Mytrueancestry.com

[davef]

I was just confused as to how you were able to score a closer distance to them than a south Italian after reading your post describing them as a population resembling modern south Italians, so I asked for clarification. But now that you brought up the variation within those samples, i get it.
I'm super ok with you being closer to any poplulation at all compared to anyone and if I sounded t-rollish I'm apologizing

edit: what's with the downvote? I had no bad intentions behind this post as well as the last

 

[Iulius]

I have decided to get the upgraded membership. Here is my full archaeological map:

 

[Angela]

I have decided to get the upgraded membership. Here is my full archaeological map:

WOW! Very cool. Look at the Mycenaean showing up, and Minoan, and Hittite. Amazing.

 

[Iulius]

Here are all of the versions of raw data I have, with complete archaeological maps:

 

[matty74]

Oops, I posted this in the wrong thread, because I clicked on one of Angela's links to a previous thread, but here it is:

So, I spent the $$$ on this as well. The medical part sort of made me rethink the value of that site. It correctly predicted many things, including my hearing loss. Anyways, can anyone more intelligent than I tell me what this map is trying to tell me? What should I be looking at here given my own known ancestry? It appears that I'm not part of the exclusive Hellenic-Roman club!

Longobard + Saxon (3.065)
Celt + Longobard (3.315)
Longobard (5.104)
Celt (6.764)
Saxon (7.239)


1. Pict (670 AD) (4.452) - CL83
2. Nordic Lombard (670 AD) (5.104) - CL92
3. Bronze Age Celt England (1000 BC) (5.469) - I5383
4. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (5.941) - SZ15
5. Celtic Briton (0 AD) (6.126) - Hinxton 4
6. Celtic/Viking Iceland (1000 AD) (6.764) - VDP-A6
7. Nordic-Celtic Gladiator York (250 AD) (6.875) - 6DRIF-18
8. Late Medieval Gotlander (1600 AD) (7.22) - Unknown
9. Anglo Saxon (700 AD) (7.239) - Hinxton HS3
10. Bell Beaker Southern France (2050 BC) (7.539) - I3875
11. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (7.546) - SZ12
12. Nordic Lombard (670 AD) (7.637) - CL146
13. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (7.64) - SZ14
14. Nordic Lombard (670 AD) (7.847) - CL145
15. Alemannic Bavaria (500 AD) (7.95) - AED_249
16. Briton Gladiator York (250 AD) (8.037) - 6DRIF-23
17. Nordic Lombard (670 AD) (8.04) - CL84
18. Alemannic Bavaria (465 AD) (8.084) - NW_255
19. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (8.12) - SZ4
20. Ireland Copper Age (1880 BC) (8.14) - Rathlin2

 

[Angela]

Oops, I posted this in the wrong thread, because I clicked on one of Angela's links to a previous thread, but here it is:

So, I spent the $$$ on this as well. The medical part sort of made me rethink the value of that site. It correctly predicted many things, including my hearing loss. Anyways, can anyone more intelligent than I tell me what this map is trying to tell me? What should I be looking at here given my own known ancestry? It appears that I'm not part of the exclusive Hellenic-Roman club!

Longobard + Saxon (3.065)
Celt + Longobard (3.315)
Longobard (5.104)
Celt (6.764)
Saxon (7.239)

I don't know your ancestry, Matty, but if you're of mainly North West European descent, then this "got" you. The Longobards are your closest ancient sample, which would indicate to me perhaps high northern German ancestry or some Scandinavian, considering the homeland of the Longobards. Likewise, your Saxon number would indicate ancestry from Germany, The Netherlands, perhaps England as well, since they invaded England. The Celt is present no doubt not only in England, but also in the more southern parts of Germany. You fit pretty well as a mix of two German tribes, with the Saxons having some "Celtic", or as a mix of Longobard and Celt.

Have you read Beowulf? There's a movie, too. Oh, and if you have Netflix there's a great series called "The Last Kingdom" about King Alfred and the Danish invasions of England. It's great.

 

[Regio X]

It seems interesting. I wonder what methodological framework they use in the comparisons.

I'll try it when I access the laptop.

 

[Salento]

Here are all of the versions of raw data I have, with complete archaeological maps:

Very nice.
That looks expensive, thanks for sharing.

 

[matty74]

Angela,

I've seen the movie before and read the book back in high school. The book definitely hints at the mainland pagan European origins of the the Anglo-Saxons in England.

