Italic peoples

[Hauteville]

Thread for them.

[Pax Augusta]

I really appreciate it, but probably not the most appropriate section though.

[Hauteville]

A video
http://www.raiscuola.rai.it/articoli...9/default.aspx

[Angela]

A video
http://www.raiscuola.rai.it/articoli...9/default.aspx

Grazie, Hauteville,

I would just state, however, that in my opinion while all the Italian people can trace some of their descent to the Italics, the Italics don't represent the majority of the ancestry of the Italian people if the Italics were still very "Yamnaya" like by the time they got to Italy.The highest percentages for that ancestry in Europe are in the far north and are only about 50% even if you take the Haak et al modeling as final. There was lots of pre-existing ancestry, for one thing. Of course, this was done before the recent advances in adna testing and modeling.

I think as more samples are found and used the percentage will drop from the 50% figure even in northern Europe and northeastern Europe.

That said, it amazes me how few people outside of Italy connect it with the Bronze Age migrations, or the later Celtic ones, for that matter, even some people with an interest in population genetics. Perhaps one of the reasons that Italians are, in general, more knowledgeable about their own history, even ancient history, than many people I encounter in the U.S. is because of a national network like RA!, which posts a lot of excellent documentaries, travel shows etc.

For most of the year I am limited to RAI for Italian television programming, and I'm a great consumer of those documentaries, on history, art, architecture etc. I like their travel shows highlighting different parts of Italy as well.

For non-Italian speakers, the visuals in this particular video are quite good even if you can't understand the text. Very nice shots of the Lake Dwellings, for example and Bronze Age finds.

Sorry, I've already reached my maximum thumbs up for the day and it's not even 10AM!

[giuseppe rossi]

Yamna pastoralists were Proto Indo Europeans, while Italics were Indo Europeized Central Europeans.

According to Haak et al, Tuscans have about 30% PIE admixture.

[Angela]

Yamna pastoralists were Proto Indo Europeans, while Italics were Indo Europeized Central Europeans.

According to Haak et al, Tuscans have about 30% PIE admixture.

Yes, I know. Since I'm always about midway between Bergamo and TSI (Firenze) in all these tests, I figure I probably score around 25-30% if that modeling is correct. I am slowly trying to come to grips with it. :) *

My father had me convinced when I was a young girl that we were pure descendents of the Romans and the Etruscans, and they were autocthonous in Italy since Adam and Eve. :) Well, not really, but it sometimes sounded that way! I can tell you that he was no great fan of the Celts! He thought we chased them all back over the Alps. That obviously wasn't the case, and there are the earlier Italic migrations, from which sprang, in part, the Romans, to consider.

Ed. * That was a joke, in case the smiley wasn't enough of a clue.

[Vallicanus]

@ Giuseppe

I agree. Italics were Indo-Europeanised Central Europeans.

@Angela

Polybius wrote that he witnessed the Roman expulsion of the Gauls from Northern Italy apart from a few areas in the Alps (2nd century BC).

[Angela]

@ Giuseppe

I agree. Italics were Indo-Europeanised Central Europeans.

@Angela

Polybius wrote that he witnessed the Roman expulsion of the Gauls from Northern Italy apart from a few areas in the Alps (2nd century BC).

I know. He was wrong. The Romans also said they exterminated all the Alpi Apuani and moved them all to central Italy. That was wrong too. Beware of groups boasting about their conquests. Check and verify.

To say that Italics were Indo-Europeanised Central Europeans obscures more than it illuminates. Which Central Europeans, and when? "Central European" is a modern term for a modern group of people. It's meaningless in this context.

We have, from Haak et al, the percentages for Unetice, and for Bell Beaker. (see above) We also have people who have provided their estimates for the autosomal composition of Urnfield. The actuality is somewhere around there, perhaps, but there is no way to tell until we have samples from the early Italics. This isn't about current Central Europeans, who are a mix of their own from various migrations, so that comment is inaccurate and misleading in my opinion.

Regardless, whether from the Italici and related groups, or from the Celtici, or what is far more likely, both, and based on the Haak et al modeling, the Tuscans are indeed about 30% Yamnaya Indo-European, not "Indo-Europeanized" Central Europeans, and the Bergamo types a little bit less because they have more WHG.

My more nuanced point is that I think those percentages for all Europeans may change slightly in the future.

[Pax Augusta]

I think that there is a bit of confusion between the Italics and the Indo-European migrations to Italy. I mean, clearly all the Italic tribes were originally Indo-European and spoke an Indo-European language but not all the Italics probably, from a certain point onward, were Indo-European as not all the Indo-European people that settled in Italy became Italics.

The Indo-European migrations to Italy were numerous, "endless" according to Devoto, occurred in a wide span of time, ranging from small groups of people and to the most consistent waves of immigration.

I know. He was wrong. The Romans also said they exterminated all the Alpi Apuani and moved them all to central Italy. That was wrong too. Beware of groups boasting about their conquests. Check and verify..

