (Boattini et al 2018). Instead he specifically refers to it as Caucasian-like.

North African admixture in southern Italy really would've been only confined to Sicily, and even then it's a relatively low percentage (4.7% per Sazzini et al).

[Tacitus]

The Romans had alot of slaves from the Balkans as well.

The famous Roman slave Spartacus who later revolted against the Romans was a Thracian.

Also alot of native people from Germany and Britain were enslaved by the Romans when they conquered these areas.

Yeah but don't you know that all the Germanic, Gaulish, and Balkan slaves were sent to northern Italy, but the Middle Eastern ones were all shipped to the south? /sarc

[Tauromachos]

Yeah but don't you know that all the Germanic, Gaulish, and Balkan slaves were sent to northern Italy, but the Middle Eastern ones were all shipped to the south? /sarc

No didn't hear about that

I though most slaves were concentrated in Rome.

They needed some Gladiators in the Colosseum to fight the Lions.
I think the robust Balkanoids from Alba highlands would have just done fine for this Job :p

[Ajeje Brazorf]

What is important to note is the Levantine affinity is not part of the ancient core, simply it exists because Sicily, far south Italy, and some Aegean islands received a secondary wave of migration that did not reach mainland Greece nor extend to far north into Italy.

But some people here want to paint it as Neolithic Anatolian migration. They can think whatever they wish.

^
Lol, said by someone who makes 3493520 threads on Sicilians making them pass as Armenoids just because he's himself an Armenoid, very reliable.
Do not worry anyway, ancient DNA from southern Italy will prove you wrong and all 100,000 posts about Sicilians, S. Italians being Europeanized Levantines will be in vain.

[Sikeliot]

^
Lol, said by someone who makes 3493520 threads on Sicilians making them pass as Armenoids just because he's himself an Armenoid, very reliable.
Do not worry anyway, ancient DNA from southern Italy will prove you wrong and all 100,000 posts about Sicilians, S. Italians being Europeanized Levantines will be in vain.


So you think the ancient DNA will show significant Near Eastern affinity, then?

[Tauromachos]

^
Lol, said by someone who makes 3493520 threads on Sicilians making them pass as Armenoids just because he's himself an Armenoid, very reliable.
Do not worry anyway, ancient DNA from southern Italy will prove you wrong and all 100,000 posts about Sicilians, S. Italians being Europeanized Levantines will be in vain.

Hahaha nevertheless he does not look Armenoid

He has even R1a haplo

He looks realy average Italian
A bit like this guy though less masculin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syc78JzHGTs

[catgeorge]

The only regions that were granted semi independence and self governance By law by the Ottoman Empire were Nothern Albanian Highlands, Drenica valley in western Kosovo, Laberia region in southern Albania (including Himara) and north montenegro Highlands.

If you are talking about some mountain regions of Thesally, most of them were Vlachs ( thesaly was called Great wllahia) and they had to pay taxes to Ali Pashe Tepelena for 35 years ( to him and not to the Sultan).

maybe mani region was some how self governed

Not really - the islands for one was largely self ruled.

[Sikeliot]

Hahaha nevertheless he does not look Armenoid

He has even R1a haplo

He looks realy average Italian
A bit like this guy though less masculin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syc78JzHGTs


I actually do not have feminine features at all.

Anyway can we keep it on topic: did the ancient Greeks genocide the Siculi or not. Stop getting personal about my business.

[Sikeliot]

The only thing we know is that apparently in Malta there were settlers from Sicily.
The few and fragmented historical informations on the "Sicanians" come mainly from Greek historiographers (which obviously can not be accurate), and according to them they were people from Iberia.

It is highly unlikely that any large part of Sicilian DNA is Iberian.

[Tauromachos]

I actually do not have feminine features at all.

Anyway can we keep it on topic: did the ancient Greeks genocide the Siculi or not. Stop getting personal about my business.

