Eupedia Ancient Ethnicities Checker: reliably compare your DNA to ancient populations

9u5s2uT.png

Thanks. It helps me make sense of my own results. My closest Latin and "Etruscan" samples are R1016, R1015,and R474. Closest of all though are R1 and Illyrian Bronze, which is a whole other story. :)
 
Thanks. It helps me make sense of my own results. My closest Latin and "Etruscan" samples are R1016, R1015,and R474. Closest of all though are R1 and Illyrian Bronze, which is a whole other story. :)

Angela what are your thoughts on this article?

https://indo-european.eu/2019/11/r1...les-from-the-west-vs-etruscans-from-the-east/

Do you think any of the many hypothesis the writer gives could be a reason for atusomal relatedness between modern Italians (North?) and these Balkan Bronze sample, or even those Szolad samples much later?
Seen a lot of Italian members in the forum fall very close to these ancient Pannonian/ Balkan samples, and always wondered why.

I had a lot of fun reading the article, but given I am really not read in the field of genetic archeology and anthropology maybe you and Pax can review whether the facts check out, and warn me not to fall for any biases the writer could have. Plus its quite an interesting read.
 
... the "Italian_Greeks" is the average results of two Iron-Age LATINS, R437 (y R1b...) and R850 (y T1a1...)

… call it Latin_Italians or Roman_Latins instead !!! … that’s where they’re from!

… or else they should be added to the other Latins.

ykNQxrY.gif
 
It doesn't make much sense, speculations of a blogger that does not know very well the Italian prehistory, protohistory and Iron age. On the Etruscans he has sided from the beginning with the fringe theories and the scholars who do not enjoy a lot of credit. To bring up Sea Peoples is to talk about nothing.

I see. Thanks. (y)

I thought he might be well informed, cause reading the article he echoed the same quote as you a couple of posts ago about proto Villanovans and Picentes, as opposed to Etruscans.

And some of the other facts in the paper seemed to make sense with recent papers.
Which parts should I be aware of as bias? I already am aware that the Asia Minor connections he argued earlier don't make much sense given the evidence. But the facts he brings about the Apennines/Rhaetians and Balkans/Pannonia and other Indo European movements make sense.

Ps what is your thought, why do modern Northern Italians such as Tuscans and some others get close distances to these bronze age Balkan/Pannonian samples? What could explain it?
 
From Maciamo's last updates (#327).
No substantial changes.

Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
2.44000000Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
5.56800682Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
5.98677710Bronze_Age_Illyrians
7.55611011Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.90949494Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
9.05316519Villanovans_(n=2)
11.05727815Etruscans_(n=3)
11.895200716th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
11.97150784Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
12.469819576th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
12.65941547Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
14.29163392Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
15.88332774Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
16.57576846Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
16.98754544Latins_(n=4)
18.57900428Western_Scythians_(n=28)
19.17563558Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
19.70430156EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
20.27443217Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
20.66584138Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
21.15670816Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
21.25037647Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
21.28523432Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
21.49713004Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
21.57357875Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)



Distance to:Dodecadk12bStuvanè
1.0075171646.80% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 53.20% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
1.2133386886.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.20% Avars_(n=2)
1.315446638.00% Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4) + 92.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.3378761689.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 10.40% Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
1.388281119.20% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8) + 90.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.3966658187.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 12.80% Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
1.403082878.40% Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12) + 91.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.4039953286.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.40% Vikings_from_Ukraine_(n=4)
1.416328427.80% Mesolithic_Baltic_Scandinavia_(SHG)_(n=31) + 92.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.4189182590.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 10.00% Medieval_Estonia_(n=7)
1.433790528.40% Bronze_Age_Estonia_(n=16) + 91.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.461554568.60% Mesolithic_Balkans_HG_(n=43) + 91.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.5106021958.20% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 41.80% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
1.5348795131.60% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 68.40% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.540100037.40% Neolithic_Ukraine_(n=12) + 92.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.5692029387.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 13.00% Vikings_from_Russia_(n=15)
1.5797795842.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 58.00% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.618422517.20% Mesolithic_Ukraine_(n=7) + 92.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.6998059512.60% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18) + 87.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.7168947911.60% Western_Corded_Ware_(n=17) + 88.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.787278909.60% Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21) + 90.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.853853406.80% Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4) + 93.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.8695318311.00% MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4) + 89.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.870157446.60% Late_Mesolithic_Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2) + 93.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.874253097.80% Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4) + 92.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

 
I see. Thanks. (y)

I thought he might be well informed, cause reading the article he echoed the same quote as you a couple of posts ago about proto Villanovans and Picentes, as opposed to Etruscans.

And some of the other facts in the paper seemed to make sense with recent papers.
Which parts should I be aware of as bias? I already am aware that the Asia Minor connections he argued earlier don't make much sense given the evidence. But the facts he brings about the Apennines/Rhaetians and Balkans/Pannonia and other Indo European movements make sense.

It's is oversimplifying writing that the Italics came from the west (from where? France? Spain?) and the Etruscans from the east (from where? Veneto? Marche? Balkans? Pannonia? Siberia? Japan? Everything comes from the east, even Indo-Europeans, EEFs and hunter gatherers). Just as the concept of North-West Indo-European makes one smiles a lot, but it does exist in the scientific literature, I remember at least in Mallory.
On this I suggest you to read this

https://www.reddit.com/r/IndoEurope...rthwest_indoeuropean_generally_accepted_as_a/

Particularly this. CQ does have a weirdo Western bias. Then there would be a discussion about how much Indo-European linguists like Adrados and Beekes have been overrated (and how many of their theories were very old and outdated). The damage done by Indo-European linguists is enormous. Just as other well-known amateur bloggers have a weirdo Eastern bias, let's be clear.

ZCyXGCx.png



Samples are few, and the interpretation of sample analysis cannot be separated from what other disciplines have been saying for years. Just as the concepts of ethnogenesis, cultural formation, self-identification and ethnic self-awareness must be taken into account.

In both cases, in the case of the Latins and the Etruscans, the consensus is that they were formed in Italy where their ethnogenesis took place, and that only from the beginning of the Iron Age we can speak of Latin and Etruscan ethnicity.

In the post Italics are being pitted against Etruscans, but the analyses in Antonio 2019 are primarily concerned with Latins except R1, not Italics. Italics is first of all a linguistic classification, and there is no consensus that Latin (or better, Latino-Faliscan) is an Italic language. Sometimes, instead, it happens to read that Latino-Faliscan is Western-Italic and Osco-Umbrian is Eastern-Italic. Strictly speaking only the Osco-Umbrian languages are considered truly Italic, with the idea that the Latino-Faliscan and the Osco-Umbrian group are two distinct IE linguistic groups and that any similarities are due to convergences of historical age due to numerous contacts. At present we do not know with certainty if Latino-Faliscan and Osco-Umbrian really descend from a common ancestor, when they split from this common ancestor, if they are languages arrived together or separate in Italy and they are really part of the Italo-Celtic family.

Specific studies on the origins in prehistory and protohistory of the ancestors of the speakers of Latin-Faliscan and Osco-Umbrian languages are few (they were all too busy writing crap about the origins of the Etruscans). From time to time you will read that the Latin-Faliscan speakers are thought to have arrived before the Osco-Umbrians and yet both have some relationship to Middle-Danube Urnfield cultures. In older studies, however, they were both related to older archaeological cultures of Prehistoric Italy.

I'll be back soon with another post, I'm busy right now.


Ps what is your thought, why do modern Northern Italians such as Tuscans and some others get close distances to these bronze age Balkan/Pannonian samples? What could explain it?


Because in modern Northern Italians and Tuscans WHG has decreased (compared to CA/EBA samples) and clearly they have moved closer to bronze age Balkan/Pannonian samples. This can be due to multiple reasons. One is undoubtedly the continuous relations between Italy, which is at the center of the Mediterranean, and the Balkans since the prehistory.
 
... the "Italian_Greeks" is the average results of two Iron-Age LATINS, R437 (y R1b...) and R850 (y T1a1...)

… call it Latin_Italians or Roman_Latins instead !!! … that’s where they’re from!

… or else they should be added to the other Latins.

ykNQxrY.gif

You're right; all six of them are members of Latin tribes from the first millennium BC.

For what it's worth, one model shows me as 65% Latin (the more "northern" four) plus 35% "Italian Greek". So, basically, a mix of the six Latins in the analysis.

The two "Italian-Greeks" are just the Latins of the Republican period who show the progressive movement north of more "Greek like ancestry" imo. Doesn't stop them from being Latins. It just means they're a mix of the "older" perhaps Latin population and more Greek like ancestry.

Either just call them Latins, or maybe "Latin-Greeks" at least.
 
It's is oversimplifying writing that the Italics came from the west (from where? France? Spain?) and the Etruscans from the east (from where? Veneto? Marche? Balkans? Pannonia? Siberia? Japan? Everything comes from the east, even Indo-Europeans, EEFs and hunter gatherers). Just as the concept of North-West Indo-European makes one smiles a lot, but it does exist in the scientific literature, I remember at least in Mallory.
On this I suggest you to read this

https://www.reddit.com/r/IndoEurope...rthwest_indoeuropean_generally_accepted_as_a/

Particularly this. CQ does have a weirdo Western bias. Then there would be a discussion about how much Indo-European linguists like Adrados and Beekes have been overrated (and how many of their theories were very old and outdated). The damage done by Indo-European linguists is enormous. Just as other well-known amateur bloggers have a weirdo Eastern bias, let's be clear.

ZCyXGCx.png



Samples are few, and the interpretation of sample analysis cannot be separated from what other disciplines have been saying for years. Just as the concepts of ethnogenesis, cultural formation, self-identification and ethnic self-awareness must be taken into account.

In both cases, in the case of the Latins and the Etruscans, the consensus is that they were formed in Italy where their ethnogenesis took place, and that only from the beginning of the Iron Age we can speak of Latin and Etruscan ethnicity.

In the post Italics are being pitted against Etruscans, but the analyses in Antonio 2019 are primarily concerned with Latins except R1, not Italics. Italics is first of all a linguistic classification, and there is no consensus that Latin (or better, Latino-Faliscan) is an Italic language. Sometimes, instead, it happens to read that Latino-Faliscan is Western-Italic and Osco-Umbrian is Eastern-Italic. Strictly speaking only the Osco-Umbrian languages are considered truly Italic, with the idea that the Latino-Faliscan and the Osco-Umbrian group are two distinct IE linguistic groups and that any similarities are due to convergences of historical age due to numerous contacts. At present we do not know with certainty if Latino-Faliscan and Osco-Umbrian really descend from a common ancestor, when they split from this common ancestor, if they are languages arrived together or separate in Italy and they are really part of the Italo-Celtic family.

Specific studies on the origins in prehistory and protohistory of the ancestors of the speakers of Latin-Faliscan and Osco-Umbrian languages are few (they were all too busy writing crap about the origins of the Etruscans). From time to time you will read that the Latin-Faliscan speakers are thought to have arrived before the Osco-Umbrians and yet both have some relationship to Middle-Danube Urnfield cultures. In older studies, however, they were both related to older archaeological cultures of Prehistoric Italy.

I'll be back soon with another post, I'm busy right now.





Because in modern Northern Italians and Tuscans WHG has decreased (compared to CA/EBA samples) and clearly they have moved closer to bronze age Balkan/Pannonian samples. This can be due to multiple reasons. One is undoubtedly the continuous relations between Italy, which is at the center of the Mediterranean, and the Balkans since the prehistory.

Osco-Umbrian is also known previously as Umbro-Sabellic or just Sabellic .............Umbrians are ancestors of the Samnites, Volsci, Sabines to name 3 major tribes.....they are associated with many more

https://oxfordre.com/classics/view/...381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-4616

meaning that in central and southern italy there was only 2 major "races" ......the 12 tribes of the Etruscans in the western part and the Umbri-Sabellic group in the eastern and southern part .............I have stated this many years ago

you only need to check where the latins came from..............since they spent over 200 years under Etruscan rule, some scholars state they are an out-branch of etruscan.....I doubt we will ever find out

in the North.............the Ligurians in the west and the 34 tribes of the Euganei in the east are the original people ..............I predict the Rhaeti are a Euganei tribe like the camuni or stoeni are, but had etruscan influence later since their language only appeared circa 600BC
 
my cousin from Cles -Trentino .............her line is from my grandfather sister

Distance to:TrentinoCles
3.03482057
Bronze_Age_Illyrians
5.83890401Villanovans_(n=2)
6.10347442Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.33524445Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.23312269Etruscans_(n=3)
11.21687122Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
12.049863076th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
12.34738029Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
12.73217185Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
13.23675564Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
13.30812909Latins_(n=4)
14.99738977Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
15.43010693Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
15.548324676th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
17.71318718Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
18.41030146Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
18.62196821Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
19.03681433Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
19.17109804Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
19.81995711Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
20.08211891Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
20.10456167Western_Scythians_(n=28)
20.50580406Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
21.16651837Ostrogoths_(n=3)
21.37520760EMBA_Greece_(n=6)



Distance to:TrentinoCles
1.8662081240.40% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 59.60% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
1.9310161241.20% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 58.80% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
2.0383436946.60% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 53.40% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
2.3616121431.40% Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21) + 68.60% Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
2.7058033034.60% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 65.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
2.7393006363.80% EMBA_Greece_(n=6) + 36.20% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)
2.7951652949.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 50.60% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
2.8406080363.00% Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4) + 37.00% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)
2.898985533.00% Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6) + 97.00% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.9235674653.60% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 46.40% Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
2.930512292.40% Chalcolithic_Israel + 97.60% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.9350170838.00% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18) + 62.00% Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
2.9523888497.80% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 2.20% Iron_Age_&_Hellenistic_Egypt_(n=3)
2.9745423297.80% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 2.20% Late_Bronze_Age_Israel_(n=3)
2.979460042.00% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4) + 98.00% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.981434792.20% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 97.80% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.981553852.00% Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9) + 98.00% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.989808732.00% Early_Bronze_Age_Jordan_(n=3) + 98.00% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.9913152089.20% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 10.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
2.9937557060.80% Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4) + 39.20% Swedish_Vikings_(n=23)
2.9953059493.40% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 6.60% Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
2.997659532.60% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 97.40% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.9980407252.00% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 48.00% Swedish_Vikings_(n=23)
2.998154122.60% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2) + 97.40% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
3.01516146
96.40% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 3.60% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)



Target: TrentinoCles
Distance: 1.8718% / 1.87180944 | ADC: 0.25x RC
77.5
Bronze_Age_Illyrians
12.2
EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
10.3Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
 
This would be the Latin average if R437 and R850 were included in them. Much more Italian:

Code:
Latins_(n=6),4.358333333,0.27,2.18,0.311666667,40.96333333,20.06666667,0.263333333,0.095,6.183333333,0,25.14333333,0.166666667

Distance to:Latins_(n=6)
3.56338751French_Corsica
5.02105207Italian_Emilia
5.11350472Italian_Liguria
5.28653924Italian_Tuscany
5.89395429Italian_Lombardy
7.47409062Italian_Romagna
7.91374735Italian_Piedmont
8.60432820Italian_Veneto
9.84376671Swiss_Italian
9.96968511Italian_Marche
10.86047254Italian_Lazio
11.26234717Italian_Trentino
11.70160091Italian_Friuli_VG
12.59631416Spanish_Baleares
13.08773715Italian_Aosta_Valley
13.64015263Spanish_Canarias
13.73156815Portuguese
13.87824666Spanish_Castilla-Leon
14.18387337Albanian_Kosovo
14.27653893Spanish_Valencia
14.34128645Albanian
15.01858506Macedonian_Vardar
15.10981018Greek_Thessaly
15.15642428Macedonian_South
15.25645319Spanish_Catalonia
 
This would be the Latin average if R437 and R850 were included in them. Much more Italian:

Code:
Latins_(n=6),4.358333333,0.27,2.18,0.311666667,40.96333333,20.06666667,0.263333333,0.095,6.183333333,0,25.14333333,0.166666667

Distance to:Latins_(n=6)
3.56338751French_Corsica
5.02105207Italian_Emilia
5.11350472Italian_Liguria
5.28653924Italian_Tuscany
5.89395429Italian_Lombardy
7.47409062Italian_Romagna
7.91374735Italian_Piedmont
8.60432820Italian_Veneto
9.84376671Swiss_Italian
9.96968511Italian_Marche
10.86047254Italian_Lazio
11.26234717Italian_Trentino
11.70160091Italian_Friuli_VG
12.59631416Spanish_Baleares
13.08773715Italian_Aosta_Valley
13.64015263Spanish_Canarias
13.73156815Portuguese
13.87824666Spanish_Castilla-Leon
14.18387337Albanian_Kosovo
14.27653893Spanish_Valencia
14.34128645Albanian
15.01858506Macedonian_Vardar
15.10981018Greek_Thessaly
15.15642428Macedonian_South
15.25645319Spanish_Catalonia

Distance to:Jovialis
2.67342477Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.137148786th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
4.96643735Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
5.23919841Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.54637350Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.89175835Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
12.93336383Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
13.26984928EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
14.82023157Latins_(n=6)
15.18323088Bronze_Age_Illyrians
15.74704734Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
17.80178643Villanovans_(n=2)
18.03439492Etruscans_(n=3)
19.67391420Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
20.82980557Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
21.04682874Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2)
21.664824026th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
22.36252669Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
22.85149010Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
23.50336997Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
23.70956769Western_Scythians_(n=28)
23.75943812Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=7)
24.15866925Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
24.22953157Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
24.28315877Early_Neolithic_Starcevo_culture_(n=8)

 
Thanks, Jovialis,

As I said a few posts upthread, about 2/3 "older" Latin, and 1/3 "newer" Latin. Since the "newer" Latins were half "older" Latin, maybe 82% "older" Latin, and 18% Greek.

