Were pre-Slavic Albanians like ancient Illyrians?

Ancient samples.

Target: GRC_Mycenaean
Distance: 1.0660% / 0.01066039
73.6Early_European_Farmer
11.8Steppe_Pastoralist
8.8Iran_Neolithic
4.6Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
0.8Iberomaurusian
0.4Early_Levantine_Farmer


Target: HRV_MBA
Distance: 1.7481% / 0.01748108
59.2Early_European_Farmer
34.4Steppe_Pastoralist
6.4Western_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: HRV_IA
Distance: 2.1776% / 0.02177573
60.2Early_European_Farmer
36.0Steppe_Pastoralist
3.8Western_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: HRV_EBA
Distance: 2.0039% / 0.02003875
59.0Early_European_Farmer
31.2Steppe_Pastoralist
4.2Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
3.4Ancient_Iberian_Hunter-Gatherer
1.2Western_Hunter-Gatherer
1.0Iberomaurusian


Target: BGR_IA
Distance: 1.9167% / 0.01916651
72.0Early_European_Farmer
25.0Steppe_Pastoralist
2.4Iran_Neolithic
0.6Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer

Target: CZE_Early_Slav
Distance: 3.3251% / 0.03325085

40.4Steppe_Pastoralist
37.6Early_European_Farmer
22.0Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
 
Interestig, ~1% Iberomaurusian score among HRV_EBA, Myceneans and Ligurians.


Haven't seen in other calculators.
 
Every group of Slavs in the Balkans can be modeled genetically as Slavic>Native expect for Bulgarians.
Even Bulgarians, when you take in the MENA component in the model, have a higher Slavic percentage than the Thracian one.

Slavs were not native to the Balkans, at least not the south Balkans. If Steppe pastoralist was their primary genetic component when they settled in the Balkans, would they have not merely added to the Steppe component already present there? It seems very clear that at least as far as Greece and Albania, Slavs are not the main genetic contributors to modern populations.

If the models presented above in this thread are close to accurate, a case can made for the importance of pre-Medieval populations in the genetic makeup of modern south Balkan populations.
 
You want to disagree, at least produce some actual evidence. Don't give me superficial, and benighted explanations of PCAs, and haplogroups. Haplogroup J has been in Italy since the Neolithic, genius.

There is all the evidence you want. Behind my opinions is years of research and reading about this issue we are debating here.
Its you who disagreed with me for some reason which is kinda obvious and if you have a problem with accepting genetic data then i am not sure that this is real hobby or profession for you. Even if i am wrong this is forum therefore its open for debate, i am very serious when typing here. I am open for debate and whatever i say, if you doubt anything, you can ask me for references and i will be very glad to give them to you if you doubt about anything i say.

Regarding haplogroup J, i really researched it for years now, i doubt you know much about it ? Do you know which subclade of J were found since mid Neolithic ? So, its J2a-M410 Neolithic Anatolian farmers with earlier Caucasus and Zagros hunter-gatherer origin. They appeared in Neolithic Europe and were in vast minority among other Neolithic haplogroups but still much more concentrated in Greece. Both Mycenaean and Minoans were J2a-M410. Then in Middle Bronze Age another J appears, J2b-L283 this time, which according to many facts is early Zagros expansion to North Caucasus and Black Sea shores where it was picked up by R1b BA Indo-Europeans with who it later spread to rest of Europe, with biggest density around Adriatic Sea. This J2b-L283 is actually Dalmatian 1600 BCE sample I4331 which we are debating here. As you probably know this sample had a lot of Steppe admixture and typical Steppe mtDNA. They were early Indo-Europeans, we then find sample of same paternal line therefore his direct expansion 1000 years later at Etruscan's dating at 700 BCE. I would say another influx of J2a-M410 probably arrived also with Greek colonies in Italy at around 800 BCE. Where things become interesting is Imperial Period, so not long after Phoenician - Roman wars (Punic Wars) more J haplotypes appear. This time J1 and J2-M205, both confirmed with previous Canaanite/Phoenician origin and with this last influx Middle Eastern Phoenician but also Hebrew haplogroups J reaches above 50 % among Imperial Romans in Italy. Its very clear that this impact is mostly from Phoenicians who become part of Roman Empire after Punic Wars.

You want proofs? NP, some time ago i analysed Italian Ydna project and plenty of studies with Italians specifically focusing on J haplogroup but also probably all major Balkan studies. I found plenty of samples but i also found researches where scientists also found plenty of samples where in Italy there are traces of Phoenician and Greek colonies.

J1 is a bit complicated because of high TMRCA and since it diversified long ago it needs a deeper analysis of subclades but i can assure you that most of J1 subclades arrived with Phoenicians, Hebrews, Christians, or Middle Eastern citizens of Roman Empire. Just as Procopius of Caesarea was, author of book i am reading at the moment and that i mentioned earlier. He was native from province of Palaestina Prima and is considered last antique historian. Since time of Punic Wars to time of Justinian I and Procopius of Caesarea Romans and Middle Easterners were already regularly intermixing. Mostly because of Roman Empire and Mediterranean connection.

J2-M205 on the other hand is much easier to track since it has TMRCA only 5900 years and it has ancient DNA in Middle East and in Phoenician Sidon in timeframe of 2500 BCE to 1700 BCE. Meaning they are without doubt of Middle Eastern Early Bronze Age origin. Regarding Europe we find it mostly in Mediterranean Europe.

For example let me show you two Phoenician Canaanite samples which assimilated into Romans:

Sample R50, 135-244 CE.
Belongs to branch J-M205>Y134194 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y134194/ (TMRCA 3300 ybp, modern Lebanon and Egypt samples in Yfull)

Centocelle Necropolis, Rome (Suburbium)

The area of the ancient Centumcellae, in a south-eastern suburb of Rome, next to the Via Labicana (withinmodern day Centocelle, Rome), extends for more than 30 hectares and preserves a rich archaeologicalrecord ranging from the 6th century BCE to the 6th century CE. Among the many monuments and sites sofar investigated, the necropolis of Centocelle is associated with a Roman imperial Villa (Ad Duas Lauros)and is dated to the IV-V century CE.The necropolis consists of 61 inhumations and the individuals possibly pertained to the inhabitants of theVilla. The preliminary bioarchaeological survey is published in (124–127). Dietary analysis of theinhumated through compound specific isotope analyses (CSIA) performed on single amino acids iscurrently in progress. The human osteological material is currently stored at the Museo delle Civiltà inRome.



Sample R1283, 771-974 CE.
Belongs to J-M205>PF7321* (no specific branch) https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-PF7321/

Cancelleria - The Basilica of San Lorenzo in Damaso

The Basilica of San Lorenzo was erected by Pope Damaso (366-384 CE) in south-western CampoMarzio, reusing part of an architectural complex in which it is possible to recognize the buildings of thefactio prasina, one of the four factions of the circus (109–111). The Basilica, with three naves, occupied alarge area largely coinciding with that of the courtyard of the Palazzo della Cancelleria, in one of the mostcentral areas of Rome, halfway between Piazza Farnese and Piazza Navona.Probably as early as the sixth century CE there are numerous burials (subsequently reworked severaltimes) that are carried out in the area of the church, in particular in a vast environment located close to thesouth side of the building (112).A radical transformation of the Basilica is recorded in the second quarter of the 11th century CEfollowing a fire, of which extensive traces have been found. In addition to conspicuous transformations ofa structural nature, the floor of all the sections of the Basilica was raised by about 1 m. In the church,starting from this date until its destruction, numerous burials were built including several masonryossuaries. New changes to the structure of the church were made during the second half of the fifteenthcentury. The numismatic artifacts found have allowed us to date, at the beginning of the last quarter of thefifteenth century, a large mass grave in which hundreds of burials were deposited (SU17, SU30 andSU471). In the way of organizing the burials it is likely to recognize the effects of a plague epidemicwhich we know to have struck the city between 1476 and 1479 CE, a hypothesis that would also beconfirmed by the study of skeletal remains. In 1489 CE the building of the Palazzo della Cancelleriabegins and the church is totally destroyed. The population of this necropolis covers most of the MiddleAges and is representative of the population of Rome of this period.


Then for example Roman Imperial J1 samples are also without doubt Phoenician origin.

Phoenicians were mixing with Greeks prior then with Italians, that is why Greeks are also pulled to East Med cluster.

Do you know that both Greek and Latin alphabets have origin in Semitic Phoenician one ? Its obvious that this Mediterranean intermixing is going on for at least since 1000 BCE and looks like only North Italians were spared of it because of their distance to shores which Mediterranean populations always prefer.

Look at this K15 PCA map and its so obvious that this Mediterranean Canaanite - Phoenician element is pulling Greeks, Albanians and Italians towards itself like some kind of Mediterranean gravitation:

(i added myself to map just out of curiosity but also i added what i think is Albanian average but of course it can be different)
So, East Med cluster pulling Albanians, Greeks, South Italians towards itself is main reason why their genetics changed most likely since 1000 BCE.
Again North Italians being so North were spared of this therefore they remained somewhat closer to I4331 Dalmatian 1600 BCE sample.


bKRAv4c.jpg




I have no problem, with anything that the genetic studies show. I post many PCAs demonstrating genetic distances between populations, from various calculators all the time. Attacking my integrity is uncalled for. You already admitted you don't read academic papers, which is obvious. Don't be so reticent on your feelings about certain groups, because that is obvious as well.

I am not going to allow you to promote stupidity here. Keep it up, and you're gone.

I read plenty of researches and analysed raw data where i found plenty of inconsistency with how the actual researches interpreted this data.
So many researches were simply a wishful thinking and i can point you to plenty of them which obviously were wrong conclusions brought by researches out of various reasons. So dont take for granted everything these researches say without questioning or double checking raw data and everything yourself.

I said that i didnt read researches lately, actually i red many researches until now and analysed raw data as STRs or even SNPs lately.

Its not nice from you to threat me with ban only because i say something that you might be sensitive to. I also pointed Maciamo for being wrong many times, but i never seen him to threat people to ban them because they have different opinion.

Read my previous post, i show my own autosomal, i said strait away that i am Slavic admix and i could not care less, my most favorite part of my DNA is my none european DNA, 1 % North African and 1 % Middle East. Rest is classic Balkan. I have no agenda whatsoever and i would not care the slightest whatever results say even if i was from Mars or Jupiter i would not care...
 

