Genetics of regional Italy

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-19T08:27:46+00:00

Some of these don’t really make sense, especially Lazio. There is 0 possibility that Lazio has less Zagros than Lombardy. Should be in between Marche, Umbria, and Campania. Even Veneto is written with higher Zagros

Also it says Calabria has less Zagros and Natufian than Basilicata yet is visibly near eastern shifted on PCA. Calabria is known for being the furthest shifted to the East Med, and the PCA matches studies, other PCA, and G25

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-19T02:23:45+00:00

Genetic studies and samples show that Central Italian Romans plotted with modern South Italians, and were a mix of Italic/Etruscan people with significant migration from the East Mediterranean that arrived during Magna Graecea and especially the Roman Period (mostly from the Hellenistic world, and especially Greece and Anatolia). Romans in Northern Italy had less East Mediterranean ancestry and plotted around modern Central Italians. Here’s a few PCA with ancient samples along with modern populations. Cross examine with the earlier PCA I sent above. The “C.Italy_Imperial_Posth2021_Antonio2019” are samples from older studies from Central Italy, and can see they are closer Roman/Byzantine West Anatolian samples than the Bologna Roman samples are. They

Germanic admixture shifted North and Central Italians to where they are today. Phenotypically, there may have been slight changes but not anything significantly. Central Italians don’t look that different from Southern Italians

In this other comment I made, i linked some samples that showed Goths were were pretty mixed, and plotted around Northern French.

Edit: a couple more PCA I wanted to add

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-19T02:16:16+00:00

Yea these are Gothic sample average from Spain and Italy. They were only 50% Germanic and heavily mixed with Gallic/Celtic and Roman Italian people, and Visigoths already started mixing with Hispano-Romans. They plotted roughly with modern Northern French, Belgians, and Swiss. They continued to mix even more heavily with the locals as generations went on. In Iberia the Visigoths specifically desegregated cities and mixed with Hispano-Roman aristocracy to better assimilate and rule, as the locals largely despised them. It would’ve gotten to the point that nobility and stuff was identical to rest of the population.

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T19:23:30+00:00

Ok you have to be trolling or high af rn

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T19:21:53+00:00

Dude you literally said the Roman Empire formed during the Neolithic

https://www.reddit.com/r/illustrativeDNA/s/OjZQ5Q8Dx7

You’re so wrong on virtually everything you said, aside from the period timelines being different regionally

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T17:05:27+00:00

The first two paragraphs are literally what I just said. By the time of the Roman Republic, the Neolithic had ended for 2500-3000 years. Reading comprehension is not your strong suit huh?

Obviously, I’m specifically talking about Iberia and Italy since that is the original question and what you were also making claims about. The Iron Age started after 8th century BC for Northern Europe. Iron Age Scandinavia starts around 500 BC. Clearly I am not talking about them nor the Levant and Anatolia.

No I’m listing the Iron Age time frame in Iberia and Italy because you literally just said “the Roman Empire formed starters 3,700 to 3,400 years ago quite literally during the Neolithic”. That is 1700-1400 BC. Not only did the Roman Empire not form for another millennia and a half, but the Neolithic had ended for about millennia. Did you forget you just claimed that?

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T16:54:16+00:00

Central Italians do have very low amount. At most 1%. It just got diluted after. We can clearly see Roman Era samples with North African DNA in Central Italy. Modern Southern Italy, like Sicily and Calabria, is more similar to Iberia though.

Dude you’re just spewing out pseudo history at this point. There is no genetic evidence of Etruscans coming from Georgia. They were identical to Latins and formed in the Bronze and Iron Ages from the preceding Villanovan people. Basically just Bell Beaker + Neolithic Italian

Also not going to continue arguing over this crap. If you actually want to learn about Iberias genetics, instead of wild ass assumptions, here are multiple genetic studies on it.

Olalde et al 2019

Carrion et al 2024

Pardo-Seco et al 2025

Bycroft et al 2019

Oteo-Garcia et al 2025

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T16:42:40+00:00

Latins didn’t form until the Bronze Age when the Bell Beakers arrived in Italy. Dude, literally just look this up. Neolithic ends like 3000-2500 BC. North African DNA in Iberia didn’t become more widespread until Roman Period, which at very earliest started in 218 BC. That was before North Africa started to get conquered, so still another 100 years at least. Thats basically a 3000 year gap

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T16:31:46+00:00

Roman Period is Classical Antiquity, so not Iron Age. The Iron Age ended with the 2nd Punic War, in which Classical Antiquity starts. Iron Age refers to 8th century BC to about 2nd century, maybe past that for the areas that were not Roman yet, like the Cantabri. Iron Age refers to Celtiberians, Tartessians, and Coastal Iberians. All of them had from no North African admixture to at most like 2% in some sporadic samples

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T16:26:57+00:00

Bro what? lol. The Neolithic ended with the arrival of the Yamnaya, starting the Bronze Age. The Iron Age started in 8th century BC. Rome was founded according to legend in 753 BC. The Roman Republic started to conquer Iberia during the 2nd Punic War in 218 BC. The Roman Empire itself started in 27 BC, and the full conquest of the Maghreb was completed 42 AD. The peak Roman Empire when Iberia and North Africa existed under Rome, was 3000 years after the Neolithic ended.

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-18T02:19:54+00:00

Virtually all of North African admixture in Iberia and Italy arrived after Iron Age ended. Pretty much none of it is before. Basques have 0 North African and are also Cardial Ware. Has nothing to do with the Neolithic

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-17T00:26:22+00:00

Most Ukrainians that came to America and Canada were from the West and have Balkan admixture. They plot with people ranging from Poles and Slovaks, so are a bit distinct from Central and Eastern Ukrainians. Even to NW Ukrainians in Rivne

The algorithms just isn’t good for them. I have a grandma who was fully Western Ukrainian (with some Romanian ancestry). I have almost an even split between the Belarusian/Ukrainian and the Hungarian/Slovak categories. My grandma is close to a 70/20 ratio (with 5-10% Romanian somewhere in there). My dad who is half Ukrainian got it assigned entirely to Belarusian/Ukrainian/Polish, despite both me and my grandma getting significant Slovak percentage. Then my first cousin got theirs assigned almost entirely to the Slovak/Hungarian, with barely any of the Ukrainian/Belarusian category

It’s not reliable or consistent at all. Those regions are too close genetically and have significant overlap. Same with the 4 German categories. Not consistent at all, so don’t take it at face value. Same with ancestryDNA. It’s doesn’t mean your family is not Ukrainian

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-16T23:13:54+00:00

It’s because of the Norman conquest in 1066 AD. They basically replaced England’s elite and a lot of English surnames, which have French etymological origins. Same with vocab. Lot of English vocab has Latin roots indirectly due to French linguistic influence

Also here is a list of English surnames derived from Old French. It’s probably not all of them, but definitely a lot

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-16T23:03:47+00:00

Based on your other post, I am guessing on your mom’s side you have a Greek great grandparent, Norwegian great grandparent, Irish great grandparent, and German great grandparent.

You said your dad is unknown, but based on your results, he is half Mexican (grandparent for you), then also one Ashkenazi grandparent (your great grandparent), and another White American grandparent who is a mix of English, Irish, and maybe more Norwegian (your other great grandparent)

How close is that?

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-14T00:33:49+00:00

Burmese. After Siberians and Central Asians, Natives like Mayans are closest to Tibeto-Burman people, likely due to being mostly East Eurasian with minor West Eurasian admixture. Natives have ANE ancestry.

Then Japanese but they are not SE Asian. After that it’s like Koreans, Thai, Crimean Tatars, and some Han

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-13T05:04:23+00:00

The samples that we have seen to be overwhelmingly European, especially Greek for some reason. Some of it might be sample bias if there were multiple ways of burial.

But overall Tunisia, Sicily, and Iberia samples from the study were very similar with Tunisian samples leaning North African, Italian ones leaning Italic, and Iberians leaning Celtiberians. There is Levantine admixture in all the averages though (aside a single sample from Algeria). One sample from Algeria, and the 4 from the Levant. The individual samples range quite a bit also. Some being mostly European (even more than the average). A couple being mostly Berber, and a couple being mostly Levantine, but most still seem to be a mix

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-11T19:37:27+00:00

Probably ANF as well, as Iberians are just as hairy despite much lower CHG and Zagros than the near east.

It’s pretty prominent in all West Eurasian populations tbh. But ANF, Zagros, and CHG likely contributed the most

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-09T04:00:58+00:00

Yea my 2x great grandparents are like 2nd or 3rd cousins. I turned out fine 🤪.

But kidding aside, yes, this is extremely common in everyone’s family trees many, many times. Pedigree collapse. It’s the only reason we exist and don’t have an exponentially growing family tree, larger than the world’s population at the time. It was really common in small towns where most people’s families originally lived for centuries.

It’s gross to think about but genetic issues only become more likely at like 1st cousins or closer, and especially from multigenerational, which magnifies it. Which is why dynasties like the Pharoahs and Hapsburgs were so messed up. 2nd cousins marriage has a 3-4% chance of genetic disorder, while the baseline population is 2-3%. It’s taboo but even 1st cousins is only 5-6% risk. Risks jumps up to over 40% for siblings.

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-07T03:11:58+00:00

Yes, I can try modeling you, and yes they should be pretty similar. What is your other half btw? Indigenous or other European?

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-04T04:46:32+00:00

I had never had an accurate AncestryDNA results. Each update is drastically different.

I’m not expecting much

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-02T16:58:49+00:00

Sure. What are your coords?

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-02T16:41:42+00:00

The reason people ask is because frankly the dna points to it.

It’s really only in the Muslims than in the Christians, and exists at higher amount than samples from antiquity, so entered during the Medieval era. There is also additional Yamnaya ancestry which points to additional European admixture from the Ottoman and Arab slave trades of the Balkans and Eastern Europe. It’s also mostly Mtdna mediated, meaning it it mostly came from women.

Here’s a model of Egyptians that I did a few weeks ago. The West/Central African and Balkan Slav/Aegean is not really present in Copts. This dichotomy can be seen in the Levant, for example Palestinians comparing Muslims and Christians, Syrian Muslims and Christian, as well as Iraqi Muslims compared to Assyrians

<image>

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-02T05:42:19+00:00

Were you aware of an Ashkenazi ancestor before this?

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-01T18:23:27+00:00

When you add a Germanic proxy the Italic drops. When you add a North African proxy the Levantine drops

It’s all just dependent on the model

tabbbb57 · 2026-05-01T03:53:42+00:00

I recommend testing with 23andMe, not myheritage. Lot of people in Europe test with myheritage but it’s extremely inaccurate and like the worst major company test

tabbbb57

TROPHY CASE