Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

[Ralphie Boy]

This paper has become relevant to me because I found out that one of my great grandfathers was J2a-L70. To my knowledge, the earliest sample of L70 was found in this paper, in late antiquity Rome. I was told as a child that we might have a little Italian ancestry. Many years later, out of the blue, a relative contacted me and shared his genetic tests, including his Y DNA result, and told me a story about an Italian connection.

The oral history is anecdotal, and unfortunately our L70 subclade is unknown, but the result is an interesting bit of evidence. There are two Greeks with L70 in YFull, and two in an unpublished Stanford study. It looks from the map like the haplogroup may have made its way from the Middle East to Anatolia then the Balkans, Italy and other parts of Europe. It’s “parent,” L25 was also found in the Stanford study, apparently. In this paper the “grandparent” L26 was found in Imperial Rome.
6FAC724A-D9EE-45C8-A8DA-8A945135E1B5.jpg9327E67A-014D-4D21-B03C-906E3E9C69A2.jpg228A5EC6-42EC-4492-81C4-39CE99AB2C26.jpg

[Palermo Trapani]

I'll answer your question by sending you a PM since I don't want to derail this thread.

Sure, thanks for the response.

[Mario]

Maybe we should not consider the roman as a concept of nation, only a concept of law and politics. Classical city-state civilization has highly floating population, if I remember correctly, the dynasty of Tarquinius was established by an 'Etruscan' whose father was from Corinth Greece, the epoch control by Latins is only a part of the whole roman civilization.After all, in the time of Tacitus(AD55-AD120), he said the senators were basically sons of knights and freed slaves (indicating a foreign source), and hardly found a few local families.

[Jovialis]

Maybe we should not consider the roman as a concept of nation, only a concept of law and politics. Classical city-state civilization has highly floating population, if I remember correctly, the dynasty of Tarquinius was established by an 'Etruscan' whose father was from Corinth Greece, the epoch control by Latins is only a part of the whole roman civilization.After all, in the time of Tacitus(AD55-AD120), he said the senators were basically sons of knights and freed slaves (indicating a foreign source), and hardly found a few local families.

Perhaps than, you should read the paper of which this thread is about. Because the Imperial era's foreign sources are shown to not have had any significant impact in the subsequent eras. The following era was defined by deep demographic shifts; which says so explicitly in the paper. Meaning, native Italians from the hinterlands had reclaimed the cities. Frankly, I am getting fed up with this canard, especially after it has been refuted by genetics.

Rome was an empire, established by the Italic tribe, the Latini. The Etruscans, Greeks, Celts, Illyrians and other Italics were incorporated into Rome. Of course there isn't a monolithic ethnic group, this is elementary.

The greatest shift probably came when newly incorporated Greeks from the south, who we know are high in CHG, mixed with the Italic population. The Latins and Etruscans we have DNA for cluster with Northern Italians, who were already intermediate between central Europeans, and other southern Europeans. This is evident in the genetic profile of medieval Central Italians.

[Jovialis]

Here is the section:

Late Antiquity and the fall of Rome


Late Antiquity was characterized by deep demographic changes and political reorganization, including the split of the Roman Empire into eastern and western halves, the movement of the capital from Rome to Byzantium (later Constantinople), and the gradual dissolution of the Western Roman Empire (maps in Fig. 3, C and D) (1, 3).

[Ozzie]

Yes, well the foreign contingent shifted to Constantinople along with the Emperor and governing body. Italia and Roma lost their importance, and the immigrants moved on and other people from the north moved in.

[Angela]

I just posted this on the Calabrian thread. For those not reading it:

"I agree with you except for the fact that Modern Iranians and Caucasians do indeed have a lot of Iran Neo ancestry, along with Anatolian farmer. The gene flow went both ways. The fact is that a wave of that ancestry spread into Anatolia and mixed with the Anatolian farmers living there. Perhaps through Anatolians it spread south into the Levant, eventually even reaching North Africa. It definitely spread into the Central and Western Mediterranean, again, as I've said over and over again, as an admixed group. There is absolutely no evidence from history of a movement to Italy or Greece, for that matter, from the Caucasus itself.

In terms of Italy in, say, the Bronze and Iron Age, I'm not sure if all of it came via the Greeks or if some of it came directly from Anatolia itself. (It certainly didn't go to Etruria, as the Etruscans clearly came from Central Europe, which 90% of the internet said was fantasy when I and a few others insisted on it here and on anthrogenica; one of the many things they and eurogenes got wrong about Southern Europe.) In isolated places like southern and southwestern Sardinia in the Iron Age, some of it may have come with Phoenicians. Perhaps a bit arrived in the same way in Northwestern Sicily. The rest of Sicily and the mainland are different.

The Moots paper, other than providing the ancient samples, tends to confuse rather than clarify the issue of what happened in Imperial Age. Once we get Southern Italian samples and Greek samples from the Iron Age, we'll know better how much Iran Neo/CHG, for example, arrived in Italy with the Greeks and then could have very likely moved northward.

The problem with Moots is that it assumes every single burial sample is a long term resident of Rome, i.e. Roman or at least Italian. That's manifestly a simplification. Not every person who "looks" like a Levantine or even an Anatolian on a PCA would have become a long time settler whose progeny contributed to the local genomes. We can see that with some of the samples from the post Imperial period whom we've analyzed and who are manifestly northern European visitors to Rome. Had they done some isotopic testing we might have a clearer idea of who was "local" and who was not. Added to all this, in the period in question, some Romans still practiced cremation, so the sample is not representative.

Then, there's the question of the big demographic change even earlier than the end of the Empire. Rome was gradually abandoned as the seat of Empire. Everything shifted either to Constantinople or to Northern Italy. That's why the "tail to the east" ended. The traders left.

There is indeed also the period of the Germanic invasions. The problem with attributing much of the change to them, the popular back to the beginning scenario particularly in the north, is that every Germanic invader sample we've found is either I1 or R1b-U106. I can't believe that a paper purporting to deal with Italian genetics totally ignored yDna. The one thing yDna is really good for is tracking migrations. There's far too little of either I1 or U106, even in the Veneto, much less in Lazio, to account for a change from people with almost no steppe to people with 25-30% steppe. It doesn't matter how small the "native" population might have been due to plague, invasion, the Gothic Wars etc.; the "Germanic" ydna would have to be higher than it is. Not to mention that the Langobards numbered around 100,000 people even according to their own scribes, and the Goths were even smaller in number. The arrival of the Visigoths mimics, imo what happened in Hungary with the arrival of the "Huns".

I really hope the Reich Lab, and Razib Khan in his summary, don't make these kind of elementary mistakes.

Now, if someone shows the Germanics carried a lot of R1b U152 then that's a different story.

I'd also like to see samples from the Italian countryside and mountains from the Late Imperial and Post Imperial Era. When cities collapse, people from the periphery move down and repopulate them.

We need more data.

Northern Italian Neo-Nazis, like their brethren from other countries, may want to believe that they have tons of "Germanic" dna from the invasion period, but that really "is" a fantasy.

[Dianatomia]

Northern Italian Neo-Nazis, like their brethren from other countries, may want to believe that they have tons of "Germanic" dna from the invasion period, but that really "is" a fantasy.

Why would they want that? Given that they do in fact have a lot of DNA similar to the people who founded Rome. DNA from a Germanic invasion breaks that continuity.

[Angela]

Why would they want that? Given that they do in fact have a lot of DNA similar to the people who founded Rome. DNA from a Germanic invasion breaks that continuity.

Brother, that's the million dollar question. Insanity springs to mind. :)

One of these weirdos has his hair cut German military style in a picture, along with what looks like his version of a German military uniform.

Meanwhile, Italy was brutalized by the German invasion, aided, to our shame, by some of our Blackshirts.

Maybe it's things on the internet, the desire to identify with the more prosperous European countries of the last two centuries? Maybe it's because of the separatism in certain regions? No proper pride in being "Italian" in some regions?

To be honest, there's long been a certain feeling of superiority in some Northern Italians versus Southern Italians based a lot on sheer "looks". My own grandfather used to say horrible things about the ancestry of Southern Italians apparently, although I learned that only when I was older. My father jokingly told me that had he been alive when I got engaged to my husband there would have been hell to pay. My own second cousin was forbidden to marry a son of Southern Italian migrants. Only after five years had passed and she wouldn't look at anyone else did they relent. Meanwhile, he was infinitely too good for her, both in character and looks. :) Out of that whole family he's much my favorite person.

Maybe those kinds of attitudes in certain families provided fertile ground for that kind of internet propaganda.ar
In the beginning, the Lega Nord, most dominant in the Veneto and certain parts of Lombardia, wanted to secede and join the Alpine countries, like Switzerland. Of all the idiocy, that was the worst. As if Switzerland would have them. They barely tolerate the Ticino. Try speaking Italian, one of the three "official" languages of Switzerland, in Basel. As if speaking in Venetian would make a difference. Still sounds "Italian" to them, as indeed it is.

Or, they take too seriously the fact that the Nazis declared us "Honorary Aryans" because that idiot Mussolini tied us to them. Of course, looking at Hitler and a lot of his cronies, yeah, quite a few of us look more "Aryan" than they do. :)

I don't know too much about Golden Dawn and whether they identify with Germans or are just their own band of loonies. Nothing would surprise me.

Ed. One of the ironies of this situation is that during the period shortly after Rome conquered the north, people like Livy were falling all over themselves in their claims to be Romans, and trying to brush aside any prior Celtic/Gallic associations. Most people are really disgusting, you know? It's just about associating yourself with what you perceive as power.

[ihype02]

Brother, that's the million dollar question. Insanity springs to mind. :)

One of these weirdos has his hair cut German military style in a picture, along with what looks like his version of a German military uniform.

Meanwhile, Italy was brutalized by the German invasion, aided, to our shame, by some of our Blackshirts.

I have seen more neo-Nazi with Slavic ancestry than of Germanic heritage or Italian or anything else. Funny because Hitler considered Slavs inferior people owned by Jewish masters. You go figure.

[Angela]

[QUOTE=ihype02;619720]I have seen more neo-Nazi with Slavic ancestry than of Germanic heritage or Italian or anything else. Funny because Hitler considered Slavs inferior people owned by Jewish masters. You go figure.[/QUOTGE]

You're exactly right. That's where there is the most in the open racist skin head activity as well.

When I've mentioned in the past that they were next on the chopping block, plans already having been drawn up to send them for extermination after the Jews and Homosexuals (forgetting some well known Nazis were Homosexual and Hitler probably had severe sexual problems of course; they weren't going to get any children from him for their breeding program) and gypsies were taken care of, they argue over the authenticity of the plans, which are completely authentic, and as if the attitude toward Slavs wasn't obvious and repeatedly displayed.

The Nazis wanted all that good, flat farmland for the more industrious German farmers. It was called Lebenstraum. This article blames it all on the Nazis, but it was part of the stated reason for World War I by Imperial Germany as well, just carried to undreamed of extremes. (The Italians to my shame, got into the act, which is why they tried to get into the colonialism game, as one example.)

"The German concept of Lebensraum (German pronunciation: [ˈleːbənsˌʁaʊm] (listen), "living space") comprises policies and practices of settler colonialism which proliferated in Germany from the 1890s to the 1940s. First popularized around 1901,^[2] Lebensraum became a geopolitical goal of Imperial Germany in World War I (1914–1918) originally, as the core element of the Septemberprogramm of territorial expansion.^[3] The most extreme form of this ideology was supported by the Nazi Party (NSDAP) and Nazi Germany until the end of World War II.^[4]Following Adolf Hitler's rise to power, Lebensraum became an ideological principle of Nazism and provided justification for the German territorial expansion into Central and Eastern Europe.^[5] The Nazi Generalplan Ost policy ('Master Plan for the East') was based on its tenets. It stipulated that Germany required a Lebensraum necessary for its survival and that most of the indigenous populations of Central and Eastern Europe would have to be removed permanently (either through mass deportation to Siberia, extermination, or enslavement) including Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, Czech and other Slavic nations considered non-Aryan. The Nazi government aimed at repopulating these lands with Germanic colonists in the name of Lebensraum during World War II and thereafter.^[6][7][8][9] Entire indigenous populations were decimated by starvation, allowing for their own agricultural surplus to feed Germany.<sup>[6]"



Of course, the Nazis identified race by physical characteristics in some cases. So, for example, if a Polish or Russian child was blonde and blue eyed and had the right cranial and face measurements, they sometimes made an exception and took them from their parents to be adopted by German parents. There's a great video program about it. The bitterness of these children. now adults, is profound, poor things.</sup>

[kingjohn]

But today we know from genetics that many of the slavs ( considered inferiour by nazis)
Are more closer to the ancient indo-iranians aka aryan than germans....( or at least the germans who are not r1a)


P.s
And personally the european left is more dangerous
At least i know what those skin head think the are not hiding what you see is what you get...

[Ailchu]

And personally the european left is more dangerous
At least i know what those skin head think the are not hiding what you see is what you get...

the nazis or skinheads are just the tip of the iceberg. most of the rest you can not see. they are just a very extreme subgroup of the overall racist population.
and if someone is a nazi who follows Hitler or just another racist in any other shape or form, doesn't matter in the end.

[Jovialis]

the nazis or skinheads are just the tip of the iceberg. most of the rest you can not see. they are just a very extreme subgroup of the overall racist population.
and if someone is a nazi who follows Hitler or just another racist in any other shape or form, doesn't matter in the end.

Including non-white racists, who advocate for their own racial supremacy.

[Palermo Trapani]

Including non-white racists, who advocate for their own racial supremacy.

My vote is

[Ailchu]

Including non-white racists, who advocate for their own racial supremacy.

of course. i would also include ethno- or "race"-centrists who base their centrism on genetics.

[Jovialis]

of course. i would also include ethno- or "race"-centrists who base their centrism on genetics.

I think the real danger is misunderstanding genetics, or twisting it to fit ideology. I see it a lot when I lurk on that dumpster fire known as twitter.

I think understanding thorny subjects like genetics is imperative, otherwise it creates a vacuum that gets filled by extremism.

[torzio]

Here is the section:

do you use information from the below attachment in your analysis

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...7th_century_BC

[Jovialis]

do you use information from the below attachment in your analysis

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...7th_century_BC

I don't follow what this would have to do with my previous post in regards to the demographic shifts of central Italy in late antiquity and the middle ages.

[Jack Johnson]

A little off topic my friend, but on one of these forums here on Eupedia, Regio X did some admixture runs on G25 with East and West Sicilians, and found around .4% Shum Laka admixture. He included the Iberomaurusians in said runs, and from what I understand, the Iberomaurusian samples are partly Eurasian, as well as partly Ancestral North African/Ancestral East African (ANA/AEA), which is in turn related in some way to Basal Eurasian (BE). If I am not mistaken, ANA/AEA ancestry is present in the Shum Laka samples, as it is in almost all Sub-Saharan African populations; there is also a minor bit of Eurasian ancestry not directly related to ANA/AEA, in the Shum Laka samples; most likely related to the various back migrations from Eurasia and Northern Africa, into Sub-Saharan Africa over the last 200kyb. Do you think that is why Regio X's G25 run picks up very minor, almost noise level Shum Laka admixture in present-day Sicilians, and even in one of the Roman Republican-era samples? I believe that because of this shared ANA/AEA ancestry, noise levels of Shum Laka admixture appear in modern day Sicily; this also explains the presence mtDNA Haplogroups L1b1 and L2a1 in Neolithic/Eneolithic Iberia, as well as the minor presence of Y-DNA haplogroup A1 in small pockets across Eurasia, such as in the Aegean Region of Turkey, Jordan, Oman, Palestine, Sardinia, Ireland, Scotland, northeastern England, Norway and even Finland. I'm finding it difficult to get more definitive answers regarding the genetic/phylogenetic relations between Eurasia, Northern Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa; especially seeing that these topics seem to have been hijacked by Afrocentrist types on Anthrogenica. Some of these posters appear to have been rejects from Egypt Search, and some of them even believe Basal Eurasian is some from of Sub-Saharan African ancestry. To me this is the equivalent of saying modern humans evolved from Chimpanzees or Old World Monkeys, when in actuality we share a common ancestor. The same applies to modern human biological diversity, you wouldn't say modern Europeans are descended from Siberians, Syrians, Turks, Egyptians or Jordanians, because for one, those modern populations didn't exist at that time in human history; instead all these groups share common Eurasian and North/Northeast African ancestors, related to the first Out of Africa expansions 60-70ybp.

[real expert]

Jovialis, honestly, I don't see the point of arguing with someone like this, or posting at anthrogenica. When you boil it down there are probably very few actual individuals posting. Most of the posts are from socks. I find the very idea of engaging them disgusting

Anyone who believes you can deduce the amount of a certain ancestry from y dna statistics at this point in the study of genetics other than to say that many times autosomal percentages are going to be a fraction of the yDna signature is beneath engaging in discussion......

I can understand Jovialis that he felt he had to step in, in order to set the record straight. There are plenty agenda and ideologically driven folks on anthrogenica, beginning by the Mods. So, it's kinda refreshing when there are users who challenge or try to refute these posters who interpret the data according to their pet theories. Certainly, debating and discussing with members of AG that have an agenda can be futile and even gets you sooner or later banned. But then again, someone has to clarify what the actual data says or indicates in order to prevent other readers from getting misled. Furthermore, AG is pretty popular and followed by many people who are intrested in their origin or just in ancient people. Plus, there are not few people who consider anthrogenica as a forum with authority when it comes to ancient DNA, etc.

[Azzurro]

@Jovialis

Riddle me this, that you say there is zero Levantine admixture in Southern and Central Italians

Here is looking at Vahaduo gradients, when comparing two pops, the first showing what pop 1 has more of and the second showing what pop 2 has. I'm half Lucanian and half Sicilian so just to see

Chart 1 me vs Lombardy

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
-0.04697202	Palestinian_Beit_Sahour
-0.04560101	Tunisian_Jew
-0.04506793	Lebanese_Christian
-0.04502367	Libyan_Jew
-0.04380057	Samaritan
-0.04369960	Palestinian
-0.04349487	Karaite_Egypt
-0.04342150	Jordanian
-0.04335536	Lebanese_Druze
-0.04331608	Romaniote_Jew
-0.04330282	Druze
-0.04323730	Cypriot
-0.04323594	BedouinA
-0.04281699	Lebanese_Muslim
-0.04240975	Syrian_Jew
-0.04202865	Sephardic_Jew
-0.04193884	Moroccan_Jew
-0.04185732	Italian_Jew
-0.04182144	Iraqi_Jew
-0.04178363	Yemenite_Amran
-0.04146349	Yemenite_Dhamar
-0.04145701	Ashkenazi_Germany
-0.04117618	Yemenite_Ma'rib
-0.04081285	BedouinB
-0.04078270	Egyptian

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
0.04616570	French_Occitanie
0.04596957	Spanish_Pais_Vasco
0.04593070	Basque_French
0.04573025	Spanish_Terres_de_l'Ebre
0.04537104	French_Auvergne
0.04481222	French_South
0.04440522	Basque_Spanish
0.04418347	Italian_Trentino-Alto-Adige
0.04409500	Spanish_Barcelones
0.04403272	Swiss_German
0.04372056	Spanish_Lleida
0.04345644	English_Cornwall
0.04336925	Spanish_Cantabria
0.04328407	French_Brittany
0.04310045	French_Nord
0.04308457	English
0.04285668	French_Paris
0.04282876	Spanish_Aragon
0.04274457	Orcadian
0.04262683	Welsh
0.04258209	Scottish
0.04254835	Belgian
0.04244068	Italian_Bergamo
0.04241583	Spanish_Pirineu
0.04237266	Spanish_Catalunya_Central

Next 2 for you since your Pugliese, Puglia vs Lombardy

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Italian_Apulia B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
-0.05039380	Greek_Kos
-0.05002065	Cypriot
-0.04991024	Greek_Dodecanese
-0.04987424	Greek_Crete
-0.04958243	Druze
-0.04932296	Lebanese_Druze
-0.04926000	Italian_Campania
-0.04919607	Lebanese_Christian
-0.04896156	Iraqi_Jew
-0.04877783	Palestinian_Beit_Sahour
-0.04816992	Karaite_Egypt
-0.04802114	Romaniote_Jew
-0.04795111	Syrian_Jew
-0.04793188	Lebanese_Muslim
-0.04771010	Italian_Calabria
-0.04770576	Italian_Basilicata
-0.04770328	Greek_Central_Anatolia
-0.04724583	Samaritan
-0.04702269	Greek_Cappadocia
-0.04623210	Assyrian
-0.04622167	Iranian_Jew
-0.04596442	Georgian_Jew
-0.04570986	Armenian
-0.04559199	Italian_Jew
-0.04541148	Sephardic_Jew

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Italian_Apulia B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
0.04811817	Spanish_Pais_Vasco
0.04762656	Basque_French
0.04659519	Basque_Spanish
0.04645296	French_South
0.04607401	Spanish_Terres_de_l'Ebre
0.04591461	Spanish_Barcelones
0.04579097	French_Occitanie
0.04507768	French_Auvergne
0.04501614	Spanish_Lleida
0.04498966	Spanish_Aragon
0.04486812	Spanish_Cantabria
0.04426657	Spanish_Navarra
0.04422151	Spanish_Pirineu
0.04417128	Spanish_Peri-Barcelona
0.04410601	Spanish_Catalunya_Central
0.04347178	Spanish_Girona
0.04344095	Spanish_Valencia
0.04328784	Spanish_Penedes
0.04276611	Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
0.04275293	Spanish_Cataluna
0.04267207	French_Paris
0.04262469	Spanish_Camp_de_Tarragona
0.04256021	Spanish_Castello
0.04254226	Spanish_Asturias
0.04220933	Italian_Trentino-Alto-Adige

Now me vs Puglia average from G25

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Apulia C: ↴
-0.01095705	Berber_MAR_TIZ
-0.01078279	Moroccan_North
-0.01061598	Berber_Tunisia_Chen
-0.01046510	Saharawi
-0.01045269	Mozabite
-0.01038683	Berber_MAR_ERR
-0.01035996	Tunisian_Berber_Tamezret
-0.00993874	Tunisian_Berber_Matmata
-0.00991996	Tunisian_Berber_Zraoua
-0.00979948	Algerian
-0.00960243	Moroccan
-0.00955279	Moroccan_South
-0.00929198	Berber_Tunisia_Sen
-0.00917140	Tunisian
-0.00807193	Berber_Algeria
-0.00799620	Tunisian_Douz
-0.00794973	Libyan
-0.00794479	Fulani
-0.00748450	Spanish_Canarias
-0.00743965	Tunisian_Rbaya
-0.00686667	Mandenka
-0.00677981	Gambian
-0.00677316	Igbo
-0.00674689	Esan_Nigeria
-0.00671087	Mende_Sierra_Leone

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Apulia C: ↴
0.01675761	Italian_Basilicata
0.01573005	Circassian
0.01572491	Ossetian
0.01571614	Kabardin
0.01545934	Karachay
0.01540089	Adygei
0.01529509	Abazin
0.01523285	Balkar
0.01520394	Ingushian
0.01520252	Italian_Molise
0.01517609	Cherkes
0.01497347	Abkhasian
0.01489201	North_Ossetian
0.01475707	Turkish_North
0.01469924	Kumyk
0.01468853	Greek_Crete
0.01447690	Turkish_Central
0.01432282	Italian_Campania
0.01421947	Greek_Izmir
0.01416759	Turkish_Kayseri
0.01412351	Georgian_Imer
0.01410833	Chechen
0.01410582	Italian_Abruzzo
0.01385643	Azeri_Turkey
0.01364512	Greek_Trabzon

[Jovialis]

I never said that. I said there could be some levantine via Moors and Saracens. I have insisted that the Imperial era did not bring in transformative waves of near eastern immigration. Which is what this paper shows. You proport to be half-Sicilian. So you would probably have a very small amount of moorish ancestry You and people like you have falsely insisted it is a significant component. When even Anatolian_BA only has 5% levant farmer in them. Also why are you using modern populations to try to deduce that? We already have ancient samples that can provide a more accurate picture. Also, those modern populations are user provided, so they're not even all that reliable. For example, I plot slightly north of Abruzzo with that sample set, and I am closer to them than it's Apulia sample. I'm not by my pc at the moment.

[Azzurro]

I never said that. I said there could be some levantine via Moors and Saracens. I have insisted that the Imperial era did not bring in transformative waves of near eastern immigration. Which is what this paper shows. You proport to be half-Sicilian. So you would probably have a very small amount of moorish ancestry You and people like you have falsely insisted it is a significant component. When even Anatolian_BA only has 5% levant farmer in them. Also why are you using modern populations to try to deduce that? We already have ancient samples that can provide a more accurate picture. Also, those modern populations are user provided, so they're not even all that reliable. For example, I plot slightly north of Abruzzo with that sample set, and I am closer to them than it's Apulia sample. I'm not by my pc at the moment.

