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

I frequently read that Etruscan culture sprung from villanovan, which itself was part of the Urnfield. However I also read that Italic culture sprung from Villanovan. Can both be correct?

You're confusing Villanovan, Iron Age Etruscan material culture, with the Proto-Villanovan, Bronze Age material culture. It's latter to be in common with the ancestors of many peoples of pre-Roman Italy, but not only those Italic, even the Veneti and the Etruscans for example.

I've already explained that "Proto-Villanovan is not ancestral only to Villanovan/Etruscans, but to almost anyone in Italy. Really complicated to explain. Proto-Villanovan and Villanovan are named after the place of the first Villanovan discovery (Villanova, near Bologna, mid-1800s) and then in the 1930s archeologists also discovered the Bronze Age Proto-Villanovan which they initially thought was only ancestral to the Villanovan. Later they discovered that it was not so, but the name has not yet been changed. "
 
So EV13 did spread in Balkans during the LBA/EIA.

Evidence points towards that. We do have plenty of pre EIA, BA samples from Bulgaria, MBA is not ideally covered, but one sample is also non V13 and it represents a strong Bulgarian MBA culture, albeit in MBA Bulgaria there was a bit of cultural hiatus between the EBA and LBA. Then in EIA the picture is totally different. And when we know Pshenichevo culture originates in modern NE Serbia/SW Romania region, its clear it came from there.

I'm starting to believe that in Greece EV13 was one of the main haplogroups carried by Dorians

Well it seems some Polish (and Russian??) sources claim Garla-Mare culture was proto-Dorian related while its mother culture Enctrusted Wave pottery was proto-Greek related.. Gimbutas claimed non-IE, Serbian archeologists usually Mysian. Ultimately they stem from Vučedol. Vučedol was considered by some long ago as being potentially proto-Greek. Proto-Greek R-Z2103 should be derived of Vučedol, Bulgarian, or those NE Hungarian Yamnaya groups.
 
Evidence points towards that. We do have plenty of pre EIA, BA samples from Bulgaria, MBA is not ideally covered, but one sample is also non V13 and it represents a strong Bulgarian MBA culture, albeit in MBA Bulgaria there was a bit of cultural hiatus between the EBA and LBA. Then in EIA the picture is totally different. And when we know Pshenichevo culture originates in modern NE Serbia/SW Romania region, its clear it came from there.
Well it seems some Polish (and Russian??) sources claim Garla-Mare culture was proto-Dorian related while its mother culture Enctrusted Wave pottery was proto-Greek related.. Gimbutas claimed non-IE, Serbian archeologists usually Mysian. Ultimately they stem from Vučedol. Vučedol was considered by some long ago as being potentially proto-Greek. Proto-Greek R-Z2103 should be derived of Vučedol, Bulgarian, or those NE Hungarian Yamnaya groups.
Thanks for the replie. Do you have any information on how Iron and roman empire age Balkanites and Greeks are going to turn out??
 
We have a Greek trader of the Roman period whose remains are pretty similar to Mycenaeans. There's no way of knowing if he came from the mainland or the islands, and anyway, one sample is not enough.

We need to wait for more data.
 
We have a Greek trader of the Roman period whose remains are pretty similar to Mycenaeans. There's no way of knowing if he came from the mainland or the islands, and anyway, one sample is not enough.

We need to wait for more data.
I'm aware of the existence of this sample it is just i can't wait for upcoming samples from southeast Europe which are rumored to be heterogenous, some having more steppe and others are going to be anatolian like we just have to wait I guess
 
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.19.256412v1
A Hungarian study. Female but she closely clusters autosomally with earlier Hungarian "Scythians", at whose two sites Gava urns were found (and I found that in some Hungarian archeological sources). So Hungarian Scythians were direct descendants of the Gava culture people as I have predicted some months before this new study. One Hungarian Scythian was R-YP340. Ottomany culture sample from the study is R-Z280. Gava developed on the Ottomany basis in good part.



Upcoming Bulgarian study shows two samples of Pšeničevo culture are E-V13. 15 year old sample of the same culture shows the same. Pšeničevo is ultimately derived of Girla Mare/Dubovac. This culture is considered by the archeologists to have been non-IE. Having 3 out of 3 finds from two sites belong to the same hg shows its strong relation to it.

