Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 154

Thread: Magna Graecia

  1. #26
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,811


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Excuse me, but let's get some things straight here. I come here once in a blue moon and it's turning into anthrogenica, and on some threads theapricity, with totally unsubstantiated claims being thrown at the wall to see what sticks. That's not how we do things on this site. If people have a point to make, they should present their evidence.

    I have repeatedly pointed out, indeed, that there was no significant Slavic impact on Italy, not genetic and not even cultural. I know that both because the historical record is clear and because of the genetics we have, especially the yDna.

    As far as the historical record is concerned, by the time the Slavs were on the move Italy was already conquered by the Germanics and they had enough control to turn the Slavs back at the northeastern border. It's all detailed in contemporary chronicles. As for the genetics, you need to have a magnifying glass to find Slavic R1a and Slavic I2a in Italy other than in the areas immediately adjacent to Slavic speaking areas in the northeast. Some of you seem fond of using yDna to support your claims. So am I. In this case, however, it supports my analysis. As for culture, where on earth someone could find evidence of "Slavic" culture in Italy is beyond me. It's ridiculous. Never did I ever say there was such a thing

    Sorry, but the Balkans had their barbarian invasions and we had ours. Ours were less impactful than yours. I don't precisely know why, but maybe it was because so many of the Germanics were warriors, not family groups, whereas the Slavs were groups of farmers. Perhaps it was because the plague had a more significant impact in the Balkans. Regardless, it is what it is. What, you like our barbarians better?

    To turn to the Greeks, I am on record as saying that I don't know how much of an impact they had, but for goodness' sakes it's clear they would have had a significant impact given the attested record of colonies, plus the omnipresence of Greek merchants in all the ports. Slavic input is found in the absence of any proof whatsoever, but an entire civilization on our shores is discounted? Precisely how much impact we'll wait and see, and yes, we'll wait and see, if someone ever publishes samples from the Bronze Age and early Iron Age in Southern mainland Italy, what those people were like, and how different they were from the Greeks.

    If some posters on this thread knew Italian pre-history they would know that the Italics were late comers to the southern mainland, arriving after the Greeks in some cases. Do you think southern mainland Italy was empty? Does that make sense? Someone was trading with the Greeks in the Bronze Age. We have the "pots", so to speak, to prove it. Did they just disappear into smoke? I suggest some reading on the topic. As I've repeatedly said, and still maintain, we don't have Bronze Age samples from mainland Southern Italy, and until we have them, there's a piece of the puzzle missing.

    Less there be any doubt about it, I have never said that there wasn't some impact on the Italian genome from the Imperial period. What I don't know is precisely how much and from where. I do know that every sample found in the capital city of an Empire is NOT going to belong to someone who stayed and admixed and reproduced. Is common sense not supposed to be one of the tools we use? For crying out loud, some of the samples from Antonio et al were from the port area where merchants and seamen stayed and no doubt died. Recently we got a bunch of samples, no doubt of slaves, from a dyeworks. You think they were being manumitted willy-nilly and blending into the population? Why, also, did the "trail into the Levant" disappear? We've gone over this ad nauseam.

    That's not to say that some slaves weren't manumitted and that some merchants or even people from the provinces who had become wealthy landlords didn't come to Italy and stay. It would be more likely that the slaves with a brighter future would be from the east or Greeks because they were literate, or trained craftsmen etc. So, as I said, I don't deny there was some impact.

    However, and I don't care which Lab is doing the analysis, you can't take every collection of bones you find in Imperial Italy and assume they are the bones of people whose dna went into the "pot". You can see it in the Early Medieval samples. Many of the bones were from monasteries. Do you know who stayed at monasteries? Travelers. In the Etruscan paper, if anyone bothered to read the part of the Supplement dealing with the archaeological context, some of the "Imperial" and "Early Medieval" bones had been picked off the ground and brought to a museum. How much, precisely, are we supposed to deduce from that?

