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/enciclopedi...reromana-i-piceni_(Il-Mondo-dell'Archeologia)
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.