>IntroductionGiven the very frequent discussion about the genetic history of those countries, I decided to study the topic myself. What it turned into, is a comprehensive theory of how Italy and Spain came to be, their genetic makeup and the historic migrations that shaped the two mediterranean countries across the centuries. I hope this thread can dispell many myths and shine some new light on the subject. >Chapter 1 – Analyzing the dataI created this PCA chart that neatly shows the genetic differences between northern and southern Europe, and the changes that occured, century after century. First, let’s focus on the historic populations in the red rectangles. The distances between IA Spain, Republican Rome and Ancient Greece are caused by the differences in the WHG admixture in each population. This difference is offset by the Yamnaya admixture, wherein the Anatolian Farmer admixture is almost the same in all three cases. Someone might say that it’s due to the difference in Near Eastern admixture, but that’s not the case, since for example, Extremadura has 9% Levantine admixture, and Lombardy has 0%, and the former is further away from the Near East than the latter. 1/7
>>520996796>ItalyThe Italian peninsula received a lot of Yamnaya (Steppe Pastoralist) admixture ever since the Iron Age, which diluted the Western Hunter Gatherer admixture, and pushed them upwards on the PCA chart. Starting from Liguria and Piedmont, we see increasing levels of Near Eastern admixture as we go south, up to 40% in Calabria. This aligns perfectly with the increasing immigration form that region into Italy (mostly the southern half) after it was conquered by Rome. Let’s take a closer look at the WHG levels in northern Italy. It’s worth noting, that northern Europe always had on average 2 percentage points more of this admixture than the Romans and Etruscans. This makes it impossible for them to contribute to this change. That’s why northern Italy drifts up (from Republican Rome) on the PCA chart, instead of heading towards Germany. It also means it must’ve been someone else who caused this change. 2/7
>>520996842>SpainIberia experienced the same type of change. The WHG admixture was greatly reduced, the EEF (Anatolian Farmer) level stayed almost the same, and Yamnaya increased significantly. And just like in Italy, northern Europe once again could not have been responsible for this shift. Their WHG levels went from 20%, to 13%. If it was northern Europe who triggered this, it wouldn’t be mathematically possible to reach this level, because it would always average out between 20% and 14% (which is the WHG level in northern Europe), resulting with a number around 16-17%, and never lower than 15%.3/7
>>520996875>The Greek factorIf we take a closer look at the PCA chart, the answer becomes quite obvious. The Ancient Greeks are the only ones, whose genetic makeup makes it possible to create this type of change. Their WHG level is near 0, EEF is very similar and Yamnaya is relatively high. Even a pure visual view suggests it – modern northern Italy is inbetween Republican Rome and Ancient Greece (even moreso Illyria) on the PCA chart, and modern Spain is inbetween IA Spain and northern Italy (suggesting that the Romans heavily influenced the Iberians). There’s also southern Italy from the Iron Age on the PCA chart. Its location there suggests a Greek influence, most likely Magna Graecia. 4/7
cliffs
>>520996915>Chapter 2 – How it all (likely) hppenedWhen talking about Greek immigration to Italy, the first thing that comes to mind is Troy – specifically, its fall. As the story goes, after the city was destroyed, Aeneas took his group of followers in seach of a new home, and after some time, landed in Italy, where eventually his descendaths established Rome. Antenor, also searching for a new place to live, went through Illyria, by the Adriatic coast, and reached north-western Italy, where he founded the city of Padua.This is where the legends and genetics tie up perfectly in one compelling theory:I think that the Trojans were of the same ethnicity as the Greeks. When their city was destroyed, they were searching for a new home. Some of them went by sea, others by land. After some time, they established themselves in Italy. When it comes to northern Italy, the genetics lines up perfectly. We have Iron Age Italy on one end, and Illyria (BeliManastir) on the other, suggesting that the latter influenced the former, creating modern northern Italy inbetween. In the center, what is the simplest explanation in my opinion, is that the Trojans found themselves surrounded by foreign ethnicities, speaking a different language. Overtime, tensions arose (culture, politics, fight for resources), which turned into a fight for survival. And as they started and got the ball rolling, they conquered the entire peninsula. A consequence of that was an increase of their population numbers, and eventual intermixing with the Etruscans, which led to the drastic reduction in the WHG admixture (and an increase in Yamnaya) that I mentioned above. 5/7
