PDA

View Full Version : Evidence that the ancient Romans spread R1b-U152 based on Roman colonies in Italy



Maciamo
26-07-13, 13:46
I have updated my article on the Genetic History of Italy, adding a section (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#bronze_iron_age) arguing that the Romans were predominantly R1b-U152 (S28) based on the geographic distribution colonies founded by the Roman inside Italy. I have created a map showing the locations of Roman colonies and U152 frequencies.


http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/roman_colonies_italy-small.jpg (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#Romans)

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 13:54
i think that is evidence but it could just be because of earlier Italic migrations

honestly i think Rome did not spread R1b U152 at least in non Italy areas. They defintley where primarily R1b U152 like modern central Italians but i dont think they spread it. I explain my argument here http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28810-Rome-spread-Middle-Eastern-and-North-African-Y-DNA (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28810-Rome-spread-Middle-Eastern-and-North-African-Y-DNA)

The Genetic history of Italy is long, descriptive, easy to understand, and really tells the full Y DNA backround of Italy. I like the zoom ins on Y DNA maps.

ebAmerican
26-07-13, 18:14
Is it possible that Brennus and his Senones tribe resettled Rome bringing U152 around 400BC? Could the stories of Brennus' eventual defeat be more propaganda, then truth? Is it possible that the Senones were misrepresented, and they should have been called Ligureans (Ambrones)? The Ligurian language has strong Italic and Celtic influence. Latin was a Q-Italic language, and may be more associated with a Q-Celtic/Q-Italic Ligurian language. This is all speculation of course. I see U152 sweeping down from the Paris Basin and invading Southern France and Northern Italy. Just a thought.

Nobody1
26-07-13, 18:16
Doubtful;

All Roman colonies were based on pre-existing settlements;


The scenario in the Po Valley for examples - where R1b-U152 is very dominant [32.2% (Boattini et al 2013)] - Had the Roman Colonies Placentia and Cremona -

and Strabo records the situation after the Roman conquest very detailed;

John Williams - The Life of Julius Cæsar (1854) (Strabo - quote)
That after the expulsion of the Boii and the extermination of the Gaesatae and Senones, there are left the Ligurian tribes and the Roman colonies; but mingled with the Romans are the Umbrian race, and, in some localities, the Tuscans. When the Romans became masters of the country, and settled colonies in many spots, they carefully preserved the remains of the original races; and now they are all Romans: nevertheless some settlements are still called both Tuscan and Umbrian, in the same manner as the Eneti-Ligurians and Insubrians still keep their ancient denominations


So the Roman Colonizers were
Umbrians - Romans - and in some localities Etruscans
with the original peoples (Bronze-age) Ligurians and (Bronz-age) Insubres Umbrians remaining
- but the (Iron-age) Gauls were exterminated;


Strabo - Book V
The Insubri still exist; their metropolis is Mediolanum, which formerly was a village, (for they all dwelt in villages,) but is now a considerable city, beyond the Po, and almost touching the Alps........in the same manner as the Eneti-Ligurians and Insubrians still keep their ancient denominations

---
Your theory might (at best/but doubtful) explain Italy;
but what about the Upper Rhine, Alsace-Lorraine, Switzerland (LaTene), Burgundy, Tyrol .... etc.etc.

A common archaic Indo-European (proto-Keltic/proto-Italic) root is more propbale;
as this common root is also manifested in the Language (Keltic/Italic);

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 21:14
i dont think there is a reason to ague the romans where mainly R1b U152 if they where Italic then they where. We dont need to prove it with their settlements in Italy.

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 21:25
Is it possible that Brennus and his Senones tribe resettled Rome bringing U152 around 400BC? Could the stories of Brennus' eventual defeat be more propaganda, then truth? Is it possible that the Senones were misrepresented, and they should have been called Ligureans (Ambrones)? The Ligurian language has strong Italic and Celtic influence. Latin was a Q-Italic language, and may be more associated with a Q-Celtic/Q-Italic Ligurian language. This is all speculation of course. I see U152 sweeping down from the Paris Basin and invading Southern France and Northern Italy. Just a thought.

Brennus was not the first Celt in Italy his ancestors did kind off the same thing all the way back in 600bc. We already know where Celtic territory in Italy was and it was a skiny spot in northeast Italy.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif

Brennus was a Hallstate/La Tene Gaul. His culture came from the same father culture as Villnoaven Italic both come from Urnfield culture in the alps 3,200ybp. Brennus people would have had just as much R1b S28/U152 as Italics but they defintley are not the reason why it is most popular in Italy. The reason is both come from the same ancestor culture. R1b S28/U152 is the beast Iron age warrior marker (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28885-R1b-S28-and-R1b-S116-Best-Bronze-and-Iron-age-warrior-DNA-marker). It started to spread around the alps in the late bronze age 3,200ybp from Urenfield culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture). Some spoke a Italic language some spoke a Celtic language. The Urnfield descendants that spread into Italy 3,200ybp and formed Villnoaven culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FVillano van_culture&ei=ec7yUeXcOKi2igLzwYDoAw&usg=AFQjCNEomyEEihCqZAFE9TdgjfgZ461ePA) and the Hallstat culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallstatt_culture) both had Iron weapons. This gave them a huge advantage over other people so they where able to conquer pretty much all of western Europe from 3,200-2,500ybp and alot of eastern Europe from 2,500-2,200ybp they even got to Turkey.

Celtic iron long sword
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101218193611/deadliestwarrior/images/d/de/Sword.jpg

zanipolo
26-07-13, 21:38
I have updated my article on the Genetic History of Italy, adding a section (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml#bronze_iron_age) arguing that the Romans were predominantly R1b-U152 (S28) based on the geographic distribution colonies founded by the Roman inside Italy. I have created a map showing the locations of Roman colonies and U152 frequencies.

wow, u put it out there. I see 1% chance of R1b-U152 being Roman due to this paper


Begoña Martínez Cruz, Evidence of pre-Roman tribal genetic structure in Basques from uniparentally inherited markers (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/12/molbev.mss091.abstract)

which states 2 groups of R1b , a South and North..........south below

R1b-S-2 (Z196), which includes:

R1b-S-2a (M153): Basques and Gascons almost exclusively
R1b-S-2b (L176.2/S179.2): Gascons and Catalans specially, but more widespread


R1b-S-3 (S28/U152): Not too frequent but neither rare either among Basques and Gascons (more common in Pyrenean Navarre, Catalonia) but widespread through mainland Europe, specially Italy .
R1b-S-4 (L21/M529/S145, L459): Often known as the Irish clade, is not restricted to Ireland at all but does have a mostly Atlantic distribution (West France, England...).


R1b-S is original from the Franco-Cantabrian region, while R1b-N would be from Doggerland (now under the North Sea), Flanders.

U-152 became the gallic-ligurian marker , from modern Barcelona to Venice

The Roman DNA project started in late 2011 of which 20 skeletons are being analysied has stil not given any news, but the consenus is that it is basically J2 and E haplotypes

Nobody1
26-07-13, 21:47
Go to - History & Civilisations > Who were the Sabines?
All you need to know about 600BC Bellovesus migration; its a fable;

The first substantial emergence of Indo-European Italics (Umbrians) was ~1500 BC Terremare culture - Po Valley;

Paul MacKendrick - The Mute Stones Speak (1962)
The terremare are important: they preserve the memory of an immigrant population, distinct in culture from the aborigines. The distinguishing marks of this new culture are knowledge of metal-working, a pottery identifiable by its exaggerated half-moon handles, and the practice of cremation rather than inhumation. On the evidence, we must suppose that this new culture emerged about 1500 B.C. as a fusion of indigenous hut-dwellers and immigrant lakedwellers. Bronze (Horse) bits found in their settlements show that they had domesticated the horse, and there is some evidence, outside the terremare, for dogs as well, described by Randall-Maclver as "doubtless good woolly animals of a fair size."


Italic language tree
http://imageshack.us/a/img13/8729/languages.png

Umbrian -
http://www.ancientscripts.com/umbrian.html

http://www.ancientscripts.com/images/oscan_text.gif


Stele of Bormio [4th cen BC] - Bormio, North Italy - Lombardy (Raetic warriors)
http://imageshack.us/a/img35/7345/raeti1.png

---


Within the Indo-European realm; the Umbrians and Kelts share a common (proto) root;
which is attested by the Linguistic links and Historical refs.


Cambrian Institute - The Cambrian Journal (1862)
from Caius Sempronius (De Divis. Ital.,);
"The portion of the Apennines from the sources of the Tiber to the Nar, the Umbri inhabit, the oldest stock of the Old Gael, (Veteres Galli), as Augustus writes."
[Apenninum colunt Ligures, portionem vero Apennini inhabitant Umbri, prima veterum Gallorum proies, ut Augustus scribit.]


James C. Prichard - Ethnography of Europe: Vol.III (1841)
Solinus informs us that Bocchus, a writer who has been several times cited by Pliny, reported the Umbri to have been descended from the ancient Gauls; and a similar account of their origin has been adopted, either from the same or from different testimony, by Servius, Isidore, and other writers of a late period.
[Bocchus (affranchi lettre de Sylla) absolvit Gallorum veterum propaginem Umbros esse]



Guy Bradley - Ancient Umbria (2000) [Oxford Uni. Press]
There is an interesting tradition that the name of the Umbrians came from their survival of a mythical flood: see Pliny, NH 3. 112. This tradition could go back at least to Marcus Antonius (Gnipho) in early 1st cent. BC. See Servius, Aen. 12. 753: [U]sane Umbros Gallorum veterum propaginem esse Marcus Antonius refert: hos eosdem, quod tempore aquosae cladis imbribus superfuerunt Ombrous ἡ Ὀμβρική / Ὀμβρικός cognominatos. "Indeed Marcus Antonius reports that the Umbrians are an offspring of the ancient Gauls; and that this same people, because they survived the rains in a time of watery disaster, were called the Ombroi' "


The Umbrians [Terremare-Urnfield(Villanova/Golasecca)] were more akin to the proto-Kelts [Tumulus-Urnfield] than to the proper Kelts [Hallstatt-LaTene].
But common links remained;


Luke Owen Pike - The English and their Origin (1866)
If now we consult the Umbrian language with a view of discovering whether it approaches more nearly the Gaelic or the Cymric type, we find, scanty though the evidence may be, that Umbrian differs from Latin in precisely the same manner in which Cymric and Greek differ from Latin. The Latin qu becomes, in Umbrian as in Welsh and Greek, p: e.g. Latin quatuor, Umbrian petur, Welsh pedwar. The Welsh uch, uchel, appears as the Umbrian ucar, the Greek aixpog; the Welsh hwra as the Umbrian hri, the Greek aipsco;

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 21:59
those raetic earriors look suprisgly Celtic. One is blowing a horn Celts always did that. The other is wearing horned helmet(dont get conused witth Vikings) Romans say Brennus army wore horned helmets this was in 390bc.
Gaul warrior tstaue from north Italy with a horned helmet
http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpg

also its shield is just like Celtic shields
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/258/e/e/ancient_celtic_shield_by_ascaso-d2ys05e.jpg

So in my opinion these where either Gauls, Raetic warriors copying Gauls, or Raetics where Gauls. Something extremely Gaulic is happening in those carvings. My guess is they where Italics who where not as influnced by Greece as Rome was and because of that they kept a traditional Italic culture which was the brother to Hallstatt Gaulic culture. They also probably had Gaulic influnce

Nobody1
26-07-13, 22:14
U-152 became the gallic-ligurian marker , from modern Barcelona to Venice

Doesnt stop at Venice;

---

East Tyrol = 12.5% R1b-U152 [270 samples]

Niederstätter et al 2012
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041885#pone.0 041885.s013


Venetian area = 19.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [73 samples]
Lombardy/Piedmont/Liguria = 32.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [161 samples]

Boattini et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065441

Nobody1
26-07-13, 22:27
So in my opinion these where either Gauls, Raetic warriors copying Gauls, or Raetics where Gauls. Something extremely Gaulic is happening in those carvings. My guess is they where Italics who where not as influnced by Greece as Rome was and because of that they kept a traditional Italic culture which was the brother to Hallstatt Gaulic culture. They also probably had Gaulic influnce

Well than feast your eyes on this:

http://imageshack.us/a/img214/6537/estecultureck9.jpg


The Umbrian Insubres - Golasecca culture was in strong contact with Keltic Hallstatt;
Both being part (Hallstatt A-B & Golasecca I) of the
Indo-European Bronze-age Urnfield culture complex;
With Umbrians and proto-Kelts sharing a common root - to begin with;


Warrior tomb - Golasecca culture / Sesto-Calende, Lombardy - 7th cen BC
http://imageshack.us/a/img819/6448/golasecca1.png


The Lepontic language is associated with the Golasecca culture
http://www.ancient-celts.com/LanguagesLepontic.html



John T. Koch - The Celts: History, Life, and Culture (2012)
The area occupied by the Golasecca culture is roughly consistent with the Celtic peoples of the Insubres, Oromobii, and Lepontii mentioned in classical literature.


Insubres and the Golasecca-culture area
http://imageshack.us/a/img198/6448/golasecca1.png

zanipolo
26-07-13, 22:31
wow, u put it out there. I see 1% chance of R1b-U152 being Roman due to this paper


Begoña Martínez Cruz, Evidence of pre-Roman tribal genetic structure in Basques from uniparentally inherited markers (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/12/molbev.mss091.abstract)

which states 2 groups of R1b , a South and North..........south below

R1b-S-2 (Z196), which includes:

R1b-S-2a (M153): Basques and Gascons almost exclusively
R1b-S-2b (L176.2/S179.2): Gascons and Catalans specially, but more widespread


R1b-S-3 (S28/U152): Not too frequent but neither rare either among Basques and Gascons (more common in Pyrenean Navarre, Catalonia) but widespread through mainland Europe, specially Italy .
R1b-S-4 (L21/M529/S145, L459): Often known as the Irish clade, is not restricted to Ireland at all but does have a mostly Atlantic distribution (West France, England...).


R1b-S is original from the Franco-Cantabrian region, while R1b-N would be from Doggerland (now under the North Sea), Flanders.

U-152 became the gallic-ligurian marker , from modern Barcelona to Venice

The Roman DNA project started in late 2011 of which 20 skeletons are being analysied has stil not given any news, but the consenus is that it is basically J2 and E haplotypes

and

Ancient Roman is not fully Villanovan culture like the etruscans

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latial_culture

zanipolo
26-07-13, 22:34
Doesnt stop at Venice;

---

East Tyrol = 12.5% R1b-U152 [270 samples]

Niederstätter et al 2012
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041885#pone.0 041885.s013


Venetian area = 19.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [73 samples]
Lombardy/Piedmont/Liguria = 32.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [161 samples]

Boattini et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065441

I am talking about bronze-age and yes I know there was no venice in the bronze-age, so julian alps would be what I refferred to
Istria, islands of friuli and dalmatian has castellani culture which was bronze-age mycenean

Yetos
26-07-13, 23:12
those raetic earriors look suprisgly Celtic. One is blowing a horn Celts always did that. The other is wearing horned helmet(dont get conused witth Vikings) Romans say Brennus army wore horned helmets this was in 390bc.
Gaul warrior tstaue from north Italy with a horned helmet
http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpg

also its shield is just like Celtic shields
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/258/e/e/ancient_celtic_shield_by_ascaso-d2ys05e.jpg

So in my opinion these where either Gauls, Raetic warriors copying Gauls, or Raetics where Gauls. Something extremely Gaulic is happening in those carvings. My guess is they where Italics who where not as influnced by Greece as Rome was and because of that they kept a traditional Italic culture which was the brother to Hallstatt Gaulic culture. They also probably had Gaulic influnce

Sea peoples also,

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSrCHPwlsRPswGlV7jlxvEQesZJ1faXQ yCo4dWWAC6k0h3C8AOT

http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/seapeoples63.jpg

a Typical Terresh (Thyrrsenian?)

http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/seapeoples23.jpg

Sea people also were helmets with 2 horns, (allien radio antennas :laughing:) and use Horne at battle, and although they were shaved, they leave a long moustache.
Sea people are connected with Thyrrenians.

there are many strange in fashion of ancients,
For example Makedoians used σκιαδιον a hat like French Berret,
and a helmet simmilar to Brygians which later gauls and Francais took it (use it),
and their system to stabilize helmet in Head was adopted by Romans.
but Makedonians were either all face shaved, either all face with a beard, never a moustache.


Big Horn shape trompets were also used by Persians.


remember Sardenia in IE Greek was Ιχθουσα-Ιχνουσα Ichthusa-Ichnusa (Fish land) and named Sardenia after Sherdana people



the bellow photo is a typical Peleset

http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/images/seapeoples32.jpg


you can see from where the IE adopted the 'feathers' in helmet as an officer mark.


As you see the 2 horn helmet was primary used by Thyrsenians, much before Celts and Vikings

The IE helmets until the times after Troyan war were made by wool and bones, so to crush and absorve the energy.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t3SPXlCgDFI/T3Ni7xf2GKI/AAAAAAAAI2c/_gzWZWDNI3g/s640/%CE%A0%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BB%CE%AF%CE%B1+% CE%9C%CF%85%CE%BA%CE%B7%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%AF%CE%BF%CF %85+%CF%83%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B1%CF%84%CE%B9%CF%8E%CF% 84%CE%B7+%28%CE%95.%CE%91.%CE%9C.%CE%91%29.jpg

Typical Mycenean/Greek before sea peoples

Nobody1
26-07-13, 23:32
Sea peoples also,

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSrCHPwlsRPswGlV7jlxvEQesZJ1faXQ yCo4dWWAC6k0h3C8AOT

Sea people also were helmets with 2 horns, (allien radio antennas :laughing:) and use Horne at battle, and although they were saved, they leave a long moustache.
Sea people are connected with Thyrrenians.

there are many strange in fashion of anccients,
For example Makedoians used σκιαδιον a hat like French Berret,
and a helmet simmilar to Brygians which later gauls and Francais took it (use it),
and their system to stabilize helmet in Head was adopted by Romans.
but Makedonians were either all face saved, either all face with a beard, never a moustache.


Big Horn shape trompets were also used by Persians.


Isnt there also a famous Greek helmet type - with Bronze horns;
Doric or Ionian / im not sure; if i find it i will post;

Found it -
Achaean helmets [CORINTHIAN TYPE] - Magna Graecia
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e166/Khshayathiya/P1040072.jpg

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 23:37
the shield is a dead give away. From what i know no one in the meditreaen Civilized world had shields like Celts and Germans. Also the design in the shield was just like what Celts used. also celts almost always used big truphets in battle. i know many people used trumphets and horned helmets but when u did that to the shield and the fact Celts had contact in that area from 3,000-2,00ybp there is a very good chance they got those weapons from celts. or some how are related.

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 23:49
Well than feast your eyes on this:

http://imageshack.us/a/img214/6537/estecultureck9.jpg


The Umbrian Insubres - Golasecca culture was in strong contact with Keltic Hallstatt;
Both being part (Hallstatt A-B & Golasecca I) of the
Indo-European Bronze-age Urnfield culture complex;
With Umbrians and proto-Kelts sharing a common root - to begin with;


Warrior tomb - Golasecca culture / Sesto-Calende, Lombardy - 7th cen BC
http://imageshack.us/a/img819/6448/golasecca1.png


The Lepontic language is associated with the Golasecca culture
http://www.ancient-celts.com/LanguagesLepontic.html



John T. Koch - The Celts: History, Life, and Culture (2012)
The area occupied by the Golasecca culture is roughly consistent with the Celtic peoples of the Insubres, Oromobii, and Lepontii mentioned in classical literature.


Insubres and the Golasecca-culture area
http://imageshack.us/a/img198/6448/golasecca1.png

u know what that means lugarians where probably italic. Hallstatt Celtic culture and villnoavean italic culture came from the same root late bronze age urnfield culture 3,200ybp. R1b U152 is centered in northern Italy and areas Villnoeven culture existed. Also liguraia today is apart of the center area of r1b s28 they have 30-40%. I am very sure they where Italic anyone who was not italic in italy 2,500-2,000ybp was a invader like estrucans i know italics dominated because how r1b s28 is in italy.

Fire Haired
26-07-13, 23:59
Nobody 1 the ligurain swords shock me. they have the same curve at the bottom of the handle which was the signature of celtic swords

for example this 3,000 year old early hallstate celtic bronze sword. this was just 200 years italic cultures split from celtic cultures and migrated to italy. so italics defintley had similar swords
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/roman4404/Antenna%20Sword/1_2.jpg

ligurian swords it possibly is a italic verson that descends from the same words types as what Hallstatt Celts had. all swords at this time had the same basic build even the ones in china but that curve to me mkes them seem related.
http://imageshack.us/a/img819/6448/golasecca1.png

Yetos
27-07-13, 00:19
Isnt there also a famous Greek helmet type - with Bronze horns;
Doric or Ionian / im not sure; if i find it i will post;

Found it -
Achaean helmets [CORINTHIAN TYPE] - Magna Graecia
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e166/Khshayathiya/P1040072.jpg


typical hel;met of IE before sea peoples.


http://odysseus.culture.gr/java/image?foto_id=385&size=m1

it is made by bones sewed above wool.


link with Greek ministry of culture

http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/4/gh430.jsp?obj_id=4654
(http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/4/gh430.jsp?obj_id=4654)


the helmet is wool inside, above is 3 leafs of leather, and above is wild boar teeth.

Yetos
27-07-13, 00:35
the shield is a dead give away. From what i know no one in the meditreaen Civilized world had shields like Celts and Germans. Also the design in the shield was just like what Celts used. also celts almost always used big truphets in battle. i know many people used trumphets and horned helmets but when u did that to the shield and the fact Celts had contact in that area from 3,000-2,00ybp there is a very good chance they got those weapons from celts. or some how are related.


No way,

there is no evidence of horn helmets in Euroep before sea peoples,

only that of Mycenean which helmet was made by leather.


that existed in Europe before sea peoples, the IEans

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Eberzahnhelm_Heraklion.jpg/350px-Eberzahnhelm_Heraklion.jpg

https://www.secureshop.gr/POOL/culturegreece/booking_manager/images/articles/ART816013382837958712021168128_small.jpg


these bellow are after sea peoples and early iron age.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQs2p0gLoU4EFq6ekoFQvM67i7ZkXrfK LO7fxKIw98NOWJnxHvb

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTf3NVUJUjGyMx26EDrguLtOiVFRXlvt MVJAogY58Dfez0tJzbZ


All Germans and Celts and Greeks took (adopted or copy) 2 horn helmet, and straw/feathers helmets by sea peoples.

Yetos
27-07-13, 00:44
Isnt there also a famous Greek helmet type - with Bronze horns;
Doric or Ionian / im not sure; if i find it i will post;

Found it -
Achaean helmets [CORINTHIAN TYPE] - Magna Graecia
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e166/Khshayathiya/P1040072.jpg

Yes but Magna Grecia was colonised by Greeks centuries after the sea peoples raids in Aegean.

and connection of Thyrrenians with Aegean is accepted by all today

Nobody1
27-07-13, 01:06
Yes but Magna Grecia was colonised by Greeks centuries after the sea peoples raids in Aegean.

and connection of Thyrrenians with Aegean is accepted by all today

The Sea-Peoples are also heavily linked with Sardinia [Sherden];

Bronze-age Sardinian warriors / Sardinia - Nuragic Civilization
(note the horned helmets)
http://i1.ifrm.com/2279/116/upload/p6766570.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img406/1275/arciereflikr.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img812/8107/t7nx.png
- very kick-ass horns


There are plenty more of such warrior-figures of Bronze-age Sardinia (Nuragic);


So the question remains:
Are the Bronze-age Sardinians the true identity of the mysterious Sea-People?

http://iruntheinternet.com/lulzdump/images/gifs/ancient-aliens-is-such-a-thing-even-possible-yes-it-is-Giorgio-Tsoukalos-aliums-1351596245T.gif

Yetos
27-07-13, 01:07
Celtic weapon (sword)

http://www.hixenbaugh.net/images/gallery/lrg/3213a-l.jpg



Etruscan swords

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/SpadaNuragica1.JPG/55px-SpadaNuragica1.JPG

http://www.bible-history.com/ibh/images/fullsized/etruscan_bronze_word.jpg

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4845866660069931&pid=15.1&H=160&W=126

Villanovan sword

http://www.royalathena.com/media/Etruscan/Bronze/HM1055.jpg


Gladius

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Uncrossed_gladius.jpg/300px-Uncrossed_gladius.jpg


I do not know about the mettalurgy or special archaiology,
but at least in shape and form, the swords found in Nuragic civilizations seems to use 2 techniques,
1) Villanovan uses 3 nails, 1 in wrisk and 2 above
2) nuragic/etruscan anters a pocket (one body)
but both five almost same shape,


while Celtic of that time is far away since we see no usage either of one body either of 3 nails.

But in Gladius we see a blade simmilar to villanovan but in shape of celtic one inside a pocket for hand.


so the case of Raeti (if Etruscans) and Rome is little bit strange, since they might have exchange of culture among non IE and celts of Alps, and Celts with Rome

Yetos
27-07-13, 01:12
The Sea-Peoples are also heavily linked with Sardinia [Sherden];

Bronze-age Sardinian warriors / Sardinia - Nuragic Civilization
(note the horned helmets)
http://i1.ifrm.com/2279/116/upload/p6766570.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img406/1275/arciereflikr.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img812/8107/t7nx.png


There are plenty more of such warrior-figures of Bronze-age Sardinia (Nuragic);


So the question remains:
Are the Bronze-age Sardinians the true identity of the mysterious Sea-People?

http://iruntheinternet.com/lulzdump/images/gifs/ancient-aliens-is-such-a-thing-even-possible-yes-it-is-Giorgio-Tsoukalos-aliums-1351596245T.gif


I told you
Sherdana and Terresh in Egyptian memmories of sea peoples raids were horn helmets,

even after troyan wars in Aegean we see no horn helmets,
but we see them after sea people raids,

yet Ichnussa with Sardenia is surrely different.

the only problem is that Etruscans came from minor Asia were also sea peoples with name Lukka and Karinka could exist,
but Turresh seems to be thee ones who devastate next to Shardenia,

Personally I doubt that Fallisti were IE. I have my argue about Peleset and Fallisti being same, yet can not prove it, so i accept the most of academic believes.

I believe that Central Italy developed its own culture away from Latenne/Hallstatt, but in neighboring with it.
it is not coinsidence that Latin have word aqua which compines with Greek ωκεανος but not found in any other IE, but found as aqwa, aswuan, su in non IE populations !!!! wonder why?

Fire Haired
27-07-13, 02:21
Yetos u do know there is a 3,000 year old Celtic sword that has that exact design the Estriucan one does. The entire Celtic world even Insular Celts in Britain had that styleof handle. Also Celts dominated Estrucans in war Estrucans knew celts very well. celts conquered half of Etruscan territory in northern Italy. U can defintley give an explanation that Estrucans copied Celtic swords. Celts where great metal workers the Roman gladus their offical sword was made by celt Iberians. Romans chain mail was invented by i think Italian Hallstatt/ La Tene Celts or Hallstatt/ La tene celts in the alps. The helmet Romans centurions used was created by Hallstat/La tene celts in the alps.

If the Romans liked Celtic made weapons so much it would not be a surprise Estrucans did too. Also i just want to say Estrucans where almost defitley not native to Italy or Europe. Their paintgs are brown skinned while Romans where white and roman writers say Celts where even whiter. The estucans have been traced back to Turkey by some historians. I dont know hwy people in modern day tuscany are not brown skinned like estrucans or why they have about 40% Italic R1b S28. Estrucans i think are predicted to have arrived in Italy 3,500-3,00ybp so Italics may have already been settled in that area Estrucans dominated early Italic tribes. They may have been the ones who brought Civilization and greek like culture to Italy well i guess greeks also played a big role.

I know it is kind off weird there are these mysterious people groups that lived around Italy and the alps before the Roman empire. Where they Celtic, Italic, Illyrian, Non Indo European what the heck where they. Possibly they where people who still spoke Pre Italic language in Italy. But since R1b S28 is so dominate in those areas i think the where Italics. the Italic language began around Austria so why couldent there still be Italic speakers in austira and the alps before the Roman empire. They probably where not Hallstat/ La tene Celtic because those Celts had such a distinct culture. They probably had a related culture because they where Italics.

Nobody1
27-07-13, 04:47
u know what that means lugarians where probably italic. Hallstatt Celtic culture and villnoavean italic culture came from the same root late bronze age urnfield culture 3,200ybp. R1b U152 is centered in northern Italy and areas Villnoeven culture existed. Also liguraia today is apart of the center area of r1b s28 they have 30-40%. I am very sure they where Italic anyone who was not italic in italy 2,500-2,000ybp was a invader like estrucans i know italics dominated because how r1b s28 is in italy.

Thats because the Ligurians mixed with the Indo-European Umbrians [Ambronen];
The Insubres (IsOmbri) are Indo-European Umbrians - Golasecca culture;

And its the Indo-European Umbrians [Terremare - Urnfield(Villanova/Golasecca)] that share a common root
with the Indo-European proto-Kelts [Tumulus - Urnfield];

Cambrian Institute - The Cambrian Journal (1862)
from Caius Sempronius (De Divis. Ital.,);
"The portion of the Apennines from the sources of the Tiber to the Nar, the Umbri inhabit, the oldest stock of the Old Gael, (Veteres Galli), as Augustus writes."
[Apenninum colunt Ligures, portionem vero Apennini inhabitant Umbri, prima veterum Gallorum proies, ut Augustus scribit.]

James C. Prichard - Ethnography of Europe: Vol.III (1841)
Solinus informs us that Bocchus, a writer who has been several times cited by Pliny, reported the Umbri to have been descended from the ancient Gauls; and a similar account of their origin has been adopted, either from the same or from different testimony, by Servius, Isidore, and other writers of a late period.



Guy Bradley - Ancient Umbria (2000) [Oxford Uni. Press]
There is an interesting tradition that the name of the Umbrians came from their survival of a mythical flood: see Pliny, NH 3. 112. This tradition could go back at least to Marcus Antonius (Gnipho) in early 1st cent. BC. See Servius, Aen. 12. 753: [U]sane Umbros Gallorum veterum propaginem esse Marcus Antonius refert: hos eosdem, quod tempore aquosae cladis imbribus superfuerunt Ombrous ἡ Ὀμβρική / Ὀμβρικός cognominatos. "Indeed Marcus Antonius reports that the Umbrians are an offspring of the ancient Gauls; and that this same people, because they survived the rains in a time of watery disaster, were called the Ombroi' "

Luke Owen Pike - The English and their Origin (1866)
If now we consult the Umbrian language with a view of discovering whether it approaches more nearly the Gaelic or the Cymric type, we find, scanty though the evidence may be, that Umbrian differs from Latin in precisely the same manner in which Cymric and Greek differ from Latin. The Latin qu becomes, in Umbrian as in Welsh and Greek, p: e.g. Latin quatuor, Umbrian petur, Welsh pedwar. The Welsh uch, uchel, appears as the Umbrian ucar, the Greek aixpog; the Welsh hwra as the Umbrian hri, the Greek aipsco;


This means a broader archaic Indo-European context
(manifested by the Urnfield culture complex)

from book:
Kristian Kristiansen - Europe before History (1998)
http://imageshack.us/a/img823/5298/villanov2.png

---

The Ligurians:

Plutarch - Lives / Vol II-XIX
The shouts brought more of the barbarians to the spot..........they often called out their name Ambrones, either to encourage one another or to terrify the Romans by this announcement. The Ligurians, who were the first of the Italic people to go down to battle with them, hearing their shouts, and understanding what they said, responded by calling out their old national name, which was the same, for the Ligurians also call themselves [B]Ambrones when they refer to their origin.

Franz Altheim - Grundlagen und Grundbegriffe (1956)
Später wurden die Ligurer von einem Stamm indogermanischer Herkunft überschichtet: den Ambronen. Ihr Name hat sich in zahlreichen Resten innerhalb des gesamtligurischen Gebietes erhalten.
TRANSLATION -
Later, the Ligurians were overlaid by a tribe of Indo-European origin: the Ambrones.
Their name has been preserved in numerous residues within the total Ligurian region.


The Ligurians were greatly mixed with the Indo-European Umbrians [Ambronen]; They even ascribed their origins to them;


How did the Ligurians look like:

Lucan - Pharsalia / Book I
Ligurian tribes, now shorn, in ancient days First of the long-haired nations [Barbarians], on whose necks Once flowed the auburn [reddish-brown] locks in pride supreme;

Theodor Arldt - Die Völker Mitterleuropas (1917)
Die alpine Rasse entspricht am besten den zur Römerzeit in den Westalpen und ihren Nachbarländern wohnenden Ligurern, so daß wir sie auch als ligurische Rasse bezeichnen könnten.
TRANSLATION-
The Alpine race best matches in the time of the Romans in the Western Alps and neighboring countries residing Ligurians, so that we could also call it Ligurian race.


I can go on about Anthropological quotes of Brachycephalic Alpinoid Ligurians (akin to Lapps etc/); but you get the picture;

---

Ligurian [MONTEFORTINO TYPE] helmet - 275 BC
/ Berceto, Parma - North Italy
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_R9cdwoMlaMc/R2FxoKDuOSI/AAAAAAAAAGA/9gGUQJLqmCg/s576/autunno2007%20029.jpg

Boii (Iron-age LaTene Gauls) [MONTEFORTINO TYPE] helmet / Monterenzio Vecchio, Bologna - North Italy
http://imageshack.us/a/img42/4192/boii.png


The Montefortino type helmet was also used by the Early (later modified) Roman infantry;

Maciamo
27-07-13, 07:36
Is it possible that Brennus and his Senones tribe resettled Rome bringing U152 around 400BC? Could the stories of Brennus' eventual defeat be more propaganda, then truth? Is it possible that the Senones were misrepresented, and they should have been called Ligureans (Ambrones)? The Ligurian language has strong Italic and Celtic influence. Latin was a Q-Italic language, and may be more associated with a Q-Celtic/Q-Italic Ligurian language. This is all speculation of course. I see U152 sweeping down from the Paris Basin and invading Southern France and Northern Italy. Just a thought.

How can you conceive that the migration of a single tribe of a few thousand men could have changed the genetic landscape of Rome, and indeed of all Italy ? If that was so easy, then what would be the impact of the 50 or so Roman colonies in and outside Italy, founded with in average from 5,000 to 10,000 Roman and Latin settlers ?

Why would the Senones have had more impact than the dozens of other Celtic and Italic tribes who settled in Italy ? You have to look at the big picture.

In my estimation, the parts of northern Italy where R1b-U152 is now between 40% and 50% would have between 20% and 30% without the Roman colonies.

However that does not mean that these frequencies are a reflection of the genetic make-up of Italy 2000 years ago. Many other people settled in Italy since then. The impact of Germanic tribes alone represents about 10% of modern Y-DNA lineages in Italy, and as much as 20% in northern Italy (7% of I1, 7% of R1b-U106, 4% of R1a and 2.5% of I2a2a). If you deduct these lineages and that of all the other migrants to Italy during the Roman Empire and Middle Ages (including the Byzantines), between a third and half of modern lineages were not present in northern Italy 2000 years ago. This means that wherever there is 40% of U152 today, there should have been between 60% and 80% at the time of Julius Caesar.

Maciamo
27-07-13, 07:45
wow, u put it out there. I see 1% chance of R1b-U152 being Roman due to this paper

Begoña Martínez Cruz, Evidence of pre-Roman tribal genetic structure in Basques from uniparentally inherited markers (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/12/molbev.mss091.abstract)

which states 2 groups of R1b , a South and North..........south below

R1b-S-2 (Z196), which includes:

R1b-S-2a (M153): Basques and Gascons almost exclusively
R1b-S-2b (L176.2/S179.2): Gascons and Catalans specially, but more widespread


R1b-S-3 (S28/U152): Not too frequent but neither rare either among Basques and Gascons (more common in Pyrenean Navarre, Catalonia) but widespread through mainland Europe, specially Italy .
R1b-S-4 (L21/M529/S145, L459): Often known as the Irish clade, is not restricted to Ireland at all but does have a mostly Atlantic distribution (West France, England...).


R1b-S is original from the Franco-Cantabrian region, while R1b-N would be from Doggerland (now under the North Sea), Flanders.

What do the Basques have anything to do with the Romans ? Actually the low percentage of U152 among the Basques and other Iberians is an additional proof that it was partly brought by the Romans, since the Basques and the peoples of eastern Iberia (from Catalonia to Andalusia) were not part of the Hallstatt or La Tène Celtic culture (the only other possible candidate who could have brought U152) but were part of the Roman Empire.

I don't often agree with you, but your comments here have made me loose all credibility that was left in you.


U-152 became the gallic-ligurian marker , from modern Barcelona to Venice

Then how do you explain that 22% of modern Ligurians belong to R1b-S116 and R1b-L21 ? That is the highest frequency in Italy.



The Roman DNA project started in late 2011 of which 20 skeletons are being analysied has stil not given any news, but the consenus is that it is basically J2 and E haplotypes

By consensus do you mean speculation from outsiders to the project ?

Maciamo
27-07-13, 07:50
Doesnt stop at Venice;

---

East Tyrol = 12.5% R1b-U152 [270 samples]

Niederstätter et al 2012
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041885#pone.0 041885.s013


Venetian area = 19.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [73 samples]
Lombardy/Piedmont/Liguria = 32.2% R1b-U152 - Boattini et al 2013 [161 samples]

Boattini et al 2013 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065441

I am not sure if you realise but these studies (among others) were all taken into account for mu U152/S28 map.

Fire Haired
27-07-13, 08:00
d the R1b U152 in those colonies. Because the city of Rome it self has only 20-30%.


Also I still dis agree that all I1 or I2a2 is German how do u know all R1a in Italy is R1a Z284. It seems most is probably Germanic but i think some of the I2a2 got there before Germans same with I1. I wonder what subclades of I1 Italy has do they have I1a1, I1a3, I1a4 or Scandinavian I1a2. I had no idea R1b U106 was 7% in north Italy i guess those Germanic kingdoms did make a affect. Also the distrbutation of I2a2 i think means it is not all from Germans
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

I think u would agree I1 is pre Germanic and I1a2 is pre Germanic. I just dont understand why people associte with Germans. I1 has nothing to do with Indo European migrations it was more popular in Scandnavia and central Europe before Germanic invasions. it is only that Germanic speakers got I1 from inter marraige with the natives. U even said on the I1 page it seems I1a2 was spread to Finalnd from Swedan before the bronze age i think before the Neloithic age too. Before Kunda culture ever got to Finland 8,000ybp.

ON ur migration maps i saw u said Kunda culture was only N1c1. I dont understand that N1c1 or just N period is a Mongliod haplogroup. The native Finnish and first people to ever live in Finland where Caucasian Europeans not Mongliods there had to be some type of Caucasian Y DNA haplogroup there before N1c1 and almost defintley was in the Y DNA I family. I1 is so distrubted in Scandnvai u can explain R1a Z284 with Corded ware culture, N1c1 with Kunda and comb Cermic cultures, R1b S21 with Nordic bronze age, G2a wih Neloithic farmers, then E1b1b and J1 can be expained with random inter marraige or farmers.

But I1 is does not match any cultures in Scandinavia in the last 8,000 years. It is spread out everywhere it seems I1 is the base Y DNA haplogroup of Scandinavia while other came later and lowered its percentage. In my opinion Scandinavia was founded by 100% or close I1a population 10,000ybp. It developed into I1a2 probably close to 10,000ybp and spread to Finland 8,000-9,000ybp and later developed into I1a2c. I1 in the rest of Europe are left overs sure alot was in central Europe probably because that is where Scandinavians migrated out off nd the Germans did spread it more but some of it i thin was already spread out. I1 probably originated in central Europe 15,000-20,000ybp

Yetos
27-07-13, 08:06
Yetos u do know there is a 3,000 year old Celtic sword that has that exact design the Estriucan one does. The entire Celtic world even Insular Celts in Britain had that styleof handle. Also Celts dominated Estrucans in war Estrucans knew celts very well. celts conquered half of Etruscan territory in northern Italy. U can defintley give an explanation that Estrucans copied Celtic swords. Celts where great metal workers the Roman gladus their offical sword was made by celt Iberians. Romans chain mail was invented by i think Italian Hallstatt/ La Tene Celts or Hallstatt/ La tene celts in the alps. The helmet Romans centurions used was created by Hallstat/La tene celts in the alps.

If the Romans liked Celtic made weapons so much it would not be a surprise Estrucans did too. Also i just want to say Estrucans where almost defitley not native to Italy or Europe. Their paintgs are brown skinned while Romans where white and roman writers say Celts where even whiter. The estucans have been traced back to Turkey by some historians. I dont know hwy people in modern day tuscany are not brown skinned like estrucans or why they have about 40% Italic R1b S28. Estrucans i think are predicted to have arrived in Italy 3,500-3,00ybp so Italics may have already been settled in that area Estrucans dominated early Italic tribes. They may have been the ones who brought Civilization and greek like culture to Italy well i guess greeks also played a big role.

I know it is kind off weird there are these mysterious people groups that lived around Italy and the alps before the Roman empire. Where they Celtic, Italic, Illyrian, Non Indo European what the heck where they. Possibly they where people who still spoke Pre Italic language in Italy. But since R1b S28 is so dominate in those areas i think the where Italics. the Italic language began around Austria so why couldent there still be Italic speakers in austira and the alps before the Roman empire. They probably where not Hallstat/ La tene Celtic because those Celts had such a distinct culture. They probably had a related culture because they where Italics.

Both Celts and Etruscans were not Native,
one is mentioned to came with IE expansion, the other in 3 waves from 1500-1800 to 800 BC,

Etruscans came from minor-Asia/ Aegean to Italy, but nothing say they were dark skin,
only Black hair which is very common in Central Italy,
the myth for Romans gives 2 origins, '
1) the Luppa (Lukos In Greek, remember Lukka people)
2) the Troyans ( Virgil's Aineiad)

Sea peoples change a lot the face of Europe, and the way of war tactics,

It is not coincidence that Greek and Roman weapons show simmilarity same time, cause both are designed after sea peoples, in the lands were sea peoples settled.

Rome either Celtic either Not, learned (assimilated) a lot by sea peoples.


the first 2 horn helmets were not used by celts or by Germans,

they learn it from Sea peoples,

ROME WAS BUILD AFTER ETRUSCAN SETTLE IN ITALY, AND NEXT TO THEM.

Fire Haired
27-07-13, 08:06
What do the Basques have anything to do with the Romans ? Actually the low percentage of U152 among the Basques and other Iberians is an additional proof that it was partly brought by the Romans, since the Basques and the peoples of eastern Iberia (from Catalonia to Andalusia) were not part of the Hallstatt or La Tène Celtic culture (the only other possible candidate who could have brought U152) but were part of the Roman Empire.

I dont really agree. Hallstatt and La Tene Celts i am pretty sure brought R1b Df27 into Iberia. eastern Iberia has 60-75% R1b S116 so they defintley where affected by Celts. The original Hallstatt. La tene people would have been full of R1b S28/U152 so as the culture spread to diff Celts possibly some R1b S28 remained. Some people said the same about R1b S28 in south England but it was in the same area La Tene spread to in England. It seems Rome did not spread any or very little R1b S28 they probably spread mainly J2 and some E1b1b and J1.



Then how do you explain that 22% of modern Ligurians belong to R1b-S116 and R1b-L21 ? That is the highest frequency in Italy.

modern ares of Liguria according to u have 30-40% R1b U152. So how could they have overall 22% R1b S116. If u mean the original R1b S116* that would be shocking that could mean it originated around northern Italy.

Fire Haired
27-07-13, 08:09
Both Celts and Etruscans were not Native,
one is mentioned to came with IE expansion, the other in 3 waves from 1500-1800 to 800 BC,

Etruscans came from minor-Asia/ Aegean to Italy, but nothing say they were dark skin,
only Black hair which is very common in Central Italy,
the myth for Romans gives 2 origins, '
1) the Luppa (Lukos In Greek, remember Lukka people)
2) the Troyans ( Virgil's Aineiad)

Sea peoples change a lot the face of Europe, and the way of war tactics,

It is not coincidence that Greek and Roman weapons show simmilarity same time, cause both are designed after sea peoples, in the lands were sea peoples settled.

Rome either Celtic either Not, learned (assimilated) a lot by sea peoples.

estrucan art
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QzIAxdEn8lo/URovTMKK4EI/AAAAAAAABqs/L6NbJlbyh3U/s1600/etruscan3.jpghttp://www.mariamilani.com/ancient_civilisation_civilization/Etruscanfresco_boxers_lrg.jpg


http://s004.radikal.ru/i206/1102/20/ef4109f1a122.jpghttps://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQpxSnm4Wr5aNxIgiRxmDqv1MBUnocFg EnbJa2C_-KJdkJUNzWP

Yes their art shows them as brown skinned while there will sometimes be one white person. Probably a Celt or Italic.

Nobody1
27-07-13, 08:26
I am not sure if you realise but these studies (among others) were all taken into account for mu U152/S28 map.

was addressed to zanipolo; something about a Barcelona-Venice range;
just wanted to throw East Tyrol in there as well; thats all;

Nobody1
27-07-13, 08:29
from an old post:

Anthropologically the Etruscans are Dolichocphalic and closest to the Semitic Phoenicians [Pruner-Bey / Nicolucci]
Classification - Mediterranean and Medit./Orientalid [Caucasoid] sub-races

Historically the Etruscans are descended from the East Mediterranean
[Herodotus - Lydia / Dionysius - Thessaly]

Madison Grant - The Passing of the Great Race (1922)
-"The Umbrian state was afterward overwhelmed by the Tyrrhenians or Etruscans, who were of Mediterranean race and who, by 800 B.C. had extended their empire northward to the Alps and temporarily checked the advance of the Nordics."-

This can be considered a prove of inter-mixing with the Indo-European Umbrians
[Female Umbrian / Male Pelasgian Tyrsenoi]

http://previews.agefotostock.com/previewimage/bajaage/219cc57b9474f74f441e680b754926d1/INH-558564.jpg


This is another Etruscan fresco from [3rd cen BC] -Tarquinia;
http://www.maravot.com/Etruscan_banquet7.gif


pos. the Pelasgian Tyrsenoi did not migrate with a sufficient female population,
so they had to select amongst the pre-existing Indo-European Umbrians;

zanipolo
27-07-13, 10:18
What do the Basques have anything to do with the Romans ? Actually the low percentage of U152 among the Basques and other Iberians is an additional proof that it was partly brought by the Romans, since the Basques and the peoples of eastern Iberia (from Catalonia to Andalusia) were not part of the Hallstatt or La Tène Celtic culture (the only other possible candidate who could have brought U152) but were part of the Roman Empire.

I don't often agree with you, but your comments here have made me loose all credibility that was left in you.



Then how do you explain that 22% of modern Ligurians belong to R1b-S116 and R1b-L21 ? That is the highest frequency in Italy.



By consensus do you mean speculation from outsiders to the project ?

Think what you like, but as per ancient DNA la Tene is not R1b
https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupil38/summary/la-tene

12 ancient dna from same area as la tene are I-L38, plus 1 R1b and 1 R1a


even Taranis mentioned it in March 2011



I2b2-L38 and La-Tene? I found this paper that argues that the spread of I2b2-L38 is associated with the spread of La-Tene. Obviously, I2b2-L38 is rather rare, but I thought it was interesting because it's something that may allow us to actually map the La-Tene expansion.


also , The Romans still did not even penetrate north the PO river by the time La Tene ended. They still have not even faced hannibal.

- Destroying ones nationalistic bias teachings by someone always leads to comments like yours!

Maciamo
27-07-13, 12:46
Think what you like, but as per ancient DNA la Tene is not R1b
https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupil38/summary/la-tene

12 ancient dna from same area as la tene are I-L38, plus 1 R1b and 1 R1a


even Taranis mentioned it in March 2011



I2b2-L38 and La-Tene? I found this paper that argues that the spread of I2b2-L38 is associated with the spread of La-Tene. Obviously, I2b2-L38 is rather rare, but I thought it was interesting because it's something that may allow us to actually map the La-Tene expansion.


also , The Romans still did not even penetrate north the PO river by the time La Tene ended. They still have not even faced hannibal.

- Destroying ones nationalistic bias teachings by someone always leads to comments like yours!


Obviously there was some I2a2b (L38) among La Tène Celts. That's what I wrote on the I2 page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml#I2a2). But that was a small minority of lineages compared to R1b. Are you really so simple minded that you can't imagine more than one haplogroup being associated with an ancient culture ? Do I have to spell everything out for you ? Unlike Fire Haired you don't have the excuse of being too young to have had time to learn.

MOESAN
27-07-13, 14:42
interesting thread, with a lot of docs (drowning in some way)
I don't think Y-R1b-S152 is typical to only an ethny, I think it was linked more than less to western Hallstatt and then to La Tène - without very new very downstream SNPs we cannot go to deeply in details about these period when more or less akin male dominated tribes (Celts, Italics,Ligurians) interacted heavily in some parts of the world - I think R1b never was born in Iberia and for U152 his birthplace is evidently around western Alps (E-France, Switzerland, N-N-Italy, W-Austria) - Y-I2a1b as a whole was in N-Central Europe for a long time, maybe from mesolithic times, maybe after (someones as L38 are supposed by someones to be come from E-Carpathians-Moldovia...? without any proof I think some Y-I2a1b bearers were involved into early I-Ean moves (either as conquered involved autohtonous OR as part of conquerant newcomers); if they were NOT THE B.B. people, some of them could have been taken in NW-Rhine B.B. moves to Brittain and Ireland, (maybe someones in Scandinavia) and later in Wessex Culture and Tumuli Culture of W-Aremorica at Bronze Times - other of their brothers were surely involved too in Urnfields moves later yet: never as dominant component but as a minor one, I guess.
SO, coming back to the chief point of this thread, I think that IN ITALY: AND late Celts, AND Ligurians, AND Italics bore Y-R1b-IU152; difficult today to give every member his part of merit

by the way, the bearers of Ligurians languages were apparently I-Es and not autochtones and I don't see phonetically an evident RECENT link between the names Umbrians and Ambrones (magic linguistic?)

with humility
good afternoon

MOESAN
27-07-13, 14:45
I recall an handfull (even two) of DNA samples cannot give us the answer concerning the genetical composition of a population- and what if the DNA pertains to family related members?

ebAmerican
27-07-13, 18:50
How can you conceive that the migration of a single tribe of a few thousand men could have changed the genetic landscape of Rome, and indeed of all Italy ? If that was so easy, then what would be the impact of the 50 or so Roman colonies in and outside Italy, founded with in average from 5,000 to 10,000 Roman and Latin settlers ?

Why would the Senones have had more impact than the dozens of other Celtic and Italic tribes who settled in Italy ? You have to look at the big picture.

In my estimation, the parts of northern Italy where R1b-U152 is now between 40% and 50% would have between 20% and 30% without the Roman colonies.

However that does not mean that these frequencies are a reflection of the genetic make-up of Italy 2000 years ago. Many other people settled in Italy since then. The impact of Germanic tribes alone represents about 10% of modern Y-DNA lineages in Italy, and as much as 20% in northern Italy (7% of I1, 7% of R1b-U106, 4% of R1a and 2.5% of I2a2a). If you deduct these lineages and that of all the other migrants to Italy during the Roman Empire and Middle Ages (including the Byzantines), between a third and half of modern lineages were not present in northern Italy 2000 years ago. This means that wherever there is 40% of U152 today, there should have been between 60% and 80% at the time of Julius Caesar.

Not a single tribe but a large folk movement of hundreds of thousands descending from the La Tenne hot spot, pouring through the Alps and southern France. I wont take your condescending post personal. I respect your knowledge and effort you put into this site, but please learn a little forum etiquette. My initial thought was the large La Tenne migration that is recorded historically as well as archaeologically could have made the U152 footprint. If this is way off, then refute it like a scholar and not like a 3rd grader. I'm not a professional historian or geneticist. I'm a hobbyist interested in history. I enjoy the site very much, but don't enjoy the belittling. If you have any higher education, then you know there is no such thing as a stupid question.

Nobody1
27-07-13, 20:17
by the way, the bearers of Ligurians languages were apparently I-Es and not autochtones and I don't see phonetically an evident RECENT link between the names Umbrians and Ambrones (magic linguistic?)

Is there really such a phonetical diff. between Ambronen and Umbronen? Ambri/Umbri - Umbro/Ambro ?

Between UMBRI and isOMBRI
or - cIMBRI / sYMBRI / sigAMBRI / AMBROnes

In the 19th century;
AMBRI/UMBRI (ambro/umbro) was connected to Gallic Amhra/Ambra = meaning Brave/Noble/Daring

This designation is found across the Indo-European (in Europe) realm; much like Veneti/Eneti;
I consider them of an archaic Indo-European branch; developing into the more distinct Indo-European branches;

I know Taranis has debunked it;
but cUMBRIA (cYMRU) and northUMBRIA - might also stem from this archaic Indo-European root;