MyTrueAncestry Mytrueancestry.com

[Salento]

Yes, so cool. I was pleased to obtain these coordinates for the Vahaduo Dodecad K12b. It was a pleasant surprise when we found out, due to the fact that he is a small distance from you, that the crusader is from Apulia. He is a very close ancient cousin of you.

thanks for that, ...

I ran out of + juice, I’ll + you tomorrow

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Torzio: Thanks for the post, So the "Rituli" are now thought by modern scholarship to part of the broader Etruscan peoples from Tuscany to Latium. If they are not Etruscans, the Latins? maybe Ligurians? who got forced South?

 

[Salento]

1600 BC - 1 BC (8 samples)

some differences between us
you have ancient latins and a Greek .......and I do not have these ...................i have ancient north balkan people

also ....yours are all yellow bars ............I have at least a "100% confirmed blue bar "

the yellow bars have a chromosome relation, ... notice the cM ...

Maybe, the most Northern deep dive sample I get is a North Roman Warrior:

Culture: Merovingian
The Alemanni were a confederation of Germanic tribes located in the Upper Rhine basin...

... the Deep Dive samples related to the yellow bar:

... and R436 - 100 AD, a paisano of R437

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Torzio: I went through some of the Source data on vahaduo.genetics and K13 has R473, R474 and R475 defined as Etruscan. Eurogenes K15 unfortunately does not have the Roman samples and Dodecad 12B does not have any of the samples labelled Etruscan. So I think as for as the Antonio/Moots et al 2019 study, the Etruscan Sample N=3 are R473, R474, and R475.

So maybe R850 is a Latin that took part in the Roman conquest of Ardea?

 

[torzio]

Torzio: I went through some of the Source data on vahaduo.genetics and K13 has R473, R474 and R475 defined as Etruscan. Eurogenes K15 unfortunately does not have the Roman samples and Dodecad 12B does not have any of the samples labelled Etruscan. So I think as for as the Antonio/Moots et al 2019 study, the Etruscan Sample N=3 are R473, R474, and R475.

So maybe R850 is a Latin that took part in the Roman conquest of Ardea?

I think R850 is a rich trader that moved from crete or cyprus with the etruscan trading ships......settled on the coastal part of Ardea and became a "rutuli" citizen............I think Ardea was the only port in lazio area at the time .............I think lazio was under etruscan rule between 550Bc and 750BC

 

[torzio]

Maybe, the most Northern deep dive sample I get is a North Roman Warrior:

Culture: Merovingian
The Alemanni were a confederation of Germanic tribes located in the Upper Rhine basin...

... the Deep Dive samples related to the yellow bar:

... and R436 - 100 AD, a paisano of R437

does not blue bars and dots mean ...confirmed match

Red dots and bars a slight match at best, and

yellow dots and bars ...a 50/50 chance for a match ?

 

[Salento]

does not blue bars and dots mean ...confirmed match

Red dots and bars a slight match at best, and

yellow dots and bars ...a 50/50 chance for a match ?

imho the Thunder goes with the yellow line

Yellow Line = an Ancient Relative you share DNA segments with !!! (cM) (Deep Dive)!

Red Line = Matching Sample (Archaeogenetic matches...)

Blue Line = Matching sample from a Specific Civilization (Archaeogenetic Matches assigned to a Specific Civilization)

 

[Salento]

R850 Latin Ardea 650 BC:
(file upload)

Ancien Ancestry Map:

Closest Matches Map:

Ancestral Timeline:

Deep Dive Map:

Deep Dive

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Salento: Ok, thanks for the post #2466 above. I should have gone back and reviewed MTA. R850 is Y-DNA Haplogroup T1a which you are as well as Torzio I think, not sure if it is exact sub-clade, but you and Torzio are similar Y-DNA haplogroup wise (not that Y-DNA is the entire story). MTA classifies him as Latin, which I guess is probably based on the way Antonio/Moots et al 2019 classify him. I am interested in R850 because he is one of the oldest Ancient Roman samples that I also share DNA segments with although using Dodecad K12b, Eurogenes K13-updated samples, I am closer to R437 distance wise.

 

[Salento]

Salento: Ok, thanks for the post #2466 above. I should have gone back and reviewed MTA. R850 is Y-DNA Haplogroup T1a which you are as well as Torzio I think, not sure if it is exact sub-clade, but you and Torzio are similar Y-DNA haplogroup wise (not that Y-DNA is the entire story). MTA classifies him as Latin, which I guess is probably based on the way Antonio/Moots et al 2019 classify him. I am interested in R850 because he is one of the oldest Ancient Roman samples that I also share DNA segments with although using Dodecad K12b, Eurogenes K13-updated samples, I am closer to R437 distance wise.

imho R850 is just a local Latin still retaining an Ancient Southeast common Ancestry.

