Page 134 of 154 FirstFirst ... 3484124132133134135136144 ... LastLast
Results 1,331 to 1,340 of 1533

Thread: The Italian Peninsula through Ancient DNA

  1. #1331
    Moderator
    Posts
    2,648
    Sex
    Location
    Viseu
    Ethnicity
    Portuguese highlander
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y31991>Y168273
    mtDNA (M)
    H20

    Asturias Portugal 1143 Portugal 1485 Portugal Order of Christ
    Quote Originally Posted by manesh View Post
    To define the origin of the Etruscans we need to check out the outliers in the early Iron Age period of central Italy.
    Like these Etruscans?

     
    YDNA - E-Y31991>PF4428>Y134104>Y168273 Domingos Rodrigues, b. circa 1690 Hidden Content , Portugal - Stonemason, miller.
    mtDNA - H20. Monica Vieira, b. circa 1700 Hidden Content , Porto, Portugal

    Hidden Content
    Global25 PCA West Eurasia dataset Hidden Content

    [1] "distance%=1.6157"
    Ruderico

    Iberia_IA,55.2
    Gaelic,26.2
    ITA_Rome_Imperial,8.8
    North_African,8.6
    Levant_Roman,1.2

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ruderico For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (11-19-2019),  Claudio (10-20-2019),  Power77 (09-26-2019),  Principe (09-25-2019)

  3. #1332
    Registered Users
    Posts
    102
    Sex

    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by LTG View Post
    There seems to have been great interest shown in the necropolis of Isola Sacra and it's inhabitants; the first study was published in The Journal of Roman Studies in 1941, and the second in the Journal of Human Evolution in 2000.

    Wiki summary of those findings:

    "A great number of the inscriptions on the tombs suggest Graeco-Oriental origin. Scholars believe this is because Portus and Ostica were cosmopolitan towns where the bourgeois population was full of businessmen of non-Italian birth. Latin, however, was the language that most townspeople used during the time that the necropolis was built. Nonetheless, the presence of Graeco-Oriental inscriptions, along with Isola Sacra tombs that resembled Hellenistic tombs of Petra, suggests Roman naturalization of foreign influence, which was prominent in the Empire."

    This would explain why many of the upcoming samples cluster the way that that they do, and how the absorption of Hellenic peoples would transmit elements not found in the Etruscans and Italics. It also confirms my suspicions that this study alone will not be sufficient, and that we will require sampling of remains from rural and non-cosmopolitan areas of Italy in the future to gain better insight into the Romans and their genetic structure.

    Yes, many people of Graeco-Oriental origins arrived in Italy, not only from Greece or the Greek islands but also from Ionia and other parts of the Hellenized East Mediterranean. I absolutely agree with you that this study alone will not be enough
    Last edited by vitellia; 09-25-2019 at 01:41 PM.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to vitellia For This Useful Post:

     Ajeje Brazorf (09-25-2019),  Cascio (09-25-2019),  Nino90 (09-25-2019)

  5. #1333
    Registered Users
    Posts
    63
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajeje Brazorf View Post
    Obviously those samples with Levant_N and Iran_N admixture date back to the end of the Republican period of Rome, not to the Iron Age, so they do not prove anything about the origin of the Etruscans.
    They proof that Levant_N and Iran_N existed in Latium in the early Roman period(not in the Imperial period or the late Antiquity), which includes the Iron Age and the Republican Period. The arrival of these individuals into the region can not be explained by a sudden appearance. It is most probable that this type of ancestry arrived a few centuries before in the early Iron Age. And as I mentioned, there are so few samples of Etruscans tested, and we dont even know if the 4 tested Etruscans date to the early Iron Age or to the later periods, and not all of them are R1b, one of the individuals is I1, which shows there is some kind of a complex population structure among the Etruscans.

    Quote Originally Posted by vitellia View Post
    Yours is just a striking example of circular reasoning and it is not known that the early Etruscans were minor elites with small population size, this one you just invented.
    Above proves that you know nothing about the history of Etruscans and the academic papers and books published about them.

  6. #1334
    Registered Users
    Posts
    664
    Sex
    Location
    Central Florida
    Ethnicity
    Aegean Greek
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-L26 (J2a1)
    mtDNA (M)
    J1b1a

    Greece United States of America
    There are apparently two papers coming out on Romans. One is the Moots paper and the other is the one with the Etruscans. I think the Moots paper is the one featuring the Isola Sacra samples since it's confined to Lazio. The other one has a wider range but shows the same trends.
    Ελευθερία ή θάνατος.

  7. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Michalis Moriopoulos For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (09-25-2019),  Claudio (09-25-2019),  J Man (09-27-2019),  Kellebel (09-30-2019),  Power77 (09-26-2019),  Principe (09-25-2019),  Psynome (09-25-2019),  rozenfeld (09-25-2019),  Ruderico (09-25-2019),  Sangarius (09-25-2019)

  8. #1335
    Registered Users
    Posts
    879
    Sex

    Based on what I've seen, its both true that Levant_N and Iran_N appears prior to the Republican period (in the Iron Age) in Latium already, and that Etruscans are indistinguishable from Italics in general such as Samnites and Umbrians (but Romans are much shifted towards the East Mediterranean continuum compared to prior Italics quite early on).
    Quoted from this Forum:

    "Which superman haplogroup is the toughest - R1a or R1b? And which SNP mutation spoke Indo-European first? There's only one way for us to find out ... fight!"

  9. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Ryukendo For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (09-25-2019),  Cascio (09-25-2019),  Claudio (09-25-2019),  JMcB (09-25-2019),  K33 (09-25-2019),  Kellebel (09-30-2019),  Michalis Moriopoulos (09-25-2019),  Power77 (09-26-2019),  Pribislav (09-25-2019),  Principe (09-25-2019),  Psynome (09-25-2019),  rozenfeld (09-25-2019),  Ruderico (09-25-2019),  Sangarius (09-25-2019)

  10. #1336
    Registered Users
    Posts
    610
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    Based on what I've seen, its both true that Levant_N and Iran_N appears prior to the Republican period (in the Iron Age) in Latium already, and that Etruscans are indistinguishable from Italics in general such as Samnites and Umbrians (but Romans are much shifted towards the East Mediterranean continuum compared to prior Italics quite early on).
    So you're basically saying that Levant_N was already present in samples before, say, 340 BC? Are you really sure about that?

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Ajeje Brazorf For This Useful Post:

     Nino90 (09-25-2019)

  12. #1337
    Registered Users
    Posts
    102
    Sex

    Italy
    I don't find so strange that Levant_N and Iran_N appear prior to the Republican period. The Phoenicians had already arrived in Italy from the 8th century BC and by the end of the 8th century BC the orientalizing period began in both Italy and Greece. Foreign merchants had been visiting the port of Rome long before the Republican period.
    Last edited by vitellia; 09-25-2019 at 05:48 PM.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vitellia For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (09-25-2019),  Claudio (09-25-2019)

  14. #1338
    Registered Users
    Posts
    78
    Sex
    Location
    Amerika ist wunderbar
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Nationality
    White American
    Y-DNA (P)
    J2b2*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1

    Germany Japan Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Sikeliot View Post
    Except Mycenaeans/Minoans did not carry Levantine ancestry, and Levantine ancestry in both modern Italy and Greece occurred much later.
    I agree, but also think it's likely Greek Cypriots always carried a Paleolithic Levantine Hunter Gatherer component (Natufian).

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Arch Hades For This Useful Post:

     Sikeliot (09-25-2019)

  16. #1339
    Registered Users
    Posts
    63
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    Based on what I've seen, its both true that Levant_N and Iran_N appears prior to the Republican period (in the Iron Age) in Latium already, and that Etruscans are indistinguishable from Italics in general such as Samnites and Umbrians (but Romans are much shifted towards the East Mediterranean continuum compared to prior Italics quite early on).
    I think the information which shows that the Etruscans and Italics are indistinguishable (although we know that there are too few Iron Age individuals in the Moots paper, and in the other unknown paper there is only 4 Etruscan individuals and there are lots of Italic individuals) is because the local population is the same since the Bronze Age when the central European Bell Beaker population replaced the populations of many parts of Europe with almost 100%.

    These Bronze Age central European Bell Beakers were the same as the later Celtic people, meaning that they spoke an IE language which is completely not related to the Etruscan language.

    And in the Early Iron Age a minor group of Etruscan elites became the head of the population of parts of central Italy(which is called the Orientalizing period), the main preceding population didnt change, which is mostly consisted of central European Bell Beaker people.
    And in time some of the Etruscan elites became assimilated and spoke the Latin language, and also vice versa, some of the Italic people became assimilated and followed the Etruscan culture and spoke the Etruscan language.
    This is why it is logical that the Iron Age Etruscan and Italic individuals are similar in ancestry. And during the Roman period, the Etruscans became fully assimilated and all accepted the Roman identity and the Italic language.
    I think that the individuals that carry the ancestry components like Iran_N, Levant_N, Anatolia_N, Anatolia_BA are associated with the original early Etruscans.

  17. #1340
    Registered Users
    Posts
    515
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic, Near East
    Nationality
    Murcan
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152 (Alsace)
    mtDNA (M)
    T2a1a

    United States of America Palestine Germany Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    Based on what I've seen, its both true that Levant_N and Iran_N appears prior to the Republican period (in the Iron Age) in Latium already, and that Etruscans are indistinguishable from Italics in general such as Samnites and Umbrians (but Romans are much shifted towards the East Mediterranean continuum compared to prior Italics quite early on).
    Just to be clear: do the Etruscans, Samnites, and Umbrians cluster around modern North Italians, while the Latins cluster around modern South Italians/Sicilians?

    Or are you saying the first group were themselves South Italian-like, and Latins were Cypriot-like/Cretan-like?

Page 134 of 154 FirstFirst ... 3484124132133134135136144 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Haplogroup L in the Iberian Peninsula
    By E_M81_I3A in forum L
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-29-2019, 10:54 AM
  2. Caucasian component in Arabian peninsula
    By Missouri1455 in forum Western
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-03-2018, 09:09 AM
  3. ftdna ancient origins results, italian
    By patrizio22 in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 03-23-2017, 06:12 PM
  4. L817 in the Arabian Peninsula
    By Omar in forum J1-M267
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-21-2016, 06:23 AM
  5. G2a-P15 in Arabian peninsula
    By Mustache in forum G2a-P15
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-21-2016, 06:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •