Autosomal map : African admixture (from Dodecad)

The jury is still out on classification as Celtic but the evidence points to Tartessian as having, at the very least, Celtic influences. Let's see what the next round of the Celtic from the West project shows us.
 
Which facts? There is NO African DNA in West Asia AT ALL!

Big deal, there is no African DNA in West Asia. Who cares?

I was referring to the comments you made regarding SW African DNA in Iberia. Please, at least try to follow the discussion and be cognizant of what you write.
 
Ok, now we are getting somewhere!

I do believe that a gene flow between the Mediterranean countries in Africa & Europe is a natural process. Even 100 Adolf Hitler's together can't stop that. The only 'final' solution is to kill / genocide all Africans, and even then I'm not sure that there will never be any gene flow from Africa!

There always has been an interaction between the 2 continents and there always will be an interaction between the 2 continents!

You can also move to the Moon, but I truly believe that Africans will go after you too. I don't know why but they like your kinsmen very much.

Hitler by the way was E3b (Y-DNA), apparently. He hardly looked like a Moroccan or Algerian.
 
Berbers are clearly different, yes. Would be good to have results from different ethnic Berber tribes. Also, East African as component, is quite far from Negroids, since it's even closer to Europe than Southeast and Northeast Asian. If Ethiopians and other East Africans have black skin is because they also carry around 16% Neo African + Paleo African.
Yes, is like mixing apples with oranges.
 
The jury is still out on classification as Celtic but the evidence points to Tartessian as having, at the very least, Celtic influences. Let's see what the next round of the Celtic from the West project shows us.

Thats rubbish, that only influence would be much later............its like saying spain and/or Italy is influenced by english because spain say the word OK and weekend now

How can it be classified Celtic if Tartessian is older ? .........Besides I was referring to the southern part not all of iberia

Hope this is not another nationalistic rubbish that most place in eupedia!
 
Not rubbish at all.

According to Koch, Villar, Untermann and any number of others, Tartessian is part of the Celtic family of languages. It has aspects similar to Old Irish and Gaulish. The Atlantic School claims that Tartessian is 500 years older than any Celtic language from the putative Celtic cradle (Central Europe). Like I said, the jury is still out, but a growing number of experts find the evidence accumulated thus far compelling.

Celtic culture apparently developed as early as the Bronze Age throughout the Iberian Atlantic from Algarve / Andalusia to Galicia, N. Portugal and Asturias.

Actually, it is possible that Celticity progressed on two fronts, Central Europe and the Atlantic Facade (SW Iberia to Orkney).

Ref: Cunliff and Koch: Celtic from the West (2010)

Koch: Tartessian (2009) and Tartessian 2 (2011)
 
Not rubbish at all.

According to Koch, Villar, Untermann and any number of others, Tartessian is part of the Celtic family of languages. It has aspects similar to Old Irish and Gaulish. The Atlantic School claims that Tartessian is 500 years older than any Celtic language from the putative Celtic cradle (Central Europe). Like I said, the jury is still out, but a growing number of experts find the evidence accumulated thus far compelling.

Celtic culture apparently developed as early as the Bronze Age throughout the Iberian Atlantic from Algarve / Andalusia to Galicia, N. Portugal and Asturias.

Actually, it is possible that Celticity progressed on two fronts, Central Europe and the Atlantic Facade (SW Iberia to Orkney).

Ref: Cunliff and Koch: Celtic from the West (2010)

Koch: Tartessian (2009) and Tartessian 2 (2011)

so if Tartessian is 500 years older, then the celtic in Spain is classified tartessian and not celtic

is this it
http://ifc.dpz.es/recursos/publicaciones/29/54/26koch.pdf

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=1EEtmT9Tbj4C&pg=PA282&lpg=PA282&dq=tartessian+culture&source=bl&ots=BIfF4EN8Sk&sig=D06EsnRIfnXt5p5U4_D24Aro7o8&hl=en&ei=Rnp1TtPtCIKNmQXYn-3iDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCIQ6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q=tartessian%20culture&f=false

accepting celtic words or sentences does not make the language celtic.......no language had a full vocabulary in their own language.

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...EwBTgU#v=onepage&q=tartessian culture&f=false

seems still to be Phoenician to me
 

The ancient Greeks (Heradotus) referred to population groups in Southern Portugal and SW Spain as "Celtoi" (Celtic), because of their distinctive cultural practices. These are the very first written references to Celtic peoples. Tartessians used the Phoenician alphabet but their language was NOT related to Phoenician. You should read the Cunliff and Koch material. Go to Amazon for reviews. There are also in depth discussions on a number of sites, including Wikipedia.

Actually, this conversation belongs in the "Celts of Iberia" thread.
 
Last edited:
The ancient Greeks (Heradotus) referred to population groups in Southern Portugal and SW Spain as "Celtoi" (Celtic), because of their distinctive cultural practices. These are the very first written references to Celtic peoples.

This is incorrect. Herodotus refers to the population of Southern Portugal as "Kynetes", and he mentions them as distinct from the Keltoi. The problem is that Herodotus was geographically challenged. He claims that the Danube (Istros) originates in the lands of the Keltoi (a statement which by itself is correct), but he somehow seems to assume that it flew across all the length of Europe.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/7/74/Orbisherodoti-sb.jpg

However, one has to add that Herodotus lived in the 5th century BC and by that time, the knowledge of the Greeks of the real extend of Western Europe was probably limited.

Tartessians used the Phoenician alphabet but their language was NOT related to Phoenician. You should read the Cunliff and Koch material. Go to Amazon for reviews. There are also in depth discussions on a number of sites, including Wikipedia.

Actually, this conversation belongs in the "Celts of Iberia" thread.

Well, let me say that I agree that Tartessian wasn't related with Phoenician, but I don't think it was Celtic, either. There are considerable concentrations of E1b, G, J1, J2 and T in the Southwest, and from that perspective I find it very compelling they were a non-Indo-European people.
 
I can't be phoenocian, since it was at least Indo-European.
 
This is incorrect. Herodotus refers to the population of Southern Portugal as "Kynetes", and he mentions them as distinct from the Keltoi. The problem is that Herodotus was geographically challenged. He claims that the Danube (Istros) originates in the lands of the Keltoi (a statement which by itself is correct), but he somehow seems to assume that it flew across all the length of Europe.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/7/74/Orbisherodoti-sb.jpg

However, one has to add that Herodotus lived in the 5th century BC and by that time, the knowledge of the Greeks of the real extend of Western Europe was probably limited.



Well, let me say that I agree that Tartessian wasn't related with Phoenician, but I don't think it was Celtic, either. There are considerable concentrations of E1b, G, J1, J2 and T in the Southwest, and from that perspective I find it very compelling they were a non-Indo-European people.

Yes, Herodotus did say that the Keltoi were neighbors of the "Kynetes" who occupied the far south-west of the Iberian Peninsula.
 
Yes, Herodotus did say that the Keltoi were neighbors of the "Kynetes" who occupied the far south-west of the Iberian Peninsula.

The critical point is that the Kynetes were distinct from the Keltoi, and that fits with the general idea that the Tartessians were a non-Indo-European people.
 
I wish I could have data for the following regions of Spain to confirm the shade : Asturias, Cantabria, Extremadura, Castille, Andalusia, and Murcia. I already have data for the other regions.
African-admixture.gif

Medical studies have concluded that genetic traits found primarily in Africa (>80%) can be found at up to 20% of the Sardinian population [see A30-B18-DR3 haplotype] [1][2] and that there is a cline of African genetic input decreasing as one moves away from Iberia in a north easterly direction [3].

1. Sanchez-Velasco P, Gomez-Casado E, Martinez-Laso J, et al. (May 2003). "HLA alleles in isolated populations from North Spain: origin of the Basques and the ancient Iberians"

2. Choukri F, Chakib A, Himmich H, Raissi H, Caillat-Zucman S (June 2002). "HLA class I polymorphism in a Moroccan population from Casablanca". European Journal of Immunogenetics 29 (3): 205–11.

3. Gómez-Casado E, del Moral P, Martínez-Laso J, et al. (March 2000). "HLA genes in Arabic-speaking Moroccans: close relatedness to Berbers and Iberians". Tissue Antigens 55 (3): 239–49.


Thus, there is medical evidence that suggests Sardinia and Iberia share significantly higher levels of gene flow from Africa, perhaps as high as 20% in some areas. However, the relative isolation and European genetic influx into these areas has decreased the total African admixture to some degree.
 
Actually, only Canarians can show 20% of African admixture. Impossible to find something like this between mainland Iberians. The most "similar" thing taking such levels of admixture as reference, are the Gipsies. And of course, they are usually separated inmediatly from the native samples (not only in Spain, everywhere in Europe).

Genetic traits found in Africa? wich part of Africa?...ejem.

PD: Thanks for using Wikipedia, the site no one can alter the information. Truly reliable LOL
 
What suprises me that there is no African genes in Balkans - it is very close to Africa , Study of HTLM genes shows influence from Ethiopia in Greece , and Balkans and Italy are only in Europe wherewe can find African R1b-V88
 
Actually, only Canarians can show 20% of African admixture. Impossible to find something like this between mainland Iberians. The most "similar" thing taking such levels of admixture as reference, are the Gipsies. And of course, they are usually separated inmediatly from the native samples (not only in Spain, everywhere in Europe).

No Canarians were tested.:LOL:

And the Gypsies are not to blame either. In fact, Spanish Gypsies were found to have 3.9% A30-B18 whereas Basques have 8.1% and Sardinians 17% in general.

The frequency of this allele is highest in Zambia's Lusaka (23.3%) and Zimbabwe Harare Shona (14.7%) but is also high in Senegal, Cameroon, Moroccan Berber's, Kenya and indigenous South Africans. However, the specific A30-Cw5-B18-DR3-DQ2 haplotype exists primarily among the indigenous populations of the Western Mediterranean and super-Equatorial West Africa.

Genetic traits found in Africa? wich part of Africa?...ejem.

A30-B18 is found in significant levels from Senegal to Morroco. The initial study in 1995 found it in Algerian Berbers. Following the initial study it was found to be common (<80%) in the region of Northwest Africa.

PD: Thanks for using Wikipedia, the site no one can alter the information. Truly reliable LOL

Wikipedia will only allow changes that reflect accepted scientific inquiry. Anybody may change erroneous info on Wikipedia.
 
What suprises me that there is no African genes in Balkans - it is very close to Africa , Study of HTLM genes shows influence from Ethiopia in Greece , and Balkans and Italy are only in Europe wherewe can find African R1b-V88

The Balkans are by no means devoid of all African influence, the African elements in the Balkans are very different to those found in Iberia though. It is likely that the R1b-V88 in Africa may have come from the same stock as that which is found in Italy and Greece suggesting European gene flow to Africa.

Northeast Africa has a very West and Southeast Asian composite, in addition one should also note its illustrious history that differs a great deal from West and Central Africa. Not that West and Central African civilization was any less illustrious, however East Africa can be divided into a predominantly Bantu zone from Central Africa to the Southern tip of Africa and a predominantly Med-Southwest Asian zone covering most of Egypt's area as well as Sudan and Ethiopia's coast.

One may say that Egypt has more South West Asian and Mediterranean admixture than the rest of Africa bearing in mind the history of its many kingdoms. It is important to emphasize that the pre-Roman East African civilization expressed a rigid form of governance unlike the West African Berbers and the Medieval Saracens who were more mobile and therefore more effective in spreading their genes. Sicily suggests later Saracen influence that was more Berber-like in organizational structure and hence more genetic flow was carried over from African bands there.
 
Last edited:
Northwest Africa is mainly Caucasoid. Keep this in mind, because if you talk about "traits", some of them are common in different European populations (not only in Southern Europe). No need to say nobody in Spain looks negroid...LOL. And of course, Wikipedia proves absolutely nothing, we had several examples here of t.r.o.l.l users who changed percents and other informations with vandal accounts there. So what you say about wikipedia (only accepting scientific inquiry) it's plain false.

