Page 1 of 23 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 229

Thread: The peoples of ancient Italy (and their origins)

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    328
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    R1a-YP406(xYP402)
    mtDNA
    K2b1

    The peoples of ancient Italy (and their origins)

    First off, here a map of all the different languages of ancient Italy:

    Attachment 16207

    C1 = Lepontic, a branch of Celtic
    C2 = Gaulish

    N4 = Ligurian, possibly IE, somewhere between Celtic and Italic, but little known

    N1 = Raetic, non-IE, related with Etruscan

    IE1 = Venetic, an Italic language, q-Italic like Latin, with some Germanic traits

    G1, G2 and G3 = various Greek dialects

    N2 = Etruscan, non-IE, related with Raetic and Lemnian

    N5 = Paleosardic, non-IE, hardly known, possibly related with Iberian. Note that Corsica may have harboured Ligurians rather.

    P1 = Punic, a West-Semitic language

    N3 = the language of the Novilara stele, also known as North Picene

    I1 = South Picene, a branch of Sabellic
    I2 = Umbrian, another branch of Sabellic
    I8 = Oscan, the third main branch of Sabellic
    I3, I6 and I7 = various Sabellic dialects that were intermediate between Oscan and Umbrian

    I4 = Faliscan, the closest relative of Latin
    I5 = Latin

    IE2 = Messapian, reportedly derived from Illyrian

    I9 = Sicel, little known, but probably Italic-related

    N7 = Sicanic, little known, probably non-IE

    N6 = Elymian, controversial, Ligurian and Anatolian connections have been discussed, recently also Italic ones


    Now for their origins!

    This map is from Volker Heyd:

    123123.JPG

    It shows the archaeological situation in the Bell Beaker era. We can see a divide between a northwestern, Bell Beaker influenced part and a southeastern part that shows close ties with the Balkans. And since Olalde et al. 2017 (the "Bell Beaker Behemoth") had come out we know that Bell Beaker influence in Italy came with steppe admixed people.

    Now compare with the Eupedia map of R1b-U152:
    http://cache.eupedia.com/images/cont...up-R1b-S28.gif

    The main concentration of this haplogroup is in the northwestern part of Italy, it's rather uncommon in the southeastern part and the gradients dividing these extremes follow exactly the dividing line between the Bell Beaker influenced part and the Balkan influenced part! And according to yfull, the age of R1b-U152 is 4400 years, so it appears to go back to the Bell Beaker era.

    I would suggest that Ligurian goes back to this early Bell Beaker influence in Italy. A lot of the R1b-U152 is probably Ligurian. Note also the strong concentration in the coastal area of Southern France and northern Corsica.

    And I would bet that the Sabellic branch of Italic came from the Balkans, with the Cetina culture. This probably brought along some extra CHG from the Caucasus that had spread in the Balkans prior to the arrival of Yamnaya. This would also explain the Roman topos of regarding the Umbrians as one of the most ancient peoples of Italy.

    And in Bronze Age Italy, the north, especially the Po plain, showed connections to central Europe. Both the Polada culture of the EBA and the Terramare culture of the MBA/LBA were pile dwelling cultures, akin to those found north of the Alps. And as central Europe had a well developped Bronze technology, Bronze Age northern Italy was also advanced in Bronze metallurgy. The Apennine culture of central and southern Italy on the other hand had a rather primitive Bronze technology. This would also preclude later influences from the Balkans.

    But what were these pile dwelling cultures of the north ethnically? My guess is that none of the above mentioned languages is derived from them. But presumably they spoke Italo-Celtic languages close to Ligurian. The Euganei who were the pre-Venetic substratum of Veneto may have been derived from them.

    According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus eventually in the LBA, Pelasgians from Greece sailed to the Po estuary where they established some settlements. Then they crossed the Apennines, marching through Umbrian territory and conquered the Etrurian coast. Now Dionysius is most often cited as the chief witness for an autochthonous origin of the Etruscans and as the main opponent of Herodotus' account of Etruscan origins. Indeed, Dionysius is ardent in stressing that his Pelasgians were not the Etruscans, and that they were a distinct people. Yet, all his arguments don't look really convincing. And when he claims that soon after their conquest of the Etrurian coast they were struck by bad luck and mysteriously disappeared, that sounds outlandish. Especially if you consider that e.g. to Thucydides there was no doubt that the Etruscans were Pelasgians. And that there was a language related to Etruscan spoken on the island of Lemnos. And actually, if you check Alberto Piazza's map of the first principal component of the serological markers of Italy, that striking southern influence on the Po estuary gels well with Dionysius' account:

    sddff.jpg

    The Po estuary has also yielded some Mycenaean pottery:

    hfghsf.png

    So I would say, Etruscan was first spoken on the Po estuary and spread from there to southern Etruria, well before the Protovillanovans arrived. The latter came in the Final Bronze Age somewhere from the eastern sphere of the Urnfield culture. While many people have suggested that they were either Etruscan or Italic or Sabellic, I take a more unusual stance and say they were at the origin of the Latins and Faliscans. Check the map of the most important Protovillanovan sites:

    xfjfg.jpg

    The concentration of sites in the area of the Latins and Faliscans is rather dense, much denser than in most of the Sabellic lands. And most of all, they stuck to the cremation rites introduced by the Protovillanovans clearly longer than most of the Sabellics, as the map of the early Iron Age shows (the dark areas were cremating, the light ones inhumating):

    villanova.jpg

    According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus the Latins acquired their name at the time of the Trojan war. That would fit well with an origin in the Final Bronze Age, during the Bronze Age collapse.

    Now for the Veneti. As I said, their language is somewhat closer to Germanic than the other Italic languages. Some have suggested that Liburnian (spoken in coastal Croatia) was a relative of Venetic. And according to Pliny the Elder, Liburnians had also been present in the middle Adriatic part of Italy, prior to the Umbrian expansion. And interestingly, the crania excavated in the necropolis of Novilara/Molaroni near Pesaro show striking similarity to Unetice crania of Silesia and Moravia. I think it would make sense that the EBA culture of Unetice was on the one hand related to Germanic, and on the other hand to more southern peoples like the Veneti and Liburnians. Somehow there must have been a push southwards in the Final Bronze Age, maybe this even caused the Protovillanovan wave and the arrival of genetically more northern people in Iron Age Montenegro. Compare the shift from RISE595 to RISE596 (PCA from Eurogenes):

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o...VFYWp0WlE/view

    Lepontic was associated with the Golasecca culture of the early Iron Age, which was derived from the Canegrate culture of the LBA. This in turn arose when Celts from the east French area had invaded the area.

    Gaulish on the other hand came with the La Tène invasions of the later Iron Age.

    As for North Picene, I don't believe that it was real. The respective epigraphic finds may be forgeries.

    In contrast, the Sicels once lived in central Italy, according to all ancient authors and were expelled by various other tribes. According to Dionysius, a quarter of Tivoli still harboured Sicels at his time (the first century BC). And according to Pliny the Elder, Sicels had founded Ancona and Numana. As for the date of their expulsion, according to Thucydides that was about 300 years before the first Greeks arrived in Sicily, i.e. about 1030 BC. And indeed, in the 11th century BC, we can see that the a facies called Ausonio II spread from Calabria and the northeastern tip of Sicily deeper into Sicily.

    Well, I didn't explain all the languages of my list now, but the rest is either uncontroversial or I'm not sure about them.

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Simon_W For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (05-21-2017), Cascio (07-15-2017), leonardo (06-06-2017), Osiris (05-26-2017), Principe (05-21-2017), Ryukendo (06-06-2017), vettor (05-21-2017)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    328
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    R1a-YP406(xYP402)
    mtDNA
    K2b1

    This is the first map again. It disappeared in my first post, because I posted too many maps.

    Messapian_map.png

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Simon_W For This Useful Post:

     dominique_nuit (07-03-2017), leonardo (06-06-2017)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    766
    Sex
    Location
    Paris
    Ethnicity
    Western European
    Y-DNA
    R1b-DF27>ZZ12>ZZ39
    mtDNA
    K1a4a1

    Italy 1861-1946 Catalonia France-Ile-de-France Flanders Lorraine
    As a reminder:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...erranean_basin

    Why do you not mention in your list the Phoenicians (P1, Punic)? they seem to have carried several haplogroups in the peninsula.

    MDLP K16: 50% Irish_Leinster +25% French_Provence +25% Italian_South@ 1.62
    MDLP K11: Nordic_BattleAxe + Corded_Ware_Chalcolithic + Salzmuende_MN + Armenia_Chalcolithic @ 1.83

  6. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,510
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA
    T1a2b1a1a2b
    mtDNA
    H95a -Ostrogoth

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Sweden Finns
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon_W View Post
    First off, here a map of all the different languages of ancient Italy:

    Attachment 16207

    C1 = Lepontic, a branch of Celtic
    C2 = Gaulish

    N4 = Ligurian, possibly IE, somewhere between Celtic and Italic, but little known

    N1 = Raetic, non-IE, related with Etruscan

    IE1 = Venetic, an Italic language, q-Italic like Latin, with some Germanic traits

    G1, G2 and G3 = various Greek dialects

    N2 = Etruscan, non-IE, related with Raetic and Lemnian

    N5 = Paleosardic, non-IE, hardly known, possibly related with Iberian. Note that Corsica may have harboured Ligurians rather.

    P1 = Punic, a West-Semitic language

    N3 = the language of the Novilara stele, also known as North Picene

    I1 = South Picene, a branch of Sabellic
    I2 = Umbrian, another branch of Sabellic
    I8 = Oscan, the third main branch of Sabellic
    I3, I6 and I7 = various Sabellic dialects that were intermediate between Oscan and Umbrian

    I4 = Faliscan, the closest relative of Latin
    I5 = Latin

    IE2 = Messapian, reportedly derived from Illyrian

    I9 = Sicel, little known, but probably Italic-related

    N7 = Sicanic, little known, probably non-IE

    N6 = Elymian, controversial, Ligurian and Anatolian connections have been discussed, recently also Italic ones


    Now for their origins!

    This map is from Volker Heyd:

    123123.JPG

    It shows the archaeological situation in the Bell Beaker era. We can see a divide between a northwestern, Bell Beaker influenced part and a southeastern part that shows close ties with the Balkans. And since Olalde et al. 2017 (the "Bell Beaker Behemoth") had come out we know that Bell Beaker influence in Italy came with steppe admixed people.

    Now compare with the Eupedia map of R1b-U152:
    http://cache.eupedia.com/images/cont...up-R1b-S28.gif

    The main concentration of this haplogroup is in the northwestern part of Italy, it's rather uncommon in the southeastern part and the gradients dividing these extremes follow exactly the dividing line between the Bell Beaker influenced part and the Balkan influenced part! And according to yfull, the age of R1b-U152 is 4400 years, so it appears to go back to the Bell Beaker era.

    I would suggest that Ligurian goes back to this early Bell Beaker influence in Italy. A lot of the R1b-U152 is probably Ligurian. Note also the strong concentration in the coastal area of Southern France and northern Corsica.

    And I would bet that the Sabellic branch of Italic came from the Balkans, with the Cetina culture. This probably brought along some extra CHG from the Caucasus that had spread in the Balkans prior to the arrival of Yamnaya. This would also explain the Roman topos of regarding the Umbrians as one of the most ancient peoples of Italy.

    And in Bronze Age Italy, the north, especially the Po plain, showed connections to central Europe. Both the Polada culture of the EBA and the Terramare culture of the MBA/LBA were pile dwelling cultures, akin to those found north of the Alps. And as central Europe had a well developped Bronze technology, Bronze Age northern Italy was also advanced in Bronze metallurgy. The Apennine culture of central and southern Italy on the other hand had a rather primitive Bronze technology. This would also preclude later influences from the Balkans.

    But what were these pile dwelling cultures of the north ethnically? My guess is that none of the above mentioned languages is derived from them. But presumably they spoke Italo-Celtic languages close to Ligurian. The Euganei who were the pre-Venetic substratum of Veneto may have been derived from them.

    According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus eventually in the LBA, Pelasgians from Greece sailed to the Po estuary where they established some settlements. Then they crossed the Apennines, marching through Umbrian territory and conquered the Etrurian coast. Now Dionysius is most often cited as the chief witness for an autochthonous origin of the Etruscans and as the main opponent of Herodotus' account of Etruscan origins. Indeed, Dionysius is ardent in stressing that his Pelasgians were not the Etruscans, and that they were a distinct people. Yet, all his arguments don't look really convincing. And when he claims that soon after their conquest of the Etrurian coast they were struck by bad luck and mysteriously disappeared, that sounds outlandish. Especially if you consider that e.g. to Thucydides there was no doubt that the Etruscans were Pelasgians. And that there was a language related to Etruscan spoken on the island of Lemnos. And actually, if you check Alberto Piazza's map of the first principal component of the serological markers of Italy, that striking southern influence on the Po estuary gels well with Dionysius' account:

    sddff.jpg

    The Po estuary has also yielded some Mycenaean pottery:

    hfghsf.png

    So I would say, Etruscan was first spoken on the Po estuary and spread from there to southern Etruria, well before the Protovillanovans arrived. The latter came in the Final Bronze Age somewhere from the eastern sphere of the Urnfield culture. While many people have suggested that they were either Etruscan or Italic or Sabellic, I take a more unusual stance and say they were at the origin of the Latins and Faliscans. Check the map of the most important Protovillanovan sites:

    xfjfg.jpg

    The concentration of sites in the area of the Latins and Faliscans is rather dense, much denser than in most of the Sabellic lands. And most of all, they stuck to the cremation rites introduced by the Protovillanovans clearly longer than most of the Sabellics, as the map of the early Iron Age shows (the dark areas were cremating, the light ones inhumating):

    villanova.jpg

    According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus the Latins acquired their name at the time of the Trojan war. That would fit well with an origin in the Final Bronze Age, during the Bronze Age collapse.

    Now for the Veneti. As I said, their language is somewhat closer to Germanic than the other Italic languages. Some have suggested that Liburnian (spoken in coastal Croatia) was a relative of Venetic. And according to Pliny the Elder, Liburnians had also been present in the middle Adriatic part of Italy, prior to the Umbrian expansion. And interestingly, the crania excavated in the necropolis of Novilara/Molaroni near Pesaro show striking similarity to Unetice crania of Silesia and Moravia. I think it would make sense that the EBA culture of Unetice was on the one hand related to Germanic, and on the other hand to more southern peoples like the Veneti and Liburnians. Somehow there must have been a push southwards in the Final Bronze Age, maybe this even caused the Protovillanovan wave and the arrival of genetically more northern people in Iron Age Montenegro. Compare the shift from RISE595 to RISE596 (PCA from Eurogenes):

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o...VFYWp0WlE/view

    Lepontic was associated with the Golasecca culture of the early Iron Age, which was derived from the Canegrate culture of the LBA. This in turn arose when Celts from the east French area had invaded the area.

    Gaulish on the other hand came with the La Tène invasions of the later Iron Age.

    As for North Picene, I don't believe that it was real. The respective epigraphic finds may be forgeries.

    In contrast, the Sicels once lived in central Italy, according to all ancient authors and were expelled by various other tribes. According to Dionysius, a quarter of Tivoli still harboured Sicels at his time (the first century BC). And according to Pliny the Elder, Sicels had founded Ancona and Numana. As for the date of their expulsion, according to Thucydides that was about 300 years before the first Greeks arrived in Sicily, i.e. about 1030 BC. And indeed, in the 11th century BC, we can see that the a facies called Ausonio II spread from Calabria and the northeastern tip of Sicily deeper into Sicily.

    Well, I didn't explain all the languages of my list now, but the rest is either uncontroversial or I'm not sure about them.

    if we look at link below
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Italic_script

    my take from this is ...........North-Picene = a Liburnian branch

    The Euganei are the indigenous Veneti plus Friuli people with "veneti" arriving ~1200BC ............one of the Euganei tribes where the Camuni
    http://mefra.revues.org/2503
    Pliny the Elder states
    Gli Euganei erano un gruppo di popolazioni, difficilmente definibile, stanziato nelle zone pianeggianti e montuose dell'Italia nord-orientale, tra le Alpi Orientali e l'Adriatico. Con l'arrivo dei Veneti si ritirarono nelle valli alpine, confondendosi con i Reti.

    Plinio il Vecchio, rifacendosi a Catone, afferma che gli Euganei si dividevano in tre stirpi, i Triumpilini (Val Trompia), i Camuni (Val Camonica) e gli Stoni. Tutte queste popolazioni vennero romanizzate prima dell'inizio dell'era volgare.

    so the huge Euganei group consisted of 3 tribes, Stoni, Triumplini and the Camuni ...............making the camuni language either a late change to celtic influence or a celtic influence pre 1200BC when the veneti arrived.

    Camuni - The Sondrio alphabet ("Camunic script“), conspicuous for its obvious graphic peculiarities, comprises the rock inscriptions of the Valcamonica, and a handful of testimonies from other places whose characters bear resemblance to those of the rock inscriptions, though the alphabets cannot be said to be identical. Indeed, different systems seem to have been employed in the Valcamonica itself. The language written in the rock inscriptions, called "Camunic" after the demonym Camunni documented by the ancients, has not yet been deciphered or convincingly connected to any of the surrounding languages; the other testimonies have been argued to write diverse languages: While the two inscriptions on stelae from Montagna in Valtellina (PID 252) and Treviso (PID 253) feature endings similar to those commonly found in Camunic rock inscriptions.

    So cumunic from Treviso ( euganei lands ) to Sondrio ( north of Bergamo ) later Euganei lands .............could be connected with the Euganei camuni people



    Rhaetic -The Raeti appear to have learned the art of writing from the Veneti rather than the Etruscans (Schumacher 2004: 312–316). While Raetic inscriptions are only known from the 5th century onward, at a time when Etruscan inscriptions have appeared in the very North , some features of the Raetic script strongly suggest a Venetic source.
    As in Venetic, different alphabet variants are used for writing the Raetic language. Some of the similarities with Venetic can only be demonstrated for the Magrè alphabet, which appears to be close to the Archaic Venetic alphabet, although the use of syllabic punctuation indicates an acquaintance with a phase 2 Venetic source. It is not yet clear whether or in how far all Raetic alphabet variants are derived from the same model. It cannot be excluded that different Venetic varieties, and maybe to some extent also Etruscan or even Celtic writing practice, have influenced Raetic writing. For details see below sub "The Raetic Script" and here. One common feature of the Raetic alphabets, three-bar Mu M s, is reminiscent of the Venetic Vicenza alphabet, unfortunately represented by only three documents

    Since raetic is attested from 500BC and from the venetic, then the conclusion ( one ) is that the raetic are a branch of the Euganei ( who spoke and wrote Venetic ) and is not associated with etruscan..........the split of raetic between its 2 groups also tell a story.

    one question on the Lepontic is.............is it from the Celtic language or the Gaulish branch of the celtic language
    Last edited by vettor; 05-21-2017 at 06:56 PM.

    Father's Mothers Ydna ......R-S22778 ........Merlengo Veneto
    Father's Mtdna .....T2b35.......1735 Porcellengo Veneto Italy
    Wife's Ydna ..........R-DF99
    Sons Mtdna .....K1a4 ...........1710 Carnic Alps

    My Path = ( K-M9+, TL-P326+, T-M184+, L490+, M70+, PF5664+, L131+, L446+, CTS933+, CTS54+, CTS8862+, Z19945+, A339+ )

    The main negatives = ( M193-, P322-, P327-, Pages11- , L25- , CTS1848- )

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to vettor For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (05-21-2017)

  8. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    256
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by vettor View Post
    Rhaetic -The Raeti appear to have learned the art of writing from the Veneti rather than the Etruscans (Schumacher 2004: 312–316). While Raetic inscriptions are only known from the 5th century onward, at a time when Etruscan inscriptions have appeared in the very North , some features of the Raetic script strongly suggest a Venetic source.
    As in Venetic, different alphabet variants are used for writing the Raetic language. Some of the similarities with Venetic can only be demonstrated for the Magrè alphabet, which appears to be close to the Archaic Venetic alphabet, although the use of syllabic punctuation indicates an acquaintance with a phase 2 Venetic source. It is not yet clear whether or in how far all Raetic alphabet variants are derived from the same model. It cannot be excluded that different Venetic varieties, and maybe to some extent also Etruscan or even Celtic writing practice, have influenced Raetic writing. For details see below sub "The Raetic Script" and here. One common feature of the Raetic alphabets, three-bar Mu M s, is reminiscent of the Venetic Vicenza alphabet, unfortunately represented by only three documents
    Vettor, that's about the script, the alphabet, not about the origin of Rhaetic as language. All those scripts (Venetic, Sanzeno alphabet, Magrè alphabet...) derive, directly or indirectly, from the Etruscan form of the Euboean Greek Cumaean alphabet or from the Euboean Greek Cumaean alphabet. Even the Germanic runic alphabet was derived from one of these alphabets. The split between Etruscan and Rhaetic is much older than the spread of these alphabets. And Schumacher is one of those scholar who thinks that Rhaetic and Etruscan are both part of the Tyrsenian family.

    Historical and linguistic frame
    Recent discovery of written documents from the ancient Raetia (Rhaetic is – so far as we can say today – an agglutinant relic language, ca. 290 inscription, spread from the 5th to the 1st century B.C. in North Italy: Trentino, South- and North-Tirol, Engadin Valley and part of Northern/Western Veneto; see de Simone, Marchesini 2013) and from Ephestia in Lemnos (“Tyrrhenic language”, few but significant inscriptions from Lemnos, among them the well-known “Lemnos-Stele”: see de Simone 2011) confirm with new linguistic evidence the deep relationship between Rhaetic, Tyrrhenic and the Etruscan language. This relationship had first been argued in the ’90 by H. Rix and S. Schumacher (Rix 1998; Schumacher 1992 [2004] and 1999) and can be now better described thanks to an increased linguistic corpus.
    The genealogical affinity among the three languages can be based on systematic and structural correspondence of phonological, morphological, syntactic and typological items. The reconstructed outline offers a new, assured argument to the reconstruction of the pre- and proto-historical European frame, to which recent data (Achilli et alii 2007, Ghirotto et alii 2013) on the Etruscan genetic pool bring new matter for the scientific discussion. The aim of the project "Monumenta Linguae Raeticae" ist to collect all Rhaetic iscriptions known until now in order to publish them in a book, furnished with topographical information for each site, epigraphic description, images or/and apographs.
    Last edited by Larth; 05-22-2017 at 12:20 AM.

  9. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,510
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA
    T1a2b1a1a2b
    mtDNA
    H95a -Ostrogoth

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Sweden Finns
    Quote Originally Posted by Larth View Post
    Vettor, that's about the script, the alphabet, not about the origin of Rhaetic as language. All those scripts (Venetic, Sanzeno alphabet, Magrè alphabet...) derive, directly or indirectly, from the Etruscan form of the Euboean Greek Cumaean alphabet or from the Euboean Greek Cumaean alphabet. Even the Germanic runic alphabet was derived from one of these alphabets. The split between Etruscan and Rhaetic is much older than the spread of these alphabets. And Schumacher is one of those scholar who thinks that Rhaetic and Etruscan are both part of the Tyrsenian family.
    Yes all come from euboean and this originated from phoenician. ...but the languages in the ancient times did not have the same volume as languages today.

    Lemnos stelae is irrelevant as it is 400 years younger than etruscan

  10. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    328
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    R1a-YP406(xYP402)
    mtDNA
    K2b1

    Quote Originally Posted by Camulogène Rix View Post
    As a reminder:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...erranean_basin

    Why do you not mention in your list the Phoenicians (P1, Punic)? they seem to have carried several haplogroups in the peninsula.
    Well, in my first list I did mention P1 and the Punics, I just didn't include them in the more elaborate explanation below, because it's uncontroversial who they were and where they came from - like the Greeks as well. I think it's true that the Phoenicians were not exactly identical to the Punics, the latter are just the Phoenicians from Tunisia and Carthago, that is, a sub-section of the Phoenicians as a whole. So I might have better mentioned the Phoenicians as well.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Simon_W For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (06-05-2017)

  12. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    328
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    R1a-YP406(xYP402)
    mtDNA
    K2b1

    OK, on a second thought, after having contemplated over the recent paper about ancient Balkan DNA by Mathieson et al., I do think that a large part of the Armenia/Iran-related and Natufian-related ancestry in central and northern Italy is relatively ancient and came from the Balkans. Probably together with some of the Italics, in the form of the Cetina culture.

    1/4 of my ancestry is from Cesena and surroundings, and my Eurogenes Global10 coordinates are best modelled using lots of the Maros sample from early Bronze Age southern Hungary, while the necessary additional MENA admixture is fairly modest, albeit undeniable:

    Maros:RISE373 31.35
    Polish 21.9
    French_East 18.65
    German 15.95
    Hungary_BA:I1504 5.7
    England_Roman_outlier:3DRIF-26 3.55
    Armenia_MLBA:average 1.3
    Mozabite 1.1
    Armenia_ChL:average 0.5

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Simon_W For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (06-05-2017)

  14. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    256
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon_W View Post
    OK, on a second thought, after having contemplated over the recent paper about ancient Balkan DNA by Mathieson et al., I do think that a large part of the Armenia/Iran-related and Natufian-related ancestry in central and northern Italy is relatively ancient and came from the Balkans. Probably together with some of the Italics, in the form of the Cetina culture.
    More the former (CHG-like) than the latter, and it arrived in the Chalcolithic from the Balkans. Then, especially in Romagna (Cesena is in Romagna) there might be a small recent legacy due to Byzantine rule but it is not something they all have.

  15. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    328
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    R1a-YP406(xYP402)
    mtDNA
    K2b1

    It looks more and more like ancient central and southern Italy were like a western extension of the ancient northern and southern Balkans, respectively. This makes sense archaeologically and genetically. We didn't yet see autosomal DNA from Bronze Age Greece, but I would expect an even more Middle East shifted population, on average, than in the northern Balkans and Bronze Age Hungary. And towards western Italy the Balkan influence got weaker, resulting in somewhat stronger Iberian affinity in some places. Whereas Bronze Age northern Italy with its pile-dwelling cultures rooted in central Europe was a different story. But Etruscan and Roman (in the broadest sense) influence also brought along the old Balkan influence.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Simon_W For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (07-15-2017)

Page 1 of 23 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ftdna ancient origins results, italian
    By patrizio22 in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 03-23-2017, 06:12 PM
  2. Replies: 74
    Last Post: 11-22-2016, 05:48 PM
  3. MDLP K23b to Ancient Origins Convertor
    By dnamania in forum FTDNA
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-14-2016, 06:32 AM
  4. Best sites / tests for ancient DNA / origins
    By UtopiasCult in forum General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-08-2016, 10:36 AM
  5. Replies: 258
    Last Post: 08-23-2015, 08:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •