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

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.
 
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).[5]


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

Colonnella - Liburnian origins nearby to martinscuro formed 962 BC
 
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]
 
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.
 
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).
 
Distance to:Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
11.11572310Spanish_Andalusia
11.14206444Spanish_Asturias
11.31010610Spanish_Valencia
11.31709327Spanish_Aragon
11.56946412Spanish_Castilla-Leon
12.07579397Spanish_La_Rioja
12.41814801Spanish_Catalonia
12.58957505Spanish_Cantabria
12.89268009Sardinian
13.04998084Spanish_Baleares
13.19316869Spanish_Galicia
14.01243733Portuguese
14.48325585French_Corsica
14.90155361Italian_Lombardy
15.21770351Spanish_Canarias
15.35303227French_Southwest
15.82868283Italian_Liguria
16.05764654Swiss_Italian
16.53261927Italian_Emilia
16.64564508Italian_Piedmont
16.85534633Italian_Aosta_Valley
17.37253867Italian_Tuscany
17.84622929Italian_Trentino
18.19239127Spanish_Basque
18.27447947Italian_Veneto


Distance to:Chalcolithic_Italy_(n=5)
6.14823552Sardinian
25.67103231French_Corsica
27.61752704Spanish_Asturias
28.61153788Spanish_Andalusia
28.75150779Spanish_Aragon
28.80539880Spanish_La_Rioja
29.26109191Spanish_Valencia
29.42986069Spanish_Castilla-Leon
30.23435132Spanish_Cantabria
30.30649270Spanish_Basque
30.50001967Spanish_Catalonia
30.61457496Italian_Liguria
30.77912442Italian_Tuscany
30.78215555Italian_Lombardy
30.81191166Italian_Emilia
30.83891211Spanish_Galicia
31.06791271Spanish_Baleares
31.13507026French_Southwest
31.37851654Spanish_Canarias
31.38383023Portuguese
32.13037504Italian_Romagna
32.70891781Italian_Marche
32.83147118Italian_Piedmont
33.27324995Swiss_Italian
34.20907190Italian_Veneto


2z2I9FN.png
 
Distance to:Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
11.11572310Spanish_Andalusia
11.14206444Spanish_Asturias
11.31010610Spanish_Valencia
11.31709327Spanish_Aragon
11.56946412Spanish_Castilla-Leon
12.07579397Spanish_La_Rioja
12.41814801Spanish_Catalonia
12.58957505Spanish_Cantabria
12.89268009Sardinian
13.04998084Spanish_Baleares
13.19316869Spanish_Galicia
14.01243733Portuguese
14.48325585French_Corsica
14.90155361Italian_Lombardy
15.21770351Spanish_Canarias
15.35303227French_Southwest
15.82868283Italian_Liguria
16.05764654Swiss_Italian
16.53261927Italian_Emilia
16.64564508Italian_Piedmont
16.85534633Italian_Aosta_Valley
17.37253867Italian_Tuscany
17.84622929Italian_Trentino
18.19239127Spanish_Basque
18.27447947Italian_Veneto


Distance to:Chalcolithic_Italy_(n=5)
6.14823552Sardinian
25.67103231French_Corsica
27.61752704Spanish_Asturias
28.61153788Spanish_Andalusia
28.75150779Spanish_Aragon
28.80539880Spanish_La_Rioja
29.26109191Spanish_Valencia
29.42986069Spanish_Castilla-Leon
30.23435132Spanish_Cantabria
30.30649270Spanish_Basque
30.50001967Spanish_Catalonia
30.61457496Italian_Liguria
30.77912442Italian_Tuscany
30.78215555Italian_Lombardy
30.81191166Italian_Emilia
30.83891211Spanish_Galicia
31.06791271Spanish_Baleares
31.13507026French_Southwest
31.37851654Spanish_Canarias
31.38383023Portuguese
32.13037504Italian_Romagna
32.70891781Italian_Marche
32.83147118Italian_Piedmont
33.27324995Swiss_Italian
34.20907190Italian_Veneto


2z2I9FN.png

Very interesting.

The PCA presents a quite different way of looking at them.

Latins are much closer to Cucuteni (and Middle Late Bronze Age Latins plot almost right on top of them) than they are to the North Alpine steppe admixed people. Looks like Etruscans and Villanovans are much the same story.

Latins are also definitely closer to the Italian Middle Late Bronze Age samples than are the Etruscans and Villanovans, who are closer to modern Italians. (Except me, who gets up to 60% Latin on some of these. :))

What is your interpretation of that? Could it be there are no samples from the western side of Italy?

Also, where would Copper Age Italians be?

Do you by chance have the individual coordinates for the Copper and Bronze Age samples? I always think in a country like Italy with so much internal diversity, averages are not always that helpful.

Thanks in advance.
 
Distance to:Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
11.11572310Spanish_Andalusia
11.14206444Spanish_Asturias
11.31010610Spanish_Valencia
11.31709327Spanish_Aragon
11.56946412Spanish_Castilla-Leon
12.07579397Spanish_La_Rioja
12.41814801Spanish_Catalonia
12.58957505Spanish_Cantabria
12.89268009Sardinian
13.04998084Spanish_Baleares
13.19316869Spanish_Galicia
14.01243733Portuguese
14.48325585French_Corsica
14.90155361Italian_Lombardy
15.21770351Spanish_Canarias
15.35303227French_Southwest
15.82868283Italian_Liguria
16.05764654Swiss_Italian
16.53261927Italian_Emilia
16.64564508Italian_Piedmont
16.85534633Italian_Aosta_Valley
17.37253867Italian_Tuscany
17.84622929Italian_Trentino
18.19239127Spanish_Basque
18.27447947Italian_Veneto


Distance to:Chalcolithic_Italy_(n=5)
6.14823552Sardinian
25.67103231French_Corsica
27.61752704Spanish_Asturias
28.61153788Spanish_Andalusia
28.75150779Spanish_Aragon
28.80539880Spanish_La_Rioja
29.26109191Spanish_Valencia
29.42986069Spanish_Castilla-Leon
30.23435132Spanish_Cantabria
30.30649270Spanish_Basque
30.50001967Spanish_Catalonia
30.61457496Italian_Liguria
30.77912442Italian_Tuscany
30.78215555Italian_Lombardy
30.81191166Italian_Emilia
30.83891211Spanish_Galicia
31.06791271Spanish_Baleares
31.13507026French_Southwest
31.37851654Spanish_Canarias
31.38383023Portuguese
32.13037504Italian_Romagna
32.70891781Italian_Marche
32.83147118Italian_Piedmont
33.27324995Swiss_Italian
34.20907190Italian_Veneto


2z2I9FN.png
Is the dot for Bronze Age Illyrian halfway between Liguria and Piedmont or halfway between Liguria and Veneto?
Thanks.
 
Distance to:
Duarte
6.17150711Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
6.71266713Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
10.86048341Etruscans_(n=3)
11.27186764Latins_(n=4)
12.12435978Villanovans_(n=2)
13.33091895Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
14.03098001Bronze_Age_Illyrians
14.05696980Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
14.07130058Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
14.52055095Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
14.84792915Early_Bronze_Age_Iberia_(n=7)
15.048843816th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
15.13849068Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
15.21667178Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
15.30209790Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
15.31625933Iron_Age_Iberia_(n=22)
16.25126149Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Spain_(n=38)
16.54298643Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
16.76632041Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
17.46561765Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
17.48110694Middle_Bronze_Age_Portugal_(n=4)
18.85846229Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
18.93396947Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13)
20.69150309Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
20.72670500Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)

Some modeling including the two newest populations added to the data

Target: Duarte
Distance: 5.2625% / 5.26246695 | ADC: 0.25x RC
76.7Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
11.4Yamna_culture_(n=16)
6.9Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)
5.0Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21)

Target: Duarte
Distance: 4.8891% / 4.88909259
58.2Chalcolithic_Italy_(n=5)
19.1Mesolithic_West_Europeans_(WHG)_(n=21)
16.5Yamna_culture_(n=16)
6.2Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)

Some modelings with all updated data, post #2


Target: Duarte
Distance: 1.4792% / 1.47915960
52.5CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
19.9Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
9.8Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
8.9Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
7.2Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)
1.7Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)

Target: Duarte
Distance: 1.7095% / 1.70947003 | R6P | ADC: 0.25x RC
56.9CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
21.2Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
11.8Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
8.8Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)
1.3Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)


Target: Duarte
Distance: 2.0215% / 2.02148464 | R6P | ADC: 0.25x RC
31.1CA_Remedello_culture_(n=3)
28.1Latins_(n=4)
15.5Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
13.2Neolithic_Latvia_(n=4)
6.3Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_Iran_(n=6)
5.8Epipaleolithic_Magreb_(Iberomaurusians)_(n=5)


 
Last edited:
Very interesting.

Do you by chance have the individual coordinates for the Copper and Bronze Age samples? I always think in a country like Italy with so much internal diversity, averages are not always that helpful.

Thanks in advance.

Hi Angela
Produced by Jovialis and Salento in
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...-the-arrival-of-Steppe-related-ancestry/page4

utigBRC002,0.87,0,1.36,0,45.47,25.27,2.32,0,4.39,0,18.99,1.33
utigBRC007_019,3.5,0,1.75,0.58,48.28,18.96,0,0,9.11,0.52,16.2,1.1
utigBRC010_018,0,0,5.13,0.5,47.79,19.51,0,0,7.86,0,18.69,0.51
utigBRC011,0,0,0,0,37.8,0,0,0,42.9,0,19.29,0
utigBRC012,0,15.45,0,0,40.8,0,0,0,43.74,0,0,0
utigBRC013,0,0,6.28,0,57.75,0,0,0,6.97,0,29,0
utigBRC022,0,0,0,0.94,62.87,3.14,0,0,10.14,0,22.91,0
utigBRC024,0,0,0,0,52.32,30.37,0,5.35,0,0,10.84,1.12
utigGCP003A1,7.58,1.55,0.86,0,49.29,22.95,0,0,4.32,0,13.45,0
utigGCP004A1,22.15,0,0,0,37.5,23.7,6.64,0,10.01,0,0,0
utigGLR002A1,0,0,6.65,0,63.81,1.89,0,0,5.79,0,21.86,0
utigGLR003B1,0,0,9.49,4.97,65.66,0,0,0,0,0,17.94,1.93
utigLSC007A1,0,0,0,0,95.95,0,0,0.6,3.45,0,0,0
utigLSC011A1,0,0,8.94,0,53.32,7.47,0,0,14.31,0,15.96,0
utigLSC012A1,0,0,0,0,97.48,0,0,0,0,2.52,0,0
BRC003_Dodecad_K12b,1.48,0.00,2.35,1.33,46.70,24.27,0.00,0.00,5.74,0.00,17.40,0.74
GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b,2.18,0.00,3.15,3.26,44.50,29.77,0.00,0.00,5.27,0.00,11.87,0.00
GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b,0.00,1.77,4.40,0.00,58.27,5.15,0.00,0.00,11.05,0.22,17.72,1.41
LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,62.94,2.45,0.00,0.00,6.28,0.00,26.23,2.11

OCOoFfs.png


Mine

Distance to:
Duarte
9.78898360BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
10.11679297GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
10.54973459utigGCP003A1
10.87721012utigBRC002
11.62877896utigBRC007_019
12.25319550utigBRC010_018
16.38538678utigBRC024
23.68935415utigLSC011A1
24.67529736utigGCP004A1
26.71058966GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b
32.59964570utigBRC022
32.60495208utigGLR002A1
33.24604187utigBRC013
33.49170942LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b
34.51189070utigGLR003B1
47.24747189utigBRC011
51.41298863utigBRC012
60.74051119utigLSC007A1
62.26290790utigLSC012A1
Distance to:Duarte
7.5312638221.00% utigGCP004A1 + 79.00% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
8.1120204076.20% utigBRC002 + 23.80% utigGCP004A1
8.3149991872.00% utigBRC010_018 + 28.00% utigGCP004A1
8.5446618240.80% utigBRC007_019 + 59.20% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7294016813.80% utigBRC013 + 86.20% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7512568846.20% utigGCP003A1 + 53.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7582739837.20% utigBRC010_018 + 62.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.8489683218.20% utigLSC011A1 + 81.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.9343688612.40% utigGLR003B1 + 87.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0051843184.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b + 15.40% GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0063294454.60% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b + 45.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0924684312.40% utigGLR002A1 + 87.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.2133662488.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b + 11.40% LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b
9.2278693039.00% utigGCP003A1 + 61.00% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.2641113441.60% utigBRC002 + 58.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.3511713514.40% utigGCP004A1 + 85.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.3975468046.60% utigBRC002 + 53.40% utigGCP003A1
9.4480505510.40% utigBRC022 + 89.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.655729736.20% utigBRC011 + 93.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.7317552135.40% utigBRC010_018 + 64.60% utigGCP003A1
9.763785091.40% utigBRC012 + 98.60% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.765446119.80% utigBRC007_019 + 90.20% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.781482422.80% utigBRC024 + 97.20% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.849461614.40% utigBRC012 + 95.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
10.071685771.60% utigLSC007A1 + 98.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b






 
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).


Target: Torziok12b
Distance: 0.2302% / 0.23020826
19.9Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture_(n=4)
18.0MBA_Sintashta_culture_(n=4)
8.0Early_Medieval_Czechs_(n=2)
7.9Iron_Age_Armenia_(n=7)
7.4Early_Neolithic_France_(n=4)
6.2Middle-Late_Bronze_Age_Hungary_(n=12)
4.4Minoan_Greece_(n=10)
4.1Chalcolithic_Bulgaria_(n=9)
3.1Chalcolithic_Anatolia_(n=35)
2.7Early_Neolithic_Italy_(n=10)
2.7Italian_Greeks_(n=2)
2.7Middle_Bronze_Age_Anatolia_(n=2)
2.5Bell_Beaker_Czechia_(n=15)
2.3Mesolithic_Anatolia_(AHG)_(n=1)
2.1Epipaleolithic_Mesolithic_Caucasus_(CHG)_(n=2)
1.9Neolithic_Lithuania_Narva_culture_(n=4)
1.1CA_Afanasievo_culture_(n=5)
1.1Late_Bronze_Age_North_Caucasus_(n=4)
0.8Globular_Amphora_culture_(n=6)
0.7Late_Bronze_Age_Israel_(n=3)
0.4Chalcolithic_Northwest_Caucasus_(n=3)



Target: Torziok12b
Distance: 1.0953% / 1.09528753 | ADC: 0.25x RC
33.0
Bronze_Age_Illyrians
27.4Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
22.7Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
16.96th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)


Distance to:Torziok12b
5.32530750
Bronze_Age_Illyrians
6.198870866th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_&_Lombards)_(n=24)
6.46840011Late_Medieval_Latium_(n=16)
7.93611996Villanovans_(n=2)
8.83276287Bell_Beaker_Hungary_(n=6)
9.58380926Medieval_Catalonia_Valencia_(n=9)
9.76980041Roman_&_Visigothic_Iberia_(n=31)
11.45072923Etruscans_(n=3)
11.79564750Early_Medieval_Latium_(n=5)
13.59802927Late_Antiquity_Latium_(n=24)
13.72095113Latins_(n=4)
14.38534671Middle_Bronze_Age_North_Alps_(n=7)
14.46272104Bell_Beaker_Poland_(n=6)
14.51663529Gauls_Belgae_(n=16)
15.18951941Medieval_Foggia_Apulia_(n=5)
15.64978594Western_Scythians_(n=28)
16.26212471Ostrogoths_(n=3)
17.553916946th-century_Piedmont_(Italians_only)_(n=7)
17.79364774Medieval_Andalusia_(n=14)
17.83940302Bell_Beaker_Bavaria/Saxony_(n=20)
18.06710824Imperial-age_Marche_(n=2)
18.08538360Early_Bronze_Age_Swabia_(n=24)
18.27350267Bell_Beaker_Gaul_(n=13)
18.80015160Early_Bronze_Age_Southern_France_(n=5)
19.50209220Middle_Late_Bronze_Age_Italy_(n=9)
 
You really can't understand that Proto-Villanovan is not an ethnicity but it is an archaeological material culture.

you need to read all of it and see what I noted at the bottom
 
Hi Angela
Produced by Jovialis and Salento in
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...-the-arrival-of-Steppe-related-ancestry/page4

utigBRC002,0.87,0,1.36,0,45.47,25.27,2.32,0,4.39,0,18.99,1.33
utigBRC007_019,3.5,0,1.75,0.58,48.28,18.96,0,0,9.11,0.52,16.2,1.1
utigBRC010_018,0,0,5.13,0.5,47.79,19.51,0,0,7.86,0,18.69,0.51
utigBRC011,0,0,0,0,37.8,0,0,0,42.9,0,19.29,0
utigBRC012,0,15.45,0,0,40.8,0,0,0,43.74,0,0,0
utigBRC013,0,0,6.28,0,57.75,0,0,0,6.97,0,29,0
utigBRC022,0,0,0,0.94,62.87,3.14,0,0,10.14,0,22.91,0
utigBRC024,0,0,0,0,52.32,30.37,0,5.35,0,0,10.84,1.12
utigGCP003A1,7.58,1.55,0.86,0,49.29,22.95,0,0,4.32,0,13.45,0
utigGCP004A1,22.15,0,0,0,37.5,23.7,6.64,0,10.01,0,0,0
utigGLR002A1,0,0,6.65,0,63.81,1.89,0,0,5.79,0,21.86,0
utigGLR003B1,0,0,9.49,4.97,65.66,0,0,0,0,0,17.94,1.93
utigLSC007A1,0,0,0,0,95.95,0,0,0.6,3.45,0,0,0
utigLSC011A1,0,0,8.94,0,53.32,7.47,0,0,14.31,0,15.96,0
utigLSC012A1,0,0,0,0,97.48,0,0,0,0,2.52,0,0
BRC003_Dodecad_K12b,1.48,0.00,2.35,1.33,46.70,24.27,0.00,0.00,5.74,0.00,17.40,0.74
GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b,2.18,0.00,3.15,3.26,44.50,29.77,0.00,0.00,5.27,0.00,11.87,0.00
GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b,0.00,1.77,4.40,0.00,58.27,5.15,0.00,0.00,11.05,0.22,17.72,1.41
LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,62.94,2.45,0.00,0.00,6.28,0.00,26.23,2.11

OCOoFfs.png


Mine

Distance to:
Duarte
9.78898360BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
10.11679297GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
10.54973459utigGCP003A1
10.87721012utigBRC002
11.62877896utigBRC007_019
12.25319550utigBRC010_018
16.38538678utigBRC024
23.68935415utigLSC011A1
24.67529736utigGCP004A1
26.71058966GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b
32.59964570utigBRC022
32.60495208utigGLR002A1
33.24604187utigBRC013
33.49170942LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b
34.51189070utigGLR003B1
47.24747189utigBRC011
51.41298863utigBRC012
60.74051119utigLSC007A1
62.26290790utigLSC012A1
Distance to:Duarte
7.5312638221.00% utigGCP004A1 + 79.00% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
8.1120204076.20% utigBRC002 + 23.80% utigGCP004A1
8.3149991872.00% utigBRC010_018 + 28.00% utigGCP004A1
8.5446618240.80% utigBRC007_019 + 59.20% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7294016813.80% utigBRC013 + 86.20% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7512568846.20% utigGCP003A1 + 53.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.7582739837.20% utigBRC010_018 + 62.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.8489683218.20% utigLSC011A1 + 81.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
8.9343688612.40% utigGLR003B1 + 87.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0051843184.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b + 15.40% GLR001A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0063294454.60% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b + 45.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.0924684312.40% utigGLR002A1 + 87.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.2133662488.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b + 11.40% LSC002_004_Dodecad_K12b
9.2278693039.00% utigGCP003A1 + 61.00% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.2641113441.60% utigBRC002 + 58.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.3511713514.40% utigGCP004A1 + 85.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.3975468046.60% utigBRC002 + 53.40% utigGCP003A1
9.4480505510.40% utigBRC022 + 89.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.655729736.20% utigBRC011 + 93.80% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
9.7317552135.40% utigBRC010_018 + 64.60% utigGCP003A1
9.763785091.40% utigBRC012 + 98.60% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.765446119.80% utigBRC007_019 + 90.20% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.781482422.80% utigBRC024 + 97.20% BRC003_Dodecad_K12b
9.849461614.40% utigBRC012 + 95.60% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b
10.071685771.60% utigLSC007A1 + 98.40% GCP002A1_Dodecad_K12b






Thanks so much, Duarte; you're always a gentleman to me, like Jovialis. :)

I'll run them.
 
I don't really believe these things, but this would make my father proud. :) He was completely convinced we were 100% Latins, so a little off, but still...

yHauyDR.png


Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Anatolia was nothing to sneeze at it either; founts of civilization both. Just miss the Greeks.
 
Very interesting.

The PCA presents a quite different way of looking at them.

Latins are much closer to Cucuteni (and Middle Late Bronze Age Latins plot almost right on top of them) than they are to the North Alpine steppe admixed people. Looks like Etruscans and Villanovans are much the same story.

Latins are also definitely closer to the Italian Middle Late Bronze Age samples than are the Etruscans and Villanovans, who are closer to modern Italians. (Except me, who gets up to 60% Latin on some of these. :))

What is your interpretation of that? Could it be there are no samples from the western side of Italy?

The Bronze Age samples are still too few to go into that much detail, in my opinion. For example, the two samples (Middle Bronze Age ca. 1400-1200 BC?) from Olmo di Nogara (Verona) - from a previous paper - have most likely less Steppe than the ones with Steppe from Broion and Regina Margherita who are older.

For the Iron Age samples, it is true that there seems to be some difference between Latins and Etruscans, as if the Latins had a few more percentage points of WHG. But it must be considered that the average for the Latins is based on 4 out of 6, the two outliers are excluded and have been labeled Italian_Greeks. While the Etruscan average is based on all three of those from the Orientalizing phase and also includes the Etruscan outlier. While Villanovan average includes the Villanovan (which is simply an Etruscan) and the Proto-Villanovan which is a Proto-Picene, not a Proto-Etruscan.

Putting all eleven Iron Age samples in the PCA, we see that three Latins and two Etruscans are actually very similar: Latins R1016, R1021, R851, Etruscan R473, Villanovan (Etruscan) R1015. The Latin R435 is the one that goes more in the direction of south of France and Spain, while the ones that are really most similar to the Italians are the Etruscan R474 and the Proto-Villanovan R1, because they have less WHG (but compensated with higher Steppe values)

LDFaSSH.jpg



the outliers

wgGwsyU.jpg



Also, where would Copper Age Italians be?

Do you by chance have the individual coordinates for the Copper and Bronze Age samples? I always think in a country like Italy with so much internal diversity, averages are not always that helpful.

Thanks in advance.


I will look up the individual coordinates for the Copper and Bronze Age and put them into the PCA.
 
Halfway between Liguria and Veneto/Piedmont.


Pl0nka7.png

I find it interesting that the Bronze Age Illyrian sample is so North Shifted. Albeit it is in line with my worldview of the time.
 
I find it interesting that the Bronze Age Illyrian sample is so North Shifted. Albeit it is in line with my worldview of the time.

ps: Pax your PCA work and analysis is a great resource.

Edit: meant to click edit post on my last one and somehow clicked reply.
 
The Bronze Age samples are still too few to go into that much detail, in my opinion. For example, the two samples (Middle Bronze Age ca. 1400-1200 BC?) from Olmo di Nogara (Verona) - from a previous paper - have most likely less Steppe than the ones with Steppe from Broion and Regina Margherita who are older.

For the Iron Age samples, it is true that there seems to be some difference between Latins and Etruscans, as if the Latins had a few more percentage points of WHG. But it must be considered that the average for the Latins is based on 4 out of 6, the two outliers are excluded and have been labeled Italian_Greeks. While the Etruscan average is based on all three of those from the Orientalizing phase and also includes the Etruscan outlier. While Villanovan average includes the Villanovan (which is simply an Etruscan) and the Proto-Villanovan which is a Proto-Picene, not a Proto-Etruscan.

Putting all eleven Iron Age samples in the PCA, we see that three Latins and two Etruscans are actually very similar: Latins R1016, R1021, R851, Etruscan R473, Villanovan (Etruscan) R1015. The Latin R435 is the one that goes more in the direction of south of France and Spain, while the ones that are really most similar to the Italians are the Etruscan R474 and the Proto-Villanovan R1, because they have less WHG (but compensated with higher Steppe values)

LDFaSSH.jpg



the outliers

wgGwsyU.jpg






I will look up the individual coordinates for the Copper and Bronze Age and put them into the PCA.

I'm out of juice but it's an excellent post. I guess I forgot my own warning that how you label a sample, into which group you put it, and using averages can give different results.
 

This thread has been viewed 143744 times.

Back
Top