Upcoming genetic study about Ancient Rome

[Samnium]

Apparently a study about the genetics of Ancient Rome and Ancient Italy will be published in one month. A geneticist, Razib Khan has seen the results before the publishing, here what he thinks :

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/492015060932362242/641749031667761166/unknown.png

That would mean that rural and inland areas of Central Italy have retained Italic DNA. I think this is also the case of the province of Cosenza in Calabria (and maybe other inland areas of S.Italy), I will ask him because it's very interesting !

The massive eastern shift would explain also the extreme outliers that have been sampled showing romans samples south of the most southern-shifted S.Italians on PCA. Also a lot of people assumed that the northward shift of Central Italy in Middle Ages was caused by repopulation by several foreigners and N.Italians, not true, apparently it's only original "Italic people" that reclaimed their cities.

Anyway it confirms that the remote areas of Italy are poorly studied and not understood as well as roman genetics.

Source : https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2019/10/21/open-thread-10-21-2019/#comments

[Lucas]

Don't forget Germanic impact in late antique / early medieval times. It could reinforce this backshift.

[Samnium]

Don't forget Germanic impact in late antique / early medieval times. It could reinforce this backshift.

Honestly this paper will rightly show that the apparent "north shift" was only the original populations that repopulated the cities, not Germanic impact. It's possible that Germanic input has shifted a little bit but honestly these Germanic tribes weren't as numerous as the local population and surely didn't settled like Ancient Greeks and other italic tribes did in Southern Italy so I doubt that it had a noticeable effect on an autosomal scale.

[Kamal900]

It's going to be the next revelation from god himself. Can't wait.

[Samnium]

It's going to be the next revelation from god himself. Can't wait.

This + the study on Ancient Italic samples in Picene would certainly change our opinions about Italics and Romans.

Anyway my reflexion about the fact that inland C./Southern Italy has retained Italic DNA is somewhat confirmed by that.

[J. Ketch]

The Germanic input in outside of parts of Northeast and Northwest Italy is obviously negligible. Good to know that this meme that true Romans were East Meds will be short lived and based on misinformation.

[Leto]

The Germanic input in outside of parts of Northeast and Northwest Italy is obviously negligible. Good to know that this meme that true Romans were East Meds will be short lived and based on misinformation.
dA rOmAnZ pLoTtEd In LeBaNoN xD

[Samnium]

The Germanic input in outside of parts of Northeast and Northwest Italy is obviously negligible. Good to know that this meme that true Romans were East Meds will be short lived and based on misinformation.

Yep of course, and there are studies that have said that the germanic input is negligible.

For me it was strange that Romans were on par (not that far) with Cypriots or other populations very East-Med shifted. They probably sampled these "false" romans that were probably immigrants from other areas.

This teach us two things :

-Never taking cities and urban areas samples as representative.
-The inland, rural, remote ares are much less prone to foreign admixture and therefore have to be studied (they are isolates basically).

[Calpurnius]

no difference between Etruscans and Latins
orientalists gonna get a heart attack

was nevertheless predictable, Romans themselves lamented the masses of east mediterranean rabble that had invaded the city and began even having significant influence, including the Greeks themselves
I hope the paper has isotope info too to understand which ones were locals or not, IIRC many samples are from the port of Ostia, which isn't exactly a place one would find patricians just hanging around during the Imperial age

[dududud]

What about sardegna?

[Samnium]

was nevertheless predictable, Romans themselves lamented the masses of east mediterranean rabble that had invaded the city and began even having significant influence, including the Greeks themselves
I hope the paper has isotope info too to understand which ones were locals or not, IIRC many samples are from the port of Ostia, which isn't exactly a place one would find patricians just hanging around during the Imperial age

I didn't know that these samples were from Ostia. Yep really not the good place, Ostia was very influenced by Near-Eastern cults like Mithra cult (I've visited the place), there are still houses with "hidden" rooms where mithraites rituals were executed (now visible). It was the "veterans" that imported this religion, but I bet that there was also a lot of near-easterners in this city. A good place to find true ancient Romans samples would be Tivoli actually.

And yes the Greeks were mainly Islanders I think because Maniots that don't have any Slavic don't plot at all with Sicilians or with Aegean Islanders.

[Samnium]

What about sardegna?

This study will sample only samples of C.Italy I think.

[dududud]

This study will sample only samples of C.Italy I think.

Thanks.

[Lucas]

This study will sample only samples of C.Italy I think.
Oh, so in Central Italy there wasn't of course Germanic input.
Before when I posted I thought samples will be from all Italy.

[Dick]

Eternal glory to Rome!


https://youtu.be/rzKHvoNWK2A

[jingorex]

Eternal glory to Rome!


https://youtu.be/rzKHvoNWK2A

i dint know they had youtubes back then?

[Dick]

-Never taking cities and urban areas samples as representative.
-The inland, rural, remote ares are much less prone to foreign admixture and therefore have to be studied (they are isolates basically).

This should be obvious from an airplane but seems as though urban samples are always used as representative.

[Adamastor]

The study will be for all Italy if it's the study of Hannah Moots and I've seen parts of it. Everything that was previously said was true.
Basically this:

1) Native Italians pre-Ancient Greeks were in between Tuscan and North Italian.
2) Etruscans were kinda like SW French/NE Spaniards
3) Early Italics were SW Europeans, not Central Europeans
4) Ancient Romans and modern South Italians are basically Ancient Greeks genetically
5) Ancient Greeks were likely like modern Cretans genetically
6) Central Italians are mixed between Ancient Greeks and native North Italian-like population
7) North Italians of Bergamo type don't have much Germanic or Slavic
8) Celts in Italy were probably not much different from modern North Italians
9) Italian population did not changed drastically from antiquity to now

Maybe one or two points I made are not exactly the same as what the study will show, but you guys can write: at least 7 of these points will be confirmed.

[Dick]

The study will be for all Italy if it's the study of Hannah Moots and I've seen parts of it. Everything that was previously said was true.
Basically this:

1) Native Italians pre-Ancient Greeks were in between Tuscan and North Italian.
2) Etruscans were kinda like SW French/NE Spaniards
3) Early Italics were SW Europeans, not Central Europeans
4) Ancient Romans and modern South Italians are basically Ancient Greeks genetically
5) Ancient Greeks were likely like modern Cretans genetically
6) Central Italians are mixed between Ancient Greeks and native North Italian-like population
7) North Italians of Bergamo type don't have much Germanic or Slavic
8) Celts in Italy were probably not much different from modern North Italians
9) Italian population did not changed drastically from antiquity to now

Maybe one or two points I made are not exactly the same as what the study will show, but you guys can write: at least 7 of these points will be confirmed.

What about Friuli - Veneto?

[Adamastor]

What about Friuli - Veneto?

Friuli and Veneto have different clusters and even different individual results. Parts of Friuli are certainly Slavic admixed, I have some Friulian ancestry and these tests usually give me Baltic/Balkanic stuff but minor anyway and Friulians are still closer to Bergamo Italians or even Iberians than to Croats or Slovenes.

There are Venetians who are like Bergamo Italians and others who can plot like people from Trento (north-shifted). Ethnic Cimbrians and other minorities in Veneto are in between Bergamo North Italians and Austrians from Tyrol.

[Peterski]

That part about cities being multicultural* and their "ethnic" population dying off by the end of the Empire (when cities collapsed) is what I predicted on Anthrogenica few months ago. So urban vs. rural genetic differences, and rural taking over when urban folks got extinct.

*Full of immigrants from MENA parts of the Empire.

[War Chef]

Urban vs. Rural theory is bullshit.

Why can't you just accept BARBARIAN INVASION

Fuck that paper, bad logic

[Peterski]

Urban vs. Rural theory is bullshit.

No it isn't, it was the same in my country, Poland. Until WW2 our cities were much more Middle Eastern genetically than countryside:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_CZDzLoKi8

[War Chef]

No it isn't, it was the same in my country, Poland. Until WW2 our cities were much more Middle Eastern genetically than countryside.

I don't buy it.
Of course cities are commerce centers and attract Jews, but still it's not enough to change the genetic makeup.
Besides Rome was composed not only of Romans from Syria, but also Gaul, Germania, Dacia, Thrace & Hispania. Not MENA people.

Romans = South Italian or Maltese genetically until Lombards and Goths came and changed genetic landscape. Lets keep it simple and not over-complicate things.

[Peterski]

I don't buy it.
Of course cities are commerce centers and attract Jews, but still it's not enough to change the genetic makeup.

I'm not talking only about Jews (and in ancient times there were others who were more urbanized than Jews and lived within the Roman Empire).

Rome was like London today - in Late Imperial period it had surely more immigrants than original Romans. The same applies to other big cities.

[Grace O'Malley]

Really looking forward to this study. These are the types of studies that tell so much about populations. It should generate a lot of discussion when it becomes available.

[Peterski]

Romans = South Italian or Maltese genetically

Some Collegno samples resemble Bronze Age Anatolians, definitely not locals because that's more southern-shifted than South Italians.

Davidski told me that Late Roman samples will range all the way almost from North Italy to Bedouin.

[J. Ketch]

That part about cities being multicultural* and their "ethnic" population dying off by the end of the Empire (when cities collapsed) is what I predicted on Anthrogenica few months ago. So urban vs. rural genetic differences, and rural taking over when urban folks got extinct.

*Full of immigrants from MENA parts of the Empire.
Those immigrants didn't just die off, modern Central and Southern Italians are between native ancient Italians and MENA/East Med interlopers from the Empire.

[War Chef]

Some Collegno samples resemble Bronze Age Anatolians, definitely not locals because that's more southern-shifted than South Italians.

Davidski told me that Late Roman samples will range from almost North Italy to Bedouin.

Well even south Italians have Norman input. Maybe Italians were Levantine until they were Europeanized by barbarian migrants.

[Peterski]

Those immigrants didn't just die off

Most of them did, look at Rome's population decline:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c1246fe5f6bfc3b9c24cf1865f85f0cd

https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/73884f82-20b0-4dd1-8524-2f2f74bff611/9051d31b1ed7281c7c2024948067a99a.jpg

[Adamastor]

Those immigrants didn't just die off, modern Central and Southern Italians are between native ancient Italians and MENA/East Med interlopers from the Empire.

False. Ancient Italians were like North Italians, early Romans were already mixed with Eastern Mediterranean type of DNA. Romans were mostly like modern South Italians.
Most of the Eastern Mediterranean DNA in ancient Romans and modern South Italians came from Aegean sources, not direct admixture from the Middle East.

And don't come with that old S.Italians are ''mixed with slaves'' theory because most slaves in Rome were from up north and resembled more your kind than any MENAs.

[catgeorge]

Just minor adjustments/variations some 10-15% at maximum not much would have changed. Very interested in the paper though. :ranger

If modern Greeks are 75% to Mycenean then modern Italians would be much closer to ancient Italics like 85-90%

[War Chef]

Most of them did, look at Rome's population decline:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c1246fe5f6bfc3b9c24cf1865f85f0cd

https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/73884f82-20b0-4dd1-8524-2f2f74bff611/9051d31b1ed7281c7c2024948067a99a.jpg

Yeah, they left the urban city life for a rural farming life. Poured into the countryside, not the opposite.

[J. Ketch]

Most of them did, look at Rome's population decline:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c1246fe5f6bfc3b9c24cf1865f85f0cd

https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/73884f82-20b0-4dd1-8524-2f2f74bff611/9051d31b1ed7281c7c2024948067a99a.jpg
The population of the cities absolutely dwarved the countryside, so they can't have not had a big effect, even if the cities themselves died. The majority of Diaspora Jews alive today likely descend from those late Metropolitan Romans, and their 'North Italian' like maternal side were the native Romans/Italians. They all went North when Rome collapsed.

[Peterski]

Yeah, they left the urban city life for a rural farming life. Poured into the countryside, not the opposite.

LOL. No, people in cities died and then cities were repopulated by people from the countryside.

Your average urban person could not survive the apocalypse and en masse learn how to farm (who would give them land, by the way?).

Their survival was dependent on state-funded "panem et circenses" (especially the former).

[War Chef]

What if Ashkenazi Jews were Romans? I mean they have the original hebrew strain, but it's only like 15-20% of their DNA. The bulk of their DNA is Italian.
JEWS ARE ROMANS! :O

[Calpurnius]

City dwellers weren't like in modern post industrial times, ancient cities were basically population sinks, dependent on more migration and welfare and not more reproductively successfull than countrymen. Between plagues(which certainly devastated cities more than countryside) and the collapse of the economy and the devastating effects of the Gothic wars, they probably died in huge numbers, they didn't just move somewhere else.

[Peterski]

City dwellers weren't like in modern post industrial times, ancient cities were basically population sinks, dependent on more migration and welfare and not more reproductively successfull than countrymen. Between plagues(which certainly devastated cities more than countryside) and the collapse of the economy and the devastating effects of the Gothic wars, they probably died in huge numbers, they didn't just move somewhere else.

I agree.


What if Ashkenazi Jews were Romans? I mean they have the original hebrew strain, but it's only like 15-20% of their DNA. The bulk of their DNA is Italian.
JEWS ARE ROMANS! :O

Don't forget Jews probably also have Gothic/Longobard admixture too, and their Yiddish language is Germanic.

Maybe Yiddish is derived from Lombard? :) Goths had a natural instinct to return to their ancestral Wistlawudu.

[Leto]

The population of the cities absolutely dwarved the countryside, so they can't have not had a big effect, even if the cities themselves died. The majority of Diaspora Jews alive today likely descend from those late Metropolitan Romans, and their 'North Italian' like maternal side were the native Romans/Italians. They all went North when Rome collapsed.
Wait a minute, you don't think Jews are at least half Semitic?

[War Chef]

LOL. No, people in cities died and then cities were repopulated by people from the countryside.

Your average urban person could not survive the apocalypse and en masse learn how to farm (who would give them land, by the way?).

Their survival was dependent on state-funded "panem et circenses" (especially the former).

I find it hard to believe the separation between city and countryside. Fat, rich Romans built their villas all throughout the Italian peninsula, their genes are everywhere. To think the Countryside preserved some archaic relic population is laughable.

[Peterski]

I find it hard to believe the separation between city and countryside. Fat, rich Romans built their villas all throughout the Italian peninsula, their genes are everywhere. To think the Countryside preserved some archaic relic population is laughable.

LOL, what? Original Romans/Latins were - in vast majority - farmers. In Republican times, before they got fat and rich and before huge cities emerged.

I wonder if urbanization processes were driven by migration of native Latin/Roman farmers to cities, or immigration of foreigners since the beginning.

[catgeorge]

I can already see a 200 page thread and nothing has been released yet.

[Peterski]

What about sardegna?

It did not change much since Neolithic times.

[J. Ketch]

Wait a minute, you don't think Jews are at least half Semitic?
They're either half Semitic immigrants to Rome, half native Roman/Italian (North Italian like), or they're mostly Roman/South Italian converts to Judaism. Either scenario is interesting. I would err towards the former even if the latter argument has it's merits.

[Dick]

They're either half Semitic immigrants to Rome, half native Roman/Italian (North Italian like), or they're mostly Roman/South Italian converts to Judaism. Either scenario is interesting. I would err towards the former even if the latter argument has it's merits.

I still wonder how 23andMe's categorizes Ashkenazi Jews to be their own genetically distinct ethnic group. Anyone know ?

[Peterski]

The massive eastern shift would explain also the extreme outliers that have been sampled showing romans samples south of the most southern-shifted S.Italians on PCA. Also a lot of people assumed that the northward shift of Central Italy in Middle Ages was caused by repopulation by several foreigners and N.Italians, not true, apparently it's only original "Italic people" that reclaimed their cities.

Exactly, some outliers were like Bronze Age Anatolians and modern Cypriots.

Or even more MENA-shifted.

[Grace O'Malley]

I still wonder how 23andMe's categorizes Ashkenazi Jews to be their own genetically distinct ethnic group. Anyone know ?

Well they form their own cluster and also share much more close genetics with each other on matching.

[Dick]

Well they form their own cluster and also share much more close genetics with each other on matching.

Judaism is a religion. Might as well make a Muslim or Mormon category ;)

[Leto]

They're either half Semitic immigrants to Rome, half native Roman/Italian (North Italian like), or they're mostly Roman/South Italian converts to Judaism. Either scenario is interesting. I would err towards the former even if the latter argument has it's merits.
Judging by the MDLP K23b spreadsheet (I know it's a damn old calc but whatever) their percentage of Euro HG, Euro EF, Near East and North Africa seems to be almost the same. I mean Ashkenazim vs. Sicilians. However I don't think Jews and Southern Italians look the same. Even the European Jews have been stereotyped as Middle Eastern-looking (I don't need to pull up 1930s Germany posters).

[PaleoEuropean]

Judaism is a religion. Might as well make a Muslim or Mormon category ;)

Jew pure Jews would just be like Syrian/Iraqi if they were a homogeneous ethnicity

[PaleoEuropean]

I still wonder how 23andMe's categorizes Ashkenazi Jews to be their own genetically distinct ethnic group. Anyone know ?

They use SNPS you can see the region your SNPS are from if you download the raw data

[PaleoEuropean]

They use SNPS you can see the region your SNPS are from if you download the raw data

Maybe I am thinking of Ancestry's raw data

[Grace O'Malley]

Judaism is a religion. Might as well make a Muslim or Mormon category ;)

Ashkenazi Jewish though is clearly picked up on genetics and they do form their own cluster. You can have converts to Judaism but they wouldn't be Ashkenazi Jewish that's the difference.

[Dick]

Ashkenazi Jewish though is clearly picked up on genetics and they do form their own cluster. You can have converts to Judaism but they wouldn't be Ashkenazi Jewish that's the difference.

What I mean is that if they didn't have an actual category then I wonder what they would get instead.

[Peterski]

What I mean is that if they didn't have an actual category then I wonder what they would get instead.

Mostly a mixture of Middle Eastern and Southern European, with some North/Eastern European.

This is how studies model them: https://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-origins-of-ashkenazi-jews-near-resolution/

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g007&type=medium

[Pine]

They're either half Semitic immigrants to Rome, half native Roman/Italian (North Italian like), or they're mostly Roman/South Italian converts to Judaism. Either scenario is interesting. I would err towards the former even if the latter argument has it's merits.

These aren't mutually exclusive scenarios, and uniparental data makes the latter scenario impossible as the entire story.

[Pine]

Judaism is a religion. Might as well make a Muslim or Mormon category ;)

Judaism is a religion. Jews aren't, at least for now.

[War Chef]

Mostly a mixture of Middle Eastern and Southern European, with some North/Eastern European.

This is how studies model them: https://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-origins-of-ashkenazi-jews-near-resolution/

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g007&type=medium

Eastern EU is bullshit. They either got their Northern Euro genes directly from Italic people, or when they where in the Rhine and created Yiddish language - They may have intermixed with local Rhine Germans (just a tiny bit).

[Pine]

Eastern EU is bullshit. They either got their Northern Euro genes directly from Italic people, or when they where in the Rhine and created Yiddish language - They may have intermixed with local Rhine Germans (just a tiny bit).

Why does it bother you? You're hardly Eastern European.

[Peterski]

Eastern EU is bullshit. They either have their Northern Euro genes directly from Italic people, or when they where in the Rhine and created Yiddish language. They may have intermixed with local Rhine Germans (just a tiny bit).

But they have higher IBD sharing with Eastern Europeans than with Western Europeans:

https://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2014/02/khazar-study-thoroughly-debunked.html

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8neaeiS52o/UwncbDA6GXI/AAAAAAAAcdA/OR7avrsY6lg/s1600/genetic.png

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure/image?size=large&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

^^^
BTW isn't high IBD sharing with Iberians surprising? Maybe it is indirect via Sephardim?

[Pine]

But they have higher IBD sharing with Eastern Europeans than with Western Europeans:

https://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2014/02/khazar-study-thoroughly-debunked.html

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8neaeiS52o/UwncbDA6GXI/AAAAAAAAcdA/OR7avrsY6lg/s1600/genetic.png

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure/image?size=large&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

To be fair, a lot of that is due to the recency of Eastern Euro admixture in Ashkenazim and partly due to Eastern Euros having Jewish admixture. Regardless, Ashkenazim do have East Euro admixture.

[War Chef]

Why does it bother you? You're hardly Eastern European.

It doesn't bother me. I try to get the truth. I don't do things out of being bothered, maybe thats just you.
And Yes I am predominantly Eastern European, thank you very much buddy.

[Peterski]

To be fair, a lot of that is due to the recency of Eastern Euro admixture in Ashkenazim and partly due to Eastern Euros having Jewish admixture. Regardless, Ashkenazim do have East Euro admixture.

What is your explanation for high IBD sharing with Iberians? Ashkenazim did not reside in Iberia, at least not recently.

[Pine]

It doesn't bother me. I try to get the truth. I don't do things out of being bothered, maybe thats just you.
And Yes I am predominantly Eastern European, thank you very much buddy.

Bulgaria?


https://blog.ometria.com/hs-fs/hubfs/giphy-25.gif?width=301&name=giphy-25.gif

[War Chef]

Bulgaria?


https://blog.ometria.com/hs-fs/hubfs/giphy-25.gif?width=301&name=giphy-25.gif

Still WAY closer to Ukrainians/Poles than any Ashkenazi will ever be on a PCA plot. :laugh:

[Pine]

What is your explanation for high IBD sharing with Iberians? Ashkenazim did not reside in Iberia, at least not recently.

Everyone underestimates South French and/or Iberian blood in Ashkenazim. Although, I am slightly biased in this direction by my own autosomal data. I'm betting some of the founding Ashkenazi K's are gonna turn up being from there. Furthermore, a lot of Ashkenazi YDNA went through Iberia, with some of it being of Iberian origin. This may also be due to Sephardic admixture being more recent in Ashkenazim and hence giving the higher number. A famous example is Zamosc. It would be useful to look how much IBD Sephardim (West and East) share with Iberians and see if the fraction makes sense for Ashkenazim.

[Pine]

Still WAY closer to Ukrainians/Poles than any Ashkenazi will ever be on a PCA plot. :laugh:

Why use Ashkenazim as the reference? Maybe you also plot closer to Ukrainians than Nigerians do.

[War Chef]

Why use Ashkenazim as the reference? Maybe you also plot closer to Ukrainians than Nigerians do.

Why would you liken your people to Nigerians you dummy. Your people are south-westernish, that's where you shine.

Also dunno what kind of buthurt it took for you to chimp out at me. Clearly this is a touchy subject for you, or are gentiles forbidden to discuss "the chosen people's:rolleyes:" genetics?

[Pine]

Why would you liken your people to Nigerians you dummy. Your people are south-westernish, that's where you shine.

Also dunno what kind of buthurt it took for you to chimp out at me. Clearly this is a touchy subject for you, or are gentiles forbidden to discuss "the chosen people's:rolleyes:" genetics?

https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2017/05/000_OZ3MT-e1495997865807-1024x640.jpg

[J. Ketch]

These aren't mutually exclusive scenarios, and uniparental data makes the latter scenario impossible as the entire story.
Mostly Judaised Romans/South Italians/Greeks is what I meant. Anyway I prefer the first explanation, it would mean the native Romans were North Italian like.

[Sweet Perv]

https://thumbs2.imagebam.com/2c/76/5f/036ed21324889483.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/036ed21324889483)

Still it doesn't refute the idea that the aristocracy and middle-class from Rome were related to the Aegean Sea (so the cities founded by the Romans had genes from there) or maybe I didn't understand the Khan's non-sentence in strange english :)

And for the cities founded by the Greeks, is it surprising that eastern mediterranean origins have been found ?

These things have been known and discussed by Italians for centuries. Also the fact that modern Italians are the descendants of the people who betrayed and sold their roman rulers. Legends or truth, I will wait for more genetic studies and won't take any of them as locking of the debate ;)

[Sweet Perv]

But they have higher IBD sharing with Eastern Europeans than with Western Europeans:

https://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2014/02/khazar-study-thoroughly-debunked.html

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8neaeiS52o/UwncbDA6GXI/AAAAAAAAcdA/OR7avrsY6lg/s1600/genetic.png

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/figure/image?size=large&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g005

^^^
BTW isn't high IBD sharing with Iberians surprising? Maybe it is indirect via Sephardim?


Crazy how the jewish question obsessed people. First it's a thread about ancient Romans...

The relations between ashkenaz jews and eastern Europe is obvious to me. The relation with Iberia may just be fortuitous.

But the battle for the seduction of eastern Europe women is raging between Pline and War Chief. ah ah :D

Pline : I think jews from the south of France have only sepharad and direct Judea origins, but do you more about it ?

War Chief : are you an anti-semistic Romanian ?

Peterski : in the study you show, how did they make the difference between sepharad and north african jews ? For the sepharad jews, they only analyze DNA from jews living in Spain nowadays ?

I wrote a post related to this question few days ago :


Ps : and I've never said that ancient Berbers were mostly "white" but it seems that, for some reasons, a lot of phenotypes that have broken through the centuries and (more or less) subsisted (with still important variations) are pale with blue eyes...

I don't deny the germanic influence in Italy, even in the south, that Nassbean underlined. (I'm more perplexed about the celtic influence that concerns mostly north of Italy already inhabited by Celts at the beginning of Ancient history.) But first, genetic must be used with precaution : some genes similar to the germanic people may have been there before "barbarian" invasions / Holy Roman Empire / Normans invasions. Haplogroups can be a clue, a track but they can't be related to one special people so easily. And second, despite observable variations, specially in the size of skulls, most of the mediterranean phenotypical caracteristics have remained among the most of nowadays Ligurians or south Italians (for instance).

My division between Mediterraneans and Asiatics among north Africans and Middle-East people is also observable among jewish people. Obviously for other reasons. A new genetic study I heard about says that, on the contrary to what have been claimed before, jews from north Africa and jews from central / eastern Europe have common ancestry in Middle-East, but Middle-East in a very large definition. Anyway, I would take it with circumspection. I don't try to bring up the Kazahrs hypothesis and I don't deny the important common points between them and also the fact that the difference in ashkenaz jews phenotypes may come from their mixing with Slavics, Germanics and Baltics (by the way mostly with females according to these studies) or their possible stay in Mesopotamy then in Persia. But according to the observation of traditions and phenotypes I would say that most of the jews from north Africa are mediterraneans but that most of the jews from central / eastern Europe are more close to the north of Middle-East, so asiatic.

Some clues would show that a lot of Berbers have converted to judaïsm to protect themselves from the islamic domination, among other possible reasons. I don't find the hypothesis that there would be more ancient Berbers descendants among jews than among muslims unreasonable.

[Sweet Perv]

Once upon a time, in an enchanted land, living with the Orks and the Goblins, there was a noble and mighty people...

Augustus, king of the Elfs :

https://thumbs2.imagebam.com/ed/41/86/dec2d11324910362.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/dec2d11324910362)

;)

[Samnium]

False. Ancient Italians were like North Italians, early Romans were already mixed with Eastern Mediterranean type of DNA. Romans were mostly like modern South Italians.

False. This paper that will come will rightly show that's false. Romans were romans, these that plot southern of S.Italians or with Sicilians weren't ethnical romans for sure.


Most of the Eastern Mediterranean DNA in ancient Romans and modern South Italians came from Aegean sources, not direct admixture from the Middle East.


First you can't use the word "South Italians" as they are so diverse that you will have to split up the parts to explain correctly the elevated East Med component in S.Italians. Of course there is an old "anatolian" stock BUT the very elevated MENA in some southern regions can't be explained by this. The arab era in Sicily and the Phoenicians, Western Asians and Levantines that fled the Middle-East during the Byzantine era, communities of armenians and jewish... To add to this point not all the regions had extensive greek colonisation, only Calabria, Apulia and Sicily.

[Adamastor]

False. This paper that will come will rightly show that's false. Romans were romans, these that plot southern of S.Italians or with Sicilians weren't ethnical romans for sure.


The paper by Hannah Moots just show what I said, wait and see. Then you can go cry in your bathroom for being half French but liking to LARP as a Roman. Early Italics were North Italians, later Romans were South Italian-like. South Italians from any region are still closer to other South Italians than to any North Italians or even Tuscans.

The paper has been presented by Moots in many academic events, it's content is no big secret.

[Samnium]

The paper by Hannah Moots just show what I said, wait and see. Then you can go cry in your bathroom for being half French but liking to LARP as a Roman.

I don't larp as a roman, I just look like some ancient romans nothing more, I don't know where you see the "larping" :picard2: I'm not ashamed to be half french :picard2:

Early Italics were North Italians, later Romans were South Italian-like.

Not at all. You're taking the extremely shifted samples that come right from the urban areas as representative of the original roman population (saying republican era romans)... As said (I've repeated this several times), the cities with the coastal ares are places prone to the mixing and to some kind of a multi-ethnic society. Someone explained here that the range of the Roman samples is from Northern-Italian like to Bedouin.


South Italians from any region are still closer to other South Italians than to any North Italians or even Tuscans.

"To other South Italians" means absolutely nothing, in regard of the genetic diversity of S.Italy.

[Leto]

A Roman-era Middle Eastern gladiator that died in York

Kit T897383

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 47.02
2 Red_Sea 21.6
3 West_Med 13.94
4 West_Asian 9.96
5 Northeast_African 5.86
6 North_Atlantic 1.45
7 Sub-Saharan 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Palestinian 9.28
2 Bedouin 9.67
3 Samaritan 11.31
4 Yemenite_Jewish 11.51
5 Jordanian 11.8
6 Egyptian 12.07
7 Lebanese_Christian 13.88
8 Saudi 14.59
9 Syrian 15.6
10 Libyan_Jewish 15.72
11 Tunisian_Jewish 16.23
12 Lebanese_Druze 16.81
13 Lebanese_Muslim 17.33
14 Cyprian 18.71
15 Algerian_Jewish 20.8
16 Sephardic_Jewish 20.82
17 Italian_Jewish 21.45
18 Kurdish_Jewish 22.22
19 Iranian_Jewish 22.64
20 Tunisian 23.84

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 63% Yemenite_Jewish + 37% Cyprian @ 4.28
2 58.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 41.4% Libyan_Jewish @ 4.28
3 50.5% Samaritan + 49.5% Yemenite_Jewish @ 4.36
4 65.7% Yemenite_Jewish + 34.3% Algerian_Jewish @ 4.47
5 59.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 40.4% Tunisian_Jewish @ 4.55
6 72% Yemenite_Jewish + 28% South_Italian @ 5.14
7 67% Yemenite_Jewish + 33% Italian_Jewish @ 5.24
8 66.4% Yemenite_Jewish + 33.6% Sephardic_Jewish @ 5.32
9 82.8% Yemenite_Jewish + 17.2% Sardinian @ 5.36
10 57.5% Palestinian + 42.5% Yemenite_Jewish @ 5.55
11 72.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 27.4% East_Sicilian @ 5.66
12 62.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 37.9% Lebanese_Muslim @ 5.72
13 55.9% Yemenite_Jewish + 44.1% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.76
14 50.9% Yemenite_Jewish + 49.1% Jordanian @ 5.79
15 59.3% Yemenite_Jewish + 40.7% Syrian @ 5.8
16 74.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 25.9% Central_Greek @ 5.8
17 58.1% Samaritan + 41.9% Saudi @ 6.08
18 75.3% Yemenite_Jewish + 24.7% West_Sicilian @ 6.12
19 71.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 28.9% Ashkenazi @ 6.36
20 56.9% Bedouin + 43.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.44

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?222836-VERY-INTERESTING-MDLP-K23b-results-of-a-Roman-era-Gladiator-in-York/page3&highlight=Roman-era+gladiators

[Samnium]

A Roman-era Middle Eastern gladiator that died in York

Kit T897383

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 47.02
2 Red_Sea 21.6
3 West_Med 13.94
4 West_Asian 9.96
5 Northeast_African 5.86
6 North_Atlantic 1.45
7 Sub-Saharan 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Palestinian 9.28
2 Bedouin 9.67
3 Samaritan 11.31
4 Yemenite_Jewish 11.51
5 Jordanian 11.8
6 Egyptian 12.07
7 Lebanese_Christian 13.88
8 Saudi 14.59
9 Syrian 15.6
10 Libyan_Jewish 15.72
11 Tunisian_Jewish 16.23
12 Lebanese_Druze 16.81
13 Lebanese_Muslim 17.33
14 Cyprian 18.71
15 Algerian_Jewish 20.8
16 Sephardic_Jewish 20.82
17 Italian_Jewish 21.45
18 Kurdish_Jewish 22.22
19 Iranian_Jewish 22.64
20 Tunisian 23.84

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 63% Yemenite_Jewish + 37% Cyprian @ 4.28
2 58.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 41.4% Libyan_Jewish @ 4.28
3 50.5% Samaritan + 49.5% Yemenite_Jewish @ 4.36
4 65.7% Yemenite_Jewish + 34.3% Algerian_Jewish @ 4.47
5 59.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 40.4% Tunisian_Jewish @ 4.55
6 72% Yemenite_Jewish + 28% South_Italian @ 5.14
7 67% Yemenite_Jewish + 33% Italian_Jewish @ 5.24
8 66.4% Yemenite_Jewish + 33.6% Sephardic_Jewish @ 5.32
9 82.8% Yemenite_Jewish + 17.2% Sardinian @ 5.36
10 57.5% Palestinian + 42.5% Yemenite_Jewish @ 5.55
11 72.6% Yemenite_Jewish + 27.4% East_Sicilian @ 5.66
12 62.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 37.9% Lebanese_Muslim @ 5.72
13 55.9% Yemenite_Jewish + 44.1% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.76
14 50.9% Yemenite_Jewish + 49.1% Jordanian @ 5.79
15 59.3% Yemenite_Jewish + 40.7% Syrian @ 5.8
16 74.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 25.9% Central_Greek @ 5.8
17 58.1% Samaritan + 41.9% Saudi @ 6.08
18 75.3% Yemenite_Jewish + 24.7% West_Sicilian @ 6.12
19 71.1% Yemenite_Jewish + 28.9% Ashkenazi @ 6.36
20 56.9% Bedouin + 43.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.44

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?222836-VERY-INTERESTING-MDLP-K23b-results-of-a-Roman-era-Gladiator-in-York/page3&highlight=Roman-era+gladiators

Pure roman, yes. :rolleyes:

[Enr1989]

Mostly Judaised Romans/South Italians/Greeks is what I meant. Anyway I prefer the first explanation, it would mean the native Romans were North Italian like.

Stop saying Romans inbred with Jew, they didn't, they really disliked them, just think that Jewish were the only folks not allowed to join the Legions, they destroyed Jerusalem as well.
Maybe Jewish started thriving after the empire collapsed travelling up not north and west

[Calpurnius]

According to the Roman foundation myths themselves, aside from the later Trojan LARPing, Romans came about by a mixing of Italic tribes bar Etruscans, which per those papers turns out were indistinguishable from them anyway, so there is no reason for early Romans, who called themselves Quirites, that is, from the kingdom and early Republic, to be anything but iron age Italics bar of course some possible outliers even early on. This includes the patricians of course, the real original gentes.
And if I'm not mistaken the leaks said that among the (few) iron age Roman samples they have 60% were north Italian-like anyway. It's only in the Imperial era that not surprisingly the balance shifts heavily to the south. And keep in mind that "iron age" for them means something like 700BC to 20BC if I remember correctly, so it will be interesting to see the actual datings and how Romans were before the end of the Punic wars and the wars with Pyrrhus, which is probably when the flood of foreigners became serious.

[MinervaItalica]

Stop saying Romans inbred with Jew, they didn't, they really disliked them, just think that Jewish were the only folks not allowed to join the Legions, they destroyed Jerusalem as well.
Maybe Jewish started thriving after the empire collapsed travelling up not north and west

Unfortunately that is an agenda here. Like the story that Jewish married Roman women en masse. They will find every excuse to relate Jews and Italians.

[Jana]

Pure roman, yes. :rolleyes:

Study specifically mentioned this person was of Near-eastern, not Roman origins. There were also native Briton and Germanic mixed ''Roman'' gladiators in same study.
This person had J2b1-M205 haplogroup which is of Syrian origin most likely and apart from important cluster in South Slavs, very rare in rest of Europe.

[Samnium]

Unfortunately that is an agenda here. Like the story that Jewish married Roman women en masse. They will find every excuse to relate Jews and Italians.

By the way the thread has deviated for quite a few pages on Jews and Romans :rolleyes:

[J. Ketch]

Stop saying Romans inbred with Jew, they didn't, they really disliked them, just think that Jewish were the only folks not allowed to join the Legions, they destroyed Jerusalem as well.
Maybe Jewish started thriving after the empire collapsed travelling up not north and west
They disliked them, so what? Whites disliked blacks in the US South and American blacks are on average 20% European. European Jews are descended from a very small bottleneck population so the mixing didn't need to be large scale. If Jewish immigrants to Italy didn't mix with Romans who did they mix with? Your alternative is that modern Jews are mostly Judaised South Italians/Romans with overwhelmingly Semitic Y-DNA, what do you think about that?

[Jana]

They disliked them, so what? Whites disliked blacks in the US South and American blacks are on average 20% European. European Jews are descended from a very small bottleneck population so the mixing didn't need to be large scale. If Jewish immigrants to Italy didn't mix with Romans who did they mix with? Your alternative is that modern Jews are mostly Judaised South Italians/Romans with overwhelmingly Semitic Y-DNA, what do you think about that?

Good post. For example Gypsies were practically slaves in Romania, and around 1/3 of Gypsy autosomal DNA is from Balkans/Eastern Europe (mostly Hungarian,Romanian, Bulgarian and Albanian according to paper I read).
People mix all the time, even with ''undesireables''.

[Leto]

Unfortunately that is an agenda here. Like the story that Jewish married Roman women en masse. They will find every excuse to relate Jews and Italians.
Well, fact is that the Ashkenazi Jews do have a large amount of European and particularly Southern European ancestry
https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644

[Dick]

Well, fact is that the Ashkenazi Jews do have a large amount of European and particularly Southern European ancestry
https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644

They have to or they wouldn’t cluster so close to southern Europeans

[Lemgrant]

Mostly a mixture of Middle Eastern and Southern European, with some North/Eastern European.

This is how studies model them: https://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-origins-of-ashkenazi-jews-near-resolution/

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644.g007&type=medium

Eurogenes K13 custom oracle for Ashkenazi reference in datasheet:

k13(c('Ashkenazi'),k=150,mixedmode=T)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] "Ashkenazi" "0"
[2,] "13.9% Erzya + 86.1% Italian_Jewish" "2.1023"
[3,] "85.2% Italian_Jewish + 14.8% Southwest_Russian" "2.5986"
[4,] "86.2% Italian_Jewish + 13.8% Kargopol_Russian" "2.6146"
[5,] "85.3% Italian_Jewish + 14.7% Ukrainian_Belgorod" "2.6396"
[6,] "15.2% Cossack_Zaporozhie1 + 84.8% Italian_Jewish" "2.6704"
[7,] "87.2% Italian_Jewish + 12.8% Lithuanian" "2.828"
[8,] "14% Estonian_Polish + 86% Italian_Jewish" "2.8719"
[9,] "13.8% Belorussian + 86.2% Italian_Jewish" "2.9486"
[10,] "86% Italian_Jewish + 14% Russian_Smolensk" "2.9505"
[11,] "87.4% Italian_Jewish + 12.6% Latvian1" "3.0386"
[12,] "12.7% East_Finnish + 87.3% Italian_Jewish" "3.1285"
[13,] "13.6% Chuvash + 86.4% Italian_Jewish" "3.1714"
[14,] "84.8% Italian_Jewish + 15.2% Ukrainian" "3.2213"
[15,] "84.5% Italian_Jewish + 15.5% Ukrainian_Lviv" "3.3133"
[16,] "12.6% Estonian + 87.4% Italian_Jewish" "3.3283"
[17,] "14% Cossack_Kuban2 + 86% Italian_Jewish" "3.3511"
[18,] "85.9% Italian_Jewish + 14.1% Polish" "3.4304"
[19,] "70.8% Italian_Jewish + 29.2% Turk_Bulgaria_Kuzey" "3.4624"
[20,] "81% Italian_Jewish + 19% Moldavian" "3.48"
[21,] "12.7% Finnish + 87.3% Italian_Jewish" "3.5407"
[22,] "84.9% Italian_Jewish + 15.1% South_Polish" "3.5412"
[23,] "27.5% SerbianBosnia + 72.5% Tunisian_Jewish" "3.5891"
[24,] "84.3% Italian_Jewish + 15.7% Tatar" "3.5928"
[25,] "36.1% Bulgarian + 63.9% Tunisian_Jewish" "3.6309"
[26,] "17.6% Croatian + 82.4% Italian_Jewish" "3.6427"
[27,] "85.4% Algerian_Jewish + 14.6% Southwest_Russian" "3.6441"
[28,] "85.5% Algerian_Jewish + 14.5% Ukrainian_Belgorod" "3.6705"
[29,] "27.8% Bulgarian + 72.2% Italian_Jewish" "3.6764"
[30,] "86.2% Algerian_Jewish + 13.8% Belorussian" "3.6962"
[31,] "87.4% Italian_Jewish + 12.6% Mari" "3.7189"
[32,] "85% Algerian_Jewish + 15% Cossack_Zaporozhie1" "3.7343"
[33,] "79.6% Italian_Jewish + 20.4% SerbianBosnia" "3.7367"
[34,] "84% Italian_Jewish + 16% Slovakian1" "3.7494"
[35,] "87.2% Algerian_Jewish + 12.8% Finnish" "3.7784"
[36,] "50.6% Greek_Thessaly + 49.4% Tunisian_Jewish" "3.789"


k13(c('Ashkenazi'),k=60)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] "Ashkenazi" "0"
[2,] "Maltese" "6.09"
[3,] "East_Sicilian" "6.8461"
[4,] "Central_Greek" "8.4195"
[5,] "South_Italian" "8.4535"
[6,] "Italian_Jewish" "8.9645"
[7,] "Algerian_Jewish" "9.1869"
[8,] "Greek_Andros_Island1" "9.1908"
[9,] "Sephardic_Jewish" "9.6827"
[10,] "West_Sicilian" "9.8232"
[11,] "Moroccan_Jew" "10.4887"
[12,] "Greek_Symi_Island" "10.7376"
[13,] "Italian_Abruzzo" "11.4574"
[14,] "Greek_Crete1" "11.9622"
[15,] "Greek_Thessaly" "12.3135"
[16,] "Tunisian_Jewish" "12.5711"
[17,] "Greek_Chios1" "12.839"
[18,] "Libyan_Jewish" "13.1217"
[19,] "Albanian" "16.1316"
[20,] "Tuscan" "16.667"
[21,] "Cypriot" "17.2896"
[22,] "Turk_Bulgaria_Kuzey" "20.3159"
[23,] "North_Macedonian" "20.3822"
[24,] "Greek_Central_Anatolia" "20.4848"
[25,] "Lebanese_Muslim" "20.7757"
[26,] "Syrian" "21.5843"
[27,] "Bulgarian" "21.5897"
[28,] "Turk_Central_West" "21.8038"
[29,] "Turk_South_West" "22.0066"
[30,] "Tunisian" "22.2901"
[31,] "Turk_North_West" "22.5035"
[32,] "Jordanian" "22.9372"
[33,] "Palestinian" "22.9865"
[34,] "Samaritan" "23.1311"
[35,] "Algerian" "23.6068"
[36,] "Turk_Central_East" "23.806"
[37,] "North_Italian" "23.9742"
[38,] "Lebanese_Druze" "24.0123"
[39,] "Turk_South" "24.0347"
[40,] "Romanian" "24.109"
[41,] "Lebanese_Christian" "24.7558"
[42,] "Turkish" "24.8279"
[43,] "Bedouin" "25.1803"
[44,] "Egyptian" "25.3584"
[45,] "Mozabite_Berber" "25.4617"
[46,] "Moroccan" "26.4665"
[47,] "Turk_Central_Black_Sea" "26.8776"
[48,] "Turk_South_East" "28.3665"
[49,] "Turk_East" "28.4177"
[50,] "Serbian" "28.5528"
[51,] "Assyrian" "29.1159"
[52,] "Iranian_Jewish" "29.1329"
[53,] "Kurdish_Jewish" "29.4241"
[54,] "Armenian_Eastern_Anatolia" "29.9548"
[55,] "Turk_Azerbaijani" "30.3182"
[56,] "Azeri" "30.6803"
[57,] "Romani" "31.1559"
[58,] "Georgian_Jewish" "31.6753"
[59,] "SerbianBosnia" "32.0296"
[60,] "Greek_Pontus" "32.1058"

[Lemgrant]

and here is a run by the Greek Dienekes from the Dodecad ancestry project: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08/fastibd-analysis-of-several-jewish-and.html


fastIBD analysis of several Jewish and non-Jewish groups

This is more of a "just the data" kind of post, inspired by the two recent papers on Jewish origins. A few quick points:

> fastIBD was run with default parameters over a dataset of 512 individuals/264,539 SNPs

> fastIBD identifies segments of relatively recent origin that are shared by individuals. These results should not be construed as measures of overall genetic similarity or origins. Rather, they suggest which populations have exchanged genes in the relative recent past, say, the last two thousand years or so.

>I included all Ashkenazi_D and North_African_Jews_D samples; of the other Dodecad and reference populations, I took random samples of 10 each; running time of fastIBD increases with the square of the number of individuals, so doing this allowed me to run this in less than a day as opposed to about a week.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LkfrDhnXdrY/UCJQb898A8I/AAAAAAAAFPI/MQnER13KcxI/s1600/Ashkenazi_D.png

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-L9Nw87uZCSg/UCJQijh-_XI/AAAAAAAAFPQ/ESq5F1gLYxA/s1600/Sephardic_Jews.png
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0aa_SAiZpxE/UCJQrICgrNI/AAAAAAAAFPY/bwbfd6dAycg/s1600/Morocco_Jews.png
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aMUJs3QUQTs/UCJQyUVGyoI/AAAAAAAAFPg/DqxwVOs6GLI/s1600/Iraq_Jews.png

[Sweet Perv]

Wow it was tense between Venitian and Calabrese ! And now those barbarians who say we are a bunch of jews ! ;) I'm gonna cry in my bathroom. Jews came after 70 and stole our genes and then left. Some were christians moreover. Well... after all, it's no big deal. We're not in "Quo Vadis". And concerning J in south of Italy, I think it was an important haplogroup before the arrival of jews. Then it was increased by Arabs.

But I'd like to reconcile everybody with a small text by a french writer : Momo le Martegaou, more frequently known under the name of Charles Maurras. He was from Martigues, near Marseille, so a descendant of Ligurians, Greeks, Romans and... a bit of Gauls. To be taken CUM GRANO SALIS ;)

"I am Roman because Rome, since the consul Marius and the divine Julius until Theodosius, have knocked up the first configuration of my country. I am Roman, because Rome, the Rome of priests and popes, has given the eternal solidarity of the feeling, the traditions, the language, the cult, to the political work of the roman generals, civil servants and judges. I am Roman, because, if my forefathers had not been Roman like I am, the first barbarian invasion, between the Vth and the Xth century, would have made me some kind of German or Norwegian. I am Roman, because, without my tutelary romanity, the second barbarian invasion, on the XVIth century, the protestant invasion, would have pulled from me some kind of Swiss. I am Roman as soon as I abound in my historical, intellectual and moral being. I am Roman because if I were not, I would have pretty much nothing of a French. And I don't feel any trouble about being Roman that way, because the interests of roman catholicism and the interests of France are mixed almost all the time, they don't contradict themselves anywhere. But other interests, more general, if not more urgent, lead me to the law of feeling Roman. I am Roman insofar as I feel human : animal that builds cities and States, non vague gnawer of roots; social animal, and non solitary carnivore; animal that, traveller or sedentary, excels in capitalising the acquisitions from the past and even in deducing from those a rational law; non destroyer wandering in hordes and fed with the vestiges of the ruins he has made. I am Roman by all the positive of my being, by all that was added in it by the pleasure, the work, the mind, the memory, the reason, the science, the arts, the policy and the poetry of the men living and assembled before me. By this treasure whose the deposit was received from Athens and delivered to our Paris, Rome means without contest the civilization of humanity. I am Roman, I am human : two identical clauses."

[Samnium]

Wow it was tense between Venitian and Calabrese ! And now those barbarians who say we are a bunch of jews ! ;) I'm gonna cry in my bathroom. Jews came after 70 and stole our genes and then left. Some were christians moreover. Well... after all, it's no big deal. We're not in "Quo Vadis". And concerning J in south of Italy, I think it was an important haplogroup before the arrival of jews. Then it was increased by Arabs.

But I'd like to reconcile everybody with a small text by a french writer : Momo le Martegaou, more frequently known under the name of Charles Maurras. He was from Martigues, near Marseille, so a descendant of Ligurians, Greeks, Romans and... a bit of Gauls. To be taken CUM GRANO SALIS ;)

"I am Roman because Rome, since the consul Marius and the divine Julius until Theodosius, have knocked up the first configuration of my country. I am Roman, because Rome, the Rome of priests and popes, has given the eternal solidarity of the feeling, the traditions, the language, the cult, to the political work of the roman generals, civil servants and judges. I am Roman, because, if my forefathers had not been Roman like I am, the first barbarian invasion, between the Vth and the Xth century, would have made me some kind of German or Norwegian. I am Roman, because, without my tutelary romanity, the second barbarian invasion, on the XVIth century, the protestant invasion, would have pulled from me some kind of Swiss. I am Roman as soon as I abound in my historical, intellectual and moral being. I am Roman because if I were not, I would have pretty much nothing of a French. And I don't feel any trouble about being Roman that way, because the interests of roman catholicism and the interests of France are mixed almost all the time, they don't contradict themselves anywhere. But other interests, more general, if not more urgent, lead me to the law of feeling Roman. I am Roman insofar as I feel human : animal that builds cities and States, non vague gnawer of roots; social animal, and non solitary carnivore; animal that, traveller or sedentary, excels in capitalising the acquisitions from the past and even in deducing from those a rational law; non destroyer wandering in hordes and fed with the vestiges of the ruins he has made. I am Roman by all the positive of my being, by all that was added in it by the pleasure, the work, the mind, the memory, the reason, the science, the arts, the policy and the poetry of the men living and assembled before me. By this treasure whose the deposit was received from Athens and delivered to our Paris, Rome means without contest the civilization of humanity. I am Roman, I am human : two identical clauses."

You like Maurras, le Félibrige héhé ! He wanted an alliance with latin countries instead of germanic people because he believed that it was the deep origins of France.

[SharpFork]

The paper by Hannah Moots just show what I said, wait and see. Then you can go cry in your bathroom for being half French but liking to LARP as a Roman. Early Italics were North Italians, later Romans were South Italian-like. South Italians from any region are still closer to other South Italians than to any North Italians or even Tuscans.

The paper has been presented by Moots in many academic events, it's content is no big secret.

What's your logic there? Apparently the Romans(that spoke Italic just like "ancient Italics" as far as we can tell) were magically half-Greek/Eastern but the Celts in Northern Italy are the same as the previous inhabitants? How does that work?

[Lucas]

Paper is in https://sci-hub.se/10.1126/science.aay6826

https://i.imgur.com/JOD69Xx.png

[Samnium]

Actually I created this post one day before his publication what a coincidence lol.

[Lucas]

I was right finally about Germanic input and medieval shift towards Central and Northern Europe...


https://i.imgur.com/rRDZFTV.jpg


This shift may have arisen from reduced contacts with the eastern Mediterranean,increased gene flow from Europe, or both,facilitated by a drastic reduction in Rome’ spopulation in this period to less than 100,000individuals, due to conflicts and epidemics(1,3).
After the move of the capital and the split of the Roman Empire, many of the net-works of trade, grain supply, and governance that had previously flowed to and from Rome
were rerouted to Constantinople (2). The re-shaping of these networks would have affected the mobility of people, leading to weakened genetic affinity to the eastern Mediterranean.
Additionally, large-scale movements of people from central Europe into Italy may have resulted from the military campaigns of the Visigoths and Vandals in the 5th century CEand the long-term settlement of the Lombards in the region in the 6th and 7th centuries CE(1,3).
Furthermore, the decline of Rome’s population meant that even moderate amounts of immigration could have driven substantial changes in average ancestry.



The persisting genetic diversity in Rome may have resulted from several sources, including prior trade, migration, slavery,and conquest during the Imperial period, as well as continued trade networks in the western Mediterranean and the movement of Visigoths,Vandals, and Lombards into Italy.

The genetic impact of Lombard settlement in northern Italy has been shown previously in individuals in Collegno during this time (35).Our data show that this impact potentially extended to Rome. One of our sites, Crypta Balbi,was originally built as a theater courtyard in the Imperial era and used for numerous subsequent purposes in Late Antiquity, including housing a workshop for Lombard-associated ornament (such as belts, seals, and jewelry) and also as a burial space. Five of the seven individuals from this site are classified into the European cluster(C7) (Fig. 4 and fig. S17) and can be modeled as a mixture of the preceding Roman Imperial population and individuals from the Lombard-associated cemeteries in Collegno and Hungary(table S28)


In the Medieval and early modern periods(n= 28 individuals), we observe an ancestry shift toward central and northern Europe in PCA (Fig. 3E), as well as a further increase in the European cluster (C7) and loss of the Near Eastern and eastern Mediterranean clusters(C4 and C5) in ChromoPainter (Fig. 4C).
The Medieval population is roughly centered on modern-day central Italians (Fig. 3F). It can be modeled as a two-way combination of Rome’s Late Antique population and a European donor population, with potential sources including many ancient and modern populations in central and northern Europe: Lombards from Hungary, Saxons from England, and Vikings from Sweden, among others (table S26).
This shift is consistent with the growing ties between Medieval Rome and mainland Europe.Rome was incorporated into the Holy Roman Empire (3), which spanned much of central and western Europe. The Normans expanded from northern France to a number of regions,including Sicily and the southern portion of the Italian Peninsula (and even sacked the city of Rome in 1084), where they established the Kingdom of Sicily (3,36).

[Lucas]

There is no mention in study about supposed repopulation of Rome from rural sources as main factor of "northern shift" in early medieval era.

[Adamastor]

There is no mention in study about supposed repopulation of Rome from rural sources as main factor of "northern shift" in early medieval era.

Interesting. So it makes modern Central Italians a mix of East Med Imperial Romans and Germanic groups.

[Lousianaboy]

Interesting. So it makes modern Central Italians a mix of East Med Imperial Romans and Germanic groups.

Did germanic mix the blood with romans ?

[Adamastor]

You like Maurras, le Félibrige héhé ! He wanted an alliance with latin countries instead of germanic people because he believed that it was the deep origins of France.

That's because Maurras looked wog/south euro.

[Samnium]

There is no mention in study about supposed repopulation of Rome from rural sources as main factor of "northern shift" in early medieval era.

This study doesn't tell that much about inland in fact there are few samples that are coming from rural areas, and I can even say that to believe that all rural areas were the same...

However this study gives an explanation of the campanian results. Campania was densely populated in the past. So likely have been affected by Imperial shift and contrary to Rome Central euros didn't pulled out campanians.

[Adamastor]

What's your logic there? Apparently the Romans(that spoke Italic just like "ancient Italics" as far as we can tell) were magically half-Greek/Eastern but the Celts in Northern Italy are the same as the previous inhabitants? How does that work?

I did not said that. Don't distort my words. Romans became eastern shifted due to mixing with Greeks and other East Meds. Probably they were mixed enough with them by the time of the last Punic war.

[Lucas]

The persisting genetic diversity in Rome may have resulted from several sources, including prior trade, migration, slavery,and conquest during the Imperial period, as well as continued trade networks in the western Mediterranean and the movement of Visigoths,Vandals, and Lombards into Italy.

The genetic impact of Lombard settlement in northern Italy has been shown previously in individuals in Collegno during this time (35).Our data show that this impact potentially extended to Rome. One of our sites, Crypta Balbi,was originally built as a theater courtyard in the Imperial era and used for numerous subsequent purposes in Late Antiquity, including housing a workshop for Lombard-associated ornament (such as belts, seals, and jewelry) and also as a burial space. Five of the seven individuals from this site are classified into the European cluster(C7) (Fig. 4 and fig. S17) and can be modeled as a mixture of the preceding Roman Imperial population and individuals from the Lombard-associated cemeteries in Collegno and Hungary(table S28)

Northern shift is evident...

https://i.imgur.com/s3hkADe.jpg

[Samnium]

That's because Maurras looked wog/south euro.

He looked distinctly southern but southern french, of course could have been exchanged as an iberian or an italian.

[Arch Hades]

According to the Roman foundation myths themselves, aside from the later Trojan LARPing, Romans came about by a mixing of Italic tribes bar Etruscans, which per those papers turns out were indistinguishable from them anyway, so there is no reason for early Romans, who called themselves Quirites, that is, from the kingdom and early Republic, to be anything but iron age Italics bar of course some possible outliers even early on. This includes the patricians of course, the real original gentes.
And if I'm not mistaken the leaks said that among the (few) iron age Roman samples they have 60% were north Italian-like anyway. It's only in the Imperial era that not surprisingly the balance shifts heavily to the south. And keep in mind that "iron age" for them means something like 700BC to 20BC if I remember correctly, so it will be interesting to see the actual datings and how Romans were before the end of the Punic wars and the wars with Pyrrhus, which is probably when the flood of foreigners became serious.

I thought the myth was they were descended from the Trojan patriarchy?

[Calpurnius]

I thought the myth was they were descended from the Trojan patriarchy?
There may be some truth to it, especially since one of the iron age samples does seem to have something Anatolian in its ancestry, but I think it was exaggerated by patricians just to make their origins more noble within an Hellenized world, especially after the contact with the Greeks.

[Samnium]

There may be some truth to it, especially since one of the iron age samples does seem to have something Anatolian in its ancestry, but I think it was exaggerated by patricians just to make their origins more noble within an Hellenized world, especially after the contact with the Greeks.

In the same way that Etruscans were said by the Greeks to be from a pelasgian origin to make them closer.

[Calpurnius]

I was just playing around with G25, seeing that iron age Romans seem essentially to be between Croatia_IA and Iberia IA/Germany_Roman, it seems like one can get really good models for Italian_Lazio even with just 3 sources.
Look at this:
https://i.imgur.com/tScZ5yw.png
Mind you, I explored a space of possible 3 population sources among 10 including Vikings from Sigtuna and a Lombard sample from Collegno as more northern sources and chose the model with the smallest error. It's not every day you get under 1% error with only 3 sources. Even rising to sets of possible populations above 3 only at k=5 it chooses another northern sources, the Collegno Lombard, and at about 7%. I don't like to choose a number of sources too high as I think it overfits it.

[andre]

Just a question guys; if you should make a G25 model for modern Italians, how would you do it? (i mean; celtic, italic, hellenic ...)

[andre]

I was just playing around with G25, seeing that iron age Romans seem essentially to be between Croatia_IA and Iberia IA/Germany_Roman, it seems like one can get really good models for Italian_Lazio even with just 3 sources.
Look at this:
https://i.imgur.com/tScZ5yw.png
Mind you, I explored a space of possible 3 population sources among 10 including Vikings from Sigtuna and a Lombard sample from Collegno as more northern sources and chose the model with the smallest error. It's not every day you get under 1% error with only 3 sources. Even rising to sets of possible populations above 3 only at k=5 it chooses another northern sources, the Collegno Lombard, and at about 7%. I don't like to choose a number of sources too high as I think it overfits it.
I think that Sigtuna Vikings are slavic admix; try with Nordic_ia (it’s a swedish sample i guess)

[Calpurnius]

I think that Sigtuna Vikings are slavic admix; try with Nordic_ia (it’s a swedish sample i guess)
For Latium doesn't seem to make a difference.
These are the 10 pops I'm cycling through, exploring all the possible subsets of k=3 to 5 sources.
Moroccan, Anatolia_Isparta_EBA, DEU_Roman, HRV_IA, Iberia_N, Iberia_North_IA, ITA_Remedello_BA, Levant_LBN_Roman, SWE_IA, ITA_Collegno_MA:CL92
Remedello and Iberia_N are there, per the paper's results, as a proxy for copper age ancestry. Moroccan+Levant_Roman+Anatolia as southern sources.
I could increase the set but obviously the space of possible subsets of k grows exponentially with it so the time to cycle through all of them grows a lot too. I think also going above k=5 starts to make overfitting a problem.

[Peterski]

Map of Germanic Y-DNA in Italy made by Passa from Anthrogenica, indicates 3% to 9% in Lazio:

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8045-Map-of-Germanic-Y-DNA-in-Italy-by-Passa

https://i.imgur.com/ROzdhPu.jpg

Two-way mixture models for individuals from 300-700 AD, Table S24:

Germany_Late_Roman was that Roman soldier FN_2 who resembled genetically Republican Era Romans, or maybe Celtiberians:

https://i.imgur.com/E1mUqeq.png

^^^ So Romans from ca. 300-700 AD can be modelled as 60% Romans from 0-300 AD + 40% Roman soldiers similar to FN_2:

https://i.imgur.com/5CRjgFA.png

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

Table S23, F4 stats: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2019/11/06/366.6466.708.DC1/aay6826_Antonio_SM.pdf

=====

Roman soldier FN_2 from Monachium dated to ca. 300-500 CE plots in the PCA just like Republican Romans several centuries before him.

Or is it just my impression?

Another question - why didn't the authors in Table S24 include more mixture models with fully ancient sources? Only one ancient model.

[XenophobicPrussian]

The Germanic input in outside of parts of Northeast and Northwest Italy is obviously negligible. Good to know that this meme that true Romans were East Meds will be short lived and based on misinformation.
?

Supp info is already out, the OP is just making his own conclusions based on what one random guy said. The paper doesn't say any of that.

I mean, what's a "true Roman"? During the Imperial period, arguably the height of the Roman civilization, the average Roman was East Med. Republic Romans clustered inbetween N. Italians and Iberians(someone said between Tuscans and modern N. Italians, completely inaccurate, see fig 15, page 56 or page 68) with one East Med outlier, then once you get to the Imperial era, the height of the Romans, they're already extremely Middle-Eastern shifted. All these samples aren't only from Rome itself, but the surrounding central Italian countryside. The paper also literally argues for Germanic admixture in central Italian samples from the Middle-Ages(table S26, page 95) and also modeled them as 18% Germanic, with better fits(lower Chisq, higher p-value) than Antiquity Romans modeled with Republican Roman+modern Central Italian or north Italian(table S24, page 93). Medieval Romans aren't modern Central Italians but it shows the population source is there. Late Antiquity Romans even even share more f stats with Norwegians and Sweden_IA than they do with French, Basques or Iberians(page 92). Modern central Italy has 5-10% Germanic y-dna(northern 10-20%) which can translate to around 1.5x or double the amount in autosomal given it wasn't only males who migrated.

The Middle-Ages and early modern Rome(700 AD-1800 AD) was still really diverse, and some of the most northern shifted individuals(a whole cluster slightly south of modern French average) are from this era. Could've been N. Italian migrants and Renaissance/early modern N. Italy was much more northern shifted than modern N. Italians, but it's a whole lot of samples for them to be immigrants. Could be possible there was a lot of inter-Carolingian/Holy Roman Empire migration, so yeah to say Germanic admixture is negligible is wrong. Oddly, the 1400-1800 period was more northern shifted than the 700-1400 period(page 51), which is really fucking weird. Blue eyes, light skin and lactose tolerance in Italy also peaked during this period(page 70).

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2019/11/06/366.6466.708.DC1/aay6826_Antonio_SM.pdf

This paper pretty much confirms modern Italians have both significant Germanic admixture and Imperial migration Middle-Eastern admixture, because even N. Italians are significantly shifted south from Republic Italians. Also confirms there was significant mixing within Italy way before Italian unification.

dA rOmAnZ pLoTtEd In LeBaNoN xD
No, but they mixed with the Lebanese. Significantly.

[Token]

The Germanic input in outside of parts of Northeast and Northwest Italy is obviously negligible. Good to know that this meme that true Romans were East Meds will be short lived and based on misinformation.

You obviously haven't read the paper.

[Token]

?

Supp info is already out, the OP is just making his own conclusions based on what one random guy said. The paper doesn't say any of that.
I have access to the paper since i'm an academic and the researchers explicitly say that the northern admixture is of Germanic provenance.

[Peterski]

They should have checked a model assuming the resurgence of local (pre-Imperial) population:

Target: Rome_LA [300-700 AD]

Source 1: Rome_IR [0-300 AD]
Source 2: Rome_IA [900-0 BC]

Not sure why they didn't do this. Just like they didn't check any Germanic models for Rome_LA.

High P value indicates that a model is good / probable.

If there was no resurgence they would get low P value.

[Lucas]

I have access to the paper since i'm an academic and the researchers explicitly say that the northern admixture is of Germanic provenance.
Yes, but why the hell they didn't check LA samples with Germanics in qpAdm. But I'm sure Davidski will check soon.

https://i.imgur.com/rRDZFTV.jpg

[Peterski]

Yes, but why the hell they didn't check LA samples with Germanics in qpAdm.

The problem with that model for LA as target, is not that they used FN_2 as a source, but that they used IR as a source.

Rome_IR population got mostly extinct and did not contribute to LA population.

Models for Medieval population have better fits because they did not use IR as one of sources, but they used already LA.

[Lucas]

The problem with that model for LA as target, is not that they used FN_2 as a source, but that they used IR as a source.

Rome_IR population got mostly extinct and did not contribute to LA population.

Models for Medieval population have better fits because they did not use IR as one of sources, but they used already LA.
They always use pop from preceding epoch as first source, it is logical. Problem is with bad second source sample s for LA models.

There isn't mention in study of complete extermination of IR population. Only decline. Also no forum fantasies about rural population being like proto-Italic in LA period and that those peasants repopulated Rome. It is only forum shitposting. Read paper first.

[Peterski]

They always use pop from preceding epoch as first source, it is logical. Problem is with bad second source sample s for LA models.

I would use a population from Imperial epoch, but only rural samples from Roman citizens from various regions of Italy.

We have only urban samples from Rome, who were Near Eastern immigrants, and who got extinct together with the city:

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

This is why they are getting poor fits. I don't think poor fits are due to FN_2 being used as the 2nd source, but due to IR.


There isn't mention in study of complete extermination of IR population. Only decline.

Decline from over 1,500,000 inhabitants to 12,000 inhabitants is like complete extermination. It is around 99% decline.

Polish Jews had higher survival rate during the Holocaust than Romans (in the city of Rome) had during the Dark Ages.

[Samnium]

xenophobicPrussian :
If you see the localisation of the archeological areas they are all around Rome, almost, I don't call this to be representative of the Latium countryside honestly.

This study proves mostly that Romans were Southwestern Europeans, not that the countryside was all uniformly outlying as the Imperial results. And sincerely given the geography of Italy I don't believe one second to the fact that the countryside was eastern shifted as metropolitan areas.

Envoyé de mon ALE-L21 en utilisant Tapatalk

[Peterski]

In case someone would drop nuclear bombs on London and all major cities in England, you woulld have a change in England's genetics.

Because London is less than half native British, but villages 50 miles from London are ca. 99% ethnic English, and they would survive.

During the Dark Ages rural population survived better than urban population, and the latter also happened to be more multicultural.

[Samnium]

In case someone would drop nuclear bombs on London and all major cities in England, you woulld have a change in England's genetics.

Because London is less than half native British, but villages 50 miles from London are ca. 99% ethnic English, and they would survive.

During the Dark Ages rural population survived better than urban population, and the latter also happened to be more multicultural.

For me it's obvious. It's impossible that even the remote villages in the Apennines moutains have been shifted ethnically.

I can agree for the cosmopolitanism of the cities but certainly not for the villages far from Rome.

[Lucas]

For me it's obvious. It's impossible that even the remote villages in the Apennines moutains have been shifted ethnically.

I can agree for the cosmopolitanism of the cities but certainly not for the villages far from Rome.

True only for very remote villages:)
During sieges of medieval towns all villages in nearby area were plundered. For food, for raping women etc. Many times peasants escaped to castles when invaders came in and then were killed as townsmen. It is obvious knowledge.

And next thing. After Volkerwandrung depopulation, cities recovered very slowly. Early Medieval period wasn't a time of massive city development. It was true for all Western and Southern Europe, not only Rome.
And those peasants who persisted were bound to the ground by local aristocrats. Massive emigration of villagers to cities it is only Modern period not VI-VII century...
So I guess Rome population in the first few centuries grew up mainly because of local birthrate. And it was the same Imperial population, heavily reduced and affected by Germanic input, with very little effect of regional peasants migrations. It started to be main factor much later in late medieval era.

[Lucas]

This chart shows very clearly what I told. After V century Rome population was tiny up to XI-XII century. No massive repupopulation by local peasants in this time. So what was in autosomal makeup in V century persisted till XII. With small Germanic input and equally small local input from migrations.

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

I guess only in late medieval / Reneissance period local migrations had substantial meaning. And they change Rome autosomal profile but only in relation to modern times, not for example V-VIII century...

I know Peterski will soon post about it, so yes cities has usually negative birthrate and we see that Rome population steadily declined up to VIII/IX century when the width of the line is impossible to show it on chart. Or maybe from this time tiny percent of local peasant emigration was little bigger.

[Samnium]

This chart shows very clearly what I told. After V century Rome population was tiny up to XI-XII century. No massive repupopulation by local peasants in this time. So what was in autosomal makeup in V century persisted till XII. With small Germanic input and equally small local input from migrations.

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

I guess only in late medieval / Reneissance period local migrations had substantial meaning. And they change Rome autosomal profile but only in relation to modern times, not for example V-VIII century...

I don't say that there have been a massive repopulation later but that I don't believe that all the Latium was like the other Imperial era samples.

The whole countryside in the Apennines mountains (not that far from the fringe of Abbruzzo) hasn't been sampled.

The same for the inland provinces of Northern Lazio.

[Peterski]

During upheavals etc. cities suffer more than countryside.

Here is example from two regions of Poland during the "Deluge" (disastrous wars of 1648-1667):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(history)

Population change of these two regions is estimated as:

In years 1578-1580:

Rural population (non-Jewish) - 1,676,000
Non-Jewish urban population - 650,200
Jewish (all urban population) - 26,500

In years 1662-1676:

Rural population (non-Jewish) - 1,531,600
Non-Jewish urban population - 308,200
Jewish (all urban population) - 43,500

Summary of the decline:

Non-Jewish urban population changed from 650 thousand to 300 thousand (decline by 54%).

Non-Jewish rural population changed from 1676 thousand to 1532 thousand (decline by 9%).

Urban population suffered much more than rural.

Jewish (vast majority urban) population increased, but mainly due to their super high natural growth rates (which is already known from Ashkenazi genetics).

SOURCES (two books):

Bogucka, Samsonowicz, "Dzieje miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce" [History of cities in Poland]
Schiper, Tartakower, Hafftka, "Żydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej" [Jews in the Reborn Poland]

====

Edit:

IIRC, in the Olalde 2019 study the authors claimed Iberia has almost no Germanic admixture after modelling Visigoths with use of very "northern" Pre-Roman samples as a source (while samples from times of the Roman rule in Iberia were no longer as northern-shifted as those Pre-Roman, due to admixtures from the east).

And that made no sense, because Celtiberian genetics got altered during Roman period. The authors used a biased model to prove lack of Germanic DNA.

Here the authors have the opposite agenda - and are also using biased models. In this case it would actually make sense to use Republican samples, because - unlike Celtiberians in Iberia - Republican Romans could survive Imperial era unaltered. Imperial samples so far are only from Rome and vicinity, not from all over Italy.

We should wait for a comprehensive study with samples from all over Italy including various rural areas, just like Olalde 2019 sampled most of Iberia.

=====

I mostly agree with this interpretation by Erik from Anthrogenica:

"This complete separation precisely show that this change didn't take place in 27 BCE - it almost certainly began in the Late Republican Era, my bet would be on both Pyrrhic War in 275 BCE and the destruction of Carthage in the 2nd century BCE - both of these process brought under Republican rule regions populated by East Mediterranean population (Magna Graecia) and MENA population (Carthage). Most likely over those two centuries Rome gradually changed to become extensively East Med and MENA.

I also don't believe Rome was mostly populated by Germanic tribes - I agree uniparental evidence points against this.

I believe that with the re-taking of Rome by the Eastern Roman Empire and the rest of Italy, Northern Italians moved south and gradually repopulated the region, leading to genetics of modern Central Italians, which are essentially an interim population between North Italians and South Italians (which are completely separated and show no overlap).

The fact that the very southern parts of South Italy continued to be part of the Eastern Roman Empire up until the 11th century CE, then the region was unified as the Kingdom of Naples and separated from Rome, made sure that Rome mostly got populated by Italians from Tuscany and up, and not from the South Italy which maintained the East Mediterranean genetic profile which during Imperial era stretched all the way to Rome."

[Lucas]

There was another factor besides wars which caused decline of Roman population, but this time everyone could die. And in the same time favoured Lombard conquest.

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


The plague's long-term effects on European and Christian history were enormous. As the disease spread to port cities around the Mediterranean, the struggling Goths were reinvigorated and their conflict with Constantinople entered a new phase. The plague weakened the Byzantine Empire at a critical point, when Justinian's armies had nearly retaken all of Italy and the western Mediterranean coast; the evolving conquest would have reunited the core of the Western Roman Empire with the Eastern Roman Empire. Although the conquest occurred in 554, the reunification did not last long. In 568, the Lombards invaded Northern Italy, defeated the small Byzantine army that had been left behind, and established the Kingdom of the Lombards. The plague may have also contributed to the success of the Arabs a few generations later in the Byzantine-Arab Wars.[21][

[Dick]

There was another factor besides wars which caused decline of Roman population, but this time everyone could die. And in the same time favoured Lombard conquest.

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

Apparently Lombards found deserted villages etc when they entered the Empire. It wasn’t some bloody + raping conquest by them afaik(similar scenario with slavs in the Balkans perhaps) quote me if I’m wrong.

[Jana]

Supp info is already out, the OP is just making his own conclusions based on what one random guy said. The paper doesn't say any of that.

You nailed it. :thumb001:

[Samnium]

You nailed it. :thumb001:

He probably misunderstood the paper on that point but otherwise he was right about Etruscans and Imperial Era.

[Calpurnius]

Apparently Lombards found deserted villages etc when they entered the Empire. It wasn’t some bloody + raping conquest by them afaik(similar scenario with slavs in the Balkans perhaps) quote me if I’m wrong.
This but also the effects of the Gothic wars between the armies of the ERE and Ostrogoths which devastated Italy. I remember reading that up until that point Rome itself wasn't even that badly declined, there was even still a senate going on, even if only a shadow of its former self. Afterwards due to conflict it received its final blow.

Also, if plagues and wars aren't enough, I think the climate was also unfavorable.

[Jana]

He probably misunderstood the paper on that point but otherwise he was right about Etruscans and Imperial Era.

I think it was rather you guys making out of nowhere theories about some rural population resurgence when paper doesn't mention it. I don't take these seriously.
Everyone can make some wild theory but we are just amateurs with agendas.

It pretty much show central euro input in middle ages while iron age input was more western than central. They aren't the same, and it doesn't take a genius to conclude it's from barbarians.

[Dick]

This but also the effects of the Gothic wars between the armies of the ERE and Ostrogoths which devastated Italy. I remember reading that up until that point Rome itself wasn't even that badly declined, there was even still a senate going on, even if only a shadow of its former self. Afterwards due to conflict it received its final blow.

Also, if plagues and wars aren't enough, I think the climate was also unfavorable.

Yeah also the Lombards weren’t a strong tribe like they used to be or they would’ve stayed in Pannonia and fought the Huns. I wonder what Europe would look like if it wasn’t for the Huns. Present day Hungary+ Balkans would probably be Germanic speaking , Slavs would’ve stayed in the east.

[Vid Flumina]

I believe that with the re-taking of Rome by the Eastern Roman Empire and the rest of Italy, Northern Italians moved south and gradually repopulated the region, leading to genetics of modern Central Italians, which are essentially an interim population between North Italians and South Italians (which are completely separated and show no overlap).

North Italians and perhaps few Frenchies/Transalpines (wonder if the Church/Papal States played a significant role too over time)

Red line = East Med Roman-Germanic Barbarian cline. Thoughts?

https://i.imgur.com/x7MPpvb.png

[Samnium]

I think it was rather you guys making out of nowhere theories about some rural population resurgence when paper doesn't mention it. I don't take these seriously.

I haven't said that the paper proved that there was a rural population resurgence, I only bolded out since the beginning that I believe that remote areas like Apennines haven't been affected like urban areas. That's all.


It pretty much show central euro input in middle ages while iron age input was more western than central. They aren't the same, and it doesn't take a genius to conclude it's from barbarians.

It's clearly Central Euro input OR North-Italian migrations as a lot of North-Italians are more Central Euro shifted than West shifted.

[Token]

Funny to see the mental gymnastics of amateurs trying to know more than academics who have studied genetics for years in full time.

By the way, here is a working model for present-day Lazians using the Collegno Mediterranean outliers, who are in all likelihood Imperial Romans, to proxy Romans. You don't need an absurd amount of Germanic and it fits Y-DNA frequency pretty well.

Target,Distance,Roman_Imperial_Proxy,Germanic
Italian_Lazio,0.01407010,78.4,21.6
Average,0.01407010,78.4,21.6

[Samnium]

North Italians and perhaps few Frenchies/Transalpines (wonder if the Church/Papal States played a significant role too over time)

Red line = East Med Roman-Germanic Barbarian cline. Thoughts?

https://i.imgur.com/x7MPpvb.png

The close relation of France and the Church is known since Middle-Ages, and there was lot of french that went in Rome or Papal states.

One of the most famous of these french is probably Stendhal (appointed as consulate in Civitavecchia in 1831), Stendhal was a person very interested in antiquities, especially etruscans, and he had read almost all the important antiquity historians of his era like Mommsen.

France had and have also lot of institutions inside Rome : l'Ecole française de Rome being the most famous of these (a very important archeological institution). I can also think about diplomats, scholars, artists (Prix de Rome allowed a bursary to the winner to go in Rome for 3 years to study architecture and arts for example), merchants coming here in Renaissance or Medieval times.

[Peterski]

North Italians and perhaps few Frenchies/Transalpines (wonder if the Church/Papal States played a significant role too over time)

Red line = East Med Roman-Germanic Barbarian cline. Thoughts?

https://i.imgur.com/x7MPpvb.png

This shows for period 300-700 CE the direction of gene flow into Lazio from areas between Spain and Germany:

https://i.imgur.com/Km71izg.png

^^^
Those Bronze Age Anatolians were genetically a lot like modern Cyprus.

Imperial Rome is modelled as 20% Republic Romans plus 80% Cyprus:

https://i.imgur.com/hUT1F4d.png

^^^
This is 4/5 replacement. Do you really believe countryside was also 80% replaced?

[Peterski]

North Italians and perhaps few Frenchies/Transalpines (wonder if the Church/Papal States played a significant role too over time)

Red line = East Med Roman-Germanic Barbarian cline. Thoughts?

https://i.imgur.com/x7MPpvb.png

This shows for period 300-700 CE the direction of gene flow into Lazio from areas between Spain and Germany:

https://i.imgur.com/Km71izg.png

^^^
Those Bronze Age Anatolians were genetically a lot like modern Cyprus.

Imperial Rome is modelled as 20% Republic Romans plus 80% Cyprus:

https://i.imgur.com/hUT1F4d.png

^^^
This is 4/5 replacement. Do you really believe countryside was also 80% replaced?


(...)

Imperial Rome is just 20% Republic Roman + 80% Anatolia Bronze Age or modern Cyprus:

https://i.imgur.com/hUT1F4d.png

^^^
Do you really believe entire population of Italy was 80% replaced by East Med immigrants?

Or was it just the city itself (where samples are from) that experienced such replacement?

BTW:

I predicted this massive MENA immigration into Rome months ago, when pretty much everyone else (including you) were arguing that Romans were "genetically Sicilian" already when "Trojans/Greeks" founded the city. That was your fantasy at that time. And guess who was right and who was wrong. Turns out Early Romans were almost Central European. Now I'm saying that this 80% Cypriot genetics from Imperial Rome was only limited to the city, which later got extinct.

I'm not saying this genetic influence was completely absent from smaller towns and the countryside, but surely was not as strong as in Rome itself. Just wait until the next study with samples from all over Italy, not just Rome, destroys your new fantasy about 80% MENA-populated Imperial Italy.

[J. Ketch]

If the Lombards were already heavily mixed with Central Europeans by the time they reached Northern Italy (and even further mixed before reaching Central Italy), I suppose them having significant influence on modern Italians is more feasible.

Even so most Italians are pulled back more towards Iberia than Germany for instance on a PCA.

[Samnium]

Imperial Rome is just 20% Republic Roman + 80% Anatolia Bronze Age or modern Cyprus:

https://i.imgur.com/hUT1F4d.png

Do you really believe entire population of Italy was 80% replaced by East Med immigrants?

Or was it just the city itself (where samples are from) that experienced such replacement?

BTW:

I predicted this massive MENA immigration months ago, when pretty much everyone else (including you) were arguing that Romans were genetically East Med already when Trojans/Greeks founded the city. That was your fantasy at that time. And guess who was right and who was wrong. Turns out Early Romans were almost Central European. Now I'm saying that this 80% Cypriot genetics from Imperial Rome was only limited to the city, which later got extinct.

I'm not saying this genetic influence was completely absent from smaller towns and the countryside, but surely was not as strong as in Rome itself.

Personally I believed that very Ancient Italics were like Central Euros and Romans were like modern C.Italians but you know it's like playing the lottery.

However I never changed about the fact that's impossible that all the population have been shifted like the Imperial samples. Even today it would be very difficult and would need a generalized multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society that could reach even areas without roads, not connected to any kind of important city.

[savvas]

Guys, seriously, I don't give a fuck about the genetic composition of that dysgenic hellhole that was Imperial ''Rome''. Why is everyone on here and on Anthro(jew)nica focusing on these mutts?
We have REPUBLICAN ERA ROMANS PLOTTING LIKE NORTH-WESTERN ITALIANS. JULIUS CAESAR AND SHIT, THE REAL DEAL. Can we fucking work out if they are really like Piedmontese, or SW French like Adamastor and the Irish poster suggested based on the results of the Roman soldier from Germany who appear to exactly overlap with the most northern-shifted Republican Era sample on a PCA? CAN I FUCKING LARP AS A ROMAN OR IS IT BASQUES/SW FRENCH/CANTABRIANS WHO WUZ ROMANS?
Please Peterski, Token, Calpurnius, Vid Flumina, Davidski, give me the answers. Thank you.

[Token]

Guys, seriously, I don't give a fuck about the genetic composition of that dysgenic hellhole that was Imperial ''Rome''. Why is everyone on here and on Anthro(jew)nica focusing on these mutts?
We have REPUBLICAN ERA ROMANS PLOTTING LIKE NORTH-WESTERN ITALIANS. JULIUS CESAR AND SHIT, THE REAL DEAL. Can we fucking work out if they are really like Piedmontese, or SW French like Adamastor and the Irish poster suggested based on the results of the Roman soldier from Germany who appear to exactly overlap with the most northern-shifted Republican Era sample on a PCA? CAN I FUCKING LARP AS A ROMAN OR IS IT BASQUES/SW FRENCH/CANTABRIANS WHO WUZ ROMANS?
Please Peterski, Token, Calpurnius, Vid Flumina, Davidski, give me the answers. Thank you.
Just because Romans plotted closest to Northwest Italians doesn't mean Northwest Italians are 'muh tru3 Romans'. Just like a half Swedish, half Italian person isn't Austrian.

[Calpurnius]

We'll see, PCAs can often give a relatively good idea of the overall genetic distance but sometimes they don't, especially of course when it comes to differentiating very closely related people. For instance, I checked yesterday, the Germany Roman sample on the 10 dimensional PCA from the visualizer is closer to north Italians than Iberians. Yet on G25 the same sample is closer to Iberians.

[J. Ketch]

Even so most Italians are pulled back more towards Iberia than Germany for instance on a PCA.
To illustrate this point:
https://i.postimg.cc/tCKMdzpW/italy.png
Aside from Italy Northeast and the Aosta Valley, it doesn't look like the Italians have veered much from the SW Euro to East Med pipeline, and back again.

[Voskos]

If you take a look at the admixture chart it clearly proves genetic continuity from republic to modern era, albeit with some watering down of the europid (steppe and whg) admixture. Unsurprisingly the researchers conveniently ignore this and prefer to focus on the migration events to darkwash italy as much as possible.
Not that i expected any better from politicized pseudoscientists.
https://i.imgur.com/0LYKuiA.png

[Adamastor]

I estimate the 'East Med' shift in Rome to have started in the period of the Punic Wars. By the time of the absorption of Magna Graecia most of Central Italy and Southern Italy conquered by Rome was already shifting east. I have the impression ancient Greeks in Italy were heavily Eastern Mediterranean, similar to modern Dodecanese islanders. Subsequent mixing with even more West Asian peoples like Phrygians, Lydians and Carians could explain the genetics of modern Campanians, Lucanians etc.

By the year 1 of Common Era Romans were already significantly Eastern Mediterranean. To that huge shift they must have started to absorb this kind of blood something like 300-200 years before. So my guess that Punic Wars Romans were already shifted to the east is likely true.

In short:

1) Most Calabrians, Campanians, Lucanians: a mix between early Italics/Romans, Greeks and Northern West Asians.
2) Abruzzo, Puglia, Molise: Ancient Greek + some Roman/Italic.
3) Sicilians and Southern Calabrians: Triracial mutts with Arabian, North African and even SSA blood.

[Token]

To illustrate this point:
https://i.postimg.cc/tCKMdzpW/italy.png
Aside from Italy Northeast and the Aosta Valley, it doesn't look like the Italians have veered much from the SW Euro to East Med pipeline, and back again.

Which region do Italian_Northeast cover? Friuli? If so, it got significant Slavic ancestry.

[Adamastor]

Which region do Italian_Northeast cover? Friuli? If so, it got significant Slavic ancestry.

Parts of Friuli and parts of Veneto it seems. But not all Friulians are that north-shifted.

[Token]

Parts of Friuli and parts of Veneto it seems. But not all Friulians are that north-shifted.

Probably from places close to Slavia Friulana, and maybe northeast Veneto?

[Jana]

There is one NE Italian outlier who I get as closest population on G25, most likely Slovenian minority from Friuli. Other samples are in normal range for NE Italy.

[Voskos]

Ethnic Greeks were too few to make italy shift east.

The population of the entire Greek civilization (Greece, the Greek-speaking populations of Sicily, the coast of western Asia Minor, and the Black Sea) in the 4th century BC was recently estimated to be 500,000 to 600,000.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_demography

[Adamastor]

Probably from places close to Slavia Friulana, and maybe northeast Veneto?

Yeah, that's likely. Most of Friuli isn't that different from Veneto average and also Trentino average and most of them don't differ immensely from average North Italian sample.
Even Northeastern Italians are mostly SW Europeans, maybe with a Central Euro shift, but still SW Euro.

[savvas]

To illustrate this point:
https://i.postimg.cc/tCKMdzpW/italy.png
Aside from Italy Northeast and the Aosta Valley, it doesn't look like the Italians have veered much from the SW Euro to East Med pipeline, and back again.

Piedmont with all that post-WWII terrone influx pulling it south of Liguria (literally northern terroni), lol. Actual native Piedmontese (bar Monferrato) from Asti, Ivrea, Turin and Cuneo are more ''northern'' than Lombards:

https://i.imgur.com/vDpO7Ws.png

[Enr1989]

Parts of Friuli and parts of Veneto it seems. But not all Friulians are that north-shifted.

That sample on the map is an Ethnic Sloven

[Enr1989]

Piedmont with all that post-WWII terrone influx pulling it south of Liguria (literally northern terroni), lol. Actual native Piedmontese (bar Monferrato) from Asti, Ivrea, Turin and Cuneo are more ''northern'' than Lombards:

https://i.imgur.com/vDpO7Ws.png

True, not rare to find people who plot in France, but it is almost impossible to find a 4/4 Piedmontese, they have been genetically erased,

[Vid Flumina]

Piedmont with all that post-WWII terrone influx pulling it south of Liguria (literally northern terroni), lol. Actual native Piedmontese (bar Monferrato) from Asti, Ivrea, Turin and Cuneo are more ''northern'' than Lombards:


I believe it's the Ligurian-speaking isolate from Val Borbera (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_Borbera), also mentioned by Sizzi in his blog:


Il campione accademico (HGDP) che abbiamo a disposizione consta di 13 individui delle valli bergamasche, che non possono certo essere rappresentativi dell’intera Italia del Nord, anche perché in numero davvero ridotto; nei calcolatori amatoriali presenti su Gedmatch o sui vari blog di appassionati di genetica, il Bergamo sample è sempre usato come campione pel Nord Italia e, infatti, spesso viene chiamato Bergamo senza ulteriori precisazioni. A volte viene usato anche un campione tratto dall’isolato genetico della Val Borbera (provincia di Alessandria), etichettato come piemontese ma che in realtà è piuttosto in linea coi valori della Liguria.

https://ilsizzi.wordpress.com/2017/10/17/genetica-dellitalia-settentrionale/

[Samnium]

True, not rare to find people who plot in France, but it is almost impossible to find a 4/4 Piedmontese, they have been genetically erased,

Humm... Could you show me these Piedmontese ? For me it's only Aostans that can plot on France, but even they are generally more southern !

And by the way when I say France I don't talk about Northern French or French that are halfway between W.German and French average

[Leto]

Piedmont with all that post-WWII terrone influx pulling it south of Liguria (literally northern terroni), lol. Actual native Piedmontese (bar Monferrato) from Asti, Ivrea, Turin and Cuneo are more ''northern'' than Lombards:

[img]https://i.imgur.com/vDpO7Ws.png


True, not rare to find people who plot in France, but it is almost impossible to find a 4/4 Piedmontese, they have been genetically erased,
Do you guys mean Italians have shifted seriously to the South in the last 100 years or so?

[SharpFork]

Ethnic Greeks were too few to make italy shift east.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_demography
500k to 600k is ridiculously low, compare that to the estimations for the peak population of Roman Italy that average around 1/6 to 1/4 of the modern population. If we take the same approach for peak antiquity Greece a estimation of 2-4 million is not too far off, which is also a mid point between those low pop approaches and the ridiculously high ones of some scholars that go up to 10 million and more AFAIK.

[Enr1989]

Do you guys mean Italians have shifted seriously to the South in the last 100 years or so?

It has been mass migration from Southern Italy to the North from the late 60s to nowadays especially to the historically wealthier North West, you will not find 4/4 in big Northern Italians city, still some enclaves in the country side but also there many people have one or two southern Grandparent /Parent.
So to answer your question yes, Italy has been southernize , also culturally.

[Leto]

It has been mass migration from Southern Italy to the North from the late 60s to nowadays especially to the historically wealthier North West, you will not find 4/4 in big Northern Italians city, still some enclaves in the country side but also there many people have one or two southern Grandparent /Parent.
Prolly those people would plot around Rome, Florence or Bologna (my guess).

[Token]

It has been mass migration from Southern Italy to the North from the late 60s to nowadays especially to the historically wealthier North West, you will not find 4/4 in big Northern Italians city, still some enclaves in the country side but also there many people have one or two southern Grandparent /Parent.
So to answer your question yes, Italy has been southernize , also culturally.

Italo-Brazilians are descended from pre 60s North Italians and they plot just like regular North Italians.

[Samnium]

Prolly those people would plot around Rome, Florence or Bologna (my guess).

Depends on both side I think.

IMO N.Italian + S.Italian (I would say like Sicilians) = Central Italian as you said
From France to North + S.Italian = N.Italian or even more northern

That's my guesses.

A person on Anthrogenica had sent the result of an half ligurian half sicilian, he come between Lazio and Tuscany if I recall

[Adamastor]

Depends on both side I think.

IMO N.Italian + S.Italian (I would say like Sicilians) = Central Italian as you said
From France to North + S.Italian = N.Italian

That's my guesses.

A person on Anthrogenica had sent the result of an half ligurian half sicilian, he come between Lazio and Tuscany if I recall

I'm 70% North Italian, 20% Portuguese and 10% South Italian and I generally plot with Swiss Italians, Northwestern Italians and Southern French depending on the calculator.

But I guess 10% South Italian isn't enough to shift me east given that the remaining 90% is SW European with some north-shift since part of my North Italian ancestors were actually German speaking Tyroleans from Bolzano region.

[Samnium]

I'm 70% North Italian, 20% Portuguese and 10% South Italian and I generally plot with Swiss Italians, Northwestern Italians and Southern French depending on the calculator.

But I guess 10% South Italian isn't enough to shift me east given that the remaining 90% is SW European with some north-shift since part of my North Italian ancestors were actually German speaking Tyroleans from Bolzano region.

Interesting. I saw that you plot a little bit northern than the N.Italian reference (like 3 something like that).

Which region of S.Italy ?

[Leto]

Depends on both side I think.

IMO N.Italian + S.Italian (I would say like Sicilians) = Central Italian as you said
From France to North + S.Italian = N.Italian

That's my guesses.

A person on Anthrogenica had sent the result of an half ligurian half sicilian, he come between Lazio and Tuscany if I recall
Are people with Sardinian roots rare in mainland Italy?

[Samnium]

Are people with Sardinian roots rare in mainland Italy?

Not common I think. But actually people can score Sardinian in their DNA results (like 23andme) don't know if it's the algorithm that gives Sardinian where there isn't sardinian ancestry...

[Adamastor]

Interesting. I saw that you plot a little bit northern than the N.Italian reference (like 3 something like that).

Which region of S.Italy ?

My great-grandmother was half Apulian and had a Calabrian great-grandfather. Her other grandmother was Venetian.

So it makes me around 6.12% Apulian and around 3% Calabrian. My Calabrian ancestor was from Bova, southern Calabria, so likely very Middle Eastern shifted but I don't show any Middle Eastern in autosomal since it's a very small ancestry.

MDLP K16 gives me this:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Neolithic 31.46
2 Caucasian 21.26
3 Steppe 20.75
4 NorthEastEuropean 20.61
5 NorthAfrican 1.5
6 NearEast 0.98
7 Indian 0.71
8 Oceanic 0.6

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Swiss (Switzerland) 2.81
2 Italian (Friul) 3.54
3 Portuguese (Portugal) 5.17
4 Provencal (Provence) 5.47
5 Italian (NorthIitaly) 5.53
6 Corsican (Corsica) 6.46
7 Austrian (Austria) 6.76
8 German (SouthGermany) 7.09
9 Spanish (Spain) 7.26
10 Spanish (Baleares) 7.57
11 Romanian (Romania) 7.59
12 Romanian (Gorj) 7.88
13 Italian (Bergamo) 7.94
14 French (NorthwestFrance) 8.1
15 Spanish (Extremadura) 8.15
16 French (EastFrance) 8.28
17 Romanian (Apuseni) 8.34
18 Jew (Belmonte) 8.38
19 Montenegrian (Montenegro) 8.41
20 Italian (Tuscany) 8.71

[Samnium]

My great-grandmother was half Apulian and had a Calabrian great-grandfather. Her other grandmother was Venetian.

So it makes me around 6.12% Apulian and around 3% Calabrian. My Calabrian ancestor was from Bova, southern Calabria, so likely very Middle Eastern shifted but I don't show any Middle Eastern in autosomal since it's a very small ancestry.

MDLP K16 gives me this:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Neolithic 31.46
2 Caucasian 21.26
3 Steppe 20.75
4 NorthEastEuropean 20.61
5 NorthAfrican 1.5
6 NearEast 0.98
7 Indian 0.71
8 Oceanic 0.6

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Swiss (Switzerland) 2.81
2 Italian (Friul) 3.54
3 Portuguese (Portugal) 5.17
4 Provencal (Provence) 5.47
5 Italian (NorthIitaly) 5.53
6 Corsican (Corsica) 6.46
7 Austrian (Austria) 6.76
8 German (SouthGermany) 7.09
9 Spanish (Spain) 7.26
10 Spanish (Baleares) 7.57
11 Romanian (Romania) 7.59
12 Romanian (Gorj) 7.88
13 Italian (Bergamo) 7.94
14 French (NorthwestFrance) 8.1
15 Spanish (Extremadura) 8.15
16 French (EastFrance) 8.28
17 Romanian (Apuseni) 8.34
18 Jew (Belmonte) 8.38
19 Montenegrian (Montenegro) 8.41
20 Italian (Tuscany) 8.71

Bova, hum, Aspromonte ! Yes Reggio Calabria is extremely east-shifted but I tend to say not as Vibo that's even more outlying.

[Enr1989]

Depends on both side I think.

IMO N.Italian + S.Italian (I would say like Sicilians) = Central Italian as you said
From France to North + S.Italian = N.Italian or even more northern

That's my guesses.

A person on Anthrogenica had sent the result of an half ligurian half sicilian, he come between Lazio and Tuscany if I recall

I am 1/8 or 1/16 southern Italian too, not sure maybe Campania but most likely Sicily, I tried to look into it but didn't get proper info, but still sligthly more NE shifted than standard N. Italy sample though.

[Samnium]

I am 1/8 or 1/16 southern Italian too, not sure maybe Campania but most likely Sicily, I tried to look into it but didn't get proper info, but still sligthly more NE shifted than standard N. Italy sample though.

Southern/Northern Italian mixes have also become more common with time.

[Enr1989]

Southern/Northern Italian mixes have also become more common with time.

Yes it is what I am saying a houndred years ago N. Italian sample was probably more north shifted than today

[Samnium]

Yes it is what I am saying a houndred years ago N. Italian sample was probably more north shifted than today

I don't think that they were like french because definitely Alps were always a barrier but I agree that they were more northern shifted.

I think (reasonably) that a good part of predominantly "northern" ancestry have atleast some southern roots definitely. To not talk about the half sicilian half venetian/piedmontese etc. I have an uncle (unrelated to me) who's an half sicilian half piedmontese just saying. :thumb001:

[Token]

Depends on both side I think.

IMO N.Italian + S.Italian (I would say like Sicilians) = Central Italian as you said
From France to North + S.Italian = N.Italian or even more northern

That's my guesses.
A person on Anthrogenica had sent the result of an half ligurian half sicilian, he come between Lazio and Tuscany if I recall
I think North Italians before Romanization were French-like, but just 100 years ago? There are still Italo-Brazilians descended from North Italians before mass migrations from Southern Italy and they are regular North Italians.

[Leto]

Didn't industrial migrations start in the Fascist period during industrialisation? Adriano Celentano was born before WW2, I believe.

[Samnium]

I think North Italians before Romanization were French-like, but just 100 years ago? There are still Italo-Brazilians descended from North Italians before mass migrations from Southern Italy and they are regular North Italians.

What he says is that in the last 100 years there was enough immigration from the South to shift the N.Italian samples more southern, it's not necessarily having one direct ancestor, it's a global shift.

And I don't know if N.Italians before the Romanization were French-like, Alps have always been a barrier and I doubt that they would have been exactly "alike".

[Samnium]

Didn't industrial migrations start in the Fascist period during industrialisation? Adriano Celentano was born before WW2, I believe.

In reality it started in 1861. So it's even older than the 20th century.

[Messier 67]

orientalists gonna get a heart attack

was nevertheless predictable, Romans themselves lamented the masses of east mediterranean rabble that had invaded the city and began even having significant influence, including the Greeks themselves
I hope the paper has isotope info too to understand which ones were locals or not, IIRC many samples are from the port of Ostia, which isn't exactly a place one would find patricians just hanging around during the Imperial age

Only one Y-DNA sample from the Isola port. Two Y-DNA samples from the road to the port. So this paper is a great example of the migrants to Rome that made Rome 1 million people. Barely any Y-DNA on the ports.

[Token]

What he says is that in the last 100 years there was enough immigration from the South to shift the N.Italian samples more southern, it's not necessarily having one direct ancestor, it's a global shift.

And I don't know if N.Italians before the Romanization were French-like, Alps have always been a barrier and I doubt that they would have been exactly "alike".

Not exactly alike, but more north shifted than post Romanization since North Italians, like Iberians, got quite a lot of East Mediterranean ancestry from Imperial Rome.
Iberians, for instance, were Southwest French-like before all that mess. Aren't the Pyrenees also a barrier?

[Samnium]

Only one Y-DNA sample from the Isola port. Two Y-DNA samples from the road to the port. So this paper is a great example of the migrants to Rome that made Rome 1 million people. Barely any Y-DNA on the ports.

And barely any sample from the remote areas of Lazio. They didn't even go there for modern samples :picard2:

[Samnium]

Not exactly alike, but more north shifted than post Romanization since North Italians, like Iberians, got quite a lot of East Mediterranean ancestry from Imperial Rome.

Yes that what I've said

[Adamastor]

Not exactly alike, but more north shifted than post Romanization since North Italians, like Iberians, got quite a lot of East Mediterranean ancestry from Imperial Rome.
Iberians, for instance, were Southwest French-like before all that mess. Aren't the Pyrenees also a barrier?

But Iron Age North Italian samples already had Iran_N, Iberians received it after Roman conquest. I think North Italians have never been French-like.

[Token]

But Iron Age North Italian samples already had Iran_N, Iberians received it after Roman conquest. I think North Italians have never been French-like.

There are no Iron Age North Italian samples.

[Vid Flumina]

Didn't industrial migrations start in the Fascist period during industrialisation? Adriano Celentano was born before WW2, I believe.

Immigration started way earlier. While reconstructing my family tree I was stunned to see typical "FOB" Southern Italian names popping up in the local archives, we're talking 1870-80 so right after Italian Unification in godforsaken Asti countryside.

[Adamastor]

There are no Iron Age North Italian samples.

I mean Roman samples who were North Italian-like. My bad. I see no reason to think they were so different from their contemporary populations in Northern Italy.

[Samnium]

Immigration started way earlier. While reconstructing my family tree I was stunned to see typical "FOB" Southern Italian names popping up in the local archives, we're talking 1870-80 so right after Italian Unification in godforsaken Asti countryside.Yep I've said even 1861 because migrations started even the years following the Unification.

Envoyé de mon ALE-L21 en utilisant Tapatalk

[Enr1989]

I think since Italy unified and population has become slightly more uniform than before obviously, but in this case the migration trend has always been south to north so N.Italian are closer to Southern now, I don't know in which degree certainly they were not French alike before

[Token]

I mean Roman samples who were North Italian-like. My bad. I see no reason to think they were so different from their contemporary populations in Northern Italy.

These North Italian-like Romans are from Latium, so i'd expect North Italians to be naturally more north shifted than that. What do you think? Also North Italians speak Romance with a Gaulish substratum (it is called Gallo-Italic after all), so i'd expect Gauls to have had at least some genetic impact there.

[Jana]

Even Italians in Croatia are mixed Italian regions. My friend is half Italian from Fiume, her father is Friulian with some Sicilian ancestry. Lot of southern Italians came here during Mussolini.
Before that almost all Italians were northeastern (Friuli, Veneto) or native Istrian-Italian origin.

[Samnium]

I struggle to convert the BAM file of the etruscan sample in files that can be read by Gedmatch anyone has a solution ?

[Leto]

Immigration started way earlier. While reconstructing my family tree I was stunned to see typical "FOB" Southern Italian names popping up in the local archives, we're talking 1870-80 so right after Italian Unification in godforsaken Asti countryside.
I see. Correct me if I'm wrong, I just got the impression you don't associate yourself with non-Northern Italians. I know there is some Northern supremacists but I won't go into that subject since it's not my country and doesn't concern me at all.

[Adamastor]

These North Italian-like Romans are from Latium, so i'd expect North Italians to be naturally more north shifted than that. What do you think? Also North Italians speak Romance with a Gaulish substratum (it is called Gallo-Italic after all), so i'd expect Gauls to have had at least some genetic impact there.

I think that's not impossible but we need Cisalpine Gaul results to now for sure. I think there are more chances of Iron Age Northwestern Italians being kinda Basque-shifted in antiquity than Northeastern Italians. Maybe Rhaetians and Venetics certainly carried some other types of admixture.

By Basque I mean French Basques ofc, they are purer than Spanish Basques. This type of extremely ''SW European'' profile without additional ''exotic'' influences like North African and Iran_N was for sure more widespread in ancient Mediterranean Europe. I just think that is probable that Iron Age North Italians had less WHG than Iberians and SW French from the same period. Etruscans likely came from up north and could be modeled as EEF + Steppe.

Btw, I'm still puzzled by the North African admixed Etruscan sample that could be modeled even using Yoruban. I think these ancient populations moved far more than we thought previously,.

[Samnium]

These North Italian-like Romans are from Latium, so i'd expect North Italians to be naturally more north shifted than that. What do you think? Also North Italians speak Romance with a Gaulish substratum (it is called Gallo-Italic after all), so i'd expect Gauls to have had at least some genetic impact there.

I don't think that it works that way. N.Italy had already populations that weren't gaullish like ligurians or veneti, and Etruscans also made it to Emilia Romagna.

Whereas France it was almost only Gauls except the Southwestern and a part of the Southeastern France.

[dududud]

I don't think that it works that way. N.Italy had already populations that weren't gaullish like ligurians or veneti, and Etruscans also made it to Emilia Romagna.

Whereas France it was almost only Gauls except the Southwestern and a part of the Southeastern France.

Le sud-ouest était bien peuplé par des tribus gauloises, celtiques si tu préfères. Aussi vasconiques, c'est un mélange.

Tu peux envoyer le sample gedmatch de l'étrusque ?

[Token]

I think that's not impossible but we need Cisalpine Gaul results to now for sure. I think there are more chances of Iron Age Northwestern Italians being kinda Basque-shifted in antiquity than Northeastern Italians. Maybe Rhaetians and Venetics certainly carried some other types of admixture.

By Basque I mean French Basques ofc, they are purer than Spanish Basques. This type of extremely ''SW European'' profile without additional ''exotic'' influences like North African and Iran_N was for sure more widespread in ancient Mediterranean Europe. I just think that is probable that Iron Age North Italians had less WHG than Iberians and SW French from the same period. Etruscans likely came from up north and could be modeled as EEF + Steppe.

Btw, I'm still puzzled by the North African admixed Etruscan sample that could be modeled even using Yoruban. I think these ancient populations moved far more than we thought previously,.
Yes, that North African Etruscan was so random that i laughed when i saw it. Etruscan were Urnfielders so they probably came from Central Europe, like Romans. Actually, i think even parts of Europe north of the Alps are going to show this SW European profile before migrations from further north. There is a sample from Tumulus culture in Germany which plots in the same general cluster as Romans, and this is the supposedly Italic homeland. So do the Lech Middle Bronze Age samples.

[Token]

I don't think that it works that way. N.Italy had already populations that weren't gaullish like ligurians or veneti, and Etruscans also made it to Emilia Romagna.

Whereas France it was almost only Gauls except the Southwestern and a part of the Southeastern France.

Adriatic Veneti were Celtic speakers and probably related to Armorica Veneti as per the most recent linguistic paper on its classfication. Ligurian was at least Para-Celtic.

[wvwvw]

Etruria was populated by a dozen unrelated tribes some of which were celtic tribes, others like Pelasgians/Myceneans, Trojans who were Greek, and of course Lydians. These migrations are documented and corraborated by all ancient writers as well by the tribes in question which were still extant at the time those historians wrote. That was the historical consensus. There was no single tribe called Etruscans and no Roman or Greek writer mention such tribe, they only refer to Etruria as a geographic term.

[Samnium]

Adriatic Veneti were Celtic speakers and probably related to Armorica Veneti as per the most recent linguistic paper on its classfication. Ligurian was at least Para-Celtic.

I don't think that they were of a full "celtic" stock but certainly they had celtic ancestry as all N.Italians of this era (and now obviously).

[Adamastor]

Etruria was populated by a dozen unrelated tribes some of which were celtic tribes, others like Pelasgians/Myceneans, Trojans who were Greek, and of course Lydians. These migrations are documented and corraborated by all ancient writers as well by the tribes in question which were still extant at the time those historians wrote. That was the historical consensus. There was no single tribe called Etruscans and no Roman or Greek writer mention such tribe, they only refer to Etruria as a geographic term.

Stop spamming serious threads with your usual ignorant bullshit, Raine. I think TA should have a serious section allowed only for members wanting to discuss genetics, history and trolling should be reserved for the other sections.

[Samnium]

Etruria was populated by a dozen unrelated tribes some of which were celtic tribes, others like Pelasgians/Myceneans, Trojans who were Greek, and of course Lydians. These migrations are documented and corraborated by all ancient writers that corraborate each other, as well by the tribes in question which were still extant at the time those historians wrote. That was the historical consensus. There was no single tribe called Etruscans and no Roman or Greek writer mention such tribe, they only refer to Etruria as a geographic term.

Etruria was a confederation of cities that had in common the etruscan religion (their sanctuary was in Volterra if I remind), but otherwise yes they were probably a little bit different ethnically and received various influences, depending on the location. We don't have Tarquinia samples but I bet that they will show some degree of East-Med ancestry as the paintings of Tarquinia depict peoples with very med/east-med phenotypes (but also "white" people).

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTh2TF7DnNyPgCFcsqczpOt-HYymvRsFn5nr2YleUOq9WzgZ7wc&s

[wvwvw]

--

[dududud]

Some have the gedmatch etruscan kit?

[Enr1989]

Etruria was populated by a dozen unrelated tribes some of which were celtic tribes, others like Pelasgians/Myceneans, Trojans who were Greek, and of course Lydians. These migrations are documented and corraborated by all ancient writers as well by the tribes in question which were still extant at the time those historians wrote. That was the historical consensus. There was no single tribe called Etruscans and no Roman or Greek writer mention such tribe, they only refer to Etruria as a geographic term.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105920

This paper confirm partially your statement, also the legend of Enea coming to Italian peninsula after the distruction of Troy may have any truth in it

[wvwvw]

Etruria was a confederation of cities that had in common the etruscan religion (their sanctuary was in Volterra if I remind), but otherwise yes they were probably a little bit different ethnically and received various influences, depending on the location. We don't have Tarquinia samples but I bet that they will show some degree of East-Med ancestry as the paintings of Tarquinia depict peoples with very med/east-med phenotypes (but also "white" people).

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTh2TF7DnNyPgCFcsqczpOt-HYymvRsFn5nr2YleUOq9WzgZ7wc&s

Speaking of Tarqunia, the first Roman Emperor to come out of Etruria, Tarquin, was a Corinthian who had settled in Etruria.

[Samnium]

Speaking of Tarqunia, the first Roman Emperor to come out of Etruria, Tarquin, was a Corinthian who had settled in Etruria.

Yes. I believe that Tarquinia was also cosmopolitan because of his position. I've visited the necropolis, and actually the hill where it stands is not that far from the sea, you can see it (15/17km something like that).

[Samnium]

Do you know how to convert a BAM (raw DNA) file to a Build 37 (GRCh37/hg19) file ? I have a software but it doesn't work.

[MinervaItalica]

Etruria was populated by a dozen unrelated tribes some of which were celtic tribes, others like Pelasgians/Myceneans, Trojans who were Greek, and of course Lydians. These migrations are documented and corraborated by all ancient writers as well by the tribes in question which were still extant at the time those historians wrote. That was the historical consensus. There was no single tribe called Etruscans and no Roman or Greek writer mention such tribe, they only refer to Etruria as a geographic term.

:picard1:

Etruscans were people on their own with their own language, stop spouting nonsense. Then, if there were other different ethnicities living in Etruria is another thing. Greeks were very limited to South Italy coastal areas.


Adriatic Veneti were Celtic speakers

I disagree.

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_venetica

[Calpurnius]

Do you know how to convert a BAM file to a Build 37 (GRCh37/hg19) file ? I have a software but it doesn't work.
what do you mean? BAMs are already aligned, you need to do the SNP calls(essentially for the 1240K panel)with something like samtools, then IIRC you can use PLINK to get genotype files. I'm a bit rusty on that sorry.

[Samnium]

what do you mean? BAMs are already aligned, you need to do the SNP calls(essentially for the 1240K panel)with something like samtools, then IIRC you can use PLINK to get genotype files. I'm a bit rusty on that sorry.

Thanks.

[wvwvw]

I'm not talking only about Jews (and in ancient times there were others who were more urbanized than Jews and lived within the Roman Empire).

Rome was like London today - in Late Imperial period it had surely more immigrants than original Romans. The same applies to other big cities.

Those people were not immigrants but people that had migrated there before the emergence of Rome. The Tyrrhenians for example had migrated to Italy shortly after the Thera explosion in 1628 BC. Greeks had been migrating there since Minoan times. Italy was also called Saturnia at some point, after the Minoan king Saturn (Cronos) who was expelled from Greece.

Other than that there were no significant migrations to Italy, nor there were mass migrations to Italy as many falsely imply, even in Imperial period.

[Samnium]

:picard1:

Etruscans were people on their own with their own language, stop spouting nonsense. Then, if there were other different ethnicities living in Etruria is another thing. Greeks were very limited to South Italy coastal areas.



I disagree.

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_venetica

Yes. People tend to over-estimate the greeks in S.Italy.

There were Italic people that fought constantly against them, like the Brettii in Calabria.

[Sizzo]

4/4 Piedmontese guy from Turin area

Eurogenes K13

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 33.87
2 West_Med 24.18
3 East_Med 17.33
4 Baltic 15.9
5 West_Asian 6.23
6 Red_Sea 1.76
7 Amerindian 0.48
8 Oceanian 0.16
9 East_Asian 0.07
10 Siberian 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 North_Italian 4.85
2 Portuguese 7.76
3 Spanish_Extremadura 8.72
4 Spanish_Galicia 8.81
5 Spanish_Cataluna 8.83
6 Spanish_Valencia 9.26
7 Spanish_Murcia 9.47
8 Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon 9.68
9 Spanish_Andalucia 10.08
10 Tuscan 10.52
11 French 10.77
12 Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha 10.88
13 Spanish_Cantabria 11.73
14 Southwest_French 12.72
15 Spanish_Aragon 13.61
16 Romanian 13.68
17 Serbian 14.3
18 Bulgarian 14.99
19 West_German 15.14
20 South_Dutch 15.81

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 61.9% Spanish_Valencia + 38.1% Bulgarian @ 1.23
2 52.4% Spanish_Aragon + 47.6% Bulgarian @ 1.57
3 80.9% North_Italian + 19.1% East_German @ 1.59
4 86.4% North_Italian + 13.6% North_Swedish @ 1.62
5 59.8% Spanish_Valencia + 40.2% Romanian @ 1.66
6 79.1% North_Italian + 20.9% Austrian @ 1.68
7 85.5% North_Italian + 14.5% Swedish @ 1.72
8 87.9% North_Italian + 12.1% Southwest_Finnish @ 1.81
9 85.5% North_Italian + 14.5% Norwegian @ 1.93
10 83.7% North_Italian + 16.3% North_German @ 1.99
11 77.3% North_Italian + 22.7% West_German @ 2.01
12 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% North_Dutch @ 2.08
13 78.2% North_Italian + 21.8% South_Dutch @ 2.1
14 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% Danish @ 2.1
15 58.2% Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha + 41.8% Bulgarian @ 2.12
16 89.6% North_Italian + 10.4% Estonian @ 2.14
17 63.4% Spanish_Cataluna + 36.6% Bulgarian @ 2.21
18 89.6% North_Italian + 10.4% Finnish @ 2.23
19 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% Orcadian @ 2.26
20 83.1% North_Italian + 16.9% Southeast_English @ 2.26

[Samnium]

4/4 Piedmontese guy from Turin area

Eurogenes K13

#PopulationPercent
1North_Atlantic33.87
2West_Med24.18
3East_Med17.33
4Baltic15.9
5West_Asian6.23
6Red_Sea1.76
7Amerindian0.48
8Oceanian0.16
9East_Asian0.07
10Siberian0.02

Single Population Sharing:

#Population (source)Distance
1North_Italian4.85
2Portuguese7.76
3Spanish_Extremadura8.72
4Spanish_Galicia8.81
5Spanish_Cataluna8.83
6Spanish_Valencia9.26
7Spanish_Murcia9.47
8Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon9.68
9Spanish_Andalucia10.08
10Tuscan10.52
11French10.77
12Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha10.88
13Spanish_Cantabria11.73
14Southwest_French12.72
15Spanish_Aragon13.61
16Romanian13.68
17Serbian14.3
18Bulgarian14.99
19West_German15.14
20South_Dutch15.81

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source)Secondary Population (source)Distance
1 61.9%Spanish_Valencia+38.1%Bulgarian@1.23
2 52.4%Spanish_Aragon+47.6%Bulgarian@1.57
3 80.9%North_Italian+19.1%East_German@1.59
4 86.4%North_Italian+13.6%North_Swedish@1.62
5 59.8%Spanish_Valencia+40.2%Romanian@1.66
6 79.1%North_Italian+20.9%Austrian@1.68
7 85.5%North_Italian+14.5%Swedish@1.72
8 87.9%North_Italian+12.1%Southwest_Finnish@1.81
9 85.5%North_Italian+14.5%Norwegian@1.93
10 83.7%North_Italian+16.3%North_German@1.99
11 77.3%North_Italian+22.7%West_German@2.01
12 84.6%North_Italian+15.4%North_Dutch@2.08
13 78.2%North_Italian+21.8%South_Dutch@2.1
14 84.6%North_Italian+15.4%Danish@2.1
15 58.2%Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha+41.8%Bulgarian@2.1 2
16 89.6%North_Italian+10.4%Estonian@2.14
17 63.4%Spanish_Cataluna+36.6%Bulgarian@2.21
18 89.6%North_Italian+10.4%Finnish@2.23
19 84.6%North_Italian+15.4%Orcadian@2.26
20 83.1%North_Italian+16.9%Southeast_English@2.26
Which part of Torino area, Canavese ?

[Sizzo]

^ Turin province.

[Samnium]

Ok nice.

Today I will try to convert the files of one of the etruscans guy and run it on Gedmatch to see.

[Peterski]

Sample R435 Roman Republic, 600-200 BC, Similitude Map:

https://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

K36 results:

R435
Basque 5.56
Central_Euro 2.72
Eastern_Euro 0.55
Fennoscandian 3.40
French 12.68
Iberian 21.95
Italian 23.51
North_Atlantic 6.45
North_Sea 12.39
West_Med 10.80

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

Sample R1021 Iron Age B, 700-600 BC, Similitude Map:

K36 results:

R1021
Basque 2.44
Central_Euro 6.81
East_Balkan 2.65
East_Central_Euro 0.70
East_Med 4.06
Fennoscandian 0.21
French 8.25
Iberian 26.56
Italian 25.56
Near_Eastern 0.50
North_African 0.46
North_Atlantic 3.75
North_Sea 4.85
Volga-Ural 0.01
West_Caucasian 0.69
West_Med 12.49

https://i.imgur.com/y1gCMh8.png

I will post more later.

[Samnium]

Sample R435 Roman Republic, 600-200 BC, Similitude Map:

https://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

K36 results:

R435
Basque 5.56
Central_Euro 2.72
Eastern_Euro 0.55
Fennoscandian 3.40
French 12.68
Iberian 21.95
Italian 23.51
North_Atlantic 6.45
North_Sea 12.39
West_Med 10.80

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

Sample R1021 Iron Age B, 700-600 BC, Similitude Map:

K36 results:

R1021
Basque2.44
Central_Euro6.81
East_Balkan2.65
East_Central_Euro0.70
East_Med4.06
Fennoscandian0.21
French8.25
Iberian26.56
Italian25.56
Near_Eastern0.50
North_African0.46
North_Atlantic3.75
North_Sea4.85
Volga-Ural0.01
West_Caucasian0.69
West_Med12.49

https://i.imgur.com/y1gCMh8.png

I will post more later.Do you have their Dodecad or Eurogenes results ?

[Peterski]

Do you have their Dodecad or Eurogenes results ?

I will post soon. But also I'm going to post R116 (one of northern-shifted Imperial Rome samples) soon.

[dududud]

Do you have their Dodecad or Eurogenes results ?

Post the gedmatch kit.

[Samnium]

I will post soon. But also I'm going to post R116 (one of northern-shifted Imperial Rome samples) soon.Ok I struggle to convert the Bam files what method you used ? All the software either don't work, you have to pay or are on Linux

Envoyé de mon ALE-L21 en utilisant Tapatalk

[dududud]

I will post soon. But also I'm going to post R116 (one of northern-shifted Imperial Rome samples) soon.

Thanks dude.

[dududud]

I will post soon. But also I'm going to post R116 (one of northern-shifted Imperial Rome samples) soon.

do you have the etruscan?

[Adamastor]

4/4 Piedmontese guy from Turin area

Eurogenes K13

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 33.87
2 West_Med 24.18
3 East_Med 17.33
4 Baltic 15.9
5 West_Asian 6.23
6 Red_Sea 1.76
7 Amerindian 0.48
8 Oceanian 0.16
9 East_Asian 0.07
10 Siberian 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 North_Italian 4.85
2 Portuguese 7.76
3 Spanish_Extremadura 8.72
4 Spanish_Galicia 8.81
5 Spanish_Cataluna 8.83
6 Spanish_Valencia 9.26
7 Spanish_Murcia 9.47
8 Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon 9.68
9 Spanish_Andalucia 10.08
10 Tuscan 10.52
11 French 10.77
12 Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha 10.88
13 Spanish_Cantabria 11.73
14 Southwest_French 12.72
15 Spanish_Aragon 13.61
16 Romanian 13.68
17 Serbian 14.3
18 Bulgarian 14.99
19 West_German 15.14
20 South_Dutch 15.81

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 61.9% Spanish_Valencia + 38.1% Bulgarian @ 1.23
2 52.4% Spanish_Aragon + 47.6% Bulgarian @ 1.57
3 80.9% North_Italian + 19.1% East_German @ 1.59
4 86.4% North_Italian + 13.6% North_Swedish @ 1.62
5 59.8% Spanish_Valencia + 40.2% Romanian @ 1.66
6 79.1% North_Italian + 20.9% Austrian @ 1.68
7 85.5% North_Italian + 14.5% Swedish @ 1.72
8 87.9% North_Italian + 12.1% Southwest_Finnish @ 1.81
9 85.5% North_Italian + 14.5% Norwegian @ 1.93
10 83.7% North_Italian + 16.3% North_German @ 1.99
11 77.3% North_Italian + 22.7% West_German @ 2.01
12 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% North_Dutch @ 2.08
13 78.2% North_Italian + 21.8% South_Dutch @ 2.1
14 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% Danish @ 2.1
15 58.2% Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha + 41.8% Bulgarian @ 2.12
16 89.6% North_Italian + 10.4% Estonian @ 2.14
17 63.4% Spanish_Cataluna + 36.6% Bulgarian @ 2.21
18 89.6% North_Italian + 10.4% Finnish @ 2.23
19 84.6% North_Italian + 15.4% Orcadian @ 2.26
20 83.1% North_Italian + 16.9% Southeast_English @ 2.26

This guy score the same North Atlantic, West Med, East Med and Baltic as me.

1 North_Atlantic 33.41
2 West_Med 23.17
3 East_Med 17.39
4 Baltic 16.95
5 West_Asian 5.62
6 Northeast_African 1.57
7 East_Asian 1.86

[Samnium]

This guy score the same North Atlantic, West Med, East Med and Baltic as me.

1 North_Atlantic 33.41
2 West_Med 23.17
3 East_Med 17.39
4 Baltic 16.95
5 West_Asian 5.62
6 Northeast_African 1.57
7 East_Asian 1.86Do you have the map where you plot ? Could give an idea

Edited: Vbn has put these guys on the k36 map

[Samnium]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/638825419436720148/643064997882232876/unknown.png

[Token]

R435 is very northern shifted.

[Samnium]

R435 is very northern shifted.

Well above Catalonia, I think his closest population is Southwest France.

I think that's some kind of an outlier even if the genetic distance with the other sample is not enormous. I think that Republican Romans were in a cline between Piemonte and Iberia.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/638825419436720148/643068890557054999/unknown.png

(There was a Tuscan-like sample in the study)

[Token]

Well above Catalonia, I think his closest population is Southwest France.

I think that's some kind of an outlier even if the genetic distance with the other sample is not enormous. I think that Republican Romans were in a cline between Piemonte and Iberia.

(There was a Tuscan-like sample in the study)
Yes, based on the PCA most of them seems to be centered around R1021. There are three very southern outliers too.

[Samnium]

Yes, based on the PCA most of them seems to be centered around R1021. There are three very southern outliers too.

So actually they aren't west-shifted as the PCA on the study showed.

[Adamastor]

Do you have the map where you plot ? Could give an idea

Edited: Vbn has put these guys on the k36 map

I did one of those K36 maps some months ago but I'm lazy to do it now. If someone wants to do it for me I can give my coordinates.

[Leto]

Which part of Torino area, Canavese ?
You'd probably end up being similar to Sizzo. Mark my words (if you're actually going to order a test).

[Samnium]

You'd probably end up being similar to Sizzo. Mark my words (if you're actually going to order a test).

We will see.

I think around Catalonia latitude based on my calculus. I know someone with the same "mixture" (his mother plot like French people, half polish, half portuguese) but his italian side is frequently exchanged as Ashkenazi, he plot very near the N.Italian reference, my italian side is "atleast" (I don't know if more west-shifted or north-shifted) very near Abbruzzo


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/490551642446495772/643203188928938043/unknown.png


The difference is rather great between the two.

[Samnium]

double

[Leto]

Romanians are relatively close to Italians, I know there is 1 million Romanians in Italy and many probably pass as Italians. They can learn Italian easily because Romanian is a related language in terms of grammar and vocabulary.

[Samnium]

Romanians are relatively close to Italians, I know there is 1 million Romanians in Italy and many probably pass as Italians. They can learn Italian easily because Romanian is a related language in terms of grammar and vocabulary.

Culturally yes. And phenotypically as well. Genetically, the closest are Central Italians, N.Italians are already a West population.

[SharpFork]

Culturally yes. And phenotypically as well. Genetically, the closest are Central Italians, N.Italians are already a West population.
Who's lighter? Romanians or North Italians?

[Samnium]

Who's lighter? Romanians or North Italians?

N.Italians surely.

[Leto]

N.Italians surely.
Do you have any Emilia Romagna results? I've never seen any.

[Samnium]

Do you have any Emilia Romagna results? I've never seen any.

Never seen either. I've seen only on sample on the eurogenes k13 map he plot right next to Tuscan average

[Sweet Perv]

I think north Italians in ancient times were a mix of Celts, Mediterraneans (even before the latin domination) and what ? Eagles, Marmots ? I mean : there were people before Celts came.

From which parts of nowadays France people would have they look like ? South of France ? Like I said to Samnium, Gallia Narbonensis was a senatorial roman province and barely inhabited by Celts before.

Central French, possible. Central Europeans, I would say no. You must take into account the mediterranean influence.

NB for non-Italians. Terrone/terroni is a pejorative term for south Italians. The academic term is "meridional".

[Percivalle]

Etruria was a confederation of cities that had in common the etruscan religion (their sanctuary was in Volterra if I remind), but otherwise yes they were probably a little bit different ethnically and received various influences, depending on the location. We don't have Tarquinia samples but I bet that they will show some degree of East-Med ancestry as the paintings of Tarquinia depict peoples with very med/east-med phenotypes (but also "white" people).

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTh2TF7DnNyPgCFcsqczpOt-HYymvRsFn5nr2YleUOq9WzgZ7wc&s


The federal Etruscan sanctuary is believed to be in Velzna/Volsinii, modern-day Orvieto, Western Umbria, surely not in Volterra.

That painting from Tarquinia (Lazio) you've posted (date 530-520 BC), like the whole series, has nothing to do with how the fully native Etruscans looked like, since it was painted by a Ionian Greek painter. The presence of foreigners in Etruria is attested, Greeks, for example, and many Ionian Greeks precisely. Although I doubt that there were so many to change the entire population. In any case, these foreigners have nothing to do with the origin of the Etruscans or with how the Etruscans were.

[Samnium]

The federal Etruscan sanctuary is believed to be in Velzna/Volsinii, modern-day Orvieto, Western Umbria, surely not in Volterra.

My bad I confused Volterra with Volsinies.



That painting from Tarquinia (Lazio) you've posted (date 530-520 BC), like the whole series, has nothing to do with how the fully native Etruscans looked like, since it was painted by a Ionian Greek painter.

The truth is that Etruscans had already adopted partially greek art and symbolism, you don't need an ionian painter for each tomb. Then, that's not an excuse, we have hundreds of painted tombs (here a thread where I show several of those coming from Tarquinia : https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?305701-Samnium-pictures-archeological-and-historical-insights) and the people represented here are etruscans. There isn't any evidence so far that these paintings were only fictional representations of etruscans. Actually it's the contrary of what historians of art and archeologists tell us about Tarquinia paintings, they are a vivid relict of etruscan civilization, along with symbolical themes and subjects there is an emphasis on the realism of the figures and the chromatism is carefully chosen. The first archeologists that "discovered" these tombs had the same sensation and the same opinion about that.


The presence of foreigners in Etruria is attested, Greeks, for example, and many Ionian Greeks precisely. Although I doubt that there were so many to change the entire population.

One of the etruscan samples in the study can be modeled as 53% moroccan so I think that there was definitely mixing and overall changes in the genetics of the population, principally towards East Med populations (maybe not the most powerful families but still).


In any case, these foreigners have nothing to do with the origin of the Etruscans or with how the Etruscans were.

I definitely don't think that these are foreigners. There is nothing as element of proof to assert that. Also if you want to know, Etruscans were mainly N.Italian-like genetically. However a shift towards East Med populations could have happened during the 6th century and the following centuries as Greeks were already around in southern Italy at this era.

[Percivalle]

My bad I confused Volterra with Volsinies. The truth is that Etruscans had already adopted partially greek art and symbolism, you don't need an ionian painter for each tomb. Then, that's not an excuse, we have hundreds of painted tombs (here a thread where I show several of those coming from Tarquinia : https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?305701-Samnium-pictures-archeological-and-historical-insights) and the people represented here are etruscans. There isn't any evidence so far that these paintings were only fictional representations of etruscans. Actually it's the contrary of what historians of art and archeologists tell us about Tarquinia paintings, they are a vivid relict of etruscan civilization, along with symbolical themes and subjects there is an emphasis on the realism of the figures and the chromatism is carefully chosen. The first archeologists that "discovered" these tombs had the same sensation and the same opinion about that.
One of the etruscan samples in the study can be modeled as 53% moroccan so I think that there was definitely mixing and overall changes in the genetics of the population, principally towards East Med populations (maybe not the most powerful families but still).I definitely don't think that these are foreigners. There is nothing as element of proof to assert that. Also if you want to know, Etruscans were mainly N.Italian-like genetically. However a shift towards East Med populations could have happened during the 6th century and the following centuries as Greeks were already around in southern Italy at this era.

The truth? It is the scholars who claim that it was painted by a Greek Ionic painter. There is maximum consensus on this. As scholars write that these frescoes are not faithful representations, is still an artistic convention, the realism is much later. But you obviously know more than they do. It doesn't surprise me at all.

It's known, the Etruscans adopted Greek symbols from the orientalizing period onwards, and in the transition between the orientalizing and archaic phases there is the arrival of Greek Ionic artists in southern Eturia. That fresco belongs to the archaic phase. The mixed Etruscan has North African blood and in the PCA it goes in the opposite direction to the Italian cline. Actually it is the two mixed Latin samples who have East Med ancestry and go exactly in the direction of the Italian cline.

Could the Etruscans have mixed with the foreigners who arrived in Etruria? Most likely, yes. Why worry about it? A lot more foreigners arrived in Roman times.

[Samnium]

The truth? It is the scholars who claim that it was painted by a Greek Ionic painter. There is maximum consensus on this. As scholars write that these frescoes are not faithful representations, is still an artistic convention, the realism is much later. But you obviously know more than they do. It doesn't surprise me at all.

Not faithful representations ? Well the painting that I've sent is considered as a realistic painting so your point is false.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/656847456453001236/656923067724988417/unknown.png

(Otto J. Brendel, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 62, No. 2 (Apr., 1958), pp. 240-242)

And again you're exagerating, there are some tombs that have purely symbolical themes like *La tomba dei demoni blu* but aside with these there are lot of tombs that represent naturalistic and realistic subject like la tomba del Cacciatore.

The fact that it was painted by an ionian painter doesn't change nothing.


It's known, the Etruscans adopted Greek symbols from the orientalizing period onwards, and in the transition between the orientalizing and archaic phases there is the arrival of Greek Ionic artists in southern Eturia. That fresco belongs to the archaic phase.

No it belongs to the orientalizing period (between 700 BCE and 500 BCE) you can verify, his name is "Tomba degli Auguri".


The mixed Etruscan has North African blood and in the PCA it goes in the opposite direction to the Italian cline. Actually it is the two mixed Latin samples who have East Med ancestry and go exactly in the direction of the Italian cline.

We don't have more Etruscans samples but as you find individuals like the outlier with 53% moroccan I definitely think that you will find people with East Med heritage, it's simply already non-proven because we lack samples and studies but we will see.

[Percivalle]

Not faithful representations ? Well the painting that I've sent is considered as a realistic painting so your point is false.


From a recent book.

"Nancy T. de Grummond, "Ethnicity and the Etruscans", in Jeremy McInerney (eds), "A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean", Chichester, Uk, John Wiley & Sons, 2014, pp. 413-414.


Is it possible to tell anything about the actual physical appearance or ethnicity of the Etruscans from these depictions? (...) The facial features, however, are not likely to constitute a true portrait, but rather partake of a formula for representing the male in Etruria in Archaic art. It has been observed that the formula used—with the face in profile, showing almond-shaped eyes, a large nose, and a domed up profile of the top of the head—has its parallels in images from the eastern Mediterranean. But these features may show only artistic conventions and are therefore of limited value for determining ethnicity.



No it belongs to the orientalizing period (between 700 BCE and 500 BCE) you can verify, his name is "Tomba degli Auguri".

Tomb of the Augurs is dated 530-520 BC, therefore Archaic period.

https://i.imgur.com/h0GmXrl.jpg

[J. Ketch]

False. Ancient Italians were like North Italians, early Romans were already mixed with Eastern Mediterranean type of DNA. Romans were mostly like modern South Italians.
Most of the Eastern Mediterranean DNA in ancient Romans and modern South Italians came from Aegean sources, not direct admixture from the Middle East.

And don't come with that old S.Italians are ''mixed with slaves'' theory because most slaves in Rome were from up north and resembled more your kind than any MENAs.
Sure pal. I didn't mention slaves but...


By sharp contrast, all analyzed individuals from the Roman Imperial and Late Antique periods (1 to 500 CE) show a marked shift in ancestry toward populations of the eastern Mediterranean. While the strength of this shift might be influenced by the changing frequency of different burial practices—such as cremation and inhumation—among groups through time (43, 44), it clearly depicts the role of the Roman Empire in the large-scale displacement of people in a time of enhanced upward or downward socioeconomic and geographic mobility. In central Italy, including around Rome itself (17), the incoming ancestry detected so far mainly originated from the Near East rather than other areas of the Empire. The genetic replacement of ~50% of the preceding Etruscan-related gene pool was likely influenced by the movement of slaves and possibly soldiers, along with a larger pattern of human mobility from the eastern Mediterranean toward Italy (45–49). In the Roman Empire, citizenship was progressively extended to more classes of free people until the Edict of Caracalla in 212 made it universal among them, and expanding citizenship likely facilitated intermixture between local and other populations. Our new data from Etruria show that the influx of Near Eastern ancestry spread far beyond the greater capital region itself and suggest that this broader pattern of population movement may have affected larger portions of the Italian peninsula..
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7673

[Insuperable]

Sure pal. I didn't mention slaves but...

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7673

And what is the influence of Ancient Greeks (Magna Grecia)? I doubt all of it comes from slaves and Middle Eastern migrants.