another paper on Mtdna Iberia

So basically the western half has more to do with North Africa than eastern half?

Wait for Drac's insults ,tap, tap, tap feet.................but yes looks like the "north Africans" entered Spain and moved along the western side........there is very good sheep country there, I wonder if that was the reason
 
Wait for Drac's insults ,tap, tap, tap feet.................but yes looks like the "north Africans" entered Spain and moved along the western side........there is very good sheep country there, I wonder if that was the reason

I'm not pyschologue but I think you have a problem or a fixation with Spanish, and I do not understand this.
Explain!
 
Wait for Drac's insults ,tap, tap, tap feet.................but yes looks like the "north Africans" entered Spain and moved along the western side........there is very good sheep country there, I wonder if that was the reason

Apparently you did not notice that "western third" of Iberia is mostly Portugal, not Spain, and you also failed to notice the comment the blogger made about this "west to east" gradient:

Much of this seems best explained by ancient flows from NW Africa (flows which may be Neolithic, Paleolithic or from the Metal Ages but hardly related to Phoenician or Muslim colonization, which had no W-E gradient whatsoever)

This curious pattern in fact contradicts the speculations of those who want to very quickly jump to conclusions regarding the origin of these markers in Iberia. Regarding the much ballyhooed "Moors", more specifically, it flies in the face of common sense and historical evidence since what today is Portugal actually was under Islamic "rule" for quite less than what today is southern Spain, yet it has a higher frequency of these markers. Once again, haplogroups or mtDNA do not confirm any supposed "huge influence" from any invasions of Iberia during historical times, whether Roman, Germanic or "Moorish".

 
So basically the western half has more to do with North Africa than eastern half?

Yes, or actually rather the western third. The gradient is not south to north, as some people with obvious agendas would certainly love it to be so they could keep on babbling about "Moors" in Iberia.
 
Wait for Drac's insults ,tap, tap, tap feet.................but yes looks like the "north Africans" entered Spain and moved along the western side........there is very good sheep country there, I wonder if that was the reason
You don't get it. The pattern of north-african input do not follow the patterns of Islamic rule. Ironically, in Granada, which is the only place of Iberia that lasted the full 780 years under islamic rule, has very low north-african, in fact lower than many parts of Northern Iberia from a Haplogroups prespective, specifically via E-M81/U6, and plenty of R1b (70% in East-Andalusia) which confirms this East-West gradient.
 
It's been known for quite some time that the gradient for the uniparental markers was east/west and not north/south here, so I don't see that the paper adds very much to our understanding of these matters.

The only way to get some handle on the issue would seem to be through dating of very specific subclades of both the ydna and the mtdna. The time depths involved with mtdna might make conclusions difficult to draw, but the ydna questions might be easier. Still, that would require the sort of resolution for the "E" clades that is now available for the "R" clades. In the case of "R", the impetus for that work came from the hobbyist community in countries with high levels of ydna "R". Unfortunately, I don't see that hobbyist interest in resolving and dating the "E" clades.

So, that said, it's unclear whether the E-M81 found in Iberia today, for example, is neolithic or from later Muslim expansions, or both. Of course, the source is still North Africa, regardless of the dating.

Historical records aren't very helpful either. Obviously, none are available for the Neolithic, and there is an absolute dearth of data on the period of the Arab/Moorish domination of Iberia. The same problem existed in Sicily and southern Italy. History is written by the last victors, and the Normans and their successors didn't leave much information behind about their predecessors. That has been rectified for Sicily in the last couple of decades, as Sicilian scholars and English language scholars as well have turned to the Muslim sources for information. I'm not aware of any similar English language treatments of Spain for that era, which is surprising. Indeed, I'm not aware of any modern Spanish language treatment of the issue either. I would certainly be interested in reading it if one was available. For instance, it would be helpful in resolving the questions concerning the cline to know the extent of the relocations of the Spanish population following the expulsions of the Moors and the Jews.
 
You don't get it. The pattern of north-african input do not follow the patterns of Islamic rule. Ironically, in Granada, which is the only place of Iberia that lasted the full 780 years under islamic rule, has very low north-african, in fact lower than many parts of Northern Iberia from a Haplogroups prespective, specifically via E-M81/U6, and plenty of R1b (70% in East-Andalusia) which confirms this East-West gradient.

don't be silly there are no such thing as an islamic markers or jewish marker or christian marker..................islam began less than 2000 years ago, how are they linked with E or any other haplogroup?............I thought you knew this.

Its north african...........who where these north african migrants....I am unsure, but I know they belonged to no religious group or even a linguistic group. If you know let me know
 
It's been known for quite some time that the gradient for the uniparental markers was east/west and not north/south here, so I don't see that the paper adds very much to our understanding of these matters.

The only way to get some handle on the issue would seem to be through dating of very specific subclades of both the ydna and the mtdna. The time depths involved with mtdna might make conclusions difficult to draw, but the ydna questions might be easier. Still, that would require the sort of resolution for the "E" clades that is now available for the "R" clades. In the case of "R", the impetus for that work came from the hobbyist community in countries with high levels of ydna "R". Unfortunately, I don't see that hobbyist interest in resolving and dating the "E" clades.

So, that said, it's unclear whether the E-M81 found in Iberia today, for example, is neolithic or from later Muslim expansions, or both. Of course, the source is still North Africa, regardless of the dating.

Historical records aren't very helpful either. Obviously, none are available for the Neolithic, and there is an absolute dearth of data on the period of the Arab/Moorish domination of Iberia. The same problem existed in Sicily and southern Italy. History is written by the last victors, and the Normans and their successors didn't leave much information behind about their predecessors. That has been rectified for Sicily in the last couple of decades, as Sicilian scholars and English language scholars as well have turned to the Muslim sources for information. I'm not aware of any similar English language treatments of Spain for that era, which is surprising. Indeed, I'm not aware of any modern Spanish language treatment of the issue either. I would certainly be interested in reading it if one was available. For instance, it would be helpful in resolving the questions concerning the cline to know the extent of the relocations of the Spanish population following the expulsions of the Moors and the Jews.

There where many different migrational groups entering iberia from the south before the moors entered. The Numidians, Carthaginians, Phoenicians, to name just 3

E marker was in Spain before the moors arrived
 
There where many different migrational groups entering iberia from the south before the moors entered. The Numidians, Carthaginians, Phoenicians, to name just 3

E marker was in Spain before the moors arrived

I thought that's what I said.
 
'The registered frequencies of Eurasian markers, together with the high incidence and diversification of African maternal lineages (15% of the total mitochondrial variability) among Huelva Andalusians'

Huelva was the Moorish Walbah;
And by the looks of it it still is; Especially the sub-saharan mtDNA L seems to have stuck;
 
Huelva on the paternal line in the study of Ambrosio et al. 2010 had only 3% of E-M81, which is lower than Spanish average, lower than many parts of northern Spain or parts of France.
 
'The registered frequencies of Eurasian markers, together with the high incidence and diversification of African maternal lineages (15% of the total mitochondrial variability) among Huelva Andalusians'

Huelva was the Moorish Walbah;
And by the looks of it it still is; Especially the sub-saharan mtDNA L seems to have stuck;

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_mtdna_haplogroups_frequency.shtml
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplo..._pco=smlwn-1.0&at_tot=1&at_ab=per-12&at_pos=0

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#at_pco=smlwn-1.0&at_tot=1&at_ab=per-12&at_pos=0

You are right partly Drac, they can compare the galiciens which have never known occupation Muslim.
 
Perhaps you would care to explain the relevance of the link to material on Italian genetics?

The thread Sile started is on Iberian mtdna.
 
Perhaps you would care to explain the relevance of the link to material on Italian genetics?

The thread Sile started is on Iberian mtdna.

and could you explain the relevance iberia for customers with E1b while on the contrary it is especially in Italy.
The knowledge that seems related to E and L generally.
In fact there nothing seems relevant or having reason except interest the debate against Iberian.
, Being or not being is not important but the thought directed into propaganda is strange. I do not see how the Italian name on a card a problem? I think it's more because they are also the people as well as the Mediterranean French South like me or iberian.

It is a geographical focus
 
It's been known for quite some time that the gradient for the uniparental markers was east/west and not north/south here, so I don't see that the paper adds very much to our understanding of these matters.

The only way to get some handle on the issue would seem to be through dating of very specific subclades of both the ydna and the mtdna. The time depths involved with mtdna might make conclusions difficult to draw, but the ydna questions might be easier. Still, that would require the sort of resolution for the "E" clades that is now available for the "R" clades. In the case of "R", the impetus for that work came from the hobbyist community in countries with high levels of ydna "R". Unfortunately, I don't see that hobbyist interest in resolving and dating the "E" clades.

So, that said, it's unclear whether the E-M81 found in Iberia today, for example, is neolithic or from later Muslim expansions, or both. Of course, the source is still North Africa, regardless of the dating.

Historical records aren't very helpful either. Obviously, none are available for the Neolithic, and there is an absolute dearth of data on the period of the Arab/Moorish domination of Iberia. The same problem existed in Sicily and southern Italy. History is written by the last victors, and the Normans and their successors didn't leave much information behind about their predecessors. That has been rectified for Sicily in the last couple of decades, as Sicilian scholars and English language scholars as well have turned to the Muslim sources for information. I'm not aware of any similar English language treatments of Spain for that era, which is surprising. Indeed, I'm not aware of any modern Spanish language treatment of the issue either. I would certainly be interested in reading it if one was available. For instance, it would be helpful in resolving the questions concerning the cline to know the extent of the relocations of the Spanish population following the expulsions of the Moors and the Jews.

There is enough surviving information from the historical period you are referring to which has allowed scholars of both Iberian and Islamic history since as far back as the 19th century to conclude that the Arab/Moorish population of Iberia was only a small minority. Info on this has already been pointed out before, like this one (page 144):

https://archive.org/stream/preachingofislam00arno#page/144/mode/2up

But of course, for those not happy with historical evidence that doesn't say what they desperately want to hear it keeps falling on deaf hears and they prefer to keep harping on about a mythological "800 years of Islamic rule of Spain".
 
'The registered frequencies of Eurasian markers, together with the high incidence and diversification of African maternal lineages (15% of the total mitochondrial variability) among Huelva Andalusians'

Huelva was the Moorish Walbah;
And by the looks of it it still is; Especially the sub-saharan mtDNA L seems to have stuck;

Huelva was also the Roman Onoba, and perhaps that's what really explains what you are so eager (as usual) to jump to conclude was due to "Moors", considering the authors themselves associate these African lineages quite possibly with the Roman empire as well:

Lineage L2a, the second most represented in the network... In Iberia, these lineages may be associated to Islamic expansion, which penetrated up to North Portugal, rendering its relationship with recent slave trade unlikely. However, its relationship with slavery during Roman Empire or Islamic rule cannot be ruled out.

The fact that Granada, which was in fact the area of Iberia longest under Islamic "rule", has lower frequencies of these markers argues that the other options considered by the authors (prehistoric migrations, Roman empire) are the more likely reasons.
 

Yes, or Asturians and Cantabrians too. In fact, the areas of Iberia that had the least of any Islamic presence whatsoever, are in fact higher in these supposedly "Moorish" markers, once again contrary to historical evidence and thus arguing against the very convenient so-called explanations of some people.
 
Yes, or Asturians and Cantabrians too. In fact, the areas of Iberia that had the least of any Islamic presence whatsoever, are in fact higher in these supposedly "Moorish" markers, once again contrary to historical evidence and thus arguing against the very convenient so-called explanations of some people.

You do know there where people in iberia before islam was created or judasim or any other religion.................whats with this paranoia ?
 

This thread has been viewed 46767 times.

Back
Top