Sicilians: Which groups overlap? (Multiple choice version)

[Angela]

That is why I think the "Central Sicily" sample, if it was larger, would be more telling of pre-Moorish Sicilians, and I think the slight differences in the samples would become more pronounced. From what a Sicilian friend of mine says who is very well-versed on the history, and from 23andme results, the coastal area from Trapani along the south to Ragusa, has a stronger North African and Moorish influence (and Levantine), and Palermo and the north coast has more Norman.

Therefore, I think the inland areas would have less North African, less Northern European/Norman, and a higher West Asian/Caucasus prevalence related to the Neolithic.

I don't know what larger, more comprehensive studies would show...what I do know is that one sample from central Sicily, and one from southern Sicily, and four from, probably, Palermo, and none from eastern Sicily, as a whole don't constitute sufficient evidence, in my mind, from which to draw very reliable conclusions.

The fact that Sicily and southern Italy are so close autosomally would seem to me to argue against significant autosomal differences between the various Sicilian regions. Believe me, before the autosomal data came out showing the close relationship between Sicilians and southern Italians in general, I would have bet good money on the fact that Sicilians would be quite different autosomally from Southern Italians. The history seemed to indicate that would be the case. But it seems they are not, and merely form part of the general cline. In fact, the major difference I can see is in the SSA component, and even then there isn't as much of it in Sicily as I would have predicted.

As I have thought about this, and after reading the Chiarelli book, which I highly recommend, I have wondered if it is because the "Moors" who invaded Sicily included a very large number of Tunisian Berbers, a population which at the time may not have included very much SSA, and whose other components were not that dissimilar from those of other southern Europeans. Ydna, in particular, which is so volatile, and which may soar to almost saturation levels from founder effect may not be a good barometer for the general genetic make-up of a population.

The area to which I was referring, and which was somewhat sheltered from Moorish settlement, is a small, circumscribed one in the very north eastern part of the island, and the only possible such refugia in Sicily from the effects of the Moorish invasion. Central Sicily had a very different history.

Palermo Province, and the area slightly to it's west does show higher levels of I1, and U-106, and perhaps those are indeed a signal of "Norman" ancestry. But we are not speaking, or at least I didn't think we were speaking, of yDNA, but instead of autosomal DNA. The "Normans" probably numbered a few hundred men at the very most. How much change could they have effected on the autosomal make-up of the people of Palermo province or the whole northwest...if I remember correctly, the population of the city of Palermo alone was larger by orders of magnitude than any city in Europe and probably than many provinces. Take the example of India...one might be able to trace the yDNA of an Indian sample to an R1a1a lineage from southern Siberia, but autosomally that made only a difference of a few percent in that man's descendant.

As for Central Sicily, were it to be shown that it is significantly different from other parts of Sicily, my speculation would be that the cause was the founding of the so-called "Lombard" towns (actually northern Italian towns) in the central areas of Sicily where a lot of the Muslim Sicilians had gathered after the fall of the Sicilian Caliphate. That was, after all, the purpose of those towns: to pacify both the Muslim Sicilian and the Greek Orthodox Sicilian populations, and to implant and nurture Latin Catholicism. The Wiki article on the Lombard towns is actually not bad at explaining the history of that settlement.

 

[oreo_cookie]

Sicily is only second to Crete in terms of it's gold mine of agriculturalist lineages in Europe.

If you look at just eastern Sicily, it's similar in haplogroup distribution to Crete. Western Sicily having high R1b brings up the average.

 

[oreo_cookie]

IBelieve me, before the autosomal data came out showing the close relationship between Sicilians and southern Italians in general, I would have bet good money on the fact that Sicilians would be quite different autosomally from Southern Italians.

I'd have expected eastern Sicilians to be like southern Italians and Greeks, and I'd have expected western Sicilians to cluster in the Levant due to all the Phoenician input. What is actually true is that southern Italians, Sicilians, and Greek islanders are all close, while mainland Greeks plot way north of them with other Balkan groups.

What would you have assumed?

 

[Angela]

What is clear is all Sicilians have a significant amount of Neolithic West Asian ancestry, wherever it came from; and Northern European elements are very, very small.

What I wanted to post was "And so?" but it wouldn't let me, LOL. Let's take your statement at face value...is there something wrong with Neolithic West Asian ancestry? As a quarter Sicilian, I suggest you embrace it...a lot to be proud of...the Neolithic was one of the most significant advances in human history, not to mention that West Asia was also the source of metallurgy, and therefore of the Copper and Bronze and Iron Age technological advances...and a lot to be proud of in the accomplishments of any "MOORISH" Muslim Sicilian ancestors too...Sicily has never been so well managed, in my opinion, having read multiple histories of the island. Spanish rule bled the island dry in every imaginable way.

You really should read the Chiaroni book...it was a real eye opener for me.

 

[oreo_cookie]

What I wanted to post was "And so?" but it wouldn't let me, LOL. Let's take your statement at face value...is there something wrong with Neolithic West Asian ancestry? As a quarter Sicilian, I suggest you embrace it...a lot to be proud of...the Neolithic was one of the most significant advances in human history, not to mention that West Asia was also the source of metallurgy, and therefore of the Copper and Bronze and Iron Age technological advances...and a lot to be proud of in the accomplishments of any "MOORISH" Muslim Sicilian ancestors too...Sicily has never been so well managed, in my opinion, having read multiple histories of the island. Spanish rule bled the island dry in every imaginable way.

You really should read the Chiaroni book...it was a real eye opener for me.

There is nothing wrong with it. As a matter of fact, I am very Med-centric, and would not want significant northern European ancestry.

And yes, I agree. I have always been sort of resentful toward the Spanish especially people who claim that we should embrace them as "brothers" because we all speak a Latin language and are Catholic.. uh, Catholicism was imposed on Sicilians, and we have lost all of our Greek language, Greek culture, etc.

My Sicilian grandfather was upset that my father married my mother (who is Portuguese) because he thought she was Spanish, and he resented Spain until he died because he said that the Spanish were hated by Sicilians as oppressive colonizers.

 

[Nobody1]

Your point, as I understood it, was that there was a specifically distinct "Trojan" group which you could identify as impacting parts of Sicily more than others. I don't see the basis for that. It would seem to me you would have to know the genetics of the specific Troy level that was engaged in the Greek wars in order to arrive at a conclusion like that. Otherwise, you might only be tracking a Neolithic era "Anatolian" component, or, perhaps, a mixed Neolithic and Indo-European component that might have nothing to do with the specific "Trojans" at all.

No;
You misunderstood;
Romano et al 2003 revealed that the peoples of Castellammare (much more than other Sicilians) share common Genetic (autosomal-DNA) grounds with modern-day Turkey;
The question is what connects Castellammare (and only Castellammare) with modern-day Turkey;
My answer the historical recorded Anatolians (Trojans/Elymi);
And the Trojans must have been related to at least either the Indo-European Anatolian branch or the pre-Indo-European Anatolian Pelasgians; and in this respect not that important which one either way common Anatolian ground for Castellammare;

 

[adamo]

There's nothing worse than being part of a very rare paternal haplogroup such as T though.

 

[Angela]

from the paper
Going back to the issue of the Etruscans’ origins, if the genetic resemblance between Turks and Tuscans reflects a common origin just before the onset of the Etruscan culture, as hypothesized by Herodotus and as considered in some recent studies [2], [6], [18], we would expect that the two populations separated about 3,000 years ago. To discriminate between the potentially similar effects of remote common origin and recent gene flow, we ran four independent analyses based on the IM method [19], [20]. In the model we tested, the two populations originate from a common ancestor, and may or may not exchange migrants after the split (Figure S7A). Assuming an average generation time of 25 years [16], [21] and no migration after the split from the common ancestors, the most likely separation time between Tuscany and Western Anatolia falls around 7,600 years ago, with a 95% credible interval between 5,000 and 10,000 (Figure 5).

where did the etruscans go between 7600 years and 2800 years ( time they arrived in Italy ) ...........maybe to the moon. The departure from anatolia was 7600 years ago.

