So basically, dark-skinned Spaniards = Arab ancestry, light-skinned Spaniards = Germanic ancestry?Southern Spain = Al-AndalusNorthern Spain = VisigothsIs that really how Spanish ancestry works?
>>18673186I don't know why your go-to assumption is Germanic ancestry here. There are places where the Celtiberian and Bell Beaker ancestry is more prominent.
No. Visigothic genetic legacy in Spain is minimal. Spaniards are mostly Celtic/native Iberian, mixed with bits of Italic, Semitic (Arab/Punic) or Germanic depending on where you are. Southern and eastern Spain have more Italic and Semitic traces but even then it's not substantial.
>>18673186No, the native Iberian population was not displaced by the Celts, Romans, Visigoths, Arabs and Berbers, unlike the Britons by the Anglo-Saxons
nope. though pedro is from the canaries, so yes he is part berber
>>18673186The guy on the right is Basque, zero germongoloid genes.
>>18673960>The guy on the right is BasqueSignificant Bell Beaker and WHG then
Este "español" es mas boliviano que español, perteneciente a la raza cloaca (cloaca gentium), el verdadero negro boliviano de las americas que larpea "español" a pesar de ser negro caca
>>18674250
>>18673960>The guy on the right is BasqueNope. Born in Navarre, as her mother. Father from La Rioja. Both surnames are not basque, but os castilian origin (Llorente Torres).
>>18674250Probably has Latin American ancestry which is undocumented.
>>18673186No. It really isn't. Most iberians are very genetically similar to each other, even those with significant north african (~10 max) only really have around 5% actual ancestral north african, as the remaining component of north african DNA is anatolian farmer which already exists as the 1st or 2nd largest ancestral component of every European alive today.
>>18675370Oh and keep in mind that ancestral north african is itself ~65% west eurasian ( Caucasoid ) and maybe 35% sub saharan african ( black ) related. Meaning the most blackest of black iberians with the exception of canary islanders will be 2% non-caucasoid at most.
>>18675333it's way more likely he's just a gypsy o algo
>>18675384It's wild how nafris have pretty much the exact same wec ancestry as chinky looking Central Asians.
>>18673694This is true for almost any population, it's very rare for invaders to genetically/demographically replace the invaded, even the Lebanese are 90% the same as the people they were in the Iron Age before Greeks/Romans/Arabs conquests. Retards here think that if a place is invaded then population replacement is a given, when the point of invading a place is getting free shit from the locals in the form of tribute and taxation, If you replace them with your own people it defeats the main purpose of conquering a territoryThe people who got most severely impacted genetically in Europe by foreign invasions were the Brits, and even then most Brits are still only like 30/40% Germanic, they are still most similar genetically to the Iron Age Britons than to the Early Medieval Germanics that invaded them
>>18676258>Retards here think that if a place is invaded then population replacement is a given, when the point of invading a place is getting free shit from the locals in the form of tribute and taxation, If you replace them with your own people it defeats the main purpose of conquering a territoryBy your stupid logic:-Current Americans are genetically the same as they were in the iron age.-Current Australians are genetically the same as they were in the iron age-Current Argentines are genetically the as they were in the iron age.
>>18676350Those are exceptions, and they involved near genocides of the locals which most of the times do not happen
>>18676368>Those are exceptions, and they involved near genocides of the locals which most of the times do not happen.but arab conquests and germanic conquests didn't involve genocides????Do you even know history or you just get your info from netflix?
>>18676395>but arab conquests and germanic conquests didn't involve genocides????not really, no
>>18676395>what do you mean European colonial expansion was the exception and not the rule?????Are you 11 years old? Do you sincerely believe that when the Ptolemaic Greeks took power in Egypt, Egyptians were replaced with Greeks?
>>18676741>not really, nogermans pretend that genocides they caused were "crusades".Only arabs deny the genocides they've caused in europe and africa.You just outed yourself as an arab/muhammed.You should go back to the middle-east where you belong you parasite.
>>18676754> Do you sincerely believe that when the Ptolemaic Greeks took power in Egypt, Egyptians were replaced with Greeks?Yes;Ptolemaic Greeks made mutts with the local population which technically is replacement on a small scale. And this only happened on a small scale because the local populace welcomed them. But arab conquests were religious conquests which always ended with extermination of male infidels and slavery of women. Just look at Türkiye and North Sudan. Are the current turks the same people as the Byzantines??
>>18676350The natives of those lands didn't have an Iron Age and they were mostly wiped out by Old World diseases
>>18676395>arab conquestshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi
>>18676769During the Middle Ages, the only ones that you could consider genocides were the Albigensian crusade, pogroms against Jews and the Mongol conquests, but they weren't deliberately trying to wipe out entire ethnic populations
>>18676789>But arab conquests were religious conquests which always ended with extermination of male infidels and slavery of women.No they didn't. And Arab conquests particularly didn't. >Just look at Türkiye and North Sudan. Are the current turks the same people as the Byzantines?Turks? You couldn't have picked a worse example to make a point. Except maybe Hungarians. The original Turks, the Göktürks, looked like the people living in Kyrgyzstan and Xinjiang nowadays. They assimilated everyone in their way like nomadic empires always do. *They* are the people who got replaced by the Iranians, Armenians and Greeks they were ruling. This was especially true for the aristocracy. The fourth Ottoman sultan, Bayezid I, the guy who got captured by Tamerlane, was 75% Greek.
>>18673186No.
>>18676258It's mostly retarded Americans projecting, they think almost totally wiping out and displacing natives was a super common thing that happened throughout history cause their ancestors did it.
>>18676769Arabs caused genocides in Europe? lol what? Muslims did enslave lots of Europeans across centuries through piracy but they didn't genocide any population in Europe. The Arabs didn't even genocide the people they converted to Islam all across the MENA region. You have a Fox News understanding of history that doesn't correspond to reality
>>18677334There are multiple examples of that happening throughout history tho
>>18677631Provide some
>>18674438Navarre is basque, and the northern part of la rioja is predominantly too. Torres is a toponimic surname that could've been translated.
>>18677631It happened in the Americas and Australia. I can't think of any other examples that could come close to matching the scale and success of those examples. At any rate it's definitely not a common thing, genocide isn't a common occurrence despite tards muddying the waters by conflating war and invasion with genocide.
>>18677721Many pre historic examples in Eurasia, Africa and the AmericasThule/DorsetPopulation turnovers in the carribeanSpread of polynesians replacing certain melanesian peoplesNeolithic movementsIE speakersBantu migrations
>>18678175So nothing in Spain?
>>18678347Maybe the conquest of the Canary islands which ended Guanche culture, but then again there wasn't a total genetic replacement, many Canarians have Guanche ancestors.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40198-wPopulation replacement after conquest was never the norm anywhere until European colonialism, and it only happened in a handful of places such as North America and Australia. Mainly because there weren't a lot of native people there in the first place. In Pakistan, Peru, Libya or Vietnam, it didn't happen.
>>18678489>VietnamThere was genetic turnover there as Viet agriculturists moved in and displaced the indigenious tribals. Theres a reason the tribal groups live in the mountains and places unsuited to agriculture
>>18676953>pogroms against Jewsthey clearly didn't work so are they even real?can we really call peasants wanting to get back at their swindlers genocide?
>>18673186If you want to use a real germanic looking Spaniard choose this one for example and not Llorente (his face is totally Spanish despite his pigmentation).And the darkest the Spaniard is the highest probability that he is a "primitive" pre-indoeuropean leftover. Discounting gypsies obviously. There are Spaniards with primitive faces and dark pigmentation. And you can find light skinned Spaniards even in deep Andalucia in the middle of nowhere.
>>18679418It was a "genocide" of the local Jews, but they always come back and in larger numbers
>>18679418>they clearly didn't work so are they even real?A genocide attempt is still a crime of genocide.>can we really call peasants wanting to get back at their swindlers genocide?According to the definition of genocide, if the goal is to destroy an ethnic, national or religious group as such, it is genocide. Whether the target population deserved it or not is irrelevant. The definition doesn't include "... who did nothing wrong", "... who are disarmed and harmless" or "... for no reason". Genocides that solve literal century-old problems for good are still considered the ultimate crime against humanity.