Here's my genetic ancestry via the Ancestry.com and MyHeritage.com. It just confused me a bit since I'm fairly new to this sort of discussion and joined for other reasons but it is interesting to me. I'm primarily German and descended mainly from European immigrants who emigrated from their homelands after the Civil War and into the 1900's. My maternal grandfather and his entire family is 100% Norwegian from southwestern Norway. My maternal grandmother is 1/2 German (great-grandfather was from Ostfriesland) and 1/4 Irish and 1/4 English/Scottish/Irish settlers mix.

My paternal grandfather is 50% German (Mecklenburg/Swedish Pomerania) through his father August (my g-grandfather) and 50% Danish through his mother. (Jutland). My g-grandmother was 100% Danish and I have the family immigration records too. My paternal grandmother is 50% German (Hannover/East Elbe) with my great grandmother being 100% German. She spoke Plattdeutsch at home and with her sisters. Her husband, my paternal great-grandfather was a typical American hodgepodge of British, French Canadian and German ancestry originating in Pennsylvania and Quebec. I've always thought the Scandinavian portion of my ancestry was overstated but perhaps I inherited more of those traits from my mother than my father.

I just got confused with the English/Celtic DNA references and how far south the Longobards were at that point in time.

View attachment 10888

View attachment 10889

 

[italouruguayan]

Mine....View attachment 10892View attachment 10893View attachment 10894

Sent from my SM-G930F using Eupedia Forum mobile app

 

[Iulius]

My first match is SZ40, which is a 100% TSI sample from the Lombard paper. For the calculator to give it the label "Hellenic Roman" is nonsensical.

 

[Duarte]

Thanks for the indication @Gibran. Very fun

Note: I believe there is an error in the dating of two samples of Roman soldiers found in the Freiham-Nord District, Munich, Bavaria.
Mytrueancestry.com states that these samples were dated to be 300 BC when, in fact, they are dated to 300 AD.​

 

[brick]

My first match is SZ40, which is a 100% TSI sample from the Lombard paper. For the calculator to give it the label "Hellenic Roman" is nonsensical.

This is where SZ40 plots in a present-day west Eurasians PCA.

 

[Iulius]

@Brick, Here's the PCA from the study.

Another comparison. This time with Popres:

 

[brick]

@Brick, Here's the PCA from the study.

This is better from the study, just my opinion.

 

[Stuvanè]

Done

 

[Iulius]

Very cool, Stuvanè

@ Brick, SZ40 is probably around where I would plot at 8.288 distance. That would make sense for a person for my region. I guess the TSI modeling at 100% is because of lack of other models, from what I recall.

 

[brick]

@ Brick I guess the TSI modeling at 100% is because of lack of other models, from what I recall.

Agreed, this may be the reason why in the PCA SZ40 is actually more to the South of TSI.

 

[Iulius]

WOW! Very cool. Look at the Mycenaean showing up, and Minoan, and Hittite. Amazing.

It is very fascinating! They seem to consistently show up in these ancient calculators:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...-genomes/page5?p=572217&viewfull=1#post572217

 

[Duarte]

Gallo Roman. Theres a first. Haven't seen any Albanian get it so far. Pretty cool.

Hi, Dibran.
I am far from you and Angela with respect to the capacity of interpretation of data from human genetic samples and their correlations with ancient history and modern history. Both of you are masters of the subject, and all that a can I have to do to is read, learn, and admire the knowledge that you both have, as well as so also have many very other assidous members of this forum.
Eupedia is a great virtual school and I'm very happy to be here.
Next, I put my modest impression on, and if I'm wrong, do not feel yourself embarrassed to correct me.
Archaeologically, the Gauls were bearers of the La Tène culture, which extended across all of Gaul, as well as east to Raetia, Noricum, Pannonia, and southwestern Germania during the 5th to 1st centuries BC. During the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, Gaul fell under Roman rule: Gallia Cisalpina was conquered in 203 BC and Gallia Narbonensis in 123 BC. Gaul was invaded after 120 BC by the Cimbri and the Teutons, who were in turn defeated by the Romans by 103 BC. Julius Caesar finally subdued the remaining parts of Gaul in his campaigns of 58 to 51 BC.
Pannonia was a province of the Roman Empire bounded north and east by the Danube, coterminous westward with Noricum and upper Italy, and southward with Dalmatia and upper Moesia. Pannonia was located over the territory of the present-day western Hungary, eastern Austria, northern Croatia, north-western Serbia, northern Slovenia, western Slovakia and northern Bosnia and Herzegovina.
In this sense, imo, it makes sense that some Albanians may have some relationship with the Gallo-Romans, considering that these ancient peoples also seem to have come so far, very close to what is now modern Albania.
A big hug