He always said that after the Fall of the Empire, a lot of the "Romans" fled to the Apennines. Maybe through his rather encyclopedic knowledge of Roman history, the history of the mountains, and sheer gut instinct he got it right? Maybe it's a pipe dream, but he would have been very, very, happy.

Distance to:Angela
2.15749791Latins_(n=6)
6.57863208Villanovans_(n=2)
7.43920023Bronze_Age_Illyrians
7.91382967Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
7.96705717Etruscans_(n=3)
10.01388037Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
10.15557975Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
13.13808205Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
13.49591049Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
13.54544942Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
13.78129892Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
13.858535286th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
14.35290215Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
14.42208723Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
14.43457308Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
16.39635935Early_Neolithic_Starcevo_culture_(n=8)
16.75045373Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
17.10258752EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
17.63364682Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
17.947283926th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
18.23290981Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
19.39564642Late_Chalcolithic_Baden_culture_(n=14)
19.57804127Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
19.84998741Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=8)
20.64407663LN_Lengyel_culture_(n=8)
 
Thanks Angela and Jovialis :)

… the six Latins on GedM… :

# XH4246097 - R435
# SA5994979 - R437
# SN3426822 - R850
# GG2504860 - R851
# YB8192286 - R1016
# AP5582604 - R1021

… one to one - Latins vs S_me:

(the Red underline indicates the minimum amount of settings that I needed in order to get results … but this might be different in your case)


R435
Ou6n6MJ.jpg


R437
ShbvlHA.jpg


R850
GvLtZ2v.jpg


R851
Lvxd7ue.jpg


R1016
8HOBrgT.jpg


R1021
MLfLZdq.jpg
 
First Ever Post With Results

Hi there, this is my first post here so I apologize for any formatting issues. I have run my genome on the Ethnicity Analyzer and, although I'm not a complete novice, I am also not a professional with an in-depth understanding of the terminology of archaeo-genetics. If anyone more experienced could give me a basic idea of what the basic takeaway from my results are, I would greatly appreciate it. I know this will be a lot to read. Thank you for your patience!

Bronze Age Single Distance
Distance to: True Caesar

3.42622241 Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
6.4413896 Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
7.39949998 Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
7.84600535 Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Britain_(n=24)
10.01050448 Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
10.15527942 Early_Bronze_Age_Britain_(n=28)
14.31376959 EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18)
15.01219504 Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)
19.04210335 Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
19.73485749 EBA_Fatyanovo_culture_(n=18)
20.41782065 MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4)
22.4217729 Bronze_Age_Illyrians
23.13338497 Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22)
24.50082652 LBA_Srubna_culture_(n=27)
25.61892465 Early_Bronze_Age_Iberia_(n=7)
26.34931878 Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Spain_(n=38)
26.65365266 MBA_Andronovo_culture_(n=3)
28.98739726 Middle_Bronze_Age_Portugal_(n=4)
30.13379166 Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
30.77936809 LBA_South_Siberia_(n=4)
36.33249372 EMBA_Poltavka_culture_(n=8)
38.45547555 LBA_Karasuk_culture_(n=7)
39.98934108 Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
40.09005862 Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12)

Bronze Age Single Populations
Target: True Caesar

Distance: 0.5824% / 0.58235238
35.3 MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4)

29.3 Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)

26.8 Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)

7.3 Late_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=4)

0.7 Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)

0.6 Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14)

Bronze Age 2 Populations
Distance to: True Caesar

1.59115478 84.80% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) + 15.20% Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12)
1.69730799 33.60% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18) + 66.40% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
1.71590661 85.00% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) + 15.00% Bronze_Age_Estonia_(n=16)
2.42189281 49.00% EBA_Fatyanovo_culture_(n=18) + 51.00% Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
2.6884176 18.60% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=7) + 81.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
2.78169513 25.40% MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4) + 74.60% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
2.84353548 60.20% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14) + 39.80% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
2.84399493 56.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5) + 43.60% LBA_Srubna_culture_(n=27)
2.89182791 96.60% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 3.40% Late_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=4)
2.95960877 3.00% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2) + 97.00% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
2.96937866 3.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2) + 97.00% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
2.97014295 2.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4) + 97.60% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
3.0341197 93.40% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 6.60% Bronze_Age_Illyrians
3.040326 79.60% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) + 20.40% MBA_Andronovo_culture_(n=3)
3.0549948 68.20% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18) + 31.80% Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
3.07180005 2.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=24) + 97.60% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
3.08046312 2.20% Early-Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Levant_(n=9) + 97.80% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
3.11285152 97.80% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 2.20% Late_Bronze_Age_Israel_(n=3)
3.13242076 18.00% EMBA_Catacomb_culture_(n=4) + 82.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
3.15717176 2.80% Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4) + 97.20% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
3.17671521 25.60% EBA_Fatyanovo_culture_(n=18) + 74.40% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
3.26430697 90.00% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 10.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
3.29712765 58.60% Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5) + 41.40% MBA_Andronovo_culture_(n=3)
3.30513966 97.80% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 2.20% Baltic_Bronze_Age_(n=12)
3.32772977 98.00% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 2.00% Bronze_Age_Estonia_(n=16)


Iron Age & Antiquity Single Distance
Distance to: True Caesar

6.81678077 Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
7.22959197 Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
7.36313113 Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
10.47329938 Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
13.78856048 Iron_Age_Sweden_(n=4)
15.58710364 Iron_Age_Norway_(n=6)
19.25478122 Western_Scythians_(n=28)
22.95246174 Latins_(n=4)
23.11163776 Villanovans_(n=2)
26.37949203 Cimmerians_(n=6)
26.49583741 Etruscans_(n=3)
28.38447287 Iron_Age_Finland_(n=3)
31.61981657 Sarmatians_(n=14)
34.38290854 Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)
36.17065109 Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
37.17051251 Tian_Shan_Saka_(n=5)
41.72189953 Eastern_Scythians_(n=12)
43.73885001 Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
45.41340661 Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7)
47.46931746 Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
61.68818607 Iron_Age_Israel_(n=6)
63.91114379 Iron_Age_&_Hellenistic_Egypt_(n=3)

Iron Age Single Populations
Target:True Caesar

Distance: 1.4333% / 1.43325196
48.3 Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)

36.9 Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)

9.4 Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7)

5 Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)

0.4 Latins_(n=4)

Iron Age 2 Populations
Distance to: True Caesar

2.75187935 82.40% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 17.60% Sarmatians_(n=14)
2.996652 40.20% Latins_(n=4) + 59.80% Iron_Age_Norway_(n=6)
3.15590703 69.60% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 30.40% Iron_Age_Norway_(n=6)
3.19892371 30.40% Villanovans_(n=2) + 69.60% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
3.57323413 80.60% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 19.40% Cimmerians_(n=6)
3.59732866 84.20% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 15.80% Iron_Age_Estonia_(n=8)
3.8589234 85.80% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 14.20% Tian_Shan_Saka_(n=5)
3.8630115 36.80% Villanovans_(n=2) + 63.20% Iron_Age_Sweden_(n=4)
3.97940546 61.00% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 39.00% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
4.02964527 30.00% Latins_(n=4) + 70.00% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
4.11643077 68.40% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 31.60% Iron_Age_Sweden_(n=4)
4.18518154 21.00% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 79.00% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
4.197866 36.80% Latins_(n=4) + 63.20% Iron_Age_Sweden_(n=4)
4.37908155 76.60% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 23.40% Western_Scythians_(n=28)
4.38652145 10.80% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 89.20% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.43890894 12.60% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 87.40% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.50035087 9.80% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46) + 90.20% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.53444738 26.60% Etruscans_(n=3) + 73.40% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
4.60175726 39.60% Villanovans_(n=2) + 60.40% Iron_Age_Norway_(n=6)
4.61345395 7.60% Iron_Age_Israel_(n=6) + 92.40% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.61423963 11.00% Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7) + 89.00% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
4.65893618 17.80% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 82.20% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10)
4.67794238 18.00% Villanovans_(n=2) + 82.00% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.6901382 46.60% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 53.40% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4)
4.84422562 79.60% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4) + 20.40% Western_Scythians_(n=28)

Late Antiquity & Middle Ages Single Distance
Distance to: True Caesar

5.54721552 Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
5.84649468 Lombards_(n=28)
6.07796841 Roman_Britain_(n=8)
7.6596214 Chernyakhiv_culture_Goths_(n=3)
8.05869096 Suebi_Alemmani_(n=20)
8.29250867 Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
9.88838207 Ostrogoths_(n=3)
10.32814117 Anglo-Saxons_(n=4)
11.42776881 Norwegian_Vikings_(n=12)
12.84083331 Swedish_Vikings_(n=23)
13.38827099 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
15.7367055 Vikings_from_Russia_(n=15)
16.42927874 Vikings_from_Ukraine_(n=4)
16.87251019 Vikings_from_Poland_(n=9)
18.47990801 Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
18.53760233 Avars_(n=2)
21.62859681 Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
24.51752027 Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
26.4309629 Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
29.45737938 Medieval_Estonia_(n=7)
30.02886112 Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
31.08826628 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
31.88300801 Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
32.25517633 Iron_Age_Kangju_(n=4)
32.56310642 Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

Late Antiquity & Early Middle Ages Single Populations
Target: True Caesar

Distance: 2.2659% / 2.26592917
69 Lombards_(n=28)

12.5 Roman_Britain_(n=8)

10.2 Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)

8.3 Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

Late Antiquity & Early Middle Ages 2 Populations
Distance to: True Caesar

2.43289014 22.40% Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9) + 77.60% Lombards_(n=28)
2.70413151 14.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 85.20% Lombards_(n=28)
2.86187318 19.20% Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31) + 80.80% Lombards_(n=28)
2.91858733 17.20% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16) + 82.80% Lombards_(n=28)
2.97033783 13.60% Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24) + 86.40% Lombards_(n=28)
3.0144616 27.80% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24) + 72.20% Lombards_(n=28)
3.24127562 19.80% Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9) + 80.20% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.24666273 12.00% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7) + 88.00% Lombards_(n=28)
3.396539 24.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 75.40% Anglo-Saxons_(n=4)
3.39995769 28.00% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24) + 72.00% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
3.43125451 17.20% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16) + 82.80% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
3.43698022 14.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 85.60% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
3.46791312 28.60% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16) + 71.40% Anglo-Saxons_(n=4)
3.5028751 43.00% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24) + 57.00% Anglo-Saxons_(n=4)
3.57655722 12.60% Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5) + 87.40% Lombards_(n=28)
3.66559614 16.40% Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31) + 83.60% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.69296151 24.40% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24) + 75.60% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.69644235 12.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 87.80% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.6989282 13.20% Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24) + 86.80% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
3.7436355 12.80% Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5) + 87.20% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
3.76244985 14.40% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16) + 85.60% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.77998859 19.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 80.20% Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
3.79251581 36.40% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24) + 63.60% Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
3.81735871 11.20% Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24) + 88.80% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
3.81843095 23.40% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16) + 76.60% Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
 
Last edited:
Thanks to Jovialis I was able to add more Neolithic samples from Anatolia, bringing to total of aceramic Neolithic from 8 to 14 and or Early Neolithic from 7 to 20 samples.
 
Great additions, Maciamo!

Here are my genetic affinities using only sample cohorts from the Epipalaeolithic to the Chalcolithic.

Early Neolithic Anatolia is my closest, albeit at a distance of 23.6

Distance to:Jovialis
23.62873463Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
24.04178446Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=14)
24.22953157Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
24.28315877Early_Neolithic_Starcevo_culture_(n=8)
25.05136523Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)
26.64969418Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
27.77403284Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6)
27.80616658LN_Lengyel_culture_(n=8)
28.89243500Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Levant_(n=15)
29.31258262Late_Chalcolithic_Baden_culture_(n=14)
29.60775743LN_Tisza-Sopot_culture_(n=11)
29.76361369EN_LBK_culture_(n=43)
29.78313953Middle_Chalcolithic_Hungary_(n=9)
29.86402016Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35)
30.09641175EN_Alfold_Linear_Pottery_culture_(n=20)
30.59360391MN_Vinca_culture_(n=6)
31.03693284Middle_Neolithic_Sicily_(n=10)
31.06454732Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4)
31.48242526Early_Neolithic_Italy_(n=10)
34.11857119Early_Neolithic_France_(n=4)
34.41035455Mesolithic_Anatolia_(AHG)_(n=1)
35.25574847Chalcolithic_Israel
36.16582088Chalcolithic_Italy_(n=5)
38.92927048Middle_Neolithic_France_(n=19)
39.94916269Early_Neolithic_Maghreb_(n=1)
40.28320990Megalithic_Europe_(n=24)
40.53531670Chalcolithic_BB_Sardinia_(n=10)
40.93693809Late_Neolithic_Switzerland_(n=58)
41.56312188Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)
41.58420373Globular_Amphora_culture_(n=6)
43.90116513Chalcolithic_Portugal_(n=11)
44.41834418Neolithic_Britain_(n=62)
44.75089385Middle_Neolithic_Sardinia_(n=10)
45.58891971Middle_Late_Neolithic_Spain_(n=12)
45.93225120CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
45.99859563Chalcolithic_Spain_(n=60)
47.45674662Middle-Late_Neolithic_Portugal_(n=4)
47.87389581Early_Neolithic_Spain_(n=10)
48.82845789MN_Westphalia_(Megalithic_Wartberg)_(n=6)
49.08029544Epipaleolithic_Levant_(Natufians)_(n=6)
51.09580805Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
52.07516491Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1)
57.12971906Chalcolithic_Pontic_Steppe_(n=3)
59.47045569Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21)
59.85499812Botai_culture_(n=3)
60.45943433CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5)
65.49179033Mesolithic_Balkans_HG_(n=43)
67.64727119Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
68.55580209Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3)
70.35709062Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
70.53476590Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4)
72.06702089Mesolithic_Baltic_Scandinavia_(SHG)_(n=31)
75.03895055Neolithic_Ukraine_(n=12)
75.32657499Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2)
75.91438665Mesolithic_Ukraine_(n=7)
77.55921480Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4)
79.68623030Late_Mesolithic_Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2)
80.93197699Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)


I get a much better fit in the two-way mixture:

Distance to:Jovialis
3.6406156072.20% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20) + 27.80% CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5)
3.7153538038.80% MN_Westphalia_(Megalithic_Wartberg)_(n=6) + 61.20% Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4)
4.0262012874.60% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20) + 25.40% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3)
4.6290386937.80% MN_Westphalia_(Megalithic_Wartberg)_(n=6) + 62.20% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35)
4.6502509369.80% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 30.20% Chalcolithic_Pontic_Steppe_(n=3)
4.9062832771.20% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20) + 28.80% Chalcolithic_Pontic_Steppe_(n=3)
5.1542381973.60% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 26.40% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3)
5.6335129361.20% Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4) + 38.80% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)
5.7254282463.80% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 36.20% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1)
6.2333333271.20% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 28.80% CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5)
6.6038492650.00% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3) + 50.00% Globular_Amphora_culture_(n=6)
6.6129111171.00% Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=14) + 29.00% Chalcolithic_Pontic_Steppe_(n=3)
7.0770372163.00% Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4) + 37.00% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1)
7.0808682023.20% Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2) + 76.80% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
7.6553539650.80% Megalithic_Europe_(n=24) + 49.20% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)
7.9717312922.40% Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4) + 77.60% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
8.0155569721.80% Late_Mesolithic_Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2) + 78.20% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=20)
8.0196598524.00% Mesolithic_Volga-Ural_(n=2) + 76.00% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)
8.2824898348.20% Neolithic_Britain_(n=62) + 51.80% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)
8.4147961475.20% Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=14) + 24.80% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3)
8.4840050254.20% Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4) + 45.80% Chalcolithic_Azerbaijan_(n=4)
8.5535124352.60% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3) + 47.40% Chalcolithic_Spain_(n=60)
8.9718412022.80% Late_Mesolithic_Comb_Ceramic_culture_(n=2) + 77.20% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)
9.0203659751.40% Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3) + 48.60% Chalcolithic_Portugal_(n=11)
9.0342405923.20% Mesolithic_Northwest_Russia_(n=4) + 76.80% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)

 
Using only Epipaleolithic to Chalcolithic samples I get something similar from you using the 2way admixtures, except that I get Globular amphora instead of Early Neolithic Anatolia.


3.76789093 38.60% CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5) + 61.40% Globular_Amphora_culture_(n=6)
4.90883067 33.60% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3) + 66.40% Globular_Amphora_culture_(n=6)

Remedello also often scores high:

4.38709789 46.00% CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5) + 54.00% CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
5.67636631 40.60% Khvalynsk_culture_(n=3) + 59.40% CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
 

This thread has been viewed 143770 times.

Back
Top