PDA

View Full Version : Two Ancient Iberia DNA Papers with articles.



Pages : [1] 2

Alyan
14-03-19, 21:20
Ancient DNA research shines spotlight on Iberia
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-03/hms-adr031119.php

Survival of Late Pleistocene Hunter-Gatherer Ancestry in the Iberian Peninsula
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(19)30145-9#

The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6432/1230

ToBeOrNotToBe
14-03-19, 21:38
One alternative possibility is that local Iberian women preferred the central European newcomers in a context of "strong social stratification," said Lalueza-Fox.

Lol basically a polite way of saying Bronze Age gold-diggers :P

halfalp
14-03-19, 21:38
To summarize basically what's new. Before Neolithic expansions coming from Anatolia, Iberia lived a Mesolithic expansion from Hunter-Gatherers related to North Africa ( Iberomaurusian? ). Living alongside individuals from the Goyet-El Miron and Villabruna Clusters.

ToBeOrNotToBe
14-03-19, 21:45
Did they rename their graph compared to before? It clearly says "proportion of Central European Beaker ancestry", but wasn't everyone saying there was a pure Steppe woman?

Alyan
14-03-19, 22:32
https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/2019_Olalde_Science_IberiaTransect_0.pdf

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/2019_Olalde_Science_IberiaTransect_Supplement.pdf

Article Paper with supplements.

berun
15-03-19, 00:22
I will need time to read well all it, but some pitable downs: for medieval Catalonia they get samples from L'Esquerda, all right, a typical village in the pre-Pyrenees, but the other sites are just the worst to know how were locals in a given time, samples from Pla de l'Horta are few kilometers from Girona city and display Gothic characteristics as recognized in the paper, also in autosomal, samples from Sant Julià de Ramis are also near Girona in a defensive position controling the city and Via Augusta, so such kind of samples is like to take samples from Paris banlieu and try to figure out how are Frenchs, very African of course.

For the magic wand of Reich, it must be broken as admixture graphs like in figure S6 there are not steppe CHG or EHG and alike that would settle down all such Steppe ancestry. Instead, to prove steppe in Iberia they use German beakers to make up Iberia_CA_steppe (composed by 60% locals and 40% German beakers), that's like if I get Coloureds from South Africa, compare them to French, and I say that French come from Africa, keeping more such ancestry those from the north, those living more near Netherlands.

Alyan
15-03-19, 00:51
Also, I'll point out the paper has the first Iron Age Greek sample that happens to be autosomal. It clusters right where Myceneans are.

berun
15-03-19, 00:52
The unique sure Indoeuropean preroman (Celtic) Y-DNA is sample I3759 from La Hoya site, well, it is I2a1a1a. LOL

Angela
15-03-19, 01:29
More HG pick up of ancestry after 4000 BCE in the north and center, so it makes sense it was more Canes like (NW) and therefore more like Central European KOI. The El Miron like ancestry was more in the southeast. I suppose some could have come with a slightly different Neolithic movement within Europe that came from around Hungary in addition to some from local HGs in the north?

Should we make much of the fact that El Miron for some reason plots closer to modern Europeans?

" Our Copper Age dataset includes a newly reported male (I4246) from Camino de las Yeseras(14) in central Iberia, radiocarbon dated to2473–2030 calibrated years BCE, who clusterswith modern and ancient North Africans in thePCA (Fig. 1C and fig. S3) and, like ~3000 BCEMoroccans (8), can be well modeled as havingancestry from both Late Pleistocene North Africans(15) and Early Neolithic Europeans (tables S9 andS10). His genome-wide ancestry and uniparentalRESEARCHOlalde et al., Science 363, 1230–1234 (2019) 15 March 2019 1 of 5on March 14, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/ Downloaded from markers (tables S1 and S4) are unique amongCopper Age Iberians, including individuals fromsites with many analyzed individuals such asSima del Ángel, and point to a North Africanorigin. Our genetic evidence of sporadic contactswith North Africa during the Copper Age fitswith the presence of African ivory at Iberiansites (16) and is further supported by a BronzeAge individual (I7162) from Loma del Puercoin southern Iberia who had 25% ancestry related to individuals like I4246 (Fig. 1D andtable S16). However, these early movementsfrom North Africa had a limited impact onCopper and Bronze Age Iberians, as NorthAfrican ancestry only became widespread inthe past ~2000 years."

Well, they seem pretty certain of that.

They show it in the graphs as well.

https://i.imgur.com/Il23CIa.png

Spain, except for the Basques, who are quite different, was apparently pulled south by these later migrations. Certain old posters who no longer darken our doors must be needing smelling salts. When I think of the abuse I took for merely raising the possibility...

"From the Bronze Age (~2200–900 BCE), weincrease the available dataset (6, 7, 17) from 7 to60 individuals and show how ancestry from thePontic-Caspian steppe (Steppe ancestry) appearedthroughout Iberia in this period (Fig. 1, C and D),albeit with less impact in the south (table S13)."

I knew it.

"The earliest evidence is in 14 individuals dated to~2500–2000 BCE who coexisted with local peoplewithout Steppe ancestry (Fig. 2B). These groupslived in close proximity and admixed to formthe Bronze Age population after 2000 BCE with~40% ancestry from incoming groups (Fig. 2Band fig. S6). Y-chromosome turnover was evenmore pronounced (Fig. 2B), as the lineages common in Copper Age Iberia (I2, G2, and H) werealmost completely replaced by one lineage, R1bM269. These patterns point to a higher contribution of incoming males than females, alsosupported by a lower proportion of nonlocal ancestry on the X-chromosome (table S14 and fig.S7).

Now there's some interesting information. So, they lived "relatively" peacefully for 500 years before mixing? No apparent immediate butchery of all the men. Yet, the local y lines wiped out. Wish we knew what happened.

Also, they meant 40% Central European Beaker ancestry after the admixture, and 60% local, although other data suggest the numbers weren't that high everywhere.The present day 20% steppe related ancestry in Spain is more logical now.

There's a second pulse of Central European ancestry, even northern ancestry, during the Iron Age, which they speculate is Urnfield related. Makes sense. That seems to have spread all the way south eventually, increasing the "foreign" ancestry from 10% to 20% in areas in the south, and 40% in some areas of the north.

They put a toe in the linguistic waters by saying that "Unlike in Central or Northern Europe, whereSteppe ancestry likely marked the introductionof Indo-European languages (12), our resultsindicate that, in Iberia, increases in Steppe ancestry were not always accompanied by switchesto Indo-European languages." So, in areas where the new gene flow was less than 20-30% the language didn't change? The Basques are a little more than that aren't they?

As to more "modern" admixture, I hate to be a naysayer, but if their only evidence of Bronze Age Aegean type ancestry is in the Greek colony in the northeast, and of Italian and Greek like ancestry is also in the northeast, can they really extrapolate this into a large scale impact Iberia wide? If it's true, so much for all the talk about how the Romans didn't change the genetics of the areas they conquered, whether through their own people or because of the mobility they made possible.

"In the historical period, our transect beginswith 24 individuals from the 5th century BCEto the 6th century CE from the Greek colony ofEmpúries in the northeast (19) who fall intotwo main ancestry groups (Fig. 1, C and D, andfig. S8): one similar to Bronze Age individualsfrom the Aegean, and the other similar to IronAge Iberians such as those from the nearby nonGreek site of Ullastret, confirming historicalsources indicating that this town was inhabitedby a multiethnic population (19). The impact ofmobility from the central/eastern Mediterranean during the Classical period is also evidentin 10 individuals from the 7th to 8th century CEsite of L'Esquerda in the northeast, who showa shift from the Iron Age population in thedirection of present-day Italians and Greeks (Fig.1D) that accounts for approximately one-quarterof their ancestry (Fig. 2C and table S17). The sameshift is also observed in present-day Iberiansoutside the Basque area and is plausibly aconsequence of the Roman presence in the peninsula, which had a profound cultural impactand, according to our data, a substantial geneticimpact too."

They also don't do much to disentangle the changes from the Iron Age on. How much of this change was because of the Greeks, how much the Phoenicians or Carthaginians? How much Roman colonists? What about the Jews or the North African Muslims?

"Unlike in Central or Northern Europe, whereSteppe ancestry likely marked the introductionof Indo-European languages (12), our resultsindicate that, in Iberia, increases in Steppe ancestry were not always accompanied by switchesto Indo-European languages. ancestry, probably related to the well-knownmobility patterns during the Roman Empire(22) or to the earlier Phoenician-Punic presence (23); the latter is also supported by theobservation of the Phoenician-associated Ychromosome J2 (24). Gene flow from NorthAfrica continued into the Muslim period, asis clear from Muslim burials with elevated NorthAfrican and sub-Saharan African ancestry (Fig.2D, fig. S4, and table S22) and from uniparentalmarkers typical of North Africa not presentamong pre-Islamic individuals (Fig. 2D andfig. S11). Present-day populations from southern Iberia harbor less North African ancestry(25) than the ancient Muslim burials, plausibly reflecting expulsion of moriscos (formerMuslims converted to Christianity) and repopulation from the north, as supported by historical sources and genetic analysis of present-daygroups (25)." The impact of Muslim rule is also seen in the Northeast, which explains the small percentages which show up there even today.

Also interesting is the yDna I2 coming in with the Central European Beakers.

The mixed "local" Iberian and North African samples are occasionally ydna R1b, so admixture with North African females, as well as the more expected bias.

Good catch, Alyan, for the Iron Age Greek. If other samples are similar, the Doric invasions wouldn't seem to have changed much at all.

Now for the Supplement.

Angela
15-03-19, 02:29
New York Times Science Section review from Zimmerman with quotes from the authors.

"But in Iberia, the new studies find, the Goyet and Villabruna people coexisted. Hunter-gatherers across the peninsula had a mixture of ancestry from the two peoples (https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(19)30145-9).“This is quite amazing, because it’s not happening in other areas,” said Vanessa Villalba-Mouco, the lead author of the Max Planck study, published in Current Biology.
Ms. Villalba-Mouco speculated that the geography of Iberia — located in a far corner of Europe — may have allowed the Goyet people to endure there after they disappeared elsewhere. “Maybe nobody was bothering these hunter-gatherers,” she said."

"“I cannot say what it is,” said Roberto Risch, an archaeologist at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, who was not involved in the new studies. But he ruled out wars or massacres as the cause. “It’s not a particularly violent time,” he said.

"Instead, Dr. Risch suspects “a political process” is the explanation. In their archaeological digs, Dr. Risch and his colleagues have found that Iberian farmers originally lived in egalitarian societies, storing their wealth together and burying their dead in group graves.
But over several centuries, palaces and fortresses began to rise, and power became concentrated in the hands of a few. Dr. Risch speculated that the cultural shift had something to do with the genetic shift found by Dr. Olalde and his colleagues."

"In addition, the scientists found a growing amount of North African ancestry in skeletons from the Iron Age. That may reflect trade around the Mediterranean, which brought North Africans to Iberian towns, where they settled down.


The Basque speak a language that is unrelated to other European tongues. Some researchers have speculated that they descended from a population that had been distinct since the Bronze Age or earlier.
Genetically, at least, that doesn’t seem to be the case. Before the Roman era, the Basque had DNA that was indistinguishable from that of other Iron Age Iberians.

The article also refers readers back to the paper on modern Iberian dna published a short while ago.

That paper, by Clare Bycroft et al was discussed here, but here is the abstract, for convenience.

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

"The Iberian Peninsula is linguistically diverse and has a complex demographic history, including a centuries-long period of Muslim rule. Here, we study the fine-scale genetic structure of its population, and the genetic impacts of historical events, leveraging powerful, haplotype-based statistical methods to analyse 1413 individuals from across Spain. We detect extensive fine-scale population structure at extremely fine scales (below 10 Km) in some regions, including Galicia. We identify a major east-west axis of genetic differentiation, and evidence of historical north to south population movement. We find regionally varying fractions of north-west African ancestry (0–11%) in modern-day Iberians, related to an admixture event involving European-like and north-west African-like source populations. We date this event to 860–1120 CE, implying greater genetic impacts in the early half of Muslim rule in Iberia. Together, our results indicate clear genetic impacts of population movements associated with both the Muslim conquest and the subsequent Reconquista."

Here is our thread where we discuss it.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37909-New-paper-about-auDNA-of-current-Iberia?highlight=Bycroft
https://i.imgur.com/DpHDeu4.png

The Copper Age North African was:

E1b1b1a(xE1b1b1a1)

All of the yDna is in Table 4 of the Supplement.

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 03:18
It looks like we've found Y DNA I1 in the Azilian culture and so Solutrean was likely I1 (and I2)!

davef
15-03-19, 04:43
The Sicilian and S. Italian samples are the closest moderns to the Iron Age Greek, it's only a few mouse hairs east on the PCA

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 04:49
The Sicilian and S. Italian samples are the closest moderns to the Iron Age Greek, it's only a few mouse hairs east on the PCA

Apparently those Greeks are probably Phoenician in origin(???) - perhaps Phoenician + Spanish would produce that result?

davef
15-03-19, 05:18
Well there's nothing that suggests that. What's interesting is that the Greek is more east than the Mycenaens who plotted with Sicily so maybe Greece took on more Caucasus ancestry and the ancient Greeks were more like Cretans. Just speculating here

johen
15-03-19, 05:24
Roman and Greek samples are all R1b, R and 3 J

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2019/03/13/363.6432.1230.DC1/aav4040_TablesS1-S5.xlsx

Angela
15-03-19, 05:27
The Sicilian and S. Italian samples are the closest moderns to the Iron Age Greek, it's only a few mouse hairs east on the PCA

Who is very close to the Mycenaeans.

So I guess the Mycenaeans and Iron Age Greeks also had tons of "Levantine" ancestry?????

"And there shall be heard throughout the land weeping and a gnashing of teeth". :)

For our forum: lest anyone get confused.
The people in the Greek settlements have nothing to do with the Phoenicians.

There are typical Iron Age Iberians, Iron Age Greeks (and Hellenistic and Roman Greeks later on) who plot with Mycenaeans (and modern Sicilians and South Italians), and mixed people.

I believe I said ten years ago on dna forums, and maybe six years ago on 23andme forums and then here that the Mycenaeans and Classical Age Greeks would be extremely close to modern Southern Italians and Sicilians, closer than to some Greeks. Took tons of abuse for it too.

@Johen,
I would have put my money on some R1b Z2103 in there. What are they? Any resolution on the J?

johen
15-03-19, 05:31
"In PCA (Fig. 1C-D), most of the individuals from Empúries form two clusters: one (which we call Empúries1) plotting close to the Iron Age Iberia cluster that includes samples from the nearby site of Ullastret and the other(which we call Empúries2) plotting close to Bronze Age samples from the eastern Mediterranean such as the Mycenaean samples from Greece"

Empúries2 has 2 J

davef
15-03-19, 05:38
Who is very close to the Mycenaeans.

So I guess the Mycenaeans and Iron Age Greeks also had tons of "Levantine" ancestry?????

"And there shall be heard throughout the land weeping and a gnashing of teeth". :)

For our forum: lest anyone get confused.
The people in the Greek settlements have nothing to do with the Phoenicians.

There are typical Iron Age Iberians, Iron Age Greeks (and Hellenistic and Roman Greeks later on) who plot with Mycenaeans (and modern Sicilians and South Italians), and mixed people.

I believe I said ten years ago on dna forums, and maybe six years ago on 23andme forums and then here that the Mycenaeans and Classical Age Greeks would be extremely close to modern Southern Italians and Sicilians, closer than to some Greeks. Took tons of abuse for it too.

I would put my money on some R1b Z2103 in there.
Absolutely. Professional studies have proven you right and this one is no exception

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 06:08
Who is very close to the Mycenaeans.

So I guess the Mycenaeans and Iron Age Greeks also had tons of "Levantine" ancestry?????

"And there shall be heard throughout the land weeping and a gnashing of teeth". :)

For our forum: lest anyone get confused.
The people in the Greek settlements have nothing to do with the Phoenicians.

There are typical Iron Age Iberians, Iron Age Greeks (and Hellenistic and Roman Greeks later on) who plot with Mycenaeans (and modern Sicilians and South Italians), and mixed people.

I believe I said ten years ago on dna forums, and maybe six years ago on 23andme forums and then here that the Mycenaeans and Classical Age Greeks would be extremely close to modern Southern Italians and Sicilians, closer than to some Greeks. Took tons of abuse for it too.

@Johen,
I would have put my money on some R1b Z2103 in there. What are they? Any resolution on the J?

Iirc Lazaridis said they were Phoenician descended

Angela
15-03-19, 06:38
Iirc Lazaridis said they were Phoenician descended

Lazaridis said WHO was Phoenician descended? The Iberians?

Before you attribute statements to anyone, especially academics, find the source and quote it.

The authors say some of the J2 in the south in the later periods may be Phoenician. It could be Carthaginian as well. What does that have to do with the samples in the large Greek settlement in the northeast?

I suggest you read the paper-carefully-before commenting further.

@Davef,
In my real life I never brag, but I've taken abuse from internet jokers who think they're experts on genetics for ten years about various positions I've taken. They deserve to be called out and told they were wrong. .

markod
15-03-19, 06:52
Iberians/Tartessians are exclusively L51 and the only Celt is I2a :thinking:

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 07:02
Iberians/Tartessians are exclusively L51 and the only Celt is I2a :thinking:

I wonder what Tartessian's linguistic affinities are. Are they L51* or just L51? Fun fact: Greeks claimed they started Western civilisation, for whatever reason.

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 07:05
Wow Tartessos is absolutely fascinating, can't believe I never paid attention to it. Also just a friendly reminder to check wiki pages in other languages as they can be way more detailed - that's the case here.

markod
15-03-19, 07:14
I wonder what Tartessian's linguistic affinities are. Are they L51* or just L51? Fun fact: Greeks claimed they started Western civilisation, for whatever reason.

Probably some distant relative of Iberian and Aquitanian.

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 07:16
Probably some distant relative of Iberian and Aquitanian.

Doubt it, no reason for it to be distant if they're all so close to each other.

markod
15-03-19, 07:29
Doubt it, no reason for it to be distant if they're all so close to each other.

The genetic evidence definitely lends support to the idea that they were quite closely related. It's just not attested very well, so the linguistic side leaves some room for doubt.

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 07:30
The genetic evidence definitely lends support to the idea that they were quite closely related. It's just not attested very well, so the linguistic side leaves some room for doubt.

French Wikipedia says the Tartessians were perhaps related to Berbers, so maybe this is the origin of those North Africans?

markod
15-03-19, 08:07
What stands out to me:
Seems like the Medieval Muslim population was almost a 50-50 mix between Europeans and Berbers, with seemingly no sex bias. The native Spaniards were probably considered full equals immediately after conversion.

The Iberian Celts were autosomally closest to Basques, so present day Iberians are presumably largely pre-Celtic genetically like the insular Celts as well.

All ethnic Greeks are like slightly West Asian shifted Sicilians, all ethnic Greek males belong to unresolved J.

Visigoths are like eastern shifted Germans (so basically Hungarians) which is quite expected given their immediate origin. E-V13 in one sample is telling.

berun
15-03-19, 08:37
Iberians/Tartessians are exclusively L51 and the only Celt is I2a :thinking:

So Iberian and Basque came from the steppe, that would be what facts alone would point. Iron Age samples can be related with more security with languages, but the Oscar Zoroaster of genetics is doing a good job to change what he gets.

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 10:25
Any autosomes for those Tartessians? Would be interesting to see given before this afaik we had no "Gibraltan" (or thereabouts) aDNA.

halfalp
15-03-19, 10:36
Ok wait calm down. Where it is spoked about Solutrean and y-dna I1? Also where it is saying that they found R1b-L51? Is this in the Reich supps? I only see the mention of P312.

Edit. Tho... i just noticed on Eurogenes. On two samples they have I1 and C1a1, C1a1 what the heck is that, is that a typo? It's like Franco-Cantabria is becoming interesting again.

hrvclv
15-03-19, 13:38
Now there's some interesting information. So, they lived "relatively" peacefully for 500 years before mixing? No apparent immediate butchery of all the men. Yet, the local y lines wiped out. Wish we knew what happened.

Yes, this is very strange. Hard to imagine that girls would spontaneously have run into the arms of those foreign newcomers/invaders. And supposing they did, harder still to imagine that the local males peacefully agreed to be deprived of wives and progeny.

Duarte
15-03-19, 16:23
Yes, this is very strange. Hard to imagine that girls would spontaneously have run into the arms of those foreign newcomers/invaders. And supposing they did, harder still to imagine that the local males peacefully agreed to be deprived of wives and progeny.

Hello hrvclv, good morning.
Male invading lions have a habit of killing the dominant males of a certain invaded group, as do all the puppies, and then mating with the females of the group they have mastered. These females passively, accept these invaders as his new partners. The DNA of the local males is totally extinct and what spreads in future generations is the DNA of the winning males, who are the strongest and the youngest.
Well, I think that's true for lions and not for humans. But it is just an analogy. After all, we are also animals, and I am not sure when the values of civilization and humanity began to oppose those of gratuitous violence and barbarism and, presumably, from when in time we would have passed to go on to act as a specie civilized, intelligent and rational.
Greetings :)

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 16:36
Ok wait calm down. Where it is spoked about Solutrean and y-dna I1? Also where it is saying that they found R1b-L51? Is this in the Reich supps? I only see the mention of P312.

Edit. Tho... i just noticed on Eurogenes. On two samples they have I1 and C1a1, C1a1 what the heck is that, is that a typo? It's like Franco-Cantabria is becoming interesting again.

It succeeded the Solutrean culture didn’t it? Idk I thought it did but could be wrong

ToBeOrNotToBe
15-03-19, 16:40
Can’t quote for some reason but Jews were in huge numbers in Spain and we know they mixed more than Ashkenazim, I’d be surprised if there isn’t a noticeable late medieval influence

Angela
15-03-19, 18:02
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.

The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people.

Getting back to the Spanish samples, I think we can see that indeed, as I've maintained for years, supported by the Chiarelli book on Muslim Sicily, the majority of the "Moors" who went to these places were not Levantine or Saudi, but North Africans. You can see it from the admixture analysis. The relative paucity of J1 in comparison to J2 and the E clades was another clue.

https://i.imgur.com/9RlQGEo.png

An interesting question is posed by the presence of J2a here. 2/3 of these North African admixed J's have no Levant at all. You would think if it was Phoenician there would be a lot more "Levant" in them. Perhaps the early ones were Carthaginian remnants with carried the Levantine y but were mostly North African? As for the later ones, if the "Moors" were mostly North African but with some men from the Levant and there had been admixture that might explain it.

Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.

Angela
15-03-19, 18:10
Yes, this is very strange. Hard to imagine that girls would spontaneously have run into the arms of those foreign newcomers/invaders. And supposing they did, harder still to imagine that the local males peacefully agreed to be deprived of wives and progeny.

Yes, but even if that happened, strange as it seems, why wait 500 years to do it?

What follows is rank speculation, so feel free to disregard. :)

Could R1b males just produce more sons? Is that possible? If they did, could an advantage of just a few percent more each generation account for it?

Or perhaps the "newcomers" kept up with their compatriots to the east who were adapting to the increased use of bronze weapons and that gave them an advantage? Yet, in places where their percentages were small, these Central European Beaker types seem even to have adapted the language of the locals.

Angela
15-03-19, 18:15
What stands out to me:
Seems like the Medieval Muslim population was almost a 50-50 mix between Europeans and Berbers, with seemingly no sex bias. The native Spaniards were probably considered full equals immediately after conversion.

The Iberian Celts were autosomally closest to Basques, so present day Iberians are presumably largely pre-Celtic genetically like the insular Celts as well.

All ethnic Greeks are like slightly West Asian shifted Sicilians, all ethnic Greek males belong to unresolved J.

Visigoths are like eastern shifted Germans (so basically Hungarians) which is quite expected given their immediate origin. E-V13 in one sample is telling.

Good points.

Do you remember all those discussions where people were vehement that the old maps showing "Celts" spreading out from Urnfield relatively late were wrong? :) Well, it seems they were right, and the "Celts" were the late arriving elites.

markod
15-03-19, 18:47
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.

The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people.

Getting back to the Spanish samples, I think we can see that indeed, as I've maintained for years, supported by the Chiarelli book on Muslim Sicily, the majority of the "Moors" who went to these places were not Levantine or Saudi, but North Africans. You can see it from the admixture analysis. The relative paucity of J1 in comparison to J2 and the E clades was another clue.

https://i.imgur.com/9RlQGEo.png

An interesting question is posed by the presence of J2a here. 2/3 of these North African admixed J's have no Levant at all. You would think if it was Phoenician there would be a lot more "Levant" in them. Perhaps the early ones were Carthaginian remnants with carried the Levantine y but were mostly North African? As for the later ones, if the "Moors" were mostly North African but with some men from the Levant and there had been admixture that might explain it.

Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.

Could the J2a be Visigothic or Roman as well? Two of the Muslims are actually not E-M81 but E-V13, so it looks like at least around half of their paternal lines were European.

Tutkun Arnaut
15-03-19, 19:10
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.

The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people.

Getting back to the Spanish samples, I think we can see that indeed, as I've maintained for years, supported by the Chiarelli book on Muslim Sicily, the majority of the "Moors" who went to these places were not Levantine or Saudi, but North Africans. You can see it from the admixture analysis. The relative paucity of J1 in comparison to J2 and the E clades was another clue.

https://i.imgur.com/9RlQGEo.png

An interesting question is posed by the presence of J2a here. 2/3 of these North African admixed J's have no Levant at all. You would think if it was Phoenician there would be a lot more "Levant" in them. Perhaps the early ones were Carthaginian remnants with carried the Levantine y but were mostly North African? As for the later ones, if the "Moors" were mostly North African but with some men from the Levant and there had been admixture that might explain it.

Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.

The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.

"The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people."
Really? Did the Greeks not borrow the alphabet from Phoenicians?
Did the Greeks not borrow sculpting from Egyptians?
Did the Greeks not learn ship building from Arabs?
Did the Greeks not learn Algebra from Arabs?
Doesn't everyone else need to be credited for their contribution?

markod
15-03-19, 20:00
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.

"The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people."
Really? Did the Greeks not borrow the alphabet from Phoenicians?
Did the Greeks not borrow sculpting from Egyptians?
Did the Greeks not learn ship building from Arabs?
Did the Greeks not learn Algebra from Arabs?
Doesn't everyone else need to be credited for their contribution?

Yes, but there's a reason we in the West study the Greeks more than those cultures. Try to understand it.

suebiking
15-03-19, 20:24
Pardon me for interrupting a most fascinating discussion about Ancient Iberian Dna but How can I see the tables S1 to S5 of the suplements, because when I open the supplements I am only able to see the titles of those same tables.

Nik
15-03-19, 20:28
I wonder how close is the I2a Celt to the I-CTS10228 as currently I still favour the theory that it (or his ancestor) was brought to Northern Balkans and the Carpathians (as well as Poland) by the Celts or later by some East Germanic tribe.

berun
15-03-19, 20:37
The other Iberian paper, that about Mesolithic and early Neolithic... the intra HG admixture... is good to explain the "steppe" in Iberian BB??

Duarte
15-03-19, 21:05
Pardon me for interrupting a most fascinating discussion about Ancient Iberian Dna but How can I see the tables S1 to S5 of the suplements, because when I open the supplements I am only able to see the titles of those same tables.

Try see the image through the link below:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d8j0b4N8tbOsVgD-F5d_xN4WmZf9uKj1/view?usp=sharing

Angela
15-03-19, 21:26
Could the J2a be Visigothic or Roman as well? Two of the Muslims are actually not E-M81 but E-V13, so it looks like at least around half of their paternal lines were European.

These particular samples are mixtures of "local" Iberian stock, however, admixed with North African and a bit of minority Levant admixture in some of them, so I don't see how that would work. The authors show the admixture of some of the more "Central and East Med" admixed people, who had about 25% of that kind of ancestry, but I don't think that has anything to do with these samples. Unless you mean that the J2 males were local Iberian autosomally with yDna from distant Greek and Roman ancestors?

You make a good point about the E samles. Two from the 10th to 16th century, the Moorish period, are M78. I can't imagine that being brought by the North African half of their ancestry, so it must be y from the Iberian Iron Age, yes?

Aaron1981
15-03-19, 22:27
I believe the Celtiberian is I2-M26 which existed in Iberia as early as the Chalcolithic. By 2000 BC, most of Iberia had become R1b-M269 in my view, and this is what the 271 samples suggest. Notice that even in modern Spain and Portugal, the haplogroups which offset R1b are Middle Eastern or North African in origin, such as J2, which is heavy in Portugal and possibly introduced by Phoenicians among other later groups. E-M81 introduced from south of Gibraltar, as well as Rome and Greece who carried J2 as well as other Middle Eastern lineages. We're going to find I1 and R1a in Andalusia from the reconquista as northerners helped reclaim the south from the Moors. However, the Bronze Age suggests a militaristic group from central Europe who were rich in M269+ moving into Iberia. I don't necessarily think this was the period that formed the Basque (some diversity under Z209). Many of those men may have come from southern France from Roman times, which suggests that Bronze Age France (rich in M269+) was already speaking "Iberian" related languages before moving into the peninsula.

markod
15-03-19, 23:28
These particular samples are mixtures of "local" Iberian stock, however, admixed with North African and a bit of minority Levant admixture in some of them, so I don't see how that would work. The authors show the admixture of some of the more "Central and East Med" admixed people, who had about 25% of that kind of ancestry, but I don't think that has anything to do with these samples. Unless you mean that the J2 males were local Iberian autosomally with yDna from distant Greek and Roman ancestors?

You make a good point about the E samles. Two from the 10th to 16th century, the Moorish period, are M78. I can't imagine that being brought by the North African half of their ancestry, so it must be y from the Iberian Iron Age, yes?

Yes, I meant the origin of the uniparentals only. E-V13 and J2a are in the pre-Muslim Visigothic sample already, and most of them are autosomally quite 'northern' still. My guess is they carried some of those 'Balkanic' or maybe 'Western Pontic' haplogroups into Spain and assimilated very quickly.

The 4 males from early Visigothic Pla de l'Horta (Catalonia) are R1b-L51, E-V13, J2a and I. These were Visigothic 'big men' from one of the most important necropolises of the period.

Some of the Visigoths have likely East Eurasian mtDNA too - C4a1a.

suebiking
15-03-19, 23:40
Try see the image through the link below:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d8j0b4N8tbOsVgD-F5d_xN4WmZf9uKj1/view?usp=sharing

Thanks. Ou melhor dizendo Obrigado.

Carlos
15-03-19, 23:51
According to the data 500,000 natives of the current Andalusia move to the north of Spain at the arrival of the Almohads. That figure is an overpopulation for the north of that time and there they were 800 years until they returned home. That number in 800 years are many children. Is not taken into account?

Duarte
16-03-19, 00:03
Thanks. Ou melhor dizendo Obrigado.

You’re welcome (ou, melhor dizendo, por nada, tu és muito bem vindo) :)

Angela
16-03-19, 00:24
Yes, I meant the origin of the uniparentals only. E-V13 and J2a are in the pre-Muslim Visigothic sample already, and most of them are autosomally quite 'northern' still. My guess is they carried some of those 'Balkanic' or maybe 'Western Pontic' haplogroups into Spain and assimilated very quickly.

The 4 males from early Visigothic Pla de l'Horta (Catalonia) are R1b-L51, E-V13, J2a and I. These were Visigothic 'big men' from one of the most important necropolises of the period.

Some of the Visigoths have likely East Eurasian mtDNA too - C4a1a.

That's certainly not what I expected for Visigoths, especially not the E-V13 and J2. I1 yes, and I would have thought possible some R1a or maybe R1b U106. The latter instead seems to be the Langobardi.

It just goes to show how misleading uniparentals can be.

berun
16-03-19, 00:47
Visigoths did a good trek from actual Sweden, and many outlaws and outcasted could have added to the tribe in Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Italy... there are some accounts about that, Romans leaving civilization for ruthless barbarians, but free to pay taxes
:)

By the way, a lesson of hocus-pocus:


For all the populations in this section with good coverage (Iberia_CA_Stp, Iberia_BA, E_Iberia IA, N_Iberia_IA), the model Iberia_CA + Steppe_EBA shows a poor fit (P-value<2.24E-02). This is not surprising because in this model all the European Neolithic-related ancestry in those populations is attributed to Iberia_CA, when in fact a portion of it must be derived from incoming populations that were not entirely Steppe_EBA in ancestry. However, using a fixed set of outgroups less sensitive to the differences between Neolithic European populations we can try to estimate the proportion of Steppe_EBA-related ancestry in our populations of interest. Table S12 and Fig. S6 show these estimates using the following set of outgroups: Mota, Ust_Ishim, Kostenki14, GoyetQ116-1, Vestonice16, MA1, EHG, Iran_N, Israel_Natufian, Anatolia_N, LBK_EN.

Also the 100% replacement is wrong: 2 males from Arenas de Rey, Granada province (2200-2000 BC) aren't R1b.

And well, even being a 99% R1b in Bronze Age and Iron Age Iberians against a I2a1, which ailas was a Celtiberian.

markod
16-03-19, 00:53
That's certainly not what I expected for Visigoths, especially not the E-V13 and J2. I1 yes, and I would have thought possible some R1a or maybe R1b U106. The latter instead seems to be the Langobardi.

It just goes to show how misleading uniparentals can be.


Yeah, the Gothic 'big man' from a monumental kurgan in Crimea was J2a1a, too. Maybe the Germanics tended to be rather loose tribal federations like the Turkic groups for instance.

Tomenable
16-03-19, 00:55
Visigoth I12034 had mtDNA haplogroup W6a, which is the same as my mtDNA haplogroup:

https://i.imgur.com/eQM1kTg.png

It was previously identified as a "Proto-Slavic" mtDNA haplogroup in my mtDNA Wiki Report:

https://i.imgur.com/6RAhKWS.png

Angela
16-03-19, 01:01
Yeah, the Gothic 'king' from the monumental Tsarskiy Kurgan in Crimea was J2a1a, too. Maybe the Germanics tended to be rather loose tribal federations like the Turkic groups for instance.

That's certainly a possibility. Could it also be possible that these two "strange" haplogroups were picked up in Iberia? The Greeks very probably brought both of these markers to Spain, certainly to northeastern Spain, the site of their largest settlement. The Visigoths may have been such a small group inititally that they absorbed some more "local" men.

I wish this was more like that Langobard paper, which used data to tell us whether the samples were "new" arrivals or locals.

Carlos
16-03-19, 01:15
In the battle of the Guadalete the Gothic army is 40,000 men, I do not know the ethnic composition of the army but I do not think that the Goths were excessively minority in that army.

Angela
16-03-19, 01:18
In the battle of the Guadalete the Gothic army is 40,000 men, I do not know the ethnic composition of the army but I do not think that the Goths were excessively minority in that army.

The only way we'd know, Carlos, is to have a good number of ancient samples from that army.

The four samples we have are from a Visigothic settlement. Perhaps it's not enough to come to hard and fast conclusions.

Carlos
16-03-19, 01:22
^^
I agree, I guess it was something more fat than you can believe today.

Milan.M
16-03-19, 02:15
Visigoths come as exotic in terms of haplogroups and not really "Germanic",first the Bavarian imported "exotic gifts" woman with elongated skulls which resembled south-east Europeans,then now this "exotic" haplogroups among them again.

Not to mention the Ostrogoth from Crimea or the Gepid from the same previous paper.

Tomenable
16-03-19, 03:10
One Visigoth from Spain - I12031 - clusters with modern Serbs and has Balkan Y-DNA haplogroup E1b1b1a1b1a.

This is Balkan haplogroup E-V13:

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/e-v13/about

Carlos
16-03-19, 03:43
E-V13 and who knows what else. It is how the villages are forged, what is the surprise?

ToBeOrNotToBe
16-03-19, 04:12
Yeah, the Gothic 'big man' from a monumental kurgan in Crimea was J2a1a, too. Maybe the Germanics tended to be rather loose tribal federations like the Turkic groups for instance.

I think Crimea could be held as an exception though, it's always been very multi-ethnic I'm guessing because of its position. In terms of hierarchy I'm not sure if Germanic tribes were "loose" or if they're more hierarchical like the Mycenaeans - I think it might come down to whether they live amongst the population they've conquered (in which case there'd be hierarchy) or if they're still marauding.

ToBeOrNotToBe
16-03-19, 04:18
Visigoths did a good trek from actual Sweden, and many outlaws and outcasted could have added to the tribe in Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Italy... there are some accounts about that, Romans leaving civilization for ruthless barbarians, but free to pay taxes
:)

By the way, a lesson of hocus-pocus:



Also the 100% replacement is wrong: 2 males from Arenas de Rey, Granada province (2200-2000 BC) aren't R1b.

And well, even being a 99% R1b in Bronze Age and Iron Age Iberians against a I2a1, which ailas was a Celtiberian.

Yeah I agree you can do a lot of "hocus-pocus" with autosomal fitting, tracking Y DNA is the final blow that's needed to consolidate any theory of migration it seems.

Tomenable
16-03-19, 05:51
Something about the estimated size of those tribes:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015005286961;view=1up;seq=100

Documentary:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuVJUKZvx4

Tomenable
16-03-19, 06:06
Sources say: in year 418 the Goths (or at least: some Goths) were in South-West France.

At the same time, archaeology still shows evidence of Wielbark Culture existing in Poland.

Wielbark Culture starts to disappear from archaeological record in Poland only around 450:

http://www.mpov.uw.edu.pl/en/thesaurus/archaeological-cultures/wielbark-culture-

"Wielbark C. disappears from the archaeological record around mid-5th century"

bicicleur
16-03-19, 09:04
That's certainly not what I expected for Visigoths, especially not the E-V13 and J2. I1 yes, and I would have thought possible some R1a or maybe R1b U106. The latter instead seems to be the Langobardi.
It just goes to show how misleading uniparentals can be.

was it not the same with the Lombards?
they started north as I1 and R1b-U106, but by the time they were in Central Europe they had absorbed a lot of I2a

the Goths would have had ample opportunity to absorb E-V13 and J2 in the Carpathian Basin and the western Ukraine before crossing the Danube

bicicleur
16-03-19, 09:08
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi1C1XMYU2Q&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR25XILFXAGPqHu48-IJIjmWJ9AiqUAP2ddlbldIqgGfM6pK6uTFOS7_wac

I wonder how, where and when these steppe people got immunity against the plague, and what it was they had which the neolithic people didn't have, that made them replace the male population.
The archeology didn't find signs of violence.

bicicleur
16-03-19, 10:36
It looks like we've found Y DNA I1 in the Azilian culture and so Solutrean was likely I1 (and I2)!
I don't think there was a connection between Azilian and Solutrean.
Acording to archeology, Solutrean was replaced by Badegoulian.
Badegoulian was replaced by Magdalenian ca 20 ka.

Genetically Magdalenian was linked to the El Miron cluster, and now it is linked to 15 ka Goyet-Q2.
Bichon was linked to Azilian in the Swiss Jura and belongs to Villabruna cluster.
The Azillian in northeast Iberia now appears to be a genetic mixture between Magdalenian and Villabruna.

in Y-DNA, Magdalenian was probably a majority of I and a minority of the Aurignacian-derived C1a2 (35 ka Goyet-Q116)
the Villabruna Y-DNA was probably I2 with a minority of I1, they had some admixture from mesolithic/EN 10 ka Central Anatolian and/or 26 ka Dzdudzuana

I think BAL003 C1a1a is a typo, it should be C1a2

halfalp
16-03-19, 11:28
Those E and J2 samples are clearly not ethnically Visigothic if we mean expanding outside Scandinavia. But Goths have encounter a lot of people in Dacia and Balkans. Are we dealing with a real elite Visigothic burial or is it the same joke as taking Assyrian Colony samples for Hittites ones?

We need a real mathematical probability with that kind of stuffs. Longobards dna of Piedmont Italy and Hungary have also shows y-dna E, then Visigoths in Iberia.

If we take the overall probable population at the time and the number of burials and their reflected haplogroups. Then E was more dominant or equal to I1 in the general population. How this can happen? and why E? E wasn't even a major Farmer haplogroup, it sounds like in plenty of paper the providential haplogroup that nobody expected shows up. There is plenty of possibilities to explain this actually.

Exemple: The Burgundians were said to have been almost completely destroyed still in Central Europe, so they probably pick up wanderers with them to growing the numbers. The same with the Goths after they got severely defeated by the Huns, while over the Danube they had to absorbe new peoples to survive.

It makes to me more sense than thinking those J2 and E guys were some Balkanic elite of a non-germanic tribe that became a noble of a germanic tribe. But still, for this few burials and samples and a that big population ( visigoths were more than a hundred thousands when entering in Spain ) how minor wanderer lineage would pop up over the lineage of the original stock.

rafc
16-03-19, 13:00
I'm not sure why the V13 is so shocking, the Goths spent a lot of time in the Balkans, first in Dacia, later also in the Western Balkans. Evidently they assimilated portions of the local population and became quite diverse from an Y-DNA point of view. The balkans with it's high V13 presence had always been a major source of Roman soldiers, it would make sense that some of them would join the Visigoths that were used as troops by the Romans. Also makes sense they could become 'Big men' due to their military experience and skills.
The Lombard cemetary that was published a while ago also had a V13, so clearly this is a recurring pattern.

Tomenable
16-03-19, 13:10
So, the most Germanic of all five Visigoths with high coverage was I12163.

Here is my model for this sample (not saying it is the best possible one), he was 2/3 Germanic + 1/3 South Euro:

Swedish (Gotland) - 29.4%
Danish (Jutland) - 25.6%
Norway Finnmark - 3.4%
German Lower Saxony - 1.8%
North-East English - 4.2%
Spanish Castilla Leon - 18.8%
Portuguese - 1.6%
East Med (Lebanese Shia) - 8%
North Caucasian - 7.2%

Visigoth I12032 had significant Celtic admixture (Welsh-like and Breton-like) as well as Scandinavian Germanic.

In general, I12032 was 1/2 Celto-Germanic and 1/2 Southern European (mostly Iberian but also some East Med).

Interestingly, at least two Visigoths had Paleo-Balkan ancestry. Apparently they absorbed it on their way to Iberia:

Visigoth I12162 can be modeled as 1/3 Danish or North German (Schleswig), 1/5 South German from former Rhaetic-speaking areas (these South Germans are far from being pure Germanic), 1/4 North-East European (either Finnic, Baltic or Slavic - probably all three), over 10% Pre-Slavic Balkan (Bronze Age Croatia, Iron Age Bulgaria) and about 10% Sardinian (extra EEF admixture, likely also absorbed in the Balkans). He also had minor Asian admixture (from Huns etc.?).

Visigoth I12031 - this one had around 1/4 Paleo-Balkan ancestry, also 1/4 North Italian (North-West - like Aosta, and North-Central - like Lombardy; maybe some French Gaulish too), 10% similar to modern North Albanians (so also Balkan likely), 1/5 to 1/4 North-East European (including some Slavic apparently, but not exclusively), 6% North Caucasus (Alans?), 5% local Iberian and 5% East Med (Druze).

Visigoth I12034 - this one was ca. 80-85% Native Iberian, 10-15% Germanic (with some Celtic), 5% Slavic.

Carlos
16-03-19, 15:00
The Alans were integrated with the vandals who arrived in the current Andalusia. Integration must be a way of survival and more in those times.

Angela
16-03-19, 15:37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi1C1XMYU2Q&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR25XILFXAGPqHu48-IJIjmWJ9AiqUAP2ddlbldIqgGfM6pK6uTFOS7_wac

I wonder how, where and when these steppe people got immunity against the plague, and what it was they had which the neolithic people didn't have, that made them replace the male population.
The archeology didn't find signs of violence.

There's been nothing about the plague being in Spain to my knowledge. Is it possible it had burned out by the time the majority of the Central European Beakers got there? However, it's possible they haven't tested the Spanish samples yet.

There's also the fact that they didn't admix for about 500 years to consider. This is a different situation from the one in Central Europe, isn't it? Unless the plague, if it arrived at all, didn't arrive until then, but then, the women survived, so it still doesn't make sense to me.

If it originated on the steppe (it's found today in marmosets there) then they may have slowly built up a resistance. Or, it may have been an immune gene to a certain pathogen in their environment which may have also coincidentally produced higher resistance to plague.

The multi-ethnicity of the Visigoths helps to explain the results of the Ralph and Coop analysis based on IBD. They said they found almost no trace of the Visigoths in Spain, Italy, and even France. The impact may still have been small, but the lack of impact they found may also be due to the fact that they were looking for "Germanic" dna.

halfalp
16-03-19, 16:04
I'm not sure why the V13 is so shocking, the Goths spent a lot of time in the Balkans, first in Dacia, later also in the Western Balkans. Evidently they assimilated portions of the local population and became quite diverse from an Y-DNA point of view. The balkans with it's high V13 presence had always been a major source of Roman soldiers, it would make sense that some of them would join the Visigoths that were used as troops by the Romans. Also makes sense they could become 'Big men' due to their military experience and skills.
The Lombard cemetary that was published a while ago also had a V13, so clearly this is a recurring pattern.

It's more complexe than that. We need to separate the Linguistic and Ethnonymic reality ( Early Germans coming from Scandinavia ) and their evolution throughout their migration from Vistula / Oder -> Sarmatia / Dacia -> Greece / Pannonia and Aquitaine / Iberia. It's basically like, you take modern Afghans migrating to Europe, when they are in Europe, there is Afghans, Pakistanese, Syrians, Kurds along with them. What is being a Visigoth when Euric entered in Iberia? Being part of the Balti Dynasty? Being a Noblemen close to the Balti? Or being any people who followed them from the Balkans to Iberia? When we see Hungarian Lombars with R1b-S21 or any kind of I1, we clearly understand that they are from the original scandinavian / north german stock, but what is the history of a Visigothic J2a or E1b? This clearly a terminological work, what is being Visigothic at this point, a Loose Confederation or a Germanic tribe?

Angela
16-03-19, 16:17
It's more complexe than that. We need to separate the Linguistic and Ethnonymic reality ( Early Germans coming from Scandinavia ) and their evolution throughout their migration from Vistula / Oder -> Sarmatia / Dacia -> Greece / Pannonia and Aquitaine / Iberia. It's basically like, you take modern Afghans migrating to Europe, when they are in Europe, there is Afghans, Pakistanese, Syrians, Kurds along with them. What is being a Visigoth when Euric entered in Iberia? Being part of the Balti Dynasty? Being a Noblemen close to the Balti? Or being any people who followed them from the Balkans to Iberia? When we see Hungarian Lombars with R1b-S21 or any kind of I1, we clearly understand that they are from the original scandinavian / north german stock, but what is the history of a Visigothic J2a or E1b? This clearly a terminological work, what is being Visigothic at this point, a Loose Confederation or a Germanic tribe?

Haven't you answered your own question?

markod
16-03-19, 16:31
Very early Gothic uniparentals might be relevant here.

8 I1
4 G2a
1 I2a
1 R1a
1 R1b
1 E1b

https://www.academia.edu/33791135/2017_Zenczak_.....Piontek_..._Y-chromosome_haplogroup_assignment_through_next_gene ration_sequencing_of_enriched_ancient_DNA_librarie s

Angela
16-03-19, 16:36
Very early Gothic uniparentals might be relevant here.

8 I1
4 G2a
1 I2a
1 R1a
1 R1b
1 E1b

https://www.academia.edu/33791135/2017_Zenczak_.....Piontek_..._Y-chromosome_haplogroup_assignment_through_next_gene ration_sequencing_of_enriched_ancient_DNA_librarie s

Excellent information.

An E1b all the way up in Poland? The G2a and I2a from the previous inhabitants is not surprising, nor the R1b and R1a.

phoenix
16-03-19, 16:42
So the E-V13 might be a Neolithic remnant that got more important during the Bronze Age in or around Central Europe?

Angela
16-03-19, 16:48
So the E-V13 might be a Neolithic remnant that got more important during the Bronze Age in or around Central Europe?

Also in the Balkans itself. It's phylogeny shows that it expanded in the Bronze Age.
https://i.imgur.com/YCQdO7o.png

The area of highest concentration is not necessarily where it originated.

Milan.M
16-03-19, 17:21
Very early Gothic uniparentals might be relevant here.

8 I1
4 G2a
1 I2a
1 R1a
1 R1b
1 E1b

https://www.academia.edu/33791135/2017_Zenczak_.....Piontek_..._Y-chromosome_haplogroup_assignment_through_next_gene ration_sequencing_of_enriched_ancient_DNA_librarie s
This are supposedly Wielbark samples from Poland and are not associated with the Roman frontier of Goths,many archeologist deny any connection between Wielbark to Chernyakhov culture,let alone Scandinavia.

And the I1 found there if i remember correct was I1-Z63 with very little connection to Scandinavia,the supposed migration.

ToBeOrNotToBe
16-03-19, 17:34
Also in the Balkans itself. It's phylogeny shows that it expanded in the Bronze Age.
https://i.imgur.com/YCQdO7o.png

The area of highest concentration is not necessarily where it originated.

It mirrors Y DNA J2b pretty well, also a lineage associated with the spread of Steppe warriors:

https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-J2b.gif

Perhaps these lineages were part of the neolithisation of the Steppe?

bicicleur
16-03-19, 18:41
There's been nothing about the plague being in Spain to my knowledge. Is it possible it had burned out by the time the majority of the Central European Beakers got there? However, it's possible they haven't tested the Spanish samples yet.
There's also the fact that they didn't admix for about 500 years to consider. This is a different situation from the one in Central Europe, isn't it? Unless the plague, if it arrived at all, didn't arrive until then, but then, the women survived, so it still doesn't make sense to me.
If it originated on the steppe (it's found today in marmosets there) then they may have slowly built up a resistance. Or, it may have been an immune gene to a certain pathogen in their environment which may have also coincidentally produced higher resistance to plague.
The multi-ethnicity of the Visigoths helps to explain the results of the Ralph and Coop analysis based on IBD. They said they found almost no trace of the Visigoths in Spain, Italy, and even France. The impact may still have been small, but the lack of impact they found may also be due to the fact that they were looking for "Germanic" dna.
There is the decline of neolithic settlements in Central and Western Europe ca 5.3 ka, which is likely associated with the spread of the plague.
If you look at the TMRCA of the neloithic Y. Pestis branch, it probably started to spread about 5.8 ka, but from where?
The expansion of the bronze age invaders, 4.5 ka is much later, I guess both farmers and bronze age invaders with steppe ancestry must both have built up immunity by then.
It however seems to me that the farmers never really recovered from the 5.3 ka decline.
Climate also may have played a role.
When climate deteriorates, often in history pastoral tribes invade farmers land.
The man in the video says there were some few finds of mass graves that point to violence during bronze age invasion and claims more will be found.
I find that highly speculative. It also does not explain why uptill now more such mass graves have been found associated with the late phase of LBK farmers than assiociated with bronze age invaders.
We don't know what realy happened, and many different theories will be put forward.
Before there was already a suspicion of replacement of Y-DNA. It proves to be even more severe, and there is also a clear timeframe now. It took 500 years.
But I am also surprised there were also so many women with steppe ancestry. It was always told before that this was an invasion of males only.
Another surprise is that the invaders in some cases switched to the local language when they settled.
The J2 Semitic tribes did the same, they switched to Afro-Asiatic, and how about the Etruscans then? To me they still seem to be descendants of Urnfield invaders.

bicicleur
16-03-19, 18:53
It mirrors Y DNA J2b pretty well, also a lineage associated with the spread of Steppe warriors:
https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-J2b.gif
Perhaps these lineages were part of the neolithisation of the Steppe?
No, not E-V13, it is impossible because TMRCA is to young.
And E-L618, the ancestor of E-V13 seems to be involved in Cardial Ware, there is a Croatian Carded Ware sample and also a 7 ka sample based on STR in Catalunia.
It is more likely that different clades of E-V13 were involved in 2 seperate westward bronze age expansions : one with IE people over land via central Europe, another with bronze age people from Anatolia/the Aegean westward through the Mediterranean.

For J2b, it is possible theorethicaly, but unlikely.

Angela
16-03-19, 19:49
No, not E-V13, it is impossible because TMRCA is to young.
And E-L618, the ancestor of E-V13 seems to be involved in Cardial Ware, there is a Croatian Carded Ware sample and also a 7 ka sample based on STR in Catalunia.
It is more likely that different clades of E-V13 were involved in 2 seperate westward bronze age expansions : one with IE people over land via central Europe, another with bronze age people from Anatolia/the Aegean westward through the Mediterranean.

For J2b, it is possible theorethicaly, but unlikely.

Finally some sanity.

Maybe he'll believe you, or a miracle might occur and he might actually look something up. He certainly didn't believe me when I said virtually the same thing. :)


Bicicleur: It proves to be even more severe, and there is also a clear timeframe now. It took 500 years.


Did it take 500 years, or it only started 500 years ago?


Bicicleur: But I am also surprised there were also so many women with steppe ancestry. It was always told before that this was an invasion of males only.
.
This is why Lazaridis had to issue that rebuttal last year on behalf of the Reich Lab stating that women from the steppe did make the journey, although perhaps in some areas there was some skew toward men.


Bicicleur: Another surprise is that the invaders in some cases switched to the local language when they settled.
The J2 Semitic tribes did the same, they switched to Afro-Asiatic, and how about the Etruscans then? To me they still seem to be descendants of Urnfield invaders.

You mean J1 right?

It is indeed not unheard of for this to happen.

As to the Etruscans, that is what those who have minutely examined the archaeology have always claimed: continutation of Villanovan, no sign of invasion etc. It was always explained away by amateur geneticists on the web as just standard anti-migrationist talk. We shall see.

markod
16-03-19, 20:47
This are supposedly Wielbark samples from Poland and are not associated with the Roman frontier of Goths,many archeologist deny any connection between Wielbark to Chernyakhov culture,let alone Scandinavia.

And the I1 found there if i remember correct was I1-Z63 with very little connection to Scandinavia,the supposed migration.

What evidence is there for a Scandinavian origin anyway? Jordanes?

halfalp
16-03-19, 21:43
What evidence is there for a Scandinavian origin anyway? Jordanes?

Why would we found I1 ìf they didn't came from Scandinavia?

One day Scandsmen decided that, " hey those Spanish guys are gettin' that rep all over europe " let's just rename that land Gotaland for making furor ".

Milan.M
16-03-19, 22:25
What evidence is there for a Scandinavian origin anyway? Jordanes?

That was a theory held in the past,and the migration from Gotaland to Wielbark then to Chernyakov culture,however today that theory is largerly dismissed,even the pressumed migration from Wielbark to Chernyakov,so the samples you posted about early Goths from Poland.

Or unless the Goths were flying from Wielbark to the Roman empire and the Balkans,cause even Chernyakov is view today as multi-ethnic or more regional development.

Modern research[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chernyakhov_culture&action=edit&section=5)]Today, scholars recognize the Chernyakov zone as representing a cultural interaction of a diversity of peoples, but predominantly those who already existed in the region,[12] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernyakhov_culture#cite_note-12)whether it be the Sarmatians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians),[13] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernyakhov_culture#cite_note-harvtxt|Mallory|1997|p=106-13) or the Getae (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getae)-Dacians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacians) (some authors believe that the Getae-Dacians played the leading role in the creation of the culture).[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernyakhov_culture#cite_note-14) Late Antiquity authors often confused the Getae with the Goths, most notably Jordanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanes), in his Getica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getica).

Maciamo
17-03-19, 16:42
I am only finding time to reply now.

A quick look at the haplogroups by period reveals that:

New lineages that appear during the Chalcolithic include:

- I2a1a-M26 and I2a1b-M423. Until the MLN, the I2 individuals all belonged to I2a2 - mostly the now rare Western European L1228 clade, but also to Z161.

- G2a-Z1903 (downstream of L30, L140 and CTS342, TMRCA 4500 ybp, found all over Europe) while earlier Neolithic G2a belonged mostly to G2a-PF3148 (like Ötzi), a rarer clade today found notably in Sardinia and the Middle East.

So there seems to have been a significant population replacement between the Middle-Late Neolithic and the Chalcolithic. The newcomers were also descended from the European G2a-I2a mixed population, but it looks like a male elite, probably originating from the Balkans, started replacing other Neolithic lineages in Iberia, and based on the modern distribution of I2-M26, I2-M423 and G2a-Z1903, across most of central and western Europe.

In this study, these new lineages only show up in southern Iberia, while R1b-L23 (with some L51 and P312) makes its appearance only in central and northwest Iberia from circa 2100 BCE.

By the Bronze Age (from 1800 BCE), samples in all Iberia are almost exclusively R1b, overwhelmingly of the L11 and P312 variety, with the first Z195 showing up in Valencia c. 1700 BCE (I3997) and another DF27 in La Rioja c. 1400 BCE.

Surprisingly, no new haplogroups crop up in Iron Age samples. What is striking is the complete absence of haplogroup E1b1b, J1 and J2 anywhere in Iberia before historical times. The E-L618 (mistakenly reported as E-V13) found by Lacan et al. (2011 bis) (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/10/24/1113061108.abstract) in Early Neolithic Catalonia seems to have been a rare exception.

The first R1b-L21 comes from Tarragona (Roman colony) during the Late Imperial period (200-500 CE).

The first trace of J2a shows up as J2a-L558 (found esp. in East Mediterranean) in Granada some time around 265–427 CE (Late Roman period).

The earliest actual E-V13 appear in the 6th century in Catalonia, during the Visigothic period, alongside a clearly Germanic R1b-U106 (Z381). Many other E1b1b samples were identified during the Visigothic period in NE and SE Iberia, although the subclade isn't available. In other words, it is not impossible that E-V13 was brought to Iberia by Germanic tribes. If that is the case, the percentage of (Slavo-Celto-)Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia would be much higher than previously thought.

E-M81 first arrives during the Moorish period. It's possible that some of it already came during the Roman period, but there is no evidence of it so far.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 16:50
The earliest actual E-V13 appear in the 6th century in Catalonia, during the Visigothic period, alongside a clearly Germanic R1b-U106 (Z381). In other words, it is not impossible that E-V13 was brought to Iberia by Germanic tribes. If that is the case, the percentage of (Slavo-Celto-)Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia would be much higher than previously thought.

Visigoth with E-V13 - sample I12031 - was a Visigoth only culturally, autosomally that person had no Germanic ancestry, but he also had no any native Iberian ancestry. It was someone with a lot of Paleo-Balkan ancestry. Visigoths marched across the Balkans on their way to Iberia, absorbing some local groups.

The most Germanic (about 2/3) of all Visigoth samples was I12163. All others were autosomally mixed.

I12032 and I12162 were predominantly Northern/Central European but also mixed with other things.

I12034 was an acculturated native Iberian (80-85%) with only minor Germanic admixture.

What about the Alans, did they contribute any Y-DNA to Iberia?

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 17:00
I am only finding time to reply now.

A quick look at the haplogroups by period reveals that:

New lineages that appear during the Chalcolithic include:

- I2a1a-M26 and I2a1b-M423. Until the MLN, the I2 individuals all belonged to I2a2 - mostly the now rare Western European L1228 clade.

- G2a-Z1903 (downstream of L30, L140 and CTS342, TMRCA 4500 ybp, found all over Europe) while earlier Neolithic G2a belonged mostly to G2a-PF3148 (like Ötzi), a rarer clade today found notably in Sardinia and the Middle East.

So there seems to have been a significant population replacement between the Middle-Late Neolithic and the Chalcolithic. The newcomers were also descended from the European G2a-I2a mixed population, but it looks like a male elite, probably originating from the Balkans, started replacing other Neolithic lineages in Iberia, and based on the modern distribution of I2-M26, I2-M423 and G2a-Z1903, across most of central and western Europe.

In this study, these new lineages only show up in southern Iberia, while R1b-L23 (with some L51 and P312) makes its appearance only in central and northwest Iberia during the Chalcolithic.

By the Bronze Age, samples in all Iberia are almost exclusively R1b, overwhelmingly of the L11 and P312 variety, with the first Z195 showing up in Valencia c. 1700 BCE (I3997).

Surprisingly, no new haplogroups crop up in Iron Age samples. What is striking is the complete absence of haplogroup E1b1b, J1 and J2 anywhere in Iberia before historical times. The E-L618 (mistakenly reported as E-V13) found by Lacan et al. (2011 bis) (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/10/24/1113061108.abstract) in Early Neolithic Catalonia seems to have been a rare exception.

The first R1b-L21 comes from Tarragona (Roman colony) during the Late Imperial period (200-500 CE).

The earliest actual E-V13 and J2a appear in the 6th century in Catalonia, during the Visigothic period, alongside a clearly Germanic R1b-U106 (Z381). In other words, it is not impossible that E-V13 was brought to Iberia by Germanic tribes. If that is the case, the percentage of (Slavo-Celto-)Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia would be much higher than previously thought.

Ah, that really clears my view up a lot. I remain convinced that the spread of metallurgy is accompanied by a spread of people (often elites) and is very rarely spread through cultural diffusion, but I always thought that there wasn't any population change between the Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic as shown by the ancient DNA literature, so I assumed R1b-L51 or perhaps J2 was involved in bringing copper metallurgy to Iberia but that those copper-bearing samples hadn't been found yet. Now there has been demonstration of the arrival of new lineages, the necessity for R1b-L51/J2 in the Late Neolithic-Early Chalcolithic is greatly reduced and almost non-existent if it weren't for the spread of anthropomorphic stelae, unless something incredible is involved like the invaders themselves being stratified with some tiny elite of L51 at the top (really unlikely but don't rule it out until we can actually find out where L51 came from).

One potentially important point but my memory and Google is failing me - was Kemi Oba Y DNA I2(a1)? I seem to remember somebody saying that but I can't find it, if so that would put a lot of evidence of an origin of these Chalcolithic newcomers in the Kemi-Oba culture (somebody must have spread those anthropomorphic stelae given the amazing similarity).

A nice map I found by the way:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aleksander_Dzbynski/publication/326147203/figure/fig8/AS:[email protected]/Early-copper-metallurgy-provinces-in-Europe-after-Strahm-1994.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Fig._9_mapa.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2d/f0/f0/2df0f095523a8f15a29abaac515b3ec4.jpg

(Btw, I doubt Kemi-Oba is actually related to Yamnaya, so ignore the Yamnaya part of the above map)

EDIT: I've also floated ideas for two migrations like above by the way, one of these I2a1 etc. guys and another of R1b-L51 pretty soon afterwards - that would depend on the chronology of the arrival of the anthropomorphic stelae (i.e. if it arrived after copper metallurgy spread). Yamnaya was definitely not L51 though, that should be clear from the Hungarian Bell Beaker samples we have. There's anthropormorphic stelae at Hamangia - which presumably predate Kemi-Oba? If the Steppe apparently first received copper metallurgy on a large scale from the Balkans, it could be associated with this. If the Hamangia stelae was from late Hamangia, it would be related to the Boian culture and ultimately to Cucuteni. Perhaps something like Cucuteni is a dark horse for the origin of PIE speech, maybe picked up by Yamnaya tribes. In terms of what we know of the culture of PIE speakers it makes more sense than a purely Steppe origin. I'm just spit-balling here, but it is definitely an underappreciated hypothesis. This doesn't even factor in Maykop's influence on Yamnaya... though it doesn't seem kurgans are actually pivotal to the IE question as plenty of likely IE cultures didn't use kurgans.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 17:00
This are supposedly Wielbark samples from Poland and are not associated with the Roman frontier of Goths, many archeologist deny any connection between Wielbark to Chernyakhov culture, let alone Scandinavia.

Just like many archeologists denied Steppe origins of Bell Beakers, or just like many archaeologists claimed that there was population continuity between Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain. Until DNA proved them wrong.

=====

Autosomal DNA from Wielbark culture apparently confirms connection to Scandinavia:

http://www.actabp.pl/#Archiwum?./supl/2_2018.html

https://i.postimg.cc/VN9xkBV3/Screenshot_20180929-073310_Drive.jpg

Maciamo
17-03-19, 17:20
Visigoth with E-V13 - sample I12031 - was a Visigoth only culturally, autosomally that person had no Germanic ancestry, but he also had no any native Iberian ancestry. It was someone with a lot of Paleo-Balkan ancestry. Visigoths marched across the Balkans on their way to Iberia, absorbing some local groups.

The most Germanic (about 2/3) of all Visigoth samples was I12163. All others were autosomally mixed.

I12032 and I12162 were predominantly Northern/Central European but also mixed with other things.

I12034 was an acculturated native Iberian (80-85%) with only minor Germanic admixture.

What about the Alans, did they contribute any Y-DNA to Iberia?

Of course, when I say Visigoths, it does not necessarily mean Germanic. The Goths were already an ethnic hybrid of Germanics and Slavs before entering the Roman Empire, then they blended with people from the Balkans before moving west to southern Gaul, Italy and Iberia. Therefore a Visigothic E-V13 with Balkanic autosomal DNA makes sense.

The Alans were a Central Asian people, but they also mixed extensively with Eastern and Central Europeans, so like the Goths they were an ethnic melting pot.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 17:33
Here is one of many possible Global25-based models for Visigoths:

[1] "distance%=1.9474"
Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 40.2%
Iberia_North_IA - 25.2%
Slavic_Bohemia - 19%
Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2 - 15.6% [this is a proxy for Paleo-Balkan ancestry, Empuries was a Greek colony]

But let's remember that Germany_Medieval were not people native to South Germany.

They were Migration Period newcomers from the North, and DNA was collected only from males buried in elite Germanic reichen Graber.

Germany_Medieval (with exception of women with deformed skulls) is genetically most similar to modern Danes and Southern Swedes.

Goths were likely Scandinavian, like Jordanes wrote. Wielbark autosomal DNA confirms similarity to Jutland.

Slavic_Bohemia is of course Early Medieval Slavic DNA, not present-day Czech samples.

Ailchu
17-03-19, 18:03
so i can't read the paper of olalde but from what i read here those 40% are indeed "central european". now i wonder how olalde comes to the conclusion of 40% replacement. on his plot, if there were no dots added, only 2 people are nearly 100% central european the rest is already mixed. did he say when the admixture started? i assume it started already during those 500 years where both ancestries are present. or the incoming people already had iberian like ancestry and the real replacement was way more than 40%.

Angela
17-03-19, 18:18
so i can't read the paper of olalde but from what i read here those 40% are indeed "central european". now i wonder how olalde comes to the conclusion of 40% replacement. on his plot, if there were no dots added, only 2 people are nearly 100% central european the rest is already mixed. did he say when the admixture started? i assume it started already during those 500 years where both ancestries are present. or the incoming people already had iberian like ancestry and the real replacement was way more than 40%.

The authors say the two groups co-existed for about 500 years before admixed people show up. I don't understand it, but that's what the samples show.

Milan.M
17-03-19, 18:22
Just like many archeologists denied Steppe origins of Bell Beakers, or just like many archaeologists claimed that there was population continuity between Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain. Until DNA proved them wrong.

=====

Autosomal DNA from Wielbark culture apparently confirms connection to Scandinavia:

http://www.actabp.pl/#Archiwum?./supl/2_2018.html

https://i.postimg.cc/VN9xkBV3/Screenshot_20180929-073310_Drive.jpg
You can say that when we gonna have Chernyakhov culture samples.

Milan.M
17-03-19, 18:27
Here is one of many possible Global25-based models for Visigoths:

[1] "distance%=1.9474"
Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 40.2%
Iberia_North_IA - 25.2%
Slavic_Bohemia - 19%
Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2 - 15.6% [this is a proxy for Paleo-Balkan ancestry, Empuries was a Greek colony]

But let's remember that Germany_Medieval were not people native to South Germany.

They were Migration Period newcomers from the North, and DNA was collected only from males buried in elite Germanic reichen Graber.

Germany_Medieval (with exception of women with deformed skulls) is genetically most similar to modern Danes and Southern Swedes.

Goths were likely Scandinavian, like Jordanes wrote. Wielbark autosomal DNA confirms similarity to Jutland.

Slavic_Bohemia is of course Early Medieval Slavic DNA, not present-day Czech samples.
Jordanes connects the Goths with Getae from antiquity,he mention a "Scandza" migration but from whatever early times,you should re-read him,and in no way he mention any Wielbark or whatsoever or date's the 'migration" in that period,that was archeological work from Gotaland-Wielbark-Chernyakhov to Roman empire.

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 18:52
The authors say the two groups co-existed for about 500 years before admixed people show up. I don't understand it, but that's what the samples show.

A logical explanation is that there was a caste system, which collapsed after 500 years.

markod
17-03-19, 19:16
Why would we found I1 ìf they didn't came from Scandinavia?
One day Scandsmen decided that, " hey those Spanish guys are gettin' that rep all over europe " let's just rename that land Gotaland for making furor ".

Gotaland refers to Gutes afaik. A North Germanic people.

Carlos
17-03-19, 19:25
The older native man had a way of looking at life very different from the newcomer, the integration between the two was not compatible with either side. Contunuously the local tribes had to move to other areas and start again, at a certain time they lived far enough apart so that 500 years would pass. These newly arrived men were continually bothering with destruction even to make their horses jump on small children and at the slightest opportunity they killed young children as a sport. The native man was in communion with nature, tribe and family and the newcomer had a vortex incomprehensible to the older natives, so they were putting distance, but sooner or later they were and everything started again until finally the number of natives would descend by extrés and by difficulty of being established in a stable and safe place so that already very depleted could have been absorbed at all.

Angela
17-03-19, 19:29
A logical explanation is that there was a caste system, which collapsed after 500 years.

That would only be logical if the archaeology indicated that the "locals" were in a "lower" position within "newcomer" settlements. When you find such DATA be sure to share it.

According to the authors, the two such groups co-existed for those 500 years.

We saw exactly the same situation in Europe with the arrival of the Anatolian farmers. The "locals" retreated to the north/northeast. The ones who remained stayed in their ancestral settlements, usually at rivers where they continued their fisher/gatherer life style. This remained the case for almost 2,000 years. People forget that the Europe of these periods was relatively unpopulated. There were very few hunter or fisher/gatherers, so there was plenty of room for the Anatolian farmers to expand without conflict with the farmers.

The only exception of which I'm aware is the presence of a low status hunter-gatherer in one of the oldest farmer settlements. An exception, however, does not a rule make.

In the case of Iberia, it was the steppe admixed people who were the minority, very much so in places in southern Iberia. Since you love speculation so much, perhaps the newcomers, who relied more on herding, initially even took the poorer, higher elevation areas. That's what happened in italy with the Appennine settlement.

Simplistic thinking devoid of nuance isn't helpful in these discussions. Nor is the anachronistic attribution of cultural artifacts or life styles to much more ancient societies. I would suggest that you and many others take a look at the archaeology of the Bell Beaker settlements and burial contexts in Central Europe. In the initial periods, they indicate much more primitive cultures than those they were encountering: bad copies of Beaker cups, wrist guards, and even bow and arrows.

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 20:00
That would only be logical if the archaeology indicated that the "locals" were in a "lower" position within "newcomer" settlements. When you find such DATA be sure to share it.

According to the authors, the two such groups co-existed for those 500 years.

We saw exactly the same situation in Europe with the arrival of the Anatolian farmers. The "locals" retreated to the north/northeast. The ones who remained stayed in their ancestral settlements, usually at rivers where they continued their fisher/gatherer life style. This remained the case for almost 2,000 years. People forget that the Europe of these periods was relatively unpopulated. There were very few hunter or fisher/gatherers, so there was plenty of room for the Anatolian farmers to expand without conflict with the farmers.

The only exception of which I'm aware is the presence of a low status hunter-gatherer in one of the oldest farmer settlements. An exception, however, does not a rule make.

In the case of Iberia, it was the steppe admixed people who were the minority, very much so in places in southern Iberia. Since you love speculation so much, perhaps the newcomers, who relied more on herding, initially even took the poorer, higher elevation areas. That's what happened in italy with the Appennine settlement.

Simplistic thinking devoid of nuance isn't helpful in these discussions. Nor is the anachronistic attribution of cultural artifacts or life styles to much more ancient societies. I would suggest that you and many others take a look at the archaeology of the Bell Beaker settlements and burial contexts in Central Europe. In the initial periods, they indicate much more primitive cultures than those they were encountering: bad copies of Beaker cups, wrist guards, and even bow and arrows.

With the Anatolian farmers and HGs, was it not the case that they were near each other but not within the same settlements? Whereas with the arrival of the Bell Beakers, they moved into pre-existing Iberian settlements? That's a big difference really, for two groups to be living side-by-side and not mixing requires a caste system or segregation. Even if I believe this to be true, it isn't necessarily the case that one group is above the other, though of course they were successful invaders so that is to be expected.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 20:20
You can claim that these Visigoths are mixed and I agree with users who say it, but they are still predominantly Germanic. And this after 500 years since they left their Scandinavian homeland and then travelled across half of Europe before reaching Iberia.

These DNA results completely debunk the theory that Goths were just some "social construct of the Roman frontier".

berun
17-03-19, 20:27
@ maciamo

sorry but in the other recent paper about Iberia there are four Cardial samples being already I2a1b...

Carlos
17-03-19, 20:27
Of castes nothing, is incompatible with Iberia yesterday, today and always. Nobility has been and is with in so many places.


Yesterday I was walking through the quiet and I came across one of the old natives, it was very pure, it surprised me, our eyes met and then I understood everything. They had straight dark hair, pronounced cheekbones, marked features, eyes similar to those of La Dama de Eche but somewhat more round and brown. Gracil but not so much, were fibrados and strong, they were not easy adversaries. Look straight ahead and they are brave but without intending to start them a fight.


Like water and oil, that man had no intention of integrating with the newcomers and therein lies his disappearance.


Those of the Steppe attacked in group to the natives, their towns to all the tribe, but nevertheless fled and avoided the confrontation with a group of native men. It was the system of the newcomers to attack the family nucleus and the tribes but they withdrew if they had to fight with a group of native men who came out to meet them, that is what finally defeated them.

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 20:34
@ maciamo

sorry but in the other recent paper about Iberia there are four Cardial samples being already I2a1b...

I believe you, but sample ID?

bicicleur
17-03-19, 20:35
I am only finding time to reply now.

A quick look at the haplogroups by period reveals that:

New lineages that appear during the Chalcolithic include:

- I2a1a-M26 and I2a1b-M423. Until the MLN, the I2 individuals all belonged to I2a2 - mostly the now rare Western European L1228 clade, but also to Z161.



the other Iberian Paper found M26 in MLN Els Trocs, 5.9-5.65 ka

bicicleur
17-03-19, 20:38
A logical explanation is that there was a caste system, which collapsed after 500 years.

what made it collapse?

berun
17-03-19, 20:42
I believe you, but sample ID?


copy&paste better
;)


BAL0051 could be assigned to haplogroup I1, while BAL003 carries the C1a1a haplogroup. To the limits of our typing resolution,
EN/MN individuals CHA001, CHA003, ELT002 and ELT006 share haplogroup I2a1b, which was also reported for Loschbour [73] and
Motala HG [13], and other LN and Chalcolithic individuals from Iberia [7, 9], as well as Neolithic Scotland, France, England [9], and
Lithuania [14]. Both C1 and I1/ I2 are considered typical European HG lineages prior to the arrival of farming. Interestingly, CHA002
was assigned to haplogroup R1b-M343, which together with an EN individual from Cova de Els Trocs (R1b1a) confirms the presence
of R1b in Western Europe prior to the expansion of steppe pastoralists that established a related male lineage in Bronze Age Europe
[3, 6, 9, 13, 19]. The geographical vicinity and contemporaneity of these two sites led us to run genomic kinship analysis in order to
rule out any first or second degree of relatedness. Early Neolithic individual FUC003 carries the Y haplogroup G2a2a1, commonly
found in other EN males from Neolithic Anatolia [13], Starc¸ evo, LBK Hungary [18], Impressa from Croatia and Serbia Neolithic [19]
and Czech Neolithic [9], but also in MN Croatia [19] and Chalcolithic Iberia [9].

ok, I was too quick, the cardials were those from Cueva Chaves.

Angela
17-03-19, 20:45
With the Anatolian farmers and HGs, was it not the case that they were near each other but not within the same settlements? Whereas with the arrival of the Bell Beakers, they moved into pre-existing Iberian settlements? That's a big difference really, for two groups to be living side-by-side and not mixing requires a caste system or segregation. Even if I believe this to be true, it isn't necessarily the case that one group is above the other, though of course they were successful invaders so that is to be expected.

To the best of my recollection there is nothing in the paper which indicates that.

It's very unwise to speculate based on facts which haven't been checked.

If that "was" the case it would be helpful if you could direct us to the place where it is so stated.

berun
17-03-19, 20:46
from the paper "PLA DE L’HORTA (SARRIÀ DE TER, GIRONA): UNA NECRÓPOLIS CON INHUMACIONES VISIGODAS EN LA TARRACONENSE ORIENTAL", googletranslated:



Concluding, in Pla de l'Horta we are facing
a necropolis largely comparable to most
of those that extend in the center of the peninsula
Iberian and that responds to the most common parameters
of this type of necropolis. Located near a large
communication route (the Via Augusta) and a major river
(the Ter), next to an old Roman villa,
It extends over a flat, gently sloping ground
towards the east, in the direction of the road and the river. Known
in a partial way, it is composed of a minimum
of 58 burials, none of them reused,
most in pit and a few (16) in cist,
other types of tomb being absolutely minority
(a tegulae box and a sarcophagus). In one part
important of the inhumations objects were recovered
of typical Germanic ornamentation
(brooches, buckles, fibulae ...), and its chronology
could establish quite accurately between finals
of the V century and the beginning of the VII as extreme dates.
We do not doubt that we are in front of a cemetery
unique in this area, used by elements of
Goth origin and Arian confession, establishing
so in this case a direct relationship between the type of
necropolis and the ethnic-cultural characteristics of
buried in it, an extreme that has sometimes
questioned or has been relativized in other cases
similar42. We do not know with absolute certainty the
habitat of those buried in Pla de l'Horta, but the
Visigoth presence in this region is more than enough
justified given the proximity of the strategic city
of Gerunda, the existence of a military castellum
control of an important communication channel
and, even, the possibility of reoccupation of an important
Roman villa as was Pla de l'Horta.
Finally, we can not escape that abandonment
of the necropolis coincides roughly with
the unifying provisions of Leovigildo and Recaredo
and the conversion to Catholicism of the community
goda Undoubtedly, the Visigoths of the region (except
probably those who resided in it
city ​​of Gerunda, which already had its own areas
cemeteries) were buried thereafter
elsewhere, perhaps in the old church of Sant
Julià, but also, why not, in a cemetery
common with the Hispano-Romans in the area, that we could
locate in all probability in the neighbor and
nearby necropolis of Les Goges, clearly dated

berun
17-03-19, 20:47
This Visigothic cemetery is a unicum in the region, not the best to do a time transect... but maybe very good data for an independent paper; well, there are many more local's cemeteries.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 20:47
Another Global25 model for Visigoths, I used in total 17 reference populations in this run:

[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCE%"
Poprad_Medieval Scythian_Ukraine Iberia_North_IA
3.701866 4.888225 4.947389
Iberia_Northeast_RomP Scythian_Moldova Balkans_BA
5.069968 5.216240 5.797893
Slavic_Bohemia Iberia_East_IA
5.916174 5.990847

[1] "distance%=1.2088" - distance is very good

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Poprad_Medieval - 23% (East Germanic from Slovakia)
Scythian_Ukraine - 16%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 12.2%
Sweden_Viking_Age - 10.2%
Iberia_East_IA - 10%
Balkans_IA - 7.6%
Nordic_IA - 6.6%
Scythian_Moldova - 6%
Mycenaean - 4.8%
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE - 2%
Slavic_Bohemia - 1.6%

Reference populations used (do you think I should add something more and try again?):

Avar_Hungary_Szolad:Av1
Avar_Hungary_Szolad:Av2
Avar_Hungary_Szolad
Nordic_IA
Balkans_IA
Balkans_BA
Slavic_Bohemia
Iberia_North_IA
Iberia_Northeast_RomP
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE
Iberia_East_IA
Baltic_IA
Scythian_Ukraine
Scythian_Moldova
Sweden_Viking_Age
Poprad_Medieval
Mycenaean

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 21:03
what made it collapse?

No idea, but I think a caste system is the most likely explanation by far especially as we know IEs implemented them all over the place.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 21:04
Another model also 17 pops but Poprad_Medieval removed and Germany_Medieval added:

[1] "distance%=1.1958"

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 30.8%
Scythian_Ukraine - 16.2%
Iberia_East_IA - 14.6%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 13.2%
Balkans_IA - 10.2%
Scythian_Moldova - 8.4%
Slavic_Bohemia - 6.2%
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE - 0.4%

And when using both Poprad_Medieval and Germany_Medieval (in total 18 reference pops):

[1] "distance%=1.1498"

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 20.2%
Scythian_Ukraine - 16%
Poprad_Medieval - 14.6%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 12%
Iberia_East_IA - 11.8%
Balkans_IA - 8.2%
Scythian_Moldova - 5.4%
Sweden_Viking_Age - 4.6%
Mycenaean - 3.8%
Slavic_Bohemia - 3%
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE - 0.4%

ToBeOrNotToBe
17-03-19, 21:07
To the best of my recollection there is nothing in the paper which indicates that.

It's very unwise to speculate based on facts which haven't been checked.

If that "was" the case it would be helpful if you could direct us to the place where it is so stated.

I'm too lazy really but check here - http://homeland.ku.dk/ - it gives the exact location of the samples, so go to around like the 2500 BCE mark and zoom in all the way to the red shapes (Steppe) and you'll see basically all of them are in the same settlements as the yellow shapes (Farmer). The new study has many more samples but it'll be the same thing - the archaeology is pretty clear anyway that Bell Beakers were limited to certain clusters of sites and not spread diffusely.

Also, why is it so "unwise" - there's no reason to be so snarky, I'd prefer if I was wrong that you made me look like an idiot instead.

markod
17-03-19, 21:15
Another model also 17 pops but Poprad_Medieval removed and Germany_Medieval added:

[1] "distance%=1.1958"

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 30.8%
Scythian_Ukraine - 16.2%
Iberia_East_IA - 14.6%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 13.2%
Balkans_IA - 10.2%
Scythian_Moldova - 8.4%
Slavic_Bohemia - 6.2%
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE - 0.4%

And when using both Poprad_Medieval and Germany_Medieval (in total 18 reference pops):

[1] "distance%=1.1498"

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 20.2%
Scythian_Ukraine - 16%
Poprad_Medieval - 14.6%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 12%
Iberia_East_IA - 11.8%
Balkans_IA - 8.2%
Scythian_Moldova - 5.4%
Sweden_Viking_Age - 4.6%
Mycenaean - 3.8%
Slavic_Bohemia - 3%
Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE - 0.4%

Have you taken a look at the Ostrogothic guy from Kerch?

I really hope someone from the prominent teams takes a look at Jastorf, so we get an idea what the earliest discernible Germanic groups looked like.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 21:27
I should not use Scythians_Ukraine average because it was an internally diverse group.

I will remove Scythians and try again. Or try with individual Scythians instead of average.

Tomenable
17-03-19, 22:06
Ukrainian Scythians removed from the model, but I still included Scythians Moldova (400-200 BC):

[1] "distance%=1.2278"

Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL

Germany_Medieval - 19.8%
Poprad_Medieval - 14.6%
Iberia_Northeast_RomP - 14.2%
Slavic_Bohemia - 11.8%
Iberia_East_IA - 11%
Scythian_Moldova - 11%
Sweden_Viking_Age - 7.4%
Mycenaean - 5.6%
Balkans_IA - 4.6%

halfalp
17-03-19, 23:22
Gotaland refers to Gutes afaik. A North Germanic people.

So the Gutes are not the Goths, but the Goths did spoke a confirmed Germanic Language? Common bro, i know you want to challenge ideas and it's a good thing, but not in those kind of exemple.

Ailchu
17-03-19, 23:46
The authors say the two groups co-existed for about 500 years before admixed people show up. I don't understand it, but that's what the samples show.

but isn't this strange when you look at the graphics? during those 500 years only 2 people are near 100% and they aren't even the earliest samples of the newcomers. all other samples in those 500 years are already mixed with something else. they are only roughly 60-70% central euro bb. so if those are actually unmixed invaders then they must have contributed way more than 40% admixture at the end of those 500 years so that the resulting population has only 20% less average central euro beaker.

is it stated in the paper that they did not already start to mix during those 500 years or even earlier? i only found pieces of the paper like this one
"The earliest evidence is in 14 individuals dated to ~2500–2000 BCE who coexisted with local people without Steppe ancestry (Fig. 2B). These groups lived in close proximity and admixed to form the Bronze Age population after 2000 BCE with ~40% ancestry from incoming groups (Fig. 2B and fig. S6)."

that could mean that the unmixex farmer group and a already mixing imigrant group were coexisting for 500 years then after 500 years there simply were no unmixed farmers left.

markod
18-03-19, 00:23
So the Gutes are not the Goths, but the Goths did spoke a confirmed Germanic Language? Common bro, i know you want to challenge ideas and it's a good thing, but not in those kind of exemple.

Geates/Gutes are the ancestors of the Swedes, i. e. North Germanics. Goths are East Germanic.

halfalp
18-03-19, 01:00
But if BB's coming from Steppe through central europe, cohabited with local BB's / local Iberians. How to explain the shift, both in Iberia and the British Islands of y-dna? What kind of social pressure could have been on local men to completely disappear? I mean it's certainly not a coincidence that everywhere where R1a and R1b went, they became dominant? Is it really just nature? Where they physically monsters comparing to their local opponents? Now why did that happened in British Islands, Continental Europe, Eastern Europe and India, but not in Greece and Anatolia? R1b is still the dominant y-dna in modern Greece, modern Armenia and the second after J in Anatolia. So what can explain this, but sample bias? The Greek guy from Empuries probably did spoke Greek, but his genetic is clearly of local Peloponnese-Minoan origin, without Steppe input.

Angela
18-03-19, 02:03
But if BB's coming from Steppe through central europe, cohabited with local BB's / local Iberians. How to explain the shift, both in Iberia and the British Islands of y-dna? What kind of social pressure could have been on local men to completely disappear? I mean it's certainly not a coincidence that everywhere where R1a and R1b went, they became dominant? Is it really just nature? Where they physically monsters comparing to their local opponents? Now why did that happened in British Islands, Continental Europe, Eastern Europe and India, but not in Greece and Anatolia? R1b is still the dominant y-dna in modern Greece, modern Armenia and the second after J in Anatolia. So what can explain this, but sample bias? The Greek guy from Empuries probably did spoke Greek, but his genetic is clearly of local Peloponnese-Minoan origin, without Steppe input.

Having to correct the incredible inaccuracies in all of your posts is becoming very tiresome.

The Greek guy from Empuries is specifically stated and shown to be very close to Mycenaeans. Mycenaeans were about 10-20% Steppe. Therefore, he was about 10-20% steppe.

This is not rocket science, for God's sake.

And who the heck told you that R1b is the dominant yDna in Greece? Where in hell do you get this crap?????

The most dominant y line in Greece is E-V13. Second is J2. Only then does R1b show up.

LOOK AT THE CHART.
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Angela
18-03-19, 02:09
but isn't this strange when you look at the graphics? during those 500 years only 2 people are near 100% and they aren't even the earliest samples of the newcomers. all other samples in those 500 years are already mixed with something else. they are only roughly 60-70% central euro bb. so if those are actually unmixed invaders then they must have contributed way more than 40% admixture at the end of those 500 years so that the resulting population has only 20% less average central euro beaker.

is it stated in the paper that they did not already start to mix during those 500 years or even earlier? i only found pieces of the paper like this one
"The earliest evidence is in 14 individuals dated to ~2500–2000 BCE who coexisted with local people without Steppe ancestry (Fig. 2B). These groups lived in close proximity and admixed to form the Bronze Age population after 2000 BCE with ~40% ancestry from incoming groups (Fig. 2B and fig. S6)."

that could mean that the unmixex farmer group and a already mixing imigrant group were coexisting for 500 years then after 500 years there simply were no unmixed farmers left.

That's correct Ailchu. I expressed myself badly.

As you can see in the graphic the unmixed farmers, including males, existed for 500 years, and only then disappeared. It doesn't at all look like a whole sale slaughter when they arrived. Nor does it look gradual in terms of the numbers.
https://i.imgur.com/64OPSzb.png

Angela
18-03-19, 02:30
Graphics for some information we haven't discussed.

Phenotype snps:

https://i.imgur.com/JbL0y7d.png

The red dotted line represents the frequencies of the Iberian samples in 1000 genomes. It doesn't seem that steppe people brought lactase persistence with them. What could have caused the selection in the last 2000 years is beyond me.

Changes in mtDna and yDna over time since the Bronze/Iron Age. More samples may change the picture somewhat, but I'm surprised there was only 25% H in the Bronze/Iron, and how much in the 10-16th centuries. Where did it come from, or was it selection? In Maciamo's charts, H is today about 41% of the total in Spain.

I'm also surprised there's no yDna "J" until the 3rd century C.E. If the Phoenicians had made an impact you would think it would have shown up before that. It may be it was actually Carthaginians who settled there to some extent, not Phoenicians.



https://i.imgur.com/ScF1GJi.png

It would have been nice to see this in the regular part of the paper;

https://i.imgur.com/wq3mr16.png


https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_mtdna_haplogroups_frequency.shtml

Tomenable
18-03-19, 04:38
Have you taken a look at the Ostrogothic guy from Kerch?

Yes, but do you know why exactly was that described as "Ostrogothic"?

Did something in that grave indicate culturally Gothic (genetically not Gothic for sure)?

I think Kerch was never under Gothic rule.

That guy was probably a descendant of Bosporan Kingdom's population:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosporan_Kingdom

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Bosporan_Kingdom_growth_map-en.svg/1024px-Bosporan_Kingdom_growth_map-en.svg.png

Tomenable
18-03-19, 05:08
Any attempts of modeling Goths as a mix of other ancient groups should reflect their migration path:

https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#4/51.13/28.86

https://i.imgur.com/5zvNH8u.png

Jovialis
18-03-19, 06:36
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2FyTBId76k

Pretty cool video for the study.

Ygorcs
18-03-19, 06:44
One alternative possibility is that local Iberian women preferred the central European newcomers in a context of "strong social stratification," said Lalueza-Fox.

Lol basically a polite way of saying Bronze Age gold-diggers :P

I always thought that was a strong possibility: slaughters and warfare casualties disproportionately affecting males, but also subsequent social hierarchy that made most local males "unfit for marriage", and those that were able to find partners and get them pregnant were mostly too unprivileged to be able to raise large families, which in times of very high mortality (and especially infant mortality) meant that their lineages were under really high risk of disappearing at every plague or war.

berun
18-03-19, 09:00
ha! who is the R1b guy 100% steppe by 0 AD?

Ygorcs
18-03-19, 09:58
Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.

By the late, declining stage of the Muslim rule in Iberia the society had become very fractured among Arab, Berber and native factions, with frequente ethnic tensions (even between the Muslim elite members themselves, Arabs and Berbers were not in unison), and probably less inclusive and much more "caste-like". That would help explain why most of the admixture happened in the early and most glorious period, and not later.

Maciamo
18-03-19, 10:54
the other Iberian Paper found M26 in MLN Els Trocs, 5.9-5.65 ka

You are right. Els Trocs is in the Pyrenees, just across the French border, so it is not exactly representative of the Iberian peninsula though. This sample is barely a few hundred years older than the Chalcolithic samples from this study. We would still need to figure out exactly how and when M26 got to Iberia.

Actually there is another M26 from MLN in this study that I had missed. It is from the Dolmen de Ansião in Leiria, in central Portugal and is dated 3700-3000 BCE.

Interestingly all the Chalcolithic I2a1a-M26 in the new study are from Portugal (Lisboa or Evora, including Bell Beaker sites) except one from El Mirador near Burgos in Castilla y Leon.

In contrast, the I2a1b-M426 show up in SW, SE, Central and NE Iberia (i.e. in all regions sampled).

At first sight it would appear that they did not spread to Iberia together, as they followed different settlement patterns. But copper metallurgy first appeared in southern Iberia, including the Lisboa and Evora region. M26 later spread to the Atlantic façade of Europe, probably in part with with the Bell Beaker network. The question is where did M26 come from before it got to Portugal? Italy, Greece? Or is it just a coincidence? M26 was already in Portugal just before the Chalcolithic, during the Megalithic period. Therefore, it could be that only G2a-L140 (Z1903) and I2a1b-M426 brought metallurgy from Italy to southern Iberia and M26 just got absorbed in the process?

berun
18-03-19, 11:02
for Muslims and Y DNA it's good to remember that sharia allows mariages between Muslim men and Christian women, but forbids the inverse.

berun
18-03-19, 11:07
also a good chunk of African/Levantine DNA must be ancient: Phoenicians, Punics, Blastophoenicians...

halfalp
18-03-19, 11:39
Having to correct the incredible inaccuracies in all of your posts is becoming very tiresome.

The Greek guy from Empuries is specifically stated and shown to be very close to Mycenaeans. Mycenaeans were about 10-20% Steppe. Therefore, he was about 10-20% steppe.

This is not rocket science, for God's sake.

And who the heck told you that R1b is the dominant yDna in Greece? Where in hell do you get this crap?????

The most dominant y line in Greece is E-V13. Second is J2. Only then does R1b show up.

LOOK AT THE CHART.
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml


Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208
Minoan_Lasithi 30.8%
Protoboleraz_LCA 28.45%
Kura-Araxes_Kalavan 25.1%
Vinca_MN 13.05%
Hajji_Firuz_ChL 2.6%

berun
18-03-19, 12:22
Changes in mtDna and yDna over time since the Bronze/Iron Age. More samples may change the picture somewhat, but I'm surprised there was only 25% H in the Bronze/Iron, and how much in the 10-16th centuries. Where did it come from, or was it selection? In Maciamo's charts, H is today about 41% of the total in Spain.

the fault is that insane way to proceed, mixing outliers is mad, but mixing different territories with different histories just by do a transect in a given region is unprofessional, if do you look at Iberians, mtDNA H is already in actual levels.

bicicleur
18-03-19, 12:33
That's correct Ailchu. I expressed myself badly.

As you can see in the graphic the unmixed farmers, including males, existed for 500 years, and only then disappeared. It doesn't at all look like a whole sale slaughter when they arrived. Nor does it look gradual in terms of the numbers.
https://i.imgur.com/64OPSzb.png

judging from the graph, I'd say the number of unadmixed and the non-R1b Y-DNA is gradually getting thinner during the last 300 years
taking into account there were also steppe females, 40 % autosomal turnover is hughe

bicicleur
18-03-19, 12:37
Graphics for some information we haven't discussed.

Phenotype snps:

https://i.imgur.com/JbL0y7d.png

The red dotted line represents the frequencies of the Iberian samples in 1000 genomes. It doesn't seem that steppe people brought lactase persistence with them. What could have caused the selection in the last 2000 years is beyond me.



A lactase persistence
B blue eyes
C & D skin tone

correct?

bicicleur
18-03-19, 12:38
for Muslims and Y DNA it's good to remember that sharia allows mariages between Muslim men and Christian women, but forbids the inverse.

men always want to reproduce their Y DNA

bicicleur
18-03-19, 12:44
By the late, declining stage of the Muslim rule in Iberia the society had become very fractured among Arab, Berber and native factions, with frequente ethnic tensions (even between the Muslim elite members themselves, Arabs and Berbers were not in unison), and probably less inclusive and much more "caste-like". That would help explain why most of the admixture happened in the early and most glorious period, and not later.
also keep in mind that Al-Andalus was taken over by the Almoravide dynasties from Morrocco
these Almoravides were much more fundamentalistic Muslims than the original Muslim invaders in the 8th century, and they were much less tolerant to non-Muslims

bicicleur
18-03-19, 12:53
You are right. Els Trocs is in the Pyrenees, just across the French border, so it is not exactly representative of the Iberian peninsula though. This sample is barely a few hundred years older than the Chalcolithic samples from this study. We would still need to figure out exactly how and when M26 got to Iberia.

Actually there is another M26 from MLN in this study that I had missed. It is from the Dolmen de Ansião in Leiria, in central Portugal and is dated 3700-3000 BCE.

Interestingly all the Chalcolithic I2a1a-M26 in the new study are from Portugal (Lisboa or Evora, including Bell Beaker sites) except one from El Mirador near Burgos in Castilla y Leon.

In contrast, the I2a1b-M426 show up in SW, SE, Central and NE Iberia (i.e. in all regions sampled).