Sample R50, 135-244 CE.
Belongs to branch J-M205>Y134194 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y134194/ (TMRCA 3300 ybp, modern Lebanon and Egypt samples in Yfull)

Centocelle Necropolis, Rome (Suburbium)


His Gedmatch results:

Calculating Population Admixture - dv3 [K=12]

2.14% East_European
16.23% West_European
41.01% Mediterranean

0.00% Neo_African
28.51% West_Asian
0.00% South_Asian
0.14% Northeast_Asian
0.00% Southeast_Asian
0.07% East_African
11.84% Southwest_Asian
0.02% Northwest_African
0.04% Palaeo_African


Calculating Population Admixture - eurogenes [K=36]

0.00% Amerindian
1.95% Arabian
6.23% Armenian

0.00% Basque
0.00% Central_African
0.00% Central_Euro
0.00% East_African
0.00% East_Asian
4.87% East_Balkan
0.00% East_Central_Asian
0.13% East_Central_Euro
23.81% East_Med
0.00% Eastern_Euro
0.00% Fennoscandian
4.23% French
10.09% Iberian
0.00% Indo-Chinese
26.91% Italian
0.00% Malayan
9.25% Near_Eastern
0.00% North_African
0.22% North_Atlantic
0.00% North_Caucasian
0.00% North_Sea
0.00% Northeast_African
0.00% Oceanian
0.00% Omotic
0.00% Pygmy
0.00% Siberian
0.00% South_Asian
0.00% South_Central_Asian
0.00% South_Chinese
0.00% Volga-Ural
0.00% West_African
4.64% West_Caucasian
7.67% West_Med



Calculating Population Admixture - globe13 [K=13]


0.01% Siberian
0.00% Amerindian
0.00% West_African
0.05% Palaeo_African
18.91% Southwest_Asian
0.00% East_Asian
38.66% Mediterranean
0.16% Australasian
0.00% Arctic
26.98% West_Asian
15.23% North_European

0.00% South_Asian
0.00% East_African
 
There is all the evidence you want. Behind my opinions is years of research and reading about this issue we are debating here.
Its you who disagreed with me for some reason which is kinda obvious and if you have a problem with accepting genetic data then i am not sure that this is real hobby or profession for you. Even if i am wrong this is forum therefore its open for debate, i am very serious when typing here. I am open for debate and whatever i say, if you doubt anything, you can ask me for references and i will be very glad to give them to you if you doubt about anything i say.

Regarding haplogroup J, i really researched it for years now, i doubt you know much about it ? Do you know which subclade of J were found since mid Neolithic ? So, its J2a-M410 Neolithic Anatolian farmers with earlier Caucasus and Zagros hunter-gatherer origin. They appeared in Neolithic Europe and were in vast minority among other Neolithic haplogroups but still much more concentrated in Greece. Both Mycenaean and Minoans were J2a-M410. Then in Middle Bronze Age another J appears, J2b-L283 this time, which according to many facts is early Zagros expansion to North Caucasus and Black Sea shores where it was picked up by R1b BA Indo-Europeans with who it later spread to rest of Europe, with biggest density around Adriatic Sea. This J2b-L283 is actually Dalmatian 1600 BCE sample I4331 which we are debating here. As you probably know this sample had a lot of Steppe admixture and typical Steppe mtDNA. They were early Indo-Europeans, we then find sample of same paternal line therefore his direct expansion 1000 years later at Etruscan's dating at 700 BCE. I would say another influx of J2a-M410 probably arrived also with Greek colonies in Italy at around 800 BCE. Where things become interesting is Imperial Period, so not long after Phoenician - Roman wars (Punic Wars) more J haplotypes appear. This time J1 and J2-M205, both confirmed with previous Canaanite/Phoenician origin and with this last influx Middle Eastern Phoenician but also Hebrew haplogroups J reaches above 50 % among Imperial Romans in Italy. Its very clear that this impact is mostly from Phoenicians who become part of Roman Empire after Punic Wars.

You want proofs? NP, some time ago i analysed Italian Ydna project and plenty of studies with Italians specifically focusing on J haplogroup but also probably all major Balkan studies. I found plenty of samples but i also found researches where scientists also found plenty of samples where in Italy there are traces of Phoenician and Greek colonies.

J1 is a bit complicated because of high TMRCA and since it diversified long ago it needs a deeper analysis of subclades but i can assure you that most of J1 subclades arrived with Phoenicians, Hebrews, Christians, or Middle Eastern citizens of Roman Empire. Just as Procopius of Caesarea was, author of book i am reading at the moment and that i mentioned earlier. He was native from province of Palaestina Prima and is considered last antique historian. Since time of Punic Wars to time of Justinian I and Procopius of Caesarea Romans and Middle Easterners were already regularly intermixing. Mostly because of Roman Empire and Mediterranean connection.

J2-M205 on the other hand is much easier to track since it has TMRCA only 5900 years and it has ancient DNA in Middle East and in Phoenician Sidon in timeframe of 2500 BCE to 1700 BCE. Meaning they are without doubt of Middle Eastern Early Bronze Age origin. Regarding Europe we find it mostly in Mediterranean Europe.

For example let me show you two Phoenician Canaanite samples which assimilated into Romans:

Sample R50, 135-244 CE.
Belongs to branch J-M205>Y134194 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y134194/ (TMRCA 3300 ybp, modern Lebanon and Egypt samples in Yfull)

Centocelle Necropolis, Rome (Suburbium)

The area of the ancient Centumcellae, in a south-eastern suburb of Rome, next to the Via Labicana (withinmodern day Centocelle, Rome), extends for more than 30 hectares and preserves a rich archaeologicalrecord ranging from the 6th century BCE to the 6th century CE. Among the many monuments and sites sofar investigated, the necropolis of Centocelle is associated with a Roman imperial Villa (Ad Duas Lauros)and is dated to the IV-V century CE.The necropolis consists of 61 inhumations and the individuals possibly pertained to the inhabitants of theVilla. The preliminary bioarchaeological survey is published in (124–127). Dietary analysis of theinhumated through compound specific isotope analyses (CSIA) performed on single amino acids iscurrently in progress. The human osteological material is currently stored at the Museo delle Civiltà inRome.