>>520996950Another thing to note is the fact that all Etruscan samples, except for Tarquina, are very similar. If a conflict arose, why would it turn into a neverending conquest campaign, instead of another local clash, if it was the same genetic groups fighting? The vast majority of wars in the ancient world have been fought between various nations and civilizations (Athens vs. Sparta, the Greeks vs. Persia, etc). I think that the Etruscans recognized the Trojans as a distinct group and wanted them gone. This pushed the Trojans to fight with no end – conquer everyone, before they get conquered. Another, more plausible theory, is that the Trojans just saw the Etruscans as inferior – easy targets, quick conquests, more loot and land. After all that took place, the Romans conquered Hispania, and heavily latinized it, both linguisticly and genetically. That’s why modern Spain lies inbetween modern northern Italy and Iron Age Iberia on the PCA chart, and why Spanish is so similar to Italian. In my opinion this was the first Greek-led Indo-European expansion that resulted in a significant genetic shift towards the same direction, and the adoption (or rather, creation) of 2 very close Indo-European languages.There’s also the question about the Roman sample (Italy IA Republic) – if it’s the Greeks/Trojans, who actually created the Roman genepool and built Rome, whom does this sample represent? The answer to me is obvious – the Etruscans. It’s another sample of the local tribes who happened to be the first subjugated people by the conquerors from the East. The striking similarity of this sample to the Etruscan ones makes it almost certain. 6/7
>>520996985CONCLUSIONMany Ancient Greek samples (from the Bronze Age onwards) show the biggest similarity with Italian regions, mostly northern and center. This might be perplexing, but when we analyze all available data, the simplest explanations turns out to be the most probable one - modern Italians ARE Greeks. It was them who shaped the European mediterranean, in all areas possible. Sources and tools:https://vahaduo.github.io/vahaduo/https://vahaduo.github.io/custompca/https://www.mapchart.net/https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/07/getting-most-out-of-global25_12.htmlHere’s the same article in a cleaner way on my Substack, feel free to check it out:https://janzamoyski.substack.com/p/the-genetic-history-of-italy-and7/7
>>520996796Where do the alpinoids come into this?
>>520996796Kura Araxes is unlikely to be a real admixture somewhere outside the Balkans.
>>520996796Bro was cooking it the entire weekend.
>>520997547Yeah, a deep rabbit hole. A little bit more than the usual /pol stuff.
>>520996950Illyrian roots in early Rome are proven thanks to some ancient elite samples having Illyrian YDNA J2b-l283 while the Celtic R1b-P312 is dated to around the time of brennus and brennus was eventually defeated and his men became the plebeians while the aristocrats remained Illyrian-Trojan.
>>520997662And what is the origin of J2b?
>>520997026>This might be perplexing, but when we analyze all available data, the simplest explanations turns out to be the most probable one - modern Italians ARE Greeks. It was them who shaped the European mediterranean, in all areas possible.Plot twist, huh? So basically the local tribes were a bunch of virgins that were BTFO'd by chad Greeks?
>>520998017Pretty much. Just like originally in Greece, I think the Mycenaeans were the Yamnaya Greeks, while the Pelasgians were the Anatolian Farmers, that got conquered in a similar way.
>>520997874>>520997874I’m glad you asked. >An elite Sredny Stog male found to be carrying CHG related paternal haplogroup J-M319 and the maternal haplogroup T2a1b.[21] (Laziridis 2025)It seems to me that the Romans were an Illyrian/Celtic peoples. Around the crisis of the third century illyrians from Illyria took the entire empire after it nearly collapsed but the original Romans were indeed illyrians as well although a synergistic Illyrian Celtic people. The Trojans also were related to the illyrians as proven by the neighbouring state of Troy being called dardania in the Bronze Age and dardania in the Iron Age being an Illyrian state in the middle of the Balkans.
>>520996842So only 5 Italian regions are white?
>>520997874how do you think
Am I considered white (given this shitty Siberian admixture)?
>>520998278>It seems to me that the Romans were an Illyrian/Celtic peoples.more like italo-celtics who learned from greeks
>>520997836Sicilians are swarthy but EuropeanTurks are not white or European, they are Central AsiansSouthern Europeans are white, but of the Med varietyItalians are white European, Northern are the more advanced Russians are white but have Asiatic admixture and ethnics in their country. Hungary, Finland, Estonia, Bulgaria, Albania are also regions with some admixture from Asiatics
>>520998530>Am I considered white (given this shitty Siberian admixture)?
>>520998278A logical conclusion of that is that the Etruscans were Celts, and everything falls in place. Celts/Etruscans and the Illyrians (of Greek origin) creating the Romans. >Around the crisis of the third century illyrians from Illyria took the entire empire after it nearly collapsedI don't think there's a lot of record on that one.