Angela, probably you're refering to the Ligures Bebiani and Ligures Corneliani deported in Sannio, south Italy.




http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeolo...ine-and-russia


The sound of Proto-Indo-European

http://news.sciencemag.org/2015/02/s...-indo-european

[Hauteville]

Here a very realistic map.

[Angela]

Thanks, Hauteville,

Do you have a citation for the paper from which that came? I wasn't able to find it. I think they're missing the "Celtic" incursions into Liguria.

I have this on order. Thank goodness for Mother's Day. :)
Landscape-Ethnicity-and-Identity in the Archaic Mediterranean:
http://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/land...nean-area.html

One of the articles is available on line:
Approaching Ethnicity and Landscapes in Pre-Roman Italy-the middle Tiber Valley
https://www.academia.edu/5452767/App...e_Tiber_valley\

This book is available online as a google book:
Social Networks and Regional Identity in Bronze Age Italy
https://books.google.com/books?id=I-...0Italy&f=false

There's a sample of this online as well:
Rome and the Western Greeks 350 BC to 200 AD:
https://books.google.com/books?id=FH...%20...&f=false

There's also this:
State Formation and Ethnicities from 8th to 5th Century BC in Central Italy:
http://www.sociostudies.org/journal/articles/140601/

[Hauteville]

Well the original Ligures from Liguria were later influenced by the Celts even in the language while the Ligures of Sicily were later hellenized mostly.

[Angela]

Well the original Ligures from Liguria were later influenced by the Celts even in the language while the Ligures of Sicily were later hellenized mostly.

That's my point. That particular map doesn't show the Celtici presence in Liguria.

This Davide Delfino paper is interesting for a number of reasons (nice maps of the Ligurian tribal areas, pictures of the pottery, descriptions of the swords and jewelry etc), but I cite it for his conclusions based on Iron Age burials that the Celtici had settled in Liguria in the first millennium BC. Not that this conclusion is at all controversial, of course.

https://www.academia.edu/1912567/BET...AGE_NECROPOLIS

He mentions, for example, a necropolis near Ameglia in far eastern Liguria, and says, "It is plausible to think of a group of warriors came as a result of the Celtic invasions of northern Italy in the IV century BC. and implanted in eastern Liguria contracting marriages with native women."

I think maybe I should offer some translation services. :)

This is another good one:
Celti e Liguri nel territorio di Parma-Daniele Vitale
https://www.academia.edu/1786154/Cel...torio_di_Parma

[Pax Augusta]

"Approaching ethnicity and landscapes in pre-Roman Italy: the middle Tiber Valley" (from Landscape, Ethnicity and Identity in the Archaic Mediterranean Area, Oxbow Books 2012)

https://www.academia.edu/5452767/App...e_Tiber_valley

Introduction: Contextualizing ethnicity

https://www.academia.edu/987289/Landscape_Ethnicity_and_Identity_in_the_pre-roman_Mediterranean_Oxford_Oxbow_2012


Gender identities and cultural identities in thepre-Roman Veneto


https://www.academia.edu/667153/Gend..._millennium_BC

[Sile]

http://mefra.revues.org/2503

This contribution proposes a theoretical framework for the investigation of ethnicity, group membership and socio-political change in the Italian region of Veneto between the Final Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age (approximately 12^th – 9^th centuries BC).

[Regio X]

http://mefra.revues.org/2503

This contribution proposes a theoretical framework for the investigation of ethnicity, group membership and socio-political change in the Italian region of Veneto between the Final Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age (approximately 12^th – 9^th centuries BC).

I can't open it. "Gateway Time-out". Could you send me the text?

[Sile]

I can't open it. "Gateway Time-out". Could you send me the text?

maybe because its a combination of many papers, like this below is one

http://www.academia.edu/221297/Family_Relationships_in_Late_Bronze_Age_Iron_Age_a nd_Early_Roman_Veneto_Italy_._Preliminary_Consider ations_on_the_Basis_of_Osteological_Analysis_and_E pigraphy


http://www.academia.edu/Documents/in..._Veneto_Region


http://www.pia-journal.co.uk/article/view/pia.462/620


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...69131713001890

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=NIj2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=Veneto +between+the+Final+Bronze+Age+and+the+Early+Iron+A ge&source=bl&ots=qTC5D-CuwO&sig=eFDexJ7-HzcxaAc5thcBbVb8bdU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wvpMVa3XK4Ly8QWq w4CYBg&ved=0CBwQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=Veneto%20betw een%20the%20Final%20Bronze%20Age%20and%20the%20Ear ly%20Iron%20Age&f=false



there are many more which I missed , i do not understand why you cannot open it

[Regio X]

Thanks, Sile!

[Angela]

I don't think this has ever been posted. If it has, I can't find it, and anyway I think this is the good thread for it.

It is a study trying to see if they can trace the forced migration of the Apuani to Sannio after the defeat of the Apuani by the Romans.

They start with the assumption that the Apuani were a certain type of U-152, and go from there. The methodology is old, using STRS, but they also use 43 y snps.

That isn't a bad assumption necessarily, as in some of these mountain communities the frequency reaches 78%. On the other hand, mountain communities subject to drift are going to have these kinds of high numbers.

I applaud the attempt, but without ancient dna from the Apuani and very resolved subclade analysis I don't think anything is conclusive.

See:
S. Bertoncini et al:

"A Y Variant Which Traces the Genetic Heritage of Ligures Tribes"
http://www.pagepressjournals.org/ind...File/4087/3590

"This suggests that surviving Y chromosomes of the Ligures deported in the Sannio by the Ligures, if any, are diluted in the current male pool."

[Jovialis]

I found this interesting map of settlements in Italy, during 350 BC.

Urbanism in Ancient Peninsular Italy: developing a methodology for a database analysis of higher order settlements (350 BCE to 300 CE)

http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue40/2/index.html

Here's one after Roman colonization. But unfortunately, this is the biggest resolution I could find:




http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/...bital_mc_2015/

[Angela]

I found this interesting map of settlements in Italy, during 350 BC.

Urbanism in Ancient Peninsular Italy: developing a methodology for a database analysis of higher order settlements (350 BCE to 300 CE)

http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue40/2/index.html

Here's one after Roman colonization. But unfortunately, this is the biggest resolution I could find:




http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/...bital_mc_2015/

Great find, Jovialis! This is definitely a keeper, especially when, hopefully, the ancient dna starts coming in...

[Maleth]

Great find, Jovialis! This is definitely a keeper, especially when, hopefully, the ancient dna starts coming in...

It would have been more complete if it included Sicily and Sardinia while they were at it :)

[Jovialis]

Great find, Jovialis! This is definitely a keeper, especially when, hopefully, the ancient dna starts coming in...

With the cost-effectiveness in processing ancient DNA, I'm eagerly anticipating the day it arrives.

[Pax Augusta]

I found this interesting map of settlements in Italy, during 350 BC. Urbanism in Ancient Peninsular Italy: developing a methodology for a database analysis of higher order settlements (350 BCE to 300 CE) http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue40/2/index.html

Thanks for sharing, Jovialis. Is there a list of the names of the settlements in that map? It would be interesting to find it, because many of those settlements did not belong to one civilization, but they go through several phases.

Interesting as 50% of the Etruscan settlements were actually in the north and center of Lazio, with the highest concentration of all Italy there.

I see in Emilia Bologna, Marzabotto and perhaps Monte Bibele or Casalecchio di Reno (I do not understand the third near Bologna what it is exactly but based on the map's position should be Casalecchio) all labeled as Gallic, but until the 4th century BC those were all Villanovan and Etruscan. And Etruscan testimonies also exist in the north-western part of Emilia. Modena (Mutna) was also Etruscan. The other Gallic settlements in Emilia could be Piacenza and Parma?

In the Adriatic side I see labeled as Etruscan (perhaps) Adria, Spina, Verucchio, Cesena and Ravenna, but the Etruscan dots are four. The Gallic dot should a place on the Romagna coast. Which one?

Adria, on the borders between Veneto and Emilia-Romagna, was Etruscan (and not only Etruscan, it was a port) but around the 3rd century BC was likely occupied by the Gauls-Celts. Maybe it's not even on the map, because it could be a little further north.

Spina was one of the few Etruscan settlements there to overcome the Gallic/Celtic invasion of the 4th century BC, and was active until the 2nd century BC.

Verucchio, first Villanovan and then Etruscan, at the end of the 4th century BC is thought that came under the influence or rule of the Umbrians. And a similar fate will have had any nearby settlement, beset by Gauls and Umbrians.

Cesena and Ravenna are thought to be of Etruscan origin because of the name (in particular because of the common suffix -ena), but are there any great testimonies there? I do not think the smoking gun has yet been found. They were certainly (also) Umbrian from a certain point onwards.

One of the most interesting civilizations in central Italy is the Faliscans, of which we do not know enough. They spoke a language similar to Latin, living on the edge of the Etruscan territories, and surrounded by everyone: Etruscans, Umbrians, Sabines, Latins, Aequians. In their cities (Capena, Falerii Novi, Falerii Veteres...) are found both inscriptions in Faliscan and in Etruscan (and the population had both Faliscan and Etruscan names). In one of the Faliscan centers, I do not remember which one, there are more Etruscan inscriptions and for this reason I believe it is labeled as Etruscan in the map.

The situation in Abruzzo is very interesting, showing great internal diversification. Perhaps due also to the type of Abruzzo territory.

Too bad the map does not include Sicily, Sardinia and the rest of northern Italy.

[AdeoF]

I found this interesting map of settlements in Italy, during 350 BC.

Urbanism in Ancient Peninsular Italy: developing a methodology for a database analysis of higher order settlements (350 BCE to 300 CE)

http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue40/2/index.html

Well yeah this map is understandable. The Celts where more north even the admixture shows this nowadays. What i find interesting is that so many different groups where close from each other and then the romans took over!
It's a nice easy map