The origin and legacy of the Etruscans through a 2000-year archeogenomic time transec

[ihype02]

Etruscan,0.123751,0.1585354,0.0362664,-0.015818,0.0495476,-0.0101486,-0.0010771,-0.0037307,0.0235146,0.0446782,0.0005098,0.0109236,-0.0207298,-0.0060898,-0.0027332,-0.0033368,0.0030024,0.0005173,0.001222,-0.0043528,0.0011542,0.0045854,-0.0025266,-0.0042675,0.0010212

The error in G25 regarding Germanic admixture is that Etruscan_IA includes outliers which inflated the Germanic admixture. Modern Tuscans get only 9% Germanic and they more northern shifted than Medieval Tuscans.

I don't have Medieval Tuscans but it should be closer to 5% than to 10% with this model which fits with Germanic Y-dna being more male-biased and pushing nearly 10%.

Target: Italian_Tuscany Distance: 1.1331% / 0.01133056
61.4	Etruscan
17.8	ARM_LBA
12.2	Levant_Ashkelon_IA2
8.6	Swedish

Also the percentages given for East Med admixture in the study for Imperial Tuscans (using ARM_LBA and other samples) are fine around 35-39% but one outlier pushed nearly 60% which screwed the whole result. Same with Germanic admixture, one outlier was more northern shifted, so scientists probably got their "20% Germanic" wrong from it.

If you check the PCA 3 out of 5 Imperial samples are very close probably those are around 39% East Med admixture.

[/COLOR]

NOTE: I am just showing a more proper way how could the Germanic admixture be estimated in the official studies model. This model is not necessarily meant to be taken literally.

[brick]

The error in G25 regarding Germanic admixture is that Etruscan_IA includes outliers which inflated the Germanic admixture. Modern Tuscans get only 9% Germanic and they more northern shifted than Medieval Tuscans.
I don't have Medieval Tuscans but it should be closer to 5% than to 10% with this model which

Are you aware that these models are actually very misleading? You can model other populations in this way as well.

[brick]

[ihype02]

Are you aware that these models are actually very misleading? You can model other populations in this way as well.

I am aware why did you delete the last part of comment in the quote which makes it clear? I did not propose those components, the scientists did. I just fixed the 20% Germanic error when modeling with those components.

Also Albanians had different genetical ancestors from Tuscans so that comparison is not really fair.
The main problem is that we need to uncover the entire Iron Age Italy before estimating the Eastern Mediterranean admixture. The Italy is cline so Tuscans might have even some ancestry from Native Southern Italians (Lucanians, Messapian, Samnites etc.)

As for Eastern Mediterranean admixture in modern Tuscans that came during Imperial Rome I think it's around 10% minimum to maximum 20% not 50% as this study suggest. That is too high beyond eyes.

[brick]

I am aware why did you delete the last part of comment in the quote which makes it clear? I did not propose those components, the scientists did. I just fixed the 20% Germanic error when modeling with those components.

Also Albanians had different genetical ancestors from Tuscans so that comparison is not really fair.
The main problem is that we need to uncover the entire Iron Age Italy before estimating the Eastern Mediterranean admixture. The Italy is cline so Tuscans might have even some ancestry from Native Southern Italians (Lucanians, Messapian, Samnites etc.)

As for Eastern Mediterranean admixture in modern Tuscans that came during Imperial Rome I think it's around 10% minimum to maximum 20% not 50% as this study suggest. That is too high beyond eyes.

Calculators do not know what ancestry the populations considered in the models have.

According to these models, there is Eastern Mediterranean admixture in all Italians and in all Balkan populations, including Albanians.

If you take these results literally, then you have to explain why Albanians and even all Balkan populations, both northern and southern, get percentages of Levant_Ashkelon and Armenian_LMBA or MBA.

My point is that these results prove nothing, and I agree with you the results in the paper can be wrong too.

[ihype02]

Calculators do not know what ancestry the populations considered in the models have.