I pay no attention to some of the extraordinarily detailed theories about R850 life ... lol

R850 Archeogenetic Map of Ancient Rome

Bronze Age: Sicily Beaker, Roman Republic R437 ...:

 

[Angela]

R850 is from 650 B.C. Italy is still tribal at that point. I would find it odd that anyone born and raised elsewhere, especially not even on the Italic mainland or Sicily would move to Rome as an adult and become a tribal Latin.

There would be a way to check. Does anyone remember if Moots did an isotype analysis to see if he was born or at least raised locally? Also, how much of that branch of yDna T is in Anatolia or the Aegean? How much of his mtDna is from the same area.

If he "was" born locally I suppose the mother could have been born elsewhere.

I think the most likely explanation is still the one originally advance, i.e. gene flow from the southern part of the peninsula, but the answer will to some extent depend on the nature of the Southern Italian samples from around the beginning of the second half of the first millennium B.C. when we have Greek colonization in the south.

 

[torzio]

R850 is from 650 B.C. Italy is still tribal at that point. I would find it odd that anyone born and raised elsewhere, especially not even on the Italic mainland or Sicily would move to Rome as an adult and become a tribal Latin.

There would be a way to check. Does anyone remember if Moots did an isotype analysis to see if he was born or at least raised locally? Also, how much of that branch of yDna T is in Anatolia or the Aegean? How much of his mtDna is from the same area.

If he "was" born locally I suppose the mother could have been born elsewhere.

I think the most likely explanation is still the one originally advance, i.e. gene flow from the southern part of the peninsula, but the answer will to some extent depend on the nature of the Southern Italian samples from around the beginning of the second half of the first millennium B.C. when we have Greek colonization in the south.

Based on one-way qpAdmmodeling, R437 forms a clade with an individual from Croatia dated to the early Iron Age. In contrast, R850 forms a clade with an individual from Copper Age Anatolia. These two individuals both came from Latin archaeological context, together with four other samples, who can be modeled as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italian and Steppe-related ancestries.Two two-way models fit well for R437 and R850: RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA and RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG. In both models, the incoming source population is temporally proximate to the Iron Age Italian samples, and their geographic locations point to ancestry input from the Near East. Strikingly, R437 and R850 both carry more ancestry from the incoming source than the preceding local population, highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians.

this is what paper states .............Incoming source instead of preceding local population ....ie, immigrants


he is T-L208.........and is the same as these 2 neoltihic samples which did not come from Anatolia ............I0700 (Bulgaria 5800-5400 calBCE) in Malek Bulgaria and I0797 (Germany 5500-4850 BCE) in Karsdorf Germany

R850_Iron_Age_Ardea,7.30,0,4.52,1.08,21.26,10.54,0,0.43,14.77,0,40.10,0


Jovialis spoke to Hannah Moots about it
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...k-colonization?p=596840&viewfull=1#post596840

 

[Angela]

Based on one-way qpAdmmodeling, R437 forms a clade with an individual from Croatia dated to the early Iron Age. In contrast, R850 forms a clade with an individual from Copper Age Anatolia. These two individuals both came from Latin archaeological context, together with four other samples, who can be modeled as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italian and Steppe-related ancestries.Two two-way models fit well for R437 and R850: RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA and RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG. In both models, the incoming source population is temporally proximate to the Iron Age Italian samples, and their geographic locations point to ancestry input from the Near East. Strikingly, R437 and R850 both carry more ancestry from the incoming source than the preceding local population, highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians.

this is what paper states .............Incoming source instead of preceding local population ....ie, immigrants


he is T-L208.........and is the same as these 2 neoltihic samples which did not come from Anatolia ............I0700 (Bulgaria 5800-5400 calBCE) in Malek Bulgaria and I0797 (Germany 5500-4850 BCE) in Karsdorf Germany

R850_Iron_Age_Ardea,7.30,0,4.52,1.08,21.26,10.54,0,0.43,14.77,0,40.10,0

That doesn't in any way invalidate what I posted.

I was responding civilly to your post stating that R850 was a man from the Near East who followed Etruscan trade routes to land up in central Italy and get adopted by a Latin tribe.

Absent some evidence, that is fantasy; good for a historical novel, perhaps, but not science.

I suggested someone check (perhaps you) if an isotope analysis of R850 was done by the researchers. Absent that or something found in the grave (and I know no such thing was found) there is absolutely no evidence to support your musings.

As for your quote from the paper, that doesn't address in any way how this more Anatolian, Iran Neo heavy ancestry arrived in Central Italy. The authors, because they are scientists, don't pronounce on it.

My suggestion for one possibility is that this ancestry arrived in Central Italy perhaps either via a spouse from the Aegean, or a gradual movement up the peninsula of more Aegean admixed ancestry. We know it arrived in Sicily, why not Southern Italy, and why not then a movement up the peninsula?

Of course, if you find that an isotope analysis was done showing R850 was born and raised somewhere in the Near East, then that would change things.

Since you very often post about yDna T perhaps you or someone else can trace the trajectory of this sub-lineage or its immediate predecessor and see if Anatolia is even probable. If not, the more Iran heavy ancestry could be through mtDna?

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Based on one-way qpAdmmodeling, R437 forms a clade with an individual from Croatia dated to the early Iron Age. In contrast, R850 forms a clade with an individual from Copper Age Anatolia. These two individuals both came from Latin archaeological context, together with four other samples, who can be modeled as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italian and Steppe-related ancestries.Two two-way models fit well for R437 and R850: RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA and RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG. In both models, the incoming source population is temporally proximate to the Iron Age Italian samples, and their geographic locations point to ancestry input from the Near East. Strikingly, R437 and R850 both carry more ancestry from the incoming source than the preceding local population, highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians.

this is what paper states .............Incoming source instead of preceding local population ....ie, immigrants


he is T-L208.........and is the same as these 2 neoltihic samples which did not come from Anatolia ............I0700 (Bulgaria 5800-5400 calBCE) in Malek Bulgaria and I0797 (Germany 5500-4850 BCE) in Karsdorf Germany

Cooper Age to Iron age (Bronze Age between the two). So the incoming source is Steppe, the earlier source is more Neolthic EEF. I read the quote you had above from Antonio et al 2019 Moots (supplement page 11). Here is the rest of the discussion from the Supplement pp. 24-25. The only Iron age Roman that can be fit with a One-way model is the with a sample from Croatia, so up to the Iron Age, connection between Italy and Balkans is clear. From Cooper to Iron, some new ancestry "Steppe" comes in. R850 is related to an older Cooper Age Anatolian. R437 and R850 can be modeled as 2-way sources from Cooper Age Anatolia and Late Bronze Age Armenia and Cooper Age Anatolia and Anatolian Iron Age. So it appears these Pre-Iron Age Italians were EEF+CHG/Iran Neolithic type ancestry before Steppe came in. The closing paragraph is interesting, the 3 Etruscans and 6 Latins (as defined by the paper) are statistically not different. So I always like thinking of it in statistical terms that I am more accustomed to using. the Mean of Etruscans (N=3) and Mean of Latins (N=6) genetic ancestry are not different using a t-test to compare sample means or if you want Medians, you could use a Non-Parametric test using a wilcoxon rank statistic.

The quote from Supplementary of Antonio/Moots et al 2019 (pp. 24-25):

"The only well-fit one-way model is with an Iron Age individual from Croatia dated to 805-761 calBCE,
suggesting that this individual form a clade with Iron Age central Italians, with respect to all the
populations in the “right” set (ANC17). This result, together with those for Neolithic and Copper Age
individuals, points to tight connections between Italy and the Balkans from Neolithic to Iron Ages.

For the Copper Age to Iron Age transition in central Italy, admixture f3 and f4 tests both point to ancestry
input that can be ultimately traced back to west Eurasian Steppe (Tables S13 and S14). This is also
supported by admixture modeling results with qpAdm: most potential source populations in working twoway
models are Bronze or Iron Age populations directly from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, with one
exception being an Iron Age Pre-scythian individual (Scythian is a nomadic culture complex inhabiting in
vast areas of the west Eurasian Steppe and north to the Black sea) from Hungary.


In consideration of the inter-individual heterogeneity in this period in PCA and ADMIXTURE, we also
performed admixture modeling for each sample separately. Based on the qpAdm results for all Iron Age
samples collectively, we started by testing a two-way model with RMPR_CA and
Russia_Yamnaya_Samara as the source populations and found that it provides reasonable fits (p>0.05)
for eight of the 11 Iron Age individuals (Table S16) but can be rejected for R437, R850 and R475. We
therefore tested for these three individuals alternative one-way, two-way and three-way models, if none of
the simpler models fits.


Based on one-way qpAdm modeling, R437 forms a clade with an individual from Croatia dated to the
early Iron Age. In contrast, R850 forms a clade with an individual from Copper Age Anatolia. These two
individuals both came from Latin archaeological context, together with four other samples, who can be
modeled as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italian and Steppe-related ancestries.

Two two-way models fit well for R437 and R850: RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA and RMPR_CA +
Anatolia_IA.SG. In both models, the incoming source population is temporally proximate to the Iron Age
Italian samples, and their geographic locations point to ancestry input from the Near East. Strikingly,
R437 and R850 both carry more ancestry from the incoming source than the preceding local population,
highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians
in Iron Age. Furthermore, the influence of this “eastern” ancestry is not limited to R437 and R850, as
R1016 and R1015 can also be modeled as RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG, and R1016 (but not R1015) as
RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA.


The location of R475 in PCA indicates that she (biological sex inferred based on sex chromosome and
autosome coverages) carries more Neolithic Anatolian or African ancestry than her contemporaries.
Further f4 analysis reveals that R475 shares more alleles with Moroccan hunter-gathers and less alleles
with Anatolia farmers, compared to other Italian Iron Age individuals. We were not able to model R475
with any one-way models or as any two-way mixtures with one source being the Copper Age location
population, but two three-way models with an African population as one of the sources provide
reasonable fits (p>0.03): RMPR_CA + Russia_Yamnaya_Samara + Mota and RMPR_CA +
Russia_Yamnaya_Samara + Mota.


Interestingly, although Iron Age individuals were sampled from both Etruscan (n=3) and Latin (n=6)
contexts, we did not detect any significant differences between the two groups with f4 statistics in the
form of f4(RMPR_Etruscan, RMPR_Latin; test population, Onge), suggesting shared origins or extensive
genetic exchange between them."

 

[torzio]

Cooper Age to Iron age (Bronze Age between the two). So the incoming source is Steppe, the earlier source is more Neolthic EEF. I read the quote you had above from Antonio et al 2019 Moots (supplement page 11). Here is the rest of the discussion from the Supplement pp. 24-25. The only Iron age Roman that can be fit with a One-way model is the with a sample from Croatia, so up to the Iron Age, connection between Italy and Balkans is clear. From Cooper to Iron, some new ancestry "Steppe" comes in. R850 is related to an older Cooper Age Anatolian. R437 and R850 can be modeled as 2-way sources from Cooper Age Anatolia and Late Bronze Age Armenia and Cooper Age Anatolia and Anatolian Iron Age. So it appears these Pre-Iron Age Italians were EEF+CHG/Iran Neolithic type ancestry before Steppe came in. The closing paragraph is interesting, the 3 Etruscans and 6 Latins (as defined by the paper) are statistically not different. So I always like thinking of it in statistical terms that I am more accustomed to using. the Mean of Etruscans (N=3) and Mean of Latins (N=6) genetic ancestry are not different using a t-test to compare sample means or if you want Medians, you could use a Non-Parametric test using a wilcoxon rank statistic.

The quote from Supplementary of Antonio/Moots et al 2019 (pp. 24-25):

"The only well-fit one-way model is with an Iron Age individual from Croatia dated to 805-761 calBCE,
suggesting that this individual form a clade with Iron Age central Italians, with respect to all the
populations in the “right” set (ANC17). This result, together with those for Neolithic and Copper Age
individuals, points to tight connections between Italy and the Balkans from Neolithic to Iron Ages.

For the Copper Age to Iron Age transition in central Italy, admixture f3 and f4 tests both point to ancestry
input that can be ultimately traced back to west Eurasian Steppe (Tables S13 and S14). This is also
supported by admixture modeling results with qpAdm: most potential source populations in working twoway
models are Bronze or Iron Age populations directly from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, with one
exception being an Iron Age Pre-scythian individual (Scythian is a nomadic culture complex inhabiting in
vast areas of the west Eurasian Steppe and north to the Black sea) from Hungary.


In consideration of the inter-individual heterogeneity in this period in PCA and ADMIXTURE, we also
performed admixture modeling for each sample separately. Based on the qpAdm results for all Iron Age
samples collectively, we started by testing a two-way model with RMPR_CA and
Russia_Yamnaya_Samara as the source populations and found that it provides reasonable fits (p>0.05)
for eight of the 11 Iron Age individuals (Table S16) but can be rejected for R437, R850 and R475. We
therefore tested for these three individuals alternative one-way, two-way and three-way models, if none of
the simpler models fits.


