Genomes from 82 Etruscans and Southern Italians.(800 BCE – 1,000 CE).

[Mmiikkii]

This sounds like baloney.
How the hell is ancient italian etruscan scoring half english?

It's 3 specific Etruscans, out of 48.
There's always someone blonde, with blue eyes... With recent Northern ancestry.

[Wanderer]

It's 3 specific Etruscans, out of 48.
There's always someone blonde, with blue eyes... With recent Northern ancestry.

What the hell that has to do with scoring "english" ancestry.

Why not finnish then or danish? Why "English"

And if they had northern ancestry it would make more sense that it was baltic ancestry than english.

[Mmiikkii]

What the hell that has to do with scoring "english" ancestry.

Why not finnish then or danish? Why "English"

And if they had northern ancestry it would make more sense that it was baltic ancestry than english.

When I say northern I mean Northern European, which is German, French, Irish, English, Swedish, Finnish...
But it's just a model of ancestries. This isn't exact a lot of times, it's just a proxy.

[Jovialis]

There's an interesting conclussion if we combine the 4% European for C7 of your picture and mine. C7 is likely to only describe the 4 Celtic/Germanic outliers in 'Imperial'.
There's no way that could include all that minority that clusters like today's Northeners and Tuscans(which is kind of arbitrary the classification).
But that being the case, that must mean that in the Middle Ages(maybe into the Renaissance), those "French and Germans" must reach 40% in the city of Rome(because C7 reaches 40%).
That's outstanding for C. Italy.

Etruscan and Latini are considered C7 because of haplotype sharing, but they exist between Iberians and Northern Italians on a PCA. They were predominately Anatolia_N, with about a quarter Steppe ancestry; as well as elevated WHG from a resurgence of that population in the central Italian copper age.

I am curious if this WHG resurgence just effected certain parts of Italy, while others remained more consistent, or even received elevated CHG like we see in the south today, from later intermediary farmers. But of course we need to sample the aDNA from more areas to see.

The rest of the C7 samples are from north of the Alps in later eras.

[Mmiikkii]

Etruscan and Latini had elevated WHG from a resurgence of that population in the central Italian copper age.

I suspect that this population survived and had more relevance in Etruscans than in Latins.

I say were WHG rather than only EEF, I also made a post about a higher rate of I2 to G2 in Basques, and I postulated that Paleolithic culture is relevant in Europe.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...G-or-Neolithic

[Angela]

I suspect that this population survived and had more relevance in Etruscans than in Latins.
I say were WHG rather than only EEF, I also made a post about a higher rate of I2 to G2 in Basques, and I postulated that Paleolithic culture is relevant in Europe.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...G-or-Neolithic

Here's an idea for you: how about you read the papers and see how much WHG there is in Etruscans before you go building all these "theories".

[Jovialis]

the paper has some flaws .............Venosa was never etruscan...it was Lucanian ( an off branch of the umbri )...it was then taken by the Samnites ( another off branch of the Umbri ) until it finally fell to the Romans in the 3rd Samnite-Roman war
Lombards and Ostrogoths came in AD times ..............by this time all of the italian peninsula was Roman..............by these times, we have no clue who was originally southern italian

I agree that we need samples of tribes from all over Italy to appropriately know the trajectory of the genetics of the peninsula. It doesn't make much sense to models the South with Etruscans, considering all of the other contemporaneous people who would be more appropriate. As well as those that came before them.

[Poxy]

I hope that the Magna Graecia paper will be published soon. Waiting is always painful.

[MOESAN]

@Jovialis
Thanks for the maps.
Even if all these "tribes" of Italy were not always so different one from another, it shows that we need very more detailed anDNA before making too arbitrary statements. BTW some groups of same origin before moves absorbed different substrata in their new settlements in history. Etruscan and Roman "label" covered a lot of diverse situations genetically speaking, even more during the Empire.
I'm wondering if the Etruscan language should not have been adopted as cement language by an Urnfield "leader" culture of Central Europe (Hungary at first and then Western lands on their road to Italy and Alps?) which had agglomerated diverse margins ethnies of too diverse languages. But to say that I need very more numerous Y-haplos and auDNA of Etruscans at their beginning.

[Mmiikkii]

Here's an idea for you: how about you read the papers and see how much WHG there is in Etruscans before you go building all these "theories".

There's basically the same amount in all of them.

[Angela]

There's basically the same amount in all of them.

That wasn't what I asked you to look up. I asked you to look up the amount before you bother people with half baked "theories".

[Kenshiro]

Now this is very interesting to me. ETR001 clusters with C6, and is closest to the so-called Latin-outlier R437 from the Iron Age.
She was a Mediterranean, not an eastern Mediterranean.

Distance to:	ETR001
3.08917465	C6_Iron_Age_Mediterranean:R437_(Latin_Prenestini_T ribe)_Palestrina_Selicata
3.12755496	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R52_Villa_Magna
4.03565360	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R131_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
4.13444071	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R113_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
4.93768164	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R117_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
5.00859262	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R56_Villa_Magna
5.05356310	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R118_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
5.56285898	C5_Late_Antiquity_Eastern_Mediterranean:R122_S_Erc olano_Necropolis_Ostia
6.02139519	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R836_Civitanova_Marche
6.29034975	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R47_Centocelle_Necropoli s
6.51112126	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R49_Centocelle_Necropoli s
6.52214689	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R835_Civitanova_Marche
6.66137373	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1290_Villa_Magna
6.98725983	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R35_Celio
7.02551777	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R973_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cian ti
7.25305453	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R65_Villa_Magna
7.88702098	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R64_Villa_Magna
7.93834366	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R969_Tivoli_Palazzo_Cian ti
8.01208462	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R54_Villa_Magna
8.17496789	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R1283_Cancelleria
8.30575704	C6_Late_Antiquity_Mediterranean:R120_S_Ercolano_Ne cropolis_Ostia
8.45656550	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R57_Villa_Magna
8.47171765	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R111_Via_Paisiello_Necro polis
8.53086748	C6_Medieval_Mediterranean:R59_Villa_Magna
8.58506261	C6_Imperial_Mediterranean:R137_Marcellino_&_Pietro

IMG_20221208_110341.jpg
IMG_20221208_110219.jpg
IMG_20221208_110143.jpg
IMG_20221208_105959.jpg
IMG_20221208_105914.jpg
Look cool, this is my results with ancient dna analyser from Eupedia, dodecad k12