Ancient Rome Test (Various Calculators)

[Duarte]

Distance to:	Duarte
9.42408706	C7_European_Average
26.60322211	C6_Mediterranean_Average
26.83845095	C2_Neolithic/Sardinian-like_Average
35.44290902	C3_North_African_Average
39.53948901	C5_Eastern_Mediterranean_Average
43.30225129	C1_Central_Italian_Mesolithic
52.83308037	C4_Near_Eastern_Average

Distance to:	Duarte
7.77007139	C7_Iron_Age_European_Avrg
9.97076328	C7_Late_Antiquity_European_Avrg
11.38872721	C7_Medieval_European_Avrg
15.21024326	C7_Imperial_Roman_European_Avrg
21.07959677	C2_Late_Antiquity_Sardinian-like(R104)
24.28853494	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean_Avrg
25.61263381	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean_Avrg
27.41258203	C2_Neolithic_Avrg
27.57527516	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean(R437)
29.15983095	C6_Imperial_Roman_Mediterranean_Avrg
33.86057796	C5_Late_Antiquity_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
35.44290902	C3_Imperial_Roman_North_African_Avrg
39.59987626	C5_Iron_Age_Eastern_Mediterranean(R850)
40.83028406	C5_Imperial_Roman_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
43.30225129	C1_C_Italian_Mesolithic_Avrg
52.83308037	C4_Imperial_Roman_Near_Eastern_Avrg

 

[Salento]

Thanks Jovialis

 

[Carlos]

Target: Carlos Distance: 0.6546% / 0.65459439
59.8	C7_European_Average
23.2	C2_Neolithic/Sardinian-like_Average
14.8	C1_Central_Italian_Mesolithic
2.2	C6_Mediterranean_Average

Distance to:	Carlos
4.26373527	C7_European_Average
28.59866192	C2_Neolithic/Sardinian-like_Average
29.95095313	C6_Mediterranean_Average
40.21368839	C1_Central_Italian_Mesolithic
40.38828419	C3_North_African_Average
43.26260171	C5_Eastern_Mediterranean_Average
56.84769656	C4_Near_Eastern_Average

Target: Carlos Distance: 0.5202% / 0.52022567
29.6	C7_Imperial_Roman_European_Avrg
19.8	C7_Iron_Age_European_Avrg
13.4	C1_C_Italian_Mesolithic_Avrg
10.4	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean_Avrg
8.8	C2_Neolithic_Avrg
7.8	C7_Medieval_European_Avrg
7.4	C2_Late_Antiquity_Sardinian-like(R104)
2.8	C5_Imperial_Roman_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg

Distance to:	Carlos
4.55094873	C7_Iron_Age_European_Avrg
6.14749825	C7_Late_Antiquity_European_Avrg
6.75727138	C7_Medieval_European_Avrg
8.89077050	C7_Imperial_Roman_European_Avrg
21.21927190	C2_Late_Antiquity_Sardinian-like(R104)
27.56160245	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean_Avrg
28.96871140	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean_Avrg
29.25888635	C2_Neolithic_Avrg
30.87690885	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean(R437)
32.53154511	C6_Imperial_Roman_Mediterranean_Avrg
37.66025385	C5_Late_Antiquity_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
40.21368839	C1_C_Italian_Mesolithic_Avrg
40.38828419	C3_Imperial_Roman_North_African_Avrg
43.38610031	C5_Iron_Age_Eastern_Mediterranean(R850)
44.53868957	C5_Imperial_Roman_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
56.84769656	C4_Imperial_Roman_Near_Eastern_Avrg

 

[Jovialis]

Here are how the Iron Age samples are modeled:

 

[Jovialis]

 

[Salento]

I wonder about the low quality of R850 sample (about 40%),

about 60% missing ... what if he's substantially different, ... or not

 

[Jovialis]

I wonder about the low quality of R850 sample (about 40%),

about 60% missing, ... what if he's substantially different, ... or not

We certainly need to see more samples.

I think the fact that R437 is C6, and is present in the Iron age, proves that this kind of ancestry was there in Italy since at least the Iron Age. I wonder if this kind of ancestry was more prevalent, than the sample set of Antonio M. et al suggests, during that time. That is the kind of ancestry that ultimately became the majority in the middle ages. Moreover, it was 28% of the Imperial samples in this sample set. I also wonder if other clusters are over represented as well. More studies, with more samples, of this kind will be required to get a better answer.

I think the fact that R1 can be modeled as 35% C6, shows that there may have been admixture between C6 and C7 very early on.

 

[Salento]

We certainly need to see more samples.

I think the fact that R437 is C6, and is present in the Iron age, proves that this kind of ancestry was there in Italy since at least the Iron Age. I wonder if this kind of ancestry was more prevalent, than the sample set of Antonio M. et al suggests, during that time. That is the kind of ancestry that ultimately became the majority in the middle ages. Moreover, it was 28% of the Imperial samples in this sample set. I also wonder if other clusters are over represented as well. More studies, with more samples, of this kind will be required to get a better answer.

I think the fact that R1 can be modeled as 35% C6, shows that there may have been admixture between C6 and C7 very early on.

All things considered, we’re very close to many C6 samples, and the various calculator distances may show that we haven't changed much in the last 2500 years. I think.

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Jovialis: Thanks again, great data. Salento, I agree, I get <=3.5 on 4 C6 samples. So lots of genetic continuity there for us whose ancestors are from South of Rome. Again, very informative data Jovialis. Well done and thanks again. PT

Distance to:	PalermoTrapani
2.45125577	C6_Mediterranean_Average
12.57761013	C5_Eastern_Mediterranean_Average
16.31467744	C3_North_African_Average
24.90321421	C2_Neolithic/Sardinian-like_Average
26.17154952	C4_Near_Eastern_Average
30.60688046	C7_European_Average
68.74784070	C1_Central_Italian_Mesolithic

Target: PalermoTrapani Distance: 0.5696% / 0.56964313 | ADC: 0.25x
83.8	C6_Mediterranean_Average
6.6	C5_Eastern_Mediterranean_Average
5.0	C2_Neolithic/Sardinian-like_Average
4.6	C3_North_African_Average

Distance to:	PalermoTrapani
0.83982141	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean(R437)
2.90416417	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean_Avrg
3.38699051	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean_Avrg
3.51913522	C6_Imperial_Roman_Mediterranean_Avrg
7.06617294	C5_Late_Antiquity_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
12.76678111	C5_Iron_Age_Eastern_Mediterranean(R850)
13.84948821	C5_Imperial_Roman_Eastern_Mediterranean_Avrg
16.31467744	C3_Imperial_Roman_North_African_Avrg
24.64782499	C2_Neolithic_Avrg
26.17154952	C4_Imperial_Roman_Near_Eastern_Avrg
26.52155697	C7_Iron_Age_European_Avrg
29.74379921	C7_Late_Antiquity_European_Avrg
30.22652974	C2_Late_Antiquity_Sardinian-like(R104)
32.86746537	C7_Medieval_European_Avrg
39.42376187	C7_Imperial_Roman_European_Avrg
68.74784070	C1_C_Italian_Mesolithic_Avrg

Target: PalermoTrapani Distance: 0.4092% / 0.40923717 | ADC: 0.25x
84.4	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean(R437)
6.8	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean_Avrg
4.6	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean_Avrg
4.0	C3_Imperial_Roman_North_African_Avrg
0.2	C2_Neolithic_Avrg

 

[Jovialis]

Most Italians are positioned between the a cline of C7 and C6 averages.

 

[Angela]

Most Italians are positioned between the a cline of C7 and C6 averages.

It makes sense for me. My closest samples are about 75% European average/25% Mediterranean average, on average.

 

[Jovialis]

It makes sense for me. My closest samples are about 75% European average/25% Mediterranean average, on average.

That is roughly in the ballpark of R1, I think the same will be true for other Italics tribes, more or less.

 

[Carlos]

Most Italians are positioned between the a cline of C7 and C6 averages.

And the ancient Romans would be endless combinations with all the avarages out there, right?

 

[Jovialis]

And the ancient Romans would be endless combinations with all the avarages out there, right?

I speculate the majority of Italians since the Iron Age and into Roman Italy are primarily between C7 and C6, as they are today. The Etruscans and many of the Latins, at least according to the study are closer to the European C7 average. But if R1 is representative of the Italics, they were at least a quarter to 1/3rd Mediterranean; one of the Etruscans too (R474) as per my chart. Perhaps C6 increased among the Italics the further south you go, Idk. I would like to see Samnite samples for example. In addition to that, R850 was almost 100% Eastern Mediterranean C5, so that element existed back then and continued on into Late Antiquity. Sicilians, and many other southern Italians are pulled a bit towards C5. Maybe C5 was eventually absorbed by C6 in those areas.

 

[torzio]

Most Italians are positioned between the a cline of C7 and C6 averages.

which is north-west Italian and which is north-east Italian from the above noted N_Italian and North_Italian

I know that O_Italian ( other italians ) are 2 samples found , one from east-Austria and one from Ukraine

 

[Jovialis]

^Not sure, they are the Dodecad K7b Italian populations.

 

[Angela]

N_Italian is Bergamo, Northern Lombardia.

North_Italian are Dodecad members with all four grandparents from Northern Italy in general. I know for a certainty there are Lombards in there. I don't know if there are people from the Veneto, but I would assume from things I've heard that there are.

 

[Carlos]

I speculate the majority of Italians since the Iron Age and into Roman Italy are primarily between C7 and C6, as they are today. The Etruscans and many of the Latins, at least according to the study are closer to the European C7 average. But if R1 is representative of the Italics, they were at least a quarter to 1/3rd Mediterranean; one of the Etruscans too (R474) as per my chart. Perhaps C6 increased among the Italics the further south you go, Idk. I would like to see Samnite samples for example. In addition to that, R850 was almost 100% Eastern Mediterranean C5, so that element existed back then and continued on into Late Antiquity. Sicilians, and many other southern Italians are pulled a bit towards C5. Maybe C5 was eventually absorbed by C6 in those areas.

Okay at least it's more than you could imagine a decade ago.

I repeat the operation and I get C3 and C4 as noise 0.8 and 0.2, I repeat the single and only C3 is left with 1.4 or C3 and C4 disappear again if I do it again, it's funny how to be on the razor's edge with those two samples. With them I have the cycle completed and I lower the distance from 0.52 to 0.51.

 

[Jovialis]

Okay at least it's more than you could imagine a decade ago.

I repeat the operation and I get C3 and C4 as noise 0.8 and 0.2, I repeat the single and only C3 is left with 1.4 or C3 and C4 disappear again if I do it again, it's funny how to be on the razor's edge with those two samples. With them I have the cycle completed and I lower the distance from 0.52 to 0.51.

Present-day North Africans are actually quite far from the ones represented in the paper:

 

[Carlos]

Present-day North Africans are actually quite far from the ones represented in the paper:

Yes of course it is to be assumed, I imagine that the same will happen for so many modern territories with a long historical past. Getting an ancient combination that survives to this day must be almost a miracle.