• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

GEDMatch HarappaWorld Gedmatch, post and compare your admixtures to ancient and contemporary.

Pax Augusta said:
I don't know if less Caucasian means more NE European. For example Bulgarians and Romanians can have both relatively high Caucasian and NE European.
Click to expand...
Good observation. Bulgarians are very close to the source of both, and they started with pretty high level of both in Neolithic. This are samples from Hungarians, not too far away.

[TABLE="width: 444"]
[TR]
[TD]NE7 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]CO1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.04[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.26[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.74[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]56.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]55.37[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]7.96[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]8.52[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Anyway, to get to Bulgarian admixture levels we will need two migrations, in size of quarter to half population change. One from Anatolia/Armenia with very high Caucasian. And one from Steppe with very high NE Euro. Bronze Age Hungarian already shows situation after Steppe migration.
[TABLE="width: 158"]
[TR]
[TD]
BR1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]3.15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]14.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]46.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]0.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]0.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]31.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]3.33[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.48[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Now if we get migration from Anatolia, even modern Anatolia, it will increase Caucasian dramatically and add to Baloch and SW Asian, and will also lower Med.
 
Why did the Caucasian components get spread around Europe, while the SW Asian did not, if they are both EEF related? I notice that Turks and Kurds do not have as much SW Asian than Italians as well. Was the SW Asian a direct result of Roman slave trade? While the Caucasian mixture was from much earlier via Bronze age and Indo European?

And as far as Baloch is concerned, its seems to be around 8% everywhere for the most part.
 
New Englander said:
"I don't know if less Caucasian means more NE European. For example Bulgarians and Romanians can have both relatively high Caucasian and NE European."

Well Im speaking for South Italians and Sicilians specifically.
Click to expand...

Should we even investigate a 1 point difference ! ...............to me they are the same , if there is a 2 point or more difference, then that is another matter
 
New Englander said:
Why did the Caucasian components get spread around Europe, while the SW Asian did not, if they are both EEF related? I notice that Turks and Kurds do not have as much SW Asian than Italians as well. Was the SW Asian a direct result of Roman slave trade? While the Caucasian mixture was from much earlier via Bronze age and Indo European?

And as far as Baloch is concerned, its seems to be around 8% everywhere for the most part.
Click to expand...

Because humans left Africa for south-asia under Haplogroup F

F


when haplogroup F split into haplogroup GHIJK the split occurred north of the Zargos mountains...........north of the Alpide belt ( not alpine )

so migration, the bulk , into SW-Asian occurred from north to south
 
New Englander said:
Why did the Caucasian components get spread around Europe, while the SW Asian did not, if they are both EEF related?
Click to expand...
These are the original levels when EEF left Anatolia. Next two are EEF from Europe. Caucasian drops due to mixing with WHG, who don't have it. They have Med at 20% so it doesn't affect much level of Med in EEF. Later we even see Med increasing by Copper Age for some reason. We don't know why? Perhaps this is a component which developed here with time, mutations and adaptation?
[TABLE="width: 182"]
[TR]
[TD]Anatolian EF[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]37.64[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]0.86[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]47.24[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD] 14.00[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.27[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE="width: 397"]
[TR]
[TD]Stuttgart[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD] 30.60[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]28.27[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD] 7.82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]12.13[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD] 49.46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]45.75[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD] 12.01[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]13.45[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD] 0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]0.05[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.35[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]






I notice that Turks and Kurds do not have as much SW Asian than Italians as well. Was the SW Asian a direct result of Roman slave trade?
Click to expand...
SW picks in Natufian Farmer but it didn't penetrate to Anatolia much. Later it drops when population from Caucasus moves in by Bronze Age.
While the Caucasian mixture was from much earlier via Bronze age and Indo European?
Click to expand...
IE/Steppe have very low Caucasian. Caucasian mostly came with Anatolian Farmer, later EEF, and much later in BA with someone we don't know yet. Check post #1 for more info.

And as far as Baloch is concerned, its seems to be around 8% everywhere for the most part.
Click to expand...
Yes. EEF didn't have it at all. Some came with Steppe, some with BA and later migrations from Anatolia/Near East.
 