At first sight it would appear that they did not spread to Iberia together, as they followed different settlement patterns. But copper metallurgy first appeared in southern Iberia, including the Lisboa and Evora region. M26 later spread to the Atlantic façade of Europe, probably in part with with the Bell Beaker network. The question is where did M26 come from before it got to Portugal? Italy, Greece? Or is it just a coincidence? M26 was already in Portugal just before the Chalcolithic, during the Megalithic period. Therefore, it could be that only G2a-L140 (Z1903) and I2a1b-M426 brought metallurgy from Italy to southern Iberia and M26 just got absorbed in the process?

afaik this M26 form Els Trocs is the earliest identified

there is a lot I2a1b indeed, and I wonder whether some of them wouldn't be unidentified I2a1b1-L161
I2a1b1-L161 was in EN Els Trocs and later it has been identified in many megalithic sites, and also in the earliest farmers on the British Isles


others are I2a-Z161 and R1b-V88, the last in EN Els Trocs
both were identified earlier in the Iron Gates
it seems to me they originated there and ca 7 ka came along with Cardial Ware

bicicleur
18-03-19, 13:03
Graphics for some information we haven't discussed.
Changes in mtDna and yDna over time since the Bronze/Iron Age. More samples may change the picture somewhat, but I'm surprised there was only 25% H in the Bronze/Iron, and how much in the 10-16th centuries. Where did it come from, or was it selection? In Maciamo's charts, H is today about 41% of the total in Spain.
I'm also surprised there's no yDna "J" until the 3rd century C.E. If the Phoenicians had made an impact you would think it would have shown up before that. It may be it was actually Carthaginians who settled there to some extent, not Phoenicians.
https://i.imgur.com/ScF1GJi.png

yes, that striked me too
before arrival of Greeks and Carthago, Iberia must have remained almost 100 % R1b
and Romans and Muslims must have had a larger impact than Greeks and Carthago

most of it R1b-DF27
but in the SW of Iberia (Tartessian) we have today R1b-U152, I cannot imagine this is a late arrival, it must have been 4.5-4 ka
and what about R1b-L21? did they arrive 4.5-4 ka or later, during the Atlantic bronze age?

as for mtDNA H, there seems to be a correlation with the blue eyes, but that is probably a mere coincidence
it looks the Muslims also brought U6 to Iberia

berun
18-03-19, 13:04
men always want to reproduce their Y DNA

correct, but under sharia and some generations, a 10% Muslim males will become a 50 or even a 90 as long as their daughters will not be available for Christians.

bicicleur
18-03-19, 13:05
correct, but under sharia and some generations, a 10% Muslim males will become a 50 or even a 90 as long as their daughters will not be available for Christians.

it is happening in Europe today

Davidtab
18-03-19, 15:07
I am reading your opinions, and simply as an amateur, I can say history is history, and facts are facts... Western part of Iberia (Galicia, Portugal, Leon and Extremadura) seems to have the biggest E-M81 impact. If this impact is because of Muslim period, it has non sense at all. Actual Asturias, Cantabria, Leon, North Portugal and Galicia (the Suevian-Gallicense Kingdom - the Roman Gallaecia) were not settled by muslims... muslims took these regions only between 714 and 740. Cities like Lugo, Tuy, Oporto, Braga, Chaves, Salamanca, Zamora and Leon were ocupied by Alfonso I, and muslim territory was away Duero river as soon as in 750... These regions were under muslim rule only 10-20 years... how could it be so much impact of E-M81, much more than regions under muslim rule for more than 300-400 years??? This has no sense at all. It is documented that christians refugees from actual Morocco arrived at NorthWestern Iberia very early (740 Bishop Odoario "and his people" to Lugo for example). I wonder if Northwestern Iberia, as being origin of resistance against muslims, could became a place where christians refugees of other parts of Iberia and even actual Morocco arrived, and that would be the origin of the E-M81 presence in there, as genetic studies date the impact of berber admixture in Iberia about 9th century (2nd and 3rd generation after their arrival, when these "refugees" mixed with autochtonous people). It´s just a theory, I would not understand another explanation in only 10-20-30 years of muslim rule in Northwestern Iberia.

berun
18-03-19, 15:09
but I can't understand how happened autosomaly in St. Julia de Ramis, as Girona was under Arab rule 70 years only, but the samples come from an ancient Visigoth castle on the top of a hill, not an usual farmer village on the plain.

berun
18-03-19, 15:17
@ Davidtab, also there were many clashes among Arab and Berber tribes as to know who got booty or ruled a rich city, maybe some of such clashes were endless and some tribes sook refuge among Christians, there are many possibilities.

berun
18-03-19, 15:26
in fact, the post-Islamic samples from L'Esquerda are devoid of African autosomal

Angela
18-03-19, 16:11
Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208
Minoan_Lasithi 30.8%
Protoboleraz_LCA 28.45%
Kura-Araxes_Kalavan 25.1%
Vinca_MN 13.05%
Hajji_Firuz_ChL 2.6%

And that proves that most of the amateurs who play around with these tools don't know what they're doing. They just throw populations into the mix until they get the result they want. He plots a hair's breath east of Mycenaeans


"In PCA (Fig. 1C-D), most of the individuals from Empúries form two clusters: one (which we call Empúries1) plotting close to the Iron Age Iberia cluster that includes samples from the nearby site of Ullastret and the other(which we call Empúries2) plotting close to Bronze Age samples from the eastern Mediterranean such as the Mycenaean samples from Greece".


Is that clear enough for you people?

Angela
18-03-19, 16:20
A lactase persistence
B blue eyes
C & D skin tone

correct?

Yes, that's right. As you can see the average for Iberians today is about 45% for lactase persistence. I have no idea what caused the selection in the last 2000 years.

Angela
18-03-19, 16:34
yes, that striked me too
before arrival of Greeks and Carthago, Iberia must have remained almost 100 % R1b
and Romans and Muslims must have had a larger impact than Greeks and Carthago

most of it R1b-DF27
but in the SW of Iberia (Tartessian) we have today R1b-U152, I cannot imagine this is a late arrival, it must have been 4.5-4 ka
and what about R1b-L21? did they arrive 4.5-4 ka or later, during the Atlantic bronze age?

as for mtDNA H, there seems to be a correlation with the blue eyes, but that is probably a mere coincidence
it looks the Muslims also brought U6 to Iberia

If I interpreted the text correctly, they propose that Greek and Roman dna constitutes on average about 25% of the modern genome of Iberians, which is contrary to what "everyone" had been saying for so long.

While the northeast is only about 2% North African, the rest of the country ranges from 6-9%, with the Portuguese at 10%, so yes, the Central and East Med portion is higher, but of course the cause of that is the brutal expulsion and murder of hundreds of thousands of people.

Perhaps the R1b-U152 and L21 are Urnfield derived, that later pulse from Central Europe? There was probably a good bit of U-152 in the Romans as well.

I've always thought H has some advantageous characteristics. It has steadily increased in Europe since the Neolithic.

Carlos
18-03-19, 16:44
Without entering the current feminist e.t.c. And referring to the ancient or relatively old times I think that H is a more submissive and complacent female in her familiar attitude to a male than other haplogroups such as J1c according to what I know so that it is a more dominant female in terms of tribal or family relationships. I think J1c will treat man as equals until he can master it and H maintains an attitude of submission making life easier for man, maybe that's where his success lies. Still and J is the second lineage in Europe which indicates that there are mens to those who should like or simply when they realize it is already too late.

According to FamilyFinder I have 4% for North Africa.

Angela
18-03-19, 16:58
As I said, there are too many agenda biased amateurs who either don't know what they're doing with some of these tools, or they deliberately mis-use them.

https://i.imgur.com/mMq0Jfm.png

Angela
18-03-19, 17:17
Don't these North African admixed samples carrying R1b ylines indicate that the admixture wasn't just one sided?

"Local" Iberians who converted to Islam, of which there seem to have been more than a few, could have taken North African women as mates.
https://i.imgur.com/uzQMv5T.png

berun
18-03-19, 17:22
It would have been a good point to remember Strabo:


The Emporitans formerly lived on a little island off the shore, which is now called Old City , but they now live on the mainland. And their city is a double one, because, in former times, the city had for neighbours some of the Indicetans, who, although they maintained a government of their own, wished, for the sake of security, to have a common wall of circumvallation with the Greeks, with the enclosure in two parts - for it has been divided by a wall through the centre; but in the course of time the two peoples united under the same constitution, which was a mixture of both Barbarian and Greek laws - a thing which has taken place in the case of many other peoples.

berun
18-03-19, 17:26
the paper even fails to get a sample about what would be like a Greek colony, well, just as everything Reich does

Ruderico
18-03-19, 17:26
Don't these North African admixed samples carrying R1b ylines indicate that the admixture wasn't just one sided?

Why should it be one sided if it started at least during the Roman period?

Carlos
18-03-19, 17:32
There would be and by the time the total expulsion would have entered the sack of the expulsions as Moorish so their Iberian, Hispano-Spanish, Spanish-European e.t. It has to be in North Africa and the areas where the expelled went.

But if those samples are used as a mirror they could raise the Iberian North African DNA when it would be reversed.

suebiking
18-03-19, 17:52
All right, I've read most of the comments in this forum and I get the impression that most people commenting have solid and unbiased arguments regarding the ancient history of the Iberian Peninsula.
This study has shed many light into previously unknown facts such has the I1 lineage (possible since it lacks confirmation) and the existence of so called north african autosomal dna in the whole of Iberia.
My biggest problem regarding this study is the fact that people specialized in genetics don't consult with other investigators in the universities which is a shame since after all we are all trying to interpret the "results" of the study when a historian and an archaeologist could do it with much better accuracy and I am saying this because I attended one of the universities involved in this study and I know the procedures (most studies are done by people of the same field without collaboration ( this happens because most Portuguese universities have different fields of study in different university campus).
Now, about the study, the presence of North African admixture in pre islamic iberia is present as it was expected and has expected the islamic occupation most likely increased the quantity of that admixture in the whole peninsula but reduced it when it comes to localized admixture for instance in Andalucia because of the mass expulsions of people some of which were christian converts to Islam who had already a lot of north african admixture and these local south iberians were somewhat replaced by northern migrants with less north african admixture.
If anyone complains that there are almost no samples taken from north Portugal, Galicia and the northwest of Spain in general, that's because the soil is very acid and the bones or any Dna trace aren not found in ancient graveyards, only what's left of the pottery and sometimes precious metals and stone coffins are found.
Finally and I know it's a lot to read, and it's someone obsessed with Iberian History here, but in the Islamic period it is quite likely that while the elites would have had some issues with inter-marriage between catholics and muslims, the same cannot be said about the common people, so it is likely that the north african admixture spread both through male and female alike, still, I still find it hard to believe that the north african admixture has already become so dispersed that it is equal between a Galician/Asturian and someone from south Spain but perhaps someone can enlighten me about that, though about the Portuguese case it still perplexes me how the Portuguese are all very close genetically since the muslims never got to occupy the northern river valleys in Portugal nor the mountainous and isolate reaches othe Minho and Tras-os-Montes regions.

Joey37
18-03-19, 18:00
Without entering the current feminist e.t.c. And referring to the ancient or relatively old times I think that H is a more submissive and complacent female in her familiar attitude to a male than other haplogroups such as J1c according to what I know so that it is a more dominant female in terms of tribal or family relationships. I think J1c will treat man as equals until he can master it and H maintains an attitude of submission making life easier for man, maybe that's where his success lies. Still and J is the second lineage in Europe which indicates that there are mens to those who should like or simply when they realize it is already too late. According to FamilyFinder I have 4% for North Africa.
You might have something there, Carlos, and you have never met my mother or sister!

Carlos
18-03-19, 18:07
^^
The North African mixture apparently is not the same between a Galician and an Andalusian apparently is greater in a Galician. The expulsion was a long process where some groups were allowed to be in a controlled manner until the total expulsion was decided. It should have been done in a very organized and exhaustive way otherwise the results would have been other, in addition to there being oral tradition that there is not.

Stop giving the current Andalusia an identity that it does not have. We have already endured many topics and misrepresented stories about our current identity. What else do you need to see now? there are the results.


I'm sorry but I defend Andalusia to death, I carry it in my blood.

Carlos
18-03-19, 18:12
I do not know, I showed my results to my specialist doctor and she told me that 4% was very old, so I assumed that I could be Phoenician or Carthaginian and maybe it came from the north of Spain or from another place in Europe, what You want me to tell you, I do not know.
Andalusia is not going to be responsible now for all the E of Europe, some cardan the wool and others take the fame.

I do not know J1c2 but J1c5 yes and I assure you that they are not behind the man and when the time comes, not even to the side but above.

Maciamo
18-03-19, 18:16
most of it R1b-DF27
but in the SW of Iberia (Tartessian) we have today R1b-U152, I cannot imagine this is a late arrival, it must have been 4.5-4 ka
and what about R1b-L21? did they arrive 4.5-4 ka or later, during the Atlantic bronze age?

IMO, most of the R1b-U152 in Iberia came with the Romans. Actually the distribution of U152 in Iberia matches very well the pattern of Roman colonies, with a particularly high concentration in Andalusia and along the Mediterranean coast up to Catalonia.

Cato
18-03-19, 18:18
R1b U152 could be Urnfield in part

Utilizzando Tapatalk

suebiking
18-03-19, 18:28
^^
The North African mixture apparently is not the same between a Galician and an Andalusian apparently is greater in a Galician. The expulsion was a long process where some groups were allowed to be in a controlled manner until the total expulsion was decided. It should have been done in a very organized and exhaustive way otherwise the results would have been other, in addition to there being oral tradition that there is not.

Stop giving the current Andalusia an identity that it does not have. We have already endured many topics and misrepresented stories about our current identity. What else do you need to see now? there are the results.


I'm sorry but I defend Andalusia to death, I carry it in my blood.


Well, I was trying to say that, I must have lost myself in such a huge text, I meant that the population of Andalucia had more north african admixture before the islamic conquest and during the islamic period but that reality was completely changed by the Reconquista and its aftermath, I actually said that I was perplexed that Galicians have more north african admixture than the Andalucians because Galicia only suffered incursions and not outright occupation, and I tried to say that while it cannot be proven, at least not yet, the isolate river valleys and mountain chains where I was born, the interior Minho region might have much less than the rest of Portugal.
About attacking Andalucia, well it is my favourite part of Spain because of its historical and cultural value and of course because of its breathtaking landscapes, the Sierra Nevada is my personal favourite. Still I respect patriotism a lot, and regionalism in this case since I am also like that, nobody mess with my home region. :)

Maciamo
18-03-19, 18:42
R1b U152 could be Urnfield in part

Utilizzando Tapatalk

Yes, but Urnfield only reached Catalonia and Valencia, while U152 is strongest in Andalusia and South Portugal. U152 is NW Iberia could be Hallstatt Celtic, but considering the limited expanse which mirrors that of I1 I would rather think that the Suebi are responsible for a higher percentage of modern U152 in that region today. If there were Hallstatt U152 in Iberia, its frequency must have suffered considerably over time with all subsequent invaders.

https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

Angela
18-03-19, 18:54
Why should it be one sided if it started at least during the Roman period?

I was responding to a statement made up thread which seemed to imply that the admixture was always "Muslim" men with local Iberian women.

That's not how I interpret that graph.

Many of these samples are from the 10th-16th century.

Ruderico
18-03-19, 18:54
I actually said that I was perplexed that Galicians have more north african admixture than the Andalucians because Galicia only suffered incursions and not outright occupation, and I tried to say that while it cannot be proven, at least not yet, the isolate river valleys and mountain chains where I was born, the interior Minho region might have much less than the rest of Portugal.

It doesn't, I've seen plenty of northern Portuguese individuals and their north African results are just like any other. Same goes for Trás-os-Montes. And León.
The explanation might be that it's way older than the Muslim period (as this paper proves in southern Spain) and fueled by the Romanisation, especially in coastal or urban areas - and Bracara was an important city - or that it might have something to do with Mozarabes during the Asturian and Leonese kingdoms. Or possibly Ibn Marwan and his rebellion against Cordoba, which was supported by Asturias and included both Muladis and Mozarabes.




Many of these samples are from the 10th-16th century.
And many are form the pre-Muslim period.

Angela
18-03-19, 19:02
All right, I've read most of the comments in this forum and I get the impression that most people commenting have solid and unbiased arguments regarding the ancient history of the Iberian Peninsula.
This study has shed many light into previously unknown facts such has the I1 lineage (possible since it lacks confirmation) and the existence of so called north african autosomal dna in the whole of Iberia.
My biggest problem regarding this study is the fact that people specialized in genetics don't consult with other investigators in the universities which is a shame since after all we are all trying to interpret the "results" of the study when a historian and an archaeologist could do it with much better accuracy and I am saying this because I attended one of the universities involved in this study and I know the procedures (most studies are done by people of the same field without collaboration ( this happens because most Portuguese universities have different fields of study in different university campus).
Now, about the study, the presence of North African admixture in pre islamic iberia is present as it was expected and has expected the islamic occupation most likely increased the quantity of that admixture in the whole peninsula but reduced it when it comes to localized admixture for instance in Andalucia because of the mass expulsions of people some of which were christian converts to Islam who had already a lot of north african admixture and these local south iberians were somewhat replaced by northern migrants with less north african admixture.
If anyone complains that there are almost no samples taken from north Portugal, Galicia and the northwest of Spain in general, that's because the soil is very acid and the bones or any Dna trace aren not found in ancient graveyards, only what's left of the pottery and sometimes precious metals and stone coffins are found.
Finally and I know it's a lot to read, and it's someone obsessed with Iberian History here, but in the Islamic period it is quite likely that while the elites would have had some issues with inter-marriage between catholics and muslims, the same cannot be said about the common people, so it is likely that the north african admixture spread both through male and female alike, still, I still find it hard to believe that the north african admixture has already become so dispersed that it is equal between a Galician/Asturian and someone from south Spain but perhaps someone can enlighten me about that, though about the Portuguese case it still perplexes me how the Portuguese are all very close genetically since the muslims never got to occupy the northern river valleys in Portugal nor the mountainous and isolate reaches othe Minho and Tras-os-Montes regions.

That distribution has always been a puzzle even before ancient dna testing. Over the years I tried to find a book or even long papers something like Leonard Chiarelli's Muslim Sicily which would detail where various North African groups were settled and when, but I came up dry.

Would another possibility be related to slighty different decrees from the Portuguese and Spanish crowns about the expulsions? Could it have been slightly easier to refugee there during the expulsions?

The Jews did, after all, shelter in the Tras os Montes regions, yes?

Ed. for typos

Ruderico
18-03-19, 19:07
That distribution has always been a puzzle even before ancient dna testing. Over the years I tried to find a book or even long papers something like Leonard Chiarett's Muslim Sicily which would detail where various North African groups were settled and when, but I came up dry.

Would another possibility be related to slightlrey different decrees from the Portuguese and Spanish crowns about the expulsions? Could it have been slightly easier to refugee there during the expulsions?

The Jews did, after all, shelter in the Tras os Montes regions, yes?
I haven't seen any evidence for that, but anyway Jews are not Berbers - you'd expect to see an excess of Levantine-related ancestry, not Berber. And people might be severely overestimating Jewish population in Portugal. The figures aren't consensual, but the country's most respected medievalist (José Mattoso) put the number under 1% somewhen during the inquirições manuelinas

Cato
18-03-19, 19:17
there were also urnfield settlements in Aragon, Navarre and part of the Meseta

Utilizzando Tapatalk

Angela
18-03-19, 19:20
^^
The North African mixture apparently is not the same between a Galician and an Andalusian apparently is greater in a Galician. The expulsion was a long process where some groups were allowed to be in a controlled manner until the total expulsion was decided. It should have been done in a very organized and exhaustive way otherwise the results would have been other, in addition to there being oral tradition that there is not.

Stop giving the current Andalusia an identity that it does not have. We have already endured many topics and misrepresented stories about our current identity. What else do you need to see now? there are the results.


I'm sorry but I defend Andalusia to death, I carry it in my blood.

It depends whether you believe there's something wrong with North African ancestry.

Yes, there seems to be more North African in the east of the Peninsula, and more in Galicia (9%) than in Andalucia (7-8%?). Does that merit congratulations?

https://i.imgur.com/BmlKz9g.png
I suggest you consider your response carefully. I like you Carlos, but I won't tolerate racism from anyone.

I don't get why this is such a big deal, and never have...I share with many Sicilians on 23andme, and percentages of North African of around 4% sometimes show up, as well as West Asian. None of them whinges about it. Even my husband, with his Calabrian ancestry gets almost 2%. Didn't bother him a bit, nor his "additional" West Asian. The only ancestry he would have preferred not to see is North Western and Northern ancestry.

Of course, there are Italian racists in the internet universe, but they're not the kind of people I would know.

Davidtab
18-03-19, 19:27
What expulsions in northwestern Iberia if Muslims never ruled there or if they did, only 10-20 years?? Associating more presence of northafrican admixture with Muslims in northwestern Iberia has no sense at all, for me. As Ruderico said, it could take sense if it's from Roman times or something related to Berbers against Arabs in 741. In Galicia northafrican admixture seems to be not homogeneous, concentrating in Pontevedra, like Tuy (an important city then) near Portugal. I am from northern Galicia and I have not "northafrican admixture" (23andme). It's a very interesting question and historian and genetics should work together to find out what kind of people brought this admixture to Iberia and why it's stronger in the west part.

Angela
18-03-19, 19:39
I haven't seen any evidence for that, but anyway Jews are not Berbers - you'd expect to see an excess of Levantine-related ancestry, not Berber. And people might be severely overestimating Jewish population in Portugal. The figures aren't consensual, but the country's most respected medievalist (José Mattoso) put the number under 1% somewhen during the inquirições manuelinas

I never said Jews are autosomally like Berbers. What I said, or perhaps better, implied, is that Morriscos with more North African ancestry might have sought refuge there from the Holy Office and the expulsion decrees.

I don't know if that actually happened. It was proferred as an option for exploration.


Ruderico: And many are form the pre-Muslim period.



So you keep saying, but I think that might be overstating. What is your data for that?

Here is their graph of the samples with North African ancestry:

https://i.imgur.com/d03LGWH.png


There are three from the 3rd to 4th century, twelve from the 5th through 8th centuries (which would include the invasion period) and twenty-three from the last period. Even if "most" of the samples from the 5th through 8th century are pre-invasion, the majority of this component came in with the Moors from the information in these samples.

With more samples things may change, of course. If they're right and some North African "E" came with the Punic settlements, why doesn't it show up in the samples from that period? Maybe they didn't hit the right settlements?

As for the proportions of North African that they propose for modern samples, I don't recall exactly and would have to check, but I think they use the Human Origins array, and also the 1000 Genomes data for Iberia. The latter is certainly what they used for the phenotype snps in the graph above. Individual results may of course differ, not to mention that commercial testing companies aren't using the same method.

In that regard I find it interesting that the Reich Lab didn't use ADMIXTURE anywhere in the analysis.

Davidtab
18-03-19, 19:41
And as Angela said, there is nothing wrong with Berber admixture... all of us are admixed people, so who could prefer Suevian or Berber admixture?? hahaha what a foolish question... Berber better than Suevian? Suevian better than Berber?? rubbish... it's only curiosity about history and facts.

berun
18-03-19, 19:54
I was responding to a statement made up thread which seemed to imply that the admixture was always "Muslim" men with local Iberian women.

That's not how I interpret that graph.

Many of these samples are from the 10th-16th century.

correct both, Christian wives, and Muslim males, even being R1b

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muladi

Angela
18-03-19, 20:02
As I said, there are too many agenda biased amateurs who either don't know what they're doing with some of these tools, or they deliberately mis-use them.

https://i.imgur.com/mMq0Jfm.png

You know, looking at this again, is it possible the Greek in that settlement was a Magna Graecia Greek, and Mycenaean like?

Ruderico
18-03-19, 20:09
What expulsions in northwestern Iberia if Muslims never ruled there or if they did, only 10-20 years?? Associating more presence of northafrican admixture with Muslims in northwestern Iberia has no sense at all, for me. As Ruderico said, it could take sense if it's from Roman times or something related to Berbers against Arabs in 741. In Galicia northafrican admixture seems to be not homogeneous, concentrating in Pontevedra, like Tuy (an important city then) near Portugal. I am from northern Galicia and I have not "northafrican admixture" (23andme). It's a very interesting question and historian and genetics should work together to find out what kind of people brought this admixture to Iberia and why it's stronger in the west part.

23andMe by itself doesn't mean much though, I didn't score any either, but when you run the rawdata though a PCA with nMonte - or even the old Gedmatch calculators - it's obvious it is present. We all have it, even Asturians.

I wouldn't say it's from the Berber revolt in itself, by that time the muslim garrisons were empied because they really wanted a more useful piece of land. The local cities had been at least partially emptied, the economy had collapsed, you didn't have a monetary economy up there, so it's usefulness for them was limited, and it doesn't seem they went back after the war finished..so the explanation must be another. However Mozarabs were quite important for Asturias/Leon, and since these would be people from further south, my guess is that they carried excess north African ancestry than the northern folks, as this study already shows LateRoman+Pre-Moorish South Iberians had very high amounts of this source of ancestry. However, even this might not be that relevant because we have no idea if their social/architectural impact was correlated with an impact on the local genepool in the early middle ages.

Be it as it may, the other Iberian study made it painfully obvious the similarities in Iberia follow a longitudinal cline, so whatever differences there might have been between ancient NW and SW Iberians, today they are mostly irrelevant. This also goes in very well with the fact that Andalusians are mostly descended from northern colonists, and thus carry less north African ancestry than we do (on average).





Angela, I suggest you look at the dates on the Supp tables and info. None of those samples are Muslim, only one is maybe dated after 711, the paper itself is the evidence.
l3982 200-400CE
l3983 265-427CE
l4055 200-400CE
l3980 432-601CE
l3981 400-600CE
l3574 400-600CE
l3575 400-600CE
l3581 400-600CE
l3576 408-538CE
l3583 400-600CE
l3577 400-600CE
l3578 400-600CE
l3579 400-600CE
l3582 400-600CE
l3585 677-866CE (Roman tradition - graves had grave goods or some object of personal use such as glass bowls, belt buckles, shells, iron rings, necklace beads, glasses with horizontal striae decoration, a rectangular belt brooch with decoration of cells filled with vitreous phase of Ostrogothic influence, and a brooch and two sheets of Byzantine origin)

Most of these samples had heavy north African ancestry, way above modern Iberian levels.
Even Reich annouced the large north African impact in Iberia during the Roman period, one or two weeks ago in a lecture. You seem to be pegging it to the Moors alone for some reason. They weren't Muslim, people from southern Spain (at least) were just like that. It wasn't expected, but hey ho.

markod
18-03-19, 20:21
Yes, but do you know why exactly was that described as "Ostrogothic"?

Did something in that grave indicate culturally Gothic (genetically not Gothic for sure)?

I think Kerch was never under Gothic rule.

That guy was probably a descendant of Bosporan Kingdom's population:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosporan_Kingdom

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Bosporan_Kingdom_growth_map-en.svg/1024px-Bosporan_Kingdom_growth_map-en.svg.png

He's buried with typically Germanic implements. He was middle aged and buried with the woman to whom the famous Crown of Kerch belonged.

https://www.smb.museum/en/museums-institutions/museum-fuer-vor-und-fruehgeschichte/exhibitions/detail/die-krone-von-kertsch.html

Perhaps a political marriage or something.

Angela
18-03-19, 20:22
23andMe by itself doesn't mean much though, I didn't score any either, but when you run the rawdata though a PCA with nMonte - or even the old Gedmatch calculators - it's obvious it is present. We all have it, even Asturians.

I wouldn't say it's from the Berber revolt in itself, by that time the muslim garrisons were empied because they really wanted a more useful piece of land. The local cities had been at least partially emptied, the economy had collapsed, you didn't have a monetary economy up there, so it's usefulness for them was limited, and it doesn't seem they went back after the war finished..so the explanation must be another. However Mozarabs were quite important for Asturias/Leon, and since these would be people from further south, my guess is that they carried excess north African ancestry than the northern folks, as this study already shows LateRoman+Pre-Moorish South Iberians had very high amounts of this source of ancestry. However, even this might not be that relevant because we have no idea if their social/architectural impact was correlated with an impact on the local genepool in the early middle ages.

Be it as it may, the other Iberian study made it painfully obvious the similarities in Iberia follow a longitudinal cline, so whatever differences there might have been between ancient NW and SW Iberians, today they are mostly irrelevant. This also goes in very well with the fact that Andalusians are mostly descended from northern colonists, and thus carry less north African ancestry than we do (on average).





Angela, I suggest you look at the dates on the Supp tables and info. None of those samples are Muslim, only one is maybe dated after 711, the paper itself is the evidence.
l3982 200-400CE
l3983 265-427CE
l4055 200-400CE
l3980 432-601CE
l3981 400-600CE
l3574 400-600CE
l3575 400-600CE
l3581 400-600CE
l3576 408-538CE
l3583 400-600CE
l3577 400-600CE
l3578 400-600CE
l3579 400-600CE
l3582 400-600CE
l3585 677-866CE (Roman tradition - graves had grave goods or some object of personal use such as glass bowls, belt buckles, shells, iron rings, necklace beads, glasses with horizontal striae decoration, a rectangular belt brooch with decoration of cells filled with vitreous phase of Ostrogothic influence, and a brooch and two sheets of Byzantine origin)

Most of these samples had heavy north African ancestry, way above modern Iberian levels.
Even Reich annouced the large north African impact in Iberia during the Roman period, one or two weeks ago in a lecture. You seem to be pegging it to the Moors alone for some reason. They weren't Muslim, people from southern Spain (at least) were just like that. It wasn't expected, but hey ho.

I don't know the reason, but in every response to my posts you attribute statements to me which I never made. I NEVER said it was ONLY the Moors.

What I said is that EVEN if all the samples from the 3rd to 8th centuries was pre-invasion, the majority of North African came with the Muslims.

"There are three from the 3rd to 4th century, twelve from the 5th through 8th centuries (which would include the invasion period) and twenty-three from the last period. Even if "most" of the samples from the 5th through 8th century are pre-invasion, the majority of this component came in with the Moors from the information in these samples. "

Please explain to me how the above statement is in any way incorrect.

I even added this:

"With more samples things may change, of course."

I try not to ascribe bias to people unless I see actual evidence of it. I suggest you do the same.

You wouldn't want me to peg you as one of those Iberians who can't stand the thought that he descends at least in part from the Moors, do you????

Angela
18-03-19, 20:45
I don't know the reason, but in every response to my posts you attribute statements to me which I never made. I NEVER said it was ONLY the Moors.

What I said is that EVEN if all the samples from the 3rd to 8th centuries was pre-invasion, the majority of North African came with the Muslims.

"There are three from the 3rd to 4th century, twelve from the 5th through 8th centuries (which would include the invasion period) and twenty-three from the last period. Even if "most" of the samples from the 5th through 8th century are pre-invasion, the majority of this component came in with the Moors from the information in these samples. "

Please explain to me how the above statement is in any way incorrect.

I even added this:

"With more samples things may change, of course."

I try not to ascribe bias to people unless I see actual evidence of it. I suggest you do the same.

You wouldn't want me to peg you as one of those Iberians who can't stand the thought that he descends at least in part from the Moors, do you????



However, thank you for the data on those pre-invasion samples. Did you check the yDna? On the summary graphic for Ydna they show about 40% for E1b for those samples and maybe close to 20% for J2a. So, Carthaginian remnants as well as relatively new arrivals?



Gidai, Gidai....Have I become your reason for living?

To the uninitiated, Gidai is a disgruntled Romanian former poster who is "punishing" me for by downvoting every single one of my posts. If I said spring is almost here he'd downvote it. :) It isn't yet clear to him that at his reputation level it's meaningless, or maybe he does get it, but it gives him emotional satisfaction. The working of some minds, or not working of some minds, is a mystery to me.

Gidai, I assume you're young. Wouldn't your time be better spent going outside and chasing girls, and kicking a football around????

davef
18-03-19, 21:47
"If I said spring is almost here he'd downvote it. :)"
too funny!!!!

Carlos
18-03-19, 22:17
[QUOTE = Angela; 570292] Depende de si crees que hay algún problema con la ascendencia del norte de África.

Sí, parece que hay más norteafricanos en el este de la península y más en Galicia (9%) que en Andalucía (¿7-8%?). ¿Eso merece felicitaciones?

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/BmlKz9g.png[/ IMG]
Le sugiero que considere su respuesta con cuidado. Me gustas Carlos, pero no toleraré el racismo de nadie.

No entiendo por qué esto es tan importante, y nunca lo he hecho ... comparto con muchos sicilianos en 23andme, y en ocasiones aparecen porcentajes de aproximadamente el 4% en el norte de África, así como en Asia occidental. Ninguno de ellos se queja al respecto. Incluso mi marido, con su ascendencia calabria, obtiene casi el 2%. No le molestó ni un poco, ni su "adicional" de Asia Occidental. La única ascendencia que hubiera preferido no ver es la ascendencia noroccidental y septentrional.

Por supuesto, hay racistas italianos en el universo de Internet, pero no son el tipo de personas que yo conocería. [/ QUOTE]

The answer is that for the scientific community it has been a surprise a value so low for Andalusia, but it has not been any surprise for the Spaniards or Andalusians for the reason that the expulsions were well documented, which apparently was ignored or not. I thought it had been so organized and effective in its purpose in European or international thinking that it still clung to the fact of the 800 years of Islamization to the 10 remaining monuments and all the fantasy literature of the 18th or 19th centuries and also obiviando that in our families there is no oral tradition of having belonged or being of Berber or Arab origin, however little there would have been if there had been in some families there would have been some clue and that is not the case.


It is not a racist issue, it is about two visions about an identity, the international vision and the vision of the interested parties that as they know they have been shouting on the Internet for decades that we are not half Moors, and it is for the reasons I quote above , historical data on the expulsions, historical data on the repopulation and feeling that this is not the case.


If it has been a surprise for foreigners it is because they thought that values ​​were much higher ignoring the opinion of the interested parties, then the problem was not of the Spaniards but of the foreigners that there is nothing more to see the internet to give account of the stakeholders that have always been in granting higher values ​​of NA to Iberia and especially to Andalusia.


For us, if you had been like that, you would not have represented any problem but you can not assume or accept an identity as a people that does not belong to you, and in this case it is a relatively modern story where there is more data than in other times past.


Finally genetics has given the reason to all those Iberians who always said that it was not that way, not because of racism but because no, and if it is not so it is not, that simple.

berun
18-03-19, 22:49
well, in the admixture graph Andalusi Muslims have some 30% North African share (in fact Iberomaurisian!!! Jesus!), I doubt so it could be done a simple correspondence, but if actual Andalusians share some 8% North African it would imply a blend of one Andalusi for three Castillans (which much or less would carry also North African ancestry).

Carlos
18-03-19, 22:56
^^
You have said it for the Muslim Al-Andalus in particular. As of 2019 in Andalusia we are the Andalusians.

suebiking
18-03-19, 22:57
It doesn't, I've seen plenty of northern Portuguese individuals and their north African results are just like any other. Same goes for Trás-os-Montes. And León.
The explanation might be that it's way older than the Muslim period (as this paper proves in southern Spain) and fueled by the Romanisation, especially in coastal or urban areas - and Bracara was an important city - or that it might have something to do with Mozarabes during the Asturian and Leonese kingdoms. Or possibly Ibn Marwan and his rebellion against Cordoba, which was supported by Asturias and included both Muladis and Mozarabes.

If I had to bet I'd bet that it is mostly from Roman times although the Muslim invasion had to have an impact of some sorts, even if little it has to exist. Ancient people, and especially invading armies didn't need to marry to produce offspring.
Still, the history of what would become the county of Portugal is quite obscure but we know that for instance the city of Braga (which was the biggest in the area at that time) was sacked and its main church destroyed but somehow they left the small churches in the northern part of the city intact. And the city was in the power of the Christians again by 740 although because of the then frequent muslim raids it wasn't definitely occupied until about the 850's or 860's when Vimara Peres founded the county of Portugal, still the city was again destroyed by Almansor when he was on the way to Compostela. The city's Lord, the Bishop, later Archbishop of Braga only returned definitively in about 1070. Since 715 the bishops of Braga add changed residence to Lugo in northern Galicia, for several occasions the bishops returned to Braga but the city was destroyed over and over during muslim raids and the bishops kept returning to Lugo. (according to the book of information of the city of Braga of 1957, the city's history was referenced like this in other books but I only have this in my possession).
Still, until definitive proof is arranged I will still be a bit skeptical about the origin of this north African admixture though has I said it is most likely from roman times.

berun
18-03-19, 23:01
^^
You have said it for the Muslim Al-Andalus in particular. As of 2019 in Andalusia we are the Andalusians.

in fact the maths are to solve ancestry in actual Andalusians.

Carlos
18-03-19, 23:01
On the other hand I would also like to mention as I have seen all over the internet I do not say only in this forum how the opinion of the Iberians in the forums has been ignored or even taken into account when they were defending what has now been demonstrated.


I sincerely saw how the theories of the Iberians in the forums were confused by foreigners with racist attitudes and I think that it was not like that, it was simply that their vision as Iberians of their own history was clearer in their minds than in the minds of foreigners who did not realize that if someone is defending again and again a theory with such passion, it must be for some reason beyond the easy position of calling it racist.


You are simply talking about your identity in relatively modern times with enough data that there are not of other times and for that reason the Iberians took those attitudes in the forums simply because they were not understood, their mistake was in seeking the approval of foreigners when the time puts everything in its place as it has happened.

Carlos
18-03-19, 23:05
in fact the maths are to solve ancestry in actual Andalusians.

Well look what I say, when you go deeper and have more data there will be more surprises. I know that foreigners expected to find in Andalusia 25% 30% and even more of NA, maybe even you too. As data that believe lower will be higher, but to time.

berun
18-03-19, 23:14
me and foreigners expect what Spanish genetists have found, a 8%. By the way, Muslims stayed so till their deportation in places where they formed compact comunities (as quarters or mountain villages), and by that many thousands were expelled per example from Valencia region, instead, from Andalusia the number was lower, and it only can be understood if local Muslims faced a major religious or social pressure in the crown of Castille, or if they were more open to integration and blended easily, or facing deportation decided to change religion en masse.

bicicleur
18-03-19, 23:15
IMO, most of the R1b-U152 in Iberia came with the Romans. Actually the distribution of U152 in Iberia matches very well the pattern of Roman colonies, with a particularly high concentration in Andalusia and along the Mediterranean coast up to Catalonia.

we still don't know what the Roman Y-DNA was, was a majority R1b-U152
the distribution of R1b-U152 matches pretty well with the Gaulish expansions, even upto Galatia
the Gaulish were probably Halstatt people
and some eastern Halstatt people would have been one of the founding faters of the Illyrians
that would account for R1b-U152 along the Dalmatian coastline
I would say the majority of the Hallstatt people were R1b-U152, and that would explain all of the distibution of R1b-U152, except for SW Iberia and Corsica
do we know what subclades of R1b-U152 are present in SW Iberia?

Carlos
18-03-19, 23:19
[CITA = berun; 570319] Yo y los extranjeros esperamos que los genetistas españoles hayan encontrado, un 8%. Por cierto, los musulmanes se mantuvieron así hasta su deportación en los lugares donde formaron las comunidades compactas (como barrios o aldeas de montaña), y por eso muchos millas fueron expulsados ​​por ejemplo de la región de Valencia, en el cambio, desde Andalucía el número Fue menor, y solo se puede entender si los musulmanes se enfrentaron a una gran presión religiosa o social en la corona de Castilla, o si ya estaban más abiertos a la integración y se mezclaron fácilmente, o si se enfrentaron a la deportación decidieron cambiar de religión en la masa [/ CITA]

What is the title of the movie?

Postscript: I leave this topic with you. Keep studying your subject that we already know what it is because it is better.

Angela
18-03-19, 23:39
On the other hand I would also like to mention as I have seen all over the internet I do not say only in this forum how the opinion of the Iberians in the forums has been ignored or even taken into account when they were defending what has now been demonstrated.


I sincerely saw how the theories of the Iberians in the forums were confused by foreigners with racist attitudes and I think that it was not like that, it was simply that their vision as Iberians of their own history was clearer in their minds than in the minds of foreigners who did not realize that if someone is defending again and again a theory with such passion, it must be for some reason beyond the easy position of calling it racist.


You are simply talking about your identity in relatively modern times with enough data that there are not of other times and for that reason the Iberians took those attitudes in the forums simply because they were not understood, their mistake was in seeking the approval of foreigners when the time puts everything in its place as it has happened.

Carlos, I wish that were the case. The Spanish members on this forum, except for one, were all members of Stormfront, as racist and hateful a forum as can exist. They shouted constantly and consistently that every single person in Spain with North African ancestry was expelled. I was here; I read every post. When they weren't pushing that view of history they were claiming they were the purest, most European nationality in Europe. It was disgusting. Nothing justifies what they were posting, just like nothing justifies what some Italian racists were posting.

Someone can belong to our ethnicity and still be totally and utterly deluded.

I don't know about anyone else, but I never expected 30% North African in southern Spain or Portugal/Galicia, but going on yDna and mtDna alone I expected some, and indeed it is there.

Now, let's get back on topic discussing scientific results as objectively as possible.

Angela
18-03-19, 23:44
we still don't know what the Roman Y-DNA was, was a majority R1b-U152
the distribution of R1b-U152 matches pretty well with the Gaulish expansions, even upto Galatia
the Gaulish were probably Halstatt people
and some eastern Halstatt people would have been one of the founding faters of the Illyrians
that would account for R1b-U152 along the Dalmatian coastline
I would say the majority of the Hallstatt people were R1b-U152, and that would explain all of the distibution of R1b-U152, except for SW Iberia and Corsica
do we know what subclades of R1b-U152 are present in SW Iberia?

That's how I see it as well.

Angela
19-03-19, 00:11
On page 99 of the Supplement you can see the precise admixture proportions for the Copper, Bronze Age, and Iron Age. Very interesting the amount of variety in the admixture.

Later on there's this:
https://i.imgur.com/sR0qleL.png

I skimmed through the archaeology section again. There are always a lot of complaints about the lack of correlation with archaeology, but in this case the archaeologists can offer almost no guidance. Either the sites were jumbled before they were ever found, or the archaeologists made a jumble of it, or they want to hoard the information for the time ten years from now when they finally get around to publishing, as Mathiesen implied in the speech he gave at Brown to which I linked.

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 01:17
Some observations I made as I read the results of the paper:

1) A 60% genetic continuity is more than enough to account for at least partial linguistic continuity in some regions, especially if the people that harbored that admixture originally wasfor a long time not inferior technologically and economically to the incoming 40%, and if - as it seems likely - those were just averages, with some regions initially having much more than 60%.

2) If there was indeed a 500-year-old coexistence, without any clear winning side, between BB-derived people and the Neolithic Iberian natives, then that would perfectly explain (not theonly possibility, though, but that is obvious) the presence of Indo-European and non-Indo-European languages in the Iron Age (perhaps not even belonging to the same language family, as there is no certainty that Basque, Iberianand Tartessian belonged to the same family or, if they did, were closely related). That would at least start to explain why not only are Basques like “Iron Age Iberians”, but also Celtic and Lusitanian speakershad also been presumably “Iron Age Iberians”. In 500 years of coexistence, a lot of sociopolitical and therefore linguistic dynamics may have happened, including mutual assimilation in different degrees and patterns(non-IE > IE; IE > non-IE), especially if the native polities were not far behind the immigrant communities - as was arguably the case, as the BB cultural package had spread from Iberia and been “culturally appropriated”later by other peoples. Al it took was for some IE-speaking people to be successfully absorbed by non-IE ones (much like not all Turks imposed Turkic languages where they migrated/conquered, even where they left some geneticimpact). Then centuries later the odds might’ve changed, and it was the turn of some non-IE-speaking people (even if they carried a significant Central European BB ancestry) to expand in Iberia, especially under EasternMediterranean influence (e.g. Tartessians, Iberians). If the initial success of some BB clans was more similar to the Franks in France or the Visigoths in Spain, then they might've changed their language even if and when they were at the top of the political hierarchy (and of course in some cases they might have originally been living on the periphery of the native civilization and offering - mercenary perhaps? - services to it, instead of dominating it).

3) The second pulse of Central European BB-like ancestry during the Early Iron Age would perfectly explain the arrival of Celtic languages to Iberia, but I wonder where Lusitanian fits.Lusitanian is scarcely attested, but it looks fairly closely related to Celtic and also to Italic, therefore suggesting a reasonably recent common origin with the Roman Era Celtic and Italic languages, not necessarily somethingas old as the first Bell Beaker incursions there around 2500 B.C., in which case we’d expect it to be much more distinctive (unless Italic or Celtic - or both - came from a source in very close contact with Iberian BB,which is IMHO unlikely). Maybe Lusitanian was not “archaic” at all after all and instead was just an Italic branch of the Iron Age expansion of Urnfield-derived people, whereas the others were from a Celtic branch.For the Indo-European speakers of Iberia, the language shift must’ve been relatively uncomplicated: if the extra Central European influx and language change happened around 800-600 B.C., then the IE Iberians’ nativelanguages were to Celtic or Lusitanian a bit like Portuguese is to French.

4) I always found it a bit strange that the Romans (i.e. Romanized Italians) had supposedly left no significant genetic impact at all even in the regions that are known to have become veryimportant for the empire’s economy, very prosperous and attractive, and to harbor hundreds of colonies. I think their Italian/Greek “eastward” shift between the Iron Age and the Early Medieval Era makes sensethen, even though 1/4 might be something of a local overstatement caused by outlier areas more exposed to Roman immigration. But if that is true, since they seem to have found a big decrease in the proportion of R1b in theY-DNA distribution, then all the J2, E1b1b and so on didn’t come mostly or almost exclusively from non-Indo-European populations (e.g. Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Berbers, Levantine Arabs, etc.), but also or even decisivelyby Late Antiquity Italians and Greeks. Were R1b levels as low as that in those regions, or maybe they just happen to have come from the hotspots of haplogroups like J2a in Southern Europe, or then randomly been more successfulthan the R1b coming from Italy and Greece (mainly U152 and Z2103, I believe?).

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 01:45
and also obiviando that in our families there is no oral tradition of having belonged or being of Berber or Arab origin, however little there would have been if there had been in some families there would have been some clue and that is not the case.

Carlos, do you sincerely believe that families, who had seen a long religious and increasingly racialized persecution of Muslims and even Moriscos (even born Christians, but merely descendants of former Muslims), and probably been exposed to the veritable demonization of Muslims in a fanatically Christian country, and doctrined about the limpieza de sangre, would still strive to maintain and pass down an oral tradition of being descendants of Berbers and Arabs who had been Muslims? Those kinds of "origin stories" in most families get lost after a few centuries (in Brazil many people have no idea when and where their family came from when they had been here for more than 200 years), let alone when there are very useful and in fact existential reasons to not stress tha, origin among so many others that would not get you in any trouble or make you feel lesser.

Milan.M
19-03-19, 02:07
He's buried with typically Germanic implements. He was middle aged and buried with the woman to whom the famous Crown of Kerch belonged.

https://www.smb.museum/en/museums-institutions/museum-fuer-vor-und-fruehgeschichte/exhibitions/detail/die-krone-von-kertsch.html

Perhaps a political marriage or something.
They were Thracian ruling families in the Bosporan kingdom from the Sparotocids onwards.
Usurped by a tyrant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrant) called Spartocus (438 – 431 BC), who was a Thracian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracians).
Later Romans placed Rhescuporis relative of Mithridates,who will be of mix of Thracian,Greek,Persian ancestries if we look in his geneaology.Rhescuporis and Spartocus are typical noble Thracian names known from the Balkans.

The Ostrogoth from Kerch overlap with present Anatolia the most i guess.

Angela
19-03-19, 02:45
Carlos, do you sincerely believe that families, who had seen a long religious and increasingly racialized persecution of Muslims and even Moriscos (even born Christians, but merely descendants of former Muslims), and probably been exposed to the veritable demonization of Muslims in a fanatically Christian country, and doctrined about the limpieza de sangre, would still strive to maintain and pass down an oral tradition of being descendants of Berbers and Arabs who had been Muslims? Those kinds of "origin stories" in most families get lost after a few centuries (in Brazil many people have no idea when and where their family came from when they had been here for more than 200 years), let alone when there are very useful and in fact existential reasons to not stress tha, origin among so many others that would not get you in any trouble or make you feel lesser.

I agree. I've read documents from the time about the experiences of the "New Christians" with the Inquisition. Some of these people were still being tortured and burned at the stake a hundred years after converting and intermarrying. No wonder if some of them turned against the "new religion" and reverted to that of their forefathers.

Even going to the New World wasn't good enough. The Inquisition followed them there. Who the heck would pass on the memory of that ancestry?

Carlos
19-03-19, 06:40
I had not seen the Ygorcs message.


Well, I would tell you that if the expulsion had not been total and half or a quarter of those who had been expelled would have been impossible to stop or inhibit an oral tradition in the family nucleus and if it had been a high number your neighbors would know it, It would be public but it would be secret. Nowadays we will find in the Town Halls thousands of documents that families or individuals have found about their origins. I think there is a high class family in Granada that knows that they are descended from Arabs of the time, so if the conversions had been massive the Inquisition would not have been able to hit the ear on each door of each house. As they say around here the solution is in mathematics.


When I was a teenager I asked my grandmother if we came from the nobility and then my grandmother went to her room and brought me a small envelope where inside there was a paper with a written name that her ancestors had left her, I read the name that she had written there (I exclaimed something) my grandmother fell silent and we never talked about it again, a subject that I did not discover until many decades later and it is very, very old.

markod
19-03-19, 06:55
I had not seen the Ygorcs message.


Well, I would tell you that if the expulsion had not been total and half or a quarter of those who had been expelled would have been impossible to stop or inhibit an oral tradition in the family nucleus and if it had been a high number your neighbors would know it, It would be public but it would be secret. Nowadays we will find in the Town Halls thousands of documents that families or individuals have found about their origins. I think there is a high class family in Granada that knows that they are descended from Arabs of the time, so if the conversions had been massive the Inquisition would not have been able to hit the ear on each door of each house. As they say around here the solution is in mathematics.


When I was a teenager I asked my grandmother if we came from the nobility and then my grandmother went to her room and brought me a small envelope where inside there was a paper with a written name that her ancestors had left her, I read the name that she had written there (I exclaimed something) my grandmother fell silent and we never talked about it again, a subject that I did not discover until many decades later and it is very, very old.

My mother's familiy comes from a quite isolated agricultural region at the French border. At a family meet I once tried to explain to my relatives that Y-DNA and surname unmistakably pointed to the line's patriarch having been a Prussian from the other end of the German-speaking areas. It wasn't a very popular idea because the older family members thought themselves deeply indigenous to the region :embarassed:

Point being that unimportant families usually do not preserve their histories very well.

Carlos
19-03-19, 07:11
^^

True, but when the river sounds water carries. A million people for setting a silent example and being Spanish, that would have been impossible even with the Inquisition through lol

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 07:40
I had not seen the Ygorcs message.


Well, I would tell you that if the expulsion had not been total and half or a quarter of those who had been expelled would have been impossible to stop or inhibit an oral tradition in the family nucleus and if it had been a high number your neighbors would know it, It would be public but it would be secret. Nowadays we will find in the Town Halls thousands of documents that families or individuals have found about their origins. I think there is a high class family in Granada that knows that they are descended from Arabs of the time, so if the conversions had been massive the Inquisition would not have been able to hit the ear on each door of each house. As they say around here the solution is in mathematics.


When I was a teenager I asked my grandmother if we came from the nobility and then my grandmother went to her room and brought me a small envelope where inside there was a paper with a written name that her ancestors had left her, I read the name that she had written there (I exclaimed something) my grandmother fell silent and we never talked about it again, a subject that I did not discover until many decades later and it is very, very old.

That kind of argument in my opinion could only make sense if the conversions happened en masse in just a very short period of time. But the Reconquista started in the 12th century and was pretty much finished in the 15th century, some generations before the expulsions and persecutions. (Re)-Christianization began centuries before the expulsion of the Muslims and Moriscos. In the final glory of Al-Andalus, around 1100 AD, it's probable that half of the Iberian population was Muslim or Jew or even slightly more, but by the late 15th century they had already been reduced to about 20%. And later those who did not get expelled were most probably those that did manage to flee and hide where people didn't know them and those that had already converted early enough for their family's former religion to be forgotten by most people. But that still doesn't mean that all people who had been Muslim or Jew were expelled. Also, part of the New Christians avoided persecution for one reason or another, at least those that assimilated best. When you say people don't have stories about their Arab or Berber ancestors, what we can know is that they probably lack one such ancestor in the last 500 years... but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of Spanish and Portuguese families do not know details any further than that (come on, anyone has THOUSANDS of ancestors 500 years ago, it's virtually impossible to take not of all of them, let alone before that). What is certain is that the North African ancestry is there in Iberia, it had increased during the Muslim rule, so it was probably diluted enough - and therefore many people who don't know their ancestry from the Caliphates in fact just missed that part of their family hstory (which in any case I'm pretty sure that many, if not most, people tried to forget as much as they could in the last centuries).

Tomenable
19-03-19, 08:15
He's buried with typically Germanic implements. He was middle aged and buried with the woman to whom the famous Crown of Kerch belonged.

https://www.smb.museum/en/museums-institutions/museum-fuer-vor-und-fruehgeschichte/exhibitions/detail/die-krone-von-kertsch.html

Perhaps a political marriage or something.

^^^
Well, wasn't KER_1 actually that woman? I can't find the info about Y-DNA haplogroup anywhere.

I only processed chromosomes 1-22 and X before uploading to GEDmatch, so I didn't check the Y.

I wonder why didn't they sample DNA of that man buried with her?

markod
19-03-19, 08:22
^^^
Well, wasn't KER_1 actually that woman? I can't find the info about Y-DNA haplogroup anywhere.

I only processed chromosomes 1-22 and X before uploading to GEDmatch, so I didn't check the Y.

I wonder why didn't they sample DNA of that man buried with her?

Nah, middle aged male as per the supplement of the paper. Assigned to J2a1 by the Russians on molgen.

They didn't sequence the woman for some reason.

Perhaps the Goths absorbed the remnants of the Bosporans.

Tomenable
19-03-19, 08:52
Nah, middle aged male as per the supplement of the paper. Assigned to J2a1 by the Russians on molgen.

They didn't sequence the woman for some reason.

Perhaps the Goths absorbed the remnants of the Bosporans.

But he was the king of Crimean Goths, right? He was buried with the crown of Kerch after all.

KER1 GEDmatch Genesis kit number - MD6611828

Maybe he was the king who ruled over remnants of Bosporans, married to a Gothic princess?

If he was the ruler of actual Goths then it means that Goths elected an ethnically foreign king:


Eurogenes K13:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 East_Med 30.97
2 West_Asian 24.07
3 North_Atlantic 18.23
4 West_Med 13.87
5 Baltic 8.01
6 Red_Sea 1.86
7 Amerindian 1.75
8 Siberian 1.14
9 Oceanian 0.09


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Central_Greek 11.11
2 Italian_Abruzzo 11.33
3 South_Italian 12.02
4 East_Sicilian 12.3
5 Turkish 13.54
6 Ashkenazi 14.07
7 West_Sicilian 14.86
8 Sephardic_Jewish 15.19
9 Greek_Thessaly 15.24
10 Italian_Jewish 16.52
11 Cyprian 17.16
12 Algerian_Jewish 17.83
13 Lebanese_Muslim 17.85
14 Azeri 17.95
15 Tunisian_Jewish 18.38
16 Tuscan 18.87
17 Libyan_Jewish 19.34
18 Syrian 19.93
19 Assyrian 20.07
20 Armenian 20.43


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 64.6% Italian_Jewish + 35.4% Tabassaran @ 5.15
2 68.2% Assyrian + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.38
3 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Lezgin @ 5.45
4 64.1% Assyrian + 35.9% West_German @ 5.48
5 65.2% Assyrian + 34.8% South_Dutch @ 5.61
6 69% Assyrian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.65
7 68.5% Italian_Abruzzo + 31.5% Kurdish @ 5.66
8 69.2% Assyrian + 30.8% Orcadian @ 5.71
9 63.3% Assyrian + 36.7% French @ 5.72
10 72.4% South_Italian + 27.6% Lezgin @ 5.82
11 69.7% Assyrian + 30.3% West_Scottish @ 5.84
12 63.7% Italian_Abruzzo + 36.3% Azeri @ 5.91
13 69.5% Assyrian + 30.5% Irish @ 5.93
14 73.2% South_Italian + 26.8% Tabassaran @ 5.98
15 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Chechen @ 5.98
16 69.1% Assyrian + 30.9% North_Dutch @ 6.06
17 67.2% Sephardic_Jewish + 32.8% Tabassaran @ 6.1
18 67.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.8% Armenian @ 6.12
19 69% Assyrian + 31% Danish @ 6.18
20 76.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 23.8% Abhkasian @ 6.21


Eurogenes K15:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 West_Asian 27.53
2 East_Med 25.61
3 Atlantic 14.99
4 North_Sea 11.57
5 West_Med 8.46
6 Eastern_Euro 3.46
7 Baltic 3.15
8 Red_Sea 3.02
9 Amerindian 1.48
10 Siberian 0.72


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Turkish 11.83
2 Italian_Abruzzo 13.36
3 Central_Greek 13.84
4 East_Sicilian 14.97
5 South_Italian 15.08
6 Azeri 15.17
7 Ashkenazi 15.61
8 Greek 17.31
9 West_Sicilian 17.43
10 Armenian 17.69
11 Sephardic_Jewish 17.9
12 Greek_Thessaly 17.96
13 Kurdish 18.22
14 Georgian_Jewish 18.41
15 Italian_Jewish 18.59
16 Lebanese_Muslim 19.04
17 Assyrian 19.16
18 Kumyk 19.29
19 Tuscan 19.6
20 Cyprian 19.63


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 69.7% Armenian + 30.3% Irish @ 5.09
2 69% Armenian + 31% Southeast_English @ 5.1
3 70% Armenian + 30% West_Scottish @ 5.24
4 66.2% Armenian + 33.8% South_Dutch @ 5.31
5 69% Armenian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.36
6 68.2% Georgian_Jewish + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.51
7 68.1% Georgian_Jewish + 31.9% Southwest_English @ 5.6
8 67.6% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.4% Georgian @ 5.61
9 68.9% Georgian_Jewish + 31.1% Irish @ 5.61
10 68.1% Armenian + 31.9% North_German @ 5.61
11 65% Armenian + 35% French @ 5.7
12 69.3% Georgian_Jewish + 30.7% West_Scottish @ 5.74
13 70.4% Armenian + 29.6% Orcadian @ 5.76
14 70.8% Italian_Abruzzo + 29.2% Abhkasian @ 5.76
15 69.6% Armenian + 30.4% Danish @ 5.82
16 65.4% Georgian_Jewish + 34.6% South_Dutch @ 5.83
17 69.6% Georgian_Jewish + 30.4% Orcadian @ 5.93
18 69.9% Armenian + 30.1% North_Dutch @ 5.97
19 64.1% Georgian_Jewish + 35.9% French @ 6.11
20 65% Armenian + 35% Spanish_Cataluna @ 6.2

markod
19-03-19, 08:59
But he was their king, right? He was buried with the crown of Kerch.

KER1 GEDmatch Genesis kit number - MD6611828

No, the crown belonged to the woman he was buried with. I'd be reluctant to speculate about the political situation there, but I think he was pretty important. Perhaps more like one of several important guys rather than an outright king - it's difficult to tell.

Davidtab
19-03-19, 09:11
Ygorcs, Reconquista started in 12th century? Where do you read that? 10 years after Muslim rule Reconquista has been started, in 722, and in 740 almost a quarter of Iberia was not under Muslim rule... Muslims are not an explanation to the presence of Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia. Bishops of Lugo, Iria Flavia and Bretoña in Galicia were never interrupted like others in Braga, Astorga, Dumio... and there are Berber admixture in northern part of Galicia and Asturias, so the explanation has to be another one.

berun
19-03-19, 09:30
comm'on Carlos, I remember that once you posted your Y DNA result and it was a kind of E spread mainly in Somalia. And in your autosomal results you have not found any trace of Moorish DNA when Andalusians have a 8%?

bicicleur
19-03-19, 09:40
Some observations I made as I read the results of the paper:


3) The second pulse of Central European BB-like ancestry during the Early Iron Age would perfectly explain the arrival of Celtic languages to Iberia, but I wonder where Lusitanian fits.Lusitanian is scarcely attested, but it looks fairly closely related to Celtic and also to Italic, therefore suggesting a reasonably recent common origin with the Roman Era Celtic and Italic languages, not necessarily somethingas old as the first Bell Beaker incursions there around 2500 B.C., in which case we’d expect it to be much more distinctive (unless Italic or Celtic - or both - came from a source in very close contact with Iberian BB,which is IMHO unlikely). Maybe Lusitanian was not “archaic” at all after all and instead was just an Italic branch of the Iron Age expansion of Urnfield-derived people, whereas the others were from a Celtic branch.For the Indo-European speakers of Iberia, the language shift must’ve been relatively uncomplicated: if the extra Central European influx and language change happened around 800-600 B.C., then the IE Iberians’ nativelanguages were to Celtic or Lusitanian a bit like Portuguese is to French.



what about the British Isles and Ireland in particular?
R1b-L21 has been identified to arrive 4.5 ka in the British Isles
today R1b-L21 is still present in the British Isles, and in Ireland it even is still abt 75 % of the population
I don't think there was a second pulse of Central European BB-like ancestry during the Early Iron Age there that could make them switch language

halfalp
19-03-19, 10:02
The only possibility is that R1b-L21, S28, DF-27 and broadly P312 were all in a same population or proximity and expanded in different direction. The reason is that L21 and DF-27 seems to follow the same trail of BB expansion respectively in British Islands and Iberia, but they are not close in the phylogenetic tree, instead DF-27 is close to S28 wich were likely central europe BB's who expanded in Switzerland ( there is a likely BB Switzerland paper that gonna came up this year, we gonna see if it confirm this ) and Italy. What about S21? and what about the origin of the expansion?

Maciamo
19-03-19, 10:53
we still don't know what the Roman Y-DNA was, was a majority R1b-U152
the distribution of R1b-U152 matches pretty well with the Gaulish expansions, even upto Galatia
the Gaulish were probably Halstatt people
and some eastern Halstatt people would have been one of the founding faters of the Illyrians
that would account for R1b-U152 along the Dalmatian coastline
I would say the majority of the Hallstatt people were R1b-U152, and that would explain all of the distibution of R1b-U152, except for SW Iberia and Corsica
do we know what subclades of R1b-U152 are present in SW Iberia?

It's not just that. Even the autosomal Italian ancestry matches the areas with high U152 in Iberia.

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/23andMe_Italian.png


In Galicia and North Portugal, there is an elevated level of both Italian and French-German (either Hallstatt or Suebi or both) to explain the higher levels of U152. However even North Italian carry that "Hallstatt-like" French-German admixture. Since Hallstatt Celts or the Suebi didn't settle anywhere near the Mediterranean coast of Spain nor the Baleares, but both were settled by the Romans, the most likely explanation for the presence of the French-German and Italian admixtures and Y-DNA R1b-U152 in Iberia is Roman colonisation. Furthermore the Romans remained for some 7 centuries in Iberia, with a constant flow of people from Italy to Iberia, including the resettlement of retired legionaries in cities like Merida (Augusta Emerita). The Hallstatt Celts and Suebi were one time migrations.

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/23andMe_French_German.png

bicicleur
19-03-19, 11:01
It's not just that. Even the autosomal Italian ancestry matches the areas with high U152 in Iberia.

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/23andMe_Italian.png


In Galicia and North Portugal, there is an elevated level of both Italian and French-German (either Hallstatt or Suebi or both) to explain the higher levels of U152. However even North Italian carry that "Hallstatt-like" French-German admixture. Since Hallstatt Celts or the Suebi didn't settle anywhere near the Mediterranean coast of Spain nor the Baleares, but both were settled by the Romans, the most likely explanation for the presence of the French-German and Italian admixtures and Y-DNA R1b-U152 in Iberia is Roman colonisation. Furthermore the Romans remained for some 7 centuries in Iberia, with a constant flow of people from Italy to Iberia, including the resettlement of retired legionaries in cities like Merida (Augusta Emerita). The Hallstatt Celts and Suebi were one time migrations.

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/23andMe_French_German.png

so, maybe the Roman colonisers were not Romans, but Gauls from the Po Valley (who had entered there 400 BC)?

suebiking
19-03-19, 12:31
It doesn't, I've seen plenty of northern Portuguese individuals and their north African results are just like any other. Same goes for Trás-os-Montes. And León.
The explanation might be that it's way older than the Muslim period (as this paper proves in southern Spain) and fueled by the Romanisation, especially in coastal or urban areas - and Bracara was an important city - or that it might have something to do with Mozarabes during the Asturian and Leonese kingdoms. Or possibly Ibn Marwan and his rebellion against Cordoba, which was supported by Asturias and included both Muladis and Mozarabes.

Sorry for replying again to the same post but, and I am not doubting you, where did you see such samples from northern Portuguese, I am now curious to see those results if they can be seen. Could you post a link to where they are if possible.

Carlos
19-03-19, 13:08
That kind of argument in my opinion could only make sense if the conversions happened en masse in just a very short period of time. But the Reconquista started in the 12th century and was pretty much finished in the 15th century, some generations before the expulsions and persecutions. (Re)-Christianization began centuries before the expulsion of the Muslims and Moriscos. In the final glory of Al-Andalus, around 1100 AD, it's probable that half of the Iberian population was Muslim or Jew or even slightly more, but by the late 15th century they had already been reduced to about 20%. And later those who did not get expelled were most probably those that did manage to flee and hide where people didn't know them and those that had already converted early enough for their family's former religion to be forgotten by most people. But that still doesn't mean that all people who had been Muslim or Jew were expelled. Also, part of the New Christians avoided persecution for one reason or another, at least those that assimilated best. When you say people don't have stories about their Arab or Berber ancestors, what we can know is that they probably lack one such ancestor in the last 500 years... but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of Spanish and Portuguese families do not know details any further than that (come on, anyone has THOUSANDS of ancestors 500 years ago, it's virtually impossible to take not of all of them, let alone before that). What is certain is that the North African ancestry is there in Iberia, it had increased during the Muslim rule, so it was probably diluted enough - and therefore many people who don't know their ancestry from the Caliphates in fact just missed that part of their family hstory (which in any case I'm pretty sure that many, if not most, people tried to forget as much as they could in the last centuries).

The expelled descendants that today are in North Africa have a memory and those who had stayed in the peninsula would have lost it? He knows that there are people who still keep the key to his house and that there are laws that even give them Spanish nationality. If they had stayed a large amount they would not have been lonely wolves where in a few years their ancestry could be lost, we talked about families more than anything and then there would be memories, oral tradition something like it happens in the descendants of the current expelled, and there is not . You grow and if you ask for some building they tell you: that was of the Moors or that the Moors did, in the past and referring to other people, it is the only thing there is, nothing more. Therefore I keep my hypothesis refuted by the data that you already know.

Ruderico
19-03-19, 13:29
Sorry for replying again to the same post but, and I am not doubting you, where did you see such samples from northern Portuguese, I am now curious to see those results if they can be seen. Could you post a link to where they are if possible.

Not off the top of my head, but over the years on forums and various commercial tests comments, with multiple kits ran through Gedmatch calculators, it's painfully obvious there are no relevant statistical deviations when it comes to this type of ancestry. There is virtually no chance you won't score normal African-related ancestry if you are a native Portuguese, regardless if you are from Braga, Chaves, Viseu or Faro, it's just the way it is. Also, the paper "Patterns of genetic differentiation and the footprints of historical migrations in the Iberian Peninsula" showed the same thing when it comes to Portuguese (and Galicians). Angela already posted a few maps from that study, as you can see not even Galicians from the interior are that different, you'd need to be from an extremelly isolated, drifted and endogamous place to have different results.

But if you are in doubt you can always take a genetic test and run your rawdata through Gedmatch of Global 25 and see for yourself :)

Carlos
19-03-19, 13:30
[QUOTE = berun; 570363] comunión a Carlos, recuerdo que una vez que publicaste el resultado de tu ADN Y, fue una especie de E difundida principalmente en Somalia. ¿Y en tus resultados autosómicos no has encontrado ningún rastro de ADN morisco cuando los andaluces tienen un 8%? [/ QUOTE]

You already know if I publish my results continuously. The subject that is most discussed is usually that of the Muslim period. I took a 4% but I have seen that other Europeans here have also taken a 4% and how can I know if it is from the Muslim era if everyone tells me that it is earlier. I do not have any problem if I almost focus more on the minor values, in Nmontes Somalia appears, I love it. In another calculator appeared altaic did not reach 3% and I have been for months thinking I was Altaic. In the topic Andalusia I speak in general about the thickness of the population not only of me.

pen0-
[1] "distancia% = 0.4171"

X

French_Basque, 44.6
Orcadian, 25.8
Sardinian, 18.4
Ossetian, 7.4
Somali, 3.6
Evens, 0.2

I do not put everything to not bore. If I had commented on my results, it could have helped me shed some light.

Here are my results in many e.t.c calculators.
https://dnaresultsandalusianspain.blogspot.com/2019/03/k15-nmontes.html

Ruderico
19-03-19, 13:32
pen0-
[1] "distancia% = 0.4171"

X

French_Basque, 44.6
Orcadian, 25.8
Sardinian, 18.4
Ossetian, 7.4
Somali, 3.6
Evens, 0.2

I do not put everything to not bore. If I had commented on my results, it could have helped me shed some light.

Here are my results in many e.t.c calculators.
https://dnaresultsandalusianspain.blogspot.com/2019/03/k15-nmontes.html



Always keep the penalty on, otherwise nmonte will give you too much overfitted models that make no sense. I still prefer K13 over all others, although K15 is good too I guess.
Still, neither beat G25

Carlos
19-03-19, 14:39
`^^^
Yes, of course, there must still be a lot to discover. Every week I feel from a different place with so much calculator.

Ruderico
19-03-19, 14:59
`^^^
Yes, of course, there must still be a lot to discover. Every week I feel from a different place with so much calculator.

I personally don't bother with small potatoes, I find it irrelevant if a model gives me 1% this or 2% that because it's just a mathematical model. For example no model currently assigns me to Portugal, but that's where all my family's from. If you know your family background, that's what matters. For me anyways.

berun
19-03-19, 20:08
The steppe cult is so deeply inserted in some brains, that now that people se how Iberian and Basque speakers are direct descendents of R1b beakers that they are thinking that there was a parallel non-IE wave, well, ok, now it's a good hour for trollling... so lets ask, ok guys, the Iberian / Basque combo came also, as everything worth in the world, from the Pontic steppe, but hey, maybe the IE Celtic-Latin combo IE beaker can be tracked down, so, my trollling question is, it's possible to assign to each combo a given admixture? per example, if the Iberian / Basque combo was more CHG / Iran Neo than EHG, and the Celtic / Latin was more EHG. Let's see how many heads pop up.

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 20:24
Ygorcs, Reconquista started in 12th century? Where do you read that? 10 years after Muslim rule Reconquista has been started, in 722, and in 740 almost a quarter of Iberia was not under Muslim rule... Muslims are not an explanation to the presence of Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia. Bishops of Lugo, Iria Flavia and Bretoña in Galicia were never interrupted like others in Braga, Astorga, Dumio... and there are Berber admixture in northern part of Galicia and Asturias, so the explanation has to be another one.

Of course I referred to the Reconquista of the parts of Iberia that were indeed under long Muslim rule, not those that were simply invaded and soon freed. After the initial decades of invasion, there was eventually a certain stability, but that started to crumble rapidly around 1100, and by 1300 most of Iberia was not under Andalusi Muslim rule. The 12th century was just an approximate dating, as in that century it had become clear that the Reconquista was decisively going to win.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Pt-Reconquista2.jpg

As for the Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia, that is really the hardest part to explain, and of course I do not think all of the North African admixture came with Al-Andalus (Roman Africa was certainly full of Romanized and not-so-Romanized Berbers, and they lived under the same empire with Iberians for centuries), but I also think it must be rather complicated to explain exactly what demographic movements happened after the Late Antiquity because of all the intensive migrations into and within Iberia.

Isn't it possible that, given that the western part of Iberia was the first to be fully and solidly "reconquered" (Portugal had basically defined once and for all its present borders by the early 14th century), some of the Berber-admixed people there were the first to fully assimilate and Christianize successfully avoiding eventual persecution because they blended with the native population soon enough, at a time (the High Middle Ages) when the hostility toward former Muslims and Jews was a lot lower than in the Early Modern Era?

That would help explain the higher than average Berber admixture in Galicia/Northern Portugal: many Berber-admixed people there would've become part of the local populace, with no clear ethnic distinction, since long before the persecutions and expulsions, whereas the society in modern Spain might've been more fractured and ethnically divided. Thus the cleaveages (genetic ones, too) between people could've made it easier to "get rid" of the Berber and Arab admixture than in the western part of Iberia, and subsequent movements (which in Iberia were clearly in a north-south direction or vice-versa) accounted for the rest of the story.

Angela
19-03-19, 20:32
Of course I referred to the Reconquista of the parts of Iberia that were indeed under long Muslim rule, not those that were simply invaded and soon freed. After the initial decades of invasion, there was eventually a certain stability, but that started to crumble rapidly around 1100 B.C., and by 1300 most of Iberia was not under Andalusi Muslim rule.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Pt-Reconquista2.jpg

As for the Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia, that is really the hardest part to explain, and of course I do not think all of the North African admixture came with Al-Andalus (Roman Africa was certainly full of Romanized and not-so-Romanized Berbers, and they lived under the same empire with Iberians for centuries), but I also think it must be rather complicated to explain exactly what demographic movements happened after the Late Antiquity because of all the intensive migrations into and within Iberia.

Isn't it possible that, given that the western part of Iberia was the first to be fully and solidly "reconquered" (Portugal had basically defined once and for all its present borders by the early 14th century), some of the Berber-admixed people there were the first to fully assimilate and Christianize successfully avoiding eventual persecution because they blended with the native population soon enough, at a time (the High Middle Ages) when the hostility toward former Muslims and Jews was a lot lower than in the Early Modern Era?

That would help explain the higher than average Berber admixture in Galicia/Northern Portugal: many Berber-admixed people there would've become part of the local populace, with no clear ethnic distinction, since long before the persecutions and expulsions, whereas the society in modern Spain might've been more fractured and ethnically divided. Thus the cleaveages (genetic ones, too) between people could've made it easier to "get rid" of the Berber and Arab admixture than in the western part of Iberia, and subsequent movements (which in Iberia were clearly in a north-south direction or vice-versa) accounted for the rest of the story.

I knew what you meant.

This all seems eminently reasonable to me, and correlates well with the assertion by the authors that as far as North African admixture from the Islamic period is concerned what survives is from the earlier centuries. They probably took a look at IBD analysis, although it's not in the paper.

A really well done IBD analysis, by someone like Graham Coop, would be very interesting. All the other people I've seen doing them date it all to the most recent admixture event because the programs they use aren't all that reliable, imo.

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 20:41
The expelled descendants that today are in North Africa have a memory and those who had stayed in the peninsula would have lost it? He knows that there are people who still keep the key to his house and that there are laws that even give them Spanish nationality. If they had stayed a large amount they would not have been lonely wolves where in a few years their ancestry could be lost, we talked about families more than anything and then there would be memories, oral tradition something like it happens in the descendants of the current expelled, and there is not . You grow and if you ask for some building they tell you: that was of the Moors or that the Moors did, in the past and referring to other people, it is the only thing there is, nothing more. Therefore I keep my hypothesis refuted by the data that you already know.

I strongly doubt that all descendants of expelled Moors and Moriscos in North Africa, Southeastern Europe and West Asia (they didn't all migrate to North África) are still fully aware of their ancestors in Iberia, especially in the case of communities that were not closed, like Muslims (as opposed to Sephardic Jews). If the numbers of estimates of the expelled population are anything near the truth, then it is definitely certain that there are dozens of millions of descendants of expelled Muslim or Jew Iberians in the world right now. A handful of them might've preserved their family history, most of them are certainly too diluted now to remember that. Anyway, I have no issue at all accepting the possibility that, yes, they might have preserved a memory of their ancestry, but those who had stayed in the peninsula would have lost it. The people that migrated didn't have to hide their origins in order to have a decent living or even to survive, so it is just obvious to me that the incentives to "forgetting" that long-gone ancestry would've been extremely higher in Iberia than in North África.

Again, you're talking of "lonely wolves" as if all the conversions and assimilation had happened only during the period of persecutions and expulsions, but the fact is that the process of Christianization and cultural assimilation and blending had started more than 500 years earlier and had intensified decisively between around 1100 and 1300. By the late 15th century when the persecution really became overwhelming the bulk of Iberia had been under Christian hands for centuries, and the number of Muslims and Jews in Iberia had decreased a lot not through simple (de)conversion and admixture. The New Christians that were persecuted were most certainly those that had been latecomers and had maintained their distinctive ethnic and religious identity the longest, especially in the parts of Iberia that had resisted the Reconquista for a longer time. But by that time some families had already had Berber or Arab ancestors centuries earlier, and all of that had already become heavily diluted.

Your hypothesis that there is "nothing more" is not corroborated by the data. 8-10% of genetic admixture is not a negligible proportion at all especially if you consider that there was a massive ethnic cleansing 400-500 years ago, which indicates clearly that it was even (much) higher for a long period.

Ygorcs
19-03-19, 20:54
But he was the king of Crimean Goths, right? He was buried with the crown of Kerch after all.

KER1 GEDmatch Genesis kit number - MD6611828

Maybe he was the king who ruled over remnants of Bosporans, married to a Gothic princess?

If he was the ruler of actual Goths then it means that Goths elected an ethnically foreign king:


Eurogenes K13:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 East_Med 30.97
2 West_Asian 24.07
3 North_Atlantic 18.23
4 West_Med 13.87
5 Baltic 8.01
6 Red_Sea 1.86
7 Amerindian 1.75
8 Siberian 1.14
9 Oceanian 0.09


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Central_Greek 11.11
2 Italian_Abruzzo 11.33
3 South_Italian 12.02
4 East_Sicilian 12.3
5 Turkish 13.54
6 Ashkenazi 14.07
7 West_Sicilian 14.86
8 Sephardic_Jewish 15.19
9 Greek_Thessaly 15.24
10 Italian_Jewish 16.52
11 Cyprian 17.16
12 Algerian_Jewish 17.83
13 Lebanese_Muslim 17.85
14 Azeri 17.95
15 Tunisian_Jewish 18.38
16 Tuscan 18.87
17 Libyan_Jewish 19.34
18 Syrian 19.93
19 Assyrian 20.07
20 Armenian 20.43


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 64.6% Italian_Jewish + 35.4% Tabassaran @ 5.15
2 68.2% Assyrian + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.38
3 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Lezgin @ 5.45
4 64.1% Assyrian + 35.9% West_German @ 5.48
5 65.2% Assyrian + 34.8% South_Dutch @ 5.61
6 69% Assyrian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.65
7 68.5% Italian_Abruzzo + 31.5% Kurdish @ 5.66
8 69.2% Assyrian + 30.8% Orcadian @ 5.71
9 63.3% Assyrian + 36.7% French @ 5.72
10 72.4% South_Italian + 27.6% Lezgin @ 5.82
11 69.7% Assyrian + 30.3% West_Scottish @ 5.84
12 63.7% Italian_Abruzzo + 36.3% Azeri @ 5.91
13 69.5% Assyrian + 30.5% Irish @ 5.93
14 73.2% South_Italian + 26.8% Tabassaran @ 5.98
15 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Chechen @ 5.98
16 69.1% Assyrian + 30.9% North_Dutch @ 6.06
17 67.2% Sephardic_Jewish + 32.8% Tabassaran @ 6.1
18 67.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.8% Armenian @ 6.12
19 69% Assyrian + 31% Danish @ 6.18
20 76.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 23.8% Abhkasian @ 6.21


Eurogenes K15:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 West_Asian 27.53
2 East_Med 25.61
3 Atlantic 14.99
4 North_Sea 11.57
5 West_Med 8.46
6 Eastern_Euro 3.46
7 Baltic 3.15
8 Red_Sea 3.02
9 Amerindian 1.48
10 Siberian 0.72


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Turkish 11.83
2 Italian_Abruzzo 13.36
3 Central_Greek 13.84
4 East_Sicilian 14.97
5 South_Italian 15.08
6 Azeri 15.17
7 Ashkenazi 15.61
8 Greek 17.31
9 West_Sicilian 17.43
10 Armenian 17.69
11 Sephardic_Jewish 17.9
12 Greek_Thessaly 17.96
13 Kurdish 18.22
14 Georgian_Jewish 18.41
15 Italian_Jewish 18.59
16 Lebanese_Muslim 19.04
17 Assyrian 19.16
18 Kumyk 19.29
19 Tuscan 19.6
20 Cyprian 19.63


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 69.7% Armenian + 30.3% Irish @ 5.09
2 69% Armenian + 31% Southeast_English @ 5.1
3 70% Armenian + 30% West_Scottish @ 5.24
4 66.2% Armenian + 33.8% South_Dutch @ 5.31
5 69% Armenian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.36
6 68.2% Georgian_Jewish + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.51
7 68.1% Georgian_Jewish + 31.9% Southwest_English @ 5.6
8 67.6% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.4% Georgian @ 5.61
9 68.9% Georgian_Jewish + 31.1% Irish @ 5.61
10 68.1% Armenian + 31.9% North_German @ 5.61
11 65% Armenian + 35% French @ 5.7
12 69.3% Georgian_Jewish + 30.7% West_Scottish @ 5.74
13 70.4% Armenian + 29.6% Orcadian @ 5.76
14 70.8% Italian_Abruzzo + 29.2% Abhkasian @ 5.76
15 69.6% Armenian + 30.4% Danish @ 5.82
16 65.4% Georgian_Jewish + 34.6% South_Dutch @ 5.83
17 69.6% Georgian_Jewish + 30.4% Orcadian @ 5.93
18 69.9% Armenian + 30.1% North_Dutch @ 5.97
19 64.1% Georgian_Jewish + 35.9% French @ 6.11
20 65% Armenian + 35% Spanish_Cataluna @ 6.2

How interesting that he looks like a Northwestern European-shifted Armenian or something of that sort. Was he a local, or where else did he come from? What would that say about the general population of his homeland back then?

Cato
19-03-19, 23:07
https://youtu.be/pADwHUYtv1k

Utilizzando Tapatalk

Carlos
20-03-19, 00:24
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-01urKxqfLoA/XJFpLnTrgnI/AAAAAAAAAJw/xLGV3161VAQ6Em65mKrv7gUgPqXgSH5XQCLcBGAs/s1600/safe_image.jpeg

Ygorcs


I have lost 4% of NA what has happened. Is it possible that the 4% given by FamilyFinder as NA were Iberian and FamilyFinder would have labeled it as NA?

Angela
20-03-19, 00:41
My Heritage results never make any sense to me, I'm sorry to say. I expected more from Israelis. Of the commercial testing companies, 23andme and Ancestry are much better, imo.

Plus, individual results might vary a bit. For population genetics purposes it is the results of academic testing based on scientifically chosen samples which can help us decipher the past.

The only thing I used my 23andme results for was for comparison with other Italians, and specifically other Italians from my area. Once it was clear that I landed exactly where someone from my part of Italy and with my geneaology should land, that was it. Of course, that was an individual choice and not everyone is going to make it.

Angela
20-03-19, 00:44
I took another look at the yDna of the samples because they're also listed in the Krause paper on the Anatolian Neolithic.

Is there a resurgence of G2a clades in southeastern Spain in the Copper Age, or was there always perhaps more G2a there.

I ask because copper metallurgy was brought to Spain. Could G2a men from the Balkans have brought it? I've always thought Otzi descended from a later wave too, one with more eastern ancestry.

ToBeOrNotToBe
20-03-19, 01:38
MyHeritage is absolutely shambolic lol, genuinely a waste of money.

ToBeOrNotToBe
20-03-19, 01:41
I took another look at the yDna of the samples because they're also listed in the Krause paper on the Anatolian Neolithic.

Is there a resurgence of G2a clades in southeastern Spain in the Copper Age, or was there always perhaps more G2a there.

I ask because copper metallurgy was brought to Spain. Could G2a men from the Balkans have brought it? I've always thought Otzi descended from a later wave too, one with more eastern ancestry.

I don't know if it would be Ötzi's branch (especially as his copper in his axe was from Tuscany, so surely he didn't know how to smelt) - but I'm leaning that way now too. I used to think it was R1b-L51 as I thought throughout the Neolithic Iberian Y DNA was consistent, yet this doesn't seem the case.

Angela
20-03-19, 02:10
Maybe not smelt, but he knew how to work copper to some degree, it seems. I don't know if the testing has stood the test of time, but some of the early results indicated he had residues in his blood.

Ygorcs
20-03-19, 10:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi1C1XMYU2Q&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR25XILFXAGPqHu48-IJIjmWJ9AiqUAP2ddlbldIqgGfM6pK6uTFOS7_wac

I wonder how, where and when these steppe people got immunity against the plague, and what it was they had which the neolithic people didn't have, that made them replace the male population.
The archeology didn't find signs of violence.

Maybe apathy, social marginalization, slavery/servitude, indifference/depression, loss of confidence, lower self-esteem and lower social status, loss of competitive advantages and willingness to compete, reproduce and thrive... all of that disturbance in the males' social identities and orders ultimately leading to them not passing their lineages down not just because they were dying in higher proportions, but because at each generation they were leaving shorter offspring? That has happened many times with primitive societies, affecting males invariably more than females, when they met more economically and technologically advanced incomers, but I'm not sure the effect would be the same when the encounter was between farmers and pastoralists with similar levels of cultural and technological achievement.

halfalp
20-03-19, 10:36
@Ygorcs That's actually an interesting hypothesis. Worth to investigate the potential psychologic and sociologic realities of Neolithic Europe. Sort of Psychologie des Foules of Prehistoric Times.

The hypothesis of Wars and Conquest from the Steppe guys could actually very well be confirmed or infirmed by burials data, like founding many graves with skulls in bad shape, like we would see at the Tollensee but in BB times. If we cannot confirmed this, we might turn into a prehistoric Civilization Sickness that would burn the society from the inside and let outsiders take commands. Wich actually happened multiple times in wrote history.

Angela
20-03-19, 21:26
Yes, well, sorry to disappoint, half Alp, but as the authors point out, there are no such sites so far.

There's violence between late neolithic groups when scarcity hit, there's lots of violence on the steppe, there's that very large battle in northern Europe, but no sign so far of mass violence by the newcomers against indigenous Europeans of central Europe or Ibera.

halfalp
20-03-19, 22:12
Yes, well, sorry to disappoint, half Alp, but as the authors point out, there are no such sites so far.

There's violence between late neolithic groups when scarcity hit, there's lots of violence on the steppe, there's that very large battle in northern Europe, but no sign so far of mass violence by the newcomers against indigenous Europeans of central Europe or Ibera.

That's interesting that you assume i wanted them to found signs of violence.

Angela
20-03-19, 22:27
Well, it seems to be the case with a lot of the young men interested in pop gen.

You know, like eurogenes with his "blonde cowboys of the steppe", who were by no means mostly blonde and didn't "ride" or fight from horseback until long after the periods we're discussing.

I do distinctly get the feeling, indeed. sometimes it's stated explicity, that they're quite fond of, as I sometimes say, this Conan the Barbarian view of history. Women are bound to take a different view, yes? The "rape", really, "theft" of the Sabine women doesn't look like a lot of fun, for example.Some of them might have quite liked their husbands, you know?

https://i1.trekearth.com/photos/64237/rape_of_the_sabine.jpg

If it were me I would have put some hemlock in their stew.

Plus, if there are uglier, less appealing men than Arnold Schwatzeneggger, it's hard for me to think of one at the moment.


If the shoe doesn't fit, however, by all means don't wear it. Good to know.

halfalp
20-03-19, 23:12
Well, it seems to be the case with a lot of the young men interested in pop gen.

You know, like eurogenes with his "blonde cowboys of the steppe", who were by no means mostly blonde and didn't "ride" or fight from horseback until long after the periods we're discussing.

I do distinctly get the feeling, indeed. sometimes it's stated explicity, that they're quite fond of, as I sometimes say, this Conan the Barbarian view of history. Women are bound to take a different view, yes? The "rape", really, "theft" of the Sabine women doesn't look like a lot of fun, for example.Some of them might have quite liked their husbands, you know?

https://i1.trekearth.com/photos/64237/rape_of_the_sabine.jpg

If it were me I would have put some hemlock in their stew.

Plus, if there are uglier, less appealing men than Arnold Schwatzeneggger, it's hard for me to think of one at the moment.


If the shoe doesn't fit, however, by all means don't wear it. Good to know.

If i need to know what is European People fond of, i just have to turn on the TV. Not to revive Bronze Age Symbolism, or just for myself on self-developpement purposes. As for Blonde or Red hairs and Horses, i still do believe in it, but not that it really matters right? I mean, it's about coincidences even if the datas dont show them or yet, not about Blonde Haired Cow-Boys. I'm dark haired and blonde girls are not my taste. As for the potential rape culture of IE men, it would circle around porn fetish of modern men to be attracted by that. And i'm actually pretty sure that BB men weren't particularly beautiful, and i'm thinking to some modern British guys ( sorry for them ) and i'm not talking about the sexy mediterranean with blue eyes, but more like the ginger with porky nose. Or he dont have to be a ginger, but the porky nose is necessary. But you also need to understand that in the modern society, were people mostly dont believe in god anymore and dont have a lot of structure, like in a society of order like in tribal societies, things can fast turn to depression. People constantly talk about the beauty of independance, but as a tumultuous boy who was raised by a single mother, i would have prefered a very structured but more rigide men society. So from that point, the idea of your ancestors one day being warriors with a code of honor, just like Chivalry ( and i know Chivalry was less honor than slaughter ), is very appealing. I'm obviously not talking about Nationalism or Purity... but about self-developpement. That is basically my personal agenda. However, there is one thing wich i'm very irrited by, is when i feel there is a globalist theme behind the speech of someone. And i'm personnally thinking of Lazaridis and Krause. Multiple times they feel the need or the condescendance to bring European history vs Others history, while Others history is fine, but it's their history. I also have a specific aversion for Lord Renfrew and his constant bashing of Gimbutas and Steppe, for god knows the reason, who cares she didn't have the perfect hypothesis? People still bashing on her 20 years after her death.

Angela
20-03-19, 23:53
Well, I'm a great admirer of Gimbutas. Yes, she got some things wrong, but she got a lot right too, and without the benefit of the technology to decipher ancient dna.

As for her view of the "Old Europe" of the Balkans as some sort of female ruled ocean of peace and harmony, I think she got that mostly wrong.

However, I still maintain that in the "farmer" societies, like my favorites, the Minoans, women may have had more of a role, and they certainly didn't have the warrior cult and idolization to which I so much object.

As to modern parenting, you're preaching to the choir. I'm extremely old-fashioned in my views. Yes, a single mother can do a good job raising her children, including sons, but I maintain it's much harder. The two parent family hasn't lasted so long without a good reason. It's the optimum situation for raising children. Fathers are particularly important, imo, for sons, to teach them how to "be" men.

I look around me now, and I don't see a lot of men like my father and my uncles, or like my husband's uncles. I see spoiled little boys obsessed with their electionic toys and with trying to get easy sex.

That's part of the reason why I'm actually in favor of mandatory military service at least for boys, although it doesn't provide the whole answer. If their families can't do it, someone or something has to socialize them. They need to learn discipline, respect, a sense of duty, and the values of commitment to the group that hopefully it can inculcate. Heck, just making sure they can keep themselves and their quarters clean, and themselves healthy is a start.

I honestly do fear for the future for my own children.

halfalp
21-03-19, 09:55
Well, I'm a great admirer of Gimbutas. Yes, she got some things wrong, but she got a lot right too, and without the benefit of the technology to decipher ancient dna.

As for her view of the "Old Europe" of the Balkans as some sort of female ruled ocean of peace and harmony, I think she got that mostly wrong.

However, I still maintain that in the "farmer" societies, like my favorites, the Minoans, women may have had more of a role, and they certainly didn't have the warrior cult and idolization to which I so much object.

As to modern parenting, you're preaching to the choir. I'm extremely old-fashioned in my views. Yes, a single mother can do a good job raising her children, including sons, but I maintain it's much harder. The two parent family hasn't lasted so long without a good reason. It's the optimum situation for raising children. Fathers are particularly important, imo, for sons, to teach them how to "be" men.

I look around me now, and I don't see a lot of men like my father and my uncles, or like my husband's uncles. I see spoiled little boys obsessed with their electionic toys and with trying to get easy sex.

That's part of the reason why I'm actually in favor of mandatory military service at least for boys, although it doesn't provide the whole answer. If their families can't do it, someone or something has to socialize them. They need to learn discipline, respect, a sense of duty, and the values of commitment to the group that hopefully it can inculcate. Heck, just making sure they can keep themselves and their quarters clean, and themselves healthy is a start.

I honestly do fear for the future for my own children.

I think Gimbutas had a lot of things wrong too, but if you think about it, most thing she got wrong are proving with Archeogenetic when it didn't really existed at her times. Wich is not fair game at all. I actually think that Farmers societies weren't that peacefull and that even Social Stratification probably came from Old Europe, or developped simultaneously with Early Steppe and Middle-East groups, maybe because of a Circum-Pontic already established trade system. I'm also extremelly old fashioned, it's actually my favorite cocktail... No but to be serious, there is a very low chance that a single mother can do the perfect job, both boys and girls needs the admiration over a father figure. Porn is one of the cancer who is ruining men's life, even married ones, it is changing something in your brain, and like Opioids, you get anesthetize and need more and more in more troubled ways. The problem and that was the point between my Order and Independance idea, people and especially Women ( sorry to tell this ) see Porn or Depraved Sexuality as something Empowering, while a lot of Men are seeing this as something Depraving for themselves and are trying to overcome that and to become better persons, you can see that with internet movements such as No Fap or MGTOW ( wich i'm not part of and dont really support the idea btw ). I also like the idea of Conscription wich my country applies, but i didn't do it. I think for Europe, countries like France would make a good use of it, they use to have it, but they stopped it, for whatever reason, probably money.

bicicleur
21-03-19, 11:36
Maybe apathy, social marginalization, slavery/servitude, indifference/depression, loss of confidence, lower self-esteem and lower social status, loss of competitive advantages and willingness to compete, reproduce and thrive... all of that disturbance in the males' social identities and orders ultimately leading to them not passing their lineages down not just because they were dying in higher proportions, but because at each generation they were leaving shorter offspring? That has happened many times with primitive societies, affecting males invariably more than females, when they met more economically and technologically advanced incomers, but I'm not sure the effect would be the same when the encounter was between farmers and pastoralists with similar levels of cultural and technological achievement.

I have the same feeling.
The bronze age newcomers had some thrive, the European farmers seem to have lost. They had become apathetic.
I don't know why.

Carlos
21-03-19, 14:39
Conan the Bárbaro is one of my favorite movies with Greasse and others. In cinema everything is possible with a good sound vanda and a script that makes us always winners but the same in reality would be quite sad, opaque, tragic regrettable. In Spain mothers and even grandmothers are already taking little boys with pigtails and painted nails to create gender equality in the future in the face of so much political advertising. If only Europe happens and at the same time we are receiving immigration from places where even though they live in Spain they will never change roles, integration will be even more impossible. Or everything is in pure aesthetics and although the man appears makeup with painted nails and shadow in the eyes continue the man in his usual role that is older than makeup. I do not know what will happen.

Duarte
21-03-19, 15:21
Conan the Bárbaro is one of my favorite movies with Greasse and others. In cinema everything is possible with a good sound vanda and a script that makes us always winners but the same in reality would be quite sad, opaque, tragic regrettable. In Spain mothers and even grandmothers are already taking little boys with pigtails and painted nails to create gender equality in the future in the face of so much political advertising. If only Europe happens and at the same time we are receiving immigration from places where even though they live in Spain they will never change roles, integration will be even more impossible. Or everything is in pure aesthetics and although the man appears makeup with painted nails and shadow in the eyes continue the man in his usual role that is older than makeup. I do not know what will happen.

The makeup at the Versailles court was extremely important. In the courts of the kings Louis XIV and Louis XV, the ideal of beauty was linked to everything that was artificial. The face, the body, the language, the emotions, everything became "makeup" ... The flaccid flesh was trapped by corsets and heavy fabrics ... The lips were makeuped with bright red and the cheeks with the pink or with red. The false pints (les mouches) made of fabrics were cut into various shapes and, depending on where they were placed, meant something. Both, men and women, makeup theirselfs. To hide the lack of hygiene, people wore perfumes with notes of flowers and musk. The teeth were brushed with coral dust, extremely abrasive, with oyster powder or white wine ...
White and red were the predominant colors. Red was seen as the tone capable of hiding old age and evoking sensuality. It came to be used everywhere, including the cheek of the dead. In addition to the red, the blue was used to hide the veins of the forehead, of the temples and of the neck in order to evoke the blue blood of the aristocracy.
Through the white oxide of lead, the women obtained the idealized white complexion. Most of the products used at that time, although extremely expensive, were highly harmful since they had as their basic element lead or arsenic. Let us also remember that women ate arsenic tablets to become anemic and keep the skin pale.
The color white was the favorite color of the skin, because a livid skin caused the effect of 'statue', and, reminder of the Middle Ages, evoked virginity. The extremely translucent skin created the illusion of purity, suggested a face and, by extension, an individual free of any blemish or scar. Being extremely makeuped also meant that her skin was homogenized, since the products disguised the dermatoses, the rosaceas, the redness ... To avoid tanning, the precious ones wore a mask that they held by their teeth, which prohibited them from talking. Fitelieu wrote in 1642 that, in order to make an elegant woman of the time, a whole boutique was necessary!


Versailles became a stage where arrogant puppets stared at each other in the mirror ...

10816

Carlos
21-03-19, 16:29
^^

I really think that the habit or the makeup would not influence the roles in the end, even if the current radical feminists, rather than equality, try to inhibit masculinity, which has nothing to do with homosexuality, since there are very masculine gays in fact They are so macho that they sleep with men.


The makeup in France is incredible, there are still people in Spain who believe that the French do not bathe but simply perfumed. You have to see what the clichés are.

Duarte
21-03-19, 17:40
^^

I really think that the habit or the makeup would not influence the roles in the end, even if the current radical feminists, rather than equality, try to inhibit masculinity, which has nothing to do with homosexuality, since there are very masculine gays in fact They are so macho that they sleep with men.


The makeup in France is incredible, there are still people in Spain who believe that the French do not bathe but simply perfumed. You have to see what the clichés are. ^^

LOL. In fact it takes to be a superman to sleep with another man. LOL. I'm laughing, but I'm not prejudiced about it. The cliché about of the hygiene of French people also exists in Brazil and there are many French YouTubers with channels directed to the Brazilian public that play with this and do much success by here. LOL.

halfalp
21-03-19, 20:16
The makeup at the Versailles court was extremely important. In the courts of the kings Louis XIV and Louis XV, the ideal of beauty was linked to everything that was artificial. The face, the body, the language, the emotions, everything became "makeup" ... The flaccid flesh was trapped by corsets and heavy fabrics ... The lips were makeuped with bright red and the cheeks with the pink or with red. The false pints (les mouches) made of fabrics were cut into various shapes and, depending on where they were placed, meant something. Both, men and women, makeup theirselfs. To hide the lack of hygiene, people wore perfumes with notes of flowers and musk. The teeth were brushed with coral dust, extremely abrasive, with oyster powder or white wine ...
White and red were the predominant colors. Red was seen as the tone capable of hiding old age and evoking sensuality. It came to be used everywhere, including the cheek of the dead. In addition to the red, the blue was used to hide the veins of the forehead, of the temples and of the neck in order to evoke the blue blood of the aristocracy.
Through the white oxide of lead, the women obtained the idealized white complexion. Most of the products used at that time, although extremely expensive, were highly harmful since they had as their basic element lead or arsenic. Let us also remember that women ate arsenic tablets to become anemic and keep the skin pale.
The color white was the favorite color of the skin, because a livid skin caused the effect of 'statue', and, reminder of the Middle Ages, evoked virginity. The extremely translucent skin created the illusion of purity, suggested a face and, by extension, an individual free of any blemish or scar. Being extremely makeuped also meant that her skin was homogenized, since the products disguised the dermatoses, the rosaceas, the redness ... To avoid tanning, the precious ones wore a mask that they held by their teeth, which prohibited them from talking. Fitelieu wrote in 1642 that, in order to make an elegant woman of the time, a whole boutique was necessary!


Versailles became a stage where arrogant puppets stared at each other in the mirror ...

10816

You are white, why are you so obsessed with blackness and why are you not telling quite clearly early? That's the real true question.

bicicleur
21-03-19, 20:50
You are white, why are you so obsessed with blackness and why are you not telling quite clearly early? That's the real true question.

this has nothing to do with blackness
it's because they despise the 'stupid peasants' who work outside in the fields and are tanned

halfalp
21-03-19, 20:57
this has nothing to do with blackness
it's because they despise the 'stupid peasants' who work outside in the fields and are tanned

You didn't see his previous posts, he has a black skin bias, but he dont quite tell it. I'm slightly aware of France history, thank you.