Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 22 of 35 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 550 of 853

Thread: Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

  1. #526
    Banned Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,261
    Points
    17,449
    Level
    40
    Points: 17,449, Level: 40
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 601
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - BY143483
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    What you posted is a good example of how, for different reasons, right and left propaganda have much more in common than they think, and are roughly the same thing.


    What you posted is the mix of a copy and paste from various different sources, that Italians don't exist is an old article from an Italian newspaper referring to an old studio. Funny that to confirm that Italians do not exist is David Pettener, an Italian biologist who does not even have an Italian surname.


    Given how obsessed the rest of the world is with us Italians, because there is no doubt that the rest of the world is obsessed with our history when the average Italian generally doesn't give a damn about what exists outside of Italy, I begin to believe that maybe we really do exist. I had some doubts until a few years ago, but now I have less doubts about this.
    Pettener surname originates in padova, and was first recorded initially spelt petenar in the year 1138 ,....it means " to have combed"......the bulk of the 95 households live in friuli italy now.....about 70% of the 95

    How do you think it is not an italian surname?

  2. #527
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Any need to write two virtually identical posts, Torzio????


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  3. #528
    Banned Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,261
    Points
    17,449
    Level
    40
    Points: 17,449, Level: 40
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 601
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - BY143483
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Any need to write two virtually identical posts, Torzio????
    Unsure what happened, i opened it up to add the last sentence abd when i saved it came out as it is....

  4. #529
    Moderator Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Pax Augusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-06-14
    Location
    Ara Pacis
    Posts
    1,148
    Points
    33,611
    Level
    56
    Points: 33,611, Level: 56
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 639
    Overall activity: 16.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    Pettener surname originates in padova, and was first recorded initially spelt petenar in the year 1138 ,....it means " to have combed"......the bulk of the 95 households live in friuli italy now.....about 70% of the 95

    How do you think it is not an italian surname?

    Pettener are from Istria, modern-day Slovenia, later moved to Trieste.

  5. #530
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,678
    Points
    154,054
    Level
    100
    Points: 154,054, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 50.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by LTG View Post


    I see that many people, including Davidski, have stated that the Prenestini outlier is half Phoenician; this is nonsense.


    Most importantly, the authors of the paper did not say that. He is the only one I have seen say that, actually. The others parroting that, must get their interpretation straight from him.
    There can be no covenants between men and lions

  6. #531
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,678
    Points
    154,054
    Level
    100
    Points: 154,054, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 50.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    I think it is very curious, that some hobbyists are not forthcoming with heat maps of samples like 850, and 437. Why no heat maps, or Gedmatch kit numbers posted? I would like to analyze the data myself, but unfortunately the original files have been removed from the Stanford site.
    I bet they would show an affinity to southern Italian populations.

  7. #532
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    162
    Points
    6,960
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,960, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 90
    Overall activity: 13.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    3 members found this post helpful.
    The averages of Rome_Imperial, Rome_Late_Antiquity, Rome_MA, Rome_Renaissance, and Tivoli_Renaissance, in the PCA with modern populations.

    I'm using the G25 because it's the only one available.











  8. #533
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Most importantly, the authors of the paper did not say that. He is the only one I have seen say that, actually. The others parroting that, must get their interpretation straight from him.
    Does anyone want to tell me again that his "interpretations" aren't agenda driven?

    To deny general access to the two samples he's virtually lied about even going by his own tools is really a new low, however.

    I think we've also seen that you have to be careful who you read on the internet. People who write the kind of garbage found on that blog are not just racists; they're certifiably insane.

  9. #534
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,678
    Points
    154,054
    Level
    100
    Points: 154,054, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 50.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I found this:

    https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB32566

    850:

    https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/ERS3573760

    437:

    https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/ERS3573767

    I'm not sure how it works to convert the files to gedmatch-friendly format. However, I see there is a VCF converter on DNAkit Studio.

  10. #535
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    4 members found this post helpful.
    Even well intentioned, honest analysis of ancient samples using these tools has to be undertaken and interpreted cautiously.

    Let's take a look at one analysis published upthread.

    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

    Greek_Central_Anatolia,42
    Sardinian,19.8
    Spanish_La_Rioja,13.8
    Italian_Piedmont_o,12.2
    Greek,8.6
    Italian_Umbria,3.6

    This does clear up the absurd assertion that the sample is "half Phoenician", but then what are we to conclude from this about the "Latin" Prenestini? In terms of modern populations were they adjusted percentages of Sardinian, Spanish La Rioja, Piemontese, Greeks and Umbrians?

