Lombard DNA in Italy

I dunno but I am sure that future Italians will have a lot of Slavic and Romanian mtdna lineages, by looking at ratio of immigration and inter ethnic mixing...
 
I have found this map,which they say is telling about R1b-U152 in Italy:
http://r1b.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/U152_Only_Map.png
http://r1b.org/?page_id=242
I do not know how accurate these percentages are.

I have already stated that a lot of swabians went into verona, vicenza and treviso ....even towns where completely swabian , like my grandmother from Merlengo was originally Merling from the same named town in swabia, and Merlengo is only 6km north of Treviso

But, the paper does state this from an earlier period

The influence of the Central European Bell Beaker Begleitkeramik group does seem to have made an impact in the formative phase of the Polada Culture in northern Italy and the late Bell Beaker period in Tuscany.[16][17] The changes brought on by the Polada Culture are so apparent that, by unanimous opinion, a movement of human groups has been presumed between Central Europe and the Po Valley.[18][19][20] The direction or origin of the gene flow is difficult to assess however.

But L2 of the U152 branch sticks out in northeast italy and into central austria .............there is a paper on this
 
I dunno but I am sure that future Italians will have a lot of Slavic and Romanian mtdna lineages, by looking at ratio of immigration and inter ethnic mixing...
:D
Maybe it was same in the past,was lots of Germanic migrants coming to Roman Empire,cause in those times German states were not even existing and Germanic tribes barely had what to eat.
Think Vikings ,when they started the expansion were desperate to make a living ,they did not had enough land to farm in Scandinavia.
Same about other Germanic tribes who started to invade Europe.
 
Well why would you take the percentages of Germanic Mtdna in North Italy?
It is supposed that most Germanic people coming in North Italy and settling there were males.
It should be something logic,that since Roman Empire had such an aggressive external policy with taking males and putting them in the army,lots of Romans died .
I understand that only after lots of years in military services Roman males were allowed to settle and than ,they could marry and have children.
So I think it was a serious shortage of Roman males in whole Italy.
And in North Italy,Germanic males took mostly native Italic women as wives and got assimilated to Italic ethnicity.
If Roman Empire would not have encountered a serious shortage of males,than Germanic tribes could have not overrun Italy and conquer it.
Cause Roman Empire army was much more superior as fighting techniques and equipment ,compared to Germanic tribes.
There is the legend of "great Germanic warriors" or "great Vikings warriors",come on,those are fairy tales.
These people were not even having metal shields,were disorganized. Any serious army would have beat hard the "great Vikings".

The account of Paul the Deacon makes it clear that the Lombard movement into Italy was a true folk migration which included women and children, even if there weren't all that many of them. That isn't to say that there might not have been a higher ratio of men vs women. Regardless, I don't see how such a relatively small group, even if it wasn't a totally elite male migration, could have had a massive impact on the Italian genome even in the northern half of the country. I'm not denying that it had some impact. Time, more ancient dna, and better analysis will tell the tale.

We also don't know yet what specific yDna clades they carried, although it's generally held that R1b U106 and I1 are probably a good bet. I would think that R1b L21 is probably more likely to be Gallic in origin. There is certainly some evidence for "Gallic/Celtic migrations into northern Italy from various directions in the first millennium BC, although again the exact numbers are not known. See Barry Cunliffe:
https://books.google.com/books?id=N...QSXyICoCw&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=lombard folk migration into italy&f=false

The presence of R1b L21 in northwestern Sicily might be from the Normans, who might have picked up some of it in Normandy and perhaps some of the "Belgian" Normans carried it as well. We also have R1b L21 in Liguria.

As for U-152, it's been speculated for years that it might correlate with the Urnfield culture,among other central European cultures. This map isn't totally accurate, in my opinion, but it gives a general idea:
480px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg
That isn't to say that some of the downstream clades couldn't have been picked up by the "Lombards" and come to Italy later.


None of that has anything to do with the policies of the Roman military. You were indeed not permitted to marry until you had served out your term of military service. However, it was well known that "unofficial" families were established with local women wherever the legions were stationed.

That is, in turn, separate from the fact that throughout Roman history colonies of Roman soldiers and their families were established, using land taken from defeated rivals, and sometimes established to pacify these newly conquered areas. That is how both Parma and Luni were founded, the two Roman cities closest to me. Roman colonies are attested in Spain, France, Pannonia, and, indeed, Romania.
 
The account of Paul the Deacon makes it clear that the Lombard movement into Italy was a true folk migration which included women and children, even if there weren't all that many of them. That isn't to say that there might not have been a higher ratio of men vs women. Regardless, I don't see how such a relatively small group, even if it wasn't a totally elite male migration, could have had a massive impact on the Italian genome even in the northern half of the country. I'm not denying that it had some impact. Time, more ancient dna, and better analysis will tell the tale.
I find this matter particularly interesting, because, according to FTDNA, an appreciable amount of my autosomal (16%) belongs to what they call Scandinavian cluster, and having no german or other "nordic" known ancestors in my family line, but just northern italians, I speculated a little about that. I discovered that my maternal grandpa's birthplace, Cervarese S. Croce, a town halfway between Padua and Vicenza in N/E Italy, was a quite important lombard centre in the early Middle Ages. Furthermore, Vicenza was the capital of a lombard Duchy, founded shortly after their arrival from present day Hungary. These facts suggest me that lombards contributed to my family, somehow. Unfortunately, I don't know what FTDNA has to say about other northern italians' autosomal data.
 
@Angela: you are avoiding the subject "German origin words in Lombard dialects".
I have talked to people from Lombardia and they have told me that the dialects (or even languages) spoken in Lombardia are not that mutually intelligible with Italian.
If someone looks on an autosomal admixture map of Italy,is clearly seen that in North Italy NW European admixture (which has the maximum in South Sweden,South Norway and Denmark) is much higher that in South Italy.If that is not a proof that a significant number of German people settled there ,how else that admixture got there?
As a comparison in Spanish language there a lot of words of Germanic origin.And also,plenty of NW admixture.However,I do not see too much talked on this forum about the Germanic blood of Spaniards.
EDIT:
Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emilian_dialect
Actually the languages spoken in Lombardia are from Gallo-Italic group of languages being more closed to French,than to Italian.
Now,Italian is the official language and people needs to learn it,even if they are willing or not.
Now,I do not think there is anyone denying French are mixed with Franks at least -I think they are also mixed with other Germanic people. Would be interesting to research if Lombards are more Celto-Germanic,than Celto-Italic.

Estimating ethnic influences or migrations by means of language or religion is notoriously unreliable, as these are cultural elements that can be easily adopted by other peoples who otherwise have little or nothing else to do with the people where those cultural elements came from. No historian worth his salt makes inferences based only on such things. By using this "logic" based on language or religious elements, we would be forced to conclude that British people are strongly "Latin" or that Serbo-Croatians are strongly "Turkish-Arab-Persian" just because a lot of words in those languages came from those other languages. Cultural influence does not equate with actual ethnic influence.
 
About 8% of the Spanish dictionary is made of Arabic words.

http://www.transpanish.biz/translation_blog/the-influence-of-arabic-on-the-spanish-language/
Considering that the Spanish lexicon is well over 100000 words:

http://catalog.elra.info/product_info.php?products_id=833

It's actually less than 4% of words in Spanish that come from Arabic.

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans.

Those "agenda driven charlatans" happen to be actual historians specializing on this subject, and who unlike you actually know what they are talking about.

Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....

All of whom came in as small, if not smaller, numbers as the Lombards, and also many of those tribes did not permanently settle down in Italy but kept on moving.
 

Considering that the Spanish dictionary has more than 100000 words:

http://catalog.elra.info/product_info.php?products_id=833

It is actually less than 4% of Arabic-derived words in Spanish.