According to these models, there is Eastern Mediterranean admixture in all Italians and in all Balkan populations, including Albanians.

If you take these results literally, then you have to explain why Albanians and even all Balkan populations, both northern and southern, get percentages of Levant_Ashkelon and Armenian_LMBA or MBA.

My point is that these results prove nothing.

[Vallicanus]

The error in G25 regarding Germanic admixture is that Etruscan_IA includes outliers which inflated the Germanic admixture. Modern Tuscans get only 9% Germanic and they more northern shifted than Medieval Tuscans.
I don't have Medieval Tuscans but it should be closer to 5% than to 10% with this model which fits with Germanic Y-dna being more male-biased and pushing nearly 10%.

Target: Italian_Tuscany Distance: 1.1331% / 0.01133056
61.4	Etruscan
17.8	ARM_LBA
12.2	Levant_Ashkelon_IA2
8.6	Swedish

Also the percentages given for East Med admixture in the study for Imperial Tuscans (using ARM_LBA and other samples) are fine around 35-39% but one outlier pushed nearly 60% which screwed the whole result. Same with Germanic admixture, one outlier was more northern shifted, so scientists probably got their "20% Germanic" wrong from it.
If you check the PCA 3 out of 5 Imperial samples are very close probably those are around 39% East Med admixture.
[/COLOR]

NOTE: I am just showing a more proper way how could the Germanic admixture be estimated in the official studies model. This model is not necessarily meant to be taken literally.

Why are modern Tuscans more northern-shifted than medieval Tuscans?

It makes no historical sense.

However 9pc Germanic in Tuscany sounds OK but a little high, perhaps.

[ihype02]

Why are modern Tuscans more northern-shifted than medieval Tuscans?

It makes no historical sense.

However 9pc Germanic in Tuscany sounds OK but a little high, perhaps.

But they are more northern shifted than Medieval Tuscans, it would make sense historically with more Northern Italian and more Northern European related ancestry.

Also 30% Middle Eastern is not really accurate (at least with Y-Dna) I was just correcting the ~20% Germanic based on the official studies model. And 30% as high as it is, it is still lower than official paper's result.

I am not sure if I can blame the scientists for the East Med admixture results, because I think they were tricked a lot by the lack of samples that were needed to take conclusions. But the "20% Germanic" seems to be most likely a fault of their own.

[Uairun]

Does the scenario of an increase in the "Iranian" bloodline due to the migration of the imperial period not imply that the epicentre of this bloodline will be in Rome and the surrounding area? And will decrease as you go north and south (excluding possibly Sicily, because of the abundance of slaves on the latifundia). Moreover, Lazio was controlled by Byzantium and then by the Pope, and the Germans there should have been even fewer than in the south, and the influence of the Greeks stronger. The latter, by the way, can be seen in the example of Romagna. (parts of the Exarchate of Ravenna)

Distance to:	Italian_Romagna
2.12087246	Italian_Umbria
3.17271177	Italian_Tuscany
3.57134484	Italian_Marche
3.78273710	Italian_Lazio
4.88089131	Italian_Emilia

[Hawk]

Considering that Osco-Umbrians and very likely the Proto-Latins practiced inhumation burial, and i associate their coming to Italy earlier, during Early Bronze Age i think Etruscans are to be associated with Proto-Villanovans who came during Late Bronze Age from somewhere from Alps to Western Carpathians, they were probably a spinoff of one of Middle Danubian Urnfield Cultures and previous to that a variant of Pannonian Encrusted Pottery Culture resisting Hugelgraberkultur invasion, and the ancestors of Etruscans might have been G2a rich.

[Pax Augusta]

Considering that Osco-Umbrians and very likely the Proto-Latins practiced inhumation burial, and i associate their coming to Italy earlier, during Early Bronze Age i think Etruscans are to be associated with Proto-Villanovans who came during Late Bronze Age from somewhere from Alps to Western Carpathians, they were probably a spinoff of one of Middle Danubian Urnfield Cultures and previous to that a variant of Pannonian Encrusted Pottery Culture resisting Hugelgraberkultur invasion, and the ancestors of Etruscans might have been G2a rich.

Nope. As it is known Proto-Latins praticed incineration just as the Proto-Etruscans and the whole northern Italy, inhumation at the beginning is (only) characteristic of speakers of Osco-Umbrian languages (but at least with an initial exception lasted little for the Umbrians where incineration graves have been found in "Fase Terni 1", as well as there are examples of inhumation tombs even in territories where incineration was more widespread).

In addition, the uniparental markers of both Latins and Etruscans do show an affinity to the Bell Beaker primarily (although some Y-DNA may have come with the Proto-Villanovan). The same linguists in dividing the Italic languages think that the speakers of Latino-Faliscan languages arrived earlier than those speaking Osco-Umbrian languages.

[Jovialis]

Does the scenario of an increase in the "Iranian" bloodline due to the migration of the imperial period not imply that the epicentre of this bloodline will be in Rome and the surrounding area? And will decrease as you go north and south (excluding possibly Sicily, because of the abundance of slaves on the latifundia). Moreover, Lazio was controlled by Byzantium and then by the Pope, and the Germans there should have been even fewer than in the south, and the influence of the Greeks stronger. The latter, by the way, can be seen in the example of Romagna. (parts of the Exarchate of Ravenna)

Distance to:	Italian_Romagna
2.12087246	Italian_Umbria
3.17271177	Italian_Tuscany
3.57134484	Italian_Marche
3.78273710	Italian_Lazio
4.88089131	Italian_Emilia

Extra CHG is prevalent throughout out much of the Roman empire. Though I do not think 100% of it can be attributed to Imperial era immigrants. A new paper speculates Iran gene-flow has been around since the past 10,000 years, and predates farming in Anatolia.

[Jovialis]

Extra CHG is prevalent throughout out much of the Roman empire. Though I do not think 100% of it can be attributed to Imperial era immigrants. A new paper speculates Iran gene-flow has been around since the past 10,000 years, and predates farming in Anatolia.

[Jovialis]

^^Some Modern Greeks get about as much or more ABA than South Italians, in my model. I think the source of this, in those respects, ultimately come from the Aegean Islands, since they can be modeled as mostly ABA (plus smaller components of Steppe and Iberomaurusian), with a very good fit. However, that could have arrived to Southern Italy during the Colonial Greek era. While IMO, the Minoan, plus Steppe "package" could have been indicative of Ancient Achaean-like/IA_Balkan-like ancestry.

[Jovialis]

^^It should also be noted that the R1 Protovillanovan can be modeled as about 1/3rd "minoan". To me, this demonstrates that this type of ancestry has been in Italy, before the arrival of Indo-European people. She was found in Abruzzo. I'd wager this ancestry is even more prevalent the further south you go... Sicily BA samples have healthy amounts of it too. Go east from there, to Puglia, Daunians have large amounts of it too. How much did the people before their arrival have?

Frankly, I don't see anything that exotic about C.Italy in the middle ages, as this study proports.

[Pax Augusta]

^^It should also be noted that the R1 Protovillanovan can be modeled as about 1/3rd "minoan". To me, this demonstrates that this type of ancestry has been in Italy, before the arrival of Indo-European people. She was found in Abruzzo. I'd wager this ancestry is even more prevalent the further south you go... Sicily BA samples have healthy amounts of it too. Go east from there, to Puglia, Daunians have large amounts of it too. How much did the people before their arrival have?

Frankly, I don't see anything that exotic about C.Italy in the middle ages, as this study proports.

R1 Protovillanovan was an ancestor of Osco-Umbrian Picentes.

[Hawk]

Nope. As it is known Proto-Latins praticed incineration just as the Proto-Etruscans and the whole northern Italy, inhumation at the beginning is (only) characteristic of speakers of Osco-Umbrian languages (but at least with an initial exception lasted little for the Umbrians where incineration graves have been found in "Fase Terni 1", as well as there are examples of inhumation tombs even in territories where incineration was more widespread).

In addition, the uniparental markers of both Latins and Etruscans do show an affinity to the Bell Beaker primarily (although some Y-DNA may have come with the Proto-Villanovan). The same linguists in dividing the Italic languages think that the speakers of Latino-Faliscan languages arrived earlier than those speaking Osco-Umbrian languages.

Well, one of these three groups need to have come during Late Bronze Age with Proto-Villanovans:

1. Proto-Etruscans.
2. Proto-Latins.
3. Proto Osco-Umbrians

I have singled out Osco-Umbrians because they practiced inhumation largely something the opposite of Proto-Villanovans. I went with Proto-Etruscans because Rhaetians were right in the Alps, and somehow it fits for them to be these group of people also due to geographicity. They were more North than Latins. But, who knows, you are the expert on Italian archeology.

[torzio]

R1 Protovillanovan was an ancestor of Osco-Umbrian Picentes.

and the association with Liburnian croatia

[torzio]

Considering that Osco-Umbrians and very likely the Proto-Latins practiced inhumation burial, and i associate their coming to Italy earlier, during Early Bronze Age i think Etruscans are to be associated with Proto-Villanovans who came during Late Bronze Age from somewhere from Alps to Western Carpathians, they were probably a spinoff of one of Middle Danubian Urnfield Cultures and previous to that a variant of Pannonian Encrusted Pottery Culture resisting Hugelgraberkultur invasion, and the ancestors of Etruscans might have been G2a rich.

Inhumation burials may account for around 2-10 % of the several hundreds of graves – mostly cremations – attested at the three burial sites presently known at Frattesina, namely Fondo Zanotto, Narde I and Narde II65. Cremation was also by far the commonest visible funerary rite attested in Iron Age Veneto66 ; the spread of cremation rites coupled with a severe decline in the adoption of inhumation is attested in Veneto since the Recent Bronze Age and reached its climax in the Final Bronze Age67 ; the meaning of this drastic change in funerary practice remains partially obscure, although it might have been related to major changes in the funerary ideology as well as the socio-political and socio-economic arrangement of the region68 ; it must be noted that the 12th century BC has already been identified as a phase of crisis and dramatic change in northern Italy, characterized, among other phenomena, by the collapse of the Terramare settlement system69

[Vallicanus]

Many think of Florence as a Medieval or a Renaissance city, but it could have begun as a Roman barracks built by Julius Caesar for his Legionaries.

… Continuity :)
I spent over a year in Tuscany, ... Arezzo, Pisa, but most of it in Florence, alla Simoni when it used to be the headquarters of the Rep. Com. RMTE, near S. M. Novella, a few minutes walk from the Duomo, Ponte Vecchio, the Uffizi (but we pronounce it with two Z).

… though Lecce is called the Florence of the South, we call Firenze the Lecce of the North

I prefer the architecture in Lecce!

[Mario]

Can anyone download the etruscan samples to see whether the blond hair gene is common among these samples?

[Jovialis]

Can anyone download the etruscan samples to see whether the blond hair gene is common among these samples?

mydnaportal.com allows you to upload raw data, and it gives you predictions based on SNPs. It works for aDNA, but you have to do it one at a time, and it is very time consuming; there's a lot of Etruscan samples. It is likely that some of them did indeed have blonde hair, or genes for blonde hair. They had steppe admixture in them after all.

[Mario]

Thanks very much，well i entered nbci.com page, then inputed the ancient etruscan samples numbers but did not found the download links . It seems that the authors of this paper don't open the raw data? A little confused.

[Mario]

[QUOTE=Mario;645688]Thanks very much.

[Pax Augusta]

Can anyone download the etruscan samples to see whether the blond hair gene is common among these samples?

How come that of all ancient history it could be of interest how blond they were?

Archaeologically, there are no realistic portraits of Etruscans before the end of the 4th century BC.