Tuscany had a middle age admixture event?

[joeyc]

As to this matter of the lack of WHG in Tuscans, I can't totally explain it. It may indeed be that there were very few local foragers in that area when the neolithic peoples arrived. However, Tuscany was indeed impacted by the Celts and the Lombards. In addition, they have Yamnaya ancestry, which would presumably include some WHG. I have wondered if it's possible that the algorithm is, in this case, having difficulty distinguishing between the WHG and the EHG in Tuscans.

There is no lack of WHG in Tuscans. The Yamna component is over 50% WHG and EEF is 30-40% WHG as well.

Indeed Tuscans fall in the North-South Euro cline in this plot from Lazaridis et al.

 

[Hauteville]

Joseph it's funny to read how many bullshits american historians write about our history especially for Roman Italy and Medieval Sicily.
According to them Roman Italy was at least 50-60% of middle eastern slaves who replaced ethnic italians and the short and insignificant muslim period of Sicily who according to them imported 300.000 arabs from Gulf lol
Of course they didn't write that Normans, Latins and Swabians expelled them and the few remained were often used in the Latin pogroms and Frederick II deported the last remnants. Lol

Luckily there are Y-Cromosome studies and IBD sharings that of course make them funny and ludicrous. Lol

 

[joeyc]

Even funnier are those Indo European Iraqis with an OWD who try to connect themselves with Europeans.

 

[Hauteville]

Because of american historian bullshits about Italy.

 

[joeyc]

LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.

 

[Arame]

joeyc
Of course Tuscans have WHG. Either within ENF or Yamna. You can see that in Lazaridis et al K=20. I posted that Haak graph not to prove that Tuscans don't have WHG but that they have another sort of difference.. Maybe due to Caucasus Gedrosia of Lazaridis.

 

[Arame]

Concerning Iraq. Iraq is the Babylon (on the basis of Sumerian civilization ). Perhaps You don't know that the first legendary Haykazuni dinasty of Armenia is from Babylon. Babylon for Armenians is like Troy for Romans. So Your sentence with some disguised negative connotation is quite funny for an educated Armenian.

I expected from a person who has the great legacy of Roman civilization to be more confident and open minded, but it seems I was wrong.
I think further discussion is meaningless. We just need to wait the autosomal components of pre-Roman Tuscany to find who was right who was wrong.

 

[Drac II]

@Drac

Are you seriously suggesting that IBD analysis is not a correct methodology?
At least do you know how it works or are you just going in circles?

The Hellenthal et al paper received critics from many professional genetists because of its methodology. AFAIK none has criticized the Ralph and Coop et al or the IBD analysis, so I stand right.

Even if the methodology is not inherently incorrect, it also has limitations, and the fact still remains that the claimed results for at least some IBD papers has been contradicted by papers using other methods.

 

[Hauteville]

LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.

Eheh i have recent read a book of an american who said that in Roman Italy there were a lot of black africans. What? lol
Totally invention of history

 

[Drac II]

This is the last time I will respond to your posts on this matter. It's a waste of time.

Nowhere do you provide any actual empirical evidence for your claims about the number, condition, or ethnic origin of the slaves in the area of Tuscany, or anywhere in Italy for that matter. The trivial matter of "slave" names has been sufficiently addressed. American slave owners didn't write down their reasons for naming slaves Homer and Venus. However, we're supposed to be intelligent enough not to draw the inference that they were necessarily Greek.

You obviously have not actually read the entire Hellenthal et al paper, , which I today read for the second time, or you would know that they didn't opine about the source of any "new" gene flow into Tuscany in the period starting in 522 AD. Given that all historical evidence indicates that the major new gene flow came from northern and western Europe in the form of actual folk migrations from Gaul, central Europe, and then northern Europe in the form of the Lombards, perhaps they didn't feel it was necessary to even address your bizarre interpretation of the event.

Any other interpretation is groundless and would have us believe that prior to that date all the "Tuscans" were 100% northern and western European.

Also, if you had read the paper, you would know that rather than deprecating IBD analysis, in their discussion of the ethnogenesis of eastern Europeans they specifically state that their work supports the findings of IBD analysis.

Of course, if you claim you did read it, am I supposed to infer you deliberately distorted the findings? I'd be happy to accept that, because then I can give you another infraction.

I hope you do realize how futile would be to compare the naming practices of 18th-19th century European and American slave traders and holders with those of Roman times. In any event, such an anachronistic comparison is even more in favor of what I am pointing out: American and English slave traders and holders gave their slaves predominantly English names, just like the Spanish, Portuguese and French ones did with their respective languages. Now I ask again: then why don't we see more Roman-era slaves with Roman names and instead the majority have the names more typical among the Hellenized peoples of the eastern parts of the empire? There are several reasons why so many historians have become convinced that this area was the most important supplier of slaves for the Romans, at least for a certain period of time (usually said to be the early Christian era.) One of them is this issue with the names. Such evidence can't be so casually dismissed. The name "Syrus" (Syrian), for example, was a generic slave name in Roman comedies.

The Hellenthal et al. paper does not seem to give any explanations regarding Tuscany in particular:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209567/

And yes, the authors are well aware of the Ralph & Coop paper and refer to it, but this is in fact more incriminating when it comes to certain regions other than Eastern Europe. Judging by the fact that in their "Genetic Atlas" companion web site they list all parts of Italy as having had admixture from more recent times than 2500 years ago, it does not seem that at least in some cases they were convinced by the IBD-based results of Ralph & Coop's paper.

 

[Drac II]

That excerpt has absolutely nothing to do with your argument that Greek names in slaves indicate that most of them came from the Near East. I told you what would happen if you misrepresented academic papers. DO IT ONE MORE TIME and I'll give you an infraction. I am really lax in handing them out, but that can be remedied. Am I sufficiently clear?

Read carefully before making accusations and threats. I did not restrict my comments to slaves (you are the one who keeps doing that.) The passage is about Caracalla's edict granting citizenship to most free people in the empire, including the Christians, and the provenance of these early Christians in Rome, which the source clearly says came from the eastern parts of the empire and North Africa. That's what I said historians conclude regarding this subject, so no one is "misrepresenting" anything. It wasn't meant as a specific example of how common the Hellenized names were among these free peoples or the slaves. It goes without saying that most of these people would have had the names typical of their areas of provenance, which in the case of the easterners would have been Hellenized names. Just some logic and common sense thrown in. Or do you really expect these foreigners to have had the Latin names common among the Romans?

 

[Hauteville]

Luckily we have IBD sharing and Y-Chromosome studies and all of them said that the only West Asian input in the whole Italy including the south and the islands came from Neolithic times to Bronze age collapse and not from historical times.
The fact that you have slaves with Greek names or muslims and jew means nothing, they can easily be a local people converted.
You must look at the ethnic cleansing of the muslim remnants in Sicily by Frederick II to begin with and again I don't believe in no one modern american pseudo-historian sources about Roman empire.

 

[joeyc]

The Italian ethnogenesis can simply explained by this model:

50% Barcin farmer + 25% German Bell Beaker + 25% Yamnaya.

Similar to the model by Haak et al.

 

[Drac II]

Luckily we have IBD sharing and Y-Chromosome studies and all of them said that the only West Asian input in the whole Italy including the south and the islands came from Neolithic times to Bronze age collapse and not from historical times.
The fact that you have slaves with Greek names or muslims and jew means nothing, they can easily be a local people converted.
You must look at the ethnic cleansing of the muslim remnants in Sicily by Frederick II to begin with and again I don't believe in no one modern american pseudo-historian sources about Roman empire.

Neither one of those methods can give definitive or infallible answers. For example, haplogroups are all thousands of years old, and IBDs can't tell gene flow direction. Even Ralph & Coop themselves admit that genetics can't do without other disciplines, like archaeology or linguistics.

Also, the issue with the preponderance of Greek names among slaves in Rome is not the only evidence. The statements of Roman and Greek authors afford other evidence for the presence of large numbers of foreigners (both slaves and free people, who migrated to Italy out of their own will) in Rome and their provenance. Tacitus, Seneca, Martial, Strabo, Juvenal, Cicero, Petronius, etc. mention or talk about such subjects (some of these writers were in fact themselves foreigners living in Italy.) Combined with the epigraphical evidence it is rather unquestionable that there was a large foreign population, and very likely that the eastern parts of the empire (which includes Greece and the southern Balkans, by the way, not only the Near East and Egypt) was where the majority of them came from.

The American sources are not by "pseudo-historians" but normal historians, plus Italian historians have also talked about this subject (this whole business of large numbers of foreigners in Rome was a sort of "nightmare" scenario for fascist Italian thinkers and some of them spoke about their "corrupting" influence on ancient Rome), so it is not any "American" invention. In fact, many historians who have talked about this subject are German, French and English.

 

[Salmon]

LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.

They wouldn't have necessarily been kicked out if they converted to Christianity or were Christian.

Not all Levantines were Muslim.
Not all Jews stayed Jews, many converted.

Not all Levantines arrived in the Middle Ages, some were probably there since the Roman Empire though Carthage, Syria, North Africa.

Joseph it's funny to read how many bullshits american historians write about our history especially for Roman Italy and Medieval Sicily.
According to them Roman Italy was at least 50-60% of middle eastern slaves who replaced ethnic italians and the short and insignificant muslim period of Sicily who according to them imported 300.000 arabs from Gulf lol
Of course they didn't write that Normans, Latins and Swabians expelled them and the few remained were often used in the Latin pogroms and Frederick II deported the last remnants. Lol

Luckily there are Y-Cromosome studies and IBD sharings that of course make them funny and ludicrous. Lol

Rome occupied the provinces of Syria, Egypt, and Africa. They absorbed Carthaginians, Arabs, etc.

There was a Roman Emperor named Phillip the Arab. He was born in Syria.

A provincial from Syria, North Africa, and Egypt could work his way up the ranks of the Roman Army and gain Roman citizenship, earn himself a ticket to Italy.

Italy was a magnet for pronvincials, particularly those of non-Roman descent. It was a center of wealth and trade for a long time.

The first Christians were Levantines. Constantine imported the Levantine religion known as Christianity to Italy and made Italy the center of Christianity. Levantine Christians may have rolled in.

 

[Sigfrido]

Italy was too much densely populated back then for any migration of few thousands of Levantines to change much of its population. Also if Italy was such a magnet for migrants, then why the Neolitch components are distribuited so well along a North-South axis and not concentrated in the big cities like Rome?

 

[LeBrok]

Italy was too much densely populated back then for any migration of few thousands of Levantines to change much of its population. Also if Italy was such a magnet for migrants, then why the Neolitch components are distribuited so well along a North-South axis and not concentrated in the big cities like Rome?

There were times in Middle Ages that Rome almost ceased to exist. From one million citizen during Roman Empire to almost nothing in middle ages. For that reason modern population of Rome is different than Roman population of Rome.

 

[Sigfrido]

There were times in Middle Ages that Rome almost ceased to exist. From one million citizen during Roman Empire to almost nothing in middle ages. For that reason modern population of Rome is different than Roman population of Rome.

And for some magic reason they dispersed into Italy forming a perfect north-south genetic cline with the peaks of "West Asian" haplotypes in the Appennines?

 

[LeBrok]

And for some magic reason the dispersed into Italy forming a perfect north-south genetix cline with the peaks of "West Asian" haplotypes in the Appennines?

What this has to do with depopulation of Rome, or lack of strong West Asian signature in Rome?!

 

[Sigfrido]

Why don't you respond my question first? Lack of arguments?