The genetic origin of Daunians

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

South and East of Genova is La Spezia at 0% and then Toscana, which is again much lower. It makes little sense to me that Genova alone would have 16% but of course you're entitled to believe whatever you wish.

As for the map being incorrect, this is data from four papers, and each area has from 60-80 samples.

Could you please provide your academic sources (a cite to the paper for each province in Italy and the number of samples for each province)? All I saw you list on the other thread is Boattini et al, which has a very small number of samples.

As for the map being of E-M78 instead of E-V13, we can see from the Boattini paper that most of the E-M78 in Italy is E-V13, so I think we still get a general idea, although of course more specificity would be better.

---

E-V13 in Southern Italy outside of Apulia is only slightly greater than average. And we don't know how much Ancient Greek colonists of Italy carried this Y-Dna, or if they even had it all to begin with.
Italy is also very understudied when it comes to Y-Dna, expect for Sicily.

For example I think most R1b-z2103 in Italy is of Italic origin (it is mostly a Western variant) even though some clades could be of Old Greek origin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihype02

Arbereshe Albanians in Calabria have 17% E-V13, which is higher than average.
Five haplogroups were found to particularly affect the genetic variability within and between the two Arbereshe groups (Supplementary Figure S1,Supplementary Table S4). The two most frequent HGs in ARB_CAL (E-V13, 16.9%; I-M223, 14.2%) do not match those found in ARB_SIC (I-P215, 20.5%; E-M123, 18.2%). By contrast, the third most frequent HG (R-SRY10831.2) is found at comparatively high frequencies in both Calabrian (9.43%) and Sicilian (11.35%) Arbereshe (Supplementary Table S4).
E-V13 in Sicily and Calabria is around 8%.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Sicily?iframe=yresults

---

Thanks
You always got interesting links :good_job:
Nice to see a well done research
On italian arbereshe

P.s
Side note cool to see e-m123 i wish
They have tested farther
To see how much of it is e-L791 and how much
Is e-m84 ( e-fgc18401, e-pf6751)
Afcorse the best would be to do y-sequence:thinking:

@riverman

The italian paper you presented has

The case of the Common of Grignano P. is particularly interesting, since its main feature is the very high frequency (22.73%) of a non-R haplogroup, T-M70,

Grignano Polesine is in Rovigo province in Veneto region ...................these people drifted from Umbri stock ........some have said Sabellic -Umbri people ..................they are similar to the many T-M70 found in the central italian mountain towns with A'Quila the main one .........they are Umbri of Sabellic and or Samnite stock ( both from Umbri origin )

One can't just use the set of samples one prefers. That goes for both the Arbereshe of Cosenza and the Italians as a whole. They have to be combined.

Therefore, the 68 samples, which are probably less than 5.9% E-V13 given that what was being tested for was E-M78, have to be considered along with the Sarno paper on the Arbereshe.

That's not to say that I don't think the number for Albanian descendants is higher than 5.9%, because it probably is; it's just a cautionary tale of how it's dangerous to make predictions or conclusions based on just one set of samples when you're dealing with yDna. You need lots and lots of samples. Even 68, in this instance, probably wasn't enough to give a valid picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

I wasn't referring to Italy alone, but the distribution as a whole. Like Greece has no higher percentages than Northern Albania-Kosovo, parts of Northern Italy and Switzerland have higher percentages, still there are differences on the same latitude between Baden-W�rttemberg/Swabia and core Bavaria etc. The point is, the map suggest a gradient, which could be associated with a simplified Neolithic model, which isn't there. The distribution is very different from that, because its no Neolithic spread, but a Bronze and Iron Age one, from a more Northern source than Greece.
Even in Italy, Apulia and the Venetian province, not just Liguria, stick out, with Central Italy being lower. Maciamo posted the numbers
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...attini-et-al-)

and there were other hints from different studies, like the paper on Italian commons:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...002/ajpa.24302

Also if looking at areas like Bretagne and Slovenia, the real frequency distribution is much more complex. In Italy there is definitely a Ligurian and Venetian centre, because the tendency persists in the neighbouring provinces as far as I know, I stumbled across some numbers on different occasions, can't list all these and didn't use all them, since it would be more fine grained than the map allows anyway, but it generally confirmed the pattern. The more above average frequency in Apulia mostly comes from later Balkan and Albanian migrants from Late Antiquity on.
What's also noteworthy is that in some core Rhaetic areas, there might be a drop, rather than increase, which might point to a difference in the more Rhaetic-Etruscan area, but this is something which needs to be confirmed once more.

---

So basically, as far as Italy is concerned, you're hanging your hat on one paper: Boattini et al.

Sorry, that's not good enough. I don't see how you can base an entire hypothesis for Italy on one very small set of samples when there are indications from many other papers that are contra-indications.