Pšeničevo was Thracian ofc but in the previous stage it is known Gava people merged with Girla Mare people.



Material cultures can be and are in great many cases directly associated with different linguistic and genetic makeup. Otherwise Yamnaya or the EEF's would not have been so uniform...

I am talking of proto-Villanovan culture. Proto-Villanovan urns were very similar to Gava urns..



Per some old sources Raetic speakers were migrants from the South. Also remember that in the Balkans existed the Lemnian language. I know some of your have dismissed them as Etruscan traders but in the light of new finds connecting the E-V13 demographic expansion with Girla Mare, the fact that E-V13 is a Neolithic hg stemming from Western Balkans, as well as the nature of Girla Mare cultures, such views must be taken with great reserve.

I do not want this discussion to descend into petty nationalism where some members of modern day X, Y, Z ethnicities consider certain old cultures as part of their own identity and that therefore they must originate within the territory of the X, Y, Z ethnicity, as ofc its modern descendants are legitimate heirs and for some culture to have originated elsewhere is an affront to the "modern national unity and cohesion".. It cannot be an affront, there are no modern Etruscans speakers anymore and only Etruscan speakers would have a right to bring such an argument to the table.

The last time I talked about this it did have such undertones..

[h=2]Transmission of the alphabet to and within Italy[/h]

https://www.univie.ac.at/raetica/wiki/Script
 
This paper seems very contradicting. Like linking E-V13 with Proto-Celtic, Tumulus Culture and Urnfield with Tyrsenian languages.
I havn't read completely; seems to me a bit aventurous.

Of course, I agree with you, it's very very adventurous and contradicting.

I posted this not because I believe the conclusions are accurate, but because it is an excellent example of what kind of very far-fetched conclusions can arise when trying to match historical, archaeological, and genetic data at all costs.
 
ENA uploaded the mtdna : ( lest hope for y dna soon ):unsure:
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB42866?show=reads

a user in anthrogenica teepean47 anlaysed the bam files (y)
and here are
the ancient mtdna types:


CAM001 (A73G! 89.8% -0 +5): H3-a
CAM002 (G14364A 94.0% -0 +3): H18
CAM003 (C16261T 95.3% -0 +3): J2a1a1
CSN001 (G3010A 92.0% -0 +4): H1
CSN002 (T7028C 91.8% -0 +4): H
CSN003 (C146T 88.7% -0 +6): H1n-c
CSN004 (T226C 98.0% -0 +1): X2b-a
CSN005 (C194T 96.2% -0 +2): H2a1r
CSN006 (A188G 93.2% -0 +4): J1c2
CSN007 (T16189C! 86.5% -0 +7): H3-c
CSN008 (A16265G 88.7% -0 +6): H7c1
CSN009 (T7028C 89.8% -0 +5): H
CSN010 (T195C! 82.0% -0 +9): HV0-a
CSN012 (T961C 82.5% -2 +4): U4a1a
CSN013 (C14365T 87.7% -0 +7): H4a1
ETR001 (T16325C 91.0% -0 +6): T1a8a
ETR003 (T195C! 84.8% -0 +7): HV0-a
ETR004 (T16311C! 93.6% -0 +3): HV-b
ETR005 (T16298C 89.6% -0 +5): HV0
ETR006 (T7028C 89.8% -0 +5): H
ETR007 (A11821G 88.9% -0 +7): J1c15c
ETR010 (T16304C 90.4% -0 +5): H5
ETR012 (C12061T 96.1% -0 +2): HV2a
ETR013 (C14653T 90.0% -0 +6): J1c18
ETR014 (T292C 86.5% -0 +7): H130
ETR015 (G2706A 93.9% -0 +3): HV-a1a
ETR016 (G14323A 82.5% -1 +8): R2b
MAG001 (A1888G! 98.4% -0 +1): T2b14a
MAS001 (T16172C 95.2% -0 +3): T2h2
MAS002 (A249G 86.8% -1 +4): H74a
MAS003 (G13759A 96.6% -0 +2): K1b2a1
MAS004 (T15940C 68.9% -2 +13): R1b
POP001 (C14365T 90.7% -0 +5): H4a1
PRZ001 (G9196A 91.7% -0 +5): U5b3b
PRZ002 (C16320A 87.0% -0 +7): H1cu
TAQ001 (T16296C! 87.5% -1 +5): T2e3a
TAQ002 (T7028C 90.0% -0 +5): H
TAQ003 (C64T 91.2% -0 +5): X2n1
TAQ004 (T152C! 90.0% -0 +5): H3-b
TAQ005 (A14605G 90.8% -1 +3): T2d2a
TAQ006 (A16038G 93.8% -0 +3): HV22
TAQ007 (G16129A! 84.9% -0 +8): H-c
TAQ008 (T195C! 86.3% -0 +7): HV0-a
TAQ009 (A9254G 92.1% -0 +5): T1b2
TAQ010 (T13326C 89.3% -0 +6): H13a1a1
TAQ011 (C7858T 92.0% -0 +4): L2a1c3a
TAQ012 (G3010A 88.0% -0 +6): H1
TAQ013 (T6719C 92.7% -0 +4): U5a1a2a
TAQ015 (C15175T 94.3% -0 +3): H5a7
TAQ016 (A16240G 89.1% -0 +6): H1bz
TAQ017 (T16296C! 86.4% -1 +6): T2e3a
TAQ018 (T16325C 98.1% -0 +1): W6
TAQ019 (C13934T 93.2% -0 +4): J1c3
TAQ020 (C14149T 90.6% -0 +5): H44a
TAQ021 (T11776C 75.5% -0 +12): X1e
TAQ022 (T152C! 97.8% -0 +1): H3-b
TAQ023 (T10031C 88.1% -1 +4): U5b2a3
TAQ024 (T16296C! 89.1% -1 +4): T2e3a
UDC_P (T195C! 95.8% -0 +2): HV0-a
VEN001 (A11128G 87.9% -0 +7): N3a
VEN002 (A14274G 78.8% -1 +11): U5a1c3a
VEN005 (T16311C! 85.2% -0 +8): HV0-a4
VEN006 (A8701G! 85.9% -1 +6): T1a26a
VEN008 (C16278T! 80.8% -1 +7): H1-b
VEN009 (C16355T 87.0% -0 +9): L2b1a
VEN010 (T16325C 82.5% -1 +8): W6
VEN012 (C13934T 87.3% -0 +8): J1c3
VEN013 (T16352C 80.6% -0 +12): H14a
VEN014 (T7028C 83.3% -0 +9): H
VEN015 (A10049G 88.5% -0 +6): H1cr
VEN016 (T6227C 84.1% -0 +10): I1b
VEN017 (C3342T 90.0% -0 +5): H35
VEN018 (A7517G 85.9% -0 +9): H5a1g1a
VEN021 (C3750T 80.6% -1 +10): U5a2d1-a
VEN022 (C16261T 67.6% -0 +22): H7a1
VET001 (T152C! 83.0% -0 +9): H3-b
VET002 (T8614C 96.6% -0 +2): J1c3s2
VET003 (C6887T 88.1% -0 +7): J1c9
VET004 (C6887T 88.5% -0 +7): J1c9
VET005 (T16311C! 83.0% -0 +9): HV-b
VET006 (C13934T 88.5% -0 +7): J1c3
VET007 (T16304C 88.1% -0 +8): T2b
VET008 (T7028C 91.7% -0 +4): H
VET009 (C13934T 91.7% -0 +5): J1c3
VET010 (G15466A 88.6% -0 +5): H58
VET011 (T16172C 95.3% -0 +3): J1b1a1
VEU001 (A13395G 94.0% -0 +3): V46
VOL001 (C13680T 94.1% -0 +3): H13a1a




 
ENA uploaded the mtdna : ( lest hope for y dna soon ):unsure:
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB42866?show=reads

a user in anthrogenica teepean47 anlaysed the bam files (y)
and here are
the ancient mtdna types:


CAM001 (A73G! 89.8% -0 +5): H3-a
CAM002 (G14364A 94.0% -0 +3): H18
CAM003 (C16261T 95.3% -0 +3): J2a1a1
CSN001 (G3010A 92.0% -0 +4): H1
CSN002 (T7028C 91.8% -0 +4): H
CSN003 (C146T 88.7% -0 +6): H1n-c
CSN004 (T226C 98.0% -0 +1): X2b-a
CSN005 (C194T 96.2% -0 +2): H2a1r
CSN006 (A188G 93.2% -0 +4): J1c2
CSN007 (T16189C! 86.5% -0 +7): H3-c
CSN008 (A16265G 88.7% -0 +6): H7c1
CSN009 (T7028C 89.8% -0 +5): H
CSN010 (T195C! 82.0% -0 +9): HV0-a
CSN012 (T961C 82.5% -2 +4): U4a1a
CSN013 (C14365T 87.7% -0 +7): H4a1
ETR001 (T16325C 91.0% -0 +6): T1a8a
ETR003 (T195C! 84.8% -0 +7): HV0-a
ETR004 (T16311C! 93.6% -0 +3): HV-b
ETR005 (T16298C 89.6% -0 +5): HV0
ETR006 (T7028C 89.8% -0 +5): H
ETR007 (A11821G 88.9% -0 +7): J1c15c
ETR010 (T16304C 90.4% -0 +5): H5
ETR012 (C12061T 96.1% -0 +2): HV2a
ETR013 (C14653T 90.0% -0 +6): J1c18
ETR014 (T292C 86.5% -0 +7): H130
ETR015 (G2706A 93.9% -0 +3): HV-a1a
ETR016 (G14323A 82.5% -1 +8): R2b
MAG001 (A1888G! 98.4% -0 +1): T2b14a
MAS001 (T16172C 95.2% -0 +3): T2h2
MAS002 (A249G 86.8% -1 +4): H74a
MAS003 (G13759A 96.6% -0 +2): K1b2a1
MAS004 (T15940C 68.9% -2 +13): R1b
POP001 (C14365T 90.7% -0 +5): H4a1
PRZ001 (G9196A 91.7% -0 +5): U5b3b
PRZ002 (C16320A 87.0% -0 +7): H1cu
TAQ001 (T16296C! 87.5% -1 +5): T2e3a
TAQ002 (T7028C 90.0% -0 +5): H
TAQ003 (C64T 91.2% -0 +5): X2n1
TAQ004 (T152C! 90.0% -0 +5): H3-b
TAQ005 (A14605G 90.8% -1 +3): T2d2a
TAQ006 (A16038G 93.8% -0 +3): HV22
TAQ007 (G16129A! 84.9% -0 +8): H-c
TAQ008 (T195C! 86.3% -0 +7): HV0-a
TAQ009 (A9254G 92.1% -0 +5): T1b2
TAQ010 (T13326C 89.3% -0 +6): H13a1a1
TAQ011 (C7858T 92.0% -0 +4): L2a1c3a
TAQ012 (G3010A 88.0% -0 +6): H1
TAQ013 (T6719C 92.7% -0 +4): U5a1a2a
TAQ015 (C15175T 94.3% -0 +3): H5a7
TAQ016 (A16240G 89.1% -0 +6): H1bz
TAQ017 (T16296C! 86.4% -1 +6): T2e3a
TAQ018 (T16325C 98.1% -0 +1): W6
TAQ019 (C13934T 93.2% -0 +4): J1c3
TAQ020 (C14149T 90.6% -0 +5): H44a
TAQ021 (T11776C 75.5% -0 +12): X1e
TAQ022 (T152C! 97.8% -0 +1): H3-b
TAQ023 (T10031C 88.1% -1 +4): U5b2a3
TAQ024 (T16296C! 89.1% -1 +4): T2e3a
UDC_P (T195C! 95.8% -0 +2): HV0-a
VEN001 (A11128G 87.9% -0 +7): N3a
VEN002 (A14274G 78.8% -1 +11): U5a1c3a
VEN005 (T16311C! 85.2% -0 +8): HV0-a4
VEN006 (A8701G! 85.9% -1 +6): T1a26a
VEN008 (C16278T! 80.8% -1 +7): H1-b
VEN009 (C16355T 87.0% -0 +9): L2b1a
VEN010 (T16325C 82.5% -1 +8): W6
VEN012 (C13934T 87.3% -0 +8): J1c3
VEN013 (T16352C 80.6% -0 +12): H14a
VEN014 (T7028C 83.3% -0 +9): H
VEN015 (A10049G 88.5% -0 +6): H1cr
VEN016 (T6227C 84.1% -0 +10): I1b
VEN017 (C3342T 90.0% -0 +5): H35
VEN018 (A7517G 85.9% -0 +9): H5a1g1a
VEN021 (C3750T 80.6% -1 +10): U5a2d1-a
VEN022 (C16261T 67.6% -0 +22): H7a1
VET001 (T152C! 83.0% -0 +9): H3-b
VET002 (T8614C 96.6% -0 +2): J1c3s2
VET003 (C6887T 88.1% -0 +7): J1c9
VET004 (C6887T 88.5% -0 +7): J1c9
VET005 (T16311C! 83.0% -0 +9): HV-b
VET006 (C13934T 88.5% -0 +7): J1c3
VET007 (T16304C 88.1% -0 +8): T2b
VET008 (T7028C 91.7% -0 +4): H
VET009 (C13934T 91.7% -0 +5): J1c3
VET010 (G15466A 88.6% -0 +5): H58
VET011 (T16172C 95.3% -0 +3): J1b1a1
VEU001 (A13395G 94.0% -0 +3): V46
VOL001 (C13680T 94.1% -0 +3): H13a1a









Thanks, kingjohn. But what about the yDNA? When it comes to the Etruscans, the revelation of the yDNA is much more interesting. Plus, if I remember correctly there was a rumor about an upcoming Etruscan paper where some Etruscans having unexpected R1b and I1 hp. If we had the yDNA from this Etruscan study, we'd know whether the rumor was true or not. Anway, we‘re furthermore kept on tenterhooks.
 
Thanks, kingjohn. But what about the yDNA? When it comes to the Etruscans, the revelation of the yDNA is much more interesting. Plus, if I remember correctly there was a rumor about an upcoming Etruscan paper where some Etruscans having unexpected R1b and I1 hp. If we had the yDNA from this Etruscan study, we'd know whether the rumor was true or not. Anway, we‘re furthermore kept on tenterhooks.

like you i hope for y dna results :)
since remains are supposed to be from the period of 800bc -1000 ad maybe some e-m123 will
turn in the later period who knows :unsure:
i think there ( etruscans) major haplogroup would be r1b-u152
most of the etruscans are a continue of villanovan culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villanovan_culture
 
like you i hope for y dna results :)
since remains are supposed to be from the period of 800bc -1000 ad maybe some e-m123 will
turn in the later period who knows :unsure:
i think there ( etruscans) major haplogroup would be r1b-u152
most of the etruscans are a continue of villanovan culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villanovan_culture

Yes, but assimilating the R1b-U152. I will be surprised if the Proto-Etruscans real Etruscans will be R1b-U152. Logic indicates that if they were non IE people then the people who spread the language must have carried non IE Y-DNA as well. Be it EEF, CHG or WHG. Let's see.
 
Yes, but assimilating the R1b-U152. I will be surprised if the Proto-Etruscans real Etruscans will be R1b-U152. Logic indicates that if they were non IE people then the people who spread the language must have carried non IE Y-DNA as well. Be it EEF, CHG or WHG. Let's see.

Indo-European men adopted the Basque language, so why not Etruscan men?

I don't understand why R1b would be unexpected necessarily , given the yDna in Toscana today.
 
I am sick and tired of researchers blue balling us. I would rather have the Daunian paper scenario, no rumors, then bam preprint. Than this... Where we are given crumbs and made to suffer.
 
I am sick and tired of researchers blue balling us. I would rather have the Daunian paper scenario, no rumors, then bam preprint. Than this... Where we are given crumbs and made to suffer.


I feel you bro.:beer1:
 
Yes, but assimilating the R1b-U152. I will be surprised if the Proto-Etruscans real Etruscans will be R1b-U152. Logic indicates that if they were non IE people then the people who spread the language must have carried non IE Y-DNA as well. Be it EEF, CHG or WHG. Let's see.

If you don't study how archaeologists and anthropologists think Iron Age ethnic groups were formed, you keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

I do not know if among Etruscans was widespread R1b U152, I think it would be strange if it was not there, but to say that Etruscans assimilated R1b U152 means little, because it starts from the assumption of already knowing the answer.

The association between languages, genetics, and archaeological data, brought forward by some geneticists 50 years ago, is criticized by many other scholars.
 

This thread has been viewed 98667 times.

Back
Top