Its not only Sicilians, all Italians have some of this ancestry just in varying degrees. I do always score North African, Moorish ancestry is specifically mostly restricted to Sicily and skewed to Western side of the island, you see when I compare myself to Puglia, I have a North African pull vs the pull for Puglia is more Italic and some Caucasus like admix. In terms of component its 3rd to Greek and Native like ancestry, probably anywhere from 5-20%. I used modern just so using all pops we can do the same with ancients if you’d like the result will be the same.

I'll do the exact same 3 but with ancient just to see

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
-0.04654301	England_Roman_Near_Eastern_o
-0.04645886	Levant_Beirut_ERoman
-0.04564379	Levant_Beirut_IAII
-0.04546720	Levant_Beirut_IAIII
-0.04537057	Levant_Sidon_MBA
-0.04524332	Levant_LBN_MA
-0.04506587	Levant_LBN_Roman
-0.04500486	Levant_Ashkelon_IA2
-0.04497101	Levant_Abel_IA
-0.04490149	Levant_Baqah_BA
-0.04416679	Levant_Megiddo_MLBA
-0.04410870	Levant_Hazor_MLBA
-0.04400349	Levant_Megiddo_IBA
-0.04389557	Levant_Ashkelon_LBA
-0.04387587	Levant_JOR_EBA
-0.04352114	SYR_Ebla_EMBA
-0.04343998	Levant_Beirut_Hellenistic
-0.04330058	Levant_Shadud_MLBA
-0.04328653	TUR_Alalakh_MLBA
-0.04301334	Levant_Beirut_IAIII_Egyptian
-0.04283930	Levant_LBN_MA_o3
-0.04269086	EGY_Late_Period
-0.04186878	TUR_Arslantepe_LC
-0.04158253	TUR_Ovaoren_EBA
-0.04113304	TUR_Arslantepe_EBA

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
0.04656284	ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA
0.04600792	FRA_Grand_Est_EBA_o
0.04554412	Iberia_North_IA
0.04488038	FRA_Occitanie_IA2
0.04471355	FRA_Hauts_De_France_IA2
0.04460014	Bell_Beaker_FRA_C
0.04452605	CZE_Hallstatt_Bylany
0.04355815	Iberia_Central_CA_Stp
0.04352483	DEU_Lech_BBC
0.04293914	Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
0.04292336	ITA_Collegno_MA
0.04260115	Levant_LBN_MA_o2
0.04230452	Scotland_LBA
0.04230000	VK2020_Scotland_Orkney_VA
0.04216315	VK2020_GreenlandE_VA
0.04215560	DEU_Lech_EBA_contam
0.04215351	Iberia_Northwest_CA_Stp
0.04203318	VK2020_Faroes_EM
0.04200165	England_Roman
0.04190681	DEU_Singen_EBA
0.04188492	CHE_EBA
0.04182430	FRA_Grand_Est_EBA
0.04180018	FIN_Levanluhta_IA_o
0.04172381	ITA_Etruscan
0.04162954	Bell_Beaker_CHE

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Italian_Apulia B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
-0.05029098	ITA_Rome_Imperial
-0.04979581	TUR_Arslantepe_LC
-0.04967688	TUR_Alalakh_MLBA
-0.04943465	SYR_Ebla_EMBA
-0.04932819	TUR_Arslantepe_EBA
-0.04919046	ITA_Collegno_MA_o1
-0.04917313	Levant_Beirut_ERoman
-0.04910746	Levant_LBN_Roman
-0.04894733	Levant_LBN_MA
-0.04884040	Levant_Beirut_IAIII
-0.04839711	IND_Roopkund_B_o
-0.04836996	Levant_Sidon_MBA
-0.04804477	Levant_Ashkelon_LBA
-0.04788977	Levant_Beirut_Hellenistic
-0.04787002	TUR_Ovaoren_EBA
-0.04779643	Levant_Megiddo_MLBA
-0.04768597	Levant_Abel_IA
-0.04756779	TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA
-0.04749306	Levant_Ashkelon_IA2
-0.04746872	Levant_Baqah_BA
-0.04743205	Levant_LBN_MA_o3
-0.04731439	Levant_Beirut_IAII
-0.04715215	Levant_Hazor_MLBA
-0.04707166	TUR_Camlibel_Tarlasi_LC
-0.04663320	TUR_Titris_Hoyuk_EBA

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Italian_Apulia B: Italian_Lombardy C: ↴
0.04717043	ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA
0.04680025	Iberia_North_IA
0.04408293	CZE_Hallstatt_Bylany
0.04393664	FRA_Occitanie_IA2
0.04381027	FRA_Hauts_De_France_IA2
0.04372629	Iberia_Central_CA_Stp
0.04351516	FRA_Grand_Est_EBA_o
0.04346890	Iberia_Northeast_c.6-8CE_ES
0.04315933	Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
0.04285383	Iberia_East_IA
0.04248588	Bell_Beaker_FRA_C
0.04239483	Iberia_Northwest_CA_Stp
0.04192815	ITA_Etruscan
0.04192044	Iberia_Mallorca_EBA
0.04191855	CHE_IA
0.04180234	DEU_Lech_EBA_contam
0.04168613	ITA_Ardea_Latini_IA
0.04138268	Iberia_Northeast_RomP
0.04115005	Iberia_Menorca_LBA
0.04105508	DEU_Lech_BBC
0.04080975	FRA_Grand_Est_IA1
0.04057321	FRA_Grand_Est_EBA
0.04055253	DEU_Singen_EBA
0.04051532	Iberia_North_BA
0.04050144	FIN_Levanluhta_IA_o

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Apulia C: ↴
-0.01184459	MAR_LN
-0.01098823	ITA_Sardinia_Punic
-0.01084036	Iberia_Southeast_c.5-8CE
-0.01068713	ITA_Etruscan_o1
-0.01064138	Canary_Islands_Guanche
-0.01041249	Levant_LBN_MA_o1
-0.01034771	ITA_Sardinia_C_o
-0.01023527	Iberia_Southeast_c.3-4CE
-0.01014421	Iberia_Central_CA_Afr
-0.00983191	MAR_EN
-0.00974578	MAR_Taforalt
-0.00856199	Iberia_Ibiza_Punic
-0.00829704	ITA_Grotta_Continenza_N_o
-0.00777278	DEU_Esperstedt_MN
-0.00776686	FRA_Occitanie_MN
-0.00753677	Iberia_Southeast_c.10-16CE
-0.00740520	TUR_Pinarbasi_HG
-0.00720464	ITA_Grotta_Continenza_CA
-0.00719512	ITA_Sardinia_LCA
-0.00715924	FRA_MN_PRI
-0.00713235	FRA_MN_FLR
-0.00710924	FRA_Grand_Est_MN
-0.00709356	IRL_EN_MN
-0.00708906	England_N
-0.00708827	CHE_MN

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓ A: Azzurro_scaled B: Italian_Apulia C: ↴
0.01596878	Ostrogothic_Crimea_ACD
0.01594113	IND_Roopkund_B
0.01539048	ARM_Areni_C
0.01496791	RUS_Alan_MA
0.01467541	UZB_Dzharkutan2_BA
0.01449881	RUS_Maykop
0.01336193	RUS_North_Caucasus_MBA
0.01330451	Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kaps
0.01321084	RUS_Maykop_Novosvobodnaya
0.01317634	ARM_MBA
0.01301759	RUS_Maykop_Late
0.01286196	Levant_Megiddo_MLBA_o2
0.01270293	RUS_Saltovo-Mayaki_low_res
0.01255068	ARM_Lchashen_MBA
0.01250893	ARM_LBA
0.01249805	IRN_Ganj_Dareh_Historic
0.01243047	GEO_CHG
0.01228049	TUR_Barcin_C
0.01227321	Levant_LBN_MA_o4
0.01215714	RUS_Darkveti-Meshoko_En
0.01211911	Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kalavan
0.01207212	IND_Roopkund_B_o
0.01199676	TJK_Ksirov_H_Kushan
0.01168996	TUR_IA
0.01156714	Kura-Araxes_RUS_Velikent

[Jovialis]

Often I have seen results suggesting Moorish ancestry being within a fraction of a percent in the mainland South. Perhaps, a tad higher in Sicily. Specifically, North African ancestry. However most of the time I see the so-called Near Eastern excess in the south being related to Iran_N. Usually as North Caucasus ancestry. I believe this kind of ancestry was flowing in since the early bronze age and probably earlier, through intermediary populations. Often Southern Italians can be modeled with populations like Minoans, according to our results in Maciamo's sample sets. This makes sense, because I think Anatolian_N with a small but significant amount of CHG, are what pre-italics in the south looked like. Who then mixed with Italics flowing in, as well as Greek colonists, and Iapygians.