Two Ancient Iberia DNA Papers with articles.

`^^^
Yes, of course, there must still be a lot to discover. Every week I feel from a different place with so much calculator.
 
`^^^
Yes, of course, there must still be a lot to discover. Every week I feel from a different place with so much calculator.

I personally don't bother with small potatoes, I find it irrelevant if a model gives me 1% this or 2% that because it's just a mathematical model. For example no model currently assigns me to Portugal, but that's where all my family's from. If you know your family background, that's what matters. For me anyways.
 
The steppe cult is so deeply inserted in some brains, that now that people se how Iberian and Basque speakers are direct descendents of R1b beakers that they are thinking that there was a parallel non-IE wave, well, ok, now it's a good hour for trollling... so lets ask, ok guys, the Iberian / Basque combo came also, as everything worth in the world, from the Pontic steppe, but hey, maybe the IE Celtic-Latin combo IE beaker can be tracked down, so, my trollling question is, it's possible to assign to each combo a given admixture? per example, if the Iberian / Basque combo was more CHG / Iran Neo than EHG, and the Celtic / Latin was more EHG. Let's see how many heads pop up.
 
Ygorcs, Reconquista started in 12th century? Where do you read that? 10 years after Muslim rule Reconquista has been started, in 722, and in 740 almost a quarter of Iberia was not under Muslim rule... Muslims are not an explanation to the presence of Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia. Bishops of Lugo, Iria Flavia and Bretoña in Galicia were never interrupted like others in Braga, Astorga, Dumio... and there are Berber admixture in northern part of Galicia and Asturias, so the explanation has to be another one.

Of course I referred to the Reconquista of the parts of Iberia that were indeed under long Muslim rule, not those that were simply invaded and soon freed. After the initial decades of invasion, there was eventually a certain stability, but that started to crumble rapidly around 1100, and by 1300 most of Iberia was not under Andalusi Muslim rule. The 12th century was just an approximate dating, as in that century it had become clear that the Reconquista was decisively going to win.

Pt-Reconquista2.jpg


As for the Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia, that is really the hardest part to explain, and of course I do not think all of the North African admixture came with Al-Andalus (Roman Africa was certainly full of Romanized and not-so-Romanized Berbers, and they lived under the same empire with Iberians for centuries), but I also think it must be rather complicated to explain exactly what demographic movements happened after the Late Antiquity because of all the intensive migrations into and within Iberia.

Isn't it possible that, given that the western part of Iberia was the first to be fully and solidly "reconquered" (Portugal had basically defined once and for all its present borders by the early 14th century), some of the Berber-admixed people there were the first to fully assimilate and Christianize successfully avoiding eventual persecution because they blended with the native population soon enough, at a time (the High Middle Ages) when the hostility toward former Muslims and Jews was a lot lower than in the Early Modern Era?

That would help explain the higher than average Berber admixture in Galicia/Northern Portugal: many Berber-admixed people there would've become part of the local populace, with no clear ethnic distinction, since long before the persecutions and expulsions, whereas the society in modern Spain might've been more fractured and ethnically divided. Thus the cleaveages (genetic ones, too) between people could've made it easier to "get rid" of the Berber and Arab admixture than in the western part of Iberia, and subsequent movements (which in Iberia were clearly in a north-south direction or vice-versa) accounted for the rest of the story.
 
Of course I referred to the Reconquista of the parts of Iberia that were indeed under long Muslim rule, not those that were simply invaded and soon freed. After the initial decades of invasion, there was eventually a certain stability, but that started to crumble rapidly around 1100 B.C., and by 1300 most of Iberia was not under Andalusi Muslim rule.

Pt-Reconquista2.jpg


As for the Berber admixture in the northwestern part of Iberia, that is really the hardest part to explain, and of course I do not think all of the North African admixture came with Al-Andalus (Roman Africa was certainly full of Romanized and not-so-Romanized Berbers, and they lived under the same empire with Iberians for centuries), but I also think it must be rather complicated to explain exactly what demographic movements happened after the Late Antiquity because of all the intensive migrations into and within Iberia.

Isn't it possible that, given that the western part of Iberia was the first to be fully and solidly "reconquered" (Portugal had basically defined once and for all its present borders by the early 14th century), some of the Berber-admixed people there were the first to fully assimilate and Christianize successfully avoiding eventual persecution because they blended with the native population soon enough, at a time (the High Middle Ages) when the hostility toward former Muslims and Jews was a lot lower than in the Early Modern Era?

That would help explain the higher than average Berber admixture in Galicia/Northern Portugal: many Berber-admixed people there would've become part of the local populace, with no clear ethnic distinction, since long before the persecutions and expulsions, whereas the society in modern Spain might've been more fractured and ethnically divided. Thus the cleaveages (genetic ones, too) between people could've made it easier to "get rid" of the Berber and Arab admixture than in the western part of Iberia, and subsequent movements (which in Iberia were clearly in a north-south direction or vice-versa) accounted for the rest of the story.

I knew what you meant.

This all seems eminently reasonable to me, and correlates well with the assertion by the authors that as far as North African admixture from the Islamic period is concerned what survives is from the earlier centuries. They probably took a look at IBD analysis, although it's not in the paper.

A really well done IBD analysis, by someone like Graham Coop, would be very interesting. All the other people I've seen doing them date it all to the most recent admixture event because the programs they use aren't all that reliable, imo.
 
The expelled descendants that today are in North Africa have a memory and those who had stayed in the peninsula would have lost it? He knows that there are people who still keep the key to his house and that there are laws that even give them Spanish nationality. If they had stayed a large amount they would not have been lonely wolves where in a few years their ancestry could be lost, we talked about families more than anything and then there would be memories, oral tradition something like it happens in the descendants of the current expelled, and there is not . You grow and if you ask for some building they tell you: that was of the Moors or that the Moors did, in the past and referring to other people, it is the only thing there is, nothing more. Therefore I keep my hypothesis refuted by the data that you already know.

I strongly doubt that all descendants of expelled Moors and Moriscos in North Africa, Southeastern Europe and West Asia (they didn't all migrate to North África) are still fully aware of their ancestors in Iberia, especially in the case of communities that were not closed, like Muslims (as opposed to Sephardic Jews). If the numbers of estimates of the expelled population are anything near the truth, then it is definitely certain that there are dozens of millions of descendants of expelled Muslim or Jew Iberians in the world right now. A handful of them might've preserved their family history, most of them are certainly too diluted now to remember that. Anyway, I have no issue at all accepting the possibility that, yes, they might have preserved a memory of their ancestry, but those who had stayed in the peninsula would have lost it. The people that migrated didn't have to hide their origins in order to have a decent living or even to survive, so it is just obvious to me that the incentives to "forgetting" that long-gone ancestry would've been extremely higher in Iberia than in North África.

Again, you're talking of "lonely wolves" as if all the conversions and assimilation had happened only during the period of persecutions and expulsions, but the fact is that the process of Christianization and cultural assimilation and blending had started more than 500 years earlier and had intensified decisively between around 1100 and 1300. By the late 15th century when the persecution really became overwhelming the bulk of Iberia had been under Christian hands for centuries, and the number of Muslims and Jews in Iberia had decreased a lot not through simple (de)conversion and admixture. The New Christians that were persecuted were most certainly those that had been latecomers and had maintained their distinctive ethnic and religious identity the longest, especially in the parts of Iberia that had resisted the Reconquista for a longer time. But by that time some families had already had Berber or Arab ancestors centuries earlier, and all of that had already become heavily diluted.

Your hypothesis that there is "nothing more" is not corroborated by the data. 8-10% of genetic admixture is not a negligible proportion at all especially if you consider that there was a massive ethnic cleansing 400-500 years ago, which indicates clearly that it was even (much) higher for a long period.
 
But he was the king of Crimean Goths, right? He was buried with the crown of Kerch after all.

KER1 GEDmatch Genesis kit number - MD6611828

Maybe he was the king who ruled over remnants of Bosporans, married to a Gothic princess?

