• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

Southern Italian Ethnogenesis (My theory)

ihype02 said:
Greek names in Pompeii (mostly among the slaves). Those Greek names represent Anatolians, Levantines and of course ethnic Greek. In other words it is a indicator of the recent eastern origin. Pompeii was an Oscan speaking regions and it recolonized by Romans in 80BC following the language shift from Oscan to Latin.
https://namenookdotcom.wordpress.com/2011/08/24/the-people-of-pompeii/
Click to expand...

What does this matter if it is not represented in IBD analysis, and we know Imperial era Anatolian ancestry died away in late antiquity?
 
It is true what you say about Pompeii however. Even our guide told us in Roman times, Pompeii was mostly a town for foreign merchants and prostitutes. I don't think many natives would have wanted to live there, since the volcanic sediment forced them to have open air sewers.
 
Jovialis: Sorry if I missed it but where are those Cetina Samples from, are those from the Southern Arc papers. Just curios, how do they compare to the Republican Roman samples from Antonio et al 2019 or the C6, C7, C5, clusters from that same paper?
 
As I said in the other thread (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...talians/page23?p=661093&viewfull=1#post661093), Iron age greeks, or at least some of them, seem even more shifted towards contemporary cycladic inhabitants and southern italians.

In particular, some samples labelled as Himera_Civilian_Pop_med (the green diamonds) and others should cluster with the two "aegean-like" individuals from Iron Age Latium.


ZvFHEts.png
 
Er Monnezza said:
Are these the samples used?

Code: 
Iberomaurusian,0,1.2814286,62.802857,2.3014286,0.062857143,0.16571429,1.6928571,17.79,6.4728571,0.60285714,0,6.8257143
Anatolian_BA,7.56,0.28666667,1.6333333,0.57333333,26.183333,3.1666667,0,0.57333333,14.066667,0.01,44.24,1.7066667
Minoan_Lasithi,0.652,0.01,3.302,0.19,37.716,0.046,0,0,14.12,0,43.886,0.078
C_Italian_ChL,0,0,2.7333333,0.04,62.923333,2.6,0,0,6.8966667,0.0066666667,24.643333,0.16333333
C_Italian_N,0,0,3.693,0,54.714,1.633,0,0.058,11.516,0.105,28.164,0.121
Remedello,0,0,0.77666667,0.70666667,69.036667,11.776667,0,0,5.1833333,0,11.8,0.71666667
Yamnaya,26.900556,1.875,0.051666667,0.051666667,4.6583333,59.562222,1.0905556,0.0066666667,0.021111111,0,5.045,0.73777778

My results (Campanian/Lucanian)

Code: 
Ajeje_Brazorf,7.84,0,5.99,0,28.45,11.1,0,0.48,13.66,0.12,32.36,0
Ajeje_Brazorf_imputed,7.95,0,4.96,0.11,29.2,11.71,0,0.35,11.94,1.22,32.49,0.08


[TD="class: xl66, width: 141"]Sample[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 95"]Minoan_Lasithi[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 62"]Yamnaya[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 86"]Anatolian_BA[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 75"]C_Italian_N[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 98"]Iberomaurusian[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Ajeje_Brazorf[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]21,7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]15,7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]40,4[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]16,4[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]5,8[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Ajeje_Brazorf_imputed[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]23,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]17,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]36,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]17,8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]4,2[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Calabria[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]48,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]17,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]30,6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]3,3[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Sicily[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]51,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]21,1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]20,6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]3,1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]4[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Campania[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]62,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]12,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0,9[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Basilicata[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]37,8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]22,3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]30,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]2,7[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Molise[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]74,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]25,1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Abruzzo[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]69,3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]26,6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]3,1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]1[/TD]

[TD="class: xl66"]Italian_Apulia[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]58,2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]26,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]13,9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, align: right"]1[/TD]
Click to expand...
Target: Kenshiro
Distance: 422.0783% / 4.22078294
69.4 Minoan_Lasithi
29.4 Yamnaya
1.2 C_Italian_ChL
From Apulia
 
Kenshiro said:
Target: Kenshiro
Distance: 422.0783% / 4.22078294
69.4 Minoan_Lasithi
29.4 Yamnaya
1.2 C_Italian_ChL
From Apulia
Click to expand...

Hi Kenshiro im VikiingMallorcaSpain from TA

wich coordinates did u used for this?
 
As expected the Minoan is highest in Greek Islands populations but most modern Greeks have at least some.

I always believed that the oldest Greek/Aegean like input in Italy came from Minoans
 
cybernautic said:
As expected the Minoan is highest in Greek Islands populations but most modern Greeks have at least some.

I always believed that the oldest Greek/Aegean like input in Italy came from Minoans
Click to expand...

If anything south Italians probably had Neolithic and Bronze Age ancestry that was comparable to Minoans genetically, if not sourced particularly from that material culture.
 
While south Italy is probably to some extent an amalgamation of many of the people that have come through in the historical period. I think the majority of the genetic approximation of southern Italians happened by at least the early bronze age.
 
The Aegean contribution southern Italy can be connected to at least two great episodes of colonization.

The first one can be traced back since the early bronze age and can be linked to Minoans first and Myceneans then. It's probably in this landscape that the italic migration gets in by the end of the bronze age/early iron age.

Then, we have a second big wave, due to the Iron Age Greek colonization of Magna Grecia, interacting with the italic world. Unfortunately, we still lack samples for this crucial Era.

There might have been a more anatolian admixed stream of population from the Aegean during the imperial era, but this wasn't limited to southern Italy only and I doubt it left a genetic impect as big as the previous streams of colonization.
 
Francesco said:
The Aegean contribution southern Italy can be connected to at least two great episodes of colonization.
The first one can be traced back since the early bronze age and can be linked to Minoans first and Myceneans then. It's probably in this landscape that the italic migration gets in by the end of the bronze age/early iron age.
Then, we have a second big wave, due to the Iron Age Greek colonization of Magna Grecia, interacting with the italic world. Unfortunately, we still lack samples for this crucial Era.
There might have been a more anatolian admixed stream of population from the Aegean during the imperial era, but this wasn't limited to southern Italy only and I doubt it left a genetic impect as big as the previous streams of colonization.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that is a spot on assessment imho.
 
Francesco said:
The Aegean contribution southern Italy can be connected to at least two great episodes of colonization.
The first one can be traced back since the early bronze age and can be linked to Minoans first and Myceneans then. It's probably in this landscape that the italic migration gets in by the end of the bronze age/early iron age.
Then, we have a second big wave, due to the Iron Age Greek colonization of Magna Grecia, interacting with the italic world. Unfortunately, we still lack samples for this crucial Era.
There might have been a more anatolian admixed stream of population from the Aegean during the imperial era, but this wasn't limited to southern Italy only and I doubt it left a genetic impect as big as the previous streams of colonization.
Click to expand...
I would like to further elaborate on this, by saing that maybe we shouldn't assume that Iron age greeks (the ones who probably affected the southen italian demography the most) were exactly the same as late bronze age mycenaeans. Infact, I guess that Iron age Greeks may be seen, genetically, as a "missing link" between the late bronze age mycenaens and the post classical age "anatolin admixed" hellenistic greeks, as a result of a progressive and continous - yet not masive and disruptive - interaction both with the anatolian world and the greek periphery in the north.

I say this based on some observation: we see more east shifted individual already present in the late bronze age Aegean (particulary in Chania were some samples alredy plot with present day cycladic inhabitants); some Himera civilians present a similar profile; we don't have, at least not yet, samples from the Iron Age who resemble a Minoan-like profile, like instead we still have in the late bronze age. We still have too few samples from Iron age and classical period Greece, so we have to wait to verify this hypothesis, but maybe we may see that they'll be a bit up shifted in the PCA, maybe roughly between their bronze age predecessor and contemporary cycladic inhabitants.

Historically, I think it make perfect sense that by the late Iron age the classical greek genome could have been a bit (not drastically, just a bit) changed by interactions both with the ionian coast and with the northern region of the aegean. Of course, this process, already present by the late bronze and prosecuted durng the iron age, could have continued in the helenistic and roman era as well.

If this is true, we should use Iron age greeks should as a more fitting donor population for southern Italy (and for the famous C6 cluster) rather than bronze age mycenaeans, since it's in the Iron age (from VIII to V century) that we have probably the most imortant demographic movement from to the colonies of Magna Graecia.
 
Last edited:
JiyNoO2.png


I'd like to say, that Southern Italians being descended from primarily classical aged Greek colonists, who mixed with local-Italics, and mercenaries from the Balkans, Northern Europe, and the Caucasus is imho also a viable ethnogenesis.
 
Jovialis said:
JiyNoO2.png


I'd like to say, that Southern Italians being descended from primarily classical aged Greek colonists, who mixed with local-Italics, and mercenaries from the Balkans, Northern Europe, and the Caucasus is imho also a viable ethnogenesis.
Click to expand...

Do you have dates ?

First Greeks I recall in Italy was circa 750BC ( iron-age) ..............the italians clearly where already mixed prior to this from others.....west-balkans, alpine people and west of italy
 
Jovialis said:
JiyNoO2.png


I'd like to say, that Southern Italians being descended from primarily classical aged Greek colonists, who mixed with local-Italics, and mercenaries from the Balkans, Northern Europe, and the Caucasus is imho also a viable ethnogenesis.
Click to expand...

Jovialis: I have not posted in this thread in while. My Dodecad12b distances using the Himera_Sicily Samples. I used Aggregate function get good results as well.

Cheers, PT

zTXoiPw.jpg
 
torzio said:
Do you have dates ?

First Greeks I recall in Italy was circa 750BC ( iron-age) ..............the italians clearly where already mixed prior to this from others.....west-balkans, alpine people and west of italy
Click to expand...


The dates are actually listed on the samples in the graphic I posted.

@Palermo that makes for a pretty good model

According to the findings of the AI result, I became aware that many of these colonists may have been Dorians.

Here's mine with more clarity, modeled with these samples:

66.7% Greek Colonist
11.5% Northern Balkan
7.9% Scani
7.5% Baltic
6.4% Caucasian
 
Jovialis said:
The dates are actually listed on the samples in the graphic I posted.

@Palermo that makes for a pretty good model

According to the findings of the AI result, I became aware that many of these colonists may have been Dorians.

Here's mine with more clarity, modeled with these samples:

66.7% Greek Colonist
11.5% Northern Balkan
7.9% Scani
7.5% Baltic
6.4% Caucasian
Click to expand...

You could say this theory, and the one in the OP are somewhat opposites.


My initial one in the OP suggest a more autochthonous origin. Nevertheless I did suggest this sort of dynamic could have maintained the structure that was already in place since the early bronze age.
 
Francesco said:
I would like to further elaborate on this, by saing that maybe we shouldn't assume that Iron age greeks (the ones who probably affected the southen italian demography the most) were exactly the same as late bronze age mycenaeans. Infact, I guess that Iron age Greeks may be seen, genetically, as a "missing link" between the late bronze age mycenaens and the post classical age "anatolin admixed" hellenistic greeks, as a result of a progressive and continous - yet not masive and disruptive - interaction both with the anatolian world and the greek periphery in the north.

I say this based on some observation: we see more east shifted individual already present in the late bronze age Aegean (particulary in Chania were some samples alredy plot with present day cycladic inhabitants); some Himera civilians present a similar profile; we don't have, at least not yet, samples from the Iron Age who resemble a Minoan-like profile, like instead we still have in the late bronze age. We still have too few samples from Iron age and classical period Greece, so we have to wait to verify this hypothesis, but maybe we may see that they'll be a bit up shifted in the PCA, maybe roughly between their bronze age predecessor and contemporary cycladic inhabitants.

Historically, I think it make perfect sense that by the late Iron age the classical greek genome could have been a bit (not drastically, just a bit) changed by interactions both with the ionian coast and with the northern region of the aegean. Of course, this process, already present by the late bronze and prosecuted durng the iron age, could have continued in the helenistic and roman era as well.

If this is true, we should use Iron age greeks should as a more fitting donor population for southern Italy (and for the famous C6 cluster) rather than bronze age mycenaeans, since it's in the Iron age (from VIII to V century) that we have probably the most imortant demographic movement from to the colonies of Magna Graecia.
Click to expand...

I totally agree that we should wait for IA and classical age Greek samples but we do not have any historical or archaeological info that there was a large and influential admixture event. Now I can theorize that internal migration from rural settlements that might have been Pelasgian into urban areas that were Greek might have changed the admix. I guess we will have to wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top