The genetic origin of Daunians

This is how one memeber of Anthrogenica hypothesized that native Apulians will plot and I pretty much agree with this, so I thought sharing it here.
https://i.imgur.com/JfnnLxb.png

… educated guess or not, I wouldn’t post fake PCAs, … some may assume they’re real though they’re not.

I personally would like to see the actual samples first hand.

At any rate, I think it is interesting to point out that Bulgarian_IA plots close to the so-called outlier Daunians:

https://i.imgur.com/rdJYYh5.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

I personally would like to see the actual samples first hand.

At any rate, I think it is interesting to point out that Bulgarian_IA plots close to the so-called outlier Daunians

---

Yup, I thought about it the other day too. Here is a Bronze Age Southern Bulgarian sample in an academic PCA.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/as...o=w970-h631-no

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihype02

Yup, I thought about it the other day too. Here is a Bronze Age Southern Bulgarian sample in an academic PCA.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/as...o=w970-h631-no

---

Here is the PCA from the study on the Genomics of Southeastern Europe. For some reason it seems to project them further east, but I am not sure why that is so. Lazaridis et al. 2017 projects Mycenaeans further east, right on top of South Italians. Though most other PCAs project them further west.

https://i.imgur.com/3e7ttTA.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

First of all, I don't appreciate the tone of your post in regards to mine. I was not rude to you, do not be rude to me.
Secondly, I am talking about Apulia in general, not just the Daunians. You falsely claim the population of all of Apulia was completely supplanted by the Romans with Greeks and East Med people, and offer no proof of it. In fact I have provided proof of the opposite.
Thirdly, the father of ORD001 leaves the speculation open to the idea of higher CHG people living among them, with his proclivity to Greece_N

---

and neither was I rude to you

direct yes, rude no


https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post628068

all these plotting scenarios are only based on the samples used and samples avoided.......looks like the many "doctored" admixture tests in vahauduo ..........selected samples to suit ones needs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

all these plotting scenarios are only based on the samples used and samples avoided.......looks like the many "doctored" admixture tests in vahauduo ..........selected samples to suit ones needs

---

I hope you are not implying that the PCAs I am using are doctored in anyway. It is a fairly comprehensive catalog of ancient DNA samples from accross all the significant studies from the Reich lab's list. Not to mention the HGDP samples along with the regular Dodecad Globe 13 samples.

https://i.imgur.com/2sUjOYi.png

Here they are with the Mycenaens.

we should look at the confirmed Isotope union of Daunians with Dalmatians/Liburnians

as per the 2 papers from 2018 and 2020

https://dspace.uevora.pt/rdpc/bitstr...isotope....pdf

https://i.postimg.cc/6q6cLd7V/croat-daunian.png

https://i.postimg.cc/nhXsnDPg/isotop...ry-croatia.png


all these agree with the paper of the origin of the Daunians

https://i.imgur.com/8rwL49J.png

Here is a PCA with all of the relevant samples from Antonio et al. 2019, as well as Bulgaria_IA, and Mycenaeans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

and neither was I rude to you
direct yes, rude no
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post628068

---

What I am saying here doesn't imply that Greeks had influence on these Daunians. Rather I said the Pre-Italic people before them were possibly C6. I am talking about Puglia in general. The Greek colonists also had influence as well. We still need to see what they were like. You're saying the Romans replaced everyone with foreigners there, which is unsubstantiated. I think these people (Iapygian, Greeks, Pre-Italics, Italics) mixed together when the Romans brought control to the area. I am sure there was some influence from Imperial age Greeks and Eastern Mediterranean people as well (As they probably did in all of Italy, and beyond throughout the Roman empire), but I think this is over blown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone

What are you referring to with "completely new group of DNA"?
Is there a paper that shows that a region in Italy, Vagnari, was all Greek adn "east med" (by this I understand near east, from the Levant to Anatolia)?

---

The Levant is represented by C4.

C5 is more people genetically south of Sicily to Cyprus, such as Greco-Anatolians.

