Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It is not known, there have not yet been studies that have revealed their Y-DNA.
For the Etruscans we have instead their mtDNA: mtDNA U5a, mtDNA JT (of course the subclades of JT) and mtDNA H1b. So Neolithic and even Mesolithic lines.
These mtDNA haplogroups differ from Indo-European ones or not? I actually want to know how we can distinguish between IE and non-IE people in Europe.
It would be necessary to check in the studies that have been published so far on ancient samples. In some cases they're distinct, in others they're not. For example, according to Maciamo, U5a is most common today in north-east Europe and have been found so far in Mesolithic Russia (U5a1) and Sweden (U5a1 and U5a2). U5a1b1 has been found in Chalcolithic Germany (Bell Beaker) and in the Unetice culture. Among the Etruscans it could have come with the Bell Beaker and not with a Neolithic culture.
In general, if EEF and Yamnaya's proto-Indoeuropeans were probably more distinct not only in autosomal DNA, but also in Y-DNA and mtDNA, but in the formation of Indo-Europeans there are also Neolithic populations that are absorbed by the previous ones.
The other mistake is to believe that from the end of the Bronze Age - the beginning of the Iron Age - a language (whether IE or not) in Europe corresponds always to a genetic profile. Modern Basques are an excellent example: they still speak a non IE language today, but their DNA also contains steppe DNA. Even the Etruscans, on the two avalaible PCAs (one academic, and the other of unclear origin) according to their genetic position in the PCA may have had a percentage of steppe DNA, even if they continued to speak a non-IE language during the Iron Age.
I find the slight increase of E-V13 in Spain quite interesting; could it be the Visigoths? They spent some time in the Balkans and V13 and it has been found in remains linked to Visigoths.
Yes, although Basque-speaking does correspond to a genetic profile. It is strongly associated with (i) yDNA R1b-DF27, and (ii) aDNA Atapuerca. Basques still speak an evolved version of a language brought by an early (4th millennium BC) group of Eastern people whose descendants have been less affected by admixture with later IE-speaking arrivals.The other mistake is to believe that from the end of the Bronze Age - the beginning of the Iron Age - a language (whether IE or not) in Europe corresponds always to a genetic profile. Modern Basques are an excellent example: they still speak a non IE language today, but their DNA also contains steppe DNA.
Yes, although Basque-speaking does correspond to a genetic profile. It is strongly associated with (i) yDNA R1b-DF27, and (ii) aDNA Atapuerca. Basques still speak an evolved version of a language brought by an early (4th millennium BC) group of Eastern people whose descendants have been less affected by admixture with later IE-speaking arrivals.
What you say I claim is exactly the opposite of what I do claim. I said Basques still speak an evolved version of a language brought by an early (4th millennium BC) group of Eastern people whose descendants have been less affected by admixture with later IE-speaking arrivals. In other words, neither they nor their main steppe DNA-bearing ancestors were IE speakers.The Basques are exactly the opposite of what you claim, since they speak a non-IE language and instead also have steppe DNA.
There is evidence that Basque-speaking, yDNA DF27 and aDNA Atapuerca-best-fit percentages are all associated with each other; and the earliest Atapuerca aDNA is clearly Eastern in origin, fitting much better with steppe-infused Balkan samples than with Iberian ones.The rest is just speculation. There is no evidence that the Basque language is an evolved version of a language brought by an early (4th millennium BC) group of Eastern people whose descendants have been less affected by admixture with later IE-speaking arrivals.
Yes, although Basque-speaking does correspond to a genetic profile. It is strongly associated with (i) yDNA R1b-DF27, and (ii) aDNA Atapuerca. Basques still speak an evolved version of a language brought by an early (4th millennium BC) group of Eastern people whose descendants have been less affected by admixture with later IE-speaking arrivals.
Name of Basque is very similar to Bashkir (Baskara), R1b has a high frequency among Bashkirs too.
Irrelevant. Bashkir are filled, I mean filled with R1a, depending on your sample.
To make things even more puzzling there's district called Edreskan in Western Afghanistan so could they have some relation with Etruscans too I have heared Etruscans were originally from Asia minor.
To make things even more puzzling there's district called Edreskan in Western Afghanistan so could they have some relation with Etruscans too I have heared Etruscans were originally from Asia minor.
Etruscans were calling themselves Rasna.
Dionysius says 'Rasenna'.
The movement from Asia Minor was rejected during the antiquity already by Dionysius who considered them native (though he mention other people in the wider region before them Siculi, Umbrians, he also mentions a movement of Pelasgians from Thessaly a little before the 'Trojan War' (He considers them to have been Hellenes). Movements of Ligurians are also consistent with what he writes.
He clearly says that the Lydians had a different language but also different laws and customs.
There was one cultural similarity with a population in Asia , those called by the Greeks 'Mossynoeci' (that is a Greek exonym but the mossyn-/mossun part could have been a native word). He says that he Tyrrhenians (Etruscans/Rasna) were the first in the region to build 'high wooden palisades resembling towers' and that the Mossynoeci were doing something similar. (Even if that points to movement, which it does not, the direction could have been opposite).
The interesting thing about the Mossynoeci is the following:
According to Xenophon's Anabasis (5.4.26-34), the Mossynoeci were "fair-complexioned and white-skinned", "with their backs variegated and their breasts tattooed with patterns of all sorts of flowers".
Rasna sounds like the names of some ancient Iranian and Slavic people in the East of Europe, like Ruthenia and Roxolani/Rosomoni, there are many places with the names of Rasna/Rosna/Rasina in Croatia, Macedonia, Czechia, Romania, Serbia, Greece, ... it seems to be really possible that some Etruscan tribes lived in the east of Europe before the arrival of Iranian and Slavic tribes.
This thread has been viewed 28267 times.