PDA

View Full Version : New population isolates identified in the eastern Italian Alps



Maciamo
21-12-12, 10:34
This is an amazing discovery in my eyes. 1310 DNA samples were collected from six geographically isolated villages of Friuli-Venezia Giulia (http://www.eupedia.com/italy/friuli-venezia_giulia.shtml) and were genotyped at for 145,000 SNP's. According the the authors of the study, the observed level of genetic isolation in Friuli-Venezia Giulia region is more extreme according to several measures of isolation compared with Sardinians, French Basques and northern Finns.

The six villages are Clauzetto, Erto, Illegio, Resia, San Martino del Carso and Sauris. According to the autosomal admixtures displayed in the chart below, the inhabitants of Resia (at the border of Austria and Slovenia) are particularly unique genetically. Clauzetto and San Martino del Carso are the closest of the six to the European mainstream.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f1.jpg


The model-based mapping convergence with SPA (below) also shows that the villages lie clearly away from other European populations, except the Basques, who are positioned together with some samples of Resia and Sauris. The genotypes from Erto and Illegio are halfway between the Basques and the Sardinians.

Too bad that they didn't test Y-DNA as well, as I am convinced that these Alpine populations would have a lot of haplogroup I2 and G2a. The fact that Ötzi was found in the same region and that he was genetically closest to modern Sardinians would a priori indicate that the people of Resia, Sauris, Erto and Illegio are more closely related to Ötzi than other Europeans.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f2.jpg


The runs of homozygosity (gROH) reveal that the population isolates of Friuli-Venezia Giulia are very homozygous, meaning that they received very little genetic contribution from the outside over the last millennia. The Jews, the Orcadians and the Finns are other well known populations with a similar level of homozygosity.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f5.jpg

Here is the full article:

Nature : Genetic characterization of northeastern Italian population isolates in the context of broader European genetic diversity (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2012229a.html)

zanipolo
21-12-12, 18:18
This is an amazing discovery in my eyes. 1310 DNA samples were collected from six geographically isolated villages of Friuli-Venezia Giulia (http://www.eupedia.com/italy/friuli-venezia_giulia.shtml) and were genotyped at for 145,000 SNP's. According the the authors of the study, the observed level of genetic isolation in Friuli-Venezia Giulia region is more extreme according to several measures of isolation compared with Sardinians, French Basques and northern Finns.

The six villages are Clauzetto, Erto, Illegio, Resia, San Martino del Carso and Sauris. According to the autosomal admixtures displayed in the chart below, the inhabitants of Resia (at the border of Austria and Slovenia) are particularly unique genetically. Clauzetto and San Martino del Carso are the closest of the six to the European mainstream.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f1.jpg


The model-based mapping convergence with SPA (below) also shows that the villages lie clearly away from other European populations, except the Basques, who are positioned together with some samples of Resia and Sauris. The genotypes from Erto and Illegio are halfway between the Basques and the Sardinians.

Too bad that they didn't test Y-DNA as well, as I am convinced that these Alpine populations would have a lot of haplogroup I2 and G2a. The fact that Ötzi was found in the same region and that he was genetically closest to modern Sardinians would a priori indicate that the people of Resia, Sauris, Erto and Illegio are more closely related to Ötzi than other Europeans.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f2.jpg


The runs of homozygosity (gROH) reveal that the population isolates of Friuli-Venezia Giulia are very homozygous, meaning that they received very little genetic contribution from the outside over the last millennia. The Jews, the Orcadians and the Finns are other well known populations with a similar level of homozygosity.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/images/ejhg2012229f5.jpg

Here is the full article:

Nature : Genetic characterization of northeastern Italian population isolates in the context of broader European genetic diversity (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2012229a.html)

friulano language is a rhaeto-romance language and is connected with the swiss via western austria. otzi was a person from "rhaetic" lands.

Could the ancient Carni tribe ( modern friulani people ) who split the venetic people/areas in half around 500BC and had invaded from the west ( some say switzerland and some say closer to toulouse ), be similar to basques?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carni
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnia

or where they semetic people from mesopotamia
http://www.mek.oszk.hu/05100/05110/05110.pdf

Knovas
21-12-12, 21:57
Amazing! I'd like to see these samples in Dodecad & Eurogenes :)

Wilhelm
22-12-12, 00:50
.Seems like some of them are pulling towards Sardinian, and Otzi lived close to that area, quite interesting thing.

Sile
03-12-13, 10:52
Second part of Friuli/veneto isolates ....more mtDna ............see excel cahrt at bottom of link

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0056371

interesting comments from DnaTribes for same area
For instance, the Ostrogothic confederations of Ermanaric and Theodoric included Finns, Slavs, Heruli, Alans,

Huns, and Sarmatians. These tribal confederations (unlike territorial nation-states) joined multiple populations

during this period of change that reshaped European civilization.

19The Veneti might have been involved in importing steppe-Urartian horse breeds from the Pannonian Sigynnians

(possibly related to Iron Age Scythians). See Europe Before History by Kristiansen and Larsson, pp. 226-227

Sile
04-12-13, 06:39
Second part of Friuli/veneto isolates ....more mtDna ............see excel cahrt at bottom of link

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0056371

interesting comments from DnaTribes for same area
For instance, the Ostrogothic confederations of Ermanaric and Theodoric included Finns, Slavs, Heruli, Alans,

Huns, and Sarmatians. These tribal confederations (unlike territorial nation-states) joined multiple populations

during this period of change that reshaped European civilization.

19The Veneti might have been involved in importing steppe-Urartian horse breeds from the Pannonian Sigynnians

(possibly related to Iron Age Scythians). See Europe Before History by Kristiansen and Larsson, pp. 226-227


The Mtdna breakdown combined as per link (as per spreadsheet ( attached )) for these Veneto and friuli



K1
34


H5
21


U5
17


U4
15


H*
13


T2
12


H1
10


J1
8


T1
8


U2
7


HV0
5


H2
4


H6
4


N1
4


H3
3


H4
3


H20
3


W
3


H11
2


H3
2


U1
2


V
2


H8
1


I5
1


R2
1


X
1






The Ydna data is below from same site, but only problem is markers where short in number to test


R1b
20


E1b1b
16


R1a
13


I2b
8


I1
6


G2c
4


J2b
4


G2a
3


I2a
2


T1
1

Nobody1
04-12-13, 08:18
Great find Sile!
Should have mentioned that those isolate communities are all German (Bavarian) isolates;
The only thing that strikes me is the 27.0% [13/48] U5 in Sauris and the 43.3% [25/59] K1 in Sappada;

Maciamo
04-12-13, 10:13
Thanks for the info, Sile.

The Y-DNA sample size is small (n=77), but it is nevertheless surprising to find nearly 21% of E1b1b and 5.2% of Levantine G2c among a population that otherwise looks quite Bavarian, Swiss German or Tyrolian (26% of R1b, 16.9% of R1a, 10.4% of I2b, 7.8% of I1). Like in the Harz mountains of central Germany, R1b is fairly low compared to R1a and especially I2b.

The way I see it is that the high E1b1b, the G2c and perhaps half of the G2a, J2b and T1 could be a remnant of Neolithic farmers. If we cut that out, we get approximately 38% of R1b, 24.5% of R1a, 15% of I2b and 11.5% of I1. This gets much closer the frequencies observed in East Germany, especially around the Harz. If the Alans, Sarmatians and Slavs also settled in the region alongside Goths it would easily explain the high frequency of R1a. The high I2b was probably inherited from the Mesolithic population who survived better in mountainous areas, like in other parts of the Alps and in the Harz.


The four locations for the mtDNA samples are too tiny to be looked at separately. Altogether (n=193) the percentage of K1 (17.6%) remains impressive.

Nobody1
04-12-13, 13:41
@ Sile

I think you have a false Y-DNA assessment;
Its not 77 samples its 88 samples;

81 samples are clearly defined:
21 R1b
14 R1a
24 E1b1b
7 I1
7 I2b1
2 G2a
6 J2b

the other 7 samples are not conclusive due to the few markers;
but the samples you claim to be G2c can equally be I1 and more likely so;

Overall its crazy how these three close proximity Alpine towns have their very own Y-DNA Hgs and epicenters which the other town is lacking and vice-versa;
Sappada E1b1b (prob. all E-V13) Sauris I2b1 and Timau R1a;

mtDNA Hg's on the other hand are clearly presented in the study at File S1
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0056371

adamo
04-12-13, 13:45
Yes; I've also noticed that extreme northeastern italy has a particularly high frequency of mtdna K females; somewhere near 20-25%. The Veneto/ Friuli-Venezia-Giulia regions bordering Slovenia in particular have unnaturally inflated frequencies when comparing to the rest of the italian peninsula.

Angela
04-12-13, 17:05
Just saw the following December 2, 2013 study by the same group...haven't yet gotten around to reading it...
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

Nobody1
04-12-13, 17:14
Just saw the following December 2, 2013 study by the same group...haven't yet gotten around to reading it...
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

Just as i thought
All (Every Single One) of the E1b1b in Sappada is E-V13;

Coia et al 2013 - File S1
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

Combining the 63.1% E-V13 with the 43.3% K1 = Neolithic hotspot;

Sauris I2 being all I2-M223 and the R1b in the Alps being of-course majority U152 (S28/S139) ;
And not a single G2c - as expected;
No surprises;

Nobody1
04-12-13, 18:07
R1b in the Alps being of-course largely (exclusevly) U152 ;
No surprises;

Except for Gardena-valley which is a good amount R1b-L21 = 24.4% (12/49);
Thats surprising;

Sile
04-12-13, 18:16
@ Sile

I think you have a false Y-DNA assessment;
Its not 77 samples its 88 samples;

81 samples are clearly defined:
21 R1b
14 R1a
24 E1b1b
7 I1
7 I2b1
2 G2a
6 J2b

the other 7 samples are not conclusive due to the few markers;
but the samples you claim to be G2c can equally be I1 and more likely so;

Overall its crazy how these three close proximity Alpine towns have their very own Y-DNA Hgs and epicenters which the other town is lacking and vice-versa;
Sappada E1b1b (prob. all E-V13) Sauris I2b1 and Timau R1a;

mtDNA Hg's on the other hand are clearly presented in the study at File S1
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0056371

thanks

I noted that the Ydna had not enough markers to actually tell ( i used athey and ypredictor as best as i could) ..............what did you use.

Did I miss a sheet?

Sile
04-12-13, 18:17
Yes; I've also noticed that extreme northeastern italy has a particularly high frequency of mtdna K females; somewhere near 20-25%. The Veneto/ Friuli-Venezia-Giulia regions bordering Slovenia in particular have unnaturally inflated frequencies when comparing to the rest of the italian peninsula.

The border of the 3 towns is with Austria and not slovenia. In Italy its noted as ladini and carnico persone ( ladins and carni people)

Sile
04-12-13, 18:25
Just as i thought
All (Every Single One) of the E1b1b in Sappada is E-V13;

Coia et al 2013 - File S1
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

Combining the 63.1% E-V13 with the 43.3% K1 = Neolithic hotspot;

Sauris I2 being all I2-M223 and the R1b in the Alps being of-course majority U152 (S28/S139) ;
And not a single G2c - as expected;
No surprises;

Thanks for link ..................

From your link I see Primiero ........I have documented ancestors from Siror which is part of Primiero ( a frazioni ie suburb ) on your link . ........When I was in Italy that area spoke 100% venetian.

In regards to your neolithic hotspot ..........clearly they did not come by sea and most people say about K

adamo
04-12-13, 18:59
I meant the Friuli-Venezia-Giulia region in general but good comment! : )

Nobody1
05-12-13, 09:15
Thanks for link ..................

Dont mention it;


From your link I see Primiero ........I have documented ancestors from Siror which is part of Primiero ( a frazioni ie suburb ) on your link . ........When I was in Italy that area spoke 100% venetian.

Sounds fantastic;

Adige-valley [56 samples] is Rovereto and Trento which is the Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Fiemme-valley [41 samples] is Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Primiero-valley [41 samples] is Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Fersina-valley [25 samples] is the German (Fersental) part of Welsch Tyrol;

Cimbrians (Luserna/Lissinia) [total 49 samples] is the German isolates of Welsch Tyrol;

Giudicarie-valley [51 samples] is the Lombard part of Welsch Tyrol;

Non-valley [48 samples] is Lombard/Ladiner part of Welsch Tyrol;

Sole-valley [66 samples] is Lombard/Ladiner part of Welsch Tyrol;

Badia/Fassa/Gardena [total 142 samples] all Ladiner valleys of South & Welsch Tyrol;

Timau/Sappada/Sauris [91 samples] all German isolate valleys in the Karnian Alps;


Ladiners are heavy in R1b-U152 L2+
23.9% of the 142 samples are L2+ alone (U152 total = 26.0% 142 samples)
37 samples are R1b-U152 with 34 L2+ & 3 U152* (91.8% of all U152 in Ladiners is L2)

Ladiners in Gardena are also heavy in R1b-L21;

Sile
05-12-13, 09:47
Dont mention it;



Sounds fantastic;

Adidge-valley [56 samples] is Rovereto and Trento which is the Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Fiemme-valley [41 samples] is Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Primiero-valley [41 samples] is Venetian part of Welsch Tyrol;

Fersina-valley [25 samples] is the German (Fersental) part of Welsch Tyrol;

Cimbrians (Luserna/Lissinia) [total 49 samples] is the German isolates of Welsch Tyrol;

Giudicarie-valley [51 samples] is the Lombard part of Welsch Tyrol;

Non-valley [48 samples] is Lombard/Ladiner part of Welsch Tyrol;

Sole-valley [66 samples] is Lombard/Ladiner part of Welsch Tyrol;

Badia/Fassa/Gardena [total 142 samples] all Ladiner valleys of South & Welsch Tyrol;

Timau/Sappada/Sauris [91 samples] all German isolate valleys in the Karnian Alps;


Ladiners are heavy in R1b-U152 L2+
23.9% of the 142 samples are L2+ alone (U152 total = 26.0% 142 samples)
37 samples are R1b-U152 with 34 L2+ & 3 U152* (91.8% of all U152 in Ladiners is L2)

Ladiners in Gardena are also heavy in R1b-L21;

What is Welsch_tyrol ?

The article states
The average genetic distances from other populations (Fst=0.097; see Table S6 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s011)) is less than one third compared to Luserna, while HD is close to the highest values of our dataset (0.978±0.019; Table S6 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s011)). The prevalent haplogroup, R1b-M269*, accounts for only one third of the total, the rest represented by different lineages (G-M201, I1-M253, M410-J2A and K-M9), which are associated with twenty-three different surnames

I see G, I1 and K stated for ydna.

Ladins are ancient raetic and carni people that learnt the Latin language from the Romans

Nobody1
05-12-13, 10:05
What is Welsch_tyrol ?

Welsch Tyrol is Welschtirol;
Welsch means Romanic and Tyrol is the historical Alpine region of the County Tyrol + Bishopric Brixen & Trent

So it means the Romanic part of Tyrol i.e. Romanic Tyrol;

Historical Welschtirol corresponds with what the Italian bureaucracy now calls Provincia di Trento/Trentino;

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGcN-rfy2Lf5o0NDqe4kIl1-VdwO3qaJQROuBm05E3iLjRQDLVhttp://www.andreas-hofer-bund.de/Tirolkarte.jpg

http://www.suedtirolerland.it/images/cms/1350057397_D-5618-marling-tiroler-platzl.jpg

Historical Tyrol = NordTirol, SüdTirol, OstTirol, WelschTirol, Ladin-valleys and Vorarlberg;
im shocked that you have no clue about it;


The article states
The average genetic distances from other populations (Fst=0.097; see Table S6 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s011)) is less than one third compared to Luserna, while HD is close to the highest values of our dataset (0.978±0.019; Table S6 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s011)). The prevalent haplogroup, R1b-M269*, accounts for only one third of the total, the rest represented by different lineages (G-M201, I1-M253, M410-J2A and K-M9), which are associated with twenty-three different surnames

from the same passage of the article;
Luserna is genetically very distant from all the other Alpine populations (average Fst=0.328; see Table S6) and shows a strikingly low intra-population diversity (0.483±0.119). Paternal lineages are represented mostly by the R1b-M269* (frequency of 84%), with six different STR haplotypes associated with only one founder surname......Your text......Luserna was founded by few families which moved from Lavarone, the first known Cimbrian settlement in the territory of Trentino [44]. This could have led to a strong founder effect in this community, a hypothesis supported by a previous study of mtDNA polymorphisms 40]. Moreover, Luserna is located on a high plateau (1,333 m a.s.l.) and is quite isolated from the surrounding areas.

The founder surname in Luserna is Nicolussi;
Almost all are called by this surname and its the most common Cimbrian surname;
Incest in remote Alpine communities is and always was a reality;


I see G, I1 and K stated for ydna.

Their amongst it;
Especially K-M9 in Primiero-valley and I1 in Lissinia;
And take a look at File S1 for all the Hg's listed;


Ladins are ancient raetic and carni people that learnt the Latin language from the Romans

Doesnt tell me anything;
Because Raeti are not a Homogenous tribe but an endonym for a host of tribes;
Keeping in mind that even Indo-European Venetic was amongst the Raeti and many Raeti were also described as Ligurian;

Sile
05-12-13, 10:19
Welsch Tyrol is Welschtirol;
Welsch means Romanic and Tyrol is the historical Alpine region of the County Tyrol (Bishopric Brixen and Bishopric Trent);

So it means the Romanic part of Tyrol i.e. Romanic Tyrol;

The Historical Welschtirol corresponds with what the Italians bureaucracy now calls Provincia di Trento or Trentino;

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGcN-rfy2Lf5o0NDqe4kIl1-VdwO3qaJQROuBm05E3iLjRQDLVhttp://www.andreas-hofer-bund.de/Tirolkarte.jpg

http://www.suedtirolerland.it/images/cms/1350057397_D-5618-marling-tiroler-platzl.jpg

Historical Tyrol = NordTirol, SüdTirol, OstTirol, WelschTirol, Ladin-valleys and Vorlarlberg;
im shocked that you have no clue about it;

Always heard it as trentino or rovereto in history especially Rovereto in venetian archives

http://tigen.tirolensis.info/wiki/Tyrolean_DNA_admixture_and_genetic_structure
Then again above site places it with south tyrol for genetics



from the same passage of the article;
Luserna is genetically very distant from all the other Alpine populations (average Fst=0.328; see Table S6) and shows a strikingly low intra-population diversity (0.483±0.119). Paternal lineages are represented mostly by the R1b-M269* (frequency of 84%), with six different STR haplotypes associated with only one founder surname......Your text......Luserna was founded by few families which moved from Lavarone, the first known Cimbrian settlement in the territory of Trentino [44]. This could have led to a strong founder effect in this community, a hypothesis supported by a previous study of mtDNA polymorphisms 40]. Moreover, Luserna is located on a high plateau (1,333 m a.s.l.) and is quite isolated from the surrounding areas.

The founder surname in Luserna is Nicolussi;
Almost all are called by this surname;
Incest in remote Alpine communities is and always was a reality;

And take a look at File S1 for all the Hg's listed;



Their amongst it;
Especially K-M9 in Primiero-valley and I1 in Lissinia;


ok, i will re-read


Doesnt tell me anything;
Because Raeti are not a Homogenous tribe but an endonym for a host of tribes;
Keeping in mind that even Indo-European Venetic was amongst the Raeti and many Raeti were also described as Ligurian;

Yes raetic, carni, venetic and nori where entwined in valleys, but the point is they must have been similar and only migration via the danube river area in the north would have introduced "foreign markers", like IMO the E marker

Maciamo
05-12-13, 13:31
I've had a closer look at the Y-DNA data for each community, and found something potentially very interesting. The Cimbrians of Luserna are almost purely R1b (92%) apart from 2 T samples (8%). More importantly 21 of the 23 R1b samples were M269*. I know that the Cimbrian language is a dialect of Bavarian, and that those Cimbrians are thought to have arrived around the 11th-12th century. Nevertheless, nobody is sure of their origin, and if by any chance they could really be descended from the Cimmerians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimmerian), like it was claimed for the ancient Cimbri of Denmark, then it would be quite amazing.

The Cimmerians lived in the North Caucasus and Pontic Steppe from circa 1300 to 800 BCE, then were displaced by the Scythians. Numerous hypotheses have been made about their possible descendants, notably the Cimbri of Jutland and the Franks, via the Sicambri. As and Indo-European people from the Black Sea region the Cimmerians could be either R1b or R1a. I believe that there is a higher chance that the Cimmerians were R1a, since in my chronology most R1b had left the Pontic Steppe by 2000 BCE. But they might have been the last predominantly R1b tribe to leave after all. If that is the case and the Cimmerians descend from those R1b who did not invade the Balkans, then go up the Danube to Central Europe then Western Europe, they would not belong to typical European subclades, but to a much older branch like M269 or L23.

The fact that we find a genetic isolate in the Alps whose name happens to be close to the Cimmerians and who belongs almost exclusively to R1b-M269 is an evidence in favour of this hypothesis (although a bit of a stretch).

R1b-M269 or L23 has been found at a low frequency (1-5%) in all Germanic populations, and is also the main R1b variety among Slavic and Balkanic people. The question is why is it present at all in Germanic populations, if the Proto-Celto-Germanic R1b was L11 and that L11 expanded dramatically from a tiny male population. If M269/L23 lineages had been with them they should also have expanded as spectacularly. So there is a good chance that the two lineages didn't expand together. In that case a later absorption of M269 or L23 people (perhaps the Cimmerians) by Germanic people would explain the low but consistent level of M269/L23 among Germanic people. The presence of M269/L23 in Italy can be attributed to the Greeks and Etruscans, and its presence of among Celtic population would be attributed to both Roman and Germanic invasions.

Unfortunately there is no mtDNA sample from Luserna.


Those Alpine valleys really have mind-boggling diversity of haplogroups. Sappada is quite clearly an Neolithic time-capsule with 63% of E-V13, 10.5% of G2a and 8% of J2a, which is mirrored on the mtDNA side by 44% of K1 and 5% of N1.

Timau is no less odd, with 56.5% of R1a, 30.5% of J2b, 13% of I1 and nothing else. Its maternal lineages have high levels of U2 (6.5%) and U4 (11%) that usually correspond to R1a.

The Fassa Valley has remarkably high percentages of J1 (15%) and T (23.5%).

Wilhelm
05-12-13, 15:37
I remember in the previous study of genetic isolates from Friul-Venezia Giula that some of them plotted with Basques, or even further away, that may have to do with being 80-90% R1b in some of these samples ??



http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v21/n6/images/ejhg2012229f2.jpg

adamo
05-12-13, 15:46
I'm surprised at how high the J2b and e-v13 frequencies are in the area; may there have been a Greek presence? The high R1a in Timau could be explained easily due to this region's proximity to parts of Austria and Slovenia.

adamo
05-12-13, 15:49
Also the Fassa valley isn't too far from the Stilfs northern italy/Bavaria region where there is 23% hg T.

Sile
05-12-13, 19:19
I've had a closer look at the Y-DNA data for each community, and found something potentially very interesting. The Cimbrians of Luserna are almost purely R1b (92%) apart from 2 T samples (8%). More importantly 21 of the 23 R1b samples were M269*. I know that the Cimbrian language is a dialect of Bavarian, and that those Cimbrians are thought to have arrived around the 11th-12th century. Nevertheless, nobody is sure of their origin, and if by any chance they could really be descended from the Cimmerians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimmerian), like it was claimed for the ancient Cimbri of Denmark, then it would be quite amazing.

The Cimmerians lived in the North Caucasus and Pontic Steppe from circa 1300 to 800 BCE, then were displaced by the Scythians. Numerous hypotheses have been made about their possible descendants, notably the Cimbri of Jutland and the Franks, via the Sicambri. As and Indo-European people from the Black Sea region the Cimmerians could be either R1b or R1a. I believe that there is a higher chance that the Cimmerians were R1a, since in my chronology most R1b had left the Pontic Steppe by 2000 BCE. But they might have been the last predominantly R1b tribe to leave after all. If that is the case and the Cimmerians descend from those R1b who did not invade the Balkans, then go up the Danube to Central Europe then Western Europe, they would not belong to typical European subclades, but to a much older branch like M269 or L23.

The fact that we find a genetic isolate in the Alps whose name happens to be close to the Cimmerians and who belongs almost exclusively to R1b-M269 is an evidence in favour of this hypothesis (although a bit of a stretch).

R1b-M269 or L23 has been found at a low frequency (1-5%) in all Germanic populations, and is also the main R1b variety among Slavic and Balkanic people. The question is why is it present at all in Germanic populations, if the Proto-Celto-Germanic R1b was L11 and that L11 expanded dramatically from a tiny male population. If M269/L23 lineages had been with them they should also have expanded as spectacularly. So there is a good chance that the two lineages didn't expand together. In that case a later absorption of M269 or L23 people (perhaps the Cimmerians) by Germanic people would explain the low but consistent level of M269/L23 among Germanic people. The presence of M269/L23 in Italy can be attributed to the Greeks and Etruscans, and its presence of among Celtic population would be attributed to both Roman and Germanic invasions.

Unfortunately there is no mtDNA sample from Luserna.


Those Alpine valleys really have mind-boggling diversity of haplogroups. Sappada is quite clearly an Neolithic time-capsule with 63% of E-V13, 10.5% of G2a and 8% of J2a, which is mirrored on the mtDNA side by 44% of K1 and 5% of N1.

Timau is no less odd, with 56.5% of R1a, 30.5% of J2b, 13% of I1 and nothing else. Its maternal lineages have high levels of U2 (6.5%) and U4 (11%) that usually correspond to R1a.

The Fassa Valley has remarkably high percentages of J1 (15%) and T (23.5%).

see page 224 in link below ..............i am talking about the E ydna group as it being Greek

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=zAY4we4LKQMC&pg=PA226&lpg=PA226&dq=Pannonian+Sigynnians&source=bl&ots=i7mcn0_5iM&sig=yo1ZW85YK17UkxkpbeI1myTLLwI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EsKgUv3vCeaaiQeegoGYDQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Pannonian%20Sigynnians&f=false

Only Greeks I know that was in the north adriatic area in ancient times and maybe the alpine areas was the Corinthians in Adria and Ancona and the Mycenaeans in istria .........the Corinthians in ancient times also ruled all of the northern parts of the Peloponnese. If E in this alpine valleys came from the sea, then this is the way, but IMO , the E came via the Balkan plains of Serbia and moesia

Nobody1
06-12-13, 17:23
Always heard it as trentino or rovereto in history especially Rovereto in venetian archives

http://tigen.tirolensis.info/wiki/Tyrolean_DNA_admixture_and_genetic_structure
Then again above site places it with south tyrol for genetics

Welschtirol/Welschtiroler is the historical term;
Welsch designates anything Romanic like in also the French speaking part of Switzerland (Romandie) being called Welschschweiz/Welschland;
Welschtirol simply being the historical Romanic part of Tyrol;
Look Wallonia or Wallachia or Wales;


Yes raetic, carni, venetic and nori where entwined in valleys, but the point is they must have been similar and only migration via the danube river area in the north would have introduced "foreign markers", like IMO the E marker

Why must the Raeti, Carni, Noricans and Veneti have been similar?
And why would E-V13 be from the Bronze/Iron age? In the Neolithic times E-V13 was already spread as far west as Spain (Avellaner ~5000BC);
prob. via the Balkans it arrived and remained in the eastern Alps since the Neolithic;

As for similarities:
There is the Indo-European common root for the Noricans, Veneti and Carni;
Raeti just an exonym of a host of alpine non-Indo-European/Indo-European peoples;
Special link between the Carni and Noricans is the deity Belenus;

adamo
06-12-13, 19:52
Very good comment nobody1, certainly the raeti derived from the Etruscans most probably (possibly Greeks) but I believe the Carni and noricans to have belonged to the R1 indo-European branch, I would go as far as saying R1b and maybe some I1 for the latter.

Sile
07-12-13, 04:23
Very good comment nobody1, certainly the raeti derived from the Etruscans most probably (possibly Greeks) but I believe the Carni and noricans to have belonged to the R1 indo-European branch, I would go as far as saying R1b and maybe some I1 for the latter.

you have it backwards, the etruscans derived from the raeti..........this is the logical path, because etruscans arrived in Italy around 800BC, the raeti where already in the alps in the bronze-age

Sile
07-12-13, 04:28
Why must the Raeti, Carni, Noricans and Veneti have been similar?
And why would E-V13 be from the Bronze/Iron age? In the Neolithic times E-V13 was already spread as far west as Spain (Avellaner ~5000BC);
prob. via the Balkans it arrived and remained in the eastern Alps since the Neolithic;



Because I doubt very much that celts in the alps where E-v13 ( la tene and hallstatt cultures) . logic tells me E came after the celts initial foray from western to eastern alps

adamo
07-12-13, 04:34
Who EVER said the celts where e-v13, what planet are you living on? Some information on Carnia; home of the Carni, Friuli region of northeastern italy:

The name of the region, like neighbouring Carantania and Carinthia, probably derives from the Carni, a Celtic tribe who had lived for centuries in the fertile plains between the Rhine and the Danube rivers where other Celtic peoples lived. Starting from 400 BC, the demographic growth and the pressure of the Germanic peoples, originated a migratory flood towards the south. The Carni crossed the Alps via the Plöcken Pass and settled in the region which is nowadays named Carnia and in the piedmont zone of Friuli. They practiced hunting and breeding. During the hard winters the herders used to move with their cattle down to the piedmont plains. Also they were skilful iron and wood manufacturers. The Carni were headed by a king and a sacerdotal caste of druids.

Sile
07-12-13, 04:56
Who EVER said the celts where e-v13, what planet are you living on? Some information on Carnia; home of the Carni, Friuli region of northeastern italy:

The name of the region, like neighbouring Carantania and Carinthia, probably derives from the Carni, a Celtic tribe who had lived for centuries in the fertile plains between the Rhine and the Danube rivers where other Celtic peoples lived. Starting from 400 BC, the demographic growth and the pressure of the Germanic peoples, originated a migratory flood towards the south. The Carni crossed the Alps via the Plöcken Pass and settled in the region which is nowadays named Carnia and in the piedmont zone of Friuli. They practiced hunting and breeding. During the hard winters the herders used to move with their cattle down to the piedmont plains. Also they were skilful iron and wood manufacturers. The Carni were headed by a king and a sacerdotal caste of druids.

why are you agreeing that celts where E-v13 , everything I say you go opposite:annoyed:

So, you believe that the carni, raeti and the E that is in those towns was before the celts arrived in the alps or the celts brought them there............''

I believe as i said, that the E came after, maybe by the Romans took illyria around 9BC

Carni ...what are you saying the carni had E marker ?......in italian historians, they say the carni always lived in the alps, English historians say the carni came from france and they where a gallic tribe....which do you believe?

adamo
07-12-13, 06:25
Are you drunk or stoned? Lol, did you read what I wrote?: " Who EVER said the celts where e-v13, what planet are you living on?" The Carni where R1b celts, the Norics where pannonians of Illyrian descent settling in parts of Austria/Slovenia; I believe they brought I2a but where later heavily celticized with the arrival of R1b to the general Austria/Slovenia region, with a smaller celticization of Slovenia.

adamo
07-12-13, 06:26
My prior quotation on the Celtic Carni : " The name of the region, like neighbouring Carantania and Carinthia, probably derives from the Carni, a Celtic tribe who had lived for centuries in the fertile plains between the Rhine and the Danube rivers where other Celtic peoples lived. Starting from 400 BC, the demographic growth and the pressure of the Germanic peoples, originated a migratory flood towards the south. The Carni crossed the Alps via the Plöcken Pass and settled in the region which is nowadays named Carnia and in the piedmont zone of Friuli. They practiced hunting and breeding. During the hard winters the herders used to move with their cattle down to the piedmont plains. Also they were skilful iron and wood manufacturers. The Carni were headed by a king and a sacerdotal caste of druids."

adamo
07-12-13, 06:28
The Carni where a Celtic people either deriving from the Gallic carnutes of north-western France or they arrived via the Plocken Pass as a more Germanic Celtic group via the Italo-Austrian border; either way they were celts. I repeat once more; they were celts that settled near north-eastern Italy. The Celtic Carni would have inhabited parts of north-eastern Italy, southern Austria and parts of Slovenia as well.

adamo
07-12-13, 06:39
The Rhaeti on the other hand were northward migrants of the Etruscans that moved from Tuscany towards alpine italy, they had a more north and eastern distribution within Italy in my opinion, not too far from the Austrian border for example. In the worst case scenario, the E-V13 presence may have been due to Greeks (originated on Balkans probably either way) but I don't see how it could easily be linked to the raetians if their genetic structure was in fact similar to that of the Etruscans, considering they are supposedly an alpine extension of the latter. The people of Noricum were pannonian Illyrians, probably having initially migrated from the Croatia or Bosnia-Herzegovina region of northernmost Illyria towards Slovenia, later on though they were heavily celticized;This is what I THINK they are. The Carni though were deffinetly celts and the raeti deffinetly weren't, so expect a different genetic composition for these two.

adamo
07-12-13, 06:42
The proto-thracians and possibly even proto-Dacians would have initially branched out from the Croatia-Bosnia-Herzegovina nucleus region towards northeastern Greece and Romania respectively; they were in my opinion offshoots of the Illyrians.

adamo
07-12-13, 06:44
The Illyrians once occupied parts of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, probably Serbia, northern Albania; I link them to y-DNA I-P37.2 (I2a). They are pre-Slavic inhabitants of the northwestern Balkans by the Adriatic Sea. Some Illyrian tribes were found as far south as Albania, but slightly more south they would have made contact with Greek tribes. Some of these Illyrians settled as far north as Slovenia and as Far East as Romania.

Sile
07-12-13, 10:24
Are you drunk or stoned? Lol, did you read what I wrote?: " Who EVER said the celts where e-v13, what planet are you living on?" The Carni where R1b celts, the Norics where pannonians of Illyrian descent settling in parts of Austria/Slovenia; I believe they brought I2a but where later heavily celticized with the arrival of R1b to the general Austria/Slovenia region, with a smaller celticization of Slovenia.

you said, what planet am I living on ........do, not insult me again

Sile
07-12-13, 10:26
The Rhaeti on the other hand were northward migrants of the Etruscans that moved from Tuscany towards alpine italy, they had a more north and eastern distribution within Italy in my opinion, not too far from the Austrian border for example. In the worst case scenario, the E-V13 presence may have been due to Greeks (originated on Balkans probably either way) but I don't see how it could easily be linked to the raetians if their genetic structure was in fact similar to that of the Etruscans, considering they are supposedly an alpine extension of the latter. The people of Noricum were pannonian Illyrians, probably having initially migrated from the Croatia or Bosnia-Herzegovina region of northernmost Illyria towards Slovenia, later on though they were heavily celticized;This is what I THINK they are. The Carni though were deffinetly celts and the raeti deffinetly weren't, so expect a different genetic composition for these two.

Raeti as stated where in the alps at the same time as the venetic people where in Italy and the venetic by archeology was from at least 1050BC ........so raeti where around before the etruscans came to Italy....logic says the etruscans came from raeti or from parts north of the raeti

Nobody1
07-12-13, 14:51
Raeti as stated where in the alps at the same time as the venetic people where in Italy and the venetic by archeology was from at least 1050BC ........so raeti where around before the etruscans came to Italy....logic says the etruscans came from raeti or from parts north of the raeti

That all depends on who exactly the Raeti even were;
The Indo-European Veneti emerged with the Este-culture (~900BC) the Raeti are however the carriers of the Fritzens-Sanzeno-culture (~500BC) that however stems from the Laugen-Melaun-culture (~1200BC);

The Etruscan civilization is a hybrid of Pelasgian Tyrsenoi and the pre-existing Urnfield/Villanova Indo-European Umbrians;
Those Tyrsenoi (Pelasgians) are recorded by Dionysius to have sailed up into the mouth of the Po from Thessaly and since they were active in expelling the Siculi from the Apennines and the Siculi are recorded by Thucydides to have reached Sicily 300 years before the first Greek colony (Naxos ~735BC) that would mean that the Pelasgian Tyrsenoi must have arrived in the 11th cen BC i.e. older than the Fritzens-Sanzeno (Raetic) culture;

Laugen-Melaun is a non-Indo-European Bronze-age culture in the same respect as Polada and Bonnanora; The pops. prob. stemmed from pre-existing cultures most notable the Neolithic (+Copper) Remedello and Mondsee-Altheim; Hence the Neolithic G2a and E-V13 and mtDNA K1 in still substantial pressence;
Indo-Europeans emerged with Terremare and Urnfield Villanova/Golasecca/Este

Maybe the Neolithic folks and the Bronze-age Pelasgians are not that diff. and infact of the same stock; The Pelasgians who originate in the Aegean are non-Indo-Europeans and why would they than be any diff. than the pre-existing Neolithic pops of the Balkans and Anatolia; So the linguistic link between Raeti and Etruscans (which isnt 1to1 anyways) could come from their broader heritage and not a direct descendants;

adamo
07-12-13, 17:26
It wouldnt have been insulting Sile, if you didn't take insignificant comments so personally : ) the illyrians



6130


6129


that is the entire spread of illyrian culture, where those dots are.

adamo
07-12-13, 17:44
First of all, the tyrsenians came to Tuscany by sea, arriving by the Tyrrhenian ocean side, the same side that Aeneas took when arriving to italy, either way, wether the Tyrrhenian or Adriatic side they landed at the height of Umbria.

adamo
07-12-13, 18:19
If the Enetoi where in fact from way out there near the Caspian Sea and Turkmenistan, this could possibly explain some of the T in the region I believe.

Sile
07-12-13, 18:58
That all depends on who exactly the Raeti even were;
The Indo-European Veneti emerged with the Este-culture (~900BC) the Raeti are however the carriers of the Fritzens-Sanzeno-culture (~500BC) that however stems from the Laugen-Melaun-culture (~1200BC);

The Etruscan civilization is a hybrid of Pelasgian Tyrsenoi and the pre-existing Urnfield/Villanova Indo-European Umbrians;
Those Tyrsenoi (Pelasgians) are recorded by Dionysius to have sailed up into the mouth of the Po from Thessaly and since they were active in expelling the Siculi from the Apennines and the Siculi are recorded by Thucydides to have reached Sicily 300 years before the first Greek colony (Naxos ~735BC) that would mean that the Pelasgian Tyrsenoi must have arrived in the 11th cen BC i.e. older than the Fritzens-Sanzeno (Raetic) culture;

Laugen-Melaun is a non-Indo-European Bronze-age culture in the same respect as Polada and Bonnanora; The pops. prob. stemmed from pre-existing cultures most notable the Neolithic (+Copper) Remedello and Mondsee-Altheim; Hence the Neolithic G2a and E-V13 and mtDNA K1 in still substantial pressence;
Indo-Europeans emerged with Terremare and Urnfield Villanova/Golasecca/Este

Maybe the Neolithic folks and the Bronze-age Pelasgians are not that diff. and infact of the same stock; The Pelasgians who originate in the Aegean are non-Indo-Europeans and why would they than be any diff. than the pre-existing Neolithic pops of the Balkans and Anatolia; So the linguistic link between Raeti and Etruscans (which isnt 1to1 anyways) could come from their broader heritage and not a direct descendants;

tests reveal earlier than 900BC

http://www.academia.edu/221297/Family_Relationships_in_Late_Bronze_Age_Iron_Age_a nd_Early_Roman_Veneto_Italy_._Preliminary_Consider ations_on_the_Basis_of_Osteological_Analysis_and_E pigraphy

Further evidence will come to hand in 2014 after the results of the 1000 plus graves, which IMO will include the raeti and egenai from the alps.

Pelasgians come from the modern area of european Turkey............where they went I do not exactly know. But they did not come from anatolia........even though some think they are linked with phygians

adamo
07-12-13, 22:10
Good post.

Nobody1
08-12-13, 14:01
tests reveal earlier than 900BC

I was talking about the Este-culture being ~900BC

your test:
The transition between the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age (c.1050–900 BC) in this region was characterized by important social realignments accompanied by a partial shift in the settlement pattern.

those are the transition cultures like Canegrate is to Golasecca (also ~900 BC);
however your test doesnt mention much about this transition phase of 1050-900 BC;


Further evidence will come to hand in 2014 after the results of the 1000 plus graves, which IMO will include the raeti and egenai from the alps.

cant wait for the results;


Pelasgians come from the modern area of european Turkey............where they went I do not exactly know. But they did not come from anatolia........even though some think they are linked with phygians

I said the Pelasgians originated in Aegean;
They are recorded in Arcadia, Thessaly, Crete, Lemnos and Anatolia (and later Oenotrians and Tyrsenoi in Italy);

Sile
10-12-13, 06:20
Distribution of Y-DNA K-M9 (~T) among the groups:

http://i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g326/dok101/Faces/Ydna_T_Alpine_Groups.png

from another forum, numbers in turquoise are the K-M9 gather from all the links on that survey.

IMO, could only be either T or L ydna markers

adamo
10-12-13, 08:15
Big Sile; what do you think about the map I recently posted of y-DNA T?

Nobody1
11-12-13, 19:39
The Y-DNA Hg's of the Ladiner in

Coia et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

142 samples of three Ladiner valleys (Badia/Fassa/Gardena)

10.5% K-M9 [15 samples]

0.7% R1b-M269 [1 samples]
8.4% R1b-L51 [12 samples]
0.7% R1b-L11 [1 samples]
28.1% R1b-U152 [40 samples]
10.5% R1b-L21 [15 samples]
4.2% R1b-U106 [6 samples]

1.4% R1a [2 samples]

0.7% I-M170 [1 samples]
4.9% I1-M253 [7samples]
0.7% I2-P37.2 [1 samples]

5.6% G-M201 [8 samples]

0.7% E-M35 [1 samples]
2.8% E-V13 [4 samples]

4.9% J1-M267 [7samples]
0.7% J2-M172 [1 samples]
10.5% J2a [15 samples]
3.5% J2b [5 samples]

Highlights are
The 28.1% R1b-U152 [2.1% U152* / 26.0% L2] meaning 92.5% of all U152 in Ladiner folks is L2;
And 10.5% R1b-L21 (reaching 24.4% in Gardena-valley 12/49 samples);
4.9% J1-M267 (only in Fassa-valley 14.8% 7/47 samples);

adamo
11-12-13, 23:07
Maybe siles dad WAS a Veneti....the Enetoi of Turkmenistan; something has to explain the definitive presence of y-DNA T in the northeastern Alps of Italy; it can be found as high as 25%. The source of R-S28, which is rarer than in the northwest or north central regions is no surprise, smaller infiltration of Gallic tribes. The 10% L21 and J2a are a surprise to me though.

adamo
11-12-13, 23:09
Of course R-S28 is still the most frequent but who would expect that in northeastern italy R-L21, J2a and K-M9* derivatives are still real contenders.

Sile
12-12-13, 06:18
The Y-DNA Hg's of the Ladiner in

Coia et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

142 samples of three Ladiner valleys (Badia/Fassa/Gardena)

10.5% K-M9 [15 samples]

0.7% R1b-M269 [1 samples]
8.4% R1b-L51 [12 samples]
0.7% R1b-L11 [1 samples]
28.1% R1b-U152 [40 samples]
10.5% R1b-L21 [15 samples]
4.2% R1b-U106 [6 samples]

1.4% R1a [2 samples]

0.7% I-M170 [1 samples]
4.9% I1-M253 [7samples]
0.7% I2-P37.2 [1 samples]

5.6% G-M201 [8 samples]

0.7% E-M35 [1 samples]
2.8% E-V13 [4 samples]

4.9% J1-M267 [7samples]
0.7% J2-M172 [1 samples]
10.5% J2a [15 samples]
3.5% J2b [5 samples]

Highlights are
The 28.1% R1b-U152 [2.1% U152* / 26.0% L2] meaning 92.5% of all U152 in Ladiner folks is L2;
And 10.5% R1b-L21 (reaching 24.4% in Gardena-valley 12/49 samples);
4.9% J1-M267 (only in Fassa-valley 14.8% 7/47 samples);

much appreciated

IMO since trentino and south tyrol have 8% of L and 5% of T , i suspect that the 15x K samples will be split 10x L and 5 xT

Sile
12-12-13, 06:23
Maybe siles dad WAS a Veneti....the Enetoi of Turkmenistan; something has to explain the definitive presence of y-DNA T in the northeastern Alps of Italy; it can be found as high as 25%. The source of R-S28, which is rarer than in the northwest or north central regions is no surprise, smaller infiltration of Gallic tribes. The 10% L21 and J2a are a surprise to me though.

28% is what southern germans say of T in bavaria/austria ....doubt it.

Yes my father is veneto.........last 10 generations in fact .....last week i found another 3 generations and I am checking the certificates at the moment ( hand writing is poor sometimes). But , the more I check into my paternal line, the further into the alps my paternal line goes

adamo
12-12-13, 08:13
Genographic project stated that depending on the region 3-23% of males can be T; I know for a fact their national average is about 1% though, even less than the suggested minimum of 3%.

Nobody1
12-12-13, 13:43
Maybe siles dad WAS a Veneti....the Enetoi of Turkmenistan; something has to explain the definitive presence of y-DNA T in the northeastern Alps of Italy; it can be found as high as 25%. The source of R-S28, which is rarer than in the northwest or north central regions is no surprise, smaller infiltration of Gallic tribes. The 10% L21 and J2a are a surprise to me though.

The R1b-U152 is no surprise - the overwhelming amount of U152/L2+ however is;
(26.0% of the total pop. and 92.5% within U152 / 142 samples);
R1b-U152 is most def. due to all the Indo-European Keltic (Vennones/Carni) and Venetic folks mingling with/within the East Alpine Raetic realms (as attested by Historic and Linguistic inscriptions); prob. also the Indo-European Symrbi (Umbrians);


J2a is not that surprising as its well common all across Italy and also other Alpine regions;
J-M304 is 8.8% in East Tyrol (270 samples - Niederstätter et al 2012)
J2-M172 is 6.8% in Bavaria (218 samples - Rebala et al 2013)


The 10.5% of R1b-L21 is the real sensation (whats the Brythonic Keltic link?);
Bavaria = 1.3% R1b-L21 (218 samples - Rebala et al 2013)
East Tyrol = 0.0% R1b-L21 (270 samples - Niederstätter et al 2012)
Venetia = 0.0% R1b-L21 (73 samples - Boattini et al 2013)

And yet right in middle of all these regions (0-1.3%) there is a Ladiner valley (Grödner/Gardena) with 24.4% and a certain volk-group (Ladiner/Raeto-Romanic) with 10.5% R1b-L21 overall 142 sampels;
Obviously an isolated pan-Keltic phenomenan;
Im waiting for a study with Romansch samples (the other Raeto-Romanic people);
Maybe R1b-L21 is an Alpine isolate in addition to a pan-Keltic phenomanan with R1b-U152 stuffing the center of this pan-Keltic phenomenan;

Sile
12-12-13, 18:24
The R1b-U152 is no surprise - the overwhelming amount of U152/L2+ however is;
(26.0% of the total pop. and 92.5% within U152 / 142 samples);
R1b-U152 is most def. due to all the Indo-European Keltic (Vennones/Carni) and Venetic folks mingling with/within the East Alpine Raetic realms (as attested by Historic and Linguistic inscriptions); prob. also the Indo-European Symrbi (Umbrians);


J2a is not that surprising as its well common all across Italy and also other Alpine regions;
J-M304 is 8.8% in East Tyrol (270 samples - Niederstätter et al 2012)
J2-M172 is 6.8% in Bavaria (218 samples - Rebala et al 2013)


The 10.5% of R1b-L21 is the real sensation (whats the Brythonic Keltic link?);
Bavaria = 1.3% R1b-L21 (218 samples - Rebala et al 2013)
East Tyrol = 0.0% R1b-L21 (270 samples - Niederstätter et al 2012)
Venetia = 0.0% R1b-L21 (73 samples - Boattini et al 2013)

And yet right in middle of all these regions (0-1.3%) there is a Ladiner valley (Grödner/Gardena) with 24.4% and a certain volk-group (Ladiner/Raeto-Romanic) with 10.5% R1b-L21 overall 142 sampels;
Obviously an isolated pan-Keltic phenomenan;
Im waiting for a study with Romansch samples (the other Raeto-Romanic people);
Maybe R1b-L21 is an Alpine isolate in addition to a pan-Keltic phenomanan with R1b-U152 stuffing the center of this pan-Keltic phenomenan;

thanks

So, L2 represents the gallic/celtic alpine people or whatever the Raetic and Carni people where.............is that your conclusion?

If so, we can co9nclude then, that with the Ghiotto paper, the L2 in Italy was introduced by etruscans migrating from the alps into north-central and central Italy.

BTW, the term VENETIA in Italy represents the 3 venice's that is the regions of Trentino, Veneto and Friuli ................so zero L21 for these areas, interesting.

MOESAN
12-12-13, 19:18
it is weird: these valleys seem to my as male "clans" territories with huge founder effects and/or drifts (common in mountainous regions) - very surprising - I have some difficulties to think this situation has been like that for ever ... or previous differences of distribution have been magnified with time (linked to partial desertification by internal rural exode?)

Nobody1
12-12-13, 19:32
thanks

Dont mention it


So, L2 represents the gallic/celtic alpine people or whatever the Raetic and Carni people where

No;
R1b-U152 in total (U152*/L2) represents the Indo-European peoples in that certain region i.e. the Keltic (Vennones/Carni) and Venetic; I want to throw in also the Indo-European Symbri (Umbrians) as well;
But L2 is also the main U152 lineage in Bavaria (Rebala et al 2013) for example;


If so, we can co9nclude then, that with the Ghiotto paper, the L2 in Italy was introduced by etruscans migrating from the alps into north-central and central Italy.

No we can not conclude this;
Because the Etruscans were a hybrid civilization of non-Indo-European Pelasgians (Tyrsenoi) and Indo-European Umbrians and Ghirotto only tested the maternal (mtDNA) lineages of this civilization which however (as also stated in that study) could come from the pre-existing Cultures;

The Indo-Europeans (Umbrians) arrived from beyond the Alps with the Terremare and Urnfield (Villanova/Golasecca) culture expansions and the Pelasgians are recorded to have come from Thessaly (from Lydia/Herodotus) by boat via the Adriatic and entering by the mouth of the Po (Dionysius I/XVIII);


BTW, the term VENETIA in Italy represents the 3 venice's that is the regions of Trentino, Veneto and Friuli ................so zero L21 for these areas, interesting.

That is interesting given in contrast that the Ladiners are 10.5% R1b-L21 (142 samples);
Im looking at the results of the Venetian valleys of Welschtirol and by now i can see some R1b-L21 but nowhere near 10.5%;

Nobody1
13-12-13, 07:16
Coia et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

138 samples from the Venetian areas/valleys (Adige/Primiero/Fiemme)

3.6% K-M9 [5 samples]

9.4% R1b-M269 [13 samples]
2.1% R1b-L51 [3 samples]
0.7% R1b-L11 [1 samples]
4.3% R1b-P312 [6 samples]
1.4% R1b-SRY2627 [2 samples]
0.7% R1b-L21 [1 samples]
26.0% R1b-U152 [36 samples]
6.5% R1b-U106 [9 samples]

5.0% R1a-M17 [7 samples]

18.1% G-M201 [25 samples]

4.3% I1-M253 [6 samples]
0.7% I2-M223 [1 samples]
2.1% I2-M423 [3 samples]

5.7% E-V13 [8 samples]
0.7% E-V22 [1 samples]

1.4% J1-M267 [2 samples]
2.1% J2a [3 samples]
2.8% J2b [4 samples]

[2 samples n.a.]

@ Sile
Do you see a connection between Vindelici, Veneti, Lacus Venetus, Vennones and Venostes?

Acc. to Strabo the Vennones were Vindelici and acc. to Ptolemy the Vennones only dwelt in the Raetia part (not Vindelicia part) and only Venetic inscriptions have been found across Raetia; Maybe its all an own (broader Alpine) Indo-European branch - akin to Keltic but more like Venetic in specifics;

Strabo - IV/VI
But the Licattii, the Clautinatii, and the Vennones proved the boldest amongst the Vindelici; and the Rucantii and Cotuantii amongst the Rhæti.

Sile
13-12-13, 07:54
Coia et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704

138 samples from the Venetian areas/valleys (Adige/Primiero/Fiemme)

3.6% K-M9 [5 samples]

9.4% R1b-M269 [13 samples]
2.1% R1b-L51 [3 samples]
0.7% R1b-L11 [1 samples]
4.3% R1b-P312 [6 samples]
1.4% R1b-SRY2627 [2 samples]
0.7% R1b-L21 [1 samples]
26.0% R1b-U152 [36 samples]
6.5% R1b-U106 [9 samples]

5.0% R1a-M17 [7 samples]

18.1% G-M201 [25 samples]

4.3% I1-M253 [6 samples]
0.7% I2-M223 [1 samples]
2.1% I2-M423 [3 samples]

5.7% E-V13 [8 samples]
0.7% E-V22 [1 samples]

1.4% J1-M267 [2 samples]
2.1% J2a [3 samples]
2.8% J2b [4 samples]

[2 samples n.a.]

@ Sile
Do you see a connection between Vindelici, Veneti, Lacus Venetus, Vennones and Venostes?

Acc. to Strabo the Vennones were Vindelici and acc. to Ptolemy the Vennones only dwelt in the Raetia part (not Vindelicia part) and only Venetic inscriptions have been found across Raetia; Maybe its all an own (broader Alpine) Indo-European branch - akin to Keltic but more like Venetic in specifics;

Strabo - IV/VI
But the Licattii, the Clautinatii, and the Vennones proved the boldest amongst the Vindelici; and the Rucantii and Cotuantii amongst the Rhæti.

below is basically the tribes
Sources tell of the first contact of Romans to Noricum in the Apenninon (Alps) 170 BC (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincibilus). From then to the Roman conquest of Tyrolean places in 15 BC to later a bunch of local tribes where named by sources:
Tridentini in the Atesis valley (around Trento (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trento)),
Anauni (Non Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_Valley)),
Isarci (in the Etsch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etsch) valley around Bozen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bozen)),
Venostes in the Isara valley (Vinschgau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinschgau)),
Atacini in the Atax valley (Eisack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisack)/Isarco),
Scaredrani (in the Eggen valley?),
Saevates in the Byrrus valley (Puster valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puster_Valley)),
Laianoi in the young Dravus valley (East Tyrol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Tyrol)),
Focunates in the young Aenus valley and on the Likas river (around Landeck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landeck))
and Breuni in the Aenus valley (around Innsbruck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innsbruck)).

-Vindelici are modern swabians and northern tyrol people.
-Veneti are ancient venetic mixed with Eugenei which are tridentini, camuni and stoeni tribes
-Lucus Venetus is Lake Constance
-Vennones are mixed Raeti and Carni
- Venostes similar to Vennones
- laianoi are norici people
- Breuni according to strabo are illyrian/venetic people.........18 venetic inscriptions have been found between Veneto border and Innsbruck

I see Vindelici, raetic and carni as similar people and add Venetic and illyrian in early iron-age to this mix and then add Norici to this list in middle iron-age. But a historian said Vindelici are Raetic people.

Note - illyrian in these notes means northern illyrian and pannonians


BTW as I stated about VENETIA, take also note that the term
Venezia-Friuli-Giulia means Veneto , Friuli and Julian mountains , which are istrians..........different term to VENETIA

Nobody1
13-12-13, 08:13
below is basically the tribes
Sources tell of the first contact of Romans to Noricum in the Apenninon (Alps) 170 BC (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincibilus). From then to the Roman conquest of Tyrolean places in 15 BC to later a bunch of local tribes where named by sources:
Tridentini in the Atesis valley (around Trento (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trento)),
Anauni (Non Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_Valley)),
Isarci (in the Etsch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etsch) valley around Bozen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bozen)),
Venostes in the Isara valley (Vinschgau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinschgau)),
Atacini in the Atax valley (Eisack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisack)/Isarco),
Scaredrani (in the Eggen valley?),
Saevates in the Byrrus valley (Puster valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puster_Valley)),
Laianoi in the young Dravus valley (East Tyrol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Tyrol)),
Focunates in the young Aenus valley and on the Likas river (around Landeck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landeck))
and Breuni in the Aenus valley (around Innsbruck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innsbruck)).

-Vindelici are modern swabians and northern tyrol people.
-Veneti are ancient venetic mixed with Eugenei which are tridentini, camuni and stoeni tribes
-Lucus Venetus is Lake Constance
-Vennones are mixed Raeti and Carni
- Venostes similar to Vennones
- laianoi are norici people
- Breuni according to strabo are illyrian/venetic people.........18 venetic inscriptions have been found between Veneto border and Innsbruck

I see Vindelici, raetic and carni as similar people and add Venetic and illyrian in early iron-age to this mix and then add Norici to this list in middle iron-age. But a historian said Vindelici are Raetic people.

Note - illyrian in these notes means northern illyrian and pannonians


BTW as I stated about VENETIA, take also note that the term
Venezia-Friuli-Giulia means Veneto , Friuli and Julian mountains , which are istrians..........different term to VENETIA

But are they all connected?

The only Indo-European language (inscriptions/archaeology) found in Raetia are Venetic inscriptions;
And Raetia was occupied by the Vennones (Ptolemy) but are a Vindelic tribe (Strabo);
i.e. possibly the Vindelici, Vennones, Veneti, Lacus Venetus and Venostes are therefor all linked and from a broader Indo-European branch - more like the Venetic branch than the Keltic branch;

PS: Strabo mentioned that the Breuni are Illyrians (only Illyrians) like the Genauni; no mention of Veneti;
And since when are the Julian Alps part of Istria? do not take notes - just look at the map;
http://de.academic.ru/pictures/dewiki/74/Julische_Alpen.png

Sile
13-12-13, 09:01
But are they all connected?

The only Indo-European language (inscriptions/archaeology) found in Raetia are Venetic inscriptions;
And Raetia was occupied by the Vennones (Ptolemy) but are a Vindelic tribe (Strabo);
i.e. possibly the Vindelici, Vennones, Veneti, Lacus Venetus and Venostes are therefor all linked and from a broader Indo-European branch - more like the Venetic branch than the Keltic branch;

PS: Strabo mentioned that the Breuni are Illyrians (only Illyrians) like the Genauni; no mention of Veneti;
And since when are the Julian Alps part of Istria? do not take notes - just look at the map;
http://de.academic.ru/pictures/dewiki/74/Julische_Alpen.png

hmmm, i was wrong venezia-frilui-guilia includes trentino and south tyrol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triveneto

Named after Roman province X ( ten )


inreagards to other question - I believe they where all related except for Vindelici ............unless a historian ( which I cannot remember ) was correct in saying the vindelici where a branch of the raetic

Unsure but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Historische_Karte_CH_Rome_1.png

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Historische_Karte_CH_Rome_1.png)http://www.figuren-modellbau.de/kelten-vindeliker.html

and some say vindelici where illyrians
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=xYM_AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA143&dq=vindelici&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mMCqUsa9KYzJkwXCmIC4Cg&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=vindelici&f=false

Nobody1
13-12-13, 10:26
inreagards to other question - I believe they where all related except for Vindelici ............unless a historian ( which I cannot remember ) was correct in saying the vindelici where a branch of the raetic

Unsure but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Historische_Karte_CH_Rome_1.png

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Historische_Karte_CH_Rome_1.png)http://www.figuren-modellbau.de/kelten-vindeliker.html

and some say vindelici where illyrians
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=xYM_AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA143&dq=vindelici&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mMCqUsa9KYzJkwXCmIC4Cg&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=vindelici&f=false

Well thats exactly the point;
Thats the ultimate question (Illyrians) - to which Indo-European branch did all these tribes Vindelici, Veneti, Vennones, Venostes, Breuni, Genauni belong to;

Strabo is very clear in that the Breuni and Genauni were Illyrians and dwelling in the middle of Raetia (Alps) and Horaz in turn associates the Breuni and Genauni with the Vindelici; Likewise Strabo clearly records the Vennones to be a tribe of the Vindelici; And only Venetic inscriptions have occurred in these areas (Vennones areas -Ptolemy); Herodotus also clearly associates the Adriatic Enetoi with the Illyrians; Venetic is neither Keltic nor Italic and in other words this broader pan-Alpine Indo-European realm is most prob. all connected and of the Illyrian branch; Raeti/Raetia is just an collective exonym term for a host of tribes; Strabo has a good passage for that in IV/VI;

MOESAN
13-12-13, 17:58
Illyrians were maybe a confederation, in fact (ancients and old scholars saw Illyrians everyplace in Europe before putting the "curser" a little bit lower!)- linguistically, the North Illyriricum space was rather 'venetic' speaking, and 'venetic' considered as close enough to 'italic', when southern Illyricum space would have been the true 'illyrian' speaker region, with a language closer to dacian and thracian (and dardanian?); it seems the dominant opinion among scholars toda, but based, it's true, upon a scarce linguistic data for Illyricum (personal names for the most) -

Sile
13-12-13, 18:17
Well thats exactly the point;
Thats the ultimate question (Illyrians) - to which Indo-European branch did all these tribes Vindelici, Veneti, Vennones, Venostes, Breuni, Genauni belong to;

Strabo is very clear in that the Breuni and Genauni were Illyrians and dwelling in the middle of Raetia (Alps) and Horaz in turn associates the Breuni and Genauni with the Vindelici; Likewise Strabo clearly records the Vennones to be a tribe of the Vindelici; And only Venetic inscriptions have occurred in these areas (Vennones areas -Ptolemy); Herodotus also clearly associates the Adriatic Enetoi with the Illyrians; Venetic is neither Keltic nor Italic and in other words this broader pan-Alpine Indo-European realm is most prob. all connected and of the Illyrian branch; Raeti/Raetia is just an collective exonym term for a host of tribes; Strabo has a good passage for that in IV/VI;

we know today that the term illyria was a geographical area, similar to the term iberian or nordic. we know the illyrians started their push from around the danube in 450BC to head south, so its logical they where a central european people. Clearly strabo saw these illyrians in the alps, they where still there in his time.
I said a while ago that Illyrian + Gallic created Celtic in the north, maybe this is a stretch, but we see celtic absorbtion of illyrian lands in the alps, then along the danube until modern hungary , then south into modern bosnia and serbia. Basically the illyrians by the time the Romans arrived in the balkans where absorbed by the celts.
La tene and Halstatt both in Raetic and vindelici and noricum lands.......its just fits.

The very ancient northern Illyrians in the north where the Nori tribe, when the Taurisci gallic people invaded , these nori where renamed norici . Taurisci where gallic people.

please link this strabo passage

Nobody1
13-12-13, 20:39
we know today that the term illyria was a geographical area, similar to the term iberian or nordic. we know the illyrians started their push from around the danube in 450BC to head south, so its logical they where a central european people. Clearly strabo saw these illyrians in the alps, they where still there in his time.

The Illyrians were an Indo-European branch;
If the Venetic is Illyrian - than the Illyrian branch is equally close to the Keltic and Italic branch;

J. Gvozdanovic - Venetic language [Heidelberg Uni. (2012)]
http://www.jolr.ru/files/%2883%29jlr2012-7%2833-46%29.pdf

And Herodotus specifically states that the Enetoi ''who live on the Adriatic'' are Illyrian - Ἰλλυριῶν Ἐνετοὺς;
And only Venetic inscriptions have occurred in Venetia and Raetia; But the Veneti were never recorded in Raetia - only Vindelic tribes (Vennones/Breuni/Genauni) who are like wise called Illyrian;

So it seems that they were all connected and Illyrian;


I said a while ago that Illyrian + Gallic created Celtic in the north, maybe this is a stretch, but we see celtic absorbtion of illyrian lands in the alps, then along the danube until modern hungary , then south into modern bosnia and serbia

That applies to the Iapodes:

Strabo - IV/VI & VII/V
IV/VI Near to these regions dwell the Iapodes, close to them is [the Mount] Ocra. Formerly the Iapodes were numerous, inhabiting either side of the mountain, and were notorious for their predatory habits.....VII/V for it lies beneath that part of the Alps which extends as far as the country of the Iapodes, a tribe which is at the same time both Celtic and Illyrian

Mount Ocra is in the Julian Alps ''For if one passes over Mount Ocra from Aquileia to Nauportus''
The Iapodes once dwelled on both sides and are a hybrid Keltic/Illyrian people; The Carni and Taurisci equally dwelled in this vicinity and the Carni and Norici were major worshippers of Belenus;
So its def. not false to assume that this entire region was a Keltic-Illyrian zone;
The Enetoi being on the Illyrian side;

Sile
15-12-13, 01:09
The Illyrians were an Indo-European branch;
If the Venetic is Illyrian - than the Illyrian branch is equally close to the Keltic and Italic branch;

J. Gvozdanovic - Venetic language [Heidelberg Uni. (2012)]
http://www.jolr.ru/files/%2883%29jlr2012-7%2833-46%29.pdf

And Herodotus specifically states that the Enetoi ''who live on the Adriatic'' are Illyrian - Ἰλλυριῶν Ἐνετοὺς;
And only Venetic inscriptions have occurred in Venetia and Raetia; But the Veneti were never recorded in Raetia - only Vindelic tribes (Vennones/Breuni/Genauni) who are like wise called Illyrian;

So it seems that they were all connected and Illyrian;



That applies to the Iapodes:

Strabo - IV/VI & VII/V
IV/VI Near to these regions dwell the Iapodes, close to them is [the Mount] Ocra. Formerly the Iapodes were numerous, inhabiting either side of the mountain, and were notorious for their predatory habits.....VII/V for it lies beneath that part of the Alps which extends as far as the country of the Iapodes, a tribe which is at the same time both Celtic and Illyrian

Mount Ocra is in the Julian Alps ''For if one passes over Mount Ocra from Aquileia to Nauportus''
The Iapodes once dwelled on both sides and are a hybrid Keltic/Illyrian people; The Carni and Taurisci equally dwelled in this vicinity and the Carni and Norici were major worshippers of Belenus;
So its def. not false to assume that this entire region was a Keltic-Illyrian zone;
The Enetoi being on the Illyrian side;

I see all logic with what to say.

No one has Illyrian script so we can assume it could be also similar to liburbian and venetic. Messapic are fro Iapodes in inner modern croatia and have no association with Epirote.

interesting book below
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=bSxHgej4tKMC&pg=PA465&dq=venetic+illyrians&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9_GsUrGVLYmziAe1tYH4AQ&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=venetic%20illyrians&f=false

Well, to conclude and I will say it again, gallic tribes mutating with illyrian tribes creates a celtic people. Illyrian markers are also found in celtic areas. .................This is what i believe.

adamo
15-12-13, 02:02
We already said that the Messapians where from Crete Sile.

Sile
16-12-13, 06:08
We already said that the Messapians where from Crete Sile.

Where and when?

Sile
16-12-13, 06:14
@nobody1

I am currently thinking in respect to languages of the alps in ancient times, that venetic was originally a Euganei language. The veneti assumed the langauge when they arrived, similar to normans arriving in Normandy and accepting the local language.
If we look at the link below its shows that Venetic, East Raetic, west raetic, Camunic and Lepontic are all similar. How can an "invading" veneti who kicked the Eugenai from the coast of Veneto into the alps have taken with them a very similar language to the raetic, camuni etc?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Venetic_Raetic_Camunic_Lepontic_alphabets.png


Also venetic was found in Innsbruck as per link below, there are 18 such finds on the road from the border of veneto to innsbruck
http://blogs.umass.edu/rwallace/2011/01/23/new-raetic-inscription/


So, in conclusion R-L2 seems to be ancient alpine people along with G-L497 and other defined markers.

Pity AuDna in Gedmatch never has and type of Alpine/central european numbers in any of their calculus

(http://blogs.umass.edu/rwallace/2011/01/23/new-raetic-inscription/)

adamo
16-12-13, 06:47
The iapyges is a cultural unit; Messapi, Peuceti, Dauni that derives from IAPYX, many sources claim they came from Crete tried invading Sicily but where repulsed to the sea before accidentally landing in southern Apulia and subsequently colonizing the region, they would have been high in J2a; boom Sile!

Sile
18-12-13, 18:45
further to post#71

Historians state there was 150 venetic towns and 34 Euganei towns, clearly the invading veneti did not bring such large numbers of people , but must have absorbed many coastal Euganei tribes ( not known in names) to gain such a strong number of populace.

adamo
18-12-13, 18:50
Dude we have a crisis on this forum I need help!

Sile
19-12-13, 00:34
Dude we have a crisis on this forum I need help!

what ???

what help

LeBrok
19-12-13, 02:18
further to post#71

Historians state there was 150 venetic towns and 34 Euganei towns, clearly the invading veneti did not bring such large numbers of people , but must have absorbed many coastal Euganei tribes ( not known in names) to gain such a strong number of populace.
It depends. If they came many centuries earlier than these historians wrote their stories, then they had enough time to build up population to settle 150 towns. What was the town definition for these historians, 200 people, 500 people, 1000 people? Probably what they called a town is just a big village by our standards. Regardless, we are not talking about millions of people, we are talking about population of few hundred thousand.

adamo
19-12-13, 02:21
There's a suicidal person on this board please track her I.p. Address and report her so that she can receive some help

LeBrok
19-12-13, 02:26
There's a suicidal person on this board please track her I.p. Address and report her so that she can receive some help
I have a feeling that Sparkey already did that.

adamo
19-12-13, 02:49
Ok thank you big guy : )

Sile
19-12-13, 03:35
It depends. If they came many centuries earlier than these historians wrote their stories, then they had enough time to build up population to settle 150 towns. What was the town definition for these historians, 200 people, 500 people, 1000 people? Probably what they called a town is just a big village by our standards. Regardless, we are not talking about millions of people, we are talking about population of few hundred thousand.

a possibility, but since venetic script is the same as raetic, camunic and lepontic script, then its logical that the veneti took the euganei script as their own as they clearly absorbed coastal euganei peoples...with this scenario, we can clearly see that the veneti where not great in numbers.
If they where great in numbers, they would have brought their own script, be it an antolian one or as recently stated a script from Turkmenistan into europe. But that is impossible since the scripts mentioned above are all very very similar

regards

Nobody1
20-12-13, 00:31
@nobody1

I am currently thinking in respect to languages of the alps in ancient times, that venetic was originally a Euganei language. The veneti assumed the langauge when they arrived, similar to normans arriving in Normandy and accepting the local language.
If we look at the link below its shows that Venetic, East Raetic, west raetic, Camunic and Lepontic are all similar. How can an "invading" veneti who kicked the Eugenai from the coast of Veneto into the alps have taken with them a very similar language to the raetic, camuni etc?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Venetic_Raetic_Camunic_Lepontic_alphabets.png

the link below shows the Alphabet types (scritps) not the languages;
all those Alphabets stem from the Cumaean Greek (via the Etruscans);

Lepontic and Venetic are Indo-European languages;
Camunic is not classified and Raetic is non-Indo-European with features to Tyrsenian (Etruscan/Lemnian);

The non-Indo-European part is prob the Neolithic remnant pop.; As in Strabo IV/VI;
Camunic might be Ligurian/Euganean might be Raetic;
Lepontic is classified as P-Keltic might also be however P-Italic (Umbrian/archaic) since this language was spoken by Umbrians to begin with;
Venetic is classified as an isolate-Indo-European language (close to Keltic/Italic) - because Illyrian itself is not substantially classified and attested;
But the Veneti (Enetoi) are classified as Illyrians in classical History;


Also venetic was found in Innsbruck as per link below, there are 18 such finds on the road from the border of veneto to innsbruck

Yes;
Venetic has been found in Alpine areas; But the Veneti were never recorded there;
Meaning - the tribes that are recorded there must have spoken an identical language (akin to Venetic);
Ergo - those tribes [Illyrians/(Vindelici)] and the Veneti must be connected and of the same Indo-European branch i.e. Illyrian (or an isolated same branch);

Thats what your talking about; Venetic inscription [vhilone.i. /filo(:)nej/] from Demlfeld, Tyrol;
Demlfeld and the entire Ampass area correspond to the Breuni (Βρεῦνοι) and Genauni (Γεναῦνοι) tribal areas;
And both the Breuni and Genauni are recorded in classical History as Illyrians just like the Veneti (Enetoi);
http://www.archaeotirol.at/
http://www.archaeotirol.at/fotoalbum%20demlfeld/bilder%20bearbeitet/Foto%2025.jpg

Sile
20-12-13, 03:18
the link below shows the Alphabet types (scritps) not the languages;
all those Alphabets stem from the Cumaean Greek (via the Etruscans);

Lepontic and Venetic are Indo-European languages;
Camunic is not classified and Raetic is non-Indo-European with features to Tyrsenian (Etruscan/Lemnian);

The non-Indo-European part is prob the Neolithic remnant pop.; As in Strabo IV/VI;
Camunic might be Ligurian/Euganean might be Raetic;
Lepontic is classified as P-Keltic might also be however P-Italic (Umbrian/archaic) since this language was spoken by Umbrians to begin with;
Venetic is classified as an isolate-Indo-European language (close to Keltic/Italic) - because Illyrian itself is not substantially classified and attested;
But the Veneti (Enetoi) are classified as Illyrians in classical History;



Yes;
Venetic has been found in Alpine areas; But the Veneti were never recorded there;
Meaning - the tribes that are recorded there must have spoken an identical language (akin to Venetic);
Ergo - those tribes [Illyrians/(Vindelici)] and the Veneti must be connected and of the same Indo-European branch i.e. Illyrian (or an isolated same branch);

Thats what your talking about; Venetic inscription [vhilone.i. /filo(:)nej/] from Demlfeld, Tyrol;
Demlfeld and the entire Ampass area correspond to the Breuni (Βρεῦνοι) and Genauni (Γεναῦνοι) tribal areas;
And both the Breuni and Genauni are recorded in classical History as Illyrians just like the Veneti (Enetoi);
http://www.archaeotirol.at/
http://www.archaeotirol.at/fotoalbum%20demlfeld/bilder%20bearbeitet/Foto%2025.jpg

thanks for info.............i had an idea that was the case.

still the language was not brought to NE-Italy by migrating venetic people......it must be the original language of the euganei. I also heard venetic was Q-celtic and not P-celtic. i will seek the old source for you.

On Breuni and Genauni.......the term illyrian in the alps must have meant a similar tribe to what was in modern slovenia and eastern austrian..........there is a Breuni tribe in southern Pannonia....IIRC it was classified as Illyrian-dacian.

Nobody1
21-12-13, 17:18
thanks for info.............i had an idea that was the case.

still the language was not brought to NE-Italy by migrating venetic people......it must be the original language of the euganei. I also heard venetic was Q-celtic and not P-celtic. i will seek the old source for you.

On Breuni and Genauni.......the term illyrian in the alps must have meant a similar tribe to what was in modern slovenia and eastern austrian..........there is a Breuni tribe in southern Pannonia....IIRC it was classified as Illyrian-dacian.

I think you mean the Breuci (Βρευκοῖ);
Strabo counts them to the Pannonii tribes but doesnt specify who exactly the Pannonii are;
But the Pannonii are situated between the Taurisci and Scordisci and prob. something just like them;
The Taurisci are classified as Keltic and the Norici being a branch of the Taurisci;
In VII/III Strabo clearly mentions the Scordisci as a Keltic tribe as well [along with the Boii and Taursici(Norici)] however in VII/V Strabo informs us:

"They alleged that the country was theirs, although it was separated from theirs by the River Parisus, which flows from the mountains to the Ister near the country of the Scordisci who are called Galatae, for these too lived intermingled with the Illyrian and the Thracian tribes"

So maybe (just maybe) the Pannonii are of an equal Indo-Euuropean Keltic/Illyrian/Thracian combo - as are the Scordisci just east of them or they are of an Indo-European Keltic/Illyrian combo as are the Iapodes west of them;

Sile
21-12-13, 20:08
I think you mean the Breuci (Βρευκοῖ);
Strabo counts them to the Pannonii tribes but doesnt specify who exactly the Pannonii are;
But the Pannonii are situated between the Taurisci and Scordisci and prob. something just like them;
The Taurisci are classified as Keltic and the Norici being a branch of the Taurisci;
In VII/III Strabo clearly mentions the Scordisci as a Keltic tribe as well [along with the Boii and Taursici(Norici)] however in VII/V Strabo informs us:

"They alleged that the country was theirs, although it was separated from theirs by the River Parisus, which flows from the mountains to the Ister near the country of the Scordisci who are called Galatae, for these too lived intermingled with the Illyrian and the Thracian tribes"

So maybe (just maybe) the Pannonii are of an equal Indo-Euuropean Keltic/Illyrian/Thracian combo - as are the Scordisci just east of them or they are of an Indo-European Keltic/Illyrian combo as are the Iapodes west of them;

my sources say, taurisci are a gallic tribe from modern switzerland with one branch going south and being called taurini ( turin) and the other going to noricum and mixing with the nori tribe ( illyrian ) and being renamed norici ( creators of noric steel ). The nori illyrians where north of the most eastern venetic tribe called the catali.
In regards to scordisci, they are migrating celtic and illyrian mix who moved to modern serbia and absorbed part of the thracian triballi or bessi tribe. some say these scordisci where remnants of the failed celtic invasion of Thessaly in Greece. IIRC there might be a mount called something similar to scordi or ?
The term galatae is strange in Roman text, they say Keltic gauls for southern french areas and galatae kelts for northern french areas.........but it is confusing

The pannonians are originally one of the "super Illyrian" tribe and later mixing with dacians and celts. Other "super" tribes being liburnians, dalmatians and others i cannot recall.

MOESAN
22-12-13, 00:05
the classification and "apparentment" of ancient tribes of ancient classical "historians" were not always soundly based -
lepontic was definitely celtic (by the way things are not simple: certain celtic speaking population of N-Italy adopted some etruscan clothes and rites at La Tène period) so...- as said in other threads, the term "illyrian" is to be taken with caution - again, the affiliation of tribes by ancients are unreliable very often

Sile
22-12-13, 22:55
the classification and "apparentment" of ancient tribes of ancient classical "historians" were not always soundly based -
lepontic was definitely celtic (by the way things are not simple: certain celtic speaking population of N-Italy adopted some etruscan clothes and rites at La Tène period) so...- as said in other threads, the term "illyrian" is to be taken with caution - again, the affiliation of tribes by ancients are unreliable very often

I agree with Nobody, I find the alpine tribes all very similar regardless on what they are called. IIRC a monument with all tribes the Romans conquered in the alps is still standing.
Celts had gallic and Illyrian blood as well as Raeti and vindelici

Sile
24-12-13, 08:07
@marciano

Are you going to use the ydna and mtdna numbers found in the 2 links in your maps and Italian data ?

Sile
24-12-13, 19:35
another link to the study

http://laboratoriobagolini.it/?page_id=2517&lang=en

Angela
07-01-14, 15:26
another link to the study

http://laboratoriobagolini.it/?page_id=2517&lang=en

Sorry, I missed this before...

Additional data is always good, but, of course, all these old studies should be reinterpreted in light of new papers like Lazaridis et al. Even just based on the state of the science at the time, some of the conclusions, like the one that some of these communities show basic continuity from the Mesolithic are based on assumptions which have not yet been proven, and were in fact disputed even at the time, such as the one that H1 and H3 are "Mesolithic" in central Europe, not to mention that all the yDNA "R" in the area could not be considered
Mesolithic" given that, as the authors concede, the attribution of yDNA "R" to the Mesolithic of Central Europe was "controversial". As is now abundantly clear, of course, neither complete Mesolithic nor Neolithic continuity can be found anywhere in modern Europe.

Just generally, all of these studies of highly inbred communities seem to merely repeat things that are already pretty well established, although of course, there's always value in tracking for public health reasons the recessive genetic disease which shows up in many of them.

As many papers have already shown, isolated, low growth populations show higher FST distances to other groups compared to high growth, expanding populations. Even so, as the authors themselves state, "In fact, the absolute value is very low (~1%) if one considers that overall, the European population is genetically homogeneous. The genetic variation in all populations, comprising those from Trentino, is mostly present within the same (>90%) rather than different populations."

Also, the paper fails to find an explanation for the genetic variation in either the cultural affiliation or the languages of the various villages. As was also shown in some relatively recent papers about Iceland, modern populations, because of the operations of drift, aren't even particularly close to the people who can with some certainty be identified as the original founders of the community, as was shown in the case of the Cimbri.

All of which implies to me that other than for historians, the affiliations attributed by ancient writers to these groups is of even less usefulness in terms of a genetic analysis of the modern day populations inhabiting the area.

I guess in academia as in everything else, what goes around, comes around. After all this insistence that genetic variation is strictly about admixture, and all these attempts to tie genetic diversity to language affiliation, we're drifting back to accepting the large role that "drift", and, no doubt, selection, plays in genetic diversity. (Pun intended, :)).

Nobody1
07-01-14, 16:58
As far as i know;
The only think Lazaridis et al. debunked is that North_Euro Componant has nothing to do with Nordic (Caucasoid) Anthropological features;

Loshbour is [K=20] 100% North_Euro and is described in the study to be just as dark if not darker than Stuttgart who is [K=20] overwhelmingly South_Euro; Loshbour = Dark/Black hair, Darker skin pigmentation, prob. light-eyes; Not a Nordic description; And if thats how 100% North_Euro looks like than that says it all;


All of which implies to me that other than for historians, the affiliations attributed by ancient writers to these groups is of even less usefulness in terms of a genetic analysis of the modern day populations inhabiting the area.

what exactly are you talking about here?
what Historians? what affiliations? which Historian did Lazaridis et al discredit here given that no Alpine pop. was even part of the study;

this constant effort of discrediting ancient scholars by simply claiming false and abstract assertions is nothing but pathetic;
mention a concrete case or let it be;

Angela
07-01-14, 22:59
Okay, let's take it one step at a time...perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear.

This is what the authors of the paper in question conclude..."Overall, these results favor the hypothesis of genetic continuity between modern and pre-neolithic local populations. This suggests that the introduction of agricultural practices in the region (Neolithization) could have occurred through a process of acculturation of local Mesolithic populations, rather than by the arrival of Neolithic groups, as suggested by the archaeological data in loco (Lanzinger et al., 2000).

Unless things change pretty drastically with the sequencing of more ancient "European" hunter gatherers, I think that it's now pretty clear, post Lazaridis et al, that agriculture in Europe was *not* mainly spread through a process of acculturation of local Mesolithic populations, but through the arrival of farmers from, probably, Anatolia, or at least the Aegean area. These isolated mountain communities are highly unlikely to be remnants of western hunter gatherers. The figures from Laziridis et al for central Europe, for example, seem to hover around 33%. Also, whatever the various layers of admixture involved, the median across Europe for the EEF component is over 55% according to one analysis I've seen, (close to 50% in Germany) and I don't even know if that figure included weighting of the data in light of the population of the various European regional areas. Then you have to factor in the percentages of ANE, which I think look pretty clearly to have arrived in western Europe much later, and from the east.

Now, the authors didn't have access to autosomal data, or these sophisticated analytical models. They were basing their conclusions, which can now be seen to be incorrect, on assumptions about mtDNA and yDNA which also, in my opinion, are incorrect. It seems to me that after Mal'ta and the Lazaridis paper, the odds are in favor of the fact that all that R1b1b1 in the Alps arrived post Neolithic. Nor is it in any way proven that H1 and H3 mtDNA are mesolithic in central Europe again, in my opinion. Furthermore, even if results came in tomorrow that R1b is mesolithic in central Europe, and so are mtDNA H1 and H3, it still wouldn't change the fact that autosomally these people are only about one third WHG. All it would show, once again, is the loose correlation between uniparental markers and autosomal DNA.

Therefore, it's my opinion that while the data from this paper is valuable, the conclusions as to this particular issue are incorrect. You're free, of course, to hold any opinion you wish on the matter. (I think many of their other conclusions, regarding the importance of drift, for example, and other issues upon which I elaborated up thread, are indeed valuable.)

I'm a little puzzled why you introduced the topic of pigmentation. I certainly didn't see the analysis of the pigmentation snps borne by the WHG as the most important take-away from the paper, but to each their own. I also wasn't particularly surprised, because I've never felt that we could transfer modern local phenotypes back thirty or even ten thousand years. Two thousand years, in some places, maybe, but not ten thousand years. Plus, the studies of pigmentation alleles have consistently proposed a relatively "modern" sweep for them, with the various estimates not coming in much before ten thousand years ago for some of them.

Finally, while you're certainly entitled to feel that some ancient author with the most limited knowledge of geography, only oral history and legend as a source, and no conception of the insights to be gained from genetics, is some sort of guide to the *genetic* composition of some modern populations in the Alps, you are not entitled to prohibit anyone else from expressing a contrary view. Nor does it do your theories any good when you engage in personal attacks and name calling. That's usually a sign of a weak argument in my opinion. What you might want to do instead is re-read the latest link to the paper in question, focusing particularly on the fact that the genetic variation does not correlate very well with either language affiliation or place of origin.

Sile
07-01-14, 23:52
Okay, let's take it one step at a time...perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear.

This is what the authors of the paper in question conclude..."Overall, these results favor the hypothesis of genetic continuity between modern and pre-neolithic local populations. This suggests that the introduction of agricultural practices in the region (Neolithization) could have occurred through a process of acculturation of local Mesolithic populations, rather than by the arrival of Neolithic groups, as suggested by the archaeological data in loco (Lanzinger et al., 2000).

Unless things change pretty drastically with the sequencing of more ancient "European" hunter gatherers, I think that it's now pretty clear, post Lazaridis et al, that agriculture in Europe was *not* mainly spread through a process of acculturation of local Mesolithic populations, but through the arrival of farmers from, probably, Anatolia, or at least the Aegean area. These isolated mountain communities are highly unlikely to be remnants of western hunter gatherers. The figures from Laziridis et al for central Europe, for example, seem to hover around 33%. Also, whatever the various layers of admixture involved, the median across Europe for the EEF component is over 55% according to one analysis I've seen, (close to 50% in Germany) and I don't even know if that figure included weighting of the data in light of the population of the various European regional areas. Then you have to factor in the percentages of ANE, which I think look pretty clearly to have arrived in western Europe much later, and from the east.

Now, the authors didn't have access to autosomal data, or these sophisticated analytical models. They were basing their conclusions, which can now be seen to be incorrect, on assumptions about mtDNA and yDNA which also, in my opinion, are incorrect. It seems to me that after Mal'ta and the Lazaridis paper, the odds are in favor of the fact that all that R1b1b1 in the Alps arrived post Neolithic. Nor is it in any way proven that H1 and H3 mtDNA are mesolithic in central Europe again, in my opinion. Furthermore, even if results came in tomorrow that R1b is mesolithic in central Europe, and so are mtDNA H1 and H3, it still wouldn't change the fact that autosomally these people are only about one third WHG. All it would show, once again, is the loose correlation between uniparental markers and autosomal DNA.

Therefore, it's my opinion that while the data from this paper is valuable, the conclusions as to this particular issue are incorrect. You're free, of course, to hold any opinion you wish on the matter. (I think many of their other conclusions, regarding the importance of drift, for example, and other issues upon which I elaborated up thread, are indeed valuable.)

I'm a little puzzled why you introduced the topic of pigmentation. I certainly didn't see the analysis of the pigmentation snps borne by the WHG as the most important take-away from the paper, but to each their own. I also wasn't particularly surprised, because I've never felt that we could transfer modern local phenotypes back thirty or even ten thousand years. Two thousand years, in some places, maybe, but not ten thousand years. Plus, the studies of pigmentation alleles have consistently proposed a relatively "modern" sweep for them, with the various estimates not coming in much before ten thousand years ago for some of them.

Finally, while you're certainly entitled to feel that some ancient author with the most limited knowledge of geography, only oral history and legend as a source, and no conception of the insights to be gained from genetics, is some sort of guide to the *genetic* composition of some modern populations in the Alps, you are not entitled to prohibit anyone else from expressing a contrary view. Nor does it do your theories any good when you engage in personal attacks and name calling. That's usually a sign of a weak argument in my opinion. What you might want to do instead is re-read the latest link to the paper in question, focusing particularly on the fact that the genetic variation does not correlate very well with either language affiliation or place of origin.

but to me you seemed to be responding to my link #88.
Is this your summary of this link?

Nobody1
08-01-14, 03:00
The studies i was talking to (with Sile) were Esko et al 2012/Capocasa et al 2013/Coia et al 2013;
And neither is Lanzinger et al 2000 an Ancient Scholar;

And ever since Skoglund et al 2012 and Gök4 it is clear that the Neolithic spread of Farming occurred with a Physical-Migration and not an idea (into previous existing pops); That goes without saying and in that regard we are absolutely on the same page;

Lazaridis et al 2013 sequenced (and used) 11 corpses from the Mesolithic/Neolithic (Hunters and Farmers) and created a 'three way mixture model' (ANE/EEF/WHG) based on those corpses and imposed this three way mixture model on modern-day European pops.; But no Alpine pop. was part of it:

But to the actual point; You claimed that Ancient Scholars are getting debunked by recent studies; And im not prohibiting you from anything - on the contrary i am encouraging you to finally post some proper sources to that;

Im still really hopeful that in the next post you will post a passage from Classical-History claiming (affiliations) this and that about Alpine pops and how Lazaridis et al debunked it; Giving that Lazaridis is not about Indo-Europeans or any Bronze-age pop and has no info on modern Alpine pops to begin with;

PS: How false were the Ancient Scholars in claiming that the Sardinians are isolated or in describing waves of migrations and inter-mixtures? Just a few examples for starters;

Eldritch
27-05-15, 16:33
I find it interesting that the villages with linguistic minorities cluster clearly more north compared to Italian ones, kinda surprising.

Regio X
29-05-15, 06:16
The lamonesi, a people of Asiatic origin: http://www.raixevenete.com/i-lamonesi-un-popolo-di-origine-asiatica/

Sile
29-05-15, 07:47
The lamonesi, a people of Asiatic origin: http://www.raixevenete.com/i-lamonesi-un-popolo-di-origine-asiatica/

thanks ...........east side of the caucasus mountains - Central asia


here is something for you to enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLzSVi64UBk

Regio X
29-05-15, 17:52
here is something for you to enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLzSVi64UBk
Very interesting. Brava sta toxa! :smile:
Thanks for sharing!