Spain, Portugal (Iberia) have Roman Italian DNA Video

[Luso]

Great video by a user on Anthrogenica explaining how Iberia has Roman (Northern Shifted) Italian DNA. In the video you’ll see that Pre-Roman Spain and Portugal (celtibericos) plot higher north than present, modern day g25 samples. And we see that the Basques are closest to the pre-Roman Iberian samples, they must of not been genetically Romanized like the rest of the peninsula. Anyway, Check it out, let me know what you think.


https://youtu.be/86AQRkeLzwM

[Ülev]

but CV hasn't, he has some other gene pool

[Hamilcar]

yes it's well known :


The impact of mobility from the central/eastern Mediterranean during the Classical period is also evident in 10 individuals from the 7th to 8th century CE site of L'Esquerda in the northeast, who show a shift from the Iron Age population in the direction of present-day Italians and Greeks (Fig. 1D) that accounts for approximately one-quarter of their ancestry (Fig. 2C and table S17). The same shift is also observed in present-day Iberians outside the Basque area and is plausibly a consequence of the Roman presence in the peninsula, which had a profound cultural impact and, according to our data, a substantial genetic impact too.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6432/1230

Iron age iberians were similar to modern day Basques but bronze age iberians had less north/central euro admixture which makes sense.

[Luso]

yes it's well known :



https://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6432/1230


Iron age iberians were similar to modern day Basques but bronze age iberians had less north/central euro admixture which makes sense.

Yes, and I think North African dna also contributed a bit to the southern shift along with the Roman dna. Hard to say which one more or less. I’d say more Roman?

[Hamilcar]

Yes, and I think North African dna also contributed a bit to the southern shift along with the Roman dna. Hard to say which one more or less. I’d say more Roman?

Yes but contacts with North africa are very old and Iberians have more italian/roman admixture than north african admixture

[Fraisod]

It makes perfect sense that there should be considerable influence from the period.

[Luso]

Bump

[Flashball]

Roman Italian?

What periode? Republican? Preroman? Roman Imperial?

Modern "italian"? If yes, what people? Southern Italian? Northern Italian? Etc

[Damião de Góis]

Great video by a user on Anthrogenica explaining how Iberia has Roman (Northern Shifted) Italian DNA. In the video you’ll see that Pre-Roman Spain and Portugal (celtibericos) plot higher north than present, modern day g25 samples. And we see that the Basques are closest to the pre-Roman Iberian samples, they must of not been genetically Romanized like the rest of the peninsula. Anyway, Check it out, let me know what you think.




Iron age iberians were similar to modern day Basques but bronze age iberians had less north/central euro admixture which makes sense.

People keep repeating that Iron Age iberians were like modern Basques after finding out that 3 Iron Age samples from the northeast were basque like. There simply isn't enough information to make that conclusion, especially taking into consideration how multi cultural Iron Age iberians were like.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Ethnographic_Iberia_200_BCE.PNG

It would be like finding 3 Tartessian samples and then concluding how all Iron Age iberians were like based on those 3 Tartessian samples. People are very fast to jump into conlusions.

We need more sampling from this period.

[Luso]

Roman Italian?

What periode? Republican? Preroman? Roman Imperial?

Modern "italian"? If yes, what people? Southern Italian? Northern Italian? Etc
Whatever period was genetically northern italian now.

More samples are needed from Iberia anyway.

[Aren]

This has been known since some time back. But resident Iberian members are in great denial - even OP disagreed with me when I was arguing with some of these obnoxious and highly ethnocentric members(Gixajo and Rocinante).

[Chris596]

Those Paleo Atlantids.. great fellas :o

[XenophobicPrussian]

People keep repeating that Iron Age iberians were like modern Basques after finding out that 3 Iron Age samples from the northeast were basque like. There simply isn't enough information to make that conclusion, especially taking into consideration how multi cultural Iron Age iberians were like.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Ethnographic_Iberia_200_BCE.PNG

It would be like finding 3 Tartessian samples and then concluding how all Iron Age iberians were like based on those 3 Tartessian samples. People are very fast to jump into conlusions.

We need more sampling from this period.
3 samples? :laugh:

This looks a bit like more than three, most are from the Bronze Age but the point still stands:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Imma_Ollich-Castanyer/publication/331744779/figure/fig1/AS:864745863266306@1583182888682/Overview-of-the-ancient-Iberian-genetic-time-transect-A-Geographic-distribution-and.png

Infact, the Iron Age samples in the north you speak of clustered with SW French people because they had extra continental admixture or were pure immigrants from France, while it's the previous Bronze Age inhabitants that clustered with Basques. Everywhere in Iberia, including Portugal, they clustered with Basques, there are no hidden populations that clustered with modern Iberians, modern Iberians are shifted to the East Med and other places.

[Luso]

This has been known since some time back. But resident Iberian members are in great denial - even OP disagreed with me when I was arguing with some of these obnoxious and highly ethnocentric members(Gixajo and Rocinante).

I don’t recall arguing with you. About what?

Also why would this be ab eurocentricism? Romans were European by all past metrics, just like native Iberians were European.

[brennus dux gallorum]

I disagree. Roman DNA is reflected on your tendency to eat pasta. Only people in blue in this reddit map have Roman Dna:
https://i.redd.it/c4b50zgmhy561.png

Merry Xmas to everyone :D

Ok except muslim friends, happy ramadan to them

[Aren]

I don’t recall arguing with you. About what?

It was mostly with Rocinante and Gixajo but you chimed in defending them.

[Damião de Góis]

3 samples? :laugh:

This looks a bit like more than three, most are from the Bronze Age but the point still stands:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Imma_Ollich-Castanyer/publication/331744779/figure/fig1/AS:864745863266306@1583182888682/Overview-of-the-ancient-Iberian-genetic-time-transect-A-Geographic-distribution-and.png

Infact, the Iron Age samples in the north you speak of clustered with SW French people because they had extra continental admixture or were pure immigrants from France, while it's the previous Bronze Age inhabitants that clustered with Basques. Everywhere in Iberia, including Portugal, they clustered with Basques, there are no hidden populations that clustered with modern Iberians, modern Iberians are shifted to the East Med and other places.

Perhaps you are seeing something i'm not. Where are the iron age samples in western iberia? I'm only seeing a few in the northeast.
You can also compare this map with the pre roman Iberia map i posted above to see what is still missing. Unless you think all those people who spoke different languages were all basque like? It's possible but remains to be seen.

Larger map:

https://i.imgur.com/4oglTUK.jpg

[XenophobicPrussian]

Perhaps you are seeing something i'm not. Where are the iron age samples in western iberia? I'm only seeing a few in the northeast.
You can also compare this map with the pre roman Iberia map i posted above to see what is still missing. Unless you think all those people who spoke different languages were all basque like? It's possible but remains to be seen.

Larger map:

https://i.imgur.com/4oglTUK.jpg
Why are you so stuck on Iron Age? Are you saying Phoenicians/etc or some other East Med group had a significant effect on Iberian DNA from the Bronze Age to the IA? The orange squares are all BA, from all around the country. Multiple sites in Portugal, Granada, NW Iberia, etc, as you can see on the map. Some today would plot inbetween Basques and Sardinians in a some what modern genetic "no mans land", but the point of is none of them are with modern Iberians and they are even less Eastern shifted than Basques(although in the case of Basques they simply have more steppe than some of the samples, modern Iberians have more East Med admixture and NA).

Also, the Iron Age is a lot more than just 3 samples, but I'm assuming you meant geographic locations/sites.

[gixajo]

This has been known since some time back. But resident Iberian members are in great denial - even OP disagreed with me when I was arguing with some of these obnoxious and highly ethnocentric members(Gixajo and Rocinante).

What and when do you exactly argue with me about Roman Dna in Iberia?

[Aren]

Why are you so stuck on Iron Age? Are you saying Phoenicians/etc or some other East Med group had a significant effect on Iberian DNA from the Bronze Age to the IA? The orange squares are all BA, from all around the country. Multiple sites in Portugal, Granada, NW Iberia, etc, as you can see on the map. Some today would plot inbetween Basques and Sardinians in a some what modern genetic "no mans land", but the point of is none of them are with modern Iberians and they are even less Eastern shifted than Basques(although in the case of Basques they simply have more steppe than some of the samples, modern Iberians have more East Med admixture and NA).

Also, the Iron Age is a lot more than just 3 samples, but I'm assuming you meant geographic locations/sites.

I was just gonna ask this too. There are 10 samples btw from the Iron Age, from two different sites, one in the Basque Country and one in Catalonia(AFAIK) and samples from both sites are very close to one and ohter. Modern Iberians deviate from these IA Iberians in that they have extra East Med input - lowering their WHG scores, varying amounts of North African, but at the same time modern day Iberians(sans Basques) have slightly more Steppe than these samples so you have a Northern Euro input aswell post-IA. The question would be then which of these deviating types of ancestry existed already in IA Iberia, in other locations that is as some here are claiming. The North African? Possibly persisted in Punic settlements in the SE, but we know today that North African input is as high if not higher in Western Iberia than it is Eastern Andalusia so areas never settled by the Punics. Is it the Northern European? I doubt it, if two sites in Catalonia and Basque Country, close to France show this relatively small amount of Steppe then we can hardly expect a higher amount in the rest of Iberia. Is it the East med/Aegan shift? Again, might've persisted in the coastal SE from Punic and Greek settlements but today this Greco-Roman input is spread relatively even throughout Iberia and only decreases substantially the closer you get to the traditionally Basque areas.

[Damião de Góis]

Why are you so stuck on Iron Age? Are you saying Phoenicians/etc or some other East Med group had a significant effect on Iberian DNA from the Bronze Age to the IA? The orange squares are all BA, from all around the country. Multiple sites in Portugal, Granada, NW Iberia, etc, as you can see on the map. Some today would plot inbetween Basques and Sardinians in a some what modern genetic "no mans land", but the point of is none of them are with modern Iberians and they are even less Eastern shifted than Basques(although in the case of Basques they simply have more steppe than some of the samples, modern Iberians have more East Med admixture and NA).

Also, the Iron Age is a lot more than just 3 samples, but I'm assuming you meant geographic locations/sites.

Because it's more interesting historically (especially to us from the region), for example Lusitanians are looked at in a romanticized way for resisting Romans. Also because those samples don't exist in a big part of the peninsula (mainly west), which means IA Models we can run here will always be incorrect for western iberians. I also think it's not correct to make the conclusion that all of IA Iberia were like the northeast samples.

I meant "3 samples" in a figurative way. Meaning few in just one or two locations (close by).





I was just gonna ask this too. There are 10 samples btw from the Iron Age, from two different sites, one in the Basque Country and one in Catalonia(AFAIK) and samples from both sites are very close to one and ohter. Modern Iberians deviate from these IA Iberians in that they have extra East Med input - lowering their WHG scores, varying amounts of North African, but at the same time modern day Iberians(sans Basques) have slightly more Steppe than these samples so you have a Northern Euro input aswell post-IA. The question would be then which of these deviating types of ancestry existed already in IA Iberia, in other locations that is as some here are claiming. The North African? Possibly persisted in Punic settlements in the SE, but we know today that North African input is as high if not higher in Western Iberia than it is Eastern Andalusia so areas never settled by the Punics. Is it the Northern European? I doubt it, if two sites in Catalonia and Basque Country, close to France show this relatively small amount of Steppe then we can hardly expect a higher amount in the rest of Iberia. Is it the East med/Aegan shift? Again, might've persisted in the coastal SE from Punic and Greek settlements but today this Greco-Roman input is spread relatively even throughout Iberia and only decreases substantially the closer you get to the traditionally Basque areas.

Or maybe from those IA samples that are missing. Who knows, maybe they could help answer questions regarding East Med and North African?

[Aren]

What and when do you exactly argue with me about Roman Dna in Iberia?

This gem of a thread (https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?235457-whoa-are-the-modern-day-iberians-descended-from). You became so mad when I posted a run showing Iberians with substantial amount of Roman.

[gixajo]

This gem of a thread (https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?235457-whoa-are-the-modern-day-iberians-descended-from). You became so mad when I posted a run showing Iberians with substantial amount of Roman.

Thanks, in that thread you make a fool of yourself since your first post,Insulting and disrespecting like you're crazy, you've been saying for almost a year that I defend points that I do not defend, and you keep saying the same thing.

Don´t you remember this in that same thread?




To reach what we are, we have all had to climb many steps, all of us are connected to many peoples , civilizations or ethnicities, we have to thank many for what we are, and not all of us thanks the same people and in the same proportion.

And I included in those people the people who came to Iberian peninsula during the muslim rule, I received a lot of criticism for doing that, and now this guy accuses me of nordicism :picard1:

[gixajo]

This gem of a thread (https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?235457-whoa-are-the-modern-day-iberians-descended-from). You became so mad when I posted a run showing Iberians with substantial amount of Roman.



And I didn´t "become mad" about Iberians with substantial amount of Roman, I just criticized using modern references mixed with ancient ones in the same calculator.

Actually who became mad was you, and everyone can see it reading that thread.

[Aren]

Thanks, in that thread you make a fool of yourself since your first post,Insulting and disrespecting like you're crazy, you've been saying for almost a year that I defend points that I do not defend, and you keep saying the same thing.

Don´t you remember this in that same thread?
I started insulting you? AHHAHA. You started insulting me - in Spanish at that too, thinking calling me "Muslim" is some kind of insult, when I wasn't even arguing with you but with Rocinante. You showed your true colors in that thread - racist and nordicistic that's what you are.

And I didn´t "become mad" about Iberians with substantial amount of Roman, I just criticized using modern references mixed with ancient ones in the same calculator.

Actually who became mad was you, and everyone can see it reading that thread.
You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

These are all samples from the pre-Roman Iron Age to the Early Middle Ages, representing what we know of Iberian history - Celt-Iberian base, Roman conquest and then the Medieval Moorish conquest.
Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.

[Smaug]

It actually makes a lot o sense. I'd like to see more studies regarding the impact of Roman conquest in other parts of Europe and MENA.

[Rafael Passoni]

And the other way around.

[Defcon2]

I started insulting you? AHHAHA. You started insulting me - in Spanish at that too, thinking calling me "Muslim" is some kind of insult, when I wasn't even arguing with you but with Rocinante. You showed your true colors in that thread - racist and nordicistic that's what you are.

You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

These are all samples from the pre-Roman Iron Age to the Early Middle Ages, representing what we know of Iberian history - Celt-Iberian base, Roman conquest and then the Medieval Moorish conquest.
Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.

The Basques were supposedly an "isolated" population. :picard1:

Target: Basque_Spanish
Distance: 2.4316% / 0.02431597
85.2 Iberia_North_IA
14.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
0.6 Imperial_Roman_East_Med

Target: Basque_French
Distance: 2.0597% / 0.02059714
90.2 Iberia_North_IA
7.4 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
2.4 Imperial_Roman_East_Med

[Aren]

The Basques were supposedly an "isolated" population. :picard1:

Target: Basque_Spanish
Distance: 2.4316% / 0.02431597
85.2 Iberia_North_IA
14.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
0.6 Imperial_Roman_East_Med

Target: Basque_French
Distance: 2.0597% / 0.02059714
90.2 Iberia_North_IA
7.4 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
2.4 Imperial_Roman_East_Med

Empuries1 are the locals, non-Greeks. So yes they are very isolated.

[gixajo]

I started insulting you? AHHAHA. You started insulting me - in Spanish at that too, thinking calling me "Muslim" is some kind of insult, when I wasn't even arguing with you but with Rocinante. You showed your true colors in that thread - racist and nordicistic that's what you are.

You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

These are all samples from the pre-Roman Iron Age to the Early Middle Ages, representing what we know of Iberian history - Celt-Iberian base, Roman conquest and then the Medieval Moorish conquest.
Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.

You are right, I was not very precise saying this, I said it from memory, it would have been more accurate to say that what I criticize is that you use "references from more modern age ages mixed with Iron age references", Canarian Guanches reference is are medieval reference.

You have already insulted me twice, one of them before even writing anything in this thread, it seems that you have a certain obsession with me and that the only thing you want is to provoke me.

[Tenma de Pegasus]

So Italy basically founded New Italy in Iberia, even the languaged was changed and the peninsula shifted towards Italy after the romanization and settlement.

[Aren]

You are right, I was not very precise saying this, I said it from memory, it would have been more accurate to say that what I criticize is that you use "references from more modern age ages mixed with Iron age references", Canarian Guanches reference is are medieval reference.

You have already insulted me twice, one of them before even writing anything in this thread, it seems that you have a certain obsession with me and that the only thing you want is to provoke me.

Are you insane? Why would we not use an Medieval North African/Berber source consideirng what we know about Iberian history? When did the Moors invade and settle in Iberia? Pleolithic? Bronze Age? No it was the early Middle Ages. I could be using modern day North Africans too, the percentage barely changes cause of how close modern day Berbers are to these Guanche samples.
Deal.with.it and move.on.

[gixajo]

I started insulting you? AHHAHA. You started insulting me - in Spanish at that too, thinking calling me "Muslim" is some kind of insult, when I wasn't even arguing with you but with Rocinante. You showed your true colors in that thread - racist and nordicistic that's what you are.

You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

These are all samples from the pre-Roman Iron Age to the Early Middle Ages, representing what we know of Iberian history - Celt-Iberian base, Roman conquest and then the Medieval Moorish conquest.
Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.