    That brings me to yDna. The paper on the Etruscans we have recently discussed showed a graphic where the "admixing" agent was a population from the Levant. It may be news to some people, but the Levant is high in a specific clade of J1. There is not enough of that kind of J1 in Italy to make that at all feasible. In fact, take all the J1 in Toscana. You can see the percentages on Maciamo's chart. Toscana has 2%. J2 is a different story, but still it's 11% in Toscana. And no, the Germanics didn't wipe it out because, as we've discussed over and over again, there's little Germanic dna in Toscana.

    Francis Drake, whoever he is, wants to hang his hat on yDna, but it doesn't support these claims.

    (I really do not get why Albanians haunt every thread on Italian genetics. Do you see us on "Albanian" threads, obsessing on your genetics and language? Why does it matter so much to you? I can understand intellectual curiosity; I certainly have it myself, and I try to analyze all the papers that come out, but this is way beyond that. I really don't understand what you're trying to prove, unless in some way it again goes back to the Greeks.)

    Also, might I suggest that we not lose sight of the fact that not all the Roman Imperial samples were Anatolian, much less Levantine.

    The latest run I did shows that I'm about 1/4 Imperial Roman. Here is the closest modern match for these remains.

    Distance to: Via_Paisiello_Necropolis_Imperial_Rome:R111:Antoni o_2019
    4.37268796 Italian_Romagna
    4.40196547 French_Corsica
    4.52567122 Italian_Tuscany
    5.34800374 Italian_Marche
    6.02374468 Italian_Emilia
    6.60205271 Italian_Lazio
    6.97389418 Italian_Liguria
    9.43665725 Italian_Lombardy
    10.32837354 Italian_Piedmont
    10.64679294 Italian_Abruzzo
    10.91365200 Italian_Veneto
    11.46594523 Albanian
    12.24593810 Greek_Thrace
    12.31293223 Greek_Thessaly
    12.37012530 Albanian_Kosovo
    12.44505524 Greek_Central
    12.52507086 Italian_Campania
    12.85758920 Greek_Athens
    13.07603533 Italian_Friuli_VG
    13.23058956 Italian_Apulia
    13.23207089 Greek_Peloponnese
    13.53561090 Swiss_Italian
    13.62172529 Italian_Sicily
    13.74291454 Greek_Thessaloniki
    13.76111551 Macedonian_South


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #27
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,384

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    I’m Pugliese, …
    If correct, my Y T line has been in Italy since the Mesolithic era, even mutated twice there, and as of now, there are no clades left, … my Final:




    … the y Tree says Europe Middle Bronze Age:



    http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-M184_tree.png

    Ardea Latin R850 (800 BCE - 500 BCE) was also close by, … though he’s T1a1… and I’m T1a2…

    did you ever find anything on the T1a2 from Lucania.....6500 years ago ?
    Fathers mtdna ...... T2b17
    Grandfather mtdna ... T1a1e
    Sons mtdna ...... K1a4p
    Mothers line ..... R1b-S8172
    Grandmother paternal side ... I1-CTS6397
    Wife paternal line ..... R1a-Z282

  3. #28
    Regular Member Salento's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-05-17
    Posts
    5,158

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H12a

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    did you ever find anything on the T1a2 from Lucania.....6500 years ago ?
    What’s his ID? … I’ll look in to it :)

  4. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    02-09-21
    Posts
    58

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13, E-Z5017
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    Albanian, South-Gheg
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Excuse me, but let's get some things straight here. I come here once in a blue moon and it's turning into anthrogenica, and on some threads theapricity, with totally unsubstantiated claims being thrown at the wall to see what sticks. That's not how we do things on this site. If people have a point to make, they should present their evidence.

    I have repeatedly pointed out, indeed, that there was no significant Slavic impact on Italy, not genetic and not even cultural. I know that both because the historical record is clear and because of the genetics we have, especially the yDna.

