12% of al-Andalus women are non-Spanish

Mmiikkii

Regular Member
Messages
464
Reaction score
72
Points
28
Ethnic group
southern EUROPEAN
The moors seem to have brought very few women, and among those it's mostly slaves.
This could be due to the locations, maybe if there are palaces slaves are overrepresented...

IMG_20221008_144824.jpg
 
Anyone who, after spending some time on sites such as this, still thinks that mtDna, or yDna, for that matter, determines ethnicity, should find another hobby.
 
It does...
Different ethnic groups have distinct subclades.
 
Anyone who, after spending some time on sites such as this, still thinks that mtDna, or yDna, for that matter, determines ethnicity, should find another hobby.
No it determines lineage. Ethnicity is cultural.
 
I'm not going to engage in idiotic conversations. R1b carrying West Africans are West Africans despite the fact they carry yDna R1b. Do you understand?

Sicilian women who carry mtDna found more frequently in North Africa are still SICILILAN WOMEN. Their mtDna is less than 2% of their total genome. It may have some health consequences but it doesn't change the fact they're SICILIAN.

Likewise, those Andalusian women are SPANISH.

If you can't intellectually grasp this, find another hobby. You also certainly don't belong on a site which tries to showcase genetic facts not silly internet jibber jabber.
 
How do you respond to scientists that use the presence of R0a, L haplogroups as indication of admixture with foreign people?

Because is the main message of all papers that show a change in ancestry, assuming something foreign must have come to the land, and change the gene pool... It's obvious by the way that that happened.

You see a new haplogroup, someone came... 2+2=4
 
I have said probably hundreds of times on this site that you use uniparentals to track migrations.

What you don't do is use uniparentals to determine "ETHNICITY", or "IDENTITY", because they represent only 2% or so of your entire genome.

Hence, yes, these markers in these Spanish women indicate there was some admixture. However, with the passage of hundreds of years the autosomal signal gets diluted. Do you understand? So, these women are as Spanish as anyone else.

Plus, going by your point of view, at what point did the Spanish become Spanish? The people of the Iberian peninsula are a combination of WHG, Anatolian farmers, Iranian farmers, steppe admixed Bell Beakers, and yes, North Africans. Some of that North African dna shows up in the Neolithic, although it seems that yes, the majority came with the Moors.

What, you're going to draw a line and say everybody with 2% of their ancestry arriving after this point is not Spanish? I would think 1200 years would be enough.
 
I have said probably hundreds of times on this site that you use uniparentals to track migrations.

What you don't do is use uniparentals to determine "ETHNICITY", or "IDENTITY", because they represent only 2% or so of your entire genome.

Hence, yes, these markers in these Spanish women indicate there was some admixture. However, with the passage of hundreds of years the autosomal signal gets diluted. Do you understand? So, these women are as Spanish as anyone else.

Plus, going by your point of view, at what point did the Spanish become Spanish? The people of the Iberian peninsula are a combination of WHG, Anatolian farmers, Iranian farmers, steppe admixed Bell Beakers, and yes, North Africans. Some of that North African dna shows up in the Neolithic, although it seems that yes, the majority came with the Moors.

What, you're going to draw a line and say everybody with 2% of their ancestry arriving after this point is not Spanish? I would think 1200 years would be enough.

How do you determine someone's ethnicity if not by haplogroups? Like for example you hear how the English are closely related to the Germans but based on haplogroups this would show mainly in West Germany?
 
How do you determine someone's ethnicity if not by haplogroups? Like for example you hear how the English are closely related to the Germans but based on haplogroups this would show mainly in West Germany?
Look at this example: my paternal grandfather was born in Veneto. According to a genealogical investigation that I commissioned, the most distant ancestor of my family emigrated from Lombardy to Veneto 500 years ago, at the request of a monastery of which he was a vassal, to raise dairy cows. My Y-DNA is R1b-U 106. Does that mean my grandfather was not a Northern Italian? Was he Longobard, Goth, Bavarian, Saxon?
 
Look at this example: my paternal grandfather was born in Veneto. According to a genealogical investigation that I commissioned, the most distant ancestor of my family emigrated from Lombardy to Veneto 500 years ago, at the request of a monastery of which he was a vassal, to raise dairy cows. My Y-DNA is R1b-U 106. Does that mean my grandfather was not a Northern Italian? Was he Longobard, Goth, Bavarian, Saxon?

Some people just don't get it. My mtDna, a branch of U2e2, is most common in the Scandinavian countries, Germany, and Great Britain. My closest personal match if someone with female ancestry from Ireland. The line from which our line descends seems to have a match in the area of Switzerland about 2300 years ago. No idea how or why my female ancestor came to Italy, but she did, and we've been here ever since.

It doesn't make me Irish, or Swiss. I'm Italian.
 
I have said probably hundreds of times on this site that you use uniparentals to track migrations.

What you don't do is use uniparentals to determine "ETHNICITY", or "IDENTITY", because they represent only 2% or so of your entire genome.

Hence, yes, these markers in these Spanish women indicate there was some admixture. However, with the passage of hundreds of years the autosomal signal gets diluted. Do you understand? So, these women are as Spanish as anyone else.

Plus, going by your point of view, at what point did the Spanish become Spanish? The people of the Iberian peninsula are a combination of WHG, Anatolian farmers, Iranian farmers, steppe admixed Bell Beakers, and yes, North Africans. Some of that North African dna shows up in the Neolithic, although it seems that yes, the majority came with the Moors.

What, you're going to draw a line and say everybody with 2% of their ancestry arriving after this point is not Spanish? I would think 1200 years would be enough.


indeed there are also some modern iberian males with y haplogroup e1b1a-m2 ( and its downstreams)
it was very likely brought to iberia during the muslim rule of the moors
doesn't make them sub-sharan
since there autosomal dna today is like the other iberians
who mainly belong to r1b which is the majority haplogroup in them

p.s
i myself more interested in uniparental markers
than autosomal have to admitt ;)
but it doesn't change the fact that
angela is correct the total autosomal is what important
 
Last edited:
Look at this example: my paternal grandfather was born in Veneto. According to a genealogical investigation that I commissioned, the most distant ancestor of my family emigrated from Lombardy to Veneto 500 years ago, at the request of a monastery of which he was a vassal, to raise dairy cows. My Y-DNA is R1b-U 106. Does that mean my grandfather was not a Northern Italian? Was he Longobard, Goth, Bavarian, Saxon?


my line ( mtdna ) is no earlier than Goth in Italy and is associated with the Carnian alps in Friuli .............I have many swedish links as well



I doubt that it is Lombard, because IIRC , not many women where brought to Italy by the Lombards...but many women came with the Goths
 
^^Could you please provide a source for your last comment. It seems counter-intuitive, as the Lombards came as family groups, i.e. a lot of women, and the Goths supposedly included a lot of young warriors instead.
 
Look at this example: my paternal grandfather was born in Veneto. According to a genealogical investigation that I commissioned, the most distant ancestor of my family emigrated from Lombardy to Veneto 500 years ago, at the request of a monastery of which he was a vassal, to raise dairy cows. My Y-DNA is R1b-U 106. Does that mean my grandfather was not a Northern Italian? Was he Longobard, Goth, Bavarian, Saxon?

Race aside, is it true that you're related to people within 30 miles of where you live? Or is it larger or smaller than that? I heard this due to people living together in small villages etc.
 
Race aside, is it true that you're related to people within 30 miles of where you live? Or is it larger or smaller than that? I heard this due to people living together in small villages etc.


the women took account on not allowing marriages to be too close in relationship with each other ....................where you going with this ?

in Veneto they used the term detto ( some say ) to separate families from the same name

eg.

Paolo Tesolin detto Zaja ..........so this Tesolin family has old marriage links with a Zaja line

Tesolin is the surname
 
My mtDna, a branch of U2e2, is most common in the Scandinavian countries, Germany, and Great Britain. My closest personal match if someone with female ancestry from Ireland. The line from which our line descends seems to have a match in the area of Switzerland about 2300 years ago. No idea how or why my female ancestor came to Italy, but she did, and we've been here ever since.

Well, Ireland and Italy are known for receiving settlers from England and Germany during the last 2000 years.
That must be why YOUR U2e haplogroup is in Italy/US.
 
Well, Ireland and Italy are known for receiving settlers from England and Germany during the last 2000 years.
That must be why YOUR U2e haplogroup is in Italy/US.

Yes, and my father carried U-152, which probably came in the late Bronze/Early Iron Age with Italic speakers.

That's the point: there are NO pure ethnicities.

Look at the English: farmers from the Near East replaced the hunter-gatherers, then we have Beaker type people coming in the Bronze Age (people who were half-steppe, half Chalcolithic European farmer, then the Celts in the Iron Age, then the Anglo-Saxons in the early Medieval period, and then a continuous flow from France.

Whyvert on Twitter: "The four big population replacements in Britain. First farmers 4000BC: 99% Steppe pastoralists 2500BC: 90% Celts 900BC: 50% Anglo-Saxons 400AD: 40% https://t.co/LrXzksXMVk" / Twitter

At the end, they're ENGLISH.

Or are people going to be allowed to draw an arbitrary line wherever they feel like it?
 

This thread has been viewed 3521 times.

Back
Top