    Sounds fine to me for what it's worth, although I'm sure it's not the "Latin" tribes signature for which Stormfront was waiting.

    As for Rome Imperial, I'm assuming this is an average?

    ITA_Rome_Imperial

    Cypriot,40.6
    Greek_Crete,33.4
    Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,15.6
    ITA_Latini_IA,10.4

    Right off the bat, whether this is an average or a particular sample, I think it's difficult to determine how "accurate" it is when it's a mixture of modern and ancient samples.

    What we really need to understand these changes is not only Bronze Age but Iron Age and post Greek colonization samples from southern Italy.

    Even going with the samples we have, did anyone try to model this group using the Sicily non Beaker "Beaker" sample, for example, or samples from Sardinia?

    Some Szolad samples (Langobard cemetery in Hungary), in addition to the expected "Germanic" samples, or in some cases admixed samples that look a bit western shifted in modern terms, are described as "Tuscan like"( in a 1000 genomes context) in the Amorim paper. Now, that particular area had been a late hold out of local "Romans", and then re-taken by the Byzantines, so there is that to consider, but could it have anything to do with the older paper on the Bronze and Iron Age in the Balkans which found some people there who were still "Tuscan like" after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans and admixture with them?

    Does anyone have gedmatch numbers for those samples? Otherwise, I'll have to go digging through all my files for at least the link to the paper and to our threads of numbers for ancient kits.

    My question is: how much "Anatolia" would that sample get just from Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age migrations?

    A related question would be about the similarity of this "Tuscan like" sample to the Szolad "Tuscan" samples, and perhaps then to actual Tuscans.

    Let's see how much "Anatolian"these programs assign to the Balkan and Hungarian samples versus modern Tuscans.


    I think these tools have a very difficult time separating out the Neolithic data with its already perhaps 10% CHG/Iran Neo ancestry, the Bronze Age data which may have more, the Iron Age data which may have more yet, and the Imperial Age data which may owe something to more recent migrations.

    Even the Reich Lab, imo, did not do a sterling job with that in their Sardinian paper, so I hope they do better this time around.





  11. #536
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    162
    Points
    6,960
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,960, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 90
    Overall activity: 13.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Even well intentioned, honest analysis of ancient samples using these tools has to be undertaken and interpreted cautiously.

    Let's take a look at one analysis published upthread.
    A plausible model could be this. nMonte with G25 is not very precise although and if inappropriate models are used the results can be very misleading.


    All the samples from Rome and the surrounding area, from Proto-Villanovan to the Renaissance period.




    The ancient Greek samples. The first two are two Greeks found at Empuries.





    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Right off the bat, whether this is an average or a particular sample, I think it's difficult to determine how "accurate" it is when it's a mixture of modern and ancient samples.

    What we really need to understand these changes is not only Bronze Age but Iron Age and post Greek colonization samples from southern Italy.

    Even going with the samples we have, did anyone try to model this group using the Sicily non Beaker "Beaker" sample, for example, or samples from Sardinia?

    Some Szolad samples (Langobard cemetery in Hungary), in addition to the expected "Germanic" samples, or in some cases admixed samples that look a bit western shifted in modern terms, are described as "Tuscan like"( in a 1000 genomes context) in the Amorim paper. Now, that particular area had been a late hold out of local "Romans", and then re-taken by the Byzantines, so there is that to consider, but could it have anything to do with the older paper on the Bronze and Iron Age in the Balkans which found some people there who were still "Tuscan like" after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans and admixture with them?

    Does anyone have gedmatch numbers for those samples? Otherwise, I'll have to go digging through all my files for at least the link to the paper and to our threads of numbers for ancient kits.

    My question is: how much "Anatolia" would that sample get just from Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age migrations?

    A related question would be about the similarity of this "Tuscan like" sample to the Szolad "Tuscan" samples, and perhaps then to actual Tuscans.

    Let's see how much "Anatolian"these programs assign to the Balkan and Hungarian samples versus modern Tuscans.


    I think these tools have a very difficult time separating out the Neolithic data with its already perhaps 10% CHG/Iran Neo ancestry, the Bronze Age data which may have more, the Iron Age data which may have more yet, and the Imperial Age data which may owe something to more recent migrations.

    Even the Reich Lab, imo, did not do a sterling job with that in their Sardinian paper, so I hope they do better this time around.


    What Anatolia? Anatolia BA?

    all samples from Bronze Age Anatolia

    Last edited by brick; 26-11-19 at 23:27.

  12. #537
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,561
    Points
    45,871
    Level
    66
    Points: 45,871, Level: 66
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 1,079
    Overall activity: 17.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    The fact that we don't know EVERYTHING doesn't mean that we know NOTHING. That's completely fallacious reasoning. We know a lot about the Etruscans now from that data: we know that regardless of the fact that they didn't speak an Indo-European language they were Indo-European, steppe admixed people, like the Basques, similar to the early Italics, and similar to modern Spaniards and Northern Italians.

    The Herodotus theory is dead in the water. Somebody fish it out and bury it.
    Agree for the most.
    Just to come back to Herodotus, here is maybe some facts or old writings which could excuse him?
    my translation from NK Sandars about Sea People:
    Sorry for the english:
    "An Hittit text of Tuddaliyas (1520-1220?) mentions Tar(u)i-sa' ('Taruisha'), maybe the 'Teresh' who took part in the attack against Merneptah in 1220 BC, maybe (again) the Tyrsenoi well known in the Greeks world. THe name is new in the Egyptians texts. But, in opposition to the 'Ekwesh's case, the 'Teresh' would have been present in the attack of 1186 BC. Ramses III doesn't mention them expressly, but a 'Teresh' chief is among the prisoniers. The Hittits placed the 'Taruishi' in the North of Assuwa, close to the Troad, but they have been localized also near the country which become Lydia. [...] where, according to Herodotus, the Tyrrhenians migrated towards Central Italy. This hypothesis should show a link between the 'Teresh'/'Taruisha'/'Tyrsenoi' and the Etruscans. On the relief of Medinet Habu dated to Ramses III the 'Teresh' prince distinguishes himself from the other prisoniers by a very different physical look. The sculptor has gaven him a short and thick nose, thick lips, a beard and no helmet."
    I know we have firstly to be sure of the identity between these diverse names in T-R-S with Etruscan/'Rasenna'. Some "maybe's" I avow.
    Just to say, we know little: even if "autochtones" in Italy, these seemingly good sailors could have had some "bridges heads" or small settlements in West coastal Anatolia at some stage of History.
    Their mt-DNA showed some ancient links with Anatolia (since 5000 years): either a MN to LN central European heritage as a lot of European tribes, + in some case some females taken here and there on travels?

    Other question (always the same): were the commoners the same as the elites? ATW the social transformation between Proto-Villanovans and Villanovans is rather fast and strong. The very same people? I have no answer. If external influence, I does not seem come from the first Italics of Rome.
    My proper post which "amused" a forumer here was just kind of fancy. But some things are still curious in the links of Italy and its Islands and Western Anatolia/Egea at the Sea People's time.

  13. #538
    Banned Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,261
    Points
    17,449
    Level
    40
    Points: 17,449, Level: 40
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 601
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - BY143483
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    Pettener are from Istria, modern-day Slovenia, later moved to Trieste.
    Istria was italian for 1000 plus years
    Until 1975 treaty between italy and yugoslavia...treaty of osimo...
    Istria then returned to italy in 1991 and slovenia and croatia paid the remaining fee to italy that remained because yugoslavia defaulted on their payments

  14. #539
    Princess Achievements:
    Overdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteranThree Friends
    davef's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-06-16
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,240
    Points
    12,148
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,148, Level: 33
    Level completed: 29%, Points required for next Level: 502
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italian,Irish,Jewish
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    A plausible model could be this. nMonte with G25 is not very precise although and if inappropriate models are used the results can be very misleading.


    All the samples from Rome and the surrounding area, from Proto-Villanovan to the Renaissance period.




    The ancient Greek samples. The first two are two Greeks found at Empuries.

