Why do native Iron Age Balkanites plot over modern Italians?

enter_tain said:
What are you even going on about? That Germans have no Germanic blood? 90% of those hits are just Italians and Spaniards.

Back then it was

Northern Europe -> Half steppe
Central Europe -> A quarter to a third steppe
Southern Europe -> One sixth or no steppe at all Minoans

Now with Czechs, Germans, etc... Obviously it's higher. But Italians, Illyrians, Rhaetians, (Thraco-Dacians?), were clearly derivates of Central European cultures that didn't become diluted like Greeks/Minoans.

You want to group Minoans and Greeks (or even Anatolian) who are like 0% or 7% steppe, to cultures that are 1/3rd steppe. That makes 0 sense.
Click to expand...
Ancient Greeks were around 20% Steppe, and Latins around 25-30%: not a lot of difference.
unknown.png
 
Good competition!
Ancient Greeks at 20% 'steppe' ??? WHere? When? How? ho said that?
 
I thought Corded Ware people were mainly R1a while the ancient Latini were mainly R1b.
 
Vallicanus said:
I thought Corded Ware people were mainly R1a while the ancient Latini were mainly R1b.
Click to expand...

Correct. In fact, the Latins (as well as the Etruscans) seem more derived from Bell Beaker to see their uniparental markers. There is probably still a lack of ancient samples showing the various transitions between Corded and Bell Beaker.
 
Vallicanus said:
I thought Corded Ware people were mainly R1a while the ancient Latini were mainly R1b.
Click to expand...
The problem is R1b-L23 is divided into Z2103+ and L51+. Bell Beaker, Corded Ware and Latini, are predominantly L51+. However, there are also Z2103+(Yamnaya z2109+) found in Bell Beaker, Corded Ware, Latini.
 
I have no strong opinions on the origin of the Proto-Italics, since I'm not too educated on the topic. But my point is that the steppe admixture they brought was via intermediate groups ( i.e. Bell Beakers).
 
I've read on Anthrogenica that the data collected by that fake Italian of Principe shows that Sicilians have Levantine Y haplos at significant amounts: I hate this idea that somehow data "collected" by delusional individuals with identity issues are preferred over the dozens of studies and samples from said studies.
 
Nobody should be using private collections of genomes to prove anything whatsoever about anyone. Even if the "collectors" are honest, it's not a scientific sample.

It's like people who post polls from the readers of a certain magazine and think it's as valuable as a poll by a polling company like Gallup which follows statistical rules in collecting random samples.

Or, heck, it would be like me getting yDna from the people in the Apennines of Emilia and saying all the people in Emilia Romagna are 85% U-152.

It's just stupid, and anyone with half a brain should know it.

Plus, who could take seriously someone who thinks he's Jewish because he carries what he thinks is a Jewish yDna. Even if it's true about the yDna, whatever "Jewishness" was in him washed out long ago. What goes on in the minds of some of these Italian wannabe Jews, like that Calabrian rabbi, is beyond me. Why can't they accept their actual identity? What makes them feel better about themselves when they do this?

Well, I suppose I could ask the same question of the idiotic Nordicist Italians.

It just has to be accepted that there are some disturbed, identity confused people out there who are attracted to this hobby. The pity is that one branch of them has taken over a long- established site dedicated to population genetics.
 
Lufta said:
The samples I used are not private collections. They are ancient samples found. As for the Albanian averages, they are over 100 Albanian samples , including my own , that have been gathered. What nobody should be doing is using Iron Age or Bronze Age samples to compare modern people. Let's rather use samples right before Slavic period

Such as Illyrian samples from Illyricum or Vicanium





Distance to: Histria
0.01498791 Albanian_Tropojë-Gjakovë
0.01623978 Italian_Piedmont
0.01628291 Albanian_Northwestern_Albania
0.01685090 Albanian_Central_Albania
0.01712691 Italian_Tuscany
0.01720881 Albanian_Labëria
0.01739315 Albanian_Pukë
0.01766900 Albanian_Himarë
0.01911879 Albanian_Kosovo
0.01960680 Albanian_Korçë
0.02025755 Swiss_Italian
0.02041372 Greek_Thessaly
0.02120641 Albanian_Montenegro
0.02315338 Italian_Marche
0.02397232 Albanian_Mirditë
0.02413487 Italian_Liguria
0.02456475 Italian_Umbria
0.02480421 Italian_Veneto
0.02502613 Albanian_Dibra
0.02553547 Italian_Bergamo
0.02592085 Albanian
0.02593033 Greek_Central_Macedonia
0.02605302 Italian_Lombardy
0.02668993 French_Corsica
0.02680556 Greek_Macedonia






Distance to: Pannonia_Savia
0.01008664 Albanian_Tropojë-Gjakovë
0.01058992 Albanian_Northwestern_Albania
0.01186581 Albanian_Kosovo
0.01319886 Albanian_Pukë
0.01325533 Albanian_Montenegro
0.01495366 Albanian_Labëria
0.01591902 Italian_Piedmont
0.01602170 Albanian_Korçë
0.01634265 Albanian_Himarë
0.01638115 Albanian_Central_Albania
0.01694924 Swiss_Italian
0.01857338 Italian_Tuscany
0.01971024 Albanian_Mirditë
0.01973539 Albanian_Dibra
0.02024482 Greek_Thessaly
0.02071263 Albanian
0.02205018 Italian_Veneto
0.02244784 Greek_Central_Macedonia
0.02400965 Greek_Macedonia
0.02523509 Greek_West_Taygetos
0.02570783 Rumelia_East
0.02597000 Italian_Bergamo
0.02653177 Italian_Marche
0.02669377 Greek_Messenia
0.02683460 Italian_Trentino-Alto-Adige



Distance to: Dalmatia
0.01134221 Albanian_Himarë
0.01159103 Italian_Tuscany
0.01160401 Albanian_Central_Albania
0.01228527 Italian_Marche
0.01305404 Albanian_Labëria
0.01332171 Italian_Umbria
0.01549999 Albanian_Pukë
0.01559871 Greek_Thessaly
0.01692635 Albanian_Mirditë
0.01699319 Albanian_Tropojë-Gjakovë
0.01841780 Italian_Lazio
0.01873896 Albanian_Northwestern_Albania
0.01921584 Italian_Piedmont
0.01953018 Greek_Achaea
0.02017517 Albanian_Dibra
0.02045083 Greek_Argolis
0.02046673 Greek_Messenia
0.02079470 Greek_Elis
0.02087670 Greek_Corinthia
0.02094803 Greek_Peloponnese
0.02097447 Greek_East_Taygetos
0.02109246 Italian_Molise
0.02113415 Italian_Abruzzo
0.02135710 Albanian_Korçë
0.02141235 Greek_Arcadia



Obviously not entirely ''Italian like''




Distance to: Roman_Dardania:Viminacium:Serbia_Viminacium:R9669___AD_220___Coverage_47.26%
0.01488396 Albanian_Tropojë-Gjakovë
0.01499980 Albanian_Northwestern_Albania
0.01573347 Albanian_Labëria
0.01578209 Albanian_Kosovo
0.01586072 Albanian_Pukë
0.01602089 Albanian_Himarë
0.01761822 Greek_Thessaly
0.01792886 Albanian_Montenegro
0.01861593 Albanian_Korçë
0.01870535 Albanian_Central_Albania
0.01940846 Italian_Tuscany
0.01961279 Italian_Piedmont
0.02038943 Albanian
0.02060000 Albanian_Mirditë
0.02128203 Swiss_Italian
0.02193268 Albanian_Dibra
0.02237420 Greek_Macedonia
0.02272031 Greek_Central_Macedonia
0.02349211 Greek_West_Taygetos
0.02395840 Greek_Messenia
0.02422429 Italian_Marche
0.02477667 Greek_Achaea
0.02534256 Greek_Elis
0.02581312 Greek_Arcadia
0.02605183 Greek_Argolis
Click to expand...

I have no idea who you are. If you're a recently banned Albanian posting under a sock, I'll make that two month ban a permanent one. Clear?

Second of all, I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Nobody was talking about Albanians or analyses using ancient samples. We were talking about a supposed Italian using MODERN SICILIAN samples from a private collection.

For God's sake, EVERYTHING IS NOT ALWAYS ABOUT ALBANIANS! Most of us don't give a damn about the ethnogenesis of a small group of people in the Balkans.

What I can SEE, is that a good many Italian areas show up as being very close to ancient Balkan samples, so you're rather proving the point of the thread.

Also, the Iron Age samples under discussion are NOT just the ones from "Illyricum". Get a grip or you're going to be out of here before the end of the day.
 
Vallicanus said:
I thought Corded Ware people were mainly R1a while the ancient Latini were mainly R1b.
Click to expand...

You‘re correct, the Corded Ware population was dominated by one single lineage: R1a-M417. With that being said, they weren't 100% R1a-M417. The Bohemia ancient DNA paper revealed that R1b-L151 is the most common Y-DNA among early CW men and one branch ancestral to R1b-P312, the dominant Y-lineage in Bell Beaker. So, the spread of hg. R1b-L151 (including the subclade R-U106) is now certainly associated with the expansion of the early Corded Ware people. Therefore, as suggested in the study, Bell Beakers probably formed to the west of Bohemia, closer to the Rhine, and spread from there in all directions ( into France, Italy, and Iberia, and northwest into Britain and Ireland).

So, Bell Beaker was just a development from Single Grave Corded Ware. Furthermore, Proto-Italics partly descended from these Central European BB. That‘s why the Etruscans and Latins were majority R1b, specifically R1b-L2 and R1b-P312, which were of Bell Beaker and Corded Ware origin.


 
Jovialis said:
I have no strong opinions on the origin of the Proto-Italics, since I'm not too educated on the topic. But my point is that the steppe admixture they brought was via intermediate groups ( i.e. Bell Beakers).
Click to expand...

I think you are right here. I think the time we saw every IE "family" arriving directly from Steppes as successive waves of pure tribes is over even if it could be true for some of them (to be proved). More than a step led to the BA/IA diverse cultural/geographic situations. I see also Celts and Italics (and others) as descendants for a big part of BB's, what does not exclude later mixes and evolutions of course, which explain their differenciation. Personally I suppose that compared to proto-Celts, proto-Italics at some stage of their cristallisation stayer more in contact with Austria/Croatia pop's, so more southern and central Europe influences from Hungary and Balkans. Maybe seen from too high a point of view?
 
real expert said:
You‘re correct, the Corded Ware population was dominated by one single lineage: R1a-M417. With that being said, they weren't 100% R1a-M417. The Bohemia ancient DNA paper revealed that R1b-L151 is the most common Y-DNA among early CW men and one branch ancestral to R1b-P312, the dominant Y-lineage in Bell Beaker. So, the spread of hg. R1b-L151 (including the subclade R-U106) is now certainly associated with the expansion of the early Corded Ware people. Therefore, as suggested in the study, Bell Beakers probably formed to the west of Bohemia, closer to the Rhine, and spread from there in all directions ( into France, Italy, and Iberia, and northwest into Britain and Ireland).

So, Bell Beaker was just a development from Single Grave Corded Ware. Furthermore, Proto-Italics partly descended from these Central European BB. That‘s why the Etruscans and Latins were majority R1b, specifically R1b-L2 and R1b-P312, which were of Bell Beaker and Corded Ware origin.
Click to expand...

Archaeology suggests the Italics might be descended from later Urnfield people, rather than directly from Bell Beaker. Is there any DNA evidence for that?
 
Last edited:
Philjames100 said:
Archaeology suggests the Italics might be descended from later Urnfield people, rather than directly from Bell Beaker. Is there any DNA evidence for that?
Click to expand...

It could be debated but it seems that the Urnfields label covers a lot of ethnies at diverse times in diverse places: it has been more a stage than an uniquely ethnic introgression. We see sometimes (Germany) "urnfield" women cremated along "local" men nhumated with "urnfield" swords! So, an Italics (and Celtic) genesis doesn't exclude at all a BB >> "Urnfield" route, with always the same male lineage until some late stage.
 
MOESAN said:
It could be debated but it seems that the Urnfields label covers a lot of ethnies at diverse times in diverse places: it has been more a stage than an uniquely ethnic introgression. We see sometimes (Germany) "urnfield" women cremated along "local" men nhumated with "urnfield" swords! So, an Italics (and Celtic) genesis doesn't exclude at all a BB >> "Urnfield" route, with always the same male lineage until some late stage.
Click to expand...

I agree, it was more like a cultural complex, but it looks like the first Urnfielders came from somewhere in Carpathian Mountains.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-022-09164-0

An admixture between the Tumulus/Hugelgraberkultur and between the Carpathian "Urnfielders" in Carpathian-Pannonian basin is what triggered in Late Bronze Age the Urnfield Cultural Complex and the spread of idea.

I think that R1b-L51, some G2a, some I2a on Western Urnfielder side and most of E-V13, R1a in Eastern Urnfielder side is what constituted this cultural complex.
 
Philjames100 said:
Archaeology suggests the Italics might be descended from later Urnfield people, rather than directly from Bell Beaker. Is there any DNA evidence for that?
Click to expand...

I think that Provo-Villanovans being rather associated with the Venetic people, rather than the Italics, which just adopted these elements secondarily and were already there. DNA evidence for Urnfielders is always a tricky thing, because cremated remains can't be tested. Like we wouldn't know about the I2a Tollense warriors, which were presumably Eastern Urnfield Lusatians for the most part, without them having died in such a battle without being properly buried according to their customs.
 
Hawk said:
I agree, it was more like a cultural complex, but it looks like the first Urnfielders came from somewhere in Carpathian Mountains.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-022-09164-0

An admixture between the Tumulus/Hugelgraberkultur and between the Carpathian "Urnfielders" in Carpathian-Pannonian basin is what triggered in Late Bronze Age the Urnfield Cultural Complex and the spread of idea.

I think that R1b-L51, some G2a, some I2a on Western Urnfielder side and most of E-V13, R1a in Eastern Urnfielder side is what constituted this cultural complex.
Click to expand...

I am not a specialist. When I try to figure out a global sketch, It seems to me that the core region was somewhere between Eastern Austria, Hungary (rather northern?) , at first, with the cremation thing (spiritual and material) being by nature a "Hungarian" thing (geographically) inherited from more ancient Tells cultures of Neolithic origin, even if already at this time mixes with people of 'steppic' origin were born. Some scholars (Hungarian or Croatian origin, I forgot) spoke of a network generated on the long time by trade contacts and maybe exogamy, having created kind of an "intercompatibility" which has permited later some populations moves at rather average to small scale; it isn't impossible. Females and some skilled "professionals" (metallurgy etc...) could have taken part in this; that some elements of the ancient clannic pop's lineages more 'steppic'like would have changed habits and joined more "open" lineages of neolithic origin is very possible; between LBA and IA it seems the total monopole of some male lineages had disappeared even if some numerical dominance can perdure.
But at first, Urnfields isn't really a Tumuli thing. They needed time before accept it.
Concerning Riverman's remark, it's hard to answer safely without writings. Proto-Villanovans = S-E Veneti? Very possible, but... That some Italics were already in Northern Italy by this time? Possivle too. Some old scholars thought the Terramare (which accepted Urnfield with some "prudence") were ancestors of the Qw- Italic people, or of proto-Latins more precisely. But someones thought about Ligurians, I think. Question: Could the brutal passage to Urnfields in Eastern Emilia be put on the account of Veneti? I don't know. possible: someones say Veneti cut Qw- Italics from P- Italics; maybe first southern Veneti were expelled there by subsequent Osco-Umbrians???
Only guess without texts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 37825 times.

Back
Top