    As far as the historical record is concerned, by the time the Slavs were on the move Italy was already conquered by the Germanics and they had enough control to turn the Slavs back at the northeastern border. It's all detailed in contemporary chronicles. As for the genetics, you need to have a magnifying glass to find Slavic R1a and Slavic I2a in Italy other than in the areas immediately adjacent to Slavic speaking areas in the northeast. Some of you seem fond of using yDna to support your claims. So am I. In this case, however, it supports my analysis. As for culture, where on earth someone could find evidence of "Slavic" culture in Italy is beyond me. It's ridiculous. Never did I ever say there was such a thing

    Sorry, but the Balkans had their barbarian invasions and we had ours. Ours were less impactful than yours. I don't precisely know why, but maybe it was because so many of the Germanics were warriors, not family groups, whereas the Slavs were groups of farmers. Perhaps it was because the plague had a more significant impact in the Balkans. Regardless, it is what it is. What, you like our barbarians better?

    To turn to the Greeks, I am on record as saying that I don't know how much of an impact they had, but for goodness' sakes it's clear they would have had a significant impact given the attested record of colonies, plus the omnipresence of Greek merchants in all the ports. Slavic input is found in the absence of any proof whatsoever, but an entire civilization on our shores is discounted? Precisely how much impact we'll wait and see, and yes, we'll wait and see, if someone ever publishes samples from the Bronze Age and early Iron Age in Southern mainland Italy, what those people were like, and how different they were from the Greeks.

    If some posters on this thread knew Italian pre-history they would know that the Italics were late comers to the southern mainland, arriving after the Greeks in some cases. Do you think southern mainland Italy was empty? Does that make sense? Someone was trading with the Greeks in the Bronze Age. We have the "pots", so to speak, to prove it. Did they just disappear into smoke? I suggest some reading on the topic. As I've repeatedly said, and still maintain, we don't have Bronze Age samples from mainland Southern Italy, and until we have them, there's a piece of the puzzle missing.

    Less there be any doubt about it, I have never said that there wasn't some impact on the Italian genome from the Imperial period. What I don't know is precisely how much and from where. I do know that every sample found in the capital city of an Empire is NOT going to belong to someone who stayed and admixed and reproduced. Is common sense not supposed to be one of the tools we use? For crying out loud, some of the samples from Antonio et al were from the port area where merchants and seamen stayed and no doubt died. Recently we got a bunch of samples, no doubt of slaves, from a dyeworks. You think they were being manumitted willy-nilly and blending into the population? Why, also, did the "trail into the Levant" disappear? We've gone over this ad nauseam.

    That's not to say that some slaves weren't manumitted and that some merchants or even people from the provinces who had become wealthy landlords didn't come to Italy and stay. It would be more likely that the slaves with a brighter future would be from the east or Greeks because they were literate, or trained craftsmen etc. So, as I said, I don't deny there was some impact.

    However, and I don't care which Lab is doing the analysis, you can't take every collection of bones you find in Imperial Italy and assume they are the bones of people whose dna went into the "pot". You can see it in the Early Medieval samples. Many of the bones were from monasteries. Do you know who stayed at monasteries? Travelers. In the Etruscan paper, if anyone bothered to read the part of the Supplement dealing with the archaeological context, some of the "Imperial" and "Early Medieval" bones had been picked off the ground and brought to a museum. How much, precisely, are we supposed to deduce from that?

    That brings me to yDna. The paper on the Etruscans we have recently discussed showed a graphic where the "admixing" agent was a population from the Levant. It may be news to some people, but the Levant is high in a specific clade of J1. There is not enough of that kind of J1 in Italy to make that at all feasible. In fact, take all the J1 in Toscana. You can see the percentages on Maciamo's chart. Toscana has 2%. J2 is a different story, but still it's 11% in Toscana. And no, the Germanics didn't wipe it out because, as we've discussed over and over again, there's little Germanic dna in Toscana.

    Francis Drake, whoever he is, wants to hang his hat on yDna, but it doesn't support these claims.

    (I really do not get why Albanians haunt every thread on Italian genetics. Do you see us on "Albanian" threads, obsessing on your genetics and language? Why does it matter so much to you? I can understand intellectual curiosity; I certainly have it myself, and I try to analyze all the papers that come out, but this is way beyond that. I really don't understand what you're trying to prove, unless in some way it again goes back to the Greeks.)

    Also, might I suggest that we not lose sight of the fact that not all the Roman Imperial samples were Anatolian, much less Levantine.

    The latest run I did shows that I'm about 1/4 Imperial Roman. Here is the closest modern match for these remains.

    Distance to: Via_Paisiello_Necropolis_Imperial_Rome:R111:Antoni o_2019
    4.37268796 Italian_Romagna
    4.40196547 French_Corsica
    4.52567122 Italian_Tuscany
    5.34800374 Italian_Marche
    6.02374468 Italian_Emilia
    6.60205271 Italian_Lazio
    6.97389418 Italian_Liguria
    9.43665725 Italian_Lombardy
    10.32837354 Italian_Piedmont
    10.64679294 Italian_Abruzzo
    10.91365200 Italian_Veneto
    11.46594523 Albanian
    12.24593810 Greek_Thrace
    12.31293223 Greek_Thessaly
    12.37012530 Albanian_Kosovo
    12.44505524 Greek_Central
    12.52507086 Italian_Campania
    12.85758920 Greek_Athens
    13.07603533 Italian_Friuli_VG
    13.23058956 Italian_Apulia
    13.23207089 Greek_Peloponnese
    13.53561090 Swiss_Italian
    13.62172529 Italian_Sicily
    13.74291454 Greek_Thessaloniki
    13.76111551 Macedonian_South
    I don't disagree with you.

  5. #30
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Drake View Post
    What is your argumentation for why its from these phantom populations rather than the heavily documented and sampled imperial roman migrants? Where are these Iron-Age southern italians who plot like this then (prenistini outlier plots west of south italians)? This isn't even accounting for the (albeit mild) Germanic/Norman input (shown by haplogroups). One also has the content with the fact that certain E and J subclades in South-Italy are certaintly not from the neolithic/chalcolithic, but appear from Imperial migrations. Occams Razor applies here IMO.
    I am not the only one that considers this scenario though. Sarno et al. 2021, Raveane et al 2018, Razib Khan also going on record saying this. The CHG pulse not only came to Italy, but also Albania and the surrounding region. Also, anyone that thinks southern Italians are simply Latin + Greek, is seriously neglecting the other other people involved. Who were the people that lived there in the Bronze Age? You want to talk about phantom populations, than who are these phantom Southern Italians that you can confidently say are Imperial era foreigners, when we don't even have samples from that area in the time periods for analysis? At the very least, the scenario I am proposing is being talked about by academic studies.


    Furthermore, you are forgetting R1 and R850 who are Italian samples that are just as east as modern Southerners. Do not be quick to conclude that it must be solely Imperial era samples, with all of these other scenarios and examples at play.

  6. #31
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    The samples pick up steppe ancestry around 1600 BC, but that’s due to a lacuna in the transect. We know now that steppe ancestry arrived in Spain and Greece before 2000 BC. It seems to me unlikely that it would be notably tardy in Italy.

    Another thing I want to mention is there is clearly something West Asian (CGH-related) that is moving westward ~2000 BC in a straight shot from Anatolia to the Balkans to southern Italy. This migration seems associated with Y chromosomal lineage J2. Trying to estimate how much exogenous post-Imperial eastern ancestry is present in Southern Italians is somewhat difficult for this reason. The differences between the far south and central and northern Italy may date to the Bronze Age because of this minority component of West Asian ancestry that extended itself across the Mediterranean


    https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2021/07/31/italian-genetics-in-the-bronze-age/
    Here is the quote from Razib Khan.

  7. #32
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Francis Drake,

    Southern Italians have non-steppe-related-CHG, much for the same reason why Albanians have so much. You don't have to blame the Imperial era migrants. It was in your ancestry from the Early Bronze Age perhaps.

  8. #33
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    I do not think the people that came to Sicily and Sardinia in the Bronze-Age were phantoms.