>>520998767https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_emperors
>>520998737Technically speaking, this is an admixture of Volga Finns (like Mordvins) and not some Turkic-Mongols
>>520998880I thought we were talking about major population movements that influence the genepool, not individual cases.
>>520998883technically speaking ogedei khan was in majority white scythian man but its funny if you ignore it
>>520998367Even if there's some foreign admixture, most people don't have any of it. It doesn't spread equally among the entire region.
>>520998530You might be better at math than the Euros.
>>520999102I love medieval painting, but if you take genetic samples of the Turks of that period, they really did have significant Scythian ancestry, but at the same time they were hapas, like modern Bashkirs or Nogais. That is, extremely far from what can be called "white."
>>520999308Considering that the founding fathers of mathematics as a science are the ancient Greeks, this is a dubious statement.
We wuz greeks and shieetfuimos griegos y tal
>>520996985>There’s also the question about the Roman sample (Italy IA Republic) – if it’s the Greeks/Trojans, who actually created the Roman genepool and built Rome, whom does this sample represent? The answer to me is obvious – the Etruscans. It’s another sample of the local tribes who happened to be the first subjugated people by the conquerors from the East. The striking similarity of this sample to the Etruscan ones makes it almost certain.So 4chan was living in a lie all this time?
>>520996796Dude even me a Hispanic had learned this at 18 in high school Spain historically was WHG Magdalenian Originally it was WHG Magdalenian then came the Anatolian Neolithic farmers. EEF in general. Also during this time iirc there was a North African input. It’s related to the guanche in the Canary Islands. Then after the guanche came the Indo European celtiberians.After the celtiberians came the Romans.After the Romans came the Visigoths Germanics. After the Visigoth Germanics came the Berbers but not much input from the Berbers was left nor the Visigoths. >>520997195I haven’t heard of that name in a while. >>520998367Sicilians have Berber dna. Sardinians are pure EEF. Northern Italians are like Lombards
>>520999603>We wuz greeks and shieetIf we assume 50% of the Roman genome is of Greek origin, and 50% of your genome is of Roman origin, you're around 25% Greek.
>>520997094Tbh idek wtf alpinid people are supposed to be. Like Central Europeans or some shit?
>>520999840what about all the visigoths moving here and shieet? we wuz germans and shieet no? Looks like your study cuts off early in western history
>>520999777Yeah, thanks for laying out the basics. This thread goes more in-depth into the issue.
summarize for me @grok
>>520999992You are Anatolian Neolithic farmer. You are a mix of AHG & Dzudzuana
>>520999777>I haven’t heard of that name in a whileThis is a component of Bronze Age Caucasians (not mixed with Yamnaya), but mixed with more southern sources such as ANF and Iran N.Genetically, it is almost entirely consistent with modern Georgians (i.e., it is a good proxy for CHG).
>>521000089Read my summary. You are probably Dzudzuana
>>520999386focus hereeven chinks painted ogedei khan with light brown/red hair and light blue eyes he was son and successor of great khan born before they even started expanding beyond mongoliamajority of mongols were central/north asian eskimo related populations but their elites at least early were majority scythianeventually they became hapas
>>520999992>visigothsThey were around 5% of the population, so their impact was minimal. >we wuz germans and shieet no?If you look like Kiko, then you might be.
>>521000093Where did green eyes come from again? I haven't lurked /his/ enough to know about haploautism
>>521000127CHG is ancient north Eurasian + Dzudzuana.
>>521000192This is just we Wuz cope desu.Tocharians we’re irrelevant and went extinct
>>521000288Probably some WHG
>>521000350you have no counter argument you retarded plebbitorhow about going back?
>>521000449The burden of proof lies on you dumbass
Here's another nice find. This one is an outlier of the Roman sample, and he's sitting right inbetween Illyria and Trentino. He might be one of the descendants of Greek-Etruscan parents.
>>521000485face it you are just retarded>even chinks painted ogedei khan with light brown/red hair and light blue eyes>he was son and successor of great khan born before they even started expanding beyond mongolia
>>520999680Opinions on Elagabalus
>>521000192>majority of mongols were central/north asian eskimo related populations but their elites at least early were majority scythianThe period of Scythian expansion into Mongolia, which lasted from the Iron Age to the early Middle Ages, is actually considered to be the period of Xiongnu/early Turkics, while modern Mongols are descended from a more pure-blooded East Asian source, not mixed with Scythians.