Do we have DNA from Apennine Culture, particularly from Southern Italy? I am pretty sure we don't

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

that's what the paper says ............No Greek influence ...........so see my reply to Jovialis above

---

This paper shows that the Daunians in north Apulia were as much "south" (in the Italian cline, westward shift in the PCA) as central Italians and north Apulians today, and thought "west" of them (downward shift in the PCA), they are roughly as much west as moderno north Italians are to ancient north Italians, and a few samples as much south as south Italians, which seems to be the case for BA Sicilians, at least from this PCA https://www.preprints.org/img/dyn_ab.../Fig_1_new.png

Honestly I do not see why you have brought up this "Greek influence" thing: I do not see any one here arguing that ancient Daunians plotted where they plot because of Greek influence, or that modern south Italians are different from Daunians because of "Greek influence", whatever that means since it is you that are claiming south Italy was utterly resettled by Near Easterners and Greeks: we have no idea how Anatolians looked like in the Iron age (just two sampes from a study, who can a Persian and a Greek settlers), and coeval Levantines would have pulled south Italians, which doesn't appear to be the case, and indeed no genetic analysis up to now showed any Levantine influence in Italians, and I doubt that there was any significant numbers of caucasians brought into Italy. As for Greeks, they too seem now east of ancient Greeks, thus I do not see how Greeks and Near Easterners resettling all south Italy could explain Italian's genetics.
By the way, the extract you posted speaks of a depopulation, but it offers no evidence of a resettlement of the east med peoples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

https://i.imgur.com/8rwL49J.png

Here is a PCA with all of the relevant samples from Antonio et al. 2019, as well as Bulgaria_IA, and Mycenaeans.

---

Distance to:	Jovialis
8.34441130	Bulgarian_IA:Mathieson_et_al_2018:I5769

I am sure I will be around this distance to the closest Daunian, when the samples are released. If Bulgarian_IA is a good proxy for it.

I think a lot of the exotic graves found in the Antonio et al. 2019 study were indeed, traders, and people passing through for business, rather than mass immigration. The regions they came from were very wealthy already:

https://i.imgur.com/9mviWq2.jpg

Modern Apulians are more northern shifted than Sicilians, and Iron Age Apulians are less Western than the Bronze Age Sicilians. Not to mention they are all from the Northern Apulia.

Still some people were expecting IA Apulians to plot as the BA Sicilians but that is not the case. Let's not ignore that.

Nearly complete Greek replacement with minority but substantial Levantine ancestry in Apulia is out of question now. I doubt Greek influence extends 20% in Apulia, even Pontic Greeks hardly push 15% Empuries-type of ancestry compared to modern Lazes with more Greek cities in Pontus and I am taking Armenians out of equation who are more even more Western, they are to Pontians what Albanians are to Peloponnesians genetically (and perphaps historically too).

Old Greeks had like 4 cities, two of which were partly hellenized. This is not rocket science. If anything we should look at the Northern African/Moorish admixture better to explian the shift which makes sense judging by historical data and the PCA position of the Northern Africans. Minor Northern African admixture can archive a greater shift than some 20% Greek impact, and it explains a lot. Given that their presence in the documented historical data was mostly ignored (in antiquity). It would not be "ignored" if they were Levantines, because you need a GREATER number of Levantines.

Also Phoenicans, Moors were predominantly of Northern Africans and undocumented migration is more likely to be from Northern Africa rather than Levant too given the gheography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihype02

Modern Apulians are more northern shifted than Sicilians, and Iron Age Apulians are less Western than the Bronze Age Sicilians. Not to mention they are all from the Northern Apulia.

Still some people were expecting IA Apulians to plot as the BA Sicilians but that is not the case. Let's not ignore that.

Nearly complete Greek replacement with minority but substantial Levantine ancestry in Apulia is out of question now. I doubt Greek influence extends 20% in Apulia, even Pontic Greeks hardly push 15% Empuries-type of ancestry compared to modern Lazes with more Greek cities in Pontus and I am taking Armenians out of equation who are more even more Western, they are to Pontians what Albanians are to Peloponnesians genetically (and perphaps historically too).

Old Greeks had like 4 cities, two of which were partly hellenized. This is not rocket science. If anything we should look at the Northern African/Moorish admixture better to explian the shift which makes sense judging by historical data and the PCA position of the Northern Africans. Minor Northern African admixture can archive a greater shift than some 20% Greek impact, and it explains a lot. Given that their presence in the documented historical data was mostly ignored (in antiquity). It would not be "ignored" if they were Levantines, because you need a GREATER number of Levantines.