At the least you'd have to look at the 68 samples in Semino et al and look at the data considering both sets of samples.

That would indicate to me a basic south/north skew, which makes perfect sense given that those areas are directly across from Greece and Albania.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

So basically, as far as Italy is concerned, you're hanging your hat on one paper: Boattini et al.

Sorry, that's not good enough. I don't see how you can base an entire hypothesis for Italy on one very small set of samples when there are indications from many other papers that are contra-indications.

At the least you'd have to look at the 68 samples in Semino et al and look at the data considering both sets of samples.

That would indicate to me a basic south/north skew, which makes perfect sense given that those areas are directly across from Greece and Albania.

---

The Southern increased frequency is mainly true for Apulia, which has the strongest Albanian impact. Other areas in Northern Italy are as high as in the South, not just by this one paper which we mostly rely upon, but also all the small papers with samples from Venetian province, Lombardy etc. And what's even more important, North of Italy, in Switzerland and Germany, this trend goes on, there are pockets of higher E-V13 frequency and the averages are not far below Central Italy, sometimes significantly higher actually.

From FTDNA and other sources we can see that in very Southern Italy other clades of E increase in frequency, like E-M81. This needs to be considered as well. If one considers that and the obviously more recent Balkan influences, what's more striking is the rather even distribution in Italy with some areas of higher frequency, especially some in the North and some in Greek settlements of the South, with some of the lowest frequencies in the core areas of Italics and Etruscans probably.
Even the Grugni paper showed a frequency not much below Apulia for e.g. Bergamo plain. The explanation he gives in the paper is insufficient, as long as we can't reconstruct the migration paths and phylogeny in detail. Its outdated like the description of the E-V13 expansion in the Balkans, though he is right about one thing: Its a Bronze Age(-Iron Age) phenomenon.

What's even more striking between the North and South is the ratio between E-V13 and J-M241/L283, the Daco-Thracian and Illyrian marker respectively, vs. other clades of E and J.

Note how E-V13 dominates totally in Northern Italy and J-M241 dominates totally in the North East:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig3_322822562

The closest association is clearly with R-U152 higher ratio within R.

This also shows that there are at least three main pathways for E-V13 in Italy:
- with R-U152 and generally from the North
- with J-L283/Illyrian-Albanian-Balkan related from later times (mainly Apulia)
- with Greek-Roman colonisations and migrations (Calabria and Sicily)

That's no strict division, but my prediction is that with higher resolution data, we will find respective networks for E-V13 clades and subclades, with some Northern in the South and Southern in the North too of course.

Its also the best explanation, the different spreading events, for why E-V13 is relatively stable throughout Italy, whereas many other haplogroups are not:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...s_in_Italy.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

What's even more striking between the North and South is the ratio between E-V13 and J-M241/L283, the Daco-Thracian and Illyrian marker respectively, vs. other clades of E and J.
Note how E-V13 dominates totally in Northern Italy and J-M241 dominates totally in the North East:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig3_322822562
The closest association is clearly with R-U152 higher ratio within R.
This also shows that there are at least three main pathways for E-V13 in Italy:
- with R-U152 and generally from the North
- with J-L283/Illyrian-Albanian-Balkan related from later times (mainly Apulia)
- with Greek-Roman colonisations and migrations (Calabria and Sicily)
That's no strict division, but my prediction is that with higher resolution data, we will find respective networks for E-V13 clades and subclades, with some Northern in the South and Southern in the North too of course.
Its also the best explanation, the different spreading events, for why E-V13 is relatively stable throughout Italy, whereas many other haplogroups are not:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...s_in_Italy.png

---

I have never seem J-L283 as Albanian .....................can you supply the data .................all I see of this marker is in croatian/Dalmatian and slovene lands ( ie, pre slav migration )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

I have never seem J-L283 as Albanian .....................can you supply the data .................all I see of this marker is in croatian/Dalmatian and slovene lands ( ie, pre slav migration )
very very odd that the map shows T ydna on the west side and K2 ( old marker for T ydna ) on the east side of italy ....................is the map an union of 2 different papers ?

---

Well, according to some peoples taste or personal preference of view E-V13 is not related to Albanians, other peoples taste J-L283 is not as Albanian. Chunk this, chunk that then what's left?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

The Southern increased frequency is mainly true for Apulia, which has the strongest Albanian impact. Other areas in Northern Italy are as high as in the South, not just by this one paper which we mostly rely upon, but also all the small papers with samples from Venetian province, Lombardy etc. And what's even more important, North of Italy, in Switzerland and Germany, this trend goes on, there are pockets of higher E-V13 frequency and the averages are not far below Central Italy, sometimes significantly higher actually.

From FTDNA and other sources we can see that in very Southern Italy other clades of E increase in frequency, like E-M81. This needs to be considered as well. If one considers that and the obviously more recent Balkan influences, what's more striking is the rather even distribution in Italy with some areas of higher frequency, especially some in the North and some in Greek settlements of the South, with some of the lowest frequencies in the core areas of Italics and Etruscans probably.
Even the Grugni paper showed a frequency not much below Apulia for e.g. Bergamo plain. The explanation he gives in the paper is insufficient, as long as we can't reconstruct the migration paths and phylogeny in detail. Its outdated like the description of the E-V13 expansion in the Balkans, though he is right about one thing: Its a Bronze Age(-Iron Age) phenomenon.

---

You are just too narrowly scoping down the spread IMO. According to Bulgarian paper on Psenicevo they see an increase of Neolithic autosomal and E-V13 during Iron Age, so this autosomal in the new Danubian limes is called as Aegean considering that Iron Age Thracian sample was leaning toward Myceneans. Then the question is, how could this happen if their initial spread was from somewhere from Slovakia/Romania/Hungary border zone.

IMO, this zone applies only for certain subclades which were migrants from the South during earlier times. What pattern do i see is that of a back and forward between Balkans and Carpathian/Alpine zone (South Central Europe) for E-V13, and that will be the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawk

You are just too narrowly scoping down the spread IMO. According to Bulgarian paper on Psenicevo they see an increase of Neolithic autosomal and E-V13 during Iron Age, so this autosomal in the new Danubian limes is called as Aegean considering that Iron Age Thracian sample was leaning toward Myceneans. Then the question is, how could this happen if their initial spread was from somewhere from Slovakia/Romania/Hungary border zone.
IMO, this zone applies only for certain subclades which were migrants from the South during earlier times. What pattern do i see is that of a back and forward between Balkans and Carpathian/Alpine zone (South Central Europe) for E-V13, and that will be the story.

---

Its forth and backward for Pannonia, not Bulgaria. For Bulgaria I do expect a replacement by a Channelled Ware people pincer movement, one from the Serbian Danubian area (Belegis II-Gava), the other from the Eastern Carpathians.
But I also expect them to replace primarily the patrilineages, while picking up women.
And for Bulgaria itself it also depends on the references, because in some areas they replaced Bulgarian Yamnaya, which were high in steppe.
Where do you have that from? Details are key.
Its in any case important that Bulgaria was reached by Channelled Ware related groups, and Psenichevo-Basarabi being largely the result of a mixture of Gava and Encrusted Ware, by two independent movements. They might even have differed autosomally.
Interestingly, the East Carpathian group was more Neolithic it seems, just like the Moldovan Geto-Scythians, whereas the Pannonian Thraco-Scythians were more Northern/Epi-Corded, with connections and gene glow between them, like respective outliers prove.
Some archaeologists said the initial Gava impact came rather from the North directly, from the Gava core and Moldova, rather than the Danube. Both met in Macedonia-Bulgaria anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

Its forth and backward for Pannonia, not Bulgaria. For Bulgaria I do expect a replacement by a Channelled Ware people pincer movement, one from the Serbian Danubian area (Belegis II-Gava), the other from the Eastern Carpathians.
But I also expect them to replace primarily the patrilineages, while picking up women.
And for Bulgaria itself it also depends on the references, because in some areas they replaced Bulgarian Yamnaya, which were high in steppe.
Where do you have that from? Details are key.
Its in any case important that Bulgaria was reached by Channelled Ware related groups, and Psenichevo-Basarabi being largely the result of a mixture of Gava and Encrusted Ware, by two independent movements. They might even have differed autosomally.
Interestingly, the East Carpathian group was more Neolithic it seems, just like the Moldovan Geto-Scythians, whereas the Pannonian Thraco-Scythians were more Northern/Epi-Corded, with connections and gene glow between them, like respective outliers prove.
Some archaeologists said the initial Gava impact came rather from the North directly, from the Gava core and Moldova, rather than the Danube. Both met in Macedonia-Bulgaria anyway.

---

I am pretty sure i have read it in some published paper for Psenicevo, though it included partial information, the same author who published the leaks in the TV Show was the author and he specifically mentioned an increase of Neolithic autosomal during Early Iron Age.

Bulgaria is out of consideration, Late Neolithic Bulgaria was dominated by G2a. But places like Serbia/Macedonia/Northern Greece are good candidates IMO, my best guess of initial spread is still Dalmatia, but at an earlier timeline than Cetina Culture phase. Places like Moldova/Ukraine by default are out of consideration. It's too East for E-V13.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawk

I am pretty sure i have read it in some published paper for Psenicevo, though it included partial information, the same author who published the leaks in the TV Show was the author and he specifically mentioned an increase of Neolithic autosomal during Early Iron Age.

Bulgaria is out of consideration, Late Neolithic Bulgaria was dominated by G2a. But places like Serbia/Macedonia/Northern Greece are good candidates IMO, my best guess of initial spread is still Dalmatia, but at an earlier timeline than Cetina Culture phase. Places like Moldova/Ukraine by default are out of consideration. It's too East for E-V13.

---

I think it came from around Dalmatia-Montenegro with Impresso-Cardial, moved up the Danube-Tisza valleys, was strong in Northern Lengyel, got cut off by Yamnaya and mixed initially, in a similar setting as Mokrin, then being integrated into Epi-Corded networks, related to the Nitra culture (R1a-dominated), probably it was in Late Otomani-F�zesabony, they came up when the Tumulus Culture pressed them Eastwards, into the triangle of Hungary-Slovakia-Romania. From there both Channelled Ware-G�va and in it E-V13 as the dominant lineage emerged.

Basically there is almost no way around the Tisza basin for the main initial spread. If we look at this map, the Upper Tisza basin was the source, the first spread along the Tisza basin, the secondary along the Danube basin, and you just got it:
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...-data-from.png

Note that these "Danube basin countries" are still the very core of the E-V13 distribution to this day! The main exception is Greece!

Just compare it with the latest frequency map of mine:

https://i.ibb.co/Gvb0bPk/E-V13-estimates.jpg

https://imgbb.com/4Z575NM

If we, in the next step, make an overlap of the geography with the Channelled Ware/Eastern Urnfield and later Hallstatt spread, its again nearly everything, except the Greek territories, which are a special case of secondary spread down the Morava valley first and then sea borne.

its also noteworthy that E-V13 wasn't even the first E1b1b group which took this path, Lengyel-Michelsberger did it before, along the Danube as well. They were however largely replaced by TRB-GAC and the steppe people later.

Compare with the initial Channelled Ware/G�va expansion:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile...ntioned-in.png

https://www.researchgate.net/profile...ntioned-in.png

Within the context of Urnfield:

https://media.springernature.com/ori..._Fig2_HTML.gif

https://media.springernature.com/original/springer-static/image/chp%3A10.1007%2F978-1-4419-6633-9_10/MediaObjects/978-1-4419-6633-9_10_Fig2_HTML.gif

The main problem is of course that they initially cremated - compare the maps before with the early spread of cremation:
https://www.oeaw.ac.at/fileadmin/Ins...CBAB_Karte.jpg

The main core was the Tisza basin, along the Danube basin the main spread of Urnfield and Channelled Ware customs took place, in successive waves. The latest was Hallstatt itself, which stems indirectly and directly, in part at least, from Channelled Ware-Basarabi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

I think it came from around Dalmatia-Montenegro with Impresso-Cardial, moved up the Danube-Tisza valleys, was strong in Northern Lengyel, got cut off by Yamnaya and mixed initially, in a similar setting as Mokrin, then being integrated into Epi-Corded networks, related to the Nitra culture (R1a-dominated), probably it was in Late Otomani-F�zesabony, they came up when the Tumulus Culture pressed them Eastwards, into the triangle of Hungary-Slovakia-Romania. From there both Channelled Ware-G�va and in it E-V13 as the dominant lineage emerged.

Basically there is almost no way around the Tisza basin for the main initial spread. If we look at this map, the Upper Tisza basin was the source, the first spread along the Tisza basin, the secondary along the Danube basin, and you just got it:
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...-data-from.png

Note that these "Danube basin countries" are still the very core of the E-V13 distribution to this day! The main exception is Greece!

Just compare it with the latest frequency map of mine:

https://i.ibb.co/Gvb0bPk/E-V13-estimates.jpg

https://imgbb.com/4Z575NM

If we, in the next step, make an overlap of the geography with the Channelled Ware/Eastern Urnfield and later Hallstatt spread, its again nearly everything, except the Greek territories, which are a special case of secondary spread down the Morava valley first and then sea borne.

its also noteworthy that E-V13 wasn't even the first E1b1b group which took this path, Lengyel-Michelsberger did it before, along the Danube as well. They were however largely replaced by TRB-GAC and the steppe people later.

Compare with the initial Channelled Ware/G�va expansion:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile...ntioned-in.png

https://www.researchgate.net/profile...ntioned-in.png

Within the context of Urnfield:

https://media.springernature.com/ori..._Fig2_HTML.gif

https://media.springernature.com/original/springer-static/image/chp%3A10.1007%2F978-1-4419-6633-9_10/MediaObjects/978-1-4419-6633-9_10_Fig2_HTML.gif

The main problem is of course that they initially cremated - compare the maps before with the early spread of cremation:
https://www.oeaw.ac.at/fileadmin/Ins...CBAB_Karte.jpg

The main core was the Tisza basin, along the Danube basin the main spread of Urnfield and Channelled Ware customs took place, in successive waves. The latest was Hallstatt itself, which stems indirectly and directly, in part at least, from Channelled Ware-Basarabi.

