Printable View
My 90% continuity post was sarcasm refering to another member. And nobody is denying genetic continuity in Southern Italy. In fact I was extremely confused when people said Ancient Greeks replaced the bulk of the population in Southern Italy, just like 50% replacement in Tuscany with Levantines and Anatolians is also just as wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
Okay than, if you were being sarcastic perhaps there was a misunderstanding.
At any rate, I hope the links I provided help illuminate my reasoning for my claims.
My two cents:
It is clear that Italy underwent a change with respect to how it was in the early iron age but the archeogenetics of Italy is still poorly understood, so no definitive answer can be reached, but what is certainly wrong are the assumptions that 1) Italy was all Latin-like (maybe all mainland Italy was Latin-like but just Sicily was Sicilian_BA-like? it might be but I find it hard to believe, afterall osco-umbrian Italics were late arrivals); 2) that the only way to explain the modern Italians' position in a PCA is the double levantine-germanic gene flow, since SE Europeans in late antiquity plotted where modern Italians plot now and gene flows between Italy and the Balkans are more parsimonious.
It is clear south Italians aren't like they were in the IA but neither are north Italians compared to ancient Italics, that is it seems that there was a global phenomenon that interested all Italy, and for that reason I am skeptical of some attempts of explaining the ethnogenesis of modern south Italians as something that had no influences on and from what happened in other parts of Italy.
The Euganei (or Euganeans) were not part of the West Indo-European migration into southern Central Europe from its Pontic steppe homeland between about 3500-2500 BC. Instead they may have borne a degree of relationship with the Etruscans of north-western Italy .
The Euganei initially had tribal centres around Verona and Padua (Patavium). They extended towards the Raeti and shared territory with them, mining and trading in iron ore. Roman historian Cato counts thirty-four Euganei towns (and therefore groups, tribes, or sub-tribes), amongst which were the Triumpilini of Val Trompia, a people who were claimed as being sold along with their territory . The dominant tribe seems to have been the Stœni (while Strabo also mentions the Stoni or Stœni among the minor Alpine tribes. Mannert thinks they dwelt near the sources of the River Chiese, around the site of the modern village of Storo). The Camuni or Camunni (around Val Camonica at the south-western end of Raeti territories are ascribed as being Euganei by Pliny.
EUGA´NEI
Eth. EUGA´NEI a people of Northern Italy, who play but an unimportant part in historical times, but appear at an earlier period to have been more powerful and widely spread. Livy expressly tells us (1.1) that they occupied the whole tract from the Alps to the head of the Adriatic, from which they were expelled by the Veneti. And it is quite in accordance with this statement that Pliny describes Verona as inhabited partly by Rhaetians, partly by Euganeans, and that Cato enumerated 34 towns belonging to them. (Plin. Nat. 3.19. s. 23, 20. s. 24.) They appear to have been driven by the Veneti into the valleys of the Alps on the Italian side of the chain, where they continued to subsist in the time of Pliny as a separate people, and had received the Latin franchise. But they must also have occupied the detached group of volcanic hills between Patavium and Verona, which are still known as the Euganean Hills (Colli Euganei), a name evidently transmitted by uninterrupted tradition, though not found in any ancient geographer.
Lucan indeed speaks of the “Euganeus collis,” which he associates with the baths of Aponus, and it is probable that the “Euganei lacus” of Martial refer to the same waters. (Lucan 7.192; Martial, 4.25. 4.) The latter author in another passage gives the name of Euganean to the town of Ateste at the foot of the same hills, and Sidonius Apollinaris applies the epithet of “Euganeae chartae” to the writings of Livy. (Id. 10.93; Sidon. Apoll. Paneg. Anthem. 189.) Hence it is evident that the tradition of their having previously occupied these regions survived long after their expulsion by the Veneti. According to Cato, the mountain tribes of the Triumpilini and Camuni, considerably further west (in the Val Camonica and Val Trompia) were also of Euganean race (ap. Plin. Nat. 3.20. s. 24).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawk
this is still the best we got
( take into account that the samples are from southern apulia the north or central part could be different)
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...on-samples.png
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...on-samples.png
source:
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...me_perspective
What I find highly interesting is the significant percentages of R1a-M17 in Apulia, Calabria Ionica, and especially Grecia Salentina, and the paucity of J1 even in the south.
For those who may have forgotten, the Valle Borbera is listed as Piemonte, but that's an accident of recent map drawing politics; the villages all speak a Ligurian dialect and even the names of the villages contain the word "Ligure". So, those are isolated Ligurians, who, as you can see, are very high in R1b, especially U-152, but also have 12.9% of G2a-497, and barely any E-V13. That, to me, and contrary to some of the speculation introduced to this board, speaks to a maritime spread of E-V13 in the Ligurians.
As for Tortona/Vorghera, they're in a no man's land between Lombardia, Piemonte and Emilia.
As I've expounded upon before, these mountain communities of the Appennines are pretty similar in genetic make-up, I think, as they are in culture. Cavalli Sforza speculated these were the refugial areas of the Celt-Ligurians. I wish they could be tested against ancient samples from there, if we ever get some, before all the older people with all four grandparents from the area are dead.
Valle Borbera: lots of burly, rather portly men with big, broad, round skulls for the most part, as there are in the Appennines of Emilia.
STEFANO VALLA e MATTEO BURRONE "" Monferrina "" - YouTube
CORO SPONTANEO "" Bella Angiolina "" - YouTube
Back in the 1990s Cavalli-Sforza saw the Northern Apennines as a Ligurian refuge while southern Tuscany/Northern Lazio was an Etruscan hotspot.
imgur.com/c5qyKxc
it is interesting that they also carry 3.5% e-m35* 3/85 ( i know its not high but still)Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
since the markers: m81, m78 and m123 were tested and been found negetive for these samples
they might belong e-pf2431 under e-L19
that wasn't tested here ....:thinking:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-PF2431/
they are interesting population indeed;-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_Borbera
p.s
about the r1a in significant % in south italy it is truly suprising
I1 is higher in Sweden, R1a in parts of Norway. I think there were also tribal differences between various Germanic groups, even more so those which might have been recent founders in Italy.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingjohn
Notice it's not the "Slavic" R1a, of which there's virtually none in Italy. It might be from the Balkans, but prior to the arrival of the Slavs, although I'm not sure how much of that is present in the western Balkans and Greece. The other possibility might be the Vikings/Normans. Even if there weren't enough of them to make a significant change in the people autosomally, the Y dna can hang around.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingjohn
The yDna differences between Calabria Ionica and Calabria Tirrenica are interesting. To explain it one only need look at the topography of the area. The Aspromonte mountains divide Calabria into halves. Don't we only have academic samples from Calabria Tirrenica?
Very interesting finding about R1a-M17. Isn't that a marker for the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European language populations. Do we know when it arrived in the area?Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
you are correct the slavic r1a is r1a-m458 extremely low % to non -exist in south italy
good question
but from looking at the calabrian greeks paper :
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82591-9
in supplemental tables
only 28 greeks from calabria were tested for autosomal anlaysis
and they didn't bother to check for there y haplogroups
which is a shame than we can see if there is overlapp in uniparental signitures
with greeks from salento in apulia:upset:
Normans for the most part I guess, but could also have been with Goths.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsnake49
Those areas are very specific, some stayed under the goths for less than 10 years while centuries under the Byzantines. If it was the Normans I think Sicily would be much higher and that isn't the caseQuote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
My belief is that the results showing +5% Germanic Y-DNA in Southern Italy suffer from sample bias. All of them.
I was wondering the same, how can those E-V13 hop Western Balkans and Italy and appear in Southern Liguria.Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
… the Duke of Puglia laid the foundations for the Kingdom of Sicily, … and the last original (Hauteville) Norman king of Sicily, Tancred of Lecce, was born in Lecce (Salento, Puglia ).Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnimirie
… Robert Guiscard (Hauteville) Norman adventurer who settled in Apulia, in southern Italy, about 1047 and became duke of Apulia (1059). He eventually extended Norman rule over Naples, Calabria, and Sicily and laid the foundations of the kingdom of Sicily …
https://www.britannica.com/biography...duke-of-Apulia
The interesting thing is that you find the E-V13 in coastal Liguria, but not in the Ligurian Appennines. If, as some think, it came from the northern Balkans into Italy I would think it would be present in the mountains north of the coast as well as on the coast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawk
That's why I've always thought that perhaps the most parsimonious explanation is Greeks, some from Massalia, and some from Luni.
Of course, with yDna lines you need lots and lots of samples and they have to be really refined as to sub-lineages, so I'm not dying on this hill, if you get my meaning. :)
Maybe just mercenaries hired by the Byzantines from the same part of the world? The Varangians? That's all the Normans were initially as well, after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnimirie
Or, it could be Greek migration, perhaps? Anyone know how much R1a-M17 there is in Greece?
At some point it would be good to compare the Tyrrhenian Calabrians, the Ionian Calabrians, and the "Greek" Calabrians of the Aspromonte enclave just north of Reggio Calabria autosomally.
Almost the entire R1a is Slavic in Greece. While R1a-Z93 is hypothesized to be a Mycenaean line from Agamemnon. Not sure where he got the idea. It could be true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
Did Greeks have colonies in modern Liguria? I searched in Internet did not find anything. Only about France.
I have seen in Kalymnos that G2a reaches 20% and in Crete it is 10% while J2a is the same. So we might see regional differences when it comes to Y-dna in Ancient Greece, given how similar Thracians were to Mycenaean. The impact of E-V13 people could go unnoticed completely during the Late Bronze Age autosomally but I strongly believe it was lower than J2a in Ancient Peloponnese.
Iron Age South Thracians might be only few hairs away from Mycenaeans in the PCA.
a few small trading posts .......but the big town wasQuote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
The oldest city of modern France, Marseille, was founded around 600 BC by Greeks from the Asia Minor city of Phocaea
They also owned Corsica ...before the etruscans invaded and took it ............
The problem with this theory is that the centre of the Greek colonisation along the Western Mediterranean shows no higher E-V13 percentage, but in fact a lower one. And if one goes North and East, from Liguria, there are pockets of high E-V13 in Switzerland, Austria, Southern, Western and Central Germany. Not as high as in Liguria, but if considering how much of the local patrilineages are of recent Germanic and Slavic origin in those areas, the relative percentage of the pre-Germanic share is still quite high. In St. Gallen it might be even as high as in Liguria or not too far from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela
We have to consider many founder effects and shifts, about which we know almost nothing, but both the overall distribution suggest rather an LBA-EIA/Urnfield-Hallstatt spread. Another problem is that we don't have enough for Greeks themselves. Both Greeks, Swiss, Venetians and Ligurians are not well tested for BigY/WGS. Same goes for the whole Southern German range.
The only really well-tested people in this respect are currently the British Isles and Albanians imho. Like there could be a connection ranging from Serbia, over Hungary, into the Alps and down to Switerland and Northern Italy, well into France and Germany, with relevant subclades for the LBA-EIA, by the looks of it. But the testing is insufficient to really confirm it at this point and ancient DNA is the prime mean to really prove it.
Ahem, I raised this very point not so long agoQuote:
Originally Posted by Angela
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post633750
Of course I am hardly a man of science. My suspicions are informed entirely by my own narrow data. I know that my Italian ancestry is from Monte Poro (Tyrrhenian Calabria) and has existed in the area dating back at least to 1500, and yet I score very high Northern Italian.
How to account for this? My gut instinct is that Etruscan-like groups settled the western coasts of Italy from north-to-south. I realize the Etruscans only barely entered Campania, but perhaps other Etruscan-like peoples went further south . . . . In Calabria, my imagined Tyrsenian-speakers were followed by Oscans (Ausonians) and eventually by Roman colonies (e.g., Vibo Valentia, initially Greek, briefly held by Carthage, thoroughly Romanized after 194 BC). Although research conducted at Punta di Zambrone has revealed deep trade links between Tyrrhennian Calabria and the Aegean world, from circa 2000 BCE down to 1200 BCE, the region also participated in West Mediterranean networks, primarily with the Aeolian Islands and north coast Sicily, but also points further north.
If there was in fact significant Etruscan & Roman gene flow into this part of Calabria, it would have partially offset the great & repeated influxes of CHG & Anatolian ancestry that came through the east-to-west corridor dating back to the Neolithic. Calabria Tirrenica should therefore be shifted to the NW from Ionian Calabria, Eastern Sicily and Apulia.
Regardless, it looks like we should have some answers soon. There are lots of caves in Calabria with very old bones ==
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146030/
I also started a new thread on Punta di Zambrone in the Archaeology section. I just discovered a 2021 book devoted to its archaeology online. It looks amazing. I'm studying for a big exam, so I probably shouldn't tax my mind reading it just yet. But I of course find ways to procrastinate (for example, visiting Eupedia)
… just a personal observation,
… KingJohn post #555 has the highest y T in Volterra,
… Modern T-SK1480 (Torzio and I final clade), is also located near Volterra,
… my SPA (Spatial Ancestral Analysis) result is Chieti, located near Bronze-Age T-Z19945
… Chieti is also one of my MyHeritage Genetic Groups.
… they’re too many to be just coincidences, … who knows :)
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...on-samples.png
https://i.imgur.com/PyLrCs1.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/iEzqfaS.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ARLidSw.jpg
http://genetics.cs.ucla.edu/spa/
http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html