Genetic study The Picenes and the Genetic Landscape of Central Adriatic Italy in the Iron Age.

torzio said:
Samnite lands where from the Adriatic sea ( north of the Daunians ) and then turned south in central Italy .............always closer to the adriatic sea than the other side

the Frentani one of 5 tribal branches of the Samnite people lived on the adriatic coast
en.wikipedia.org

Frentani - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
The Adriatic coast around modern Abruzzo was home to several Italic tribes bordering with the Picenes and Sabini to their north: the Marrucini, the Vestini, the Peligni...
 
Vitruvius said:
My perspective is still that we are seeing the emergence of an old north south cline and less so east west, but I'm not opposed to your idea either. I'd certainly welcome seeing some more ancients that cluster like modern Central Italians. It looks like there were already a couple in the Picene cluster. I bet those two are especially close to Vallicanus.
Click to expand...
It may also be the signal of a more recent indo european migration to Italy in the late bronze age, maybe linked to the expansion of the proto-villanovan culture, who displaced the more ancient latino-faliscan tribes. If I remember correctly, Osco-umbrian are believed to have entered Italy after the latino-faliscans, despite probably descending by a common branch.
 
Poxy said:
I think it is too early to be sure when the Balkan BA like profile came to Italy. Carpathian Urnfield refugees who fled to northern Italy in the 16th century BC due to the expansion of the Tumulus culture? Maybe so, but I don't know.
Click to expand...

What are you on about? Urnfield ended Tumulus in central Europe and it hasn't got much to do with Balkans where Tumulus remained. Urnfield core was in central Europe and high on WHG ancestry, it expanded north west (Germany), west (France, north Italy) and east (Ukraine, Romania) probably assimilating/recruiting a lot of the natives in these regions
 
Last edited:
Vitruvius said:
On the topic of proto-italic having a possible balkanic origin, you may be interested to know that numerous archaeologists today hypothesize the Nagyrev and later Vatya cultures of Hungary to be the origin of proto Italic and link their material culture and ubran organization methods to the arrival of the demographically massive Terramare culture in Po Valley of the middle bronze age. There is a line of thought which associates the collapse of the Tell system in the Carpathian basin to a large migrations into Northern Italy through the Julian alps which dwarfed the preceeding Polada culture in size. The Terramare culture whose culture, weaponry and militarized practices mimic that of Vatya in turn would go on to become the protovillanovan culture which stretched from Sicily to the Alps and the first broad pan-Italic material culture of the bronze age.

We also have samples from Vatya and Proto Nagyrev which look distinctly like the picenes we are looking at here and also modern northern Italians. Some here are somewhat averse to this theory but to me it seems very likely.
Click to expand...

Are you drunk?
Vatya were i2, there is zero i2 in picenes. They are completely unrelated. Hungary is not in balkans, iron age Italians seem to get some of their ancestry from illyrians or a shared Cetina ancestry which were unrelated to Vatya further north east -

"No convincing evidence for significant migratory movements from the Urnfield-Lusatian culture into the west Balkans has ever been found."
 
Last edited:
Francesco said:
It may also be the signal of a more recent indo european migration to Italy in the late bronze age, maybe linked to the expansion of the proto-villanovan culture, who displaced the more ancient latino-faliscan tribes. If I remember correctly, Osco-umbrian are believed to have entered Italy after the latino-faliscans, despite probably descending by a common branch.
Click to expand...
Personally I think that the proto-villanovan phenomenon was more so a cultural one than a genetic displacement. The biggest reason for me is that we do have access to proto appenine samples and they remain identical to the Latin/southern Etruscan populations of the iron age. This type of profile is of course more WHG/Barcin shifted than the more northerly Italics like the Picenes who I am assuming right now are are a respectable proxy for Terramare, which I see as the origin of protovillanovan.
 
TaktikatEMalet said:
Are you drunk?
Vatya were i2, there is zero i2 in picenes. They are completely unrelated. Hungary is not in balkans, iron age Italians seem to get some of their ancestry from illyrians or a shared Cetina ancestry which were unrelated to Vatya further north east -

"No convincing evidence for significant migratory movements from the Urnfield-Lusatian culture into the west Balkans has ever been found."
Click to expand...
I never said Hungary is in the balkans. I brought it up because it borders the balkans and shows extensive material and genetic links to northern Italy in a time in which Po Valley was experiencing a demographic explosion of its populace.

Don't you have some other clown nonsense to be pushing like your idea that the sea peoples were northern europeans or that urnfield culture was some sort of centralized state empire which vanquished your supposed Terramare rebels? Whatever bronze age fanatasies go on in your head is not relevent to reality so I have zero interest in what you have to say about this topic.
 
Vitruvius said:
I never said Hungary is in the balkans. I brought it up because it borders the balkans and shows extensive material and genetic links to northern Italy in a time in which Po Valley was experiencing a demographic explosion of its populace.

Don't you have some other clown nonsense to be pushing like your idea that the sea peoples were northern europeans or that urnfield culture was some sort of centralized state empire which vanquished your supposed Terramare rebels? Whatever bronze age fanatasies go on in your head is not relevent to reality so I have zero interest in what you have to say about this topic.
Click to expand...

My theories are backed up by archeology whereas yours are completely backwards misinformation - I don't care about your opinion I just like to correct your made up BS. You literally mentioned Hungary as being Balkans and then Urnfield. Balkans had nothing to do with Urnfield, it formed in Hungary/Slovakia/Poland and didn't make an impact in Balkans -

"No convincing evidence for significant migratory movements from the Urnfield-Lusatian culture into the west Balkans has ever been found."

Proto Urnfielders = Polish people of today + more WHG ancestry

The materials you find in north Italy are a result of Urnfield expansion which was mostly cultural in north Italy. Genetically Italy was closer to Balkans due to shared ancestry through Cetina
 
Last edited:
Technically speaking, Serbia and Romania are part of the Balkans and were associated with the Urnfield culture.
 
from what I recall , a paper about 5 years ago stated that Umbri arrived in Italy circa 2200BC ............I will need to revist it and well as finally read

www.nature.com

The mitogenome portrait of Umbria in Central Italy as depicted by contemporary inhabitants and pre-Roman remains - Scientific Reports

Umbria is located in Central Italy and took the name from its ancient inhabitants, the Umbri, whose origins are still debated. Here, we investigated the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation of 545 present-day Umbrians (with 198 entire mitogenomes) and 28 pre-Roman individuals (obtaining 19...
www.nature.com www.nature.com

The mitogenome portrait of Umbria in Central Italy as depicted by contemporary inhabitants and pre-Roman remains​

 
TaktikatEMalet said:
My theories are backed up by archeology whereas yours are completely backwards misinformation - I don't care about your opinion I just like to correct your made up BS. You literally mentioned Hungary as being Balkans and then Urnfield. Balkans had nothing to do with Urnfield, it formed in Hungary/Slovakia/Poland and didn't make an impact in Balkans -

"No convincing evidence for significant migratory movements from the Urnfield-Lusatian culture into the west Balkans has ever been found."

Proto Urnfielders = Polish people of today + more WHG ancestry

The materials you find in north Italy are a result of Urnfield expansion which was mostly cultural in north Italy. Genetically Italy was closer to Balkans due to shared ancestry through Cetina
Click to expand...
Illyrian tribes have been mixing with Italic people on the adriatic side since the late bronze-age and continued to mix with each other up to imperial Roman empire days
 
@

TaktikatEMalet​


There is 6.3% of I2 ydna in Picenes as per the 2019 atudy by Antonio ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and he states migration happened as below
 

Attachments

  • umbri migration.PNG
    umbri migration.PNG
    337.8 KB · Views: 72
Vallicanus said:
Presumably, this applies to myself too?
Click to expand...
Of course. This profile comprises a majority of ancestry for almost all Italians north of Lazio. The Picenes from my perspective are just one ancient population amongst many that will end up sharing this profile in Northern/North-Central Italy.
 
Now Northern Italy does indeed has some 15% Germanic DNA but as I expected some Italic tribes to plot right on top of Northern Italians so it will increase the Italic admixture and decrease the West Asian and Germanic one in my hypothesis.
 
ihype02 said:
Now Northern Italy does indeed has some 15% Germanic DNA but as I expected some Italic tribes to plot right on top of Northern Italians so it will increase the Italic admixture and decrease the West Asian and Germanic one in my hypothesis.
Click to expand...
Northern Italy has zero or near zero Germanic ancestry, just as Southern Italy has zero to near zero levantine ancestry. It's clearly showing continuity with northern Italics here. We now have the results of the Picenes and northern Illyrians which plainly overlap one another and modern Northern Italians. Raetics, adriatic etruscans, and the Veneti are going to look the same as they lie between these two points. I also hightly doubt golaseccian populations are going to be much different either.
 
Last edited:
ihype02 said:
Now Northern Italy does indeed has some 15% Germanic DNA but as I expected some Italic tribes to plot right on top of Northern Italians so it will increase the Italic admixture and decrease the West Asian and Germanic one in my hypothesis.
Click to expand...
There is no germanic in north-italy in bronze or iron age period

maybe you are mixing up gallic and or celtic as germanic
 
torzio said:
There is no germanic in north-italy in bronze or iron age period

maybe you are mixing up gallic and or celtic as germanic
Click to expand...
I was talking about modern Northern Italians obviously.
Vitruvius said:
Northern Italy has zero or near zero Germanic ancestry, just as Southern Italy has zero to near zero levantine ancestry. It's clearly showing continuity with northern Italics here. We now have the results of the Picenes and northern Illyrians which plainly overlap one another and modern Northern Italians. Raetics, adriatic etruscans, and the Veneti are going to look the same as they lie between these two points. I also hightly doubt golaseccian populations are going to be much different either.
Click to expand...
You really think Germanic ancestry in modern Northern Italian is zero?

Germanic_Europe.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 13635 times.

Back
Top