Eupedia Ancient Ethnicities Checker: reliably compare your DNA to ancient populations

[Duarte]

Playing with admixtures distances (>1 and <5)

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.4830% / 1.48299702
52.0	CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
19.7	Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
10.0	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
9.5	Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
7.0	Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)
1.8	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.6138% / 1.61382644 | R7P
35.2	CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
18.9	Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
15.8	Bell_Beaker_Iberia_(n=11)
12.6	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
11.2	Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
6.3	Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.6151% / 1.61511000 | R6P
33.8	CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
18.8	Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
17.0	Bell_Beaker_Iberia_(n=11)
13.0	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
11.2	Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
6.2	Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.7724% / 1.77242631 | R5P 46.9 Bell_Beaker_Iberia_(n=11) 21.9 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 16.6 Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4) 10.7 Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2) 3.9 Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5) Target: Duarte Distance: 1.7965% / 1.79650761 | R4P | ADC: 0.25x RC 56.9 CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3) 21.2 Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4) 13.0 Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2) 8.9 Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5) Target: Duarte Distance: 2.0215% / 2.02148464 | R7P | ADC: 0.25x RC 31.1 CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3) 28.1 Latins_(n=4) 15.5 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 13.2 Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4) 6.3 Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6) 5.8 Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5) Target: Duarte Distance: 2.5614% / 2.56136519 | R4P | ADC: 0.25x RC 44.6 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 32.6 MN_Westphalia_(Megalithic_Wartberg)_(n=6) 13.7 Bell_Beaker_Iberia_(n=11) 9.1 Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2) Target: Duarte Distance: 2.6422% / 2.64221838 | R5P | ADC: 0.25x RC 44.8 Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5) 29.7 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 16.6 Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22) 5.1 Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6) 3.8 Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5) Target: Duarte Distance: 3.1782% / 3.17820510 | R7P | ADC: 0.5x RC 43.9 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 23.8 Early_Bronze_Age_Iberia_(n=7) 16.9 Latins_(n=4) 15.4 Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4) Target: Duarte Distance: 3.2011% / 3.20109738 | R5P | ADC: 0.5x RC 41.3 Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22) 40.9 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 9.8 Latins_(n=4) 8.0 Iron_Age_Kangju_(n=4) Target: Duarte Distance: 3.2610% / 3.26098011 | R3P 45.8 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 38.5 Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) 15.7 Bell_Beaker_Iberia_(n=11) Target: Duarte Distance: 4.1420% / 4.14199492 | ADC: 0.5x RC 44.9 Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9) 29.2 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 25.9 Early_Bronze_Age_Iberia_(n=7) Target: Duarte Distance: 4.3416% / 4.34164051 | R6P | ADC: 0.25x RC 45.3 MN_Westphalia_(Megalithic_Wartberg)_(n=6) 27.1 CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3) 18.1 Epipaleolithic_M****ithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2) 9.5 Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5) Target: Duarte Distance: 4.6642% / 4.66417136 | R2P 52.4 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 47.6 Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22) Target: Duarte Distance: 4.8532% / 4.85323448 | R2P | ADC: 0.5x RC 50.9 Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14) 49.1 Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)

[Maciamo]

I have just added 12 Norwegian Viking samples (I updated this post with individual samples). They are also ethnically mixed, like the other Vikings so far. Overall these 12 samples have an average closer to modern Swedes.

[Archetype0ne]

One of the only times I get better results in single mode than multi or two way.

[Archetype0ne]

Ill compare these calculator with the Vahaduo's K12b Ancient Database in the following post.

[Archetype0ne]

Vahaduo K12b Ancient:

LOL

Target: Archetype0ne Distance: 0.0719% / 0.07192577
5.0	RISE568¬_Brandysek_Czech_Republic
4.9	R71_Imperial_Era_ANAS
4.7	I9127_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete
4.6	I0073_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_La sithi_Crete
4.2	scy305_Scythian
4.1	I9006_Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Agia_Kyriaki_Salamis
4.0	RISE145_Polwica_Poland_3677_years
3.4	I10854_NE_Iberia_c.8-12CE
3.4	RISE412_Noratus_Armenia_2885_years
3.0	R78_Imperial_Era_Viale_Rossini_Necropolis
2.6	I3716_Ukraine_Neolithic
2.6	RISE435_Tiefbrunn_Germany_4094_years
2.5	I4112_Ukraine_Neolithic
2.4	ANI152_Varna
2.4	Bockstein_Mesolithic_Germany
2.4	R51_Imperial_Era_Centocelle_Necropolis
2.3	I4930_Bronze_Age_Beaker_Sicily
2.1	I0074_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_La sithi_Crete
1.8	Bul10_Balkans_BronzeAge
1.8	RISE42_Marbjerg_Denmark_3681_years
1.8	RISE483_Erd_4_Hungary
1.7	I8208_NE_Iberia_Hel_Empuries2
1.5	Bavaria_BB_II5524
1.4	R39_Imperial_Era_Isola_Sacra_Necropolis
1.2	I4081_Iron_Gates_HG
1.2	R128_Imperial_Era_Casale_del_Dolce
1.1	I7796_Sicily_EBA_Contrada_Paolina_Castellucciana
1.1	R1021_Iron_Age_Boville_Ernica
1.1	RISE595_Velika_Gruda_Montenegro
1.0	I11442_Sicily_EBA_Buffa_Cave_II
1.0	RISE431_Leki_Male_Poland_3762_years
0.9	I8212_NE_Iberia_Greek_Empuries1_atypical
0.9	MX310_Switzerland_LN
0.9	Szolad19
0.8	I8205_NE_Iberia_Hel_Empuries2
0.8	I9129_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete
0.8	R1551_Imperial_Era_Monterotondo
0.8	RISE397_Kapan_Armenia_2807_years
0.7	R43_Imperial_Era_Isola_Sacra_Necropolis
0.7	R44_Imperial_Era_Isola_Sacra_Necropolis
0.6	I0174_BAM25_Starcevo_EN_Alsónyék-Bátaszék_Mérnöki_telep_Hungary_5710-5530_calBCE
0.6	I2176_Balkans_BronzeAge
0.6	RISE373_Szoreg-C_Sziv_Utca_Hungary_3476_years
0.6	RISE598_Turlojiske_Lithuania_2590_years
0.5	ASH2-3_Iron_Age1
0.5	Collegno31
0.5	I2318_Peloponnese_Neolithic
0.5	RISE247_Szazhalombatta-Foldvar_Hungary_3372_years
0.5	RISE47_Sebber_skole_Denmark_3153_years
0.5	Szolad18
0.4	CuevadelaPalomaSpain_I3243
0.4	I4331_Balkans_BronzeAge
0.4	I5402_Iron_Gates_HG
0.4	R437_Iron_Age_Palestrina_Selicata
0.4	RISE1_Oblaczkowo_Poland_4117_years
0.4	RISE471_Untermeitingen_Germany
0.3	I0070_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_La sithi_Crete
0.3	I2425_Balkans_Chalcolithic
0.3	I3878_Sicily_LBA_Marcita
0.3	I6491_NE_Iberia_RomP
0.3	R115_Imperial_Era_Via_Paisiello_Necropolis
0.3	R69_Imperial_Era_ANAS
0.3	R970_Medieval_Era_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cianti
0.3	RISE567_Knezeves_Czech_Republic
0.2	ASH033_Late_Bronze_Age
0.2	Collegno102
0.2	France_IA_COL153A
0.2	France_IA_NOR3-15
0.2	I0012_Molta2_Motala_HG_Molata_Sweden_5898-5531_calBCE
0.2	I0176_SZEH4_LBKT_EN_Szemely-Hegyes_Hungary_5210-4940_calBCE
0.2	I0706_Balkans_Neolithic
0.2	I12650_SE_Iberia_c.10-16CE
0.2	I1727_AG_83_3082_Early_MPPNB
0.2	I2181_Balkans_Chalcolithic_outlier
0.2	I3498_Balkans_Neolithic
0.2	I3708_Peloponnese_Neolithic
0.2	MX254_Switzerland_LN
0.2	RISE479_Erd_4_Hungary_~2000_years
0.1	BronzeAgeNorthernSpain_I2472
0.1	France_IA_PECH5
0.1	I0633_Balkans_Neolithic
0.1	I0679_Krepost_Neolithic
0.1	I1298_Balkans_Neolithic
0.1	I2431_Balkans_Chalcolithic
0.1	I3125_Sicily_MBA_Buffa_Cave_II
0.1	I4089_Balkans_Chalcolithic
0.1	I9123_Bronze_Age_Armenoi_Crete
0.1	R113_Imperial_Era_Via_Paisiello_Necropolis
0.1	R19_Neolithic_Ripabianca_di_Monterado
0.1	RISE21_Karlstrup_Denmark_3092_years
0.1	RISE569_Brandysek_Czech_Republic_~2000_years
0.1	scy300_Scythian

Had to change Cycles, ADC to make this more digestable.

Target: Archetype0ne Distance: 1.5838% / 1.58378609 | ADC: 0.25x RC
32.3	Szolad37
18.3	I2165_Balkans_BronzeAge
16.0	Szolad20
14.4	scy197_Scythian
10.7	I8205_NE_Iberia_Hel_Empuries2
6.6	MX265_Switzerland_LN
1.7	scy305_Scythian

[Duarte]

Individual VKK

Distance to:	Duarte
11.34021164	VK90_Denmark_(NW_Italian-like)
11.77031860	VK286_Denmark_(NW_Italian-like)
16.66366106	VK146_UK_Oxford_(NE_Italian-like)
16.84747162	VK84_Denmark_(North_French-like)
16.99850876	VK211_Poland_(Bavarian-like)
17.71131842	VK261_UK_Dorset_(French-like)
17.92253051	VK150_UK_Oxford_(Belgian-like)
19.66530956	VK138_Denmark_(Belgian-like)
20.21818736	VK280_Denmark_(Belgian-like)
20.41495040	VK276_Denmark_(Belgian-like)
21.32140708	VK278_Denmark_(Bavarian-like)
21.41239828	VK92_Denmark_(NW_French-like)
21.50960948	VK177_UK_Oxford_(NW_French-like)
23.09795229	VK178_UK_Oxford_(Dutch-like)
23.17185362	VK114_Norway_(Dutch-like)
23.21924202	VK173_UK_Oxford_(Scottish-like)
23.29828749	VK262_UK_Dorset_(North_English-like)
23.62943503	VK113_Norway_(English-like)
23.71635301	VK22_Russia_(Dutch-like)
24.26826941	VK94_Denmark_(Irish-like)
24.54090870	VK260_UK_Dorset_(Irish-like)
25.51463502	VK525_Norway_(Irish-like)
25.59980078	VK254_Russia_(Hungarian-like)
25.63136555	VK285_Denmark_(NW_German-like)
26.30090303	VK257_UK_Dorset_(Irish-like)