I don't mean you look feminin but you look much younger more boylike.
Yes of course discussion ended here from my side back to topic

[Sikeliot]

I don't mean you look feminin but you look much younger more boylike.
Yes of course discussion ended here from my side back to topic

What we see, and I don't understand why some people are intent on denying it, is not all of the Near Eastern affinity in Sicily is Neolithic. Some of it must be from the accumulation of DNA from Phoenicians, Arabs, Berbers even if individually each of these only contributed a small amount.

[Tauromachos]

What we see, and I don't understand why some people are intent on denying it, is not all of the Near Eastern affinity in Sicily is Neolithic. Some of it must be from the accumulation of DNA from Phoenicians, Arabs, Berbers even if individually each of these only contributed a small amount.

I concur with this

At least the Phoenician signature in Western Sicily is an established fact

[Ajeje Brazorf]

So you think the ancient DNA will show significant Near Eastern affinity, then?

It'll be a surprise. In any case, I'm interested in a more recent period like the Iron Age, I think that the Calabrese of that period were not so different from the current ones. An Eastern Mediterranean component was also present in the Minoans, and therefore has a much older origin for the Cretians, for example.

[Tauromachos]

It'll be a surprise. In any case, I'm interested in a more recent period like the Iron Age, I think that the Calabrese of that period were not so different from the current ones. An Eastern Mediterranean component was also present in the Minoans, and therefore has a much older origin for the Cretians, for example.

The J2a in Sicily and Calabria came from Greek colonizers.

And Crete is the place in Greece where this haplogroup peaks the most.


The high incidence of J2a in Italy is owed in great part to the migration of the Etruscans from western Anatolia to central and northern Italy, and to the Greek colonisation of southern Italy. However both the Etruscans and Greeks would have carried many other Y-DNA lineages, including G2a, J1, R1b-Z2103, T1a, and probably also E-M34. J2a levels would have been higher among the Greeks than the Etruscans, and particularly among the insular Greeks that colonised Magna Graecia.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

At least the Phoenician signature in Western Sicily is an established fact

Their genetic heritage is 0, they only had 4 cities. If we follow the same reasoning then half of Europe is Roman.

[Sikeliot]

Their genetic heritage is 0, they only had 4 cities. If we follow the same reasoning then half of Europe is Roman.

The Carthaginians conquered the western 1/3 of the island and surely had some genetic impact. I disagree with you that it is not present. Funny how you say wait for genetic data but then you draw conclusions we cannot prove such as the above...

[Sikeliot]

The J2a in Sicily and Calabria came from Greek colonizers.

Not all of it. In western Sicily at least most J2 does not match the subclades common to Albania and Greece.

[Sikeliot]

It'll be a surprise. In any case, I'm interested in a more recent period like the Iron Age, I think that the Calabrese of that period were not so different from the current ones. An Eastern Mediterranean component was also present in the Minoans, and therefore has a much older origin for the Cretians, for example.


So are you saying you think an Eastern Mediterranean component was, or was not, present in prehistoric Sicily and Calabria? If you had to guess.

[Tauromachos]

Not all of it. In western Sicily at least most J2 does not match the subclades common to Albania and Greece.

You don't understand the J2a i'm talking about is not the one which Greeks have in common with the Balkans but is the one in common with Iran and Jews and it peaks in Cretans.

[Sikeliot]

You don't understand the J2a i'm talking about is not the one which Greeks have in common with the Balkans but is the one in common with Iran and Jews and it peaks in Cretans.

That is not a mainland Greek haplogroup. I am speaking of the J2a common in the mainland.

The J2 in Sicily could not have possibly arrived from the Greek mainland because the subclades do not match it, except for a J2a also shared with Albanians that is present in some part of eastern Sicily.

Western Sicilian J2 matches that of Levantines more.

[Tauromachos]

That is not a mainland Greek haplogroup. I am speaking of the J2a common in the mainland.

The J2 in Sicily could not have possibly arrived from the Greek mainland because the subclades do not match it, except for a J2a also shared with Albanians that is present in some part of eastern Sicily.

Western Sicilian J2 matches that of Levantines more.

Whatever it is it doesn't imply direct ancestry from Non Greek Near Easterners

The high incidence of J2a in Italy is owed in great part to the migration of the Etruscans from western Anatolia to central and northern Italy, and to the Greek colonisation of southern Italy. However both the Etruscans and Greeks would have carried many other Y-DNA lineages, including G2a, J1, R1b-Z2103, T1a, and probably also E-M34. J2a levels would have been higher among the Greeks than the Etruscans, and particularly among the insular Greeks that colonised Magna Graecia.

[Sikeliot]

Whatever it is it doesn't imply direct ancestry from Non Greek Near Easterners


This haplogroup might be the J2 in Apulia (where it is almost as high as Crete) and eastern Sicily. But it's not western Sicily's J2 is what I mean.

I am unsure which subclades exist in Calabria.

[Tauromachos]

This haplogroup might be the J2 in Apulia (where it is almost as high as Crete) and eastern Sicily. But it's not western Sicily's J2 is what I mean.

I am unsure which subclades exist in Calabria.

Yes

but its also high in Calabria even higher than in Apulia i think.

[Sikeliot]

Yes

but its also high in Calabria even higher than in Apulia i think.


J2 is higher in Apulia than in Calabria, but Calabria has higher R1b-L23 (the highest in all of Europe).

[Sikeliot]

What this really comes down to, for me, is did the Greek settlers bring their wives. If not, they would have likely taken their wives from the native population.

As far as Phoenician or not in western Sicily, this is a cousin whose family is entirely from around the city of Palermo. If we compare this to the Bell Beaker era Sicilian we clearly see she is closer to Levantines than that sample was, and closer to them than Minoans or Mycenaeans were, so clearly this cannot JUST be prehistoric..

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 30.08
2 West_Med 17.11
3 West_Asian 14.11
4 Atlantic 13.41
5 North_Sea 11.12
6 Red_Sea 7.27
7 Baltic 2.83
8 Northeast_African 1.33
9 Eastern_Euro 0.95
10 Sub-Saharan 0.73
11 Oceanian 0.59
12 Southeast_Asian 0.3
13 Siberian 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 South_Italian 4.4
2 East_Sicilian 4.53
3 Italian_Jewish 4.84
4 Central_Greek 5.96
5 Sephardic_Jewish 6.52
6 Italian_Abruzzo 6.76
7 West_Sicilian 6.78
8 Ashkenazi 6.88
9 Algerian_Jewish 7.45
10 Tunisian_Jewish 10.49
11 Libyan_Jewish 11.58
12 Greek_Thessaly 11.83
13 Tuscan 11.85
14 Greek 12.11
15 Cyprian 13.66
16 Lebanese_Muslim 16.58
17 Syrian 17.22
18 North_Italian 18.37
19 Turkish 18.87
20 Bulgarian 19.3

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 63.9% Italian_Abruzzo + 36.1% Libyan_Jewish @ 2.14
2 59.8% Italian_Jewish + 40.2% Italian_Abruzzo @ 2.26
3 54.5% Lebanese_Christian + 45.5% Portuguese @ 2.5
4 64.3% Tuscan + 35.7% Lebanese_Christian @ 2.66
5 52.5% East_Sicilian + 47.5% Italian_Jewish @ 2.72
6 53.3% North_Italian + 46.7% Lebanese_Christian @ 2.74
7 65.7% Cyprian + 34.3% Spanish_Galicia @ 2.79
8 56.1% Lebanese_Christian + 43.9% Spanish_Cataluna @ 2.83
9 65% Cyprian + 35% Portuguese @ 2.86
10 57.2% Italian_Jewish + 42.8% Central_Greek @ 2.86
11 89.2% Italian_Jewish + 10.8% West_German @ 2.87
12 55.2% Lebanese_Christian + 44.8% Spanish_Galicia @ 2.87
13 91.2% Italian_Jewish + 8.8% Orcadian @ 2.88
14 91.1% Italian_Jewish + 8.9% North_Dutch @ 2.93
15 90.6% Italian_Jewish + 9.4% North_German @ 2.95
16 90.6% Italian_Jewish + 9.4% Southwest_English @ 2.95
17 55.9% Lebanese_Christian + 44.1% Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon @ 2.97
18 91.7% Italian_Jewish + 8.3% West_Norwegian @ 2.98
19 91.2% Italian_Jewish + 8.8% Irish @ 2.99
20 89.5% Italian_Jewish + 10.5% South_Dutch @ 2.99

[Tauromachos]

J2 is higher in Apulia than in Calabria, but Calabria has higher R1b-L23 (the highest in all of Europe).


Several common Italian J2a subclades are found mainly in the south of Italy (M319, M92, Z467, Z7671, all under L558) and are likely to be of Greek origin. The highest concentrations of J2a in Europe are found in Crete (32% of the population) and Calabria (26%). M319, one of the principal J2a1 subclades in Greece, Italy and Western Europe, reaches is maximum frequency in Crete (6-9%).

[Ajeje Brazorf]

As far as Phoenician or not in western Sicily, this is a cousin whose family is entirely from around the city of Palermo. If we compare this to the Bell Beaker era Sicilian we clearly see she is closer to Levantines than that sample was, and closer to them than Minoans or Mycenaeans were, so clearly this cannot JUST be prehistoric.

Of course, because they were far from any modern population and therefore do not appear in the oracle.

[Ajeje Brazorf]

Sikeliot and your sockpuppets on Anthrogenica: stop your obsessive Levantinization of Sicilians.

[Sikeliot]

Sikeliot and your sockpuppets on Anthrogenica: stop your obsessive Levantinization of Sicilians.


I have one account here, and one account there. You do not have to like what I say, but it does not change the number of accounts I have. Disagree with my opinions, I do not care, but don't spread false information about me.

[-Scar-]

Ancient greeks never did geonocides on local populations!!!

Everywhere they went,they just assimilated the natives.

From sicily,to asia minor and even with alexanders the great conquest in middle east.

The ancient Hellenes committed genocide towards each other during the city-states wars, and let alone to other people.

Look it up:
Thebes-Athens-Sparta-Macedonia-Melos etc.

Just for a starter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos

[Ajeje Brazorf]

This thread itself is bs lol, obviously the Greeks did not genocide the natives.

[Sturmgewehr]

This thread itself is bs lol, obviously the Greeks did not genocide the natives.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkuNpgACH0

[Ajeje Brazorf]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkuNpgACH0

Ancient Greeks - the Nazis of 500 BC

[Sturmgewehr]

Ancient Greeks - the Nazis of 500 BC

Actually that is true not only for Ancient Greeks but for every Ancient empire, that was pretty much the norm, Genocide, land grabbing, pluntering and looting was the thing.

[Sikeliot]

This thread itself is bs lol, obviously the Greeks did not genocide the natives.

The Sicels were particularly rebellious and gave the Greeks a difficult time. I did read that the Ionians in Sicily had OK relations with them, it was the Doric Greeks who settled the Syracuse/Ragusa area who did not.

[Tauromachos]

The Sicels were particularly rebellious and gave the Greeks a difficult time. I did read that the Ionians in Sicily had OK relations with them, it was the Doric Greeks who settled the Syracuse/Ragusa area who did not.


Where did you read this?

Never heard about this

[Wrong]

IMO R-L23 in Sicily is likely connected to Magna Graecia and possibly earlier movements from the Balkans and Anatolia.

Or later, the Arberesh. R1b-L23 of the Balkans peaks in Ghegs at a frequency of 30%.

[Wrong]

We all got our IE languages from R-sources.

The Native-Balkanite & Hellenic language source was R1b-L23.