Sample R1283, 771-974 CE.
Belongs to J-M205>PF7321* (no specific branch) https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-PF7321/

Cancelleria - The Basilica of San Lorenzo in Damaso

The Basilica of San Lorenzo was erected by Pope Damaso (366-384 CE) in south-western CampoMarzio, reusing part of an architectural complex in which it is possible to recognize the buildings of thefactio prasina, one of the four factions of the circus (109–111). The Basilica, with three naves, occupied alarge area largely coinciding with that of the courtyard of the Palazzo della Cancelleria, in one of the mostcentral areas of Rome, halfway between Piazza Farnese and Piazza Navona.Probably as early as the sixth century CE there are numerous burials (subsequently reworked severaltimes) that are carried out in the area of the church, in particular in a vast environment located close to thesouth side of the building (112).A radical transformation of the Basilica is recorded in the second quarter of the 11th century CEfollowing a fire, of which extensive traces have been found. In addition to conspicuous transformations ofa structural nature, the floor of all the sections of the Basilica was raised by about 1 m. In the church,starting from this date until its destruction, numerous burials were built including several masonryossuaries. New changes to the structure of the church were made during the second half of the fifteenthcentury. The numismatic artifacts found have allowed us to date, at the beginning of the last quarter of thefifteenth century, a large mass grave in which hundreds of burials were deposited (SU17, SU30 andSU471). In the way of organizing the burials it is likely to recognize the effects of a plague epidemicwhich we know to have struck the city between 1476 and 1479 CE, a hypothesis that would also beconfirmed by the study of skeletal remains. In 1489 CE the building of the Palazzo della Cancelleriabegins and the church is totally destroyed. The population of this necropolis covers most of the MiddleAges and is representative of the population of Rome of this period.


Then for example Roman Imperial J1 samples are also without doubt Phoenician origin.

Phoenicians were mixing with Greeks prior then with Italians, that is why Greeks are also pulled to East Med cluster.

Do you know that both Greek and Latin alphabets have origin in Semitic Phoenician one ? Its obvious that this Mediterranean intermixing is going on for at least since 1000 BCE and looks like only North Italians were spared of it because of their distance to shores which Mediterranean populations always prefer.

Look at this K15 PCA map and its so obvious that this Mediterranean Canaanite - Phoenician element is pulling Greeks, Albanians and Italians towards itself like some kind of Mediterranean gravitation:

(i added myself to map just out of curiosity but also i added what i think is Albanian average but of course it can be different)
So, East Med cluster pulling Albanians, Greeks, South Italians towards itself is main reason why their genetics changed most likely since 1000 BCE.
Again North Italians being so North were spared of this therefore they remained somewhat closer to I4331 Dalmatian 1600 BCE sample.


bKRAv4c.jpg






I read plenty of researches and analysed raw data where i found plenty of inconsistency with how the actual researches interpreted this data.
So many researches were simply a wishful thinking and i can point you to plenty of them which obviously were wrong conclusions brought by researches out of various reasons. So dont take for granted everything these researches say without questioning or double checking raw data and everything yourself.

I said that i didnt read researches lately, actually i red many researches until now and analysed raw data as STRs or even SNPs lately.

Its not nice from you to threat me with ban only because i say something that you might be sensitive to. I also pointed Maciamo for being wrong many times, but i never seen him to threat people to ban them because they have different opinion.

Read my previous post, i show my own autosomal, i said strait away that i am Slavic admix and i could not care less, my most favorite part of my DNA is my none european DNA, 1 % North African and 1 % Middle East. Rest is classic Balkan. I have no agenda whatsoever and i would not care the slightest whatever results say even if i was from Mars or Jupiter i would not care...


What is this garbage? This is not proof of anything, except your own ignorance. Where are the papers that verify these claims? I could care less about what YOUR interpretation is. I posted four recent papers on the topic, in my last post. Are you denying the existence of the Anatolian Bronze age? Because it seems that you are to fit your flawed conclusion.

Imperial Roman samples come from two isolated grave sites outside of Rome, that what does that have to say of southern Italy? Absolutely nothing. Moreover, many of them cluster with Island Greeks, not middle easterners.

Earth to Dema, there wasn't any substantial admixture into Greeks or Mainland Italians from the Phoenicians.

Also, for the last time, Eastern Mediterranean is not a valid term. I doubt you are as serious about this hobby as you claim to be, since you are using inaccurate terminology.

Here, I will retort with exactly what I posted prior, so anyone reading this will not be lead astray by your inferior quality post:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...llyrians/page3?p=605746&viewfull=1#post605746
 
I used ULTIMATE ANCIENT COMPONENTS by Celtíbero Itálico.

Target: Progon_scaled
Distance: 1.9252% / 0.01925168
59.8Early_European_Farmer
40.2Steppe_Pastoralist


Target: Italian_Tuscany
Distance: 0.8792% / 0.00879156
57.8Early_European_Farmer
33.8Steppe_Pastoralist
3.4Western_Hunter-Gatherer
3.2Iran_Neolithic
1.8Early_Levantine_Farmer


Target: Italian_Liguria
Distance: 1.7346% / 0.01734632
55.8Early_European_Farmer
35.2Steppe_Pastoralist
6.2Western_Hunter-Gatherer
1.8Iberomaurusian
0.6Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
0.2Africa_Mesolithic
0.2Ancient_Dravidian


Target: Italian_Lazio
Distance: 1.0490% / 0.01049045
58.0Early_European_Farmer
29.2Steppe_Pastoralist
6.2Iran_Neolithic
4.8Early_Levantine_Farmer
1.8Western_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 1.0964% / 0.01096360
58.2Early_European_Farmer
34.2Steppe_Pastoralist
5.2Iran_Neolithic
1.4Western_Hunter-Gatherer
0.6Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
0.4Early_Levantine_Farmer


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 1.2071% / 0.01207146
62.2Early_European_Farmer
28.8Steppe_Pastoralist
4.8Iran_Neolithic
2.2Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
1.4Early_Levantine_Farmer
0.4Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
0.2Northeastern_Asia_Neolithic


Target: Montenegrin
Distance: 2.5224% / 0.02522434
50.4Early_European_Farmer
37.6Steppe_Pastoralist
10.6Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
1.4Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: Serbian
Distance: 2.7144% / 0.02714450
50.8Early_European_Farmer
36.4Steppe_Pastoralist
9.8Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
3.0Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: Polish
Distance: 4.3662% / 0.04366247
37.2Steppe_Pastoralist
35.2Early_European_Farmer
25.0Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
2.6Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: Ukrainian
Distance: 4.6315% / 0.04631483
36.4Steppe_Pastoralist
35.6Early_European_Farmer
21.8Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
6.2Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: Macedonian
Distance: 2.7525% / 0.02752508
53.4Early_European_Farmer
36.8Steppe_Pastoralist
7.2Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
1.8Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer
0.8Iran_Neolithic


Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 2.3001% / 0.02300116
52.6Early_European_Farmer
32.6Steppe_Pastoralist
7.4Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
3.6Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer
3.0Iran_Neolithic
0.4Ancient_Dravidian
0.4Northeastern_Asia_Neolithic


Target: Albanian
Distance: 1.5854% / 0.01585405
59.4Early_European_Farmer
30.2Steppe_Pastoralist
4.8Iran_Neolithic
4.6Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer
0.4Ancient_Dravidian
0.4Northeastern_Asia_Neolithic
0.2Eastern_Hunter-Gatherer

Beautifully presented models. Are these considered accurate, and if not, are there other models to challenge these?
 
Ancient samples.

Target: GRC_Mycenaean
Distance: 1.0660% / 0.01066039
73.6Early_European_Farmer
11.8Steppe_Pastoralist
8.8Iran_Neolithic
4.6Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
0.8Iberomaurusian
0.4Early_Levantine_Farmer


Target: HRV_MBA
Distance: 1.7481% / 0.01748108
59.2Early_European_Farmer
34.4Steppe_Pastoralist
6.4Western_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: HRV_IA
Distance: 2.1776% / 0.02177573
60.2Early_European_Farmer
36.0Steppe_Pastoralist
3.8Western_Hunter-Gatherer


Target: HRV_EBA
Distance: 2.0039% / 0.02003875
59.0Early_European_Farmer
31.2Steppe_Pastoralist
4.2Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer
3.4Ancient_Iberian_Hunter-Gatherer
1.2Western_Hunter-Gatherer
1.0Iberomaurusian


Target: BGR_IA
Distance: 1.9167% / 0.01916651
72.0Early_European_Farmer
25.0Steppe_Pastoralist
2.4Iran_Neolithic
0.6Caucasus_Hunter-gatherer

Target: CZE_Early_Slav
Distance: 3.3251% / 0.03325085
40.4Steppe_Pastoralist
37.6Early_European_Farmer
22.0Scandinavian_Hunter-Gatherer

What calculator are you using, @progon?
 
CJZMg27.png


@Dema,

Take a look at the chart by the Medieval period. No J1 to be accounted for, the same study you had cited.

Like I said prior, and it should be well known by now, the Imperial Roman samples are mostly taken from two cemeteries that were made up of foreigners, outside of the city of Rome. Not people representative of the Italian population as a whole. These groups had went extinct after the fall of the Empire, because there wasn't consistent immigration. The land was reclaimed by people from the hinterlands. The J2, and E are probably representative of Italy's long standing Greek/Greek-like population in the South, that had arrived in central Italy, after the Romans, unified the peninsula.
 
He prefers the modeling because it makes him:

Target: Progon_scaled
Distance: 1.9252% / 0.01925168
59.8Early_European_Farmer
40.2Steppe_Pastoralist


What a joke! I recommend ignoring his ramblings.

I just saw a ready one made by http://g25vahaduo.genetics.ovh/ULTIMATE ANCIENT COMPONENTS.htm and it's the first time i am seeing this model lol.

This is the ancient samples which are taken more in consideration, but anyway, similar results. The Tepecik_Ciftlig is used as sort of a proxy, Anatolian farmer with CHG/Iranian influences. IMO, all of these tools are very cheap, and not to be taken seriously. Probably they are made of some shitty Python scripts/modules, but anyway, more or less on a more generic sense they can tell a story.