    These models are some of the most logical models I've seen on Ancient Greeks and Romans using this tool.
    And I knew the Greek Empuries had more Iran than the Mycenaean average bc it seemed to plot a bit eastward in
    that study and it shows in its high Armenia score of 25 percent. Some Greeks may have had more Caucasus
    than others (and most or all of it from Bronze Age/copper age Anatolian ancestry)
    mmmmmmmmm dooouuughhhnuuuutz

  15. #540
    Banned Achievements:
    10000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,261
    Points
    17,449
    Level
    40
    Points: 17,449, Level: 40
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 601
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - BY143483
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    Agree for the most.
    Just to come back to Herodotus, here is maybe some facts or old writings which could excuse him?
    my translation from NK Sandars about Sea People:
    Sorry for the english:
    "An Hittit text of Tuddaliyas (1520-1220?) mentions Tar(u)i-sa' ('Taruisha'), maybe the 'Teresh' who took part in the attack against Merneptah in 1220 BC, maybe (again) the Tyrsenoi well known in the Greeks world. THe name is new in the Egyptians texts. But, in opposition to the 'Ekwesh's case, the 'Teresh' would have been present in the attack of 1186 BC. Ramses III doesn't mention them expressly, but a 'Teresh' chief is among the prisoniers. The Hittits placed the 'Taruishi' in the North of Assuwa, close to the Troad, but they have been localized also near the country which become Lydia. [...] where, according to Herodotus, the Tyrrhenians migrated towards Central Italy. This hypothesis should show a link between the 'Teresh'/'Taruisha'/'Tyrsenoi' and the Etruscans. On the relief of Medinet Habu dated to Ramses III the 'Teresh' prince distinguishes himself from the other prisoniers by a very different physical look. The sculptor has gaven him a short and thick nose, thick lips, a beard and no helmet."
    I know we have firstly to be sure of the identity between these diverse names in T-R-S with Etruscan/'Rasenna'. Some "maybe's" I avow.
    Just to say, we know little: even if "autochtones" in Italy, these seemingly good sailors could have had some "bridges heads" or small settlements in West coastal Anatolia at some stage of History.
    Their mt-DNA showed some ancient links with Anatolia (since 5000 years): either a MN to LN central European heritage as a lot of European tribes, + in some case some females taken here and there on travels?

    Other question (always the same): were the commoners the same as the elites? ATW the social transformation between Proto-Villanovans and Villanovans is rather fast and strong. The very same people? I have no answer. If external influence, I does not seem come from the first Italics of Rome.
    My proper post which "amused" a forumer here was just kind of fancy. But some things are still curious in the links of Italy and its Islands and Western Anatolia/Egea at the Sea People's time.
    There is no linguistic association between the etruscans and lydians of anatolia......the lydians where still in anatolia circa 500bc fighting against phyrgians.....still no association with etruscans......we should expect something berween the 2 if they are linked

  16. #541
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    A plausible model could be this. nMonte with G25 is not very precise although and if inappropriate models are used the results can be very misleading.


    All the samples from Rome and the surrounding area, from Proto-Villanovan to the Renaissance period.




    The ancient Greek samples. The first two are two Greeks found at Empuries.








    What Anatolia? Anatolia BA?

    all samples from Bronze Age Anatolia

    The non-Imperial samples look pretty reasonable, with a few exceptions, don't you think?

    I don't know what's up with the Renaissance Roman sample, however: 41% Yamnaya? Maybe it's just an individual aberration, or someone with an origin in more northern places.

    That's an awful lot of steppe in Proto-Villanovan. I'm quite close to that sample, and my highest steppe is about 25-30%. I don't know why Villanovan might be pulling so much more WHG. The lower Yamnaya, slightly higher WHG in Spaniards might account for the Spanish matches with some of the Spaniards/Portuguese?

    Maybe they're pretty close, maybe they're not. I don't know.

    Of course, those are far from proximate sources, but they have the advantage of clarity because of that.

    Much better than a lot of the stuff people have been throwing at the wall to see what sticks.

    I think there's a real problem using an average for the Imperial samples. It's the same problem I've been pointing out since the first leaks about this paper came out.

    The whole point about these Imperial samples is that some of them may have been descendants of people moving up from Cumae to Rome, or Calabria to Rome, etc. and already "perhaps" heavily admixed with "additional" CHG/Iran Neo i.e. in addition to that which arrived with the Italics. The Greek colonization had already taken place by this time, after all, as well as Neolithic and Bronze Age migrations. Until we know what those people looked like this is too much like shooting darts in the dark imo.

    Other samples might be directly from Anatolia or places in the Levant who arrived twenty years before. Not all the samples were tested to see if they were born and raised locally. Some of them might be Syrians or Jews, merchants temporarily in the city or not. How the hell would we know???

    You can't, imo, average samples from the capital city of what was for its time an international empire, and then make predictions about changes or not in the genomes of people living there 2,000 years later.

    Why don't we average out some Chinese and Koreans from Flushing, some Puerto Ricans from the Bronx, some Hasidic Jews from Brooklyn, some Italians from Bay Ridge, some Irish people from Bayside, and some WASPS and JEWS from the upper east side and come up with a prediction for what future inhabitants of this area will look like in 2000 years, and after a near apocalyptic collapse to a population of about 100,000.

    It just doesn't work.

    The Greek samples are very interesting, especially the "Iranian" percentages of 17%-24%. So, some additional input to the mainland after the Mycenaeans, or are these Greeks from the Islands, Ionia? It will be very interesting to compare them to Greek Colonization Era samples in Southern Italy and Sicily. Very interesting, indeed, Brick.

    The Anatolian samples are interesting too. I've been saying for years now that part of Anatolia would have had "Levant" type admixture, and so if migration was from Anatolia, it might pick up Levant-ish admixture as well, and there it is. You can see it in the people of Hatay province in Turkey today, the Cilicia of the Classical World, with its capital of Antioch, even after the "Turkic" migrations. St. Paul knew it well. :)

    I hope I can find a lead to that "Tuscan like" sample from the Iron Age Balkans, and maybe you could try it.

    Have you ever done this for the more "Italian" like samples from the Langobard paper?

    It's cheeky of me, I know, but it would be interesting.


    Maybe they're pretty close, maybe they're not. I don't know.

  17. #542
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    03-09-17
    Posts
    13
    Points
    3,521
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,521, Level: 17
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 329
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Even well intentioned, honest analysis of ancient samples using these tools has to be undertaken and interpreted cautiously.

    Let's take a look at one analysis published upthread.

    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

    Greek_Central_Anatolia,42
    Sardinian,19.8
    Spanish_La_Rioja,13.8
    Italian_Piedmont_o,12.2
    Greek,8.6
    Italian_Umbria,3.6

    This does clear up the absurd assertion that the sample is "half Phoenician", but then what are we to conclude from this about the "Latin" Prenestini? In terms of modern populations were they adjusted percentages of Sardinian, Spanish La Rioja, Piemontese, Greeks and Umbrians?
    Yes, these tools are certainly not a complete replacement for the more rigorous methods used in the professional studies. That said, they're pretty good as far as the amateur world goes; much better than the more binary "oracles" in my opinion. The model itself simply indicates that the Latin side of this individual was something like a mixture of those populations but it's never going to be perfect. The Latin samples are quite varied in general but the pattern is firmly Western Mediterranean i.e. Spanish, Northern Italian and French populations. We already know that Neolithic and Copper Age Italians are close to Sardinians so this model is something of a crude calculation with some underlying logic. The best course of action for samples that are mixed is to find two points of ancient ancestry and model them as simply as possible.

    [1] "distance%=2.4179"

    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

    Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,60.6
    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA,39.4

    Keep in mind that ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA is the most northern shifted of all the Iron Age & Republic samples and is closest to French_South. This may result in the outlier coming across as more Anatolian than they would if ran against some of the other Latins, but it made sense to use the other non-outlying Prenestini.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    As for Rome Imperial, I'm assuming this is an average?

    ITA_Rome_Imperial

    Cypriot,40.6
    Greek_Crete,33.4
    Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,15.6
    ITA_Latini_IA,10.4

    Right off the bat, whether this is an average or a particular sample, I think it's difficult to determine how "accurate" it is when it's a mixture of modern and ancient samples.

    What we really need to understand these changes is not only Bronze Age but Iron Age and post Greek colonization samples from southern Italy.

    Even going with the samples we have, did anyone try to model this group using the Sicily non Beaker "Beaker" sample, for example, or samples from Sardinia?


    This is indeed the average. The heterogeneity of these Imperial Roman samples makes it hard to model the average, or come to any concrete conclusions about their genetic structure. They have such a genetic range that it's obvious which ones are native to Italy (those that cluster like Italians) and those that are from the Middle East (those that cluster like Iraqi Jews/Lebanese). The problem lies in the fact that the majority of them have a centroid of clustering around Greek_Kos. I imagine we will need to "organize" them into further distinguishable clusters; not only between Romans and foreigners, but also Aegean, Anatolian and Middle Eastern foreigners. It's a complete mess, in other words.

    The samples we currently have of Ancient Greeks indicate a strong continuation from the Bronze Age. The Mycenaean samples are all homogeneous and strongly overlap with the Empuries samples who were themselves Ionian Greeks from Western Anatolia. So we know that Greeks were still much like their Bronze Age ancestors both in Greece and Western Anatolia throughout the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic Periods, and according to Olalde et al. also well into the Roman Empire. T
    he colonists who settled Southern Italy from the Greek world would have almost certainly clustered like Mycenaeans, and by extension Southern Italians, as a result of this (for the most part). I would expect some samples to look like Cypriots/Bronze Age Anatolians because those regions were part of the Hellenic world but I doubt they formed a majority in Southern Italy. Perhaps they were the natural merchant class among the Greek population of Rome; that would explain why the Isola Sacra necropolis has Greek inscriptions but the people seem to cluster tightly around Cypriots rather than Mycenaeans. There are many possibilities; I focus on the Republic and Late Antiquity because port towns during the height of the Imperial Era are simply too messy to deal with using our current tools.

    The Sicilian Beakers were removed from the datasheet a while ago for being "low quality".



  18. #543
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    LTG;591548]Yes, these tools are certainly not a complete replacement for the more rigorous methods used in the professional studies. That said, they're pretty good as far as the amateur world goes; much better than the more binary "oracles" in my opinion. The model itself simply indicates that the Latin side of this individual was something like a mixture of those populations but it's never going to be perfect. The Latin samples are quite varied in general but the pattern is firmly Western Mediterranean i.e. Spanish, Northern Italian and French populations. We already know that Neolithic and Copper Age Italians are close to Sardinians so this model is something of a crude calculation with some underlying logic. The best course of action for samples that are mixed is to find two points of ancient ancestry and model them as simply as possible.

    [1] "distance%=2.4179"

    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

    Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,60.6
    ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA,39.4

    Keep in mind that ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA is the most northern shifted of all the Iron Age & Republic samples and is closest to French_South. This may result in the outlier coming across as more Anatolian than they would if ran against some of the other Latins, but it made sense to use the other non-outlying Prenestini.



    This is indeed the average. The heterogeneity of these Imperial Roman samples makes it hard to model the average, or come to any concrete conclusions about their genetic structure. They have such a genetic range that it's obvious which ones are native to Italy (those that cluster like Italians) and those that are from the Middle East (those that cluster like Iraqi Jews/Lebanese). The problem lies in the fact that the majority of them have a centroid of clustering around Greek_Kos. I imagine we will need to "organize" them into further distinguishable clusters; not only between Romans and foreigners, but also Aegean, Anatolian and Middle Eastern foreigners. It's a complete mess, in other words.

    The samples we currently have of Ancient Greeks indicate a strong continuation from the Bronze Age. The Mycenaean samples are all homogeneous and strongly overlap with the Empuries samples who were themselves Ionian Greeks from Western Anatolia. So we know that Greeks were still much like their Bronze Age ancestors both in Greece and Western Anatolia throughout the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic Periods, and according to Olalde et al. also well into the Roman Empire. T
    he colonists who settled Southern Italy from the Greek world would have almost certainly clustered like Mycenaeans, and by extension Southern Italians, as a result of this (for the most part). I would expect some samples to look like Cypriots/Bronze Age Anatolians because those regions were part of the Hellenic world but I doubt they formed a majority in Southern Italy. Perhaps they were the natural merchant class among the Greek population of Rome; that would explain why the Isola Sacra necropolis has Greek inscriptions but the people seem to cluster tightly around Cypriots rather than Mycenaeans. There are many possibilities; I focus on the Republic and Late Antiquity because port towns during the height of the Imperial Era are simply too messy to deal with using our current tools.

    The Sicilian Beakers were removed from the datasheet a while ago for being "low quality".



    The Sicilian Beakers were removed from the datasheet a while ago for being "low quality".

    How "low quality"? Are there other samples on the datasheet of similar or "lower" quality?

    Is there access to them for independent modeling?

    The problem lies in the fact that the majority of them have a centroid of clustering around Greek_Kos. I imagine we will need to "organize" them into further distinguishable clusters; not only between Romans and foreigners, but also Aegean, Anatolian and Middle Eastern foreigners. It's a complete mess, in other words.
    So I've been saying until I'm blue in the face.

    Still, it would be informative, imo, to list the Imperial Era samples by sample number in clusters: Aegean, Anatolian, Middle Eastern, Italian Peninsula. If they have been uploaded to gedmatch people can compare their own data to the samples.

    As to the Greeks from Empuries, the post from LTG using G25 seems to indicate that one of the Empuries' samples has more "Iranian" type ancestry than the Mycenaeans, doesn't it? Unless you mean that it's still roughly in the same range. I had already speculated that the more Iranian heavy sample might be from Ionian Greece.

  19. #544
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    162
    Points
    6,960
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,960, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 90
    Overall activity: 13.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I hope I can find a lead to that "Tuscan like" sample from the Iron Age Balkans, and maybe you could try it.

    Bulgaria_IA? Croatia_IA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    That's an awful lot of steppe in Proto-Villanovan. I'm quite close to that sample, and my highest steppe is about 25-30%. I don't know why Villanovan might be pulling so much more WHG. The lower Yamnaya, slightly higher WHG in Spaniards might account for the Spanish matches with some of the Spaniards/Portuguese?
    Maybe nMonte/G25 inflates WHG, I don't know. However yes, the higher WHG is the reason why the Latins and some Etruscans go in the direction of Iberia/South France.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    The whole point about these Imperial samples is that some of them may have been descendants of people moving up from Cumae to Rome, or Calabria to Rome, etc. and already "perhaps" heavily admixed with "additional" CHG/Iran Neo i.e. in addition to that which arrived with the Italics. The Greek colonization had already taken place by this time, after all, as well as Neolithic and Bronze Age migrations. Until we know what those people looked like this is too much like shooting darts in the dark imo.

    Other samples might be directly from Anatolia or places in the Levant who arrived twenty years before. Not all the samples were tested to see if they were born and raised locally. Some of them might be Syrians or Jews, merchants temporarily in the city or not. How the hell would we know???

    You can't, imo, average samples from the capital city of what was for its time an international empire, and then make predictions about changes or not in the genomes of people living there 2,000 years later.

    Why don't we average out some Chinese and Koreans from Flushing, some Puerto Ricans from the Bronx, some Hasidic Jews from Brooklyn, some Italians from Bay Ridge, some Irish people from Bayside, and some WASPS and JEWS from the upper east side and come up with a prediction for what future inhabitants of this area will look like in 2000 years, and after a near apocalyptic collapse to a population of about 100,000.

    It just doesn't work.

    Later I post all the individual results from Imperial samples.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Have you ever done this for the more "Italian" like samples from the Langobard paper?

    It's cheeky of me, I know, but it would be interesting.

    Maybe they're pretty close, maybe they're not. I don't know.

    The more "Italian" like samples from the Langobard paper





    The G25 Italian averages




    The G25 Balkans averages (including Greece and Crete)






    PCA

    SZ43 plots in the Tuscan cluster (the yellow one), Z36 more with Marche, CL23 with Lombardy/Bergamo.



  20. #545
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    162
    Points
    6,960
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,960, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 90
    Overall activity: 13.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by davef View Post
    These models are some of the most logical models I've seen on Ancient Greeks and Romans using this tool.
    And I knew the Greek Empuries had more Iran than the Mycenaean average bc it seemed to plot a bit eastward in
    that study and it shows in its high Armenia score of 25 percent. Some Greeks may have had more Caucasus
    than others (and most or all of it from Bronze Age/copper age Anatolian ancestry)
    Agreed. The ancient Greeks had colonies in Anatolia and will have mixed very much with the local Anatolia_BA-like population. Probably the ancient Greeks are among the main sources of CHG/Iran_N in Italy.

  21. #546
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    Bulgaria_IA? Croatia_IA?



    Maybe nMonte/G25 inflates WHG, I don't know. However yes, the higher WHG is the reason why the Latins and some Etruscans go in the direction of Iberia/South France.





    Later I post all the individual results from Imperial samples.





    The more "Italian" like samples from the Langobard paper





    The G25 Italian averages




    The G25 Balkans averages (including Greece and Crete)




    PCA

    SZ43 plots in the Tuscan cluster (the yellow one), Z36 more with Marche, CL23 with Lombardy/Bergamo.


    It was Bulgaria in the Iron Age, but only one of the samples was "Tuscan like". I'll try to find the paper, but who the heck knows if he put it on the list.

    Where are you estimating placement for CL36? It looks a little "north" of Toscana, but not Lombardia.

    Thank you to both LTG and Brick for sharing all of this data. These definitely go in my files.

  22. #547
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    162
    Points
    6,960
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,960, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 90
    Overall activity: 13.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    It was Bulgaria in the Iron Age, but only one of the samples was "Tuscan like". I'll try to find the paper, but who the heck knows if he put it on the list.

    HRV_IA:I3313 might be Croatia IA, and BGR_IA:I5769 might be Bulgaria Iron Age.




    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Where are you estimating placement for CL36? It looks a little "north" of Toscana, but not Lombardia.
    Most likely Liguria, even if CL36 plots in the Piedmont cluster that is currently the northern Italian sample closest to the Tuscany. It's doesn't look so distant from Tuscany and there is no Emilia-Romagna and Liguria has only one individual (ALP099).

    For a complete picture, G25 Spanish and Portuguese averages.



    What Iberomaurusian is.


  23. #548
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience PointsThree Friends

    Join Date
    26-09-11
    Posts
    2,180
    Points
    31,727
    Level
    54
    Points: 31,727, Level: 54
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 223
    Overall activity: 17.0%


    Country: Spain



    There is a displacement, something fails, none are correct. It's the only thing I can say: Oracle

  24. #549
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,678
    Points
    154,054
    Level
    100
    Points: 154,054, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 50.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    HRV_IA:I3313 might be Croatia IA, and BGR_IA:I5769 might be Bulgaria Iron Age.






    Most likely Liguria, even if CL36 plots in the Piedmont cluster that is currently the northern Italian sample closest to the Tuscany. It's doesn't look so distant from Tuscany and there is no Emilia-Romagna and Liguria has only one individual (ALP099).

    For a complete picture, G25 Spanish and Portuguese averages.



    What Iberomaurusian is.

    How is Levant_Natufian modeled in this program? I know they already had some Anatolain_N in them.

  25. #550
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    17,554
    Points
    380,364
    Level
    100
    Points: 380,364, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    HRV_IA:I3313 might be Croatia IA, and BGR_IA:I5769 might be Bulgaria Iron Age.






    Most likely Liguria, even if CL36 plots in the Piedmont cluster that is currently the northern Italian sample closest to the Tuscany. It's doesn't look so distant from Tuscany and there is no Emilia-Romagna and Liguria has only one individual (ALP099).

    For a complete picture, G25 Spanish and Portuguese averages.



    What Iberomaurusian is.

    The "Piedmont" cluster and the Ligurian cluster are almost identical because those "Piedmont" samples are mountain Ligures. They only became "part" of Piemonte very recently, they speak a Ligurian dialect, and every town has "Ligure" in its name. They're also pretty close to Apennine Emilians. So, yes, CL36 is probably closest to mountain Ligures, and therefore to eastern Liguria. It makes absolute sense I'd get a 4.5 similarity to CL36, since my father's family comes from that adjoining area of Apennine Emilia. I get almost the same "fit" on calculators to that Piedmont sample when it's on calculators, although actually a bit higher.

    As for SZ43, my highest match at 3.4, it has absolutely no Iran related ancestry, and Marche with its 12%, plus 5% Levant/Natufian seems too "southern" to me, so I don't think Marche is quite right, and it might be closer to Romagna, but I won't quibble because we have no sample from there, and there's the whole Northern Marche vs Southern Marche thing as well. :)

    It doesn't look to me like he included the "Tuscan like" Iron Age sample, of course.

    As for the Spanish samples, they may plot near the Northern Italians, but the mix is different: less Indo-European (about 30%, down to 26% among the Basques), but more WHG. It makes perfect sense: it's always been clear from the ancient samples that there was more surviving WHG there. That probably explains the affinity to the Etruscan samples they have, because their WHG is a bit elevated as well.

    It still amazes me how ancient dna can just put to bed questions that have generated debate for so long.

    From a personal point of view I'm amazed that I can end up with a mix so close to an ancient sample.

    The miracle of ancient genomics.

Page 22 of 35 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •