G25 Global Ancient Civilizations

[ssha_cha7]

I'm East Coast and should probably sleep

But one more for tonight is, without 'Scandinavians.' It seems to absorb a lot of the Germanic, perhaps rightly so. Anyway:

 

[ssha_cha7]

Two-way has a lot more depth, too. V2 w/o 'Scandinavian'

 

[ssha_cha7]

I'll hopefully leave the matter alone after this. But here are some Chebyshev experiments with fits of 0.002 sometimes. With simulated Coords there is now a mysterious Indus component. Likely noise or perhaps the trace Roma floating around.

Also it interestingly/importantly swaps Goth for Jutes. Which makes sense. Nobody alive is 60% Goth, they were dispersed weren't they? But 40% Angle/Jute is a more reasonable amount for British. Then tried putting an MA Saami sample as I am prone to do which absorbed some of the Baltic

To me Chebyshev seems more "realistic" and seems to simulate a segment-by-segment approach. But surely it's only madness to use it.

 

[ssha_cha7]

This is only one example but a fit of 0.007 and the V1.1 model prefers Scandinavian over Germanic because obviously Jutes were north shifted, so Chebyshev here will do about 2/3 Sca 1/3 Ger instead of pure Angle/Jute

No idea why it switches Briton for Wales

Then the models can be cleaned up a little with dist col showing here perhaps a Gaelic bent and closer to Frisii than Svears

So maybe Celto-Germanic, Celtic is 1/3 & pretty balanced with Gaelic, Gaul, etc inputs

2/3 Germanic with Denmark center, with Gothic, Saxon, Swedish, etc inputs

Then the usual bits of Mediterranean and Baltic that tag along

Finally this all makes sense:

And if this all correct, I'll be correcting people. The Anglo-Saxons...

And the Jutes. There were three of them

 

[qh777]

This is only one example but a fit of 0.007 and the V1.1 model prefers Scandinavian over Germanic because obviously Jutes were north shifted, so Chebyshev here will do about 2/3 Sca 1/3 Ger instead of pure Angle/Jute

No idea why it switches Briton for Wales
View attachment 17311


Then the models can be cleaned up a little with dist col showing here perhaps a Gaelic bent and closer to Frisii than SvearsView attachment 17312View attachment 17313

So maybe Celto-Germanic, Celtic is 1/3 & pretty balanced with Gaelic, Gaul, etc inputs

2/3 Germanic with Denmark center, with Gothic, Saxon, Swedish, etc inputs

Then the usual bits of Mediterranean and Baltic that tag along

Finally this all makes sense:

View attachment 17314

And if this all correct, I'll be correcting people. The Anglo-Saxons...

And the Jutes. There were three of them

Try reducing to 3,4, 5 populations. Most of the time I reduce to avoid a huge list of admixture.

etc.

 

[ssha_cha7]

Seems to play on more or less the theme:

2/3 Germanic, fairly Scandinavian but falls continental
1/3 Celt, pretty balanced but perhaps slightly centered on Britain/Wales

Comparing the two coordinates these are more Germanic. But even here lumping samples is almost 50/50

Chebyshev with 3 pops and I increased dist col as much as possible. You can see one more increase and everything lumps as Alemanni.

 

[ssha_cha7]

I'm definitely looking at this way too long and should take a break. But the Illyrian sample...

I removed Franks from what may not have even been a good model to begin with (i.e. my modifications). Which broke down into Germanic (>Angles), Celt (>Pict), Iberian, and Illyrian? Which was interesting and probably all faulty modeling. But this sample plots closest to Switzerland while they were a Balkan tribe?

Anyway not a very important question

 

[qh777]

I'm definitely looking at this way too long and should take a break. But the Illyrian sample...

I removed Franks from what may not have even been a good model to begin with. Which broke down into Germanic (>Angles), Celt (>Pict), Iberian, and Illyrian? Which was interesting and probably all faulty modeling. But this sample plots closest to Switzerland while they were a Balkan tribe?

Anyway not a very important question

View attachment 17332

That's an interesting result. It may have to do with the amount of samples used. In my case this list I made was inspired by a couple of lists you can find on exploreyourdna.com: https://www.exploreyourdna.com/calculator/125/ph2ter-roman-calculator-2022.htm and https://www.exploreyourdna.com/calculator/21/g25-calculateur-antiquite.htm

1st list:

2nd list:

my list:

My Germanic ancestry is not reflected in the first 2 lists

 

[ssha_cha7]

That's an interesting result. It may have to do with the amount of samples used. In my case this list I made was inspired by a couple of lists you can find on exploreyourdna.com: https://www.exploreyourdna.com/calculator/125/ph2ter-roman-calculator-2022.htm and https://www.exploreyourdna.com/calculator/21/g25-calculateur-antiquite.htm

1st list:
View attachment 17334
2nd list:
View attachment 17335

my list:
View attachment 17336

My Germanic ancestry is not reflected in the first 2 lists

Very interesting. The Near East aspect is something. Hopefully you can find out more. And thank you for all the help. I may take a break from the research but there's been some good progress these last few days with these ancient samples.

Also these new coordinates are a bit more Germanic and perhaps as a result bringing up Norwegian in addition to the usual Danish and Dutch, which phenotypically, is generally where I am. Not to generalize too much but it seems the ancient Denmark region was home for many people on both sides, the British and Swedish.

Before I was pretty confused at my genetic closeness and thought it was solely a mid-point. But having lots of South East England... a clearer picture is forming of the various components of the British Isles ancestry.

All in all though, pretty mutt-y

 

[qh777]

Very interesting. The Near East aspect is something. Hopefully you can find out more. And thank you for all the help. I may take a break from the research but there's been some good progress these last few days with these ancient samples.

Also these new coordinates are a bit more Germanic and perhaps as a result bringing up Norwegian in addition to the usual Danish and Dutch, which phenotypically, is generally where I am. Not to generalize too much but it seems the ancient Denmark region was home for many people on both sides, the British and Swedish.

Before I was pretty confused at my genetic closeness and thought it was solely a mid-point. But having lots of South East England... a clearer picture is forming of the various components of the British Isles ancestry.

All in all though, pretty mutt-y

View attachment 17347View attachment 17348

I don’t know the study but there was one conducted on the British isles and long story short the Celtic/Germanic mix was not the same in various regions. I’m thinking that it was the Germanic admix was higher in southeast England compared to say the border with Wales.

 

[ssha_cha7]

I don’t know the study but there was one conducted on the British isles and long story short the Celtic/Germanic mix was not the same in various regions. I’m thinking that it was the Germanic admix was higher in southeast England compared to say the border with Wales.

Makes sense. For me perhaps the simple Norse/Danish distinction used here is as far into the subject I'll look. But also looks like invaders never really conquered Wales (I'm not a historian). At any rate Wales is pretty r1a absent.

All seems pretty evident and logical except for Cornwall. Surprisingly r1a

Basically a big part of my heritage seems to be Danes who got into boats. I'm happy with that

 

[ssha_cha7]

I keep going back to it after saying I wont. But now Eurogenes makes perfect sense.

Southeast_English for Celto-Germanic
North_Swedish for Scand/Balt/Finn
North_Dutch, Nor, etc for excess British-Germanic
Or Irish, Scot for excess Celt
And so on.

Honestly a revelation and results are finally making sense. Still pretty mutt-y but it's making sense

 

[qh777]

My Eurogenes K13 with my merged dna file with the 4 way oracle

2way oracle: