Southern Italian DNA and Ashkenazi Jews are connected by a recurring ancient genetic pattern: individuals from Imperial Italy fall close to both eastern and western Ashkenazi references.
German and French comparisons preserve the relationship already visible among the eastern Ashkenazim examined in my previous article. The affinity crosses the east-west Ashkenazi divide.
This matters because two shortcuts repeatedly derail the discussion: dismissing Italian affinity as merely Slavic admixture, and treating a high Natufian calculator value as a direct measure of recent Levantine or Judean ancestry. The ancient comparisons challenge both.
My earlier article on Ashkenazi origins and Southern Italian DNA established the broader pattern across Imperial, late antique and medieval individuals. This companion article centers German and French Ashkenazim, connects the findings to those eastern comparisons, and examines eight Roman-period genomes.
Why western Ashkenazi Jews sharpen the Southern Italian comparison
Eastern Ashkenazi populations can carry additional eastern-European ancestry. German and French references therefore provide a useful comparison with relatively less of that shift. Waldman and colleagues’ study of medieval Erfurt Jews also distinguished ancestry histories associated with modern western and eastern Ashkenazim, including additional eastern-European-related admixture in the latter history.
Western does not mean zero Slavic ancestry, and these G25 comparisons do not subtract admixture mathematically. The question is more direct: does the Italian relationship survive without making eastern Ashkenazi references carry the argument? It does. Simply invoking Slavic input cannot explain why German and French references also fall close to Imperial Italian genomes.
The same ancient genomes connect eastern and western Ashkenazim
R835 makes the bridge explicit. The earlier article placed Ashkenazi Belarus at 0.0235, Campania at 0.0238 and Calabria at 0.0239. The western comparison adds German Ashkenazim at 0.0259 and French Ashkenazim at approximately 0.0272. Changing the Ashkenazi reference changes the distance, but the ancient Italian affinity remains.
R835
Imperial Marche · c. 136 CE
R47
Imperial Rome · c. 295 CE
R1544
Imperial Lazio · c. 200 CE
Blue: Southern Italian reference. Purple: eastern Ashkenazi. Orange: German Ashkenazi. Teal: French Ashkenazi. R835’s French value is approximate. Values reproduce collected modern-reference outputs.
R47 and R1544 repeat the result. R47 actually sits closer to the German reference than to the Belarusian reference in these outputs. R1544 falls close to both. These are individual Imperial genomes connecting the two articles, rather than a claim that eastern and western Ashkenazim have identical histories.
Eight Roman genomes place Ashkenazi Jews near Southern Italian profiles
| Sample · approximate CE | Context | German AJ | French AJ | Italian reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R835 · 136 | Marche | 0.0259 | ~0.0272 | Campania 0.0238 |
| R47 · 295 | Rome | 0.0241 | 0.0274 | Campania 0.0186 |
| R1544 · 200 | Lazio | 0.0266 | 0.0275 | Calabria 0.0230 |
| R1543 · 200 | Lazio | 0.0300 | 0.0280 | Calabria 0.0327 |
| R115 · 100 | Rome | 0.0330 | 0.0319 | Reggio Calabria 0.0283 |
| R39 · 152 | Isola Sacra | 0.0329 | 0.0333 | Reggio Calabria 0.0270 |
| R1556 · 125 | Marche | 0.0319 | 0.0327 | Campania 0.0225 |
| I24680 · 270 | Sicily | 0.0309* | 0.0307 | Reggio Calabria 0.0311 |
R835 and R47: different paternal branches, related genomes
R835, a male from Civitanova Marche, carries J1-P58 and mtDNA H2a5. His approximate 136 CE date summarizes a broader 27 BCE–300 CE interval. Despite his J1 lineage, his modeled Natufian component is 4.0%, with 3.6% Levant PPNB in a separate fit. R47, from Centocelle in Rome, carries G2a-M406 and mtDNA J1c1c. His Southern Italian-centered profile retains close western Ashkenazi affinities.
R1544 and R1543: the same place, different profiles
Both come from Mazzano Romano around 200 CE. R1544 is female, with mtDNA J1c; R1543 is male, carrying T-M70 and mtDNA H1e. She favors Calabria and Campania. His closest listed references include Bulgarian and Turkish Sephardim, followed by Italian Jews, with French Ashkenazim at 0.0280.
Yet R1544 has more modeled Natufian: 11.6% against his 10.4%. The more Southern Italian-centered individual has the higher value. A prehistoric component cannot decide whether a whole genome belongs closer to Italian or Jewish reference populations.
R115, R39 and R1556: Rome and Marche extend the pattern
R115 carries J2a-M92 and mtDNA U4. French Ashkenazim at 0.0319 precede the listed Campania reference at 0.0327. R39 is female, with mtDNA J2b1c1; her German and French distances, 0.0329 and 0.0333, also precede the listed Campania value of 0.0342.
R1556 carries R1b-DF27 and mtDNA H-T195C. He favors Campania, while German and French Ashkenazim remain nearby at 0.0319 and 0.0327. His separate PPNB fit is only 0.7%. A large fitted PPNB component is unnecessary for this reported affinity.
Roman Sicily: I24680 nearly overlaps the western references
I24680, from Lilybaeum at modern Marsala, dates to 215–326 calibrated CE, summarized as approximately 270 CE. He is male, with mtDNA U1a1a and a paternal assignment recorded in the collected material as R1b-Z2103. French Ashkenazim rank first in the supplied modern comparison, German Ashkenazim second, and Reggio Calabria third.
These are close numerical distances, not a statistically established tie. The separate 786-record scan reports German distance 0.03123157, rather than 0.0309; the outputs remain separately labeled because their discrepancy has not been resolved.
The Natufian meme: why the r/JewishDNA inference fails
The r/JewishDNA narrative I am challenging treats high Natufian = a direct measure of recent Levantine or Judean ancestry, then uses that shortcut to rank Jewishness or dismiss a Southern Italian connection. That inference is false. A prehistoric calculator component is being asked to identify a much later population and its migration history.
Natufians were prehistoric people of the Levant. Natufian-related ancestry therefore has a real Levantine connection. But a fitted percentage cannot tell us how much ancestry arrived through Judeans, Imperial Italians, or another Mediterranean population already carrying related ancestry. Geographic origin deep in prehistory and the immediate historical source of ancestry are different questions.
R1549 exposes the second failure: more Natufian does not consistently mean closer Ashkenazi affinity. His modeled value is 17.3%, compared with R835’s 4.0%, yet his German-reference distance is approximately 0.0448 against 0.0259. R47 also has less Natufian than R134 while sitting closer to the German reference.
Each column uses its own unit and zero baseline. These selected counterexamples challenge a simple ranking rule; they are not a correlation analysis of all 786 records.
PPNB is a separate fitted model, not a second percentage to add to Natufian. R835 has 3.6% PPNB and R1556 only 0.7%; R1549 has 27.0% but is farther from the German and French references. Neither model is a direct Jewishness meter. These comparisons undermine that misuse without denying Levantine-related ancestry.
J1, J2 and R1b: paternal labels do not determine autosomal ancestry
The earlier article compared two Imperial men from Marche: J1-P58 R835 and R1b-U152 R1554. The R1b man has more modeled Natufian and PPNB than the J1 man. Treating J1 as an automatic whole-genome Levantine label, or R1b as its opposite, fails this straightforward comparison.
Natufian component
Shared scale 0–12%
Separate Levant PPNB fit
Shared scale 0–12%
Values reproduced from the earlier article. Natufian and PPNB come from separate models and must not be summed.
The wider male set includes J1-P58, J2a-M92, J2a-L70, G2a-M406, T-M70, R1b-DF27 and R1b-Z2103. Female examples include R1544, R39 and R35, carrying J1c, J2b1c1 and H32. The relationship crosses paternal and maternal branches. Y-DNA follows one paternal line; mtDNA follows one maternal line; autosomal ancestry reflects many lines.
From Imperial Rome to medieval Italy: both articles show recurrence
The new scan ranked 786 individual Italy-labeled ancient coordinate records against Ashkenazi_Jew_Germany_(n=10), excluding ancient population averages. R35, a female from Rome’s Celio around 500 CE, leads at 0.02346634. R47 follows at 0.02410090, then medieval Foggia’s VK534 at 0.02473542.
| Sample | Approximate CE | German AJ scan distance | Connection |
|---|---|---|---|
| R35 | 500 | 0.02346634 | Late antique Rome |
| COL_106 | 642 | 0.02774205 | Early medieval Collegno |
| VEN015 | 700 | 0.03020212 | Early medieval Venosa |
| VK537 | 1150 | 0.02760708 | Medieval Foggia; earlier article |
| VK534 | 1184 | 0.02473542 | Medieval Foggia; earlier article |
| VK535 | 1250 | 0.03062557 | Medieval Foggia; earlier article |
The eastern comparisons in the earlier article placed VEN006 near Belarusian and Lithuanian Ashkenazim, and VK535 near Ukrainian and Belarusian Ashkenazim. VK535 now also appears close to the German reference. The Imperial examples and later recurrences connect the two analyses without making the selected skeletons a documented family tree.
What the Southern Italian evidence means for Ashkenazi Jews
Antonio and colleagues’ ancient Rome study documented an Imperial eastern Mediterranean ancestry shift and substantial diversity. Imperial Italy was already a meeting place of ancestries. Italian burial context does not imply an exclusively local ancestry or identify someone’s religion.
Close profiles occur among men and women, so the historical discussion must examine both. Their presence does not quantify male versus female contributions to Ashkenazi founders. Similarly, nearest G25 matches cannot establish direct descent or the percentage of ancestry contributed by Italy.
My thesis remains that populations rooted in Italy’s ancient Mediterranean genetic landscape contributed substantially to Ashkenazi ethnogenesis. The western comparisons strengthen the argument already developed through eastern Ashkenazim. Slavic admixture alone cannot dismiss a relationship retained in German and French comparisons. A Natufian percentage cannot explain it away, and neither can a haplogroup label.
Sources and method
Sample access: Explore Your DNA. Choose Italy and search the IDs. Key records: R835, I24680, R1556 and R1549. Records identify underlying publications. Companion analysis: Ashkenazi origins and Southern Italian DNA. Research context: Antonio et al. (2019) and Waldman et al. (2022), linked above.
Data note: Figures reproduce collected calculator outputs; they are not newly calculated from raw genomes. G25 measures distance in 25-dimensional coordinate space, not ancestry percentages. Selected close matches do not establish the frequency of these profiles across ancient Italy. Dates summarize broader intervals; reference sets, model settings and ancient DNA quality affect comparisons. The full 786-record scan and reference coordinates are needed for independent replication. Natufian components and separate PPNB fits must remain distinct.