Individual VKK + data post #2

Distance to:	Duarte
6.17150711	Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
6.71266713	Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
10.86048341	Etruscans_(n=3)
11.27186764	Latins_(n=4)
11.34021164	VK90_Denmark_(NW_Italian-like)
11.77031860	VK286_Denmark_(NW_Italian-like)
12.12435978	Villanovans_(n=2)
13.33091895	Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
14.03098001	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
14.05696980	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
14.52055095	Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
14.84792915	Early_Bronze_Age_Iberia_(n=7)
15.04884381	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
15.13849068	Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
15.21667178	Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
15.30209790	Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
15.31625933	Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22)
16.25126149	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Spain_(n=38)
16.54298643	Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
16.66366106	VK146_UK_Oxford_(NE_Italian-like)
16.76632041	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
16.84747162	VK84_Denmark_(North_French-like)
16.99850876	VK211_Poland_(Bavarian-like)
17.46561765	Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
17.48110694	Middle_Bronze_Age_Portugal_(n=4)

Mixed (individual VKK + data post #2)

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.4889% / 1.48887500
50.4	CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
18.3	Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
10.8	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
9.5	Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
6.9	Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)
2.7	VK262_UK_Dorset_(North_English-like)
1.4	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)

---

Target: Duarte Distance: 1.9847% / 1.98472593 | R5P | ADC: 0.25x RC
36.5	VK286_Denmark_(NW_Italian-like)
28.1	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
18.5	CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
12.1	VK262_UK_Dorset_(North_English-like)
4.8	Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)

[Jovialis]

I ran the C6 cohort from the Antonio et al. 2019 paper against the Eupedia Ancient Ethnicity Checker:

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R973_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cian ti
2.61600841	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.70417899	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.30261057	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.68716681	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.20353385	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R970_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cian ti
5.57357157	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
5.84922217	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
5.86388949	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.88190445	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.88704113	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R969_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cian ti
3.80529894	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.22886510	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
4.85081436	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
4.95432135	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.44554109	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R65_Villa_Magna
3.44583807	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.08265679	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.99617038	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.15323004	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
9.20751324	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R64_Villa_Magna
4.66380746	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.66931213	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.56278142	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
8.02063589	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
8.95030167	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R60_Villa_Magna
2.65045279	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
5.53810437	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.78648425	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
5.86209860	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.49679351	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R59_Villa_Magna
5.36142705	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.37707613	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.92614611	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.18032033	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
8.28886603	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R58_Villa_Magna
5.47464154	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.97795115	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
8.02636281	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
8.71297882	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
9.12259831	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R57_Villa_Magna
4.33122385	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.28406094	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.23247142	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.09248898	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
8.54275717	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R56_Villa_Magna
3.43877885	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.06511599	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
5.42444467	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
7.46507870	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.03433258	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R54_Villa_Magna
3.42504015	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.66333572	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.13098687	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.06942006	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
7.43289311	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R53_Villa_Magna
2.98610114	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.96599531	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
6.77462914	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
8.32407352	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
10.26876331	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R52_Villa_Magna
3.89666524	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.97099588	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
5.81291665	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.08876381	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
8.21042630	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1290_Villa_Magna
2.93139898	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.14209101	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.20004032	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
6.38917835	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.59439925	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1287_Cancelleria
3.77262508	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
5.12042967	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.47535250	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
8.73772282	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
9.26634772	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1285_Cancelleria
4.26171327	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
6.23410780	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
9.13794835	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
9.53922953	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
9.59946353	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)

---

Distance to:	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1283_Cancelleria
2.85338396	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
3.41041053	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
6.41774883	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.98561379	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.14095932	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R36_Celio
3.00244900	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
3.86877242	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
4.92868137	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
6.04142367	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.35379494	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R35_Celio
5.33175393	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.46040292	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.93511584	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.61207593	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
8.16885549	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R121_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
3.42668936	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
4.13474304	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
4.32866030	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.59916297	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.18370378	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R120_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
2.63964013	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
2.64575131	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
6.57918688	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
6.65265361	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.75934908	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R118_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
4.59311441	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
6.02151974	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.11260992	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
6.19984677	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
8.73195282	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R117_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
4.50196624	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.40243464	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.94146238	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
8.58108967	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
9.59722877	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R107_Crypta_Balbi
6.08292693	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.58274259	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
6.98462597	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
7.26746173	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
8.19426019	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean:R437_(Latin_Prenestini_T ribe)_Palestrina_Selicata
5.31416974	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.72588284	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
6.90958754	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.04519695	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
8.27300429	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R836_Civitanova_Marche
2.14727735	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.07275073	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.61933531	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
7.78833102	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.99144543	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R835_Civitanova_Marche
2.67884303	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
3.04032893	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
3.92655065	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
5.01279363	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.32022541	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R51_Centocelle_Necropoli s
3.59934716	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
3.77650632	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
10.53298628	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
11.11080105	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
11.87786176	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R49_Centocelle_Necropoli s
3.57442303	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.35588461	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.83648010	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
8.38284558	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.43298286	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R47_Centocelle_Necropoli s
5.79032814	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.88561806	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.44457521	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
8.83147213	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
9.46944560	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R436_Palestrina
4.34047232	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.34744831	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.57445055	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
7.90332209	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
10.23175449	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R1549_Monterotondo
5.50899265	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
7.11763303	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
7.93293767	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
8.49173127	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.81342726	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R1544_Necropolis_of_Mont e_Agnese
4.86201604	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.22086811	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
7.07886290	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
7.64440972	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
9.43550211	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R137_Marcellino_&_Pietro
3.78828457	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
4.91094696	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
8.82375770	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
9.96097385	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
10.21738225	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R136_Marcellino_&_Pietro
3.63997253	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
6.24226722	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
6.58507403	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
7.72998060	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
9.63470290	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R131_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
3.60251301	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.61106942	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.91682731	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
7.51154445	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.64459369	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R125_Casale_del_Dolce
4.12417264	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
5.29698971	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
9.52042016	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
10.12414441	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
11.15687232	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R113_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
4.62101720	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
5.75598819	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
6.25346304	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.63121660	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
9.50438320	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)

---

Distance to:	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R111_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
3.94391937	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
4.63322782	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
7.72665516	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
8.05250272	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.24195365	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)

---

Distance to:	Jovialis
2.67342477	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
4.13714878	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
4.96643735	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
5.23919841	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.54637350	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)

[Jovialis]

^^Many of these C6 Romans are similar to Imperial Age Marche, 6th Century Piedmont (Italians Only) and Medieval Foggia. Also a few of them get Italian-Greeks.

