Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 83

Thread: The Italian Peninsula through Ancient DNA

  1. #51
    Registered Users
    Posts
    304
    Sex

    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Nino90 View Post
    Thank you for posting! Like I said - Just looking at Villonova culture and Etruscan + Celtic you see similarities. The R1b-U152 Y-dna branch is said to be a Italo-celtic branch who is common in North Italy and Tuscany. Could be from both Celtic invaders + Early Italics(Villonova) and maybe also Etruscans.
    Villanovans and Etruscans are the same people. Villanovan culture is the first phase of Etruscan civilization. Even the Etruscans themselves traced the beginning of their history back to the Villanovans according to Marcus Terentius Varro (reported by Censorinus) and other Roman writers. And this information is taken from the ritual calendars of the Etruscan religion. At the time of Augustus, for the Etruscans it was the tenth century of their history. Nothing strange, for most of the all pre-Roman peoples it is so, because in the pre-Roman Italy the self-awareness of the ethnos is formed from the tenth century BC. And what unites the Etruscans almost everywhere, not only those of Etruria in the strict sense, but also those of northern Italy and those of Campania, is the common Villanovan phase.
    Last edited by Larth; 02-11-2019 at 02:46 PM.

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

     Ajeje Brazorf (02-11-2019),  Bernard Marx (02-11-2019),  Nino90 (02-11-2019),  vitellia (02-12-2019)

  3. #52
    Registered Users
    Posts
    403
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by Larth View Post
    Villanovans and Etruscans are the same people. Villanovan culture is the first phase of Etruscan civilization. Even the Etruscans themselves traced the beginning of their history back to the Villanovans according to Marcus Terentius Varro (reported by Censorinus) and other Roman writers. And this information is taken from the ritual calendars of the Etruscan religion.
    I think there's a great misunderstanding here. Properly speaking the Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population that set foot on the tyrrenian coasts giving birth to the "orientalizing period". At that time the native inhabitants of the area were all italics umbrian ( and IE). In this sense the etruscans were not locals. In a broader sense "etruscans" were the fusion of these east-mediterranean folks with the native Umbrians. So an "etruscan" could be a "east mediterranean" if we speak in a strict ethnic sense and at the same time he could be an "umbrian" if we speak in "geopolitical sense". That is plain evident that 90% or more of the people that lived in the "etruscan" cities were local italics .

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to etrusco For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (02-11-2019),  alexfritz (02-11-2019),  Cascio (04-05-2019),  Power77 (02-11-2019),  Romilius (02-11-2019)

  5. #53
    Registered Users
    Posts
    776
    Sex
    Location
    Sweden
    Ethnicity
    Italian-Swedish
    Nationality
    Swedish
    Y-DNA
    R-L2 / R1b-U152
    mtDNA
    H1a1

    Sweden Italy Italy 1861-1946 Sami Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    I think there's a great misunderstanding here. Properly speaking the Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population that set foot on the tyrrenian coasts giving birth to the "orientalizing period". At that time the native inhabitants of the area were all italics umbrian ( and IE). In this sense the etruscans were not locals. In a broader sense "etruscans" were the fusion of these east-mediterranean folks with the native Umbrians. So an "etruscan" could be a "east mediterranean" if we speak in a strict ethnic sense and at the same time he could be an "umbrian" if we speak in "geopolitical sense". That is plain evident that 90% or more of the people that lived in the "etruscan" cities were local italics .
    The Hellenic culture sure had some impact on the Etruscans. But I don't think that the whole Etruscan culture derived from Anatolia. Maybe the Villanova culture had some trade with Hellenic people who inspired them. But the whole Ideá that Etruscan was a ruler class from West Anatolia does not make much sense.

    The only evidence for that is DNA on a Cattle race that possible came from Anatolia and some Greek Historians clames that Etruscan were Lydians.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nino90 For This Useful Post:

     Bernard Marx (02-11-2019),  Larth (02-11-2019)

  7. #54
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,783
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    I think there's a great misunderstanding here. Properly speaking the Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population that set foot on the tyrrenian coasts giving birth to the "orientalizing period". At that time the native inhabitants of the area were all italics umbrian ( and IE). In this sense the etruscans were not locals. In a broader sense "etruscans" were the fusion of these east-mediterranean folks with the native Umbrians. So an "etruscan" could be a "east mediterranean" if we speak in a strict ethnic sense and at the same time he could be an "umbrian" if we speak in "geopolitical sense". That is plain evident that 90% or more of the people that lived in the "etruscan" cities were local italics .
    Yes, it's quite clear that the Villanovan culture is closely tied to the arrival of the earliest Italic-speaking communities, and that the Etruscans largely ruled over a rural population of Umbrian origin. If we are to use linguistic terms, the Etruscans were a superstrate of sorts, and while we cannot be absolutely certain of their origin, the odds definitely are in favour of an Aegean one.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 02-11-2019 at 02:59 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (02-11-2019),  Erikl86 (02-11-2019),  etrusco (02-11-2019),  ffoucart (02-11-2019),  Helves (02-11-2019),  JMcB (02-11-2019),  Power77 (02-11-2019),  Romilius (02-11-2019)

  9. #55
    Registered Users
    Posts
    304
    Sex

    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    I think there's a great misunderstanding here. Properly speaking the Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population that set foot on the tyrrenian coasts giving birth to the "orientalizing period". At that time the native inhabitants of the area were all of italics umbrian ( and IE). In this sense the etruscans were not locals. In a broader sense "etruscans" were the fusion of these east-mediterranean folks with the native Umbrians. So an "etruscan" could be a "east mediterranean" if we speak in a strict ethnic sense and at the same time he could be an "umbrian" if we speak in "geopolitical sense". That is plain evident that 90% oe more of the people that lived in the "etruscan" cities were local italics .
    I think that the great misunderstanding is inside you. First, there is no evidence of what of your're saying, that Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population. There's still no proof today. Everything is resolved within the linguistic relations between Etruscan, Rhaetian and the inscriptions of Lemnos. But if we look at the numbers, those of Lemnos are posterior to those of the Etruscan language, Lemnian inscriptions are much smaller in number - in a considerable way - than both those of the Etruscan and the Rhaetian languages, and are also written with an alphabet that suggests the arrival in Lemnos from the west, not from East.

    Orientalizing period has nothing to do with the origins of Etruscans. If you think that, you're left behind at least 60 years compared to current studies. Orientalizing period was a cultural phenomenon extended even to the Italic populations, to the Venetis and obviously to the Greeks, which together with the Phoenicians were among the main cause of the spread of the orientalizing phase. The Etruscan civilization begins at least 200 years before the orientalizing period.

    There is not a single archaeologist who believes that Etruria was first inhabited by Umbrians. Also because the ancestors of the Etruscans were incinerators, while the Umbrians were not, inhumation is in fact the funerary rite that has always characterized them.

    Then of course in this forum there are many supporters of the eastern origin of the Etruscans. But are they really interested in the Etruscans or more in keeping the Eastern narrative alive?
    Last edited by Larth; 02-11-2019 at 04:02 PM.

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Larth For This Useful Post:

     Acque agitate (02-11-2019),  Ajeje Brazorf (02-11-2019),  Bernard Marx (02-11-2019),  Camulogène Rix (02-11-2019),  Nino90 (02-11-2019),  vitellia (02-12-2019)

  11. #56
    Registered Users
    Posts
    87
    Sex
    Location
    Paris, France
    Ethnicity
    3/4 marche, 1/4 abruzzo
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA
    J-zs1727
    mtDNA
    U5a1a1

    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
    Cross posting from another thread since most of it's content seem more relevant here:

















    I have to agree with Erik here. The Latial Culture which spanned from 1000-580 BC had strong roots in the Proto-Villanovan Culture, which was an Urnfield Culture (not to be confused with the Villanovan Culture). The Proto-Villanovan Culture reached all the way to N.E. Sicily where the Siculi spoke a language that was probably Latin-like. Being that modern N.Italians and S.Italians are relatively distant populations from one another, I think it is more likely that the N.Italian like 60% represent the "native" Italics and the 40% represent a mix of previously N.Italian like locals mixed with populations coming from the East as early as the Orientalizing Period.
    In one of the posts you quoted above someone wrote that the Oscan may have had a different, more southern admixture. I'm no expert, but according to inscriptions of some of these osco-umbrian tribes, at least the South Picenes of Marche and Northern Abruzzi, the Peligni of Southern Abruzzi and the Sanniti of Campania, (probably others) identified themself as "Safin". This should put them in the "Sabini" or "Oscan" group, shouldn't it? So, probably this word "Safin" had something to do with a larger group who probably identified themselfes with the Sabini and the Oscan languages.

    Could it be that these "Safin" had a slightly different origin than the Umbrians? Could the two of them be the result of different waves from North of the Alps or later from Northern Italy, who had contributions from other ethnic groups? May that be possible? Why did some Greeks talk about Pelasgians being present(probably during the Bronze Age) around Emilia Romagna? As I said I'm no expert, so please, don't ask me to say which Greek historian said that, I do not recall.

