Printable View
Since when do people only have male ancestors? This is a very unlikely looking Lombard autosomally, whatever his yDna.Quote:
Originally Posted by torzio
As for the "Moors" of Sicily, the more proper term would be the "Muslims" of Sicily, which is the title of the masterful work by Leonard Chiaroni. As he points out in great detail, while many of the "invaders" were indeed from North Africa, there were also Arabs and other people from all over the Muslim world.
If we're speaking of mtDna there is mtDna L in the Neolithic in the Near East. From there it of course could have passed into Europe.
In addition, there is also mtDna L in Iberia long before the arrival of the Muslims, presumably crossing over the Straits of Gibraltar.
Of course, each mtDna sublineage will have its own history and time period of arrival, and the complete story has yet to be written.
I just don't know why the assumption would be that every mtDna "L" we find in Europe had to arrive with a Sub-Saharan African. Indeed, the ultimate source could also have been East Africa, but either way, in these very early periods, by the time it arrived in Europe I would think the odds would be pretty good that it was carried by a perhaps highly admixed person.
The Encyclopédie under “Peuceti”, distinguishes them from another ancient people, the Peucetioe who were living in Liburnia at the head of the Adriatic, with a reference to Callimachus, as quoted in Pliny (H.N. III.21) placing their country in Pliny’s day as part of Illyria.[3]”
@salento
https://youtu.be/7La3f7MQhtQ
you maybe arrived from terramare culture
Rectification of the ancient geographic coordinates in
Ptolemy’s Geographike Hyphegesis
file:///C:/Users/User/AppData/Local/Temp/hgss-3-99-2012.pdf
Abstract.AmultitudeoftheancientplacesgivenbyPtolemyinhisGeography(∼150 AD)aresofarun-
known.One of the main problems of their identification are the errors of the given ancient coordinates.The
different kinds of errors are illustrated by examples.A new geodetic-statistical analysis method is described,
bywhichgroupsofplaceswithhomogeneoussystematicerrorsandplaceswithgrosserrorscanbedeter-
mined.Based on a transformation function describing the systematic errors, presumable modern coordinates
of unknown places can be computed.That, in conjunction with further information, can make possible their
identification.Atestoftheanalysismethodiscarriedoutonacomplexsimulatedexampleandshowsits
practicability. The analysis method has been applied within an interdisciplinary research project on Ptolemy’s
Geography.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ike_Hyphegesis
@Torzio
… I can’t access your PC … yet :grin:
… from your Video: … Terramare refugees bypassed the Etruscans, (guess they weren’t welcome), they kept heading Southeast, except for one group that went to Campania.
https://i.imgur.com/lNHeBZA.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/WtLBLTG.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Salento
:petrified::laughing:
https://i.imgur.com/tsWmVFy.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Duarte
I'm much more sophisticated than Anonymous.
Maybe he's searching for some Daunian’s .bam :)
Let's hope they are BAM, and not FASTQ. Otherwise, we will become aDNA before they are done processing. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Salento
Quote:
Originally Posted by torzio
I added the workable link
https://www.academia.edu/35896111/Il...erranean_World
Iapodes
The Iapodic territory extended along the Adriatic coastline and covered almost all of modern-day Croatia. Their coastal boundary meant that they had access to trade with the Italic peoples and even Greek merchants. Like the Veneti-Illyrians, the Iapodes emulated Greek and Etruscan artistic conventions, so much so that their works are nearly identical.
https://i.postimg.cc/1zhxQB2N/isapodes.png
9This is certainly one of those Illyrian peoples most scarcely referred to. Straboidentifies them as Pannonian (Illyrian) people, along with Breuci, Deuri, Deretini,Dindari, Ditiones, Ditiones, Maezei and Daesitiates.
12
They started receiving Romancitizenship in the reign of Trajan (AD 98-117), along with other Illyrian communities of southeast Pannonia.
13
Pliny mentions several Pannonian civitates, including that of Andizetes, saying that their name was known before the Roman conquest, along withBoii, Breuci, Amantini, Scordisci and Latobici.
14
Although
they didn‟t
seem to have particularly significant role for the history of Illyrians, the Andizetes might be interesting in linguistic sense, for a mere fact that the
possible root word „
And
‟(izetes)
is among the most frequently occurring linguisticelement throughout the entire territory inhabited by Illyrians, particularly in southeastPannonia. Thus we find personal Illyrian names like Andes (m.)/Andia (f)
in Katiĉić‟s
middle Dalmatian-Pannonian onomastic province (corresponding with modern Bosniaand Herzegovina), but also among the south-Illyrian names, with other variants likeAndena included. This name appears too on the list of Illyrian names in Dardanianterritory, in the form of Andio and Andinus, the latter being found among Dalmatians, inaddition to Andius, found in central Dalmatian group.
15
This is certainly one of those Illyrian peoples most scarcely referred to. Straboidentifies them as Pannonian (Illyrian) people, along with Breuci, Deuri, Deretini, Dindari, Ditiones, Ditiones, Maezei and Daesitiates.
They started receiving Roman citizenship in the reign of Trajan (AD 98-117), along with other Illyrian communities of southeast Pannonia.
Pliny mentions several Pannonian civitates, including that of Andizetes, saying that their name was known before the Roman conquest, along with Boii, Breuci, Amantini, Scordisci and Latobici.
Although they didn‟t seem to have particularly significant role for the history of Illyrians, the Andizetes might be interesting in linguistic sense, for a mere fact that the possible root word „And‟(izetes)
is among the most frequently occurring linguistic element throughout the entire territory inhabited by Illyrians, particularly in southeast Pannonia. Thus we find personal Illyrian names like Andes (m.)/Andia (f)in Katiĉić‟s middle Dalmatian-Pannonian onomastic province (corresponding with modern Bosniaand Herzegovina), but also among the south-Illyrian names, with other variants like Andena included. This name appears too on the list of Illyrian names in Dardanian territory, in the form of Andio and Andinus, the latter being found among Dalmatians, in addition to Andius, found in central Dalmatian group.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingjohn
if we add the ancient croatian paper samples from august........
we report new whole-genome data for 28 individuals dated to between ~ 4700 BCE–400 CE from two sites in present-day eastern Croatia.
In the Middle Neolithic we evidence first cousin mating practices and strong genetic continuity
from the Early Neolithic. In the Middle Bronze Age community that we studied, we find multiple
closely related males suggesting a patrilocal social organisation. We also find in that community an
unexpected genetic ancestry profile distinct from individuals found at contemporaneous sites in the
region, due to the addition of hunter-gatherer-related ancestry. These findings support archaeological
evidence for contacts with communities further north in the Carpathian Basin. Finally, an individual
dated to Roman times exhibits an ancestry profile that is broadly present in the region today, adding
an important data point to the substantial shift in ancestry that occurred in the region between the
Bronze Age and today.
8 x G2a ydna
2 x I2a ydna
1 x R1b
1 X J
1 x C
so ancient Illyrians have G2a, I2a, J2b and R1b as majority ..................clearly G2a is in majority
ORD001 was found to be the daughter of ORD009, with a much more Rome_Republican makeup, with an (unsampled) father who was certainly much more Caucasian and Middle Eastern-shifted, given the admixture makeup of the daughter ORD001. So ORD001 represents a very recent inter-ethnic mixing, not an average individual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
Tarquinius Priscus married an aristocratic Etruscan lady called Tanaquil so even Etruscan nobles did marry people of foreign extraction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax Augusta
Maybe public office was confined to a fixed and limited number of important families in Etruscan city states like Tarquinia.
Rome on the other hand had a much more open society reflected in the legend that Romulus instituted an Asylum for foreigners, slave and free, to increase the population of early Rome.
Being that R850 is in the range of the father, who would be about equidistant from the Mother ORD009; I think it is likely that the more recent ancestry would be similar. R850 was a C5 person in Antonio et al. 2019 (Eastern Mediterranean, similar to modern Maltese-Cypriots). I think if this kind of ancestry was found in Central Italy, among a member of a Latin tribe, it is not unlikely to found in Puglia in the south. In Antonio et al. 2019, R850 formed a clade with Anatolian_IA. I would bet the father of ORD001 would also be a part of that clade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ygorcs
Daunians seem like Sardinian shifted Tuscans just like Etruscans are like Sardinian-shifted Northern Italians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
To me it seems that Native Campanians fall into the Native-Apulian cluster, otherwise what is filling the empty space between the Aegean Cluster in the PCA below? Otherwise in that case Daunians would be closer to ancient Greeks than they actually are. Maybe I am wrong. Those "Etruscans" in this PCA, might not be the same as the ones we have seen, as they are even more eastern shifted than the Italics.
https://i.imgur.com/zvfz03q.jpg
Distance to: GRC_Mycenaean 0.05085882 Sicilian_East 0.05509976 Greek_Crete 0.05545855 ITA_Sicily_LBA
Distance to: Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2 0.04994000 Sicilian_East 0.05175499 ITA_Sicily_LBA 0.05421812 Greek_Crete
Native Sicilians were not so different from old Greeks, it's just that they were shifted in a Western direction.
They were as close as modern Cretans are. Now I wish we had Daunian samples.
Me too, it is hard to guage when, some papers have released samples before even publishing, some a few days after the study is published from peer-review.Quote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
IHYPE 02: "Native Sicilians were not so different from old Greeks, it's just that they were shifted in a Western direction.
They were as close as modern Cretans are."
Thank-you. I've only been saying that for ten years. :) It took a long time to get actual proof.
Now what I want to see is Bronze Age samples from the Salento, Basilicata, Calabria.
Are they even supposed to publish them? I don't think they are coming, unless someone contacts them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
Have you noticed how both Etruscans and Daunians are genetically diverse towards Sardinians. Maybe that existed in Sicily, from Sardinian shifted West Sicilians (that we have already seen) towards Minoans in the East like the Bell_Beaker_Sicily.
Daunians will be even closer to Classical Greeks than the LBA Sicilians. I expect Lucanians to be like Daunians (I wont accept the rumours about them being Etruscan-like until I see it) and Eastern Sicilians to shift towards Bell_Beaker_Sicily.
It's a pity that you really can't look at them, even with one eye!Quote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
more like ............etruscans and daunians are more northern shifted ( daunians came from dalmatia and liburnia lands ) ............and Lucanians and Bruttians are Samnite in origin and the samnites are Umbri in origin and Umbri are also northern shifted
Italy is isolated by the sea. Daunians and Messapians did not pop out of nowhere without 'cousins' in there. Maybe you are right but I prefer to wait and see actual Lucanian samples. I don't believe the Illyrian hypothesis. (Regarding Apulia)Quote:
Originally Posted by torzio
Etruscans spoke a non IE language after all.
The Goths had already run through the Balkans before SGR001 lived in Daunia. The east shift probably came from there. It would be interesting if SGR001 were even more east shifted at this time. The Volga to middle east connection could be a way, or known Byzantine guards. I hope we get a BAM to determine a subclade.
correctQuote:
Originally Posted by I1a3_Young
Early Medieval individual (SGR001 (670 - 774 AD )
IIRC , someone said a goth from modern Moldova ( bessarabia province ) ....I will recheck
the region was inhabited by Thracians, as well as for shorter periods by Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians, and Celts, specifically by tribes such as the Costoboci, Carpi,
The carpi where with the Goths
could be any of these
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
again … from Apulia, I don’t know to what extent my results correlate to Antiquity,
… fwiw … though by distance while I’m not close to the Illyrians, it seems that they have left genetic markers in my chromosomes:
https://i.imgur.com/Sntvvym.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/eJEIX9T.jpg
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/vi...831?show=reads
Bam files are released.
Great! I've been keeping an eye on when they would be ready. I am very busy today, but I will try to get to these. No doubt I will have them ready during the week.
Jovialis: Thanks for being willing to run the coordinates from the various calculators for those Daunians. Looking forward to having something to potentially post about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
Just a little preview, because I haven't finished yet: Most of these guys are coming out as relatively close to Northern Italians in Dodecad K12b.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....524#post819524Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
...