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans.[/quoted]

Those "agenda driven charlatans", like the one referred to above, happen to actually be historians specializing on the era in question, so unlike you they actually have more familiarity with the subject, and they all agree that the numbers of these Germanic invaders were relatively small when compared to the peoples they encountered living in those territories they invaded.

Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....

All of whom came in as small, if not smaller, numbers as the Lombards, and many of these tribes did not permanently settle down in Italy but kept on moving.
 

Considering that the Spanish vocabulary has more than 100000 words:

http://www.languagepossible.com/

It is actually less than 4% of Arabic-derived words in Spanish.

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans.

Those "agenda driven charlatans", like the one referred to above, happen to actually be historians specializing on the era in question, so unlike you they actually have more familiarity with the subject, and they all agree that the numbers of these Germanic invaders were relatively small when compared to the peoples they encountered living in those territories they invaded.

Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....

All of whom came in as small, if not smaller, numbers as the Lombards, and many of these tribes did not permanently settle down in Italy but kept on moving.
 
The 8% figure come from professional linguists, but I understand your extreme butthurt.

Here are other source by the professional linguists Quintana, Lucía; Mora, Juan Pablo

http://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ele/asele/pdf/13/13_0697.pdf

All of whom came in as small, if not smaller, numbers as the Lombards, and many of these tribes did not permanently settle down in Italy but kept on moving.

Many? I can only think of Visigoths and maybe Alemans, but there is also evidence for their permanent settling in Italy.

By the time Visigoths arrived in Iberia, they were mostly Balkanic and Italic from a genetic point of view.

Real Visigoths settled in masse only in France.

and they all agree that the numbers of these Germanic invaders were relatively small when compared to the peoples they encountered living in those territories they invaded.

Which does not change the fact that there is no way to know for sure how many settled, so they are simplying talking out of their asses.
 
Everytime I see this kind of threads, I love when the usual idiot came out saying that medieval migrations did not change nothing.

Then I see this graph of IBD blocks sharing between populations from Ralph Coop et al. and I laugh.

PmiqF8C.png


Too bad that Southerners are overepresented in that cluster from the POPRES Database. They should be only 20% of the samples, but they are about 60%.
 
The 8% figure come from professional linguists, but I understand your extreme butthurt.

Here are other source by the professional linguists Quintana, Lucía; Mora, Juan Pablo

http://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ele/asele/pdf/13/13_0697.pdf

Unfortunately for you and them, it is very easy to prove them wrong on this. All we have to do is take a look at the Real Academia Española (RAE) dictionary of the Spanish language and its over 93000 words (which is not the actual total for the Spanish language as a whole):

http://www.rae.es/sites/default/files/Preambulo.pdf

to plainly see that about 4000 words of Arabic origin obviously do not make up 8% of the vocabulary. Simple math. I know that you are "butthurt" (as you say) and all, and want to desperately inflate that number (as if it really meant anything relevant to begin with; you might as well rant about the over 1000 words of Arabic origin in English), but it just ain't going to happen.

Many? I can only think of Visigoths and maybe Alemans, but there is also evidence for their permanent settling in Italy.

The Vandals and the Suevi/Suebi/Swabians did not end up in Italy either.

By the time Visigoths arrived in Iberia, they were mostly Balkanic and Italic from a genetic point of view.

By the same token, by the time they arrived in Italy they were already mostly Balkanic from a genetic point of view.

Real Visigoths settled in masse only in France.

The Visigoths in France were part of the same kingdom as that in Iberia:

visigoth_kingdom.jpg


Which does not change the fact that there is no way to know for sure how many settled, so they are simplying talking out of their asses.

No, they are giving educated estimates based on such things as historical and/or archaeological evidence.
 
Unfortunately for you and them, it is very easy to prove them wrong on this. All we have to do is take a look at the Real Academia Española (RAE) dictionary of the Spanish language and its over 93000 words (which is not the actual total for the Spanish language as a whole):

http://www.rae.es/sites/default/files/Preambulo.pdf

to plainly see that about 4000 words of Arabic origin obviously do not make up 8% of the vocabulary. Simple math. I know that you are "butthurt" (as you say) and all, and want to desperately inflate that number (as if it really meant anything relevant to begin with; you might as well rant about the over 1000 words of Arabic origin in English), but it just ain't going to happen.

There is not reference to 4000 words in the PDF I've linked. You are inventing stuff again.

8% of Spanish vocubalary is made up of Arabic words.

Read the complete article again.

http://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ele/asele/pdf/13/13_0697.pdf




The Vandals and the Suevi/Suebi/Swabians did not end up in Italy either.



By the same token, by the time they arrived in Italy they were already mostly Balkanic from a genetic point of view.



The Visigoths in France were part of the same kingdom as that in Iberia:

View attachment 7202




No, they are giving educated estimates based on such things as historical and/or archaeological evidence.

By Swabians I meant the late Medieval Hohenstaufen dinasty who ruled Italy for about two century, not the Germanic tribe. Vandals occupied Sardinia, Corsica and parts of Sicily.

Visigoths settled in masse in France, then they slowly expanded south.
 
Italy had as well the Gothic kingdom. In red.
 
Yes and before them the Scires and the Erules lead by Odoacer.

Lombards brought also many Gepids and Saxons with them into Italy.
 
M8s can you please stop arguing about Arab words from Spanish?
This thread is about Lombards genetics in Italy.
 
Now coming back to the thread,I understand that according to history,Lombards moved first in Austria and from Austria,moved to Italy.
It would be common sense,that they moved first in North East Italy.
According to the percentages of R1B-U152 ,from the Boattini et al. ,R1B-U152 can not be carried by Lombards since highest density is in NW Italy.
I think that Lombards should have brought some I1,some I2B,maybe even some R1A and other HGs that they might have picked up from Austria.
I know that there some I2A in NE Italy,that could have been also brought by Lombards and other Germanic migrators,picked up from Austria and Pannonia.
EDIT:
Here is the table with detailed results,of 884 samples of males DNA,per area:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/asset?unique&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0065441.s013
Percentages of I1 in Vicenza:
From 40 samples,we have 7 samples being I1 - 6 are I1-M253 and 1 is I1d-L22.
So a quite spectacular result,14.3% of the paternal lines in Vicenza are I1.
So I think most of these I1 could be attributed to Lombards,cause I1 is mostly of Scandinavian origins.
Another weird thing,4 samples of these 40 samples are L-M20 which I think is also brought by Germanics,who have mixed with some Asians,or Fino-Ugric people,or Turkic people.
From these 40 samples,only 4 are R1B-U152/L20.So I think is clearly out of questions that Germanics might have brought R1b-U152 to Italy.
 
Italian wasn't artificially created by Dante. Many North Italians had an important role to make the Tuscan the main language of Italy: Pietro Bembo, Alessandro Manzoni and many others.




Italian wasn't really accepted by some of the poorest and uneducated people. Italian was already the language of the upper class of most of the preunitarian states with few exceptions.

Even the Republic of Venice used for many centuries since the 1500 AD the Tuscan as language in the internal affairs: "Così, per es., le relazioni degli ambasciatori veneziani al Senato della Serenissima all’inizio del XVI secolo appaiono scritte in un volgare sostanzialmente toscano, cioè italiano, ma che conserva ancora elementi fonologici, morfologici e lessicali veneziani."

"La diffusione di una lingua letteraria di base toscana era cominciata già attorno alla fine del XIII secolo a Bologna; nel secolo successivo i principali poli di irradiazione furono le città del Veneto (Venezia, Treviso, Padova) e la corte dei Visconti a Milano. Nel 1332 il metricologo e poeta padovano Antonio da Tempo dichiara la lingua tusca, cioè il toscano, magis apta [...] ad literam sive literaturam quam aliae linguae «più adatta all’espressione scritta e alla letteratura delle altre lingue». Sempre nel Trecento, il modello fiorentino si diffonde anche in centri dell’Italia centrale e meridionale come Perugia e Napoli. Il processo di unificazione della lingua letteraria, anzitutto poetica, procede – anche se con esitazioni e regressioni – nel Quattrocento, accelerando alla fine del secolo, grazie soprattutto all’affermarsi del petrarchismo.
Più tarda è l’adozione del toscano nella lingua amministrativa. La prima corte che adotta il fiorentino trecentesco come modello, oltre che nella letteratura, anche nella prassi cancelleresca, è quella di Ludovico il Moro, signore di Milano tra il 1480 e il 1499 (Vitale 1988).

Le lingue in uso nelle corti d’Italia tra Quattrocento e Cinquecento avevano abbandonato i tratti dialettali più evidenti, ma facevano pur sempre concessioni nella fonetica e nella morfologia ai volgari locali. Il successo della proposta arcaizzante di ➔ Pietro Bembo, che appoggiava la lingua letteraria all’uso degli autori fiorentini del Trecento, soprattutto ➔ Francesco Petrarca e ➔ Giovanni Boccaccio, spezza il filo che le lingue cortigiane mantenevano con la lingua parlata, e dunque anche con i volgari locali.
Nell’ambito cancelleresco, amministrativo, giuridico, ecc., l’uso dell’italiano-fiorentino restava basato su conoscenze approssimative e condizionato dal volgare locale più a lungo di quanto accada nella lingua letteraria. Così, per es., le relazioni degli ambasciatori veneziani al Senato della Serenissima all’inizio del XVI secolo appaiono scritte in un volgare sostanzialmente toscano, cioè italiano, ma che conserva ancora elementi fonologici, morfologici e lessicali veneziani. Questo genere di lingua è chiamata spesso tosco-veneto. Nei decenni successivi i tratti locali vennero progressivamente abbandonati, e si giunse entro la fine del secolo a una pressoché completa toscanizzazione (Durante 1981: 163-164; Tomasin 2001: 158-164). L’adozione del modello toscano nel secondo Cinquecento e nel Seicento è un fenomeno che riguarda più in generale la lingua degli scriventi colti di tutta Italia. Da questo termine in avanti solo le scritture dei semicolti (➔ italiano popolare) presentano fenomeni di ibridismo tra la norma scritta nazionale, l’italiano, e la lingua parlata locale, il dialetto (Bartoli Langeli 2000). "


Source:
http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/volgari-medievali_(Enciclopedia-dell'Italiano)/




Northern Italian Pomo and French Pom both derives from Latin pomum, generic term for a fruit. In Sicilian there is pumu, in Italian/Tuscan there is pomo (just as in Gallo-Italic and Venetian) but considered obsolete in Tuscany.

Giovanni Boccaccio (medieval Tuscan writer) from The Decameron

«nell'un di questi forzieri è la mia corona, la verga reale e 'l pomo »





"dì" is Italian/Tuscan of Latin origin (Latin dies), not northern Italian only. If you were Italian, you'd know it.

buon dì (or buondì) and buongiorno are both Italian. Buondì is still used today in many regions of Italy, not only in North Italy.

http://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/di/


Giovanni Boccaccio (medieval Tuscan writer) from The Decameron

«Io son veramente colui che quell'uomo uccisi istamane in sul di" »




Dì is not Gallo-Italic and Romanian doesn't surely derive from a Gallo-Italic dialect.

Excellent post. However, I am going to be moving all the posts which go into a detailed analysis of the Italian language to a dedicated thread I have just created. That includes my own posts. It was high time, anyway, that such a thread was created.
 
A discussion of Arabic loan words into Spanish is totally off topic. Any further such comments will be removed.
 

This thread has been viewed 238763 times.

Back
Top