The villanova proves nothing because the etruscans cremated their dead...........

Sile, even the Italian scientists who did the original mtDNA analysis of the Etruscans and trumpeted that they were similar to some found in Anatolia, and proclaimed a link between the two areas in the Bronze Age have now stated that since those sequences are so old, there is no way of knowing if they arrived in Italy in the Neolithic or the late Bronze Age. And we have no yDNA, and no autosomal DNA, so I, for one, am just going to wait until somebody (if not the Italians given the current state of the economy there) can do at least a half way decent mtDNA analysis that gets down to the subclade levels necessary and isn't just based on some general HVRI values. In fact, if they can do a whole genome from the bone of a 22-24,000 thousand year old child from south central Siberia, they should be able to find a useable Etruscan bone from the hundreds stored in museums around the world.

Until then, I'm an agnostic, lol.

 

[Angela]

As for your "Moorish Sicily";
It was not the Moors that conquered Sicily - it was the Ifriqiyans;
The Moors are Saracens (Saracen simply means Muslim) from the ancient Roman prov. of Mauritania;
The Ifriqiyans (Africans) are Saracens from the ancient Roman prov. of Africa;
There was even a caliphate that was called Ifriqiya that corresponded to the old Roman province of Africa and it was these Ifriqiyan Saracens that conquered Sicily;

Sicily also never belonged to any Moorish kingdoms (whether Almohad, Almoravid etc.) - Sicily belonged to the Caliphate of Ifriqiya and under the rule of al-Qayrawan;

All Medieval chronicles (whether Norman, Byzantine, Arab or the Pope) record the muslims of Sicily as Ifriqiyans, Saracens (muslims) or from the Byzantines as Hagarenes;
Sicily [Siqilliyya] was even ruled by its own Shia Muslim Dynasty - Kalbids (Battle of Stilo);

And of course - not every Saracen (simply means Muslim) was a foreigner;
Many of the Sicilian Saracens were local converts (something you should know if you have read Chiarelli)

Ibn-Hawqal - Sūrat al-Ard - First visit to Sicily in 973 AD
Most of them are Barqajānah (Berbers) and mawālī (local converts)......Most people are bastardised Muslims (musha'midhūn) and think it is acceptable to marry Christians on the basis that their male child follows the father by being a bastardised Muslim, while the female child becomes a Christian like her mother.

Something also the Normannic census reveals (many are Berbers many are local):

El-Said M. Badawi - Understanding Arabic (1996)
The following list of Nisbas reflects some of the Muslim population movements during the Norman period.....al-cajami Persia (474), al-andalusi Spain (252), al-asfaqusi Sfax (Tunisia) (164), al-atrabulusi Tripoli (Libya) (264); al-baji Beja (Tunisia) (160), al-barbari Berber (136), al-barqi Barqa (Libya) (592), al-bartiniqi Partinico (Sicily) (168), al-batrali Petralia Soprana (Sicily) (145), al-bijawi Beja (Tunisia) (475), al-buni Bone (Tunisia) (575), branqat Broccato (Sicily).....(271); al-damunnashi Demona (Sicily).....al-hijazi Hijaz (574), al-ifriqi North Africa (248), al-jarbi Djerba (Tunisia) (264).....al-karkinti Agrigento (Sicily) (252).....al-madani Palermo (Sicily) (154), al-mahdawi Mahdia (Tunisia) (250), al-maliti Malta (260), al-mazari Mazara (Sicily) (248), al-minawi Mineo (141).....al-nabuli Napoli (Italy) (543).....al-qurulluni Corleone (Sicily) (137), al-raghusi Ragusa (Sicily) (285), al-rimatti Rametta (Sicily) (137), rum(a) Byzantine (543), al-shami Syria (476).....al-shaqqi Sciacca (Sicily) (138), al-saraqusi Syracuse (Sicily) (583), al-siqilli (Sicily) Palermo (166).....