---

I cannot say things or be so specific at which Neolithic context since it's quite an unpredictable spread so to say, by that i mean the Late Neolithic context since Cardial-Impresso for Early Neolithic is a safe bet. So far we know it had a Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age expansion, but how much similar were some of the cultures which are directly or indirectly related to Aegean migrations is yet to be explained. I am interested on the scope of the spread, of the language of the people that spread with this Y-DNA including all subclades. I already know about Daco-Thracians, i want to know if there is more than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawk

I cannot say things or be so specific at which Neolithic context since it's quite an unpredictable spread so to say, by that i mean the Late Neolithic context since Cardial-Impresso for Early Neolithic is a safe bet. So far we know it had a Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age expansion, but how much similar were some of the cultures which are directly or indirectly related to Aegean migrations is yet to be explained. I am interested on the scope of the spread, of the language of the people that spread with this Y-DNA including all subclades. I already know about Daco-Thracians, i want to know if there is more than that.

---

If you look at Channelled Ware and if we consider it being the culture of Daco-Thracians, there are some things to note:
First, they did expand into other people's territories, but seem to not have replaced them everywhere, but sometimes just influenced and mixed with them. Notable instances would be especially Greece and the areas West of the Middle Danubian-Channelled Ware borderzone, which affected Urnfield almost as a whole, up to Poland, Germany, Austria, Italy. But these might have been more sporadic individual and small group migrations and contacts, we don't know for sure as of yet.
However, with the Cimmerians going through Channelled Ware people like a wedge, cutting them in half and mixing with those in the middle, at least the female side, this was a major turning point. At the same time this pushed a lot groups even more up the Danube, and those fused Thraco-Cimmerians reached far and these "Cimmerianised" Thracians being at the very foundation of Hallstatt, by, after the destruction, combining the innovations of the Channelled Ware with those brought from the Pontic steppe and Caucasus by the Cimmerians. Urnfield just like Hallstatt being multi-ethnic, so we have to expect admixtures and layers, without complete ethnic shifts, in many areas.

The real special case are the Greeks, because they being culturally heavily influenced by the Channelled Ware people too, but in the end, they seem to have, after adopting some elements from them, pushed them back or "just swallowed them". So the early Iron Age Greeks are the truly unknown factor, as to how much of a lasting genetic impact the Urnfield groups reaching the Aegais had on them directly. Because of the many later shifts, this is without way more ancient DNA and modern data impossible to tell.

As for the Illyrians, the flame shaped spears and the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon tell the story, because some being more influenced from these Pannonian-Carpathian incoming groups which carried E-V13 presumably, others less. Similar to Veneti vs. Rhaeti. It was more of a contact and surely no overtake, on the contrary, on the longer run they gained a momentum and pushed Channelled Ware related groups back. The contact zone caused mixed groups like the Dardanians and the Triballi.

As for the position in the crucial moment, they can't have been more South in the LBA than the Serbian Danube, because if we consider the two main ingredients for the Psenichevo-Basarabi groups, Channelled Ware and Encrusted Ware, with Channelled Ware as the more dominant element, the E-V13 clans need to jump in, also because of their phylogeny, early, in the MBA already and spread wide, take a dominant position in the Channelled Ware networks. This means the G�va core in the triangle of Hungary-Slovakia-Romania is ideal, the Serbian Danube still possible, anything further away from the Tisza basin quite unlikely.

… the chrom. I share with ORD010 on GedMatch shows up as full Italian on my 23andme “DNA Painting”.
… for 23andme “Italian” means: Italian, Northern Italian, and Tuscan.

… obviously the chromosome and population I share with ORD010 could be different than yours :)

ORD010 vs S
https://i.imgur.com/U0PeGnQ.jpg

my chrom. 17 DNA Painting filtered by Population:
https://i.imgur.com/jzYzowP.jpg

If E-V13 existed as a non minor linage in Classical Peloponnese it is the number one indicator of a Doric migration. Can't wait to find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salento

… the chrom. I share with ORD010 on GedMatch shows up as full Italian on my 23andme “DNA Painting”.
… for 23andme “Italian” means: Italian, Northern Italian, and Tuscan.

… obviously the chromosome and population I share with ORD010 could be different than yours :)

ORD010 vs S
https://i.imgur.com/U0PeGnQ.jpg

my chrom. 17 DNA Painting filtered by Population:
https://i.imgur.com/jzYzowP.jpg

---

g25

Distance to:	Daunian_MA:ORD010_1088AD_Quality=66.86%
0.03408838	Italian_Jew
0.03521583	Italian_Calabria
0.03571421	Romaniote_Jew
0.03654870	Ashkenazi_Germany
0.03802511	Italian_Campania
0.03842613	Greek_Kos
0.03930560	Greek_Dodecanese
0.04066085	Italian_Basilicata
0.04115180	Greek_Crete
0.04150311	Sicilian_East
0.04200528	Maltese
0.04211272	Sephardic_Jew
0.04300372	Italian_Apulia
0.04565498	Cypriot
0.04632788	Ashkenazi_Poland
0.04711165	Italian_Abruzzo
0.04762662	Ashkenazi_Belarussia
0.04804729	Ashkenazi_Lithuania
0.04831682	Greek_Izmir
0.04853918	Greek_Laconia
0.04863658	Italian_Molise
0.04897330	Sephardic_Jew_o
0.04948669	Ashkenazi_Ukraine
0.05011956	Ashkenazi_Russia
0.05073157	Sicilian_West

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingjohn

g25

Distance to:	Daunian_MA:ORD010_1088AD_Quality=66.86%
0.03408838	Italian_Jew
0.03521583	Italian_Calabria
0.03571421	Romaniote_Jew
0.03654870	Ashkenazi_Germany
0.03802511	Italian_Campania
0.03842613	Greek_Kos
0.03930560	Greek_Dodecanese
0.04066085	Italian_Basilicata
0.04115180	Greek_Crete
0.04150311	Sicilian_East
0.04200528	Maltese
0.04211272	Sephardic_Jew
0.04300372	Italian_Apulia
0.04565498	Cypriot
0.04632788	Ashkenazi_Poland
0.04711165	Italian_Abruzzo
0.04762662	Ashkenazi_Belarussia
0.04804729	Ashkenazi_Lithuania
0.04831682	Greek_Izmir
0.04853918	Greek_Laconia
0.04863658	Italian_Molise
0.04897330	Sephardic_Jew_o
0.04948669	Ashkenazi_Ukraine
0.05011956	Ashkenazi_Russia
0.05073157	Sicilian_West

---

23andme assign Ashkenazy / Jewish population, … I don’t get any in my 23andme results, the chromos. position I share with ORD010 according to 23andme is totally Italian :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salento

23andme assign Ashkenazy / Jewish population, … I don’t get any in my 23andme results, the chromos. position I share with ORD010 according to 23andme is totally Italian :)

---

23andme are too slap-hazed on giving Ashkenazi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salento

23andme assign Ashkenazy / Jewish population, … I don’t get any in my 23andme results, the chromos. position I share with ORD010 according to 23andme is totally Italian :)

---

I never said you have jewish segments
On dna ;-)
Just posted his g25 values closest results
You can see calabria in the list this dude was southern european autosomally speaking ...
The italian jews, and romanioes are just close
Because they have southern european admixture
They aquired in italy or greece thats all:smile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingjohn

I never said you have jewish segments
On dna ;-)
Just posted his g25 values closest results
You can see calabria in the list this dude was southern european autosomally speaking ...
The italian jews, and romanioes are just close
Because they have southern european admixture
They aquired in italy or greece thats all:smile:

---

… Knish, a stuffed Ashkenazi dish contained by dough, sounds similar to my dialect “Caniscia”, it means container,
… the pronunciation of Knish and Caniscia are very similar, … maybe there’s an ancient connection.
… as perspective, in Italian I would call “Knish / Caniscia” “un Farcito di …” or “in Camicia”.

In Salento we have a Christmas dish similar to fried Knish: Le Pittule, though I’ve seen restaurants that serve it year round as an appetizer :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

23andme are too slap-hazed on giving Ashkenazi

---

I think it is because a lot of Jewish people are very interested in genealogy. Also, the founder (sister of the owner of YouTube), is Jewish, so she's probably keen on that aspect.

It is kind of like the way some companies are very liberal about claiming they can tell you so much about ancient ancestors like mta.

Usually 23andme is very reliable in assigning Ashkenazi Jewish segments, its never 100 percent, especially for more rare segments. Then 23andme works with smoothing for Ashkenazi too, which means these segments being assigned by context, Ashkenazi if that's the context, Italian or German or whatever if that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

Usually 23andme is very reliable in assigning Ashkenazi Jewish segments, its never 100 percent, especially for more rare segments. Then 23andme works with smoothing for Ashkenazi too, which means these segments being assigned by context, Ashkenazi if that's the context, Italian or German or whatever if that's it.

---

agree but they are not special
almost all the companies out there are great in finding aschenazi ancestery
for example :
my % is the same in ftdna and my heritage ( which was ftdna upload )
because aschenazi experinced a (bottlneck + endogomy) it is very easy to find aschenazi ancestery
if it is there;-)

p.s
personally speaking my granny is aschenazi with roots in ukraine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingjohn

agree but they are not special
almost all the companies out there are great in finding aschenazi ancestery
for example :
my % is the same in ftdna and my heritage ( which was ftdna upload )
because aschenazi experinced a (bottlneck + endogomy) it is very easy to find aschenazi ancestery
if it is there;-)

p.s
personally speaking my granny is aschenazi with roots in ukraine

---

No, they are not as good. FTDNA and MyHeritage in particular are by far not as reliable, giving people AJ which don't have it and vice versa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

No, they are not as good. FTDNA and MyHeritage in particular are by far not as reliable, giving people AJ which don't have it and vice versa.

---

i know of cases in my heritage of what you say
but in ftdna not so much it is pretty a spot on
specially in the my origins 3.0 version ...:thinking:


p.s
i am 1/4 aschenazi by geneology
and ftdna gave me 26% aschenazi pretty good if you ask
me ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingjohn

i know of cases in my heritage of what you say
but in ftdna not so much it is pretty a spot on
specially in the my origins 3.0 version ...:thinking:


p.s
i am 1/4 aschenazi by geneology
and ftdna gave me 26% aschenazi pretty good if you ask
me ;-)

---

FTDNA and sometimes even My Heritage do get it right, sometimes even better than the others, but not consistently so. Like they gave some of my Central European matches, which are practically close 100 percent from one region and ethnicity, very good looking results, but others get complete nonsense, even if they are from the same place, village and even family. They might be siblings and it goes way off. I'm not just judging by my own results, but those from thousands of matches and those of administered samples and from other reports.
But I do agree that FTDNA might be somewhat better than MH, but still behind AncestryDNA and 23andme which are currently still setting the gold standard, because there is simply no better ethnicity estimate out there.

any of your austrian matches get aschenazi % ?
i know among non- jews there are some cases mainly in hungary and russia
maybe austrians from vienna will have some
who knows:thinking:
johann strauss ii famous austrian composer was 1/8 aschenazi

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

if he would take a dna test today ( i mean if he was alive)
he would score 6% or 12% aschenazi


p.s
but i know usually jews lived seperate from non-jews where ever they lived
so chance for mixing was low

There are of course people with Ashkenazi ancestry in Vienna, even some prominent families. In the 19th century a lot of Jews did convert and some assimilated more than others.
There are records of those leaving the Israelite community and there were some peaks of this, already in the 19th century.
It did actually happen in both directions of proselytes and converts at different times, but from Jewish to Christian there was a peak in the 19th century already.
You rather have to consider that the urban German populations have rather low birth rates, most of the time. That's one of the reasons for the replacement over time.
Both rural Catholic Austrians and religious Jews tended to have more offspring than the more urban and bourgeois population to which most converts belonged.
In parts of Hungary the conversions and mixed couples became more widespread even beyond Budapest, though I would be very careful to extrapolate any numbers from testers mostly from this big cosmopolitan city to the rest of the country.
The high numbers for Hungary come definitely from a specific urban and social context, they are not representative for the country as a whole.

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

P.s
This guy converted and i sure there were
Others to make there life easier
Now
We can turn back to the daunians:smile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverman

No, they are not as good. FTDNA and MyHeritage in particular are by far not as reliable, giving people AJ which don't have it and vice versa.

---

neither of the above has given my family members (6) any ashkenazi percentage.

23andme is the only site which gave my father about 2% .....................but also gave him Lower Saxony link with East-Frisian jew ...............a person with the impossible surname to trace, which is Tax

it could come from ...............The German surname Tax is derived from the Old German word "dachs" or "dahs," meaning "badger."

Any news whether we're going to get deep subclades on these samples? I'm super curious to see whether those J2B2-L283 are related to northern Illyrians or southern Illyrians/Z638.

They've done lots of comparisons of Messapian and Albanian as languages, and assumed a larger Illyro-Messapic, or Messapo-Illyrian group (Eric Hamp and others), taking Albanian as a modern descendant of Illyrian, but it could just be that Messapic = Northern Illyrian!! We don't have to abandon the theory of Messapian being Illyrian migrants to Italy. They could just be from Croatia/Slovenian parts of Illyria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enter_tain

Any news whether we're going to get deep subclades on these samples? I'm super curious to see whether those J2B2-L283 are related to northern Illyrians or southern Illyrians/Z638.
They've done lots of comparisons of Messapian and Albanian as languages, and assumed a larger Illyro-Messapic, or Messapo-Illyrian group (Eric Hamp and others), taking Albanian as a modern descendant of Illyrian, but it could just be that Messapic = Northern Illyrian!! We don't have to abandon the theory of Messapian being Illyrian migrants to Italy. They could just be from Croatia/Slovenian parts of Illyria.

---

They have only been in Puglia since the LBA, so I think it is still possible they could have come from Illyria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enter_tain

Any news whether we're going to get deep subclades on these samples? I'm super curious to see whether those J2B2-L283 are related to northern Illyrians or southern Illyrians/Z638.

They've done lots of comparisons of Messapian and Albanian as languages, and assumed a larger Illyro-Messapic, or Messapo-Illyrian group (Eric Hamp and others), taking Albanian as a modern descendant of Illyrian, but it could just be that Messapic = Northern Illyrian!! We don't have to abandon the theory of Messapian being Illyrian migrants to Italy. They could just be from Croatia/Slovenian parts of Illyria.

---

Well, there is a view, but not totally conclusive that Peucetian tumuli resemble Istrian tumuli, on the other hand, Histria was dominated by Castellieri Culture which in turn was related to Posusje/Dinaric Culture where J2b2-L283 was found.

ORD009 & ORD010 ... Dod. K12b ... Least-squares method vs Gaussian method

ORD009:

Least-squares method	Gaussian method
1 Italian_Liguria @ 2.001298 2 Italian_Lombardy @ 2.673237 3 Italian_Emilia @ 3.229977 4 Italian_Piedmont @ 3.581089 5 Italian_Tuscany @ 4.438362 6 Italian_Veneto @ 4.612169 7 Swiss_Italian @ 5.902585 8 Italian_Friuli_VG @ 6.853336 9 Italian_Trentino @ 7.025113 10 Italian_Romagna @ 7.078929	1 Italian_Lombardy @ 2.374203 2 Italian_Tuscany @ 2.746119 3 Italian_Veneto @ 2.771867 4 Italian_Piedmont @ 2.800869 5 Italian_Trentino @ 2.802866 6 Italian_Liguria @ 2.910394 7 Swiss_Italian @ 3.143305 8 Italian_Friuli_VG @ 3.22007 9 Italian_Emilia @ 3.293109 10 Italian_Romagna @ 3.433222

ORD010:

Least-squares method	Gaussian method
1 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 4.073816 2 Moldovan_Jewish @ 4.893942 3 Italian_Jew @ 5.151244 4 Italian_Calabria @ 5.340065 5 Italian_Campania @ 6.831305 6 Greek_Fournoi @ 7.092064 7 Italian_Sicily @ 7.121437 8 Greek_Crete @ 7.777078 9 Greek_Icaria @ 7.848497 10 Sephardic_Jew @ 7.945274	1 Italian_Campania @ 4.172999 2 Italian_Calabria @ 4.475073 3 Greek_Izmir @ 4.78169 4 Greek_Crete @ 4.79933 5 Italian_Jew @ 4.927132 6 Moldovan_Jewish @ 5.055584 7 Greek_Rhodes @ 5.066042 8 Greek_Kos @ 5.156257 9 Italian_Abruzzo @ 5.214077 10 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 5.285824

… Gaussian found a better fit for ORD010 than Least-squares, I think :)

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

There's something about the ORD010 sample that makes it too exotic to be a typical Southern Italian. Both I and ORD009 are very good fits for the modeling I have put together.

As we know, the Italian_Apulia sample (and other "Updated Dodecad K12b modern samples) comes from dubious sources, so we cannot verify if it is representative, or where it actually comes from.

But relatively speaking, this modeling is a bad fit for ORD010:

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

Normally, this modeling works well for Modern and Ancient Italians.

https://i.imgur.com/Idl3THN.png

https://i.imgur.com/zV0kYKy.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

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

There's something about the ORD010 sample that makes it too exotic to be a typical Southern Italian. Both I and ORD009 are very good fits for the modeling I have put together.

As we know, the Italian_Apulia sample (and other "Updated Dodecad K12b modern samples) comes from dubious sources, so we cannot verify if it is representative, or where it actually comes from.

But relatively speaking, this modeling is a bad fit for ORD010:

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

Normally, this modeling works well for Modern and Ancient Italians.

https://i.imgur.com/Idl3THN.png

https://i.imgur.com/zV0kYKy.png

---

the T1a ydna of R850 is very very close to ORD010 in regards to the numbers you presented

we know that R850 came from the Etruscan Rutuli tribe in Lazio province

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

the T1a ydna of R850 is very very close to ORD010 in regards to the numbers you presented

we know that R850 came from the Etruscan Rutuli tribe in Lazio province

---

That's true, but the distance is very large compared to the majority of the others.

8.6+ for R850

5.7+ for ORD010

There's something else that should be included in the modeling, that would make their fit better.

Modern Northern and Southern Italians, along with Latins, and Etruscans fit really well with the modeling, around 1 distances or below 0.

The Daunians look very heterogenous, with mostly bad fits, though if the modeling is anything to go by, I would suggest ORD009 was a "native" to Italy.