Anatolia_Barcin_N,0.1175998,0.180118,0.0035312,-0.101158,0.0510443,-0.0483875,-0.0043582,-0.0069334,0.0362287,0.0807473,0.0079718,0.0118803,-0.0234545,0.0004691,-0.0419807,-0.0101913,0.0233091,0.0019866,0.0136954,-0.0097489,-0.0142249,0.0057723,-0.0041232,-0.0031658,-0.0043437
Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N,0.108701,0.1731478,-0.0143308,-0.100534,0.0270818,-0.0402298,-0.0045828,-0.005019,0.02623,0.05745,0.008444,0.0080555,-0.0101832,0.0052298,-0.0352192,-0.0104748,0.0088662,0.0004432,0.005342,-0.0032828,0.0026827,0.0044515,-0.0071795,-0.0038258,-0.0045805
GEO_CHG,0.091058,0.102568,-0.083344,-0.00323,-0.08617,0.020638,0.024911,-0.001846,-0.128236,-0.074717,-0.006333,0.023979,-0.054856,0.004404,0.026601,-0.03275,0.02386,-0.013429,-0.022249,0.034767,0.033815,-0.007048,0.006532,-0.025787,-0.002036
IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N,0.0430252,0.0664158,-0.1550722,0.0047158,-0.122669,0.0235384,0.017109,-0.0011998,-0.082546,-0.0544158,-0.0028258,-0.0016186,0.0044896,-0.0062756,0.0316498,0.0561384,-0.0054242,0.0068664,0.0136508,-0.0334162,0.00856,-0.028836,-0.0110678,-0.039331,0.0222254
Yamnaya_RUS_Samara,0.1255849,0.089028,0.0426986,0. 1153479,-0.0287232,0.0450564,0.0036033,-0.0025642,-0.0559032,-0.0728943,0.0018222,3.32e-05,-0.0026924,-0.0233041,0.0366141,0.0157633,-0.0012316,-0.0017879,-0.0038408,0.0137704,-0.0031749,0.0007557,0.0110649,0.0186102,-0.004537
Levant_Natufian,0.020488,0.1431895,-0.0377125,-0.1387295,0.030775,-0.079484,-0.025616,-0.0175375,0.114329,0.002005,0.0332085,-0.0222555,0.076486,0.002133,0.0153365,0.009016,-0.0154505,-0.001014,-0.02206,0.040832,0.001497,0.0001235,-0.003636,-0.0044585,0.006287
WHG,0.1246365,0.116278,0.184789,0.189279,0.1546445 ,0.0464355,0.0131605,0.0372675,0.0890705,0.017768,-0.0153455,-0.015811,0.0159065,-0.0030275,0.053338,0.0582065,0.00502,0.016343,-0.0093015,0.055589,0.0944585,0.0111905,-0.049607,-0.160866,0.0170045
Baltic_LVA_HG,0.1292603,0.1004104,0.1802636,0.1972 329,0.1064236,0.0560919,0.0083574,0.0207106,0.0524 476,-0.0261394,-0.0046788,-0.0181151,0.0281434,-0.0053759,0.0355759,0.0480141,0.003072,0.0040856,-0.0059236,0.042325,0.0613526,0.0130531,-0.0262979,-0.1110549,0.0095949
RUS_Devils_Gate_Cave_N,0.0227646,-0.4480516,0.0728598,-0.052972,-0.0414846,-0.0407738,0.005264,0.011215,0.0075266,0.021431,-0.0507624,-0.005665,0.0027948,0.0100466,-0.0100162,-0.0120658,-0.0043026,0.0060558,0.0153102,0.0099798,0.0104566,-0.0287366,-0.0196458,-0.0016628,-0.0099152

Target: Progon_scaled
Distance: 2.7672% / 0.02767175
47.6Anatolia_Barcin_N
37.0Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
13.6Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
1.8Baltic_LVA_HG


What calculator are you using, @progon?

http://g25vahaduo.genetics.ovh/ULTIMATE ANCIENT COMPONENTS.htm
 
Beautifully presented models. Are these considered accurate, and if not, are there other models to challenge these?

It's just an unofficial model, one of so many. But, more or less i am cautious in taking all of these amateur calculators seriously. They might be good to some degree, but for more advanced conclusions they shouldn't be taken seriously at all.
 
6TjWeeC.png


Can we even confirm if I3313 is actually Illyrian? I searched for the word in the study it is from, and found no results. I would like to see some confirmation on the archeological designation. MTA has made mistakes before.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317094992_The_Genomic_History_Of_Southeastern_Europe

As I said before, I believe the predecessors of Albanians, were Greek/Southern Italian-like, and were pulled north/east towards their modern position, due to Slavic admixture.

Perhaps the actual Illyrians were Greek/South Italian-like, like the Mycenaeans:

lUlQXV4.jpg
 
6TjWeeC.png


Can we even confirm if I3313 is actually Illyrian? I searched for the word in the study it is from, and found no results. I would like to see some confirmation on the archeological designation. MTA has made mistakes before.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317094992_The_Genomic_History_Of_Southeastern_Europe

As I said before, I believe the predecessors of Albanians, were Greek/Southern Italian-like, and were pulled north/east towards their modern position, due to Slavic admixture.

Perhaps the actual Illyrians were Greek/South Italian-like, like the Mycenaeans:

lUlQXV4.jpg

I don't know if they were or not, or just their ancestors, but regardless of the yDna one of these Dalmatians carried, and regardless of the fact that these Balkan samples are pretty close to Albania and nearby areas, they're a hell of a lot closer to Italians, especially central-northern Italians, than they are to Albanians, not that I give a damn. Of all the things to obsess over.

I think they're pinning their hope on Roman Era people from that area being the real "Illyrians" and Albanians being the closest people to them. I hope for their sakes it turns out that way, or they'll all have a collective nervous breakdown.
 
I would have thought it was the opposite. There's an awful lot of Neolithic farmer and Caucasus in the Balkans.

It's all difficult to untangle, I'll give you that. You have the European Middle Neolithic farmers, who were something like 80% Anatolian, or "Near Eastern" farmer, if you will, and 20% WHG. Then you have people like the Thracians and Illyrians who brought in steppe ancestry, but it was already mixed with MN farmer, and became progressively more diluted. Then you had some incursions by Gauls, but how long did they stay, and how much impact did they have? Plus, they also had, what, 40-50% MN by that time?

Only much later later do you have the Slavs coming in, who, despite having much more steppe, also have their share of MN ancestry.

So, how do you apportion the percentage of more "northern" ancestry which the Slavic migrations introduced?

I'd be interested to see averages of the major clusters in, say, Serbs, or Romanians, as well as Bulgarians, and compare them to actual "Slavs". Does Eurogenes provide public data about that in, say, K13 or K15 or even G25? Not that I would necessarily trust his data. He has a vested interest in inflating the "Slavic" percentage wherever possible.

I suppose the real way to know would be to compare ancient samples from the Balkans during the period of the Roman Republic and Early Empire (Dacians,Thracians, Illyrians) vs modern people.

I was going to look it up in the old Dodecad spreadsheets, but the idiots have infected it with viruses of some kind.
I know that the northern shift is not exclusive due to Slavic migration but the vast majority of it is. Many Anatolians were settled in Macedonia and Thrace which were gradually Bulgarized and Hellenized, so it's not that the southern impact of, say, Bulgarians is entirely native either.
In general I think that Anatolians and others helped the southern impact of the Bulgarians more than the for example Goths or other northern European who were not Slavs helped the Slavic shift.
 
6TjWeeC.png


Can we even confirm if I3313 is actually Illyrian? I searched for the word in the study it is from, and found no results. I would like to see some confirmation on the archeological designation. MTA has made mistakes before.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317094992_The_Genomic_History_Of_Southeastern_Europe

As I said before, I believe the predecessors of Albanians, were Greek/Southern Italian-like, and were pulled north/east towards their modern position, due to Slavic admixture.

Perhaps the actual Illyrians were Greek/South Italian-like, like the Mycenaeans:

lUlQXV4.jpg
The sourthern ones most likely were but we need data. Thracians are too ancient Greek-like to be the ancestors of Albanians, which inflates the autosomal Slavic impact, especially in Ghegs. I would assume Dacians to cluster with Albanians and Thessalians, which minimizes the Slavic component. So I believe the original ancestors of the Albanians might be central Illyrians, somewhere in Montenegro, who will end up plotting really close to Tuscans + 5% Sardian shift I suppose.

Albanians might also be mixed population of Bergamo-like Illyrians and Thracians for all we know.
 
Slavs were not native to the Balkans, at least not the south Balkans. If Steppe pastoralist was their primary genetic component when they settled in the Balkans, would they have not merely added to the Steppe component already present there? It seems very clear that at least as far as Greece and Albania, Slavs are not the main genetic contributors to modern populations.

If the models presented above in this thread are close to accurate, a case can made for the importance of pre-Medieval populations in the genetic makeup of modern south Balkan populations.

Well, I said South Slavs not Albanians and Greeks.

I think the idea that Slavs that occupied the South Balkans were nothing like Poles comes from the fact that most people assumed South Slavs to be very similar to native Balkanic population, which they clearly aren't.
 
I don't know if they were or not, or just their ancestors, but regardless of the yDna one of these Dalmatians carried, and regardless of the fact that these Balkan samples are pretty close to Albania and nearby areas, they're a hell of a lot closer to Italians, especially central-northern Italians, than they are to Albanians, not that I give a damn. Of all the things to obsess over.

I think they're pinning their hope on Roman Era people from that area being the real "Illyrians" and Albanians being the closest people to them. I hope for their sakes it turns out that way, or they'll all have a collective nervous breakdown.

Hi Angela. I don't want to get involved in this discussion but, IMO, I think that the nomenclature given by the MTA for these samples is not very adequate. It should be ‘Dalmatia BA’ and not Illyrian/Dalmatia. The label ‘Dalmatia BA’ is presented in BAM files stored in the ENA by the paper’s authors. The nomenclature of MTA is a innovation.
Cheers. ;)
 
@Dema,
R 850 is a Phoenician? Where on earth do you get that? Are you aware that the modern Lebanese are very close descendants of the Canaanites/Phoenicians? Do you see them anywhere on this list of closest modern populations from Eurogenes K13, who never gets Near Easterners right, or Italians, for that matter? It's either deliberate or incompetence. You're aware, yes, that the Dodecanese is off the coast of Anatolia?

