- Reaction score
If we're speaking of a resurgence in iron age italic ancestry it seems apparent that was almost certainly that of northern Italic rather than IA Latin/Etruscan based off the current cline. If Latin/Etruscan IA rural resurgence was the cause for this shift, then modern Italians would have a much greater overlap with higher WHG Spaniard-like profiles than they do today.Otherwise the alternative is that there was (also) resurgence of an Iron Age genetic profile from more rural areas after the fall of Rome, this decreases both the northern European and the Imperial Rome contribution. If there is any truth in all the assumptions, it becomes really really difficult to get accurate results.
Modern Italians have now lower WHG because they have also changed compared to the Early Iron Age population.
We don't have nearly enough data to determine this. We can say with more confidence they've changed compared to Latin/Etruscan populations, but as for Magna Graecian and N. Italic - the jury is still out.
If what Posth 2021 claims is true, the idea that an Imperial Rome profile was anywhere, then there needs to be a significant northern European DNA contribution to have a genetic profile of modern central Italians.
This idea doesn't add up from what I can see. WHG ancestry is too low in all Italians for this to be feasible I think. Also, EEF ancestry remains too high - even in the north.