The genetic origin of Daunians

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

Something I find to be strange, the paper for the Mycenaeans determined that there was generally continuity from them to the Modern Greeks, despite being pulled "east" of them. Yet the Iron Age Apulians, compared to the modern Apulians despite being just as close or even closer are considered radically different? Why? Is this some kind of subjectivity from the authors?


The Daunians also seem to be just about as "North West" from Modern Apulians, as Iron Age Latins, and Etruscans are from Modern Northern Italians.

---

The massive striking continuity was blown out of proportion, as if being 33% shifted towards Poles is no big deal.
Even Goths that attacked Greece were probably closer to Myceneans than the Northern Slavs, because they were more western. And don't get me started on Venetians, Albanians, Anatolians, Celts, Thracians etc.

I wonder if we add 10% Medieval Moorish onto an average Iron age Apulian sample what will we get, just as an experiment. Ignoring the old Greeks and others, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihype02

The massive striking continuity was blown out of proportion, as if being 33% shifted towards Poles is no big deal.
Even Goths that attacked Greece were probably closer to Myceneans than the Northern Slavs, because they were more western. And don't get me started on Venetians, Albanians, Anatolians, Celts, Thracians etc.

I wonder if we add 10% Medieval Moorish onto an average Iron age Apulian sample what will we get, just as an experiment. Ignoring the old Greeks and others, of course.

---

In this logic, Albanians are a subset of Greeks and why not “Greek like” people. Lets not forget that north Italians are closer to Illyrians than Albanians. I wondering if South Illyrians from Italy might be closer to Albanians?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

HRV MBA and Mokrin samples would best be classified as proto-Illyrian, and that a northern subset of proto-Illyrians.

About the Greek thing. I don't want to get on conversations we have had ad nauseam, its like beating a dead horse.

But just looking at most DNA services classifying modern Albanians as 90%+ Greek. Then, you know that genetically speaking Albanians have on average more "Greek" DNA than the average Greek. This probably means something does not add up in the methodology department, as its paradoxical and makes no sense.

But this is a matter of classification. I for one think it is wrong to name that component which Albanians I have in my matches score over 90%while Greeks I have as matches score 40% to 60%, peaking in Northern Greece, as "Greek".

Like in the past, I would understand when Albanian samples where scarce... There is not enough sampling for a representative data set yada yada. But with Albanians being some of the better sampled nations, population wise in the Balkans, it seems like plain bias to call that component Greek. Hey there is progress, they call it "Greece and Balkans" now after a couple of updates on FTDNA at least.

This has more to do with the limitation of current methods used in the field, than anything real I am afraid. Else, I would be more Greek than some Greek members' fathers on PCAs.

About this stuff I have argued countless times with Jovialis on the Greek thread, where I have claimed, that if that particular study can be taken to suggest continuity between Modern Greeks and BA-IA Greeks, then it can be taken to suggest continuity between BA-IA Greeks, and Albanians and <North Italians>. So one really has to pick their poison on this one. I am glad to see Jovialis come around and see how perplexing it all is when you zoom out and see the implications. And sometimes it takes ones own ancestral population to be implicated to realize it. Now with the Puglia study and the authors claiming no continuity, with similar starting inputs as the Greek study, it comes to peoples attentions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blevins13

In this logic, Albanians are a subset of Greeks and why not “Greek like” people. Lets not forget that north Italians are closer to Illyrians than Albanians. I wondering if South Illyrians from Italy might be are closer to Albanians?


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum

---

north-italians ( venetics ) with Illyrians .............if you think histrians are Illyrian then, yes
Oderzo was the border of Venetics and Histrians and
Eraclea the border of Liburnians and Venetics

Wilkes states that Oderzo was instead a Liburnian and Venetic market town

............................
Illyrian towns

Opitergium = Oderzo Veneto italy
Tergeste = Trieste Friuli Italy
Tergolape = outside of Wels Austria

I found this paper that might add some insights from Archeology and maybe help provide some additional information, clarification, etc.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/d...2020-0166/html

It is an electronic peer reviewed Journal seems mostly European Scholars. Attached is the Editorial board.

https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/OPAR/html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palermo Trapani

I found this paper that might add some insights from Archeology and maybe help provide some additional information, clarification, etc.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/d...2020-0166/html

It is an electronic peer reviewed Journal seems mostly European Scholars. Attached is the Editorial board.

https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/OPAR/html

---

Super interesting paper Palermo thanks for sharing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Archetype0ne

Super interesting paper Palermo thanks for sharing.

---

Archetype0ne: Your welcome, cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palermo Trapani

I found this paper that might add some insights from Archeology and maybe help provide some additional information, clarification, etc.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/d...2020-0166/html

It is an electronic peer reviewed Journal seems mostly European Scholars. Attached is the Editorial board.

https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/OPAR/html

---

great....what i could not find

… included in the Bari (Puglia) genetic group there’s Pula (Istria), … maybe the name is just a coincidence :) though Puglia still is and Pula was the end of Adriatic Italy (… I say the beginning of Adriatic Italy)


https://i.imgur.com/KTOiA50.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salento

… included in the Bari (Puglia) genetic group there’s Pula (Istria), … maybe the name is just a coincidence :) though Puglia still is and Pula was the end of Adriatic Italy (… I say the beginning of Adriatic Italy)


https://i.imgur.com/KTOiA50.jpg

---

your line spreads like covid ....hehe


seriously your line is a pure adriatic line ..............no etruscan for you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

your line spreads like covid ....hehe


seriously your line is a pure adriatic line ..............no etruscan for you

---

we get Florence and … too.
… is the blue dot near Treviso you? :)

… my Y line and yours are one and the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salento

we get Florence and … too.
… is the blue dot near Treviso you? :)

… my Y line and yours are one and the same.

---

all your blue dots are illyrian settlements or market towns ( Histrian or Liburnian ) .............the one west of Treviso is most likely modern Oderzo

not sure about Pula ( pola in istria ) except ...................The inhabitants of Istria in the Bronze Age are known as Proto Illyrians.<sup>[4]

some say they are colchians ...which means black sea georgia area</sup>

it was inhabited by the Histri,^[7] a Venetic or Illyrian tribe. Strabo, Pomponius Mela and Lycophron wrote that it was inhabited by Colchians.^[8][9][10] The Istrian peninsula was conquered by the Romans in 177 BC


pula house from illyrian times....same as in apuglia
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ka...-48650329.html


you need to check for yourself the history

I have a recently past ( died ) close friend who was from there , his ancestors had to leave Istria in 1948 ....spent 2 years in Asiago Veneto ( they could only speak venetian ) ...and family moved to Australia in 1951

The Bjelotic Bela Crkva Bronze Age Culture from Western Serbia is usually associated as ancestral to the Glasinac-Mat Culture, according to Albanian archeologist Frano Prendi the Matt-Painted Pottery Culture from Southern Albania has influences from Bjelotic Bela Crkva Culture. The Matt-Painted Pottery Culture is usually associated with the three Iapygian tribes. So they might actually come from Southern Albania as indicated by archeologists.

Don't take it as capital, just my two cents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Archetype0ne

Out of curiosity where do Sardinians fall in that PCA? C6 or?
I am more interested in ancient Sardinians where they would fall.

Have a gut feeling the population of Peninsular Italy must have been unique before all these colonizations. And only Sardinian like populations seem unique and old enough to my uninformed opinion. Might as well ask someone who has a clue about this. So I am all ears.

---

Here is an excerpt from the study, the father of ORD001 has a proclivity towards Greece_N, which was higher in CHG. Personally, I think this person probably reflects what someone from Pre-Italic Gnatia was like, or the surrounding area. Unlike like what the study thinks reflects a cosmopolitan aspect. Rather this was possibly a native:

Quote:

---

An example of the cosmopolitan nature of194 Iron Age Mediterranean is the first-degree relationship between ORD009 (mother) and ORD001

195 (daughter), whose positions in the PCA strikingly differ with the individual ORD001 beingavailable under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is madebioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.30.454498; this version posted July 30, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which10

196 stretched towards Middle Eastern and Caucasus modern populations, as a consequence of the

197 foreign origin of the father (Figure 1C and Figure S4). F4 analyses in the form f4(ORD009,

198 ORD001; X, Mbuti) report a slightly significant (Z-score between -2 and -3) excess of Greece_N,199 Portugal_LN_C, Lebanon_Roman and Italy_Sicily_EBA in ORD001, which may explain its

200 eastward shift (Figure S8A). Moreover, ORD001, together with SGR002, but not ORD009

201 harboured more CHG when compared to Lebanon_Hellenistic and Lebanon_IA3 samples,

202 respectively (Figure S8C), as well as an increase in Lebanon_Hellenistic traces when compared203 with modern Apulians (data not shown).

---

https://i.imgur.com/3lZM8jY.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihype02

The massive striking continuity was blown out of proportion, as if being 33% shifted towards Poles is no big deal.
Even Goths that attacked Greece were probably closer to Myceneans than the Northern Slavs, because they were more western. And don't get me started on Venetians, Albanians, Anatolians, Celts, Thracians etc.

I wonder if we add 10% Medieval Moorish onto an average Iron age Apulian sample what will we get, just as an experiment. Ignoring the old Greeks and others, of course.

---

I think the continuity between Ancient Greeks, and Modern Greeks is there, especially for Southern Greeks. I find it odd that despite similar results for Iron Age Apulians, and Modern ones are basically just as distant if not closer, yet the authors do not suggest continuity.


IMHO, Maybe it is because Italian academics are more left-wing/woke, and have a conscious or even sub-conscious inclination to deracinate Italians from their homeland to facilitate a cosmopolitan ideal. This is purely subjective interpretation of the data; I much prefer the way someone like Lazaridis would interpret it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by torzio

did you use this paper in determining anything ?

https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/bitstr...mery_Final.pdf

---

No, but I will check it out. Nevertheless, the point I was making was that Daunians are as close to modern Apulians, as Mycenaeans are to Modern Greeks, and Iron Age Latins/Etruscans are to Modern Northern Italians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

I think the continuity between Ancient Greeks, and Modern Greeks is there, especially for Southern Greeks. I find it odd that despite similar results for Iron Age Apulians, and Modern ones are basically just as distant if not closer, yet the authors do not suggest continuity.

IMHO, Maybe it is because Italian academics are more left-wing/woke, and want to deracinate Italians from their homeland to facilitate a cosmopolitan ideal.

---

I am wondering if someone can “humbly” accuse Italian academics of being biased or misleading in their conclusion. I believe in some areas you can have more continuity in some not and there are several factors that impact that.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blevins13

I am wondering if someone can “humbly” accuse Italian academics of being biased or misleading in their conclusion. I believe in some areas you can have more continuity in some not and there are several factors that impact that.


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum

---

Why does one have continuity and one does not?

https://i.imgur.com/d6198fv.png

https://i.imgur.com/J32aoHC.png

Continuity/discontinuity a subjective, arbitrary assessment. The same affinity means continuity for Greeks and discrepancy for Italians. I personally favor the second up to the point of where affinity of ancient samples is clearly highest with the modern population, which has not been demonstrated in either case.

Regardless, Iron Age Apulians were diverse within themselves. On the PCA they are as distant from each-other as modern Spaniards are from Englishmen, and Albanians from Czechs. Of course they are part of the same Mediterranean continuum, so in that sense they do have affinity with each-other.

Attachment 12848

Another reason why this paper claims discontinuity is that IA samples are different from Medieval and modern ones. Once again, within the same Mediterranean continuum, but not closest to them.

"Three samples located at the bottom of the PCA (ORD004, ORD019, SAL007) and one (SAL010) falling in the middle did not include modern Apulians among the top 25 results of an f3 outgroup analysis(Figure S3). All of them showed an affinity to Copper and Bronze Age Italians11 as well as the Aegean and the Mediterranean worlds (including Minoans, Greece, Croatians, and Gibraltar). A similar distribution is mirrored in the Multi-Dimensional scaling (MDS) built from the f3 outgroup134 measures, where the oldest IAA individual (SAL001; 1235 - 1048 calBCE (95.4%)) lies farthest from the modern samples, while the medieval ones (ORD010: 1078 - 1156 cal CE (95.4%) and SGR001: 670 - 774 cal CE (95.4%)) are the closest (Figure S4). The peculiar positioning of the IAA individuals casts doubt on when the major population shift resulting in modern Italian genetic composition took place. The shift towards the modern Italian genetic variability can be seen with the Republican-Imperial Roman samples6 , the latter being more “similar” to modern Italians (Figure 1C). Whether Apulian individuals dating back to the Imperial phase would also show a repositioning towards modern genetic variability remains an open question, although the later, medieval samples of this study point in that direction."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Çerç

Another reason why this paper claims discontinuity is that IA samples are different from Medieval and modern ones. Once again, within the same Mediterranean continuum, but not closest to them.

"Three samples located at the bottom of the PCA (ORD004, ORD019, SAL007) and one (SAL010) falling in the middle did not include modern Apulians among the top 25 results of an f3 outgroup analysis(Figure S3). All of them showed an affinity to Copper and Bronze Age Italians11 as well as the Aegean and the Mediterranean worlds (including Minoans, Greece, Croatians, and Gibraltar). A similar distribution is mirrored in the Multi-Dimensional scaling (MDS) built from the f3 outgroup134 measures, where the oldest IAA individual (SAL001; 1235 - 1048 calBCE (95.4%)) lies farthest from the modern samples, while the medieval ones (ORD010: 1078 - 1156 cal CE (95.4%) and SGR001: 670 - 774 cal CE (95.4%)) are the closest (Figure S4). The peculiar positioning of the IAA individuals casts doubt on when the major population shift resulting in modern Italian genetic composition took place. The shift towards the modern Italian genetic variability can be seen with the Republican-Imperial Roman samples6 , the latter being more “similar” to modern Italians (Figure 1C). Whether Apulian individuals dating back to the Imperial phase would also show a repositioning towards modern genetic variability remains an open question, although the later, medieval samples of this study point in that direction."

---

Well to be fair, I did say upthread that the Iapygians are just a component of Apulian ancestry. There are others that lived in the area, before and after them. As I also say, the father of ORD001 is possibly more representative of the population that was there prior to the Iapygians. But yes, they are all part of the pan-Mediterranean genetic continuum. If anything, I think those medieval samples are somewhat irrelevant, considering the history of Foggia, and demographic shifts during this period, due to ethnic cleansing.

Quote:

---

The majority of the city's Muslim inhabitants were slaughtered or – as happened to almost 10,000 of them – sold into slavery,[1] with many finding asylum in Albania across the Adriatic Sea.[15] Their mosques were demolished or the buildings reconverted back to churches, such as the cathedral S. Maria della Vittoria.[16] Even most of those Muslims that converted to Christianity were sold as slaves.[17]

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

---

We need to see the bronze-age samples from the region, as well as samples from the Messapii.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

Why does one have continuity and one does not?

https://i.imgur.com/d6198fv.png

https://i.imgur.com/J32aoHC.png

---

Considering that I am not a academic in this field, the studies for Greece IMBO are not as comprehensive as they should when attesting continuity. They don’t have samples from each period. They just conclude that modern population and Mycenaean are similar so conclusion continuity. But who knows what might have happened in 3000 years without samples. For example, for the people of Dyrrahum it will be a surprise to have continuity to Modern Albanians even though they might be Greek-like aka Albanian.

Or as you said the Italian Academics might be woke. This is a plausible argument as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blevins13

Considering that I am not a academic in this field, the studies for Greece IMBO are not as comprehensive as they should when attesting continuity. They don’t have samples from each period. They just conclude that modern population and Mycenaean are similar so conclusion continuity. But who knows what might have happened in 3000 years without samples. For example, por the people of Dyrrahum it will be a surprise to have continuity to Modern Albanians even though they might be Greek-like aka Albanian.


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum

---

Lazaridis et al. 2017 comes from a more respected institution, and he is a more respected scientist. So I would defer to his opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jovialis

Lazaridis et al. 2017 comes from a more respected institution, and he is a more respected scientist. So I would defer to his opinion.

---

So basically you are saying, no need to test in between.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blevins13

So basically you are saying, no need to test in between.


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum

---

Of course we need to analyze new data as it comes in. What I am saying is that despite augmentation, Greeks have continuity, according to Lazaridis. Apulians are just as distant to the Daunians, but as mentioned above they're just one component among other Pan-Mediterranean groups. Nevertheless, they're all part of the same soup. Their affinity is just as close.