Two Ancient Iberia DNA Papers with articles.

So, is it really ancient similarity, ie. Anatolian farmer like ancestry? We both have a lot of it. Is it also a signal that there is indeed Roman Era ancestry going into Iberia from the Italian peninsula, as the paper maintains? Yes, I think so, and Greek as well. I think it was most prominent in the east and south going by the settlement patterns, but we'd need more results from more Iberians and Italians.

I think so as well, which I think is illustrated in my Genetic Similarity map. Outside of Italy, and the Northeastern Mediterranean basin; Iberia is closest. I think it has much to do with Roman, and Greek settlement there.

550now6.png
 
I get samples from Iberia in my Mytrueancestry.com, but they're Visigoths.
 
I think the fact that my map outlines the boarders of the Roman Empire in Europe is telling. This kind of ancestry in the Imperial-era circulated throughout the boarders. It is found in Northern Italy, Iberia, Hungary. Perhaps this south Italian/Greek-like people were a staple population in the colonies. I'm not sure if they were Romans themselves, perhaps they could be; many of the samples do overlap in the leaked PCA. Or perhaps populations that would accompany and mix with Romans to facilitate Romanization abroad. Sort of like how Scots, Irish, and Welsh people would help to build English settlements later in history.
Perhaps some could have been descended from the prized-slaves. Nevertheless, this is all speculation, I can't wait to see the upcoming paper.
Q8UrtU6.jpg


There is also the spread of greek colonies to take into account.

rRftbik.jpg
 
As I've been comparing mytrueancestry results with Iberians, I thought I might post some of the results here for whatever insights they might provide.

Here are the samples. The first genetic "fit" is Carlos', the second is mine, and the third one is for Jovialis. The smaller the number the better the fit. I also have Duarte's and Stuvane's figures. Duarte gets numbers close to those of Carlos but a little bit worse in terms of fit, and Stuvane gets numbers similar to mine, with fits also a bit larger. Both have posted their results so you can easily look them up in the mytrueancestry thread. It's just getting very tedious looking all these numbers up, as well as being time consuming.

Imperial Period:
6. Roman Iberia Granada (300 AD) (16.5) - I3982 Angela (15.42)
51. Roman Iberia Granada (350 AD) (22.96) - I3983 Angela (15.18) Jovialis (20.78)

Early Medieval:

40. Late Roman Iberia Granada (470 AD) (21.55) - I3575 Angela (13.51) Jovialis (17.51)
Early Medieval Iberia Granada (500 AD) (17.63) - I3981 Angela (11.99) Jovialis (23.83)
45. Late Roman Iberia Granada (500 AD) (22.0) - I3581 Angela (14.39) Jovialis (22.58)
EarlyMedieval Iberian (670 AD) (14.53) - CL23 Angela: (9.671) Jovialis (24.17) I would be cautious about this. It comes from Collegno and I'm doubtful about the labeling by mytrueancestry.
Early Medieval Iberia Granada (760 AD) (13.51) - I3585 Angela(15.1)

Medieval Iberian Valencia (1100 AD) (15.42) - I2515 Angela (10.29 Jovialis (24.77)

Later Medieval Iberia:
19. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1120 AD) (16.75) - I2514 Angela 11.87 Jovialis (26.5)
Medieval Iberian Valencia (1200 AD) (14.63) - I2649 Angela(15.54)Jovialis(27.14)
17. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1200 AD) (16.53) - I2644 Angela 15.06 Jovialis (27.54)
30. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1200 AD) (19.83) - I2647 Angela (15.84) Jovialis (24.22)

Carlos doesn't seem to get results in the top 60 for these, which seems strange. Well, there are samples in the top 60 which aren't in ours.
22. Late Roman Iberia Granada (500 AD) (14.83) - I3582 Jovialis (24.54)
26. Late Roman Iberia Granada (470 AD) (15.17) - I3576 Jovialis (22.49)
36. Early Medieval Iberia Granada (515 AD) (18.88) - I3980 Jovialis (20.48)

In one case Carlos gets a better fit than I do. In the rest mine are closer, in a few cases by not very much, and in the rest by a lot. The fits for Jovialis are sometimes in between mine and those of Carlos, and in some cases they're the most distant.

In other samples, like the Bell Beakers of France, central Europe etc., his scores are either better than mine and those of Jovialis or they don't even show up for us.

Yet, on these samples we have some similarities.

So, is it really ancient similarity, ie. Anatolian farmer like ancestry? We both have a lot of it. Is it also a signal that there is indeed Roman Era ancestry going into Iberia from the Italian peninsula, as the paper maintains? Yes, I think so, and Greek as well. I think it was most prominent in the east and south going by the settlement patterns, but we'd need more results from more Iberians and Italians.

Did that "Roman" ancestry come from northern, central or southern Italy? I don't think there's any way to even get a hint from results like this. There could have been southerners who admixed over time.

You would need to do some analyses to see if they were newcomers to the area or were at least local from birth, as was done in the Langobard paper.

I don't know how universal these results are...I'm from Emilia and Eastern Liguria/Lunigiana. Stuvane is from the Romagna, and his fits are usually a little less close than mine but very similar, even the order is almost the same. However, there might be more northern Italians who get worse fits, or better ones for that matter.

We really adjust, it must mean something is clear.
 
We really adjust, it must mean something is clear.

I've always wished time travel were possible, so I could visit all the time periods I've read about so often. Now I've added Roman Iberia and especially Medieval Iberiaan Valencia. A fit of 10.59 with an ancient sample is not bad! :)
 
Maybe one day you can capture images of the past, everything is possible. The truth is that these adjustments with the antiquity are surprising.
 
I found this study from a Spanish university. I think it's the same conclusion that was already known. But it's OK to start getting interested in these genetic issues.

Science dismantles the myth of miscegenation: the population of southern Spain has hardly any DNA from North Africa

The Kingdom of Granada was the last Islamic stronghold in the Iberian Peninsula. The eight centuries of Muslim domination supposed an Andalusian legacy that is manifested in the customs, speech or architecture of southern Spain, but not in the genetic heritage of the population. Bridging the myth of miscegenation, a study conducted by the University of Granada with individuals from the south of the Iberian Peninsula has found that the similarities between its DNA and that of the populations of North Africa are minimal.

The study, published in the prestigious journal Scientific Reports, of the Nature group, has compared the genetic markers of the Y-chromosome -the specific of men- of the population of Granada, Málaga and Almería with that of the rest of Spain, Europe and the north of Africa. Researchers from the University of Granada have concluded that "it is difficult to identify any trace of the genetic legacy left by the ancient settlers."

An "effective expulsion"
This is the main author of this work, María Saiz Guinaldo, of the Genetic Identification Laboratory of the UGR, who explains this finding by the "effective expulsion" of the Muslim population in North Africa and "to repopulate the area with inhabitants from the rest of the Iberian Peninsula », since they left no more genetic legacy in these Spanish provinces than in other areas where they spent much less time.

«Our results reveal that no African component has remained in the population of the south of the Iberian Peninsula, despite having been occupied by them for 800 years», warns María Saiz: «The presence of typically African haplogroups in the population of Granada, Malaga and Almeria is not significant when compared to the frequencies of these in European populations, both Mediterranean and northern Europe.

https://sevilla.abc.es/andalucia/gr...RNs_Z4IqUlNlM896pulIs65Ou1bOQlstELLIMZ1ad3qJk
 
I've always wished time travel were possible, so I could visit all the time periods I've read about so often. Now I've added Roman Iberia and especially Medieval Iberiaan Valencia. A fit of 10.59 with an ancient sample is not bad! :)

My closest match is Bell Beaker Scotland (2145 BC) 3.668, and I have one from Girona, Spain, but a Visigoth, at 5.45
 
The Moors did not colonize northern Iberia as lords but as slaves captured in Christian raids to the south and later in the Portuguese conquests in North Africa may account for much of the excess of North African DNA found there, because while in the south the Moorish women for belonging to the elite did not mixed with Christians, in the north they were among the Portuguese, known by having children with slave women (they populated Brazil with very little help from the Portuguese women, 60% of the mtDNA there is from brazilian indians, joining african mtADN and little remains for the Portuguese women). Astrologers, guitarists, alchemists (soap, alcohol,Perfumes...) and other agents of the thus said Arab cultural superiority may also have given a tiny help.
Although Portugal be one of the genetically most homogeneous of the world or even the 1st when compared with others of the same dimension there are some minor differences, the Douro River valley is still today a genetic and dialectal border, in the rice-growing areas of the rivers Sado in the south and Vouga / Mondego in the center, the load of African DNA is superior to the rest of the population due to black workers that were taken there for they are resistant to malaria of the rice "marshes", in the archipelago of Madeira is the same perhaps due to the slaves who worked there in the sugar mills and not only, in the Islands of the Azores a case is the excess of Asian DNA on the island of corvo (founder effect ???).......
The DNA of the moinantes, may have a say in all this it would be interesting that it had been analyzed.


 
Although Portugal be one of the genetically most homogeneous of the world or even the 1st when compared with others of the same dimension there are some minor differences, the Douro River valley is still today a genetic and dialectal border,

Douro isn't a dialectal border, let alone genetic, just look at the dialectal map made by Instituto Camões who are probably the top authority on the matter.
The biggest dialectal barriers in the country are the mountain systems, particularly the Estrela system and those that separate the litoral (Coimbra/Aveiro) from the interior (Viseu) such as Buçaco, Caramulo and so on
http://cvc.instituto-camoes.pt/hlp/geografia/mapa06.html
mapa06.gif


We're not very homogenous, just look at any PCA and our cluster nearly totally overlaps that of Spain. Yet they are 5 times more than us. Saying we're nr1 is very wrong. Besides how can you say we're "1st homogenous in the world" and in the same sentence mention a genetic border within the country? You just contradicted yourself
PCA.jpg

magovalle.png
(Portugal in medium blue, plus additional Portuguese individuals)

Also here's the K7 from a recent study on Iberia, Portuguese samples from Lisbon and Porto follow the same trends, but within each group there is considerable variation, greater than within some Spanish regions, which further emphasises we're not that homogenous
admixturek7.png



in the rice-growing areas of the rivers Sado in the south and Vouga / Mondego in the center, the load of African DNA is superior to the rest of the population due to black workers that were taken there for they are resistant to malaria of the rice "marshes"

No offense, that sounds silly, I've never seen anything even remotely pointing to that. Care to provide us a genetic study or models that support that?
 

I wonder how, where and when these steppe people got immunity against the plague, and what it was they had which the neolithic people didn't have, that made them replace the male population.
The archeology didn't find signs of violence.

There is clear signs of climate change that adversely impacted farming, which could lead to drought, famine, pandemics, etc.:

https://www.heritagedaily.com/2018/...-site-in-all-recent-iberian-prehistory/120856

The paleoenvironmental data for the Mediterranean and Europe indicate that between the 24th and 23rd centuries BCE, a period of greater aridity and dryness began globally, which could have had severe consequences for many of the planet’s societies, including droughts. At this time, the Iberian Peninsula saw the end of chalcolithic way of life and the abandonment of some of the most important sites with ditched enclosures, as now seems to be the case with Valencina de la Concepción. In broad strokes, this coincides with the end of the Old Kingdom in the Nile Valley, with a great crisis that brought about the end of the period of construction of the great pyramids.

Pastoralists are not generally adept at overcoming walled/ditched fortifications, but could encircle and lay siege, while letting their herds loose to browse in the fields. A violent overthrow was not at all necessary, with a simple surrender, after the grain stocks had been exhausted, and the imposition of a new ruler(s) being a distinct possibility:

After what seems like a long period in the reduction of activity in the 27th century BCE, the tholos of La Pastora was probably built, with very different architectural characteristics: without great slabs of slate, but with a roofed chamber with a false stone dome, an important technical and aesthetic innovation, and with a “heretical” orientation towards the south east, facing away from the sunrise. “It is very probable that these changes in the monumental architecture were due to were due to changes in the social and ideological sphere, including, perhaps, religious “heterodoxies”, the researcher adds.

That there are no signs of violence, however, is simply not true:

“In fact, the abandonment of the site seems rather abrupt, without a gradual transition towards a different social model. The possibility that the end of the Valencina settlement was due to a social crisis has been hinted at by the dates obtained from several human skulls separated from the rest of the skeletons in a pit in a Calle Trabajadores in Valencina”, states the director of the research group. According to the data obtained from the radiocarbon dating, all these individuals almost died at the same time, which opens the possibility of a violent episode (killing, crime or sacrifice). The fact that several of the skulls were treated in a ritual manner, showing marks of having had the flesh removed and that this ‘special’ mortuary deposit appears to be associated with the greatest collection of pottery beakers found on the site, suggests that the episode had great symbolic significance.

The separated skulls could be the result of a ceremonial decapitation, bringing comparison to the later Celtic skull cult. It can't be excluded that the defeated rulers were sacrificed and the population expelled.

These were found in the abandoned Montelirio tholos:

ARROW2.jpg
 
@Ruderico.

Forgive my being so stupid, but do you have any idea what populations the colors stand for in the AdmixtureK7 you refer to above? It would be nice if you could give me a key to that. (Son-in-law is Portuguese, by the way; that's why I am interested)
 
@Ruderico.

Forgive my being so stupid, but do you have any idea what populations the colors stand for in the AdmixtureK7 you refer to above? It would be nice if you could give me a key to that. (Son-in-law is Portuguese, by the way; that's why I am interested)
Not stupid at all, here's the breakdown:

The green component is a lot higher in Italy than in Iberia or Western Europe, so I assume its central/eastern mediterranean related.
The brown in basically north African, as is the yellow (for some reason it's split into two, one for Morocco and another for Algeria)
Light Blue is what dominates W Europe, but not totally (they also have dark blue).
Orange is Basque-like, so probably some sort of palaeohispanic reference.
Dark blue totally dominates the Finnish samples, so NE European - in Iberia I suppose it's related to Germanic and/or Celtic settlement since I assume they'd get a good share of it when compared to us
 
Not stupid at all, here's the breakdown:

The green component is a lot higher in Italy than in Iberia or Western Europe, so I assume its central/eastern mediterranean related.
The brown in basically north African, as is the yellow (for some reason it's split into two, one for Morocco and another for Algeria)
Light Blue is what dominates W Europe, but not totally (they also have dark blue).
Orange is Basque-like, so probably some sort of palaeohispanic reference.
Dark blue totally dominates the Finnish samples, so NE European - in Iberia I suppose it's related to Germanic and/or Celtic settlement since I assume they'd get a good share of it when compared to us

Thanks a lot.
 
The statements about the Douro as genetic border, were made by mr. Manuel Sobrinho Simões, elected in 2015 by the British magazine «The Patologist», as the most influential pathologist in the world. the popular Latin spoken in the Roman province north of the Douro was different from that spoken in the province to the south, this will be the basis of the two dialectal groups of European Portuguese, with the end of the administrative frontier the influence of geographical accessibility was felt to say that the old frontier continues today it is necessary to forget the Northern dialects that have overflowed south of the Douro.
As to the homogeneity of the Portuguese population, I would like to draw attention to the post nº270 of this thread, the truth is that the study of the Portuguese autonomous groups has not yet been published. this homogeneity was affirmed in this last study on the Spanish autosomal groups and in a post of this thread.
In the populations of the rice fields are visible the African traits (not to be confused with recent emigrants) and even have a folklore of their own in the Sado area is called "cantar ao ladrão" (in these songs it seems that they are accusing the Portuguese of being the thief) about their genetics maybe ipatimup or i3s might lend a hand, regarding location maybe a local association of rice producers or a major producer.
 
I'm sorry but all that sounds very feeble and against the most recent genetic studies, the "unpublished paper" is clear that both samples from Porto and Lisbon draw from the same source population (ie, no barriers in between, which again goes against that supposed genetic barrier in the Douro valley), not that all the samples are genetically homogenous. We don't have samples from the interior, particularly from the interior north of Serra da Estrela, to be certain the trend is the same there, but it should be at least similar

barriers.png


Dr. Manuel Sobrinho Simões is a phenomenal pathologist, but he's not a population geneticist who's been studying the latest data.
Also "In the populations of the rice fields are visible the African traits" sounds horribly pseudo-scientific. I want hard data, not unsourced claims

This "Portugal is nr1 homogenous country" sounds like nationalistic mumbo jumbo. We're not extremelly homogenous, and we don't have to be. We do however have our unique markers because we're basically descended from the same source populations, so we all share a lot of DNA with each other, but that doesn't mean our genetic profiles are going to be the same because if they were we'd see that in various models and statistical analysis. We're more homogenous than the Germans, French, Italians or Greeks. Not more than the Irish, for example.
 
Last edited:
What about moinantes?? Sounds interesting, I would never say they are genetically different... they are a group apart but different from gipsies.
 
What about moinantes?? Sounds interesting, I would never say they are genetically different... they are a group apart but different from gipsies.

No idea, but for what it is worth Irish Travellers are also regular Irish despite the gypsie stereotype, as far as I know, but the study I read was very old. The field of population genetics is advancing very rapidly, so things can get outdated quickly
 
The internet has updated information about travelers (genetics, etc.).
I have notion that ipatimup has studied the sub-Saharan heritable diseases of rice paddy the populations of which I spoke, they or the i3s should have hard data on the subject.
I look forward to a study of the Portuguese autosomes at least like the last ones they did in Uk, Ireland and Spain




 
No idea, but for what it is worth Irish Travellers are also regular Irish despite the gypsie stereotype, as far as I know, but the study I read was very old. The field of population genetics is advancing very rapidly, so things can get outdated quickly

I don't know why you eraned a thumb down. Here <whta Wikipedia says, alike to what I red in other fora:
"
Present genetic evidence indicates that they are genetically Irish.[23] In 2011, researchers at the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin and the University of Edinburgh analyzed DNA samples from 40 Travellers. The study provided evidence that Irish Travellers are a distinct Irish ethnic minority, who have been distinct from the settled Irish community for at least 1000 years; the report claimed that they are as distinct from the settled community as Icelanders are from Norwegians. This apparent distance though may be the effect of genetic drift within a small homogeneous population and may therefore exaggerate the distance between the two populations.[24] A genetic analysis of Irish Travellers found evidence to support: (1) Irish ancestry; (2) several distinct subpopulations; and (3) the distinctiveness of the midland counties due to Viking influence.[23]
In 2017 a further genetic study using profiles of 50 Irish Travellers, 143 European Roma, 2232 settled Irish, 2039 British and 6255 European or worldwide individuals confirmed ancestral origin within the general Irish population. An estimated time of divergence between the settled population and Travellers was set at a minimum of 8 generations ago, with generations at 30 years, hence 240 years and a maximum of 14 generations or 420 years ago. The best fit was estimated at 360 years ago, giving an approximate date in the 1650s.[25] This date coincides well with the final destruction of Gaelic society following the 1641 Rebellion and during the Wars of the Three Kingdoms in which Cromwell's forces devastated the country.
Irish Travellers are not an entirely homogeneous group instead reflecting some of the variation also seen in the settled population. Four distinct genetic clusters were identified in the 2017 study, and these match social groupings within the community.[26]
[h=4]Genetic disease studies[/h]Genetic studies by Miriam Murphy, David Croke, and other researchers identified certain genetic diseases such as galactosemia that are more common in the Irish Traveller population, involving identifiable allelic mutations that are rarer among the rest of the community.
Two main hypotheses have arisen, speculating whether:

  1. this resulted from marriages made largely within and among the Traveller community, or
  2. suggesting descent from an original Irish carrier long ago with ancestors unrelated to the rest of the Irish population.[27]
They concluded that: "The fact that Q188R is the sole mutant allele among the Travellers as compared to the non-Traveller group may be the result of a founder effect in the isolation of a small group of the Irish population from their peers as founders of the Traveller sub-population. This would favour the second, endogenous, hypothesis of Traveller origins."
More specifically, they found that Q188R was found in 100% of Traveller samples, and in 89% of other Irish samples, indicating that the Traveller group was typical of the larger Irish population."

It could seem out of topic to certain members here, but it is comparable to a "travellers community" among German Swisses also considered as "Gypsies", and it could be the same for others marginal communities in Europe and in the world. Not all "travellers" are coming from India.
 

This thread has been viewed 52860 times.

Back
Top