Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Hi, people! I have been very busy in the last few months and unfortunately had to reduce my posts here to a minimum. Now I'm coming back to discuss with you something that I found pretty intriguing and maybe meaningful as I got access to the recently released and made available Italian aDNA samples. I have been reading a lot being said about "Italics and Etruscans being almost indistinguishable, only the language that survived in their groups differing"... but is that so?
Firstly, I modelled some of the most relevant aDNA population samples from ancient Italy using all Paleolithic, Neolithic and Chalcolithic DNA samples available in Global25 datasheets just to see what it'd give me. I also did the same for some Iberian, French and Balkanic aDNA. Interestingly, an imperfect but noticeable pattern started to emerge: the EEF in Italic-related aDNA is more related to Western Europe (Iberia and France), the EEF in Etruscan-related aDNA is more related to Eastern Europe (the Balkans and Pannonian plain in particular).
In addition to that, there's also something else that I found meaningful: Remedello and North Italian BB were predominately "Western EEF", whereas Sicilian BB (with no steppe ancestry) is wholly "Eastern EEF", and Grotta Continenza (Central Italian) DNA had an almost even split between "Western EEF" (52.6%) and "Eastern EEF" (47.4%)... that suggests that the Italian Peninsula had a subtle genetic cline previously from "Western European-like" in North Italy to "Balkanic-like" in South Italy (not really unlike today, right?).
I also tried several other models with fewer reference populations - and the same pattern still emerged every time. Another thing is that, if you add French BB samples, and compare IA Romans with IA Etruscans, only the former pick a lot of ancestry from those, with the latter "preferring" more CA Central Italian (Grotta Continenza), North Italian BB and Yamnaya ancestry than the Roman sample. If you add several Bell Beaker samples, this thing gets even more interesting: the Etruscan sample picks a steppe admixture right from Kalmykia Yamnaya (~28%), whereas IA Roman picks ancestry only from Bell Beaker samples from Germany, North Italy and France (with or without steppe admixture). In all cases, the Etruscan sample gets much more Grotta Continenza admixture than the Roman one. In general, the non-steppic DNA in "Italic" DNA samples(with the exception of Ardea Latini, which is a sort of middle-ground between them) looks more "northwestern" than the more "southeastern" "Tyrrhenian/Etruscan" DNA samples and the genetic outliers in "Italic" sites (Prenestini and Ardea).
Does it all hint to us a more "local" origin for the Etruscans and other Tyrrhenian peoples in the Central & South Italian peninsula, while the genetically similar Italics arose somewhere not very far, but closer to the Alps region (France-South Germany-Switzerland-North Italy)? Also, would steppe ancestry have arrived in the proto-Tyrrhenian population independently, through a different path than the Bell Beaker-like ancestry that gave birth to the Italics?
Interestingly, though, the Villanovan and the Proto-Villanovan DNA samples come off as different from each other, the latter much more "Etruscan-like", and the former more "Italic-like"(is that maybe an indication that in later times the Villanovan culture was influential enough to absorb Italic peoples in its vicinity even if they didn't really forget their language and cultural identity? We know that was the case in the Roman kingdom era).
Another curious thing that would not be unexlainable from a historical point of view is that the Ardea DNA samples look quite a bit more "Etruscan-like" than those from Bovea Ernica, Rome and Prenestini... We know that Ardea was said to be the capital of the Rutuli, whose identity is not definitely known but may have been a Tyrrhenian people akin to the Etruscans, so are we maybe seeing a lot of extant "Italicized" Rutuli people in this Iron Age Ardea aDNA?Some of the outliers are also intriguing: the Prenestini outlier DNA sample has mostly "Eastern EEF" with a lot of West Asian ancestry (affinities with Anatolia, Caucasus and Levant) and looks not very distant from the overall genetic makeup of the earlier BA Sicilian Beak (with the important addition of steppe ancestry since then, though)... was he perhaps a migrant from South Italy? The other outlier, from Ardea (Latini), is pretty similar to the Prenestini outlier in its combinaton of Steppic + Western EEF + Eastern EEF (and also pretty similar to the Sicilian Beaker if you take the steppic ancestry out), and just like the Prenestini outlier it also has a lot of Anatolian/Caucasian admixture... Maybe another South Italian migrant to Central Italy in the Iron Age?
So, what are your thoughts on this?
Firstly, I modelled some of the most relevant aDNA population samples from ancient Italy using all Paleolithic, Neolithic and Chalcolithic DNA samples available in Global25 datasheets just to see what it'd give me. I also did the same for some Iberian, French and Balkanic aDNA. Interestingly, an imperfect but noticeable pattern started to emerge: the EEF in Italic-related aDNA is more related to Western Europe (Iberia and France), the EEF in Etruscan-related aDNA is more related to Eastern Europe (the Balkans and Pannonian plain in particular).
In addition to that, there's also something else that I found meaningful: Remedello and North Italian BB were predominately "Western EEF", whereas Sicilian BB (with no steppe ancestry) is wholly "Eastern EEF", and Grotta Continenza (Central Italian) DNA had an almost even split between "Western EEF" (52.6%) and "Eastern EEF" (47.4%)... that suggests that the Italian Peninsula had a subtle genetic cline previously from "Western European-like" in North Italy to "Balkanic-like" in South Italy (not really unlike today, right?).
I also tried several other models with fewer reference populations - and the same pattern still emerged every time. Another thing is that, if you add French BB samples, and compare IA Romans with IA Etruscans, only the former pick a lot of ancestry from those, with the latter "preferring" more CA Central Italian (Grotta Continenza), North Italian BB and Yamnaya ancestry than the Roman sample. If you add several Bell Beaker samples, this thing gets even more interesting: the Etruscan sample picks a steppe admixture right from Kalmykia Yamnaya (~28%), whereas IA Roman picks ancestry only from Bell Beaker samples from Germany, North Italy and France (with or without steppe admixture). In all cases, the Etruscan sample gets much more Grotta Continenza admixture than the Roman one. In general, the non-steppic DNA in "Italic" DNA samples(with the exception of Ardea Latini, which is a sort of middle-ground between them) looks more "northwestern" than the more "southeastern" "Tyrrhenian/Etruscan" DNA samples and the genetic outliers in "Italic" sites (Prenestini and Ardea).
Does it all hint to us a more "local" origin for the Etruscans and other Tyrrhenian peoples in the Central & South Italian peninsula, while the genetically similar Italics arose somewhere not very far, but closer to the Alps region (France-South Germany-Switzerland-North Italy)? Also, would steppe ancestry have arrived in the proto-Tyrrhenian population independently, through a different path than the Bell Beaker-like ancestry that gave birth to the Italics?
Interestingly, though, the Villanovan and the Proto-Villanovan DNA samples come off as different from each other, the latter much more "Etruscan-like", and the former more "Italic-like"(is that maybe an indication that in later times the Villanovan culture was influential enough to absorb Italic peoples in its vicinity even if they didn't really forget their language and cultural identity? We know that was the case in the Roman kingdom era).
Another curious thing that would not be unexlainable from a historical point of view is that the Ardea DNA samples look quite a bit more "Etruscan-like" than those from Bovea Ernica, Rome and Prenestini... We know that Ardea was said to be the capital of the Rutuli, whose identity is not definitely known but may have been a Tyrrhenian people akin to the Etruscans, so are we maybe seeing a lot of extant "Italicized" Rutuli people in this Iron Age Ardea aDNA?Some of the outliers are also intriguing: the Prenestini outlier DNA sample has mostly "Eastern EEF" with a lot of West Asian ancestry (affinities with Anatolia, Caucasus and Levant) and looks not very distant from the overall genetic makeup of the earlier BA Sicilian Beak (with the important addition of steppe ancestry since then, though)... was he perhaps a migrant from South Italy? The other outlier, from Ardea (Latini), is pretty similar to the Prenestini outlier in its combinaton of Steppic + Western EEF + Eastern EEF (and also pretty similar to the Sicilian Beaker if you take the steppic ancestry out), and just like the Prenestini outlier it also has a lot of Anatolian/Caucasian admixture... Maybe another South Italian migrant to Central Italy in the Iron Age?
So, what are your thoughts on this?
Last edited: