Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Otzi-The Ice Man's Origins-Early Italian

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Otzi-The Ice Man's Origins-Early Italian

    I've heard people say Otzi is Early Italian,but I can't seem to figure out what that means. I mean, is he Italian genetically or not? And by that I mean does he genetically match other people who are known to be ethnically Italian?

    I believe there were no countries in Europe 5,000 years ago-so Otzi was in the mountains ,not in modern day Italy. And he could have walked over to Italy from Austria the same way anyone could have walked across any border,and the border might not have existed 5,000 years ago.

    So what the hell is Otzi? Does anybody really know?

    I know he doesn't match modern day haplogroup Mt K, but Mt K itself is said to be German-Austrian type,so that's what Otzi must be.

    Besides no one mentions anything about "real" Italians anyway-I haven't heard too much about them.

  • #2
    You are right that back then there were no Italians, not even Romans. What the scientists have claimed is that he seemed to have lived in the valley to the south, based on pollen and other similar evidence. Incidentally, the valley to the south, while in Italy, is in South Tyrol, which is inhabited by German speakers.

    As for the mt K, I think he is K1*, so he's well within K, though his particular subgroup beyond K1 doesn't seem to exist anymore,or at least, nobody's been found yet. Curiously, I think I remember from some study that K is very common in the aforementioned valley.

    cacio

    Comment


    • #3
      You must learn to take things in historical perspective. Otzi came from an area, which has had all sorts of different ruling groups. Even prior to WWII, it was considered to be "Austrian."

      The simplest way to look at it is that he is native to that region, regardless of what modern boundaries exist.

      I have a similar issue describing my Y-DNA line, being Sudeten German. People as "Where is your family from?" I can give all sorts of answers. If I was to put it in the words of my ancestors, themselves, they'd say "Austria," since that was the country they left at the time. But, that area became Austria-Hungary, then Czechoslovakia, and now the modern Czech Republic. But, saying the modern country is misleading since everyone from the country presumes if you're from the Czech Republic that you are ethnically Czech, which is not that case (because the country is almost all Czech now). Most people are unaware they booted out all Germans (1/3rd of the population) at the end of WWII. In records going back 500 years, I haven't found a single Czech ancestor. So, what am I left with? Well, given that they said they were Austrian and I have living relatives who are now in modern Austria, I do that, but still don't think it's geographically accurate.

      What's my point?

      That if you focus on modern borders, it makes no genetic sense.

      Consider regions very locally and highly specific. It's the only way it works.
      Last edited by jr76x; 1 March 2009, 07:23 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        What :"was' Oetzi?

        Originally posted by Jambalaia32 View Post
        I've heard people say Otzi is Early Italian,but I can't seem to figure out what that means. I mean, is he Italian genetically or not? And by that I mean does he genetically match other people who are known to be ethnically Italian?

        I believe there were no countries in Europe 5,000 years ago-so Otzi was in the mountains ,not in modern day Italy. And he could have walked over to Italy from Austria the same way anyone could have walked across any border,and the border might not have existed 5,000 years ago.

        So what the hell is Otzi? Does anybody really know?

        I know he doesn't match modern day haplogroup Mt K, but Mt K itself is said to be German-Austrian type,so that's what Otzi must be.

        Besides no one mentions anything about "real" Italians anyway-I haven't heard too much about them.
        What "was" he?
        Oetzi was one of us, a Homo Sapiens, Cro-Magnon type person.
        He would have spoken a pre-IndoEuropean, or maybe an early Celto-Germanic tongue.
        Archaeologic finds in the region tell us that thereabouts,in 3300 BC he might,( if he could afford it), have lived in a nice timber house, perhaps with floorboards, maybe on stilts on the border of a lake or in a sheltered valley.

        He did not have, or need a nationality!
        His cultural identity, that of his Neolithic-Copper age family, village and tribe, was sufficient; his personal pride came from what he knew they all thought of him. His tattoos suggest he had achieved some distinction.

        You know the rest from the many essays on what his corpse revealed. Since it lay on the soil of modern Italy, and no living relatives claimed him, Italy gladly accepted reponsibility for its disposition.

        Comment


        • #5
          Interesting message! The Otzi man was a Cro-Magnon type.
          I saw some pictures of him and I thought that he was a mixture of
          Alpine/Mediterranean type (very dark haired).

          I do not think that he spoke a kind of Germanic or Celtic language.
          It is impossible that he spoke a Germanic language, because the
          Germanic languages arose in the area of Jastorf (north and central
          Germanic) during the Bronze Age. I often read that people think
          that Germanic and Celtic languages are very related to each others.
          Although both are of course Indo-European languages, the Celtic
          languages are much more related to the Italian languages (one of them
          was latin). The Germanic is much more separated from Celtic.
          But during the Latene Era the Germanic languages were exposed to the
          Celtic culture (for example the word iron from isarno).

          Comment


          • #6
            RE what's an Austrian...

            Originally posted by jr76x View Post
            You must learn to take things in historical perspective. Otzi came from an area, which has had all sorts of different ruling groups. Even prior to WWII, it was considered to be "Austrian."

            The simplest way to look at it is that he is native to that region, regardless of what modern boundaries exist.

            I have a similar issue describing my Y-DNA line, being Sudeten German. People as "Where is your family from?" I can give all sorts of answers. If I was to put it in the words of my ancestors, themselves, they'd say "Austria," since that was the country they left at the time. But, that area became Austria-Hungary, then Czechoslovakia, and now the modern Czech Republic. But, saying the modern country is misleading since everyone from the country presumes if you're from the Czech Republic that you are ethnically Czech, which is not that case (because the country is almost all Czech now). Most people are unaware they booted out all Germans (1/3rd of the population) at the end of WWII. In records going back 500 years, I haven't found a single Czech ancestor. So, what am I left with? Well, given that they said they were Austrian and I have living relatives who are now in modern Austria, I do that, but still don't think it's geographically accurate.

            What's my point?

            That if you focus on modern borders, it makes no genetic sense.

            Consider regions very locally and highly specific. It's the only way it works.
            My maternal grandfather was born in Steyr, Austria. His mother's maiden name was Grilnauer. His own surname I try not to reveal, since it is a security risk (although I'm sure lots of people know it). Anyway, on Google recently, I found two different men with his surname (obviously German) in Moravia (Czech Republic), as well as one or two just over the border from Austria in Hungary. But they may not be genetically related, since the name is occupational in nature. "Austria got Hungary and fried Turkey in Greece", is what I heard when I was little.

            Take a look at ISOGG for Oetzi:

            http://www.isogg.org/
            Last edited by PDHOTLEN; 2 March 2009, 09:07 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              speculation re Sudetenland Germans

              I think it is in Oppenheimer's book (Origins of the British) that I saw something regarding the Sudetenland Germans. They were originally from various sources; the southern Sudetens were Austrians; while other areas were from Silesia, Saxony and Bavaria.

              Comment


              • #8
                Oetzi's language?

                Responding to haganus (03 02 2009); thanks for your informative comments.

                1. I apologise for labelling Oetzi as "Cro-Magnon type" This is just my outdated 20th century nomenclature. The term has been replaced by AMH, or "anatomically modern human", meaning any post-Neanderthal Homo Sapiens, of whatever later differentiation, like "Alpine".

                2. What would have been Oetzi' s language? On checking, I note that Paleolinguistic science views Oetzi's lifetime (3300 BC) as being in a language fringe period, with Indo-European percolating irregularly across Europe, and not yet differentiable to the level of Celtic, Germanic, Latinate etc. Its arrival, adoption and differentiation would probably be much delayed in Alpine terrain, where traditional lifestyles are strongly retained even today.

                Comment


                • #9
                  probably not related to subject...

                  From what I've gathered from a couple of sources and putting 2 & 2 together, there was an early branch of Indo-European in the west Balkans-Hungarian-Austrian Danube regions that was classified as Illyrian/Pononnian (or etc). They would have occupied the middle Danube; with earliest German moving up the Dniester (Anthony); and Celtic-Italic moving into Italy, probably via the Sava-Drava river plain in Croatia. But that's just my current speculation, subject to change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Language drift

                    Originally posted by PDHOTLEN View Post
                    From what I've gathered from a couple of sources and putting 2 & 2 together, there was an early branch of Indo-European in the west Balkans-Hungarian-Austrian Danube regions that was classified as Illyrian/Pononnian (or etc). They would have occupied the middle Danube; with earliest German moving up the Dniester (Anthony); and Celtic-Italic moving into Italy, probably via the Sava-Drava river plain in Croatia. But that's just my current speculation, subject to change.
                    Yes, the moves you describe are attested for the last millenium BC, long after Oetzi's 3300BC, but do elucidate the probable pattern. Paleolinguists have less very ancient evidential material to riddle, than do genographers. So it is amazing what they are able to conclude.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      RE earliest Indo-Europeans

                      THere may well have been Indo-Europeans earlier than the Celti-Italic branch. Two ancient I-E languages, for example, don't seem to be unequivocally related to that dual line: Ligurian and Lusitanian. We need a time machine to go back and see what went on.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        speculation RE Lusitanian

                        I recall one hypothesis RE the Lusitanian language that said they came down from the Alps. Assuming they were Indo-Europeans, but not Celtic-Italic, they may have been more related linguistically to the Pononnians/Illyrians, and went up the Danube and then filtered across to Iberia via Alpine valleys and foothills?

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X