Sile said:
Should we even investigate a 1 point difference ! ...............to me they are the same , if there is a 2 point or more difference, then that is another matter
Click to expand...
We mostly ignore 1%, but in this case we see a steady trend of 1% up with every group going south. It is one directional and steady trend, not a random up and down. We've found a pattern. That's why it means something.
Now we have fun figuring out what it means.
 
There is a problem with using an admixture calculator's modern "clusters" to trace ancient movements, other than in the broadest and most general sense. Northeast Euro contains Med. Caucasian includes other layers. These are just geographic descriptions of the alleles presently modal in those areas. It's not the same as seeing what percentage of a modern group can be attributed to Satsurblia, or LBK, or even MN etc.

Also, you can't use modern Turks (and their percentages of these modern "clusters") as a proxy population for any group that would have moved into southern Europe from the east. There have continued to be large population movements across the whole Near East since the Bronze Age. Modern Anatolians, for example, have from 6-12% Siberian/East Asian etc. from the movement of Turkic populations into Anatolia only within the last 1000 years. That would necessarily have lowered their percentages of other components. That's only one example.

Specifically, to the best of my recollection, some of the modelers at anthrogenica looking closely at the Near Eastern Copper Age and Bronze Age samples found that after the Neolithic there was a movement of a more heavily SW Asian "like" population north and east across the region. This may be closer to the population that moved into southern Europe. I'll see if I can find it. Unfortunately, I didn't save a copy of the analysis.

If any of our members did keep a copy, it would be helpful if you could post it.

Oh, there wasn't one Neolithic wave and then nothing else until the Bronze Age. There seem to have been a few waves of migrations. One pre-pottery Neolithic, one pottery Neolithic. One perhaps closer to the Copper Age. One of the later waves might have brought the J2 and pre-E-V13 found in Sopot and Lengyel?

Anyway, that's how I see it.
 
New Englander said:
Why did the Caucasian components get spread around Europe, while the SW Asian did not, if they are both EEF related? Was the SW Asian a direct result of Roman slave trade? While the Caucasian mixture was from much earlier via Bronze age and Indo European?
Click to expand...

Roman slave trade? Just saying, but SW Asian is also found in Finnish, Germans, French, Spaniards, Romanians, Austrians, Hungarians, Slovenians, Croats, Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbians, Albanians, Sardinians. I am listing the ones that come to mind only.

A SW Asian component is spread in Europe at least since the Chalcolithic.

New Englander said:
I notice that Turks and Kurds do not have as much SW Asian than Italians as well.
Click to expand...

Not true, Kurds have 14% on average, so more than most Italians. Turkish, who are pretty varied, range from 7 to 13% with the latter closer to their average.

New Englander said:
Well Im speaking for South Italians and Sicilians specifically.
Click to expand...

So what you said could only go well for the Italian cline. But everything needs to be set within the context of a broader perspective in my opinion.
 
There is a problem with using an admixture calculator's modern "clusters" to trace ancient movements, other than in the broadest and most general sense. Northeast Euro contains Med. Caucasian includes other layers. These are just geographic descriptions of the alleles presently modal in those areas. It's not the same as seeing what percentage of a modern group can be attributed to Satsurblia, or LBK, or even MN etc.

Also, you can't use modern Turks (and their percentages of these modern "clusters") as a proxy population for any group that would have moved into southern Europe from the east. There have continued to be large population movements across the whole Near East since the Bronze Age. Modern Anatolians, for example, have from 6-12% Siberian/East Asian etc. from the movement of Turkic populations into Anatolia only within the last 1000 years. That would necessarily have lowered their percentages of other components. That's only one example.

Specifically, to the best of my recollection, some of the modelers at anthrogenica looking closely at the Near Eastern Copper Age and Bronze Age samples found that after the Neolithic there was a movement of a more heavily SW Asian "like" population north and east across the region. This may be closer to the population that moved into southern Europe. I'll see if I can find it. Unfortunately, I didn't save a copy of the analysis.

If any of our members did keep a copy, it would be helpful if you could post it.

Anyway, that's how I see it.
 
LeBrok said:
This is Boreas' run.

[TABLE="width: 831"]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Boreas[/TD]
[TD] 3[/TD]
[TD] 11[/TD]
[TD] 29[/TD]
[TD] 22[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] 6[/TD]
[TD] 3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] 19[/TD]
[TD] 7[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turk[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]16%[/TD]
[TD]47%[/TD]
[TD]9%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turk-aydin[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]12%[/TD]
[TD]38%[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]6%[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[TD]9%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turk-istanbul[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]16%[/TD]
[TD]45%[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]9%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turk-kayseri[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]45%[/TD]
[TD]8%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turkish[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]17%[/TD]
[TD]40%[/TD]
[TD]9%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]turkmen[/TD]
[TD]5%[/TD]
[TD]26%[/TD]
[TD]30%[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]7%[/TD]
[TD]8%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]7%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

To me it looks like almost half of it comes from South Europe giving strong Euro and Med. Other almost half is local Anatolia/Caucasus, giving strong Caucasian. And about 10% of Turkic DNA, Siberian and NE Asian.
Interesting that your Siberian and NE Asian are in similar proportions to each other as Tuvinian/Tuvan Turks of Central Asia, though in 10 times smaller amount.
Click to expand...

Let me give up all results and also my bro's

Mine:

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]2.78[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Baloch[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]11.05[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]29.17[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]21.96[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]5.56[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]2.78[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Papuan[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.38[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]American[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.05[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Beringian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.47[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]18.64[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]6.72[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]San[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.14[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]E-African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.29[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]W-African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

My Bro:
Population

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"][/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]2.19[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Baloch[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]10.07[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]28.16[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]20.57[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]4.12[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]4.50[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Papuan[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.68[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]American[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.06[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Beringian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]21.83[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]7.40[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]San[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.16[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]E-African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.25[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]W-African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

Less Anatolian, more Balkan and Med, I guess I am not like average Turk
 
Angela said:
There is a problem with using an admixture calculator's modern "clusters" to trace ancient movements, other than in the broadest and most general sense. Northeast Euro contains Med. Caucasian includes other layers. These are just geographic descriptions of the alleles presently modal in those areas. It's not the same as seeing what percentage of a modern group can be attributed to Satsurblia, or LBK, or even MN etc.
Click to expand...
It is good enough to play with it for fun. Comparison samples to their contemporaries is rather precise, but much less through time with new mutations and drifting complicates things.

Also, you can't use modern Turks (and their percentages of these modern "clusters") as a proxy population for any group that would have moved into southern Europe from the east. There have continued to be large population movements across the whole Near East since the Bronze Age. Modern Anatolians, for example, have from 6-12% Siberian/East Asian etc. from the movement of Turkic populations into Anatolia only within the last 1000 years. That would necessarily have lowered their percentages of other components. That's only one example.
Click to expand...
Aside of Siberian admixture, modern Turk was just example who we need to look up in the past for the source. Someone alike but 4 ky older without Syberian and NE Asian. Whoever it was in Bronze Age, I'm guessing, modern Turks have huge genetic continuity with them.

Specifically, to the best of my recollection, some of the modelers at anthrogenica looking closely at the Near Eastern Copper Age and Bronze Age samples found that after the Neolithic there was a movement of a more heavily SW Asian "like" population north and east across the region. This may be closer to the population that moved into southern Europe. I'll see if I can find it. Unfortunately, I didn't save a copy of the analysis.
Click to expand...
I'm sure there were movements of populations in Neolithic Europe, but by looking at admixtures, the movements were of local "stock" only. No new admixtures popping up, or dramatic changes, or rise of Near Eastern admixtures like Caucasian, SW Asian and Baloch indicating migration from Near East or Anatolia. Till Bronze Age when we see huge jump of Steppe admixtures. If there were bigger movements, Hungarian area was insulated, or cultural achievements and changes were introduced only by small traveling artisan groups, small bands, nothing dramatic.

[TABLE="width: 1127"]
[TR]
[TD]Stuttgart[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE7 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]CO1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]BR1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]3.15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD] 30.60[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]28.27[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.04[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.26[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]14.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD] 7.82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]12.13[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.74[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]46.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]0.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]0.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD] 49.46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]45.75[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]56.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]55.37[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]31.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD] 12.01[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]13.45[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]7.96[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]8.52[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]3.33[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD] 0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]0.05[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]- [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD] - [/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.35[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.48[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
LeBrok said:
It is good enough to play with it for fun. Comparison samples to their contemporaries is rather precise, but much less through time with new mutations and drifting complicates things.

Aside of Siberian admixture, modern Turk was just example who we need to look up in the past for the source. Someone alike but 4 ky older without Syberian and NE Asian. Whoever it was in Bronze Age, I'm guessing, modern Turks have huge genetic continuity with them.

I'm sure there were movements of populations in Neolithic Europe, but by looking at admixtures, the movements were of local "stock" only. No new admixtures popping up, or dramatic changes, or rise of Near Eastern admixtures like Caucasian, SW Asian and Baloch indicating migration from Near East or Anatolia. Till Bronze Age when we see huge jump of Steppe admixtures. If there were bigger movements, Hungarian area was insulated, or cultural achievements and changes were introduced only by small traveling artisan groups, small bands, nothing dramatic.

[TABLE="width: 1127"]
[TR]
[TD]Stuttgart[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE7 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]CO1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]BR1 Hungary[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Population[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]S-Indian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Baloch[/TD]
[TD]3.15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]30.60[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]28.27[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.04[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]19.26[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD]14.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]7.82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]12.13[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]16.74[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Euro[/TD]
[TD]46.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]0.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Siberian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]NE-Asian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Papuan[/TD]
[TD]0.18[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]American[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Beringian[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]49.46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]45.75[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]56.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]55.37[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD]31.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]12.01[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]13.45[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]7.96[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]8.52[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]SW-Asian[/TD]
[TD]3.33[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]San[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]E-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]0.05[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Pygmy[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.35[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]W-African[/TD]
[TD]0.48[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

I know that you understand that these numbers can't be precise in terms of ancient movements, but other people reading these posts may not. (Comparisons between modern populations are a different story, of course.)

I agree that any movement from the east in the Bronze Age would have had more "Caucasian" than the Anatolian farmers. What we don't know, because of the internal migrations within the Near East and from the Arabian peninsula into the Near East, is how much more "Caucasian", how much "SW Asian", how much "Mediterranean"? I agree that modern Turks have a lot of ancestry from the Bronze Age; I just think our best proxies are and will be ancient samples from the Near East.*

As for movements into Europe up to and including the Copper Age, we know there were different waves from archaeology. I agree that they were roughly similar people, but your own data in this post does indeed show differences in the percentages of components like SWAsian, Caucasus etc. and I think some of that may come from slight variations in the composition of the different Neolithic waves.

Ed. * Given how much variation there is in Turkey even today, I think it's quite likely that variation existed in the Bronze Age as well.
 
New Englander said:
Why did the Caucasian components get spread around Europe, while the SW Asian did not, if they are both EEF related? I notice that Turks and Kurds do not have as much SW Asian than Italians as well. Was the SW Asian a direct result of Roman slave trade? While the Caucasian mixture was from much earlier via Bronze age and Indo European?

And as far as Baloch is concerned, its seems to be around 8% everywhere for the most part.
Click to expand...
If you are willing to do that, Germanic admixture can be attributed to slave trade as well.
 
@Pax Augusta , Not on this run, but Iv seen plenty of GED spread sheets that show Sicilians and South Italians with more SW Asian than Turks and Kurds. it might mean different things on different calculators though, so Im not sure if it would be relevant to Harppa world.
 
A. Papadimitriou said:
If you are willing to do that, Germanic admixture can be attributed to slave trade as well.
Click to expand...

What of all the Gauls (one-third of their entire population), Britons, Spaniards, Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, and on and on. It's always amazed me that certain people think the Romans enslaved only Syrians. Or, that all the slaves taken were sold in Italia; many, perhaps, but not all. Aren't all these ancient dna samples from Britain, for example, who are genetically Levantine or Arabian, or Egyptian, or African proof of that? Nor were all the slaves sold in Italia sold in Sicily and the south. It doesn't really make sense to me. Where is the indication that only slaves from Syria were sent to Italy, and moreover, that they were all sent to the south?



It doesn't matter what we say, however. The same people will continue to claim the same things.

I don't want to be mis-understood, however; some slaves in Italy undoubtedly passed on their dna. It's just more complicated that these kind of people are willing to admit.
 
Last edited:
^ Why cant it be than slaves from Northern and Eastern Europe were more likely to end up in the Italian North, while slaves from the middle east were more common in the South specifically. This could be due to simple geography, you import the slaves that are closet to you, not from farther away. Not saying all slaves ended up in Italy, or in one place to that matter. Nor am I saying only Syrians were enslaved. Im saying maybe the slaves brought in were related to a geographical restriction.

But it this way. Most Italians live in Jew Jersey and New York. That does not mean I cannot find them in Wyoming, just that they are less able to make a genetic contribution.
 
New Englander said:
^ Why cant it be than slaves from Northern and Eastern Europe were more likely to end up in the Italian North, while slaves from the middle east were more common in the South specifically. This could be due to simple geography, you import the slaves that are closet to you, not from farther away. Not saying all slaves ended up in Italy, or in one place to that matter. Nor am I saying only Syrians were enslaved. Im saying maybe the slaves brought in were related to a geographical restriction.

But it this way. Most Italians live in Jew Jersey and New York. That does not mean I cannot find them in Wyoming, just that they are less able to make a genetic contribution.
Click to expand...

Where is your proof that this happened? Was there some huge slave market in, say, Sicily, where all slaves from the east were sent?

By contrast, we have a lot of information, including carvings on major triumphal arches in Rome, as well as actual writings, that slaves taken in battle were brought to Rome and marched in the triumphal processions for the conquering general. You can go to the Arch of Titus and look at the depictions of all the Judean slaves. Or you can go and see the depictions of the Dacians, the Gauls, and on and on.

A certain number were executed, but the rest were sold by the general to slave traders. It's said that Caesar sold so many Gaulish slaves that there was a glut on the Roman market and they brought half the normal going rate. The slave traders then transported them to wherever in the Roman world there was a need for certain types of slaves: strong men for the mines, the galleys, or latifundia in various parts of the Roman world, pretty girls for the brothels. None of the preceding was likely to survive long enough to be manumitted and have offspring. People with specialized skills would be disposed of accordingly.

People were also sold into slavery, or sold themselves into slavery, including poor farmers in Italia, or captured by pirates, etc. Every town had a slave market and slave dealers. This was a business. They would send the slaves where they could get the best price, where they were needed. Or, if they had been captured in war, they in fact sent them as far away as feasible. Supposedly, many of my own Celt-Liguri were settled in Samnite country. You can see that distance didn't really pose a problem for the Romans. North Africans incorporated into the Roman military machine were sent to the Wall in Britain and stayed there for a long time. By your reasoning they should have been sent to Iberia. Balkan troops were also stationed there.

The immigrants who came to America in the late 19th/early 20th century didn't wind up along the eastern seaboard because it was closer to Europe. They wound up there because middle men hired by factory owners etc. had gone to small towns in Italy and persuaded people to sign up to go to America to work in the factories in the industrial belt in the east, or on the railroads, or, they themselves had heard about these jobs. Scandinavians made the much further trip out to the midwest because cheap land had been advertised to them. The Irish worked on the railroads for the same reason. There's an economic motive for most things if you know anything about history.

Your proposal is sheer speculation unsupported by any shred of data, and, indeed, contradicted by the data we do have. You can continue to pull it out of your hat for eternity, and I'm sure you will. It won't make it any more credible.

Nor, by the way, does this explain why there are similar percentages of Caucasian in Greece and southern Italy, and, in fact, southern Italians have less Caucasian, Mediterranean, and SW Asian than Greek Islanders. Were all the eastern slaves dumped there? The islands would have sunk under the weight. Nor was there that kind of need there.

Of course, should something come to light that proves differently, that's fine. What difference does it make? I just like my history as objectively interpreted as possible, not agenda driven.

Now, I'm tired of talking about it. I can't believe I got drawn into this dance once again.
 
New Englander said:
^ Why cant it be than slaves from Northern and Eastern Europe were more likely to end up in the Italian North, while slaves from the middle east were more common in the South specifically. This could be due to simple geography, you import the slaves that are closet to you, not from farther away.
Click to expand...

It's not supported by any historical source, and to be honest it doesn't make any sense. Btw slaves were in the entire Roman Empire and in Italy mostly concentrated in Rome.

More than 200 skeletons found in three Cemeteries from Imperial Rome (non-elite Imperial-era cemeteries) have been examined in two reaserches, 2007 and 2016.

From the 2007 paper abstract:

We hypothesize that migrants most likely came from higher elevations to the East and North of Rome. One individual with a higher δ18O value may have come (as a child) from an area isotopically similar to North Africa.
Click to expand...

Source: Isotopic evidence for age-related immigration to imperial Rome

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20541/abstract


In the 2016 paper 1 out of 189 individuals examined is of supposed North African origin. Others come from the Alps.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eal-migration-to-Rome-during-the-imperial-era
 
New Englander said:
^ Why cant it be than slaves from Northern and Eastern Europe were more likely to end up in the Italian North, while slaves from the middle east were more common in the South specifically. This could be due to simple geography, you import the slaves that are closet to you, not from farther away. Not saying all slaves ended up in Italy, or in one place to that matter. Nor am I saying only Syrians were enslaved. Im saying maybe the slaves brought in were related to a geographical restriction.

But it this way. Most Italians live in Jew Jersey and New York. That does not mean I cannot find them in Wyoming, just that they are less able to make a genetic contribution.
Click to expand...
Why 'Middle eastern' admixture has to be attributed to slavery, especially when we know that slaves were quite often local and also quite often imported from the north too. And some 'SW Asian' admixture seems to have already existed in Neolithic Hungary, for example. Besides, some of it can be attributed to 'Phoenicians' too. Also Herodotus writes for example.

I said as far back as Perseus, and I took the matter no further than that, because no one is named as the mortal father of Perseus, as Amphitryon is named father of Heracles. So I used correct reasoning when I said that the Greek record is correct as far back as Perseus; farther back than that, if the king's ancestors in each generation, from Danae daughter of Acrisius upward, be reckoned, then the leaders of the Dorians will be shown to be true-born Egyptians.
Click to expand...

That may be wrong but I think we should take it into account. There might be prehistorical flows somewhat like that in Italy too.
 
So everyone knows the extra CHG/Iran Neo in Europe doesn't only exist in Southern Europe it exists in all of France, some German speaking Central European countries, Moldova/Romania/SW Ukraine, and it's most northern extent might be England. One piece of data one can use to try to deceiver where in West Asia it is from is parental markers(Y DNA, mtDNA). E1b1b and J2 are pretty popular in Southern Europe. This indicates it came from Natufian/Levant Neo+Iran Neo/CHG mixed populations.

Everyone in the Middle East was that way by 4500-3000 BC so that doesn't narrow it down much. Local popular Mid eastern Y DNA haplogroups in Southern Europe; E-V13 and J2b2, indicates this admixture has been there for a while. Like how local Steppe Y DNA haplogroups indicate Steppe admixture has been in Europe for a while.

This doesn't indicate it came mostly from Mid Eastern slaves brought to Europe in Roman times, I can't imagine slaves making impact anyways. Plus, as hard as it is to detect, a higher frequency of Mid Eastern-specific mtDNA is documented in Italy and Greece. If enough is found, with high coverage mtDNA, it'll be good evidence it was a migration not sporadic immigration.

Also btw Italy is one of the few spots in Europe mega Bronze age lineages(R1b, R1a, I2a1b, I1, N1c) don't completely dominate the Y DNA and because of that you do you see a decent amount of Anatolian Neolithic G2a2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top