The genetic origin of Daunians

Dodecad 12B distances (Top 10) for Danubians using Estrucan and Basilicata samples from Posth et al 2021 paper "The origin and legacy of the Etruscans through a 2000-year archeogenomic time transect"

Distance to:SGR003
5.94590615ETR010
7.06024787ETR006
8.39179957POP001
8.51145111ETR013
9.04584988TAQ022
9.51753119TAQ009
10.03700653TAQ011
10.08439884TAQ020
10.35107724VEU001
10.53070273VET001


Distance to:SGR002
4.68212559PRZ002
6.89088528CAM001
6.90240538TAQ001
7.11973314TAQ016
7.37112610CSN010
7.39902021CSN008
7.56595004TAQ019
7.65233951TAQ004
7.81037771CAM003
8.03080320CSN001


Distance to:SGR001
14.15046289VEN012
14.77935046ETR014
14.94171008TAQ003
14.97329623VEN006
15.32855831VEN005
15.49594140VEN013
16.08058768VEN015
16.36894621TAQ021
16.59850596MAS002
16.82142087VEN001


Distance to:SAL011
14.32201452TAQ012
16.32623043CSN004
17.06387119TAQ008
17.38105290VET007
17.92161823TAQ017
18.05106091CSN003
18.65095976CSN007
18.69448849VET011
19.16083505CAM003
19.56583246VET002


Distance to:SAL010
6.28593668VET005
8.33964628CAM002
10.78882755CSN010
12.86447045UDC_P
13.26703433CSN008
13.73138376MAS004
13.88514314PRZ002
14.51640107CSN012
16.13642463CSN005
16.57881479CSN002


Distance to:SAL007
3.42147629TAQ012
5.19651807CSN004
5.98080262TAQ017
6.70681743VET007
6.74945183TAQ008
7.19252390VET002
7.78009640CSN007
8.32338873CSN003
8.35371774TAQ018
8.74006293TAQ013


Distance to:SAL003
6.39077460ETR010
8.16328978POP001
8.36761615ETR013
8.95930801TAQ009
9.59400855TAQ022
9.79175674ETR006
10.60465935TAQ021
10.91983058TAQ011
10.95366605VEN017
11.68952950TAQ020


Distance to:SAL001
8.18297012CSN010
8.57958624CAM002
9.74403407PRZ002
10.28883861UDC_P
11.24469653VET005
11.52591428CSN012
11.69528110CSN008
11.78300471CSN005
11.97888559MAS004
12.27830200TAQ001


Distance to:ORD019
10.48864148TAQ022
11.55514171POP001
11.60765265CSN009
11.64505474TAQ006
12.29873977ETR010
12.69123319TAQ009
12.76714925CSN002
13.35416414TAQ020
13.99194054ETR013
14.23710645VEU001


Distance to:ORD014
5.32971857PRZ002
5.42706182MAS004
5.73863224CSN005
6.33037124VOL001
6.77239987TAQ006
6.88430824CSN008
7.08674820TAQ019
7.19277415TAQ001
7.22886575CSN009
7.28420208VET001


Distance to:ORD011
5.39201261VET001
6.18942647VOL001
7.16297424TAQ002
7.51988032TAQ006
7.94584797VEU001
8.00527326CSN001
8.19323501MAG001
8.30339690TAQ015
8.49814097ETR005
8.56479422CSN009


Distance to:ORD010
4.59941301ETR014
6.78947715MAS002
7.29499143VEN015
8.56057241VEN012
8.65677769VEN016
8.91321491TAQ021
9.42338050TAQ003
10.06500869VEN013
10.17965127VEN005
10.61008011VEN001


Distance to:ORD009
5.24433027VET001
7.36747582CSN005
7.46725519CSN009
7.58424683VOL001
8.18590252TAQ006
8.43888618POP001
8.66895034TAQ022
8.76640177CSN006
8.81552040CSN013
8.85961060CSN008


Distance to:ORD006
4.23157181VET001
5.10840484VOL001
5.81871120CSN001
5.99354653TAQ002
6.73645307CSN006
6.74083081ETR005
7.07381085TAQ015
7.34993197VEU001
7.43492434CAM001
7.55246979TAQ019


Distance to:ORD004
3.90639220MAS004
6.47434167CSN002
7.08855415CSN009
7.15793266MAG001
7.71954014TAQ006
8.15677632CSN008
8.26452660TAQ010
8.26899631VOL001
8.42884334PRZ002
8.78585795TAQ002


Distance to:ORD001
7.15296442MAS001
9.94691409ETR007
11.19466391CSN005
13.56424344CSN009
14.68057901CAM002
15.07017253CSN010
15.19138243TAQ009
15.30518213VET001
15.69626707TAQ011
15.76193199ETR003

 
Jovialis said:
Here is something interesting I observed with these samples:

If we compare what makes me different from the Daunian ORD009, we can see it points to the Caucasus.

Basically, I can be modeled as 2/3rd IA_Daunian + 1/3rd BA_Caucasian.


Target: Jovialis
Distance: 2.5944% / 2.59444185
67.4ORD009
32.6Caucasus_lowlands_LN
Click to expand...


As far as the Daunians being "natives", they have only been in the region as long as the late Bronze age, which is probably after the arrival of the CHG-pulse into the region from the Early Bronze Age:

Towards the late Bronze Age (11th-10th centuries BC), Illyrian populations from the eastern Adriatic arrived in Apulia.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daunians
Click to expand...
 
^^
hmmm, this makes me ponder this observation a bit more:

Jovialis said:
Another interesting thing I noticed,

FWIW, these samples get little to no Gedrosia; instead they 20-30% Caucasus. Typically, populations in places like Northern Europe get Gedrosia, which could probably be attributed to the CHG in Steppe. Caucasus was speculated by some respectable posters here to be attributed to non-steppe related CHG.
Click to expand...
 
I would be hesitant to draw a lot of conclusions from these samples given that a lot of them are of poor quality, which is why so many aren't really close to anyone.

Perhaps the analysis should only center on the ones which are of decent quality.
 
My analysis similar to Jovialis Post #380. My results are consistent with his.

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑
A: PalermoTrapani_Combined
B: ORD010
C: ↴
-7.60404166I3574:Olalde_2019
-7.52651938Collegno121:Amorim_2018
-7.49438938I12173:Olalde_2019
-7.48455582bns023-b1e1l1:Krzewinska_2018_(Sept)
-7.39565774I2469:Olalde_2019
-7.37212878TAQ020:Etruscan_Pre-Print_2021
-7.23687882I3587:Olalde_2018
-7.22413589Beaker_Central_Europe:I5022:Olalde_2018
-7.19709389I4936:Olalde_2018
-7.18030356Mallorca_EBA_Cova_des_Moro:I4329:Fernandes_2020
-7.15935268C6-Via_Paisiello_Necropolis_Imperial_Rome:R113:Antonio_2019
-7.14939480ETR012:Etruscan_Pre-Print_2021
-7.14490600Sardinia_Early_Medieval_Grotta_Colombi:I12221:Fernandes_2020
-7.13403701SE_Iberia_c10-16CE:I12649:Olalde_2019
-7.11298941I4556:Olalde_2019
-7.09864361C6-Civitanova_Marche_Imperial_Rome:R835:Antonio_2019
-7.09719330France_LBA:NIED:Brunel_2020
-7.08668031C6-S_Ercolano_Necropolis_Ostia_Late_Antiquity:R118:Antonio_2019
-7.05726813E_Iberia_IA:I3327:Olalde_2019
-7.05251212I12164:Olalde_2019
-7.03541865SE_Iberia_c10-16CE:I12648:Olalde_2019
-7.03071986utigGCP003A1:Saupe_2021
-7.02513885SE_Iberia_c5-8CE:I3981:Olalde_2019
-7.00738450CSN012:Etruscan_Pre-Print_2021
-7.00619696I5520:Olalde_2018

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓
A: PalermoTrapani_Combined
B: ORD010
C: ↴
7.62746112LBK_EN:I2005:Lipson_2017
7.54455032Levant_N:I1701:Lazaridis_2016
7.50633295Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1154:Harney_2018
7.40042482Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1155:Harney_2018
7.29718534Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1180:Harney_2018
7.21369026Levant_BA:I1730:Lazaridis_2016
7.19247760Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1184:Harney_2018
7.15732360Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1168:Harney_2018
7.11995164Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1164:Harney_2018
7.08077779İkiztepe_LC:IKI038:Skourtanioti_2020
7.03199985Ashkelon_IA2:ASH087:Feldman_2019_(Jul.)
7.00796010Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1179:Harney_2018
6.99978564Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1160:Harney_2018
6.97243214Ebla_EMBA:ETM001:Skourtanioti_2020
6.86436526Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1172:Harney_2018
6.85563516Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1170:Harney_2018
6.85182247Ashkelon_LBA:ASH033:Feldman_2019_(Jul.)
6.81281654Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1171:Harney_2018
6.76164418Alalakh_MLBA:ALA008:Skourtanioti_2020
6.74713749TellKurdu_MC:KRD002:Skourtanioti_2020
6.73423037Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1152:Harney_2018
6.73307736Ebla_EMBA:ETM012:Skourtanioti_2020
6.71805248Ebla_EMBA:ETM006:Skourtanioti_2020
6.68537518Ancient_Egyptian:JK2134:Schuenemann_2017
6.67863808Peqi’in_Cave_Upper_Galilee_ChL_Levant:I1166:Harney_2018
 
Angela said:
I would be hesitant to draw a lot of conclusions from these samples given that a lot of them are of poor quality, which is why so many aren't really close to anyone.

Perhaps the analysis should only center on the ones which are of decent quality.
Click to expand...
Considering the disappointment with ORD001, I'd say caution is certainly advised.
 
torzio said:
I don't see any Mycenaen ...I see

The excess of WHG ancestry, tentatively suggesting a local origin, is somewhat blurred by
the genetic similarity of the two most probable sources - Illyrians (Croatia EIA) and an
autochthonous one (Roman Republicans),
Click to expand...

What local origin? They arrived in the late Bronze Age. You think local WHG were hiding out there???
 
Stuvanè said:
Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
5.95642510ORD009
9.51839272ORD011
10.24488165ORD001
11.15438927ORD006
12.28001221SGR003
12.67598911SAL003
13.63475339ORD019
14.88423999ORD014
16.70144605ORD004
18.06751228SGR002
19.09894500ORD010
21.58455235SAL001
22.56468923SAL007
23.16593836SGR001
24.63075923SAL010
34.44569349SAL011


Target: Dodecadk12bStuvanè
Distance: 1.0829% / 1.08293744
44.1ORD010
35.5SAL010
12.4ORD001
5.7SGR001
2.3ORD019

Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
1.8644302456.40% ORD010 + 43.60% SAL010
3.9820791256.00% ORD001 + 44.00% SAL003
4.0143149255.20% ORD001 + 44.80% SGR003
4.0180316381.00% ORD009 + 19.00% ORD010
4.3557708984.80% ORD009 + 15.20% SGR001
4.8740156727.60% ORD001 + 72.40% ORD009
4.9862896453.20% ORD010 + 46.80% SAL001
5.1090216743.20% ORD010 + 56.80% ORD014
5.5530659748.40% ORD010 + 51.60% SGR002
5.6780262286.20% ORD009 + 13.80% SAL003
5.7205519188.20% ORD009 + 11.80% ORD019
5.7447332853.80% ORD004 + 46.20% ORD010
6.0998112859.80% ORD001 + 40.20% ORD019
6.1361345747.00% ORD001 + 53.00% ORD011
6.2957042543.20% SGR001 + 56.80% SGR002
6.4083557471.00% ORD006 + 29.00% SGR001
6.5090386269.40% ORD001 + 30.60% ORD010
6.6639201974.00% ORD001 + 26.00% SGR001
6.6682867766.60% ORD006 + 33.40% ORD010
6.9566413177.20% ORD011 + 22.80% SGR001
7.2192173826.00% ORD010 + 74.00% ORD011
7.2763348674.80% ORD001 + 25.20% SAL007
7.5859889963.00% ORD014 + 37.00% SGR001
7.6873971554.40% ORD001 + 45.60% ORD006
7.9210765452.00% SAL001 + 48.00% SGR001
Click to expand...

Thanks, Stuvane.

This is a prime example of why the two way admixture function is so misleading and unhelpful.
 
:worried:
Jovialis said:
Considering the disappointment with ORD001, I'd say caution is certainly advised.
Click to expand...

Is there a list of the samples by quality? Did I miss it?

Thanks in advance.
 
Jovialis: Following your post in #379, I get a reasonable 2-way fit with 1 of the Iron Age Daunians (from Salapia) and Caucus Lowlands. My results are similar to yours again. So if I understand your post correctly, you are suggesting an CHG or Iran Neolithic type admixture into Southern Italy/Sicily that predates Roman period and even bronze age. I think some of the previous papers have been suggesting this (e.g., Antonio et al 2019). If I am wrong, my apologies. Thanks for the coordinates again.



Target: PalermoTrapani_Combined
Distance: 3.2712% / 3.27117932 | R2P | ADC: 0.25x RC
68.8 SAL003
31.2 Caucasus_lowlands_LC
 
Angela said:
:worried:

Is there a list of the samples by quality? Did I miss it?

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Indeed, most of them are very low-coverage, even in the single digits; with the exception of ORD009 and ORD010:


FilenameCalculatorGenotype ratio
ORD001.txtDodecad K12b4.22%
ORD004.txtDodecad K12b4.23%
ORD006.txtDodecad K12b12.85%
ORD009.txtDodecad K12b65.02%
ORD010.txtDodecad K12b62.17%
ORD011.txtDodecad K12b9.53%
ORD014.txtDodecad K12b11.36%
ORD019.txtDodecad K12b4.96%
SAL001.txtDodecad K12b5.14%
SAL003.txtDodecad K12b11.56%
SAL007.txtDodecad K12b3.71%
SAL010.txtDodecad K12b3.17%
SAL011.txtDodecad K12b5.00%
SGR001.txtDodecad K12b4.71%
SGR002.txtDodecad K12b10.43%
SGR003.txtDodecad K12b5.99%
 
Palermo Trapani said:
Jovialis: Following your post in #379, I get a reasonable 2-way fit with 1 of the Iron Age Daunians (from Salapia) and Caucus Lowlands. My results are similar to yours again. So if I understand your post correctly, you are suggesting an CHG or Iran Neolithic type admixture into Southern Italy/Sicily that predates Roman period and even bronze age. I think some of the previous papers have been suggesting this (e.g., Antonio et al 2019). If I am wrong, my apologies. Thanks for the coordinates again.



Target: PalermoTrapani_Combined
Distance: 3.2712% / 3.27117932 | R2P | ADC: 0.25x RC
68.8 SAL003
31.2 Caucasus_lowlands_LC
Click to expand...

We see a CHG pulse into the Mediterranean which some speculate may have come in the early Bronze age (Raveane et al. 2018). A good paper to get familiar with much of this is Sarno et al. 2021.

This is supported by the fact that Minoans, Mycenaeans, Daunians, Latins, Etruscans, South Eastern Iberians, BA Sicilians, and Sardinians all must be modeled with extra CHG/Iran_N along with regular Steppe, in their modeling for academic papers.

It is also possible it has been trickling in slowly since earlier times, as seen in Neolithic Central Italian samples, that can be modeled better with (95%) Central Anatolian farmers, than others like LBK. As well as J2 being present there as well since the neolithic.

We also see a great push of CHG into Anatolia during the copper age, westward. As well as massive diffusion of this kind of ancestry into the Levant, supplanting haplogroups, and becoming a very strong component there; prior to which was mostly Levant_N and Anatolian_N.
 
My results again with the admixture and two way results included.

Distance to:Angela
5.50442549SGR003
7.36377621ORD009
8.12565074ORD011
8.76072486SAL003
10.57615242ORD006
10.62336576ORD019
13.79169315ORD014
14.71112164ORD004
15.53606771SAL007
17.38914029SGR002
18.57492396ORD001
21.72402587ORD010
21.96395911SAL001
23.93889931SGR001
25.43408540SAL010
28.23543873SAL011

SGR 003
Distance to:SGR003
4.94254995French_Corsica
8.92909850Italian_Tuscany
9.45517319Italian_Romagna
9.62746072Italian_Emilia
9.94150391Italian_Liguria
10.13745353Italian_Marche
10.27812240Italian_Umbria
11.39715754Italian_Lombardy
11.57066117Italian_Lazio
13.22713877Italian_Piedmont
13.74658867Italian_Veneto
14.48500259Italian_Abruzzo
14.84739034Italian_Molise
15.23313206Swiss_Italian
15.48784039Albanian
15.61807607Italian_Campania
16.53730933Italian_Friuli_VG
16.64232556Italian_Trentino
16.65447988Albanian_Kosovo
16.72953974Greek_Central
16.74756400Italian_Sicily
16.76540784Greek_Athens
16.82096311Greek_Thessaly
16.84315588Greek_Thrace
16.88500222Italian_Basilicata


ORD009
Distance to:ORD009
2.01910871Italian_Liguria
2.79744526Italian_Lombardy
3.22854456Italian_Emilia
3.59342455Italian_Piedmont
4.42649975Italian_Tuscany
4.63920252Italian_Veneto
5.98281811Swiss_Italian
6.84963503Italian_Friuli_VG
7.04014204Italian_Romagna
7.08038841Italian_Trentino
7.46207076French_Corsica
8.95600916Italian_Umbria
9.62911730Italian_Aosta_Valley
10.41710056Italian_Marche
10.45613695Spanish_Baleares
10.56515499Italian_Lazio
11.38797612Portuguese
11.40762903Albanian_Kosovo
11.43364771Spanish_Canarias
11.64887548Macedonian_Vardar
11.78715827Macedonian_South
12.34889874Macedonian_East
12.36776051Spanish_Castilla-Leon
12.91960913Spanish_Valencia
12.94037480Greek_Thessaly

Distance to:ORD011
6.42186110Italian_Lombardy
6.88650855Italian_Liguria
7.63293522Italian_Emilia
8.10289454Italian_Tuscany
8.50312663Swiss_Italian
8.54601077French_Corsica
8.63030127Italian_Piedmont
8.88684421Italian_Veneto
10.06520740Italian_Romagna
10.09342856Italian_Trentino
10.92957913Italian_Friuli_VG
11.61375478Italian_Umbria
12.66085700Italian_Aosta_Valley
12.85975365Italian_Marche
12.98476800Spanish_Baleares
13.43456363Italian_Lazio
14.10114889Albanian_Kosovo
14.48291407Portuguese
14.54434254Spanish_Castilla-Leon
14.78194507Macedonian_South
14.80031419Spanish_Valencia
14.91207900Macedonian_Vardar
15.04591971Spanish_Canarias
15.05025249Albanian
15.16072887Macedonian_East

Distance to:SAL003
8.82537251French_Corsica
10.10311061Italian_Marche
10.21458761Italian_Umbria
10.30606132Italian_Romagna
11.11037353Italian_Tuscany
11.36665298Italian_Lazio
12.23170471Italian_Emilia
12.54079344Italian_Liguria
12.85479677Italian_Molise
13.02486468Italian_Abruzzo
13.11500667Albanian
13.73923215Italian_Campania
13.97218308Greek_Athens
14.00067141Italian_Lombardy
14.36772425Greek_Central
15.08748819Greek_Thrace
15.18918694Greek_Thessaly
15.25700495Italian_Apulia
15.28364158Albanian_Kosovo
15.34261712Italian_Sicily
15.50002581Greek_Peloponnese
15.51963595Italian_Veneto
15.60632564Greek_Thessaloniki
15.72926890Greek_Foca
15.75539590Italian_Basilicata

Distance to:ORD006
6.56547790Italian_Lombardy
6.97412450Swiss_Italian
7.90031645Italian_Liguria
8.14086605Italian_Piedmont
8.60689840Italian_Trentino
8.87972973Italian_Veneto
8.96735747Italian_Emilia
9.99375305Italian_Tuscany
10.17519533Spanish_Baleares
10.21299662Italian_Aosta_Valley
10.44496529Italian_Friuli_VG
10.95734913French_Corsica
11.63861246Spanish_Castilla-Leon
11.69351102Portuguese
11.87551683Spanish_Valencia
12.30234124Spanish_Catalonia
12.41697226Italian_Romagna
12.71958726Spanish_Canarias
13.51683025Spanish_Andalusia
13.56832709Spanish_Galicia
14.02259605Spanish_Aragon
14.15262167Italian_Umbria
14.19366056Spanish_Cantabria
15.29555491Austrian_Tyrol
15.50962359Italian_Marche
Target: Angela
Distance: 1.1662% / 1.16616543
40.8ORD019
24.1SAL011
20.5ORD010
7.0ORD014
4.1SGR001
3.5ORD001

ORD 019 = Tuscan like
SAL 011=Aragon
ORD 010=Ashkenazi and S.Italian Sicilian
ORD 014=North Italian
SGR 001=Ashkenazi and S.Italian Sicilian
ORD 001=Romanian and Bulgarian


SAL 010=French

So, French and TSI or North Italian and TSI, but the fits aren't good.

Distance to:Angela
3.7893529513.60% SAL010 + 86.40% SGR003
3.7911142238.80% ORD009 + 61.20% SGR003
3.9462396122.60% ORD014 + 77.40% SGR003
3.9598875121.20% ORD004 + 78.80% SGR003
4.3408089516.80% SGR002 + 83.20% SGR003
4.4604456125.00% ORD019 + 75.00% SGR003
4.5358393231.60% ORD011 + 68.40% SGR003
4.5691534712.60% SAL001 + 87.40% SGR003
4.5934399314.40% ORD001 + 85.60% SGR003
4.6512166656.60% ORD009 + 43.40% SAL003
4.8086037022.20% ORD006 + 77.80% SGR003
5.2247538170.20% SAL003 + 29.80% SGR002
5.275953209.60% SAL007 + 90.40% SGR003
5.3276486480.00% SAL003 + 20.00% SAL011
5.3369606878.20% SAL003 + 21.80% SAL010
5.361574954.40% SAL011 + 95.60% SGR003
5.4440386161.40% ORD019 + 38.60% SAL007
5.4703235464.80% ORD009 + 35.20% ORD019
5.470885738.20% SAL003 + 91.80% SGR003
5.5039717361.60% SAL007 + 38.40% SGR001
5.5571026868.20% SAL003 + 31.80% SAL007
5.5657564435.00% ORD014 + 65.00% SAL003
5.5720520724.20% SAL001 + 75.80% SAL003
5.8991036875.80% ORD019 + 24.20% SAL011
6.0447848181.00% ORD011 + 19.00% SGR001
 
Jovialis said:
As well as J2 being present there as well since the neolithic.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use J2 as an argument, because just like H and E1b, it seems to have been common in various early farmer groups, which were otherwise not much more Eastern shifted than the LBK farmers, sometimes even more WHG actually. Because of this, we need to reconstruct J2 and its subclades migrations first, before using it for any sort of argument in favour of an earlier Iranian ancestry spread.
Since you mentioned Minoans: Its so low in those, that even if they would have replaced local, earlier EEF groups completely, it wouldn't suffice. The gap is just too big without the later, Hellenistic and Roman era gene flow. At the same time, however, I think you are right that there was a constant trickling in too. A lot of samples hint at this kind of slow effect, just like the Northern shift in Italy didn't end with the migration period, but continued with slow trickling in from Central Europe directly and indirectly from Northern Italy to Southern Italy.

By the way, I wondered about the Molise sampels and their special case, but I guess some of it can be explained by the Slavic settlement in the region. Its interesting to compre Molise with Marche. There are just 2 samples form Molise, but these have above average Slavic admixture, while the Marche samples have one with higher Slavic, but the rest being more Celto-Germanic shifted in comparison. Quite interesting, but probably the result of:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molise_Croats

Does anyone know results of "full blooded" Molise Slavs? If such even exist up to this point.
 
Basing an analysis on the tiny percentage of Molise Slavs doesn't seem very helpful. Also, could you provide historical context for the "slow trickling in" from Central Europe into Italy after the Migration Period.
 
Jovialis said:
We see a CHG pulse into the Mediterranean which some speculate may have come in the early Bronze age (Raveane et al. 2018). A good paper to get familiar with much of this is Sarno et al. 2021.

This is supported by the fact that Minoans, Mycenaeans, Daunians, Latins, Etruscans, South Eastern Iberians, BA Sicilians, and Sardinians all must be modeled with extra CHG/Iran_N along with regular Steppe, in their modeling for academic papers.

It is also possible it has been trickling in slowly since earlier times, as seen in Neolithic Central Italian samples, that can be modeled better with (95%) Central Anatolian farmers, than others like LBK. As well as J2 being present there as well since the neolithic.

We also see a great push of CHG into Anatolia during the copper age, westward. As well as massive diffusion of this kind of ancestry into the Levant, supplanting haplogroups, and becoming a very strong component there; prior to which was mostly Levant_N and Anatolian_N.
Click to expand...

Very true.
If we look at Maciamo's Genetic Analysis of ancient Europeans and West Asians we see that while Gauls/Belgae and Hallstatt Celts have only 9pc-10pc of Caucasus, Etruscans and Latins have nearly 20pc of the "Caucasus" component from Dodecad 12b.

Anglo-Saxons,Suebi/Alemanni and Lombards have only 2pc to 7pc.
 
Angela said:
Basing an analysis on the tiny percentage of Molise Slavs doesn't seem very helpful. Also, could you provide historical context for the "slow trickling in" from Central Europe into Italy after the Migration Period.
Click to expand...

There were e.g. many mercenaries and artisans, but in some regions even settlers and magistrates, which came in from German speaking territories. There are various articles and historical accounts for that.

Their context might be "special", but its interesting nevertheless that some of the samples from Medieval Rome in the Renaissance period were basically French-German too. The most striking sample being R1219, which carries E-V13 also, which seems to have additional Slavic admixture (plus the Germanic), so being even more clearly Central European/German related, minimum half:

https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-CTS1273/

Compare also with the paper: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aay6826

They might be Swiss mercenaries or who knows, but there were many instances of German-French people coming to Italy.
 
Riverman said:
There were e.g. many mercenaries and artisans, but in some regions even settlers and magistrates, which came in from German speaking territories. There are various articles and historical accounts for that.

Their context might be "special", but its interesting nevertheless that some of the samples from Medieval Rome in the Renaissance period were basically French-German too. The most striking sample being R1219, which carries E-V13 also, which seems to have additional Slavic admixture (plus the Germanic), so being even more clearly Central European/German related, minimum half:

https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-CTS1273/

Compare also with the paper: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aay6826

They might be Swiss mercenaries or who knows, but there were many instances of German-French people coming to Italy.
Click to expand...

I'll certainly buy the "WHO KNOWS?"

I asked for LINKS to papers, not hearsay from who knows where...

After all this time you really think some mercenaries are going to change the autosomal profile of a people? Really?

I think you've forgotten or don't understand the significance of the fact that Rome was the center of Christendom. We have documentation in my area for an Archbishop of Canterbury taking the Via Francigena to Rome to make a request of the Pope. All of those Franco-German samples were undoubtedly political envoys, churchmen seeking benefices or pilgrims. You honestly think it makes sense to base a population genetics analysis on the burial from the rampant disease and banditry of samples like those?

This is not a serious, scientific analysis.

As for Swiss, Bavarians or French migrating into Italy the only ones of which I'm aware were into neighboring areas, i.e. far northern, northeastern, and northwestern areas, i.e. EXTREMELY localized, and therefore irrelevant for "Italian" ethnogenesis as a whole. We have papers showing how localized and isolated those groups were if you don't recall.

I am beyond tired of unsubstantiated, a-scientific and a-historical, pseudo-analysis of Italian genetic history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 138752 times.

Back
Top