I wasn't telling Gipsies have blame or not (I don't really care with such sources), just they are simply the most mixed people in Iberia (the only ones who can get 20% non European or more like you said) Another thing perhaps you don't know (or just want to ignore) is that of course there are Canarians tested (yes, it was false too). The IBS sample surely includes 2 or 3, but you are free to think what you want. Even if you don't think so, I let you know there's a thing called DIYDODECAD, and there are Canarians who performed the analysis with this tool. It's very accurate, since I am a project member and also tried DIYDODECAD, and results were almost the same.

Here you have the results of a Canarian, first of all what Doug McDonald said (he was even generous):

80% - All Western Europe
20% - All North Africa

"Basically a mix of Spanish and Moorish" - He clearly separates both populations.

DODECAD (DIY)

[FONT=&quot]East_European 4.22%
West_European 32.99%
Mediterranean 35.87%
Neo_African 1.41%
West_Asian 9.00%
South_Asian 0.23%
Northeast_Asian 0.14%
Southeast_Asian 0.43%
East_African 2.11%
Southwest_Asian 4.30%
Northwest_African 8.63%
Palaeo_African 0.66%
[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Wich is: 12.81% Africa, 13.3% W+SW Asia, 0.8% little bits. Total European = 73.08%[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Nothing to do with Spanish_D sample, Behar Spaniards sample (6 Catalans and 6 Andalusians), and the IBS average. All of them,, excepting 2-3 in the IBS sample (Canarian profile), score more than 80% European. The average is near 91%, so take your own conclusions...although I don't expect a huge effort xd. [/FONT]
 
73.08% seems more reasonable for a Spanish sample. I appreciate you coming down to earth and seeing things from a more realistic perspective, good job. The 90+ percent that floats around is not accurate.

No sample from the Canary Isles has undergone testing for the specific A30-B18 haplotype as far as I know. I doubt if this haplotype has been included in Dodecad or any other admixture analysis.

The better defined admixture results become the more likely these percentage will drop rather than rise. The Spanish Gypsies should not have much more if any additional African admixture compared to an average Spaniard. What do you base this on except off-course likely preconceptions and prejudice.

Northwest Africa is mainly Caucasoid.

Is a glass half empty or half full? I am not concerned where Caucasoid traits or African traits can be found in Africans, it concerns me that some people insist on believing that gene-flow was a purely one-sided affair, as if there had been a membrane allowing European genes out but no African genes in. Caucasoid is a stretch though, you have to admit that saying Northwest Africans are mainly Caucasoid is like saying Iberians are mainly African. Both statements are based on rhetoric.

ps. Africans do not all look typically Bantu. This is based on Walt Disney's stereotypical depiction of a native with a bone through his nose, not based on reality.
 
Guy, I'm telling you this results come from a CANARIAN MAN joining 23andme. He posted the results claiming even he was happy to be DIFFERENT from Spaniards, because most Canarians don't consider themselves Spanish. So not from mainland Iberia, since those are represented in the other samples you now say aren't accurate. Of course, you must say such thing simply because you have absolutely no reason XD

Believe it or not, only Gipsies in Spain could get 73% European (doesn't matter the amount of African admixture), any of the maindland Spaniards tested is near of this (all score more than 80%). I think you are the one who should come down to earth...

PD1: Now is when you go and say I'm lying, and the sample is from Spain, not Canarian LOL.

PD2: Check the North African, Mozabite, Moroccan etc. averages. And Check the component distances. They are of course mainly Caucasoid, nothing to do with Negroids (phenotypically and genetically speaking) and they simply don't cluster with them for obvious reasons (Neo and Paleo African are very far from a Northwest African component). Now, call me racist if you want to complete the series XD

PD3: Keep trusting Wikipedia, keep.
 

This thread has been viewed 140294 times.

Back
Top