# Population Genetics > Paleogenetics > Bronze Age >  New conference on Bronze Age mobility in Europe

## Angela

Very interesting. One abstract stopped me in my tracks.

See:​
https://www.orea.oeaw.ac.at/veransta...and-artefacts/

"The aim of the conference is to identify the different scales, patterns and societal impacts of mobility throughout Europe. This international event will bring together leading scholars from all parts of the continent and research fields tackling similar problems with different methods rooted in the humanities and natural sciences. As an inter-disciplinary forum, this event will provide room for networking and discussions to lay the theoretical and methodological foundations for future scientific advancement.

Participants include Morten Erik Allentoft, Andrea Cardarelli, Claudio Cavazzuti, Edward Caswell, Peter Clark, Karin Margarita Frei, Catherine Frieman, Mario Gavranović, Jelena Grujić, Wolfgang Haak, Johannes Krause, Anthony Harding, Barbara Horejs, Reinhard Jung, Viktória Kiss, Corina Knipper, John Koch, Kristian Kristiansen, Gabriella Kulcsár, Anne Lehoërff, Andrew Millard, Barry Molloy, Janet Montgomery, Ron Pinhasi, Miljana Radivojević, Katharina Rebay-Salisbury, David Reich, Martin Sikora, Philipp Stockhammer, Benjamin Roberts, Natalia Shishlina, Robin Skeates and Marc Vander Linden."

"Steppe and Iranian ancestry among Bronze Age Central and Western Mediterranean populations

Ron Pinhasi, Daniel Fernandes, David Reich

_Steppe-related ancestry is known to have reached central Europe ca. 3000 BCE, while Iran-related ancestry reached Greece by 1500 BCE. However, the time course and extent of their spread into the central/western Mediterranean remains a mystery. We analysed 48 Neolithic and Bronze Age individuals from Sicily, Sardinia and the Balearic Islands aiming to investigate when and how continental European and Aegean influences affected these insular populations. Results show that the first Balearic settlers had substantial Steppe-related ancestry which was subsequently diluted by increasing proportions of farmer-related ancestry. In Sardinia, we identified the appearance of Iran-related ancestry from the Aegean as early as the Middle Bronze Age, with no genetic influences seen from populations carrying Steppe-related ancestry despite cultural or commercial exchanges with Bell Beaker populations. In SICILY, DURING THE BRONZE AGE AND POSSIBLY EARLIER, we found evidence for admixture with groups carrying both these ancestries. These results suggest that Steppe-related migrants had a crucial role in the settlement of the Balearic Islands and their ancestry reached as far south as Sicily, and that the population movements that brought Iran-related ancestry to the Aegean also impacted the Western Mediterranean around the same time the first civilizations started to develop."

_I have lots and lots of questions. Can't wait to read this one when it comes out. More tomorrow.

----------


## Ygorcs

Wow, this paper, at least from the conclusions in the abstract, looks really mindblowing. Pthe demographic and genetic history of each region of Europe was clearly much more complicated and nuanced than was thought even as recently as 2016. And steppe-like people really spread in an explosive and extremely mobile way after roughly the start of the Yamnaya (just figure that by the mid Bronze Age reasonably high ammounts of steppe ancestry were found from Iberia to Mongolia!).

But I wonder: when they say the first Balearic settlers were heavily steppe-related what time span are they really talking about? Even before the Early Bronze Age or, even more unbelievably, before the Chalcolithic?

EDIT: Oh I see, these earliest confirmed settlers probably date from the 3rd millennium BC and perhaps as late as circa 2000 BC. So roughly Bell Beaker times.

----------


## halfalp

So there was an Anatolian migration after the " Yamnaya Package " into mainland Europe, wich i always say. But i'm a little bit confused on many points. How Iran_Neo pass through Anatolian_Neo for it to not be that important in this paper and the genetic makeup of BA Greece? I feel like they want to tell us that Steppe Ancestry brought something like Paleohispanic language or a " Vasconic " group, while Iran_Neo brought IE languages. We can see that their Greece Iran_Neo ancestry is dated for 1500 so Mycenaean, wich is the dream of Lazaridis. Hope they gonna clarify their idea of what they try to say for not being confused. Because you know that even if the paper is absolutely not about IE languages, it is totally about it in every interested person mind, them included.

----------


## markod

> Wow, this paper, at least from the conclusions in the abstract, looks really mindblowing. Pthe demographic and genetic history of each region of Europe was clearly much more complicated and nuanced than was thought even as recently as 2016. And steppe-like people really spread in an explosive and extremely mobile way after roughly the start of the Yamnaya (just figure that by the mid Bronze Age reasonably high ammounts of steppe ancestry were found from Iberia to Mongolia!).
> 
> But I wonder: when they say the first Balearic settlers were heavily steppe-related what time span are they really talking about? Even before the Early Bronze Age or, even more unbelievably, before the Chalcolithic?
> 
> EDIT: Oh I see, these earliest confirmed settlers probably date from the 3rd millennium BC and perhaps as late as circa 2000 BC. So roughly Bell Beaker times.


I think in the case of the Balearic isles they're probably talking about Bell Beaker samples or closely related groups. Sicily & Sardinia are going to be interesting because there the population history seems to be more complex.

----------


## berun

@Ygorcs, yes, for the Balearics the first dates are by about 2300 BC, BB artifacts are found in the islands. To provide "steppe" ancestry it must depart from south France as the Catalan BB were devoid of it.

By the way I'm happy to see a paper not lumping Iranian Neo with steppe ancestry.

----------


## bicicleur

iran related, is it iran-neo?
1500 BC? aren't Myceneans a few centuries older?

----------


## halfalp

> iran related, is it iran-neo?
> 1500 BC? aren't Myceneans a few centuries older?


You are right, i missread. It could be Iran anything, more likely Iran_Chl?

----------


## Angela

> Wow, this paper, at least from the conclusions in the abstract, looks really mindblowing. Pthe demographic and genetic history of each region of Europe was clearly much more complicated and nuanced than was thought even as recently as 2016. And steppe-like people really spread in an explosive and extremely mobile way after roughly the start of the Yamnaya (just figure that by the mid Bronze Age reasonably high ammounts of steppe ancestry were found from Iberia to Mongolia!).
> 
> But I wonder: when they say the first Balearic settlers were heavily steppe-related what time span are they really talking about? Even before the Early Bronze Age or, even more unbelievably, before the Chalcolithic?
> 
> EDIT: Oh I see, these earliest confirmed settlers probably date from the 3rd millennium BC and perhaps as late as circa 2000 BC. So roughly Bell Beaker times.


Lots and lots of questions, right? 

I'm particularly intrigued by the following: "_ In Sicily, during the Bronze Age and possibly EARLIER, we found evidence for admixture with groups carrying both these ancestries."

_Both ancestries were present possibly earlier? Just the Iran related ancestry? One from the north, one from the southeast? 

All very exciting.

----------


## davef

> Lots and lots of questions, right? 
> 
> I'm particularly intrigued by the following: "_ In Sicily, during the Bronze Age and possibly EARLIER, we found evidence for admixture with groups carrying both these ancestries."
> 
> _Both ancestries were present possibly earlier? Just the Iran related ancestry? One from the north, one from the southeast? 
> 
> All very exciting.


I'm dying to know this as well. I had to read a lot of that abstract multiple times to ensure I wasn't misreading things. 

So I guess that's where steppe and Iran Neolithic ancestry in Sicily is from

----------


## Angela

Two papers on Bronze Age Northern Italy also presented at this conference.

"Andrea Cardarelli*, Alberta Arena**Università degli studi di Roma, “La Sapienza”

From colonization to diaspora. Models of human mobility in the Terramare Culture between Europeand the Mediterranean

The Terramare represent one of the most renowned archaeological cultures in European Bronze Age, at leastsince the late 19th century.After a long period of decline that characterized most of the 20th century, the archaeological research hastaken new impulse and has constantly grown during the last three decades, largely confirming the intuitionsof the 19th century scholars.*The Terramare are situated in the central Po River valley and date between the mid-17th and the first half ofthe 12th century BC (Middle Bronze Age and Recent Bronze Age).* These villages were equipped with artificialfortifications and could reach 20 hectares in size.With the beginning of the historical cycle of the Terramare culture, this territory appears densely populatedreaching, and perhaps exceeding, 200,000 inhabitants, during the apogee.During these five centuries, the landscape drastically changed and became intensively anthropized, withhundreds of villages, cultivated and irrigated fields, roads and other kind of infrastructures.*The intense demographic growth recorded for the early phases of the Terramare cycle does not seemto be explained only by an internal increase, but rather as the result of diverse forms of human mobility.*After a long period of great economic and social success, the Terramare culture entered a deep crisis that ledto its collapse, a very complex phenomenon still not fully understood. Certainly, *among the motivations thatcontributed to the disappearance of the Terramare, there were critical environmental and ecological conditions,but also the rigidity of the economic and socio-political model.Plausibly, the disappearance of the Terramare is correlated with the deep socio-economic transformationsthat occurred in continental Italy in the last centuries of the second millennium BC.* The archaeological evidence suggests that *more or less large groups of refugees from the collapsing Terramare moved also southwardsthroughout the Italian peninsula.The paper will focus on the possible role of the mobility in the rise and collapse of the Terramare*, in thewider context of the Bronze Age Europe and Mediterranean."

Two migrations? One contributing to the rise and one to the fall of the Terramare?

Another one:

"Claudio Cavazzuti1,2, Robin Skeates1, Andrew Millard11Durham University, Department of Archaeology2Istituto Centrale per la Demnoetnoantropologia, Roma"

"Mobility of people in Northern Italy Bronze Age communities investigated through isotope analyses"

"How did people move across the landscape during the Bronze Age in Northern Italy? To what extent weredifferent categories of people mobile? How did mobility patterns change during the second millennium? Canwe observe differences between small villages and large centres?

The Ex-SPACE project (Exploring Social Permeability in Ancient Communities of Europe) has addressedthese questions, *applying strontium, oxygen and carbon isotope analyses to a sample of 160 individuals (and40 baseline samples) from four cemeteries situated in the Po plain.* The* sites, which represent various culturalcontexts and chronological phases of the Bronze Age, were selected in order to understand how mobilitychanged in relation to the socio-political development from the small kinship-based communities of the Early Bronze Age to the Terramare system of the Middle and Late Bronze Age, and finally, to the complex societiesof the Final Bronze Age*.The sampling strategy was conceived so as to explore mobility patterns among different categories ofindividuals, differentiated by sex, age, burial chronology/topography and grave goods.

We found that,* regardless of long-term trends, the central place of a polity played a crucial role in determiningthe characteristics of mobility and the permeability to non-local components. Moreover, as also highlighted byother studies in Europe (notably Knipper et al.’s 2017 study on Bell Beaker and EBA in Bavaria), the movementof female individuals appears to have been of primary importance in defining a system of alliances, powerrelations and trade networks.*A further element of interest is the relation between mobility and social inequalities. *At Frattesina* -theimportant port of trade which emerged as the Terramare system declined, *commoners appear almostcompletely indigenous, while elites moved extensively across the hinterland, plausibly as part of the processof establishing and reinforcing power relations. Among them we distinguished a warrior chief, who was anoutsider and may have contributed to the overcome of the traditional isonomy of the Terramare and to theinstitution of a more hierarchical structure of society."

*I don't understand what they mean by the importance of "Polity". We'll have to wait and see.

Could this movement of Terramare people "south" explain the arrival of "steppe" ancestry in Sicily?

----------


## Cato

First settlers in the Balearic were Bell Beaker that's why they had high steppe..

The other study said that steppe in Ancient Sardinia was almost completely absent, not totally absent...strange considering that Bell Beaker there were of the same physical type of those in Continental Europe

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## Angela

In addition to these Bronze Age papers on Northern Italy and the OP one, there are lots of others on the Northern Bronze Age etc., and another one on the Caucasus. They're not revealing very much in the abstract. Hope we get it soon.

"Svend Hansen1, Sabine Reinhold1, Wolfgang Haak2, Chuan-Chao Wang21Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien Abteilung2Max Planck Institut für Menschheitsgeschichte, Department of Archaeogenetics" 

"At the interface of culture and biology – First results from a paleogenetic transect through BronzeAge populations of the Caucasus" 

"The Caucasus is one of the most important geographical joints in Western Eurasia. Linking Europe, Western Asiaand the Eurasian steppe zone, this region today is one of the genetically and linguistically most diverse spotsof Eurasia. It is easy to imagine that repeated population influx and drain, but similarly compartmentalisationin the remote mountain valley is behind this modern situation.Eneolithic and Bronze Age populations play an important role in this scenario, as they represent thefirst epochs of formations, which can be regarded either as associated ‘cultures’ and/or coherent biologicalpopulations. *A first study on the paleogenetic background of 50 individuals from the 5th to the 2nd millenniumBC, which represent all cultural formations of Bronze Age Caucasia, give a first insight into highly complexscenarios of interaction. The paleogenetic perspective could proof the presence of populations with differentgenetic-make ups and different biological vectors of formation among these individuals. Affiliation bymaterial cultural and other archaeological attributes, however, revealed epochs of interaction, where culturaland biological borders were crossed, and those, where no population exchange seemed to have happenedamong the neighbouring inhabitants of one area.* This region thus allows to study in detail the mixing andinterdigitation of people, their materiality and cultural systems and challenge many of the too simple modelsdeveloped for another interface of the Eurasian steppe zone those directed towards Europe."

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Two papers on Bronze Age Northern Italy also presented at this conference.
> 
> "Andrea Cardarelli*, Alberta Arena**Università degli studi di Roma, “La Sapienza”
> 
> (...)
> 
> Two migrations? One contributing to the rise and one to the fall of the Terramare?


Andrea Cardarelli is an archeologist who teaches at La Sapienza. His past papers are usually very much based on trying to give credence to ancient Greek sources, rather than based on objective archaeological data. Let's see if now he has really found archaeological evidence on what he is trying to prove.

----------


## Cato

Terramare influences in Sicily only touched the eastern part and the Aeolian Islands (Ausonio I and II)

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## Johane Derite

> So there was an Anatolian migration after the " Yamnaya Package " into mainland Europe, wich i always say. But i'm a little bit confused on many points. How Iran_Neo pass through Anatolian_Neo for it to not be that important in this paper and the genetic makeup of BA Greece? *I feel like they want to tell us that Steppe Ancestry brought something like Paleohispanic language or a " Vasconic " group, while Iran_Neo brought IE languages.* We can see that their Greece Iran_Neo ancestry is dated for 1500 so Mycenaean, wich is the dream of Lazaridis. Hope they gonna clarify their idea of what they try to say for not being confused. Because you know that even if the paper is absolutely not about IE languages, it is totally about it in every interested person mind, them included.


This made me curious and I would love for you to explain what makes you think this, also what you mean by the dream of Lazaridis?

----------


## halfalp

> This made me curious and I would love for you to explain what makes you think this, also what you mean by the dream of Lazaridis?


I think it's easy to explain a " big " story with " few " samples. And obviously 3000BC Bell Beaker doesn't equal 1500BC Mycenaean Greece in terms of IE studies, because we dont know the hell what BB people spoked, but we know what Mycenaean people spoked. So it's easy to deduce their idea " if we see an imput of Iran Related ancestry in Mycenaean Greece, wich is the first Greek speaker, so IE languages in Greece came with Iran related ancestry and not with Steppe related ancestry. "
I think it's the same story as the " CHG " in Yamnaya that Reich is pushing for being an " Iran_Neolithic " ancestry. As for Lazaridis, i just follow his Twitter for years now, and i read things, and the conclusion is: He loves Greece, like he really loves Greece. And anything coming from Greece can be see maybe not personal, but important for him. I'm going way further with that " IE conclusion " in this paper, because i know it's a general big deal. Once Bronze Age Europe is involve, everything is about IE languages, and i'm cautious in the way few samples are used to wright a story that might come later. But to be fair, an Anatolian ( where else? the sea? ) migration in mainland Europe after the Bell Beaker ( i roughly told to myself from 2200 to 1200 before Jesus Christ ), was always one of my expectation.

----------


## Fatherland

> I think it's easy to explain a " big " story with " few " samples. And obviously 3000BC Bell Beaker doesn't equal 1500BC Mycenaean Greece in terms of IE studies, because we dont know the hell what BB people spoked, but we know what Mycenaean people spoked. So it's easy to deduce their idea " if we see an imput of Iran Related ancestry in Mycenaean Greece, wich is the first Greek speaker, so IE languages in Greece came with Iran related ancestry and not with Steppe related ancestry. "
> I think it's the same story as the " CHG " in Yamnaya that Reich is pushing for being an " Iran_Neolithic " ancestry.* As for Lazaridis, i just follow his Twitter for years now, and i read things, and the conclusion is: He loves Greece, like he really loves Greece. And anything coming from Greece can be see maybe not personal, but important for him.* I'm going way further with that " IE conclusion " in this paper, because i know it's a general big deal. Once Bronze Age Europe is involve, everything is about IE languages, and i'm cautious in the way few samples are used to wright a story that might come later. But to be fair, an Anatolian ( where else? the sea? ) migration in mainland Europe after the Bell Beaker ( i roughly told to myself from 2200 to 1200 before Jesus Christ ), was always one of my expectation.


This is why there can never be a purely objective geneticist.

----------


## Cato

As far as i know there arent archaeological traces of Anatolians moving into Europe in the bronze age, at least in Western Europe....

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

Who am I kidding I'm not quitting this forum after seeing this post - wow is all I have to say.

Perhaps, this is actually legitimate evidence for my theories of (pre-)L51 ancestors of the Beaker metallurgical elite coming over from West Asia to Spain via the Mediterranean before spreading to the Rhineland.

I can't believe it - Steppe pre-Bronze Age changes everything. If this turns out to be Chalcolithic (pre-)L51, I think it's safe to say they didn't come from the Steppe, but rather following the previous Megalithic sea route.

Down with Yamnaya, and long live the Southern Caucasus, homeland of L23!

And also, screw Davidski - that guy hates West Asians.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> This is why there can never be a purely objective geneticist.


The community is extremely inbred to be honest, don't you think it's odd that all of these guys hold the exact same basic viewpoint despite the lack of current evidence? It reminds of the narrow-mindedness of far-left and far-right circles, or at least it does to me - there really is basically no diversity of opinion, unlike these forums.

Also, I have seen Lazaridis's Twitter, and it amazes me how someone that seemingly stupid can get as far as he has. Maybe it's a language barrier thing though, who knows.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> In addition to these Bronze Age papers on Northern Italy and the OP one, there are lots of others on the Northern Bronze Age etc., and another one on the Caucasus. They're not revealing very much in the abstract. Hope we get it soon.
> 
> "Svend Hansen1, Sabine Reinhold1, Wolfgang Haak2, Chuan-Chao Wang21Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien Abteilung2Max Planck Institut für Menschheitsgeschichte, Department of Archaeogenetics" 
> 
> "At the interface of culture and biology – First results from a paleogenetic transect through BronzeAge populations of the Caucasus" 
> 
> "The Caucasus is one of the most important geographical joints in Western Eurasia. Linking Europe, Western Asiaand the Eurasian steppe zone, this region today is one of the genetically and linguistically most diverse spotsof Eurasia. It is easy to imagine that repeated population influx and drain, but similarly compartmentalisationin the remote mountain valley is behind this modern situation.Eneolithic and Bronze Age populations play an important role in this scenario, as they represent thefirst epochs of formations, which can be regarded either as associated ‘cultures’ and/or coherent biologicalpopulations. *A first study on the paleogenetic background of 50 individuals from the 5th to the 2nd millenniumBC, which represent all cultural formations of Bronze Age Caucasia, give a first insight into highly complexscenarios of interaction. The paleogenetic perspective could proof the presence of populations with differentgenetic-make ups and different biological vectors of formation among these individuals. Affiliation bymaterial cultural and other archaeological attributes, however, revealed epochs of interaction, where culturaland biological borders were crossed, and those, where no population exchange seemed to have happenedamong the neighbouring inhabitants of one area.* This region thus allows to study in detail the mixing andinterdigitation of people, their materiality and cultural systems and challenge many of the too simple modelsdeveloped for another interface of the Eurasian steppe zone those directed towards Europe."