Distance to:R850_Lazio_Rome_Italy_Iron_Age
4.12800497Greek_Dodecanese
5.35067285Greek_Chios
6.26520550Calabria
6.35148014Greek_Symi_Island
7.40556547Malta
8.29838539Turk_Cypriot
8.47106841Sicily
8.53762262East_Sicilian
8.62302151Sephardic_Jewish
9.30844778Campania
9.46088262Algerian_Jewish
9.58992179Central_Greek
10.57814729Italian_Jewish
10.61534738Apulia
10.67247862Ashkenazi
11.03320896Tunisian_Jewish
11.27887849Cyprian
11.27887849Greek_Cypriot
11.56409962Basilicata
11.56547448Molise
11.62612145Libyan_Jewish
11.84490608Greek_Andros_Island
12.31438996Abruzzo
12.83437572Moroccan_Jew
13.40095146Greek_Cappadocian

Let’s look at Dodecad

Distance to:R850_Iron_Age_Ardea
3.90799181Greek_Crete
7.13377179Ashkenazy_Jews
7.63860109Italy_Calabria
7.74058137Sephardic_Jews
7.82175172Ashkenazi
10.04684154Italy_Sicily
10.57089239Italy_Campania
10.88449356Greek_Cappadocia
11.39101962Italy_Apulia
11.86263040Cypriots
12.08694751Nusayri_Turkey
12.19292418Morocco_Jews
12.92056940Italy_Abruzzo
13.12759689Crimean_Tatar_Coast
13.17106678Turk_West_BlackSea
13.49063008Turk_Central_West
14.16544387Greek
14.43175665Turk_Central_East
14.45064012Turk_Anatolia
15.19421600Turk_Southwest
15.21064759Lebanese
15.74333510Turk_Northwest
15.93597503Turk_South
15.96534685Turk_Central_Black_Sea
16.59878610Turk_Southeast
That makes the most sense and was, I believe, also the conclusion of the paper.

You're aware, yes, that there were no Ashkenazi Jews at that time, and they're a more recent population which is anywhere from 40-60% European?

Did you also somehow miss this from Antonio et al? Who could look at that and say...PHOENICIAN????

XXEh5Xo.png



Obviously ludicrous claims like that make everything you say not only subject to ridicule, but undeserving of reasoned responses.

I will also point out once again some fundamental facts about the Phoenicians/Carthaginians. You have presented absolutely no historical or archaeological proof that the Greeks admixed with either group. When you make such claims absent proof, it’s not debate, it’s misinformation and t-rolling, and that isn’t permitted here.

In terms of Italians, the only Phoenician/Carthaginian settlements were, to repeat, on the northwestern part of Sicily and the southwestern part of Sardinia.

There was no war with Phoenicia. There were the Punic Wars with the Carthaginians, who were different people, with only the elites probably of Levantine origin. The rest of them would have been partly or mostly Berber. Now, you seem to have your dates confused as well. The Punic Wars have nothing to do with the middle to late Empire and any supposed genetic changes to the actual natives. The Carthaginians, much less the Phoenicians, didn’t exist by that time. The Punic Wars, for your information, occurred from 264 to 146 BC.

So, you seem to be implying an admixture with Phoenicians, who were actually Carthaginians, during the period of the Empire, when it was actually the Republic. During the course of those wars, indeed some of the “Carthaginian” soldiers were probably enslaved, and perhaps brought back to Italy, although they could have been bought all over the Empire. The bigger problem is that the VAST majority of the Carthaginian troops were not Carthaginians, much less Phoenicians; there were never enough of them, because they were mainly just elite traders. Probably most of the troops were, from the historical record, Spaniards and Alpine people and north Italians, including my Ligures. See the problem with your reasoning? This is what comes of not knowing any history.

Now, as to J2-M205, how the heck do you know where it formed?

I can’t figure out what, apart from the typical Albanian desire to t-roll Greeks could lead you to this conclusion, unless it’s that you still haven’t grasped or understood the fundamental principle in population genetics that y dna DOES NOT DETERMINE ETHNICITY.

You do the same thing with J2b- I don’t know where it was first picked up and spread from, and I don’t care, but Albanians don’t own it and nor did the Illyrians. The fact that it shows up amongst Etruscans and modern Italians doesn’t mean “Illyrians” brought it there or that Etruscans were Illyrians. Certainly, Albanians don’t have anything to do with it. I realize that you were all taught you were the descendants of the Illyrians, but you’re certainly not very close to the samples we currently have, and are much further from them than are Italians, so let it go; it just makes you all look ridiculous.

Leaving all that aside, how could you possibly conclude that all the J2-M205 in Italy or Greece or anywhere else in Europe only comes from the Levant? Haven’t you done the least bit of unbiased research? Don't you realize how much came from Anatolia to Greece, and perhaps particularly, to Crete?

Don’t you see that your conclusions are not grounded in unbiased fact?

As for those ridiculous models, who made them? Was it Sikeliot acting as Portuguese Princess, or that card carrying Skin Head, Stormfront member Drac who used to regularly threaten me on this site?

You really have to start hanging around with a better class of people.

Everyone else can do as they wish, but I will no longer debate these issues with someone seemingly blithely drawing conclusions based on absolutely no actual facts.
 
Last edited:
Well, I said South Slavs not Albanians and Greeks.

I think the idea that Slavs that occupied the South Balkans were nothing like Poles comes from the fact that most people assumed South Slavs to be very similar to native Balkanic population, which they clearly aren't.

According to the Lazaridis Mycenaean study, Anatolia Neolithic appears to be stronger in south Balkan populations than further north. Bronze Age Steppe also appears to be strong in certain places in the Balkans.

EE5207E2-E239-464D-A660-0CFBF4BA2D6A.jpg4574F581-D4DB-4793-9135-C960D8535ADD.jpg
 

This thread has been viewed 65217 times.

Back
Top