Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Iberians/Tartessians are exclusively L51 and the only Celt is I2a
I wonder what Tartessian's linguistic affinities are. Are they L51* or just L51? Fun fact: Greeks claimed they started Western civilisation, for whatever reason.
Probably some distant relative of Iberian and Aquitanian.
Doubt it, no reason for it to be distant if they're all so close to each other.
The genetic evidence definitely lends support to the idea that they were quite closely related. It's just not attested very well, so the linguistic side leaves some room for doubt.
Iberians/Tartessians are exclusively L51 and the only Celt is I2a
Now there's some interesting information. So, they lived "relatively" peacefully for 500 years before mixing? No apparent immediate butchery of all the men. Yet, the local y lines wiped out. Wish we knew what happened.
Yes, this is very strange. Hard to imagine that girls would spontaneously have run into the arms of those foreign newcomers/invaders. And supposing they did, harder still to imagine that the local males peacefully agreed to be deprived of wives and progeny.
Ok wait calm down. Where it is spoked about Solutrean and y-dna I1? Also where it is saying that they found R1b-L51? Is this in the Reich supps? I only see the mention of P312.
Edit. Tho... i just noticed on Eurogenes. On two samples they have I1 and C1a1, C1a1 what the heck is that, is that a typo? It's like Franco-Cantabria is becoming interesting again.
Yes, this is very strange. Hard to imagine that girls would spontaneously have run into the arms of those foreign newcomers/invaders. And supposing they did, harder still to imagine that the local males peacefully agreed to be deprived of wives and progeny.
What stands out to me:
Seems like the Medieval Muslim population was almost a 50-50 mix between Europeans and Berbers, with seemingly no sex bias. The native Spaniards were probably considered full equals immediately after conversion.
The Iberian Celts were autosomally closest to Basques, so present day Iberians are presumably largely pre-Celtic genetically like the insular Celts as well.
All ethnic Greeks are like slightly West Asian shifted Sicilians, all ethnic Greek males belong to unresolved J.
Visigoths are like eastern shifted Germans (so basically Hungarians) which is quite expected given their immediate origin. E-V13 in one sample is telling.
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.
The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people.
Getting back to the Spanish samples, I think we can see that indeed, as I've maintained for years, supported by the Chiarelli book on Muslim Sicily, the majority of the "Moors" who went to these places were not Levantine or Saudi, but North Africans. You can see it from the admixture analysis. The relative paucity of J1 in comparison to J2 and the E clades was another clue.
[/IMG]
An interesting question is posed by the presence of J2a here. 2/3 of these North African admixed J's have no Levant at all. You would think if it was Phoenician there would be a lot more "Levant" in them. Perhaps the early ones were Carthaginian remnants with carried the Levantine y but were mostly North African? As for the later ones, if the "Moors" were mostly North African but with some men from the Levant and there had been admixture that might explain it.
Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.
The "Celt" I2a could either be from an absorbed local or it could have come with the newcomers. What specific type is it? There was plenty of I2a in Europe, and we know the "Slavs", for one, absorbed one variety of it.
The Greeks certainly did start Western Civilization. Get out the history books, people.
Getting back to the Spanish samples, I think we can see that indeed, as I've maintained for years, supported by the Chiarelli book on Muslim Sicily, the majority of the "Moors" who went to these places were not Levantine or Saudi, but North Africans. You can see it from the admixture analysis. The relative paucity of J1 in comparison to J2 and the E clades was another clue.
[/IMG]
An interesting question is posed by the presence of J2a here. 2/3 of these North African admixed J's have no Levant at all. You would think if it was Phoenician there would be a lot more "Levant" in them. Perhaps the early ones were Carthaginian remnants with carried the Levantine y but were mostly North African? As for the later ones, if the "Moors" were mostly North African but with some men from the Levant and there had been admixture that might explain it.
Also interesting, only one of the samples from the 10th to 16th centuries, the period of Muslim presence, plots with modern Spaniards, yet most of Spain is around 7,8,9 % North African, with Portugal reaching 10%. So, it would seem that the expulsions and the re-settlement of Spain from north to south had an effect. The authors state most of the admixture was from the earlier centuries. That would explain it, I guess. Those people were "safe" because their admixture was "hidden" by the passage of time, perhaps.
This thread has been viewed 54645 times.