AAAAAAAAAAAA IT'S COMING! IT'S SO OBVIOUS... CAUCASIAN R1B-L23!!!

I can't wait to see Davidski's metaphorical face when they publish R1b-L23 samples from the Caucasus (but I CAN definitely wait to see Olympus Mons misinterpret it lol)

I'm so excited, these results better come out before Christmas.

----------


## Fatherland

> The community is extremely inbred to be honest, don't you think it's odd that all of these guys hold the exact same basic viewpoint despite the lack of current evidence? It reminds of the narrow-mindedness of far-left and far-right circles, or at least it does to me - there really is basically no diversity of opinion, unlike these forums.


Spot on man!

----------


## Ygorcs

> So there was an Anatolian migration after the " Yamnaya Package " into mainland Europe, wich i always say. But i'm a little bit confused on many points. How Iran_Neo pass through Anatolian_Neo for it to not be that important in this paper and the genetic makeup of BA Greece? I feel like they want to tell us that Steppe Ancestry brought something like Paleohispanic language or a " Vasconic " group, while Iran_Neo brought IE languages. We can see that their Greece Iran_Neo ancestry is dated for 1500 so Mycenaean, wich is the dream of Lazaridis. Hope they gonna clarify their idea of what they try to say for not being confused. Because you know that even if the paper is absolutely not about IE languages, it is totally about it in every interested person mind, them included.


I do not think they implied in the abstract that the Iranian farmer ancestry arrived alone, in unadmixed form (I wonder if they really did differentiate it clearly from CHG ancestry, this variation and uncertainty between a CHG and an Iranian source is unsettling for me). These "Iranians" were actually probably Anatolian populations of the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age people in my opinion, already an intensive mix of Anatolian-Neo with Iranian-Neo (and CHG too maybe). But if they migrated to a place already very rich in Anatolian-Neo ancestry then the real novelty would be Iranian-Neo alone and they would not have changed the Anatolian farmer-like percentages much.

As for Vasconic, I see no reason to not believe, considering how little steppe ancestry they have, that maybe the EEF were not always the defeated and assimilated ones. It would be really strange in my opinion that ansolutely all the languages of Europe of the Iron Age had come from the east, either the steppes or West Asia. EEF ancestry still remained in very high amounts in much of the continent, and I find it hard to believe they just never managed to win this cultural dispute.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

If what I've been going on about for so long turns out to be the case, you all owe me $5 and Davidski owes me $50 :P

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

Actually just out of pure excitement, if they find either South Caucasian L23 older than Yamnaya or Western European L51 older than Yamnaya, I'll give the first person to quote this $10 via PayPal.

This is so ridiculously pointless, but god I would literally feel so vindicated.

----------


## Salento

> Why is ancient Italy and Rome so understudied despite proportionately being way more important to european history than obscure swamps


To find Real early Roman DNA is a bit complicated, Cremation was popular until the rise of Christianity, and by that time around 1 million people lived in Rome from all over the Empire.

----------


## Yetos

> By Turks and Arabs maybe?


how come?

the altaic component is so low in Greece, lower than N and W Europe.

----------


## berun

It must have some autosomal effect either as Turks ruled the Balkans five centuries, otherwise we might take into acount the Byzantine empire and little and free movements inside it, the Roman empire, the same, Alexander the Great empire, even if colonies were in Asia, but we can think about movements of artisans into the Balkans, or then the dark and shadowed epoch of the Sea Peoples, but it was mainly an Aegean expansion to me.

----------


## berun

Eitherway the Altaic in Turks is lesser than the Levantine? the proportion would be keept or even be less depending on the Turkish region and momentum.

----------


## halfalp

Wasn't after the Caucasus paper, Reich doing research on Prehistoric Italy?

----------


## epoch

> In addition to these Bronze Age papers on Northern Italy and the OP one, there are lots of others on the Northern Bronze Age etc., and another one on the Caucasus. They're not revealing very much in the abstract. Hope we get it soon.
> 
> "Svend Hansen1, Sabine Reinhold1, Wolfgang Haak2, Chuan-Chao Wang21Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien Abteilung2Max Planck Institut für Menschheitsgeschichte, Department of Archaeogenetics" 
> 
> "At the interface of culture and biology – First results from a paleogenetic transect through BronzeAge populations of the Caucasus" 
> 
> "The Caucasus is one of the most important geographical joints in Western Eurasia. Linking Europe, Western Asiaand the Eurasian steppe zone, this region today is one of the genetically and linguistically most diverse spotsof Eurasia. It is easy to imagine that repeated population influx and drain, but similarly compartmentalisationin the remote mountain valley is behind this modern situation.Eneolithic and Bronze Age populations play an important role in this scenario, as they represent thefirst epochs of formations, which can be regarded either as associated ‘cultures’ and/or coherent biologicalpopulations. *A first study on the paleogenetic background of 50 individuals from the 5th to the 2nd millenniumBC, which represent all cultural formations of Bronze Age Caucasia, give a first insight into highly complexscenarios of interaction. The paleogenetic perspective could proof the presence of populations with differentgenetic-make ups and different biological vectors of formation among these individuals. Affiliation bymaterial cultural and other archaeological attributes, however, revealed epochs of interaction, where culturaland biological borders were crossed, and those, where no population exchange seemed to have happenedamong the neighbouring inhabitants of one area.* This region thus allows to study in detail the mixing andinterdigitation of people, their materiality and cultural systems and challenge many of the too simple modelsdeveloped for another interface of the Eurasian steppe zone those directed towards Europe."


That is the Wang paper. Check the authors.

----------


## epoch

> Greek and Armenian were once the same language. If Greek speakers came from Balkans where did Armenians came from? Clearly Greek speakers and Armenian were Anatolian populations


Phrygian is even closer to Greek and several classical author mention Phrygians coming from the Balkans.

----------


## Cato

> By Turks and Arabs maybe?


No idea, but even Germans and some prehistoric Europeans (1 Salzmunde, 1 Funnelbeaker) have some of it

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## Lenab

> Phrygian is even closer to Greek and several classical author mention Phrygians coming from the Balkans.


Yes they did and yes they do.

----------


## berun

> No idea, but even Germans and some prehistoric Europeans (1 Salzmunde, 1 Funnelbeaker) have some of it
> 
> Utilizzando Tapatalk


well, a 10% of Germans have Turkish ancestry, so... for the Neolithic cases in which paper appear?

----------


## Cato

genetiker, the admixture graph 

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## Ygorcs

> I largely agree. I don't, however, think it came from Iberia. 
> 
> I always thought this is the "Ligurian" element in Italy, which once covered broad swathes of the Northwest, stretching to the North Central. 
> 
> 
> 
> I do think the lack of penetration of U-152 to the south, and indeed some of the autosomal differences are also partly the result of the fact that the area covered by the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was separated politically from the north for at least 1000 years. That also explains the "amalgamation" in the south which makes them more similar to one another than areas in the north, very separated from one another as well as the south for the same 1000 years. 
> 
> The genetic "break" in the cline is just south of Rome.
> ...


1) Yes, I also do not think it came from Iberia directly, rather I think it is more likely that both Iberia and Italy were impacted by the same influx that probably came from France via Rhine Bell Beaker-derived cultures. In my opinion it is possible that those "uncertain" languages like Lusitanian, Ligurian, Venetic and Siculian are the remnants of this first wave of "R1b-L51" BB-derived Indo-European, though relative re-convergence to Celtic and/or Italic may have happened during the Iron Age (not very different from how Galician, Leonese, Aragonese and other Iberian languages clearly converged slowly to become more Castillian-like, or Bokmal Norwegian became clearly Danish-like after centuries of influence). 

2) I don't know if I understood your point very well, but do you think that the U152 expansion was still happening reasonably late in history, during the Middle Ages, and it was not mainly completed by the time of the Italic migrations and later the Roman expansion? I concluded something like that based on your assertion that part of the genetic differentiation between the two regions as far as U152 is concerned may be partly attributed to the relative and reciprocal isolation for much of the Middle Ages and Modern Era. Your point about how the southern population is much more similar to one another than the northern population, which has signs of more genetic isolation and drift, is very interesting, indeed.

3) I was maybe a bit too enthusiastic and hasty to assume that R1a(x M458) means necessarily R1a-Z93. It may also include or even be mostly composed of R1a-Z283 clades except for the "typical Slavic" M458, and still a brother of R1a-Z93. R1a-Z282 (x Z93) seems to be much more common in Greece than Z93 alone, though much of it may have come with Slavic (and maybe some Turkic/Avar too) input. But I still think that the heavy frequency of R1a (x M458) in the South Italian samples of that study may also suggest to us that the Ancient Greeks already had some of that non-M458 R1a in their original gene pool, not just the often speculated R1b-Z2103, J2a and J2b.

----------


## halfalp

> 1) Yes, I also do not think it came from Iberia directly, rather I think it is more likely that both Iberia and Italy were impacted by the same influx that probably came from France via Rhine Bell Beaker-derived cultures. In my opinion it is possible that those "uncertain" languages like Lusitanian, Ligurian, Venetic and Siculian are the remnants of this first wave of "R1b-L51" BB-derived Indo-European, though relative re-convergence to Celtic and/or Italic may have happened during the Iron Age (not very different from how Galician, Leonese, Aragonese and other Iberian languages clearly converged slowly to become more Castillian-like, or Bokmal Norwegian became clearly Danish-like after centuries of influence). 
> 
> 2) I don't know if I understood your point very well, but do you think that the U152 expansion was still happening reasonably late in history, during the Middle Ages, and it was not mainly completed by the time of the Italic migrations and later the Roman expansion? I concluded something like that based on your assertion that part of the genetic differentiation between the two regions as far as U152 is concerned may be partly attributed to the relative and reciprocal isolation for much of the Middle Ages and Modern Era. Your point about how the southern population is much more similar to one another than the northern population, which has signs of more genetic isolation and drift, is very interesting, indeed.
> 
> 3) I was maybe a bit too enthusiastic and hasty to assume that R1a(x M458) means necessarily R1a-Z93. It may also include or even be mostly composed of R1a-Z283 clades except for the "typical Slavic" M458, and still a brother of R1a-Z93. R1a-Z282 (x Z93) seems to be much more common in Greece than Z93 alone, though much of it may have come with Slavic (and maybe some Turkic/Avar too) input. But I still think that the heavy frequency of R1a (x M458) in the South Italian samples of that study may also suggest to us that the Ancient Greeks already had some of that non-M458 R1a in their original gene pool, not just the often speculated R1b-Z2103, J2a and J2b.


What's interesting is that R1b-DF27 was found in a Cogotas sample 1700-1000BC, wich make it likely that Bell Beaker's where culturally and transitional between Western Europe Neolithic and Italo-Celtic Western Europe. Bell beaker lingua franca probably could be some pre-italo-celtic wich would give daughter language sometimes more related to the Italic family and sometimes more related to the Celtic family. Such hypothetic languages could be, as you said, Lusitanian, Ligurian, Ancient Belgian, Britain Pictish and Venetic. All those languages have the particularity to be related with IE languages, but undirect with Italic or Celtic ones. And to come from strong Bell Beaker strongholds.

Edit: What i was trying to say with my R1b-DF27 comment is that 1700-1000BC is a fork wich seems to be more correlated with Italo-Celtic ( Urnfield/Hallstat ) than Bell Beaker ( even if Cogotas I is a site think to be related with BB? ). Wich also make sense looking the fact that his brother R1b-S28 is mostly an Alpine lineage.

----------


## halfalp

> If you were to arrange the defining mutations in a joing network like this, presumably the geographical distribution of the mutations closer to the origin *might* tell us something about the place where the branch first arose:
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of M269 I think that might simply have been misleading. Perhaps some places/populations simply preserved Y-chromosome diversity better than others? I'm not sure.


I'm still confused, i just read a paper from a certain Clyde Ahmad Winters about the origin of R1-M173 in Africa and in the Conclusions he says:
" The greatest diversity of haplogroup R is found in Africa, not Asia ". So what's all this diversity, how is it really relevant if one can say it's in Iran and an other can say it's in Africa?

----------


## Angela

> 1) Yes, I also do not think it came from Iberia directly, rather I think it is more likely that both Iberia and Italy were impacted by the same influx that probably came from France via Rhine Bell Beaker-derived cultures. In my opinion it is possible that those "uncertain" languages like Lusitanian, Ligurian, Venetic and Siculian are the remnants of this first wave of "R1b-L51" BB-derived Indo-European, though relative re-convergence to Celtic and/or Italic may have happened during the Iron Age (not very different from how Galician, Leonese, Aragonese and other Iberian languages clearly converged slowly to become more Castillian-like, or Bokmal Norwegian became clearly Danish-like after centuries of influence). 
> 
> 2) I don't know if I understood your point very well, but do you think that the U152 expansion was still happening reasonably late in history, during the Middle Ages, and it was not mainly completed by the time of the Italic migrations and later the Roman expansion? I concluded something like that based on your assertion that part of the genetic differentiation between the two regions as far as U152 is concerned may be partly attributed to the relative and reciprocal isolation for much of the Middle Ages and Modern Era. Your point about how the southern population is much more similar to one another than the northern population, which has signs of more genetic isolation and drift, is very interesting, indeed.
> 
> 3) I was maybe a bit too enthusiastic and hasty to assume that R1a(x M458) means necessarily R1a-Z93. It may also include or even be mostly composed of R1a-Z283 clades except for the "typical Slavic" M458, and still a brother of R1a-Z93. R1a-Z282 (x Z93) seems to be much more common in Greece than Z93 alone, though much of it may have come with Slavic (and maybe some Turkic/Avar too) input. But I still think that the heavy frequency of R1a (x M458) in the South Italian samples of that study may also suggest to us that the Ancient Greeks already had some of that non-M458 R1a in their original gene pool, not just the often speculated R1b-Z2103, J2a and J2b.


1. I completely agree. I used to recount that Portuguese sometimes sounded to me a bit like the Ligurian dialect, and that's why I found it relatively easy to pick up. :) I don't know. Maybe that was my imagination. 



2. Until we have the ancient dna it's difficult to estimate how much U-152 might have made it into the deep south in the Bronze Age, let's say. Could it have been very much an elite migration? Or, was there a more significant amount which might have been diluted by the Greek migrations as well as the Iran Neo "like" migrations which also came in the Bronze Age? Any subsequent migrations also have to be considered, even if it's only a few percent.. Even with ancient dna it may be difficult to come to firm conclusions. 

All I was getting at is that other than the "Lombard" migrations into Sicily, you didn't get much movement of more "northern" clades into the south after the Roman Era. There also was no movement south to north. The south, including Sicily, was either part of the Byzantine Empire, or the Normans, or later the Spanish. Whoever ruled it, it was largely one unit, which permitted internal migration but inhibited migration to or from the north. 

As I said, the Lombards used to pacify the island after the Moorish control of about 200 years is another story. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards_of_Sicily

I've met Sicilians here who have ancestors whom they've traced back to my own Liguria and Emilia in the Middle Ages, very high U-152 areas. They came from Piemonte and French areas like Brittany and Normandy as well, although that would have brought a different pattern of yDna. 

One of the things which has always struck me about Italian genetics is indeed that southerners are pretty similar to one another. Northerners are more different from one another from what I can see, as well as obviously different from southerners. Part of that is different migration waves, the Apennines which separate west from east, but part of it is also that for most of the time we were separated into different kingdoms, city-states etc. 

Just a small personal example: in all the time I've been on 23andme, all my close legitimate "matches" are from northwest Italy and Tuscany, none from Lazio south, but also none from Venezia or even eastern Lombardia, Marche, or even Romagna. It's amazing.

3.) I don't know what R1a (non M-458) the Mycenaeans might have carried, if indeed they carried an R1a lineage rather than the often cited R1b one, but whatever one it might be, there's very little of it in Greece.

----------


## Megalophias

> I'm still confused, i just read a paper from a certain Clyde Ahmad Winters about the origin of R1-M173 in Africa and in the Conclusions he says:
> " The greatest diversity of haplogroup R is found in Africa, not Asia ". So what's all this diversity, how is it really relevant if one can say it's in Iran and an other can say it's in Africa?


I can't tell if you're joking? Clyde Winters' claims are generally fictional. Usually wildly fictional.  :Smile:

----------


## halfalp

> I can't tell if you're joking? Clyde Winters' claims are generally fictional. Usually wildly fictional.


I dont joke. That's an article that i've found googling " what is haplogroup diversity? ". He doesn't look fictional, i mean it's not a fake, it's a real scientist right? How could he faked some results?

----------


## Megalophias

Lol no he's not a scientist. Check out his posts on EgyptSearch, they're hilarious

For instance here (you have to scroll down) for the origins of white people:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ul...;f=15;t=012676

----------


## berun

> well, a 10% of Germans have Turkish ancestry, so... for the Neolithic cases in which paper appear?


Two farmers between a hundred may be a problem with the running program or with the quality of samples, the last resorts would be a caste or a component Levantine-like.

----------


## Ygorcs

> I'm still confused, i just read a paper from a certain Clyde Ahmad Winters about the origin of R1-M173 in Africa and in the Conclusions he says:
> " The greatest diversity of haplogroup R is found in Africa, not Asia ". So what's all this diversity, how is it really relevant if one can say it's in Iran and an other can say it's in Africa?


Don't even waste your time with anything written by the "independent researcher" Clyde Ahmad Winters. He is clearly a strongly Afrocentric revisionist author who always makes everything possible (not necessarily scientifically sound, to say the least) to tie genetics, archaeology and linguistics to Africa and more specifically West Africa (certainly nothing personal, right?), and he talks too much of subjects he is not fully prepared to analyse (he is not a geneticist, but writes papers - not peer-reviewed of course - about it). Much of what he says borders on the bizarre. If you don't believe me, see the list of his papers in Research.gate (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Clyde_Winters): _Paleoamericans came from Africa, Pre-Columbian black Mexican tribes, first Europeans were Subsaharan Africans, first European farmers came from Africa, Olmec language was a Mande (African) language, R1-M173 was spread to Eurasia by people of Kush, Dravidian people and agriculture came from Africa, Tocharian was actually a Dravidian language..._ That's more than enough for conclusions. Just ignore his texts.

----------


## Ygorcs

> Lol no he's not a scientist. Check out his posts on EgyptSearch, they're hilarious
> 
> For instance here (you have to scroll down) for the origins of white people:
> http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ul...;f=15;t=012676


Wow I can't believe an Afrocentric person in that thread had the guts to say this ridiculously bigoted sentence: _Caucasians as a whole are more of genetically recessive inbred mutant population in comparison with their Africoid genetic superiors._ They learned social darwinism and racism from the whites really well, huh? :-o

As for Clyde Winter, all I can say is: ROFLMAO. :-D He really believes no white people existed at all 4800 years ago and they come from black people who had lived in caves, isolated from the blacks on the ground since the LGM, and the cavemen left them to colonize Eurasia from the Caucasus. People who lived inside caves for millennia! That requires at least a lot of creativity! LOL

----------


## Megalophias

> I would think the easy counter to Winter's claims would be how Subsaharan Africans spent so much history as being conquered and/or enslaved by MENAs or Euros.


It's a waste of time to argue against patently ludicrous claims, those making them did not arrive there by reasoning. And talking about who conquered and oppressed who in the past is not a good way to begin a rational debate in any case.  :Smile: 

Besides, as any rabid ethnocentrist will explain to you, when their superior and virtuous people have been defeated by their naturally inferior enemies, it can only be possible because those enemies are especially evil and treacherous.

----------


## halfalp

> Don't even waste your time with anything written by the "independent researcher" Clyde Ahmad Winters. He is clearly a strongly Afrocentric revisionist author who always makes everything possible (not necessarily scientifically sound, to say the least) to tie genetics, archaeology and linguistics to Africa and more specifically West Africa (certainly nothing personal, right?), and he talks too much of subjects he is not fully prepared to analyse (he is not a geneticist, but writes papers - not peer-reviewed of course - about it). Much of what he says borders on the bizarre. If you don't believe me, see the list of his papers in Research.gate (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Clyde_Winters): _Paleoamericans came from Africa, Pre-Columbian black Mexican tribes, first Europeans were Subsaharan Africans, first European farmers came from Africa, Olmec language was a Mande (African) language, R1-M173 was spread to Eurasia by people of Kush, Dravidian people and agriculture came from Africa, Tocharian was actually a Dravidian language..._ That's more than enough for conclusions. Just ignore his texts.


Yeah, i was more concerned about the " more genetic diversity " than the ethnic story behind it.

----------


## Ygorcs

> Pan troglodytes have at least as much genetic diversity as homo sapiens.


I honestly need to ask you: what do you exactly mean in this context? I just hope it's not what I am thinking...

----------


## halfalp

> The point was even if Winters claims on genetic diversity were so then it wouldn't lead to some superiority or whatever you call it.


No i think the point was " R1 came from Africa, therefore, Europeans are mostly R1, so ,most Europeans are whitened Africans, therefore, real Africans are superior than Europeans " Something on those lines.

----------


## Jovialis

Good news, parts of the event will be filmed, and posted to Youtube. Here is an e-mail response I received from the person in-charge of coordinating the event:



This is the official Youtube page of OREA:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgr...f_7Dg70rcW5bMw

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> I don't think anyone here doubts that the Carthaginians conquered Sardinia, I only doubt that they left much of a genetic impact because that's what the genetic evidence suggests.
> 
> 
> 
> That's Pausanias referring to the mythical past of Sardinia. He said that the North of the Tyrsus river lived the Libyans and the natives, and South of the Tyrsus lived the Trojans and Greeks, and that they avoided fighting because they were equal in number, of course this can't be taken as a historical account.


I don't think he says what you write exactly.

Basically in his text there is something that could explain low Punic admixture, the fact Carthaginians used 'Iberian' and 'Libyan' mercenaries, according to that account.

Concerning these 'Libyans' there's also the possibility of a copying mistake or confusion based on the similarities between Libues vs Ligues, Libici etc.

The linguistic affiliation of Ligurians is uncertain either way, so it would be worth considering if the Ligues, Ligures, Libici and whatnot of Europe have anything in common with North African Libues apart from the similar sounding names. I am not talking necessarily about a movement from N Africa. Even if an account is wrong there should be something that leads to that mistake.

If I was writing a scientific study I would have been very cautious but now that I'm not doing that, I'm considering the texts reflect real movements from 1) NW Anatolia, 2) Spain and either 3) Liguria or N. Africa

----------


## MOESAN

points_
Northern Italy (Bergamo Valleys and plain, Tortona-Voghera and Borbera Valley) is characterised by an extremely high incidence of the R1b 
haplogroup (69.0%) when compared to all the other main haplogroups whose frequencies do not reach 10%. This haplogroup, which characterises a wide portion of the gene pool of the examined populations, shows a decreasing frequency pattern from North to South Italy, where it shows its lowest incidence (27.5%). This pattern is virtually totally ascribable to R1b-U152, the most represented R1b sub-lineage, whereas no frequency gradients were detected for the other sub-lineages. R1b-S116*(xU152, M529) is equally represented in all the Italian populations (Figure 3, dusty rose sector in secondary pies). This shows the highest frequencies in two isolated areas of Northern Italy: Borbera Valley (12.9%) and Bergamo Valleys (17.9%). The frequency peak is particularly noticeable in Bergamo Valleys in comparison to the neighbouring plain area (17.9% vs 3.8%, respectively, p < .01).
[...]
Thus, taking into account that the highest reported incidence of R1b-S116*(xU152, M529) is in Iberia (Adams et al., 2008 Adams SM, Bosch E, Balaresque PL, Ballereau SJ, Lee AC, Arroyo E, López-Parra AM, et al. 2008. The genetic legacy of religious diversity and intolerance: paternal lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula. Am J Hum Genet 83:725–736.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], , [Google Scholar]; Myres et al., 2011 Myres NM, Rootsi S, Lin AA, Järve M, King RJ, Kutuev I, Cabrera VM, et al. 2011. A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe. Eur J Hum Genet 19:95–101.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], , [Google Scholar]), its high frequency_ _in the relatively isolated populations of the Bergamo and Borbera Valleys could represent the outcome of ancient gene flow from that area, possibly magnified by genetic drift. On the other hand, R1b-M412*, so far described only in Turkey, Iran, Cyprus and Crete (Myres et al., 2011 Myres NM, Rootsi S, Lin AA, Järve M, King RJ, Kutuev I, Cabrera VM, et al. 2011. A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe. Eur J Hum Genet 19:95–101.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], , [Google Scholar]; Voskarides et al., 2016 Voskarides K, Mazières S, Hadjipanagi D, Di Cristofaro J, Ignatiou A, Stefanou C, King RJ, et al. 2016. Y-chromosome phylogeographic analysis of the Greek-Cypriot population reveals elements consistent with Neolithic and Bronze Age settlements. Investig Genet 7:1.[Crossref], [PubMed], , [Google Scholar]), is observed in all the four Southern Italian samples, all from the ancient Magna Graecia area, but only sporadically in population groups from Northern Italy. The R1b-M412* Y chromosomes could, therefore, represent the legacy of an Eastern Mediterranean input associated with the early Hellenic colonisation, and/or the more recent Byzantine domination. This scenario is supported by the high frequency of R1b-M412* in the Griko-speaking community of Grecìa Salentina (13.4%), where haplogroup R1b-M412* probably reflects ancient colonisation events from Greek-speaking islands rather than continental Greece_

. 
A point of view
Y-R1b-M472 = Y-R1b-L51 if I dont mistake.
Come in Italy from Greece ? Possible. But with Mycenians or well defined Greeks ? I doubt. Its presence would be very older in Italy, and come as well from South as from North.
Its level presence in Italy as opposed to the gradiant North-South of grandgrand daughter Y-R1b-U152 is uneasy to analyse. It could be as well the result of  at some stage  a denser pop of M472 in North than in South and its capacity there to give birth to downstream SNPs. Very often I read people thinking that every SNP level marks a different pop, as if children were not of the same family as their parents ! Yes, there are and there has been founder effects changing drastically the proportions of diverse up- and down-stream SNPs. So giving the impression of different pops sometimes, but the downstream SNPs are born by upstream SNPs (do I say again! LOL). Genetics is dynamics.
A conservative pop concerning SNP (old, upstream) is not by force living in the cradle, or at least not by force the precise geographic source of a diaspora, I said that already. Of course, this  conservative  pop and its place of life is not more by force too far of the called cradle.
Concerning Iberia, and S116/P312, the domination of Iberia is rather tiny, and by the way its downstream to M412/L51, so not sure to mark a  cradle . In Italy its rather level, according to someones, but not always, and here again, some strongholds are in Northern Italy in isolated highlands places ; one can say its the proof of a layer of more ancient pop. Maybe, not proved !

Here again, same reasoning of mine : these less peopled areas are by force the one where the new downstream SNPs had less chances to be born. Paradoxe: a far place rich in upstreams and poor in downstream is seen as the "parent" of places rich in downstream and poor in upstream, and a same kind of place BUT close is seen as excluded from the possible "parent"... we need clear gradual trail.
I have no cristal bowl, so I affirm nothing, but I take some caution with some mainstream deductions concerning places of birth of SNP. What works well with very distinct lineages can mistake us with close lineages.

Maybe I am wrong all the way. My brain is tired, my 70s are approaching dangerously. Dont send me flowers. A bottle of whisky perhpas ?...

----------


## Jovialis

Here's another Youtube page associated with the organization.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_N...S7z3Q/featured

Hopefully they'll post those videos soon.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

> Here's another Youtube page associated with the organization.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_N...S7z3Q/featured
> 
> Hopefully they'll post those videos soon.


Check Twitter, it’s gonna be a while until they’ve finished censoring

----------


## Jovialis

> Good news, parts of the event will be filmed, and posted to Youtube. Here is an e-mail response I received from the person in-charge of coordinating the event:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the official Youtube page of OREA:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgr...f_7Dg70rcW5bMw


The videos have been posted to their Youtube page!

----------


## Jovialis

_Mobility of people in Northern Italy Bronze Age communities investigated through isotope analyses_




Here's the lecture on Bronze-Age Northern Italy.

*"Steppe and Iranian ancestry among Bronze Age Central and Western Mediterranean populations"* with Ron Pinhasi, Daniel Fernandes, David Reich has not been published. Though it still might be, considering OREA just uploaded a new one today. Most of these were posted on the 14th.

----------


## I1a3_Young

> _Mobility of people in Northern Italy Bronze Age communities investigated through isotope analyses_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the lecture on Bronze-Age Northern Italy.
> 
> *"Steppe and Iranian ancestry among Bronze Age Central and Western Mediterranean populations"* with Ron Pinhasi, Daniel Fernandes, David Reich has not been published. Though it still might be, considering OREA just uploaded a new one today. Most of these were posted on the 14th.


Fantastic

Sent from my SM-G935V using Eupedia Forum mobile app

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Mobility of people in Northern Italy Bronze Age communities investigated through isotope analyses
> 
> 
> Here's the lecture on Bronze-Age Northern Italy.
> 
> *"Steppe and Iranian ancestry among Bronze Age Central and Western Mediterranean populations" with Ron Pinhasi, Daniel Fernandes, David Reich has not been published.*


The text in bold comes from another study.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

New talk:

----------


## Angela

No surprises, but a good review for those unfamiliar with the Terramare Culture. 

Without ancient dna we can't be sure, but the archaeological track from the Danubian plain into Terramare in the Po Plain and Emilia, and then beyond into Central and Southern Italy after its collapse is mirrored by very high genetic correlation between Italians and Bronze Age Hungary. 

Anyone have a genetic breakdown of Bronze Age Hungary handy?

The tie with the Sea Peoples is again not knew. As some of us have been saying forever, the gene flow went both ways across the Adriatic. Interesting too that she shows a map pointing toward the Peloponnese, the area of mainland Greece with the highest genetic similarity to Italy, and Crete, where there is also a lot of similarity. That's of course in addition to all the shared Neolithic ancestry.

I wildly speculated years ago, way back when I was active on the 23andme forums, that perhaps some of the people who attacked and then mixed with the inhabitants of the coastal Levant were from Italy and that this might help to account for some of the more "western Mediterranean" admixture in Jews. As I said, complete speculation. We need ancient dna besides the swords and other artifacts.

----------


## Cato

Basically she's confirming that Terramare are an Alpine (Polada) and Danubian mix if i'm not wrong

Utilizzando Tapatalk

----------


## Pax Augusta

*Towards a new osteometric method for sexing ancient cremated human remains. Analysis of Late Bronze Age and Iron Age samples from Italy with gendered grave goods
*

Claudio Cavazzuti ,Benedetta Bresadola,Chiara d’Innocenzo,Stella Interlando,Alessandra Sperduti

Published: January 30, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209423




*Abstract*

Sex estimation of human remains is one of the most important research steps for physical anthropologists and archaeologists dealing with funerary contexts and trying to reconstruct the demographic structure of ancient societies. However, it is well known that in the case of cremations sex assessment might be complicated by the destructive/transformative effect of the fire on bones. Osteometric standards built on unburned human remains and contemporary cremated series are often inadequate for the analysis of ancient cremations, and frequently result in a significant number of misclassifications. This work is an attempt to overcome the scarcity of methods that could be applied to pre-proto-historic Italy and serve as methodological comparison for other European contexts. A set of 24 anatomical traits were measured on 124 Bronze Age and Iron Age cremated individuals with clearly engendered grave goods. Assuming gender largely correlated to sex, male and female distributions of each individual trait measured were compared to evaluate sexual dimorphism through inferential statistics and Chaktaborty and Majumder’s index. The discriminatory power of each variable was evaluated by cross-validation tests. Eight variables yielded an accuracy equal to or greater than 80%. Four of these variables also show a similar degree of precision for both sexes. The most diagnostic measurements are from radius, patella, mandible, talus, femur, first metatarsal, lunate and humerus. Overall, the degree of sexual dimorphism and the reliability of estimates obtained from our series are similar to those of a modern cremated sample recorded by Gonçalves and collaborators. Nevertheless, mean values of the male and female distributions in our case study are lower, and the application of the cut-off point calculated from the modern sample to our ancient individuals produces a considerable number of misclassifications. This result confirms the need to build population-specific methods for sexing the cremated remains of ancient individuals.

----------


## Olympus Mons

> *Towards a new osteometric method for sexing ancient cremated human remains. Analysis of Late Bronze Age and Iron Age samples from Italy with gendered grave goods
> *
> 
> Claudio Cavazzuti ,Benedetta Bresadola,Chiara d’Innocenzo,Stella Interlando,Alessandra Sperduti
> 
> Published: January 30, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209423
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Pax, 
The study keeps referring Goncalves (David) and Pires (Ana)... at the time (2016) I had just finished writing my shulaveri-Shomu hypothesis, but on Fridays my daughter was on Chemotherapy and I used to sit at a chair (Kids do chemo with parents sited next) and there was a 3 year old kid every Friday that seated in front of my daughter, Luca, and he just adored my daughter. One day the parents asked us for a coffee on a Sunday. To cut short imagine me being immersed in Shulaveri Shomu, archaeogenetic, Adna…. And when I asked what they did for a living they were very embarrassed to explain not knowing how. Ana Elizabete talked for a minute. I smiled and said really? I am particularly interested in the Chalcolithic ancient dna, Y-dna, Mtdna, autosomal, bla bla bla….they couldn’t believe I knew about the subject matte they investigated for a living and what were the odds two Portuguese meeting in that way, and both even knowing about that matter. 
I have their phone number…. But I don’t know what happened to Luca (it was really, really bad) and today still never find the courage to call or ask.
What a gentle soul Luca is…

----------

