Talk on Ancient Italian/Roman DNA over in Stanford.

[markod]

The point about Rhaetian is interesting, I of course knew the relationship but now I think about it there doesn't seem to be any archaeological movement of a population from Italy into the Alps. Moreover, it appears that Rhaetian is more archaic than Etruscan in the Tyrsenian hypothesis. So you may have just changed my mind. In any case, I will never believe Etruscan dates back to the Italian Neolithic, so must be from some foreign influence. When did all the Y DNA J2 arrive in Italy then if not with Tyrsenians?

No idea about haplogroups, but there aren't many options since there's not much going on in Italy in the BA. The strongest parallel of the Apenninic culture that develops into tribal Italic culture without break seems to exist in the pottery of the Romanian Wietenberg culture, so I think an origin there or common descent are likely. The latter culture is unquestionably Indo-European IMHO. Lots of weapons, meander- and animal motifs, spiral jewelry - it's all very similar to Mycenaean materials.

Of course we find no such parallels in early Latin material culture, which is identical to that of the Etruscans. So the question really is about the nature of the relationship between those peoples and the direction of cultural exchange. I find it more likely that tribal herdsmen like the Samnites retained their primitive Italic culture, while the Latins co-opted Etruscan civilization. Historians of classical antiquity probably wouldn't be surprised by that suggestion.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

My sources in the occult world, those who still do Etruscan magic and say they know Etruscan history passed down, tell the Etruscans were originally from Iran and traveled to SW Anatolia, before finally settling in Tuscany and surrounding areas. Many assume these settlers were Js, perhaps some Gs, Ts, Ls and others. Not R dominant.

That's a large migration to lack any archaeological presence

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

No idea about haplogroups, but there aren't many options since there's not much going on in Italy in the BA. The strongest parallel of the Apenninic culture that develops into tribal Italic culture without break seems to exist in the pottery of the Romanian Wietenberg culture, so I think an origin there or common descent are likely. The latter culture is unquestionably Indo-European IMHO. Lots of weapons, meander- and animal motifs, spiral jewelry - it's all very similar to Mycenaean materials.

Of course we find no such parallels in early Latin material culture, which is identical to that of the Etruscans. So the question really is about the nature of the relationship between those peoples and the direction of cultural exchange. I find it more likely that tribal herdsmen like the Samnites retained their primitive Italic culture, while the Latins co-opted Etruscan civilization. Historians of classical antiquity probably wouldn't be surprised by that suggestion.

So where do you think the Etruscans came from? Surely they weren't aboriginal to the extent of Cardial Ware farmers right?

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

It appears that the Villanovan culture is a clear precursor to the Etruscans, but supposedly the proto-Villanovan culture descends from Urnfield (more than likely proto-Celtic).

Between the proto-Villanovan and Villanovan cultures, iron metallurgy is introduced - perhaps whoever introduced this introduced the Etruscan language via elite dominance? Yet again, I'm not sure.

 

[markod]

So where do you think the Etruscans came from? Surely they weren't aboriginal to the extent of Cardial Ware farmers right?

If I had to guess I'd locate the origins of Rhaetian and Etruscan in the Riegsee phase of Urnfield, so southern Bavaria.

It's safe to assume that subsequent Celtic expansions in the IA changed the linguistic landscape in these regions.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

If I had to guess I'd locate the origins of Rhaetian and Etruscan in the Riegsee phase of Urnfield, so southern Bavaria.

It's safe to assume that subsequent Celtic expansions in the IA changed the linguistic landscape in these regions.

So you don't see Urnfield as Celtic? That seems unlikely to me.

Apparently the Iron Age began in Sardinia as early as the 13th century BC, which is earlier than in Italy. This Nuraghic iron working is linked to Cyprus - so perhaps a link lies there?

I really really doubt Urnfield was Tyrsenian.

 

[Alyan]

We have another paper with Ancient Italian DNA coming.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

We have another paper with Ancient Italian DNA coming.

Source?

It looks like the Etruscans and similar tribes were associated with the Sea Peoples

Also, for any Italians I found this (Google translate sucks here for whatever reason):

Il linguista Massimo Pittau sostiene che la lingua protosarda o "sardiana" e quella etrusca fossero strettamente legate, essendo entrambe emanazioni del ramo anatolico dell'indoeuropeo. Secondo l'autore i "nuragici" erano una popolazione lidica che importò sull'isola la propria lingua di tipo indoeuropeo la quale si andò a sovrapporre su una lingua preesistente di tipo pre-indoeuropeo parlata dalle popolazioni pre-nuragiche; le concordanze rilevate dal Pittau investono in realtà un quadro più ampio della stessa area lidica, dato che si estendono, in modo non dirimente, più spesso a tutta l'area egeo-anatolica. Appellattivi nuragici/sardiani di matrice indoeuropea sarebbero ad esempio^[15]:

• calambusa «rametto di ciliegio coi frutti» Ulassai e (Osini), probabilmente relitto sardiano o nuragico [suff. egeo-anatolico -ús(s) a], forse da confrontare – non derivare - col greco kaláme«canna, stelo» (indoeur.).
• élimu/a, èlamu, èlema/e, éluma, èlma, èramu, (Lodè, Posada) sèlema «àlimo» (Atriplex halimus L.), relitto sardiano o nuragico, da confrontare – non derivare - col greco hálimos (indoeur.).
• meulla, méurra, meúrra, miúrra, maúrra «merlo» (camp.), relitto sardiano o nuragico (-ll- conservato e suff.), da connettere con mérula «merlo» (vedi) [che invece deriva dal seg. vocabolo latino] e da confrontare – non derivare – col lat. merula che probabilmente è di origine indoeur. (DELL, DELI).
• saurra «umidità della notte, brina, rugiada» (log.), toponimi Saurrecci (Guspini), Zaurrái (Isili), Aurracci (Ussassai), Urracci (Guspini) (suffissi e accento); relitto sardiano o nuragico, probabilmente da confrontare – non derivare - con una metatasi, coi lat. ros, roris, lituano rasà, ant. slavo rosa, vedico rasá «rugiada» e col sanscrito rásah «umidità» (DELL) e quindi indoeur. (corrige DILS, LISPR).

 

[markod]

So you don't see Urnfield as Celtic? That seems unlikely to me.

Apparently the Iron Age began in Sardinia as early as the 13th century BC, which is earlier than in Italy. This Nuraghic iron working is linked to Cyprus - so perhaps a link lies there?

I really really doubt Urnfield was Tyrsenian.

I'd say that Urnfield was multi-ethnic. Probably lots of mobile elites so it will be difficult to figure out in other places. It's far too early for Celtic.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I'd say that Urnfield was multi-ethnic. Probably lots of mobile elites so it will be difficult to figure out in other places. It's far too early for Celtic.

Celtic isn't necessarily that young is it? Also it really neatly explains the Q/P Celtic split (First Urnfield expansion is Q celtic, then later Hallstatt-La-Tene is P celtic)

 

[halfalp]

Well i dont know about language, but all four R1b breeds that are DF-27, S28, L21 and S21 are found and likely of Bell Beaker stock origins. So the Celtic group is not a Language stricto sensus in historical times, but a Dialect emerged in the broader Beaker stock. The very obvious origins are Hallstatt and La Tène, it's possible that Celtic languages expand without big y-dna replacement of the previous Beaker stock.

 

[halfalp]

No idea about haplogroups, but there aren't many options since there's not much going on in Italy in the BA. The strongest parallel of the Apenninic culture that develops into tribal Italic culture without break seems to exist in the pottery of the Romanian Wietenberg culture, so I think an origin there or common descent are likely. The latter culture is unquestionably Indo-European IMHO. Lots of weapons, meander- and animal motifs, spiral jewelry - it's all very similar to Mycenaean materials.

Of course we find no such parallels in early Latin material culture, which is identical to that of the Etruscans. So the question really is about the nature of the relationship between those peoples and the direction of cultural exchange. I find it more likely that tribal herdsmen like the Samnites retained their primitive Italic culture, while the Latins co-opted Etruscan civilization. Historians of classical antiquity probably wouldn't be surprised by that suggestion.

That prehistoric Kriegsmesser is amazing, it would have been impressive to confront this in those times.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Is there a reason that the Italian admix among Western Jews was modelled using Tuscans? Because if the link of the Tyrsenians to the Sea Peoples is correct, and with the pretty obvious link of the Philistines to the Sea Peoples, then it could explain that supposed ancient Jews=high EEF leak without admixture occurring in Italy itself.

The sea peoples likely have an Aegean origin, which could also explain the links of Tyrsenians to other Aegean languages and indeed the presence of a Tyrsenian language in the Aegean itself (Lemnian).

That would mean that the Lebanese-like Italian individuals in this paper (dating to Imperial period) would represent a Middle Eastern group other than Jews.

 

[markod]

Celtic isn't necessarily that young is it? Also it really neatly explains the Q/P Celtic split (First Urnfield expansion is Q celtic, then later Hallstatt-La-Tene is P celtic)

Not sure how solid those language trees are, but I don't see the Urnfield connection in any case. The places where Urnfield customs survive best and longest would probably be Poland and Eastern Germany. Lost Celts? I doubt it.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Not sure how solid those language trees are, but I don't see the Urnfield connection in any case. The places where Urnfield customs survive best and longest would probably be Poland and Eastern Germany. Lost Celts? I doubt it.

Why not just replaced by Germanics and later Slavs? These groups are all relatively closely related IE languages so it makes sense they'd be nearby; there is no Central European culture that can account for warlike Tyrsenian tribes

 

[Alyan]

https://twitter.com/Cliouch/status/1042807392545779713

The paper I just brought up. It goes from Central to South Italy too.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

https://twitter.com/Cliouch/status/1042807392545779713

The paper I just brought up. It goes from Central to South Italy too.

Looks like a paper on the Cardial ware folk

 

[suyindik]

My sources in the occult world, those who still do Etruscan magic and say they know Etruscan history passed down, tell the Etruscans were originally from Iran and traveled to SW Anatolia, before finally settling in Tuscany and surrounding areas. Many assume these settlers were Js, perhaps some Gs, Ts, Ls and others. Not R dominant.

This is what Piazza(2007) said in the past about "Origin of the Etruscans: novel clues from the Y chromosome lineages":

Here we show the genetic relationships of modern Etrurians, who mostly settled in Tuscany, with other Italian, Near Eastern and Aegean peoples by comparing the Y-chromosome DNA variation in 1,264 unrelated healthy males from: Tuscany-Italy (n=263), North Italy (n=306), South Balkans (n=359), Lemnos island (n=60), Sicily and Sardinia (n=276). The Tuscany samples were collected in Volterra (n=116), Murlo (n=86) and Casentino Valley (n=61).
We found traces of recent Near Eastern gene flow still present in Tuscany, especially in the archaeologically important village of Murlo. The samples from Tuscany show eastern haplogroups E3b1-M78, G2*-P15, J2a1b*-M67 and K2-M70 with frequencies very similar to those observed in Turkey and surrounding areas, but significantly different from those of neighbouring Italian regions. The microsatellite haplotypes associated to these haplogroups allow inference of ancestor lineages for Etruria and Near East whose time to the most recent common ancestors is relatively recent (about 3,500 years BP) and supports a possible non autochthonous post-Neolithic signal associated with the Etruscans.

I cant believe that since 2007 there has not been a serious study published about the Y-DNA of ancient Etruscan skeletal remains.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Is there a reason that the Italian admix among Western Jews was modelled using Tuscans? Because if the link of the Tyrsenians to the Sea Peoples is correct, and with the pretty obvious link of the Philistines to the Sea Peoples, then it could explain that supposed ancient Jews=high EEF leak without admixture occurring in Italy itself.

The sea peoples likely have an Aegean origin, which could also explain the links of Tyrsenians to other Aegean languages and indeed the presence of a Tyrsenian language in the Aegean itself (Lemnian).

That would mean that the Lebanese-like Italian individuals in this paper (dating to Imperial period) would represent a Middle Eastern group other than Jews.

This seems nice for Etruscan origins, and possibly for such high EEF-admixture amongst Jews (Philistines not shown though). It's in Polish, but it's the best map I could find that explains the Aegean origin and later colonisation of Tuscany:

Ludy Morza is Polish for Sea Peoples.

The possibility that the Teresh were connected on the one hand with the Tyrrhenians,^[106] believed to be an Etruscan-related culture, and on the other with Taruisa, a Hittite name possibly referring to Troy,^[107] had been considered by the ancient Romans.^{[verification needed]} The Roman poet Virgil refers to this belief when he depicts Aeneas as escaping the fall of Troy by coming to Latium to found a line descending to Romulus, first king of Rome. Considering that Anatolian connections have been identified for other Sea Peoples, such as the Tjeker and the Lukka, Eberhard Zangger puts together an Anatolian hypothesis.^[108]

Perhaps the Sea Peoples spoke Pelasgian, and perhaps Pelasgian is distantly related to Anatolian. If there was an expansion of Y DNA J-rich CHG-heavy warlike tribes from the Kura-Araxes culture to Anatolia, and knowing that the Minoans and Pelasgians (as seen from the Mycenaean paper, minus the extra Steppe) had this sort of ancestry, such a Pelasgian branch of Indo-European - with similarities to proto-Anatolian and ultimately descending from a common language node or perhaps very distantly Luwian - isn't so unlikely:

Albert Joris Van Windekens (1915—1989) offered rules for an unattested hypothetical Indo-European Pelasgian language, selecting vocabulary for which there was no Greek etymology among the names of places, heroes, animals, plants, garments, artifacts, social organization.^[69] His 1952 essay Le Pélasgique was critically received.^[70]

This could explain why the speculated Aegean language family (Tyrsenian, Minoan, Eteocretan and Eteocypriot, possibly Pelasgian) has many similarities with Anatolian but not enough for mainstream consensus of proto-Anatolian origin (but rather proto-Aegean-Anatolian origin).

Various locations of Pelasgians:

And below location of the Lemnian language:

In the Pelasgian map, the region about Troy is clearly described as Pelasgian, and the Pelasgians were described as allies of Troy. So maybe the origin of the Etruscan civilisation, via the Teresh branch of the Sea Peoples, is in or under the influence of Troy! It really doesn't seem that far-fetched.

 

[Alyan]

Looks like a paper on the Cardial ware folk

Regardless of who it is, it should be a solid source on researching what would Central Italy's genetic core be considering how other agriculture bringers like Natufians and Zagros Mountain Farmers and Anatolian Farmers compare with modern Levantines/Arabians and Persians and and Anatolian Turks. Keep in mind that Italy's geography would stem any tide of invaders. M0