K12b Eupedia Ancient Ethnicities Checker: reliably compare your DNA to ancient populations

Here is the average for the 37 samples from Early Iron Age Britain (600-400 BCE).

Distance to:Early_Iron_Age_Britain_(n=37)
1.98073219French_FrenchFlanders
2.77602233French_Northwest
3.54295075English_South
3.83846323Scottish
3.88332332English_North
3.99540987English_Kent_1KG
4.10285267Irish
5.58969588Belgian_Flanders
5.73317539English_Cornwall_1KG
6.21379916British
6.37330370Dutch_Frisia
6.39633489French_Normandie
6.55961127Belgian_average
6.99621326Belgian_Wallonia
7.07876402French_North

 
No substantial changes for me

Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
2.44000000Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
5.56800682Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
5.98677710Bronze_Age_Illyrians
7.17117145Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
7.55611011Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.90949494Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
9.05316519Villanovans_(n=2)
9.79013789Early_Iron_Age_Croatia_(n=9)
11.15952956Medieval_Basilicata_(n=10)
11.895200716th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
11.97150784Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
12.469819576th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
12.65941547Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
13.83990607Etruscans_(n=48)
14.29163392Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
14.33619894Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
14.81254536Early_Iron_Age_Slovenia_(n=10)
15.88332774Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
16.54552810Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23)
16.57576846Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
16.98754544Latins_(n=4)
18.30430277Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
18.57900428Western_Scythians_(n=28)
19.17563558Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
19.70430156EMBA_Greece_(n=6)

Target: Dodecadk12bStuvanè
Distance: 1.7423% / 1.74230116 | ADC: 0.5x RC

53.7Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
35.9Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.4Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23)


Target: Dodecadk12bStuvanè
Distance: 1.0570% / 1.05704240 | ADC: 0.25x RC

61.7Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
28.8Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.0Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
1.5Chalcolithic_Israel


Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
1.0075171646.80% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 53.20% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
1.1389150628.00% Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9) + 72.00% Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
1.2133386886.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.20% Avars_(n=2)
1.315446638.00% Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4) + 92.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.3378761689.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 10.40% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
1.3828065253.80% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 46.20% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.388281119.20% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8) + 90.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.3966658187.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 12.80% Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
1.3984334130.00% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 70.00% Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
1.403082878.40% Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12) + 91.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.4039953286.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.40% Vikings_from_Ukraine_(n=4)
1.416328427.80% Mesolithic_Baltic_Scandinavia_(SHG)_(n=31) + 92.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.4189182590.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 10.00% Medieval_Estonia_(n=7)
1.433790528.40% Bronze_Age_Estonia_(n=16) + 91.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.461554568.60% Mesolithic_Balkans_HG_(n=43) + 91.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.5290492858.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 41.60% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
1.5348795131.60% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 68.40% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.540100037.40% Neolithic_Ukraine_(n=12) + 92.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.5692029387.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.00% Vikings_from_Russia_(n=15)
1.5758910841.80% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 58.20% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
1.5796458614.40% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 85.60% Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
1.5797795842.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 58.00% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.618422517.20% Mesolithic_Ukraine_(n=7) + 92.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.6196262912.40% Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21) + 87.60% Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
1.6251463553.40% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 46.60% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
 
My top 25 Distances.

Distance to:PalermoTrapani_ANCESTRY
2.21022623Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
3.69576785Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.04279606Medieval_Basilicata_(n=10)
4.567045006th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.40511514Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
6.82852107Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.88947023Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
7.34777517Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
9.28752927Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.15466395EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
10.64579729Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
12.60896506Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
13.70398117Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
17.53414383Bronze_Age_Illyrians
18.82482404Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
19.24242448Villanovans_(n=2)
19.26982615Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
19.78511814Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
20.23252332Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
20.45064058Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=14)
20.59513292Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
20.74764806Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2)
20.74958072Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
20.89875116Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)
21.27021627Early_Neolithic_Starcevo_culture_(n=8)


Top 25 two variable/Factor source ancestry model fits.