    The spread of steppe and Iranian-related ancestry in the islands of the western Mediterranean (harvard.edu)

  9. #34
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Francis Drake,

    Southern Italians have non-steppe-related-CHG, much for the same reason why Albanians have so much. You don't have to blame the Imperial era migrants. It was in your ancestry from the Early Bronze Age perhaps.
    How else could the native Balkanites from the Iron Age be southern Italian-to-Tuscan-like, if not for the EBA CHG pulse? This was before the Imperial era.

  10. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    02-09-21
    Posts
    58

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13, E-Z5017
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    Albanian, South-Gheg
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    How else could the native Balkanites from the Iron Age be southern Italian-to-Tuscan-like, if not for the EBA CHG pulse? This was before the Imperial era.

    Honestly I don't think they were south Italian like, here are my G25, Imperial roman only shows up in 5-population admixture, not changing much. 1.PNG2.PNG

    Albanians would naturally have less imperial admix than italians, I myself am eastern-plotting compared to Excine, Dibran, Kelmendasi, and Hawk. They score no imperial roman on my admixture runs.4.PNG

  11. #36
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    02-09-21
    Posts
    58

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13, E-Z5017
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    Albanian, South-Gheg
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    I am not the only one that considers this scenario though. Sarno et al. 2021, Raveane et al 2018, Razib Khan also going on record saying this. The CHG pulse not only came to Italy, but also Albania and the surrounding region. Also, anyone that thinks southern Italians are simply Latin + Greek, is seriously neglecting the other other people involved. Who were the people that lived there in the Bronze Age? You want to talk about phantom populations, than who are these phantom Southern Italians that you can confidently say are Imperial era foreigners, when we don't even have samples from that area in the time periods for analysis? At the very least, the scenario I am proposing is being talked about by academic studies.


    Furthermore, you are forgetting R1 and R850 who are Italian samples that are just as east as modern Southerners. Do not be quick to conclude that it must be solely Imperial era samples, with all of these other scenarios and examples at play.

    Interesting, I never knew about R850, how would an iron-age latin have such high red-sea ancestry?

    I am not concluding anything, I'm just saying what the evidence points to as being most likely. Occams Razor and all.

    I hope to not offend anyone with my posts, I know many over the years have tried to denigrete Italians by calling them levantines and whatnot... I don't consider any of this to be insulting towards italians.

  12. #37
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Drake View Post
    Interesting, I never knew about R850, how would an iron-age latin have such high red-sea ancestry?

    I am not concluding anything, I'm just saying what the evidence points to as being most likely. Occams Razor and all.

    I hope to not offend anyone with my posts, I know many over the years have tried to denigrete Italians by calling them levantines and whatnot... I don't consider any of this to be insulting towards italians.
    Red sea ancestry is not a legitimate term, it means nothing. I don't see why Red sea ancestry is considered to be a source of anything, considering how deeply mixed a population form that place would be.

    The same goes for Levantine. They are predominately, Anatolian_N, mixed with Iran_N, mixed with paleolithic Morroccan Hunter-gatherer dna. These ancestries can be found in Europe too, but at much different percentage distributions.

    I have demonstrated in other threads that these places are not sources of genetic monolithic ancestry, like that of Anatolia, or Iran.

    The pulse of CHG would be likely related to Anatolian/Iran_N admixed populations come out of Anatolia.

    R850 clusters with Anatolia_IA.

    It is not about being offended, it is about looking at the evidence and being accurate. I don't give a crap if I have some ancestors that could have come from the middle east in more recent times.

    Furthermore, I will reassert the fact that the same CHG in southern Italians, also likely went to Albanians as well, as other southern Europeans.

    Raveane et al. 2018 also shows a Anatolain_BA like signal in Albanians, so again, the reason why your Iron Age ancestors were like modern Southern Italians, is because of the CHG pulse that affected the Balkans, including Italy. As noted by Razib Khan.