[torzio]

I have just added 12 Norwegian Viking samples (I updated this post with individual samples). They are also ethnically mixed, like the other Vikings so far. Overall these 12 samples have an average closer to modern Swedes.

Target: Torziok12b Distance: 1.0953% / 1.09528753 | ADC: 0.25x RC
31.6	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
27.4	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
22.7	Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
16.9	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
1.4	Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)

Distance to:	Torziok12b
0.96235572	30.80% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) + 69.20% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.28275078	26.00% Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24) + 74.00% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.32009497	67.80% Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13) + 32.20% Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
1.32271482	38.60% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 61.40% Chernyakhiv_culture_Goths_(n=3)
1.36758056	30.40% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 69.60% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.41204789	44.60% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 55.40% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
1.42057771	30.40% Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6) + 69.60% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.42644518	64.20% Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7) + 35.80% Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
1.43970424	47.00% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 53.00% Battle-Axe_culture_(n=3)
1.47469894	23.60% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 76.40% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
1.61329492	66.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 33.60% Roman_Britain_(n=8)
1.62339551	14.60% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 85.40% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
1.63696416	54.20% Bronze_Age_Illyrians + 45.80% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
1.64679071	54.40% Bell_Beaker_Netherlands_(n=7) + 45.60% Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
1.65219103	32.00% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Britain_(n=24) + 68.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.65452907	21.20% Iron_Age_Britons_(n=4) + 78.80% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.68529846	51.80% EMBA_Greece_(n=6) + 48.20% Anglo-Saxons_(n=4)
1.69887007	51.00% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 49.00% MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4)
1.70260430	44.80% Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6) + 55.20% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.71723077	23.60% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 76.40% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.72693236	24.00% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 76.00% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.73022344	53.00% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) + 47.00% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
1.73354583	39.20% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 60.80% Chernyakhiv_culture_Goths_(n=3)
1.75877548	14.20% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 85.80% 6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
1.77260423	47.60% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 52.40% Battle-Axe_culture_(n=3)

[torzio]

Distance to:	Torzio12b
3.13482057	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
5.83890401	Villanovans_(n=2)
6.10347442	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.33524445	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.23312269	Etruscans_(n=3)
11.21687122	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
12.04986307	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
12.34738029	Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
12.73217185	Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
13.23675564	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
13.30812909	Latins_(n=4)
14.99738977	Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
15.43010693	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
15.54832467	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
17.71318718	Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
18.62196821	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
19.03681433	Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
19.17109804	Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
19.81995711	Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
20.08211891	Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
20.10456167	Western_Scythians_(n=28)
20.50580406	Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
21.16651837	Ostrogoths_(n=3)
21.37520760	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
22.20247509	Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)

[torzio]

my father results

Distance to:	Ponsan_K12b
6.01870418	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
6.39941404	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
7.90473276	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
8.28037439	Villanovans_(n=2)
8.70974741	Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
9.03701278	Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
9.62883170	Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
11.64315249	Etruscans_(n=3)
12.76489326	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
13.19541208	Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
13.63991202	Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
13.67783974	Latins_(n=4)
13.85478618	Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
15.01443972	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
15.70286280	Ostrogoths_(n=3)
16.13783753	Western_Scythians_(n=28)
16.36747690	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
17.01621873	Bell_Beaker_Bavaria/Saxony_(n=20)
17.13053122	Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
17.27221758	Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13)
17.73917416	Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
18.09489707	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
18.66592082	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
18.77717764	Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26)
18.83326313	Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)

Target: Ponsan_K12b Distance: 0.8817% / 0.88170498 | ADC: 0.25x RC
31.9	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
26.6	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
23.8	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
11.3	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
6.1	Chalcolithic_Israel
0.3	Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)

[torzio]

Distance to:	Ponsan_K12b
1.00389945	28.60% Nordic_Bronze_Age_(n=14) + 71.40% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.45187767	45.40% Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3) + 54.60% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18)
1.45751495	36.80% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 63.20% Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
1.48872393	29.40% Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12) + 70.60% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.49160073	18.80% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 81.20% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.53930914	30.80% Chalcolithic_Romania_(n=1) + 69.20% Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
1.60687324	29.20% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 70.80% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.62726510	36.40% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 63.60% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
1.63868042	37.60% Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46) + 62.40% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
1.71091353	21.40% Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35) + 78.60% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
1.74923613	64.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 36.00% Lombards_(n=28)
1.78620266	37.00% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16) + 63.00% Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
1.79260753	36.00% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=7) + 64.00% Bell_Beaker_Czechia_(n=15)
1.80683223	32.00% Iron_Age_Denmark_(n=10) + 68.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.85614823	41.00% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 59.00% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2)
1.88822466	20.40% Early_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=4) + 79.60% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
1.89556169	40.40% Bronze_Age_Germany_(n=26) + 59.60% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
1.89636899	62.80% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 37.20% Danish_Vikings_(n=21)
1.92577818	32.60% Italian_Greeks_(n=2) + 67.40% Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
1.94338611	44.60% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 55.40% EBA_Unetice_culture_(n=18)
1.97770758	44.20% Hallstatt_Celts_(n=2) + 55.80% Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
1.99647698	66.00% Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5) + 34.00% Vikings_from_England_(n=28)
2.01213238	38.20% Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=7) + 61.80% Lombards_(n=28)
2.02477552	64.60% Bell_Beaker_Czechia_(n=15) + 35.40% Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
2.02788263	37.60% Minoan_Greece_(n=10) + 62.40% Lombards_(n=28)

[Jovialis]

This sample is also extremely close to Imperial-Age_Marche_(n=2).

As well as pretty close to the Iron Age R437:

Distance to:	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean:R437_(Latin_Prenestini_T ribe_o)_Palestrina_Selicata
5.31416974	Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
6.72588284	EMBA_Greece_(n=6)
6.90958754	6th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
7.04519695	Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
8.27300429	Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
8.83409871	Mycenaean_Greece_(n=4)
10.38617832	Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
10.40333120	Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
10.92016026	Imperial-age_Latium_(East_Med_immigrants)_(n=46)
15.54221992	Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
16.33827714	Early_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=7)
16.75771763	Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
17.52457132	Bronze_Age_Sicily_(n=15)
17.57787530	Early_Neolithic_Greece_(n=3)
18.16961750	Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
18.19599956	Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
18.28769805	Bronze_Age_Illyrians
18.51004592	Etruscans_(n=3)
18.79689868	Early_Neolithic_Starcevo_culture_(n=8)
19.54934782	Villanovans_(n=2)
20.24499444	Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Anatolia_(n=8)
20.83053768	Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
21.05738825	Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hittites_(n=2)
21.74766884	LN_Lengyel_culture_(n=8)
22.59695776	Chalcolithic_North_Levant_(n=6)

These samples exist within the light-blue cohort labeled C6.

Rather than attributing it totally to Greeks, could it be possible that this is indicative of a native pre-Italic ancestry?

Could Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) be a proxy for native pre-Italic Ancestry? Or perhaps Italic tribes who are more well mixed with these pre-Italics?

[Pax Augusta]

Could Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2) be a proxy for native pre-Italic Ancestry? Or perhaps Italic tribes who are more well mixed with these pre-Italics?

The R1 Proto-VIllanovan is a Proto-Italic, a Proto-Picene most likely, a Osco-Umbrian speaker.

[torzio]

The R1 Proto-VIllanovan is a Proto-Italic, a Proto-Picene most likely, a Osco-Umbrian speaker.

A Liburnian woman......maybe a slave............in Picene lands , Liburnian colony from 1000Bc for a few hundred years ....most probably born in Liburnia


R1 sample ( female ) originates from Nis town in Liburnia


A Proto-Villanovan female from Martinsicuro in the Adriatic coast (ca. 890 BC), of mtDNA hg. U5a2b, is the earliest mainland sample available showing foreign ancestry:

Martinsicuro is a coastal site located on the border of Le Marche and Abruzzo on central Italy’s Adriatic coast. It is a proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river, dating to the late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (…) finds from the site indicate an affinity with contemporaries in the Balkans, suggesting direct trade contacts and interaction across the Adriatic. In particular, the practice of decorating ceramics with bronze elements was shared between the Nin region in Croatia and Picene region of Italy, including Martinsicuro.

The sample clusters very close to the Early Iron Age sample from Jazinka (ca. 780 BC), from the central Dalmatian onomastic region, on the east Adriatic coast opposite to Marche lands, possibly related to the south-east Dalmatian onomastic region to the south. However, there is no clear boundary between hydrotoponymic regions for the Bronze Age, and it is quite close to the (possibly Venetic-related) Liburnian onomastic region to the north, so the accounts of Martinsicuro belonging to the Liburni in proto-historical times can probably be extrapolated to the Final Bronze Age.


You need to stop trying to "marry" R1 with R1015



An Umbrian-Sabellic people born from the fusion of different elements, including the mysterious Liburnian people of the eastern shore of the Adriatic, the Picenians for a long time played a fundamental role in the development of the cultures of Central Italy, making themselves the intermediary between the Balkan and Aegean world for Italics and Etruscans, at the same time spreading valuable goods and the use of new weapons, such as the Xiphos and the Kopis. Among the first allies that Rome finds beyond the borders of Latium, the Picenians will be the same ones to start the Social War against the Romans with the massacre of Asculum, passionately claiming the right to Roman citizenship. ========================================= 16 - WHO WERE THE PICENIANS? =========================================

[Pax Augusta]

A Liburnian woman......maybe a slave............in Picene lands , Liburnian colony from 1000Bc for a few hundred years ....most probably born in Liburnia... R1 sample ( female ) originates from Nis town in Liburnia

Duh! Come on, now you want us to believe that you even figured out what her name was and what her favorite dish was. With this copy and paste what do you think you have proved? Relationships with the Liburnians are attested especially from the VIII century BC., R1 is at least two centuries earlier (930-839 BCE). Contacts between the two sides of the Adriatic are clearly even older.

Alessandro Naso, I Piceni. Storia e archeologia delle Marche in epoca preromana, Biblioteca di Archeologia 29, Milano 2000, p. 89.




If instead of giving credit to all the nonsense you read on the internet, you had spent a little of your time to read the texts of archaeology, you would know that a connection between the Adriatic coast and the Balkans has been known for years! The earliest relations between the Adriatic and the Balkans do not refer to Iron Age ethnos in the strict sense. I realize that this is not an easy concept to understand for those who are completely unfamiliar with studies.

There were several migrations from the Balkans to Italy. As there were also in the context of the Urnfield culture (and the Protovillanovan is a facies related to the Urnfield culture), and that in the ethnogenesis of the Picenes are recognized three different cultural components at least is written anywhere "At the basis of its formation was recognized the competition of different cultures, the Apennine, Protovillanovan and trans-Adriatic populations." There is no need to call into question either slaves and much less the Liburnians in a strict sense, not least because we are still in the throes of prehistory (also known as protohistory), and neither the Liburnians nor the Piceni were yet fully formed.

https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia...27Archeologia)

You need to stop trying to "marry" R1 with R1015

Do I need what? Just saying, being two women, it would be a case of same-sex marriage.

Perhaps you have not understood that Italian archaeologists have collaborated to the Stanford study who obviously know more than you, and they also know more than your amateur sources. If R1 has been labeled as Protovillanovaan there is a reason!

I'm the last one who wants to marry R1 with R105, since the latter is Villanovan, and as I have already said several times, the Protovillanovan is a "supranational" Bronze Age facies, while the Villanovan culture is an Iron Age facies exclusively Etruscan. They are called the same way because of nomeclature issues, because the Villanovan was first discovered at Villanova near Bologna around 1850, and almost 90 years later the Protovillanovan was discovered, initially thinking it was only related to the Villanovan. Later, it was realized that this was not the case, but the names were not changed.

[torzio]

Duh! Come on, now you want us to believe that you even figured out what her name was and what her favorite dish was. With this copy and paste what do you think you have proved? Relationships with the Liburnians are attested especially from the VIII century BC., R1 is at least two centuries earlier (930-839 BCE). Contacts between the two sides of the Adriatic are clearly even older.

Alessandro Naso, I Piceni. Storia e archeologia delle Marche in epoca preromana, Biblioteca di Archeologia 29, Milano 2000, p. 89.




If instead of giving credit to all the nonsense you read on the internet, you had spent a little of your time to read the texts of archaeology, you would know that a connection between the Adriatic coast and the Balkans has been known for years! The earliest relations between the Adriatic and the Balkans do not refer to Iron Age ethnos in the strict sense. I realize that this is not an easy concept to understand for those who are completely unfamiliar with studies.

There were several migrations from the Balkans to Italy. As there were also in the context of the Urnfield culture (and the Protovillanovan is a facies related to the Urnfield culture), and that in the ethnogenesis of the Picenes are recognized three different cultural components at least is written anywhere "At the basis of its formation was recognized the competition of different cultures, the Apennine, Protovillanovan and trans-Adriatic populations." There is no need to call into question either slaves and much less the Liburnians in a strict sense, not least because we are still in the throes of prehistory (also known as protohistory), and neither the Liburnians nor the Piceni were yet fully formed.

https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia...27Archeologia)




Do I need what? Just saying, being two women, it would be a case of same-sex marriage.

Perhaps you have not understood that Italian archaeologists have collaborated to the Stanford study who obviously know more than you, and they also know more than your amateur sources. If R1 has been labeled as Protovillanovaan there is a reason!

I'm the last one who wants to marry R1 with R105, since the latter is Villanovan, and as I have already said several times, the Protovillanovan is a "supranational" Bronze Age facies, while the Villanovan culture is an Iron Age facies exclusively Etruscan. They are called the same way because of nomeclature issues, because the Villanovan was first discovered at Villanova near Bologna around 1850, and almost 90 years later the Protovillanovan was discovered, initially thinking it was only related to the Villanovan. Later, it was realized that this was not the case, but the names were not changed.

we had this conversation before and last time you threw in the Vianovan to deflect the discussion

Look at current italian scholars and not one from 21 years ago

Current scenario is the liburnians settled colonies in picene lands and corfu circa 1000 BC .................they lost Corfu to the Corinthian greeks in 730BC

Archaeological finds do not show the existence of significant social and state institutions in Liburnia, which would support a political infrastructure that would enable Adriatic-domination in the early and mid-Iron Ages. Neither is there more abundant material evidence which would show strong connections between Liburnia and the central Adriatic islands, or Corcyra and Epidamnus in the southern Adriatic. It is only established, with a reasonable quantity of material evidence, that Liburnia and Picenum on the Italian coast did have close and important Iron Age connections through the islands of the Kvarner gulf. [35]A joint cultural habitus known as the Eastern Adriatic cultural koine existed in the late Bronze Age, and remains visible in the early Iron Age material record, especially in typologies of objects such as fibulae, pottery or jewellery. This koine even included parts of the Italian coast, such as Picenum. However, the unity of the Adriatic koine was increasingly diversifying into distinctive regional types; although it was still visible in the seventh and sixth century archaeological record as far as the central and southern Dalmatian coast. 


You should check Liburnian thalassocracy

or maybe adriatic history in the early iron age was a myth

https://www.academia.edu/720252/Myth...a_and_its_name

[torzio]

this site is stuffed ...............I cannot edit post .............crap for last 6 months

extent of the Liburnian dominance at a given time between 11th and 1st century BC. Domination of the Liburnian thalassocracy in the Adriatic Sea


even old wilkes had/states


The Liburni are placed by Hecataeus on the innermost part
of the Adriatic gulf. In the Periplus they dwell on the northeast
Adriatic between lllyrians and Istri, where much of the coast
is closed off from the interior by the Velcbit mountains and
screened by the islands of the Dalmatian archipelago. The
Liburnian name seems to have passed into general use from
the time when they dominated not only the entire Dalmatian



Suic 1955. Hecataeus, K'.rHist vol. i, p. 20, F93-6.



Neighbour* >•/ the Creek*



101



coasi but even foi a time held Corcyra (Corfu) from which
the) were ejected by Corinthian settlers in the eighth century.
A Liburnian maritime supremacy, or thalassocracy, recalls a
historical tradition from a time when peoples were possibly
moving across the Adriatic from east to west, from Liburnia
into Picenum and from lllyria into Messapia and Japygia. The
garbled list of places on the Liburnian coast in the Periplus
has been reconstructed to name Tarsatica (Trsat near Rijeka),
Lopsica (Sv Juraj), Scnia (Senj) and Ortopula (Stinica), all in
the northern part of historical Liburnia. The difficulty here is
that this interpretation necessitates the identification of the
river Catarbates with the Zrmanja (the ancient Tedanius) north
ol Zadar, placing the southern limit of the Liburni farther to
the north than was ever later the case. Another, and more
plausible, reconstruction lists Apsyrtae, the modern islands Crcs
and Mali Losinj in the Kvarner, Alypsoi of the later Lopsica
among the northern Liburni, and some of the major settlements
on the plain behind Zadar, including Nedinum (Nadin),
Aenona (Nin) and Jader (Zadar). In that case the Catarbates,
literally the 'steeply-falling', is the Krka, which marked the
boundary between Liburnians and Dalmatians in Hellenistic
and Roman times. Finally, a long-standing association between
the head of the Adriatic and the amber trade explains the name
Elektrides (from elektroti, the Greek word for amber) for some
islands of the Kvarner gulf, including Crcs, Krk and Mali
Losinj. The Mentores named by Hecataeus and other writers
may denote other islands, such as Rab (ancient Arba) or Pag
(Gissa). The reference to the Istrian peninsula as an island of
around 40 by 15 miles is a not uncharacteristic error of the
Periplus. 11

[Pax Augusta]

we had this conversation before and last time you threw in the Vianovan to deflect the discussion

Look at current italian scholars and not one from 21 years ago

Current scenario is the liburnians settled colonies in picene lands and corfu circa 1000 BC .................they lost Corfu to the Corinthian greeks in 730BC

Archaeological finds do not show the existence of significant social and state institutions in Liburnia, which would support a political infrastructure that would enable Adriatic-domination in the early and mid-Iron Ages. Neither is there more abundant material evidence which would show strong connections between Liburnia and the central Adriatic islands, or Corcyra and Epidamnus in the southern Adriatic. It is only established, with a reasonable quantity of material evidence, that Liburnia and Picenum on the Italian coast did have close and important Iron Age connections through the islands of the Kvarner gulf. [35]A joint cultural habitus known as the Eastern Adriatic cultural koine existed in the late Bronze Age, and remains visible in the early Iron Age material record, especially in typologies of objects such as fibulae, pottery or jewellery. This koine even included parts of the Italian coast, such as Picenum. However, the unity of the Adriatic koine was increasingly diversifying into distinctive regional types; although it was still visible in the seventh and sixth century archaeological record as far as the central and southern Dalmatian coast. 


You should check Liburnian thalassocracy

or maybe adriatic history in the early iron age was a myth

https://www.academia.edu/720252/Myth...a_and_its_name

Do you even read what you post? What would be the exact point in all your copy and paste where it's claimed that archaeology has found evidence that "the Liburnians settled colonies in Picene lands circa 1000 BC"?

[torzio]

R1 sample

Martinsicuro
Date range:930 cal BCE -839 calBCEIndividuals: R1 Martinsicurois a coastal site located on the border of Le Marche and Abruzzo on central Italy’s Adriatic coast. It is a proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river, dating to the late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age(154). Excavations at the site have been limited, but during an excavation in preparation forroad construction, a single post-built structure was excavated which contained a rich archaeological deposit of ceramics (155). These finds from the site indicate an affinity with contemporaries in the Balkans, suggesting direct trade contacts and interaction across the Adriatic. In particular, the practice of decorating ceramics with bronze elements was shared between the Nin region in Croatia and Picene region of Italy, including Martinsicuro (156). These finds also show the conservation and preservation (e.g. as artifacts) of ceramics from the earlier Middle Bronze Age into the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age.


Martinsicuro (Latin: Castrum Truentinum)^[3] is a town and comune in province of Teramo, Abruzzo, central Italy. It is located on the right of the mouth of Tronto River.
Remains of a Bronze Age (10th-9th centuries BC) settlement were found in the communal territory, on a hill overlooking the Tronto river. At the river's mouth existed Truentum, remembered by Roman writer Pliny the Elder as part of the Roman region of Picenum, and attributed to the Liburni tribe.



Liburnian onomastic region to the north, so the accounts of Martinsicuro belonging to the Liburni in proto-historical times can probably be extrapolated to the Final Bronze Age.

[Pax Augusta]

R1 sample

Martinsicuro
Date range:930 cal BCE -839 calBCEIndividuals: R1 Martinsicurois a coastal site located on the border of Le Marche and Abruzzo on central Italy’s Adriatic coast. It is a proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river, dating to the late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age(154). Excavations at the site have been limited, but during an excavation in preparation forroad construction, a single post-built structure was excavated which contained a rich archaeological deposit of ceramics (155). These finds from the site indicate an affinity with contemporaries in the Balkans, suggesting direct trade contacts and interaction across the Adriatic. In particular, the practice of decorating ceramics with bronze elements was shared between the Nin region in Croatia and Picene region of Italy, including Martinsicuro (156). These finds also show the conservation and preservation (e.g. as artifacts) of ceramics from the earlier Middle Bronze Age into the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age.

Martinsicuro (Latin: Castrum Truentinum)^[3] is a town and comune in province of Teramo, Abruzzo, central Italy. It is located on the right of the mouth of Tronto River.
Remains of a Bronze Age (10th-9th centuries BC) settlement were found in the communal territory, on a hill overlooking the Tronto river. At the river's mouth existed Truentum, remembered by Roman writer Pliny the Elder as part of the Roman region of Picenum, and attributed to the Liburni tribe.

The first is the well known paragraph from Antonio's 2019 study; the second is from Wikipedia.

Liburnian onomastic region to the north, so the accounts of Martinsicuro belonging to the Liburni in proto-historical times can probably be extrapolated to the Final Bronze Age.

This is an opinion of an amateur blogger, not an archaeological evidence.

The sources used by Antonio 2019 are as follows. Did you read them?

1) 154. T. Di Fraia, in Proceedings of the XXXVIII Scientific Meeting. Italian Institute of Prehistory and Protohistory (2005), pp. 755–765.

2) 155. D. Gatti, BAR Int. Ser. 1452, 482 (2005).


The first is a chapter in "Atti della XXXVIII Riunione scientifica: preistoria e protostoria delle Marche", published by IIPP (Istituto italiano di preistoria e protostoria), the second is a chapter published by BAR Publishing, British Archaeological Reports International series.

I was able to read the first one. Undeniably, as I've already written, contacts between the shores of the Adriatic date back to at least the second half of the Bronze Age, but it is never mentioned the possibility that remains of the Bronze Ages settlements were a colony of the Liburnians, also because the remains of the Bronze Age settlements are not located where Truentum is, but are further inland, and the text in the 2019 Antonio paper seems to imply that R1 comes from the Proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river. This settlement, according to the the archaeological excavations, has a long continuity of habitation which from the last phase of the Middle Bronze Age to the first Iron Age.

[torzio]

The first is the well known paragraph from Antonio's 2019 study; the second is from Wikipedia.




This is an opinion of an amateur blogger, not an archaeological evidence.

The sources used by Antonio 2019 are as follows. Did you read them?

1) 154. T. Di Fraia, in Proceedings of the XXXVIII Scientific Meeting. Italian Institute of Prehistory and Protohistory (2005), pp. 755–765.

2) 155. D. Gatti, BAR Int. Ser. 1452, 482 (2005).


The first is a chapter in "Atti della XXXVIII Riunione scientifica: preistoria e protostoria delle Marche", published by IIPP (Istituto italiano di preistoria e protostoria), the second is a chapter published by BAR Publishing, British Archaeological Reports International series.

I was able to read the first one. Undeniably, as I've already written, contacts between the shores of the Adriatic date back to at least the second half of the Bronze Age, but it is never mentioned the possibility that remains of the Bronze Ages settlements were a colony of the Liburnians, also because the remains of the Bronze Age settlements are not located where Truentum is, but are further inland, and the text in the 2019 Antonio paper seems to imply that R1 comes from the Proto-Villanovan village, situated on a hill above the Tronto river. This settlement, according to the the archaeological excavations, has a long continuity of habitation which from the last phase of the Middle Bronze Age to the first Iron Age.

Martinscuro - The territory was inhabited since Neolithic times, it was a town of the Liburni, a pre-Roman Italic population under the name of Trunetum, later called Castrum Truentum under the Romans, when it aquired strategic importance for the whole area.

I primi insediamenti sono stati rinvenuti sulla collina sovrastante il fiume Tronto in località Colle di Marzio, dove sono emersi resti di un insediamento dell'età del bronzo (X-IX secolo a.C.). Già nel III secolo a.C. la città è una colonia romana.
Infatti alla foce del fiume Tronto era sorto l'abitato di Truentum, ricordato da Plinio il Vecchio^[4] tra le altre colonie e cittadelle fortificate della regio V Picenum, presso il fiume omonimo, e attribuita ai Liburni. Strabone la cita come città che riprende il nome dal fiume Truentus (Τρουεντῖνος ποταμός), collocandola tra il Fanum Cupra (Cupramarittima) e Castrum Novum (Giulianova).<sup>[5]


Martinscuro, Tronto river complex, Trunetum ................all Liburnian origins from 10th century

Colonnella - Liburnian origins nearby to martinscuro formed 962 BC</sup>

[torzio]

R1 sample admixure

Target: ITA_Proto-Villanovan
Distance: 2.9920% / 0.02992024 | ADC: 0.25x
50.2 HRV_EBA .....................Ancient Pannonia/Dalmatia
19.2 Bell_Beaker_ITA
12.0 CZE_Unetice_EBA
9.2 HRV_MBA
6.0 GRC_Mycenaean
3.4 Levant_ISR_Ashkelon_IA1

Proto-Villanovans seem to be direct migrants from the Balkans, likely representing the opposite 80-20 Balkan and Native Italian split

.................................................. .................................................. ................................................
should she ( R1 ) be classified as Proto-Villanovan ?



Proto-Villanovan culture was part of the central European Urnfield culture system. Similarity has also been noted with the regional groups of Bavaria-Upper Austria^[1] and of the middle-Danube.^[1][2]

[Pax Augusta]

R1 sample admixure

Target: ITA_Proto-Villanovan
Distance: 2.9920% / 0.02992024 | ADC: 0.25x
50.2 HRV_EBA .....................Ancient Pannonia/Dalmatia
19.2 Bell_Beaker_ITA
12.0 CZE_Unetice_EBA
9.2 HRV_MBA
6.0 GRC_Mycenaean
3.4 Levant_ISR_Ashkelon_IA1

Proto-Villanovans seem to be direct migrants from the Balkans, likely representing the opposite 80-20 Balkan and Native Italian split

.................................................. .................................................. ................................................
should she ( R1 ) be classified as Proto-Villanovan ?

Proto-Villanovan culture was part of the central European Urnfield culture system. Similarity has also been noted with the regional groups of Bavaria-Upper Austria^[1] and of the middle-Danube.^[1][2]

You really can't understand that Proto-Villanovan is not an ethnicity but it is an archaeological material culture.

[Maciamo]

I have added:

- Chalcolithic Italy : closest to modern Sardinians (distance 6.1) and nobody else.

- Middle/Late Bronze Age central and north Italy (added 5 samples for a total of 9) : most similar to modern Spaniards (distance between 11 and 13 depending on the region).