Magna Graecia

[Francis Drake]

Who cares? These aren't even legitimate components.

Ok then, show me a run where R850 scores no Levantine when its used as a left-pop in qpadm. Until then, you also have no legitamate admixture proof.

 

[Milan.M]

They are attested first on Danube, so what kind of Slavs are you talking about, coming from where?

They are probably not aware of new works in history and archeology of Slavs,South Slavs in general and that is mainstream,other than 19th century crazy nordicist theories about migration from supposed urheimat and what not.I must say however that the imagination and story making is amazing but reality and history books with which new historians like Florin Curta came out is different story.

 

[Francis Drake]

How do you even accurately measure it, with all of the examples of overlap I have stated?

Qpadm <used as a left-pop>, tools like G25(???), ADMIXTURE

 

[Jovialis]

Qpadm <natufian used as a left-pop>, tools like G25(???)

Natufian within and of itself is mostly Anatolia_N-like even if you just use Anatolia_N and Morroccan_HG.

It is a mixed population not a source!

 

[Jovialis]

Ok then, show me a run where R850 scores no Levantine when its used as a left-pop in qpadm. Until then, you also have no legitamate admixture proof.

Hey genius, they already did that in Antonio et al. 2019!

I am not going to turn this thread into me having to explain every paper to you.

You are ignorant of many facts, so you have no right to lecture anyone here.

 

[Cato]

Very likely that Iran Neo/CHG was already present in the South of Italy, at least in the extreme south in the Bronze Age. I was rereading Genetic history of Sardinia 2020 by Marcus et al. and some Nuragics shown traces of Iran Neo admixture, for example MA87 from Seulo, central Sardinia, is 20% Iran Neo. If it was present in Sardinia and Sicily then it's obvious that migrations from Anatolia reached even places like Calabria or Apulia.

My two cents

Inviato dal mio POT-LX1T utilizzando Tapatalk

 

[Francis Drake]

Natufian within and of itself is mostly Anatolia_N-like even if you just use Anatolia_N and Morroccan_HG.

It is a mixed population not a source!

Anatolia Neolithic is 75% Natufian <Without north african> + 25% WHG Crown Eurasian

Whether natufian introgression occured will be readily apparent in the p-values with such differentiation.


Pure Natufians are like Bedouin Arabs, Pure Anatolian-Hunter Gatherers are like Sardinians.

 

[Francis Drake]

Hey genius, they already did that in Antonio et al. 2019!

I am not going to turn this thread into me having to explain every paper to you.

You are ignorant of many facts, so you have no right to lecture anyone here.

I'm not so ignorant as to posit that Natufians are 75% Dzudana + 25% Morrocan in October 2021

 

[Milan.M]

They choose these Slavs from Ingria because no other model could explain the genetic makeup of South Slavs and Balkans in general,Iron age and present day. However the Slav that was found in the Balkans was not Ingrian,so why we care about Ingria concerning the Balkans.This has more to do with mathematics than genetics.We will put little of this and that to have this, which is absurd otherwise is impossible.Very bad assumption because they did not and will probably never found Ingrian Slavs in Balkans

 

[Jovialis]

Anatolia Neolithic is 75% Natufian <Without north african> + 25% WHG Crown Eurasian

Whether natufian introgression occured will be readily apparent in the p-values with such differentiation.


Pure Natufians are like Bedouin Arabs, Pure Anatolian-Hunter Gatherers are like Sardinians.

This is a joke, not even worth of my time.


Also here is the only modeling that makes sense for R850 according to Stanford, it is Anatolia/Iran related, it has nothing to do with the Levant:

Maybe you're someone evading ban, I am starting to suspect...

 

[torzio]

Is this "R1" sample on G25? I can't find him anywhere.

it is a her .....born in Croatia , died in Italy

the others are beyond 11.0

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Baltic 53.32
2 Southern 26.58
3 West_Asian 17.95
4 Siberian 1.34
5 African 0.81

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 N_Italian (Dodecad) 3.88
2 O_Italian (Dodecad) 5
3 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 5.16
4 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 5.66
5 North_Italian (HGDP) 5.67
6 Romanians (Behar) 5.76
7 Tuscan (HGDP) 7.15
8 TSI30 (Metspalu) 7.29

 

[Jovialis]

it is a her .....born in Croatia , died in Italy

the others are beyond 11.0

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Baltic 53.32
2 Southern 26.58
3 West_Asian 17.95
4 Siberian 1.34
5 African 0.81

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 N_Italian (Dodecad) 3.88
2 O_Italian (Dodecad) 5
3 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 5.16
4 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 5.66
5 North_Italian (HGDP) 5.67
6 Romanians (Behar) 5.76
7 Tuscan (HGDP) 7.15
8 TSI30 (Metspalu) 7.29

The study shows there is affinity between Croatia and Picene. However, I didn't caught details on her birth.

Nevertheless, This lends support to my argument that the North Balkans, was North Italian-like, in these days.

Here is the excerpt on the sample's archeological data:

Martinsicuro Date range: 930 cal BCE - 839 calBCEIndividuals: R1Martinsicuro is a coastal site located on the border of Le Marche and Abruzzo on central Italy’s Adriaticcoast. It is a proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river, dating to the late BronzeAge and Early Iron Age(154). Excavations at the site have been limited, but during an excavation inpreparation for road construction, a single post-built structure was excavated which contained a richarchaeological deposit of ceramics (155). These finds from the site indicate an affinity with contemporariesin the Balkans, suggesting direct trade contacts and interaction across the Adriatic. In particular, the practiceof decorating ceramics with bronze elements was shared between the Nin region in Croatia and Piceneregion of Italy, including Martinsicuro (156). These finds also show the conservation and preservation (e.g.as artifacts) of ceramics from the earlier Middle Bronze Age into the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age.

 

[Francis Drake]

This is a joke, not even worth of my time.


Also here is the only modeling that makes sense for R850 according to Stanford, it is Anatolia/Iran related, it has nothing to do with the Levant:

Maybe you're someone evading ban, I am starting to suspect...

This is my first eupedia account, I do notice ive been arguing with italians quite a lot recently though to be fair.

(I did have a burner account that I didn't post on though, it was called Arianiti11 or something)

 

[Angela]

Russians were not even Slavic speaking but Turkic and Ugro- Finnic…so your points are not taken.
R1a and R1b are not original IE markers so get over it, that is the explanation for the Etruscans nothing else

There are some posters who are so clueless that one wonders if they should be allowed to post on population genetics sites.

 

[Angela]

They are probably not aware of new works in history and archeology of Slavs,South Slavs in general and that is mainstream,other than 19th century crazy nordicist theories about migration from supposed urheimat and what not.I must say however that the imagination and story making is amazing but reality and history books with which new historians like Florin Curta came out is different story.

OMG, you actually cite that loon Florin Curta????

"Curta is known for his usage of post-processual and post-structuralist approach in explaining Slavic ethnogenesis and migrations by which is arguing against the mainstream view and primordial culture-historical approach in archaeology and historiography.^[4][5][6][7] In his arguing against the Slavic mass expansion from the Slavic Urheimat by which is denying the existence of the Slavic Urheimat, Slavic language as unifying element of the Slavs and Prague-type ceramics as expression of the Early Slavs, is advancing an alternative hypothesis which considers the Slavs as an "ethno-political category" invented by the Byzantines which was formed by political instrumentation and interaction on the Roman frontiers where flourished barbarian elite culture.^{[4][8][9][10][11]} It was met with substantial disagreement and "severe criticism in general and in detail" by other archaeologists and historians who noted Curta's arbitrary selection of archaeological sites, data and interpretation of chronologies to support his preconceived conclusions and cultural model which fails to explain the emergence and spread of the Slavs and Slavic culture.^{[12][13][14][15][16]} The migrationist model remains as the most acceptable and possible to explain the spread of the Slavs as well as Slavic culture (including language),^[8][17] but Curta's work did spark a new scientific debate." and found support by those who use similar approach, like Walter Pohl and Danijel Dzino.<sup>[12][18]"


Sure, let's ignore the clear archaeological trail into the Balkans of a people speaking a new language for the Balkans, having new gods, distinctive artifacts etc. in order to create a history we prefer. Too bad he got tenure before they understood what an idiot he was.

Did you guys get kicked off every other site except theapricity or something?</sup>

 

[Angela]

I'd like to see the statement in an academic paper that they did an isotope analysis on these bones and therefore know that she was born in Croatia and moved across the Adriatic to Martinoscuro, and this isn't just an internet hobbyist supposition.

 

[Francis Drake]

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.

Also it's as if Tuscans don't have significant northern-European ancestry as well. They aren't a relic population.

Even south-italians can have 5-10% generally.

 

[Milan.M]

OMG, you actually cite that loon Florin Curta????
"Curta is known for his usage of post-processual and post-structuralist approach in explaining Slavic ethnogenesis and migrations by which is arguing against the mainstream view and primordial culture-historical approach in archaeology and historiography.^[4][5][6][7] In his arguing against the Slavic mass expansion from the Slavic Urheimat by which is denying the existence of the Slavic Urheimat, Slavic language as unifying element of the Slavs and Prague-type ceramics as expression of the Early Slavs, is advancing an alternative hypothesis which considers the Slavs as an "ethno-political category" invented by the Byzantines which was formed by political instrumentation and interaction on the Roman frontiers where flourished barbarian elite culture.^{[4][8][9][10][11]} It was met with substantial disagreement and "severe criticism in general and in detail" by other archaeologists and historians who noted Curta's arbitrary selection of archaeological sites, data and interpretation of chronologies to support his preconceived conclusions and cultural model which fails to explain the emergence and spread of the Slavs and Slavic culture.^{[12][13][14][15][16]} The migrationist model remains as the most acceptable and possible to explain the spread of the Slavs as well as Slavic culture (including language),^[8][17] but Curta's work did spark a new scientific debate." and found support by those who use similar approach, like Walter Pohl and Danijel Dzino.<sup>[12][18]"

Sure, let's ignore the clear archaeological trail into the Balkans of a people speaking a new language for the Balkans, having new gods, distinctive artifacts etc. in order to create a history we prefer. Too bad he got tenure before they understood what an idiot he was.
Did you guys get kicked off every other site except theapricity or something?</sup>

Again you lol.I can cite you many more but I bet you do not know any of them.I can bet that you never read a book about history of Slavs but take your 'quick' knowledge on wikipedia and you try to school other people here about the said history.For example calling a man loon who is professor of history at university in Florida speaking for yourself yet again, you're only a fan of history and genetics therefore not competent at all to call man specialist in his field a loon.You never learn instead of insulting try to attack with knowledge if you have it.By the things you wrote you clearly have no idea what approach he for example has in history,and I have no time to explain to you.

 

[Angela]

Again you lol.I can cite you many more but I bet you do not know any of them.I can bet that you never read a book about history of Slavs and you try to school other people here about the said history.Fir example calling a man loon who is professor of history at university in Florida speaking for yourself yet again, you're only a fan of history and genetics therefore not competent at all to call man specialist in his field a loon.You never learn instead of insulting try to attack with knowledge if you have it.By the things you wrote you clearly have no idea what approach he for example has in history,and I have no time to explain to you.

I completely understand his approach. Problem is that it's completely faulty, as is the mainstream consensus in his own field. Or maybe you don't know that?

You just agree with him because it matches your own mythology, a mythology both of you were fed by those in power. Is the truth so frightening that you deaden yourself to logical thinking of any kind? How can you ignore the evidence in your own museums in the form of Slavic artifacts proving the arrival of a new people to the Balkans, an arrival which is imprinted in your genes.

I am indeed a "fan of history and genetics". That's all we have to anchor us to reality, and to say that makes someone not competent is one of the more bizarre statements I've seen in a hobby full of people making bizarre statements.

 

[Angela]

Also it's as if Tuscans don't have significant northern-European ancestry as well. They aren't a relic population.

Even south-italians can have 5-10% generally.

Do you realize you completely missed the point?

Btw, no one ever said the Tuscans don't have ancestry from north of the Alps. People who were probably about half "steppe" like and about half European farmer like came to Italy, admixed with the people there, and gave birth to the Etruscans and Latins etc. of history. We don't need to go over it.