^^hmm, Maybe someone can double-check my work here, but ORD001 doesn't seem anywhere near Mycenaeans. Maybe due to the low-coverage?
Using 1 populations approximation
1 100% Romanians @ 11.535
2 100% Bulgarian_D @ 12.448
3 100% Bulgarians_Y @ 12.601
4 100% O_Italian_D @ 14.207
5 100% N_Italian_D @ 15.513
6 100% TSI30 @ 17.934
7 100% North_Italian @ 18.341
8 100% Tuscan @ 18.947
9 100% Hungarians @ 19.195
10 100% C_Italian_D @ 19.545
Another interesting thing I noticed,
FWIW, these samples get little to no Gedrosia; instead they 20-30% Caucasus. Typically, populations in places like Northern Europe get Gedrosia, which could probably be attributed to the CHG in Steppe. Caucasus was speculated by some respectable posters here to be attributed to non-steppe related CHG.
all the daunians are as the paper states......modern croatia area...that is, northern balkans and not-slavs.................the younger samples should be aligned with samnite samples if there is anyQuote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
modern croatia area = 600BC to 1300BC = Liburnian
modern croatia area = roman occupation to 600Bc = Dalmatian
Liburnian lands circa 1100BC also took in Dalmatian lands
the data you provided above are typical veneti, friuli and trentini modern people numbers
If you look at the PCA from the study though, ORD001 is supposed to be close the Mycenaeans, though.
Probably low coverage. Iron Age Camapanians overlap with both Daunians and Etruscans "in between" and they show a pull towards Central Italians too. So Daunians should be closer to Central Italians than to Northern Italians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovialis
Yeah, that's what I assumed from the PCA from the study. All Italians are basically on the same z-axis, so a 3D pca shouldn't make much of a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by ihype02
Here they are:
Code:ORD001,2.13,0,3.17,1.09,29.5,31.57,0,0.75,9.39,1.76,20.64,0
ORD004,0,0,0,0,44.67,29.85,0,0,0.14,0,22.4,2.95
ORD006,0,0,0,2.54,41.99,25.03,0,0,8.55,0,21.11,0.78
ORD009,4.03,0.65,1.42,0.98,38.29,23.77,0,0,7.95,0,22.52,0.39
ORD010,4.29,0,2.9,0,26.43,12.34,0,1.12,17.75,0,35.16,0
ORD011,0,0,0,0,41.49,23.76,0,0,8.92,0.98,24.85,0
ORD014,0,2.06,4.08,0,43.2,28.47,0.29,0,2.97,0,18.93,0
ORD019,1.73,0,0.9,0,38.01,22.88,2.51,0,0,0,33.46,0.52
SAL001,0,0,3.78,3.04,43.72,32.79,0,3.1,2.05,0,11.51,0
SAL003,0,0,1.91,0,39.06,17.5,0,0,7.93,0,33.23,0.38
SAL007,4.63,0,0,0,53.35,16.94,0,0,6.74,0,18.34,0
SAL010,4.31,0,0,0.02,45.37,38.34,0,0,0,0,11.95,0
SAL011,8.8,0,0.77,0.26,61.26,14.72,0,0,5.84,0,8.35,0
SGR001,9.06,4.24,0,2.32,23.85,12.46,0.86,3.12,3.86,0,40.22,0
SGR002,1.02,0.6,2.92,0,45.47,29.36,0,0.66,5.54,0,14.06,0.37
SGR003,2.69,0,1.74,2.68,40.79,15.65,0,1.55,7.31,0,27.6,0
Pretty distant, relatively speaking.
Distance to: Jovialis 11.00351308 ORD010 13.17645248 SAL003 14.31068482 SGR003 14.35199289 SGR001 15.41134647 ORD009 16.30636992 ORD019 17.94313796 ORD011 19.25433977 ORD001 20.62921714 ORD006 24.66633739 ORD014 25.87282551 ORD004 28.24325052 SGR002 28.26578143 SAL007 31.81476544 SAL001 34.98141364 SAL010 40.10389009 SAL011