And the list goes on;
Always insightful to read Medieval chronicles and documents (and the Normans had a lot);

The correct term is therefor Ifriqyan Sicily or simply Islamic Sicily (multitude of diff. muslims);

PS: The Barqajana were Berbers from the ancient Cyrenaica/Barqa (Creta et Cyrenaica)

Ma'had al-Malakī lil-Dirāsāt al-Dīnīyah (Jordan) - (2004)
- Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies: Vol.VI-VII
Ibn Hawqal reports that the inhabitants of Palermo included members of the Barqajana and mawali ('clients', that is, indigenous converts to Islam) claiming a connection with those who had conquered the island. According to al-Ya'qubi, the Barqajana were a Berber tribe which originally migrated west from the region of Barqa in Libya after the Arab advance into North Africa.

Forgive me, but I think you're being rather tiresome, and pedantic as well. Everyone who read my post was, I'm sure, well aware of what I meant, or they wouldn't, or at least shouldn't be posting on this kind of thread. I put "Moorish" in quotes most of the time for a reason. I'm well aware of the material you have posted. I just finished a 300 page book on the history of Muslim Sicily, one of many which I've read. The history of Italy has been a life long pursuit for me...I don't appreciate being lectured about it in this tone.

However, in the spirit of collegiality, I will make sure not to offend your desire for precision, and in the future, I will be careful to refer to this period as that of Muslim Sicily. All better now?

 

[Alan]

Cretan Greeks and Iberians for most

 

[Sile]

aha;
I dont know about we; But I understand the term Anatolian today as in Turkish nation;
But the Turkish nation also has the Indo-European Anatolian branch as its heritage as also the Pelasgian;
The Sicilians of Castellammare share the same Anatolian (whether Pelasgian Trojans or Indo-European Trojans -thats not really important) as the modern day Turks from modern-day Turkey;
And isnt it a coincidence that Castellammare was the ancient port of Segesta a settlement of the Elymi who are recorded as being Trojans (whether Pelasgian Trojans or Indo-European Trojans -thats not really important);
No; I say it is not;

Anatolia should be the term used for non-Turkish tribes/people in genetics ( ie before the ottomans)

pelasgian was referred by homer as people living between the thracians and trojans ( ie Dardanelles area)
phygians are in anatolia
correct me if i am wrong

 

[Sile]

Sile, even the Italian scientists who did the original mtDNA analysis of the Etruscans and trumpeted that they were similar to some found in Anatolia, and proclaimed a link between the two areas in the Bronze Age have now stated that since those sequences are so old, there is no way of knowing if they arrived in Italy in the Neolithic or the late Bronze Age. And we have no yDNA, and no autosomal DNA, so I, for one, am just going to wait until somebody (if not the Italians given the current state of the economy there) can do at least a half way decent mtDNA analysis that gets down to the subclade levels necessary and isn't just based on some general HVRI values. In fact, if they can do a whole genome from the bone of a 22-24,000 thousand year old child from south central Siberia, they should be able to find a useable Etruscan bone from the hundreds stored in museums around the world.

Until then, I'm an agnostic, lol.

I quoted from the mtdna test paper and not the ydna test papers by ghiotto

besides...its proven the "etruscans" left anatolia 7600 years ago...where did they go? ..........maybe the albanians are correct, they are albanians. I believe they followed the danube and sat in southern germany - black forest area or swabia

 

[Angela]

There is nothing wrong with it. As a matter of fact, I am very Med-centric, and would not want significant northern European ancestry.

And yes, I agree. I have always been sort of resentful toward the Spanish especially people who claim that we should embrace them as "brothers" because we all speak a Latin language and are Catholic.. uh, Catholicism was imposed on Sicilians, and we have lost all of our Greek language, Greek culture, etc.

My Sicilian grandfather was upset that my father married my mother (who is Portuguese) because he thought she was Spanish, and he resented Spain until he died because he said that the Spanish were hated by Sicilians as oppressive colonizers.

Ah...didn't mean to single out Spanish rule...just one of many foreign governments that didn't really care about the island and its inhabitants, in my opinion. And then, some Sicilians would say the current government is a "foreign" one as well, but that's an entirely different conversation...

Much of this was all long ago...I don't believe that we can, or more precisely, that we should, hold people responsible for the sins, if any, of their ancestors... or even less, their ancestors' governments; it's quite sufficient, I think, to hold them responsible for their own. And it's good to always remember that in our own lineages, we probably have members of both the "oppressors" and the "oppressed". And the "oppressed" sometimes go right from being oppressed to becoming "oppressors". And sometimes the biggest "oppressors" can be members of one's own ethnicity...look at the Chinese or the Cambodians or the Russians in modern times. And many others as well... It's sadly the way of the world.

 

[oreo_cookie]

No;
You misunderstood;
Romano et al 2003 revealed that the peoples of Castellammare (much more than other Sicilians) share common Genetic (autosomal-DNA) grounds with modern-day Turkey;
The question is what connects Castellammare (and only Castellammare) with modern-day Turkey;
My answer the historical recorded Anatolians (Trojans/Elymi);
And the Trojans must have been related to at least either the Indo-European Anatolian branch or the pre-Indo-European Anatolian Pelasgians; and in this respect not that important which one either way common Anatolian ground for Castellammare;

If they did an island-wide study they might see something similar for other western Sicilian towns. The area I would like to see is Sciacca, Sambuca Zabut, Agrigento etc. and see if they have a higher North African and Levantine influence. I know some people in Palermo score high autosomally with Lebanese Christians and Druze on Dodecad Oracle.

 

[adamo]

The shortest genetic distances between the Etruscan and modern populations are with Tuscans (FST=0.036; P=.0017) and Turks (FST=0.037; P=.0001); values of FST<0.050 were also observed for other populations of the Mediterranean shores and for the Cornish.

 

[adamo]

The Etruscans came from Western Asia Minor. Today I personally estimate they represent about 1/10 to 2/10 male lineages in Tuscany today.

 

[Nobody1]

Forgive me, but I think you're being rather tiresome, and pedantic as well. Everyone who read my post was, I'm sure, well aware of what I meant, or they wouldn't, or at least shouldn't be posting on this kind of thread. I put "Moorish" in quotes most of the time for a reason. I'm well aware of the material you have posted. I just finished a 300 page book on the history of Muslim Sicily, one of many which I've read. The history of Italy has been a life long pursuit for me...I don't appreciate being lectured about it in this tone.

However, in the spirit of collegiality, I will make sure not to offend your desire for precision, and in the future, I will be careful to refer to this period as that of Muslim Sicily. All better now?

Sorry that the post wasnt entertaining enough;
Its all Historically based and therefor precision (or as i call it the documented timeline as it was actually recorded) is the A & O;
You also do not designate Byzantine Sicily as "Magna Graecia Sicily" or use "Gothic Sardinia" when referring to the Vandals; Its not even much about precision (or being "too" precise) its just factual History;

 

[adamo]

Muslim Sicily...what nonsense. There has been Greek, Ligurian or Iberian, Phoenician, Lombard, ottoman Byzantine and even Norman influence in Sicily I believe, but not Muslim. There may have been minor Arab revivalism and nationalism in western Sicily were the Phoenicians had anciently settled I suppose (hg T has a high here), but there was never Muslims on the island.

 

[oreo_cookie]

Muslim Sicily...what nonsense. There has been Greek, Ligurian or Iberian, Phoenician, Lombard, ottoman Byzantine and even Norman influence in Sicily I believe, but not Muslim. There may have been minor Arab revivalism and nationalism in western Sicily were the Phoenicians had anciently settled I suppose (hg T has a high here), but there was never Muslims on the island.

Ligurian and Iberian are highly contested and cannot be proven.. there has yet to be any genetic proof of either.

 

[adamo]

A Celtic group called the SICANI ended up on Sicily is all I'm trying to say Si-cane.