Genetic study Population changes in northern Italy from the Iron Age to Modern Times

[Moja]

It's 2024 and such pseudoscientific Bullshit maps are still circulating on the web Sorry for my choice of words but yeah not sorry.

Share your scientific maps, it seems you just don't like it.

Look at this map from 2024 in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44430-5

 

[torzio]

what does post #21 have to do with North Italy ?????????????

 

[Vitruvius]

Share your scientific maps, it seems you just don't like it.

Look at this map from 2024 in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44430-5

This map places the PIE homeland in the Armenian highlands, which is actually more feasible for Europe than direct Iranian colonization. In the case of Europe/Anatolia, Caucasian ancestry is common to all IE speaking groups where as Steppe is lacking in Anatolia.

 

[ihype02]

It seems that the focus of these studies, when it comes to Italy, is always an "Eastern Mediterranean signal".

Where else should the focus be? What are scientists supposed to say when they see Imperial samples in direction of West Asia in comparison to the ones from Republic era in Tuscany, Marche, Rome/Lazio and now even in parts of North Italy in the same pattern? Voodoo?

 

[Vitruvius]

Where else should the focus be? What are scientists supposed to say when they see Imperial samples in direction of West Asia in comparison the ones from Republic era in Tuscany, Marche, Rome/Lazio and now even in Northern Italy in the same pattern? Voodoo?

The focus should be in the Magna Graecian world which is the largest and best documented vector for Aegean ancestry in Italy instead of speculating mass undocumented middle eastern population replacement. Notice how they don't even specify "Greek-like" but instead "Eastern Mediterranean"? This is done purposefully with ill intent and a lack of interest in the historic/archaeologic record.

 

[ihype02]

How much West African archeology is there in Deep South States of America?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Census_1900_Percent_Black.png

 

[Vitruvius]

What if most Greeks samples in Magna Graecia plot like they one from Himera? What would that make of this theory?

95% of samples in Greek world so far overlap with their Bronze Age predecessors. Why should scientists ignore that?

Late Bronze age Greeks plotted like southern Italians. We have literally hundreds of samples attesting to this. Any genealogist up to date on Skouranioti et al 2023 is already well aware of this.

The Himerans existed on a Sicanian to Aegean cline with most samples plotting somewhere in between. Like the Daunians, they were in the middle of a transition process. We also see this with the leaked Etruscans of Pontecagnano. Their results are not mirrored in Ischia whose leaked samples plot more homogenously like the LBA greeks.

How much West African archeology is there in Deep South States of America?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Census_1900_Percent_Black.png

West african entrance into the United States through the slave trade is well documented and a civil war was fought in part over their status in American society. We have exact demographic figures to know their numbers and exactly what proportion of society they represent in various time periods. We can say none of this for the middle eastern replacement hypothesis in Italy.

 

[Vallicanus]

The focus should be in the Magna Graecian world which is the largest and best documented vector for Aegean ancestry in Italy instead of speculating mass undocumented middle eastern population replacement. Notice how they don't even specify "Greek-like" but instead "Eastern Mediterranean"? This is done purposefully with ill intent and a lack of interest in the historic/archaeologic record.

Inscriptions under the late Roman Republic/Early Roman Empire (when most genetic change occurred) in Central Italy) together with Pompeii show only the Latin, Oscan and Greek languages. Even graffiti is in Latin.

 

[Moja]

This map places the PIE homeland in the Armenian highlands, which is actually more feasible for Europe than direct Iranian colonization. In the case of Europe/Anatolia, Caucasian ancestry is common to all IE speaking groups where as Steppe is lacking in Anatolia.

This study talks about the Near Eastern ancestry in northern Italy, not Caucasian ancestry. Whether the Armenian highlands or Iran, new scientific studies show migrations from this region in the Near East to Europe.

 

[Vitruvius]

This study talks about the Near Eastern ancestry in northern Italy, not Caucasian ancestry. Whether the Armenian highlands or Iran, new scientific studies show migrations from this region in the Near East to Europe.

Let's wait and see all of these "Near eastern" samples that are supposedly roaming about in Northern Italy if you are confident in this idea, then. If near easterners are the true source of the ancestry then they should be all over the place, and their resulting ancestry should average in easily to the proceeding population norms. In truth I'll be surprised if we see anything more southerly than European LBA Greek profiles in this region.

