Has there been genetic studies done on the remains of any Moorish inhabitants from Al-Andalus?

[Kess]

Gallop currently researching it

Conclusion: They were Visigoths.

[Flashball]

Morisco (from actual North Africa)
Tetwani1_scaled,0.052359,0.139128,0.016593,-0.033269,0.028005,-0.011435,-0.00987,0.002769,0.034565,0.026242,0.003573,0.0022 48,0.000595,-0.004542,0.007057,-0.012066,-0.011343,-0.008615,-0.015838,-0.000125,-0.007362,-0.013725,0.008751,-0.009278,0.010897

Target: Tetwani1_scaled
Distance: 3.0022% / 0.03002189
37.6 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
20.8 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
18.2 TUR_Barcin_N
14.2 MAR_Taforalt
6.4 WHG
1.6 Yoruba
1.2 Dinka


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morisc...co_descendants

[axel.aleman]

El residuo norteafricano proviene más de inmigraciones aún más atrás en el Neolítico que se asentaron en el oeste de la península ibérica, no por nada Galicia y Portugal tienen más NA residual que el Este de Andalucía
Y el promedio es solo 4%
Puedo decir esto ahora que no están los Trolles Shitcanos y spaghetti que saquen de contexto esto para sus trolleos

[axel.aleman]

También cabe recordar que el Al Andalus no fue una precuela de Hispanoamérica en cuanto a mestizaje masivo

[HelloGuys]

El residuo norteafricano proviene más de inmigraciones aún más atrás en el Neolítico que se asentaron en el oeste de la península ibérica, no por nada Galicia y Portugal tienen más NA residual que el Este de Andalucía
Y el promedio es solo 4%
Puedo decir esto ahora que no están los Trolles Shitcanos y spaghetti que saquen de contexto esto para sus trolleos

Bro, about the Neolithic times in Iberia, there are not evidence to support this claim; in fact we have a sample from Copper Age or Early Bronze Age that was like a pre-proto-berber in Iberia (No steppe contribution) but it does not mean that they mixed with the local population because we have not found North African heritage in the Iberian samples in those Ages but until the Roman times which is where they began to have those North African genetic markers, but still the greatest contribution in the genetic pool from Berbers to the Spanish population as a whole was in the Early half of Middle Ages according to Clare Bycroft's 2019 study:



About the Galician and portuguese people having more North African heritage, (My opinion) well, I think is because that they were a small population and mixing between them remained more the MENA markers than the other iberians/spaniards (End of my opinion) but still the greatest admixture is in Early half of Middle Ages as you can see in the admixture dates in the 6 iberian clusters:



And the spanish average is a little bit more, like 5.5%. Ranging from 0% (Basques) to around 10.6% (Galicians).

For more information here is the link of the study:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08272-w

[Jingle Bell]

Bro, about the Neolithic times in Iberia, there are not evidence to support this claim; in fact we have a sample from Copper Age or Early Bronze Age that was like a pre-proto-berber in Iberia (No steppe contribution) but it does not mean that they mixed with the local population because we have not found North African heritage in the Iberian samples in those Ages but until the Roman times which is where they began to have those North African genetic markers, but still the greatest contribution in the genetic pool from Berbers to the Spanish population as a whole was in the Early half of Middle Ages according to Clare Bycroft's 2019 study:



About the Galician and portuguese people having more North African heritage, (My opinion) well, I think is because that they were a small population and mixing between them remained more the MENA markers than the other iberians/spaniards (End of my opinion) but still the greatest admixture is in Early half of Middle Ages as you can see in the admixture dates in the 6 iberian clusters:



And the spanish average is a little bit more, like 5.5%. Ranging from 0% (Basques) to around 10.6% (Galicians).

For more information here is the link of the study:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08272-w

Overall i agree, but seens that NA admix dont peaked in Early MA but rather in Early-Middle Roman Era or maybe a bit earlier (Late IA?)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6436108/


In average, Late Roman/Visigothic Iberia (3 - 4CE/ 5 - 8 CE) actually had a a bit less Iberian genepool than Al-Andalus period ( 10 - 16CE)


Some Y-dna NA markers apperared just after 8CE, which seens of indiscutible Moorish origin, but despite some Y-DNA from NA (Which inst suprisingly bcs the moor invasion despite no so big in absolute number was havily man/soldier biased) the autossonomical contribuition acutally remain the same or actually lowered a bit, which seens that overall the earlier NA influx in Iberia (as the study sugest of Phoenician/Cartaghe origin or even mabe NA slaves/roman mercenaries) was just replaced/added by other NA source more south shifted (as the more Arabian/SSA y-dna presence indicates) which gets in Iberia about Early Middle Age.

Moorish invasion was very man-biased and despote the low autossonomical contribuition the y-dna was very visible: (E1b clades, J ones can be from Jewsih or even later Roman imigration, while I is strongly associated with Germanic settlers, that despite also the low autossonomical impact was very man-biased and impacted y-dna mostly)



Individuals from SE Iberia actually suffered a lower in NA blood, prob associated with a homogenization inter-iberian during the Moorish invasion, and descreases more in 10 -16 CE (expulsion of marranos) , despite the Levant contribuition actually remain stabel (prob indicating a Jewish contribuition of less probably a late roman influx)

[HelloGuys]

Overall i agree, but seens that NA admix dont peaked in Early MA but rather in Early-Middle Roman Era or maybe a bit earlier (Late IA?)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6436108/


In average, Late Roman/Visigothic Iberia (3 - 4CE/ 5 - 8 CE) actually had a a bit less Iberian genepool than Al-Andalus period ( 10 - 16CE)


Some Y-dna NA markers apperared just after 8CE, which seens of indiscutible Moorish origin, but despite some Y-DNA from NA (Which inst suprisingly bcs the moor invasion despite no so big in absolute number was havily man/soldier biased) the autossonomical contribuition acutally remain the same or actually lowered a bit, which seens that overall the earlier NA influx in Iberia (as the study sugest of Phoenician/Cartaghe origin or even mabe NA slaves/roman mercenaries) was just replaced/added by other NA source more south shifted (as the more Arabian/SSA y-dna presence indicates) which gets in Iberia about Early Middle Age.

Moorish invasion was very man-biased and despote the low autossonomical contribuition the y-dna was very visible: (E1b clades, J ones can be from Jewsih or even later Roman imigration, while I is strongly associated with Germanic settlers, that despite also the low autossonomical impact was very man-biased and impacted y-dna mostly)



Individuals from SE Iberia actually suffered a lower in NA blood, prob associated with a homogenization inter-iberian during the Moorish invasion, and descreases more in 10 -16 CE (expulsion of marranos) , despite the Levant contribuition actually remain stabel (prob indicating a Jewish contribuition of less probably a late roman influx)

I am talking about the NA geneflow in whole Iberia not just in some zones, bro; I have read that study of Olalde and just says about the North African impact in Southern Iberia, so Bycroft`s arguments about the Early Middle Ages is still valid, even in the A flores-Bello 2021 study when he modeled iberians he wrote this description:

" Finally, 3-way admixture model was performed including Mozabite to represent the North African geneflow during the Islamic period in the Iberian Peninsula."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...60982221003493

He did not write: "North African geneflow during the roman period...."

That is because the greatest impact in the whole iberia was in the islamic period, the EMA.

[Damião de Góis]

I am talking about the NA geneflow in whole Iberia not just in some zones, bro; I have read that study of Olalde and just says about the North African impact in Southern Iberia, so Bycroft`s arguments about the Early Middle Ages is still valid, even in the A flores-Bello 2021 study when he modeled iberians he wrote this description:

" Finally, 3-way admixture model was performed including Mozabite to represent the North African geneflow during the Islamic period in the Iberian Peninsula."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...60982221003493

He did not write: "North African geneflow during the roman period...."

That is because the greatest impact in the whole iberia was in the islamic period, the EMA.

I thought it was common knowledge by now that NA was introduced in the roman period. Some samples came out after the Olalde study and they were very revealing:



These are samples from the late roman empire, and all of them score Taforalt. One of them (Portugal_Miroico_LateRoman.SG) even socres very close to the modern portuguese sample in the bottom. So to say the greatest impact was in the islamic period is incorrect, it was already there before.

[HelloGuys]

I thought it was common knowledge by now that NA was introduced in the roman period. Some samples came out after the Olalde study and they were very revealing:



These are samples from the late roman empire, and all of them score Taforalt. One of them (Portugal_Miroico_LateRoman.SG) even socres very close to the modern portuguese sample in the bottom. So to say the greatest impact was in the islamic period is incorrect, it was already there before.

" thought it was common knowledge by now that NA was introduced in the roman period."

I never denied that, did you read the thread?

And in a debate you would have to show studies and papers, so if you have a study that support your claim, I will read it without problem

[Damião de Góis]

" thought it was common knowledge by now that NA was introduced in the roman period."

I never denied that, did you read the thread?

And in a debate you would have to show studies and papers, so if you have a study that support your claim, I will read it without problem

These samples came out after the Olalde sample like i said. The Olalde study had litle or no IA samples from western Iberia so he took some liberties in his conclusions.

I get that for latin americans "the moors in iberia" are an important subject, but now with the information these roman samples provide you can conclude whatever you want, or you can ignore them and wait for the next study.