Also Phoenicans, Moors were predominantly of Northern Africans and undocumented migration is more likely to be from Northern Africa rather than Levant too given the gheography.

---

Modern Apulians are pulled in the direction of CHG, which is the opposite direction of North Africa, and the Moors. Also, modern DNA shows that Apulians only have trace amounts at most of North African. The modeling from Raveane et al. 2018 do not even model Apulians with North African.

From the Antonio et al. 2019 samples, we see some CHG/IN in Central Italian Neolithic samples at a relatively higher rate than for example LBK. Puglia has been a starting point for Neolithic migrations in Italy. Thus I believe that Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from the region will reflect higher CHG that was present in later farmers migrating from the East, already found in Greece_N. I think this legacy would have survived in Pre-Italic people. It would not have been in later comers like the Daunians. This is why C6 existed in the IA, among samples like R437.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

Modern Apulians are pulled in the direction of CHG, which is the opposite direction of North Africa, and the Moors. Also, modern DNA shows that Apulians only have trace amounts at most of North African. The modeling from Raveane et al. 2018 do not even model Apulians with North African.

From the Antonio et al. 2019 samples, we see some CHG/IN in Central Italian Neolithic samples at a relatively higher rate than for example LBK. Puglia has been a starting point for Neolithic migrations in Italy. Thus I believe that Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from the region will reflect higher CHG that was present in later farmers migrating from the East, already found in Greece_N. I think this legacy would have survived in Pre-Italic people. It would not have been in later comers like the Daunians. This is why C6 existed in the IA, among samples like R437.

---

All I have seen by this paper, the 2 isotope papers and the 2 papers from the 2 italian women is that the daunians came from modern croatians lands .................I have attached part articles of the 2 italian women in earlier posts.
Either all these papers , scholars, archeologists etc are wrong or ................

As for your Bulgarian sample .................north-italians always match bulgarian and provenzal french samples closely..........it goes back at least 6 years

Puglia has very ancient samples ..............but does the neolithic period have a close union with late bronze-age and iron-age periods or is the time gap too great ?

If your C6 covers central italy and the Umbri and their sub-tribes of Sabellic, sabines, Samnites are all in central and south Italy ( not sicily ) and we are told the Umbri came from around central europe into Italy circa 2200BC, then is your C6 purely a central italian marker or should it be a central-northern italian marker ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leopoldo Leone

This paper shows that the Daunians in north Apulia were as much "south" (in the Italian cline, westward shift in the PCA) as central Italians and north Apulians today, and thought "west" of them (downward shift in the PCA), they are roughly as much west as moderno north Italians are to ancient north Italians, and a few samples as much south as south Italians, which seems to be the case for BA Sicilians, at least from this PCA https://www.preprints.org/img/dyn_ab.../Fig_1_new.png

Honestly I do not see why you have brought up this "Greek influence" thing: I do not see any one here arguing that ancient Daunians plotted where they plot because of Greek influence, or that modern south Italians are different from Daunians because of "Greek influence", whatever that means since it is you that are claiming south Italy was utterly resettled by Near Easterners and Greeks: we have no idea how Anatolians looked like in the Iron age (just two sampes from a study, who can a Persian and a Greek settlers), and coeval Levantines would have pulled south Italians, which doesn't appear to be the case, and indeed no genetic analysis up to now showed any Levantine influence in Italians, and I doubt that there was any significant numbers of caucasians brought into Italy. As for Greeks, they too seem now east of ancient Greeks, thus I do not see how Greeks and Near Easterners resettling all south Italy could explain Italian's genetics.
By the way, the extract you posted speaks of a depopulation, but it offers no evidence of a resettlement of the east med peoples.