  13. #38
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    887


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Excuse me, but let's get some things straight here. I come here once in a blue moon and it's turning into anthrogenica, and on some threads theapricity, with totally unsubstantiated claims being thrown at the wall to see what sticks. That's not how we do things on this site. If people have a point to make, they should present their evidence.
    I have repeatedly pointed out, indeed, that there was no significant Slavic impact on Italy, not genetic and not even cultural. I know that both because the historical record is clear and because of the genetics we have, especially the yDna.
    As far as the historical record is concerned, by the time the Slavs were on the move Italy was already conquered by the Germanics and they had enough control to turn the Slavs back at the northeastern border. It's all detailed in contemporary chronicles. As for the genetics, you need to have a magnifying glass to find Slavic R1a and Slavic I2a in Italy other than in the areas immediately adjacent to Slavic speaking areas in the northeast. Some of you seem fond of using yDna to support your claims. So am I. In this case, however, it supports my analysis. As for culture, where on earth someone could find evidence of "Slavic" culture in Italy is beyond me. It's ridiculous. Never did I ever say there was such a thing
    Angela I was not talking about Slavs in Italy, even Goths did not have a significant impact there and let alone Slavs.

    To be honest I did not express myself well but I think it would have been known anyways to claim Slavs left a massive trace in Italy is ridiculous.

    You misunderstood me.

  14. #39
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Drake View Post
    Honestly I don't think they were south Italian like, here are my G25, Imperial roman only shows up in 5-population admixture, not changing much. 1.PNG2.PNG

    Albanians would naturally have less imperial admix than italians, I myself am eastern-plotting compared to Excine, Dibran, Kelmendasi, and Hawk. They score no imperial roman on my admixture runs.4.PNG

    Go ahead and use the 2-way modeling too, you can model yourself in all kinds of ways using any populations. Even modern ones, that would make absolutely no sense. This is not reliable.

    According to the Reich Lab,

    Your ancestors were on a cline between Aegaen_IA, and Slovanian_IA like people. That is why they plot over Italians. Until they were augmented by the Slavs.


  15. #40
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Go ahead and use the 2-way modeling too, you can model yourself in all kinds of ways using any populations. Even modern ones, that would make absolutely no sense. This is not reliable.

    According to the Reich Lab,

    Your ancestors were on a cline between Aegaen_IA, and Slovanian_IA like people. That is why they plot over Italians. Until they were augmented by the Slavs.

    Furthermore,

    Take a look, Anatolia_ChL (Anatola_N+Iran_N) are in a perfect position to have pulled the Mediterranean populations a bit east, from a very early time. I don't think it was people straight from here, but people that came to the west, existing on a cline towards Anatolia_ChL.

    The Red sea has absolutely nothing to do with it.

  16. #41
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Albanians are modeled very similar as Tuscans here,




    Francis Drake,

    do you outright deny that your ancestors were similar to Tuscans/Southern Italians, until they were augmented by the Slavs? It is okay to disagree.

  17. #42
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Drake View Post
    Honestly I don't think they were south Italian like, here are my G25, Imperial roman only shows up in 5-population admixture, not changing much. 1.PNG2.PNG

    Albanians would naturally have less imperial admix than italians, I myself am eastern-plotting compared to Excine, Dibran, Kelmendasi, and Hawk. They score no imperial roman on my admixture runs.4.PNG
    Also, a huge issue with this modeling is that you are taking samples from different eras, some of which overlap. It is not the way I would have done it.

    Nevertheless,

    Occam's Razor... How do you apply it to samples we do not even have for the South? Sorry to say it, but your argument to use Occam's razor with no evidence is somewhat odd to me. Especially when I have already confirmed to you there is more nuance to the scenario. Furthermore, the fact that you are using non-scientific terminology isn't making me feel confident about your assessment. No matter, we are all here to learn.

  18. #43
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Being Mediterranean is a genetic reality:

    Together with Minoans and Roman Republicans, this component can be broadly modelled as a Pan-Mediterranean population (constituted by AN and IN/CHG components) with the addition of WHG and Steppe-related ancestry in Roman Republicans

    The genetic origin of Daunians and the Pan-Mediterranean southern Italian Iron Age context | bioRxiv
    These are no phantoms, not in the opera, and not in what I am discussing here. As supported by yet another paper, on the Daunians.