Distance to:PalermoTrapani_ANCESTRY
1.209641583.00% Chalcolithic_Pontic_Steppe_(n=3) + 97.00% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.2740769512.60% Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Levant_(n=15) + 87.40% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
1.277346253.00% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=7) + 97.00% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.317036692.80% EMBA_Catacomb_culture_(n=4) + 97.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.343873722.80% Yamna_culture_(n=16) + 97.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.424758362.80% EMBA_Poltavka_culture_(n=8) + 97.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.4290287196.00% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 4.00% Iron_Age_Kangju_(n=4)
1.432469372.60% CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5) + 97.40% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.433974782.20% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3) + 97.80% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.444569155.40% Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7) + 94.60% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.4658188467.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 32.80% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
1.5005010770.20% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46) + 29.80% Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
1.5068574296.60% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 3.40% Sarmatians_(n=14)
1.5456794894.80% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 5.20% Caucasian_Alans_(n=2)
1.5565348045.60% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24) + 54.40% Etruscans_(n=48)
1.569834933.80% Late_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=4) + 96.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.573727344.20% Maykop_culture_(n=16) + 95.80% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.5893843321.60% Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22) + 78.40% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
1.604632302.80% LBA_Srubna_culture_(n=27) + 97.20% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.6131355696.80% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 3.20% Tian_Shan_Saka_(n=5)
1.621899312.60% Eastern_Corded_Ware_(n=14) + 97.40% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4)
1.6247346576.60% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 23.40% Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
1.6378047771.40% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 28.60% Medieval_Basilicata_(n=10)
1.6505651774.40% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 25.60% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
1.6592473396.60% Imperial-age_Tuscany_(n=4) + 3.40% Cimmerians_(n=6)

 
I find it strange that my mother has so much affinity for Lombard ancestry. According to Ancestry.com, she is 67% Irish, 20% Scottish, 8% English & NW European, and 5% Norway. This suggests to me that the Lombard samples used in the calculator may in fact reflect Celtic ancestry? Are the "Lombard" samples taken from the 2018 study on 6th-century movements from Scania down to Pannonia to Piedmont? Something seems strange here.

How do other English and Irish people fare on this calculator?
 
The DNA world needs to start shifting into IBD analysis. I'm sorry to say it but stuff like this is becoming almost useless. Those steppe analysis done by David Reich showed it. On the surface two populations can seem identical, but they share no close kinship. Some R1b Yamnaya shared more kinship with R1a Corded Ware, than other R1b steppe people.

Sharing similar ratios of distant ancestry, is not an indication for close kinship. Someone needs to start using those 23andme tools.

identity-by-descent-ringbauer-yamnaya-corded-ware.png
 
In reply to Malaparte.
"How do other English and Irish people fare on this calculator?"

My Mothers results. Paper trail 100 % British Isles.

23 and me came back 77% British Isles 23 % Germany lower Saxony. The German most likely from some ancient Germanic invasion.

Distance to: Mother
2.33687826 Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
3.40586259 Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.02438815 Roman_Britain_(n=8)
4.05710488 Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13)
4.66179150 Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
5.50851160 Bell_Beaker_Bavaria/Saxony_(n=20)
5.70870388 MBA_Tumulus_culture_(n=4)
6.03211406 Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Britain_(n=24)
6.32173236 La_Tène_Celts_(n=55)
6.61238989 Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
6.63202081 Lombards_(n=28)
6.98846192 Bell_Beaker_Czechia_(n=15)
7.18018106 Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
7.49013351 Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
7.77740317 Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)

Distance to Modern populations:

Her closest example, Bronze Age Germany.
The next two Iron Age Britons and Roman Britain speak for themselves. Then Bell Beaker Gaul.
Lombards comes in #11 at 6.632.

Distance to: Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
1.83313938 French_Northwest
2.10366347 English_South
2.52962448 English
3.27696506 Belgian
3.48383409 English_North

Distance to: Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13)
3.94361509 French_North
4.23975235 French_Northwest
4.30866569 Belgian
4.78920661 English_South
4.83107648 French_Northeast

Distance to: Lombards_(n=28)
1.02946588 German_Northwest
3.39992647 Icelandic
3.75497004 Dutch
3.94944300 Norwegian
3.99797449 Danish
 
Last edited:
interesting that the modern central europeans aren't closer. is this because those regions are nowadays more southern/eastern shifted or maybe because those samples are only from the elite of that time while the common people were different?

The elite aspect may partly be at play but what I see is the known less Celtised regions are still different and that the geographically ancient central-west Celtic regions were new ethnies were historically settled later (Slavs, Germanics) had changed and are no more so close as northern French and Belgian people of today. I see hre a rough confirmation of written history and archelology.
 
The elite aspect may partly be at play but what I see is the known less Celtised regions are still different and that the geographically ancient central-west Celtic regions were new ethnies were historically settled later (Slavs, Germanics) had changed and are no more so close as northern French and Belgian people of today. I see hre a rough confirmation of written history and archelology.

but i wonder why for example Belgian would be closer. they are more "northern" shifted than austrians and maybe even some southern germans. i think germanics couldn't have caused the shift in that case. more likely it is the slavic influence in central europe or roman maybe.
 
'northern' is not enough per se. Spite a Germanic input in Belgia, more in Flanders, their Celtic substratum is very strong ("Germanic" Franks had absorbed a lot of Belgae tribes (so Celtic+close to Celts added to others of the same sort), and were surely not of the same "northern" quality than the Germanics which colonised southeastern Germany and Austria later. And later, some light input of mor southern people in Belgia could have added a bit... Slavs could have plaid a role in Bavaria too, visible on physical aspect of some individuals.
 
'northern' is not enough per se. Spite a Germanic input in Belgia, more in Flanders, their Celtic substratum is very strong ("Germanic" Franks had absorbed a lot of Belgae tribes (so Celtic+close to Celts added to others of the same sort), and were surely not of the same "northern" quality than the Germanics which colonised southeastern Germany and Austria later. And later, some light input of mor southern people in Belgia could have added a bit... Slavs could have plaid a role in Bavaria too, visible on physical aspect of some individuals.

Very good explanation as usual, Moesan.
 
'northern' is not enough per se. Spite a Germanic input in Belgia, more in Flanders, their Celtic substratum is very strong ("Germanic" Franks had absorbed a lot of Belgae tribes (so Celtic+close to Celts added to others of the same sort), and were surely not of the same "northern" quality than the Germanics which colonised southeastern Germany and Austria later. And later, some light input of mor southern people in Belgia could have added a bit... Slavs could have plaid a role in Bavaria too, visible on physical aspect of some individuals.

yes of course but if we look at a pca, then compare the position of belgians, who for some reason are closer to the ancient central europeans, with modern central europeans like swiss, austrians, southern germans or czech then the shift seems to be mostly towards east and a bit towards south. slavs almost certainly plaid a role in that case, if we assume that the people in that region were once more similar to modern belgians than to the modern inhabitants. not sure about swiss. the celts in that region might already have been different back then, but they would be shifted towards the south.
 
PCA's are PCA's and give us rough proximities or distances (the lightest components, absent, have also something to tell us, erased in PCA).
My first reading of your post was you doubted of the relative proximity of average Belgians and ancient continental Celts.
My answer at first covered the different regions around where different inputs occurred later in History: in quantity and in quality.
Whatever Germanic, Slavic, or Germanic+Slavic and even more southern, according not only to country (state) but also to region, these later inputs can easily explain the today distanciation between the ancient inhabitants of these ancient continental Celtic or proto-Celtic regions and their today inhabitants. Austria is central Europe for me, and, irrigated by the Danube (a highway!), its today position on PCA's has nothing surprising (it has never been a Celtic stronghold). Concerning Slavs, yes, surely they played some role in the game. Particularly in Czechia, less in Bavaria or Austria. To me, Swiss like southern France are shifted "southwards" rather than "eastwards", to speak like that. I don't speak about the more eastern territories less succesfully occupied, some time ago, by the Celts. Their footprint was already light.
 
Germanic people from Scandinavia expanded towards North Germany and the Netherlands between 500 and 250 BCE. In this period all samples already appear quite Germanic and not very different from modern (northern) Dutch and NW Germans.

That's imo not correct, no signs or sources (it's the old frame). There was an Anglo-Saxon and Jutish influx, but that's from fifth and sixth century AD.
 
PCA's are PCA's and give us rough proximities or distances (the lightest components, absent, have also something to tell us, erased in PCA).
My first reading of your post was you doubted of the relative proximity of average Belgians and ancient continental Celts.
My answer at first covered the different regions around where different inputs occurred later in History: in quantity and in quality.
Whatever Germanic, Slavic, or Germanic+Slavic and even more southern, according not only to country (state) but also to region, these later inputs can easily explain the today distanciation between the ancient inhabitants of these ancient continental Celtic or proto-Celtic regions and their today inhabitants. Austria is central Europe for me, and, irrigated by the Danube (a highway!), its today position on PCA's has nothing surprising (it has never been a Celtic stronghold). Concerning Slavs, yes, surely they played some role in the game. Particularly in Czechia, less in Bavaria or Austria. To me, Swiss like southern France are shifted "southwards" rather than "eastwards", to speak like that. I don't speak about the more eastern territories less succesfully occupied, some time ago, by the Celts. Their footprint was already light.

no, i never doubted the values, it was just interesting to see that there seems to have been quite a lot of different influences in central europe, not just "germanic", so that nowadays the closest populations are northern french and belgians, even southern english. if i understood it right the ancient celtic samples are from Austria, Czechia. and now closest to them are the Belgians. the situation for Czechs is clear but also Austrians are a lot further east shifted on a european pca. do you mean that those ancient samples were the elite and the inhabitants were different?
 
I have just added these:

Iron Age Netherlands (600-0 BCE)

Distance to:Iron_Age_Netherlands_(n=5)
2.81817317German_Northwest
3.64554523Icelandic
4.36874124Dutch
4.63766105German
5.33819258Dutch_Frisia
5.50960071English_North
5.64025709Scottish
6.07415838English_South
6.34811783Belgian_Flanders
6.35255067Irish
6.99798542French_Northwest
9.33842599English_Kent_1KG
9.59563442French_FrenchFlanders
9.59705163Belgian_average
10.26558815Austrian

Germanic people from Scandinavia expanded towards North Germany and the Netherlands between 500 and 250 BCE. In this period all samples already appear quite Germanic and not very different from modern (northern) Dutch and NW Germans.

Modern North Dutch
 
I have analysed the Iron Age Gauls from Patterson et al. 2021 and calculated the modal K12b values for three regional groups. Here are the closest modern populations.

Northern Gauls (n=2)

Distance to:Iron_Age_Northern_Gaul_(n=2)
3.15520205French
3.78540619Swiss_Geneva
5.01332225Belgian_Wallonia
5.10972602French_FrenchFlanders
5.46592170French_North
5.81957902French_Normandie
6.09651540French_Northwest
6.37784446Belgian_average
6.47431077French_Northeast
7.06896739English_South
North-eastern Gauls (n=24)
Distance to:Iron_Age_Northeastern_Gaul_(n=24)
2.14042052Belgian_Wallonia
2.36674882French_Normandie
2.68780580French_North
2.92805396Belgian_average
3.06462069French_Northeast
3.37948221Belgian_mixed
3.63093652French_Bretagne
5.79695610Belgian_Flanders
6.10355634German_Bavaria
6.25462229French

Southern Gauls (n=8)

Distance to:Iron_Age_Southern_Gaul_(n=8)
4.75871831Swiss_Geneva
4.91603499French
6.02854875French_South
6.50635074French_Auvergne
8.77627484Spanish_Cantabria
8.95000000Belgian_Wallonia
9.31670543Spanish_Catalonia
9.42351315French_Normandie
9.62419867French_Southwest
9.68433787French_North
 
I have analysed the Iron Age Gauls from Patterson et al. 2021 and calculated the modal K12b values for three regional groups. Here are the closest modern populations.

Northern Gauls (n=2)

Distance to:Iron_Age_Northern_Gaul_(n=2)
3.15520205French
3.78540619Swiss_Geneva
5.01332225Belgian_Wallonia
5.10972602French_FrenchFlanders
5.46592170French_North
5.81957902French_Normandie
6.09651540French_Northwest
6.37784446Belgian_average
6.47431077French_Northeast
7.06896739English_South
North-eastern Gauls (n=24)
Distance to:Iron_Age_Northeastern_Gaul_(n=24)
2.14042052Belgian_Wallonia
2.36674882French_Normandie
2.68780580French_North
2.92805396Belgian_average
3.06462069French_Northeast
3.37948221Belgian_mixed
3.63093652French_Bretagne
5.79695610Belgian_Flanders
6.10355634German_Bavaria
6.25462229French

Southern Gauls (n=8)

Distance to:Iron_Age_Southern_Gaul_(n=8)
4.75871831Swiss_Geneva
4.91603499French
6.02854875French_South
6.50635074French_Auvergne
8.77627484Spanish_Cantabria
8.95000000Belgian_Wallonia
9.31670543Spanish_Catalonia
9.42351315French_Normandie
9.62419867French_Southwest
9.68433787French_North

So, it seems that North Eastern Gauls dispersed northeners after the arrival of Germanic peoples
 
Modeling myself together with other Iberians in single population mode.

Modeling 1 targeting populations from the Vahaduo Dodecad K12b Updated Spreadsheet.
B0YdjEA.png


Modeling 2 targeting populations from the Vahaduo Dodecad K12b Original Spreadsheet (in this case the populations are all from the 1000 genomes project, except Portuguese and Spanish, which are populations from the Dodecad project, and Spaniards, which is a Behar population).
g1rbTA1.png
 
2-way results per age, only included distances under 4.

Epipaleolithic to Chalcolithic:

Distance to:pelop
1.7462337458.00% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 42.00% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1)
2.8508420428.60% Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2) + 71.40% Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
2.9753227327.60% Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2) + 72.40% Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
3.0903576128.20% Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4) + 71.80% Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
3.2480722819.20% Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2) + 80.80% EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
3.2507339718.40% Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2) + 81.60% EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
3.3406146118.80% Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4) + 81.20% EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
3.4546962851.20% Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6) + 48.80% Bell_Beaker_Czechia_(n=15)
3.6523311057.60% Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6) + 42.40% Battle-Axe_culture_(n=3)
3.9589895328.00% Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2) + 72.00% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
3.9940768819.20% Mesolithic_Ukraine_(n=7) + 80.80% EMBA_Greece_(n=6)

Bronze Age:

Distance to:pelop
1.1038731662.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 37.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4)
2.1648670146.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4) + 53.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
3.0591910459.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 40.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24)
3.1998695549.80% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24) + 50.20% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
3.2533552652.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 47.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2)
3.2795763655.60% MBA_Tumulus_culture_(n=4) + 44.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4)
3.2971995862.20% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23) + 37.80% Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9)
3.7527602657.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2) + 43.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
3.8227401147.20% Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9) + 52.80% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)


Iron Age & Early Antiquity:

Distance to:pelop
3.1398622957.00% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46) + 43.00% Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
3.2140941962.80% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 37.20% Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
3.5798661487.60% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 12.40% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)
3.8835586880.00% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 20.00% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)
3.9455090275.40% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 24.60% Iron_Age_Norway_(n=6)

Late Antiquity & Middle Ages:

Distance to:pelop
3.8682279277.80% Imperial_Tuscany_(n=4) + 22.20% Avars_(n=2)
3.8820019694.20% Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5) + 5.80% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
3.9589800393.00% Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5) + 7.00% Avars_(n=2)
 
How are people getting such low numbers on the Single mode when these are ancient, supposedly distant samples?

Distance to:Nicu
10.05644569Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
11.279171076th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
12.37316855Western_Scythians_(n=28)
12.70523514Bronze_Age_Illyrians
13.84101875Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
14.75679166Early_Iron_Age_Croatia_(n=9)
14.86152078Medieval_Tuscany_(n=10)
14.89718094Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
15.52592348Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
15.96748571Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23)
15.97754049Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
16.22885701Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
16.57700516Villanovans_(n=2)
16.67520914Ostrogoths_(n=3)
17.49727407Early_Iron_Age_Slovenia_(n=10)
17.75346163Medieval_Basilicata_(n=10)
17.893213806th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
18.04430381Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
19.21437743Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
19.69899236Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
20.53302705Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
20.60836723La_Tène_Celts_(n=55)
21.47164875Etruscans_(n=48)
21.47843803Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
21.53327193Bell_Beaker_Bavaria/Saxony_(n=20)

The 2-Way did yield closer results though

Distance to:Nicu
2.3819385844.80% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 55.20% Vikings_from_Russia_(n=15)
2.4440512545.00% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 55.00% Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
2.6041902343.20% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 56.80% Vikings_from_Ukraine_(n=4)
2.8225311543.60% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 56.40% Avars_(n=2)
3.3819504154.20% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 45.80% Avars_(n=2)
3.3879212253.40% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 46.60% Medieval_Estonia_(n=7)
3.4029868126.00% Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12) + 74.00% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.4535529861.40% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 38.60% Avars_(n=2)
3.5361737325.60% Bronze_Age_Estonia_(n=16) + 74.40% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.6100153424.00% Mesolithic_Baltic_Scandinavia_(SHG)_(n=31) + 76.00% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.6168894771.80% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 28.20% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)
3.6248961324.40% Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4) + 75.60% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.6309965424.40% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3) + 75.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Serbia_(n=23)
3.6388790824.60% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3) + 75.40% Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
3.6871999662.40% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 37.60% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
3.7089902723.00% Neolithic_Ukraine_(n=12) + 77.00% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.7289360855.60% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 44.40% Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
3.7796982353.80% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 46.20% Vikings_from_Ukraine_(n=4)
3.8731952953.80% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18) + 46.20% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
3.9463221941.20% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 58.80% Swedish_Vikings_(n=23)
3.9749277145.40% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 54.60% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)
3.9778222552.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2) + 47.60% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)
3.9843339869.40% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 30.60% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
3.9862242226.20% Kura-Araxes_culture_(n=8) + 73.80% Early_Iron_Age_Hungary_(n=9)
3.9967952159.20% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46) + 40.80% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)

Is this what happens when your ancient ancestry is spread among peoples that were originally rather distant from each other?


Target: Nicu
Distance: 0.8328% / 0.83279168
34.3Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
22.2Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
9.4MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4)
8.6Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
6.6Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4)
6.0Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7)
5.5Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35)
2.5Mongolian_Xiongnu_(n=5)
2.3Early_Neolithic_France_(n=4)
1.3Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6)
1.3Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)
 

This thread has been viewed 146428 times.

Back
Top