Population structure in Italy using ancient and modern samples

@Angela But Etruscans were very sophisticated / advanced people and had considerable influence on Romans. I mean from their perspective you can understand why would they want Italians to have more Arab ancestry, so that they could call them non-European/white etc. But why would these Nord-Eastern supremacists would like Etruscans to be Near Eastern? Isn't Etruscans being closer to the steppe better for their ideology? Then in their mind they can claim Romans' successes too.

On Razib Khan, he used to write on Unz along with Jared Taylor etc. I think he is Republican too. I find it a little weird, i don't think most republicans would have positive views about South Asians, even though they are the richest/most educated group in US. Maybe he thinks deeper than me, i don't know.

The point is that these people don't care and have never cared about the sophistication and achievements of certain ancient civilizations. Shouldn't it have been obvious to anyone with two brain cells who managed to graduate even from just middle school that the Near East was "civilized" long before any "European" civilization? Where did farming start, or animal husbandry, or real cities, or metallurgy, or writing and on and on?

They don't care. All that matters is that these people to their minds are the "other", dark foreigners whom they can't, to this day, admit form part of their heritage too. Has Polako ever talked about the ANF in Poles? He can't even admit that the "Caucasus" half of the Yamnaya, and which is also present in Corded Ware, is Near Eastern in origin. The fact that these people might have gone onto the steppe in the Eneolithic instead of the Bronze Age is supposed to be all that matters, not their genetic make-up. He wants everyone to forget or ignore that the difference between the "CHG" and Iran Neolithic/Chalcolithic of which there is more in Italians and some Balkanites is laughably small. He's just pathetic.

These people made a fetish not of literate, sophisticated cultures, but of hunter-gatherers living off fish and half raw meat while living in yurts. Or, they envisioned themselves as blonde, wild, he-men, raiding on horseback, killing "inferior" dark males and stealing their women. That's the kind of crap that they used to openly say. I have some beautiful examples from Polako talking about blonde cow-boys of the steppe, an anachronism if I ever saw one, and others getting misty eyed about the great old days when they roamed the land hunting and fishing and all that new-fangled "civilization" was far away, or almost weeping when the saw the "blondes" of Central Asia.

When advanced civilizations are on European soil they have indeed tried to "claim" them. That's what's behind all the old "the ancient Greeks and Romans were Nordic people" nonsense. That's why there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of idiotic posts on the internet about how "Nordic" they looked, how blonde and blue eyed they were. Meanwhile, even Central European looking ancient Greeks and Romans are by no means the norm, nor even, by a long shot, the majority.

With all the murals we have of the Etruscans they couldn't claim that. Plus, there was the Herodotus story. So, that narrative just became a convenient way to support their exaggerated ideas about Italian genetic history.

This is what I mean:

boxers-tomb-fresco-tarquinia.jpg


main-qimg-ec97cf0448add3c7a18c64192de6744c-c


Trust me, if the murals showed blonde people, they would have called Herodotus a quack.

What they ignored, of course, but now suddenly seem to have discovered is that some of the Etruscans did seem to have lighter hair. They also never gave credence to the well-known fact that artistic representations are not always reliable in terms of the phenotype of the people of the locale. A lot of those artists were Greek, there was a fad for Greek art, and the Etruscans wanted to associate themselves with the advanced civilizations of the east.

Never expect consistency from people with an agenda. Instead of following the money, you have to follow the agenda. :)

I assure you that if it turns out that the Etruscans, but especially the Etruscan elite, were much more "northern" than thought, these people will suddenly discover what a "cool" culture they had, how superior they were, etc.


As for the "Republican" thing, that has absolutely nothing to do with the interpretation of genetics. Khan used to be very libertarian. Libertarianism has absolutely nothing to do with racism. I have my own libertarian leanings to a degree, and I haven't voted Democrat for a very, very, long time, and I absolutely am not a racist of any kind. You've been listening to too much "leftist-progressive" propaganda where they are trying to brainwash everyone into equating conservatism or even just being moderate, which is basically what I am, with racism and fascism.

There is no difference, you know, in terms of human rights abuses, between communism and fascism. They're just too sides of the same coin.
 
Yeah, i think now they will slowly start to claim Etruscans. But i continue to disagree with you on the republicans. Core republicans would just like to stop immigration from South Asia. I think it should be kind of weird knowing that and voting for them if you are South Asian. That's just my opinion. (I am not a progressive btw i don't have any ideology)
 
Republicans prefer an immigration policy based on merit, no matter where they come from.

gone off-topic, sorry, I Stop.
 
Now it appears that of the strictly Etruscan samples, four low quality ones are R-M269, one high quality one is R-U152, and one is I1.

Yes, indeed, if true, very Asia Minor like elites! :)

There is a reason, as Pax has been saying since FOREVER, that there is so much R1b in Toscana.


Personally, I prefer to wait for the publication of the studies. Rumors may be fake, too.


This is what I mean:

boxers-tomb-fresco-tarquinia.jpg


main-qimg-ec97cf0448add3c7a18c64192de6744c-c


Trust me, if the murals showed blonde people, they would have called Herodotus a quack.


I obviously agree with you.

As you know these frescoes from southern Etruria were made during the Orientalizing period and reflect the artistic taste of that precise period and often they were also painted by foreign artists. Many etruscologists have repeatedly said, not least Nancy Thomson de Grummond, that they are not realistic portraits and that they cannot be taken as evidence of anything.

The wrong Nordicist reading of these frescoes led over time in the forums even to the falsification of some images. The image below is also from an Etruscan tomb in southern Etruria. Both dancers are part of the same fresco, but the one with the lightest hair becomes "Latin", when of course there's no evidence of it.

Nordicism, but this applies also to certain exasperated forms of Orientalism, always manipulates the alleged evidence.




2a0ce45975de5130a63e64e0a8207eaf.jpg
 
Personally, I prefer to wait for the publication of the studies. Rumors may be fake, too.





I obviously agree with you.

As you know these frescoes from southern Etruria were made during the Orientalizing period and reflect the artistic taste of that precise period and often they were also painted by foreign artists. Many etruscologists have repeatedly said, not least Nancy Thomson de Grummond, that they are not realistic portraits and that they cannot be taken as evidence of anything.

The wrong Nordicist reading of these frescoes led over time in the forums even to the falsification of some images. The image below is also from an Etruscan tomb in southern Etruria. Both dancers are part of the same fresco, but the one with the lightest hair becomes "Latin", when of course there's no evidence of it.

Nordicism, but this applies also to certain exasperated forms of Orientalism, always manipulates the alleged evidence.




2a0ce45975de5130a63e64e0a8207eaf.jpg

I, in turn, agree with you. That's why I always say, "if true". Sometimes I even say IF, true, and it's a BIG if", to drive the point home. :)

I wouldn't, for example, be shocked if some J2 does show up among them. That haplogroup and ancestry from the east had been filtering into Italy for a long time.
 
Angela, why do you think there is an agenda behind Etruscans from Anatolia hypothesis?

Of course there's alywas an agenda behind this. Just see how many people talk about Etruscans in the forums without ever having read anything and are focused only on the origins. The "agenda" starts with the ancient Greek writers who obviously had a different mindset from us and what they wrote cannot be judged by the standards of our time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Greek authors were tr-olls. Many scholars, who have studied the Etruscans in depth, explain the Greek authors do not always report historical facts, and in the case of the theories about the Etruscans, these theories are the result of how the Greeks "see" the Etruscans in a specific historical moment and in a specific Greek context. The oldest Greek sources that mention the Etruscans do not report an eastern origin of the Etruscans. Then it was only from the 5th century B.C. that the Greek authors began to discuss about the origins of the Etruscans, which coincides roughly with the end of the period of the Etruscan Kings of Rome, when the Etruscans are perhaps the most powerful civilization in Italy. When Greek authors claim that the Etruscans come from Lydia in Anatolia (which is broadly speaking Hellenized peripheral world) and or from Thessaly in Greece, Greek authors want to connect, even peripherally, the Etruscans to themselves. When, on the other hand, they claim that the Etruscans are autochthonous, they want to distance the Etruscans from the Greeks (in fact in the latter case they connect instead the Romans with themselves).

The Anatolia hypothesis, as in Herodotus' text, is not believed true by etruscologists. For linguistic, archaeological and historical reasons, there is nothing that can support a link between Etruscans and the Lydians, who spoke an Indo-European language closer to Greek and or Latin than to the Etruscan language. Usually it is non-Etruscologists or Indo-Europeanists who push this theory.

It is necessary to reiterate a starting assumption at this point: language and genetics in southern Europe are not necessarily the same thing between the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age, when historical ethnos are going to be formed. Language and genetics are maybe the same long before this period. So it is not surprising at all that in this period people who spoke a pre-Indo-European language and people who spoke a Indo-European language were similar genetically. A similar situation also existed in the Iberian peninsula, where both Indo-European and pre-Indo-European languages ​​are documented in this same period.

Having said this, the origin of the Etruscan language is obviously still not entirely clear. Today we know that a similar and connected language has existed in the Alps of northern Italy, the Rhaetian language. Etruscan and Rhaetian together with the language attested in the few inscriptions of Lemnos are part of a hypothetical pre-Indo-European linguistic family. Some people say that another language spoken in the Alps of northern Italy, the Camunic language, may also be part of this linguistic family. The linguists are still working here.


@Angela But Etruscans were very sophisticated / advanced people and had considerable influence on Romans. I mean from their perspective you can understand why would they want Italians to have more Arab ancestry, so that they could call them non-European/white etc. But why would these Nord-Eastern supremacists would like Etruscans to be Near Eastern? Isn't Etruscans being closer to the steppe better for their ideology? Then in their mind they can claim Romans' successes too. .

Etruscans were very sophisticated but it's only true from a certain time onwards and this has nothing to do with the origin of the Etruscans but is due to the contact with the Greeks and the Orientalizing period, the spread in southern Europe of art, culture and even religious elements from the ancient Near East. The Greeks themselves are culturally indebted to the cultures of the Ancient Near East.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalizing_period
 
Of course there's alywas an agenda behind this. Just see how many people talk about Etruscans in the forums without ever having read anything and are focused only on the origins. The "agenda" starts with the ancient Greek writers who obviously had a different mindset from us and what they write cannot be judged by the standards of our time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Greek authors were tr-olls. Many scholars, who have studied the Etruscans in depth, explain the Greek authors do not always report historical facts, and in the case of the theories about the Etruscans, these theories are the result of how the Greeks "see" the Etruscans in a specific historical moment and in a specific Greek context. When Greek authors claim that the Etruscans come from Lydia in Anatolia (which is broadly speaking Hellenized peripheral world) and or from Thessaly in Greece, Greek authors want to connect, even peripherally, the Etruscans to themselves. When, on the other hand, they claim that the Etruscans are autochthonous, they want to distance the Etruscans from the Greeks (in fact in the latter case they connect instead the Romans with themselves).

The Anatolia hypothesis, as in Herodotus' text, is not believed true by etruscologists. For linguistic, archaeological and historical reasons, there is nothing that can support a link between Etruscans and the Lydians, who spoke an Indo-European language closer to Greek and or Latin than to the Etruscan language. Usually it is non-Etruscologists or Indo-Europeanists who push this theory.

It is necessary to reiterate a starting assumption at this point: language and genetics in southern Europe are not necessarily the same thing between the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age, when historical ethnos are going to be formed. Language and genetics are the same long before this period. So it is not surprising at all that in this period people who spoke a pre-Indo-European language and people who spoke a Indo-European language were similar genetically. A similar situation also existed in the Iberian peninsula, where both Indo-European and pre-Indo-European languages ​​are documented in this same period.

Having said this, the origin of the Etruscan language is obviously still not entirely clear. Today we know that a similar and connected language has existed in the Alps of northern Italy, the Rhaetian language. Etruscan and Rhaetian together with the language attested in the few inscriptions of Lemnos are part of a hypothetical pre-Indo-European linguistic family. Some people say that another language spoken in the Alps of northern Italy, the Camunic language, may also be part of this linguistic family. The linguists are still working here.




Etruscans were very sophisticated but it's only true from a certain time onwards and this has nothing to do with the origin of the Etruscans but is due to the contact with the Greeks and the Orientalizing period, the spread in southern Europe of art, culture and even religious elements from the ancient Near East. The Greeks themselves are culturally indebted to the cultures of the Ancient Near East.

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

The Greeks themselves are culturally indebted to the cultures of the Ancient Near East.

Absolutely true! Greeks did to near east cultures what Romans did to Greek culture! They embraced those achievements and advanced them!
let say:
sea going ships were Arab invention
alphabet an Egyptian invention
sculpting n Egyptian invention
Anatomy Egyptian invention
Algebra Arab invention
Literature, trade Babylonian invention
And list going on.....
I always believed that Etruscans were an early farmer stratum population. So they could have genetic similarities with Greeks or Turks. On the other side most Greeks and Albanians are Bronx age population. The contact of Greeks and Etruscans could have happened in sicily
 

Absolutely true! Greeks did to near east cultures what Romans did to Greek culture! They embraced those achievements and advanced them!


I always believed that Etruscans were an early farmer stratum population. So they could have genetic similarities with Greeks or Turks. On the other side most Greeks and Albanians are Bronx age population. The contact of Greeks and Etruscans could have happened in sicily

Albanians and almost all southern European have no less farmer ancestry than Greeks and Italians. Modern Turks are extremely variable, since they have assimilated over centuries everything from the Balkans, the Slavs and the Middle East.

The contact between Greeks and Etruscans happened in Campania (Pithecusa, Cuma), where both Greeks and Etruscans had colonies.
 
As for those with an agenda.......
There are two sides that make up a coin; so there are two sides to a story.
Do you think if we were to get Sara's side of the story of how her brother/husband pimped her out to two kings [Pharaoh's harem]as his sister to save his own skin; and or Isaac calling Rebekah his wife, and or Abraham's uncle Lot getting drunk and raping his two daughters in a cave would change your perspective of Abraham,Lot, Isaac ?

Sometimes we don't know the full story/reason why people post silly things if it is about an agenda or something deeper.
 
There are two sides that make up a coin; so there are two sides to a story.
Do you think if we were to get Sara's side of the story of how her brother/husband pimped her out to two kings [Pharaoh's harem]as his sister to save his own skin; and or Isaac calling Rebekah his wife, and or Abraham's uncle Lot getting drunk and raping his two daughters in a cave would change your perspective of Abraham,Lot, Isaac ?

Sometimes we don't know the full story/reason why people post silly things if it is about an agenda or something deeper.

Silesian, you're talking about the whys of behavior. If I'm interpreting you correctly, you're saying there may be more behind people's actions than is apparent on the surface.

That's very true, but I can also tell you that people spin the most incredible falsehoods about their parents, spouses, friends, co-workers and on and on in order to put themselves and their own behavior in a better light. Never believe anyone when they're trying to pin the blame for their bad behavior on someone else. Not only is it often a lie, but it doesn't excuse anything. Even revenge against an individual human being who has harmed you is wrong. To denigrate a whole large subset of the human race for something done to one personally would still be evil. A lot of the darkness in human beings is just there, innate; bad parenting doesn't necessarily make a criminal. Otherwise, there would be a hell of a lot more criminals.

Plus, while motivations can in some cases help you understand "why" people do the things they do, in others you can't ever really understand the motivations even when you have heard everyone's version of the events. The human psyche is still a mystery. (I almost said "soul".) If anyone tells you they completely understand why some people become serial killers, or pedophiles, or torturers, or batterers/rapists and on and on they're either lying or they don't know what they're talking about. I'm not equating the kind of behavior we're discussing with those aberrations, but there is definitely something wrong with some posters on genetics sites, and dishonesty and egomania is only the tip of the iceberg.

Plus, you can't do anything about whatever happened to them in the past. You can't fix people's bad brain wiring or chemistry, or go back and make all their bad experiences good ones. All you can do is protect whom and what you can by exposing bad behavior, warning people about the perpetrators of it, and, where you can, removing them from situations where they can cause harm.
 
What really turns me red is when these t-rolls on anthro forums either get some sort of amnesia when shown data from reputable journals and carry on with their ideas or when they play anthro forum chess and say things like "well there's not enough samples" (when there are ), "the scientists are politically motivated", "those so called Etruscans are only Etruscan culturally, not genetically", or my favorite: "just you wait and see, as more burial sites are uncovered, there will be more samples that are genetically X"
 
What you say is true in many respects. Many of us come from different backgrounds. For example I was raised in a cult as my wife; and forbidden to go to University with the penalty of having my friends and family never speaking to me again. So my perspective on peoples [outright criminals, like for example Paul Bernardo or Clifford Olsen as Canadian examples] behavior is different but similar to yours. My parents [ from the region of Poland/Germany/Prussia ]who were staunch catholic/protestants converted to a cult after surviving WW2 had a different perspective after witnessing first hand the horrors of human behavior. I will spare you the details of their hardship, however I still remember my mother digging in the garbage after I finished a half eaten sandwich scolding me for wasting food,saying I never new what it was like to be starving. Poles were treated very bad by Germans, some Poles had their surnames changed to make them sound more German[like ours]; it's not until you take a genetic test and the revelations that come with it that you can see all the people who you are related to, be it Polish,German,Italian, Czech, Lithunanian, etc.....Some Polish even have small amounts of Jewish ancestry, although you would never know by the way they act or post online. Sometimes the more we learn about a situation the more we grow in our understanding.
 
What really turns me red is when these t-rolls on anthro forums either get some sort of amnesia when shown data from reputable journals and carry on with their ideas or when they play anthro forum chess and say things like "well there's not enough samples" (when there are ), "the scientists are politically motivated", "those so called Etruscans are only Etruscan culturally, not genetically", or my favorite: "just you wait and see, as more burial sites are uncovered, there will be more samples that are genetically X"

They’re purposely selective, and they omit or doubt the “Inconvenient Truth”.
 
What you say is true in many respects. Many of us come from different backgrounds. For example I was raised in a cult as my wife; and forbidden to go to University with the penalty of having my friends and family never speaking to me again. So my perspective on peoples [outright criminals, like for example Paul Bernardo or Clifford Olsen as Canadian examples] behavior is different but similar to yours. My parents [ from the region of Poland/Germany/Prussia ]who were staunch catholic/protestants converted to a cult after surviving WW2 had a different perspective after witnessing first hand the horrors of human behavior. I will spare you the details of their hardship, however I still remember my mother digging in the garbage after I finished a half eaten sandwich scolding me for wasting food,saying I never new what it was like to be starving. Poles were treated very bad by Germans, some Poles had their surnames changed to make them sound more German[like ours]; it's not until you take a genetic test and the revelations that come with it that you can see all the people who you are related to, be it Polish,German,Italian, Czech, Lithunanian, etc.....Some Polish even have small amounts of Jewish ancestry, although you would never know by the way they act or post online. Sometimes the more we learn about a situation the more we grow in our understanding.

Sometimes, for those who are capable of it, hardship leads to great insight and understanding. You sound like one of those people. Thank you for sharing it with us.
 
I knew the mental midgets at anthrogenica would try to retaliate for me calling them out, but I honestly didn't think they'd be so lame about it.

All these pronouncements about whether "Italy" or "Italians" exist before we have any halfway complete knowledge about Italian ethnogenesis is completely absurd.

More importantly, as if any "pure" ethnicity exists anywhere, or as if there aren't clines in lots of countries.

It's laughable.

Look at our fake Jew:


"As do I it goes with out saying that I feel a connection to ancient Israel, the Phoenicians and Carthaginians (hence my avatar being Hannibal Barca)."

I'm now absolutely convinced he's just a Sikeliot sock. Nobody else could be this crazy or know so little about how Italians actually think and feel about these things.

Going by this standard I should feel a connection with EHG people sitting in their yurts eating half raw meat. I carry their mtdna after all. What idiots.

Or how about our fake Sicilian (half at most):


"
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by SikeliotI would also say I identify more with ancient Greece rather than Rome and the primary reason for this is that Romans didn't go to Greece to experience and borrow Greek culture, they encountered it in southern Italy. Southern Italy was absolutely necessary for the development of Roman culture and identity, by virtue of its Greek culture.

Though obviously with some family from right around Palermo as well, I also admire the Phoenicians.






Sure you do, Sikeliot. That's why you spent years on the apricity, city data and here trying to prove Sicilians were inferior to the Portuguese. What's the matter, do you want to forget your years as "Portuguese Princess"?

I'm going to treat this parading of genetic malpractice the way it deserves: I'm going to ignore it.

As for the concept of Italy as a defined geographic space, and Italians as a group, I will address it, but only because I am discussing it in a thread I am preparing about Northern Italy in the Roman era. What even people with Italian citizenship don't know about their own history is a disgrace. They should yank it away from all of them.
 
Last edited:
I call for Unity!

Italy is wearing the Helmet of Scipio who defeated Hannibal !!!

from the Song of the Italians

... Italy has woken, Bound Scipio's helmet Upon her head...

... From the Alps to Sicily, Legnano is everywhere; ...
....

remember this!
 
I call for Unity!

Italy is wearing the Helmet of Scipio who defeated Hannibal !!!

from the Song of the Italians

... Italy has woken, Bound Scipio's helmet Upon her head...

... From the Alps to Sicily, Legnano is everywhere; ...
....

They don't even know who the hell Scipio was, or Legnano.

Let all the socks talk to each other.

They're not Italians; they're fakes, phonies, and frauds, wannabes, or suffering from a massive inferiority complex about their own origins, and our history, our achievements, our very existence, is a threat to their perverted ideologies.

I shouldn't let such know-nothings cause me to lose my temper, but we are who we are, all of us.
 
This is how it should be sung! :)


A reminder even to me that not all Italians are gracile. :) Some of these guys definitely have more than the average amount of Neanderthal.

It has to be said that the soccer players are better looking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzmzQnOelH0
 
What’s in a Name:

Calabria was called Italy, so the original Italians are the Calabresi.

... Italia, the ancient name of the Italian peninsula, which is also eponymous of the modern republic, originally applied only to a part of what is now Southern Italy ...

... during the reign of Augustus, at the end of the 1st century BC, the term was expanded to cover the entire peninsula until the Alps ...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Italy#Etymology
 

This thread has been viewed 326304 times.

Back
Top