Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Some Greek influence in Liguria and Veneto to me is proved by now as 16% of Genoese males are E3b of which the totality is E-V13. Vicenza has 18% E3b all of it E-V13 as well.
I agree, i wouldnt equate E-V13 presence with Greeks.How have you determined that it came by way of the "Greeks" versus the Neolithic farmers...have you determined the subclade(s) of E-V113 present in both areas and their estimated dates? Matched the STR's against those in the Balkans, say, versus Greece?
@ adamo
I think there might be some Genetic proof (underlining) to the Elymians being Trojan recordings;
Romano et al 2003 - did an autosomal-DNA test in which it turned out that Castellammare clusters closest with Turkey;
The significance is that Castellammare was the ancient harbor of Segesta [an Elymian settlement];
The Elymians (as we all know) are recorded to have been Trojans (i.e. Anatolians);
Thucydides - Book VI/XVIII
On the fall of Ilium, some of the Trojans escaped from the Achaeans, came in ships to Sicily, and settled next to the Sicanians under the general name of Elymi; their towns being called Eryx and Egesta.
All other 6 tested modern-day Sicilian towns cluster on complete diff. branches;
Romano et al 2003
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1469-1809.2003.00007.x/full#t7
I think the Trojans arrived before the Phoenicians;
Trojan war in ancient dating is the early 12th cen BC
The first Phoenician colony (not really sure) prob. was Motya ~8th cen BC;
Carthage itself was only founded in the late 9th cen BC; So the Trojans (Elymi) must have settled earlier;
DiGaetano et al 2012 (post #55) shows the Sicilians are autosomal-DNA very similar to South Italians;
Figures from DODECAD 'K12b' (not academic/not to be taken seriously)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...EY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEYlE&hl=en_US#gid=0
S Italian & Sicilian [10 samples] - (5.5% Gedrosia)
29.9% Atl.-Med. / 11.8% N Europe / 36.5% Caucasus
12.5% SW Asia / 0.5% S Asia
2.5% NW Africa / 0.7% E African / 0.0% Sub-Saharan
Sicilian [15 samples] - (4.5% Gedrosia)
30.0% Atl.-Med. / 11.9% N Europe / 36.5% Caucasus
11.9% SW Asia / 0.1% S Asia
4.1% NW Africa / 0.7% E African / 0.2% Sub-Saharan
This makes the results from Romano et al 2003 - extra special;
It shows that certain specific areas with a certain specific historical backround are also Genetically diverse from the rest of the island as is the case with Castellammare the ancient Trojans and modern-day Turkey;
The Y-DNA results from DiGaetano et al 2009 are also very revealing;
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v17/n1/full/ejhg2008120a.html
as are the mtDNA results from Romano et al 2003
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1469-1809.2003.00007.x/full#t7
I thought modern consensus was that the Elymians were related to either the Hittites or to Armenians. But either way that'd still be Anatolian.
Notice also Butera and Sciacca, also in western Sicily, drift toward the Turkey cluster. Troina, Caccamo etc. should have more Greek input.
How have you determined that it came by way of the "Greeks" versus the Neolithic farmers...have you determined the subclade(s) of E-V113 present in both areas and their estimated dates? Matched the STR's against those in the Balkans, say, versus Greece?
The south is one of the most maximal regions of Neolithic influence in Europe with R1b (25%), E3b (25%), J2 (25%) and G (25%) would be a fair haplogroup distribution in the south. The center is more R1b (40%) E3b (10%) J2 (20%) G (10%). The north is R1b (55%) E3b (10%) j2 (10%) G (10%)
I'm sorry but you've gone the wrong way Sile, confusing villanovan Danube region celts in Tuscany with proto-Etruscans descending from the alps. The Etruscans. Moved from Tuscany TOWARDS the alps, and not vice versa. You've failed Sile. Leave.
I find your comments rather contradictory. DiGaetano shows that autosomally, Sicilians are very similar to Southern Italians, something which is also clear from the Dodecad analyses done by Dienekes. (It's a good thing we have that confirmation, as I think the DiGaetano results on their own shouldn't be taken very literally for the make-up of the different geographic areas of Italy, given that for a large portion of their data, they never asked if all four grandparents came from the same area. That is because a lot of that data was collected from hospitals; all that is certain is that the samples lived in certain cities. Since very few northerners migrate south, the southern data is marginally o.k. in my opinion, but the central Italian and northern Italian data is highly questionable.)
You then go on to focus on the mtDNA and yDNA results which do reveal differenes. Those may be informative for population genetics purposes and the tracking of migrations, but it has little to do with genetic relatedness. The MDLP run figures I posted above (which I think are highly suspect anyway, since they're only using one central Sicilian, one southern Sicilian, and no eastern Sicilians) show 1 to 2 percent differences in components...even the more homogenous northern Europeans show more variation than that at times.
Could you provide me with an academic source for the proposition that the "Elymians" were related to the Hittites or the Armenians? Thank-you.
There is no yDNA, mtDNA or aDNA for the "Trojans". There's even controversy about which settlement level was involved in the "Trojan" War, and some scholars postulate an Indo-European intrusive origin for them, or to put it another way, they would NOT have been, according to these scholars, very Anatolian at all as we understand that term today.
In fact, if someone wanted to see if they could distinguish between the pre-Moorish Sicilians, and the post-Moorish Sicilians, they might want to look at the people in the triangular region formed by the mountainous areas of the Peloritani, and Nebrodi Mountains of the Northeast coast and Etna.
Where is the contradiction?
Y-DNA results, mtDNA results and autosomal-DNA results - all reveal a Genetic picture;
And the studies i posted contain these results of the atDNA/Y-DNA/mtDNA of the Sicilians;
Are the studies contradicted themselves of course not results for each field are the results for each field;
Maybe the results contradict your false conclusions and assumptions; but thats not my business;
aha;
I dont know about we; But I understand the term Anatolian today as in Turkish nation;
But the Turkish nation also has the Indo-European Anatolian branch as its heritage as also the Pelasgian;
The Sicilians of Castellammare share the same Anatolian (whether Pelasgian Trojans or Indo-European Trojans -thats not really important) as the modern day Turks from modern-day Turkey;
And isnt it a coincidence that Castellammare was the ancient port of Segesta a settlement of the Elymi who are recorded as being Trojans (whether Pelasgian Trojans or Indo-European Trojans -thats not really important);
No; I say it is not;
This thread has been viewed 55634 times.