 

[Jovialis]

I think it relates to haplgroup J2a, from Iran to the Eastern Mediterranean region, Greece and finally Italy: https://j2-m172.info/wp-content/upl...ements_into_Europe_speculative_map_2014c1.png

This is a map from 10 years ago, much has changed in our understanding since then.

Also I've seen "Near eastern" to describe Anatolia_N in the past. It should be noted that Modern Europeans have more Anatolian_N than modern Near Easterners. Thus, it is more a feature of Europe now than it is of the middle east.

We need to examine the study to clarify what is meant.

The paper on Etruscans rather unimpressively says the same thing about Tuscany. But that is because they take "Imperial Romans" as a kind of panmixia of all the various groups. But As we see in the middle ages, that wasn't the case. Yet for some reason, some researchers want to move forward with that.

I think it is better explained by the fact the South has had a higher Iran-like component due to connections to the Aegean, and thus was mediated to the North via the Roman empire. Thus Modern Northerners are 3/4 BA/IA Italic - 1/4 Aegean-like.

 

[Jovialis]

Share your scientific maps, it seems you just don't like it.

Look at this map from 2024 in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44430-5

The origins of Anatolian Neolithic Farmers is dubious, because we still haven't found the Basal Eurasian.

A tale of two pre-prints (Basal Eurasians, or No Basal Eurasians?)

Basal Eurasians, or No Basal Eurasians? Demogenomic modeling of the timing and the processes of early European farmers differentiation https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.23.394502v2 Originally discussed here...

www.eupedia.com

Also even the Southern Arc theory says most of the languages in Europe came via the Steppe route.

 

[Jovialis]

This is a map from 10 years ago, much has changed in our understanding since then.

Also I've seen "Near eastern" to describe Anatolia_N in the past. It should be noted that Modern Europeans have more Anatolian_N than modern Near Easterners. Thus, it is more a feature of Europe now than it is of the middle east.

We need to examine the study to clarify what is meant.

The paper on Etruscans rather unimpressively says the same thing about Tuscany. But that is because they take "Imperial Romans" as a kind of panmixia of all the various groups. But As we see in the middle ages, that wasn't the case. Yet for some reason, some researchers want to move forward with that.

I think it is better explained by the fact the South has had a higher Iran-like component due to connections to the Aegean, and thus was mediated to the North via the Roman empire. Thus Modern Northerners are 3/4 BA/IA Italic - 1/4 Aegean-like.

We also know for a fact, since 2019 that some G2 and J2 came to Italy at least as early as the Neolithic, as per Antonio et al. 2019:

 

[Vitruvius]

This is a map from 10 years ago, much has changed in our understanding since then.

Also I've seen "Near eastern" to describe Anatolia_N in the past. It should be noted that Modern Europeans have more Anatolian_N than modern Near Easterners. Thus, it is more a feature of Europe now than it is of the middle east.

Yes, and the same logic applies to IA Anatolians. They are all closest to modern Greek, S. Italian or Armenian populations. This is not surprising because their ancestral profile is a simple 2 way cross between Neolithic Armenian and Neolithic Anatolian population genetics. Western ones seem to be a bit more greek like with eastern being closer to Armenia.

 

[ihype02]

The one Jovalis posted is the largest sample of BA Greeks we have to date. It shows quite clearly how they "became" more modern like as time progressed through the gradual absorption of both steppe rich and BA Anatolian DNA at the expense of EEF ancestry.

To give you an idea as to how close a 0.038 average is you should know that modern day Campanians (with no outliers outside of the S. Italian cluster) have a distance of 0.05 between each other based on the existing G25 dataset. So if you're willing to agree that Campanians overlap Campanians, you have to agree that the LBA Greek average overlaps Campanians as well. This is all without getting into the likelyhood that this process of Anatolian and steppe absorption continued into the IA where we see the Greek world now encompasses unbroken coastal regions of West Anatolia.

View attachment 15482

Also, from my perspective the Ischian samples you posted overlap the imperial roman black circle you've made (C6 cluster). This is what I presume Greece proper will look like and not so much the purple area.

0.038 differences on the average samples not on individual samples, not the same thing.

Those two are the Latin outliers in black circle I made, check the Imperial Rome paper and make a comparison to get a clearer image.
One of those two Latins is fully in the Mycenaean triangle (also in the purple circle in the previous edited picture of mine) which is close with the Iron Age Greek. It's easy to detect both of them and correlate both of them with the Rome 2019 PCA.

Sicilians are in small dots opposite to them.

 

[Jovialis]

I've moved most of the discussion of Magna Graecia, Dorians, etc. to a more appropriate thread:

Comparing Ancient Greek populations to modern Greeks and Italians

Again, Himera was founded by Ionians in the second phase. LBA Cretans, which overlaps with Modern Puglia were Dorian-Speakers. The people who colonized Puglia were also Dorian-Speakers. Dorian Speakers also colonized a large part of Sicily. Achaean-Doric were likely genetically similar to...

www.eupedia.com

Clearly Magna Graecia is essential to the OP, since it argues that 1/4 of the Modern Northern Italian genetic profile comes from it; with 3/4ths coming from BA/IA Italians.

Nevertheless, it was becoming less and less about Northern Italy.

This is an interesting dynamic in the discourse of Italian genetics though.

Everything, even Northern Italian genetics, is reducible to the so-called "Near East" input.

Furthermore, it is is reducible to a matter of two theories:

So-called "Near east" component being conflated with non-steppe-related CHG coming from Greek influence. Or coming from a panmixia of Imperial era immigrants; notably Levantine.

As I said earlier, and I'm sure it is abundantly clear by now, I am a proponent of it coming primarily from Dorian Greek colonization in Magna Graecia, and the legacy of Greek/Balkan influence. I think most of the participants in this thread would agree with that.

 

[Jovialis]

I've moved most of the discussion of Magna Graecia, Dorians, etc. to a more appropriate thread:

Comparing Ancient Greek populations to modern Greeks and Italians

Again, Himera was founded by Ionians in the second phase. LBA Cretans, which overlaps with Modern Puglia were Dorian-Speakers. The people who colonized Puglia were also Dorian-Speakers. Dorian Speakers also colonized a large part of Sicily. Achaean-Doric were likely genetically similar to...

www.eupedia.com

Clearly Magna Graecia is essential to the OP, since it argues that 1/4 of the Modern Northern Italian genetic profile comes from it; with 3/4ths coming from BA/IA Italians.

Nevertheless, it was becoming less and less about Northern Italy.

This is an interesting dynamic in the discourse of Italian genetics though.

Everything, even Northern Italian genetics, is reducible to the so-called "Near East" input.

Furthermore, it is is reducible to a matter of two theories:

So-called "Near east" component being conflated with non-steppe-related CHG coming from Greek influence. Or coming from a panmixia of Imperial era immigrants; notably Levantine.

As I said earlier, and I'm sure it is abundantly clear by now, I am a proponent of it coming primarily from Dorian Greek colonization in Magna Graecia, and the legacy of Greek/Balkan influence. I think most of the participants in this thread would agree with that.

 

[Robotnick]

You might need a Jstore account to access, but here's an old 1930s article about epigraphic evidence that following the expulsion of Gauls from Gallia Cisalpina, the Later Republican Po Valley was resettled in large part by Samnites.

THE SAMNITES IN THE PO VALLEY
By D. O. Robson
University of Western Ontario
London, Canada

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3290441?read-now=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 

[HereToLearn]

You might need a Jstore account to access, but here's an old 1930s article about epigraphic evidence that following the expulsion of Gauls from Gallia Cisalpina, the Later Republican Po Valley was resettled in large part by Samnites.

Where Gauls expelled from Gallia Cisalpina?

 

[Vallicanus]

You might need a Jstore account to access, but here's an old 1930s article about epigraphic evidence that following the expulsion of Gauls from Gallia Cisalpina, the Later Republican Po Valley was resettled in large part by Samnites.

THE SAMNITES IN THE PO VALLEY
By D. O. Robson
University of Western Ontario
London, Can

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3290441?read-now=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

I can't access this article.

Can you summarise it?