If he was the ruler of actual Goths then it means that Goths elected an ethnically foreign king:


Eurogenes K13:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 East_Med 30.97
2 West_Asian 24.07
3 North_Atlantic 18.23
4 West_Med 13.87
5 Baltic 8.01
6 Red_Sea 1.86
7 Amerindian 1.75
8 Siberian 1.14
9 Oceanian 0.09


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Central_Greek 11.11
2 Italian_Abruzzo 11.33
3 South_Italian 12.02
4 East_Sicilian 12.3
5 Turkish 13.54
6 Ashkenazi 14.07
7 West_Sicilian 14.86
8 Sephardic_Jewish 15.19
9 Greek_Thessaly 15.24
10 Italian_Jewish 16.52
11 Cyprian 17.16
12 Algerian_Jewish 17.83
13 Lebanese_Muslim 17.85
14 Azeri 17.95
15 Tunisian_Jewish 18.38
16 Tuscan 18.87
17 Libyan_Jewish 19.34
18 Syrian 19.93
19 Assyrian 20.07
20 Armenian 20.43


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 64.6% Italian_Jewish + 35.4% Tabassaran @ 5.15
2 68.2% Assyrian + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.38
3 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Lezgin @ 5.45
4 64.1% Assyrian + 35.9% West_German @ 5.48
5 65.2% Assyrian + 34.8% South_Dutch @ 5.61
6 69% Assyrian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.65
7 68.5% Italian_Abruzzo + 31.5% Kurdish @ 5.66
8 69.2% Assyrian + 30.8% Orcadian @ 5.71
9 63.3% Assyrian + 36.7% French @ 5.72
10 72.4% South_Italian + 27.6% Lezgin @ 5.82
11 69.7% Assyrian + 30.3% West_Scottish @ 5.84
12 63.7% Italian_Abruzzo + 36.3% Azeri @ 5.91
13 69.5% Assyrian + 30.5% Irish @ 5.93
14 73.2% South_Italian + 26.8% Tabassaran @ 5.98
15 63.9% Italian_Jewish + 36.1% Chechen @ 5.98
16 69.1% Assyrian + 30.9% North_Dutch @ 6.06
17 67.2% Sephardic_Jewish + 32.8% Tabassaran @ 6.1
18 67.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.8% Armenian @ 6.12
19 69% Assyrian + 31% Danish @ 6.18
20 76.2% Italian_Abruzzo + 23.8% Abhkasian @ 6.21


Eurogenes K15:


Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 West_Asian 27.53
2 East_Med 25.61
3 Atlantic 14.99
4 North_Sea 11.57
5 West_Med 8.46
6 Eastern_Euro 3.46
7 Baltic 3.15
8 Red_Sea 3.02
9 Amerindian 1.48
10 Siberian 0.72


Single Population Sharing:


# Population (source) Distance
1 Turkish 11.83
2 Italian_Abruzzo 13.36
3 Central_Greek 13.84
4 East_Sicilian 14.97
5 South_Italian 15.08
6 Azeri 15.17
7 Ashkenazi 15.61
8 Greek 17.31
9 West_Sicilian 17.43
10 Armenian 17.69
11 Sephardic_Jewish 17.9
12 Greek_Thessaly 17.96
13 Kurdish 18.22
14 Georgian_Jewish 18.41
15 Italian_Jewish 18.59
16 Lebanese_Muslim 19.04
17 Assyrian 19.16
18 Kumyk 19.29
19 Tuscan 19.6
20 Cyprian 19.63


Mixed Mode Population Sharing:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 69.7% Armenian + 30.3% Irish @ 5.09
2 69% Armenian + 31% Southeast_English @ 5.1
3 70% Armenian + 30% West_Scottish @ 5.24
4 66.2% Armenian + 33.8% South_Dutch @ 5.31
5 69% Armenian + 31% Southwest_English @ 5.36
6 68.2% Georgian_Jewish + 31.8% Southeast_English @ 5.51
7 68.1% Georgian_Jewish + 31.9% Southwest_English @ 5.6
8 67.6% Italian_Abruzzo + 32.4% Georgian @ 5.61
9 68.9% Georgian_Jewish + 31.1% Irish @ 5.61
10 68.1% Armenian + 31.9% North_German @ 5.61
11 65% Armenian + 35% French @ 5.7
12 69.3% Georgian_Jewish + 30.7% West_Scottish @ 5.74
13 70.4% Armenian + 29.6% Orcadian @ 5.76
14 70.8% Italian_Abruzzo + 29.2% Abhkasian @ 5.76
15 69.6% Armenian + 30.4% Danish @ 5.82
16 65.4% Georgian_Jewish + 34.6% South_Dutch @ 5.83
17 69.6% Georgian_Jewish + 30.4% Orcadian @ 5.93
18 69.9% Armenian + 30.1% North_Dutch @ 5.97
19 64.1% Georgian_Jewish + 35.9% French @ 6.11
20 65% Armenian + 35% Spanish_Cataluna @ 6.2

How interesting that he looks like a Northwestern European-shifted Armenian or something of that sort. Was he a local, or where else did he come from? What would that say about the general population of his homeland back then?
 
safe_image.jpeg


Ygorcs


I have lost 4% of NA what has happened. Is it possible that the 4% given by FamilyFinder as NA were Iberian and FamilyFinder would have labeled it as NA?
 
My Heritage results never make any sense to me, I'm sorry to say. I expected more from Israelis. Of the commercial testing companies, 23andme and Ancestry are much better, imo.

Plus, individual results might vary a bit. For population genetics purposes it is the results of academic testing based on scientifically chosen samples which can help us decipher the past.

The only thing I used my 23andme results for was for comparison with other Italians, and specifically other Italians from my area. Once it was clear that I landed exactly where someone from my part of Italy and with my geneaology should land, that was it. Of course, that was an individual choice and not everyone is going to make it.
 
I took another look at the yDna of the samples because they're also listed in the Krause paper on the Anatolian Neolithic.

Is there a resurgence of G2a clades in southeastern Spain in the Copper Age, or was there always perhaps more G2a there.

I ask because copper metallurgy was brought to Spain. Could G2a men from the Balkans have brought it? I've always thought Otzi descended from a later wave too, one with more eastern ancestry.
 
I took another look at the yDna of the samples because they're also listed in the Krause paper on the Anatolian Neolithic.

Is there a resurgence of G2a clades in southeastern Spain in the Copper Age, or was there always perhaps more G2a there.

I ask because copper metallurgy was brought to Spain. Could G2a men from the Balkans have brought it? I've always thought Otzi descended from a later wave too, one with more eastern ancestry.

I don't know if it would be Ötzi's branch (especially as his copper in his axe was from Tuscany, so surely he didn't know how to smelt) - but I'm leaning that way now too. I used to think it was R1b-L51 as I thought throughout the Neolithic Iberian Y DNA was consistent, yet this doesn't seem the case.
 
Maybe not smelt, but he knew how to work copper to some degree, it seems. I don't know if the testing has stood the test of time, but some of the early results indicated he had residues in his blood.
 

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.

Maybe apathy, social marginalization, slavery/servitude, indifference/depression, loss of confidence, lower self-esteem and lower social status, loss of competitive advantages and willingness to compete, reproduce and thrive... all of that disturbance in the males' social identities and orders ultimately leading to them not passing their lineages down not just because they were dying in higher proportions, but because at each generation they were leaving shorter offspring? That has happened many times with primitive societies, affecting males invariably more than females, when they met more economically and technologically advanced incomers, but I'm not sure the effect would be the same when the encounter was between farmers and pastoralists with similar levels of cultural and technological achievement.
 
@Ygorcs That's actually an interesting hypothesis. Worth to investigate the potential psychologic and sociologic realities of Neolithic Europe. Sort of Psychologie des Foules of Prehistoric Times.

The hypothesis of Wars and Conquest from the Steppe guys could actually very well be confirmed or infirmed by burials data, like founding many graves with skulls in bad shape, like we would see at the Tollensee but in BB times. If we cannot confirmed this, we might turn into a prehistoric Civilization Sickness that would burn the society from the inside and let outsiders take commands. Wich actually happened multiple times in wrote history.
 