    I'm from the Marche, the ancestors of the last 10 generations were from the Marche and Northern Abruzzi, and I have, as well as many people from central Italy and Southern Emilia Romagna a high percentage of CHG, around 30 per cent.
    Last edited by patrizio22; 02-11-2019 at 04:45 PM.

  12. #57
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,783
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Larth View Post
    I think that the great misunderstanding is inside you. First, there is no evidence of what of your're saying, that Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population. There's still no proof today. Everything is resolved within the linguistic relations between Etruscan, Rhaetian and the inscriptions of Lemnos. But if we look at the numbers, those of Lemnos are posterior to those of the Etruscan language, Lemnian inscriptions are much smaller in number - in a considerable way - than both the Etruscan and the Rhaetian languages, and are also written with an alphabet that suggests the arrival in Lemnos from the west, not from East.

    Orientalizing period has nothing to do with the origins of Etruscans. If you think that, you're left behind at least 60 years compared to current studies. Orientalizing period was a cultural phenomenon extended even to the Italic populations, to the Venetis and obviously to the Greeks, which together with the Phoenicians were among the main cause of the spread of the orientalizing phase. The Etruscan civilization begins at least 200 years before the orientalizing period.

    There is not a single archaeologist who believes that Etruria was first inhabited by Umbrians. Also because the ancestors of the Etruscans were incinerators, while the Umbrians were not, inhumation is in fact the funerary rite that has always characterized them.

    Then of course in this forum there are many supporters of the eastern origin of the Etruscans. But are they really interested in the Etruscans or more in keeping the Eastern narrative alive?
    The linguistic evidence does favour the "Eastern narrative" you seem so eager to reject. The model you put forth relies heavily on Carlo de Simone's work, and at least one of the points you made here can be firmly rejected, the allegedly Etruscan origin of the Lemnian alphabet for instance, in reality the Etruscan alphabet is a variation of the Cumaean alphabet which is of Euboean origin while the Lemnian alphabet is directly derived from the Euboean alphabet (and not the Etruscan one). There is also an Italic (and more to the point Umbrian-like) substrate in Etruscan, in fact numerous Etruscan personal names and theonyms are of Italic origin (onomastic borrowing also went the other way around though).

    As far as the genetic evidence is of concern, a west-to-east migration from the Italian peninsula to the Aegean during the LBA collapse, while not impossible per se (the outlier from Armenoi could potentially fit) is somewhat questionable. Aegean influence in the Italian peninsula on the other hand is going to be quite substantial, that much is clear. The major problem with the west-to-east model is that it is hard to picture an association between Proto-Tyrsenian and the Urnfield horizon, although I am aware of the presence of Villanovan material bearing Etruscan inscriptions as well as Villanovan material in Greece.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 02-11-2019 at 04:43 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  13. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (02-11-2019),  Helves (02-11-2019),  jonahst (02-11-2019),  Power77 (02-11-2019),  Psynome (02-11-2019),  Ruderico (02-11-2019),  sprfls (02-12-2019)

  14. #58
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,435
    Sex
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Italo-Iberian
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    R1b-U152+L2+FGC10543
    mtDNA
    H4a1-T152C!

    United States of America Italy Spain
    Quote Originally Posted by Larth View Post
    I think that the great misunderstanding is inside you. First, there is no evidence of what of your're saying, that Etruscans were an eastern mediterranean non IE population. There's still no proof today. Everything is resolved within the linguistic relations between Etruscan, Rhaetian and the inscriptions of Lemnos. But if we look at the numbers, those of Lemnos are posterior to those of the Etruscan language, Lemnian inscriptions are much smaller in number - in a considerable way - than both those of the Etruscan and the Rhaetian languages, and are also written with an alphabet that suggests the arrival in Lemnos from the west, not from East.

    Orientalizing period has nothing to do with the origins of Etruscans. If you think that, you're left behind at least 60 years compared to current studies. Orientalizing period was a cultural phenomenon extended even to the Italic populations, to the Venetis and obviously to the Greeks, which together with the Phoenicians were among the main cause of the spread of the orientalizing phase. The Etruscan civilization begins at least 200 years before the orientalizing period.

    There is not a single archaeologist who believes that Etruria was first inhabited by Umbrians. Also because the ancestors of the Etruscans were incinerators, while the Umbrians were not, inhumation is in fact the funerary rite that has always characterized them.

    Then of course in this forum there are many supporters of the eastern origin of the Etruscans. But are they really interested in the Etruscans or more in keeping the Eastern narrative alive?
    One thing that archaeologists agree on is that the Villanovan Culture was the first unquestionably Etruscan culture. However, that is not the beginning of incineration, which begins before that with the very misleadingly named Proto-Villanovan Culture which is found in many non-Etruscan areas from Northern Italy to NE Sicily. This much I know - when I look at Etruscan material culture, I see a lot of clearly eastern influences that have absolutely no parallels in prior periods. So, there are good arguments from both sides of the Etruscan debate, but neither can be proven with the data we have today. Some ancient DNA from non-incinerated youths will hopefully clear that up some day.
    Paternal: R1b-U152 >> L2 >> FGC10543, Pietro della Rocca, b. 1559, Agira, Sicily, Italy
    Maternal: H4a1-T152C!, Maria Coto, b. ~1864, Galicia, Spain
    Mother's Paternal: J1+ FGC4745/FGC4766+ PF5019+, Gerardo Caprio, b. 1879, Caposele, Avellino, Campania, Italy
    Father's Maternal: T2b-C150T, Francisca Santa Cruz, b.1916, Garganchon, Burgos, Spain
    Paternal Great (x3) Grandfather: R1b-U106 >> L48 >> CTS2509, Filippo Ensabella, b.~1836, Agira, Sicily, Italy

  15. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to R.Rocca For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (02-11-2019),  Power77 (02-11-2019),  Psynome (02-11-2019),  Romilius (02-11-2019),  Ruderico (02-11-2019),  vitellia (02-12-2019)

  16. #59
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,301

    Quote Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
    And Ryukendo first hand summary of the Moots presentation:
    IRON AGE TO REPUBLICAN PERIOD (700-20BC)
    Note: Separated from previous period by 1000 year gap.
    Fewer samples, of those that exist 60% overlap with North Italy, 40% overlap with South Italy and Sicily, centroid of overall cluster in central Italy but no samples occur there, very wide spread.
    EHG appears, Levant N Appears for the first time, sporadic and inhomogeneous distribution, Iran_N increases further.
    So are we going to see any R1b-M269 or R1a-M417 in Rome in this period? Early? Late?
    Or will it be Y-J as in the Mycenaeans?

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (02-11-2019)

  18. #60
    Registered Users
    Posts
    304
    Sex

    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
    One thing that archaeologists agree on is that the Villanovan Culture was the first unquestionably Etruscan culture. However, that is not the beginning of incineration, which begins before that with the very misleadingly named Proto-Villanovan Culture which is found in many non-Etruscan areas from Northern Italy to NE Sicily. This much I know - when I look at Etruscan material culture, I see a lot of clearly eastern influences that have absolutely no parallels in prior periods. So, there are good arguments from both sides of the Etruscan debate, but neither can be proven with the data we have today. Some ancient DNA from non-incinerated youths will hopefully clear that up some day.

    The misleadingly name of Proto-Villanovan is due to the sequence of archaeological discoveries. So the proto-Villanovan inherited the name from the next phase, the Villanovan, that was previously discovered. We just need to be a little careful with the names, and then the picture is clear.

    The incineration is already attested in the culture of Terramare (and maybe even something in Polada, but not sure), in any case it doesn't begin with Proto-Villanovan Culture. There are ancient examples also in Sicily of incineration.

    The oldest examples of eastern influences in Italy are located in Frattesina, in the south of the Veneto region. That's where archaeologists are looking for the answers. It is no coincidence that papers have also come out recently on Frattesina. Of course, these eastern influences in Frattesina are much older than the Etruscan civilization.

    I never said otherwise, that there are not good arguments from both sides of the Etruscan debate. I agree with you. I only intervene when someone wants to make it look like only one side of the debate has good arguments.

  19. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Larth For This Useful Post:

     Ajeje Brazorf (02-11-2019),  Bernard Marx (02-11-2019),  Camulogène Rix (02-12-2019),  Nino90 (02-11-2019),  Power77 (02-11-2019),  Psynome (02-11-2019),  R.Rocca (02-11-2019),  vitellia (02-12-2019)

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Caucasian component in Arabian peninsula
    By Missouri1455 in forum Caucasus
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-03-2018, 09:09 AM
  2. Haplogroup L in the Iberian Peninsula
    By E_M81_I3A in forum L
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-20-2018, 10:33 PM
  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
  •