Genetic history of Calabrian Greeks reveals ancient events and long term isolation in

[Jovialis]

I would not swear to the accuracy of Iran_N's percentages in this paper. One has to see what reference ancient samples she exactly used.

I've checked in the supp info. For example as reference samples to represent Steppe she did not use the usual Yamanya Samara only, but threw in as reference samples also individuals from Potapovka, Afanasievo etc...

Unfortunately, in the analyzes there are none of the southern European populations genetically close to the Italians, so we cannot have any comparison.



More WHG in Sardinians is not strange, it has always been so. What is strange is Iran_N being inflated everywhere.

If you take a look at the Z-axis on this 3D-PCA, you can see it matches the CHG/IN cline.

[Regio X]

You guys have already said what I was willing to say: results should not be taken too literally, and they must be discussed and interpreted (which we've been doing here). Taken together, and compared to others, they may provide good clues on ancient movements, as we all know.

@Jovialis
As a general rule, professionals should be taken more seriously, of course.

I found the time to revisit those p-values. I missed something, indeed.
In this case, the higher the p-value the better. Ok then. What I don't understand now is why they used a threshold of 0.01 rather than 0.05, as for example Lazaridis et al. did here and here. Well, details...

At the end they must have used Barcin (predominant in EEF) rather than Tepecik (possibly predominant in ABA). So it'd be supposedly the opposite: Tepecik could have resulted in even better fits for Calabrians (?).

@Pax
Yes, I know. IIRC, we discussed it in a thread regarding Caucasus. Even Barcin itself would have a bit of Natufian, and Tepecik would have more, while PPNB would have something about 40% of ANF, if I'm not mistaken. Adding Natufian and eliminating PPNB could result in part of the former going to Anatolian, indeed; however, as Natufian is so old, this extra Natufian should correspond to some actual Levant Neo-like ancestry in that context, I believe, and Levant Neo (as well as Levant BA) did have Anatolian Neo after all. That's why I preferred PPNB, expecting that the tool would accommodate the extra Natufian into the correspondent pop of Levant in the timeframe chosen.
Of course, there would be different ways of estimating "Levantine(-like)" ancestry, from more recent pops to more ancient ones. As you know, shared ancestry is frequently an issue, especially when we use more recent pops as sources.
Apparently one way to estimate/isolate Natufian-like ancestry would be using it with AHG, CHG/Iran Meso etc., but this is another story.

[Cato]

Do you think that the percentages of Steppe in South Italians are correct? In Fernandes 2020 Sicilians are 20% yamnaya while in this study nearby Calabrese are less than 15% Steppe emba

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

[kingjohn]

Fernandes et al 2020 seems to model Sardinians similarly to the paper, however. In fact, Sardinians seem to have more Iran_N in the Fernandes paper.:

thanks for remainding us of this paper
about steppe and iranian related ancestery in med isalnads

i12221 the
one who show show orange steppe in this diagram https://i.imgur.com/PwUuh9d.png
is interesting to me as he was happen to be paternally e-z830 and cluster autosomally with the one of the iron age
sardinians i16163 who also show this steppe signiture in his autosomal

from the paper supplemental :

Iron Age Sardinians: The two Iron Age individuals from Sardinia (I10366: 391-209 calBCE and I16163: 762-434 calBCE) were not consistent with forming a clade with each other (Supplementary Table 11) or any of the individuals from the Neolithic, Chalcolithic, or Bronze Age Sardinian groups. However, the former was consistent with forming a clade with one of the two individuals from Late Antiquity that was modeled with Iranian-related ancestry (I12220, p=0.146), and the latter with Sardinia_EarlyMedieval who had Steppe ancestry (I12221, p=0.258) (see Fig. 2 or Supplementary Fig. 1). This suggests arrival in Sardinia of new ancestry types at least by the Iron Age, potentially related to the period of Phoenician or Greek settlement. We analyzed I10366 and 16163 separatel



p.s
it is possible the greeks at least partly brought this steppe ancestery to sardinia

[Jovialis]

thanks for remainding us of this paper
about steppe and iranian related ancestery in med isalnads

i12221 the
one who show show orange steppe in this diagram https://i.imgur.com/PwUuh9d.png
is interesting to me as he was happen to be paternally e-z830 and cluster autosomally with the one of the iron age
sardinians i16163 who also show this steppe signiture in his autosomal

from the paper supplemental :

Iron Age Sardinians: The two Iron Age individuals from Sardinia (I10366: 391-209 calBCE and I16163: 762-434 calBCE) were not consistent with forming a clade with each other (Supplementary Table 11) or any of the individuals from the Neolithic, Chalcolithic, or Bronze Age Sardinian groups. However, the former was consistent with forming a clade with one of the two individuals from Late Antiquity that was modeled with Iranian-related ancestry (I12220, p=0.146), and the latter with Sardinia_EarlyMedieval who had Steppe ancestry (I12221, p=0.258) (see Fig. 2 or Supplementary Fig. 1). This suggests arrival in Sardinia of new ancestry types at least by the Iron Age, potentially related to the period of Phoenician or Greek settlement. We analyzed I10366 and 16163 separatel



p.s
it is possible the greeks at least partly brought this steppe ancestery to sardinia

I would say the Greeks indeed contributed some small amounts of Steppe. But whether it be the Mycenaeans, or like people found in Logkas, the amount would still be pretty low overall.

[kingjohn]

I would say the Greeks indeed contributed some small amounts of Steppe. But whether it be the Mycenaeans, or like people found in Logkas, the amount would still be pretty low overall.

did the italic tribes( might be source for steppe componnent) made it to sardinia ?

[Cato]

did the italic tribes( might be source for steppe componnent) made it to sardinia ?

The Romans in 238 BC

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

[kingjohn]

The Romans in 238 BC

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

nice
but the one of the iron age remains (i16163) already show the steppe signiture
and he is dated to 762-434 bc
maybe the early mediveal individual i12221 which is in later period 892-990 ad
show steppe partly from vandal influence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandal_Sardinia

[Jovialis]

I am sure all of these groups all contributed some amount to the steppe throughout Italy:

[torzio]

I am sure all of these groups all contributed some amount to the steppe throughout Italy:

The turquoise colour needs to be placed on the 2 x Picene areas plus the Messapic area ............then this map is decent

Plus the purple need to go into eastern austria

Umbrian and Oscan separated ? ......maybe it should be joined and called Umbrian-Sabellic group

[Jovialis]

Perhaps this is a better map for showing Osco-Umbrian language:



Here is evidence of the Oscan language still being spoken in Pompeii, during the Imperial era.



HAVE is the Oscan equivalent of AVE.

[torzio]

Perhaps this is a better map for showing Osco-Umbrian language:



Here is evidence of the Oscan language still being spoken in Pompeii, during the Imperial era.



HAVE is the Oscan equivalent of AVE.

the two maps are different time period

the first is early iron age and
the second map after the celtic invasion of the Boii and Semnones tribes

is the first map a linguistic or ethnic map as the second would be considered neither

[Angela]

I agree with most of what the map shows, but it may be downplaying the extent of Greek speaking areas a bit.



Others go even further:


In the end, no one today can know how far inland the Greek language spread from the initial settlements. There also is the fact that very few people lived, for example, in the Aspromonte mountains, so the majority of the population probably spoke Greek and did some admixing, imo.

Of course, everything also depends on the time period being represented. At earlier periods, for example, the Ligures extended much further into Emilia-Romagna and down into Toscana, and, of course, all the way down into Spain.



Originally, in fact, they were even above the Apennines.

[Palermo Trapani]

Nice maps, very informative (post #59 to #63). Thanks Jovialis, Torzio and Angela.

Any thoughts on the language of the Elymians and Sicani. The Elymians definitely adopted Greek culture as their Temples in Segesta, Trapani suggest but they still wrote in their own language which the Linguistic Scholars are not totally sure on what type of language it is (some scholars suggest Indo-European connected to the Ligurians or Anatolians). Sicani I don't think left any traces of their language or very little and it too is not classified. The Sicels I think it is pretty well agreed spoke a similar language to what was spoken in Southern Italy.

[Jovialis]

Here are maps showing the type of Greek dialects being spoken in Magna Graecia





@Angela, great maps,

Here is another also showing Greek influence in Sardinia:

[torzio]

Nice maps, very informative (post #59 to #63). Thanks Jovialis, Torzio and Angela.

Any thoughts on the language of the Elymians and Sicani. The Elymians definitely adopted Greek culture as their Temples in Segesta, Trapani suggest but they still wrote in their own language which the Linguistic Scholars are not totally sure on what type of language it is (some scholars suggest Indo-European connected to the Ligurians or Anatolians). Sicani I don't think left any traces of their language or very little and it too is not classified. The Sicels I think it is pretty well agreed spoke a similar language to what was spoken in Southern Italy.

I thought Elymian was late Hittite language before it became purely Luwian...........Luwian died out in modern Lebanon circa 600BC

[Palermo Trapani]

Torzio: very debated, some say tied to Ligures, some Anatolian Hittite, which is why it is as today the best of my knowledge, unclassified. There is even less known about Sicani. The connection to the Ligures is do to many of the names of towns and cities in the area of the Elymians are also found in modern Liguria. So that is the reason for the hypothesis that the Elymian language is connected to the Ligures.

[Angela]

Here are maps showing the type of Greek dialects being spoken in Magna Graecia





@Angela, great maps,

Here is another also showing Greek influence in Sardinia:

This is why there's absolutely no surprise for me in the fact that Iran Neo exists in Italians, even without considering that it was already in central Italy, according to Antonio et al, in the Neolithic and Copper Age and Bronze Ages.

The first to colonize Southern Italy were the Euboeans, who with the move to Pithecusae (on the isle of Ischia), founded a series of cities in that region. The second city that they founded was Cumae, nearly opposite Ischia. The colonists from Cumae founded Zancle in on Sicily, and nearby on the opposite coast, Rhegium. Further, the Euboeans founded Naxos, which became the base for the founding of the cities of Leontini, Tauromenion and Catania. In this effort they were accompanied by small numbers of Dorians and Ionians; the Athenians had notably refused to take part in the colonization.^{[quotes 1]}
The strongest of the Sicilian colonies was Syracuse, an 8th-century B.C. colony of the Corinthians. Colonists of that same period from Achaea founded the cities of Sybaris and Croton in the Gulf of Taranto but also in the Metapontum in the same district. In the same area, refugees from Sparta founded Taranto which evolved into one of the most powerful cities in the area. Other Greek states that founded cities in Southern Italy were Megara, which founded Megara Hyblaea, and Selinous; Phocaea, which founded Elea; Rhodes, which founded Gela together with the Cretans and Lipari together with Cnidus, even as the Locrians founded Epizephyrean Locris.^[1]
Many cities in the region became in turn metropolis for new colonies such as the Syracusans, who founded the city of Camarina in the south of Sicily; or the Zancleans, who led the founding of the colony of Himera. Likewise Naxos, which we see taking further part in the founding of many colonies while the city of Sybaris founded the colony of Poseidonia to its north. The city of Gela which was a colony of Rhodes and Crete founded its own colony, Acragas.

Gela and Lipari seem to be the only colonies founded by Island Greeks.

[blevins13]

This is why there's absolutely no surprise for me in the fact that Iran Neo exists in Italians, even without considering that it was already in central Italy, according to Antonio et al, in the Neolithic and Copper Age and Bronze Ages.

The first to colonize Southern Italy were the Euboeans, who with the move to Pithecusae (on the isle of Ischia), founded a series of cities in that region. The second city that they founded was Cumae, nearly opposite Ischia. The colonists from Cumae founded Zancle in on Sicily, and nearby on the opposite coast, Rhegium. Further, the Euboeans founded Naxos, which became the base for the founding of the cities of Leontini, Tauromenion and Catania. In this effort they were accompanied by small numbers of Dorians and Ionians; the Athenians had notably refused to take part in the colonization.^{[quotes 1]}
The strongest of the Sicilian colonies was Syracuse, an 8th-century B.C. colony of the Corinthians. Colonists of that same period from Achaea founded the cities of Sybaris and Croton in the Gulf of Taranto but also in the Metapontum in the same district. In the same area, refugees from Sparta founded Taranto which evolved into one of the most powerful cities in the area. Other Greek states that founded cities in Southern Italy were Megara, which founded Megara Hyblaea, and Selinous; Phocaea, which founded Elea; Rhodes, which founded Gela together with the Cretans and Lipari together with Cnidus, even as the Locrians founded Epizephyrean Locris.^[1]
Many cities in the region became in turn metropolis for new colonies such as the Syracusans, who founded the city of Camarina in the south of Sicily; or the Zancleans, who led the founding of the colony of Himera. Likewise Naxos, which we see taking further part in the founding of many colonies while the city of Sybaris founded the colony of Poseidonia to its north. The city of Gela which was a colony of Rhodes and Crete founded its own colony, Acragas.

Gela and Lipari seem to be the only colonies founded by Island Greeks.

This study adds to the Anatolian route of Mycenaeans.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[Jovialis]

Northern Italy (Etruscan, Raetic and other non-IE people) from Steppe
Southern Italy (Greek, Oscan and other IE people) from a non-Steppe CHG/Iran_N source

Did I get it correctly?

All of those groups in the south still have still have some Steppe in them though.

My opinion is that after a while, the spread and development of language and culture probably had less to do with genetics and more to do with acculturation. Sort of like how farming was adopted by central Anatolians, via acculturation. (Agricultural origins on the Anatolian plateau | PNAS)

I think this was done more for pragmatic reasons, than romanticized sentimental ones that some hobbyists believe. People needed systems that worked, in order to organize their societies.

[Cato]

The Oscan group had to have steppe in their DNA, they came from Central_eastern Italy. According to Giacomo Devoto Oscans were preceded by Latin faliscan people like the Aenotrians, Opici etc.

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

[Jovialis]

But I believe there is a strong relation between genetics and culture

To a certain extent imo, I take a middle of the road approach to this.

For example, if have a group that is able to metabolize alcohol better than others, it is more likely you will have a culture that has a tradition of specialized alcohol production.

[Jovialis]

https://www.historyfiles.co.uk/Featu...000-2000BC.htm



First it was believed that just Anatolians migrated from the south of Caucasus, but genetic studies show this region could be also the source of Indo-Iranians, Hellenic and Italic people too. I don't know why some people don't want to believe it was the original land of Indo-European, as David Reich and some other scholars have said.

I don't rule it out for the PIE. Especially considering David Reich's sentiments in Who We are and How We Got Here.

[Jovialis]

[Maciamo]

Interesting study. This PCA shows that Calabria is most similar to the Copper & Bronze Age Anatolia and Mycenaean Greece.



Did I miss something or did they not provide any Y-DNA data?