Population structure in Italy using ancient and modern samples

It's interesting how much Cretans are shifted toward modern Anatolians and Levantines in comparison to the other Greek samples. The same pattern is seen using ancient (BA) Anatolian and Levantine samples. That cannot be attributed to Minoan ancestry, because even including the Minoan_Lasithi sample the Cretans still require extra Levantine and especially BA Anatolian admixture. Was there something in the post-Minoan history of Crete that I don't know?
I don't think this is a lot. In any case, Crete was under Arab rule for a period, in what became known as Emirate of Crete, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirate_of_Crete, which lasted for some 150 years or so. It was also under Ottoman rule for some 200 years, and used to have a large Muslim population. In 1821, during the Greek revolution, as much as 45% of the population on the island may have been Muslim, but most of them were local Cretan converts. In any case, all of these Muslims left with the population exchange between Greece and Turkey in 1923. Here is some additional information about them, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretan_Turks.

An ethnic map of Crete, around 1861. Turks and Muslim Greeks are in red, Orthodox Greeks in blue.
Crete_-_ethnic_map%2C_1861.jpg
 
Which one of the three belongs to the Proto Etruscans and the Proto Etruscan language?

Proto Etruscan language is likely a remnant of the European Neolithic. Exactly as with the Iberians, Aquitains and Basques in Spain and southwest France.
 
There have already been studies on Etruscan samples that had supported what the leak claims.
Genetics is not saying anything new, scholars have been thinking for years that the Etruscans were native.
I am not talking about native or not... Neolithic => Bronze Age => Iron Age ... A lot of things happen during these time periods, a lot of migrations happen and population replacements happen...
 
Proto Etruscan language is likely a remnant of the European Neolithic. Exactly as with the Iberians, Aquitains and Basques in Spain and southwest France.

So you are talking about the Early European Farmers? Are the Early European Farmers the core of the original Proto Etruscans?
 
So you are talking about the Early European Farmers? Are the Early European Farmers the core of the original Proto Etruscans?

The Etruscans were no different from the other populations of the late Bronze and early Iron Age of south west Europe, the only difference is that they kept the pre-Indo-European language, just as the Iberians, Aquitains and Basques in Spain and southwest France, the Rhaeti in the Alps and many other populations who have not left traces.
 
I don't think this is a lot. In any case, Crete was under Arab rule for a period, in what became known as Emirate of Crete, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirate_of_Crete, which lasted for some 150 years or so. It was also under Ottoman rule for some 200 years, and used to have a large Muslim population. In 1821, during the Greek revolution, as much as 45% of the population on the island may have been Muslim, but most of them were local Cretan converts. In any case, all of these Muslims left with the population exchange between Greece and Turkey in 1923. Here is some additional information about them, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretan_Turks.

An ethnic map of Crete, around 1861. Turks and Muslim Greeks are in red, Orthodox Greeks in blue.
Crete_-_ethnic_map%2C_1861.jpg

Some Armenian families settled in Crete and exactly in Sfakia after that Phokas, an Armenian himself, liberated the island from the Arabs.
 
Some Armenian families settled in Crete and exactly in Sfakia after that Phokas, an Armenian himself, liberated the island from the Arabs.
Phokas's origin isn't certain. There have been authors who claimed he was of either Roman (as in Latin), Arab, Armenian, or Georgian descent. As for Armenian migrants in Crete, there weren't many, and it wasn't just in Crete. Armenians migrated since the Byzantine era to Thessaly, Macedon, Thrace and the islands of Crete and Kerkyra (Corfu), although again not many.
 
The Etruscans were no different from the other populations of the late Bronze and early Iron Age of south west Europe, the only difference is that they kept the pre-Indo-European language, just as the Iberians, Aquitains and Basques in Spain and southwest France, the Rhaeti in the Alps and many other populations who have not left traces.

How can we be so sure they are no different(based on how many samples?)? Arent they a mix of Neolithic Farmers and Bronze Age Bell Beakers? And arent the Iberian Bell Beakers equal to the Neolithic Farmers? Genetically the EEF component(Anatolia_N, Iran_N, Levant_N) among the Etruscans should be equal to the proto Etruscan language. The EHG component should be equal to the populations of the proto Italic tribes.
 
How can we be so sure they are no different(based on how many samples?)? Arent they a mix of Neolithic Farmers and Bronze Age Bell Beakers? And arent the Iberian Bell Beakers equal to the Neolithic Farmers? Genetically the EEF component(Anatolia_N, Iran_N, Levant_N) among the Etruscans should be equal to the proto Etruscan language. The EHG component should be equal to the populations of the proto Italic tribes.

I've already read this on Anthrogenica. Are you the same user as Anthrogenica?

I doubt that EEF component is Anatolia_N, Iran_N, Levant_N.
 
Is there any news about when the paper will be published?
I contacted the organizer of the event that took place in February 2019, in which Hannah Moots presented some of her research, and she wrote the following, "I don't have an exact date. I believe this work is part of ongoing dissertation research, and will be published when she completes her degree.". By the way, after a little additional research from my part i found out that she is to graduate in 2020.
 
How can we be so sure they are no different(based on how many samples?)? Arent they a mix of Neolithic Farmers and Bronze Age Bell Beakers? And arent the Iberian Bell Beakers equal to the Neolithic Farmers? Genetically the EEF component(Anatolia_N, Iran_N, Levant_N) among the Etruscans should be equal to the proto Etruscan language. The EHG component should be equal to the populations of the proto Italic tribes.

The EEF component is just Anatolian farmer with a little WHG picked up in Europe. The Late Neolithic peoples of Europe, like the people of "Old Europe" in the Balkans and Ukraine, and Iberia, Italy, etc. had picked up more WHG, up to 25% or so.

The relationship of the Anatolian farmers to the Iranian farmers to the farmers of the Levant is complicated. Anatolian farmers can be modeled with or as part Levant Neolithic, and Levant Neolithic can be modeled with Anatolian Neolithic, and Anatolian Neolithic can be modeled with even a bit of Iran Neolithic.

The point is that after the Anatolian farmers had left for Europe, there was a pinzer movement into Europe beginning in the Bronze Age from two directions: the steppe (60% EHG/40%CHG/IranNeo like ancestry) and the southern Caucasus by way of what used to be called Asia Minor. The ancestry which arrived by way of this southern route also contained some Anatolian farmer, but was very Iran Neo heavy. I personally think the wave may be Kura Araxes related.

It seems that both the Etruscans and the Italics are a combination of LN farmers (EEF plus up to 25%WHG) and some steppe input that probably arrived from Central Europe. So, they seem to have been very similar.

Autosomal analysis is quite different from analysis using yDna or mtDna. You don't need thousands of samples, although you have to be certain you got the dating correct, the burial context correct, and hopefully you've done some analysis so you know if the samples were born and raised in that area.

As for theories about the Etruscans, archaeologists always leaned toward them being local, but virtually everyone writing on genetics, from the academics, to Jean Manco, with whom I argued for ten years, to Eurogenes, to all the people on "biodiversity" sites, was convinced they came straight from the Near East. On here Pax and I and some of the other Italian posters who had studied the Etruscans a lot were the only ones who were skeptical of that idea. Not that you'd know that given the deafening silence on the subject on other sites. You'd think they always knew it.
 
The EEF component is just Anatolian farmer with a little WHG picked up in Europe. The Late Neolithic peoples of Europe, like the people of "Old Europe" in the Balkans and Ukraine, and Iberia, Italy, etc. had picked up more WHG, up to 25% or so.

The relationship of the Anatolian farmers to the Iranian farmers to the farmers of the Levant is complicated. Anatolian farmers can be modeled with or as part Levant Neolithic, and Levant Neolithic can be modeled with Anatolian Neolithic, and Anatolian Neolithic can be modeled with even a bit of Iran Neolithic.
Agree

As for theories about the Etruscans, archaeologists always leaned toward them being local, but virtually everyone writing on genetics, from the academics, to Eurogenes, to all the people on "biodiversity" sites, was convinced they came straight from the Near East. On here Pax and I and some of the other Italian posters who had studied the Etruscans a lot were the only ones who were skeptical of that idea, not that you'd know that given the deafening silence on the subject. You'd think they always knew it.

I dont think local is the right term to use. So, if the proto Etruscans and their language were the Early European Farmers, then it means their initial migration to Italy was from West Asia(through Turkey and Greece) after all, only it happened in the Neolithic.
Also, considering the fact that the Proto Iberian Bell Beakers were a mix of EEF and WHG, the leaked ancestry component of Bell Beakers could be related to the EEF people participating in the formation of the Bell Beaker culture in Iberia.
But what I think is that when the Steppe people and their Indo European language(coming from Central/North-Western Europe) replaced the populations in a lot of European areas in the Bronze Age, it could have been possible that these Early European Farmers from Italy migrated back towards the Aegean region (remaining unmixed in there, retaining their neolithic EEF autosomal ancestry component) when they met the expansions of the Corded Ware culture. And then during the Early Iron Age, a back migration happened from the Aegean region to Central Italy, mixing with the Italic people who were there since the Late Bronze Age.
 
I contacted the organizer of the event that took place in February 2019, in which Hannah Moots presented some of her research, and she wrote the following, "I don't have an exact date. I believe this work is part of ongoing dissertation research, and will be published when she completes her degree.". By the way, after a little additional research from my part i found out that she is to graduate in 2020.

Maybe a preprint will be published earlier, but when?
 
Agree



I dont think local is the right term to use. So, if the proto Etruscans and their language were the Early European Farmers, then it means their initial migration to Italy was from West Asia(through Turkey and Greece) after all, only it happened in the Neolithic.
Also, considering the fact that the Proto Iberian Bell Beakers were a mix of EEF and WHG, the leaked ancestry component of Bell Beakers could be related to the EEF people participating in the formation of the Bell Beaker culture in Iberia.
But what I think is that when the Steppe people and their Indo European language(coming from Central/North-Western Europe) replaced the populations in a lot of European areas in the Bronze Age, it could have been possible that these Early European Farmers from Italy migrated back towards the Aegean region (remaining unmixed in there, retaining their neolithic EEF autosomal ancestry component) when they met the expansions of the Corded Ware culture. And then during the Early Iron Age, a back migration happened from the Aegean region to Central Italy, mixing with the Italic people who were there since the Late Bronze Age.

By that criterion, NOBODY is local to Europe. Even the Paleolithic hunter-gatherers were not "local". They came from elsewhere. The LN farmers were a mix of Anatolian farmer and WHG. They were the only indigenous population of all of western Europe and the Balkans at the time.

There is no sign in the archaeological record of a folk migration from the Aegean. Period. That is and was always the case. People preferred to believe otherwise, choosing one ancient author over others in order to so so.
 
By that criterion, NOBODY is local to Europe. Even the Paleolithic hunter-gatherers were not "local". They came from elsewhere. The LN farmers were a mix of Anatolian farmer and WHG. They were the only indigenous population of all of western Europe and the Balkans at the time.

As far as I know, the WHG component is considered to be local(before 8.000-10.000 BCE) to Central/Northern/Southern/Western Europe. The First Farmers came from West Asia.

There is no sign in the archaeological record of a folk migration from the Aegean.

Firstly, we cannot ignore the hypothesis of ancient historians. Without the combination of historical records and archaeology we cant know anything about the identities of ancient populations.
How can we explain the Iron Age people (and their inscriptions) in Lemnos? Maybe, skeletal remains from Iron Age Lemnos should also be studied, to be compared with a larger sampled set of ancient Etruscan individuals(not only 5-10 samples).
And also secondly, the Etruscan archaeological findings(cultural and religious materials) have a lot of similarities with contemporary and earlier cultures in West Asia. The Etruscan alphabet itself has its origin in West Asia.
 
As far as I know, the WHG component is considered to be local(before 8.000-10.000 BCE) to Central/Northern/Southern/Western Europe. The First Farmers came from West Asia.



Firstly, we cannot ignore the hypothesis of ancient historians. Without the combination of historical records and archaeology we cant know anything about the identities of ancient populations.
How can we explain the Iron Age people (and their inscriptions) in Lemnos? Maybe, skeletal remains from Iron Age Lemnos should also be studied, to be compared with a larger sampled set of ancient Etruscan individuals(not only 5-10 samples).
And also secondly, the Etruscan archaeological findings(cultural and religious materials) have a lot of similarities with contemporary and earlier cultures in West Asia. The Etruscan alphabet itself has its origin in West Asia.

Yes, well, that's incorrect. Who is local in any given area is time specific. Europe is a genetic sink. Paleolithic people were the first to arrive. There's shockingly little of their dna left in anyone in Europe. Mesolithic WHG is next, then EEF then Bronze Age migrations. Europeans in the modern sense didn't exist until at the earliest 4,000 years ago.

You can argue all you want. Ancient dna doesn't lie. IF the leaks are accurate, people are just going to have to admit they were WRONG.
 
And also secondly, the Etruscan archaeological findings(cultural and religious materials) have a lot of similarities with contemporary and earlier cultures in West Asia. The Etruscan alphabet itself has its origin in West Asia.

Etruscan archaeological findings have not more similarities with contemporary and earlier cultures in West Asia than Greek archaeological findings and other contemporary civilizations have similarities with contemporary and earlier cultures in West Asia.

The Etruscan alphabet comes from the Greek Alphabet, that has Phoenician origins, was not even born in West Asia, and Lemnos has ties to the Greek world.

Rather it is also true the opposite, West Asia in that historical period is also deeply influenced by what comes from the west. So much so that the Phrygians come from the Balkans and the Greeks themselves settle in Anatolia.
 
As far as I know, the WHG component is considered to be local(before 8.000-10.000 BCE) to Central/Northern/Southern/Western Europe. The First Farmers came from West Asia.

Well, ultimately the WHG also came from West Asia... This kind of discusson over who's reeeeeeallly native is always circular if a specific timeline is not defined, it can be endless.
 
Yes, well, that's incorrect. Who is local in any given area is time specific. Europe is a genetic sink. Paleolithic people were the first to arrive. There's shockingly little of their dna left in anyone in Europe.

This is a quote from David Reich's book:

David_Reich said:
Analyzing our data, he found that about ten thousand years ago there were at least four major populations in West Eurasia—the farmers of the Fertile Crescent, the farmers of Iran, the hunter-gatherers of central and western Europe, and the hunter-gatherers of eastern Europe.

So, the hunter-gatherers of central and western Europe were the locals of central and western Europe(and parts of Northern / Souther Europe). Majority of them were the Mesolithic population you mentioned.

You can argue all you want. Ancient dna doesn't lie. IF the leaks are accurate, people are just going to have to admit they were WRONG.

Admit what? What are you trying to prove? I dont get it...
 

This thread has been viewed 326368 times.

Back
Top