>>521000558Yea some Turks were Hapas. Turks essentially are just Hapas. What’s your point buddy.Genghis Khan we know was majority mongoloid race I also iq mog you to death
>>521000316Yep
>>521000693turkics and mongols both originated from scytho-siberian world and were riding scythian bred horses in east ukraine/southwest russiamongolian native horse was never domesticated
>>521000727your thoughts are literally one line long retardhapas look like pic rel
>>521001178You know nothing about genetics. You don’t even know who or what the Dzudzuana are idiot
>>521001241you dont even know what logical argument is plebbitorjust go back and spare yourself humiliation
>>521000946>turkicsYes>mongolsNoI mean there is no evidence that Genghis Khan's family could have been Turkic and not Mongolian, which means that most likely he was 100% chink and not hapa like the neighboring Altai Turks.>scythian bred horses in east ukraine/southwest russiamongolian native horse was never domesticatedIt is common knowledge that all modern horses originate from the Sintashta culture.
>>521001342We Wuz da mongolz n Shiet - polack brain
>>521001359>It is common knowledge that all modern horses originate from the Sintashta culture.so it only makes sense mongols orginated from scythian dominated eskimo-related populations and their early elites up to ogedei khan at least were majority scythianthen when scythian blood got diluted with time their slided into irrelevance>I mean there is no evidence that Genghis Khan's family could have been Turkic and not Mongolian, which means that most likely he was 100% chink and not hapa he was tops 20% eskimo related rest was scythian
>>520996796Now modern italians and spanish are mutts mixed with everyone and every race so your little talent show doesnt matter anymore
>>521001489i asked you for logical arguments on mongol genetics not illogical arguments further proving you are an idiot
>>520999680>So 4chan was living in a lie all this time?Likely. In my opinion there's more evidence for this to be an Etruscan, than a Roman. Which btw brings up the fact that the definition of a Roman should be redefined, if my theory is correct.
>>521001607>he was tops 20% eskimo related rest was scythianOkay bro, that's your opinion, but not the opinion of official science.
>>521001707Yeah it's a problem. But from what I've heard Italy doesn't receive as many immigrants as north-west countries.
>>521001893hence replication crisisits science done by women and ethnic minorities
>>520996796I just noticed - if Italy never imported any Middle Easteners, they would be more homogenous than Germany. From Aosta, to this Ordona sample.Such a waste.
>>521001893i mean just look at themdo they look european to you?didnt think socase closednow about CO2 destroying environment
>>521002118It's just a little crazy to think that Europeans founded literally every civilization on this planet (though population genetics has already proven that this is true for half of all of Eurasia).
>>521002089Ah yes I am sure 400 years of non stop slaves from the ME, North Africa and beyond left no mark whatsoever. Even excluding modern day immigration they still are mutts
>>521002361>its crazy to think particular set of genes proves to be productive time after timemr Ilyasov i presume?
>>521002257The is the consequence of empire. Nordic tribes are going through the same thing today.
>>521002257It's even crazier - what if Ordona received even more Greek stuff? They would be close to Lombardy. Given how rich Italy is nowadays, they'd be rivaling Germany, when it comes to absolute numbers.
>>521002361but back to logical argumentsif mongols didnt originate from scythians the mongol horse would be domesticated and they would be riding it instead of the ones scythians domesticated thousands kms awaywhole their culture was adapted from scythians who conquered them
GRAZIE RAGAZZI
>>520998737imagine being poo aryan instead of chad fingolian
>>521002914lmao
>>521002914>imagine being poo aryan instead of chad fingolianThe early access version of an aryan.
>>521002678I'll let you in on a secret: the horse was borrowed from all over the world and quickly reached even Africa and the Pacific islands, and this was not necessarily connected with the migration of the Scythians.
>>520996875I've seen a pic of Spain showing the exact same thing, the north eastern triangle being quite pure, while the rest is contaminated.
>>520996875What you don't understand in this image is that Andalusia was repopulated with Germans from Charles I / Chales V times, almost 500 years ago.Meanwhile muslims converts to Christianity were being expelled from Castilla (with covered Andalusia) to remote regions of the North where they weren't known.That's why there are a lot of swarthy people in Galicia and Asturias (north of Spain).There's a province named Granada were many muslims remanied, converted to Christianism. They look distinctively more Moorish than the average Spaniard. Although they have a lot of admixture too.
>>521002261Who are these people? Eskimo people from Finland?
>>521003281lmao nice try but you dont just adapt whole nomad horse riding lifestyle that both turkics and mongols adapted from scythians thanks to scytho-siberian world and again if they had it in their blood they would just domesticate the said horse themselvesbut they only learned it after scythians conquered them
Daniel Lacalle, 100% Spanish economist
>>521004039nah man they are mongolians in front of monument of gengis khan with phostoshopped flag to fin
trying to understand the genetic history of Europe post bronze age using only stone age components is a bit silly, G25 might not have that precision to tell apart super close sources but it doesn't mean you have to reduce yourself to vague inference using 5000-8000 years old populationsboth Italy and Greece received significant post classical migration input from Anatolia/Syria, Aegean BA, albeit it already had some extra caucaso-anatolian ancestry, doesn't suffice to explain the observed gradient, even if you assume Aegean BA completely replaced everyone in south Italy it still wouldn't be enough for the modern gradient, you need something similar to modern Cypriots to get something more in line
>>521004039kinda /pol/ joke
>>521003788Where's the contradiction? I'm aware of the events you mentioned. The data there also reflects it. The question of scale is always important. These internal muslim migrations might've influenced the genepool by 1%, 10%, or 0,1%. Who knows.
>>521002261Man if Hitler had made it far east enough he could've had his own MongolWaffen brigade or something.
>>521004871if hitler made it far east enough he would make throat singing germanic tradition
They all wanted to fuck at seaworld
>>521004321Lmao I should’ve known although I’ve not seen it before haha
>>521004871Yeah why not, he already had a nigger waffen brigade
>>5210044051 - the ancient sample act as a supplement to the PCA data, which very accurately shows the distances and movements. 2 - it's the exact opposite. The oldest avalible samples are the best at calculating certain admixtures, because the further (later) you go, the more intermixing there is, and in that case the signaling is all over the place. >you need something similar to modern Cypriots to get something more in lineModern Cyprus has some European admixture. This will artificially increase non-European admixture in the model, if I use it as a proxy for Near Eastern admixture.
>>521005174
>>521002361everyone is racemixed with european dna at one point
>>521005174>he already had a nigger waffen brigadeI wanted to link the Zoomer Historian video of Hitler hating blacks and wanting to stay away from them, when I noticed his channel got nuked.
>>521005177>2 - it's the exact oppositeso why aren't you using paleolithic populations from 40000 years ago according to your ridiculous logic? you clearly have no idea about G25as I said, sure, with G25 you'll have trouble distinguishing e.g Celto-Germanics from southern Scandinavians, but you don't have to be retarded the other way either, G25 has no problem telling apart e.g bronze age south European ancestry from bronze age levant ancestry, and this allows you to say more precise things than "hurr WHG go down, Barcin go up"
>>521005698G25 deals with autosomal dna, to make a concise approach in individual inputs one should use YDNA to determine different tribes and peoples.
>>521005698>so why aren't you using paleolithic populations from 40000 years ago according to your ridiculous logic?Because at that time there weren't any WHGs, Yamnayas and Farmers in Europe, who are the people that make up 98% of our genepools. And also, I'm not saying only old samples should be ever used. Look at the model I made in the 7th post: >>520997026 . What I'm saying is we should always know what samples we're using and what we are testing.
>>521005843no one's talking about individual inputs and g25 deals with individuals tooY-DNA too would also require me to make more or less the same point i.e stop dealing with low resolution broad groups like hurr G, E, R1b, I when nowadays you can easily track it down to the mutation
>>521006044I’m am talking about individual mutations since they’re more accurate and certain groups have mutations while others don’t.>>520997874>>520998278
>>521005695Ah fuck I was meaning to watch his stuff as someone recommended it to me. Is it all gone??
>>521006002>Because at that time there weren't any WHGs, Yamnayas and Farmers in Europe, who are the people that make up 98% of our genepools.yeah but the latter are mixture of the former therefore they are less "good" according to your previous point? no, far from it, you do want to use "mixed" WHG, Barcin and Yamnaya because they are more relevantthe point remains true as well for populations post those, the fact that they are mixes doesn't mean G25 still can't produce fits/distances that are meaningful and consistentof course if you are e.g trying to make a model hoping to distinguish whether e.g Germanic ancestry in Spain is from Goths or Franks it will be much less precise due to how close the latter are, but the distance between e.g bronze age Remedello EEF in north Italy and bronze age Anatolia is big enough that G25 will pick that up without having to do math with stone age ancestral populations
Iberians are the real Romans, we were Patricians and things.
>>521006216J2b was a minor to irrelevant lineage in Tyrrhenian thus Roman Italy, it was more present in the Adriatic for obvious reasons, but even there e.g among Osco-Umbrians it wasn't dominant
>>521006688
>>521006344>Is it all gone??On YT - most likely. He'll be uploading everything on Rumble. https://rumble.com/user/ZoomerHistorianReal
>>521006688Not really, obviously if you look at the dates of the samples J2b is older than R1b in early Iron Age Rome, and I stress the different mutation since the more Balkan z2103 lineage is associated with J2b in cultural origins than the more bell beaker and thus Celtic U152 mutation. The Celtic U152 mutation appears in my opinion to the horde of brennus.
>>521007241>Not really, obviously if you look at the dates of the samples J2b is older than R1b in early Iron Age Romenope, R1b has been in Italy before since the bronze ageI remember dealing with you already, you are completely delusional and keep slamming your head against hard data hoping to make it stick with your personal pet theory(you are probably Albanian)
>>521006350>but the distance between e.g bronze age Remedello EEF in north Italy and bronze age Anatolia is big enough that G25 will pick that up without having to do math with stone age ancestral populationsIt doesn't matter, because the distance between both those farmer samples is much, much smaller than the distance between either of them and Yamnaya and WHG. Which means, that either of them will work as a proxy for the farmer admixture. >yeah but the latter are mixture of the former Then if I used the paleolithic sample, it would show me a 100% ancestry with nothing else. What use do I have from that?
>>521005695>>521006344Why would Hitler care about blacks in Germany during the 1930s. He was nice to Jesse Owens but why would he care about blacks when they weren’t really a big population in Germany. That’s retarded>>521002361That’s just cope & larp.Ask them about how they think the Norte Chico in Andean Peru was developed or ancient Mesopotamia.Btw who do you think the ubaidians were that predated the Sumerians in that region?
>>521007427R1b-z2103 is not Celtic. Any U152 is dated between 700-400 bc and that high range is due to this - haldanes dilemma ->>> https://www.gnxp.com/blog/2006/04/haldanes-dilemma-should-we-worry.phpAnd thus it is related to brennus. Bronze Age R1b-P312 in Sicily from 2000 bc is what I assume when you say Bronze Age R1b (not directly Balkan/yamnaya) and it believe that they were entirely imported by Aegean/Egyptian merchants and they weren’t U152 but Iberian DF27!
>>521007839>It doesn't matter, because the distance between both those farmer samples is much, much smaller than the distance between either of them and Yamnaya and WHGirrelevant, it's still informative, that's the point, and thus much more relevant than playing with stone age samples>Which means, that either of them will work as a proxy for the farmer admixture.but what if you want to distinguish EEF-type ancestry that has been in Italy since 6000BC and EEF-type ancestry that was introduced in 0BC by migrants from Anatolia? you miss that entirely, and get wrong impressions about how much actual EEF there is in a place>>Then if I used the paleolithic sample, it would show me a 100% ancestry with nothing else. >What use do I have from that?you are doing this thing but replace paleolithic with neolithic/chalcolithic
>>521008212>R1b-z2103 is not Celtic. Any U152 is dated between 700-400 bcagain, no point in arguing with you, you are completely clueless about the topicsample I2478.AG, Bell Beaker culture, Parma, 2196-1939 calBCE, R1b-P312sample BRC003.SG, bronze age North Italy, 1608 - 1431 calBCE, R1b-Y4353(under U152 and L2)don't even bother replying to me I don't care about clowns
>>521008247>irrelevant, it's still informative, that's the point, and thus much more relevant than playing with stone age samplesWe're splitting hair at this point. Farmer stuff is farmer stuff. >you miss that entirely, and get wrong impressions about how much actual EEF there is in a placeNo, I don't. I told you before, other distinct samples will isolate all other types of admixture. And like you said with the Germanic vs. Frankish admixture - yes, that would be tough, but it's nowhere close in this example.
>>521000252The Vandals settled in northern Spain. Did they change demographics in the region? Are the Vandals Swedish, German or Polish? What about the Tollense valley battlefield what is up with that?
>>521008509>parma>northern ItalyNot Tuscany, Rome or southern Italy. Now for the DF27, Celt Iberian samples in Sicily for 2000 bc, they were either misdated and must be redated or they were imported by Aegean or Egyptian merchants to cause havoc in Sicily. Bell Beakers could not have invaded past the appenine and make zero genetic imprint before brennus.
1. You don't measure genetic distance with Principal component analysis (PCA), let alone PCA charts with only 2 axis. You use the exact fixation index (Fst). 2. A haplogroup is the marker of a single ancestor from perhaps 10,000 years ago or more, seeing as a number of pre-historical populations overlapped due to semi-related ancestors. All the other ancestors from in-between are not taken into account since they carry the same haplogroup, even though genetically they can be completely different. E.g., Norwegians and Swedes have different Y-haplogroups while Brits and Spaniards have the same Y-haplogroups, yet the Norwegian and the Swede are almost identical while the Spaniard are the Brit are, relatively speaking in comparison to Norwegians and Swedes, more distantly related.Haplogroups are 0.5% of our DNA at most, they're not autosomal DNA, since autosomal is the DNA of all of ancestors combined, they don't determine individual ancestry or genetic distance, nor do they contribute anything to the genes that determine the species or racial group. Haplogroups are only somewhat useful for tracking population movements.
>>521009240Pajeets are Abos
>>521008742>We're splitting hair at this point. Farmer stuff is farmer stuff.no we aren't, this is key, you are missing out that it's from sources that are possibly VERY divergent, more than 6000 years in the case of the kind of EEF that from NW Anatolia entered Europe in the stone age and the one that specifically only affected Italy/Greece in the Roman era, you see where I'm getting? if you use stone age sources you'll get e.g Calabria has X amount EEF and Y, W amounts of CHG/Iran/Natufian/whatever, but it's hard to estimate the amount of post bronze age impact from those regions using these disparate cavemen when you can actually use e.g bronze age southeast Anatolia and not fear any overfitting(you can tell this by the fact that e.g Sardinians will get only very minimal post bronze age eastern ancestry if you include it in a model that has also EEF and WHG, whereas south Italy will get much more of it, thus G25 CAN distinguish it well and be informative, instead of having to sort of work it out backwards from how much natufian+iran is there)
>>521009240The Yamnaya influence among Greeks and Italians was mostly cultural and linguistic rather than genetic.In the case of Europe in general, it is probable that Yamnaya didn't leave any significant genetic imprint, they may have been a dud population that pushed slightly into the Balkans only to be superseded by CWC.The population basically went as such:Aurignacian, Gravettian, Magdalenian, Soultrean, Azilian, Sauverrian (other specific variants of Cro-Magnon-Neanderthals) Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG), Anatolian Neolithic/Early Anatolian/European Farmer (ANF/EAF/EEF), Western Steppe Pastoralist/Herder (WSP/WSH)Greeks, Italians, British, Dutch, etc. ANE was generally 80% WHG (backlogged) and 20% Gravettian.WHG and EAF derived from a split among ANE, they had 20,000 years of separation before re-converging.There's an unclear defining line between WHG and Gravettian, but WHG were a direct subset of Gravettians who survived the previous ice age.ANE + WHG = EHG (Eastern Hunter Gatherer)ANE + Dzudzuana = CHG (Caucasus Hunter Gatherer - they were generally 35/65% ANE/DZU, Dzudzuana were another off-shoot of WHG that settled in north-east Anatolia)WHG + EAF = EEFWHG + EHG = SHG/BHG (Scandanavian/Baltic Hunter Gatherer)SHG/BHG + EEF = Funnelbeaker/GAC (Gobular Amphora Culture)EHG + CHG = WSP/WSH (Steppe/Yamnaya)WSP/WSH + Funnelbeaker/GAC = CWC (Corded Ware Culture)CWC + GAC + EEF = Bell BeakerCWC + Steppe = AndronovoThere were also other off-shoots and intermediary populations like Sunghir and Sintashta.
>all samples that demolish my theory are badly dated o algothere are people unfortunately even in the scientific community who do this level of special pleading with a straight face and don't even wear a clown suit to make people avoid them
>>521009362In Greeks and Italians, the WSP/WSH admixture was <15% and no more than 20-25% in rare cases, it also came from a different branch of the WSH (the brachycephalic one, rather than the northern dolichocephalic one that moved into Scandinavia), that pushed the Vinca/Varna (pre-Slavic population) out of the Balkans and created a breed of people who then encountered proto-Greeks and proto-Italians. Therefore, Greeks and Italians have WSH admixture via an off-shoot proxy population that was 50% WSH at most, whereas other Europeans received it directly. The difference between northern Europeans and southern Europeans (excluding Balkan Slavs among Southern Europe) are their respective WSH and EEF infusion densities.Greeks and Italians both have large amounts of Anatolian Neolithic, which also partially broke off into CHG (admixing into Semitic populations), the WHG component, and between 10-20% WSH/WSP. Academia claims that Rome was founded by Italic tribes of "Indo-Europeans”. However, the scholars list them as Indo-Europeans because of the language they used, not because of their genetic composition, even though those founders of Rome were 85%+ Anatolian (EAF/EEF). Also, Latins and Etruscans were genetically identical even though they used different languages. MENA (Middle East North Africa) percentages with southern European genetic tests are remnants of Early European Farmer DNA, technically ANF, (specifically Iranian Neolithic/CHG that derived from proto-European Anatolians), as well as more recent historical southern European admixture in Semites (i.e., during ancient Greece and Rome) being cross referenced and backlogged into southern European results. There is also a high probability that most if not all of the "non-European" results in this case are actually Ionian Greek.
>>521008946vandals were west slavs who joined norse goths when they planned their southwest expedition
tl;dr
>>521009454Meanwhile,>Mathieson et al. (2018) included a genetic analysis of a male buried at Olexandria (Ukraine) and dated to 4153-3970 calBC,[22] ascribed to the Sredny Stog culture.[23] He was found to be carrying the paternal haplogroup R1a1a1, and the maternal haplogroup H2a1a.[22] He carried about 80% Western Steppe Herder (WSH) ancestry and about 20% Early European Farmer (EEF) ancestry.[23] This Sredny Stog male was thought to be the first steppe individual found to have been carrying EEF ancestry. As a carrier of the 13910 allele, he was supposed to be the earliest individual ever examined who has had a genetic adaptation to lactase persistence.[24] However, the recent publication by David Reich Lab, October 2021, presented another date from a different sample of the same individual, 2134–1950 cal BC,[25] which could actually belong to Srubnaya culture period, as Haplotree Information Project considers this sample I6561 is from around 3650 ybp (c.1700 BC), and belongs to Y-DNA R1a-F2597*, corresponding to R1a-Y3.[26]Same logic applies with P312 past the appenines before Brennus.
>>521009605South Italians share a south-east Mediterranean ancestry with Greeks. North Italians share a north-west Mediterranean ancestry with Spaniards. Central Italians are evenly balanced between these south-east and south-west Mediterraneans.https://italianthro.blogspot.com/"Official studies" like to focus in on the remains of statisticlally insignificant individuals and then claim that the given country was Middle Eastern or African, and yet they won't apply the same logic (or lack thereof) to the historical remains of Europeans in Africa and the Middle East.But what does this matter? Present day demography is disastrous.
>>520996796Nice paint images but what's the source?
>>521009313I get what you're saying. My point is that the further we go, the bigger risk there is that the sample will be admixed with someone else, thus giving an innacurate result. The best example is Anatolia. People talk about this admixture over and over, when in fact post-bronze age, an Anatolian admixture doesn't exist, because it's a dumpster of all ethnicities around them - the Caucasus, the Levant, European-like admixture, with a bit on Iranian admixture. And thus, you need to go earlier, to measure each of them separatly in any target country, because using the "Anatolian" sample won't tell you anything.
>>521010438He obviously consulted me after I had a dream.
>>521010509>thus giving an innacurate resultnot if the samples are distant enough, which is my main point, you do NOT run into this problem if you are not interested in finding which specific post bronze age population from Anatolia contributed to it as long as you choose one and you are guaranteed that the distance it will have with EEF(LBK Germany) is big enough for G25 to distinguish itthis is the key, whatever happened to Anatolia still makes it distinct enough to be able to distinguish it with EEF, hence you can use it
posted without comment
>>521010744oh I see. Carry on.
>>521009469>Academia claims that Rome was founded by Italic tribes of "Indo-Europeans”. However, the scholars list them as Indo-Europeans because of the language they used, not because of their genetic composition, even though those founders of Rome were 85%+ Anatolian (EAF/EEF). Also, Latins and Etruscans were genetically identical even though they used different languages.That's the exact issue I address in this thread. In short - all inhabitants of the Italian peninsula spoke non-Indo European language(s). Then came the Greeks, they brought their Indo-European language, their high Yamnaya genes and the faustian spirit, which allowed them to beat everyone around them and to build Rome. It makes no sense for all the tribes (Italics and Etruscans) to be genetically the same, but for the former to speak IE language, and for the latter to speak something else.
>>521009605>drYou should, it's interesting. Perhaps you find this format more compelling:https://janzamoyski.substack.com/p/the-genetic-history-of-italy-and
>>521010438>what's the source?If you're asking this, you didn't read all 7 posts.
>>521010757I feel like we found the middleground, because I agree with this post. In fact, the purity of the sample is what I've been talking about before.
>>521011224>In short - all inhabitants of the Italian peninsula spoke non-Indo European language(s).that's a fine clown opinion to have if you are willing to completely ignore archaeology and linguistics
>>520999603Do you have a lot of immigrants from colonies you held?
>>521011930And I'm sure you can tell me the exact date where this thing comes from.
Not reading all of this just tell me if I'm white or I should kill myself
>>521012160six century BC, showing archaic Indo-European features as well like genitive second declension -osio which in Mycenaean Greek had already lost the ssaying Greeks brought IE languages to Italy is so unbelievably retarded with some nearly 300 years of philology
>>521012303If you have to ask, kys
>>521012373It's over