Yes, well, sorry to disappoint, half Alp, but as the authors point out, there are no such sites so far.

There's violence between late neolithic groups when scarcity hit, there's lots of violence on the steppe, there's that very large battle in northern Europe, but no sign so far of mass violence by the newcomers against indigenous Europeans of central Europe or Ibera.
 
Yes, well, sorry to disappoint, half Alp, but as the authors point out, there are no such sites so far.

There's violence between late neolithic groups when scarcity hit, there's lots of violence on the steppe, there's that very large battle in northern Europe, but no sign so far of mass violence by the newcomers against indigenous Europeans of central Europe or Ibera.

That's interesting that you assume i wanted them to found signs of violence.
 
Well, it seems to be the case with a lot of the young men interested in pop gen.

You know, like eurogenes with his "blonde cowboys of the steppe", who were by no means mostly blonde and didn't "ride" or fight from horseback until long after the periods we're discussing.

I do distinctly get the feeling, indeed. sometimes it's stated explicity, that they're quite fond of, as I sometimes say, this Conan the Barbarian view of history. Women are bound to take a different view, yes? The "rape", really, "theft" of the Sabine women doesn't look like a lot of fun, for example.Some of them might have quite liked their husbands, you know?

rape_of_the_sabine.jpg


If it were me I would have put some hemlock in their stew.

Plus, if there are uglier, less appealing men than Arnold Schwatzeneggger, it's hard for me to think of one at the moment.


If the shoe doesn't fit, however, by all means don't wear it. Good to know.
 
Well, it seems to be the case with a lot of the young men interested in pop gen.

You know, like eurogenes with his "blonde cowboys of the steppe", who were by no means mostly blonde and didn't "ride" or fight from horseback until long after the periods we're discussing.

I do distinctly get the feeling, indeed. sometimes it's stated explicity, that they're quite fond of, as I sometimes say, this Conan the Barbarian view of history. Women are bound to take a different view, yes? The "rape", really, "theft" of the Sabine women doesn't look like a lot of fun, for example.Some of them might have quite liked their husbands, you know?

rape_of_the_sabine.jpg


If it were me I would have put some hemlock in their stew.

Plus, if there are uglier, less appealing men than Arnold Schwatzeneggger, it's hard for me to think of one at the moment.


If the shoe doesn't fit, however, by all means don't wear it. Good to know.

If i need to know what is European People fond of, i just have to turn on the TV. Not to revive Bronze Age Symbolism, or just for myself on self-developpement purposes. As for Blonde or Red hairs and Horses, i still do believe in it, but not that it really matters right? I mean, it's about coincidences even if the datas dont show them or yet, not about Blonde Haired Cow-Boys. I'm dark haired and blonde girls are not my taste. As for the potential rape culture of IE men, it would circle around porn fetish of modern men to be attracted by that. And i'm actually pretty sure that BB men weren't particularly beautiful, and i'm thinking to some modern British guys ( sorry for them ) and i'm not talking about the sexy mediterranean with blue eyes, but more like the ginger with porky nose. Or he dont have to be a ginger, but the porky nose is necessary. But you also need to understand that in the modern society, were people mostly dont believe in god anymore and dont have a lot of structure, like in a society of order like in tribal societies, things can fast turn to depression. People constantly talk about the beauty of independance, but as a tumultuous boy who was raised by a single mother, i would have prefered a very structured but more rigide men society. So from that point, the idea of your ancestors one day being warriors with a code of honor, just like Chivalry ( and i know Chivalry was less honor than slaughter ), is very appealing. I'm obviously not talking about Nationalism or Purity... but about self-developpement. That is basically my personal agenda. However, there is one thing wich i'm very irrited by, is when i feel there is a globalist theme behind the speech of someone. And i'm personnally thinking of Lazaridis and Krause. Multiple times they feel the need or the condescendance to bring European history vs Others history, while Others history is fine, but it's their history. I also have a specific aversion for Lord Renfrew and his constant bashing of Gimbutas and Steppe, for god knows the reason, who cares she didn't have the perfect hypothesis? People still bashing on her 20 years after her death.
 

This thread has been viewed 52845 times.

Back
Top