Based on one-way qpAdm modeling, R437 forms a clade with an individual from Croatia dated to the
early Iron Age. In contrast, R850 forms a clade with an individual from Copper Age Anatolia. These two
individuals both came from Latin archaeological context, together with four other samples, who can be
modeled as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italian and Steppe-related ancestries.

Two two-way models fit well for R437 and R850: RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA and RMPR_CA +
Anatolia_IA.SG. In both models, the incoming source population is temporally proximate to the Iron Age
Italian samples, and their geographic locations point to ancestry input from the Near East. Strikingly,
R437 and R850 both carry more ancestry from the incoming source than the preceding local population,
highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians
in Iron Age. Furthermore, the influence of this “eastern” ancestry is not limited to R437 and R850, as
R1016 and R1015 can also be modeled as RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG, and R1016 (but not R1015) as
RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA.


The location of R475 in PCA indicates that she (biological sex inferred based on sex chromosome and
autosome coverages) carries more Neolithic Anatolian or African ancestry than her contemporaries.
Further f4 analysis reveals that R475 shares more alleles with Moroccan hunter-gathers and less alleles
with Anatolia farmers, compared to other Italian Iron Age individuals. We were not able to model R475
with any one-way models or as any two-way mixtures with one source being the Copper Age location
population, but two three-way models with an African population as one of the sources provide
reasonable fits (p>0.03): RMPR_CA + Russia_Yamnaya_Samara + Mota and RMPR_CA +
Russia_Yamnaya_Samara + Mota.


Interestingly, although Iron Age individuals were sampled from both Etruscan (n=3) and Latin (n=6)
contexts, we did not detect any significant differences between the two groups with f4 statistics in the
form of f4(RMPR_Etruscan, RMPR_Latin; test population, Onge), suggesting shared origins or extensive
genetic exchange between them."

the Croatian is sample R437

 

[torzio]

That doesn't in any way invalidate what I posted.

I was responding civilly to your post stating that R850 was a man from the Near East who followed Etruscan trade routes to land up in central Italy and get adopted by a Latin tribe.

Absent some evidence, that is fantasy; good for a historical novel, perhaps, but not science.

I suggested someone check (perhaps you) if an isotope analysis of R850 was done by the researchers. Absent that or something found in the grave (and I know no such thing was found) there is absolutely no evidence to support your musings.

As for your quote from the paper, that doesn't address in any way how this more Anatolian, Iran Neo heavy ancestry arrived in Central Italy. The authors, because they are scientists, don't pronounce on it.

My suggestion for one possibility is that this ancestry arrived in Central Italy perhaps either via a spouse from the Aegean, or a gradual movement up the peninsula of more Aegean admixed ancestry. We know it arrived in Sicily, why not Southern Italy, and why not then a movement up the peninsula?

Of course, if you find that an isotope analysis was done showing R850 was born and raised somewhere in the Near East, then that would change things.

Since you very often post about yDna T perhaps you or someone else can trace the trajectory of this sub-lineage or its immediate predecessor and see if Anatolia is even probable. If not, the more Iran heavy ancestry could be through mtDna?

Thanks ...............I only posted what others noted here and in other sites, like Quilles etc , what ever they found, be it with Hannah or whoever .............

I care little for the sample R850 as he is not from my branch ............his branch is different to mine, the difference is the same as R1a is to R1b.

I can accept your conclusion , i have no issue with it .................the question is , how long was he an Etruscan, never seen that he is called a Roman

 

[Angela]

Thanks ...............I only posted what others noted here and in other sites, like Quilles etc , what ever they found, be it with Hannah or whoever .............

I care little for the sample R850 as he is not from my branch ............his branch is different to mine, the difference is the same as R1a is to R1b.

I can accept your conclusion , i have no issue with it .................the question is , how long was he an Etruscan, never seen that he is called a Roman

Who said R50 was an Etruscan???

R437 "is" an Etruscan.

You can't change the archaeological context of these samples just because you feel like it. Whether the Etruscans were rather similar to Bronze Age people from the Balkans is irrelevant. It just shows the ancestors of the Etruscans may have moved into Italy from the eastern side of the Alps. That may be true of the Italics as well.

If you have all this information about yDna T, then where is this sample's particular yDna T found? If it was long in Neolithic Europe, then the likelihood he immigrated as a grown man from Anatolia is even less.

If the people on the site where you got this information are this confused perhaps you shouldn't rely on their conclusions.

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Ok, I thought they compared R437 to a Croatian sample. My bad, thanks for the clarification. So Eurogenes Top 25 for R437 using K13 Modern Updated samples are as follows. So at least 1 of those Iron Age Romans is genetically similar to Modern Sicilians and very close to Apulia, Molise, Campania, Abruzzo. Among Sicilians, seems more shifted towards Modern West Sicilian (my neck of the woods, ancestrally speaking) and then Basilicata, Calabria before Central Greek comes then followed by East Sicily. I will admit I don't know enough about modern Croatian DNA to speak but for my fellow Americans who follow Football, Croatia is the ancestral home of Bill Belichick, arguably along with the Great Vince Lombardi (American of Italian ancestry with relatives from Campania and Basilicata), the greatest NFL Coach in the history of the game. So pretty cool.

Distance to:	R437b_Lazio_Rome_Roman_Republic
5.96156020	Sicily
5.99169425	Apulia
6.54077977	Molise
6.64305653	Campania
6.98167602	Abruzzo
7.04230786	West_Sicilian
7.07317468	Basilicata
8.00281201	Calabria
8.00512336	Central_Greek
8.03797238	East_Sicilian
8.19987805	Malta
9.56499869	Lazio
9.84146331	Marche
10.28831862	Greek_Symi_Island
10.42845147	Greek_Andros_Island
10.45037798	Greek_Western-Thrace
10.76324301	Umbria
11.49563830	Greek_Chios
11.85400038	Greek_Dodecanese
11.89326700	Greek_Peloponnese
12.12562576	Romagna
12.49138503	Tuscan
12.91142517	Sephardic_Jewish
13.02632719	FrenchCorsica
13.08787989	Moroccan_Jew

 

[Salento]

@Torzio ...

as I reminder: the much older Karsdorf samples (Germany) and R850 (Italy) are all T1a1...

R850 Dod K12

 

[Palermo Trapani]

Who said R50 was an Etruscan???

R437 "is" an Etruscan.

You can't change the archaeological context of these samples just because you feel like it. Whether the Etruscans were rather similar to Bronze Age people from the Balkans is irrelevant. It just shows the ancestors of the Etruscans may have moved into Italy from the eastern side of the Alps. That may be true of the Italics as well.

If you have all this information about yDna T, then where is this sample's particular yDna T found? If it was long in Neolithic Europe, then the likelihood he immigrated as a grown man from Anatolia is even less.

If the people on the site where you got this information are this confused perhaps you shouldn't rely on their conclusions.

Angela: My comment here is only for clarification and it is in the context of you as an Advisor. Earlier in a post, it was suggested that R850 was an Etruscan. There was some discussion about R850, respectful on all parts of which I was involved, as I and I think Salento both with respect to R850 get DNA matches on R850 from MTA chroma analysis. I had never heard R850 described as an Etruscan and the published paper (Antonio/Moots et al 2019) while defining 3 Samples as Etruscan, only discusses R475 as an Etruscan. So I was unclear as to what 3 samples were defined as Etruscan by Antonio/Moots et al 2019. So Torzio and I had several respectful posts and replies but in one post above (#2462) I noted that I went to the various Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators to see which 3 Iron Age Roman samples were defined as Etruscan. According to the Eurogenes K13 ancient spreadsheet, the 3 are R473,, R474 and R475

R473_Civitavecchia_Etruscan._Iron_Age,33.38,12.03,31.63,0.41,18.38,3.34,0.34,0.42,0.06,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00
R474b_Civitavecchia_Etruscan._Iron_Age,35.67,12.22,25.57,5.16,17.48,1.51,0.00,0.00,1.10,0.59,0.00,0.71,0.00
R475b_Civitavecchia_Etruscan._Iron_Age,21.50,7.31,32.84,0.00,26.37,6.15,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.10,4.30,1.44

So based on what I gathered, R850 is not an Etruscan nor is R437. If this Quilles etc group is claiming R850 and R437 are both Etruscans in public blogs, vs Latin Tribes, then one plausible explanation might, I repeat might, lie with the fact that both cluster closer to Modern Southern Italians (Sicily inclusive). This last statement I will say is purely conjecture on my part, not a statement of dogmatic fact.

Respectfully, PT.