---

Best you check for yourself Livy works on the area in question

https://i.postimg.cc/JhgRZDf1/livy.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

Do we have DNA from Apennine Culture, particularly from Southern Italy? I am pretty sure we don't

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

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

---

One individual (GCP003) from Grotta Regina Margherita (Saupe et al. 2021), early Apennine culture (1600 BC) , but from Central Italy not South

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

All I have seen by this paper, the 2 isotope papers and the 2 papers from the 2 italian women is that the daunians came from modern croatians lands .................I have attached part articles of the 2 italian women in earlier posts.
Either all these papers , scholars, archeologists etc are wrong or ................
As for your Bulgarian sample .................north-italians always match bulgarian and provenzal french samples closely..........it goes back at least 6 years
Puglia has very ancient samples ..............but does the neolithic period have a close union with late bronze-age and iron-age periods or is the time gap too great ?
If your C6 covers central italy and the Umbri and their sub-tribes of Sabellic, sabines, Samnites are all in central and south Italy ( not sicily ) and we are told the Umbri came from around central europe into Italy circa 2200BC, then is your C6 purely a central italian marker or should it be a central-northern italian marker ?

---

The Italics were not C6, they were a C7 group that came to the south. C6 are the pre-Italics in my speculation.

what the romans state about apulia by roman writers


http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...y%3Dapulia-geo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

All I have seen by this paper, the 2 isotope papers and the 2 papers from the 2 italian women is that the daunians came from modern croatians lands .................I have attached part articles of the 2 italian women in earlier posts.
Either all these papers , scholars, archeologists etc are wrong or ................

As for your Bulgarian sample .................north-italians always match bulgarian and provenzal french samples closely..........it goes back at least 6 years

Puglia has very ancient samples ..............but does the neolithic period have a close union with late bronze-age and iron-age periods or is the time gap too great ?

If your C6 covers central italy and the Umbri and their sub-tribes of Sabellic, sabines, Samnites are all in central and south Italy ( not sicily ) and we are told the Umbri came from around central europe into Italy circa 2200BC, then is your C6 purely a central italian marker or should it be a central-northern italian marker ?

---

This is what Dodecad Globe 13 shows comparing Bulgarian_IA to modern populations. The closest are C_Italians, after them, Southern Italians.

Distance to:	Mathieson_et_al_2018:I5769
4.35862364	C_Italian_D
6.84000000	Sicilian_D
7.14573999	S_Italian_Sicilian_D
8.34441130	Jovialis
8.86282122	Tuscan
9.62546622	TSI30
9.75733570	Greek_D
10.20468520	Ashkenazi_D
10.67040768	Ashkenazy_Jews
13.56376054	O_Italian_D
14.68657891	Sephardic_Jews
14.70032653	Morocco_Jews
15.69992357	North_Italian
17.52265962	N_Italian_D
19.60529520	Canarias_1KG
21.09306995	Murcia_1KG
21.46964369	Andalucia_1KG
22.00703524	Baleares_1KG
22.84621632	Portuguese_D
22.93891017	Cypriots
23.00577319	Extremadura_1KG
23.43219153	Turkish_Aydin_Ho
23.74488577	Turkish_Cypriot_D
24.08098005	Galicia_1KG
24.21164183	Castilla_Y_Leon_1KG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

This is what Dodecad Globe 13 shows comparing Bulgarian_IA to modern populations. The closest are C_Italians, after them, Southern Italians.

Distance to:	Mathieson_et_al_2018:I5769
4.35862364	C_Italian_D
6.84000000	Sicilian_D
7.14573999	S_Italian_Sicilian_D
8.86282122	Tuscan
9.62546622	TSI30
9.75733570	Greek_D
10.20468520	Ashkenazi_D
10.67040768	Ashkenazy_Jews
13.56376054	O_Italian_D
14.68657891	Sephardic_Jews
14.70032653	Morocco_Jews
15.69992357	North_Italian
17.52265962	N_Italian_D
19.60529520	Canarias_1KG
21.09306995	Murcia_1KG
21.46964369	Andalucia_1KG
22.00703524	Baleares_1KG
22.84621632	Portuguese_D
22.93891017	Cypriots
23.00577319	Extremadura_1KG
23.43219153	Turkish_Aydin_Ho
23.74488577	Turkish_Cypriot_D
24.08098005	Galicia_1KG
24.21164183	Castilla_Y_Leon_1KG
24.21610208	Bulgarians_Y

---

I assume this calculator lacks Albanian as a reference? And probably many more reference populations. Am I correct?