PDA

View Full Version : A Genome-Wide Study of Modern-Day Tuscans: Revisiting Herodotus's Theory on the Origi



Pages : [1] 2

Angela
22-09-14, 17:40
I just gave this paper a quick run through. I may change my mind after a more thorough analysis, but I think they may have gotten it wrong. Again...even with whole genomes. It's not to say that the conclusion is necessarily incorrect. It's just to say that their analysis doesn't prove it.

You would think that by now some of these academics would have read and absorbed Lazaridis et al, and realized that you can't use modern populations to analyze ancient gene flow. Nor can use use IBS segments. IMO, you need ancient DNA, and absent that, some really sophisticated IBD analysis.

Here's the link to the paper.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105920

John Doe
22-09-14, 18:00
You would think that by now some of these academics would have read and absorbed Lazaridis et al, and realized that you can't use modern populations to analyze ancient gene flow. Nor can use use IBS segments. IMO, you need ancient DNA, and absent that, some really sophisticated IBD analysis.

Well hopefully they will soon, so that we won't get a confusing inaccurate and outdated study every month that just gives wrong information and confuses everyone.

Angela
22-09-14, 20:41
Here are some gems of generalization from the paper:

"however, almost all the studies agree that there is a proportion of their mtDNA pool that could be traced to somewhere in the Middle East, thus testifying to an ancient connection between both regions."

I have news for these guys: so does the mtDna of 80% of Europeans.

Then they resurrect this old chestnut: both humans and cattle reached Etruria from the Eastern Mediterranean area by sea. Hence the Eastern origin of Etruscans, first claimed by the classic historians Herodotus and Thucydides, receives strong independent support”

Yes, plants, cattle, sheep, goats, and the knowledge of what to do with them all came from the eastern Mediterranean. That doesn't prove that a specific breed came in 800 BC!

As to ancient Etruscan mtDna see:
Silvia Ghirotto et al 2013
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055519
See the discussion at the Dienekes site:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html
As a knowledgeable poster explained, the Etruscan mtDna in this large sample is a mixture of U5 and J. Looks like admixture betwee Neolithic and Mesolithic peoples to me...

Also, these guys should know by now that without resolution of mtDna on a very detailed subclade level, and some agreement on mutation rates, it's impossible to use mtDna to track migration flows precisely.

As for the Armenian connection...

Of course there's more "Caucasus" like ancestry in Tuscans than in northern Italians, but the question is, when did this Caucasus like ancestry arrive in Europe? I'll buy Metal Ages...Oetzi had a little bit already, but this doesn't prove that a specific migration in 800 BC brought it!

Also, there's more in southern Italians yet, and more in Greeks. There's the same amount in Balkan people. Were they all settled in the first millennium BC by people from Anatolia?

Take a look at the "Caucasus" proportion in these groups as per the Dienekes K-12b analysis"
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEY lE&hl=en_US#gid=0
Northern Italians: 22.9
Romanians: 28.4
Tuscans: 30.5
Bulgarians: 30.7
Southern Italians/Sicilians: 36.5
Greeks: 37.4

Do I think it's possible that there was a late movement from Anatolia (first millenium BC) into Central Italy? Yes, I do; it's just that neither mtDNA, ancient or modern, is going to prove it, and especially not at the level of resolution which currently exists. A comparision of the full genomes of modern Tuscans to other modern populations doesn't prove it either. Who says this isn't Neolithic era? We need a high quality Etruscan genome and the genome of prior inhabitants from the same area.

I do think that there's generally something to be said for an additional Bronze Age gene flow (and later) into Italy not only from the north, but also from the south east.

I saw a speculation on Anthrogenica this morning about the proto-Indo-Europeans possibly carrying a lot of "Anatolian" like or "Near Eastern" like ancestry. (The mtDna of the Yamnaya people looks totally "Neolithic" from the evidence of that thesis. Perhaps the full genomes will show something different, but then that would mean that they left all their own women at home, or they didn't like them very much.)

It would certainly be interesting if Dienekes was onto something back in the day when he speculated that the proto-Indo-Europeans had their origin in the Armenian Highlands. Perhaps they remained more "Anatolian" like or Caucasus like in the southern regions, even if in the more northern areas they were different.

Sile
22-09-14, 21:06
the paper still does not answer the missing 2000 plus years between anatolia and tuscany.............maybe the paper below answered the question better

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.22319/abstract

Aaron1981
22-09-14, 23:11
I just gave this paper a quick run through. I may change my mind after a more thorough analysis, but I think they may have gotten it wrong. Again...even with whole genomes. It's not to say that the conclusion is necessarily incorrect. It's just to say that their analysis doesn't prove it.

You would think that by now some of these academics would have read and absorbed Lazaridis et al, and realized that you can't use modern populations to analyze ancient gene flow. Nor can use use IBS segments. IMO, you need ancient DNA, and absent that, some really sophisticated IBD analysis.

Here's the link to the paper.


The paper predicts about 25% ME admixture among Tuscans which isn't really any different from results 3 years ago when Dienekes first opened up the Dodecad project using Admixture. (Just add West Asian with SW Asian)

I'm anticipating that the "first farmers" brought some ME admixture to Europe, but then subsequent waves of eastern people brought more ME admixture. YDNA J2 comes to mind as the strongest candidate for the later waves and the real differentiation between north and southern Europe.

MOESAN
22-09-14, 23:49
Here are some gems of generalization from the paper:

"however, almost all the studies agree that there is a proportion of their mtDNA pool that could be traced to somewhere in the Middle East, thus testifying to an ancient connection between both regions."

I have news for these guys: so does the mtDna of 80% of Europeans.

Then they resurrect this old chestnut: both humans and cattle reached Etruria from the Eastern Mediterranean area by sea. Hence the Eastern origin of Etruscans, first claimed by the classic historians Herodotus and Thucydides, receives strong independent support”

Yes, plants, cattle, sheep, goats, and the knowledge of what to do with them all came from the eastern Mediterranean. That doesn't prove that a specific breed came in 800 BC!

As to ancient Etruscan mtDna see:
Silvia Ghirotto et al 2013
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0055519
See the discussion at the Dienekes site:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html
As a knowledgeable poster explained, the Etruscan mtDna in this large sample is a mixture of U5 and J. Looks like admixture betwee Neolithic and Mesolithic peoples to me...

Also, these guys should know by now that without resolution of mtDna on a very detailed subclade level, and some agreement on mutation rates, it's impossible to use mtDna to track migration flows precisely.

As for the Armenian connection...

Of course there's more "Caucasus" like ancestry in Tuscans than in northern Italians, but the question is, when did this Caucasus like ancestry arrive in Europe? I'll buy Metal Ages...Oetzi had a little bit already, but this doesn't prove that a specific migration in 800 BC brought it!

Also, there's more in southern Italians yet, and more in Greeks. There's the same amount in Balkan people. Were they all settled in the first millennium BC by people from Anatolia?

Take a look at the "Caucasus" proportion in these groups as per the Dienekes K-12b analysis"
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEY lE&hl=en_US#gid=0
Northern Italians: 22.9
Romanians: 28.4
Tuscans: 30.5
Bulgarians: 30.7
Southern Italians/Sicilians: 36.5
Greeks: 37.4

Do I think it's possible that there was a late movement from Anatolia (first millenium BC) into Central Italy? Yes, I do; it's just that neither mtDNA, ancient or modern, is going to prove it, and especially not at the level of resolution which currently exists. A comparision of the full genomes of modern Tuscans to other modern populations doesn't prove it either. Who says this isn't Neolithic era? We need a high quality Etruscan genome and the genome of prior inhabitants from the same area.

I do think that there's generally something to be said for an additional Bronze Age gene flow (and later) into Italy not only from the north, but also from the south east.

I saw a speculation on Anthrogenica this morning about the proto-Indo-Europeans possibly carrying a lot of "Anatolian" like or "Near Eastern" like ancestry. (The mtDna of the Yamnaya people looks totally "Neolithic" from the evidence of that thesis. Perhaps the full genomes will show something different, but then that would mean that they left all their own women at home, or they didn't like them very much.)

It would certainly be interesting if Dienekes was onto something back in the day when he speculated that the proto-Indo-Europeans had their origin in the Armenian Highlands. Perhaps they remained more "Anatolian" like or Caucasus like in the southern regions, even if in the more northern areas they were different.


Angela, I agree with the most of your observations: mt DNA needs very deep analysis before sending some basis to theory - Near-Eatsern and Anatolia-Caucasus has been the center of diffusion of a lot of cultures and populations, northwards, westwards and eastwards, at more than a time

MOESAN
22-09-14, 23:51
That said, the homophony of several names as Iberians or Sardes from East to West could very well be more than the fruit of hazard...

Angela
23-09-14, 01:33
The paper predicts about 25% ME admixture among Tuscans which isn't really any different from results 3 years ago when Dienekes first opened up the Dodecad project using Admixture. (Just add West Asian with SW Asian)

I'm anticipating that the "first farmers" brought some ME admixture to Europe, but then subsequent waves of eastern people brought more ME admixture. YDNA J2 comes to mind as the strongest candidate for the later waves and the real differentiation between north and southern Europe.

The point, surely, is that these authors have not proved their claim? Not that it matters to me personally in the long run whether they are "native" or from Anatolia so long as I match them a bit when one of their genomes is finally sequenced! I just dislike bad science.

As for admixture analyses, I am no longer enamored of them, despite the fact that I used one upthread. :) Even before Lazaridis et al, it was clear that they obscure ancient genetic flows as much or perhaps more than they elucidate them. They are just geographical "poolings" to steal a term that I very much like. Or perhaps they are like artifacts of the algorithm in a way.

In terms of the genetics of Tuscans, they are, according to Lazaridis et all, approximately 75% EEF, 14% WHG, and 11% ANE.
6657


Also according to the Lazaridis analysis, Tuscans can be modeled as an admixture of Sardinians and ANE. That makes total sense to me.

Furthermore, as we know, Sardinians are the closest we have to EEF. See this comment from Figure 2 PCA Analysis in the paper finally published a few days ago.
'Stuttgart clusters with other NeolithicEuropeans and present-day Sardinians"

I definitely have said, and I believe, that J2 in Italy is late Neolithic at the earliest, and probably Bronze Age or later. Other than the proposed direct flow from Anatolia for the Etruscans, it would have been mediated through the Greeks, imo, or at least I don't know of any other possible source in terms of Tuscany, other than perhaps by way of the Balkans.

We won't know what the proportions were in the various post Stuttgart/Oetzi migrations to the area until ancient samples from those migration areas are analyzed. In that context, I'm very interested to see the results for the Samara population, especially at the point when they are proposed to be moving toward Europe, and also, of course, for a full analysis of the Yamnaya population. It would be nice to finally get one from the Sea Peoples, perhapsm or people from the Balkans at various stages.

I don't think it's very helpful to talk about the" Middle East". The Middle East from which ancient man first went to Europe? The Middle East at the time of the early Neolithic? The Middle East of today, by which you perhaps mean the Levant? The Near East of today? I don't think so as far as modern Middle Easterners or Near Easterners are concerned, no disrespect to them.

If we've learned anything, surely we've learned that the people who came to Europe bringing farming were not the same as the people in the Near or Middle East today, largely, in terms of the Near East, because of their large modern day proportions of ANE, (almost 30% in the Caucasus and at high levels everywhere) and in case of the Levant, of SSA gene flow. That's what I was alluding to when I suggested that perhaps these authors hadn't fully absorbed the implications of the Lazaridis et al analysis.

Perhaps it's better, as Moesan alluded to, to think of it as a question of repeated gene flows from the area of the Caucasus.

Ed. I think it's also interesting to consider the case of the Portalon Iberian farmer. His remains date to 2,000 BC and yet he clusters very close to modern Tuscans.

See:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/11/iberian-neolithic-farmer-dna.html

Other bloggers have opined on the subject.

John Doe
23-09-14, 05:19
Here are some gems of generalization from the paper:

"however, almost all the studies agree that there is a proportion of their mtDNA pool that could be traced to somewhere in the Middle East, thus testifying to an ancient connection between both regions."

I have news for these guys: so does the mtDna of 80% of Europeans.

LOL, you're talking about haplogroup H right?




Do I think it's possible that there was a late movement from Anatolia (first millenium BC) into Central Italy? Yes, I do; it's just that neither mtDNA, ancient or modern, is going to prove it, and especially not at the level of resolution which currently exists. A comparision of the full genomes of modern Tuscans to other modern populations doesn't prove it either. Who says this isn't Neolithic era? We need a high quality Etruscan genome and the genome of prior inhabitants from the same area.

So what you're saying is that only a full genome comparison of modern Tuscans and Etruscans + previous ancient peoples may be able to prove that or indeed anything concerning recent origins (also in connection to all populations including AJs)?

John Doe
23-09-14, 05:28
I don't think it's very helpful to talk about the" Middle East". The Middle East from which ancient man first went to Europe? The Middle East at the time of the early Neolithic? The Middle East of today, by which you perhaps mean the Levant? The Near East of today? I don't think so as far as modern Middle Easterners or Near Easterners are concerned, no disrespect to them.

If we've learned anything, surely we've learned that the people who came to Europe bringing farming were not the same as the people in the Near or Middle East today, largely, in terms of the Near East, because of their large modern day proportions of ANE, (almost 30% in the Caucasus and at high levels everywhere) and in case of the Levant, of SSA gene flow. That's what I was alluding to when I suggested that perhaps these authors hadn't fully absorbed the implications of the Lazaridis et al analysis.

Bingo, and, maybe, just maybe, that's why according to Lazaridis AJs don't plot in the modern near east, but in the gap between Europe and the near east, just a little closer to Europe than Stuttgart, alongside Maltese and Sicilians, and, not major admixture with a European population (although the high IBD sharing with modern Greeks, the gene flow from them and the apparent genetic continuity of Greeks still doesn't make me put that off the table, so I guess I'll have to patiently wait for a full genome comparison with ancient populations).

Link to supposed genetic continuity among Greeks:
http://dienekes.blogspot.co.il/2014/08/craniofacial-morphology-of-greeks.html

Yetos
23-09-14, 07:05
I think that subject must expand to even north of Italy, to val Camunnico,
personally I believe from toponyms, that they were from the same material,

bicicleur
23-09-14, 09:33
IMO there must have been some immigration, but not massive, of some people with some better knowledge, probably of metal smelting than the local Italic and Celtic tribes at the time , they founded a new society of which they themself where the elite
the immigration was so small, it is hardly detectable in the DNA
you can ask the same question about copper age southern Iberia, some 5200 years ago : who founded Los Millares and introduced copper smelting ?
and southern Iberia 4000 years ago : who founded La Bastida and later created El Argar cities and started bronze smelting ?

these are things we'll never know in detail, it takes just a small elite tribe with a specific knowledge and the right organizational skills to have a very big local impact

Sile
23-09-14, 12:36
IMO there must have been some immigration, but not massive, of some people with some better knowledge, probably of metal smelting than the local Italic and Celtic tribes at the time , they founded a new society of which they themself where the elite
the immigration was so small, it is hardly detectable in the DNA
you can ask the same question about copper age southern Iberia, some 5200 years ago : who founded Los Millares and introduced copper smelting ?
and southern Iberia 4000 years ago : who founded La Bastida and later created El Argar cities and started bronze smelting ?

these are things we'll never know in detail, it takes just a small elite tribe with a specific knowledge and the right organizational skills to have a very big local impact

what yeasr are you talking about by celts in italy...........they only arrived around 500BC ......................which asks the question , if R-U152 is celtic, did it only arrive in Italy around 500BC

Angela
23-09-14, 16:37
LOL, you're talking about haplogroup H right?

Not only mtDNA H...last time I checked, U4 and U5 only account for at most 20% of modern European lineages, and most of it can be found in the far north, both east and west, where you also find the highest WHG proportions.

So what you're saying is that only a full genome comparison of modern Tuscans and Etruscans + previous ancient peoples may be able to prove that or indeed anything concerning recent origins (also in connection to all populations including AJs)?

Yes, I think that only a full genome comparison of "Etruscans" and "Villanovans" say, or at least people from the closest prior central Italian culture which didn't cremate their dead would answer the question satisfactorily. I think the situation is the same for the Ashkenazim.

One final thing occurs to me in connection to the Tuscans. The published version of Lazardis et al does state that in Finestructure linked mode, Stuttgart clusters not with Sardinians but with North Italians and Tuscans. "This might indicate that despite the fact that Sardinians have more EEF-related ancestry than any other population, the EEF ancestry in some continental southern European populations may be more closely related to the early farmers of central Europe."


I have to think about that some more, and go over the tables again if I get a chance. I don’t quite understand it. I'm sure that they've written elsewhere that EEF is Stuttgart. Although in other places they've said that EEF is Stuttgart, Oetzi, and Gok. Maybe all they mean is that Sardinians are closest to Oetzi, but North Italians and Tuscans are closer to Stuttgart? Certainly in the PCA, Stuttgart is closer to Sardiniansthan even to Tuscans, although that's a projection, and PCAs in general and that one in particular are not the optimum way of looking at genetics, in my opinion.

However, it seems that this result might support the position of those who hold that any input from the Near East post Neolithic was not terribly significant. Even if J2 was involved, I think we’ve seen numerous examples where the ydna doesn’t affect the autosomal results all that much.

John Doe
23-09-14, 19:42
Yes, I think that only a full genome comparison of "Etruscans" and "Villanovans" say, or at least people from the closest prior central Italian culture which didn't cremate their dead would answer the question satisfactorily. I think the situation is the same for the Ashkenazim.

One final thing occurs to me in connection to the Tuscans. The published version of Lazardis et al does state that in Finestructure linked mode, Stuttgart clusters not with Sardinians but with North Italians and Tuscans. "This might indicate that despite the fact that Sardinians have more EEF-related ancestry than any other population, the EEF ancestry in some continental southern European populations may be more closely related to the early farmers of central Europe."


I have to think about that some more, and go over the tables again if I get a chance. I don’t quite understand it. I'm sure that they've written elsewhere that EEF is Stuttgart. Although in other places they've said that EEF is Stuttgart, Oetzi, and Gok. Maybe all they mean is that Sardinians are closest to Oetzi, but North Italians and Tuscans are closer to Stuttgart? Certainly in the PCA, Stuttgart is closer to Sardiniansthan even to Tuscans, although that's a projection, and PCAs in general and that one in particular are not the optimum way of looking at genetics, in my opinion.

However, it seems that this result might support the position of those who hold that any input from the Near East post Neolithic was not terribly significant. Even if J2 was involved, I think we’ve seen numerous examples where the ydna doesn’t affect the autosomal results all that much.

Alright, thanks for the answer and the detailed information. I'm pretty sure Semitic Duwa already stated that several pre exile Jews have been sampled and analyzed, so far... Apparently maternal lineage W was common among them (which makes sense since its origin is in west Asia and appears in the region of origin including south Asia and Europe).

P.S Apparently, at least today, the highest concentration of haplogroup W is in northern Pakistan, but it appears as a minority subclade in all the regions I mentioned.
Also, W* is found among the Svan people of the Caucasus (Georgia) at a frequency of 8.3%.

bicicleur
24-09-14, 09:41
what yeasr are you talking about by celts in italy...........they only arrived around 500BC ......................which asks the question , if R-U152 is celtic, did it only arrive in Italy around 500BC

Italic tribes arrived in the Po Valley 1500 BC
1300 BC other tibes arrived from north of the Alps who cremated their deads - I call them bronze age Celts - and Italic people moved further south
Villanova II started 900 BC, first Etruscan cities being founded, this was an iron age culture
soon after Golaseccans arrived, first iron age celts, they were connected to Halstatt celts
400 BC celts invading Italy were La Tene iron age celts

definition of who are celts and who are not is not clear

Angela
24-09-14, 15:28
IMO there must have been some immigration, but not massive, of some people with some better knowledge, probably of metal smelting than the local Italic and Celtic tribes at the time , they founded a new society of which they themself where the elite
the immigration was so small, it is hardly detectable in the DNA
you can ask the same question about copper age southern Iberia, some 5200 years ago : who founded Los Millares and introduced copper smelting ?
and southern Iberia 4000 years ago : who founded La Bastida and later created El Argar cities and started bronze smelting ?

these are things we'll never know in detail, it takes just a small elite tribe with a specific knowledge and the right organizational skills to have a very big local impact


I agree with that, and my hunch is that these tribes came from the eastern Mediterranean by sea, perhaps from the area of the Aegean, at least in terms of the Etruscans, as that would tie in rather nicely with evidence of an "Etruscan language" in that area.

This is all just speculation, of course. The answer will come with the ancient dna, if we ever get it.




definition of who are celts and who are not is not clear

Whatever is the case in other parts of Europe, I would agree that this is the case for Italy...when and where did the Italo-Celts separate into two different groups...where do the Ligures fit in...how do the Boi fit in? More importantly, for this discussion, how different were these people from one another genetically? Since we don't have ancient dna for each tribe, I think it's impossible to say. For my purposes, they're just northern migrations post Neolithic.

Yetos
24-09-14, 21:11
@Angela

last days I am looking toponyms around and inside Val Cammunnico,
do you have any genetic statistics? especially from Laas/Lasha?

Angela
24-09-14, 22:50
@Angela

last days I am looking toponyms around and inside Val Cammunnico,
do you have any genetic statistics? especially from Laas/Lasha?


@Angela

last days I am looking toponyms around and inside Val Cammunnico,
do you have any genetic statistics? especially from Laas/Lasha?

Laas? This is the Val Camunica:
http://siti.voli.bs.it/gian/images/foto/cartina.jpg

I'm not familiar with any samples specifically from that area.

Given its geographic location, the results from Bergamo or Brescia would probably be closest.
Bergamo is used in all academic and hobbyist analyses as the Northern Italian reference sample, so autosomally I would look at those results.

Despite small sample sizes, Boattini et al is still, imo, the best analysis of uniparental markers in Italy, both because of their higher level of resolution and because they do their sampling based on surname origin, which is essential in a country like Italy.

See Boattini et al: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065441#pone.0 065441.s001

Table 1 lists the frequencies of ydna haplogroups by region. Both Region III and IV would be applicable.

Boattini is extensively analyzed on this Board. You can find the threads through the search engin

All of Maciamo's maps of uniparental markers are useful as well.

The Capocasa et al study does look at isolates, but not specifically from the Val Camunica. Plus, due to budgetary constraints, no doubt, they tried to do the analyses based on old studies which were not very resolved, so the final analysis uses only 7 STRs. Very disappointing.

Ed. A study from the Estonian Institute did examine some Italian isolates. I'll try to dig it out later tonight to see if any of them were near this region.

Angela
25-09-14, 16:01
I refreshed my recollection of the papers from the Estonian Institute and the isolates are in northeastern Italy and Val Borbera in basso Piemonte.

FWI, the creator of the MDLP calculator obviously has access to the raw date from the Estonian Institute papers. That's why so many northern Italians are now getting Piemonte as one of their matches on that run.

The samples from this institute are not, in my opinion, the best choice for autosomal analysis. Their sampling locations are always these very unrepresentative genetic isolates, chosen perhaps because they're studying recessive or otherwise genetic dieseases. In the case of the Val Borbera, in particular, I don't think it's very representative of general northwestern Italian populations. It has a very unique history. The same holds true for their Apulia sample.

I do understand the need for population geneticists not to sample in large cities where there has been a lot of mixing from disparate areas over the centuries. In such cases, a middle ground is, I think, to take a Boattini approach if the concern is not to mix southerners with northerners or Venetians with the Piemontese; use surnames. That's what Cavalli Sforza did for a lot of his studies.

Aberdeen
25-09-14, 19:12
I refreshed my recollection of the papers from the Estonian Institute and the isolates are in northeastern Italy and Val Borbera in basso Piemonte.

FWI, the creator of the MDLP calculator obviously has access to the raw date from the Estonian Institute papers. That's why so many northern Italians are now getting Piemonte as one of their matches on that run.

The samples from this institute are not, in my opinion, the best choice for autosomal analysis. Their sampling locations are always these very unrepresentative genetic isolates, chosen perhaps because they're studying recessive or otherwise genetic dieseases. In the case of the Val Borbera, in particular, I don't think it's very representative of general northwestern Italian populations. It has a very unique history. The same holds true for their Apulia sample.

I do understand the need for population geneticists not to sample in large cities where there has been a lot of mixing from disparate areas over the centuries. In such cases, a middle ground is, I think, to take a Boattini approach if the concern is not to mix southerners with northerners or Venetians with the Piemontese; use surnames. That's what Cavalli Sforza did for a lot of his studies.

I'm curious about the surname thing, because in English speaking countries it's very common for people from various ethnic groups to change their name in order to seem more part of the mainstream. Does that not happen in Italy?

Angela
25-09-14, 20:06
I'm curious about the surname thing, because in English speaking countries it's very common for people from various ethnic groups to change their name in order to seem more part of the mainstream. Does that not happen in Italy?


I'm not aware of anyone ever doing that, Aberdeen. Sometimes, if an adoption has taken place in adulthood, the person will use both surnames. The same might happen if the male line of a prominent family dies out; then, both the paternal and maternal surnames might be used. Of course, there are childless Italian families who adopt, and the child will take the surname of the adoptive father. Other than that, there is no changing of names of which I'm aware, although an individual here or there might do it. That might be more a function of immigrant societies?

In Italy, we do have certain surnames that have a sort of pan Italian distribution. But most, even some of the most common ones, are very regional in their distribution. There are, for example, names which are much more likely to be northern Italian, or names which are much more likely to be southern Italian. For example, Esposito is the fourth most common name in Italy. If I meet someone named Esposito I know they are at least partly of southern extraction, and the odds are they are more likely to be from Campania than anywhere else. This is its distribution:
http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turismo-viaggi-e-tradizioni-italia?t=cognomi&cognome=Esposito&x=29&y=12#.VCRUzMk9jw0
The splotches in the north are mostly due to internal migration.

Some names are even more specifically regional in nature. There are ten to twenty surnames in my area that are highly area specific. These are just two examples:
http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turismo-viaggi-e-tradizioni-italia?t=cognomi&cognome=Ballestracci&x=28&y=13#.VCRWwMk9jw0
http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turismo-viaggi-e-tradizioni-italia?cognome=Ferdani&x=27&y=16#.VCRXQck9jw0

The few dots in Torino and Milano represent internal emigrants who went there for work.

LeBrok
25-09-14, 20:15
I'm curious about the surname thing, because in English speaking countries it's very common for people from various ethnic groups to change their name in order to seem more part of the mainstream. Does that not happen in Italy?
Valid observation. This happened in every European country at some point of time, or still is ongoing. Sort of like fashion, but in much slower pace. Otherwise all last names would correspond to previous cultures. We don't have Latin names in Italy now, do we?

Angela
25-09-14, 20:21
Valid observation. This happened in every European country at some point of time, or still is ongoing. Sort of like fashion, but in much slower pace. Otherwise all last names would correspond to previous cultures. We don't have Latin names in Italy now, do we?

No, we don't, but they're virtually unchanged since surnames were first recorded after the Council of Trent.

Ed. Well, even that's not exactly correct, at least if you're talking about given names. From my own family...Aurelia, Ottaviano, Ameglia, Agostina, Claudio(a), Adriano(a)...We don't have a Cesare, but there are tons in Italy, and Tiberios, and on and on...

In my husband's family, there's a Constantino, a Florio (Florian), Flavio, Fabbio...

Enough?:laughing:

MOESAN
25-09-14, 20:29
Valid observation. This happened in every European country at some point of time, or still is ongoing. Sort of like fashion, but in much slower pace. Otherwise all last names would correspond to previous cultures. We don't have Latin names in Italy now, do we?

Since the patronymic fixation of family surnames in Europe (XV° century for the most, except Sandinavia, Jews and Welsh people, I think), I think the changing of name was very seldom -
it's in the USA I think that the phenomenon took a slightly greater place- in Europe, and in USA too, we see rather adaptation of foreign names than a complete change and a linguist (anthroponymist/onomastician) can tell the origin of such partially "adapted" names - I saw more many a germanic names among slavic or hungarian countries, and the contrary too (especially in Austria), sometimes in France - very often the dapatation was more in spelling than in pronounciation (some difficult sounds apart) -
so, yes, names changings, but very seldom - cannot bias statistics too much -

MOESAN
25-09-14, 20:31
it's true these personal names say nothing to us about earlier times

Sile
25-09-14, 20:34
I'm curious about the surname thing, because in English speaking countries it's very common for people from various ethnic groups to change their name in order to seem more part of the mainstream. Does that not happen in Italy?

http://italian.about.com/od/italianculture/a/meaning-italian-last-names.htm

name changes only happened from what I know , due to law if you where under the venetian republic. The venetians had the same rules as Germany and England in regards to estates, ie the first boy inherited all holdings and other sons get nothing. So , under the republic, the second, third, fourth etc sons would add additions to their surnames, like, otto, ato, igo, lin, er, is, acco and a few others.
If the first son did not produce an heir at his death, the republic would take all the holdings into the state and provide lodgings and finance to the females of the family for life.
If the family was of the nobility side...........the same rules apply except second, third, fourth etc sons would be given well paid government jobs either in Italy or the colonies.

In regards to female and their surnames, they where always forbidden to take the husband surname in marriage ( this is again stated in Italian law of 1975). I know in the north-east this has always applied as I have searched many many BDM's registrars ...............essentially, very easy for me to track my maternal line

Angela
25-09-14, 20:41
Wait a minute. Did I miss the point? Are you talking about, say, southern Italian immigrants changing their names when they move north? I'm not aware of any wide spread phenomenon like that. Most southern Italians with whom I'm acquainted, whether in Italy or here, are insanely proud of their heritage, more so than some northern Italians I know, and wouldn't dream of it.

It doesn't happen all that often when Italians move abroad either, even if it's to Anglo countries. In the few cases where I personally know that it has happened, it was an error by Ellis Island officials. So, a family named Chini became Kinney. They didn't change it to blend in...they're the type of family that tells you they're Italian in the first five minutes :), it's just that it was almost impossible to change mistakes like that in the early years.

LeBrok
26-09-14, 02:16
No, we don't, but they're virtually unchanged since surnames were first recorded after the Council of Trent.

Ed. Well, even that's not exactly correct, at least if you're talking about given names. From my own family...Aurelia, Ottaviano, Ameglia, Agostina, Claudio(a), Adriano(a)...We don't have a Cesare, but there are tons in Italy, and Tiberios, and on and on...

In my husband's family, there's a Constantino, a Florio (Florian), Flavio, Fabbio...

Enough?:laughing:
I thought that we were talking about surnames? As per Aberdeen post starting this discussion.
First names are much more traditional and longer lasting.

LeBrok
26-09-14, 02:24
Since the patronymic fixation of family surnames in Europe (XV° century for the most, except Sandinavia, Jews and Welsh people, I think), I think the changing of name was very seldom -
it's in the USA I think that the phenomenon took a slightly greater place- in Europe, and in USA too, we see rather adaptation of foreign names than a complete change and a linguist (anthroponymist/onomastician) can tell the origin of such partially "adapted" names - I saw more many a germanic names among slavic or hungarian countries, and the contrary too (especially in Austria), sometimes in France - very often the dapatation was more in spelling than in pronounciation (some difficult sounds apart) -
so, yes, names changings, but very seldom - cannot bias statistics too much -
Jewish surnames in Poland are either of German or Polish origin. Rosentzveig or Kaczmarski for example. In Poland most last names sound very recent, with nothing to do with Slavic name 1,000 years ago.
First names, given names, can be much more persistent, much more traditional either among Jews, Poles or Italians, as Angela mentioned.

I think Swedes (maybe Norwegians) are unusual case. They had so few last names that recently government ask people to get creative and select new last names to increase variety.

Angela
26-09-14, 05:11
I thought that we were talking about surnames? As per Aberdeen post starting this discussion.
First names are much more traditional and longer lasting.

I was teasing a bit, LeBrok, but yes, it's true, given names are much more traditional. I have a Venetian cousin in law whose family has lived in the city since the 1400s and they have a tradition of naming their sons Greek names as the family used to trade with, and owned lands in Greece. So, the son of the family is named Archimedi, thankfully shortened to Medi.

I think the first modern Italian surnames came into use in Venice around the year 1000 AD. By about 1400 the use of surnames was pretty widespread, and then in 1564 the Council of Trent mandated that all children had to be registered by given name and surname.

That's why it's relatively easy to do a long family tree in Italy so long as you're willing to spend days looking through dusty parish records. It helps that women keep their maiden names through life as well. The only problem is that naming traditions where it was customary to name a child after a grandfather or grandmother meant that lots of cousins had the same name. Also, women were often automatically given Maria as a first name, so you have to go by the second name.

Still, it's certainly doable. Most people aren't interested, however. They know their ancestral villages, and that's enough for them.

LeBrok
26-09-14, 05:52
I think the first modern Italian surnames came into use in Venice around the year 1000 AD. By about 1400 the use of surnames was pretty widespread, and then in 1564 the Council of Trent mandated that all children had to be registered by given name and surname.

That's why it's relatively easy to do a long family tree in Italy so long as you're willing to spend days looking through dusty parish records.
That's amazing. In Poland after destruction of two World Wars there is not much old archive left. People are happy if they can go back 5-6 generations in family history.

John Doe
26-09-14, 11:11
Jewish surnames in Poland are either of German or Polish origin. Rosentzveig or Kaczmarski for example. In Poland most last names sound very recent, with nothing to do with Slavic name 1,000 years ago.
First names, given names, can be much more persistent, much more traditional either among Jews, Poles or Italians, as Angela mentioned.

I think Swedes (maybe Norwegians) are unusual case. They had so few last names that recently government ask people to get creative and select new last names to increase variety.

It depends, for example the surnames I know were involved in my family are:
Weinberg
Brunengraber
Mandelberg
Elsenberg
Czerniak
Zolka
Klinghoffer

German/Polish surnames probably adopted by my ancestors in the 18th century. As for the first names, while it's true that at first you see mixed German/Polish and Jewish names like Woolf, Sury (Sarah), Emma, David etc, in more recent generations (since we're very Secular), the names had little to no relation to Judaism, names like Laurence, Diana, Nicola, Philippa, Peter etc, also going even further my great grandpa completely changed his surname when he got to England. Still 23andme says 95.1% AJ but you get the point. I suppose that if you look at religious Jews you'll still see Jewish first names and sometimes no surnames, just Moses son of Jacob or w/e.

John Doe
26-09-14, 11:12
That's amazing. In Poland after destruction of two World Wars there is not much old archive left. People are happy if they can go back 5-6 generations in family history.

Very true, I can only go back to the early 19th century, my ancestors came from Poznan, Krakow and Boryslaw. Paternally Germany and Poland but I know nothing of specific regions.

Angela
26-09-14, 14:32
That's amazing. In Poland after destruction of two World Wars there is not much old archive left. People are happy if they can go back 5-6 generations in family history.

Some areas, like La Spezia, were totally flattened during WWII, so the churches and the records are gone. However, the Bishop's archives still exist. The records also still exist for the surrounding villages.

Anyway, to be able to trace at least some family lines back to the mid 1500s is not all that unusual.

As for the number of surnames, I think it might be like STRS or SNPS, the longer you've had them, the more you have...the latest estimate was 350,000.

http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2006/09_Settembre/15/cognomi.shtml

Aberdeen
26-09-14, 16:06
Some parts of Scotland have a naming tradition as well, although I don't think it's used as much today. But if you look at old church or municipal records going back two or three centuries, in some families all the men are named William, Robert or James and all the women are named Heather or Mary. But surnames were often changed because members of a clan or sept would be proscribed for some reason, especially during and after the Jacobite rebellions. It makes tracing ancestry very difficult, especially since you can usually only go back 300 or 400 years at most, since the majority of churches were made of wood, and in northeastern Scotland there was a big switch from Catholic to Presbyterian in some areas.

MOESAN
26-09-14, 16:17
Jewish surnames in Poland are either of German or Polish origin. Rosentzveig or Kaczmarski for example. In Poland most last names sound very recent, with nothing to do with Slavic name 1,000 years ago.
First names, given names, can be much more persistent, much more traditional either among Jews, Poles or Italians, as Angela mentioned.

I think Swedes (maybe Norwegians) are unusual case. They had so few last names that recently government ask people to get creative and select new last names to increase variety.

I think just the opposite: First name are less stabile (modes) contrary to surnames (family names) fixed for a long time among the most of European cuntries (the first ones: Ireland) -
for Jews I agree: they took names when they were obliged to leave their old system, common among all countries at some stage of history: first name of the father + a suffix indicating filiation (genitive: -sen, -son, -sohn, -sson, mac-, (m)ab- (Welsh? breton), fitz-, ben-, ibn- (Jews, Arabs), -ian (?Armenians)
in France they choose a discrete name, except some Levy and Cohen - (Livi in Italy, Lewin elsewhere) in Germany, the Cohen name became "hidden" behind some Kohn, Kuhn, Kaan, Koen forms but more often they took german placenames of localization or translated hebraic names into german pseudo palcenames: very often they countain the elements:
tal, rosen, gold, berg, stein, blum, baum (boim), silber... in combinations - in Poland I don't know, surely they took also local placenames or pseudo-
placenames - but Jews were great travellers and Germany wurely was a big place for them at some time because they created the yiddish language on a south-german basis and everywhere in Europe or almost they spoke this yiddish - and as you say, the most of jews in Central and East Europe bear "german" surnames
in North Africa it seems they took arabic surnames, sometimes very close to their own names -
$: some Cohen, Coen 's in Ireland have a celtic root, not jewish!

LeBrok
26-09-14, 17:25
I think just the opposite: First name are less stabile (modes) contrary to surnames (family names) I meant stable as long existence and history, longer than surnames. I didn't mean stable as stuck to one family, lineage.



in France they choose a discrete name, except some Levy and Cohen - (Livi in Italy, Lewin elsewhere) in Germany, the Cohen name became "hidden" behind some Kohn, Kuhn, Kaan, Koen forms but more often they took german placenames of localization or translated hebraic names into german pseudo palcenames: very often they countain the elements:
tal, rosen, gold, berg, stein, blum, baum (boim), silber... in combinations - in Poland I don't know, In Poland variety of last names is huge, as big as it gets, I guess. If you know two people of the same last name, they must be from the same family. This was also common for Jewish names. I think, many modern Jewish names in Poland were created just recently with assimilation to mainstream population, going secular, and to avoid anti semitism, to be treated as ordinary citizens, and not just Jews, the outsiders.

Sile
26-09-14, 21:44
That's amazing. In Poland after destruction of two World Wars there is not much old archive left. People are happy if they can go back 5-6 generations in family history.

In italy , prior to 1800, the church and the heraldry scribes held all the records of BDM. Once napoleaon entered Italy then , the rules where that the records are held in civic places and the church has there own records. 2 places for records to be held.
Why....because in Italy, one had to produce a letter of proof of his ancestors and her ancestors, then place on the outside of the civic offices an intent to marry. This notice had to stay in display for 21 days , which is the only time someone can contest the wedding. The service would be firstly held in the civic offices , then the couple would go to the church for another service ........this is the reason, Italy has 2 places that marriages are recorded.

Pax Augusta
26-11-14, 22:24
I just gave this paper a quick run through. I may change my mind after a more thorough analysis, but I think they may have gotten it wrong. Again...even with whole genomes. It's not to say that the conclusion is necessarily incorrect. It's just to say that their analysis doesn't prove it.

You would think that by now some of these academics would have read and absorbed Lazaridis et al, and realized that you can't use modern populations to analyze ancient gene flow. Nor can use use IBS segments. IMO, you need ancient DNA, and absent that, some really sophisticated IBD analysis.

Here's the link to the paper.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105920

I agree with this: "When all the genetic evidence obtained so far are taken together, it seems clear that the Etruscans cannot be regarded as ancestral of all modern-day Tuscans".

I will read carefully the research.


No, we don't, but they're virtually unchanged since surnames were first recorded after the Council of Trent.

Not always true.

joeyc
27-11-14, 16:18
LOL???

WTF is this crap?

I am not surprised that the authors are Iberian.

joeyc
27-11-14, 16:37
Few things wrong with this study:

1. Highly SSA admixed Yemenis are used as reference population for the Middle Eastern admixture in the ADMIXTURE analysis.
2. ANE and WHG admixture are both considered as European, hence Northern Middle Easterners scoring high European admixture.

3. Estimates of the age of admixture in TSI with Caucasus/Middle Eastern people by using the ALDER software???

What is the purpose of using an European admixed population to get an estimate for age of the Middle Eastern admixture in Tuscans? Obviously this is going to completely skew the results.

It's like using Brazilian mulattos to estimate the age of African admixture among the Portuguese.

joeyc
28-11-14, 11:05
The paper predicts about 25% ME admixture among Tuscans which isn't really any different from results 3 years ago when Dienekes first opened up the Dodecad project using Admixture. (Just add West Asian with SW Asian)

I'm anticipating that the "first farmers" brought some ME admixture to Europe, but then subsequent waves of eastern people brought more ME admixture. YDNA J2 comes to mind as the strongest candidate for the later waves and the real differentiation between north and southern Europe.

Tuscans carry a normal level of SWA for Southern Europeans. They actually have less of it than most Neolitich farmers, including the ones in Scandinavia.

The West Asian component is not really Middle Eastern, as it is very ANE/North Asian like influenced. The West Asian and the North European components are closer to each other, than either of them is to both the Med and the SWA components.

The oldest J2a in Europe has been found in Bronze Age Hungary and there is no reason to believe that J2 is not much older than that in Southern Europe.

The whole paper is obviously wrong. Using populations with so much recent European ancestry like the Turks and the Caucasians to estimate the age of West Asian admixture in Tuscany makes no sense at all.

I am waiting for a much serious paper without Iberian authors.

Pax Augusta
22-04-15, 03:02
Guido Barbujani "Why modern-day Tuscans don't descend from the Etruscans"

Video (in Italian)

http://www.dialoghisulluomo.it/multimedia/video.php?miovideo=incontro_15.flv&title=Perch%C3%A9%20i%20Toscani%20non%20discendono %20dagli%20Etruschi&rel1=Guido%20Barbujani%20&watch=1

Angela
23-04-15, 18:56
Guido Barbujani "Why modern-day Tuscans don't descend from the Etruscans"

Video (in Italian)

http://www.dialoghisulluomo.it/multimedia/video.php?miovideo=incontro_15.flv&title=Perch%C3%A9%20i%20Toscani%20non%20discendono %20dagli%20Etruschi&rel1=Guido%20Barbujani%20&watch=1

Thanks for the link, Pax Augusta. I posted the video myself years ago on 23andme in response to a discussion with Gioiello, but I could never find it again. It's very informative. (He gives a nice introduction to dna testing and terms and the problems with getting ancient samples and then dealing with contamination issues as well.)

I think that the kinds of distinctions he's drawing are sort of lost on a lot of hobbyists. As he points out, what the ancient samples he tested tell us, looked at one way, is that of the 27 sequences, 5 were indeed found in Anatolia, but 7 were found in Germany, and only 2 may be found in Tuscany. So just looking at the results in this way would see a higher correspondence to Germany than to Toscana. (In other interviews and publications he points out that at the level of resolution that they did, and the age of the mtDna lineages, it's impossible to tell if they arrived in Europe in the late Bronze/Iron Age or in the Neolithic thousands of years earlier. )

They then seem to have looked at upstream lineages and compared modern lineages to them through a Bayesian analysis. They found that of the three ancient Etruscan cities of the League where they thought there was the most likelihood of finding Etruscan dna, i.e. Cosentino, Murlo, and Volterra, only in Cosentino was there are indication of population continuity. So, as he says, although the Tuscans may be the closest population to the ancient Etruscans, most of them are not descended from the Etruscans by any measure that they tested, which is mtDna.

I think this may be like the situation discovered in the recent paper about the Lombards in Piemonte . In a few small communities where there was a founder effect, a small group who went to the area and whose descendents basically never moved anywhere else and intermarried only among themselves, you can find some traces of these ancient peoples, but other than that, there is no trace of them.

Given that there is absolutely no record archaeologically of a mass migration into Tuscany around 800 BC, I have my doubts that the common people were anything but Villanovans. Perhaps the upper classes were mixed with newer arriving migrants. Certainly, the civilization shows rapid signs of sophistication in every area, perhaps most particularly in metallurgy. Those people and any unique genetic signature they carried were rapidly absorbed by the Romans, however, along with their culture and accomplishments. The language disappeared.

Of course, this may all change with more fine scale resolution and dating of mtDna lineages, or with ydna analysis, or even better, with a good enough sample for a sophisticated analysis of their autosomes. So far, thought, this is what we have.

Pax Augusta
26-04-15, 19:45
Thanks for the link, Pax Augusta. I posted the video myself years ago on 23andme in response to a discussion with Gioiello, but I could never find it again. It's very informative. (He gives a nice introduction to dna testing and terms and the problems with getting ancient samples and then dealing with contamination issues as well.)

I think that the kinds of distinctions he's drawing are sort of lost on a lot of hobbyists. As he points out, what the ancient samples he tested tell us, looked at one way, is that of the 27 sequences, 5 were indeed found in Anatolia, but 7 were found in Germany, and only 2 may be found in Tuscany. So just looking at the results in this way would see a higher correspondence to Germany than to Toscana. (In other interviews and publications he points out that at the level of resolution that they did, and the age of the mtDna lineages, it's impossible to tell if they arrived in Europe in the late Bronze/Iron Age or in the Neolithic thousands of years earlier. )

They then seem to have looked at upstream lineages and compared modern lineages to them through a Bayesian analysis. They found that of the three ancient Etruscan cities of the League where they thought there was the most likelihood of finding Etruscan dna, i.e. Cosentino, Murlo, and Volterra, only in Cosentino was there are indication of population continuity. So, as he says, although the Tuscans may be the closest population to the ancient Etruscans, most of them are not descended from the Etruscans by any measure that they tested, which is mtDna.

I think this may be like the situation discovered in the recent paper about the Lombards in Piemonte . In a few small communities where there was a founder effect, a small group who went to the area and whose descendents basically never moved anywhere else and intermarried only among themselves, you can find some traces of these ancient peoples, but other than that, there is no trace of them.

Given that there is absolutely no record archaeologically of a mass migration into Tuscany around 800 BC, I have my doubts that the common people were anything but Villanovans. Perhaps the upper classes were mixed with newer arriving migrants. Certainly, the civilization shows rapid signs of sophistication in every area, perhaps most particularly in metallurgy. Those people and any unique genetic signature they carried were rapidly absorbed by the Romans, however, along with their culture and accomplishments. The language disappeared.

Of course, this may all change with more fine scale resolution and dating of mtDna lineages, or with ydna analysis, or even better, with a good enough sample for a sophisticated analysis of their autosomes. So far, thought, this is what we have.

Thanks for this, Angela.


I add something from an old interview to Barbujani: http://www.antrocom.it/textnews-view_article-id-760.html

A.: - gli etruschi erano un gruppo elitario, che è l'ipotesi che caldeggiate nell'articolo. Se è vero, come spiegare le mappe genetiche di cui sopra e il fatto che la dodecapoli fosse una realtà fondamentalmente pacifica (romani e celti permettendo)? Un gruppo elitario non presuppone una dominanza di tipo militare rispetto al resto della popolazione? Da questo punto di vista, si può fare un parallelo tra l'India antica delle invasioni "ariane" e l'Etruria (con le dovute distanze)?

G.B.: Belle domande, non so le risposte. So però che molte delle nostre idee su come vivevano le popolazioni del passato sono ricavate da interpretazioni, a volte molto acute, spesso geniali, di fenomeni le cui conseguenze biologiche però fino a poco fa non potevano essere studiate. Adesso che questa possibilità esiste, anche se è limitata, mi sembra serio basarci sui dati reali più che sulle illazioni. Detto questo, non conosco abbastanza la storia dell'India, ma so qualcosa dei turchi. L'idea che mi sono fatto (ma questa è una speculazione) è che, un po' come i selgiuchidi e gli ottomani, che hanno imposto la loro lingua mongola ma rappresentavano una frazione piccola della popolazione dell'Anatolia, i gruppi di élite etruschi possono (possono) aver introdotto la loro lingua non-indo-europea in una popolazione che non era tutta geneticamente come loro. Se (se!) così fosse, e tenendo conto che abbiamo studiato soprattutto individui provenienti da sepolture ricche, il nostro lavoro dimostrerebbe solo che si è estinta questa élite. E dunque, passando alla prossima domanda...

A.: Se gli etruschi erano un gruppo elitario, quale era la popolazione autoctona e quale la popolazione immigrata, sempre ammesso che si possa parlare di migrazione? Etruschi o "prototoscani"?

G.B.: Forse (forse!) i prototoscani potrebbero essere le classi basse e gli Etruschi quella alta. Oppure (sempre forse) non c'erano differenze al loro interno, ma gli eventi di migrazione successiva potrebbero aver cambiato la popolazione toscana molto più di quanto verrebbe da pensare. Magari non è vero che i nostri antenati sono sempre quelli che stavano qui duemila o quattromila anni fa. Magari, anche senza immaginarsi migrazioni di massa, la nostra mobilità, poco alla volta, ha fatto sì che i nostri geni andassero in giro molto più di quanto pensiamo.

Yetos
26-04-15, 19:57
Given that there is absolutely no record archaeologically of a mass migration into Tuscany around 800 BC, I have my doubts that the common people were anything but Villanovans. Perhaps the upper classes were mixed with newer arriving migrants. Certainly, the civilization shows rapid signs of sophistication in every area, perhaps most particularly in metallurgy. Those people and any unique genetic signature they carried were rapidly absorbed by the Romans, however, along with their culture and accomplishments. The language disappeared.


The story of Etruscans in Italy did not start at 800 BC but in 1200 BC, the city of Hatria (Hatti+ru) modern Adria


Hatria has also Mycenean elements, which means that Hatrians knew and met before with IE,

Angela
26-04-15, 20:36
Thanks for this, Angela.


I add something from an old interview to Barbujani: http://www.antrocom.it/textnews-view_article-id-760.html

A.: - gli etruschi erano un gruppo elitario, che è l'ipotesi che caldeggiate nell'articolo. Se è vero, come spiegare le mappe genetiche di cui sopra e il fatto che la dodecapoli fosse una realtà fondamentalmente pacifica (romani e celti permettendo)? Un gruppo elitario non presuppone una dominanza di tipo militare rispetto al resto della popolazione? Da questo punto di vista, si può fare un parallelo tra l'India antica delle invasioni "ariane" e l'Etruria (con le dovute distanze)?

G.B.: Belle domande, non so le risposte. So però che molte delle nostre idee su come vivevano le popolazioni del passato sono ricavate da interpretazioni, a volte molto acute, spesso geniali, di fenomeni le cui conseguenze biologiche però fino a poco fa non potevano essere studiate. Adesso che questa possibilità esiste, anche se è limitata, mi sembra serio basarci sui dati reali più che sulle illazioni. Detto questo, non conosco abbastanza la storia dell'India, ma so qualcosa dei turchi. L'idea che mi sono fatto (ma questa è una speculazione) è che, un po' come i selgiuchidi e gli ottomani, che hanno imposto la loro lingua mongola ma rappresentavano una frazione piccola della popolazione dell'Anatolia, i gruppi di élite etruschi possono (possono) aver introdotto la loro lingua non-indo-europea in una popolazione che non era tutta geneticamente come loro. Se (se!) così fosse, e tenendo conto che abbiamo studiato soprattutto individui provenienti da sepolture ricche, il nostro lavoro dimostrerebbe solo che si è estinta questa élite. E dunque, passando alla prossima domanda...

A.: Se gli etruschi erano un gruppo elitario, quale era la popolazione autoctona e quale la popolazione immigrata, sempre ammesso che si possa parlare di migrazione? Etruschi o "prototoscani"?

G.B.: Forse (forse!) i prototoscani potrebbero essere le classi basse e gli Etruschi quella alta. Oppure (sempre forse) non c'erano differenze al loro interno, ma gli eventi di migrazione successiva potrebbero aver cambiato la popolazione toscana molto più di quanto verrebbe da pensare. Magari non è vero che i nostri antenati sono sempre quelli che stavano qui duemila o quattromila anni fa. Magari, anche senza immaginarsi migrazioni di massa, la nostra mobilità, poco alla volta, ha fatto sì che i nostri geni andassero in giro molto più di quanto pensiamo.

I don't think anything has substantially changed since he made those comments.

Yes, as he says, these are all speculations, but it is certainly possible that the "Etruschi", like the Seljuks and the Ottomans, were an elite who imposed their language and their advanced culture upon the mixed Neolithic/Urnfield (and/or other "Indo-European") base. It's also possible, as he points out, that they were all one people, although they would still have had to have been a mixed group of the prior inhabitants and any newcomers. I don't know if we'll ever be able to sort it out completely satisfactorily because as Barbujani says, any samples we have will be from elite burials, not from the majority of the population.

The other major complication is that the Villanovans cremated their dead, so no comparisions can be made with the people of the immediately preceding culture.

Regardless it will still be very interesting to discover if this very sophisticated civilization developed naturally from a group of mixed Middle Neolithic?/Bronze-Iron Age"Indo-European" stock who through trade with the east quickly incorporated advanced technology, or if the advances came from a group from the more developed areas of the Aegean and/or Anatolia.

I've said before that I doubt it was a mass migration. There is no indication of that in the archaeological record, and, in addition, from everything that I can see Tuscans are eastern shifted or Indo-European admixed Sardinians. No one has yet succeeded in showing me that a further massive gene flow from Anatolia in the first millennium BC is necessary to explain their genetic make up. They also fit seamlessly into the Italian cline.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible that there were further gene flows from the southeast in the Bronze Age. We know that there was gene flow from Greece into southern Italy during the first millennium BC and that could have diffused northward. Maybe there was some specific gene flow into Toscana from the Aegean/Anatolia starting in 1200 BC as well. I don't know. I'm just saying that in order to get a handle on Tuscan genetics and Italian genetics in general we need some Middle Neolithic genomes from this area, some incoming "Indo-European" genomes, some samples from the influence from Crete, some "Etruscan" samples, and hey, let's throw in some Greek immigrants from the first settlements of Magna Graecia as well.

Then we can come to some reasonable conclusions.

One thing that is clear to me is that the paper that is the subject of this thread has proved nothing, because there is no time stamp on any of these similarities, which you would think the authors should have known.

Sile
27-04-15, 20:52
The story of Etruscans in Italy did not start at 800 BC but in 1200 BC, the city of Hatria (Hatti+ru) modern Adria


Hatria has also Mycenean elements, which means that Hatrians knew and met before with IE,

Adria , which was on the coast at the time ( it is now 20km inland ) was firstly a mycenean outpost and conquered by the etruscans, but not as early as 1200BC. the area was north Picene. The North Picene is linked also with liburnian .
The myceneans are also said to be in istria at the time

http://www.academia.edu/1491061/Terramare_and_glass_Mycenaean_influence_in_Norther n_Italy_during_the_Late_Bronze_Age

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=xgHnT3xNzvQC&pg=PA222&lpg=PA222&dq=mycenaean+istria&source=bl&ots=LKPgKq-0d6&sig=anuGxri5LpIK7C3ROOR9hKa_BJU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fYY-Vaq5CuTYmAXG5oH4CQ&ved=0CEIQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=mycenaean%20istria&f=false (http://www.academia.edu/1491061/Terramare_and_glass_Mycenaean_influence_in_Norther n_Italy_during_the_Late_Bronze_Age)

Pax Augusta
29-04-15, 02:52
I don't think anything has substantially changed since he made those comments.

Yes, as he says, these are all speculations, but it is certainly possible that the "Etruschi", like the Seljuks and the Ottomans, were an elite who imposed their language and their advanced culture upon the mixed Neolithic/Urnfield (and/or other "Indo-European") base. It's also possible, as he points out, that they were all one people, although they would still have had to have been a mixed group of the prior inhabitants and any newcomers. I don't know if we'll ever be able to sort it out completely satisfactorily because as Barbujani says, any samples we have will be from elite burials, not from the majority of the population.

The other major complication is that the Villanovans cremated their dead, so no comparisions can be made with the people of the immediately preceding culture.

Regardless it will still be very interesting to discover if this very sophisticated civilization developed naturally from a group of mixed Middle Neolithic?/Bronze-Iron Age"Indo-European" stock who through trade with the east quickly incorporated advanced technology, or if the advances came from a group from the more developed areas of the Aegean and/or Anatolia.

I've said before that I doubt it was a mass migration. There is no indication of that in the archaeological record, and, in addition, from everything that I can see Tuscans are eastern shifted or Indo-European admixed Sardinians. No one has yet succeeded in showing me that a further massive gene flow from Anatolia in the first millennium BC is necessary to explain their genetic make up. They also fit seamlessly into the Italian cline.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible that there were further gene flows from the southeast in the Bronze Age. We know that there was gene flow from Greece into southern Italy during the first millennium BC and that could have diffused northward. Maybe there was some specific gene flow into Toscana from the Aegean/Anatolia starting in 1200 BC as well. I don't know. I'm just saying that in order to get a handle on Tuscan genetics and Italian genetics in general we need some Middle Neolithic genomes from this area, some incoming "Indo-European" genomes, some samples from the influence from Crete, some "Etruscan" samples, and hey, let's throw in some Greek immigrants from the first settlements of Magna Graecia as well.

Then we can come to some reasonable conclusions.

One thing that is clear to me is that the paper that is the subject of this thread has proved nothing, because there is no time stamp on any of these similarities, which you would think the authors should have known.

I agree with that all, Angela.


A must-see interview (this time in English, so need a translation) dated 2010 to British archaeologist Phil Perkins about the Etruscan Dna and the modern studies. Perkins has excavated for a long time in Tuscany and northern Lazio.

Etruscan DNA 1 part


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEt1b0Zazfo

Pax Augusta
29-04-15, 02:53
Etruscan DNA 2 part


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSYa0NZI2rw

LeBrok
29-04-15, 04:17
I like this interview, very balanced, smart, beautifully worded and objective.
Thanks

Angela
29-04-15, 04:41
I agree with that all, Angela.


A must-see interview (this time in English, so need a translation) dated 2010 to British archaeologist Phil Perkins about the Etruscan Dna and the modern studies. Perkins has excavated for a long time in Tuscany and northern Lazio.

Etruscan DNA 1 part


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEt1b0Zazfo

Thanks for the link, Pax Augusta. Well, I'd never heard that Etruscan has some similarities to Finnish and Hungarian, which are Uralic languages. That certainly doesn't sound like Etruscan would have been spoken in Anatolia does it? Unless they were some late arriving non-Indo-European speaking people from the northern steppe who just passed through Anatolia. That would certainly over turn things.

His view of the "Oriental" nature of their culture as probably being "cultural" and acquired through trade and that the same process took place in Greece is an argument I've heard before. It's very difficult to sort all these things out, because there are fashions in science as there are in everything else. First archaeologists were certain that everything was cultural diffusion, and now geneticists are certain that every cultural change is due to mass migration. How about just looking at each civilization on its own and trying to figure it out?

Angela
29-04-15, 04:53
Etruscan DNA 2 part


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSYa0NZI2rw

Actually, to the best of my recollection the newest papers say that because the samples were tested before tests for subclades were available, there's no way of knowing whether the material arrived in the Neolithic or 800 BC or even later. I'll try to find the citation for that.

Arame
29-04-15, 06:44
What You think about this website??


Maravot's work in deciphering the Etruscan Language. This work was originally published in 1981 as the "Catalog of Etruscan Words," by Mel Copeland. The work now integrates the Tavola Cortonensis and Zagreb Mummy scripts, which are the most recent finds. The work shows Etruscan conjugation and declension patterns. The first page lists the words and is an easy reference as to where they can be found and where their declension and conjugation patterns may be compared and examined. Translation of the various scripts is nearly complete.
...Tables are furnished showing the relationship of hundreds of Etruscan cognates to the basic Indo-European language groups.
http://www.maravot.com/#anchor#5


A curious turn in our exploration of the Etruscan language has led to the Phrygian language and its very similar grammatical patterns that relate to the Etruscan language. Herodotus and other ancients, particularly Strabo, provided pointers suggesting that the Etruscans, originating in Lydia, and the Phrygians shared a common heritage and land. Strabo and others further point out that the Phrygians are identical to the Mysians and Thracians. He also compares the Thracians to the Celts. The ancient texts that point to the Etruscan-Phrygian-Celtic connection are at the "Etruscan Phrases" Phrygiank.html. Strabo describes these people as being very ancient and attributes many inventions, such as wagons, to them. He, as well as other ancient writers, says that the Phrygians are believed to have come from Thrace. He further points out that the Getae and Thracians share the same tongue. Strabo then points out that the island of Lemnos was first settled by Thracians. Lemnos has strong connections to the Phrygians and interestingly the Lemnos Stelae, Script S, written in Etruscan characters, shows a punctuation (3-dot colon) like the Phrygian script. While the Lemnos Script has been identified as an Etruscan writing, it appears that it is Phrygian, though both the Etruscans and Phrygians appear to share the same language.

http://www.maravot.com/Etruscan_Phrases_a.html#anchor_1_06_08_1

Arame
29-04-15, 06:48
I see a lot off cognates in Etruscan and other IE languages. This is strange because I always thought it was not related to IE in anyway. Also the probable link between Phrygian and Etruscan is interesting

Kardu
29-04-15, 13:17
Maybe an echo of Anatolian roots

Etruscan huth - Five
Georgian hut-(i) - Five

Etruscan papa - Grandfather
Georgian papa - Grandfather

Etruscan teta - Grandmother
Georgian deda - Mother

Etruscan marish - Bridegroom
Georgian qmar-(i) - Husband
Svan mare - Man

Etrsucan lupu - (has) died
Georgian -lp- -To rot

Etruscan tinia - Day
Georgian -ten - Light

Etruscan tiur - Month
Georgian tve<-- ttue - Month

http://etruskisch.de/pgs/vc.htm

giuseppe rossi
29-04-15, 13:47
Nah I find more probable that Basques came from the Caucasus.

Shared words between Kartvelian and Basque languages.

Lo (sleep)– Logini (bed)
Ur (water)– Ur (old georgian) water
Ashur (lamb) – Shuri (sheep)
Gau (night)– Game (night)
Karoin (ice)– Karuime (ice)
Ashli (limb) – Ashal (leg)
Apal (low)– Dabali (low)
Nigar (weeping)– Ngara (weeping)
Sagu (mouse)– Tagu (old georgian) mouse
Pipril (ash) – Perpli (ash)
Shagar (apple)– Ushguri (apple)
Mayte (dear)– Malate (dear)
Eger-ezer (good)– Ezer (good)

giuseppe rossi
29-04-15, 14:09
Back to topic these ridiculous attempts to date admixtures with statistical methods, are completely useless!

Do not forget that untill 2011, everyone thought that R1b was a Paleolitich European haplogroup!

Funny that the highest frequencies of J1 and J2 haplogroups in Tuscany are found in non Etruscan areas, like the Appenines, while Italo Celtic y-dna lineages are most common in the Etruscan areas, like the coast.

I want to see how the prophets of the Anatolian theory can explain this.

Kardu
29-04-15, 14:22
Nah I find more probable that Basques came from the Caucasus.

Shared words between Kartvelian and Basque languages.

Lo (sleep)– Logini (bed)
Ur (water)– Ur (old georgian) water
Ashur (lamb) – Shuri (sheep)
Gau (night)– Game (night)
Karoin (ice)– Karuime (ice)
Ashli (limb) – Ashal (leg)
Apal (low)– Dabali (low)
Nigar (weeping)– Ngara (weeping)
Sagu (mouse)– Tagu (old georgian) mouse
Pipril (ash) – Perpli (ash)
Shagar (apple)– Ushguri (apple)
Mayte (dear)– Malate (dear)
Eger-ezer (good)– Ezer (good)



Certain linguistic similarities do not necessarily mean genetic relatedness. In case of Etruscan and Georgian/Kartvelian both might have borrowed these words from some other source in Anatolia.

Arame
29-04-15, 14:54
giuseppe rossi

Before the advent of genetics I also thought the Basque has some link to Caucasus but the genetics show that the Basques lack the Western Asian component that is very high in Caucasus.
Nevertheless the presence of Armenian and Georgian cognates in Basque language is very intriguing.

The only explanation I have is the time when R1b-M269 was in North of Near East (but it is neolithic ?!)

Concerning the Etruscan. What You think about the idea that Etruscan is someway related to IE?

Arame
29-04-15, 15:10
Another study that found an admixture from places even farther East at North Iran.


We analyzed the genetic characteristics of 110 Tuscan mitogenomes in the context of a large dataset of mitogenomes representing the worldwide phylogeny. There is strong evidence suggesting the existence of a Near East component in the Tuscans, thus adding further support to previous findings based on mtDNA control region data and autosomal data. If we consider #60 (T2d2), #29 (J1b1a3a), #24 (T2n1), #95 (J1d6), #92 and #105 (HV9c), #66 (U7a4a1a), #22 (H92) and #63 (H97) as haplotypes recently introduced to the Tuscan area from the Near East, the introgression of Near East haplotypes would account for 8.2% of the total mtDNA Tuscan pool. This signal is significantly lower than the one observed at a genome-wide scale (21%). Moreover, the autosomal data indicate that carriers of Near East mitogenomes do not correspond to migrants arriving recently to Tuscany from the Near East (S1 Text).

Within the Near East, the main genetic signature comes from Iran, although this view could be distorted by an overrepresentation of this region in the database of mitogenomes from the Near East.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0119242

Pax Augusta
29-04-15, 15:27
I like this interview, very balanced, smart, beautifully worded and objective.
Thanks

Of course I completely agree with you. We need more scholar like Perkins. I'm pleased that you like it.


Thanks for the link, Pax Augusta. Well, I'd never heard that Etruscan has some similarities to Finnish and Hungarian, which are Uralic languages. That certainly doesn't sound like Etruscan would have been spoken in Anatolia does it? Unless they were some late arriving non-Indo-European speaking people from the northern steppe who just passed through Anatolia. That would certainly over turn things.

Angela, as I know, the connection between the Etruscan and the Old Hungarian (and so the Finnish) is mainly due to an Italian linguist, Mario Alinei, who taught at the University of Utrecht and now lives in Tuscany. But Alinei wasn't the first to make this connection. Etruscan and Old Hungarian/Finnish are considered both agglutinative language. Some of the ancient languages of Near Est were agglutinative: Hattic, Sumerian, Hurrian, Urartian... But also the Basque is considered by many linguists an agglutinative language. Agglutination is an ancient typological feature and does not imply a linguistic relation according to many scholars though. I have read Alinei's work some years ago and I found it not very believable on a historical level not to mention that Alinei is commonly criticised for his theories. The very ancient typological feature of Etruscan could be due to an ancient migration from Near East or as well to a very ancient Mediterranean pre-Indo-European substratum (in the ancient Greek is called the pre-Greek substrate).

Etruscan: An Archaic Form of Hungarian (Il Mulino, Bologna – 2003).

http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_etruscan.pdf (http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_etruscan.pdf)

https://www.mulino.it/isbn/9788815093820



His view of the "Oriental" nature of their culture as probably being "cultural" and acquired through trade and that the same process took place in Greece is an argument I've heard before. It's very difficult to sort all these things out, because there are fashions in science as there are in everything else. First archaeologists were certain that everything was cultural diffusion, and now geneticists are certain that every cultural change is due to mass migration. How about just looking at each civilization on its own and trying to figure it out?

I really think that geneticists need to start to ask the collaboration of archaeologists, as Perkins said, historians and linguists. In my opinion geneticists have a Ferrari but they still don't know how to drive it.

LeBrok
29-04-15, 16:50
The only explanation I have is the time when R1b-M269 was in North of Near East (but it is neolithic ?!)

Concerning the Etruscan. What You think about the idea that Etruscan is someway related to IE?


Of course I completely agree with you. We need more scholar like Perkins. I'm pleased that you like it.
The very ancient typological feature of Etruscan could be due to an ancient migration from Near East or as well to a very ancient Mediterranean pre-Indo-European substratum (in the ancient Greek is called the pre-Greek substrate).



I also think there is a big chance that Etruscans spoke original Neolithic Farmer's language. The same substratum might be showing through in Basque and Georgian.

Pax Augusta
29-04-15, 17:33
I also think there is a big chance that Etruscans spoke original Neolithic Farmer's language. The same substratum might be showing through in Basque and Georgian.

Yes a remnant of a Neolithic farmers' widely spoken language, with a likely common substratum "in Basque, Sumerian, Urartian, Hurrian, Etruscan and North Caucasian languages". As seen in Ivanov, Gamkrelidze, Starostin, Diakonoff, Orel and others.



Another interesting contribution.

DNA and Etruscan Identity by Philip Perkins

https://www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/14%20Perkins-pp.pdf

Angela
29-04-15, 18:16
Of course I completely agree with you. We need more scholar like Perkins. I'm pleased that you like it.

Angela, as I know, the connection between the Etruscan and the Old Hungarian (and so the Finnish) is mainly due to an Italian linguist, Mario Alinei, who taught at the University of Utrecht and now lives in Tuscany. But Alinei wasn't the first to make this connection. Etruscan and Old Hungarian/Finnish are considered both agglutinative language. Some of the ancient languages of Near Est were agglutinative: Hattic, Sumerian, Hurrian, Urartian... But also the Basque is considered by many linguists an agglutinative language. Agglutination is an ancient typological feature and does not imply a linguistic relation according to many scholars though. I have read Alinei's work some years ago and I found it not very believable on a historical level not to mention that Alinei is commonly criticised for his theories. The very ancient typological feature of Etruscan could be due to an ancient migration from Near East or as well to a very ancient Mediterranean pre-Indo-European substratum (in the ancient Greek is called the pre-Greek substrate).

Etruscan: An Archaic Form of Hungarian (Il Mulino, Bologna – 2003).

http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_etruscan.pdf (http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_etruscan.pdf)

https://www.mulino.it/isbn/9788815093820

I really think that geneticists need to start to ask the collaboration of archaeologists, as Perkins said, historians and linguists. In my opinion geneticists have a Ferrari but they still don't know how to drive it.

Very informative, Pax Augusta...thanks.

Of course, it has to be acknowledged that it depends which archaeologist or linguist they choose as their "source".

In terms of the Etruscans, I think the vast majority of archaeologists see Etruscan culture as growing out of the prior Villanovan culture, with the "Orientalizing" features being absorbed through trade and other cultural exchanges. However, to be fair, archaeologists have been very anti-migration for many groups for many years. Many of them didn't even allow for gene flow into Europe from the Near East with the Neolithic Advance.

However, J.P. Mallory, an editor of the Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture can hardly be classified as a rabid anti-migrationist, and he concludes that the Etruscans were most likely "native" in the area.
https://books.google.com/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA316&lpg=PA316&dq=J.P.+Mallory+on+the+Etruscans&source=bl&ots=wWmY_159eE&sig=Oa7AgJVNlhGwiIXjJ4-Wo8FLeJc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=f_pAVZqmMu_jsATtzIHIDw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBw#v=snippet&q=Etruscans&f=false

I don't know if his views have changed since then.

Ed. to clarify the source of the opinion and correct the link.

MOESAN
30-04-15, 11:43
Certain linguistic similarities do not necessarily mean genetic relatedness. In case of Etruscan and Georgian/Kartvelian both might have borrowed these words from some other source in Anatolia.

OK, I agree - that said, same loanwords made from the same third language can prove geographic proximity at some stage of History, so have some worth -

Arame
30-04-15, 14:46
The question is were was that geographic proximity :)
this man thinks Armenians brought their Etruscan parallels from Balkans.
https://www.academia.edu/11493537/ETRUSCAN_AND_ARMENIAN
But how then Georgians have their cognates with Etruscan?

Look at the plural suffix discussed in the other thread (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30527-Etruscan-and-Germanic). German,Armenian, Hittite and Etruscan had similar plural suffixes! So how that happened? Neolithic? But why so different language families?

I start to think that the Tree model of languages is not able to explain everything and we need to revisit the Wave model of languages.

MOESAN
30-04-15, 16:32
The question is were was that geographic proximity :)
this man thinks Armenians brought their Etruscan parallels from Balkans.
https://www.academia.edu/11493537/ETRUSCAN_AND_ARMENIAN
But how then Georgians have their cognates with Etruscan?

Look at the plural suffix discussed in the other thread (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30527-Etruscan-and-Germanic). German,Armenian, Hittite and Etruscan had similar plural suffixes! So how that happened? Neolithic? But why so different language families?

I start to think that the Tree model of languages is not able to explain everything and we need to revisit the Wave model of languages.

concerning the armenian connection, I'm not convinced for some comparisons in the short abstract you linked to us, but but I'm ready to accept a possible link between Balkans (proto?)armenian and etruscan - that said, it's not contradicting an other link georgian-etruscan: if a pre-I-Ean language were spoken at some time from Caucasus to Balkans, across Anatolia, I don't see any dramatic obstacle here - it could date from a stage of Neolithic or even later...
concerning the plurals in different languages, I'm without opinion today - coincidences can occur, we need more than that to make our opinion, I think - and some very archaic lnguistic traits can remain in today separate families: the personal pronouns in some Uralic languages shows ties with I-Ean too, and it didn't signify the current classification is wrong (this type of words are not too often subject to borrowings)-

Pax Augusta
30-04-15, 17:24
Another study that found an admixture from places even farther East at North Iran.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0119242


It's just another study from the same authors of the paper discussed in this thread. Anyway their newer study shows a lower post-Neolithic gene flow (8%) from their previous paper (21%). They haven't proved that this gene flow is due to Etruscans though.



Very informative, Pax Augusta...thanks.

Of course, it has to be acknowledged that it depends which archaeologist or linguist they choose as their "source".

In terms of the Etruscans, I think the vast majority of archaeologists see Etruscan culture as growing out of the prior Villanovan culture, with the "Orientalizing" features being absorbed through trade and other cultural exchanges. However, to be fair, archaeologists have been very anti-migration for many groups for many years. Many of them didn't even allow for gene flow into Europe from the Near East with the Neolithic Advance.

However, J.P. Mallory, the head of the Journal of Indo-European Studies for decades, who I don't think can be labeled a die hard anti-migrationist, believes roughly the same thing, and based not only on archaeology, but also on linguistics. His views can be found in these pages of his "In Search of the Indo-Europeans", which is available as a google book .
https://books.google.com/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA316&lpg=PA316&dq=J.P.+Mallory+on+the+Etruscans&source=bl&ots=wWmY_159eE&sig=Oa7AgJVNlhGwiIXjJ4-Wo8FLeJc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=f_pAVZqmMu_jsATtzIHIDw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=J.P. Mallory on the Etruscans&f=false

I don't know if his views have changed since then.

Yes, if someone is genuinely interested about the origins of the Etruscans can not exclude both cases:

1) Etruscan is the remnant of a non-IE language of central Mediterranean, that later absorbed various elements from east Mediterranean and from the IE Italic languages

2) Etruscan is a language originally from east Mediterranean carried in central Mediterranean by some newcomers (merchants, warriors, priests...), that later absorbed various elements from the IE Italic languages and the non-IE language of central Mediterranean

Actually we know very little about a non-IE language spoken in western-central Mediterranean except the Basque language. But some other non-IE languages were for sure spoken in western and central Mediteranean. Furthmore many scholars believe that a pre-IE substrate (also called Mediterranean substrate) exists in the Italic languages, as it exists in the acient Greek.

If someone is not genuinely interested about the origins of the Etruscans then he will try to force one of the two hypotheses.


A Mediterranean pre-Indo-European substratum is also found in the ancient Ligurian language according to some scholars.

The language of the ancient Ligurians is attested by some glosses, place-names and personal names and a few inscriptions on the stelae in Lunigiana. The study of these few data between from 19th c. to Second World War years shown an Indo-European language and close to the Celtic, with some own features which were due to a Mediterranean pre-Indo-European substratum, according some scholars.

https://www.academia.edu/3674003/Gli_studi_sulla_lingua_degli_antichi_Liguri_nel_XI X_secolo_e_agli_inizi_del_XX_indoeuropeo_celtico_p reindoeuropeo_mediterraneo..._in_La_nascita_della_ Paletnologia_in_Liguria_atti_del_convegno_Bordighe ra_2008_pp._143-154




The question is were was that geographic proximity :)
this man thinks Armenians brought their Etruscan parallels from Balkans.
https://www.academia.edu/11493537/ETRUSCAN_AND_ARMENIAN
But how then Georgians have their cognates with Etruscan?

Look at the plural suffix discussed in the other thread (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30527-Etruscan-and-Germanic). German,Armenian, Hittite and Etruscan had similar plural suffixes! So how that happened? Neolithic? But why so different language families?

I start to think that the Tree model of languages is not able to explain everything and we need to revisit the Wave model of languages.

You need more reliable sources. It's true that since the past Etruscan language has been linked with Armenian (Robert Ellis), but to be honest Etruscan has been linked with many other modern languages (Slovenian, Albanian, Basque, Hungarian...) and ancient languages (Lydian, Luwian, Hurrian, Tartessian... ).



concerning the armenian connection, I'm not convinced for some comparisons in the short abstract you linked to us, but but I'm ready to accept a possible link between Balkans (proto?)armenian and etruscan - that said, it's not contradicting an other link georgian-etruscan: if a pre-I-Ean language were spoken at some time from Caucasus to Balkans, across Anatolia, I don't see any dramatic obstacle here - it could date from a stage of Neolithic or even later...
concerning the plurals in different languages, I'm without opinion today - coincidences can occur, we need more than that to make our opinion, I think - and some very archaic lnguistic traits can remain in today separate families: the personal pronouns in some Uralic languages shows ties with I-Ean too, and it didn't signify the current classification is wrong (this type of words are not too often subject to borrowings)-

Agree, these languages could have some very ancient common ancestors, but it doesn't imply that are strictly related.

Kardu
30-04-15, 23:47
Agree, these languages could have some very ancient common ancestors, but it doesn't imply that are strictly related.

The fact that those few common words between Georgian/Kartvelian and Etruscan are practically identical, probably indicates more to borrowing from a common source rather than to belonging to common language family.

Arame
01-05-15, 06:59
MOESEN, Pax Augusta

My interest is not to link Etruscan to Anatolia or whoever else. I want to understand the broader picture with the help of Etruscan. And in this broader context to understand what is interesting to me: the origins of Hurro-Urarteans. Some time ago I also thinked that this old languages are related to Neolithic farmers. But now I am not sure anymore. Now I start to think that the IE was not a simple phenomena. Perhaps there was a first archaic layer of IE that spread around before the main known IE languages appeared. And Etrsucan is part of it.
There is a genetic discontinuity in Europe at 4500-5000 BP. So basically there are three options here.
1. Etruscan is a Neolithic language related to G2a and Oetzi before 5000BP
2. Etruscan is a Bronze Age language (or Late Neolithic) related to R1b (ANE) or J2 (West Asian). Between 5000 and 3200 BP
3. And the Etruscan is an Iron Age people moved from Anatolia as in Herodotus. After 3200 BP.

I don't believe in 3-rd option. The article of Perkins convinced me that it is not an option. But I am not sure about the first option also. So I am more inclined to the 2-nd option.
And such researches are favouring the second option.

Gianfranco Forni. Etruscan as an Anatolian (non-Hittite) Language
https://www.academia.edu/3801969/Etruscan_as_an_Anatolian_Language

giuseppe rossi
01-05-15, 11:02
The Etruscan language was a mixture of some native Neolitich language of Italy and some other language from North of the Alps.

According to Boattini et al 2013, the haplogroup R1b U152 is the only y-dna lineage which correlates with the ancient Etruscans in Italy.

Arame
01-05-15, 11:32
Thanks Giuseppe
That was the thing I was suspecting.
I think there was a two waves of R1b in Europe. The first one was not IE. like Basque ( or it was a very archaic IE like languages ).
The second wave was the true IE.

Kardu
01-05-15, 11:51
The Etruscan language was a mixture of some native Neolitich language of Italy and some other language from North of the Alps.

According to Boattini et al 2013, the haplogroup R1b U152 is the only y-dna lineage which correlates with the ancient Etruscans in Italy.

From where that Neolitihic language would originate?

Pax Augusta
01-05-15, 12:04
Gianfranco Forni. Etruscan as an Anatolian (non-Hittite) Language
https://www.academia.edu/3801969/Etruscan_as_an_Anatolian_Language

Forni is an amateur scholar. You can find hundreds amateur studies on the Etruscan language with all different theories.


The Etruscan language was a mixture of some native Neolitich language of Italy and some other language from North of the Alps.

According to Boattini et al 2013, the haplogroup R1b U152 is the only y-dna lineage which correlates with the ancient Etruscans in Italy.

Isn't still today R1b U152 the most common Y-Dna haplogroup in Tuscany?

Maciamo
01-05-15, 12:48
The Etruscan language was a mixture of some native Neolitich language of Italy and some other language from North of the Alps.

According to Boattini et al 2013, the haplogroup R1b U152 is the only y-dna lineage which correlates with the ancient Etruscans in Italy.

It is very possible that a scenario similar to the Basques took place in Etruria. R1b-P312 (especially U152) invaded in Italian peninsula, but for some reason (more developed Neolithic/Chacolithic culture ?) the invaders didn't impose their Italic language as elsewhere, but adopted the local language. If it happened with the Basques, who are heavily R1b-P312 despite speaking a non-IE language, I don't see why the same couldn't have occurred with the Etruscans.

But that doesn't rule out a third population source, neither Neolithic G2a nor Italic R1b. I could very well be that a mixture of J1, J2, E-M34 and T people migrated from the Eastern Mediterranean to Etruria some time during the late Copper Age or the Bronze Age. Like R1b newcomers they might have adopted the local Neolithic language.

What I am trying to say is that there isn't necessarily a connection between language and ethnicity, and when more than two peoples mix in one region, more than one language disappears. Genes can mix easily, but there aren't so many examples of truly hybrid languages with more than a few percents of loanwords from one other language (only English and Japanese come to mind).

Sennevini
01-05-15, 16:03
I view the Etruscans as a non-Indo-European people from Anatolia, who in the time of the Sea People around 1200 BC came to Italy, and settled there as a ruling elite over Italic tribes there, bringing with them their language, just like the Magyar did in Hungary. It does not make sense to me that Etruscan was already spoken in Italy before the Italics came in, because unlike the Basque area, Tuscany is not some isolated place.

giuseppe rossi
01-05-15, 16:34
@Sevennini

Interesting opinion but linguistics and archeology do not support the Anatolian origin.

Now we have also genetics and the haplotype R1b U152, the only one which correlates with Etruscans, originated North of the Alps.

Kardu
01-05-15, 19:47
@Sevennini

Interesting opinion but linguistics and archeology do not support the Anatolian origin.

Now we have also genetics and the haplotype R1b U152, the only one which correlates with Etruscans, originated North of the Alps.


What do you think about this study?

'The mystery of Etruscan origins: novel clues from Bos taurus mitochondrial DNA'

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/274/1614/1175.long

Sile
01-05-15, 19:55
@Sevennini

Interesting opinion but linguistics and archeology do not support the Anatolian origin.

Now we have also genetics and the haplotype R1b U152, the only one which correlates with Etruscans, originated North of the Alps.

Tacitus states that Raetian lands start at the danube river and go south into the Alps.

The Raetian language based on some hungarian linguistics is said to originate from west-semitic ( modern Syria )

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=9WL0TJuVjacC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=tacitus+and+the+raetian&source=bl&ots=rdbEWU42E_&sig=9J1lpPMKytfkV8t1_oIfLVEKPXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cLVDVazVL4aMmwWKmIDQCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tacitus%20and%20the%20raetian&f=false

there are no Raetian towns between the alps and the danube river as they are only Roman built towns, Trent seems the only town.

The Reeti were divided, according to Pliny, into many states or tribes. Of these the most important were, 1. The Lepontii, in the southwestern part of the province. 2. The Tridenlini, in the southeastern. 3. The Genauni, whom Horace mentions, east of the Lepontii. 4. The Vennoncs, near the sources of the Athesis, now Adige. 5. The Brixentes, north of the Tridentini. 6. The Brenni or Brcuni, north of the Raitian Alps, also mentioned by Horace.

The great chain of the Alps passes almost through the center of this province, and bears various names in different parts of it. On the western borders are the Alpcs Pennina, in the northwest are the Alpes Leponiia, and on the north are the Alpcs Summa, succeeded by the Alpes Ralica. These mountains were all inhabited by various tribes of the Raeti.
Several large rivers rise in these mountains, of which the most important were, 1. The Rhenus or Rhine, rising in the Lepontine Alps. 2. The Rhodanus or Rhone, rising in the same vicinity. 3. The Ticinus or Tesino, a tributary of the Po, rising in the same division of the Alps. 4. The Addua or Adda, another Italian river, rising in the Raetian Alps. 5. The Athesis or Adige, rising in the same Alps, and flowing into the Adriatic; and, 6. The (Enus or Inn, a tributary of the Danube.
The valleys between these mountains were very fertile, and were particularly celebrated for their grapes, from which excellent wine was made. The Raetian wine was the favorite wine of Augustus.

The only place of importance in Raetia was Tridentum, now Trent.


there is little similarly between etruscan and raetian script
http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/germ/runealph.htm

giuseppe rossi
01-05-15, 21:58
What do you think about this study?

'The mystery of Etruscan origins: novel clues from Bos taurus mitochondrial DNA'

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/274/1614/1175.long

In Ghirotto et al 2013, the Etruscan mtdna is identical to the Neolitich Central mtdna from Germany and the like.

http://dienekes.blogspot.it/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html

The ancestorts of Etruscans and modern Antolians separated over 5000 years ago.


For these tests we chose the mutation rate (μ) estimated from the data in the previous ABC analyses (very close to the figure accounting (http://dienekes.blogspot.it/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html#) for the time-dependency of the mitochondrial molecular clock [13], μ = 0.003). Tests were also run using the value incorporating a correction for the effects of purifying selection [23] (μ = 0.0014), always finding that it results in a further increase of the estimated separation times (Figure S7B). Only assuming very high mutation rates, at least twice as large as estimated in Henn et al. [13], was it possible to obtain separation times less than 5,000 years (Figure S7B). With both Anatolian samples, any degree of gene flow after separation between the ancestors of Tuscans and Anatolians resulted in more remote separation times.


Tacitus states that Raetian lands start at the danube river and go south into the Alps.

The Raetian language based on some hungarian linguistics is said to originate from west-semitic ( modern Syria )

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=9WL0TJuVjacC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=tacitus+and+the+raetian&source=bl&ots=rdbEWU42E_&sig=9J1lpPMKytfkV8t1_oIfLVEKPXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cLVDVazVL4aMmwWKmIDQCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tacitus%20and%20the%20raetian&f=false

there are no Raetian towns between the alps and the danube river as they are only Roman built towns, Trent seems the only town.

The Reeti were divided, according to Pliny, into many states or tribes. Of these the most important were, 1. The Lepontii, in the southwestern part of the province. 2. The Tridenlini, in the southeastern. 3. The Genauni, whom Horace mentions, east of the Lepontii. 4. The Vennoncs, near the sources of the Athesis, now Adige. 5. The Brixentes, north of the Tridentini. 6. The Brenni or Brcuni, north of the Raitian Alps, also mentioned by Horace.

The great chain of the Alps passes almost through the center of this province, and bears various names in different parts of it. On the western borders are the Alpcs Pennina, in the northwest are the Alpes Leponiia, and on the north are the Alpcs Summa, succeeded by the Alpes Ralica. These mountains were all inhabited by various tribes of the Raeti.
Several large rivers rise in these mountains, of which the most important were, 1. The Rhenus or Rhine, rising in the Lepontine Alps. 2. The Rhodanus or Rhone, rising in the same vicinity. 3. The Ticinus or Tesino, a tributary of the Po, rising in the same division of the Alps. 4. The Addua or Adda, another Italian river, rising in the Raetian Alps. 5. The Athesis or Adige, rising in the same Alps, and flowing into the Adriatic; and, 6. The (Enus or Inn, a tributary of the Danube.
The valleys between these mountains were very fertile, and were particularly celebrated for their grapes, from which excellent wine was made. The Raetian wine was the favorite wine of Augustus.

The only place of importance in Raetia was Tridentum, now Trent.


there is little similarly between etruscan and raetian script
http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/germ/runealph.htm

Raeti were heavily mixed with Italo Celtic people.

Indeed the oldest Celtic inscriptions have been found the Lepotian territory.

Read here.

http://rootsofeurope.ku.dk/kalender/arkiv_2012/celtic_spring/Lepontisch_WS_2010.pdf/

Ligures are also now considered to be mostly of Celtic stock based on place names and personal names.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligurian_language_(ancient)

According to Plutarch Ligures called themselves Ambrones which indicates a strong link with the Ancient Ambrones tribes of Jutland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrones

Celtic presence has been found as far South as Umbria. Indeed the ancient Umbri were assumed to be of Celtic/Gaulish stock by many ancient Roman writers and closely related to the Celto Germanic Ligures/Ambrones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbri

Some interesting stuff if you are able to read Italian.

Celtic origin hypothesis for the stone heads found in the Emilian and Ligurian Appennines: http://kenoms3.altervista.org/mummie/CATALOGO.pdf

In particular:


Riproposta recentemente da Maini (E viandare, n. 9, pp. 69 -74) è la teoria che ritiene i volti di pietra altorenani di derivazione celtica; nella cultura celtica, infatti, la testa rappresenta la sede delle maggiori virtù dell'uomo per cui era usanza, presso i guerrieri gallici, usare le teste dei nemici uccisi per "abbellire" le proprie case. Di questa tradizione fanno menzione sia Strabone che Diodoro Siculo: "Al ritorno dalla battaglia i celti appendono le teste dei nemici al collo dei cavalli, per poi attaccarle come ornamento ai portici delle case. Dice Posidonio di aver visto spesso coi propri occhi tale spettacolo e di essersi in principio disgustato, finendo però dopo col sopportarlo per abitudine (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#). Le teste degli uomini illustri poi, conservate con olio di cedro, le mostravano agli ospiti e non acconsentivano al riscatto, neppure a peso d’oro " (Strabone, “Geografia”, IV, 4,5).

Rinvenimenti archeologici hanno mostrato che nel santuario gallico di Entremont (in Provenza) teste litiche facevano mostra di sé accanto a "têtes coupées" di uomini offerti in sacrificio. Il motivo delle teste è, in generale, assai rappresentato nell’arte celtica al punto che “si è potuto parlare dell’esaltazione della testa nel pensiero e nell’arte dei Celti (Lambrechts, 1954): la testa separata dal resto, la maschera umana, infatti figura spesso in quest’arte, che pure è così poco figurativa”
(Enciclopedia Treccani dell’Arte Antica, vol. II, Roma, 1959, P. 462). Arte e tradizione che non è affatto morta coi Celti come mostrano epigoni sorprendenti ai giorni nostri.

Anche nella monetazione compare il motivo del capo mozzato, ad esempio le monete con la legenda DUBNOREIX, un capo degli Edui, recano la raffigurazione di un guerriero che tiene in una mano una testa mozzata. L'eco di questa macabra usanza potrebbe sopravvivere nelle espressioni che, abbiamo già avuto modo di ricordare, si presentano non di rado, in queste figure, deformi e inquietanti. In alcuni miti del celtismo insulare (ad esempio in quello di Bran) teste decapitate sono in grado di parlare e vivere per anni separate dal proprio corpo, mentre nella saga irlandese di Cù Chulainn è descritto un vasto locale adibito all’esposizione delle teste recise ospitato nel castello di Conchobar. I capi mozzati sarebbero, in quest’ottica, il prezioso contenitore di un’energia misteriosa, soprannaturale, che può mettere in comunicazione il mondo visibile con quello invisibile consentendo (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#) di elevarsi (specie nel rituale druidico) alla sfera del sacro.

Ettore Scagliarini (nei numeri 30 e 38 di “la Musola”) ha instaurato un rapporto tra le teste mozzate dell’arte celtica insulare (Irlanda e Regno Unito) che alcuni scalpellini locali hanno, poi, effettivamente mutuato nelle loro opere (vedi la maschera di via Panoramica, a Vidiciatico. È probabile che anche le zucche, intagliate a guisa di faccia deforme e spaventosa, usate in Nord America nella notte di Ognissanti siano collegate ad antiche tradizioni celtiche. In effetti, val (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#) la pena ricordare che (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#) l’uso d’intagliare zucche per farne dei visi era tradizione popolare, sino alla prima metà del XX secolo, anche in alcune parti del Centro (Toscana compresa) e Nord Italia (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#) (cfr. E. PERCIVELDI, “I Celti”, Firenze, 2003, p. 72; AA.VV. “Cultura contadina in Toscana”, Firenze, 2004, pp. 246 - 247).

Oltre al culto dei capi mozzati esiste un ulteriore, importante, indizio che sembra andare nella direzione dell’ipotesi celtica e che si riferisce direttamente al concetto di maschera: “Le lingue celtiche non hanno una parola (http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/947/Gauls-in-Italy?page=2#) per ‘maschera’, ma l’hanno tratta dal latino; gli archeologi hanno comunque ritrovato un certo numero di maschere celtiche (e numerose rappresentazioni) e si potrebbe dedurre da alcune descrizioni mitologiche irlandesi, che certi personaggi o inviati dell’Altro Mondo portavano una maschera. La scomparsa di ogni termine celtico originario dopo la cristianizzazione fa sospettare l’esistenza di un dato tradizionalmente
importante che non c’è più accessibile” (J. CHEVALIER – A. GHEERBRANT, “Dizionario dei simboli”, vol. II, Milano 1988, p. 73).
This also shows a cultural feature shared by the Celts and their Italic close cousins (namely the Umbri): https://sites.google.com/site/viaromea/Home/lemarcolfe

On the Appennino Tosco-Emiliano, in the Frignano area, can still be found some heads sculpted into the stone and placed at the front of the houses. Some researchers date it back to a macabre rite that the North Umbri, an ancient population living in these mountains, used to do at the end of every battle. To protect themselves and their own families from the evil spirits, they used to behead the enemy warriors and after sticking the tips of their spears into their heads, they put them in front of their houses (https://sites.google.com/site/viaromea/Home/lemarcolfe).


Here is an interesting read abot a possible Celtic presence as far south as Umbria: http://umbriaceltica.webs.com/umbriambrones.htm



Altro fatto curioso è rappresentato dalla Stele di Todi, che oggi si trova a Roma presso il Museo Gregoriano. Questa stele, è scritta in Lepontico-celtico ( o alfabeto di Lugano), molto simile alla lingua primitiva Umbro celtica e antico latino. Il nome antico di Todi era Tular, che significa confine.Una curiosità è l'analogia fra gliAmbrones (http://books.google.com/books?id=TpIEAAAAQAAJ&dq=ambrones&lr=&as_brr=1&pg=PT369#v=onepage&q=ambrones&f=false) (detti oggi Liguri) ed i paleo-umbri-leponti .Secondo "Novelle letterarie (http://books.google.com/books?id=TpIEAAAAQAAJ&dq=ambrones&lr=&as_brr=1&pg=PT369#v=onepage&q=ambrones&f=false) "del 1765"Insubres erant Vmbri inferiores:Vmbri cum Siculis fuere primi Italiae incolae......Vmbri genere erant Celtae: Celtica vocabula uti in Latinam linguam transmissa fuerint. Altera de origine Insubrum. Elenchus: Celt-Vumbri commigrarunt in Regiones Transpadanas,&in Liguriam. Vera Ligurum nominis Etymologia explicat uti tam late reoeriantur Ligures. Ligures erant Ambrones genere: Ambri Ambrones, Vmbri,Vmbrones, idem erant genus -Vmbri Ligures, atque adeo Vmbri inferiores, idest Insubres profecti funt ab Ambris sive Ambronibus, qui erant Vmbri superiores : ambrones ciusdem fuere generi ac Sicambri. (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigambri)Sicambri eiusdem ac Cymbri. Vmbrorum ex Cymbris origo confirmatur, &nomine,& facto :quae aetas nomen Cymbrorum primum extulerit."Degli Ambri, come degli Umbri, si dice fossero sopravvissuti ad una inimmaginabile alluvione.

giuseppe rossi
02-05-15, 12:06
Why have mods deleted my post? Nevermind.


What do you think about this study?

'The mystery of Etruscan origins: novel clues from Bos taurus mitochondrial DNA'

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/274/1614/1175.long

So what?

According to Ghirotto et al 2013, the Etruscan mtdna is identical to the Neotlich Central European mtdna from Germany.

http://dienekes.blogspot.it/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html

On the other hand Etruscans and Anatolians separated over 5000 years ago.

For these tests we chose the mutation rate (μ) estimated from the data in the previous ABC analyses (very close to the figure accounting for the time-dependency of the mitochondrial molecular clock [13], μ = 0.003). Tests were also run using the value incorporating a correction for the effects of purifying selection [23] (μ = 0.0014), always finding that it results in a further increase of the estimated separation times (Figure S7B). Only assuming very high mutation rates, at least twice as large as estimated in Henn et al. [13], was it possible to obtain separation times less than 5,000 years (Figure S7B). With both Anatolian samples, any degree of gene flow after separation between the ancestors of Tuscans and Anatolians resulted in more remote separation times.

giuseppe rossi
02-05-15, 12:35
Tacitus states that Raetian lands start at the danube river and go south into the Alps.

The Raetian language based on some hungarian linguistics is said to originate from west-semitic ( modern Syria )

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=9WL0TJuVjacC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=tacitus+and+the+raetian&source=bl&ots=rdbEWU42E_&sig=9J1lpPMKytfkV8t1_oIfLVEKPXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cLVDVazVL4aMmwWKmIDQCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tacitus%20and%20the%20raetian&f=false

there are no Raetian towns between the alps and the danube river as they are only Roman built towns, Trent seems the only town.

The Reeti were divided, according to Pliny, into many states or tribes. Of these the most important were, 1. The Lepontii, in the southwestern part of the province. 2. The Tridenlini, in the southeastern. 3. The Genauni, whom Horace mentions, east of the Lepontii. 4. The Vennoncs, near the sources of the Athesis, now Adige. 5. The Brixentes, north of the Tridentini. 6. The Brenni or Brcuni, north of the Raitian Alps, also mentioned by Horace.

The great chain of the Alps passes almost through the center of this province, and bears various names in different parts of it. On the western borders are the Alpcs Pennina, in the northwest are the Alpes Leponiia, and on the north are the Alpcs Summa, succeeded by the Alpes Ralica. These mountains were all inhabited by various tribes of the Raeti.
Several large rivers rise in these mountains, of which the most important were, 1. The Rhenus or Rhine, rising in the Lepontine Alps. 2. The Rhodanus or Rhone, rising in the same vicinity. 3. The Ticinus or Tesino, a tributary of the Po, rising in the same division of the Alps. 4. The Addua or Adda, another Italian river, rising in the Raetian Alps. 5. The Athesis or Adige, rising in the same Alps, and flowing into the Adriatic; and, 6. The (Enus or Inn, a tributary of the Danube.
The valleys between these mountains were very fertile, and were particularly celebrated for their grapes, from which excellent wine was made. The Raetian wine was the favorite wine of Augustus.

The only place of importance in Raetia was Tridentum, now Trent.


there is little similarly between etruscan and raetian script
http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/germ/runealph.htm

Raeti were heavily mixed with various Italo Celtic tribes.

Indeed the oldest Celtic inscription has been found among the Lepontii.

Read here.

http://rootsofeurope.ku.dk/kalender/arkiv_2012/celtic_spring/Lepontisch_WS_2010.pdf/

Nowaday also Ligures are considered as Celtic based on place names and personal names.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligurian_language

Celtic art has been found as far South as Umbria.

Read here.

http://umbriaceltica.webs.com/umbriambrones.htm

https://sites.google.com/site/viaromea/Home/lemarcolfe

Indeed according to Plutarch the Ligures called themselves "Ambrones" just like the Celto Germanic tribe of Jutland who invaded Italy in the 2 century BC.

Ambrones were related to the Umbri, who were considered to be a Celtic/Gaulish tribe by many Roman writers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbri

Kardu
02-05-15, 12:39
Why have mods deleted my post? Nevermind.



So what?

According to Ghirotto et al 2013, the Etruscan mtdna is identical to the Neotlich Central European mtdna from Germany.

http://dienekes.blogspot.it/2013/02/etruscan-mtdna-origins-ghirotto-et-al.html

On the other hand Etruscans and Anatolians separated over 5000 years ago.

For these tests we chose the mutation rate (μ) estimated from the data in the previous ABC analyses (very close to the figure accounting for the time-dependency of the mitochondrial molecular clock [13], μ = 0.003). Tests were also run using the value incorporating a correction for the effects of purifying selection [23] (μ = 0.0014), always finding that it results in a further increase of the estimated separation times (Figure S7B). Only assuming very high mutation rates, at least twice as large as estimated in Henn et al. [13], was it possible to obtain separation times less than 5,000 years (Figure S7B). With both Anatolian samples, any degree of gene flow after separation between the ancestors of Tuscans and Anatolians resulted in more remote separation times.

You could have continued with Dienekes' full comment:

'If Etruscans did originate in Anatolia then presumably the historical Etruscans were not descended entirely from them but from a mixture of pre-Etruscans with the incoming population. So, it would seem that the inferred dates are incompatible with a folk migration model of Etruscan origins, but not necessarily with a model that accommodates admixture (e.g., initial mtDNA gene pool separation c. 8,000 years ago with the onset of the Neolithic + later admixture during the Bronze Age). On the other hand, the close similarity between Etruscan and Central European Neolithic mtDNA is a good argument for (mostly) continuity in this case.

That things did happen in Italy in the last 5,000 years can be inferred on the basis of the Iceman's genome. It will certainly be interesting to extract Y chromosomes and/or autosomal DNA from some of these Etruscan samples.'

giuseppe rossi
02-05-15, 12:50
You could have continued with Dienekes' full comment:

'If Etruscans did originate in Anatolia then presumably the historical Etruscans were not descended entirely from them but from a mixture of pre-Etruscans with the incoming population. So, it would seem that the inferred dates are incompatible with a folk migration model of Etruscan origins, but not necessarily with a model that accommodates admixture (e.g., initial mtDNA gene pool separation c. 8,000 years ago with the onset of the Neolithic + later admixture during the Bronze Age). On the other hand, the close similarity between Etruscan and Central European Neolithic mtDNA is a good argument for (mostly) continuity in this case.

That things did happen in Italy in the last 5,000 years can be inferred on the basis of the Iceman's genome. It will certainly be interesting to extract Y chromosomes and/or autosomal DNA from some of these Etruscan samples.'

Are you able to read English?

Dienekes is just saying that Etruscan were identical to Neoltich Central Europeans when it comes to mtdna and separated from Anatolians over 5000 years ago.

According to Boattini et al, Etruscans were mostly R1b U152 carriers which means that they were a mix of variouts Neolitich farmers/herders and Copper/Bronze age invaders from North of the Alps.

Arame
02-05-15, 15:57
Maciamo

Not only the Basque and Etruscan. But also the Iberian language that survived until Roman era in Spain that was non-IE and probably very high in R1b. Maybe the Pictish is also a pre-IE language.
Probably there was a first archaic layer of IE-like languages that spread with R1b and later came the genuine IE that was bringed by mix (R1b, R1a, J2 ) people. This second wave was not very powerful enough to enter the Spain and more advanced regions of Italy.

Kardu
02-05-15, 16:31
Are you able to read English?

Dienekes is just saying that Etruscan were identical to Neoltich Central Europeans when it comes to mtdna and separated from Anatolians over 5000 years ago.

According to Boattini et al, Etruscans were mostly R1b U152 carriers which means that they were a mix of variouts Neolitich farmers/herders and Copper/Bronze age invaders from North of the Alps.

And those Neolithic farmers/herders did come from Eastern Mediterranean didn't they (with their cattle, which apparently still shows genetic affinity to Anatolia)? I meant that, not that Etruscans came after Troan war like some old authors believed.

giuseppe rossi
02-05-15, 17:19
If you go enough back with the time, we were all African monkeys once....

Angela
02-05-15, 17:27
And those Neolithic farmers/herders did come from Eastern Mediterranean didn't they (with their cattle, which apparently still shows genetic affinity to Anatolia)? I meant that, not that Etruscans came after Troan war like some old authors believed.

I'm not sure I understand what you're driving at...that ancestry is all over Europe indeed, as this Haak et al graphic shows:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-boprzJzw7VQ/VNxU8VTUphI/AAAAAAAAJ7g/2A_cJM6Hirk/s1600/3.jpg
It's based on the genome of the LBK farmer, and before anyone starts telling me how WHG or UHG she was, the original "academic" estimate is about 20%. We'll see how much similarity there is when we get an ancient sample from the Near East. As you can see, the only countries where that component is very low is in the outlying and very lightly populated areas of northeastern Europe. I believe the number for the European average as a whole is in the mid 60s.

That's not to mention how much of that ancestry came by way of the Indo-Europeans as per other modeling in Haak et al. Then, as far as Italy is concerned, you have movements form Greece (Crete and Mycenae, and later migration in the first millennium BC), and however much the Phoenicians might have contributed through their trading posts in northwestern Sicily. I don't know how much Cretan and Mycenaean genomes or those of the classical Greeks might have differed from those of the original Neolithic peoples because the migration movements into southeastern Europe after the Neolithic are still a mystery. Also, that entered via the south and/or the east. Still, it might have filtered northward.


However, none of that is being discussed here. It isn't the topic under discussion.

As for that paper on the cows, I've always considered it one of the more nonsensical papers I've ever read, or at least the conclusions drawn from it are nonsensical in my opinion. The Neolithic advance came with cattle. There was some interbreeding with native aurochs, but not everywhere, and even where it occurred it differed in degree. Nowhere in that paper do I see a "date stamp", or anything to indicate that even if you could "date stamp" them it couldn't arrive through trade.

This entire field of study seems to me replete with people opining on the matter who have an ax of one type or another to grind or a pre-conceived notion of some sort based on obscure agendas, and they just, in the words of Pax Augusta, try to "force" all the data into their theory.


Just so it's clear, my speculation, and we're all only speculating here, is that it's certainly possible that a mostly male elite migration arrived in generally the area where we later find the signature of "The Etruscans" in the late 2nd millennium/1st millennium BC. I don't think we'll be able to tell until we get some detailed analysis of mtDna, yDna and autosomal Dna from an ancient sample. Unfortunately, I have my doubts that this ancient dna will totally solve this riddle because any bones taken from elite burials will come from the elite class.

No one has yet persuaded me that the Tuscans are descendents of a mass migration from the east in that time period, and absolutely not with an admixture rate of 40%. That flies in the face not only of even the more questionable assertions about mtDna, but autosomal dna as well. If that were the case, why do the Tuscans fit so seamlessly in the Italian cline, and why are Tuscans so similar to a Copper Age farmer from Spain?
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-29796.html

I actually don't find this very welcome news as I would very much like to be a descendent through some pseudo-Tuscan ancestry of Priam's and Hector's people, but that's not what the data shows in my opinion.

Kardu
02-05-15, 18:26
I'm not sure I understand what you're driving at...

What can I be diving at apart from what I've said so far?

Kardu
02-05-15, 18:29
If you go enough back with the time, we were all African monkeys once....

You somehow seem to be uncomfortable with it.
Or with a possibility of Etruscan relationship with Anatolia, for the matter :)

giuseppe rossi
02-05-15, 20:59
You somehow seem to be uncomfortable with it.
Or with a possibility of Etruscan relationship with Anatolia, for the matter :)

Weren't you the clown who banned me for saying that Georgians are basically Iraqis with some Slavic admixture or something along those lines???

Kardu
02-05-15, 22:25
Weren't you the clown who banned me for saying that Georgians are basically Iraqis with some Slavic admixture or something along those lines???

Not sure, there are several other half-wits apart from you around here as well, but if you've said that kind of provocative BS, probably I did ask for your ban. Same will be now

Pax Augusta
07-05-15, 02:48
I'm not sure I understand what you're driving at...that ancestry is all over Europe indeed, as this Haak et al graphic shows:

It's based on the genome of the LBK farmer, and before anyone starts telling me how WHG or UHG she was, the original "academic" estimate is about 20%. We'll see how much similarity there is when we get an ancient sample from the Near East. As you can see, the only countries where that component is very low is in the outlying and very lightly populated areas of northeastern Europe. I believe the number for the European average as a whole is in the mid 60s.

That's not to mention how much of that ancestry came by way of the Indo-Europeans as per other modeling in Haak et al. Then, as far as Italy is concerned, you have movements form Greece (Crete and Mycenae, and later migration in the first millennium BC), and however much the Phoenicians might have contributed through their trading posts in northwestern Sicily. I don't know how much Cretan and Mycenaean genomes or those of the classical Greeks might have differed from those of the original Neolithic peoples because the migration movements into southeastern Europe after the Neolithic are still a mystery. Also, that entered via the south and/or the east. Still, it might have filtered northward.


However, none of that is being discussed here. It isn't the topic under discussion.

As for that paper on the cows, I've always considered it one of the more nonsensical papers I've ever read, or at least the conclusions drawn from it are nonsensical in my opinion. The Neolithic advance came with cattle. There was some interbreeding with native aurochs, but not everywhere, and even where it occurred it differed in degree. Nowhere in that paper do I see a "date stamp", or anything to indicate that even if you could "date stamp" them it couldn't arrive through trade.

This entire field of study seems to me replete with people opining on the matter who have an ax of one type or another to grind or a pre-conceived notion of some sort based on obscure agendas, and they just, in the words of Pax Augusta, try to "force" all the data into their theory.


Just so it's clear, my speculation, and we're all only speculating here, is that it's certainly possible that a mostly male elite migration arrived in generally the area where we later find the signature of "The Etruscans" in the late 2nd millennium/1st millennium BC. I don't think we'll be able to tell until we get some detailed analysis of mtDna, yDna and autosomal Dna from an ancient sample. Unfortunately, I have my doubts that this ancient dna will totally solve this riddle because any bones taken from elite burials will come from the elite class.

No one has yet persuaded me that the Tuscans are descendents of a mass migration from the east in that time period, and absolutely not with an admixture rate of 40%. That flies in the face not only of even the more questionable assertions about mtDna, but autosomal dna as well. If that were the case, why do the Tuscans fit so seamlessly in the Italian cline, and why are Tuscans so similar to a Copper Age farmer from Spain?
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-29796.html

I actually don't find this very welcome news as I would very much like to be a descendent through some pseudo-Tuscan ancestry of Priam's and Hector's people, but that's not what the data shows in my opinion.

Very informative as usual, Angela.

In my opinion Haak et al. basically shows that a LBK farmer-like migration in Tuscany was very ancient. We know that the Villanovans were followed by the Etruscans. But before the Villanovans there were a middle Bronze Age culture (15th-14th centuries BC), called Apennine culture, and a Copper Age culture, called Rinaldone culture, that spread between the 4rd and the 2nd millennium BC in southern Tuscany and northern Lazio exactly where was located the main religious and political center, especially in their early stages, of Etruscan civilization. Proto-Villanovans were IE but Rinaldone people could be indeed those who spoke a non-IE language.

Arame
07-05-15, 11:20
2500 ya Etrsucan aDNA is more shifted to North and little bit to East than todays Tuscans
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html

Pax Augusta
07-05-15, 14:33
2500 ya Etrsucan aDNA is more shifted to North and little bit to East than todays Tuscans
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html

Thanks Arame. One sample a little bit more west shifted if IBS is Iberia Spain. Diekenes: "All that can be said based on this is that they seem broadly southern European and not particularly Tuscan."

We need more info about the Etruscan samples they used, but I think that once again a study on ancient Dna of Etruscans shows that there is no evidence of a mass migration from Anatolia in that time period. There were contacts, probably, between Italy and Anatolia but as there were between the whole Europe and Anatolia and these contacts must be dated much further back in time.

Arame
07-05-15, 15:32
My error I didn't noticed that one Etruscan in IBS cloud.

Angela
07-05-15, 15:56
Thanks Arame. One sample a little bit more west shifted if IBS is Iberia Spain. Diekenes: "All that can be said based on this is that they seem broadly southern European and not particularly Tuscan."

We need more info about the Etruscan samples they used, but I think that once again a study on ancient Dna of Etruscans shows that there is no evidence of a mass migration from Anatolia in that time period. There were contacts, probably, between Italy and Anatolia but as there were between the whole Europe and Anatolia and these contacts must be dated much further back in time.

Does anyone know where the paper can be found?

Indeed, one western shifted. One pretty close to TSI, one a bit north. As Dienekes pointed out, southern European, but not particularly Tuscan. Had they inter-married heavily with the Villanovans, if indeed some came from elsewhere? Or are we looking basically at Villanovan genomes? Of course, these would be elite burials. I don't know that any remains exist from more "common" people.

I wonder where slightly more northern Italians would plot on that graph? The Lunigianesi, for example, or the people of Emilia Romagna, to where the Etruscans extended their dominion? In the interests of science I am ready to provide my genome! :)

It's become clear from the latest papers that people 4,000 years ago were not exactly like us...now, it seems that genetic signatures had not totally set even 3,000 years ago. The Hinxton genomes weren't a perfect match for the modern English either.

Not that it matters, but why are Spanish scientists so interested in the Etruscans? Don't they have some moldering bones of their own to study? :)

Ed. Sorry, that was a little snarkey. :)

Pax Augusta
07-05-15, 16:55
Does anyone know where the paper can be found?

Not yet published, I guess. Probably the study has been or will be presented during the talks of BOG 2015, that started on 5th May and ends on 9th May 2015 (The Biology of Genomes, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA - May 5-9, 2015).

Here is the title

"Avila-Arcos, M.C. Assessment of whole genome capture methodologies on single- and double-stranded ancient DNA libraries from Caribbean and European archaeological human remains"

http://nextgenseek.com/2015/04/2015-...ers-announced/ (http://nextgenseek.com/2015/04/2015-the-biology-of-genomes-accepted-talks-and-posters-announced/)

http://meetings.cshl.edu/meetings/2015/genome15.shtml



Indeed, one western shifted. One pretty close to TSI, one a bit north. As Dienekes pointed out, southern European, but not particularly Tuscan. Had they inter-married heavily with the Villanovans, if indeed some came from elsewhere? Or are we looking basically at Villanovan genomes? Of course, these would be elite burials. I don't know that any remains exist from more "common" people.

I wonder where slightly more northern Italians would plot on that graph? The Lunigianesi, for example, or the people of Emilia Romagna, to where the Etruscans extended their dominion? In the interests of science I am ready to provide my genome! :)

It's become clear from the latest papers that people 4,000 years ago were not exactly like us...now, it seems that genetic signatures had not totally set even 3,000 years ago. The Hinxton genomes weren't a perfect match for the modern English either.

That sample probably even a bit more north shifted than Lunigianesi or Emilians, we need to wait further infos. I will back on this.


Not that it matters, but why are Spanish scientists so interested in the Etruscans? Don't they have some moldering bones of their own to study? :)

I was wondering just the same thing. There are many ancient populations to be studied in Spain. By the way Maria Avila Arcos is a Mexican Postdoctoral researcher at Stanford.

Angela
07-05-15, 17:13
O.K., this is the name of the paper:
"Assessment of Whole-Genome capture methodologies on single- and double-stranded ancient DNA libraries from
Caribbean and European archaeological human remains"
Maria C Avila Arcos et al

Catchy title, right? :)

This is the abstract:
7220
http://maria-avila.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/AvilaArcos_BOG2015.pdf

That's all that's available so far, which tells us nothing. I'll keep searching.

Angela
07-05-15, 17:28
Not yet published, I guess. Probably the study has been or will be presented during the talks of BOG 2015, that started on 5th May and ends on 9th May 2015 (The Biology of Genomes, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA - May 5-9, 2015).

Here is the title

"Avila-Arcos, M.C. Assessment of whole genome capture methodologies on single- and double-stranded ancient DNA libraries from Caribbean and European archaeological human remains"

http://nextgenseek.com/2015/04/2015-...ers-announced/ (http://nextgenseek.com/2015/04/2015-the-biology-of-genomes-accepted-talks-and-posters-announced/)

http://meetings.cshl.edu/meetings/2015/genome15.shtml




That sample probably even a bit more north shifted than Lunigianesi or Emilians, we need to wait further infos. I will back on this.



I was wondering just the same thing. There are many ancient populations to be studied in Spain. By the way Maria Avila Arcos is a Mexican Postdoctoral researcher at Stanford.

We're cross posting again. :)

Darn! I just called them...I thought I could talk my way into the presentation, but she gave it yesterday. I had actually looked at the list of papers, but that title sure didn't draw my attention. We're going to have to wait, I think.

Alan
07-05-15, 17:29
Weren't you the clown who banned me


Didn't knew that an elite member was able to ban people. Unlikely that Kardu gave you a ban.



for saying that Georgians are basically Iraqis with some Slavic admixture or something along those lines???

Which is a claim without evidence and therefore can be considered spamming. The same way someone could argue that all Europeans are "Iraqis, Levantines and Anatolians who mixed with H&G who came from South_Central Asia at some point in time.

Angela
07-05-15, 17:34
O.K., this is the name of the paper:
"Assessment of Whole-Genome capture methodologies on single- and double-stranded ancient DNA libraries from
Caribbean and European archaeological human remains"
Maria C Avila Arcos et al

Catchy title, right? :)

This is the abstract:
7220
http://maria-avila.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/AvilaArcos_BOG2015.pdf

That's all that's available so far, which tells us nothing. I'll keep searching.

Just so we have the visual in front of us:
7221

I can't believe I missed the presentation. How exactly was I supposed to know from the title it was going to be about Etruscans? :)

I was talking about the one who is pretty close to TSI. That space would be filled by northern Italians of one stripe or another. I don't know about the other one. It's still southern Europe, I think. Where would the people of the Ticino plot?

Ed. I wonder where the ancient Thracians would plot? We have those genomes, even if they're not great quality, don't we, so it could be done. Were they just another group of Bronze Age Indo-Europeans who in this case happened to adopt the language of the prior inhabitants?

Fire Haired14
07-05-15, 23:04
http://aphs.worldnomads.com/vagabonds/33030/detail.jpg
(http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html)

"2,500-year old Etruscans" (http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html). Dienekes.

Estruscan genomes from 2,500YBP were sampled and put in a PCA with HGDP populations: CEU(Utah Americans), GBR(British), FIN(Finnish), IBS(Iberians), and TSI(Tuscans). The Estruscans cluster with Tuscans and Iberians. No info was given about where the Estruscan genomes came from, but I guess probably Tuscany.

The Estruscan samples are slightly farther north and east than modern Tuscans. Davidski recreated the PCA Estruscans (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQWjl1WHU3UllSYms/view) and shows that modern Bulgarians might be clustering closest to where Estruscans would if put in his PCA.

All I'm confident of, is these Estruscans were generally Southern European in the modern sense. They certainly were not immigrants from Anatolia. If Esturscans came from Anatolia, by 500BC they had already become heavily admixed with the natives. If these Estruscans are representative of most Italians 2,500YBP, Italy has probably been for the most part genetically stagnant in the last 2,500YBP.

Theories of heavy admixture from West Asia in Italy during Roman times(which some have considered) doesn't make a lot of sense now(it's still possible of course). These Estruscans are evidence the West Asian-signal in Italy(ancestry which can't be explained by Pre-Historic genomes from mainland Europe) must be at least 2,500 years old.

Angela
08-05-15, 00:05
http://aphs.worldnomads.com/vagabonds/33030/detail.jpg
(http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html)

"2,500-year old Etruscans" (http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html). Dienekes.

Estruscan genomes from 2,500YBP were sampled and put in a PCA with HGDP populations: CEU(Utah Americans), GBR(British), FIN(Finnish), IBS(Iberians), and TSI(Tuscans). The Estruscans cluster with Tuscans and Iberians. No info was given about where the Estruscan genomes came from, but I guess probably Tuscany.

The Estruscan samples are slightly farther north and east than modern Tuscans. Davidski recreated the PCA Estruscans (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQWjl1WHU3UllSYms/view) and shows that modern Bulgarians might be clustering closest to where Estruscans would if put in his PCA.

All I'm confident of, is these Estruscans were generally Southern European in the modern sense. They certainly were not immigrants from Anatolia. If Esturscans came from Anatolia, by 500BC they had already become heavily admixed with the natives. If these Estruscans are representative of most Italians 2,500YBP, Italy has probably been for the most part genetically stagnant in the last 2,500YBP.

Theories of heavy admixture from West Asia in Italy during Roman times(which some have considered) doesn't make a lot of sense now(it's still possible of course). These Estruscans are evidence the West Asian-signal in Italy(ancestry which can't be explained by Pre-Historic genomes from mainland Europe) must be at least 2,500 years old.

It's already been posted and discussed. Arame linked it in post #96.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30476-A-Genome-Wide-Study-of-Modern-Day-Tuscans-Revisiting-Herodotus-s-Theory-on-the-Origi/page4

Too bad Eurogenes didn't bother to put northern Italians in the PCA. We've already speculated as to whether some of them would cluster in that space. Not that this is necessarily a conflict. Bulgarians and Italians have similar kinds of breakdowns in Lazaridis et al. The similarity between northern Italians and some people from the Balkans was postulated by Cavalli Sforza decades ago.
7222


Somehow, when Italian researchers say it, it carries no weight.

Welcome to the world of Ralph and Coop.
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

As we pointed out in the other thread, a Copper Age Iberian was also pretty "Tuscan" like, and the ancient Thracians should be put into the mix to see where they would plot.*

Ed.You are exaggerating once again the amount of "West Asian" in Italians, certainly in northern Italians and even Tuscans. We've had this discussion before.

You might want to take a look at the SW Asian figures, for example, for Oetzi and Gok 4 versus modern northern Italians and Tuscans, and the West Asian scores in some of the Dodecad runs.

Ed. Still, this is just a PCA. Let's wait and see the actual genomes.

Certainly, though, these elite Etruscans are not Anatolians.

*This is the link to the paper about the Portalon farmer.
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:667495/FULLTEXT01.pdf

LeBrok
08-05-15, 03:18
http://aphs.worldnomads.com/vagabonds/33030/detail.jpg
(http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html)

(http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html)
Interestingly they have a very high nose roots, flash with forehead and in line with forehead , the Greek Style, not a Roman nose. Typical ENF admixture of first farmers? They used to look the same through South Europe to Levant. If Etruscans were from Anatolia, it would need to be from secluded region who never mixed with IE or other Bronze Age nomads. We know that EEF from Spain, Italy, Balkans plotted almost in same spot on PC2, and I assume Anatolian EEF/ENF (when finally sequenced) will plot very close to them. Modern Anatolians/Turks will plot distinctly away.

Maciamo
08-05-15, 09:52
http://aphs.worldnomads.com/vagabonds/33030/detail.jpg
(http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html)

"2,500-year old Etruscans" (http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html). Dienekes.

Estruscan genomes from 2,500YBP were sampled and put in a PCA with HGDP populations: CEU(Utah Americans), GBR(British), FIN(Finnish), IBS(Iberians), and TSI(Tuscans). The Estruscans cluster with Tuscans and Iberians. No info was given about where the Estruscan genomes came from, but I guess probably Tuscany.

The Estruscan samples are slightly farther north and east than modern Tuscans. Davidski recreated the PCA Estruscans (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQWjl1WHU3UllSYms/view) and shows that modern Bulgarians might be clustering closest to where Estruscans would if put in his PCA.

All I'm confident of, is these Estruscans were generally Southern European in the modern sense. They certainly were not immigrants from Anatolia. If Esturscans came from Anatolia, by 500BC they had already become heavily admixed with the natives. If these Estruscans are representative of most Italians 2,500YBP, Italy has probably been for the most part genetically stagnant in the last 2,500YBP.

Theories of heavy admixture from West Asia in Italy during Roman times(which some have considered) doesn't make a lot of sense now(it's still possible of course). These Estruscans are evidence the West Asian-signal in Italy(ancestry which can't be explained by Pre-Historic genomes from mainland Europe) must be at least 2,500 years old.

If these ancient Etruscans cluster with modern Bulgarians, that could actually mean that they are from northern Greece or western Anatolia. It has long been suggested that the Etruscan language was related to the Lemnian language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemnian_language) of the Aegean island of Lemnos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemnos). That is quite close from Bulgaria. Let's also not forget that modern Bulgarians have plenty of Proto-Indo-European and Central Asian blood, the heritage of
5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25619-5000-years-of-migrations-from-the-Eurasian-steppes-to-Europe). Coastal Ionia would be the most likely place of origin of the Etruscans, as later even Ionian Greeks set off to colonise Italy. It had to be a coastal region or island(s), ideally on the Aegean Sea. The Sea or Marmaris region is also possible.

Fire Haired14
08-05-15, 10:24
Turks, even western, are very differnt from Bulgarians. Davidski plotted Turks/Antolians on his PCA, and they're far away from where the Estruscans would cluster. Although Estruscans can be from anywhere and mixed with the locals. Bulgarians and Italians are so similar that Estruscans clustering by Bulgarians isn't a big deal to me.

Alan
08-05-15, 13:00
that modern Bulgarians might be clustering closest to where Estruscans would if put in his PCA.


They certainly were not immigrants from Anatolia.

Somehow contradicting these two statements. Also let's keep in mind, no one of us knows how Anatolia was genetically until the Etruscans possibly left. The Turks brought an huge amount of Central Asian Iranic (Not necessary East Eurasian) genes with them. Assyrians conquered many part of the Regions, the whole regions was re populated constantly. Let's also keep in mind that some individuals in Thrace where still EEF like until the Iron Age.

Pax Augusta
08-05-15, 13:21
Indeed, one western shifted. One pretty close to TSI, one a bit north. As Dienekes pointed out, southern European, but not particularly Tuscan. Had they inter-married heavily with the Villanovans, if indeed some came from elsewhere? Or are we looking basically at Villanovan genomes? Of course, these would be elite burials. I don't know that any remains exist from more "common" people.

I wonder where slightly more northern Italians would plot on that graph? The Lunigianesi, for example, or the people of Emilia Romagna, to where the Etruscans extended their dominion? In the interests of science I am ready to provide my genome! :)

It's become clear from the latest papers that people 4,000 years ago were not exactly like us...now, it seems that genetic signatures had not totally set even 3,000 years ago. The Hinxton genomes weren't a perfect match for the modern English either.

We need to know the locations of the burials of these samples and the historical dating. We already know many Etruscan surnames (many Etruscan surnames are of Italic/IE origin or strongly related to them as showed in "Prosopographia etrusca"). By the way the proto-Villanovans are the proto-Etruscans just as they are the proto-Umbrians. The main differences were cultural and religious probably due to the fact the proto-Villanovans met and assimilated in southern Tuscany and northern Lazio the descendants of the Rinaldone culture that had a huge impact on them. We cannot rule out a late third migration (the Tyrrenians) with no or little impact on the genetics of Etruscans (even the studies more aligned with the theory of Herodotus show this and cannot prove a mass migration). And we must never forget that Etruscans called themselves Rasenna (as said by Dionysius of Halicarnassus), neither Tyrrenians nor Etruscans. Except Dionysius, all the Greek authors used the broader term Tyrrenian. The Etruscan inscriptions show that Dionysius was right.

Boundary stone from Cortona, 2nd century BC. The inscription reads: TULAR RASNAL. Tular means border, Rasnal is the genitivus of Rasenna, the name the Etruscans gave to themselves. The meaning of the inscription is therefore ‘Border of the Etruscans’.


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/4b/a8/d0/4ba8d0b59895589e2da1e613f663ecfa.jpg





I was talking about the one who is pretty close to TSI. That space would be filled by northern Italians of one stripe or another. I don't know about the other one. It's still southern Europe, I think. Where would the people of the Ticino plot?

Culturally and ethnically they are related to modern Lombards with some strong influence from north-east Piedmont. I guess that people of the Ticino could plot in the northern-western shifted side of the spectrum of modern Lombards, considering that Bergamo is the sample for average Northern Italians.



All I'm confident of, is these Estruscans were generally Southern European in the modern sense. They certainly were not immigrants from Anatolia. If Esturscans came from Anatolia, by 500BC they had already become heavily admixed with the natives. If these Estruscans are representative of most Italians 2,500YBP, Italy has probably been for the most part genetically stagnant in the last 2,500YBP.

Theories of heavy admixture from West Asia in Italy during Roman times (which some have considered) doesn't make a lot of sense now (it's still possible of course).

I agree, they were not immigrants from Anatolia surely not in the sense of a civilization that one day, bag and baggage, moved from Anatolia to central Italy. Central Italy was already inhabited.


Interestingly they have a very high nose roots, flash with forehead and in line with forehead , the Greek Style, not a Roman nose. Typical ENF admixture of first farmers? They used to look the same through South Europe to Levant. If Etruscans were from Anatolia, it would need to be from secluded region who never mixed with IE or other Bronze Age nomads. We know that EEF from Spain, Italy, Balkans plotted almost in same spot on PC2, and I assume Anatolian EEF/ENF (when finally sequenced) will plot very close to them. Modern Anatolians/Turks will plot distinctly away.

That's a cinerarium, surely unrealistic, from Northern Lazio, Southern Etruria. It's similar to the archaich Greek style (kouroi and korai) due to common external cultural influences. I don't think that style depends by the kind of admixture, it's just an artistic style.

This is also another Etruscan cinerarium from Tuscany (Northern Etruria) much more realistic than the previous one.

http://digilander.libero.it/JackLoSquartatore666/coperchio%20di%20un%27urna%20cineraria.jpg

Angela
08-05-15, 15:41
Pax Augusta: We need to know the name the location of the burials of these samples and the historical dating.

I think this is very important. Are the remains from later in the first millennium BC or earlier? Are they from the "heartland", or in one of the expansion areas? How far had the "Orientalizing" process gone?


Pax Augusta:I agree, they were not immigrants from Anatolia surely not in the sense of a civilization that one day, bag and baggage, moved from Anatolia to central Italy. Central Italy was already inhabited.

We're presumably talking about elite graves here, yes? So, these are the people who would have had the highest percentages of "new" ancestry in the area.

If we look at the placement of these people on the PCA again, one lands in the IBS area. I don't think Iberians got a massive migration from the east in the first millennium BC.
7224

Unless there is something very unexpected in the paper, we are seeing, if anything, an elite migration. Let's not forget that even if we had a way of proving that the supposedly "Anatolian" mtDna came in the first millennium BC rather than in the Neolithic, it was, what, 6% of the total?

It's true that Anatolia has experienced its own population changes in the last 2800 years. However, the largest one would have been the "Turkic" invasion. I'm by no means an expert on Turkish genetics, but I've never seen that influx of genes described as "massive" in nature. In fact, to the best of my recollection, wasn't it estimated at about 10%? Does anyone have a paper that explores that?

Again, looking at the PCA, it seems that one of the other samples lands pretty close to TSI, just a little north. The other one is north of that. I hate to sound like a broken record, but where would northern Italians plot? Would they plot somewhere in that general area as well? Since Bergamo samples are available from the same data set that the authors used, it's curious they weren't included in the plot.

It would also be nice to see the ancient Thracians plotted on there. Here, I'm not focused on the one that was so "Oetzi" like. I don't think anyone is claiming that the inhabitants of central or northern Italy in the first millennium BC were necessarily still all "Oetzi" like. Italy too was impacted by the "Indo-Europeans". That is evident in the archaeology, and has now been verified by genetics analysis. I think we recently discussed that the Haak et al figure for modern Tuscans is 30%. Looking at ancient genomes in Gamba et al, for example, you can see that modern Tuscans plot east of Sardinians, and northern Italians east and north of them. The Haak et al figure for Yamnay in Tuscans is 30%.
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/images/ncomms6257-f2.jpg

So, I'm just if not more interested in seeing where the Bronze Age Thracian would plot, and where the Iron Age one would plot as well. (I realize that it wouldn't be dispositive given the contamination issues, but I still think it would be interesting.)

The question to me is how much did any putative migration from the east in the first millennium BC impact modern central/north Italians...not during the Neolithic, and not even during the Bronze Age, but during the first millennium BC. That's what this whole intellectual puzzle is all about, yes?

As for Bulgarians, they are not transplanted Anatolians either.The Eurogenes plot is of modern Bulgarians. Their ethnogenesis is not solely EEF; like the Italians, they have been impacted by Indo-European migrations, i.e. the Thracians, and to some extent the Slavs. The same general migration movements affected them both.

Ed. One other thing occurs to me. It's informative to look at the "West Asian" scores of northern Italians. If they plot near these Etruscans, and even some TSI isn't far, then that is approximately the amount that was present at least in Etruria in the first millennium. So, as Fire Haired has noted, not very much came in during the Empire, and that brings us full circle back to Ralph and Coop.


PaxAugusta: That's a cinerarium, surely unrealistic, from Northern Lazio, Southern Etruria. It's similar to the archaich Greek style (kouroi and korai) due to common external cultural influences. I don't think that style depends by the kind of admixture, it's just an artistic style.

That's the problem with discussions about phenotype and the Etruscans. Any art historian would point out that much of Etruscan art is very derivative of Greek art...sometimes the art is just copied wholesale. So, are we looking at "Greek" faces, or "Etruscan" faces, or just "stylized" faces that don't really represent either. That's not of course to say that there weren't "Greek" looking Etruscans.

This is another sarcophagus which is said to be in a "naturalistic" style.
http://usercontent2.hubimg.com/6332136_f260.jpg


Here are some other representations. I don't know if they are representative of them or not, but they look totally normal to me for modern Italians.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0f/bf/53/0fbf53a1ca0cd6fb339f135930feb982.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1412/565837652_5e6e4da4a2.jpg

LeBrok
08-05-15, 17:06
That's a cinerarium, surely unrealistic, from Northern Lazio, Southern Etruria. It's similar to the archaich Greek style (kouroi and korai) due to common external cultural influences. I don't think that style depends by the kind of admixture, it's just an artistic style.

This is also another Etruscan cinerarium from Tuscany (Northern Etruria) much more realistic than the previous one.

http://digilander.libero.it/JackLoSquartatore666/coperchio%20di%20un%27urna%20cineraria.jpg
The dude has more of hunter gatherer or IE nose or even the whole face. The woman however has again very high nose roots and forehead and nose inline. She looks like a typical farmer. Therefore it is not just a style.
The two busts Angela posted also have same typical South European/farmer features.

Pax Augusta
08-05-15, 17:58
If these ancient Etruscans cluster with modern Bulgarians, that could actually mean that they are from northern Greece or western Anatolia. It has long been suggested that the Etruscan language was related to the Lemnian language of the Aegean island of Lemnos. That is quite close from Bulgaria. Let's also not forget that modern Bulgarians have plenty of Proto-Indo-European and Central Asian blood, the heritage of 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe. Coastal Ionia would be the most likely place of origin of the Etruscans, as later even Ionian Greeks set off to colonise Italy. It had to be a coastal region or island(s), ideally on the Aegean Sea. The Sea or Marmaris region is also possible.


I often agree with you but this time your analisys seems unfounded. Do ancient Etruscans really cluster with modern Bulgarians? Are we really sure about this? Similar ratios and proportions of the components in my opinion doesn't mean that they are the same people. And one Etruscan sample plots in IBS- Iberia Spain, as northern Greece is not exactly the same of western Anatolia. Etruscan art had indeed some Ionian influences during the Orientalizing period but it doesn't imply that they were Ionians, as if I wear a kimono or I eat sushi it doesn't make me a Japanese. Not to mention that Etruria was already inhabited since prehistoric times and there is archaeological evidence for continuity between the Etruscans and the people that lived in Etruria before the rise of their civilization.

Etruscan is the name of a civilization developed in central Italy, there is no archaeological evidence so far that can challenge this. Outside Etruria we have just the Rhaetian and Lemnos inscriptions only. What we are trying to find out if there was a later migration (the Tyrrenians) to central Italy. In any case, the people that already inhabited Etruria before the rise of the Etruscan civilization played a leading role in the formation of the Etruscan ethnos.



Turks, even western, are very differnt from Bulgarians. Davidski plotted Turks/Antolians on his PCA, and they're far away from where the Estruscans would cluster. Although Estruscans can be from anywhere and mixed with the locals. Bulgarians and Italians are so similar that Estruscans clustering by Bulgarians isn't a big deal to me.

I agree with this.


The dude has more of hunter gatherer or IE nose or even the whole face. The woman however has again very high nose roots and forehead and nose inline. She looks like a typical farmer. Therefore it is not just a style. The two busts Angela posted also have same typical South European/farmer features.

Basically Etruscans were a mixture of IE and EEF, typically south European.

Other Etruscan cinerarium from Northern Etruria (Tuscany). Some of these are not different from the Romans.

Portrait of Lars Sentinates Caesa (Chiusi, Tuscany)

http://www.archeo.it/uploads/media/2009/GIUGNO/etruschi_ranuccio/thumbnail/view_01_-11064952.jpg

Chiusi (Tuscany)

http://www.vcostantini.eu/uploads/images/prima/Chiusi_sarcofago_etrusco.jpg

Volterra (Tuscany)


https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5562/15000389885_f9286bb6bc_b.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3846/15000412425_5a9d1f3999_b.jpg



http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/07/76/28/38/museo-etrusco-guarnacci.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3874/14764561550_e9b743c034_b.jpg


Chiusi (Tuscany)




http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/3760513.jpg


Siena, Tuscany

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Etruscan_sarcophagus_SMS_n1.jpg


Arezzo (Tuscany), Ariadne (Etruscan: Areatha)

http://firenze.repubblica.it/images/2011/03/04/163638509-df5117c5-826f-41b8-b4e5-abd938ed2c99.jpg

Pax Augusta
08-05-15, 18:45
That's the problem with discussions about phenotype and the Etruscans. Any art historian would point out that much of Etruscan art is very derivative of Greek art...sometimes the art is just copied wholesale. So, are we looking at "Greek" faces, or "Etruscan" faces, or just "stylized" faces that don't really represent either. That's not of course to say that there weren't "Greek" looking Etruscans.

Yes, very true.


Portrait of Etruscan Aule Metele (from Perugia, Umbria, or Cortona, Tuscany) in Etruscan-Roman style (so even more realistic than the previous ones).

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5UjwzatPrX8/UoFITdX0beI/AAAAAAAABKE/WJaZNDanD8w/s1600/Arringatore_03.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Arringatore_04.JPG

Sile
08-05-15, 20:15
Somehow contradicting these two statements. Also let's keep in mind, no one of us knows how Anatolia was genetically until the Etruscans possibly left. The Turks brought an huge amount of Central Asian Iranic (Not necessary East Eurasian) genes with them. Assyrians conquered many part of the Regions, the whole regions was re populated constantly. Let's also keep in mind that some individuals in Thrace where still EEF like until the Iron Age.

The Turks only entered Anatolia a 1000 years ago...........Anatolia prior to this was something else in regards to ethnicity.

oriental
08-05-15, 20:57
From the Trojan War it seems there was a lot of traffic between Greece and Troy so there would be a lot of mingling. Trojans also had a lot of women slaves who were used for the textile industry as suggested in various videos. Maybe it was Greek women who were taken so "Helen" was just a sybolic figure for the great war.

Maciamo
08-05-15, 21:06
Turks, even western, are very differnt from Bulgarians. Davidski plotted Turks/Antolians on his PCA, and they're far away from where the Estruscans would cluster. Although Estruscans can be from anywhere and mixed with the locals. Bulgarians and Italians are so similar that Estruscans clustering by Bulgarians isn't a big deal to me.

Modern Turks differ a lot from Iron Age Anatolians in that they have a considerable amount of Turkic/Mongolian and Central Asian (including assimilated Andronovo Indo-Europeans). Obviously modern Bulgarians also differ from Iron Age ones, but probably less (they have very little East Asian admixture, for instance).

Then, as always with migrations, you shouldn't expect people to remain pure and unadmixed when they move from one region to another. Iron Age Etruscans were a hybrid population, with part of their gene pool descended from Bronze Age Italy, and part from those hypothetical migrants from the Aegean or West Anatolia. Based on the high percentage of R1b-P312 and U152 in Tuscany today, and on the proximity of ancient Etruscans samples to modern Iberian ones, I'd say that the Bronze Age Italo-Celtic genetic heritage of the Etruscans could have been dominant on the Iron Age Aegean one.

We'll know more once these Etruscan samples will be run in the Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators. PCA charts have their limits.

Angela
08-05-15, 21:08
The Turks only entered Anatolia a 1000 years ago...........Anatolia prior to this was something else in regards to ethnicity.

To my knowledge, from 800 BC to the present the only large scale migration into Anatolia was from the "Turks", as you say.

If that's incorrect, could someone correct the record?

How much are they supposed to have changed the Anatolian genome? As I asked upthread, isn't it supposed to be below 10%?

I just took a look at the Globe 13 spreadsheet, which has a number of Turkish populations as well as the Dodecad set. If I add the Siberian, East Asian and Arctic, some populations score around 6% of those components, and the highest score is around 8%.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2

The Turkish Cypriots, in contrast, only score about 2.2 % of those components, but I don't think it looks as if the elite Etruscans would cluster near them either.

oriental
08-05-15, 21:44
The sultan had huge harems and the Turks could have four wives so their aDNA would be smothered by Circarssian women they seem to like.

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

http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/star/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIn2wWOGlo

http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/lm/311/

http://www.geocurrents.info/place/russia-ukraine-and-caucasus/the-circassian-mystique-and-its-historical-roots

Angela
08-05-15, 22:06
Yes, very true.

Portrait of Etruscan Aule Metele (from Perugia, Umbria, or Cortona, Tuscany) in Etruscan-Roman style (so even more realistic than the previous ones).



I think you have to understand the art, where it came from, or in other words what influenced it, and how it changed before you can hope to use it to get clues as to phenotype.

This is the sarcophagus previously posted:
http://courses.washington.edu/rome250/gallery/archaicimages/web_Etruscansarcophagus.jpg


This is the Apollo from Veii, carved by an Etruscan.
https://41.media.tumblr.com/51db79c9ba31cd0c9cfc47f69df5d395/tumblr_mnpyj69lYg1qdoh4po7_500.jpg

This is a restored Ionian style Kore from Greece:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ebgb9jSrXm0/UZ-ZxMUnl_I/AAAAAAAAuZQ/HdYwW84bKjw/s1600/Archaic_Colours_01.png

The similarities are obvious. What does it tell us about what the Etruscans looked like? Or the Ionian Greeks for that matter? Who knows? It was a stylized representation. The place to look is at more "natural" presentations. I think, especially given these autosomal results, that people can stop wasting tons of verbiage "classifying" Tuscans as having "Asiatic" style eyes.:) At any rate, as the examples we have posted show, there were other "types" as well among the Etruscans.

I also think there's some confusion with nomenclature when discussing phenotypes in southern Europe in general and Italians in particular. To my eye, the Etruscans, and the Romans, for that matter, in the more "natural" portraits, look like southern Europeans. That means they look like a combination of more WHG types, early neolithic farmers and Indo-Europeans, even if the percentages are different than in northern Europe. As Moesan pointed out in a separate thread, modern Italians are by no means all classical "Mediterranean" in a traditional anthropological sense. There were other influences.

Fire Haired14
08-05-15, 22:52
We'll know more once these Etruscan samples will be run in the Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators. PCA charts have their limits.

Formal stats also work magic.

Sile
08-05-15, 22:59
To my knowledge, from 800 BC to the present the only large scale migration into Anatolia was from the "Turks", as you say.

If that's incorrect, could someone correct the record?

How much are they supposed to have changed the Anatolian genome? As I asked upthread, isn't it supposed to be below 10%?

I just took a look at the Globe 13 spreadsheet, which has a number of Turkish populations as well as the Dodecad set. If I add the Siberian, East Asian and Arctic, some populations score around 6% of those components, and the highest score is around 8%.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2

The Turkish Cypriots, in contrast, only score about 2.2 % of those components, but I don't think it looks as if the elite Etruscans would cluster near them either.

The turkish influence on Anatolia ( modern Turkey ) is stated as between 6 to 10 %

There was no turks in anatolia until circa 1100 AD

But we need to ask to question ....Is Turkic and Turkish one of the same.....Is Central Asia and its Turkic ethnicity the same as current "Anatolian Turks."

Sile
08-05-15, 23:02
The sultan had huge harems and the Turks could have four wives so their aDNA would be smothered by Circarssian women they seem to like.

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

http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/star/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIn2wWOGlo

http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/lm/311/

http://www.geocurrents.info/place/russia-ukraine-and-caucasus/the-circassian-mystique-and-its-historical-roots



hehe , LOL, for what it is worth...............DnaTribes states I originate from karbardino-Balkar from the bronze-age

Interpretome state I am Haraza or Burusho from the bronze-age

Otherwise .......Circassian ethnicity is difficult to analyse ..................Mamuluks where circassians

oriental
08-05-15, 23:10
Mamluks were slave warriors. When Genghis Khan conquered Khwarazm Empire he sold many of the people to slavery.


many Khwarezmians survived by working as mercenaries in northern Iraq


The Khwarezmiyya, heading south from Iraq towards Egypt, invaded Crusader Christian-held Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem) along the way, on July 11, 1244. The city's citadel, the Tower of David (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_David), surrendered on August 23, the Crusader Christian population of the city was expelled. This triggered a call from Europe for the Seventh Crusade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Crusade), but the Crusaders would never again be successful in retaking Jerusalem. After being conquered by the Khwarezmian forces, the city stayed under Muslim control until 1917, when it was taken from the Ottomans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire) by the British.

Saladin was a Kurd. Now I wonder if the Khwarazms were Kurds.


The remains of the Muslim Khwarezmians served in Egypt as Mamluk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk) mercenaries until they were finally beaten by al-Mansur Ibrahim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Mansur_Ibrahim) some years later.

http://www.historytoday.com/james-waterson/mamluks

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/glossaryko/g/Who-Were-The-Mamluks.htm

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

willy90
08-05-15, 23:36
This new study is the smoking gun that Etruscans came from North of the Alps, as anyone with half brain already knew.

Now we have both mtdna and autosomal DNA.

Archeology and linguistics also point out to a Central European origin of Etruscans.

Anyone still blabbing about the Anatolian theory needs a doctor ASAP.

willy90
08-05-15, 23:43
Modern Turks differ a lot from Iron Age Anatolians in that they have a considerable amount of Turkic/Mongolian and Central Asian (including assimilated Andronovo Indo-Europeans). Obviously modern Bulgarians also differ from Iron Age ones, but probably less (they have very little East Asian admixture, for instance).

Then, as always with migrations, you shouldn't expect people to remain pure and unadmixed when they move from one region to another. Iron Age Etruscans were a hybrid population, with part of their gene pool descended from Bronze Age Italy, and part from those hypothetical migrants from the Aegean or West Anatolia. Based on the high percentage of R1b-P312 and U152 in Tuscany today, and on the proximity of ancient Etruscans samples to modern Iberian ones, I'd say that the Bronze Age Italo-Celtic genetic heritage of the Etruscans could have been dominant on the Iron Age Aegean one.

We'll know more once these Etruscan samples will be run in the Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators. PCA charts have their limits.

You are making stuff here.

No serious scientist will ever take this stuff seriously.

The Lemnos people were Etruscan immigrants in Greece.

Bronze Age Greece was filled up with Etruscan and Italic mercenaries, merchants,....

Please read AN ‘ETEOCRETAN’ INSCRIPTION FROM PRAISOS AND THE HOMELAND OF THE SEA PEOPLES by Luuk de Ligt

Now go edit your Eupedia page about Italian genetics with all that bullsh!t about "Anatolian" Etruscans and similar sh!t.

Goga
08-05-15, 23:52
Wow, this is incredible information! It seems to me that Etruscans were native Europeans after all! If they would be from Anatolia, they would be very close to Armenians or something.

If someone wants to know how ancient Anatolians looked like or how their aDNA looked like, I believe the best example would be the Armenians. because not all native Anatolians are gone and became part of a 'new race', I think that Armenians are still part of the ancient Anatolia race, but then again heavily mixed with the Iranians (Medes, Kurds, Persians etc.)



How close are Etruscans to the Armenians???

Goga
08-05-15, 23:58
Anyone still blabbing about the Anatolian theory needs a doctor ASAP.You might be right, and at this moment I believe you're right. But it's still too early to make conclusions.

Armenians are still the closest living creatures to the ancient Anatolians.


I want to see results of a comparison between Etruscans and Armenians first. Armenians have also lots of the so called mediterranean aDNA component in them..

Pax Augusta
09-05-15, 00:31
I think you have to understand the art, where it came from, or in other words what influenced it, and how it changed before you can hope to use it to get clues as to phenotype.

This is the sarcophagus previously posted:
http://courses.washington.edu/rome250/gallery/archaicimages/web_Etruscansarcophagus.jpg


This is the Apollo from Veii, carved by an Etruscan.
https://41.media.tumblr.com/51db79c9ba31cd0c9cfc47f69df5d395/tumblr_mnpyj69lYg1qdoh4po7_500.jpg

This is a restored Ionian style Kore from Greece:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ebgb9jSrXm0/UZ-ZxMUnl_I/AAAAAAAAuZQ/HdYwW84bKjw/s1600/Archaic_Colours_01.png

The similarities are obvious. What does it tell us about what the Etruscans looked like? Or the Ionian Greeks for that matter? Who knows? It was a stylized representation. The place to look is at more "natural" presentations. I think, especially given these autosomal results, that people can stop wasting tons of verbiage "classifying" Tuscans as having "Asiatic" style eyes.:) At any rate, as the examples we have posted show, there were other "types" as well among the Etruscans.

I also think there's some confusion with nomenclature when discussing phenotypes in southern Europe in general and Italians in particular. To my eye, the Etruscans, and the Romans, for that matter, in the more "natural" portraits, look like southern Europeans. That means they look like a combination of more WHG types, early neolithic farmers and Indo-Europeans, even if the percentages are different than in northern Europe. As Moesan pointed out in a separate thread, modern Italians are by no means all classical "Mediterranean" in a traditional anthropological sense. There were other influences.

Yes, similarities are obvious as it's obvious they share a common artistic origin: "The pose of the kouros, a clear and simple formula, derives from Egyptian art and was used by Greek sculptors for more than a hundred years. From the very beginning, however, the Greeks depicted their male figures in the nude, while the Egyptians were normally skirted." It was just an artistic style in vogue at that time. At one point, the prestige of the Egyptians was so big that imposed some of their styles on many peoples of the Mediterranean.



Other examples of Greek Kouroi

http://i.imgur.com/RpTTSQ0l.jpg


From Attica, the region around Athens (Statue of a kouros (youth), ca. 590–580 b.c.; Archaic
Greek, Attic; now at the Met in New York)

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/32.11.1

http://www.oberlin.edu/images/Art200-08/200-016.JPG

From Thebe

http://i.imgur.com/BJp1g7rl.jpg

Kardu
09-05-15, 00:39
To my knowledge, from 800 BC to the present the only large scale migration into Anatolia was from the "Turks", as you say.


How about Galatians? And hundreds of thousamds of Muhajirs from the Caucasus who were relocated to Turkey after Russian-Ottoman wars in the 19th century...

Alan
09-05-15, 00:56
The turkish influence on Anatolia ( modern Turkey ) is stated as between 6 to 10 %

There was no turks in anatolia until circa 1100 AD

But we need to ask to question ....Is Turkic and Turkish one of the same.....Is Central Asia and its Turkic ethnicity the same as current "Anatolian Turks."

Thats the estimation of East Eurasian among modern Turks. Modern Turks have 6-12% East Eurasian DNA, but how much of Central Asian Iranic DNA did they brought with them? I have seen estimates of up to 30%!

Than we have the dozens of other admixture coming from Syria, Iraq, the Caucasus and the Balkans.

Anatolia today is definitely significantly different from Anatolia 1000, let alone 2000 years ago.

Angela
09-05-15, 01:05
The turkish influence on Anatolia ( modern Turkey ) is stated as between 6 to 10 %

There was no turks in anatolia until circa 1100 AD

But we need to ask to question ....Is Turkic and Turkish one of the same.....Is Central Asia and its Turkic ethnicity the same as current "Anatolian Turks."


I wouldn't think anyone would need to ask after looking at the Dodecad analyis. Obviously, Central Asian "Turks" and the people who inhabit the modern country of Turkey are not the same. My question is, how much did the genome in Anatolia change from 800 BC to the present? Is the Central Asian input the only major change? Is around 10% a good estimate for their impact until we get some genomes tested?

Goga
09-05-15, 01:09
Iranic DNA in Turks is not only from Central Asia. It's mostly from the Iranian Plateau (Medes, Kurds, Persians) and from the people (modern & ancient) related to the Caucasus, like Circassians. People in the Caucasus were already full of Iranic DNA even before the Turks arrived from the Altai. And Turks assimilated millions of Circassians (Adyghe people, Kabarday etc. ) and other people native to Caucasus. And those 'Caucasians' who still live in Northern Caucasus are still carrying a lot Iranic DNA in them.

Goga
09-05-15, 01:12
I wouldn't think anyone would need to ask after looking at the Dodecad analyis. Obviously, Central Asian "Turks" and the people who inhabit the modern country of Turkey are not the same. My question is, how much did the genome in Anatolia change from 800 BC to the present? Is the Central Asian input the only major change? Is around 10% a good estimate for their impact until we get some genomes tested?Before the 'Armenian' and Christian (including Eastern Greeks) GENOCIDE 100 years ago Anatolia was very similar to ancient Anatolia. After that it changed drastically, so even 100 year ago Anatolia looked very different from today.

Pax Augusta
09-05-15, 01:26
I wouldn't think anyone would need to ask after looking at the Dodecad analyis. Obviously, Central Asian "Turks" and the people who inhabit the modern country of Turkey are not the same. My question is, how much did the genome in Anatolia change from 800 BC to the present? Is the Central Asian input the only major change? Is around 10% a good estimate for their impact until we get some genomes tested?

There are various studies about Central Asian input in Turkey, ranging from 8/9% to 30%.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28883-Turks-with-10-25-Mongoloid-admixture-%28-Turkish-people-autosomal-DNA-%29

Goga
09-05-15, 01:31
We should also not underestimated Semitic/Arabic DNA in Turkey. Even the wife of current president of Turkey (Erdogan) is an ethnic Arab. Erdogan himself has Circassian roots, LOL! And Prime-Minister of Turkey, Ahmet Davutoğlu, has Armenian roots, LMAO!!!

Turks are very mixed people and are a 'new modern race'. I think that Turks are the MOST mixed people in West Asia. (That's why most of them are ultra-nationalisitc and have a some kind of an identity crisis, they don't know who they 'really' are.)



That's why I'm telling you folks that Eastern Greeks and Armenians are the best representation for the ancient Anatolians, although Armenians are also heavily mixed with Iranic people. Armenians have been under Persian and Kurdish control/dominance for thousands of years.

LeBrok
09-05-15, 03:02
You are making stuff here.

No serious scientist will ever take this stuff seriously.

The Lemnos people were Etruscan immigrants in Greece.

Bronze Age Greece was filled up with Etruscan and Italic mercenaries, merchants,....

Please read AN ‘ETEOCRETAN’ INSCRIPTION FROM PRAISOS AND THE HOMELAND OF THE SEA PEOPLES by Luuk de Ligt

Now go edit your Eupedia page about Italian genetics with all that bullsh!t about "Anatolian" Etruscans and similar sh!t.
Joyce (or whatever the spelling was) you are banned again.
IP 87.7.27.60

LeBrok
09-05-15, 03:27
I think you have to understand the art, where it came from, or in other words what influenced it, and how it changed before you can hope to use it to get clues as to phenotype.

This is the sarcophagus previously posted:
http://courses.washington.edu/rome250/gallery/archaicimages/web_Etruscansarcophagus.jpg


This is the Apollo from Veii, carved by an Etruscan.
https://41.media.tumblr.com/51db79c9ba31cd0c9cfc47f69df5d395/tumblr_mnpyj69lYg1qdoh4po7_500.jpg

This is a restored Ionian style Kore from Greece:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ebgb9jSrXm0/UZ-ZxMUnl_I/AAAAAAAAuZQ/HdYwW84bKjw/s1600/Archaic_Colours_01.png

The similarities are obvious. What does it tell us about what the Etruscans looked like? Or the Ionian Greeks for that matter? Who knows? It was a stylized representation. The place to look is at more "natural" presentations. I think, especially given these autosomal results, that people can stop wasting tons of verbiage "classifying" Tuscans as having "Asiatic" style eyes.:) At any rate, as the examples we have posted show, there were other "types" as well among the Etruscans.

I also think there's some confusion with nomenclature when discussing phenotypes in southern Europe in general and Italians in particular. To my eye, the Etruscans, and the Romans, for that matter, in the more "natural" portraits, look like southern Europeans. That means they look like a combination of more WHG types, early neolithic farmers and Indo-Europeans, even if the percentages are different than in northern Europe. As Moesan pointed out in a separate thread, modern Italians are by no means all classical "Mediterranean" in a traditional anthropological sense. There were other influences.

Yes, obviously there is style, tradition and artistic fashion involved in art. However if they had faces like Putin, they would never portray them as they did, no mater what style. Angela is much closer to Southern phenotype, where Putin would never blend in. He has typical Northern hunter gatherer phenotype, if it comes to shape of his head and nose.
http://gdb.rferl.org/9CC6F365-F319-4737-8DF6-B83A6EFA81B1_mw1024_mh1024_s.jpg

LeBrok
09-05-15, 03:37
There are various studies about Central Asian input in Turkey, ranging from 8/9% to 30%.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28883-Turks-with-10-25-Mongoloid-admixture-%28-Turkish-people-autosomal-DNA-%29
That was my point that if we take away the recent admixtures, the original Anatolians' aDNA was very close to all farmers around Mediterranean. In this case if Etruscans came from Anatolia way back, they would look the same, had similar culture and belonged to same language family, as residents of Italy. Having said that I think they most likely were overwhelmingly original farmers of Italian peninsula. After IE invasion of peninsula, original Etruscans, after some struggle, managed to come to the political top and rule over IE who settled in their region, and sustained their original language. It was completely reversed in Roman region, where IE dominated locals and established IE political class and their IE language.

Hauteville
09-05-15, 10:11
Ancient Greeks called Anatolians every enemy because of every enemy of Italy remembered them the enemies of Aegean Anatolia.
It happened with many other indigenous Italians, even with the Romans but the science and the linguistic has shown that Etruscans (and the other so-called Trojan exiles in Italy) were basically an indigenous population if you see the cluster and the linguistical studies.
Anyway i really doubt that ancient Anatolians clustered with modern Bulgarians, it's true that they were related to the Thracians, and Phrygians came from the Balkans but modern Bulgarians have absorbed Slavic blood.
In my opinion ancient Anatolians were very close to modern Aegean islander population more than other.

Angela
09-05-15, 13:56
Yes, obviously there is style, tradition and artistic fashion involved in art. However if they had faces like Putin, they would never portray them as they did, no mater what style. Angela is much closer to Southern phenotype, where Putin would never blend in. He has typical Northern hunter gatherer phenotype, if it comes to shape of his head and nose.
http://gdb.rferl.org/9CC6F365-F319-4737-8DF6-B83A6EFA81B1_mw1024_mh1024_s.jpg


No one ever said that they looked like Putin. Why would they? Do even all Slavs look like Putin? I've known Poles from southwestern areas who wouldn't look out of place in northern Italy. One of my friends comes from right over the border in Czechoslovakia. In fact, they used to speak Polish in her ancestral area, and everybody thinks we're sisters when we go out and about. Granted, most people aren't trained or even amateur anthropologists! :) Angela Merkel looks to me like what she is...central European.

The point was that you can't use the statues in the well known "Kouri" stylized form current throughout the ancient world to get an idea of the common phenotypes among the Etruscans. For the same reason, you can't use the paintings obviously copied from Cretan originals.

You have to look at the totality of the more "naturalistic" representations of them. In those artifacts they exhibit the range of phenotype that can still be seen in Italy, from more "central European" leaning, to more "Greek" leaning phenotypes. In another words, they look like a cross section of modern southern Europeans, which is exactly where they plot genetically.

Yetos
09-05-15, 14:33
Some times I do wonder what termination Anatolian is and means in Linguistic in Geography in anthropology etc

ok for me term Anatolia is the inner land East of Phrygia, south of Pontus, North of Cilicia, West of Armenia and Kurdistan,
Generally the land today Konya Kappadokia etc

Linguistic Anatolian Language is Lydian, Tocharrian etc but Hettit? but Phrygian?

Yetos
09-05-15, 14:52
Ancient Greeks called Anatolians every enemy because of every enemy of Italy remembered them the enemies of Aegean Anatolia.
It happened with many other indigenous Italians, even with the Romans but the science and the linguistic has shown that Etruscans (and the other so-called Trojan exiles in Italy) were basically an indigenous population if you see the cluster and the linguistical studies.
Anyway i really doubt that ancient Anatolians clustered with modern Bulgarians, it's true that they were related to the Thracians, and Phrygians came from the Balkans but modern Bulgarians have absorbed Slavic blood.
In my opinion ancient Anatolians were very close to modern Aegean islander population more than other.


That is not truth,
Ancient Greeks also call minor Asians as Brothers or cousins etc
in Troyan war we see enemies the greeks and the Troyans,
BUT we see also allies the Arzawa/Assuwa with Achaians

in Persian wars we also see as enemy the Persians,
but as Greece the west minor Asia, and as Makedonia the Phrygian Gordion
in Xenophon we read about the Hostility among Atheneans and Pontus, but we also see religious and sacred respect and hospitality, so not to drop even a single drop of blood,

Arame
09-05-15, 15:06
although Armenians are also heavily mixed with Iranic people.

Goga
Armenians don't have any admixture the last 3200 years. ;)
As a Ezdi You will know how religious isolation work.


However, genetic signals of population mixture cease after ~1,200 BCE when Bronze Age civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean world suddenly and violently collapsed. Armenians have since remained isolated
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/18/015396

Yes we share common ancestry with Iranians and Kurds but it is the result of much more complex events.

Goga
09-05-15, 16:02
Goga
Armenians don't have any admixture the last 3200 years. ;)
As a Ezdi You will know how religious isolation work.


http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/18/015396

Yes we share common ancestry with Iranians and Kurds but it is the result of much more complex events.I don't know what you mean, but since the Medes Armenians and the land where they live(d) has been under the Iranic dominance. It was part of the Median Empire, it was part of Sassanian empire, it was part of Safavid Empire, it was part of many independent Kurdish Kingdoms etc. Since the time of Urartu, Armenians had never again the true sovereignty of themselves.

Arame
09-05-15, 16:14
I don't know what you mean

We are speaking genetics not politics. Marc Haber didn't find any admixture after 1200 BC. Do You have any other study proving the contrary?

Goga
09-05-15, 16:24
We are speaking genetics not politics. Marc Haber didn't find any admixture after 1200 BC. Do You have any other study proving the contrary?I can't say anything about it. I never specifically studied Armenian DNA myself.

LeBrok
09-05-15, 17:17
No one ever said that they looked like Putin. Why would they? Do even all Slavs look like Putin? I've known Poles from southwestern areas who wouldn't look out of place in northern Italy. One of my friends comes from right over the border in Czechoslovakia. In fact, they used to speak Polish in her ancestral area, and everybody thinks we're sisters when we go out and about. Granted, most people aren't trained or even amateur anthropologists! :) Angela Merkel looks to me like what she is...central European. Just an example that at some point phenotypical traits would trample over the style of art.


The point was that you can't use the statues in the well known "Kouri" stylized form current throughout the ancient world to get an idea of the common phenotypes among the Etruscans. For the same reason, you can't use the paintings obviously copied from Cretan originals. Not one statue, same as one person is not the best representative of how general society look. However many of them would certainly bring out a statistical truth, a popular look. Even more so if timeline stretches through few centuries and few artistic styles.


You have to look at the totality of the more "naturalistic" representations of them. In those artifacts they exhibit the range of phenotype that can still be seen in Italy, from more "central European" leaning, to more "Greek" leaning phenotypes. In another words, they look like a cross section of modern southern Europeans, which is exactly where they plot genetically. There is also a chance that the classical Greek nose was the idealized symbol of beauty, and portrait at every possible occasion.

Angela
09-05-15, 17:52
There are various studies about Central Asian input in Turkey, ranging from 8/9% to 30%.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28883-Turks-with-10-25-Mongoloid-admixture-%28-Turkish-people-autosomal-DNA-%29

I found the following exchange on that thread which seems to sum up the opinions.

Maciamo: "According to the Dodecad K12 and K12b admixtures, there is only about 6% of Mongoloid admixtures among the Turks."


Answer: "That is the average for instanbul and northern turkey but still you have some who are 12-15% Mongoloid other parts of Turkey are 10-15% Mongoloid on average."

Another answer: Turks with over 15% East Asian Genes are very rare. The average Turk has something around your 10%, some even less. But there are areas, for example Southwest and Central Turkey with almost 15%.


So, I don't think 30% is at all accurate for an average for East Eurasian even going by the data that was posted.

I also have some questions about the source of those figures.

I have my doubts that those figures came from 23andme, which is why there is a conflict between them and what shows up in Dodecad. The graphic posted shows that the Behar Turks score around 14% "Mongolian", yet the Dodecad analysis (Globe 13) has the Behar Turks at about 8% for a total of Siberian, Amerindian, East Asian and Arctic, and 9.5% if you add in South Asian. So, about 10%.

I'm assuming that it was the Behar Turks that Eurogenes added to that paper's PCA, yes? So, somewhere from the just under 10% of the Dodecad analysis to a high of 14%?

Perhaps though the 30% figure was meant to include the West Eurasian ancestry in these "Turkic" invaders. As to this perhaps 10-15% ancestry, I wonder how much of it was old ancestry "coming home", a back migration in a way? By that I mean didn't much of the "West Eurasian" in Central Asia come from Anatolia in the first place? Even in terms of the "Iranic" component, wouldn't that ancestry have been present in Anatolia before the Middle Ages, through Bronze Age migrations? That's why I thought that the only "new" ancestry brought by the "Turks" was the Siberian/Arctic/East Asian components.

Which brings me to the notion that Anatolians were basically indistinguishable from "Greeks" or "Italians" in 800 BC.

Given that we don't have a single ancient genome from Anatolia from any period whatsoever, I don't have much certainty about my own or any one else's opinion. We're all speculating here, but it's fun, so here goes...

I don't doubt that at some point in history the people in Anatolia, particularly in western Anatolia around the Aegean, were very EEF like. We know it changed with the "Turkic" invasions in the Middle Ages. However, the question is did it change before that, and if so, when. Also, was it uniform around Anatolia, and furthermore how much and when did that change affect southern Europe through gene flow from that area? In terms of a discussion of the Etruscans, did it change before 800 BC?

I think it did. There may have been ANE flowing into some eastern parts of Anatolia from a very early period, but certainly with the Bronze Age new peoples moved through the area and admixed. Some of that ancestry may have been a back migration of ancient Neolithic stock, but they also carried different ancestry from ANE rich or Gedrosia rich populations. I don't know what modern people would be a good model for the "new" Anatolians that lived in central Anatolia around 800 BC but I don't think they would still have been only EEF or Oetzi like. Perhaps they were more Armenian like, or more Kurd like? I don't know. For any certainty we're going to have to wait for some ancient genomes.

In terms of the Etruscan ethnogenesis, as has been said before in other places, Italy has been heavily populated since the Neolithic. If some Oetzi like people were still around in Iron Age Thrace, I don't think it's a stretch to say they would have been present in central Italy as well. Then you have to add in the migrations from north of the Alps, which is attested not only through archaeology, and language, but also now through genetics. I think this later ancestry was also on a north/south cline in Italy. That's the mix that would have existed in the area around 800 BC. I would also point out that the "upper classes" for want of a better word, although they would be mixed, would probably be higher in that more "northern" and "eastern", Indo-European component than the "lower classes". Wouldn't that produce a genome that would plot just about where these ancient genomes plot? Maybe some gene flow did arrive from Lydia or from the Greek islands in 800 BC, but it's not attested in the archaeology, and I don't see where it's necessary to explain where these samples plot even if Anatolians in 800 BC were still very EEF like. If they had already changed, then it either didn't take place at all, or it was a very small input. Ed. (If the gene flow actually came from the northern Aegean, it might have been more similar, but again, I don't think a migration from there is necessary to explain where these elite Etruscans plot.

The larger question to my mind is how do we explain the Caucaso/Persian or West Asian in all of Europe, not just in southern Europe, although obviously it's a bit larger in some parts of southern Europe. Here is the K=20 from Haak et al:
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Admixtures-Lazaridis.png

The European groups who seem to have virtually none of it are the Basques and the Sardinians. The French South and Pais Vasco have a bit but minimal, then you start to get some with the Spaniards but still lower than the rest of Europe. So, there is a decided east to west cline with far southwestern Iberia having less of it. There are also very high levels around the Caucasus, predictably enough, which is why it was given that name. Just from eyeballing it, the levels in the Czechs and the Croatians aren't much different from the levels in Bergamo, or the Tuscans, and that, to me, implicates the Indo-European migrations in some way. I think it's just a different kind of farmer ancestry. The difference between southern and northern Europeans is not the Caucaso ancestry, it's the amount of the original early Neolithic ancestry that went into Europe from the coastal Levant, and southwestern Anatolia.

So, then, what does it mean to say that some southern Europeans are "West Asian" shifted? Not much, in my opinion, if by West Asian is meant that Caucaso/Persian component, because northerners and eastern European groups have it too. Southern Europeans who are said to be "West Asian" shifted have about the same amount of this Caucaso/Persian component (a bit more in some populations, but not very much, and not in all of them) as do a lot of other Europeans. They just have more of the original Neolithic component. So, maybe the presence of this component in the older calculators was just an artifact.

At the same time, it's possible that the Caucaso/Persian component arrived in southern Europe from the Indo-Europeans by a northern route, but that there was also gene flow through Anatolia into southern Europe, particularly south eastern and south/Central Europe during the Bronze Age that carried with it both the Caucaso/Persian component and some more EEF like genetic material.

That's why it's so important to have Mycenean genomes from the Bronze Age. Did they arrive in Greece directly via the Balkans, or was there a sweep through northern Anatolia? How much of the Caucaso/Persian did they carry? Then we need to see the genomes of the Cretans of the Bronze Age, and from the migrations right after the Bronze Age collapse and from the Greek migrants to Magna Graecia. In terms of Italian genetics, which is my main interest, perhaps an additional dose of farmer ancestry arrived in southern Italy through these later migrations and some of it diffused northwards.

I guess part of what I'm saying is that, in my opinion, people are conflating those issues with the specific one about Etruscan ethnogenesis in 800 BC due to a migration from Lydia.

A specific movement from Anatolia to central Italy around 800 BC doesn't explain the percentages of "West Asian" in the Balkans or southern Italy, where it is even higher than in Tuscans and northern Italians. There is a bigger process in play here, and with all due respect, I doubt the Phoenicians in northwest Sicily or some places in Iberia are enough to explain it. They wouldn't have affected the northern Greeks for one thing, who, without the input from the Slavic migrations, would, in my opinion, be even higher in "West Asian". This would also apply to the Bulgarians and the Romanians.

We need the genomes from these Etruscans. As Maciamo pointed out, there's only so much that a PCA can tell us, and especially one with not very many populations on it, and no other ancient samples. We also need samples from Anatolia from various time periods. We'll have to see how things shake out.

MOESAN
09-05-15, 18:38
Yes, obviously there is style, tradition and artistic fashion involved in art. However if they had faces like Putin, they would never portray them as they did, no mater what style. Angela is much closer to Southern phenotype, where Putin would never blend in. He has typical Northern hunter gatherer phenotype, if it comes to shape of his head and nose.
http://gdb.rferl.org/9CC6F365-F319-4737-8DF6-B83A6EFA81B1_mw1024_mh1024_s.jpg

Lebrok, I'll split hairs here even if it's not the right topic t do it: yes Putin has some HGs heritage, but his too shallow lower jaw and other small details in his face could have been inherited from an 'uralic' ancestor (who would be a mix or at contrary an "insufficiently" evolved 'europoid-mongoloid': it's debated) - Angela (Merckel?) has a 'nordic' influence in her (roughly said very evolved recent -'mediterranean' type whose geographical cradle - if one - can be debated too)

Angela
09-05-15, 23:55
Lebrok, I'll split hairs here even if it's not the right topic t do it: yes Putin has some HGs heritage, but his too shallow lower jaw and other small details in his face could have been inherited from an 'uralic' ancestor (who would be a mix or at contrary an "insufficiently" evolved 'europoid-mongoloid': it's debated) - Angela (Merckel?) has a 'nordic' influence in her (roughly said very evolved recent -'mediterranean' type whose geographical cradle - if one - can be debated too)

Well, I'm glad you said it this time and not me. When on another thread I said he and some other people from northeastern Europe who had been posted had what I called a slight Eurasian look, I got my head handed to me on a platter.:grin:

Angela
10-05-15, 00:29
I found the following exchange on that thread which seems to sum up the opinions.

Maciamo: "According to the Dodecad K12 and K12b admixtures, there is only about 6% of Mongoloid admixtures among the Turks."


Answer: "That is the average for instanbul and northern turkey but still you have some who are 12-15% Mongoloid other parts of Turkey are 10-15% Mongoloid on average."

Another answer: Turks with over 15% East Asian Genes are very rare. The average Turk has something around your 10%, some even less. But there are areas, for example Southwest and Central Turkey with almost 15%.


So, I don't think 30% is at all accurate for an average for East Eurasian even going by the data that was posted.

I also have some questions about the source of those figures.

I have my doubts that those figures came from 23andme, which is why there is a conflict between them and what shows up in Dodecad. The graphic posted shows that the Behar Turks score around 14% "Mongolian", yet the Dodecad analysis (Globe 13) has the Behar Turks at about 8% for a total of Siberian, Amerindian, East Asian and Arctic, and 9.5% if you add in South Asian. So, about 10%.

I'm assuming that it was the Behar Turks that Eurogenes added to that paper's PCA, yes? So, somewhere from the just under 10% of the Dodecad analysis to a high of 14%?

Perhaps though the 30% figure was meant to include the West Eurasian ancestry in these "Turkic" invaders. As to this perhaps 10-15% ancestry, I wonder how much of it was old ancestry "coming home", a back migration in a way? By that I mean didn't much of the "West Eurasian" in Central Asia come from Anatolia in the first place? Even in terms of the "Iranic" component, wouldn't that ancestry have been present in Anatolia before the Middle Ages, through Bronze Age migrations? That's why I thought that the only "new" ancestry brought by the "Turks" was the Siberian/Arctic/East Asian components.

Which brings me to the notion that Anatolians were basically indistinguishable from "Greeks" or "Italians" in 800 BC.

Given that we don't have a single ancient genome from Anatolia from any period whatsoever, I don't have much certainty about my own or any one else's opinion. We're all speculating here, but it's fun, so here goes...

I don't doubt that at some point in history the people in Anatolia, particularly in western Anatolia around the Aegean, were very EEF like. We know it changed with the "Turkic" invasions in the Middle Ages. However, the question is did it change before that, and if so, when. Also, was it uniform around Anatolia, and furthermore how much and when did that change affect southern Europe through gene flow from that area? In terms of a discussion of the Etruscans, did it change before 800 BC?

I think it did. There may have been ANE flowing into some eastern parts of Anatolia from a very early period, but certainly with the Bronze Age new peoples moved through the area and admixed. Some of that ancestry may have been a back migration of ancient Neolithic stock, but they also carried different ancestry from ANE rich or Gedrosia rich populations. I don't know what modern people would be a good model for the "new" Anatolians that lived in central Anatolia around 800 BC but I don't think they would still have been only EEF or Oetzi like. Perhaps they were more Armenian like, or more Kurd like? I don't know. For any certainty we're going to have to wait for some ancient genomes.

In terms of the Etruscan ethnogenesis, as has been said before in other places, Italy has been heavily populated since the Neolithic. If some Oetzi like people were still around in Iron Age Thrace, I don't think it's a stretch to say they would have been present in central Italy as well. Then you have to add in the migrations from north of the Alps, which is attested not only through archaeology, and language, but also now through genetics. I think this later ancestry was also on a north/south cline in Italy. That's the mix that would have existed in the area around 800 BC. I would also point out that the "upper classes" for want of a better word, although they would be mixed, would probably be higher in that more "northern" and "eastern", Indo-European component than the "lower classes". Wouldn't that produce a genome that would plot just about where these ancient genomes plot? Maybe some gene flow did arrive from Lydia or from the Greek islands in 800 BC, but it's not attested in the archaeology, and I don't see where it's necessary to explain where these samples plot even if Anatolians in 800 BC were still very EEF like. If they had already changed, then it either didn't take place at all, or it was a very small input. Ed. (If the gene flow actually came from the northern Aegean, it might have been more similar, but again, I don't think a migration from there is necessary to explain where these elite Etruscans plot.

The larger question to my mind is how do we explain the Caucaso/Persian or West Asian in all of Europe, not just in southern Europe, although obviously it's a bit larger in some parts of southern Europe. Here is the K=20 from Haak et al:
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Admixtures-Lazaridis.png

The European groups who seem to have virtually none of it are the Basques and the Sardinians. The French South and Pais Vasco have a bit but minimal, then you start to get some with the Spaniards but still lower than the rest of Europe. So, there is a decided east to west cline with far southwestern Iberia having less of it. There are also very high levels around the Caucasus, predictably enough, which is why it was given that name. Just from eyeballing it, the levels in the Czechs and the Croatians aren't much different from the levels in Bergamo, or the Tuscans, and that, to me, implicates the Indo-European migrations in some way. I think it's just a different kind of farmer ancestry. The difference between southern and northern Europeans is not the Caucaso ancestry, it's the amount of the original early Neolithic ancestry that went into Europe from the coastal Levant, and southwestern Anatolia.

So, then, what does it mean to say that some southern Europeans are "West Asian" shifted? Not much, in my opinion, if by West Asian is meant that Caucaso/Persian component, because northerners and eastern European groups have it too. Southern Europeans who are said to be "West Asian" shifted have about the same amount of this Caucaso/Persian component (a bit more in some populations, but not very much, and not in all of them) as do a lot of other Europeans. They just have more of the original Neolithic component. So, maybe the presence of this component in the older calculators was just an artifact.

At the same time, it's possible that the Caucaso/Persian component arrived in southern Europe from the Indo-Europeans by a northern route, but that there was also gene flow through Anatolia into southern Europe, particularly south eastern and south/Central Europe during the Bronze Age that carried with it both the Caucaso/Persian component and some more EEF like genetic material.

That's why it's so important to have Mycenean genomes from the Bronze Age. Did they arrive in Greece directly via the Balkans, or was there a sweep through northern Anatolia? How much of the Caucaso/Persian did they carry? Then we need to see the genomes of the Cretans of the Bronze Age, and from the migrations right after the Bronze Age collapse and from the Greek migrants to Magna Graecia. In terms of Italian genetics, which is my main interest, perhaps an additional dose of farmer ancestry arrived in southern Italy through these later migrations and some of it diffused northwards.

I guess part of what I'm saying is that, in my opinion, people are conflating those issues with the specific one about Etruscan ethnogenesis in 800 BC due to a migration from Lydia.

A specific movement from Anatolia to central Italy around 800 BC doesn't explain the percentages of "West Asian" in the Balkans or southern Italy, where it is even higher than in Tuscans and northern Italians. There is a bigger process in play here, and with all due respect, I doubt the Phoenicians in northwest Sicily or some places in Iberia are enough to explain it. They wouldn't have affected the northern Greeks for one thing, who, without the input from the Slavic migrations, would, in my opinion, be even higher in "West Asian". This would also apply to the Bulgarians and the Romanians.

We need the genomes from these Etruscans. As Maciamo pointed out, there's only so much that a PCA can tell us, and especially one with not very many populations on it, and no other ancient samples. We also need samples from Anatolia from various time periods. We'll have to see how things shake out.

Before I go out I thought I'd update this. Someone sent me a copy of the Etruscan PCA with both the Bulgarians and Oetzi added to the plot. I presume this was helpfully done by Eurogenes.

If this is correct, and not contradicted when we get the actual genomes, Oetzi lands right between the Tuscans and the Iberians, and south of the Etruscans. After 5,000 years and whatever various migrations actually flowed into Italy, the net result is that modern Tuscans are a bit northern and quite a bit eastern shifted versions of Oetzi. That would make sense if they are about 30% Indo-European, as Haak et al claims, yes? Northern Italians would plot north of them, and southern Italians a bit south of them...the Italian cline. So, we have this, we have Gamba et al which I already posted, and we have Ralph and Coop, all telling essentially the same story.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQZFU0Vl8ySjJ3WkE/view

Ed. I hope it was alright for me to post this link. If there's a problem, someone just PM me and I will remove it.

To the usual suspect, no, as we've discussed before, here and at 23andme, Greeks from Thessaly don't plot precisely where Tuscans plot. In every PCA I've seen, some of them overlap the most southern plotting Tuscans and the rest are southeast of the Tuscans. Also, again, I would think that the northern Italians would plot very near to where the Bulgarians plot. That's been the case since the days of Cavalli-Sforza.

Boreas
10-05-15, 09:17
Alan and Goya

You guys, are these your personel ideas/theories, or do you have scientific sources?

check the "Eupedia Map of Late Neolithic Europe-Europeans Culture arounds 4000-3500BC" and see which haplogroups(ydna) popular in Anatolia

Still haplogroups j2-j1-g-r1b are in top five between Turks. T changed as E which can associated with Greek İnvasion and Hellenistic period of Anatolia and it is fourth common group.

so why you are think that current Anatolia is much more different then 1000-2000 years old Anatolia in genetic case?

bighipert
10-05-15, 12:00
Tuscan Etruscan heritage is part of an old and misleading cultural revival that has nothing to do with nowadays genetic composition of the Tuscan people which is mainly Western European R1b-U152 (52,5%) which peaks here to the top following Provence (city of Grasse). A large italo-celtic substrate with an important germanic (lombardic) contribution. J2 is the Y-DNA haplogroup referred to greco-roman-anatolian population and it is 11% of the tuscans just one point over of the rest of Northern Italy.

Pax Augusta
11-05-15, 15:50
Before I go out I thought I'd update this. Someone sent me a copy of the Etruscan PCA with both the Bulgarians and Oetzi added to the plot. I presume this was helpfully done by Eurogenes.

If this is correct, and not contradicted when we get the actual genomes, Oetzi lands right between the Tuscans and the Iberians, and south of the Etruscans. After 5,000 years and whatever various migrations actually flowed into Italy, the net result is that modern Tuscans are a bit northern and quite a bit eastern shifted versions of Oetzi. That would make sense if they are about 30% Indo-European, as Haak et al claims, yes? Northern Italians would plot north of them, and southern Italians a bit south of them...the Italian cline. So, we have this, we have Gamba et al which I already posted, and we have Ralph and Coop, all telling essentially the same story.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQZFU0Vl8ySjJ3WkE/view

Ed. I hope it was alright for me to post this link. If there's a problem, someone just PM me and I will remove it.

To the usual suspect, no, as we've discussed before, here and at 23andme, Greeks from Thessaly don't plot precisely where Tuscans plot. In every PCA I've seen, some of them overlap the most southern plotting Tuscans and the rest are southeast of the Tuscans. Also, again, I would think that the northern Italians would plot very near to where the Bulgarians plot. That's been the case since the days of Cavalli-Sforza.

Interesting post as usual, Angela.

According to wikipedia, Oetzi is attested to have spent his childhood in the area of Velturno (German Feldthurns), modern day South Tyrol, where there have been many interesting archaeological findings: burial site, megaliths... It's interesting because Velturno is one of the south Tyrolean toponyms that some scholar have linked with an Etruscan origin (from Velthur, Etruscan word very common in other place names).

Origin and Migration of the Alpine Iceman

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/302/5646/862.short

Angela
11-05-15, 17:25
Tuscan Etruscan heritage is part of an old and misleading cultural revival that has nothing to do with nowadays genetic composition of the Tuscan people which is mainly Western European R1b-U152 (52,5%) which peaks here to the top following Provence (city of Grasse). A large italo-celtic substrate with an important germanic (lombardic) contribution. J2 is the Y-DNA haplogroup referred to greco-roman-anatolian population and it is 11% of the tuscans just one point over of the rest of Northern Italy.

I have no doubt that Tuscany was impacted by the migration of Indo-European peoples who came by way of central or central/eastern Europe. So, obviously, Tuscans are not a purely "Oetzi like" group. Then there's the fact that the Neolithic farmers themselves were migrants to this land to the best of our current understanding. Therefore, Tuscans are not in any way an "autochthonous" group, whatever that even means, and anyone claiming that I or anyone else is asserting that merely because we aren't sure how much, if any, migration from Anatolia in 800 BC affected them is making a straw man argument.

The percentages for the Yamnaya EN WHG components are clearly set out in Haak et al for Bergamo and Toscana, and the southern Italian figures are available elsewhere:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-dIAiuvDRSMs/VOmimlVjEVI/AAAAAAAACCE/h2aiCQmTRqE/w350-h365-no/Haak_et_al_Fig_3_small.png

Tuscans are about 30% Yamnaya and 70% Early Neolithic farmer as based on the Stuttgart genome. Now, Yamnaya was about half farmer too, of a different variety, in my opinion, and the early farmers were perhaps 20% WHG, but that's a discussion for a different time.

Every "ethnic" group of people you are discussing as having made an impact in Tuscany would have been some combination of those groups. That Italic speakers came is clear from the archaeology and the language, and if, as seems likely, they carried U-152, we know that they had a genetic impact. Much of that 30% Yamnaya percentage probably cames from them. I don't know about the Langobardi. We need more and better analysis. If they carried mostly U-106 and I1 yDna lineages, then their input was minimal. If they carried some downstream clades of U152, perhaps a bit more.

In terms of the Etruscans, which is the subject of this thread, I have no idea how you can state that they had no genetic impact on the Tuscans. Everyone who settled or lived in this land had a genetic impact. The question is how much, what was their autosomal make-up, and how was that autosomal make-up created.

The interesting part of the poster and PCA from this latest study is that if the actual genomes tell basically the same tale, whatever their ethnogenesis, the Etruscans wound up looking like southern Europeans, not very different from Tuscans, and perhaps even closer to northern Italians. That is not what many expected.

What would help a great deal is an ancient genome from their predecessors in the area, but they burned their dead. Ancient samples from the same period, i.e. around 800-1000 BC from Anatolia might clarify matters. A lot would depend on what these people were like autosomally. We don't even know if the people of Anatolia in Neolithic times were EEF or Stuttgart/Oetzi like. It depends on whether the WHG/UHG, or whatever it was, was incorporated in the Near East or, say, in the Balkans. Then, we don't know how much affect the Bronze Age migrations, which of course took place before 800 BC, would have had on the area.

If the Lydians were "Armenian like" or "Kurd like" at that period, then if any migration took place, it would probably have been a minor elite one, or elite ancient Etruscan genomes, which would show the most influence, should presumably have been more "Armenian" like or "Near Eastern" like. I also have a problem with the idea of a "Lydian" central Anatolian mass migration or even 50% impact on the Tuscan genome because the Lydians spoke a Indo-European language, and if there was such a large migration, one would think they would have imposed their language on the population. The Saxons 1000 years later in Britain certainly did.

Of course, perhaps the migration from the east, if any, actually came from the Aegean. We would need a genome from there as well, for clarity, because the question again is what were they like autosomally in 800 BC, after the Bronze Age migrations, and also what languages did they speak? (Crete might have been very different from the northern Aegean, for example.)

When looking at the analysis of this paper around the web, it seems to me that many people are ignoring the fact that the population in the central Italy of that time was unlikely to have been entirely or even mostly "Indo-European". Why would it have been? Even in northern Europe, the Yamnaya ancestry portion is around 50% by current estimates, less in Central Europe. In southern Europe, always more densely populated, and to my knowledge not subject to the repeated population crashes of Central and northern Europe, why isn't an estimate of 30% reasonable for around 1000 BC until we get, hopefully, more ancient samples?

It's about 30% today in Tuscany. Northern Italy is actually a bit less, but has some additional WHG, additional to what is present in the EN, while Tuscany does not, according the Haak et al diagram above. The IBS samples also have 0 WHG in addition to what is present in EN. I think the jury is still out about the source of the additional WHG, or perhaps the "survival" of the additional WHG in Europe would be a better way to put it. I don't know whether there were WHG people who continued to live in Europe and who increased in number and admixed only with the Yamnaya migrations, or whether they existed only in isolated fringe areas and were incorporated in the Yamnaya like migrations, and/or they moved south with later migrations. Time will tell.

In terms of Italy, I know that there is precious little evidence so far for Mesolithic hunter gatherers in Italy, but the ones that are attested are on a north/south cline. There may have been a wipe out of hunter gatherers in southern and even central Italy with the coming of the Neolithic. The amounts that are present in northern Italy may partly be a survival and re-emergence, and/or may have come with later migrations from the north that petered out as the waves moved south. It's also possible, of course, that later migrations from the southeast diluted their presence in the genome in a south/north cline. Certainly this is a phenomenon that doesn't just affect Tuscans. It's also something that is present in southern Italy, so I don't see why it would all be down to a specific movement from Anatolia, or the Aegean, for that matter, to "Etruria" in 800 BC.

I think any more speculation should probably wait at least until the ancient Etruscan samples can be looked at more closely to see if they do cluster near northern Italians, and more importantly to see their percentages of EN, Yamnaya, and WHG. Then, we would need a similar analysis for genomes in Anatolia and the Aegean for the same period.

Yetos
11-05-15, 17:47
@ Angela

ok you are searching for Tuscans after 800 BC,
But if I follow the Hadria/Adria which might been an entrance, then we might speak about 1200BC about
have you thought the possibility of 1200 BC and Hadria colony cityhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/), which also shows mycenean and eastern marks?

Angela
11-05-15, 18:12
@ Angela

ok you are searching for Tuscans after 800 BC,
But if I follow the Hadria/Adria which might been an entrance, then we might speak about 1200BC about
have you thought the possibility of 1200 BC and Hadria colony cityhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/), which also shows mycenean and eastern marks?

Yetos, are you speaking about Adria, in the Veneto?

So far as I know, the Wiki entry is pretty accurate. From 1200 BC to the 9th century it seems to have been inhabited by the Veneti tribes. From the 10th to the 6th century we have the Villanovans, centered around Bologna. Then come the Etruscans. The Greeks apparently started trading with the area in the 6th century, long after the Etruscans are attested on the Tyrhennian side of Italy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adria#Ancient_era

Do you think that's incorrect?

Ed. I was talking about 800-1000 BC, but 1200 BC is ok too.

The point is that the Bronze Age migrations would have already affected Anatolia and the Greek islands as well. Thrace too, of course.

I do think that one thing to consider in all of this is the fact that the Bronze Age collapse might have triggered movements from the East to the West. The question still remains, what would these people have been like autosomally, where specifically did they go, how many of them were there, and what was the autosomal composition of the people who already were inhabiting the regions where they settled.

Pax Augusta
11-05-15, 18:35
It's about 30% today in Tuscany. Northern Italy is actually a bit less, but has some additional WHG, additional to what is present in the EN, while Tuscany does not, according the Haak et al diagram above. The IBS samples also have 0 WHG in addition to what is present in EN. I think the jury is still out about the source of the additional WHG, or perhaps the "survival" of the additional WHG in Europe would be a better way to put it. I don't know whether there were WHG people who continued to live in Europe and who increased in number and admixed only with the Yamnaya migrations, or whether they existed only in isolated fringe areas and were incorporated in the Yamnaya like migrations, and/or they moved south with later migrations. Time will tell.

Not a big problem but that Tuscan and Spanish samples have both 0 WHG it sounds a bit strange to me. Tuscans aren't an isolated population unlike the Sardinians (that instead have a bit of WHG). I'd be curious to see the results of the bordering regions: Liguria, Emilia-Romagna, Umbria and Lazio. I can't believe that there were never population exchange among these regions and Tuscany, not even a bit.



When looking at the analysis of this paper around the web, it seems to me that many people are ignoring the fact that the population in the central Italy of that time was unlikely to have been entirely or even mostly "Indo-European". Why would it have been? Even in northern Europe, the Yamnaya ancestry portion is around 50% by current estimates, less in Central Europe. In southern Europe, always more densely populated, and to my knowledge not subject to the repeated population crashes of Central and northern Europe, why isn't an estimate of 30% reasonable for around 1000 BC until we get, hopefully, more ancient samples?

Yes, not only in central Italy but elsewhere population was unlikely to have been entirely or even mostly "Indo-European".

Yetos
11-05-15, 19:22
Once I was searching about Val camunico if exist any search, and some toponyms, which I can not certify but possibly are conected or just coinsidence and my mistake
Val Camunico people seem to be affected by IE much much later (at least historically) than other areas, and possibly kept characteristic Data of even back to epi or not paleolithic era
in fact if Thyrrenians were 'Italians' who moved East (and not the oposite) my mind will go to that valley at once as begining point.

bighipert
11-05-15, 19:33
I could be a good sample for autosomal DNA, my closest ethnical group both in EUROGENES and DODECAD is "Tuscan" (it works!) the second is "Western Sicilian" (Normans?). My aDNA data are:

EEF=85,3 % (Huge like many Western Europeans)
WHG=7,3 %
ANE=7,2%

North Atlantic=21,23%
Baltic=8,1%
West Med=25,98%
West Asian=10,98%
East Med=29,31%

In Sicily there are a few of my Y-DNA R-L21 but they didn't match me, L21 is connected with Bell Beakers Folk expansion in 2700 BC and it is basically a Celtic haplogroup with huge diffusion in the British Isles. I must admit that it is somehow alienic in Italy (2-3%) with some exceptions.

Etruscan decline begins after the expansion of the Alpine Celtic tribes (R1b-U152) in North Italy from 480bc

Pax Augusta
11-05-15, 20:57
I could be a good sample for autosomal DNA, my closest ethnical group both in EUROGENES and DODECAD is "Tuscan" (it works!) the second is "Western Sicilian" (Normans?). My aDNA data are:

EEF=85,3 % (Huge like many Western Europeans)
WHG=7,3 %
ANE=7,2%

North Atlantic=21,23%
Baltic=8,1%
West Med=25,98%
West Asian=10,98%
East Med=29,31%

In Sicily there are a few of my Y-DNA R-L21 but they didn't match me, L21 is connected with Bell Beakers Folk expansion in 2700 BC and it is basically a Celtic haplogroup with huge diffusion in the British Isles. I must admit that it is somehow alienic in Italy (2-3%) with some exceptions.

You seem more southern shifted than average Tuscans, basically you seem a West Sicilian according Eurogenes K13 but EEF, WHG and ANE admixtures says something different but not average Tuscan.

Lazaridis 2013

Tuscan
EEF 0.746 (74,6 %)
WHG 0.136 (13,6 %)
ANE 0.118 (11,8%)

Bergamo (Northern Italian)
EEF 0.715 (71,5%)
WHG 0.177 (17,7%)
ANE 0.108 (10,8%)

Sicilian
EEF 0.903 (90,03%)
WHG 0 0 (0%)
ANE .097 (9,7%)

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30123-Makin-a-map-of-EEF-WHG-and-ANE-admixtures-in-Europe-Please-post-your-data

Eurogenes K13

Tuscan
North Atlantic - 27.18
Baltic - 10.00
West Med - 23.79
West Asian - 8.83
East Med - 24.59
Red Sea - 4.29
South Asian - 0.24
East Asian - 0.01
Siberian - 0.29
Amerindian - 0.00
Oceanian - 0.50
North-East African - 0.17
Sub-Saharan African - 0.09

West Sicilian
North Atlantic - 21.14
Baltic - 7.59
West Med - 22.70
West Asian - 10.85
East Med - 28.65
Red Sea - 5.07
South Asian - 0.65
East Asian - 0.52
Siberian - 0.20
Amerindian - 0.05
Oceanian - 0.61
North-East African - 0.99
Sub-Saharan African - 0.96

North Italian

North Atlantic - 31.68
Baltic - 11.93
West Med - 25.76
West Asian - 6.90
East Med - 19.58
Red Sea - 2.78
South Asian - 0.56
East Asian - 0.34
Siberian - 0.13
Amerindian - 0.05
Oceanian - 0.21
North-East African - 0.04
Sub-Saharan African - 0.03

Tuscans
Dodecad Oracle k12b
[1,] "Tuscan" "0"
[2,] "TSI30" "2.3896"
[3,] "C_Italian_D" "4.7624"
[4,] "O_Italian_D" "6.1384"
[5,] "N_Italian_D" "9.985"
[6,] "North_Italian" "10.4355"
[7,] "Greek_D" "12.625"
[8,] "S_Italian_Sicilian_D" "13.5348"
[9,] "Sicilian_D" "13.586"


Northern Italians
[1,] "North_Italian" "0"
[2,] "N_Italian_D" "3.5071"
[3,] "TSI30" "8.3899"
[4,] "Tuscan" "10.4355"
[5,] "Baleares_1KG" "10.8217"
[6,] "O_Italian_D" "12.2221"
[7,] "Galicia_1KG" "13.4179"
[8,] "Extremadura_1KG" "14.2773"
[9,] "C_Italian_D" "14.2955"
[10,] "Murcia_1KG" "14.6925"
[11,] "Andalucia_1KG" "14.9345"
[12,] "Portuguese_D" "15.4848"
[13,] "Spaniards" "15.574"

Sicilians
[1,] "Sicilian_D" "0"
[2,] "S_Italian_Sicilian_D" "2.0372"
[3,] "Ashkenazi_D" "5.728"
[4,] "Ashkenazy_Jews" "6.1514"
[5,] "Sephardic_Jews" "8.5417"
[6,] "C_Italian_D" "9.14"
[7,] "Greek_D" "9.5525"
[8,] "Morocco_Jews" "11.3119"
[9,] "Tuscan" "13.586"
[10,] "O_Italian_D" "14.2681"
[11,] "TSI30" "15.023"
[12,] "Cypriots" "18.674"
[13,] "Turkish_D" "22.4515"
[14,] "N_Italian_D" "22.4562"
[15,] "North_Italian" "23.0712"



Etruscan decline begins after the expansion of the Alpine Celtic tribes (R1b-U152) in North Italy from 480bc

Not really, R1b-U152 was already in Italy.

Alan
11-05-15, 22:48
Yes, obviously there is style, tradition and artistic fashion involved in art. However if they had faces like Putin, they would never portray them as they did, no mater what style. Angela is much closer to Southern phenotype, where Putin would never blend in. He has typical Northern hunter gatherer phenotype, if it comes to shape of his head and nose.
http://gdb.rferl.org/9CC6F365-F319-4737-8DF6-B83A6EFA81B1_mw1024_mh1024_s.jpg


Right I had posted reconstruction of Trypillian Neolithic features and Angela comes much closer to this.

http://v-stetsyuk.name/files/VStecuk/Ill/TrpFMm.JPG


But I think Putin looks more like this recontruction

http://www.kunstkamera.ru/images/g/11_05.jpg



While classic H&G would look more like this.
http://blobsvc.wort.lu/picture/bbea9ba55a019d57bf5c0fec43eaf82a/519/291/wortv3/2334d8c5a0f081505ce8892d640c37f1965fa43c

Alan
11-05-15, 23:07
Lebrok, I'll split hairs here even if it's not the right topic t do it: yes Putin has some HGs heritage, but his too shallow lower jaw and other small details in his face could have been inherited from an 'uralic' ancestor (who would be a mix or at contrary an "insufficiently" evolved 'europoid-mongoloid': it's debated) - Angela (Merckel?) has a 'nordic' influence in her (roughly said very evolved recent -'mediterranean' type whose geographical cradle - if one - can be debated too)


We weren't talking about "Races" in early 20s century sense. What LeBrock means is Angela Merkel has physical features which have been brought to Europe via the farmers. "Nordic" is simply a depigmented farmer type. . Take in mind neither H&G nor farmers were yet that depigmented. H&G would result in a broad/round faced North European type.

depigmented H&G type
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T2iJgU9kOnc/hqdefault.jpg
http://www.fcb-kirchweidach.de/images/Bilder/photos/362.jpg


depigmented Farmer type
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1579/1283il.jpg
http://mediadb.kicker.de/2012/fussball/spieler/xl/49928_109_2011781623749.jpg
http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/56/5613/YAPVG00Z/posters/elena-dementieva.jpg

bighipert
12-05-15, 20:13
Romano, nobody matches the population means, every person has a personal genetic heritage based on the recombination of the genes of both parents. That's why I think a-dna is not very good for genealogical testing.

I must say that West Sicilians are not very far from Tuscans, both populations have 4% of I1 or even more, a clear signal of a wider nordic ancestry of 10% of the actual population. Angela I don't think that this 10% has a "minimal" impact because it involves the elites, all the patronymics in Italy are of germanic origin and are among the older surnames in Europe. When the Lombards came in the migration period after the end of the Roman Empire they were 150.000 and they took control of a country of 5-6 milion, they seized all the lands and eliminated the celto-roman aristocracy of landowners. This period of almost 2 century had a founder effect for Tuscany, everything changed: they changed the law with the Edictum Rothari, they radically changed the economy based on the rural curtis with a different land organization, I investigate many aspects of their heritage in my blog.

They put the basis of what is now Tuscany and many other parts of Italy under their control. Today Tuscans are more close to the Dark Ages than to any other period in history.

Angela
12-05-15, 20:34
Romano, nobody matches the population means, every person has a personal genetic heritage based on the recombination of the genes of both parents. That's why I think a-dna is not very good for genealogical testing.

I must say that West Sicilians are not very far from Tuscans, both populations have 4% of I1 or even more, a clear signal of a wider nordic ancestry of 10% of the actual population. Angela I don't think that this 10% has a "minimal" impact because it involves the elites, all the patronymics in Italy are of germanic origin and are among the older surnames in Europe. When the Lombards came in the migration period after the end of the Roman Empire they were 150.000 and they took control of a country of 5-6 milion, they seized all the lands and eliminated the celto-roman aristocracy of landowners. This period of almost 2 century had a founder effect for Tuscany, everything changed: they changed the law with the Edictum Rothari, they radically changed the economy based on the rural curtis with a different land organization, I investigate many aspects of their heritage in my blog.

They put the basis of what is now Tuscany and many other parts of Italy under their control. Today Tuscans are more close to the Dark Ages than to any other period in history.

Sorry, we're going to have to agree to disagree. First of all, we were talking about genetics, and specifically, the genetics of the Etruscans.

If you're referring to the Langobardi, going by the levels of I1 and U-106, if that is mostly what they carried, their contribution genetically is inconsequential, which is more than fine with me. For Italians, even northern Italians, to think of themselves as Langobards is as wrong headed in my opinion as modern Turks thinking that they are "Turkic". Modern Turks are mostly Middle Easterners. Italians are southern Europeans, and very different from the people who left southern Scandinavia and eventually wound up in Italy. All you need to do is look any of the dozens of analyses that have been done. I would suggest you start with Lazaridis et al and continue with Haak et al.

At least in the case of Turkey the invaders imposed their language and religion. Neither is the case in Italy with the Langobardi. In case it's escaped your attention, Italians speak a Latin language, follow the Roman rite of Catholicism, and do not have a legal code based on Germanic law.

What the Langobardi brought was the final destruction of an advanced civilization, a civilization they were too primitive to keep going.It took at least 1000 years to get any semblance of it back.

I can't understand how any Italian could celebrate it. That's of course, however, your prerogative.

Pax Augusta
13-05-15, 01:35
It deserves a listen.

The Etruscan Civilisation. Podcast from the history section of BBC Radio 4 series "In Our Time"
Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Etruscan civilisation.

BBC Radio 4

http://podbay.fm/show/73330895/e/1317291300?autostart=1

Angela
13-05-15, 17:33
It deserves a listen.

The Etruscan Civilisation. Podcast from the history section of BBC Radio 4 series "In Our Time"
Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Etruscan civilisation.

BBC Radio 4

http://podbay.fm/show/73330895/e/1317291300?autostart=1

Very refreshing to listen to reasonable scholars with no particular ax to grind discussing the complexity of the situation. They're obviously aware of the genetic papers that had been published up to the time of the broadcast, and are hardly the caricature of migration denying archaeologists that is sometimes proposed.

I've said it before...there was a definite trend in archaeology where pots were never held to represent new people, to a contrary trend among some population geneticists and certainly most hobbyists to thinking that they've proved that pots are always masses of people. I would just suggest that perhaps individual cases have to be looked at individually. Pots might represent people, or they might not, and if they do represent people, they don't necessarily represent tons of new people, and even if they do, maybe the "new" people aren't so different from the "old" people. :) We just don't know yet. From my perspective, there's an awful lot of jumping to conclusions.

In terms of the Etruscans there's a strange situation where there are definitely some "pots" from the east, easily explained by trade, but no sign of discontinuity or mass migration from elsewhere, nothing like the trail even of Kurgans into central Europe, or even the trail of the Indo-Europeans into Italy from north of the Alps, or from the Greeks into southern Italy. There's no trail at all. That's not to say that there was no migration from the east at that specific time into that specific place. It's just that I don't know why there is such certainty about it or its significance. The fact is that the genetic results so far are contradictory, or at least inconclusive, as we've pointed out here. We'll see what the actual genomes in the most recent paper show, although we probably need an Anatolian genome from approximately the same time to get a real handle on it.

Also interesting to see their take on the language issue. I don't know where it came from; it may be that we won't ever know that, but it's certainly true that they haven't found any language like Etruscan, neither in Europe nor in the Near East, other than Lemnian, and I don't know how much can be made of that, given the Etruscan trade with the east. I also wonder why there would have been this island of non-Indo-European speakers in the midst of all those "Greek" speakers, although I suppose the same could be said about the Basques, or the Etruscans, if it was a "Neolithic" language.

One thing that was new to me is this speculation that the Etruscan archives were deliberately destroyed. It's certainly noteworthy that the majority of what we have of their language is just from the tombs or the artwork or a few of what amount to merchant exchanges. Did the Romans want to hide how much of their culture derived from the Etruscans? Did the archives somehow show the Romans in a bad light? Would that have extended to destroying even Claudius' twenty volume work on them? One also wonders how much of his interest came from his Etruscan first wife.

As to their supposed disappearance, as the scholars point out, Augustus still needed the help of the nineteen major Etruscan families, and there were still practitioners of the Etruscan religion at the end of the empire.

Hauteville
13-05-15, 18:08
I could be a good sample for autosomal DNA, my closest ethnical group both in EUROGENES and DODECAD is "Tuscan" (it works!) the second is "Western Sicilian" (Normans?). My aDNA data are:

EEF=85,3 % (Huge like many Western Europeans)
WHG=7,3 %
ANE=7,2%

North Atlantic=21,23%
Baltic=8,1%
West Med=25,98%
West Asian=10,98%
East Med=29,31%

In Sicily there are a few of my Y-DNA R-L21 but they didn't match me, L21 is connected with Bell Beakers Folk expansion in 2700 BC and it is basically a Celtic haplogroup with huge diffusion in the British Isles. I must admit that it is somehow alienic in Italy (2-3%) with some exceptions.

Etruscan decline begins after the expansion of the Alpine Celtic tribes (R1b-U152) in North Italy from 480bc
Full Tuscan?Yes there are some R1b L21.

bighipert
13-05-15, 22:25
Full Tuscan?Yes there are some R1b L21.

Yes there are some, Apart from the British Isles and Brittany where L21 peaks, the haplogroup is rather scattered in Europe. In Italy I think it is reasonably connected with the Normans (Northmen), which usually took Celtic slaves from their raids in Britain.

Actually the Normans raided Fiesole in 816 but I doubt that they settled in Tuscany, there are no Norman cities in Tuscany, nevertheless some of them could served as mercenaries under Bonifacio I "the Bavarian" marquis of Tuscany.

In fact some of the L21 in Italy have italianized Norman surnames. There are some STR which are considered a Normans genetic signature such as "William the conqueror" modal: look for "A Y-Chromosome Signature of Polygyny in Norman England" DYS464=15-15-17-17 and YCAII=19-23.

Vallicanus
13-05-15, 23:23
Sorry, we're going to have to agree to disagree. First of all, we were talking about genetics, and specifically, the genetics of the Etruscans.

If you're referring to the Langobardi, going by the levels of I1 and U-106, if that is mostly what they carried, their contribution genetically is inconsequential, which is more than fine with me. For Italians, even northern Italians, to think of themselves as Langobards is as wrong headed in my opinion as modern Turks thinking that they are "Turkic". Modern Turks are mostly Middle Easterners. Italians are southern Europeans, and very different from the people who left southern Scandinavia and eventually wound up in Italy. All you need to do is look any of the dozens of analyses that have been done. I would suggest you start with Lazaridis et al and continue with Haak et al.

At least in the case of Turkey the invaders imposed their language and religion. Neither is the case in Italy with the Langobardi. In case it's escaped your attention, Italians speak a Latin language, follow the Roman rite of Catholicism, and do not have a legal code based on Germanic law.

What the Langobardi brought was the final destruction of an advanced civilization, a civilization they were too primitive to keep going.It took at least 1000 years to get any semblance of it back.

I can't understand how any Italian could celebrate it. That's of course, however, your prerogative.

You are absolutely right.

It's a pity the Byzantines were distracted by the Avar and Persian wars in the decades following the Langobard invasion of Italy (568 CE).

Vallicanus
13-05-15, 23:28
As to their supposed disappearance, as the scholars point out, Augustus still needed the help of the nineteen major Etruscan families, and there were still practitioners of the Etruscan religion at the end of the empire.

What were the names of these Etruscan families?

Angela
13-05-15, 23:31
Yes there are some, Apart from the British Isles and Brittany where L21 peaks, the haplogroup is rather scattered in Europe. In Italy I think it is reasonably connected with the Normans (Northmen), which usually took Celtic slaves from their raids in Britain.

Actually the Normans raided Fiesole in 816 but I doubt that they settled in Tuscany, there are no Norman cities in Tuscany, nevertheless some of them could served as mercenaries under Bonifacio I "the Bavarian" marquis of Tuscany.

In fact some of the L21 in Italy have italianized Norman surnames. There are some STR which are considered a Normans genetic signature such as "William the conqueror" modal: look for "A Y-Chromosome Signature of Polygyny in Norman England" DYS464=15-15-17-17 and YCAII=19-23.

I don't see why L-21 would be especially "Norman" in Italy. According to Boattini et al we have some in Piedmont, Bologna, central Liguria, and La Spezia. None of those areas are connected with Normans.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28657-Breakdown-of-R1b-subclades-in-Italy-%28Boattini-et-al-%29?highlight=Boattini

There is L-21 in French areas right next door...a far more parsimonious explanation, in my opinion.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/27/47/5b/27475bc02806a62196a69037294f27b5.jpghttps://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/27/47/5b/27475bc02806a62196a69037294f27b5.jpg

Hauteville
13-05-15, 23:41
Yes there are some, Apart from the British Isles and Brittany where L21 peaks, the haplogroup is rather scattered in Europe. In Italy I think it is reasonably connected with the Normans (Northmen), which usually took Celtic slaves from their raids in Britain.

Actually the Normans raided Fiesole in 816 but I doubt that they settled in Tuscany, there are no Norman cities in Tuscany, nevertheless some of them could served as mercenaries under Bonifacio I "the Bavarian" marquis of Tuscany.

In fact some of the L21 in Italy have italianized Norman surnames. There are some STR which are considered a Normans genetic signature such as "William the conqueror" modal: look for "A Y-Chromosome Signature of Polygyny in Norman England" DYS464=15-15-17-17 and YCAII=19-23.
If you look at the map it seems more common in British Isles and Brittany more than in Normandy.
But there is there as well.
Maybe in Italy entered also with the Celts?

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#L21

bighipert
14-05-15, 03:21
Sorry, we're going to have to agree to disagree. First of all, we were talking about genetics, and specifically, the genetics of the Etruscans.

If you're referring to the Langobardi, going by the levels of I1 and U-106, if that is mostly what they carried, their contribution genetically is inconsequential, which is more than fine with me. For Italians, even northern Italians, to think of themselves as Langobards is as wrong headed in my opinion as modern Turks thinking that they are "Turkic". Modern Turks are mostly Middle Easterners. Italians are southern Europeans, and very different from the people who left southern Scandinavia and eventually wound up in Italy. All you need to do is look any of the dozens of analyses that have been done. I would suggest you start with Lazaridis et al and continue with Haak et al.

At least in the case of Turkey the invaders imposed their language and religion. Neither is the case in Italy with the Langobardi. In case it's escaped your attention, Italians speak a Latin language, follow the Roman rite of Catholicism, and do not have a legal code based on Germanic law.

What the Langobardi brought was the final destruction of an advanced civilization, a civilization they were too primitive to keep going.It took at least 1000 years to get any semblance of it back.

I can't understand how any Italian could celebrate it. That's of course, however, your prerogative.

It's not a matter of celebration it's a matter of heritage.

You should know that the father of italian language Dante Alighieri was discendent of a family of the longobardic aristocracy, his name was ALDIGHER (ALDI=noble) + (GAER=lance) and he was very proud of his noble ancestry. The Divina Commedia was “zeppa” (zeppjan = full) of longobardism, longobardic words.

Italian language is full of hundreds words of longobardic origin, among them: Guerra (da werra), balcone (da balk "palco di legname"), banca (da banka "panca"), bara (dabāra "lettiga"), castaldo (da gastald "amministratore dei beni sovrani"), federa (da fëdera "penna, piuma"), graffa e graffio (da krapfo "uncino"), greppia (da kruppja), grinza (da grimmisōn "corrugare"), guancia (da wangja o wankja), milza (da milzi), nocca (da knohha "nodo, nocca"), palco (da palk "trave"), palla (da palla), panca (panka "panca"), ricco (da rīhhi), riga (da rīga), russare (da hrūzzan), scaffale (da skafa "palco di tavole, ripiano di legno"), scherzare (da skerzan), schiena (da skēna), sgherro (da skarrjo "capitano"), sguattero (da wàhtari "guardiano), spaccare (da spahhan "fendere"), spalto, spanna (da spanna), spranga (da spanga), stamberga (da stainberga "casa di pietra"), stinco (da skinkā "femore, coscia"), stracco (da strak, "stanco"), strale (da strāl "freccia"), stronzo (da strunz "sterco"), stucco (da stukki "scorza"), tanfo (da thampf o tampf "vapore"), tuffare (da tauff(j)an "immergere"), zanna (da zann "dente"), zazzera (da zazera "ciocca di capelli"), schifo (da skiff, barchetta) and even Pizza da bizzan, mordere, boccone, tuscan bizza, and many, many more.

Angela, how many Ethruscan words are there in the italian language? Lingustics is King.

P.S: The map of L21 that you posted was outdated, look at the Eupedia map.

Angela
14-05-15, 03:39
It's not a matter of celebration it's a matter of heritage.

You should know that the father of italian language Dante Alighieri was discendent of a family of the longobardic aristocracy, his name was ALDIGHER (ALDI=noble) + (GAER=lance) and he was very proud of his noble ancestry. The Divina Commedia was “zeppa” (zeppjan = full) of longobardism, longobardic words.

Italian language is full of hundreds words of longobardic origin, among them: Guerra (da werra), balcone (da balk "palco di legname"), banca (da banka "panca"), bara (dabāra "lettiga"), castaldo (da gastald "amministratore dei beni sovrani"), federa (da fëdera "penna, piuma"), graffa e graffio (da krapfo "uncino"), greppia (da kruppja), grinza (da grimmisōn "corrugare"), guancia (da wangja o wankja), milza (da milzi), nocca (da knohha "nodo, nocca"), palco (da palk "trave"), palla (da palla), panca (panka "panca"), ricco (da rīhhi), riga (da rīga), russare (da hrūzzan), scaffale (da skafa "palco di tavole, ripiano di legno"), scherzare (da skerzan), schiena (da skēna), sgherro (da skarrjo "capitano"), sguattero (da wàhtari "guardiano), spaccare (da spahhan "fendere"), spalto, spanna (da spanna), spranga (da spanga), stamberga (da stainberga "casa di pietra"), stinco (da skinkā "femore, coscia"), stracco (da strak, "stanco"), strale (da strāl "freccia"), stronzo (da strunz "sterco"), stucco (da stukki "scorza"), tanfo (da thampf o tampf "vapore"), tuffare (da tauff(j)an "immergere"), zanna (da zann "dente"), zazzera (da zazera "ciocca di capelli"), schifo (da skiff, barchetta) and even Pizza da bizzan, mordere, boccone, tuscan bizza, and many, many more.

Angela, how many Ethruscan words are there in the italian language? Lingustics is King.

P.S: The map of L21 that you posted was outdated, look at the Eupedia map.

Italian is a Latin language. The presence of a couple of hundred loan words in Italian, or place names or surnames from the Langobardi are of minor importance in the broad scheme of things.

I have no doubt that there was more Langobard ancestry in aristocratic families than in the vast majority of the populace.

As for Dante, a less Langobard looking man I can scarcely imagine. Plus, nobody's perfect, not even the divine Dante. :)

L21 is in France, no matter whose map you use, and L21 is in northwest Italy, which was subject to documented folk migrations by the Celts in the first millennium BC.

A connection with the Normans, who have no historical connection with these areas at all, is not persuasive.

Ed. This is off topic for this thread, as I already pointed out. Just use the search engine to find the thread for the Langobards in Italy.

Angela
14-05-15, 03:54
What were the names of these Etruscan families?

I can't find the paper, but I don't know that the names were listed in the source I read. I'll keep looking though when I have a chance.

However, "The Etruscan World", edited by Jean MacIntosh Turfa, is a very good source for the Etruscans, and you can find the following named prominent Etruscan families very late in Roman history:

7236

7237

This is a list of Etruscan names taken from monuments etc. It also includes some place names and a few words.
http://www.peiraeuspubliclibrary.com/names/europa/etruscan.html

Angela
14-05-15, 04:09
This textbook, "The Etruscan World", has an excellent chapter by Dominique Briquel on the opinions of the ancient authors on the ethnogenesis of the Etruscans.

It's the best compilation of information I've seen. Apparently, many ancient authors opined on the subject whose work hasn't survived. I also actually didn't remember what a long treatise Dionysius wrote on the subject. Were he alive today he'd make one heck of a lawyer. :) Not a surprise, a lawyer is a rhetorician by another name.

Oh, apparently people were familiar with the language the Pelasgians spoke, and Dionysius, at least, didn't think it resembled Etruscan.

https://books.google.com/books?id=n5g3h5G16EkC&q=Lydia#v=onepage&q=Lydia&f=false

Sile
14-05-15, 05:04
It's not a matter of celebration it's a matter of heritage.

You should know that the father of italian language Dante Alighieri was discendent of a family of the longobardic aristocracy, his name was ALDIGHER (ALDI=noble) + (GAER=lance) and he was very proud of his noble ancestry. The Divina Commedia was “zeppa” (zeppjan = full) of longobardism, longobardic words.

Italian language is full of hundreds words of longobardic origin, among them: Guerra (da werra), balcone (da balk "palco di legname"), banca (da banka "panca"), bara (dabāra "lettiga"), castaldo (da gastald "amministratore dei beni sovrani"), federa (da fëdera "penna, piuma"), graffa e graffio (da krapfo "uncino"), greppia (da kruppja), grinza (da grimmisōn "corrugare"), guancia (da wangja o wankja), milza (da milzi), nocca (da knohha "nodo, nocca"), palco (da palk "trave"), palla (da palla), panca (panka "panca"), ricco (da rīhhi), riga (da rīga), russare (da hrūzzan), scaffale (da skafa "palco di tavole, ripiano di legno"), scherzare (da skerzan), schiena (da skēna), sgherro (da skarrjo "capitano"), sguattero (da wàhtari "guardiano), spaccare (da spahhan "fendere"), spalto, spanna (da spanna), spranga (da spanga), stamberga (da stainberga "casa di pietra"), stinco (da skinkā "femore, coscia"), stracco (da strak, "stanco"), strale (da strāl "freccia"), stronzo (da strunz "sterco"), stucco (da stukki "scorza"), tanfo (da thampf o tampf "vapore"), tuffare (da tauff(j)an "immergere"), zanna (da zann "dente"), zazzera (da zazera "ciocca di capelli"), schifo (da skiff, barchetta) and even Pizza da bizzan, mordere, boccone, tuscan bizza, and many, many more.

Angela, how many Ethruscan words are there in the italian language? Lingustics is King.

P.S: The map of L21 that you posted was outdated, look at the Eupedia map.


you mean ger = lance
e ger (lancia), può essere tradotto come vecchia lancia

gher surname endings are typical of Friuliani , triestini and gorizani

certain endings of surname are regional in origin and will remain regional
and some are shared regionally......like the tour of italy stage winner today , Davide Formolo ...Olo endings are molise or veneto............

Ini endings , usually abruzzo or puglia


It is not always the case, but one has a start

bighipert
14-05-15, 08:37
you mean ger = lance
e ger (lancia), può essere tradotto come vecchia lancia

longobardic gaire = lance, gairethinx in Edictum Rothari, St. Gallen, "assembly of the people in arms". Look for "The Origins of the European Legal Order"

Dante's surnames means "noble lance" or "old lance"

bighipert
14-05-15, 08:49
Italian is a Latin language Sure? European language most similar to Latin is Romanian. Italian is a Romance language.



Ed. This is off topic for this thread, as I already pointed out. Just use the search engine to find the thread for the Langobards in Italy. "Che fai? Mi cacci?" [cit.]

Vallicanus
14-05-15, 09:25
Italian is a Latin language. The presence of a couple of hundred loan words in Italian, or place names or surnames from the Langobardi are of minor importance in the broad scheme of things.

I have no doubt that there was more Langobard ancestry in aristocratic families than in the vast majority of the populace.

As for Dante, a less Langobard looking man I can scarcely imagine. Plus, nobody's perfect, not even the divine Dante. :)



The depictions and descriptions of Dante indicate a dark, very non-Langobard-looking individual.

Mars
14-05-15, 12:17
Arezzo (Tuscany), Ariadne (Etruscan: Areatha)

http://firenze.repubblica.it/images/2011/03/04/163638509-df5117c5-826f-41b8-b4e5-abd938ed2c99.jpg

Minister Maria Elena Boschi from Montevarchi, Province of Arezzo:

http://images.vanityfair.it/Storage/Assets/Crops/345352/53/176763/Maria-Elena-Boschi-VF-16-2014_980x571.jpg

Excuse me for not posting her pic diectly. I have a lot of trouble with Eupedia, I can never post pictures and even digiting text is difficult, I don't know the reason...

bighipert
14-05-15, 15:09
Minister Maria Elena Boschi from Montevarchi, Province of Arezzo:

http://images.vanityfair.it/Storage/Assets/Crops/345352/53/176763/Maria-Elena-Boschi-VF-16-2014_980x571.jpg

Excuse me for not posting her pic diectly. I have a lot of trouble with Eupedia, I can never post pictures and even digiting text is difficult, I don't know the reason...

Boschi is a germanic surname http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Bosch

Angela
14-05-15, 15:22
Minister Maria Elena Boschi from Montevarchi, Province of Arezzo:

http://images.vanityfair.it/Storage/Assets/Crops/345352/53/176763/Maria-Elena-Boschi-VF-16-2014_980x571.jpg

Excuse me for not posting her pic diectly. I have a lot of trouble with Eupedia, I can never post pictures and even digiting text is difficult, I don't know the reason...

Mars, when you want to post a picture, first capture or copy the url of the picture. Then click on the picture screen icon here. At that point, click on "from url". Remove the check from remove remote file box. Then paste in the url and click ok. That should work.

Ed. make sure you click on the url box until you see the cursor before you paste in the url itself.

Angela
14-05-15, 20:02
The depictions and descriptions of Dante indicate a dark, very non-Langobard-looking individual.

QUOTE=Vallicanus;457069]The depictions and descriptions of Dante indicate a dark, very non-Langobard-looking individual.[/QUOTE]

Why does everything boil down to pigmentation with you? First of all, Dante is well within the European range as portraits of him which have been restored show. This is a reconstruction from his skull. It matches quite well some of the portraits. Some depictions are very much more severe, so we can't know for sure, and we know the perils of reconstructions. However, as I said, within the range of European variation, although definitely not Langobard looking.
http://www.elpais.com/recorte/20070112elpepucul_1/LCO340/Ies/verdadero_rostro_Dante_Aliguieri.jpg

http://www.internetculturale.it/opencms/directories/ViaggiNelTesto/dante/eng/thumb/a2.jpg

http://icdn.lenta.ru/images/2013/09/25/17/20130925170332573/pic_4e82041582c89d89b505e3e228bd472c.jpg


Much more important, his little finger is worth more than all the Langobard nobles put together in the grand scheme of European civilization, in my opinion, and I say that as someone who, given the fact that every hill in my area is crowned with a "Lombard" castle, and whose family tree contains more than one surname of Langobard derivation, probably carries some of their dna.


I used to have a "go" bag in case our local nuclear power plant exploded...Dante, a copy of The Complete Works of Shakespeare, and Montale were part of my "survival" kit. :)

For both you and Bighibert, this is a thread on the Etruscans. The next post on the Langobards after this one will be removed to a thread on their presence in Italy. Goodness knows I don't use a heavy hand as a moderator, but my patience is not infinite, especially with people who repeatedly try to bring their anthrofora war on Italians to this site, trying to place them as outliers in Europe, and the other side piping in to paint them as Norwegians. ENOUGH!

I am going to post on the appropriate thread my response to some of this discussion, because I am sometimes misquoted or misinterpreted.

Kardu
14-05-15, 22:00
I've seen Dante's type of nose/profile on several people in Toscana. Even my teacher of Italian had it :)

Mars
14-05-15, 22:44
Mars, when you want to post a picture, first capture or copy the url of the picture. Then click on the picture screen icon here. At that point, click on "from url". Remove the check from remove remote file box. Then paste in the url and click ok. That should work.

Ed. make sure you click on the url box until you see the cursor before you paste in the url itself.
It works!!! Thank you
So, compare Maria Elena Boschi, politician from the Arezzo area, and the statue of goddess Ariadne (from Arezzo). I find similarities (well, comparing a person to a statue isn't that easy, I know... but the facial structure is similar)
http://images.vanityfair.it/Storage/Assets/Crops/345352/53/176763/Maria-Elena-Boschi-VF-16-2014_980x571.jpg
http://www.classictuscanhomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/arianna.jpg
http://www.unita.it/polopoly_fs/1.561881.1396799653!/image/1942282481.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_638/1942282481.jpg

wlkwos
14-05-15, 23:41
How do you explain this? Etruscans have clearly strong IE.


Etruscan pendant with swastika symbols, Bolsena, central Italy, 700-650 BC. Louvre Museum.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Etruscan_pendant_with_swastika_symbols_Bolsena_Ita ly_700_BCE_to_650_BCE.jpg


Bronze kardiophylax (pectoral armor)
Etruscan or Central Italian
ca. 675-625 BCE

British Museum, London
Blacas Collection
GR 1867.5-8.374
Bronze 368
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3411/3491901661_36291eb281.jpg


Barrel-shaped oinochoe (jug) with goats planking a tree and geometric patterns, Etruscan, Italo-Geometric, ca. 725-700 B.Cc. Terracotta


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-17MaIZaGkh0/UDZ4gK0mvXI/AAAAAAAADqg/bXoaGjM0M9U/s1600/Swastika+Etruscan+Art.jpg


Etruscan antefix in the shape of a female bust with squares and swastikas C.500BC

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ec/4c/f9/ec4cf9b4ccd6e4b816002f60f3e57a3b.jpg

Etruscan necropolis

http://www.proswastika.org/thumb.php?id=c3JjPWUxMDdfaW1hZ2VzL25ld3Nwb3N0X2ltY Wdlcy9ldXJvcGVfZXRydXNjYW5fbmVjcm9wb2xlaXMuanBnJmF 3PTYyMA==

Angela
15-05-15, 03:18
It works!!! Thank you
So, compare Maria Elena Boschi, politician from the Arezzo area, and the statue of goddess Ariadne (from Arezzo). I find similarities (well, comparing a person to a statue isn't that easy, I know... but the facial structure is similar)



The mouth is off in terms of the Etruscan lady, don't you think? Too big and wide? In the first picture maybe Boschi's face is narrower and her chin is longer? Although, the Etruscan lady is older and heavier so that may account for the fuller face to some degree. I have the same type of face and I can tell you that the weight goes to my face first...very distressing. :)


Or going back to yesteryear...
http://www.solaresdellearti.it/img/rassegne/FotoRassegnaSito.jpg

I always liked this Etruscan girl, so serious and self possessed:
http://www.vroma.org/images/raia_images/etrusgirl2.jpg

This one reminds me of her...
7247


Or this one...with a sun bronzed look...
7246

Just click to enlarge the small ones.


This Bronzino is one of my favorite Renaissance portraits...all my aunts had this color hair when they were young...unfortunately it fades so quickly...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/31/40/f4/3140f4326c85fab02b38f4040ca8a779.jpg

Ah well, where is Moesan? :)

Ed. This one looks like Chiara Francini to me, and she was Tuscan as well, I believe.

Vallicanus
15-05-15, 09:16
Boschi is a germanic surname http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Bosch

Boschi merely implies a dweller in the woods.

She looks very Tuscan, and not Langobard in the old Germanic sense.

Genetic testing shows that Tuscans are mainly South European within an Italian cline.

Angela
15-05-15, 18:47
Boschi merely implies a dweller in the woods.

She looks very Tuscan, and not Langobard in the old Germanic sense.

Genetic testing shows that Tuscans are mainly South European within an Italian cline.

I wouldn't disagree with your latter statement.

However, what about Elena Boschi strikes you as particularly Tuscan? In contrast to other regions of Italy or the rest of Europe for that matter?

It amazes me that a Scot living in Scotland has such a detailed knowledge of Tuscan phenotypes. Positioned as they are genetically between northern Italians and southern Italians, or even, more precisely, between northern Italians and even central Italians, I've not found that there is one "Tuscan" look. There is a great diversity of phenotype...it's not like some places in northern Europe where there is so much uniformity, you know, and even there, even as a visitor, I can see variation.

In addition to Elena Boschi:

Elena Ricci
https://yt3.ggpht.com/-YO8xcQ0jo9E/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/iN4yl4S69jQ/s900-c-k-no/photo.jpg

Vittoria Puccini:
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/wennpic/vittoria-puccini-68th-venice-film-festival-01.jpg

Valentina Banci:
http://www.metastasio.net/media/compagnia-stabile/valentina-banci.jpg

Chiara Francini: (I just noticed it...doesn't she look a lot like Carice Van Hooten...perhaps someone should inform her she looks unmistakeably Tuscan. :)
http://files.gossip.it/images5/1355491252_.jpg


You cannot get more Tuscan than these surnames.

I don't want to give the impression that all Tuscan women are fair, because that's not true. These are just modern actresses whom I know to be Tuscan. I'll have to look up some of the ones from older eras to give a full presentation, because different time periods "promote" certain looks perhaps...

I'm really curious, you think people seeing these women in another part of the world would say...yep...they're definitely Tuscan?

Ed. However, I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but for whatever reason, Tuscan women do tend to be fairer than the men...

Angela
15-05-15, 19:07
I don't want this to turn into a phenotype thread, but...


Francesca Bertini...I already posted her...They had to exaggerate so much in the silent screen era...
http://video.archivioluce.com/foto/high//CM/CM02/CM00000158d.jpg

Two Tuscan directors...Benigni:
https://newsfromtshirts.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/berlinguer28.jpg

Zeffirelli:
http://cineplex.media.baselineresearch.com/images/135615/135615_full.jpg

Oriana Fallaci when she was young and not quite so stern...you can look at my avatar for a later version...she got better looking with age, I think.
http://www.oriana-fallaci.com/img/gliarticoli.jpg

Angela
15-05-15, 19:27
My favorite Tuscan...Puccini...at his piano...
http://www.turismo.intoscana.it/allthingstuscany/aroundtuscany/files/2011/07/puccini_39__800_800.jpg

Pax Augusta
15-05-15, 19:53
Positioned as they are genetically between northern Italians and southern Italians, or even, more precisely, between northern Italians and even central Italians, I've not found that there is one "Tuscan" look. There is a great diversity of phenotype...it's not like some places in northern Europe where there is so much uniformity, you know, and even there, even as a visitor, I can see variation.

Of course it doesn't exist only one "Tuscan" look. There is a great diversity of phenotypes as in all (hypothetical) ethnic or sub ethnic groups.

Some of them to my eyes look very Tuscan (Boschi including) though. Chiara Francini is extremely typical.

Maria Tucci I don't think she is full Tuscan, probably only 1/4; his father Niccolò was born in Switzerland from a Russian mother and an Italian father. Niccolò married a noble woman of the Rusconi family (mother of Maria). Rusconi are not Tuscan.

Oriana Fallaci had also a typical "Tuscan" face. Vittoria Puccini and Franco Zeffirelli haven't probably the most common faces but they aren't rare.

Pax Augusta
15-05-15, 20:07
It deservers a reading.

"Marie-Laurence Haack, The invention of the Etruscan "race". E. Fischer, nazi geneticist, and the Etruscans, Quaderni di storia, 80, luglio-dicembre 2014, p. 251-282".

https://www.academia.edu/8613335/The_invention_of_the_Etruscan_race_._E._Fischer_na zi_geneticist_and_the_Etruscans_Quaderni_di_storia _80_luglio-dicembre_2014_p._251-282

How many Nazi geneticists are still around?

A portrait of Eugen Fischer, German professor of medicine, anthropology and eugenics. He was director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics between 1927 and 1942. He was appointed rector of the Frederick William University of Berlin by Adolf Hitler in 1933, and later joined the Nazi Party.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HRdfUt10xto/VFS0aORdp6I/AAAAAAAAB0A/pF3SGrzLgPQ/s1600/Eugen-Fischer-2.jpg

Vallicanus
15-05-15, 20:22
@Angela

The French blogger Herau agrees that Tuscan women are often lighter than the men. See his Tuscany photos in his Anthroeurope site.

Pax Augusta
15-05-15, 20:29
@Angela

The French blogger Herau agrees that Tuscan women are often lighter than the men. See his Tuscany photos in his Anthroeurope site.

I have seen that blog. The blogger is even less than an hobbyist, many people in the pics aren't even Italian.

Angela
15-05-15, 20:43
Of course it doesn't exist only one "Tuscan" look. There is a great diversity of phenotypes as in all (hypothetical) ethnic or sub ethnic groups.

Some of them to my eyes look very Tuscan (Boschi including) though. Chiara Francini is extremely typical.

Maria Tucci I don't think she is full Tuscan, probably only 1/4; his father Niccolò was born in Switzerland from a Russian mother and an Italian father. Niccolò married a noble woman of the Rusconi family (mother of Maria). Rusconi are not Tuscan.

Oriana Fallaci had also a typical "Tuscan" face. Vittoria Puccini and Franco Zeffirelli haven't probably the most common faces but they aren't rare.

I'll remove Maria Tucci.

I've always thought that a pretty good way to get an idea of the way people "used to" look in specific areas of Italy is to google something like "corteo storico" and add the name of a small town. As here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Corteo+storico-Certaldo,+Toscana&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=6j1WVYeyGPeUsQT9o4DABA&ved=0CB4QsAQ&biw=1047&bih=504#imgrc=tdfA0oCQMtTGQM%253A%3BmSk3XzCuJb66ZM %3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.jafovideo.it%252Fpublic% 252Fgallery3%252F245bc029152fcd5fbf3a76d412fa852a. jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.jafovideo.it%252Ffoto .php%253Fcat%253DEventi%3B958%3B550

Vallicanus
15-05-15, 20:43
He claims to use only local surnames in searching out photos.

Pax Augusta
15-05-15, 21:00
He claims to use only local surnames in searching out photos.

He can claim what he wants. I highly doubt that a French knows really the local surnames of every Italian region. But assuming that what he claims is true, it means nothing. A local surname doesn't imply that your ancestry is fully from there.




I've always thought that a pretty good way to get an idea of the way people "used to" look in specific areas of Italy is to google something like "corteo storico" and add the name of a small town. As here:

Yes, but considering that also in a small town there have been migrations. Btw in these pics through the google search there are clearly some foreigners like those of Mercanzia. :)

Vallicanus
15-05-15, 21:11
He can claim what he wants. I highly doubt that a French knows really the local surnames of every Italian region. But assuming that what he claims is true, it means nothing. A local surname doesn't imply that your ancestry is fully from there.




I'm not defending Herau.

I'm only saying that he agreed with Angela that Tuscan women are often lighter in colouring than the men.

Angela
15-05-15, 21:20
He can claim what he wants. I highly doubt that a French knows really the local surnames of every Italian region. But assuming that what he claims is true, it means nothing. A local surname doesn't imply that your ancestry is fully from there.



Yes, but considering that also in a small town there have been migrations. Btw in these pics through the google search there are clearly some foreigners like those of Mercanzia. :)

I would think people would know enough about google searches to click on each picture and follow the link to the site to make sure it's related to the topic.

There have been migrations everywhere...The discussion moved from Herodotus' theory on the origins of the Etruscans to the phenotypes of modern "Tuscans". My fault more than that of anyone else. My point, for non-Italians, before we leave this digression, was that if you want to know what "Tuscans" looked like before the emigration from the south, and other areas in recent times, these kinds of photos are a pretty good bet, even though some of them might have some "foreign" admixture.

And yes, even someone from a couple of kilometers away can be considered a "foreigner". :) The old women used to tell me not to date anyone from Santo Stefano di Magra because they were all descended from "foreign" pirates, and they would undoubtedly treat me badly. Sometimes I wonder if they were right...
"moglie e buoi dei paesi tuoi"...just reverse the sex. I would have had to pick the paese, though...there were three in the running...:)

Pax Augusta
15-05-15, 21:47
It's not a matter of celebration it's a matter of heritage.

You should know that the father of italian language Dante Alighieri was discendent of a family of the longobardic aristocracy, his name was ALDIGHER (ALDI=noble) + (GAER=lance) and he was very proud of his noble ancestry. The Divina Commedia was “zeppa” (zeppjan = full) of longobardism, longobardic words.

Italian language is full of hundreds words of longobardic origin, among them: Guerra (da werra), balcone (da balk "palco di legname"), banca (da banka "panca"), bara (dabāra "lettiga"), castaldo (da gastald "amministratore dei beni sovrani"), federa (da fëdera "penna, piuma"), graffa e graffio (da krapfo "uncino"), greppia (da kruppja), grinza (da grimmisōn "corrugare"), guancia (da wangja o wankja), milza (da milzi), nocca (da knohha "nodo, nocca"), palco (da palk "trave"), palla (da palla), panca (panka "panca"), ricco (da rīhhi), riga (da rīga), russare (da hrūzzan), scaffale (da skafa "palco di tavole, ripiano di legno"), scherzare (da skerzan), schiena (da skēna), sgherro (da skarrjo "capitano"), sguattero (da wàhtari "guardiano), spaccare (da spahhan "fendere"), spalto, spanna (da spanna), spranga (da spanga), stamberga (da stainberga "casa di pietra"), stinco (da skinkā "femore, coscia"), stracco (da strak, "stanco"), strale (da strāl "freccia"), stronzo (da strunz "sterco"), stucco (da stukki "scorza"), tanfo (da thampf o tampf "vapore"), tuffare (da tauff(j)an "immergere"), zanna (da zann "dente"), zazzera (da zazera "ciocca di capelli"), schifo (da skiff, barchetta) and even Pizza da bizzan, mordere, boccone, tuscan bizza, and many, many more.

Angela, how many Ethruscan words are there in the italian language? Lingustics is King.

The great influence that Germanic languages had on Latin in early Middle Ages is well known. There are some Etruscan words even in the Italian and English, but you're comparing two different historical period. Of course the Germanic influence is stronger but also more recent.

Dante Alighieri wasn't the discendent of a family of the longobardic aristocracy. Your source? He came from a family of the Florentine gentry. Alighiero is really an Italian name of Germanic origin, such as there are Germanic names of Latin origin. It's just onomastics with no ethnic implications.

Alighieri is said to be the name of Dante's ancestor, Alighiero di Cacciaguida. But Dante could have been named after his father, Alighiero di Bellincione: Dante di Alighiero, full name Durante di Alighiero degli Alighieri, named Dante short for Durante.



Boschi is a germanic surname http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Bosch

You're confused on how onomastics works. Boschi is an Italian surname, the variant Bosco is extremely common and considered panitalian. Boschi and Bosco both come from the Italian word "bosco" (wood, woodland), derived from medieval Latin buscus or boscus. Classic Latin language had at least 2 or 3 different terms for a wood (silva, nemus, lucus) but medieval Latin buscus is indeed of Germanic origin (from Old High German busk) due to the great influence that Germanic languages had on Latin in early Middle Ages but it has nothing to do with the ethnicity.

Angela
15-05-15, 23:02
It deservers a reading.

"Marie-Laurence Haack, The invention of the Etruscan "race". E. Fischer, nazi geneticist, and the Etruscans, Quaderni di storia, 80, luglio-dicembre 2014, p. 251-282".

https://www.academia.edu/8613335/The_invention_of_the_Etruscan_race_._E._Fischer_na zi_geneticist_and_the_Etruscans_Quaderni_di_storia _80_luglio-dicembre_2014_p._251-282

How many Nazi geneticists are still around?

A portrait of Eugen Fischer, German professor of medicine, anthropology and eugenics. He was director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics between 1927 and 1942. He was appointed rector of the Frederick William University of Berlin by Adolf Hitler in 1933, and later joined the Nazi Party.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HRdfUt10xto/VFS0aORdp6I/AAAAAAAAB0A/pF3SGrzLgPQ/s1600/Eugen-Fischer-2.jpg

Are you being facetious? The internet is full of this bilge. Sloshing through it can give you the mental equivalent of typhoid fever. :)

I read it. Mostly it seems to be an explanation or summary of the typical circular reasoning and a scientific thinking that was typical of them. Their, and his, arguments all seem to spring from a desire to glorify their own "phenotype" by accruing to it all the achievements of mankind, and to correspondingly denigrate all the others. There were all the mental gymnastics required when Mussolini allied the Italians with them, too.

Or did you mean the bits where he attempts to define the Etruscan "race" and finds its source in the "Indo-Germans", by which he means the "Indo-Europeans" who went to northern Asia Minor? Too bad Etruscan isn't an Indo-European language. The Etruscans seem to always have been the subject of a tug of war between those who want to see them as "Indo-Germans" and those who want to see them as "Orientals" or Near Easterners. Well, whatever the details of the ethnogenesis they wound up to be southern Europeans, it seems.

I wonder what he would have done if he got a flash into the future and found out that the "Indo-Europeans" can be modeled as half ancient Karelian like and half Iraqi Jew? Maybe he would have committed the Nazi equivalent of hara kiri? :)

As for his phenotype, I've always found it amusing how many "Mediterranean looking" people, broadly speaking, there were among them. :) Well, people can convince themselves of anything, it seems.

bighipert
16-05-15, 00:09
Pax Augusta, Italian is the romance language with the highest number of loanwords from Germanic because of its Longobardic superstrate. Longobardic linguistic influence was higher in the northern dialects and in the Tuscan language. The modern language most similar to Latin is Romanian not Italian.

Want to discover the Tuscan heritage? Then before continuing to post, read the Editto di Rotari, the only copy ist in St. Gallen, you can't find it very easily in italian translation but I made a translation from German http://bighipert.blogspot.it/p/leditto-d.html Good Reading

About Dante: The Divina Commedia is full of Longobardic words: "S'e' ode squilla di lontano" squilla dal longobardo skwilla = campana, "mei foste state qui pecore o zebe!" zebe = capre

Angela
16-05-15, 00:24
Pax Augusta, Italian is the romance language with the highest number of loanwords from Germanic because of its Longobardic superstrate. Longobardic linguistic influence was higher in the northern dialects and in the Tuscan language. The modern language most similar to Latin is Romanian not Italian.

Want to discover the Tuscan heritage? Then before continuing to post, read the Editto di Rotari, the only copy ist in St. Gallen, you can't find it very easily in italian translation but I made a translation from German http://bighipert.blogspot.it/p/leditto-d.html Good Reading

About Dante: The Divina Commedia is full of Longobardic words: "S'e' ode squilla di lontano" squilla dal longobardo skwilla = campana, "mei foste state qui pecore o zebe!" zebe = capre

I'm not going to say this again. Take your language discussion about the influence of Langobard on Italian to language threads or at least Lombard dna threads, and your obsession with Germanic influence on Italians to the Lombard thread as well. The next totally off topic post will just be removed. I'm tired of wasting time moving posts to the proper threads.

Kardu
16-05-15, 00:53
Etruscan ancestry or not I found women in Toscana remarkably pretty. Still vividly recall beautiful green-eyed guide from Palazzo Strozzi in Florence :)

Yetos
16-05-15, 01:23
This textbook, "The Etruscan World", has an excellent chapter by Dominique Briquel on the opinions of the ancient authors on the ethnogenesis of the Etruscans.

It's the best compilation of information I've seen. Apparently, many ancient authors opined on the subject whose workhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) hasn't survived. I also actually didn't remember what a long treatise Dionysius wrote on the subject. Were he alive today he'd make one heck of a lawyer. :) Not a surprise, a lawyer is a rhetorician by another name.

Oh, apparently peoplehttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) were familiar with the language the Pelasgians spoke, and Dionysius, at least, didn't think it resembled Etruscan.

https://books.google.com/books?id=n5g3h5G16EkC&q=Lydia#v=onepage&q=Lydia&f=false



ok I read it

I can not find transalations, but seems Greek archaiologists found etruscan religious remnants also in island of Tηνος Τinos before 800-700 BC

http://www.academia.edu/4681120/%CE%A7%CE%AC%CF%81%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%9C%CE%B9%CF%87. _%CE%9A%CE%BF%CF%85%CF%84%CE%B5%CE%BB%CE%AC%CE%BA% CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%B4%CF%81_%CE%91%CF%81%CF%87%CE%B1% CE%B9%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%AF%CE%B1%CF%82-%CE%99%CF%83%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C%C F%82_%CE%97_%CE%91%CE%A1%CE%A7%CE%91%CE%99%CE%91_% CE%A4%CE%97%CE%9D%CE%9F%CE%A3_%CE%A3%CE%A4%CE%9F_% CE%9C%CE%99%CE%9A%CE%A1%CE%9F%CE%A3%CE%9A%CE%9F%CE %A0%CE%99%CE%9F


also a Historian which even today no one dare to chalange him Thoukidides

The same winter the Megarians took and razed to the foundations the long walls which had been occupied by the Athenians; and Brasidas after the capture of Amphipolis (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=perseus,Amphipolis&n=1&type=place) marched with his allies against Acte, [2] a promontory running out from the king's dike with an inward curve, and ending in Athos (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002722&n=1&type=place), a lofty mountain looking towards the Aegean (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002675&n=1&type=place) sea. [3] In it are various towns, Sane, an Andrian colony, close to the canal, and facing the sea in the direction of Euboea (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002677&n=1&type=place); the others being Thyssus, Cleone, Acrothoi, Olophyxus, [4] and Dium, inhabited by mixed barbarian races speaking the two languages. There is also a small Chalcidian element; but the greater number are Tyrrheno-Pelasgians once settled in Lemnos (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7011173&n=1&type=place) and Athens (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=perseus,Athens&n=1&type=place), and Bisaltians, Crestonians, and Edonians; the towns being all small ones. [5] Most of these came over to Brasidas; but Sane and Dium held out and saw their land ravaged by him and his armyhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:chapter= 109&highlight=athos#).

Yetos
16-05-15, 01:25
OK IF YOU READ ALL THE ABOVE

WHO CAN ANSWER?

and a question about the daring theory of the Hattians or compatible of Lydians,
1) Tarhuntassa could be the early capital? before hettit? Tarconia
2) Arkadians their legend, if Arzawa/Assuwa were not IE, could they be the Pelasgians/proto-thyrrenians?
3) could Homer's Σειρηναι Σειρηνες mean Sardinians or Thyrsenians and Κυρνος/Συρνος? (Κυρνος -> Kurnos Curnos Cerni Cerini Serini Surnos?)
compare Thalatta->Thalassa t <-> s

Pillar_of_Fire
16-05-15, 10:02
O.K., this is the name of the paper:
"Assessment of Whole-Genome capture methodologies on single- and double-stranded ancient DNA libraries from
Caribbean and European archaeological human remains"
Maria C Avila Arcos et al

Catchy title, right? :)



That's all that's available so far, which tells us nothing. I'll keep searching.

The preprint is on biorxiv.org/content/early/2014/07/24/007419 under the title of Comparative Performance of Two Whole Genome Capture Methodologies on Ancient DNA Illumina Libraries

bighipert
16-05-15, 11:30
Angela, it could be interesting for you to take a look to the Livi's maps of 1860 (immediately after the Union). The genetic specificity of the tuscans emerges dramatically, and doesn't point to a fanciful Etruscan ancestry. In this map you have in blue the diffusion of "pure blond type" (blond hair with fair eyes). Another genetic factor that emerges from these maps is the tall of the Tuscans among the higher in Italy.

7250

Angela
16-05-15, 17:44
Angela, it could be interesting for you to take a look to the Livi's maps of 1860 (immediately after the Union). The genetic specificity of the tuscans emerges dramatically, and doesn't point to a fanciful Etruscan ancestry. In this map you have in blue the diffusion of "pure blond type" (blond hair with fair eyes). Another genetic factor that emerges from these maps is the tall of the Tuscans among the higher in Italy.

7250

We've often discussed Livi's work here. There's also no need to tell me that there are a lot of fair Tuscans. My mother's home region is the Lunigiana, which has been administratively part of Toscana for hundreds of years, even if it has just as many similarities to Emilia and Liguria (my other two ancestral areas) as to Toscana. I was also born there, spent my childhood there, and have spent some part of every year there ever since. I very often "go down" into Toscana proper, as they say there...quite my favorite region of Italy, well, that and Liguria.

As to the pigmentation of the Etruscans, their art, particularly the funerary art which depicts the upper class families and their servants, makes it clear that there were fair individuals amongst them. One also has to consider the conventions of the art of the time, where men were often depicted as darker than women, and also the fact that while Etruscan art is almost always unique in its motifs, attitudes, and what could be called its world view, it's undeniable that some aspects of it, whether created by Etruscans or imported Greek artisans, is derivative of the Greek art of the time. This all makes it very difficult to assign any sorts of percentages to the Etruscans in terms of these pigmentation issues which so fascinate some people.
http://urnsthroughtime.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/tarquinia1.jpg

http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Med/Etruscan_tomb/Tomb_painting4.jpg

As for height in terms of the Etruscans, I can't recommend highly enough the work I cited above, the 2013 "The Etruscan World", edited by Jean MacIntosh Turfa. It is a 1200 page compendium of the work of the leading Etruscologists from around the world. It's extraordinarily expensive, however, $250 U.S. dollars, so I am reading excerpts from google play. In the chapter about Etruscan demography by Geof Kron, he specifically points out that, "on the whole, Greco-Roman final heights suggest a significantly better level of nutrition and health than that experienced by the working classes of Western Europe prior to the mid-twentieth century for most countries (references in Kron 2005; Dron 2012b)."

This resulted in mean heights for many adult male populations in 18th and 19th century Europe as low as 158 cm to around 162 cm, whereas "Roman era populations in Italy seem to have averaged mean male heights much closer to 168 cm, with Classical and Hellenistic Greeks typically reaching mean heights ranging from 170 to 172 cm."

Also, the evidence from individual Etruscan sites show "mean male heights for populations of the Etruscan region clustering around 169 or 170 cm or more..."

Btw, does anyone have a citation for the height of the Bronze Age "Indo-European" found in Poland? I don't remember his exact height in cm, but wasn't he around the same height or maybe an inch or two taller?

It's a mistake to transpose the heights of current European nationalities back into the past. The Dutch are now the tallest Europeans, I think, but at one time were much shorter. So, it's better to be cautious with these things.

In terms of Livi's data on height, my recollection is that the Italians of that time were, as a mean, about 162 cm, which is right in line with heights around Europe in the 19th century. In terms of Toscana, it depended on the area. The men of Lucca and surroundings were quite a bit shorter. If that's incorrect, please post a cite to the relevant data.

Regardless, it's pretty clear to me that diet is a big factor in all of this. I happen to be in almost constant contact with Italian Americans. :) The difference in height, and weight, in that case, unfortunately, between them and their grandparents is quite marked.

Vallicanus
16-05-15, 17:58
We've often discussed Livi's work here. There's also no need to tell me that there are a lot of fair Tuscans. My mother's home region is the Lunigiana, which has been administratively part of Toscana for hundreds of years, even if it has just as many similarities to Emilia and Liguria (my other two ancestral areas) as to Toscana. I was also born there, spent my childhood there, and have spent some part of every year there ever since. I very often "go down" into Toscana proper, as they say there...quite my favorite region of Italy, well, that and Liguria.

As to the pigmentation of the Etruscans, their art, particularly the funerary art which depicts the upper class families and their servants, makes it clear that there were fair individuals amongst them. One also has to consider the conventions of the art of the time, where men were often depicted as darker than women, and also the fact that while Etruscan art is almost always unique in its motifs, attitudes, and what could be called its world view, it's undeniable that some aspects of it, whether created by Etruscans or imported Greek artisans, is derivative of the Greek art of the time. This all makes it very difficult to assign any sorts of percentages to the Etruscans in terms of these pigmentation issues which so fascinate some people.
http://urnsthroughtime.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/tarquinia1.jpg

http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Med/Etruscan_tomb/Tomb_painting4.jpg

As for height in terms of the Etruscans, I can't recommend highly enough the work I cited above, the 2013 "The Etruscan World", edited by Jean MacIntosh Turfa. It is a 1200 page compendium of the work of the leading Etruscologists from around the world. It's extraordinarily expensive, however, $250 U.S. dollars, so I am reading excerpts from google play. In the chapter about Etruscan demography by Geof Kron, he specifically points out that, "on the whole, Greco-Roman final heights suggest a significantly better level of nutrition and health than that experienced by the working classes of Western Europe prior to the mid-twentieth century for most countries (references in Kron 2005; Dron 2012b)."

This resulted in mean heights for many adult male populations in 18th and 19th century Europe as low as 158 cm to around 162 cm, whereas "Roman era populations in Italy seem to have averaged mean male heights much closer to 168 cm, with Classical and Hellenistic Greeks typically reaching mean heights ranging from 170 to 172 cm."

Also, the evidence from individual Etruscan sites show "mean male heights for populations of the Etruscan region clustering around 169 or 170 cm or more..."

Btw, does anyone have a citation for the height of the Bronze Age "Indo-European" found in Poland? I don't remember his exact height in cm, but wasn't he around the same height or maybe an inch or two taller?

It's a mistake to transpose the heights of current European nationalities back into the past. The Dutch are now the tallest Europeans, I think, but at one time were much shorter. So, it's better to be cautious with these things.

In terms of Livi's data on height, my recollection is that the Italians of that time were, as a mean, about 162 cm, which is right in line with heights around Europe in the 19th century. In terms of Toscana, it depended on the area. The men of Lucca and surroundings were quite a bit shorter. If that's incorrect, please post a cite to the relevant data.

Regardless, it's pretty clear to me that diet is a big factor in all of this. I happen to be in almost constant contact with Italian Americans. :) The difference in height, and weight, in that case, unfortunately, between them and their grandparents is quite marked.

Excellent post.

Just one point. Livi's stature maps showed Lucca and the Garfagnana to be one of Italy's TALLEST areas.

Vallicanus
16-05-15, 18:09
In Biasutti's "Razze e Popoli della Terra" Volume 2, the Garfagnana is included in a relatively tall-statured mountain area straddling northern Tuscany and part of Emilia.

Vallicanus
16-05-15, 18:14
The old circondario of Lucca was also relatively dark with 6.8 pc blond and 33.3 pc black-haired despite Lucca being the seat of a Langobard duchy

bighipert
16-05-15, 19:03
Of the three Tuscans tested positive for R-U106 in the R1b-U106 project at FTDNA, two are from Lunigiana and one from Massa. One of the two from Lunigiana surname is Lombardi, but obviously is a random coincidence. Ethnonyms doesn't mean anything so the surname Romano has nothing to do with Romans, and Parisi, Santoni and Briganti have nothing to do with the respective Celtic tribes.

I should find an ethnonym for the Etruschi ... may be Truschi could be a good candidate, quite rare, but ... (drum roll) ... it is in Tuscany!

Angela
16-05-15, 19:33
Excellent post.

Just one point. Livi's stature maps showed Lucca and the Garfagnana to be one of Italy's TALLEST areas.

You're correct.

That's indeed what it says in this review of Livi's work:
https://books.google.it/books?id=x-AXAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA420&lpg=PA420&dq=Livi+-la+statura+degli+italiani&source=bl&ots=oJHVxiG4XO&sig=thByj6kccTVsmfhex4EgILYl86I&hl=it&sa=X&ei=AG1XVbTtKoieyQTCsIGQDw&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Livi%20-la%20statura%20degli%20italiani&f=false

"Castelnuovo di Garfagnana (a sub-district of Massa, in the Apennines) furnishes a striking contrast. It stands first among the districts of Italy in order of stature...but is very near the bottom of the scale of brachycephaly."

"Coterminous with it is the district of Lucca, second in order of stature, low in the scale of brachycephaly (79.8), and in colour darker than its neighbors."

It was the low brachycephaly and darker than average pigmentation that I was remembering. However, I've spent a lot of time in Lucca, and there is a difference between the people of the plain surrounding the city of Lucca, and the people in the mountains of the region of Lucca...areas around Barga and northwest, for example.


Vallicanus: In Biasutti's "Razze e Popoli della Terra" Volume 2, the Garfagnana is included in a relatively tall-statured mountain area straddling northern Tuscany and part of Emilia.

That I knew. In this area of Italy, mountains seem to be the determining factor. Anecdotally, for what it's worth, half of my ancestry stems from that part of Emilia and one quarter from the Lunigiana (which is included in the area called northern Tuscany), and I can attest that many people in those areas are very tall indeed. My grandmother, from the Emilian Apennines, was 5'10, and the men in her family often topped 6 feet by quite a bit. The people in charge of recruitment for the King's honor guard often came to that general area because of the height of the men. I have a few collateral relatives who were in it.

For a modern example, there's always Buffon, shown here with his mother, whose home village is a few kilometers from mine. (His other half is from the Veneto, another tall region of Italy.)
http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2011/06/17/115478-italy-keeper-buffon-marries-live-in-partner-model-seredova.jpg?itok=z1TNA4SU

There's also this:" Udine, Vicenza, Chiavari, all very high in stature all inclining to be blond, are diverse in head breadth; in the two former the heads are broad, in the two latter only moderately so. Pontremoli, Gallarate (Milan), Varese, Borgotaro (south of Parma) Guastalla, Pistoia, Perugia, Civitavecchia, and the neighborhood of Benevento (the ancient Samnium) are rather fair in comparison to their neigbors."

Pontremoli is the largest city in the Lunigiana and Borgotaro is, as indicated, south of Parma, my father's ancestral area. Depending on the map maker, both areas are sometimes located in the territory of the Ligures, who are now felt to be an Indo-European admixed people, at least. Somebody could also look at the trends and say it's down to generally "Celtic", "Gallic" influence...the Ligurians became "Celt-Ligurians", after all.

Now, bringing this back on topic, I don't know why this pattern exists. Ligurian tribes influened by the Celtic invasions were resettled in the general area around Benevento, and it was also a Langobard site. As you pointed out, however, Lucca is also a Langobard site but is rather dark, and the Lunigiana has been influenced by both the Celt-Ligurians and some Langobards. The Apennines south of Parma, however, have, to my knowledge, no connection to the Langobards.

As to connections with the Etruscans, they seem to have been relatively tall for their era, and had light and darker individuals. They might have had an influence in some of these areas and not very much in others. I'd also point out that the Tuscans of Siena or even closer to Rome are not very much like the "Tuscans" of the Garfagnana and the Lunigiana,who have only been part of Toscana for a few hundred years, and who instead, in my opinion, form a sort of genetic cluster with the mountain people of the Parma Appennines and are much closer to the people of the "Quattro Province" than to Tuscans proper:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quattro_Province

Specifically as to the Etruscans, they had fair haired and light skinned people among them as well, as did the Romans, as did Neolithic farmers, so I don't think this kind of pawing through history to try to find the "tribal" source is either informative, or, for me, interesting. We know a lot now about the recent selection for pigmentation traits in Europe regardless of where they originated, and we know that the "Yamnaya Indo-Europeans" were by no means blonde and blue eyed people, so I think a lot of these old conjectures have to be taken with a massive amount of salt.

In terms of height as I said before I think that diet is an important factor...my father's people ate huge quantities of dairy, and hardly used tomatoes at all...it snows more than half of the year there. Don't the Dutch have the highest overall consumption of dairy products? In terms of pigmentation, there has been, according to recent studies, selection against blue eyes in southern Europe, and, in my opinion, it makes eminent sense that, given the climate in many parts of Italy, there would be selection for more olive colored skin or at least skin that tans very well in most parts of Italy, or at least not very much selection for lighter colored skin.

MOESAN
16-05-15, 21:55
Boschi is a germanic surname http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Bosch

I'm sorry, this thread is becoming a little boring without more ancient and current toscan DNA but I feel myself obliged to precise things here, if i'm allowed to, spite it is not the very topic: because the same mistake appears very often: confusing origin of words with origin of personal surnames and origin of the people bearing these surnames:
the root 'BUSK':'BOSK' is without doubt of germanic origin: same as the french BOIS - but the italian word 'bosco' is no more germanic, it is an italian word borrowed from germanic, what is not the same - and the personal surnames were fixed surely some centuries after the loanword entered italian language, and every kind of Italian living in a region which dialect had this loanword, can have been surnamed BOSCO or BOSCHI without any link to any germanic origin.
here we are speaking about word passed in language and becoming surnames; but even borrowed achieved surnames don't mark true origin: French people bear a HUGE amount of germanic pre-medieval names (ROBERT/LOUIS/ENGUERRAN/ROGER/AUFFRAY-ALFRED:OURY/HENRY/CHARLES/ALLEAUME/AUBERT-ALBERT...it doesn't signify the people bearing this personal names become surnames during 16° century (family names) are of germanic origin, not more than Spanyards named RODRIGUEZ/ALVAREZ/FERNANDEZ...

Angela
16-05-15, 22:01
ok I read it

I can not find transalations, but seems Greek archaiologists found etruscan religious remnants also in island of Tηνος Τinos before 800-700 BC

http://www.academia.edu/4681120/%CE%A7%CE%AC%CF%81%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%9C%CE%B9%CF%87. _%CE%9A%CE%BF%CF%85%CF%84%CE%B5%CE%BB%CE%AC%CE%BA% CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%B4%CF%81_%CE%91%CF%81%CF%87%CE%B1% CE%B9%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%AF%CE%B1%CF%82-%CE%99%CF%83%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C%C F%82_%CE%97_%CE%91%CE%A1%CE%A7%CE%91%CE%99%CE%91_% CE%A4%CE%97%CE%9D%CE%9F%CE%A3_%CE%A3%CE%A4%CE%9F_% CE%9C%CE%99%CE%9A%CE%A1%CE%9F%CE%A3%CE%9A%CE%9F%CE %A0%CE%99%CE%9F


also a Historian which even today no one dare to chalange him Thoukidides

The same winter the Megarians took and razed to the foundations the long walls which had been occupied by the Athenians; and Brasidas after the capture of Amphipolis (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=perseus,Amphipolis&n=1&type=place) marched with his allies against Acte, [2] a promontory running out from the king's dike with an inward curve, and ending in Athos (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002722&n=1&type=place), a lofty mountain looking towards the Aegean (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002675&n=1&type=place) sea. [3] In it are various towns, Sane, an Andrian colony, close to the canal, and facing the sea in the direction of Euboea (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7002677&n=1&type=place); the others being Thyssus, Cleone, Acrothoi, Olophyxus, [4] and Dium, inhabited by mixed barbarian races speaking the two languages. There is also a small Chalcidian element; but the greater number are Tyrrheno-Pelasgians once settled in Lemnos (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=tgn,7011173&n=1&type=place) and Athens (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/entityvote?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:ch apter=109&auth=perseus,Athens&n=1&type=place), and Bisaltians, Crestonians, and Edonians; the towns being all small ones. [5] Most of these came over to Brasidas; but Sane and Dium held out and saw their land ravaged by him and his armyhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0200:book=4:chapter= 109&highlight=athos#).

Well, the conclusion of Briquet, and my conclusion after reading the chapter again, is that none of what these ancient writers say should be taken as a "scientific inquiry about the identity of a people."

As Briquet shows quite compellingly, I think, these ancient writers were not historians in the modern sense of the world. They wove together the stories of their gods and ancient heroes and modern cultural and trade associations into one big mish mash, and, as is the case for some people nowadays as well, they often had an agenda to promote.

Dionysius, as has been seen, supported the autochthonous origin. However, given the tenor of his entire work, some scholars believe he supported this theory largely to denigrate the Etruscans by showing them not to be Greek or civilized, but rather the barbarian pirates of common Greek perception.

As to Herodotus' claim, I would suggest reading the whole chapter by Briquet; it's not very long. To recap it, it appears in a much longer exposition of who invented the games. In the course of it he says that the Lydians maintained that they invented the games at the same time that they sent some settlers to "Tyrrhenia". It doesn't seem they were necessarily correct about who invented the games, and, of course, the area around the northern Aegean was also called "Tyrrhenia" at one point. Meanwhile, the Etruscan/Tyrrenians called themselves Rasenna. You see how it goes?

Also, as has been pointed out, Lydians spoke an Indo-European language, and the Lydian historian of the 5th century BC, Xanthos, had, according to Dionysius, never heard of the story.

As for the "Pelasgian" theory of Hellicanus, among others, both the Greeks and the Etruscans promoted it, but from the explanation of Briquet, both the Greeks and the Etruscans, although sometimes rivals in trade, were also allies in trade, and it was in both their interests to support a theory whereby the Greeks and the Etruscans were somewhat related.

From the text:
"Etruscans were barbarians; this connected them with a people whom the Greeks represented as having been established on the soil of Hellas even before themselves and constituting the source of several Hellenic populations of later times (especially the Athenians presented by Herodotus 1.56 as the finest example of a Greek people descended from the Pelasgians.)...He well understood an aspect that would have been a positive in the eyes of the Greeks: being of Pelasgian origin, the Etruscans could be perceived, if not as Greeks in the strict sense (because they did not speak Greek) at least as related to a people with whom the Greeks were linked. In short, considered as ancient Pelasgians, the Etruscans were quasi-Hellenes."

This putative "Pelasgian" origin was also helpful to the Etruscans. "It is no coincidence either that around the time that Hellicanus developed the tradition of the Pelasgian origin of the Etruscans (firth century BC)... these two Etruscan cities (Spina and Caere) were centers of active trade with the Greek world. They presented themelves as founded by Pelasgians, highlighted their syngeneia" with this nearly Hellenic people, and conferred on themselves a prestigious foundation for the bonds of exchange and commercial partnership."

I'm quite aware that there are people who would interpret this claim by the Etruscans as meaning they must indeed descend from the "Pelasgians". The Etruscans are like a Rohrschack test; people see what they want to see.

In that regard it should be noted that the Pelasgian spoken, according to Herodotus, in Placia and Sylace near the Hellespont, and in Chalcidice , not in Cortona, as sometimes averred, is held by Dionysius not to resemble Etruscan at all. Well, at least it seems everyone is in agreement that Pelasgian was still spoken in some areas even at this late date. :)
Chalcidice is in Macedonia, by the way, so we are circling that area again...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalkidiki#/media/File:Nomos_Chalidikis.png

I'm rather persuaded by Briquet's conclusions about these stories: "Whether for the autochthonist thesis, or that identifying the Etruscans with the Pelasgians, or that they derived from Lydian colonists, their primary function was to account for the connections that existed at the time that these traditions were disseminated between the historical Etruscans and the Greeks. The meaning of a doctrine such as this, making the Etruscans natives, carried the corollary that they were mere Italian barbarians and were unrelated to Hellenism and its values: we recognize a development by hostile Greeks, probably the Syracusans at the time of their struggles against the Etruscans. The other two doctrines were rather favorable presentations: whether that of the Lydian origin...or that of the Pelasgian origin...With all of this we are far from scientific discourse."

I was particularly amused by the author's citation for a situation where, to facilitate trade, the Spartans asserted "brotherhood" with the Jews through their common origin from Abraham. Who knew? :)

That isn't to say that some historical memories might not have survived of an ancient population movement from the Aegean or other areas to the east into portions of Italy. We in fact know from archaeology that there was movement during the Bronze Age from Greece proper and Crete into Italy. The point is that we don't know if an additional migration happened specifically around 1000 BC to central Italy from either the northern Aegean or some other part of Anatolia, because the ancient writers contradict one another, and the stories are based on assertions that could be seen as agenda driven. I'm back to the beginning on this...if it happened, we don't know if it happened around 900 to 1000 BC, we don't know from where, and we don't know what they were like autsomally. Hopefully we'll know more soon.

What we do know, as the author points out, is that " we cannot reduce a people to a single origin to account for all they have been in history. Every people has been the result of a melting pot, formed by the superposition and mixing of diverse elements. Any attempt to explain it in terms of origin is historically simplistic and wrong."

Yetos
17-05-15, 01:08
Well, the conclusion of Briquet, and my conclusion after reading the chapter again, is that none of what these ancient writers say should be taken as a "scientific inquiry about the identity of a people."

As Briquet shows quite compellingly, I think, these ancient writers were not historians in the modern sense of the world. They wove together the stories of their gods and ancient heroes and modern culturalhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) and trade associations into one big mish mash, and, as is the case for some people nowadays as well, they often had an agenda to promote.

Dionysius, as has been seen, supported the autochthonous origin. However, given the tenor of his entire work, some scholars believe he supported this theory largely to denigrate the Etruscans by showing them not to be Greek or civilized, but rather the barbarian pirates of common Greek perception.

As to Herodotus' claim, I would suggest reading the whole chapter by Briquet; it's not very long. To recap it, it appears in a much longer exposition of who invented the games. In the course of it he says that the Lydians maintained that they invented the games at the same time that they sent some settlers to "Tyrrhenia". It doesn't seem they were necessarily correct about who invented the games, and, of course, the area around the northern aegeanhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) was also called "Tyrrhenia" at one point. Meanwhile, the Etruscan/Tyrrenians called themselves Rasenna. You see how it goes?

Also, as has been pointed out, Lydians spoke an Indo-European language, and the Lydian historian of the 5th century BC, Xanthos, had, according to Dionysius, never heard of the story.

As for the "Pelasgian" theory of Hellicanus, among others, both the Greeks and the Etruscans promoted it, but from the explanation of Briquet, both the Greeks and the Etruscans, although sometimes rivals in trade, were also allies in trade, and it was in both their interests to support a theory whereby the Greeks and the Etruscans were somewhat related.

From the text:
"Etruscans were barbarians; this connected them with a people whom the Greeks represented as having been established on the soil of Hellas even before themselves and constituting the source of several hellenichttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) populations of later times (especially the Athenians presented by Herodotus 1.56 as the finest example of a Greek people descended from the Pelasgians.)...He well understood an aspect that would have been a positive in the eyes of the Greeks: being of Pelasgian origin, the Etruscans could be perceived, if not as Greeks in the strict sense (because they did not speak Greek) at least as related to a people with whom the Greeks were linked. In short, consideredhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) as ancient Pelasgians, the Etruscans were quasi helleneshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/)."

This putative "Pelasgian" origin was also helpful to the Etruscans. "It is no coincidence either that around the time that Hellicanus developed the tradition of the Pelasgian origin of the Etruscans (firth century BC)... these two Etruscan citieshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) (Spina and Caere) were centers of active tradehttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) with the Greek world. They presented themelves as founded by Pelasgians, highlighted their syngeneia" with this nearly Hellenic people, and conferred on themselves a prestigious foundation for the bonds of exchange and commercial partnership."

I'm quite aware that there are people who would interpret this claim by the Etruscans as meaning they must indeedhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) descend from the "Pelasgians". The Etruscans are like a Rohrschack test; people see what they want to see.

In that regard it should be noted that the Pelasgian spoken, according to Herodotus, in Placia and Sylace near the Hellespont, and in Chalcidice , not in Cortona, as sometimes averred, is held by Dionysius not to resemble Etruscan at all. Well, at least it seems everyone is in agreement that Pelasgian was still spoken in some areas even at this late date. :)
Chalcidice is in Macedonia, by the way, so we are circling that area again...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalkidiki#/media/File:Nomos_Chalidikis.png

I'm rather persuaded by Briquet's conclusions about these stories: "Whether for the autochthonist thesis, or that identifying the Etruscans with the Pelasgians, or that they derived from Lydian colonists, their primary function was to accounthttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) for the connections that existed at the time that these traditions were disseminated between the historical Etruscans and the Greeks. The meaning of a doctrine such as this, making the Etruscans natives, carried the corollary that they were mere Italian barbarians and were unrelated to Hellenism and its values: we recognize a development by hostile Greeks, probably the Syracusans at the time of their struggles against the Etruscans. The other two doctrines were rather favorable presentations: whether that of the Lydian origin...or that of the Pelasgian origin...With all of this we are far from scientific discourse."

I was particularly amused by the author's citation for a situation where, to facilitate trade, the Spartans asserted "brotherhood" with the Jews through their common origin from Abraham. Who knew? :)

That isn't to say that some historical memories might not have survived of an ancient population movement from the aegeanhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) or other areas to the east into portions of Italy. We in fact know from archaeology that there was movement during the Bronze Age from Greece proper and Crete into Italy. The point is that we don't know if an additional migration happened specifically around 1000 BC to central Italy from either the northern Aegean or some other part of Anatolia, because the ancient writers contradict one another, and the stories are based on assertions that could be seen as agenda driven. I'm back to the beginning on this...if it happened, we don't know if it happened around 900 to 1000 BC, we don't know from where, and we don't know what they were like autsomally. Hopefully we'll know more soon.

What we do know, as the author points out, is that " we cannot reduce a people to a single origin to accounthttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) for all they have been in history. Every people has been the result of a melting pot, formed by the superposition and mixing of diverse elements. Any attempt to explain it in terms of origin is historically simplistic and wrong."

let me keep my precautions,
cause for example Greeks accuse the Thyrrenians as women pirates,
Miltiades burns Lemnos to punish the Thyrrenians who once steall the women from Athens!!
now the point that Greeks puts Thyrrenians in North Aegean and West minor Asia, (pelasgian argoshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) and Aktai generally) is correct as lemnian stele proved,
dating to Greek colonization and Greek nation unification movements, we see it follows the Etruscan first to West minor Asia, a possibly occupy the empty space after 800 BC,

Exonym and esonym has no meaning,
we call our shelves Hellenes, but all the rest call us Greeks so that means nothing,

now ok all lets admit ancient Greeks were try to connect thyrrenians with Lydians, but Lydians possibly learn IE same time with Hettit, and pre-Lydians are known that are connected with Kretans/ and still nobody is sure of what were Arzawa/Assuwa who stood against Hettit, on controversary, but also a Greek say that Σκοτουσα Pelasgiotis, pelasgion Argos in North Greece was build by Cretans, but were Cretans that split on the way from Crete to Italy!!!!

Lemnean stele does not say that Brutus is going to homeland, but West, away from homeland.

and the 'coinsidence'
Hattica and Parna etc were the Pelasgian/thyrrenians toponyms before IE take Athens, Athens was not Mycenean and possibly not in Troyan war!!!
Hattian and Thyrrenian are the 'lost' languages?, or the lost language?

etc,

so to my conclusion,
before lemnean stele we could say a lot,
but after that, we see also existance in Tinos island that stops!!!! that stops about 800-700 BC
coinsidence?
Pyrgi tablet!!! what can someone say?
strange but only Greeks Tyrros and Etruscans claim Hercules, before Alexander

ok I am waiting autosomals also, but I am certain of the result :laughing:
cause if Lemnean stele proved what Thoukidides wrote, surely that will prove more and more the correct of ancient writters
and the village that stele was found is named Καμινια kaminia Caminia, and also we know that another city of Thyrrenians was named καμικι-οις Kamiki Camiki
and odysseus went to the land of Seireinai and κυρνος kurnos Cyr-nos

Pax Augusta
17-05-15, 02:02
Well, the conclusion of Briquet, and my conclusion after reading the chapter again, is that none of what these ancient writers say should be taken as a "scientific inquiry about the identity of a people."

As Briquet shows quite compellingly, I think, these ancient writers were not historians in the modern sense of the world. They wove together the stories of their gods and ancient heroes and modern cultural and trade associations into one big mish mash, and, as is the case for some people nowadays as well, they often had an agenda to promote.

(...)

What we do know, as the author points out, is that " we cannot reduce a people to a single origin to account for all they have been in history. Every people has been the result of a melting pot, formed by the superposition and mixing of diverse elements. Any attempt to explain it in terms of origin is historically simplistic and wrong."

Thanks Angela. Briquel is certainly one of the most interesting Etruscologist. One can not speak of Etruscan without reading some Briquel's text.


Dominique Briquel, L'origine lydienne des Étrusques. Histoire de la doctrine dans l'Antiquité, 1990 (full text PDF)

http://www.persee.fr/web/ouvrages/home/prescript/article/efr_0000-0000_1990_ths_139_1_4502

Dominique Briquel, Les Pélasges en Italie. Recherches sur l'histoire de la légende, 1984 (full text PDF)

http://www.persee.fr/web/ouvrages/home/prescript/monographie/befar_0257-4101_1984_mon_252_1

Dominique Briquel, Visions étrusques de l'autochtonie, 1986 (full text PDF)

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/dha_0755-7256_1986_num_12_1_1724

Dominique Briquel, Les Tyrrhènes, peuple des tours. Denys d'Halicarnasse et l'autochtonie des Étrusques, 1993 (full text PDF)

http://www.persee.fr/web/ouvrages/home/prescript/monographie/efr_0000-0000_1993_mon_178_1

Dominique Briquel, Le regard des Grecs sur l'Italie indigène, 1987 (full text PDF)

http://www.persee.fr/web/ouvrages/home/prescript/article/efr_0000-0000_1990_act_137_1_3903


(http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/topoi_1161-9473_1992_num_2_1_1343)

Drac II
17-05-15, 13:01
As to the pigmentation of the Etruscans, their art, particularly the funerary art which depicts the upper class families and their servants, makes it clear that there were fair individuals amongst them. One also has to consider the conventions of the art of the time, where men were often depicted as darker than women, and also the fact that while Etruscan art is almost always unique in its motifs, attitudes, and what could be called its world view, it's undeniable that some aspects of it, whether created by Etruscans or imported Greek artisans, is derivative of the Greek art of the time. This all makes it very difficult to assign any sorts of percentages to the Etruscans in terms of these pigmentation issues which so fascinate some people.
http://urnsthroughtime.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/tarquinia1.jpg

http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Med/Etruscan_tomb/Tomb_painting4.jpg

Besides the paintings of Etruscans by the Etruscans themselves, we can also get a general idea of what their average pigmentation was like from Roman-era statements on the subject. Martial characterized the Etruscans as "swarthy" in his Epigrams.

Vallicanus
17-05-15, 13:33
Besides the paintings of Etruscans by the Etruscans themselves, we can also get a general idea of what their average pigmentation was like from Roman-era statements on the subject. Martial characterized the Etruscans as "swarthy" in his Epigrams.

Actual quote from Martial, please.

Drac II
18-05-15, 12:19
Actual quote from Martial, please.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/martial_epigrams_book10.htm

"Though, Laelia, your home is not Ephesus, or Rhodes, or Mitylene, but a house in a patrician street at Rome; and though you had a mother from the swarthy Etruscans, who never painted her face in her life, and a sturdy father from the plains of Aricia;"

Hauteville
18-05-15, 14:07
Ancient Iberians were blonde and blue eyes lol
http://s21.postimg.org/8s4hnfnk7/spagnoli.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

Vallicanus
18-05-15, 15:07
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/martial_epigrams_book10.htm

"Though, Laelia, your home is not Ephesus, or Rhodes, or Mitylene, but a house in a patrician street at Rome; and though you had a mother from the swarthy Etruscans, who never painted her face in her life, and a sturdy father from the plains of Aricia;"

Interesting. Do you have any other literary descriptions of ancient Italian groups?

Vallicanus
18-05-15, 15:41
If you google the Latin original to Martial's epigram to Laelia it speaks of "coloratis (ie high-coloured)Etruscis" when the Latin for swarthy is "fuscus" or "adustus".

Vallicanus
18-05-15, 15:55
Reading the context of the epigram "ruddy" Etruscans makes more sense.

Kardu
18-05-15, 15:57
If you google the Latin original to Martial's epigram to Laelia it speaks of "coloratis (ie high-coloured)Etruscis" when the Latin for swarthy is "fuscus" or "adustus".

Indeed even with my modest knowledge of Latin: 'Cum tibi non Ephesos nec sit Rhodes aut Mityline, sed domus in uico, Laelia, Patricio, deque coloratis numquam lita mater Etrsuscis, durus Aricina de regione pater.' doesn't exactly translate into:

Though, Laelia, your home is not Ephesus, or Rhodes, or Mitylene, but a house in a patrician street at Rome; and though you had a mother from the swarthy Etruscans, who never painted her face in her life,

Angela
18-05-15, 16:08
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/martial_epigrams_book10.htm

"Though, Laelia, your home is not Ephesus, or Rhodes, or Mitylene, but a house in a patrician street at Rome; and though you had a mother from the swarthy Etruscans, who never painted her face in her life, and a sturdy father from the plains of Aricia;"

As other posters have pointed out, your translation of that quote is questionable.

Regardless, the discussion of phenotype arose because a poster seemed to imply that the presence of "fairer" people among the modern Tuscans must be a result of gene flow from Langobards. I pointed out that there were also "fair" people among the Etruscans. The source of those traits in terms of migration is unclear. There were fair Middle Neolithic farmers in central Europe. Whether there were any in Middle Neolithic Italy we don't yet know because we don't have any samples. There were "fairer" people among the Indo-Europeans, and there's an archaeological and linguistic trail from them into Italy as well, which could have filtered into the Villanovan culture.

As to whether any incoming migrations in the Bronze Age and/or beginning of the Iron Age may have changed the phenotype is impossible to determine at this point. Perhaps the analysis of the genomes of these "southern European" plotting Etruscans will include phenotype snps, although even if they reveal that they didn't possess many de-pigmentation snps we do have evidence from portraits that some Etruscans did possess them. More importantly, as to your point, we won't know until we get samples from, say, Lydia (although I doubt that is the source of any first millennium gene flow) and, say, the northern Aegean or, perhaps, Greece, what comparisons can be drawn. There's also the additional fact that whether or not the Etruscans were "swarthier" than the Romans, which, I would submit, your quote absolutely does not prove, this could be explained by the fact that the Etruscans retained more native "Neolithic" ancestry than the Romans, which would be supported by the fact that the Romans spoke an Indo-European language and the Etruscans spoke a language which some people, at least, believe to be a remnant Neolithic one.

So, I don't see how this quote gets us very far. Nor am I going to let this thread deteriorate into another pigmentation war.

Just generally, you seem to have an obsession with pigmentation, Drac II. Indeed, I fail to find any evidence in your posts of any interest in genetics, ancient or modern, other than a desire to prove that Spaniards are not "swarthy", and if forced to admit that they are, to prove that they are at least less swarthy than Italians.

I'm sure that from, say, a Swedish or Finnish perspective all southern Europeans might be described "swarthy", wouldn't you agree? Does that mean that there aren't "fairer" people among them? There's a lot more variation in southern Europe than in those countries, as you are at pains to point out for Spain at every possible opportunity. What's wrong with being "swarthy" anyway? Some of us have, indeed, a decided personal preference for a "Mediterranean look" whether in the Iberian, Italian, Greek, Balkan, or southern French variety.:)

Regardless, there are rules on this forum about harassment of other people. I think that could extend to harassment of other national groups on the basis of racist concerns having to do with pigmentation or "origin". This isn't Stormfront or even theapricity. I'm not inclined to tolerate it any longer no matter the source or the object. Be advised.

Ed. Hautville, there's no need to descend to that level, no matter the provocation.

Pax Augusta
18-05-15, 17:26
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/martial_epigrams_book10.htm

"Though, Laelia, your home is not Ephesus, or Rhodes, or Mitylene, but a house in a patrician street at Rome; and though you had a mother from the swarthy Etruscans, who never painted her face in her life, and a sturdy father from the plains of Aricia;"

That's a 1800's translation! Extremely obsolete. There are other words for swarthy in Latin ("niger", "subniger", "fuscus", "nigrans") coloratis is more ambiguous and less strong. Litteraly is the past participle of verb coloro and means "to give a color to, color, tinge, dye". It could be also translated as "tinted, coloured, ruddy" and to a lesser extent as "sunburned", while Seneca used the term ("corpora colorata") with the meaning of healthy glow.

Martial was neither a historian nor a geographer but a satirical and parodistic poet of Iberian origin, lived in Rome in the 1st century AD; Martial is mocking Laelia because she uses Greek phrases with a strong non Greek accent and basically he is saying that she has not noble roots to act like that. These epigrams were written at the end of the 1st century AD (from 86 AD to 102 AD), when Etruscans were already assimilated by Romans and they had lost prestige and influence on the Romans.

Something similar happened to the Etruscan quarter in Rome, the Vicus Tuscus, that underwent a process of deterioration and vilification. Originally inhabited by Etruscans since the Rome foundation, also center of commercial activity in Rome and one of the city's bookselling districts, Vicus Tuscus was much later around the 1st century AD, at the time of Martial, associated with low life and prostitution when wasn't anymore inhabited by Etruscans only. Whatever is the true meaning of coloratis used by Martial, at his time a sunburned or tanned skin was a sign of poverty and rusticity, while a pale skin was essential for a rich Roman woman.

http://dlib.etc.ucla.edu/projects/Forum/resources/Richardson/Vicus_Tuscus

Due to the decline of the Vicus Tuscus, the term "tuscus" in Rome became synonym of a rude person, coarse, crude, and that's really ironic, Etruscans were much more sophisticated than Romans, especially than early Latin and Sabin shepherds. By the way this meaning survived in Spanish and Portuguese but not in Italian. Tuscans had their revenge on Rome 1000 years later, imposing popes, language and culture.

https://books.google.com/books?id=UxxwAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA630 (https://books.google.it/books?id=UxxwAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA630)




LXVIII

Cum tibi non Ephesos nec sit Rhodos aut Mitylene,

Sed domus in vico, Laelia, patricio,

Deque coloratis numquam lita mater Etruscis,

Durus Aricina de regione pater;

5

Κύριέ μου, μέλι μου, ψυχή μου congeris usque,

- Pro pudor! - Hersiliae civis et Egeriae.

Lectulus has voces, nec lectulus audiat omnis,

Sed quem lascivo stravit amica viro.

Scire cupis quo casta modo matrona loquaris?

10

Numquid, cum crisas, blandior esse potes?

Tu licet ediscas totam referasque Corinthon,

Non tamen omnino, Laelia, Lais eris.

Angela
18-05-15, 19:28
In the course of this research, I came upon the following:

The March 2015 edition of the Bryn Mawr Review contains a review of Giovanni Rapelli's work on the Etruscan language in which Bouk van der Meer of Leiden University disagrees with Rapelli's presumption that there was a migration of Etruscan speakers from northwest Anatolia, stating:

"As for Etruscan immigration(s) into Italy based on Herodotus and the non-Greek, Etruscoid Lemnian inscriptions, there is now evidence to the contrary: Etruscan pirates from Southern Etruria may have settled on Lemnos, around 700 BC or earlier and had been responsible for the inscriptions. Moreover, Carlo de Simone has definitely shown that Etruscan is not an Anatolian language.3 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2015/2015-03-02.html#n3) The Etruscan numerals, very characteristic elements of any language, do not have any parallels in Anatolian or other languages. "

http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2015/2015-03-02.html

This is the Carlo de Simone work to which he makes reference:
Carlo de Simone, “La nuova iscrizione ‘Tirsenica’ di Lemnos (Efestia, teatro): considerazioni generali”, Rasenna 2011, 1-34.

It may be in the new Italian language volume on the Etruscans or even in more recent papers. I'm going to try to hunt it down.

Oh, so much for the proposition that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin. People have very quickly forgotten all the early autosomal studies and even some of the early mtDna studies by Italian researchers which came to the opposite conclusion. It would be nice if people on the internet gave Italian scholars (and hobbyists, for that matter), some respect as serious scholars trying to be as objective as possible.

Ed. I'm unsure why Beeks takes this position in 2015, when Carlo De Simone has maintained this for years, and in prior publications Beeks did not seem convinced.

Drac II
19-05-15, 13:21
That's a 1800's translation! Extremely obsolete. There are other words for swarthy in Latin ("niger", "subniger", "fuscus", "nigrans") coloratis is more ambiguous and less strong. Litteraly is the past participle of verb coloro and means "to give a color to, color, tinge, dye". It could be also translated as "tinted, coloured, ruddy" and to a lesser extent as "sunburned", while Seneca used the term ("corpora colorata") with the meaning of healthy glow.

Martial was neither a historian nor a geographer but a satirical and parodistic poet of Iberian origin, lived in Rome in the 1st century AD; Martial is mocking Laelia because she uses Greek phrases with a strong non Greek accent and basically he is saying that she has not noble roots to act like that. These epigrams were written at the end of the 1st century AD (from 86 AD to 102 AD), when Etruscans were already assimilated by Romans and they had lost prestige and influence on the Romans.

Something similar happened to the Etruscan quarter in Rome, the Vicus Tuscus, that underwent a process of deterioration and vilification. Originally inhabited by Etruscans since the Rome foundation, also center of commercial activity in Rome and one of the city's bookselling districts, Vicus Tuscus was much later around the 1st century AD, at the time of Martial, associated with low life and prostitution when wasn't anymore inhabited by Etruscans only. Whatever is the true meaning of coloratis used by Martial, at his time a sunburned or tanned skin was a sign of poverty and rusticity, while a pale skin was essential for a rich Roman woman.

http://dlib.etc.ucla.edu/projects/Forum/resources/Richardson/Vicus_Tuscus

Due to the decline of the Vicus Tuscus, the term "tuscus" in Rome became synonym of a rude person, coarse, crude, and that's really ironic, Etruscans were much more sophisticated than Romans, especially than early Latin and Sabin shepherds. By the way this meaning survived in Spanish and Portuguese but not in Italian. Tuscans had their revenge on Rome 1000 years later, imposing popes, language and culture.

https://books.google.com/books?id=UxxwAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA630 (https://books.google.it/books?id=UxxwAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA630)




LXVIII

Cum tibi non Ephesos nec sit Rhodos aut Mitylene,

Sed domus in vico, Laelia, patricio,

Deque coloratis numquam lita mater Etruscis,

Durus Aricina de regione pater;

5

Κύριέ μου, μέλι μου, ψυχή μου congeris usque,

- Pro pudor! - Hersiliae civis et Egeriae.

Lectulus has voces, nec lectulus audiat omnis,

Sed quem lascivo stravit amica viro.

Scire cupis quo casta modo matrona loquaris?

10

Numquid, cum crisas, blandior esse potes?

Tu licet ediscas totam referasque Corinthon,

Non tamen omnino, Laelia, Lais eris.

Martial was a Romanized Celtiberian, and he actually lived in Italy, so he was well acquainted with what the people from different areas there looked like.

The word "coloratus" can indeed mean "swarthy", among other similar meanings all relating to a darker complexion:

http://www.latin-dictionary.org/coloratus

So no, there is nothing wrong with the translation of the passage. In fact, this is the exact same word that Tacitus used to describe the Silures and Iberians, and which I don't see many people desperately trying to turn into something else just because some might incorrectly think the word "swarthy" means something like "black" or what have you. Martial applies the word in a similar way as Tacitus, but to the Etruscans.

Martial can hardly be accused of having something against the Etruscans since he was not a Roman to begin with, but a Celtiberian living in Rome, so he had no hidden agenda against Etruscans. He characterizes various other people as also having darker complexions (Egyptians, Indians, some Romans.)

Drac II
19-05-15, 13:36
Ancient Iberians were blonde and blue eyes lol
http://s21.postimg.org/8s4hnfnk7/spagnoli.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

This thread is not about Iberians, but about Etruscans

http://cache3.asset-cache.net/gc/501579775-etruscan-terracotta-antefix-of-a-head-of-a-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=X7WJLa88Cweo9HktRLaNXoqMkmWGIZS8kFYRsi7D1%2Bqjxs d6LQnMRbvyXvqEVRMfQwYf3zSpXvnTxU2fO%2BOg%2Bw%3D%3D

Drac II
19-05-15, 13:42
As other posters have pointed out, your translation of that quote is questionable.

Regardless, the discussion of phenotype arose because a poster seemed to imply that the presence of "fairer" people among the modern Tuscans must be a result of gene flow from Langobards. I pointed out that there were also "fair" people among the Etruscans. The source of those traits in terms of migration is unclear. There were fair Middle Neolithic farmers in central Europe. Whether there were any in Middle Neolithic Italy we don't yet know because we don't have any samples. There were "fairer" people among the Indo-Europeans, and there's an archaeological and linguistic trail from them into Italy as well, which could have filtered into the Villanovan culture.

As to whether any incoming migrations in the Bronze Age and/or beginning of the Iron Age may have changed the phenotype is impossible to determine at this point. Perhaps the analysis of the genomes of these "southern European" plotting Etruscans will include phenotype snps, although even if they reveal that they didn't possess many de-pigmentation snps we do have evidence from portraits that some Etruscans did possess them. More importantly, as to your point, we won't know until we get samples from, say, Lydia (although I doubt that is the source of any first millennium gene flow) and, say, the northern Aegean or, perhaps, Greece, what comparisons can be drawn. There's also the additional fact that whether or not the Etruscans were "swarthier" than the Romans, which, I would submit, your quote absolutely does not prove, this could be explained by the fact that the Etruscans retained more native "Neolithic" ancestry than the Romans, which would be supported by the fact that the Romans spoke an Indo-European language and the Etruscans spoke a language which some people, at least, believe to be a remnant Neolithic one.

So, I don't see how this quote gets us very far. Nor am I going to let this thread deteriorate into another pigmentation war.

Just generally, you seem to have an obsession with pigmentation, Drac II. Indeed, I fail to find any evidence in your posts of any interest in genetics, ancient or modern, other than a desire to prove that Spaniards are not "swarthy", and if forced to admit that they are, to prove that they are at least less swarthy than Italians.

I'm sure that from, say, a Swedish or Finnish perspective all southern Europeans might be described "swarthy", wouldn't you agree? Does that mean that there aren't "fairer" people among them? There's a lot more variation in southern Europe than in those countries, as you are at pains to point out for Spain at every possible opportunity. What's wrong with being "swarthy" anyway? Some of us have, indeed, a decided personal preference for a "Mediterranean look" whether in the Iberian, Italian, Greek, Balkan, or southern French variety.:)

Regardless, there are rules on this forum about harassment of other people. I think that could extend to harassment of other national groups on the basis of racist concerns having to do with pigmentation or "origin". This isn't Stormfront or even theapricity. I'm not inclined to tolerate it any longer no matter the source or the object. Be advised.

Ed. Hautville, there's no need to descend to that level, no matter the provocation.

It is not "my translation" but a very popular English translation of Martial's Epigrams. And the word in question can indeed mean "swarthy", no matter what some non-Latinists here have said.

As Alan explained in another thread, these "pigmentation" SNPs can be misleading, as the people who carry them may or may not show the pigmented/depigmented appearance.

I never denied that there were fairer people among Etruscans, only that both their own paintings and Martial's characterization of Etruscans as having a darker complexion gives us a good idea that the majority of them were of the darker types.

You should be directing your attacks against users like Hauteville, who as usual pulls out rants about "Iberians" whenever something he does not like is posted about Italians. I was actually sticking to the topic. Martial did characterize the Etruscans as having a darker complexion. Nothing wrong with my post.

Drac II
19-05-15, 13:54
If you google the Latin original to Martial's epigram to Laelia it speaks of "coloratis (ie high-coloured)Etruscis" when the Latin for swarthy is "fuscus" or "adustus".

"Coloratus" can also mean "swarthy":

http://www.latin-dictionary.org/coloratus

Drac II
19-05-15, 14:23
Interesting. Do you have any other literary descriptions of ancient Italian groups?

I assume you mean pigmentation-wise. If so, yes, there are some others. The same Martial mentions what seems to be a belief of the time that Tivoli produced people with lighter complexions (he uses this to parody a certain "Lycoris", apparently a Roman woman, whom he teases for being obsessed to be lighter complexioned.) Catullus refers to the Lanuvians as dark complexioned.

Vallicanus
19-05-15, 17:02
I assume you mean pigmentation-wise. If so, yes, there are some others. The same Martial mentions what seems to be a belief of the time that Tivoli produced people with lighter complexions (he uses this to parody a certain "Lycoris", apparently a Roman woman, whom he teases for being obsessed to be lighter complexioned.) Catullus refers to the Lanuvians as dark complexioned.

Thanks for that so I'll ignore the jibe about me being a "non-Latinist".

Lanuvines were described as "ater dentatusque" ie dark and full-toothed".

Pax Augusta
19-05-15, 17:36
This thread is not about Iberians, but about Etruscans

http://cache3.asset-cache.net/gc/501579775-etruscan-terracotta-antefix-of-a-head-of-a-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=X7WJLa88Cweo9HktRLaNXoqMkmWGIZS8kFYRsi7D1%2Bqjxs d6LQnMRbvyXvqEVRMfQwYf3zSpXvnTxU2fO%2BOg%2Bw%3D%3D


For your information, that's the head of a satyr.

An example of Attic janiform red-figured kantharos with the moulded heads of a satyr, ca. 470 BC.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Janiform_kantharos_BM_E786.jpg/640px-Janiform_kantharos_BM_E786.jpg



The word "coloratus" can indeed mean "swarthy", among other similar meanings all relating to a darker complexion:

http://www.latin-dictionary.org/coloratus

In any case it's not the main meaning and that site isn't even a scientific dicitionary.

By the way, it's extremely clear that you're not really interested about Etruscans and you're here just for fun. There are many pseudo-anthrophora where you can do that. Please, let's keep Eupedia free from that, Thanks.

Angela
19-05-15, 17:44
You can all stop playing games now.

This is a thread to discuss how linguistics, archaeology and genetics may prove or disprove the assertions of ancient authors about the "origins" of the Etruscans. Unless someone has genetic pigmentation data on the people of the area pre and post the Etruscan era and data for the Balkans and Anatolia in the same era, a discussion of the pigmentation of the Etruscans is not particularly useful. This is most particularly not a thread for the discussion of the pigmentation of ancient peoples, or modern ones for that matter. IT IS OFF TOPIC.

This is the second time I have had to remind posters of this fact. Further totally off topic commentary will be removed. Am I sufficiently clear now?

Pax Augusta
19-05-15, 17:56
In the course of this research, I came upon the following:

The March 2015 edition of the Bryn Mawr Review contains a review of Giovanni Rapelli's work on the Etruscan language in which Bouk van der Meer of Leiden University disagrees with Rapelli's presumption that there was a migration of Etruscan speakers from northwest Anatolia, stating:

"As for Etruscan immigration(s) into Italy based on Herodotus and the non-Greek, Etruscoid Lemnian inscriptions, there is now evidence to the contrary: Etruscan pirates from Southern Etruria may have settled on Lemnos, around 700 BC or earlier and had been responsible for the inscriptions. Moreover, Carlo de Simone has definitely shown that Etruscan is not an Anatolian language.3 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2015/2015-03-02.html#n3) The Etruscan numerals, very characteristic elements of any language, do not have any parallels in Anatolian or other languages. "

http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2015/2015-03-02.html

This is the Carlo de Simone work to which he makes reference:
Carlo de Simone, “La nuova iscrizione ‘Tirsenica’ di Lemnos (Efestia, teatro): considerazioni generali”, Rasenna 2011, 1-34.

It may be in the new Italian language volume on the Etruscans or even in more recent papers. I'm going to try to hunt it down.

Oh, so much for the proposition that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin. People have very quickly forgotten all the early autosomal studies and even some of the early mtDna studies by Italian researchers which came to the opposite conclusion. It would be nice if people on the internet gave Italian scholars (and hobbyists, for that matter), some respect as serious scholars trying to be as objective as possible.

Ed. I'm unsure why Beeks takes this position in 2015, when Carlo De Simone has maintained this for years, and in prior publications Beeks did not seem convinced.

Extremely interesting, so now Bouk van der Meer agrees with Carlo De Simone, Etruscan pirates from Southern Etruria may have settled on Lemnos, around 700 BC. I don't think that Robert Beekes has changed his position, but his last work on Etruscans I have found is dated 2004.

Here you can download Carlo de Simone's work, “La nuova iscrizione ‘Tirsenica’ di Lemnos (Efestia, teatro): considerazioni generali”, Rasenna 2011, 1-34.

http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=rasenna



Oh, so much for the proposition that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin. People have very quickly forgotten all the early autosomal studies and even some of the early mtDna studies by Italian researchers which came to the opposite conclusion. It would be nice if people on the internet gave Italian scholars (and hobbyists, for that matter), some respect as serious scholars trying to be as objective as possible.

Clearly not true that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin, there are many examples of Italian scholars that support a invasionist or migrationist theory.

Italian linguists are generally more open to a invasionist or migrationist theory, Italian archaeologists not, just like in the rest of the world.

Angela
19-05-15, 18:42
Pax Augusta: Clearly not true that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin, there are many examples of Italian scholars that support a invasionist or migrationist theory.

Italian linguists are generally more open to a invasionist or migrationist theory, Italian archaeologists not, just like in the rest of the world.

I think that's accurate.

In terms of van der Beeks, it's difficult to know precisely what he now thinks because he hasn't, as you point out, actually written on the subject since 2004. All we have are snippets from his reviews of other papers. The 2015 review only admits that Etruscan pirates "may" have settled on Lemnos.

In a 2013 review he still says the following:
"In discussing genetic relations between Etruscan, Raetic and Lemnian in Chapter VI Canuti keeps all options open. This is wise, since a recent discovery of a non-Greek Lemnian inscription on a base may show that the third person verbal perfect ending in -ke did exist. (heloke probably means ‘he/they placed/erected/dedicated’; in Etruscan: *heluce). Earlier only the third person verbal perfect ending -ai was known in Lemnian (e.g. aomai; in Etruscan: amuce: ‘x was’). Since the -ai morpheme is absent in Etruscan verb endings, Lemnian is supposed to be more archaic than Etruscan. The new discovery is a tiny indication that Etruscans may have settled on Lemnos in the archaic period, as C. de Simone has argued for decades.3 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n3) Still, serious objections are possible: there are no Villanovan or Etruscan artifacts on the island; all Lemnian inscriptions and graffiti (c. 550-510 BC) show the vowel o instead of u (Etruscan has only u); and the Lemnian alphabet is local and ancient authors do not mention migrations of Etruscans from Etruria to Lemnos.4 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n4) In addition, Greek has non-Greek so-called substrate words like opuioo (‘I take as wife’) and maybe prytanis which are also present in Etruscan (puia ‘wife’, purth (a kind of magistrate)). These congruences are difficult to explain if Lemnian was a form of exported Etruscan."
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html

So, I don't know if he has actually changed from this view on the matter. He would have had access to the 2011 Carlo De Simone article by the time he wrote this. It may be that he is now just more open to De Simone's analysis, but still believes the evidence is stronger for his position.

I'm not competent to judge as to the specifically linguistic arguments, although I don't see how there can be enough of a corpus of Lemnian from which to judge whether it is more archaic than Etruscan. Even if it could be shown that it is archaic, I know that there are people who hold that languages remain more archaic at the periphery.

As to Meeks' argument that ancient authors don't mention migrations of Etruscans to Lemnos, I don't know that Etruscan pirates showing up on Lemnos would constitute a "migration", and Etruscan pirates in the Aegean are certainly mentioned. If it was a sort of polyglot Cartagena kind of area, the inscriptions might all be muddled anyway. The only one of van der Meeks' arguments which I think represent a real problem for De Simone's theory is that there aren't Villanovan or Etruscan artifacts on the island. You would think even pirates would bring some of their amphora of Etruscan wine with them.

Thanks for the link to the De Simone article. Have you taken a look at it yet? Does it answer some of these concerns?

If I can get a copy of "The Etruscan World" from a library, perhaps the discussion there by Ambrosiani will be more illuminating, but I'm beginning to doubt whether linguistics can settle this issue.

Alan
19-05-15, 19:25
Of course a good percentage of Etruscans was fair pigmented but the majority in the average Mediterranean skin range. Why not? If we even go by the Greek/Anatolian theory, the People of those regions have a significant percentage of fair featured people too.

Sile
19-05-15, 20:24
Extremely interesting, so now Bouk van der Meer agrees with Carlo De Simone, Etruscan pirates from Southern Etruria may have settled on Lemnos, around 700 BC. I don't think that Robert Beekes has changed his position, but his last work on Etruscans I have found is dated 2004.

Here you can download Carlo de Simone's work, “La nuova iscrizione ‘Tirsenica’ di Lemnos (Efestia, teatro): considerazioni generali”, Rasenna 2011, 1-34.

http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=rasenna




Clearly not true that all Italian scholars come down on the side of an autochthonous origin, there are many examples of Italian scholars that support a invasionist or migrationist theory.

Italian linguists are generally more open to a invasionist or migrationist theory, Italian archaeologists not, just like in the rest of the world.

Be whatever for etruscans ( indienous or migrational ), their language is found to not be the same as Raetic and not the same as lemnian. Carlo found no link between Raetic and etruscan.

Lemnian uses an ancient Eubeon alphabet

Until we find the realtionship of Etruscans with the indigenous ancient Umbrians in the same area of central Italy is when we have a better understanding of where etrucans are from

Yetos
19-05-15, 20:39
ok I will give non ancients Greeks that admit the same

Strabo bookhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/) 13 chapter 4
ferrihttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/)
Bofante

the alternative name of the local of pithikousai Arimaioi


and more
the flying TURAN

https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/669orjgzeo2xuuyd/images/7-0701677120.jpg

found in Tinos island, before 700 BC

Alternatine names Pelasgians Thyrrenians Kranaoi

there also more workshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/)
like the difference among Avantes and Kadmeians
( Alonso Moreno Cl.,

Maritime Interests: Palatial Lifestyle and the role of the Euboean elites

Teffeteller Annette, Dale Alexander, The Spear- famed Lords of Euboea: Anatolian Traditions in Abantis

Dominguez Adolfo,Euboeans in the Far West?
New data and interpretations

the Thyrrenian/villanovan armory is not IE, although the burial ritual is
it is same with the one Greeks call storks

yet I must wait the autosomals

Pax Augusta
19-05-15, 20:45
Be whatever for etruscans ( indienous or migrational ), their language is found to not be the same as Raetic and not the same as lemnian. Carlo found no link between Raetic and etruscan.


Sile, I haven't read anything of De Simone about the Raetic language but this is what I've found.

Carlo de Simone, Simona Marchesini (a cura di), La lamina di Demlfeld, Roma-Pisa 2013.

Abstract:

We are pleased to present, with this collection of papers, the study of a written document from the Raetic votive place of Demlfeld near Ampass (Innsbruck, Austria). The inscription was engraved on a small bronze tablet, the discovery of which was preliminarily published in 2006 (TOMEDI ET ALII 2006).
Since every written document needs as much contextual information as possible in order to be interpreted correctly, we invited the scholars who discovered the Demlfeld plate and had kindly given us the opportunity to study it from a linguistic perspective, to supply the contextual background. Three archaeological papers (Tomedi for chapter 1, Hye for chapter 2 and Blecha for chapter 4), and one topographical paper (Töchterle, cap. 2) have thus been added to our commentary. Another paper, dealing with the linguistic origin of the name Ampass (Anreiter, chapter 5) was necessary to complete the toponymic understanding of the place.
The interpretation of the sacred place (seen until now as “Brandopferplatz”) as fanum, with votive offerings belonging to the feminine world is the key to understand the message of the lamina: a dedication from a certain Kleimun to the Avaśueras (a plural entity).
The collection of given information takes the reader to the situation where the plate belongs, to a comprehension of the context where the text was conceived.
An epigraphic (Marchesini, chapter 6) and linguistic analysis (de Simone, chapter 7) are given to the technical description of form and content of the inscription. Moreover a conclusive, historical-linguistic chapter (Marchesini, chapter 8) complete the book, presenting an overview on the research of the Etruscan-Raetic-Tyrrenic connections.
The text analysis and comprehension of the Demlfeld plate has lead us to this subject, i.e. the relationships between these three peoples, since its close linguistic affinity not only with the Etruscan language, but also to the language of the Lemnian inscriptions, is evident.
The recently published epigraphic text from Lemnos, namely the inscribed support of an anathema from Ephestia also confirms, in its text patterns, the deep relationship between Tyrrhenic and Etruscan. The linguistic evidence of genealogical affinity among the three languages offers a new, assured argument to support the difficult reconstruction of the pre- and proto-historical European world.

Sile
19-05-15, 21:04
I haven' read anything of De Simone about the Raetic language but this is what I've found.

Carlo de Simone, Simona Marchesini (a cura di), La lamina di Demlfeld, Roma-Pisa 2013.

Abstract:

We are pleased to present, with this collection of papers, the study of a written document from the Raetic votive place of Demlfeld near Ampass (Innsbruck, Austria). The inscription was engraved on a small bronze tablet, the discovery of which was preliminarily published in 2006 (TOMEDI ET ALII 2006).
Since every written document needs as much contextual information as possible in order to be interpreted correctly, we invited the scholars who discovered the Demlfeld plate and had kindly given us the opportunity to study it from a linguistic perspective, to supply the contextual background. Three archaeological papers (Tomedi for chapter 1, Hye for chapter 2 and Blecha for chapter 4), and one topographical paper (Töchterle, cap. 2) have thus been added to our commentary. Another paper, dealing with the linguistic origin of the name Ampass (Anreiter, chapter 5) was necessary to complete the toponymic understanding of the place.
The interpretation of the sacred place (seen until now as “Brandopferplatz”) as fanum, with votive offerings belonging to the feminine world is the key to understand the message of the lamina: a dedication from a certain Kleimun to the Avaśueras (a plural entity).
The collection of given information takes the reader to the situation where the plate belongs, to a comprehension of the context where the text was conceived.
An epigraphic (Marchesini, chapter 6) and linguistic analysis (de Simone, chapter 7) are given to the technical description of form and content of the inscription. Moreover a conclusive, historical-linguistic chapter (Marchesini, chapter 8) complete the book, presenting an overview on the research of the Etruscan-Raetic-Tyrrenic connections.
The text analysis and comprehension of the Demlfeld plate has lead us to this subject, i.e. the relationships between these three peoples, since its close linguistic affinity not only with the Etruscan language, but also to the language of the Lemnian inscriptions, is evident.
The recently published epigraphic text from Lemnos, namely the inscribed support of an anathema from Ephestia also confirms, in its text patterns, the deep relationship between Tyrrhenic and Etruscan. The linguistic evidence of genealogical affinity among the three languages offers a new, assured argument to support the difficult reconstruction of the pre- and proto-historical European world.

In discussing genetic relations between Etruscan, Raetic and Lemnian in Chapter VI Canuti keeps all options open. This is wise, since a recent discovery of a non-Greek Lemnian inscription on a base may show that the third person verbal perfect ending in -ke did exist. (heloke probably means ‘he/they placed/erected/dedicated’; in Etruscan: *heluce). Earlier only the third person verbal perfect ending -ai was known in Lemnian (e.g. aomai; in Etruscan: amuce: ‘x was’). Since the -ai morpheme is absent in Etruscan verb endings, Lemnian is supposed to be more archaic than Etruscan. The new discovery is a tiny indication that Etruscans may have settled on Lemnos in the archaic period, as C. de Simone has argued for decades.3 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n3) Still, serious objections are possible: there are no Villanovan or Etruscan artifacts on the island; all Lemnian inscriptions and graffiti (c. 550-510 BC) show the vowel o instead of u (Etruscan has only u); and the Lemnian alphabet is local and ancient authors do not mention migrations of Etruscans from Etruria to Lemnos.4 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n4) In addition, Greek has non-Greek so-called substrate words like opuioo (‘I take as wife’) and maybe prytanis which are also present in Etruscan (puia ‘wife’, purth (a kind of magistrate)). These congruences are difficult to explain if Lemnian was a form of exported Etruscan.

Angela
19-05-15, 23:24
In discussing genetic relations between Etruscan, Raetic and Lemnian in Chapter VI Canuti keeps all options open. This is wise, since a recent discovery of a non-Greek Lemnian inscription on a base may show that the third person verbal perfect ending in -ke did exist. (heloke probably means ‘he/they placed/erected/dedicated’; in Etruscan: *heluce). Earlier only the third person verbal perfect ending -ai was known in Lemnian (e.g. aomai; in Etruscan: amuce: ‘x was’). Since the -ai morpheme is absent in Etruscan verb endings, Lemnian is supposed to be more archaic than Etruscan. The new discovery is a tiny indication that Etruscans may have settled on Lemnos in the archaic period, as C. de Simone has argued for decades.3 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n3) Still, serious objections are possible: there are no Villanovan or Etruscan artifacts on the island; all Lemnian inscriptions and graffiti (c. 550-510 BC) show the vowel o instead of u (Etruscan has only u); and the Lemnian alphabet is local and ancient authors do not mention migrations of Etruscans from Etruria to Lemnos.4 (http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-09-09.html#n4) In addition, Greek has non-Greek so-called substrate words like opuioo (‘I take as wife’) and maybe prytanis which are also present in Etruscan (puia ‘wife’, purth (a kind of magistrate)). These congruences are difficult to explain if Lemnian was a form of exported Etruscan.

This comment is by van der Beeks, not by Carlo de Simone. Furthermore, he doesn't talk about the relationship of Raetic to the other two languages; he talks about the relationship between Etruscan and Lemnian.