Azzurro
Banned
- Messages
- 450
- Reaction score
- 117
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J-Y15222
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U5a2b5
Let's not get off topic. We're talking strictly about Puglia and especially Grecia Salentina. If you think the R1a there is not important, why draw the conclusions you drew from it? The northeast, areas near Slovenia etc., are a completely different topic.
You cannot logically draw the conclusions you are drawing for these areas from this paper. There is virtually nothing from M-458 that would indicate the presence of "Slavic" y. There is no indication of Slavic I2a being much of a possibility either, which you would think would be higher than any R1a anyway.
I also don't understand why you would think Grecia Salentina is particularly isolated. It's all nice and flat. No isolated, high altitude valleys there.
Now, perhaps you're drawing your conclusions from private testing company results. I'd like to see screen shots of the results from Grecia Salentina to see all this "Slavic" dna. I'm not interested in any "private" collections.
Of course, even if it exists in those data banks, those collections can be very deceiving. For one thing, no one is checking to see all four grandparents or, in this case, that the paternal grandfather is from the area. Also, it's self selected, not a random sample. In the early days a lot of incorrect predictions were made about R1b clades in Britain because people relied on results like that.
I think at this stage, unless I'm blown away by all the "Slavic" y lines in the data from the private testing companies, I would say that there doesn't seem to be much of an indication that the R1a and I2 in Puglia and especially Grecia Salentina is from the post Slavic era Balkans, particularly in light of the thousands of years of interactions between the two areas. Why on earth single that time period out?
Of course, people can believe whatever they want to believe, for whatever reason, and often do.
I said R1a in general is not common in Italy, and it can clearly be that the high R1a in Graecia Salentina can be from Founder effect, its possible that all the samples in Graecia Salentina in this paper could be from one village, and could drastically be different from the next village.
Again M458 is not the only Slavic R1a, CTS1211 is also largely Slavic and is much more common than M458, to your point about I-CTS10228, no R1a is more common than I-CTS10228 in the Slavic world.
Whoever said its isolated? Your added ideas that I never mentioned.
Its your decision not to see ftdna as valid as low resolution dna papers, there is over 2000 Italians (in projects) who tested their Y dna at ftdna of which a good 100-150 tested BigY, if anything more can be learnt from ftdna than this paper or many of the papers unfortunately, hopefully the next papers will be NGS tested.
As for your final comment you can believe what you want to be believe your entitled to your own opinion.