Oh, my memory is not so bad, Aren, you did it as you can see:


You do it with the French cause you are deeply nordicistic like some other Spanish members despite minimal contact between the French and you guys. But you are quick to argue against NA admixture arriving with Moors despite the compelling evidence.
What really baffles me is that you dare to claim people from Spain who are E-M81 to not actually be ethnic Spaniards meanwhile you have a rare subclade yourself. No one would believe you were Spanish if you uploaded to yfull and they hadn’t seen your autosomal results. Ironic really. But nothing I wouldn’t expect from a nordicist like you.

I’m not even gonna go on about your ”modells” that’s not how you are supposed to use the tool. You wanna see how much MENA there is in Spain yet you use already admixed averages. Your father is from Andalusia right? Sadly for you this is the most relevant run for Iberians atm

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.1076% / 0.01107568
52.6 Iberia_North_IA
19.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
18.0 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
9.6 Moroccan_North

But I doubt you’ll accept any run not showing you as French.

Who is the liar now?

[Defcon2]

Empuries1 are the locals, non-Greeks. So yes they are very isolated.

Clearly Empuries1 moves further north than the Iron Age sample, it does not appear to be Iberian (not quite).

Target: Iberia_North_IA
Distance: 4.2085% / 0.04208522
53.4 TUR_Barcin_N
26.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
20.0 WHG
0.2 MAR_Taforalt

Target: Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
Distance: 3.6179% / 0.03617918
47.8 TUR_Barcin_N
36.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
16.0 WHG

Target: Basque_Spanish
Distance: 4.9697% / 0.04969749
56.2 TUR_Barcin_N
24.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.8 WHG

Target: Basque_French
Distance: 4.9460% / 0.04946016
55.2 TUR_Barcin_N
25.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.4 WHG

[Token]

You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

These are all samples from the pre-Roman Iron Age to the Early Middle Ages, representing what we know of Iberian history - Celt-Iberian base, Roman conquest and then the Medieval Moorish conquest.
Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.

I believe this is the most sensible model for modern-day Iberians, but it is quite possible that actual Middle Eastern ancestry may be inflating the Roman. It is known that Syrians and Arabs settled Al-Andalus in large numbers. Besides that, i think a composite average of all IA samples would be a good substitute for the native Iberian references. I wonder if that would work in qpAdm, but i don't care enough about Iberians to try it.

[Aren]

Oh, my memory is not so bad, Aren, you did it as you can see:



Who is the liar now?

HAHAHAH taking things out of context and then calling me a liar. My run with the Moroccans was an example for you to see that it doesn't matter whether we use a Medieval source(like the Guanches) or modern day North Africans/Berbers since they are so close to one and other and the results barely change. You would know all of this considering how much you play around with the PCA 25 spreadsheet on vahaduo, but you are too obsessed with the French that you don't know about any other models.

But you know what, I'll post this run again. This and nothing else is the most logical run for Iberians with the samples we have no. No matter how much you try to deflect.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

[Token]

Clearly Empuries1 moves further north than the Iron Age sample, it does not appear to be Iberian (not quite).

Target: Iberia_North_IA
Distance: 4.2085% / 0.04208522
53.4 TUR_Barcin_N
26.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
20.0 WHG
0.2 MAR_Taforalt

Target: Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
Distance: 3.6179% / 0.03617918
47.8 TUR_Barcin_N
36.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
16.0 WHG

Target: Basque_Spanish
Distance: 4.9697% / 0.04969749
56.2 TUR_Barcin_N
24.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.8 WHG

Target: Basque_French
Distance: 4.9460% / 0.04946016
55.2 TUR_Barcin_N
25.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.4 WHG

The Empuries1 average includes a British-like, probably Gaulish guy. It may very well be eating the Germanic portion of Iberians.

[gixajo]

My terrible insult in Spanish:


Que fijación tienen los musulmanes con la península, no?

Pensaba que todo esto ya había acabado.


You are so ignorant that you don't even know Assyrians are one of the most devout Christians and there are few people in the world who dislike Muslims as people of my own ethnicity(I obviously don't)


But you are busy using this tool to modell yourself as French and fetish over that instead of really getting deep. I guess avoiding modelling urself as anything North African is a coping mechanism

Last edited by Aren; 07-23-2020 at 08:53 PM.

.



I´ve told you, in Spanish "Asirio" is not the same as "Siríaco" I take your Assyrian as "Asirio" and not as "Siríaco", because I thought your were trying to link yourself with ancient Assyrians, so I thought you would be muslim,simply because nowadays countries where "Asirios" used to live have mainly a muslim population,and what I said in Spanish is not any insult, if i want to say anything you will not be able to trabslate i would have used basque euskalki, and not Spanish.

I told you this and you continue saying the same, you never learn???

[gixajo]

HAHAHAH taking things out of context and then calling me a liar. My run with the Morrcans was an example for you to see that it doesn't matter whether we use a Medieval source(like the Guanches) or modern day North Africans/Berbers since they are so close to one and other and the results barely change. You would know all of this considering how much you play around with the PCA 25 spreadsheet on vahaduo, but you are too obsessed with the French that you don't know about any other models.

But you know what, I'll post this run again. This and nothing else is the most logical run for Iberians with the samples we have no. No matter how much you try to deflect.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Sorry for you, but anyone can see it in that thread, thanks for posting its link.

And now find another one to fight, you have not any interest for me. Bye.

[gixajo]

Again?


I started insulting you? AHHAHA. You started insulting me - in Spanish at that too, thinking calling me "Muslim" is some kind of insult, when I wasn't even arguing with you but with Rocinante. You showed your true colors in that thread - racist and nordicistic that's what you are.

You are a pathological liar. My run never included moderns. Here it is again, I'll post it just to see you chimp out again.


Now stop lying, no one is ever gonna take you seriously.


You do it with the French cause you are deeply nordicistic like some other Spanish members despite minimal contact between the French and you guys. But you are quick to argue against NA admixture arriving with Moors despite the compelling evidence.
What really baffles me is that you dare to claim people from Spain who are E-M81 to not actually be ethnic Spaniards meanwhile you have a rare subclade yourself. No one would believe you were Spanish if you uploaded to yfull and they hadn’t seen your autosomal results. Ironic really. But nothing I wouldn’t expect from a nordicist like you.

I’m not even gonna go on about your ”modells” that’s not how you are supposed to use the tool. You wanna see how much MENA there is in Spain yet you use already admixed averages. Your father is from Andalusia right? Sadly for you this is the most relevant run for Iberians atm

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.1076% / 0.01107568
52.6 Iberia_North_IA
19.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
18.0 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
9.6 Moroccan_North

My terrible insult:

Que fijación tienen los musulmanes con la península, no?

Pensaba que todo esto ya había acabado

[Aren]

Clearly Empuries1 moves further north than the Iron Age sample, it does not appear to be Iberian (not quite).

Target: Iberia_North_IA
Distance: 4.2085% / 0.04208522
53.4 TUR_Barcin_N
26.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
20.0 WHG
0.2 MAR_Taforalt

Target: Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
Distance: 3.6179% / 0.03617918
47.8 TUR_Barcin_N
36.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
16.0 WHG

Target: Basque_Spanish
Distance: 4.9697% / 0.04969749
56.2 TUR_Barcin_N
24.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.8 WHG

Target: Basque_French
Distance: 4.9460% / 0.04946016
55.2 TUR_Barcin_N
25.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
19.4 WHG

There's an outlier in the Empuries1 average with high Steppe, probably a migrant from Gaul.


Target: Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1:I8206
Distance: 4.6634% / 0.04663437
45.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
38.8 TUR_Barcin_N
15.6 WHG

The other samples score around 30-35% Steppe, it's possible they were Celts whilst the other IA samples from Iberia we have were Iberians/Aquitanians.

[Aren]

My terrible insult in Spanish:







I´ve told you, in Spanish "Asirio" is not the same as "Siríaco" I take your Assyrian as "Asirio" and not as "Siríaco", because I thought your were trying to link yourself with ancient Assyrians, so I thought you would be muslim,simply because nowadays countries where "Asirios" used to live have mainly a muslim population,and what I said in Spanish is not any insult, if i want to say anything you will not be able to trabslate i would have used basque euskalki, and not Spanish.

I told you this and you continue saying the same, you never learn???
Why would you refer to me as Muslim though, even if I am a Muslim(which I clearly am not, but you are too ignorant to figure that out before spewing hate) why would you even use Muslim in that context? Why would you shift over to Spanish and write that when we were dicussing in English? Why are you such a snake?

Again?




My terrible insult:

Hehe, you are over 40 years old right? And you're this ignorant. I'll pray to Allah for your soul and mind.

Why can Spaniards be modelled successfully with high Imperial Roman and Medieval Berber? I'll post it again. This is too much fun.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

[Defcon2]

I believe this is the most sensible model for modern-day Iberians, but it is quite possible that actual Middle Eastern ancestry may be inflating the Roman. It is known that Syrians and Arabs settled Al-Andalus in large numbers. Besides that, i think a composite average of all IA samples would be a good substitute for the native Iberian references. I wonder if that would work in qpAdm, but i don't care enough about Iberians to try it.

Here is another model but the Iberian averages do not reach 30% Roman + North African. Which one to believe?

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?15798-Portugueses-no-Global25&p=703827&viewfull=1#post703827

[gixajo]

Why would you refer to me as Muslim though, even if I am a Muslim(which I clearly am not, but you are too ignorant to figure that out before spewing hate) why would you even use Muslim in that context? Why would you shift over to Spanish and write that when we were dicussing in English? Why are you such a snake?


Hehe, you are over 40 years old right? And you're this ignorant. I'll pray to Allah for your soul and mind.

Why can Spaniards be modelled successfully with high Imperial Roman and Medieval Berber? I'll post it again. This is too much fun.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Liar.

You have been exposed every time you open your mouth, I have explained it to you, I have been lenient with you on many occasions and I have offered you my hand, and you again and again, you have continued to attack me continuously, if you were honest you would acknowledge it and shut up at once, but you keep insisting.

You are the liar, and this is not any insult, is the truth, and anyone have seen it.

I am going to give you the opportunity to apologize, if you don´t do it, I will spare you the pleasure of reading me.

Give thanks that I don't have you in front of me, you liar.

[Aren]

Liar.

You have been exposed every time you open your mouth, I have explained it to you, I have been lenient with you on many occasions and I have offered you my hand, and you again and again, you have continued to attack me continuously, if you were honest you would acknowledge it and shut up at once, but you keep insisting.

You are the liar, and this is not any insult, is the truth, and anyone have seen it.

I am going to give you the opportunity to apologize, if you don´t do it, I will spare you the pleasure of reading me.

Give thanks that I don't have you in front of me, you liar.

So every time I post that model you get a bit closer to ending up in a lunatic asylum. That's good to know.

[gixajo]

Why would you refer to me as Muslim though, even if I am a Muslim(which I clearly am not, but you are too ignorant to figure that out before spewing hate) why would you even use Muslim in that context? Why would you shift over to Spanish and write that when we were dicussing in English? Why are you such a snake?


Hehe, you are over 40 years old right? And you're this ignorant. I'll pray to Allah for your soul and mind.

Why can Spaniards be modelled successfully with high Imperial Roman and Medieval Berber? I'll post it again. This is too much fun.

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0928% / 0.01092835
52.8 Iberia_North_IA
20.8 Imperial_Roman_East_Med
17.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
8.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

I will explain to you last time, trying to hide the continued disrespect that you continually mix in your monomaniacal posts.

We can be modellated fantastically with Guanches, because Iberians have usually NA dna input in us, and Guanches were basically Berbers.

What we know about those medieval Guanches is that they are close to modern Moroccans, and that they are medievals.We know also that modern Moroccans have usually more Iberian input than Iberians Moroccan input, some of Guanches references have also Iberian inside them.

If you make a model, trying to demonstrate something , and your model is not "just for fun",It is preferable don´t mix references from different ages, and this is logic.

I´ve never denied that Iberians have NA admixture,and most of Spanish and portuguese here don´t deny this, the point is how can we discriminate a possible ancient input from a modern one, I mean modern as the input received during muslim rule of most of the Iberian peninsula.

I do not see any problem in scoring 5%, 10% or 25% NA, because it is not bad to have a contribution from North Africa, just as it is not bad to have it from Levantine, Roman or Japanese.

I have always said the same thing, so if you want argue with someone that don´t see this, search another one to discuss.

Will you apologize or not about your lies and your insults?

[gixajo]

So every time I post that model you get a bit closer to ending up in a lunatic asylum. That's good to know.

Demasiada paciencia he tenido contigo, hala, a jugar a pala!!!;)

[Aren]

I will explain to you last time, trying to hide the continued disrespect that you continually mix in your monomaniacal posts.

We can be modellated fantastically with Guanches, because Iberians have usually NA dna input in us, and Guanches were basically Berbers.

What we know about those medieval Guanches is that they are close to modern Moroccans, and that they are medievals.We know also that modern Moroccans have usually more Iberian input than Iberians Moroccan input, some of Guanches references have also Iberian inside them.
See this is where your true nature really shows. You refuse to model yourself with any North African source other than the Iberomaurusian, because in your mind only this distinct Paleolithic group is to be regarded as North African. Nevermind that Maghreb received ancient, prehistoric input from Anatolia, Levant or other places just like Europe. But then you claim there's an Iberian input in North Africa when it's actually a documented Bell Beaker era movement into North Africa, this is well before the formation of modern day Iberians but yet you don't hesitate calling it "Iberian"!


Target: Canary_Islands_Guanche
Distance: 2.0394% / 0.02039364
32.4 MAR_Taforalt
23.4 Bell_Beaker_Iberia
17.0 TUR_Barcin_N
15.6 Levant_PPNB
6.6 Yoruba
5.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N

Target: Mozabite
Distance: 2.4594% / 0.02459443
31.4 MAR_Taforalt
24.8 TUR_Barcin_N
14.8 Bell_Beaker_Iberia
13.0 Levant_PPNB
10.4 Yoruba
5.6 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N



If you make a model, trying to demonstrate something , and your model is not "just for fun",It is preferable don´t mix references from different ages, and this is logic.
This is so ahistoric I'm astonished. Ofcourse we need to use samples from different eras. Celt-Iberians formed pre-Roman conquest, Romans in turn arrived before the Moors. Do you not realize they are from different eras and we thuse need to use samples in accordance to the periods they arrived?
You have zero arguments against that model, that is clear. Just your biasedness and wishes.
My model above is the most logical and sensible one for Iberians with the samples we have. Your models where you model yourself as part French and whatnot - that is "just for fun". Don't get things twisted.


I´ve never denied that Iberians have NA admixture,and most of Spanish and portuguese here don´t deny this, the point is how can we discriminate a possible ancient input from a modern one, I mean modern as the input received during muslim rule of most of the Iberian peninsula.

HOW? Oh I don't know how, maybe through analyzing the hundreds of pre-Moorish and pre-Roman samples from Iberia - how much North African input do we see there? How about looking through modern day Spanish uniparentals if we are able to find Spaniards today who share recent subclades with North Africans dated to the Middle Ages? Maybe that's how?


Will you apologize or not about your lies and your insults?
I'll keep insulting you though.

[Luso]

Aren... Gixajo is just asking for you to apologize, he already said openly he doesn't give a fuck ab the NA admixture, roman admixture that we undoubtfully score, like most Iberians. I get that your model is what you deem as the best representative of our dna, I am not opposed to it... but If we cared that much you wouldn't see people like me, and other iberians posting calculator results with NA percentages there (and quite high for us western Iberians), and you don't see us manipulate the results. I don't like getting into anthrotarded arguments and I barely take sides... but honestly it's evident you sound more obsessed with trying to paint him in a bad way when he isn't trying to even argue with you at this point, but you keep on going. So please just stop derailing this thread further, thank you. :stop Let's all be friends.

[Tenma de Pegasus]

Great video by a user on Anthrogenica explaining how Iberia has Roman (Northern Shifted) Italian DNA. In the video you’ll see that Pre-Roman Spain and Portugal (celtibericos) plot higher north than present, modern day g25 samples. And we see that the Basques are closest to the pre-Roman Iberian samples, they must of not been genetically Romanized like the rest of the peninsula. Anyway, Check it out, let me know what you think.


https://youtu.be/86AQRkeLzwM

About this video, I agree with the guy that there a clear line of Old Iberia(mostly celtic and proto celt) to Italy with Modern Iberia in the middle, thats a clear italian/north italian admixture.

But Germany and Morroco? There is no clear line/shift between iberia and these countries? No significant impact?

[Cristiano viejo]

Bullshit.


I believe this is the most sensible model for modern-day Iberians, but it is quite possible that actual Middle Eastern ancestry may be inflating the Roman. It is known that Syrians and Arabs settled Al-Andalus in large numbers. Besides that, i think a composite average of all IA samples would be a good substitute for the native Iberian references. I wonder if that would work in qpAdm, but i don't care enough about Iberians to try it.
hahaha. Where, in Brazil? :lol: what is known is that they settled in very few numbers.

[Gallop]

Perhaps more Etruscans than you think ended up being Romans.

[Token]

Here is another model but the Iberian averages do not reach 30% Roman + North African. Which one to believe?

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?15798-Portugueses-no-Global25&p=703827&viewfull=1#post703827

Probably the best we can do with the avaiable samples:


Target: Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon
Distance: 1.4637% / 0.01463750
64.4 Iberia_North_IA
14.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.6 Gothic
9.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
Distance: 1.2720% / 0.01272045
71.8 Iberia_North_IA
22.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
3.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche
2.6 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Castello
Distance: 1.7604% / 0.01760417
72.6 Iberia_North_IA
19.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.2 Gothic
1.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Cantabria
Distance: 2.0063% / 0.02006272
76.2 Iberia_North_IA
16.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
5.8 Gothic
1.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.2207% / 0.01220721
65.6 Iberia_North_IA
20.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche
6.0 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Galicia
Distance: 1.3443% / 0.01344285
65.0 Iberia_North_IA
17.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
9.6 Gothic
8.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Extremadura
Distance: 1.7031% / 0.01703138
58.2 Iberia_North_IA
21.4 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.2 Gothic
9.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche


The Gothic reference is I12162 from Girona, Spain. I selected this specific individual because he is the least admixed of the Visigothic samples - the others are too Iberian to be meaningful. I12162 plots with South Dutch, so there is still plenty of room for non Germanic admixture, but we shouldn't expect a far wandering people like the Visigoths to have been purely Germanic at the time they slipped into Iberia.
There is an excess of Gothic in western Iberia, which may well be because Iberia_North_IA is not an adequate reference for the Celtiberian ancestry of west Iberians. The model can be significantly improved by getting Iron Age samples from the area.
ITA_Rome_Imperial includes several very Near Eastern individuals, so it should be seen as Roman + Near Eastern rather than just Roman. Some people prefer to hone this reference and exclude these Near Easterners - that is what Aren did and it significantly increases the Roman percentage, but it disregards possible Near Eastern ancestry in Iberians.
Ideally Iberia_North_IA should be substituted by a composite average of all available Iron Age Iberian samples.
Guanches should be substituted by actual Medieval Berbers when we get them. I don't think there will be much difference between them.

[Hamilcar]

All types of Berbers settled Medieval Iberia but the bulk came from North Morocco without any doubt and alot of pittoresque local Amazigh tribes like the Ghomaras.
Many Portuguese and Western Andalusians can reach as high as 15 to even 20% in some calculators with a Guanche or North Moroccan reference.

Target: Portuguese
Distance: 2.2758% / 0.02275756
66.4 Basque_French
19.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
14.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Portuguese:EBC_Portugal13
Distance: 2.9002% / 0.02900177
65.2 Basque_French
19.8 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
15.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche


That's exactly the amount of North african admixture I've said portuguese have (supported by studies too) but they kept denying it and prefer to focus on paleolithic iberomaurusians.

[Aren]

Aren... Gixajo is just asking for you to apologize, he already said openly he doesn't give a fuck ab the NA admixture, roman admixture that we undoubtfully score, like most Iberians. I get that your model is what you deem as the best representative of our dna, I am not opposed to it... but If we cared that much you wouldn't see people like me, and other iberians posting calculator results with NA percentages there (and quite high for us western Iberians), and you don't see us manipulate the results. I don't like getting into anthrotarded arguments and I barely take sides... but honestly it's evident you sound more obsessed with trying to paint him in a bad way when he isn't trying to even argue with you at this point, but you keep on going. So please just stop derailing this thread further, thank you. :stop

Disgusting. Deplorable. You make me puke. Imagine parroting Gixajos claims that I should apologize when he instigated with me in that thread. In the most coward, fake typically Iberian-like behaviour by shifting to Spanish and making ignorant claims. And you're aware of this, you were in that thread giving him thumbs up like a real whore.


Let's all be friends.
You disgust me to my very core.

[Cristiano viejo]

This dirty brown Muslim Aren just posts to troll ad insult Iberians, as everybody can check. Only about Iberians. Such inferior being.

[Defcon2]

Probably the best we can do with the avaiable samples:


Target: Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon
Distance: 1.4637% / 0.01463750
64.4 Iberia_North_IA
14.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.6 Gothic
9.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
Distance: 1.2720% / 0.01272045
71.8 Iberia_North_IA
22.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
3.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche
2.6 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Castello
Distance: 1.7604% / 0.01760417
72.6 Iberia_North_IA
19.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.2 Gothic
1.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Cantabria
Distance: 2.0063% / 0.02006272
76.2 Iberia_North_IA
16.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
5.8 Gothic
1.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.2207% / 0.01220721
65.6 Iberia_North_IA
20.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche
6.0 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Galicia
Distance: 1.3443% / 0.01344285
65.0 Iberia_North_IA
17.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
9.6 Gothic
8.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Extremadura
Distance: 1.7031% / 0.01703138
58.2 Iberia_North_IA
21.4 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.2 Gothic
9.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche


The Gothic reference is I12162 from Girona, Spain. I selected this specific individual because he is the least admixed of the Visigothic samples - the others are too Iberian to be meaningful. I12162 plots with South Dutch, so there is still plenty of room for non Germanic admixture, but we shouldn't expect a far wandering people like the Visigoths to have been purely Germanic at the time they slipped into Iberia.
There is an excess of Gothic in western Iberia, which may well be because Iberia_North_IA is not an adequate reference for the Celtiberian ancestry of west Iberians. The model can be significantly improved by getting Iron Age samples from the area.
ITA_Rome_Imperial includes several very Near Eastern individuals, so it should be seen as Roman + Near Eastern rather than just Roman. Some people prefer to hone this reference and exclude these Near Easterners - that is what Aren did and it significantly increases the Roman percentage, but it disregards possible Near Eastern ancestry in Iberians.
Ideally Iberia_North_IA should be substituted by a composite average of all available Iron Age Iberian samples.
Guanches should be substituted by actual Medieval Berbers when we get them. I don't think there will be much difference between them.


Average of these:


Iberia_East_IA:I12410,0.132035,0.146236,0.060339,-0.004845,0.066782,-0.005857,0,0.001385,0.034155,0.050115,-0.001137,0.012589,-0.025867,-0.012248,0.008822,0.012596,0.022687,-0.001014,-0.00729,0.008879,0.006239,0.007172,-0.009983,-0.013737,-0.001916
Iberia_East_IA:I12879,0.126344,0.151314,0.061848,0 .009044,0.061242,0.006414,-0.010105,0.004154,0.014726,0.031162,-0.001786,0.009741,-0.021853,-0.015138,0.001493,-0.014187,-0.011474,-0.003041,0.013324,0.010005,0.009608,-0.004575,-0.01405,-0.007109,-0.000599
Iberia_East_IA:I3320,0.118376,0.152329,0.051288,0. 004522,0.064935,-0.003347,-0.014101,0.005538,0.030679,0.049022,-0.002273,0.014237,-0.017245,-0.017203,0.005293,0.001989,0.012386,-0.005068,-0.001006,-0.004377,0.006863,0.000124,0.001972,-0.012893,-0.000359
Iberia_East_IA:I3321,0.126344,0.157407,0.065619,0. 008075,0.062781,-0.013387,0.002115,0.007846,0.039064,0.045923,-0.000487,0.008692,-0.032111,-0.025873,0.011129,0.008221,0.007562,0.010642,0.007 919,-0.00988,0.013601,-0.008779,-0.002465,-0.023859,-0.007544
Iberia_East_IA:I3322,0.124067,0.152329,0.05506,0.0 06137,0.06155,-0.006972,0.003055,0.002769,0.037837,0.055946,-0.003735,0.013188,-0.020367,-0.009083,0.017508,-0.013126,-0.023078,0.005068,0.004902,-0.006753,0.006863,0.000495,-0.005546,-0.018677,0.001437
Iberia_East_IA:I3323,0.121791,0.15436,0.05242,-0.002261,0.059703,-0.008646,-0.00564,0.003231,0.032928,0.05212,-0.006171,0.011839,-0.031962,-0.003578,0.004343,0.001591,0.011474,0.002154,-0.003142,-0.002376,0.002246,0.001607,-0.016392,-0.018195,0.002874
Iberia_East_IA:I3324,0.122929,0.131003,0.05506,0.0 15181,0.059703,0.007809,-0.002585,0.006692,0.019225,0.036083,-0.005846,0.004946,-0.026016,-0.00234,0.00285,0.022938,0.017602,-0.001267,0.01169,-0.008004,-0.00287,0.005564,-0.004067,-0.002048,-0.005269
Iberia_East_IA:I3327,0.124067,0.146236,0.050157,-0.018411,0.042162,-0.001394,-0.00188,0.004154,0.031292,0.054671,-0.016239,0.013638,-0.011447,-0.03069,0.011401,0.025059,0.01708,0.005448,0.00402 2,0.004252,0.001996,-0.002349,-0.008381,-0.002651,0.002395
Iberia_North_IA:I3758,0.125205,0.146236,0.06675,0. 013889,0.053241,0.003347,-0.004465,0.002308,0.030474,0.034989,0.001624,0.008 393,-0.017691,-0.00812,0.013843,-0.007292,-0.02047,0.00114,-0.00352,-0.002751,0.003494,0.000618,-0.008134,-0.016508,-0.002994
Iberia_North_IA:I3759,0.125205,0.140143,0.063356,0 .009044,0.062781,0.003347,-0.00235,0.006692,0.02168,0.034989,-0.006008,0.009292,-0.016204,-0.008945,0.0076,0.007425,0.003912,0.000633,0.00326 8,0.001251,0.012977,0.004081,-0.006039,-0.007109,-0.009221



Iberia_IA_Average,0.1246363,0.1477593,0.0581897,0. 0040375,0.059488,-0.0018686,-0.0035956,0.0044769,0.029206,0.044502,-0.0042058,0.0106555,-0.0220763,-0.0133218,0.0084282,0.0045214,0.0037681,0.0014695, 0.0030167,-0.0009754,0.0061017,0.0003958,-0.0073085,-0.0122786,-0.0021196


Your model:

Target: Juan_scaled
Distance: 3.1884% / 0.03188400
54.8 Iberia_North_IA
18.0 Gothic
14.8 ITA_Rome_Imperial
12.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche

With average Iron Age:

Target: Juan_scaled
Distance: 3.1798% / 0.03179813
49.2 Iberia_IA_Average
27.4 Gothic
12.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche
11.0 ITA_Rome_Imperial

The gothic increases considerably :confused:

[Gallop]

The Etruscans could already have some NA and then the Carthaginians would enter the Roman fabric having Roman citizens who could be a mixture of Romans-Etruscans with some Carthaginian ancestor, in a multitude of combinations. Perhaps this is what is found in Spain and if we take into account the history, Islam when it enters the Iberian Peninsula does not annihilate the native population and history documents that the expulsions of Muslims were massive, we also know that many Romans settled in Hispania and also Hispania was a destination in the retirement of military.

[Luso]

Disgusting. Deplorable. You make me puke. Imagine parroting Gixajos claims that I should apologize when he instigated with me in that thread. In the most coward, fake typically Iberian-like behaviour by shifting to Spanish and making ignorant claims. And you're aware of this, you were in that thread giving him thumbs up like a real whore.


You disgust me to my very core.

It’s a Internet forum. If I’m making you puke id take some time off. Just a suggestion. I am sorry for having offended

[Luso]

That's exactly the amount of North african admixture I've said portuguese have (supported by studies too) but they kept denying it and prefer to focus on paleolithic iberomaurusians.

I for one agree with these numbers. But we need to continue getting more samples to get the most accurate numbers. Quantifying Genetics is in its infancy.

[Aren]

Probably the best we can do with the avaiable samples:


Target: Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon
Distance: 1.4637% / 0.01463750
64.4 Iberia_North_IA
14.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.6 Gothic
9.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
Distance: 1.2720% / 0.01272045
71.8 Iberia_North_IA
22.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
3.4 Canary_Islands_Guanche
2.6 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Castello
Distance: 1.7604% / 0.01760417
72.6 Iberia_North_IA
19.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.2 Gothic
1.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Cantabria
Distance: 2.0063% / 0.02006272
76.2 Iberia_North_IA
16.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
5.8 Gothic
1.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.2207% / 0.01220721
65.6 Iberia_North_IA
20.6 ITA_Rome_Imperial
7.8 Canary_Islands_Guanche
6.0 Gothic

Target: Spanish_Galicia
Distance: 1.3443% / 0.01344285
65.0 Iberia_North_IA
17.2 ITA_Rome_Imperial
9.6 Gothic
8.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche

Target: Spanish_Extremadura
Distance: 1.7031% / 0.01703138
58.2 Iberia_North_IA
21.4 ITA_Rome_Imperial
11.2 Gothic
9.2 Canary_Islands_Guanche


The Gothic reference is I12162 from Girona, Spain. I selected this specific individual because he is the least admixed of the Visigothic samples - the others are too Iberian to be meaningful. I12162 plots with South Dutch, so there is still plenty of room for non Germanic admixture, but we shouldn't expect a far wandering people like the Visigoths to have been purely Germanic at the time they slipped into Iberia.
There is an excess of Gothic in western Iberia, which may well be because Iberia_North_IA is not an adequate reference for the Celtiberian ancestry of west Iberians. The model can be significantly improved by getting Iron Age samples from the area.
ITA_Rome_Imperial includes several very Near Eastern individuals, so it should be seen as Roman + Near Eastern rather than just Roman. Some people prefer to hone this reference and exclude these Near Easterners - that is what Aren did and it significantly increases the Roman percentage, but it disregards possible Near Eastern ancestry in Iberians.
Ideally Iberia_North_IA should be substituted by a composite average of all available Iron Age Iberian samples.
Guanches should be substituted by actual Medieval Berbers when we get them. I don't think there will be much difference between them.


We're also assuming that the Roman settlers where basically overwhelmingly Aegan-Greek-like. But we know that there was a native Etruscan/IA Latini type of people still existing around Rome and the Late Antiquity samples are strikingly similar to modern day Central Italians - basically a mix of Rome Imperial(Hellenic-Near Eastern) and Rome IA(Latini). If we model Iberians with these Late Antiquity Romans the percentage is obviously significantly higher but it's important to point out that no Levantine nor no Arabian shows up despite using a Roman source that is significantly less Near Eastern.

The horror is real in this model below - I advise Luso, Gixajo and other proud Celt-Iberian conquistadores not to view this spoiler tag.


Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0916% / 0.01091607
47.0 Iberia_North_IA
29.4 ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity
14.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
9.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche
0.0 BedouinB
0.0 Levant_LBN_Roman

[Leto]

Is Roman blood something bad? Sure, I can understand if it's Moro or Negro but the Roman empire was pretty much the birthplace of Western civilization (of course including the Greeks).

[Gallop]

My results for Rome in Regional Archeogenetics

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-l6WvUbZBLnc/X_UrSDMmEFI/AAAAAAAAFm4/skPOpWvX4wAMVc1O8WTAy5xfiItTUBbqgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.BRONZEageMIO.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NKo5sSKgeow/X_UtboJeb1I/AAAAAAAAFnA/Dh4APHoPQjM5xG1r75vypn6gNNYs_wruQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.IRONageMIO.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qawNpzlmuFs/X_UtoMPVdYI/AAAAAAAAFnE/xGixlJn4LoImBl-lTbVqg16UKl3IYEidwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.REPUBLICageMIO.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5XrW3V6X8S0/X_UtyWgwhCI/AAAAAAAAFnM/YifZOw6N2lstf9rZLLDXSkgl6JnH6lzTgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.EARLYperid.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dLatWEGh-hw/X_UuHvG_rMI/AAAAAAAAFnY/SxRKrB1fscYTmeaQ362PJr-Q7BLrNYSagCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.lateantiquity.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xLZnahTY_pQ/X_UuVh1ORLI/AAAAAAAAFnc/WuFlPhJNVw8FFK5wKIURpOSjE4X66tyYQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1287/ROME.MedievalAge.jpeg


How do you see it?



I could have done it in this format but it looks too small, it is preferable to download the image.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tHVDfcbZ398/X_UvfHUiHSI/AAAAAAAAFno/XG6GibW8GIEOdX47dlI34qzkFC11cCCcQCLcBGAsYHQ/s621/MuestraGall.jpg

[Luso]

Is Roman blood something bad? Sure, I can understand if it's Moro or Negro but the Roman empire was pretty much the birthplace of Western civilization (of course including the Greeks). And I don't know why certain non-Iberians (who are not even white) are so focused on the subject.

Absolutely not... Idk why anyone would think that. I don't think moro blood, or negro blood is bad either for that matter. This DNA output is what it is.

[Aren]

....

[Leto]

...

[Aren]

...

[Leto]

...

[Aren]

...

[Token]

We're also assuming that the Roman settlers where basically overwhelmingly Aegan-Greek-like. But we know that there was a native Etruscan/IA Latini type of people still existing around Rome and the Late Antiquity samples are strikingly similar to modern day Central Italians - basically a mix of Rome Imperial(Hellenic-Near Eastern) and Rome IA(Latini). If we model Iberians with these Late Antiquity Romans the percentage is obviously significantly higher but it's important to point out that no Levantine nor no Arabian shows up despite using a Roman source that is significantly less Near Eastern.

The horror is real in this model below - I advise Luso, Gixajo and other proud Celt-Iberian conquistadores not to view this spoiler tag.


Target: Spanish_Andalucia
Distance: 1.0916% / 0.01091607
47.0 Iberia_North_IA
29.4 ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity
14.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
9.0 Canary_Islands_Guanche
0.0 BedouinB
0.0 Levant_LBN_Roman


Several of the samples making up this average plot in Northern Europe, one in particular clusters with Norwegians. The average centers in Central Italians, but it is bound to include a lot of Germanic admixture. But i get your point, and i think it is a real possibility that the Roman settlers in Iberia were more northern than the Imperial samples

[Hajimurad]

So what's a conclusion? Did Iberians received a large amount of Italic-Roman ancestry or not?

[Gallop]

Mine

Neolithic Age

8. Proto Thracian/Illyrian Vucedol
2775 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.09 - I3499

11. Bell Beaker Haunstetten Germany
2385 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.35 - UNTA58_68Sk1

12. Copper Age Alburg-Lerchenhaid Straubing Bavaria
2225 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.46 - I3590

13. Late Copper Age Italy
2600 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.49 - 9314_Oss

34. Cueva de la Paloma Spain
2350 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.17 - I3239

45. Copper Age Prague Kobylisy Czech
2220 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.67 - I4890

51. Copper Age Szigetszentmiklos Hungary
2350 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.22 - I704

52. Neolithic France
3500 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.25 - PEN001_real2

60. Copper Age Alburg-Lerchenhaid Straubing Bavaria
2225 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.47 - I3597

61. Celtiberian Mix Tribe Northern Spain
2300 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.49 - I3238

Early Bronze Age

9. Dolmen de Saint-Eugene Bronze Age France
1950 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.28 - EUG11

17. Early Bronze Age Mokrin Necropolis Serbia
1950 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.98 - MOK29

21. High Status Male Haunstetten
2059 BC - Genetic Distance: 11.38 - POST_44

32. Vatya Bronze Age Hungary
1750 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.12 - Rise483

36. North Alpine Bronze Age
1677 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.2 - AITI_98

37. Rec de Ligno Bronze Age France
2050 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.31 - PIR3037AB

38. Bronze Age Vatya Pannonia
1600 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.36 - Rise480

39. Early Bronze Age Mokrin Necropolis Serbia
1950 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.45 - MOK15

43. Le Pirou Valros Bronze Age France
1630 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.59 - Pir6

48. North Alpine Bronze Age
1794 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.9 - AITI_43

Late Bronze Age

15. Illyrian / Dalmatian
1200 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.75 - I3313

33. Bronze Age Spain Cogotas
1290 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.13 - I12209

62. Menorca Late Bronze Age
861 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.55 - I3315

85. Bronze Age Spain Cogotas
1290 BC - Genetic Distance: 14.25 - I12208

106. Thraco-Cimmerian Black Sea
900 BC - Genetic Distance: 14.67 - MJ12

135. Bronze Age Niederergheim France
860 BC - Genetic Distance: 15.62 - NIED

137. Quinquiris Bronze Age Aude France
1200 BC - Genetic Distance: 15.68 - QUIN58

144. Villanovan Etruscan Italy VGG
850 BC - Genetic Distance: 15.88 - R1015

156. Bronze Age Spain Cogotas
1350 BC - Genetic Distance: 16.23 - ESP005

186. Protovillanovia Martinsicuro
930 BC - Genetic Distance: 16.97 - R1

Iron Age

7. Jebsen Boden Alsace France
500 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.03 - Jeb8

10. Etruscan Civitavecchia
650 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.31 - R474

16. Aquitani Pech-Maho France
350 BC - Genetic Distance: 10.9 - PECH8

25. Greco-Era Emporion
425 BC - Genetic Distance: 11.65 - I8341

30. Rhaeti Tribe Wartau Switzerland
88 BC - Genetic Distance: 11.91 - SX18

35. Ilergetes Tribe Catalan
600 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.19 - I4556

44. Iron Age Catalan
620 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.63 - I12640

46. Ilergetes Tribe Catalan
440 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.75 - I12878

47. Belgic Tribe Colmar France
340 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.77 - COL153i

53. Ilergetes Tribe Catalan
200 BC - Genetic Distance: 13.39 - I3320


Roman Age

2. Roman Soldier Germany
300 AD - Genetic Distance: 9.032 - FN_2

3. Roman Soldier Freiham-Nord Germany
300 AD - Genetic Distance: 9.04 - FN_2

6. Roman-Era Empuries
47 BC - Genetic Distance: 9.529 - I10866

19. Gallo-Roman Crypta Balbi
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.21 - R109

22. Late Roman Mix Crypta Balbi
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.46 - R105

24. Vasconic-Roman Mix Crypta Balbi
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.54 - R110

28. Gallo-Roman Mix Crypta Balbi
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.78 - R108

41. Imperial Rome Mausoleo Augusto
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 12.56 - R33

63. Roman-Carthago Mix Empuries
150 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.63 - I8475

71. Celtoiberian Outlier Roman Empire VP
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.88 - R116

Dark Ages

1. Visigoth Iberian Girona
550 AD - Genetic Distance: 8.765 - I12034

4. Gallo-Roman Lombard Grave
580 AD - Genetic Distance: 9.106 - CL94

18. Late Roman-Era Emporion
550 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.18 - I8343

20. Roman-Illyrian Lombard Grave
580 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.31 - CL23

42. Carolingian Settlement Barcelona
790 AD - Genetic Distance: 12.58 - I7676

55. Frankish-Gaul / Lombardy Italy
580 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.4 - CL47b

57. Medieval Piedmont
580 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.45 - CL57

58. Celtiberian Alemannic Mix
520 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.46 - STR_535

59. Early Medieval Andalusia
760 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.46 - I3585

73. Gallo-Roman
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.94 - SZ28


Medieval Age

5. Girona Sant Julia de Ramis
880 AD - Genetic Distance: 9.193 - I10895

14. Girona Sant Julia de Ramis
1060 AD - Genetic Distance: 10.71 - I10852

26. Girona Sant Julia de Ramis
1060 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.65 - I10851

27. Medieval Villa Magna Italy
990 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.72 - R63

29. Late Medieval L'Esquerda Spain
1350 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.81 - T-145-2

31. Late Medieval Cancelleria Basilica
1485 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.94 - R1221

40. Viking St. Brice Massacre Oxford
1002 AD - Genetic Distance: 12.46 - VK146

49. Viking Age Karda Smaland Sweden
1000 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.0 - VK265

65. Girona Sant Julia de Ramis
1060 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.64 - I10853

69. Late Medieval Cancelleria Basilica
1429 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.84 - R1289


Early Modern Period

23. Le Mans Revolutionary France
1793 AD - Genetic Distance: 11.51 - LM_406_T

123. Marseilles Plague Victim
1721 AD - Genetic Distance: 15.24 - OBS137

159. Le Mans Revolutionary France
1793 AD - Genetic Distance: 16.35 - LM_306_T

172. Post-Reconquista Granada
1550 AD - Genetic Distance: 16.58 - I7425

182. Post-Reconquista Granada
1550 AD - Genetic Distance: 16.77 - I3809

198. Relic French King Louis XVI
1793 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.27 - LXVI

221. Marseilles Plague Victim
1721 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.64 - OBS116

234. Jean-Paul Marat Revolutionary France
1793 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.92 - Marat

351. Oxford Infirmiary
1790 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.25 - CSD

362. Late Medieval Latvia Riga Dome Church
1622 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.52 - RG161c


Your Outlier Samples...

319. Medieval La Palma Sardinia
941 AD - Genetic Distance: 20.49 - I12221

342. Carthago Outlier San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.0 - R121

361. Late Roman Iberia Granada
470 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.51 - I3576

378. Morisco Post-Reconquista Granada
1550 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.79 - I7424

1. Tuscan (10.76)
2. North_Italian (11.90)
3. West_Sicilian (12.70)
4. Kosovar (13.96)
5. Spanish_Andalucia (14.17)
6. Italian_Abruzzo (15.27)
7. Spanish_Extremadura (15.54)
8. Spanish_Murcia (15.71)

385. Late-Roman Era Montefrio Granada
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 21.96 - I3581

387. Central Roman Mausoleo Augusto
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.03 - R32

389. North Alpine Middle Bronze Age Outlier
1756 BC - Genetic Distance: 22.08 - OTTM_154

392. Phoenician Cas Moli Ibiza
270 BC - Genetic Distance: 22.1 - MS10614

398. Central Roman
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.29 - SZ43

402. Germanic Mixed Tribe
505 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.35 - AED125b

403. Ostrogoth Frankish Mix
410 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.37 - STR_328

404. Byzantine Roman Warrior
605 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.4 - NS3b

415. Bronze Age Jinonice Prague Czech
2215 BC - Genetic Distance: 22.58 - I4896

419. Medieval Cancelleria Basilica
860 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.64 - R1283

430. Roman Villa Granada Spain
350 AD - Genetic Distance: 22.91 - I3983

435. Roman-Era Empuries
47 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.04 - I10865

440. Unetice Bohemia
1875 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.16 - Rise154

444. Carthago-Iberian-Mehrebi Cordoba Caliphate
950 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.22 - I7500

453. Carthaginian Roman-Era Empuries
200 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.42 - I8204

454. Avar Szolad Hungary
700 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.46 - SZ1

456. Late Neolithic Oberbipp Switzerland
2800 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.5 - MX299

457. Phoenician/Punic Sardinia Mount Sirai
675 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.52 - MSR003

459. Corded Ware Estonia
2460 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.53 - Rise595

460. North Alpine Middle Bronze Age
1593 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.55 - OTTM_142

462. Bronze Age Yehud Southern Levant
2250 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.61 - I6932

463. Central Roman
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.62 - SZ36

464. Post-Roman Sierra de Alhama
550 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.63 - I3584

465. Iberian / Ilergetes Tribe
550 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.63 - I3322

466. Carthago-Roman San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.67 - R120

469. Copper Age Rouffach Haut-Rhin France
2225 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.71 - I1391

470. Copper Age Beaker Brandysek Czech
2350 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.73 - I7276

472. Late Neolithic Oberbipp Switzerland
3300 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.73 - MX219

475. Tivoli Palace Late Renaissance
1650 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.77 - R970

477. Roman Empire Monterotondo
165 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.8 - R1540

478. Imperial Rome Cluana Ancona
165 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.81 - R836

481. Celt Hinxton Iron Age
45 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.85 - HI2

484. Bronze Age Leith Edinburgh Scotland
1535 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.87 - I5470

487. Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.93 - R113

488. Roman-Era Emporion
200 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.93 - I8205

489. Danish Gaelic Viking Iceland
935 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.94 - SSG-A2

490. Celtic Medieval Denmark
1250 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.95 - G973

491. Niedertiefenbach Western Germany
3200 BC - Genetic Distance: 23.96 - Niedertiefenbach40

494. Roman Mix San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 24.02 - R118

495. Roman Outlier Lombard Grave
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 24.03 - SZ31

496. Western Scythian Ukraine
600 BC - Genetic Distance: 24.04 - MJ47

497. Neolithic Ireland
3200 BC - Genetic Distance: 24.06 - Ballynahatty

499. Germanic Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia
1500 AD - Genetic Distance: 24.1 - SNN001

500. Bronze Age Chippenham Cambridgeshire England
1850 BC - Genetic Distance: 24.1 - I7639

547. Late Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia
1450 AD - Genetic Distance: 25.04 - SNN001

[Hamilcar]

So what's a conclusion? Did Iberians received a large amount of Italic-Roman ancestry or not?

Yes they did (around 20-25% of the modern iberian genome) which is surprising because we don't see such impact in other regions of the empire

[Ranger0075]

Yes they did (around 20-25% of the modern iberian genome) which is surprising because we don't see such impact in other regions of the empire

not that surprise taking into consideration it's the only region of the empire which still speak latin derivated languages, I wonder about Romania tho

[Hajimurad]

Yes they did (around 20-25% of the modern iberian genome) which is surprising because we don't see such impact in other regions of the empire

Which regions?

[Hamilcar]

not that surprise taking into consideration it's the only region of the empire which still speak latin derivated languages, I wonder about Romania tho

that doesn't make sense because back then almost every region had its own latin dialect

[Hamilcar]

Which regions?

it's an average for the whole peninsula, the lowest amount is found in the basque region and the highest amount in the balearic islands

[Leto]

I regret getting involved in this thread, that was none of my business. Deleted my comments which weren't necessary. Peace out!

[Damião de Góis]

The Gothic reference is I12162 from Girona, Spain. I selected this specific individual because he is the least admixed of the Visigothic samples - the others are too Iberian to be meaningful. I12162 plots with South Dutch, so there is still plenty of room for non Germanic admixture, but we shouldn't expect a far wandering people like the Visigoths to have been purely Germanic at the time they slipped into Iberia.
There is an excess of Gothic in western Iberia, which may well be because Iberia_North_IA is not an adequate reference for the Celtiberian ancestry of west Iberians. The model can be significantly improved by getting Iron Age samples from the area.
ITA_Rome_Imperial includes several very Near Eastern individuals, so it should be seen as Roman + Near Eastern rather than just Roman. Some people prefer to hone this reference and exclude these Near Easterners - that is what Aren did and it significantly increases the Roman percentage, but it disregards possible Near Eastern ancestry in Iberians.
Ideally Iberia_North_IA should be substituted by a composite average of all available Iron Age Iberian samples.
Guanches should be substituted by actual Medieval Berbers when we get them. I don't think there will be much difference between them.


Your points are all valid and rational. I appreciate especially the bolded ones, it's nice to see other people noticing what i've been saying for some time.



Is Roman blood something bad? Sure, I can understand if it's Moro or Negro but the Roman empire was pretty much the birthplace of Western civilization (of course including the Greeks).

It is what it is. What people are discussing here are the claims of 20 or 30% Roman ancestry based on speculative models which don't correlate with Y-DNA for example.

In my personal opinion i'm more fond of pre-roman people than i am of the subsequent invaders that came later (romans, barbarians and moors). And i think that's the general feeling here, which is why Viriato, the Lusitanian leader, has statues in Spain and Portugal. In Portugal people aren't knowledgeable of roman generals, visigoth or suebi kings or moorish kings. I personally don't know their names either.

In the particular case of romans, while their cultural legacy here is undeniable it's also a fact that their legions killed and enslaved people here, including backstabbing after making peace treaties.

[Gallop]

In Spain, for example, the list of the Goths had to be known by heart in public education for many decades. There is interest in the Romans, and many popular festivals recreate situations from Roman times. As for the Muslim period, it is lived from the perspective of the Reconquest, logically and more recently Iberian recreations are being made as well as Vikings but they are not traditional like the others, they are more modern.


https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/gr-cms/media/featured_images/none/bf9eda79-210a-49ff-87c5-f0272fbc2c61/thumbnails/_mg_0687.jpg.0x740_q100.jpg

https://meencantamurcia.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Embajador-cristiano.jpg

https://static2.abc.es/media/espana/2017/04/19/moros-cristianos-alcoy-k0sG--620x349@abc.jpg

http://www.españaescultura.es/export/sites/cultura/multimedia/galerias/propuestas_culturales/moros_cristianos_alcoy_t0300884.jpg_1306973099.jpg

https://blog.global-exchange.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Moros_cristianos_alcoy-1.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/86/a3/be/86a3be639c282a106817857abc6afdcd.jpg

[Hamilcar]

It is what it is. What people are discussing here are the claims of 20 or 30% Roman ancestry based on speculative models which don't correlate with Y-DNA for example.

In my personal opinion i'm more fond of pre-roman people than i am of the subsequent invaders that came later (romans, barbarians and moors). And i think that's the general feeling here, which is why Viriato, the Lusitanian leader, has statues in Spain and Portugal. In Portugal people aren't knowledgeable of roman generals, visigoth or suebi kings or moorish kings. I personally don't know their names either.

In the particular case of romans, while their cultural legacy here is undeniable it's also a fact that their legions killed and enslaved people here, including backstabbing after making peace treaties.


It's not a valid argument to deny scientific conclusions, you did this not only with romans but also with moors. It is what it is, your people absorbed lots of foreign admixture throughout its history and studies confirm this.

[Damião de Góis]

It's not a valid argument to deny scientific conclusions, you did this not only with romans but also with moors. It is what it is, your people absorbed lots of foreign admixture throughout its history and studies confirm this.

I appreciate the interest shown in the genetic composition of foreign people, but at this moment all the models include iron age basques from the northeast of the peninsula. When we have proper samples we will see who scores what. Until then people are using speculative models like i said, unless they want to model northeast iberians, in their case i think they have every sample avaliable for a decent model.

[Cristiano viejo]

not that surprise taking into consideration it's the only region of the empire which still speak latin derivated languages, I wonder about Romania tho
Dont forget France, Belgium, Luxembourg or Switzerland and in aany case language does not mean anything. Currently Basques speak a Latin-derived language, yet they were barely romanized and this includes genetically.


It's not a valid argument to deny scientific conclusions, you did this not only with romans but also with moors. It is what it is, your people absorbed lots of foreign admixture throughout its history and studies confirm this.
Just like every country of the world.
You wish we had more moronegro of your kind.

[Jana]

Yes they did (around 20-25% of the modern iberian genome) which is surprising because we don't see such impact in other regions of the empire

Not suprising, because it seems Balkans received tons of Imperial Roman like admixture as well. You can't label Balkanites as Slavic + native, they need late Romans for a good model.
Romance languages did not spread out of thin air. And I think France has significant Roman input as well.

[Dick]

Not suprising, because it seems Balkans received tons of Imperial Roman like admixture as well. You can't label Balkanites as Slavic + native, they need late Romans for a good model.
Romance languages did not spread out of thin air. And I think France has significant Roman input as well.

Looks like it indeed. Viminacium was a big Roman settlement, unfortunately the dna from there is taking too long to come out.