    Just like being Slavic, or Nordic is a genetic reality.

    Modern Albanians, and other Balkanites are on the cline between Mediterranean and Slavic (and some Germanic I am told by people here).

  19. #44
    Regular Member Salento's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-05-17
    Posts
    5,158

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H12a

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Edit … deleted
    Last edited by Salento; 10-10-21 at 15:39.

  20. #45
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    @Francis Drake, let me reiterate,

    R1 is eastern shifted already, so there were Northern Italian-like people similar to Vento already in the early Iron Age.

    Also, why do we need imperial to shift southern Italians east, when we already have a two-way modeling with Slovenian_IA + Aegean_IA that plots them right on top of modern Southern Italians? Again, you would have found Slovenian_IA like people in Italy, if you consider the existence of R1.

  21. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    29-08-21
    Posts
    40


    Country: Bulgaria



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Being Mediterranean is a genetic reality:



    These are no phantoms, not in the opera, and not in what I am discussing here. As supported by yet another paper, on the Daunians.

    Just like being Slavic, or Nordic is a genetic reality.

    Modern Albanians, and other Balkanites are on the cline between Mediterranean and Slavic (and some Germanic I am told by people here).
    Who is the "Slavic" profile here?
    And when you say Slavic, you must to be 100 % sure that he is the source of the language, and not some Turk, Finno-Ugric, Baltic...who is Slavicized, because today the term refers only to a language family.

  22. #47
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Blablabla View Post
    Who is the "Slavic" profile here?
    And when you say Slavic, you must to be 100 % sure that he is the source of the language, and not some Turk, Finno-Ugric, Baltic...who is Slavicized, because today the term refers only to a language family.
    Whatever you want to call it, there was a significant shift represented by the Kuline cluster in the Balkans, during the middle ages; using that model.

    I know some people disapprove this model, because they feel it should be more nuanced. Who knows how this analysis will change overtime.

    I'm not going to go as far and claim people are "offend".

    However, I don't care if people are offended, if they are, they shouldn't be involved in the study of ethnic analysis using aDNA.

  23. #48
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Drake View Post
    What is your argumentation for why its from these phantom populations rather than the heavily documented and sampled imperial roman migrants? Where are these Iron-Age southern italians who plot like this then (prenistini outlier plots west of south italians)? This isn't even accounting for the (albeit mild) Germanic/Norman input (shown by haplogroups). One also has the content with the fact that certain E and J subclades in South-Italy are certaintly not from the neolithic/chalcolithic, but appear from Imperial migrations. Occams Razor applies here IMO.
    I am sure there was some Imperial immigrants that are in my ancestry. In fact, I am sure they are in the ancestry of most people that are from former-Roman dominions. However, what I question is the degree of the impact. Especially considering, the EBA CHG pulse.

  24. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    29-08-21
    Posts
    40


    Country: Bulgaria



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Whatever you want to call it, there was a significant shift represented by the Kuline cluster in the Balkans, during the middle ages; using that model.

    I know some people disapprove this model, because they feel it should be more nuanced. Who knows how this analysis will change overtime.

    I'm not going to go as far and claim people are "offend".

    However, I don't care if people are offended, if they are, they shouldn't be involved in the study of ethnic analysis using aDNA.
    This “shift” can not be connected to any even minimal language change at the Balkans. In this case, your profile for the Slavs is unproven, as well as according to the scientific community, especially the linguistic one.
    I can only feel offended by a lie, the truth doesn't bother me.

  25. #50
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    6,036

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Blablabla View Post
    This “shift” can not be connected to any even minimal language change at the Balkans. In this case, your profile for the Slavs is unproven, as well as according to the scientific community, especially the linguistic one.
    I can only feel offended by a lie, the truth doesn't bother me.
    This is not my profile, or analysis; I didn't think of it.

    You should write the authors of Olalde et al. 2021, if you have points you want to make about their analysis. They are usually good at getting back to people.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •