did light eyes/hair in Southern Europe appeared in the bronze age with the indoeuropean migrations from Central-Eastern Europe or they were already present in the indigenous paleolithic/neolithic popoluation ??
from what i've read it seems that Oetzi the mummy who lived in Chalcolithic northern Italy (before the indoeuropeans) had brown eyes and no northern european admixture...while this component among modern-day northern italians reach about 50% of aDNA :rolleyes:
I'd assume light traits would be less frequent in Southern Europe if not for Northern European admixture, but they'd still exist to a degree. You see light pigmented West Asians after all, so why not Southern Europeans too?
They still are not completely "Northern European" freeQuote:
Originally Posted by Sikeliot
But the Northern European admixture is small enough that it shouldn't have much phenotypical impact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solin
If 10% of SWA can make someone look Arab so 10% of northern European admixture can make some look northernQuote:
Originally Posted by Sikeliot
These phenotypic qualities disperse as a gradient with an origin. Define what you mean by "North-European." It's likely the case that Southern Europeans have had many waves of admixture since the origin of the mutation which caused light traits in Northeastern Europe. Since Southern Europe is further away from Northeastern Europe and population movements to Southern Europe from these regions and the adjacent regions (which decrease in frequency by distance) would be less frequent, there is a lower frequency. Hence, the further away from the origin of the mutation, with a few exceptions, the lesser the probabilistic chance that you will have that mutation. It's likely the case that enough populations movement occurred very early on (since the onset of the mutation) that Southern Europeans mixed enough to have these light features, and the frequency increased or decreased based on other population movements and gradients.
Basically, in order to have these light features you must have mixed some time in the distant or near past with the population in which the light features originated or populations they have mixed with. Furthermore, different light features such as: skin pigmentation, eye color, hair color, etc originated in different periods of time, and some of these traits are polygenic, meaning multiple mutations (in multiple genes) contribute to the overall phenotype.
So yes, since the mutation for most of these traits, with the exception of skin depigmentation originated in Northern Europe, Southern Europeans have mixture with Northern Europeans. Of course, this holds true for Northern Europeans with each-other as well. All of these groups are intermixed heavily and could be considered one genetic population, if we are to use the biological and ecological definition of population.
edit: This is of course excluding natural selection from the picture.
The only West Asians that can overlap with North Euros are North Caucasians and they rarely do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solin
I don't know how true that is. The natives of Central Turkey in Greco-Roman times were Celts who were said to strongly resemble the Gauls of France.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikeliot
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfieb
Before them even the Phrygians migrated from Europe (Lusatian area according to Gimbutas) to Anatolia...
It depens zone by zone.
In northern Italy lighter traits are moslty celtic (that's also why our languages are called ''Gallo-Romance'') + minor germanic, in some zone slike Sicily are a normannic and swabian heritage.
i agree in part for northern Italy (or better North-western Italy , Veneto it's another story) but to be honest i don't think that northern european aDNA +light features were inexistent in Sicily and South Italy in general before the Normans...the Siculi were indoeuropeans of the Latin-faliscan group and the Island was reached in the ancient bronze age by the Bell Beakers from Spain that may could have brought some northern admixture :Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
"We have detected here a signal of gene flow from northern Europe into Spain around 2000 B.C.We
discuss a likely interpretation. At this time there was a characteristic pottery termed ‘bell-beakers’
believed to correspond to a population spread across Iberia and northern Europe. We hypothesize
that we are seeing here a genetic signal of the ‘Bell-Beaker culture’ (HARRISON, 1980). Initial
cultural flow of the Bell-Beakers appears to have been from South to North, but the full story
may be complex. Indeed one hypothesis is that after an initial expansion from Iberia there was a
reverse flow back to Iberia (CZEBRESZUK, 2003); this ‘reflux’ model is broadly concordant with
our genetic results, and if this is the correct explanation it suggests that this reverse flow may have
been accompanied by substantial population movement."
http://www.genetics.org/content/earl...45037.full.pdf
Attachment 33415
http://www.conigliofamily.com/images...yRoute2009.jpg
Map is an approximation, but the Siculi were never anywhere near Palermo, where the most Germanic/Celtic admix is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
Is the Veneto Are inlfuenced by slavs?
I'm sure Veneto and Friuli-Venezia Giulia are both influenced by Croats and Slovenes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kastrioti1443
Ancient venetians were called ''Venedi'', like an ancient population of Poland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kastrioti1443
I don't know if there are some relations, btw.
Modern venetics are basically gallo-romance people with a strong germanic inputo and a quite high slavic one (even if the slavic imput is higher in the Veneto's neighbor, Friuli, the only place in Europe where a rhaeto-romanic language is majoritary).
Fòrlan (friulian) language sound a bit portuguese and/or romanian, btw (from 0:55).Quote:
Originally Posted by alfieb
Quite unintelligible with standard italian and other northern italic languages, btw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJYYDSxesKI
I'd say due to a Nordid or Alpine impact in the West/Central regions and West/East Baltid in East. Light "traits" are recessive and cannot be compared to the "Arab" 10% dominant genes playing a role as somebody stated .
The Mesolitich hunther gathereres are the main source of Northern Euro admixture in S.Europe .
Btw, light eyes for single italian regions...as you can see, more south you go, less light eyers you can see.
Veneto/Friuli 41,4%
Piemonte/Valle d'Aosta 40%
Lombardia 37,2%
Liguria 29,6%
Emilia-Romagna 31,2%
Umbria 32,8%
Toscana 31,5%
Marche 31,3%
Lazio 26,2%
Abruzzo/Molise 28,5%
Campania 25,6%
Puglia 26,4%
Sicilia (isola) 23,7%
Basilicata 23,1%
Calabria 19,6%
Sardegna (isola) 13,9%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
These numbers seem exaggerated unless they include green/hazel eyes.
Slovenia is sometimes considered Southern on maps. If that is the case then yes Slovene light hair come mostly from ancestors which came from more northern latitudes than Slovenia geographically is. The combination of Celtic (Taurisci, etc.), Slavic, Germanic, etc. migrators, settlers.... and so forth
Sicily being much higher than Sardinia and Calabria (and marginally higher than Lucania) most likely has to be attributed to the Germanic/Celtic admixture.
They aren't since i live in this country and i don't base my opinion over stereotypes and american sitcoms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Driven Mind
Green eyes are inlcuded, btw.
Btw, ''italian'' ethnicity never existed since our ''country'' exist only since 1861.
True story. Frank Sinatra, f ex. was half Northern Italian (Liguria) and half Sicilian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
His mother was an immoral, evil woman who volunteered as an illegal abortionist... but her family didn't mind that. They did disown her for marrying his father, because he was a Sicilian tirruni.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
Green eye are not considered light by the anthropologists. Living in the country doesn't mean you know everything about it and its people.It is a fact that Italians have many people with light eyes,but 40% regardless the region is exaggerated my friend. Bavarians don't have that many let alone the Italians,again regardless whether being close to Slovenia or not.
How much do you know about history of Northern Italy? How many times you been there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Driven Mind
Btw, bavarians are closer to 50-55% of light eyes, as i saw my last time in Munich.
...and Munich absorbed also a lot of non-german immigrants, so the percentage can be even higher...just ask to the bavarian members there.
I don't know why people consider bavarians and austrians some kind of mystical swarthoid populations.
...and yes, everybody on earth consider green eyes light...lol, how is this color, dark? :lol:
http://imworld.aufeminin.com/dossier...1-161525_L.jpg
Light eyes = blue, green and grey eyes.
Dark eyes = all the rest.
Btw... Driven Mind, since you're bulgarian (and not austrialian as you claim to be), just take the first illegal boat from the balkans toward the Adriatic and come here to see the truth...
mah :loco:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
not really , light eyes in italy are quite (not majority of course) , but in some area's of italy are really around 40% , where i live in central-north italy (emilia-romagna) on 10 people 3 have light eyes so those data seems accurate , and yes green/hazel eyes are considered light for sure not dark , at least they are more on the light side than the darkQuote:
Originally Posted by Driven Mind
Amber eyes are light too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Capelli
That's pretty much impossible to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reozek
More like intermediate.
from Tony Frudakis, Ph.D. - Molecular Photofitting: Predicting Ancestry and Phenotype Using DNA p. 424 (Google books)
"NOR1 admixture greater than or equal to 35% (row 2) and NOR1+NOR2 combined admixture greater than 45% (row 4) is strongly assiocated with iris color scores greater than 2.2 (Light) , which corresponds to color scores above the mean for individuals of majority European ancestry , and includes the light hazels , greens , and blues. In contrast , MIDEA and SA admixture leveles were individually associated with color scores below 2.2 (Dark) , corresponding to color scores below the mean (dark hazels , browns , blacks)"
SpainQuote:
Originally Posted by Peyrol
http://w11.zetaboards.com/ethnodiver...pic/7720154/1/
Study 2 : Hoyos-Sánz
Fair-eyes color (includes blue, greenish and grey) :
Vasco-Navarra 39.2%
Aragón 34.9%
Castilla La Nueva 21.4%
Castilla La Vieja 21.1%
Baleares 21.0%
León 18.8%
Múrcia 16.9%
Extremadura 18.8%
Cataluña 14.5%
Asturias 19.1%
Valencia 12.1%
Galícia 12.3%
Granada 11.7%
Andalucía 10.7%
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimo
Some lombard and furlan alpine valleys are also around 50%, while probably some isolated sardinian or calabrian village can be even around 2-5%...a very big difference for a single country, indeed.
I'm curious about the portuguese and the french percentages.
It could be both; a product of medieval Germanic conquest and just simply local variation.
http://whatishistory.edublogs.org/fi...empire-526.gif
It's a difference of 4% or so. But you also have to figure this.. eastern versus western Sicily. Eastern Sicily light eyes is probably close to (and possibly below) 10%. Whereas in western regions it may be close to 35%.Quote:
Originally Posted by alfieb
I find some of this data about North Italy/Spain to be exaggerated. I've read studies that showed that the pigmentation difference between Southern and Northern Italy/Spain to be sizable but rather small.
I don't think so. Maybe due to the fact that many northern Italians have southern Italian ancestry now due to people moving north, but overall from pictures and all studies I have seen, both northern Italy an Spain are lighter than southern Italy by quite a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ABest
And only about 2m Sicilians live in the West.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikeliot