Genetic study Ancient DNA of Roman Danubian Frontier and Slavic Migrations (Olalde 2021)

Someone been playing too much Rome 2 Total War
 
torzio said:
All samples from ancient Moesia ............now known as Serbia

purely thracians as Moesia was one of the 4 regions of Thracian people, others Dacia, Getae ( romania and moldova ) and Odyssian ( bulgaria )
Click to expand...

I meant this guy
 
Pr0_ said:
There is no compelling evidence that proto-Albanians were Thracians or Dacians anyway. And even then, that supposedly Albanians have no Illyrian ancestry is pure propaganda. But I don't necessarily believe we are pure Illyrians either.

There were also a bunch of Aromanians/Vlachs that were assimilated in Kosovo/Northern Albania and Eastern Albania. So we are probably a mix of different Ancient Balkan tribes.
Click to expand...


The only proto-Albanians where the ancient Dardanians ( modern Kosovo area ) and some of their southern neighbour called the Paeonians .
 
ImpartialAmericanSci said:
There were rumors that Albanian scientists were testing DNA like this and destroying results because they didnt like them...Ancient Illyrians from Albania are very different than Albanians they said......What the hell? We will never get DNA from Albania if they keep doing that. We still dont have DNA from Albania. Just why??? When its known in Albania that Albanians are a multimix of Dacians, Thracians, Greeks, Slavs, Serbs and other groups and that Albanian is a Thracian language from way outside Albania, there will be huge outrage and thats what theyre trying to avoid i think......

Over one third of Albanian ancestry and probably way more is just pure Slavic!! Wow I never expected that much cos in Albania its veryyy downplayed by official histories who claim only Illyrian ancestors and sometimes Pelasgians...Thank you for the great great article Maciamo!!
Click to expand...

I have seen these comments as well ............its to do with national identity.

Its a problem ever since the Albanian government choose Tosk as the national language over Gheg in 1975
 
lacreme said:
Other ancient samples and obviously a 3 or more -way model would be much more suitable but with this in mind it's as follows if I understood correctly your request :


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 2.9462% / 0.02946240
77.6BGR_IA
22.4Polish

Target: Serbian
Distance: 1.2656% / 0.01265575
60.6Polish
39.4BGR_IA

and the rest of the relevant populations (rest of the Greeks, Albanians, Montenegrins )
Code: 
[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 2.8483% / 0.02848349[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]68.0[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]32.0[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 2.7323% / 0.02732343[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]72.6[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]27.4[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 3.3217% / 0.03321716[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]83.6[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]16.4[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Greek_Izmir
Distance: 3.6081% / 0.03608104[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]84.8[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]15.2[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 5.0301% / 0.05030105[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]92.8[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]7.2[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
(The rest like Dodecanese and Cappadocia, 100% BGR_IA but the model obviously fails with even bigger distances )

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Albanian
Distance: 2.2994% / 0.02299404[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]69.8[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]30.2[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 2.1402% / 0.02140202[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]51.2[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]48.8[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TH="class: singleheader, colspan: 2, align: left"]Target: Montenegrin
Distance: 1.5212% / 0.01521183[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]59.4[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]Polish[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: barchartmode1 nonselectable, colspan: 2"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[TD="class: singleleftcolumn, align: right"]40.6[/TD]
[TD="class: singlerightcolumn"]BGR_IA[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #555555"]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

What calculator are you using? I used similar components and got a really bad fit. I probably was doing something wrong.
 
Archetype0ne said:
I doubt even Poles are 80% Slavic tbh. Depends what you take as the baseline (base population, historical period). My personal guess would be some insular populations, of "central" Slavs akin to Byelorussians would be the most "slavic", not even Russians or Poles due to admixture events from east and west.

But as you can see from analyzing his writing style this guy is some gen Z zoomer with mental health issues.

"Illyrians were a veryyy different people!! "

But definitively not who he claims to be, a) impartial, b) american.

"doesnt isnt it sus at all??"

In the past I would report such crap, but from my experience on here it does absolutely nothing, so might as well enjoy the freakshow.
Click to expand...

Lol, good post by you.

It’s what Greeks go through sometimes as well with people who deny their ancestry. If person X is from ethnic group Y, and evidence repeatedly implies an indigenous relationship, if person X wants to claim ancient descent, maybe give the person the benefit of doubt until evidence refutes it. I am not interested in refuting people’s claims of ancestry unless evidence clearly backs it up.
 
ihype02 said:
What calculator are you using? I used similar components and got a really bad fit. I probably was doing something wrong.
Click to expand...

I picked the samples from the modern+ancient scaled averages from the relevant g25 calculator and the calculator itself from
vahaduo[dot]genetics[dot]ovh
 
Ralphie Boy said:
Lol, good post by you.

snip
Click to expand...

Hope that was not sarcasm :LOL:. Reading this very thread will refresh you on my opinion on such claims regarding Greeks.
 
Angela said:
The paper was also discussed here:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/39761-Upcoming-Reich-Lab-paper-on-Viminacium-etc/page2

It's important to have the whole quote for some of these conclusions as some people still don't seem to get it; or perhaps they didn't actually read the paper:

I'll highlight so it can't be missed.

""The Roman Empire expanded through the Mediterranean shores and brought human mobility and cosmopolitanism across this inland sea to an unprecedented scale. However, if this was also common at the Empire frontiers remains undetermined. The Balkans and Danube River were of strategic importance for the Romans acting as an East-West connection and as a defense line against “barbarian” tribes. We generated genome-wide data from 70 ancient individuals from present-day Serbia dated to the first millennium CE; including Viminacium, capital of Moesia Superior province. Our analyses reveal large scale-movements from Anatolia during Imperial rule, similar to the pattern observed in Rome, and cases of individual mobility from as far as East Africa. Between ~250-500 CE, we detect gene-flow from Central/Northern Europe harboring admixtures of Iron Age steppe groups. Tenth-century CE individuals harbored NorthEastern European-related ancestry likely associated to Slavic-speakers, which contributed >20% of the ancestry of today's Balkan people.

"A key feature of the data is two parallel genetic clines running along PC1 (Fig. 1). We call the first the “Balkan Iron Age cline”, with southern Balkan populations such as Bronze Age and Iron Age Aegean groups on the right extreme closer to Near Eastern populations (larger values in PC1), northern populations such as Slovenian Iron Age groups on the left extreme closer to Central European populations (smaller values in PC1), and a Bulgarian Iron Age individual and Bronze Age and Iron Age Croatian groups taking intermediate positions but closer to the southern and northern extremes, respectively. This Iron Age cline is mirrored by the “presentday Balkan cline”, which is shifted towards the upper-left of the plot (lower values in PC1 and higher values in PC2) with respect to the Iron Age cline but maintains the same geographical pattern of southern Balkan populations such as the Greeks on the right, and northern Balkan populations such as Croatians on the left. This suggests that present-day populations are not direct descendants without admixture of Iron Age groups from the same region, and that similar demographic shaped Balkan populations from North to South over the past 2,000 years."

"Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Clusteras predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-Iron Age expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans 17. We interpret this cluster as the descendants of local Balkan Iron Age populations living at Viminacium, where they represented an abundant ancestry group during the Early Imperial and later periods (~47% of sampled individuals from the 1-550 CE).

"The other major cluster (44% of the samples from Viminacium between 1-250 CE) is represented by individuals who projected towards ancient and present-day Eastern Mediterranean groups in PCA (Figure 1A), close to ancient individuals from Rome during Imperial times 3. Their ancestry can be modelled as deriving deeply from Chalcolithic Western Anatolian groups (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.2), and we refer to this cluster as the Near Eastern-related cluster. The same signal of arrivals individuals with Anatolian/Near Eastern ancestral origins is also evident in Rome during the same period 3, consistent with largescale gene-flow originating from the major eastern urban centers of the Empire (such as Constantinople, Antioch, Smyrna and Alexandria). These results suggest that immigration from the east was a common feature across urban centers in the Roman Empire, including in border areas and large cities/military outposts such as Viminacium. Individuals with Eastern Mediterranean ancestry could have high social status: 3 out of the 4 individuals buried in two sarcophagi (each containing a male-female pair) with exceptionally rich grave goods at the Rit necropolis in Viminacium belonged to the Near Eastern-related cluster, while the remaining one belonged to the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster. This kind of burial was common in the Eastern Roman settlements for aristocratic members of society 20. Individuals from this cluster were also more likely to be inhumated in a wooden coffin rather than freely buried, which could also be an indication of higher social prestige."
Three individuals from ~1-250 CE did not fit into the two major clusters. Two males from Viminacium could be modelled using Iron Age individuals from Northwest Europe as their only source (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.5), pointing to a Northwestern European origin also supported by the R1b-U106 paternal lineage, which was not been detected in the Balkans in earlier periods but was found at high frequencies in Germanic-speaking areas, both in ancient and present-day individuals. The most remarkable outlier is male I15499, excavated at Pirivoj necropolis in Viminacium, who projects outside West Eurasian genetic diversity (Figure S7). When we incorporated African populations onto the PCA (Figure S8), he projected within the variation of present-day East African populations and close to early Christians from Northern Sudan from 500-800 CE 21 who provide a good fit for his ancestry in qpAdm (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.4). An Eastern African ancestral origin agrees with his uniparental markers mtDNA L2a1j and Y-chromosome E1b-V32, both common in East Africa today 17,22. Archeological examination of I15499’s grave found an oil lamp depicting an eagle, the symbol of Roman legion (Figure S2C). Although lamps are a common finding in Viminacium graves 23, not many depict military iconography. We hypothesize that this male was a Roman legionary or auxiliary stationed at Viminacium. We cannot determine if he was a Roman citizen, although auxiliary military service for a prolonged period of time resulted in citizenship. Historical evidence also points to African recruits being tapped to reinforce the Roman Danubian limes 24."

"At Slog, we found one directly radiocarbon dated individual with a clear Near Eastern ancestral origin, likely from the Northern Levant (Figure 1B Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.3), as well as directly radiocarbon dated individuals belonging to the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster. This confirms that the two major ancestry clusters from 1-250 CE period co-existed at least three centuries in the Danubian limes. The legacy of Balkans Iron Age groups persists in admixed form in later groups including present-day Balkan populations (see below), whereas the Near Eastern-related ancestral legacy eventually ebbed in favor of Northern/Eastern European-related ancestry, similar to the patterns observed in the city of Rome itself 3."

"These findings support the hypothesis that such individuals were part of a cosmopolitan group comprising a large proportion of individuals in Imperial towns and cities who over time were demographically overwhelmed by populations in the countryside or by faster reproductive rates of rural or populations without as much Near Eastern influence."

"The legacy of Balkans Iron Age groups persists in admixed form in later groups including present-day Balkan populations (see below), whereas the Near Eastern-related ancestral legacy eventually ebbed in favor of Northern/Eastern European-related ancestry, similar to the patterns observed in the city of Rome itself 3. These findings support the hypothesis that such individuals were part of a cosmopolitan group comprising a large proportion of individuals in Imperial towns and cities who over time were demographically overwhelmed by populations in the countryside or by faster reproductive rates of rural or populations without as much Near Eastern influence.

"We found highly similar ancestry trajectories across time in Rome and Viminacium, with a strong Anatolian/Near Eastern influence during the Imperial period that resulted in a large portion of the analyzed individuals in both cities having Near Eastern ancestry, followed by a resurgence of local ancestry after the Empire’s decline 3. These results highlight how mobility from the Easternmost areas of the Empire was a common feature of large cities and towns from the capital city of Rome to the Danubian limes, but that demographically these populations were a veneer without long-lasting influences, suggesting either that they were greatly outnumbered by local rural populations, or that their reproductive rates were much lower than that of local rural populations, consistent with evidence that cities and towns in the Roman empire did not successfully reproduce themselves demographically and instead constantly had to be repopulated through immigration 29. In the Imperial period, genetic data suggest that a large proportion of this immigration derived from the Eastern Mediterranean highlighting the centrality of this region in the period of intense human connectivity during Imperial Rome. Conversely, the decline in the geographic scale and number of people involved in transMediterranean movements following the Empire’s decline is reflected in the fact that in later periods, Eastern Mediterranean influence largely disappeared in both the city of Rome and in the large towns of the Balkans."

(Finally, someone got it!)

We also observe new ancestry during this period at Mediana, Slog necropolis at Timacum Minus and Viminacium (mostly at Pecine and Vise Grobalja necropoli), as early as the 4thcentury CE. A cluster of 10 individuals from these necropoli is shifted in PCA from the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster toward Central/Northern European ancient and present-day populations (Figure 1B). This group which we refer to as Central/Northern European cluster, could be modeled as deriving from two main sources: ~38% related to the local Balkans Iron Age substratum (we use the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster as a proxy for this type of ancestry) and 50% Central/Northern European ancestry (we use as a proxy individuals from a roughly contemporaneous Langobard-associated cemetery in Hungary 25). To obtain a fitting model, a significant proportion of ancestry (~14%) related to contemporaneous nomadic steppe groups (proxied in our analysis by Late Sarmatians from the Eastern Pontic-Caspian steppe 26) is also needed (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.6). This is even more evident in two individuals from the Pecine necropolis in Viminacium (referred to as Steppe cluster), who could be modelled as deriving ~43% of ancestry from the Balkans Iron Age-related cluster and 57% ancestry from Late Sarmatian-related Steppe groups (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.7). Ychromosome lineages also provide evidence for gene-flow, as 5 of 7 males in the Central/Northern European and Steppe cluster belonged to two lineages not found in the Balkans earlier: haplogroup I1 with a strong Northern European distribution and haplogroup R1a-Z645, common in the Steppe during the Iron Age and early 1st millennium CE 26–28. The Roman Empire had a prolonged history of contact with Germanic tribes, whose homelands were in Northern Europe between the Rhine and Vistula rivers. During the Great Migration period groups that coalesced as the Goths moved southwards, and settled at the Black Sea north coast prior to their entry in the Roman Empire 6. Our observations are consistent with the hypothesis that such tribes interacted with Steppe-related nomadic populations reaching the Eastern European plateau, and incorporated their ancestry into their gene pool before moving into the Balkans. However, the occurrence and manner of this interaction needs to be clarified with a more thorough sampling of this region and time period.

"The remaining five individuals clustered in the West-Eurasian PCA (Figure 1C) on top of the “present-day Balkan genetic cline”, close to present-day Serbianspeaking individuals that we newly genotyped for this study, but this apparent similarity is a projection artifact as their ancestry could not be fitted using the same qpAdm models (Supplementary section 12.8). To understand this, we performed a PCA using present-day Germanic- and Slavic-speaking populations (Supplementary section 9; Figure S9) that we expected would be sensitive to more recent drift separating Central, Northern and Eastern European populations. The Kuline individuals are more shifted towards present-day Slavicspeaking populations as compared to individuals in the Central/Northern European cluster, agreeing with the presence of Y-chromosome lineage I2-L621 in Kuline, which is common in present-day Slavic-speaking groups and absent in earlier periods. In light of these results, we modeled the ancestry of the Kuline individuals as a mixture of 56% deriving from the local Balkan Iron Age substratum and 44% deriving from Northeastern European Iron Age groups, and obtained a good statistical fit (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.8). Our results point to a strong demographic impact of Eastern European groups in the Balkans during the Medieval period, likely associated to the arrival of Slavic-speaking populations. Yet, our results rule out a complete demographic replacement, as we observe a significant portion of local Iron Age Balkan ancestry in Kuline individuals. Interestingly, we found sex bias when modeling the X chromosome of the individuals of this necropolis (Supplementary section 12.8). Perhaps the immigrant groups were constituted by a higher number of women, who therefore impacted more greatly in the demographics of the post-Roman Balkans. However, these findings have only been observed in the Kuline individuals with North-European related ancestry (n=5), we suggest more data will be needed to obtain more evidence Slavic sex bias in the Balkans. To explore whether this Northeastern European ancestry signal persisted in present-day Balkan and Aegean populations, we attempted to model present day groups by using the same qpAdmmodel used for the Kuline individuals (Supplementary section 13). Present-day Serbs, Croats and the rest of central/northern Balkan populations yielded a similar ancestral composition as the Kuline individuals, with approximately 50% Northeastern European-related ancestry admixed with ancestry related to Iron Age native Balkan population (Figure 3), implying substantial population continuity in the region over the last 1,000 years. This ancestry signal significantly decreases in more southern groups, but it is still presents in populations from mainland Greece (~30%) and even the Aegean islands (7-20%)."

(I think we already postulated about 30% "Slavic" in Thessaly years ago in Dienekes' day.)
Click to expand...

Great points, it is clear from this paper, that cosmopolitanism and Near easterner demographic shift was only a temporary phase during the Roman Empire, in large towns and cities. Both Italy and the Balkans show a reclamation by local peoples.

I'm looking forward to seeing the BAM files. It is interesting to me how the locals overlap with Italians. Given relatively easy access of mobility from the Balkans to South Italy, I wonder if we will see IA south Italians with a similar genetic profile.
 
Jovialis said:
Great points, it is clear from this paper, that cosmopolitanism and Near easterner demographic shift was only a temporary phase during the Roman Empire, in large towns and cities. Both Italy and the Balkans show a reclamation by local peoples.

I'm looking forward to seeing the BAM files. It is interesting to me how the locals overlap with Italians. Given relatively easy access of mobility from the Balkans to South Italy, I wonder if we will see IA south Italians with a similar genetic profile.
Click to expand...

When you say temporary, you mean several days, a week, several years, a century? Just being curious what you mean by temporary.
In addition would you consider your residence in US temporary?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Jovialis said:
Great points, it is clear from this paper, that cosmopolitanism and Near easterner demographic shift was only a temporary phase during the Roman Empire, in large towns and cities. Both Italy and the Balkans show a reclamation by local peoples.

I'm looking forward to seeing the BAM files. It is interesting to me how the locals overlap with Italians. Given relatively easy access of mobility from the Balkans to South Italy, I wonder if we will see IA south Italians with a similar genetic profile.
Click to expand...


It doesn't look that temporary even in regions like Germany and the Balkans. It didn't last at that level, but the level in the general population might have always been lower. Beause the local population both in Rome and the Balkans more often cremated and with some possible regional exceptiosn, like in the Southern Italian plantation system (needs to be investigated), it was concentrated in the urban areas. But some percentages up to Central Europe, as well as some "unusual haplogroups", might all be attributed to this "temporary" migrants.
What's for sure is:
- The numbers were even lower at that time, because the local population did much more often cremate and live in the countryside
- A large fraction of the urban population died off with the collapse, so their relative numbers became even more reduced
- The constant flow of migrants was connected to the importance of a place, its safety and wealth for migrants. As soon as personal safety and economic wealth were going down, the flow of Near Eastern migrants was going down as well.
 
Jovialis/Angela: I haven't seen these papers linked anywhere. They may deserve there own thread. They are however related to this paper, in particular the De Angelis et al 2021. The first one is a summary of 5 recent papers that were just published in Annals of Human Biology. One (2nd paper linked) of them deals with an Imperial Roman Suburb that has some additional samples not covered in the Antonio et al 2019 paper which had some 48 Imperial Romans from other sites. The basic findings as reported in the review paper is that the new Imperial Roman samples do not cluster with the 48 from Antonio et al 2019, which as I remember, about 2/3 of those were in Central Med. Cluster (C6) which I tend to show very close genetic distances to on various calculators, and 1/3 or so were in the Near East Cluster (C4). These new Imperial Samples seem to be related to Punic Communities and they clearly buried their dead (so maybe early Christian Community or Jewish??).

Caramelli, Posth, and Rickards 2021

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03014460.2021.1944313#.YSvyQNBXabI.twitter


De Angelis et al 20121 " Ancient genomes from a rural site in Imperial Rome (1st-3rd cent. CE): a genetic junction in the Roman Empire"

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03014460.2021.1944313
 
Last edited:
Some of the responses to Jovialis' post are a little too precious imo. Everyone should know precisely what he means by "temporary".

It's what I've been suggesting as a possibility for years, as has Jovialis since he joined this site, and which has now been adopted by Razib Khan, the Reich Lab, and has been adopted and summarized in post number 177 by Riverman.

Under this hypothesis, cities were sinks, not sources for variation, not very healthy and so the population had to constantly be replenished from the countryside, and as Rome declined, and tradesmen, etc. moved to new centers, the "tail to the east" of Antonio et al disappeared.

Was there some impact on the local population? Probably, but considering the Italian cline it lessened as one goes north.

Why might that be? I think it is probable that a lot of Aegean, Western Anatolian influence moved up the boot of Italy as the result of Greek colonization and perhaps even before. We shall see.
 
A certain reclamation for local people is assumed for Balkan by Jovialis, this conclusion seems baseless. New emigrants came from north and destroyed the big military cities of Danube. This changed the genetic composition of the Balkans not the local reclamation.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
blevins13 said:
A certain reclamation for local people is assumed for Balkan by Jovialis, this conclusion seems baseless. New emigrants came from north and destroyed the big military cities of Danube. This changed the genetic composition of the Balkans not the local reclamation.


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum
Click to expand...

As always, I suggest you READ the paper, including all of the Supplement. The admixture analyses using various methods are extremely clear; that's if one can understand them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 184583 times.

Back
Top