PDA

View Full Version : R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?



Pages : [1] 2

Maciamo
06-09-10, 08:14
The last new paper by Myres et al. (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25949) shed new light on the overall distribution of one of the principal branches of R1b, R-U152 (aka S28). It was already clear before that R-U152 was strong in the northern half of Italy, around the Alps, southern Germany, eastern France and Belgium. It now seems that U152 is common all over France, not just in the East. (see attached map)

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/U152-Myres.jpg

Interestingly its presence in Iberia is mostly confined to Catalonia. In England it is almost exclusively found in the south, where it can exceeds 10% of the lineages.

It was obvious before that U152 was virtually absent of northern Germany, Scandinavia and Eastern Europe. But a sizeable pocket has been found in western Poland.

The last noteworthy observation is that U152 is very strong in both Corsica and Sardinia.

I have so far supported that R1b1b2a1 represents the Italo-Celto-Germanic people, i.e. the branch of the Indo-European speakers from the Pontic steppe that settled in Central Europe and dispersed all over Western and Northern Europe. In this theory, R-U106/S21 represents the Germanic branch, and R-P312/S116 the Italo-Celtic branch.

As such U152 is a branch of Italo-Celtic. But does it represent more accurately the Italic branch alone, or not ? In the last two and a half years I have equated U152 with the Alpine Celts, and more specifically the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures, that radiated from southern Germany to northern Italy, France, Belgium and southern England. If you compare the map of U152 with that of the Hallstatt/La Tène culture, the correlation is evident.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Hallstatt_LaTene.png

The only areas that don't match are north-western Iberia and Italy.

North-western Iberia was part of the La Tène culture, but only has a low percentage of U152. This can be explained simply: a small group of La Tne Celts migrated to N-E Iberia and exported their culture there while being genetically absorbed by the locals (other Celts).

But what about Italy ? If U152 was indeed associated with Hallstatt and La Tène Celts, why is it so common in the Italian peninsula ?

1) The first possibility is that Celts moved in great number to Italy. This has been historically documented by the migration of the Gauls to northern Italy, which the Romans renamed Gallia Cisalpina. Just after the Roman conquest of Gaul and southern Germany, hundreds of thousands of Gauls were taken as slaves to Italy. In the following centuries, as they became integrated in Roman society, many more Gauls moved to Italy for business or politics. It is also documented that numerous Roman senators were of Gaulish origin. Once they have reached the top level in government, it is easy to imagine that just anybody from Gaul could settle in Italy (and vice-versa, as countless Romans established themselves in Gaul).

This is all very well, but it doesn't really explain why R-152 is so strong in Corsica and Sardinia. These islands were not settled by any migrating Celts that I know of, and their remoteness and little political or economic importance did not make them prime destinations for Gauls to settle in.

Additionally, Myres' map shows that U152 peaks around Umbria and the Latium but is weaker in Alpine Italy. This could be because Gauls migrated en masse to Rome, or because so many of them were taken as slaves to Rome. But it could just as well be because U152 was actually Roman to start with.

2) This leads us to the second hypothesis: Italic people were an early offshoot of the Hallstatt Celts, and therefore all Italic tribes, including the Romans, carried a high percentage of U152. The migration to Italy might have happened at the beginning of the Hallstatt period (circa 1200-1000 BCE), or just before, during the Tumulus culture (see maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml)).

I think that the answer is surely a combination of both hypothesis. U152 has numerous subclades, and some might later be identified as Roman, or at least Italic, while others will be exclusively Gaulish or North Alpine. So far data is too scarce to see any pattern. The main subclade of U152 is L2, which is found in roughly 3/4 of all lineages, but indiscriminately anywhere from Italy to England.

elly
06-09-10, 21:06
My Elliot family, through a 'Y' match, has been traced to Larriston, Scotland; what does this say about my 'Y?'

LeBrok
07-09-10, 02:01
Interesting stuff, I'm wondering if the U106 is the Veneti tribe marker, that existed for some time where today's Poland is, before Slavic expansion. Possibly part of the tribe that settled around today's Venice. I'm surprised that Czech republic is U106 desert, though they are rich in R1b overall.

Aristander
07-09-10, 22:08
I'm still waiting for more information on my Y DNA to find out if I am SRY2627 or just R-P312/S116. Since my German speaking ancestors were from Switzerland I assume they must have stopped there when the rest of tribe moved on into Iberia and France.
Perhaps the R-152 in Sardinia and Corsica is from a founders effect from early migrants.

Chris
08-09-10, 15:50
Interesting stuff, I'm wondering if the U106 is the Veneti tribe marker, that existed for some time where today's Poland is, before Slavic expansion. Possibly part of the tribe that settled around today's Venice. I'm surprised that Czech republic is U106 desert, though they are rich in R1b overall.

Interesting. Given this new data, what are the preliminary knock-on implications for U106, in anyone's opinion?

LeBrok
08-09-10, 17:21
Sorry, I meant U152 present in Poland, as per map. It will be interesting getting subclades for Venice area and Poland to see if there are matching ones.

When you look at Normandy, second map, there is also a Celtic tribe called Veneti. We might had same celtic/sea fairing tribe in 3 places: Venice, Normandy, and Poland; all by the sea. If we can find same subclade of U152 in 3 of them, then bingo!

Theodisk
24-09-10, 21:08
Hello Maciamo,

ive contact with the people of igenea. They say, there more genetic difference between the celtic R1b-S28 and the italics. They had analyzed the genetic marker and allels (i dont know the exact english word for it) of the profiles and can say, which profile is typical celtic or italic.

Also they analyzed more difference between the germanic and nordic (northgermanic).

We know that the most R1b1b2a1a, I2b and a smaller part of I1 are the
typical mixture of germanic (continental). But the nordic (northgermanic) are most I1 and R1a.

Igenea also analyzed the profiles and they say, there before a viking-profile, a nordic-profile and at the same time in the south a seperate germanic-profile [seperate profiles of I1, I2b, R1b and so on].

Also they compared the germanic (not nordic) profile and the celtic profile. A scientist there find out, that the germanic and celtic had most 4-allels together.

At result my personal meaning is, that the most germanic (not nordic) as pre-celtic people (R1b1b2a1) looks more like celts, than the germanics who f.e. tacitus (his personal meaning is like the other mediterranean author at this time; but not the reality) describe.

Maciamo
25-09-10, 11:06
Hello Maciamo,

ive contact with the people of igenea. They say, there more genetic difference between the celtic R1b-S28 and the italics. They had analyzed the genetic marker and allels (i dont know the exact english word for it) of the profiles and can say, which profile is typical celtic or italic.

I seriously doubt so. Subclades of R-S28 (U152) do not show any particular geographic pattern. For example, the main subclade, L2, is found in roughly 3/4 of all R-S28. There is no significant differences between English, French, Belgian, German or Italian samples. L2+ and L2- are found in about the same proportion everywhere, which indicates that this mutation surely predates the split between Italic and Celtic tribes.

I have looked at STR variances, but have not found anything conclusive that would split Italic from Celtic. Actually we won't know until hundreds of ancient DNA samples are tested, because all Gaulish Celts were completely taken over by the Romans. Therefore, any R-S28 in Gaul (meaning France, Belgium, southern Germany and northern Italy) could be either Gaulish Celtic or Roman. Southern England, where R-S28 is also found at high frequencies (about 10% of the population) could be of La Tène Celtic origin, or Roman. This doesn't help us either.

Furthermore, iGenea does not have a good reputation when it comes to associate haplogroups or haplotypes with ancient ethnic groups. There has been many complaints (notably on dna-forums.com) that iGenea gave completely 'fanciful' (to stay polite) interpretations of ancient ethnicity in their reports. I remember reading that they consider G2a3b1 to be a Germanic marker (or all the possibilities this is one of the more far-fetched), or that mtDNA H could be Celtic, Germanic, Etruscan, Illyrian or Hellenic (among many others, how helpful !). They also give names of specific Germanic tribes, which is also completely fanciful and unprofessional, as there is absolutely no way of distinguishing their Y-DNA at the moment (or perhaps ever). If it is achievable one day, it will be through very deep subclade (not yet discovered) or very high STR analysis (over 100 markers) and only after hundreds of well-identified ancient samples have been tested for each tribe. It's a titanic task and I don't expect it to happen before several decades from now (unless new faster and cheaper methods of testing ancient DNA come up quickly).

Taranis
25-09-10, 12:53
2) This leads us to the second hypothesis: Italic people were an early offshoot of the Hallstatt Celts, and therefore all Italic tribes, including the Romans, carried a high percentage of U152. The migration to Italy might have happened at the beginning of the Hallstatt period (circa 1200-1000 BCE), or just before, during the Tumulus culture (see maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml)).

Well, one idea that crossed my mind on multiple times, which actually might explain this pattern is the idea that what we perceive as "Celtic" languages is actually paraphyletic.

You may be well aware of the infamous 2009 paper by Koch et al. which proposed that Tartessian was actually an Celtic language, and that the Atlantic Bronze Age was the origin of the Celtic languages. Now, the idea that Tartessian was Celtic can be thoroughly debunked, however, I give the Atlanticist school some credit in so far that they are probably right about one thing: Hallstatt/La-Tene alone cannot explain the thorough presence of Celtic languages in the Atlantic region by the time that the Classic sources start to mention it.

However, the Atlanticist school consistently ignores a few things:
- first, the complete absence of west-to-east movements from the Atlantic Bronze Age into Central Europe. Basically all the movements of innovations go out from Central Europe into the Atlantic Façade where they disperse, not vice versa.
- second, if the Atlantic Bronze Age was Celtic, what do they make out of contemporary Urnfield culture? Iberian? Etruscan? Germanic?! The fact that the Atlanticists are totally silent on the issue (read: they seem to just don't care) makes me suspicious that this hypothesis is not proper science, but politics.
- third, they totally ignore the very existence of the close relationship that exists between the Celtic and Italic languages.
- fourth, the very existence of languages which are neither Celtic nor Italic, but definitely closely related with the two families, ie Lusitanian (in Iberia) and Ligurian (in northern Italy).

Regarding the Celto-Italic relationship, there are three possible interpretations:

- First, there was a common Italo-Celtic stage from which the Proto-Celtic and Proto-Italic language split.
- Second, the Celtic and Italic languages did some common innovations after Proto-Celtic and Proto-Italic actually split.
- Third, these are merely archaisms that have been lost in other Indo-European languages.

However, most linguists will agree that while some of the commonalties of the Celtic and Italic languages are certainly archaisms, the bulk of them are actually actually innovations the two families have in common. So, even if you assume that a common proto-language stage did not exist, this demands for the development of the two language families in close geographic proximity. This, obviously, favours an origin of the Celtic languages in the Alpine (Hallstatt/La-Tene) region, and not in the Atlantic Façade.

However, perhaps a bit of both Italo-Celtic scenarios actually did happen. My suggestion, which would reconcile the problems we see (especially in respect for the Atlantic Facade) is the following: an early split between "Atlantic" Celtic languages (from which the archaic varieties of Celtic later evolved - in particular Gallaecian and Goidelic) and a common Italo-Celtic language. From the latter, Gaulish (or possibly Gallo-Brittonic, I don't know about that one?) on the one hand, and the Italic languages on the other hand evolved. Also, in this scenario it's possible that some of the Atlantic languages (ie, the Brittonic branch) did common innovations with Proto-Gaulish (notably the Q to P shift) despite having already split from it.

In this scenario, U-152 would indeed be associated with the Italo-Celtic (or, if you will "Italo-Gallic" might be more appropriate), and the scenario would perfectly explain why U-152 is associated with the Hallstatt/La-Tene cultures and with the Italic peoples.

Theodisk
25-09-10, 13:41
I seriously doubt so. Subclades of R-S28 (U152) do not show any particular geographic pattern. For example, the main subclade, L2, is found in roughly 3/4 of all R-S28. There is no significant differences between English, French, Belgian, German or Italian samples. L2+ and L2- are found in about the same proportion everywhere, which indicates that this mutation surely predates the split between Italic and Celtic tribes.

No, they dont define it with the haplogroup. The scientists from there know, that haplogroups and ancient groups were not the same.
But they match specific markers and allels of a profile (not haplogroup)
and could say, if it special for a ancient group. There are for every haplogroup (and subclade) specific profiles. F.e. nordic profiles of R1a, I1, R1b, so for every haplogroup, but the profiles dont base on the defintion of haplogroups.


I have looked at STR variances, but have not found anything conclusive that would split Italic from Celtic. Actually we won't know until hundreds of ancient DNA samples are tested, because all Gaulish Celts were completely taken over by the Romans. Therefore, any R-S28 in Gaul (meaning France, Belgium, southern Germany and northern Italy) could be either Gaulish Celtic or Roman. Southern England, where R-S28 is also found at high frequencies (about 10% of the population) could be of La Tène Celtic origin, or Roman. This doesn't help us either.
But there is an interesting thing about roman soldiers. It was typical for them, to go back to italy after the battle or assimilation. Also remember, that the romans where a mix and not only R1b people. So i and iGenea dont think that there are many roman blood out of italy. A former scientist of iGenea says, that we find nearly no italic dna in other countries out of italy. Its because of the points of the secound sentence.

But also think about the fact, that it was your personal interpretation of the haplogroups and there are also other people and scientits, not just you, who interpret the subclades of the haplogroups.
So i couldnt understand, why you say the italic and celtic where both R1b-S28. You dont know whether (and sure) the ancient italic realy were R1b-S28, because in Northern Italy settled many many celts(the most very late). Also we hadnt assigned all subclades to ancient groups. So there could be one or two subclades of R1b1b2 which are typical for italics.

Also think about the fact, that in the time of the late roman empire many gaulic soldiers were in the army of the romans.
A roman mustnt be compelling a genetic italic or etruscan. There were so many ancient groups which romans were to.


Furthermore, iGenea does not have a good reputation when it comes to associate haplogroups or haplotypes with ancient ethnic groups. There has been many complaints (notably on dna-forums.com) that iGenea gave completely 'fanciful' (to stay polite) interpretations of ancient ethnicity in their reports. I remember reading that they consider G2a3b1 to be a Germanic marker (or all the possibilities this is one of the more far-fetched), or that mtDNA H could be Celtic, Germanic, Etruscan, Illyrian or Hellenic (among many others, how helpful !). They also give names of specific Germanic tribes, which is also completely fanciful and unprofessional, as there is absolutely no way of distinguishing their Y-DNA at the moment (or perhaps ever). If it is achievable one day, it will be through very deep subclade (not yet discovered) or very high STR analysis (over 100 markers) and only after hundreds of well-identified ancient samples have been tested for each tribe. It's a titanic task and I don't expect it to happen before several decades from now (unless new faster and cheaper methods of testing ancient DNA come up quickly).
Thats a misunderstanding. They dont match haplogroups with ancient groups. The analyzed profiles which are typical for specific haplogroups.
But for this process they dont use the defintions of the haplogroups. For me its difficult to explain it in english for you.

Wilhelm
25-09-10, 15:03
So i and iGenea dont think that there are many roman blood out of italy. A former scientist of iGenea says, that we find nearly no italic dna in other countries out of italy. Its because of the points of the secound sentence.
Sorry, but iGenea is a really bad company. Their interpretations are almost pseudo-science and amateurish. What the hell is " italic dna" ?

Theodisk
25-09-10, 22:56
Sorry, but iGenea is a really bad company. Their interpretations are almost pseudo-science and amateurish. What the hell is " italic dna" ?
Their interpretations are not pseudo-science. Its a daughter company of family tree dna.

With "italic dna" i mean typical italic subclades or profiles.

Wilhelm
25-09-10, 23:10
Their interpretations are not pseudo-science. Its a daughter company of family tree dna.

With "italic dna" i mean typical italic subclades or profiles.
There are not typical italic subclades. The most common subclades in Italy are also common in Western Europe. I's bull.

Theodisk
25-09-10, 23:30
There are not typical italic subclades. The most common subclades in Italy are also common in Western Europe. I's bull.
Because we couldnt assign all subclades to the ancient groups. And we dont know all subclades.

So it is possible that there are one or two subclades which are typical italic. Maciamo says, that there are only R1b-S28/U152 typical for italic but,
1. We dont know so they realy were italics; more possible is they were only celts (Northern Italy was populated by many celts)
2. Without the consideration of the haplogroups, there were defintions of profiles/profile which were typical italic

willy
26-09-10, 01:36
Because we couldnt assign all subclades to the ancient groups. And we dont know all subclades.

So it is possible that there are one or two subclades which are typical italic. Maciamo says, that there are only R1b-S28/U152 typical for italic but,
1. We dont know so they realy were italics; more possible is they were only celts (Northern Italy was populated by many celts)
2. Without the consideration of the haplogroups, there were defintions of profiles/profile which were typical italic

Yes I agree with you Theodisk Why we have always here these kind of " informations" about "R1b1b2" and subclades to definite the Celts the Germans the Italic etc ... The Romans or Italics were J2 G2a I R1b1b2 etc ... When I read that ITALICS = one suclade of R1b1 sorry but this is idiot ! R1b1b2 is very old on the west of Europe the paleolithic or the neolithic it has nothing to do with the steppe and the "Indo Europeans" if IE means something when we talk about a IE people ? STOP please with this washing brain of R1b1b2 and the steppes and IE and etc ... STOP these interpretations .

TY Theodisk !

Maciamo
26-09-10, 11:10
Yes I agree with you Theodisk Why we have always here these kind of " informations" about "R1b1b2" and subclades to definite the Celts the Germans the Italic etc ... The Romans or Italics were J2 G2a I R1b1b2 etc ... When I read that ITALICS = one suclade of R1b1 sorry but this is idiot ! R1b1b2 is very old on the west of Europe the paleolithic or the neolithic it has nothing to do with the steppe and the "Indo Europeans" if IE means something when we talk about a IE people ? STOP please with this washing brain of R1b1b2 and the steppes and IE and etc ... STOP these interpretations .

TY Theodisk !

For those you can't read properly, I never said that all the Gaulish or Italic people were R-S28. They obviously included many different lineages, like J2, G2a, E1b1b, etc. This thread is only about trying to determine where R-S28 originated, what ancient group spread it to the places where it is common today. Starting from an ancient ethnic group and trying to guess what haplogroup they belonged to is the reverse process !

Saying that the Bretons are French is not the same as saying all French people are Bretons.
Saying that the R-S28 are Italo-Celtic is not the same as saying all Italo-Celtic people are R-S28.

Taranis
26-09-10, 11:34
What I wonder about on the map with the distribution of R1b-U152 is the area of Austria and Bohemia. This was the heartland of the early Hallstatt culture, but U152 is relatively rare there today. Could this be an artifact of the migrations period, or the sign of some completely different pattern?

Theodisk
26-09-10, 15:29
For those you can't read properly, I never said that all the Gaulish or Italic people were R-S28. They obviously included many different lineages, like J2, G2a, E1b1b, etc. This thread is only about trying to determine where R-S28 originated, what ancient group spread it to the places where it is common today. Starting from an ancient ethnic group and trying to guess what haplogroup they belonged to is the reverse process !

Saying that the Bretons are French is not the same as saying all French people are Bretons.
Saying that the R-S28 are Italo-Celtic is not the same as saying all Italo-Celtic people are R-S28.
But we should differentiate ancient italic from "modern italics". The italics were indo-europeans and the first romans were etruscans. So italics were since for not so a long time romans like the etruscans. Latin were the main language of the romans, but before, the first romans spoke a language of the etruscan, because they were etruscan and no italic in view.

Maciamo, why did you wrote that R-M228 were Alpine Celtic? Most we found in northern italy. It is very possible that this was a only italic subclade.
It could be that a part of R-S28 people were italics, but i think only a very small part. Because after the R-S28 happend other mutations and they are younger than R-S28. So its possible that the R-M228 was a near only italic subclade.

Now something else:
You wrote that the italic helmet were copied from the alpine celts. But this was few hundred years later, mostly at the early L-Tene time. There are no connection with genetics.

Taranis
27-09-10, 16:40
Hmm... I may have a hypothetical scenario which actually reconciles the distribution of U-152 with the pattern we actually see, specifically most of the patches of the map that are non-consistent with Hallstatt/La-Tene alone: The Urnfield Culture. Since I normally don't like to speculate wild like this, I'm not sure if this scenario is viable (especially, how old is U-152?) at all, but take a look anyways:

- Urnfield influence enters into Iberia via the area of Catalonia (around 9th or maybe 8th century BC), from where it disperses into the west. Of course, by the time that Classic sources start to mention the area, the area of Catalonia is firmly Iberian-speaking, and the Celtic-speaking Celtiberians are located only to the west in the Ebro valley. This paradox may be explained by the idea that the expansion of the Iberians into the area happened after the 8th century. Indeed, the Northeastern Iberian script is attested only from the 4th century BC onward (probably created under Greek influence from the Southeastern Iberian script).

- The Polish peak may be explained by the Lusatian Culture, which also was part of the Urnfield tradition. We obviously don't know what language they spoke, but it's conceivable to have been a Indo-European language related with early Celtic.

- The Italian peak (centered around Tuscany/Etruria) may be explained by the Villanovan culture, which is notable for burial rites similar to the Urnfield culture. Obviously, the relationship between Etruscan and the Italic languages, but it appears the Villanovan culture was an ancestor of the Etruscan civilization. It has also been suggested that the Q-to-P shift which occured in some Celtic and Italic languages occured under Etruscan influence. What's also been suggested is that the Etruscan civilization has dual origins.

- The Urnfield Culture evolved further into the (possibly proto-Gaulish speaking) Hallstatt Culture, which remained in contact with the Etruscans. Later (with the emergence of La-Tene, which is previously just peripherically to the Hallstatt Culture) there is the power shift from the east to the west, and probably U-152 expanded greatly westwards into later Gaul during this period.

- Expansions of the Gauls into northern Italy (Cisalpine Gaul) leads to a further enrichment of U-152 in northern Italy.

- As Maciamo suggested, slavery during the Roman period may have enhanced U-152 in Italy even further.

- The only thing not explained by this scenario above is the relative rarity of U-152 in Austria and Czechia. Based on Urnfield/Hallstatt/La-Tene influences, it should be much more common there. It's possible that some later events (Marcomannic invasions, Slavic migrations) are responsible for U-152 becoming so rare in the area.

This scenario also works with the Italo-Celtic relationship I mentioned above. So... what are your thoughts?

Theodisk
27-09-10, 17:24
Hmm... I may have a hypothetical scenario which actually reconciles the distribution of U-152 with the pattern we actually see, specifically most of the patches of the map that are non-consistent with Hallstatt/La-Tene alone: The Urnfield Culture. Since I normally don't like to speculate wild like this, I'm not sure if this scenario is viable (especially, how old is U-152?) at all, but take a look anyways:

- Urnfield influence enters into Iberia via the area of Catalonia (around 9th or maybe 8th century BC), from where it disperses into the west. Of course, by the time that Classic sources start to mention the area, the area of Catalonia is firmly Iberian-speaking, and the Celtic-speaking Celtiberians are located only to the west in the Ebro valley. This paradox may be explained by the idea that the expansion of the Iberians into the area happened after the 8th century. Indeed, the Northeastern Iberian script is attested only from the 4th century BC onward (probably created under Greek influence from the Southeastern Iberian script).

- The Polish peak may be explained by the Lusatian Culture, which also was part of the Urnfield tradition. We obviously don't know what language they spoke, but it's conceivable to have been a Indo-European language related with early Celtic.

- The Italian peak (centered around Tuscany/Etruria) may be explained by the Villanovan culture, which is notable for burial rites similar to the Urnfield culture. Obviously, the relationship between Etruscan and the Italic languages, but it appears the Villanovan culture was an ancestor of the Etruscan civilization. It has also been suggested that the Q-to-P shift which occured in some Celtic and Italic languages occured under Etruscan influence. What's also been suggested is that the Etruscan civilization has dual origins.

- The Urnfield Culture evolved further into the (possibly proto-Gaulish speaking) Hallstatt Culture, which remained in contact with the. Later (with the emergence of La-Tene, which is previously just peripherically to the Hallstatt Culture) there is the power shift from the east to the west, and probably U-152 expanded greatly westwards into later Gaul during this period.

- Expansions of the Gauls into northern Italy (Cisalpine Gaul) leads to a further enrichment of U-152 in northern Italy.

- As Maciamo suggested, slavery during the Roman period may have enhanced U-152 in Italy even further.

- The only thing not explained by this scenario above is the relative rarity of U-152 in Austria and Czechia. Based on Urnfield/Hallstatt/La-Tene influences, it should be much more common there. It's possible that some later events (Marcomannic invasions, Slavic migrations) are responsible for U-152 becoming so rare in the area.

This scenario also works with the Italo-Celtic relationship I mentioned above. So... what are your thoughts?
Also note the fact, that the north-urnfield-culture evolute to the harpstedt-nienburger-culture and jastorf-culture. The central-urnfield-culture evolute to a part of the harpstedt-nienburger-culture (which was a cultural bridge to jastorf and hallstatt) and to the hallstatt-culture.

It could also be, that alpine celts have a strong influence to non R-S28 italics (when no italics were R-S28) and they assimilated them and their dialect evolute to the italic languages. Later some R-S28 alpine celts would assimilated by italics, so this is the possible, why we think some R-S28 were also italics.

Taranis
27-09-10, 23:41
Mind you, U-106 must have been also very common in northern Germany. Indeed, in the Lichtenstein Cave (which we cannot yield to be too representative of the time/area, anyways), we find R1b-U106 inside the Urnfield context. Still, it's conceivable that (Proto-?) Celtic influences was responsible for shaping the Germanic languages, and perhaps also responsible for the split between North Germanic and South Germanic (which would have happened in the Jastorf area, anyways).

Also, what still eludes me regarding the distribution of R1b-U152 is Corsica and Sardinia. I have no explanation for that yet. :startled:

Theodisk
27-09-10, 23:55
Also, what still eludes me regarding the distribution of R1b-U152 is Corsica and Sardinia. I have no explanation for that yet. :startled:
Ich can say you why in corsica and sardinia were so much R1b-U152. Because when corsica would a part of france, many french people come to corsica.

The demography of the native-corsican is very bad, so the genes of the french (with most R1b-U152) are dominant of corsica. Its fact.
A friend of my parents is a real corsican (with french ancestors) and his wife a austrian. So many corsican with french ancestors, live on corsica.
The statistics about the haplogroup distribution are from the new-time.
So do you understand what i want so say?

How exact it is on sardinia, i dont know. But i think we must include modern migrations, because all the haplogroup statistics, dont exclude this migrations f.e. since the 18. century.

Maciamo
03-10-10, 09:44
I have split the discussion about R-U106 and Irish Gaelic (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26005)

Maciamo
07-11-10, 13:36
I came across the Maghreb Y-DNA Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/maghreb/default.aspx?section=yresults) and had a look at the R1b results. The presence of 1 to 5% of R1b in North Africa is still fairly mysterious due to the absence of detailed study on the subclades of R1b found in that region. This is why I was glad to find that one of the project members tested for subclades and happens to be R1b1b2a1b4c (U152+, L2+). I checked the STR values of other R1b's and they all seemed quite similar and could well be R-U152+. That is what I expected. In other words it means that Maghreban R1b is of Roman/Italian origin.

The presence of U152+ in the Maghreb also reinforce the hypothesis that the Romans carried this haplogroup, and that the U152 in Italy is not exclusively of Celtic origin.

Further evidence that R1b1b2 in Europe is neither of Paleolithic nor of Neolithic origin

If R1b1b2 had come to Europe during the Neolithic expansion, it would most likely also have reached North Africa during that time, based on the pattern of diffusion of agriculture along the Mediterranean (see map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25603)). We would therefore expect to find a trail from southern Turkey to Greece, Italy, the Maghreb and southern Iberia. The only common trail is the presence of E1b1b, J2 and G2a. R1b is present in all these regions, but in very different proportions and the subclades are completely different. U152+ is very rare in southern Turkey, minor in Greece, omnipresent in Italy, apparently the major type of R1b in the Maghreb but very low in frequency, and minor in Iberia despite the huge percentage of R1b.

A Neolithic spread of R1b would involve that all the older subclades of R1b1b2 be found in the places settled earliest, and a new trail showing an northward expansion from southern to northern Iberia, southern to northern France and across the Channel to Britain. That is simply not the case.

The fact that U152+ appears to be the main subclade in the Maghreb is enough to rule out the presence of R1b among the Neolithic migrants that left Greece for Italy, North Africa and Iberia. Otherwise southern Spain and Portugal would also abound with U152+, but they don't.

If R1b1b2 originated in Western Europe during the Paleolithic or Mesolithic, the highest diversity of R1b subclades would be found in Iberia and southern France, and all subclades would radiate from there. Instead what we see is that the oldest subclades of R1b1b2 are found around Anatolia, the Caucasus and Central Asia, then all subclades from R1b1b2a1 radiate from the Alps, along with the diffusion of Indo-European languages.

The Italic language branch is the most distinctive in the Italo-Celtic group, and matches U152+. Once again, if R1b-U152 is the main type of R1b in the Maghreb, it fits the Indo-European migration model best because Tunisia and Algeria were heavily colonised by the Romans, the main carriers of U152+. The low overall percentage of R1b in the Maghreb (max. 5% + the Roman J1, J2, G2 and E1b1b, for a total of perhaps 10%) is also consistent with a colonisation pattern, rather than a massive migration or resettlement.

The Phoenician having settled in the Maghreb too, I would expect to find the typically Levantine type of R1b too (namely R1b1a, M18+).

how yes no 2
07-11-10, 16:29
it is for sure not Roman..I am inclined to see it as Celtic....in Gaul there are many candidates, in north Italy it can be Celtic Boii and there can be some spread from that hotspot with spread Roman empire, but complete lack of it in Bohemia/Bavaria indicates that this might not be related to Celtic Boii, so I think later germanic invasions are worth exploring...



http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/U152-Myres.jpg

looks like a spread that started somewhere from 2 hotspots one within east germanic tribes, and one within west germanic tribes, and that later spread over areas of Frankish empire..

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Franks_expansion.gif/299px-Franks_expansion.gif



perhaps Burgundians, Langobards and Franks carried a lot of this type....

Burgundians explain initial hotspot in west Poland and their movement fits well in pattern, but doesnot make whole shape...
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/300/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/600/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/800/entity_1225.html


The Burgundians were extending their power over southeastern Gaul; that is, northern Italy, western Switzerland, and southeastern France. In 493 Clovis, king of the Franks, married the Burgundian princess Clotilda (daughter of Chilperic), who converted him to the Catholic faith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgundians

Langobards/Lombards explain well north Italy and together with Franks southwest Germany
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/100/entity_792.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/400/entity_792.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/700/entity_792.html

and Franks/Franci
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/Frankish_Empire_481_to_814-en.svg/800px-Frankish_Empire_481_to_814-en.svg.png

elly
12-11-10, 16:39
What origin is Scottish Borders, U152+, L2+, L20- (L2*), then?

brianco
21-12-10, 13:43
Votadini :smile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votadini

http://www.roman-britain.org/tribes/votadini.htm





What origin is Scottish Borders, U152+, L2+, L20- (L2*), then?

Vallicanus
21-12-10, 14:05
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.

how yes no 2
21-12-10, 15:47
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.

it is not present in parts of UK & Ireland that were Celtic, also absent from Wales where according to Steven Bird one can expect more people originating from Roman soldiers... and it is present in Germanic settled parts of UK...

and it was not only Langobards, north Italy was also settled by other Germanic people who could have carried it...e.g. Goths and Franks, Gepids...

north Italy was for long time under control of various Germanic tribes...

Vallicanus
21-12-10, 16:28
The Goths were mostly eradicated in Italy and the Gepids were confined to a few villages.

The Franks only influenced the aristocracy, and slightly at that.

how yes no 2
21-12-10, 21:08
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.


The Goths were mostly eradicated in Italy and the Gepids were confined to a few villages.

The Franks only influenced the aristocracy, and slightly at that.

you give numbers, you speak as pretty sure in what you claim...
what historical sources make you so sure of Germanic tribes not being populous in north Italy?

Vallicanus
21-12-10, 21:26
you give numbers, you speak as pretty sure in what you claim...
what historical sources make you so sure of Germanic tribes not being populous in north Italy?

Whatever their numbers in antiquity they have left surprisingly few descendants in modern Northern Italy.:thinking:

how yes no 2
21-12-10, 21:33
Whatever their numbers in antiquity they have left surprisingly few descendants in modern Northern Italy.:thinking:
that is something else...

people do change language...e.g. 2500 year ago latin was spoken only around Rome...today languages derived from latin are spoken in France, Spain, Portugal, Romania, latin America...

many germanic people were already speaking latin, as it was widespread as english today...

therefore, latin was likely lingua franca in occupied parts of Italy
languages that are in use survive...

besides, germanic settlements were in several waves... so the waves might have always merged into majority that speaks italian...

also Y-DNA is about small part of genes that is inhereted in direct male line from grandgrandfather to grandfather, from grandfather to father, from father to son, and invading tribes often leave much higher imprint in Y-DNA than in the rest of the genes...

corinth
07-02-12, 06:40
I came across the Maghreb Y-DNA Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/maghreb/default.aspx?section=yresults) and had a look at the R1b results. The presence of 1 to 5% of R1b in North Africa is still fairly mysterious due to the absence of detailed study on the subclades of R1b found in that region. This is why I was glad to find that one of the project members tested for subclades and happens to be R1b1b2a1b4c (U152+, L2+). I checked the STR values of other R1b's and they all seemed quite similar and could well be R-U152+. That is what I expected. In other words it means that Maghreban R1b is of Roman/Italian origin.

This is a faulty conclusion for this reason.. the Visigoths conquered this area in ancient times and have certainly left descendants into modern times within the local population and they are brothers to the Ostrogoths, Gepids, Heruli, and Lombards who controlled U-152 regions in Italy with elevated pct of U-152 into modern times.

Secondly, up to ONE MILLION westerners were held as white slaves in the nations of the Mahgreb for hundreds of years. Entire villages were emptied by barbary raids for white slaves from england, france, iceland.. etc..
The one way within a strict interpretation of Islam for a slave to escape a brutal and short life as a slave was to convert to Islam at which point he was (supposed to be) freed.. There are countless cases of many tens of thousands of western european males in this region converting to Islam and being freed into the local population to one degree or the other.

Any R1b found in a modern sample from the barbary coast could very easily trace to a slave-convert of which countless are known to exist in this region from the barbary pirate/white slavery days of Islamic raids.

There is really no mystery at all about low levels of M-269 varieties of R1b on the barbary lands, given the massive enslavement of european males there and the habit of some to convert and 'go native' to end their torment and mistreatment.


see=White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves

Vallicanus
07-02-12, 10:36
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.

WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.

Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.

corinth
08-02-12, 02:41
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.

WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.

Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.

I really dont have to, in order to dispell this particular conclusion, because I can show clearly that a massive number of western european males were taken as slaves into the Mahgreb over many hundreds of years and that they produced offspring and settled with families into the local populations to easily account for a significant portion of the R1b in the Barbary coast populations that does not in any way require ancient Italic introgression of U-152 or any other SNP of R1b.

I cited a good book in "White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves" that anyone who wants additional information of this topic can read to gain additional information to verify my claims.

Now.. all that said - I am going to be polite and simply ask you not to respond to me, nor will I do so to you in the future.
I do not think the rest of this site wants to waste time with bickering, and I do not say this as a insult to you, but merely as a statement of fact borne out in your posts..
Your statements and insistence on constant references based NOT in Y-dna (which is what this particular message board is concerned with) but largely related to discredited racialist nonsense skull measurements and constant references to Phenotypes as being somehow relevant to Y-dna in any way shape or form makes your posts of no value but to spur arguments and bickering.

I appreciate your right to your opinion, but when you are clearly deviating into phrenology and skin/hair/eye color instead of concentrating on Y-dna, I simply have no time to spare with such nonsense. I hope you can understand this, and lets discontinue contact, please.
I promise that in return I will not post in response to any opinion you offer in any other thread and we can both express our opinion without pointless conflict that is not even related to the topic of Y-dna.
thank you.

Vallicanus
08-02-12, 10:18
You have presented no valid evidence even in terms of Y-dna.

THe Lombards, always a minority even in Northern Italy, brought in a lot of U-106 not U-152!

corinth
09-02-12, 06:36
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.
WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.
Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.


You have presented no valid evidence even in terms of Y-dna.
THe Lombards, always a minority even in Northern Italy, brought in a lot of U-106 not U-152!


All speculation and pseudo-history and not a trace of evidence.
U-152 was a mutation that arose around the Swiss Alps about 3,500 years ago.

You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to spam-post the same thing over and over while adding no new content or thought, and simply repeating nearly exactly what you ranted as total opinion previously.

You are acting like 'babby' who wants attention and cries until someone picks it up.

I have numerous times declined to address something that I have already addressed in detail in a previous post because I thought it would be abusive to reiterate the exact same thoughts for someone who failed to read previous posts.

You are a 'babby' who does nothing but spam-post and throw tantrums, after I specifically asked you not to bother responding to me with your nonsense about hair/skin color and skull measurements, on a DNA-based board.

Vallicanus
09-02-12, 10:25
You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to spam-post the same thing over and over while adding no new content or thought, and simply repeating nearly exactly what you ranted as total opinion previously.

You are acting like 'babby' who wants attention and cries until someone picks it up.

I have numerous times declined to address something that I have already addressed in detail in a previous post because I thought it would be abusive to reiterate the exact same thoughts for someone who failed to read previous posts.

You are a 'babby' who does nothing but spam-post and throw tantrums, after I specifically asked you not to bother responding to me with your nonsense about hair/skin color and skull measurements, on a DNA-based board.


Do the facts lose their value through repetition?

I hate to see facts twisted by people with agendas.

I think you are the spam merchant on this thread and your views are somewhat at variance with general opinion on this site.

You are entitled to your view but all your arguments are weak to say the least.

You add nothing relevant and new to the genetic debate and you were the first to throw a tantrum because you don't understand physical anthropology and call it phrenology "a la Lombroso"!

You don't even understand the latest peer-reviewed genetic studies which point up the Northern Italians as more South European than the Spaniards and much more South European than North European.

Are you suggesting Lombards were mainly South European genetically even though they originally spoke a Germanic language???

corinth
09-02-12, 19:44
Do the facts lose their value through repetition?

I hate to see facts twisted by people with agendas.

I think you are the spam merchant on this thread and your views are somewhat at variance with general opinion on this site.

You are entitled to your view but all your arguments are weak to say the least.

You add nothing relevant and new to the genetic debate and you were the first to throw a tantrum because you don't understand physical anthropology and call it phrenology "a la Lombroso"!

You don't even understand the latest peer-reviewed genetic studies which point up the Northern Italians as more South European than the Spaniards and much more South European than North European.

Are you suggesting Lombards were mainly South European genetically even though they originally spoke a Germanic language???


Originally Posted by Maciamo
In my opinion, the Bashkirs R1b descend directly from the Bronze-age Proto-Indo-Europeans. The only place where both M73 and M269 are both common is around the Caucasus and Anatolia. Based on my theory of the PIE moving to the Pontic steppes in the Neolithic, the first steppe invaders would have belonged to both M73 and M269, although the latter would have been much more dominant. It is possible that all the subclades as far as S116 and even S28/U152 developed in the steppes before migrating to Europe. The Bashkirs could represent the last leftovers from these PIE R1b, who would later been overwhelmed by neighbouring R1a from further north and east.

I have no intent to carry on any discussion with you. I feel you are a lay-about with too much time on your hands who is unbalanced and fixates on phenotypes and skull measuring while trying to bring this medieval nonsense onto a DNA based board.

Take it up with Maciamo. You assert on his site that - not as theory- but as certain fact, that U-152 arises in switzerland 3500 years ago. So you challenge the site owners own theory, not me.

Vallicanus
09-02-12, 21:28
Your whole debate is unsound since you have not deviated from your pet unjustifiable theory of linking Lombards and U-152.

Why do you care about European matters anyway.

At least I am of Italian extraction and take a deep interest in the subject of the Lombards and R1b-U152.

All the autosomal and genome-wide studies mention the Southern European nature of North Italians while as I have repeated, as shown in the R1b map, R1-U152 is most characteristic of NORTH-WEST Italy not all of the north.

MOESAN
13-02-12, 20:42
it is not present in parts of UK & Ireland that were Celtic, also absent from Wales where according to Steven Bird one can expect more people originating from Roman soldiers... and it is present in Germanic settled parts of UK...

and it was not only Langobards, north Italy was also settled by other Germanic people who could have carried it...e.g. Goths and Franks, Gepids...

north Italy was for long time under control of various Germanic tribes...


I am late to answer these affirmations (I don't put hypothesis into here, but only %s -
I have a survey (I did not note the origin) about Ireland-G-B (3 localisations in Scotland, 4 in Ireland, 5 in England and 1 only in NORTH WALES/
For N-Wales it says:
R-U152: 7,5% (of R1b, it is to say: of 82% maybe>> 6% of the total) R-L21: 45%, R-U106: 9,2% -
it is not big but not insignifiant, and Wales was celtized surely before the La Tène period, as Ireland so it is not surprising finding weak percentages of the U152 -
in this survey they found only between 1,1 to 1,4% of the R1b that was U152 in Ireland, except EASTERN IRELAND: U152: 4% or R1b '3% of the total there)
I add, when speaking about Wales, let's keep in mind there are 'archaïcal' regions as opposed to immigration regions (industrial South and extreme N-E) and that the central eastern Wales appears very "germanized" genetically (and partially phenotypically, this last point for the ones that have huge doubts about classical anthropology usefulness...

MOESAN
13-02-12, 20:57
also Y-DNA is about small part of genes that is inhereted in direct male line from grandgrandfather to grandfather, from grandfather to father, from father to son, and invading tribes often leave much higher imprint in Y-DNA than in the rest of the genes...

Yes, but it is true for invading warriors factions composed of only males - but when we speak about colonization by a big number of persons, all the genes carried by the newcomers (males & females) are transmitted to descendants...

Dubhthach
13-02-12, 22:50
is not big but not insignifiant, and Wales was celtized surely before the La Tène period, as Ireland so it is not surprising finding weak percentages of the U152 -in this survey they found only between 1,1 to 1,4% of the R1b that was U152 in Ireland, except EASTERN IRELAND: U152: 4% or R1b '3% of the total there)
I add, when speaking about Wales, let's keep in mind there are 'archaïcal' regions as opposed to immigration regions (industrial South and extreme N-E) and that the central eastern Wales appears very "germanized" genetically (and partially phenotypically, this last point for the ones that have huge doubts about classical anthropology usefulness...

How many of the Irish U152 had native Irish surnames? In general U152+ samples from Ireland tend to have a high level of non-native surnames. Eastern Ireland of course having the highest input from the 12th century AD onwards. The Pale been the area around Dublin. Thence to be "beyond the pale" implies Gaelic Irish society (eg. native Irish society) during the middle ages.

MOESAN
14-02-12, 20:29
How many of the Irish U152 had native Irish surnames? In general U152+ samples from Ireland tend to have a high level of non-native surnames. Eastern Ireland of course having the highest input from the 12th century AD onwards. The Pale been the area around Dublin. Thence to be "beyond the pale" implies Gaelic Irish society (eg. native Irish society) during the middle ages.

I agree (relying on you for the surnames because I have no big knowledge about the links concerning patronymics and HG's in the "green island" even if I know that some clans present very tight links with precise HG's there - I was just giving some percentages (for Wales upon all) found in small enough samples ...
slàinte!

Taranis
16-02-12, 22:02
I have moved the discussion about the Veneti/Venedi/Wends etc. into a separate thread. (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?27302-Venetic-Venedi-Wends-(OFFTOPIC-Y-DNA-Haplogroups-R1b-U152-S28))

julia90
16-02-12, 23:46
i think it's italic.

about the proximity of italic-celtic if steaming from a same ancestor, then we should consider italic tribes an elite who inhabitated italy, if not italians would look like central europeans.

Where did the italic tribes entere Italy from?
They entered from north-east italy, because previously the italic tribes have lived in Pannonia
So, if there were a contact between italic tribes with celtic tribes it should be in Pannonia.

Pannonia
It is in present day western Hungary, eastern Austria, Northern Croatia, North-western Serbia, Slovenia, western Slovakia and northern Bosnia Herzegovina
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Pannonia01.png

MOESAN
19-02-12, 23:47
just a little word
I do not remember if it was on this thread or on one about map of Y-RU152/L28 but I red sometimes and somewhere of Hallstatt culture as it would be an homogenous ethnic culture: but my old readings "told" me the Western Hallstatt region was almost sure celtic but the Eastern Hallstatt region was something else ... ?
yet we had the same problem with the Urnfields Culture -

alais
16-03-12, 13:21
What origin is Scottish Borders, U152+, L2+, L20- (L2*), then?

Celt? I'm just asking.

alais
16-03-12, 13:24
i think it's italic.


What does mean italic? U-152 is italic?

MOESAN
16-03-12, 17:00
What I wonder about on the map with the distribution of R1b-U152 is the area of Austria and Bohemia. This was the heartland of the early Hallstatt culture, but U152 is relatively rare there today. Could this be an artifact of the migrations period, or the sign of some completely different pattern?

Hallstatt is a culturel term comprising time and place I believe - but someones, asH. HUBERT thought There was 2 Hallstatt regions arounsd the 'cradle': a western one, celtic according to him, and an other in the eastern part, maybe illyrian, I do not know - I believe U152 is not I-E (but I want not fight today about that, because I'm still "my bottom between two chairs") but furnished a lot of alpine people to the I-E acculturators - If Italics was coming from Hungaria or S.Austria-N.Croatia, so they was not Y-R-U152 as a majority - I mean the Celts or early celtized people was the majority of U152 bearers - maybe some Italics could have incorportated U152 bearers during the Urnfield movements (because there have been movements caused by a big enough demographic rising, despite the "no-movement-history" supporters -
so it is not so astonishing that U152 is seldom in Austria (1- I was not too present at the beginning and 2- historic other movements can have erased the previous inhabitants...)

MOESAN
16-03-12, 17:15
- If Italics was coming from Hungaria or S.Austria-N.Croatia, so they was not Y-R-U152 as a majority - I mean the Celts or early celtized people was the majority of U152 bearers - maybe some Italics could have incorportated U152 bearers during the Urnfield movements (because there have been movements caused by a big enough demographic rising, despite the "no-movement-history" supporters -
so it is not so astonishing that U152 is seldom in Austria (1- I was not too present at the beginning and 2- historic other movements can have erased the previous inhabitants...)

I answer myself here: the 'italic hypothesis' for U152 is not completely out of work: U152 could have been swept towards the West by the deplacing of Italics and have been replaced by new HGs (Slavs? Illyrians?) in present day Pannonia (N-Croatia S-Austria) I have in mind (suddenly) the likely links between Lusacian culture and Villanova and the presence of some Y-U152 in Western Poland- what is sure is that Empire Romans was a mix of true Italics and other peoples, the weight of Italics decreasing from North to South so it remains hard to decide, U152 could have been present among Ligurians and Rhaetians too... I'm afraid it could by a question without answer...
other question: when came the first Italics in Italy ?

zanipolo
16-03-12, 21:18
I answer myself here: the 'italic hypothesis' for U152 is not completely out of work: U152 could have been swept towards the West by the deplacing of Italics and have been replaced by new HGs (Slavs? Illyrians?) in present day Pannonia (N-Croatia S-Austria) I have in mind (suddenly) the likely links between Lusacian culture and Villanova and the presence of some Y-U152 in Western Poland- what is sure is that Empire Romans was a mix of true Italics and other peoples, the weight of Italics decreasing from North to South so it remains hard to decide, U152 could have been present among Ligurians and Rhaetians too... I'm afraid it could by a question without answer...
other question: when came the first Italics in Italy ?

according to Greek historians, they named Italy and it comprised of mainland italy only from the Po river to the toe. The only tribes the greeks associated with Italy at the time was Umbrians ( from the Po to rome ) and the osci ( from rome to the toe) there where sub-tribes like the sabines belonging to the umbrians as an example.

The Ligures where not Italic at this time, nor where etruscans, venetics, latins, sicels, raeti and more

I think this marker developed from non-italic people that where in northwest Italy as well as swiss and western austrian lands. there migration was always south or east at the start

MOESAN
20-03-12, 00:08
according to Greek historians, they named Italy and it comprised of mainland italy only from the Po river to the toe. The only tribes the greeks associated with Italy at the time was Umbrians ( from the Po to rome ) and the osci ( from rome to the toe) there where sub-tribes like the sabines belonging to the umbrians as an example.

The Ligures where not Italic at this time, nor where etruscans, venetics, latins, sicels, raeti and more

I think this marker developed from non-italic people that where in northwest Italy as well as swiss and western austrian lands. there migration was always south or east at the start

are you thinking Italic tribes colonized Italy in a single wave of advance? Do you distinguish between linguistic latin 'Qw-' (I think Sabines and Sabellians was of the same stock) and osco-ombrian 'P- italic speakers??? and what about the Sicels and Sicans ??? are you telling me Latins was not Italics??? or just their name was not known by Greeks at this time?

reading anthropology books I red someone saying that about -3000 a distinct colonization took place in Italy coming by North (continent) an not by sea, that brought there (northern half of Italy but on the eastern side not the Thyrrenian Sea) at the middle-late Néolithic time phenotypes that he supposed was coming from the central Balkans, because they showed a mixture of 'dinaroid' wirh a kind of 'mediterranean' of more eastern affiliation than the previous ones present there before -
another problem could be the language of these colonisators? I-E yet??? just a question arrived to soon for me at this moment.
good evening

zanipolo
22-03-12, 08:02
are you thinking Italic tribes colonized Italy in a single wave of advance? Do you distinguish between linguistic latin 'Qw-' (I think Sabines and Sabellians was of the same stock) and osco-ombrian 'P- italic speakers??? and what about the Sicels and Sicans ??? are you telling me Latins was not Italics??? or just their name was not known by Greeks at this time?

reading anthropology books I red someone saying that about -3000 a distinct colonization took place in Italy coming by North (continent) an not by sea, that brought there (northern half of Italy but on the eastern side not the Thyrrenian Sea) at the middle-late Néolithic time phenotypes that he supposed was coming from the central Balkans, because they showed a mixture of 'dinaroid' wirh a kind of 'mediterranean' of more eastern affiliation than the previous ones present there before -
another problem could be the language of these colonisators? I-E yet??? just a question arrived to soon for me at this moment.
good evening

Latins are not italics but where southern etruscan tribe that resided on the extreme southern etruscan border of the tiber river

Vallicanus
22-03-12, 10:43
Latins are not Italics but where southern Etruscan tribe that resided on the extreme southern etruscan border of the tiber river

How do you explain the fact that the Latin language was Indo-European while Etruscan (most experts see it as non-IE) was a completely different language.

zanipolo
22-03-12, 12:02
How do you explain the fact that the Latin language was Indo-European while Etruscan (most experts see it as non-IE) was a completely different language.

Latin as we know it began 75BC, ancient Latin 450BC.

The romans learnt to read and write and learn the alphabet from the etruscans, reinforced by the rule of the tarquins ( etruscans)

Etruscans arrived in italy between 800-900BC, the latin came from the etruscan, between these years and 450BC and slowly developed into "modern" latin in 75BC

Taranis
22-03-12, 12:09
Latin as we know it began 75BC, ancient Latin 450BC.

The romans learnt to read and write and learn the alphabet from the etruscans, reinforced by the rule of the tarquins ( etruscans)

Etruscans arrived in italy between 800-900BC, the latin came from the etruscan, between these years and 450BC and slowly developed into "modern" latin in 75BC

That's nonsense, Zanipolo. Latin is an Italic language, it didn't "come from Etruscan", it evolved from Proto-Italic along with the Osco-Umbrian languages. The Romans adopted the Etruscan alphabet, yes, but so did most other people in Italy. That doesn't make them Etruscan however.

zanipolo
23-03-12, 08:04
That's nonsense, Zanipolo. Latin is an Italic language, it didn't "come from Etruscan", it evolved from Proto-Italic along with the Osco-Umbrian languages. The Romans adopted the Etruscan alphabet, yes, but so did most other people in Italy. That doesn't make them Etruscan however.

Many sites are against what you say like ancientscripts.com, omliglot.com and many others.

Lets look at this logically.

IF you believe the roman historians, they came from trojans, Aeneas after 1080BC . These trojans spoke Luwian .......what is this?

If you do not believe the story above, and you believe they where always where they where, then why no language has been found before 450BC.
What is fact, is the etruscans arrived in italy around 800-1000BC they had a language already and written evidence is present from 700BC to 100AD
- etrusan is not lydian language as lydian is a I-P language.
- Etruscans got there alphabet from eurboea .
- the romans learnt writing and took the etruscan alphabet from the etruscans and started to convert some letters around 600BC

- The etruscan empire incorporated the latins for over 300 years, what did the latins speak at that time?
- The tarquins ( etruscans) ruled Rome for over 100 years bringing in etruscan people, what did the latins speak at that time?
- old latin language ranged from 450BC to 75BC.
- Romans still got their sons to learn etruscan in school at Caere in 310BC
- etruscan language changed writing system to left to right in 350 BC.

Do you not think that the latins had no other language until around 600BC except etruscan as etruscan ruled these lands for so long.

Its not as if etruscan was a weak language as they communicated with veneti who spoke a I-P language called venetic.

what or who do you believe are the Latins ( Romans) at the time of the etruscan bronze age

Taranis
23-03-12, 11:25
Many sites are against what you say like ancientscripts.com, omliglot.com and many others.

I'm pretty sure they do not.


Lets look at this logically.

IF you believe the roman historians, they came from trojans, Aeneas after 1080BC . These trojans spoke Luwian .......what is this?

That's not logical. That's what the Romans believed.

Regardless of that, we also do not know what language the Trojans spoke. It's possible that they spoke an Anatolian language (such as Luwian).


If you do not believe the story above, and you believe they where always where they where, then why no language has been found before 450BC.

Actually, evidence for Latin dates back approximately 2 centuries further. Even then, just because no written samples are available before that time doesn't mean the language wasn't there? You don't really believe that, do you?


What is fact, is the etruscans arrived in italy around 800-1000BC they had a language already and written evidence is present from 700BC to 100AD
- etrusan is not lydian language as lydian is a I-P language.
- Etruscans got there alphabet from eurboea .
- the romans learnt writing and took the etruscan alphabet from the etruscans and started to convert some letters around 600BC

- The etruscan empire incorporated the latins for over 300 years, what did the latins speak at that time?
- The tarquins ( etruscans) ruled Rome for over 100 years bringing in etruscan people, what did the latins speak at that time?

Just no. Just because they were dominated by the Etruscans doesn't mean the language disappeared from one day to another. To pick some different examples: after the Romans had taken Gaul, it took centuries for the Gaulish language to completely become extinct (which probably didn't happen until the early Frankish period). In the year 1795, Poland was participated between Prussia, Austria-Hungary and Russia and effectively disappeared off the map, and that didn't mean that the Polsh language disappeared over night.


- old latin language ranged from 450BC to 75BC.
- Romans still got their sons to learn etruscan in school at Caere in 310BC
- etruscan language changed writing system to left to right in 350 BC.

Do you not think that the latins had no other language until around 600BC except etruscan as etruscan ruled these lands for so long.

What I wrote above.


Its not as if etruscan was a weak language as they communicated with veneti who spoke a I-P language called venetic.

I have no idea what you're trying to say there.


what or who do you believe are the Latins ( Romans) at the time of the etruscan bronze age

It would have been a language closer to Proto-Italic. We obviously don't know when Proto-Italic was spoken, but it must have been during the Bronze Age.

MOESAN
23-03-12, 14:28
Ich can say you why in corsica and sardinia were so much R1b-U152. Because when corsica would a part of france, many french people come to corsica.

The demography of the native-corsican is very bad, so the genes of the french (with most R1b-U152) are dominant of corsica. Its fact.
A friend of my parents is a real corsican (with french ancestors) and his wife a austrian. So many corsican with french ancestors, live on corsica.
The statistics about the haplogroup distribution are from the new-time.
So do you understand what i want so say?

How exact it is on sardinia, i dont know. But i think we must include modern migrations, because all the haplogroup statistics, dont exclude this migrations f.e. since the 18. century.

it is false all the way!!! lets be serious
the mixture in Corsica was very light before the 1950s
+ the more MALE THE MORE corsican! look at their names: COLONNA/ROSSI/ANDRIETTI/ANOTINI/ORSATTI/VESVOCALI/ACQUAVIVA/PASQUALETTI... no end!!! more than 90% italian patronymics!
the U152 in Corsica could be the result of a drift from post-Bell-Beakers and from people carried there at the time of the GENOVA kindom domination -
yet, lets be serious!!!
I agree enough with TARANIS as a whole - just: Austria receives surely some Germanics of the invasions (U106) and saw a lot of movements E>W, W>E - and I repeat that according to someones (HUBERT) East-Hallstatt was different from West-Hallstatt (I'm not competant to judhe here)
for northern cultures around Denmark North Germany I suppose that the most of the Y-R1b was U106 and downstream...

zanipolo
25-03-12, 00:47
it is false all the way!!! lets be serious
the mixture in Corsica was very light before the 1950s
+ the more MALE THE MORE corsican! look at their names: COLONNA/ROSSI/ANDRIETTI/ANOTINI/ORSATTI/VESVOCALI/ACQUAVIVA/PASQUALETTI... no end!!! more than 90% italian patronymics!
the U152 in Corsica could be the result of a drift from post-Bell-Beakers and from people carried there at the time of the GENOVA kindom domination -
yet, lets be serious!!!
I agree enough with TARANIS as a whole - just: Austria receives surely some Germanics of the invasions (U106) and saw a lot of movements E>W, W>E - and I repeat that according to someones (HUBERT) East-Hallstatt was different from West-Hallstatt (I'm not competant to judhe here)
for northern cultures around Denmark North Germany I suppose that the most of the Y-R1b was U106 and downstream...

names , surnames!!?
colonna from aragonese
andretti, pasquletti from lombardia
orsatti, from umbria
antonini vesvocali can be tuscan or roman
rossi, is ligurian

what does it matter,
Napoleon Bonapart was italian from Corsica with a surname of Bonaparte, his father's name was Luciano ( Lucien in french) .

What are you trying to say?

MOESAN
25-03-12, 01:25
names , surnames!!?
colonna from aragonese
andretti, pasquletti from lombardia
orsatti, from umbria
antonini vesvocali can be tuscan or roman
rossi, is ligurian

what does it matter,
Napoleon Bonapart was italian from Corsica with a surname of Bonaparte, his father's name was Luciano ( Lucien in french) .

What are you trying to say?

what I say is for people that try to understand!
1- I was answering to your affirmation of a majoritary FRENCH male pole in Corsica, that is not serious (the studies about Corsicans was made by foreign scientists, not frenchmen, and so I think the samples was made with inrooted Corsicans and not freshly arrived continental Frenchmen -
2- I have studied the question of family rnames (in english: 'surnames') and can tell you that A NAME IS NOT ALWAYS A ONE PLACE ORIGIN THING: a lot of common words served to built names - the majority of corsican surnames has been forged by italian speakers according to general rules common in Italy as a whole, because italian language was the language of this island for a very long time, since the roman empire I think (latin evolved into neo-latin and after that into italian dialects- - only some names have a very located origin or dialectal form: it is true for italian names as for french names and even breton names: saying Colonna is from there, Luciani is from this precise place is a nonsense as saying that Dupont or Martin or Lefèbvre is from that precise place - the only surnames that indicate precise place of origin are the ones which have evident dialectal forms (North Italy: Meneghin, Del Pin, Faggin... / Sardigna: Puddu by instance) or are towns/places/ethnic names (Padovani, Lombardo, etc...)
3- Telling me all these supposed italian local origins (even if I know some of your indications could be valid for a few of these surnames) undermines your non serious affirmation of a heavy impact of french males on the genetic making of true Corsicans (I am Breton, so I don't feel too concerned by some complex) - you can read yourself if you forgot...
4- Corsican old population (they are living yet...) show phenotypes different as a whole from the continental French population (high dolichocephaly, different distribution of dark hairs hues, different distribution of brown hues, high presence of very dark eyes hues...etc... DIFFERENT ENOUGH TOO FROM THE BASIC CENTER ITALIAN POPULATION - crossings occurred but they were not so important and did not erase some peaculiar traits of Corsicans
5- even if put among the italian toscan dialects, corsican dialect shows phonetic tendencies closer to the sardignan dialects (more yet in southern corsican) plus some southern France influences in north corsican -
and I have always put more consideration into phonetics than into lexicals...;
6- eveyibody (or almost) in France knows that Napoleon was a BUonaparte and that is family was not ancient in Corsica - all the way, Corsica was bought little before by France to Italy but this point is very futile in the present matter

have a good night

MOESAN
25-03-12, 20:17
3- Telling me all these supposed italian local origins (even if I know some of your indications could be valid for a few of these surnames) undermines your non serious affirmation of a heavy impact of french males on the genetic making of true Corsicans (I am Breton, so I don't feel too concerned by some complex) - you can read yourself if you forgot...

I'm sorry ZANIPOLO!
it is not you but THEODISK that affirmed male pole of Corsicans was heavily influenced by french fathers...
so...
I hold on for my other affirmations as a whole (for COLONNA I confess I don't know, maybe it is from Catalan origin, this fact doesn't destroy the global evidence of my answer concerning family names of Corsica

do not be offensed
buona notte

Vico
09-11-12, 15:42
North-western Iberia was part of the La Tène culture, but only has a low percentage of U152.Excuse me, but the Celts of Culture La Ten did not reach to Iberia. Celts of Iberia belong to the first wave, Era Hallstatt.

Eldritch
19-11-12, 21:02
5771


It can be worth having a look.

MOESAN
20-11-12, 00:15
5771


It can be worth having a look.

thanks, but what is the conclusion? (and I prefer the SNP naming to the old system)
perhaps xould you compare what appears to be R-U152 France versus Corsica? (France have very different menas according to provinces) - it is just a male mediated %, that surely precedes the family names hereditary transmission - but your amiable post is so mysterious?

adamo
11-04-13, 21:38
In my opinion, u-152 is indeed a marker of the la tene culture brought to Italy via France and Switzerland. Many reliable historical sources, such as Livy , speak of many invasions of the italian peninsula from French Gauls. Livy for one, states that Bellovesus, king of the bituriges cubi, rounded up more than 300,000 men from various different tribes across France ( bituriges cubi hailed from central France) and brought them across the alps to Italy. He brought men from the arverni, ambarri, aedui, senones, lingones, carnutes, aulerci/cenomani and his own bituriges cubi tribe(s). (Check map of Gauls people on Wikipedia to see in what regions of France these tribes where originally centred at.) you can also see on many maps of ancient Italy and on Wikipedia maps of celts the senones both in France ( near Belgium) and the same tribe in the Marche region of Italy. The italian Cenomani can be traced to the cenomani of western France. The Emilia-romana lingones can be traced to north eastern France near Belgian and German border, etc. it is said that when these men arrived in northern Italy in the modern Lonbardy region, they encountered another group of men that called the self the Insubres. Upon realizing that Insubres was also the name of a canton/district in the homeland of his fellow Aedui tribesmen that ventured to Italy with him, he decided to keep that areas name as Insubria. He then proceeded to found mediolanum, modern day Milan, within the limits of Insubria, and he did so happily and peacefully while melting in his 300,000 men with these similar Celtic men. Livy also speaks of brennus's sack of Rome which took place a few hundred years earlier, so we already know that la teen Gauls where making their way far into the italian peninsula long before. Thus these attacking Gauls where waging war on men that, 1000 years earlier they would have called their own blood brothers. The Roman Empire was built by men that shared the same looks and genetic markers as these invaders, separated by a few hundred/thousand years. It is thus my strong conviction that the Latins where Gauls that arrived in Italy long before their cousin invaders and got separated/lost from them with time....and when they met up again, they no longer knew who they where due to relative isolation, nor had the knowledge of genetics to realize they where one and the same. Maybe 800 or a few thousand years before brennus's and his Gauls, a similar troop of men, cousins or genetic brothers to Gauls, left their la tene origin point near the Meuse/Loire/Moselle rivers in northeast France at an early point, crossed the alps, made their way over time to Rome, and set up a competing empire. This makes sense because the overwhelming majority of Italians are U-152. Why? Maybe because the Gaulish people's where very high concentration and only had u-152 when they came over in their small sample size. So the massive success and population growth that happened in Italy spawned from a few men, after generations, became MANY men all with u-152 subclade as was found in their bottleneckec small group of ancestors, all across north-central Italy, cisalpine Gaul, the so-called "Germanic" settlement areas, or more like Gaul/French settlement areas. The only inconsistency in my theory is that P312 ( the Iberian S-116) is found in high concentrations in Spain, Portugal, AND France, but at very low concentrations In Italy. If the Gauls did go from France to Italy, wouldn't italy also have traces of the Iberian/ west French S-116 lineage? Maybe not, if the s-116 migrated to France at a later time, after the departure of many U-152, a movement to fill in the "vacuum" hole of the massive U-152 departure. Needless to say, u-152 is still found in 15-20% of all areas of France and at a significantly higher frequency in Switzerland and north Italy.... Maybe this is why Cesar was always allied with lingones and aedui and Belgian remi against all the other Gaulish tribes, maybe in the end they where all the same thing!

zanipolo
11-04-13, 22:40
what I say is for people that try to understand!
- the only surnames that indicate precise place of origin are the ones which have evident dialectal forms (North Italy: Meneghin, Del Pin, Faggin... / Sardigna: Puddu by instance) or are towns/places/ethnic names (Padovani, Lombardo, etc...)


The dialectual forms of surnames is apparent in Italy , by this method
Italian is a dialect of the italian regional language and they are a dialect of latin ...known as vulgar Latin.

Surnames in Veneto in friuli are historically like this.
In Veneto ...endings in IN is the original form with endings in ER next . In friuli its the opposite.
In Venice proper the original surname endings in IGO

Then there is the surname change used at the time of the Venetian Republic due to the system of only the first son getting all the family wealth, other sons surnames ( ONE METHOD ) where changed to indicate their body ( once they left the home)
large frame/height endings in OTTO
medium frame/height endings in OTTI
small frames/height endings in ONI

There where other methods, all due to heridary constraints.
Under ITALY from 1866....many had ( forced ) to add a vowel, usually the Tuscan I or the northern O.
In regards to corsica, they would have used and I or E ending due to Genoese influence and the Sardinians usually have endings in U

binx
06-06-13, 14:57
Latins are not italics but where southern etruscan tribe that resided on the extreme southern etruscan border of the tiber river

Latins are an Italic people.

binx
06-06-13, 15:00
R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?


R1b-U152/S28 is the dominant Y-DNA hp of all the Italics people: Umbrians, Latins, Sabins, Samminetes...

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 16:16
R1b-U152/S28 is the dominant Y-DNA hp of all the Italics people: Umbrians, Latins, Sabins, Samminetes...

If the Samnites were mostly R1b-U152 why does modern Benevento in the old Samnite heartland have only 5.5pc of U-152 according to the 2013 Boattini study and Aquila on the eastern edge of Sabine country only 13pc?

Foligno in Umbria has rather more, at 24.5pc, but that is still far from a majority of R1b-U152.

binx
06-06-13, 16:25
if the Samnites were mostly R1b-U152 why does modern Benevento in the old Samnite heartland have only 5.5pc of U-152 according to the 2013 Boattini study and Aquila on the eastern edge of Sabine country only 13pc?

Foligno in Umbria has rather more, at 24.5pc, but that is still far from a majority of R1b-U152.

Due to Roman Empire (people from all parts of the Empire went to Italy and viceversa), to medieval internal and external migrations, and to the neolithic farmers non-indoeuropeans absorbed by the Italic people. Italian pensinsula, after the fall of Roman Empire, underwent a process of depopulation.

There is also an historical episode in particular, according to which the Ligurians of Garfagnana (Southern Liguria-Northern Tuscany) were deported-brought in Samnium (Avellino and Benevento area) around 180 BC, and the Samnites were deported in Garfagnana (not very sure of the last part).

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 16:30
[QUOTE=binx;409597]Due to Roman Empire (people from all parts of the Empire went to Italy and viceversa), to medieval internal and external migrations, and to the neolithic farmers non-indoeuropeans absorbed by the Italic people. Italian pensinsula, after the fall of Roman Empire, underwent a process of depopulation.

QUOTE]

All conjecture..where is your evidence?

The relative lack of U-152 in modern Aquila, Campobasso and Benevento may only reflect the fact that R1b-U152 was NEVER prevalent hereabouts.

binx
06-06-13, 16:31
@Vallicanus

This is the Biasutti map on Percentage of blonds in Italy. Very high percentage in Benevento area.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/BiasuttiMappa.png/502px-BiasuttiMappa.png

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/BiasuttiMappa.png/502px-BiasuttiMappa.png)

Eldritch
06-06-13, 16:37
^
How does this map correlate with U-152 presence?

binx
06-06-13, 16:38
All conjecture..where is your evidence?

The relative lack of U-152 in modern Aquila, Campobasso and Benevento may only reflect the fact that R1b-U152 was NEVER prevalent hereabouts.

Evidence? A good book about Italian History.

All jokes aside, next days I will try to find a more convincing evidences. Anyway, I think it's hard to think that a genetics photography of a modern country like Italy with a very complex history may actually reflect the perfect distribution of ancient peoples lived 3000 years before.

binx
06-06-13, 16:41
^
How does this map correlate with U-152 presence?

Try to find, You could make yourself useful in this discussion.

Nobody1
06-06-13, 16:44
Due to Roman Empire (people from all parts of the Empire went to Italy and viceversa), to medieval internal and external migrations, and to the neolithic farmers non-indoeuropeans absorbed by the Italic people. Italian pensinsula, after the fall of Roman Empire, underwent a process of depopulation.

There is also an historical episode in particular, according to which the Ligurians of Garfagnana (Southern Liguria-Northern Tuscany) were deported-brought in Samnium (Avellino and Benevento area) around 180 BC, and the Samnites were deported in Garfagnana (not very sure of the last part).

Correct,

Given the high G2a in Southern Italy also the high E-V13 one might well conclude a substantial Neolithic pressence that was absorbed by the Indo-European Italics ;


The fact that regions like Calabria still have 15.5% U-152[B] -Bruttii and
Molise 8% with the Abruzzo region 13% -Samnites -of course also a lot were killed in the 3 wars

is a significant remnant of the Indo-European Italics [Umbrian/Ambronen];
And this is just exclusively U-152;

Given what was before [G2a] and what all came contemporary from the East Mediterranean with Pelasgians and Greeks, i would have expected much lower;

in total S Italy = 8.6% U-152 and 16.2 G2a and 10.6% E-V13 and 17.1% J2 -Boattini et al 2013

all in all paints a very accurate picture;

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 16:46
What has that to do with R1b-U152?

Uniparental markers do not directly affect phenotype; only autosomal DNA does that.

Boattini has 11pc of male lineages which may be Germanic rather than Italic.

However Benevento was a major Lombard/Longobard duchy for 5 centuries and its relative blondism may be due to that strain but again only an autosomal study can confirm the facts.

Eldritch
06-06-13, 17:07
Try to find, You could make yourself useful in this discussion.

Well i can tell you that the map you posted isn't in any way useful to the discussion.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 17:10
Well i can tell you that the map you posted isn't in any way useful to the discussion.

This is exactly right.

Nobody1
06-06-13, 17:11
Well i can tell you that the map you posted isn't in any way useful to the discussion.

Correct,
This isnt even a Biasutti map, there are few maps on the i-net that claim to be Biasutti or Livi but are not;

this is from Dr. R. Livi -

Dr. R. Livi - Antropometria Militare / 299,000 recruits all regions
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/4562291520_678f532076_z.jpg

everyone is capable in calculating the %s; But this is strictly Anthropological;

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 17:12
Correct,

Given the high G2a in Southern Italy also the high E-V13 one might well conclude a substantial Neolithic pressence that was absorbed by the Indo-European Italics ;




The fact that regions like Calabria still have 15.5% U-152[B] -Bruttii and
Molise 8% with the Abruzzo region 13% -Samnites -of course also a lot were killed in the 3 wars

is a significant remnant of the Indo-European Italics [Umbrian/Ambronen];
And this is just exclusively U-152;

Given what was before [G2a] and what all came contemporary from the East Mediterranean with Pelasgians and Greeks, i would have expected much lower;

in total S Italy = 8.6% U-152 and 16.2 G2a and 10.6% E-V13 and 17.1% J2 -Boattini et al 2013

all in all paints a very accurate picture;

It only suggests that R1b-U152 was never common in these areas.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 17:15
Evidence? A good book about Italian History.

All jokes aside, next days I will try to find a more convincing evidences. Anyway, I think it's hard to think that a genetics photography of a modern country like Italy with a very complex history may actually reflect the perfect distribution of ancient peoples lived 3000 years before.

Well it hasn't stopped you speculating on insufficient grounds.

I think I know more about Italian history than you so quit the snide remarks.

binx
06-06-13, 17:17
Ich can say you why in corsica and sardinia were so much R1b-U152. Because when corsica would a part of france, many french people come to corsica.

The demography of the native-corsican is very bad, so the genes of the french (with most R1b-U152) are dominant of corsica. Its fact.
A friend of my parents is a real corsican (with french ancestors) and his wife a austrian. So many corsican with french ancestors, live on corsica.
The statistics about the haplogroup distribution are from the new-time.
So do you understand what i want so say?

How exact it is on sardinia, i dont know. But i think we must include modern migrations, because all the haplogroup statistics, dont exclude this migrations f.e. since the 18. century.

Not so true. It's very easy to distinguish a true Corsican from one of French origin. All the true Corsicans have Italian surnames, in particular Tuscan and Ligurian surnames. True Corsicans are mixed only in more recent times with the French people.

I think that it's completely normal that in Corsica is found R1b-U152, Corsica has an history closely linked to Tuscany and Liguria until 1700. And as we know today, the higher percentage of R1b-U152 is between Southern Liguria and Northern Tuscany.

Nobody1
06-06-13, 17:19
It only suggests that R1b-U152 was never common in these areas.

Yes,

But who told you the Samnites or Bruttii massacred or disposed the Neolithic populations?

They settled amongst them, look up Ver Sacrum thats how the Indo-European Umbrian [Sabellic] stock expanded in the south - not full scale migrations;

So the results (post #79) are as expected, and clearly indicate the Indo-European Italics;

Homer recorded in the times of the Odyssey that Cimmerians [Umbrians] were dwelling in caves (roaming bands) in Southern Italy; so the Umbrians (Cimmerians of Homer) did not settle much in the South at least till the times of the Odyssey;

Not sure who told you otherwise;

binx
06-06-13, 17:22
Well it hasn't stopped you speculating on insufficient grounds.

I think I know more about Italian history than you so quit the snide remarks.

You need to show me some real evidences to demonstrate that You know Italian history better than me.

Eldritch
06-06-13, 17:24
Correct,
This isnt even a Biasutti map, there are few maps on the i-net that claim to be Biasutti or Livi but are not;

this is from Dr. R. Livi -

Dr. R. Livi - Antropometria Militare / 299,000 recruits all regions
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/4562291520_678f532076_z.jpg

everyone is capable in calculating the %s; But this is strictly Anthropological;
Actually i wasn't doubting the map more than the fact about a presumed correlation between R1b-U152 and Blondism.

binx
06-06-13, 17:28
Correct,

Given the high G2a in Southern Italy also the high E-V13 one might well conclude a substantial Neolithic pressence that was absorbed by the Indo-European Italics ;


The fact that regions like Calabria still have 15.5% U-152[B] -Bruttii and
Molise 8% with the Abruzzo region 13% -Samnites -of course also a lot were killed in the 3 wars

is a significant remnant of the Indo-European Italics [Umbrian/Ambronen];
And this is just exclusively U-152;

Given what was before [G2a] and what all came contemporary from the East Mediterranean with Pelasgians and Greeks, i would have expected much lower;

in total S Italy = 8.6% U-152 and 16.2 G2a and 10.6% E-V13 and 17.1% J2 -Boattini et al 2013

all in all paints a very accurate picture;

Again, I completely agree with You.

We must consider the U-152 found in South Italy as as a remnant of something that was more widespread in the past. I think this is the right interpretation.

As We know, Samnites and Romans never had good relations. The Samnite Wars were a bloodbath for the Samnites.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 17:28
Actually i wasn't doubting the map more than the fact about a presumed correlation between R1b-U152 and Blondism.

Agreed. He is lost.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 17:30
Again, I completely agree with You.

We must consider the U-152 found in South Italy as as a remnant of something that was more widespread in the past. I think this is the right interpretation.

As We know, Samnites and Romans never had good relations. The Samnite Wars were a bloodbath for the Samnites.

The facts only show that R1b-U152 were NEVER common in these areas.

Why would R1b disappear to a greater extent than local J or G?

Your scholarship is weak even here.

Nobody1
06-06-13, 17:30
Actually i wasn't doubting the map more than the fact about a presumed correlation between R1b-U152 and Blondism.

yes, both is correct - thats why i wrote strictly Anthropological

binx
06-06-13, 17:43
Correct,
This isnt even a Biasutti map, there are few maps on the i-net that claim to be Biasutti or Livi but are not;

this is from Dr. R. Livi -

Dr. R. Livi - Antropometria Militare / 299,000 recruits all regions
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/4562291520_678f532076_z.jpg

everyone is capable in calculating the %s; But this is strictly Anthropological;

Biasutti text refers to the Livi studies. And so I guess that the map should have been elaborate on the Livi studies.

From Treccani Enciclopedia:

Inviato in Africa orientale nel 1887-88 con il corpo di spedizione italiano, fu in seguito richiamato a Roma presso l'Ispettorato della sanità militare, incaricato dal ministero della Guerra della sistemazione ed elaborazione dei dati di una grande indagine antropometrica avviata sui militari di leva delle classi 1859-63.

It's definitely Anthropometry and certainly not genetics. I posted because we'ere talking about the Benevento area, a southern area that shows a peek of blondism on the South. That could be due to medieval migrations, that may well be.

Nobody1
06-06-13, 17:47
The facts only show that R1b-U152 were NEVER common in these areas.

Why would R1b disappear to a greater extent than local J or G?

Your scholarship is weak even here.

its def. more common in S Italy than any other region of S Europe;
Now take a wild guess why thats the case;

Or dont you believe in the existence of the historical Samnites - Bruttii - Lucani,

binx
06-06-13, 17:50
The facts only show that R1b-U152 were NEVER common in these areas.

Why would R1b disappear to a greater extent than local J or G?

Your scholarship is weak even here.

My scholarship? I pretend not to have read.

I dont' have much time to play with You.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 18:09
its def. more common in S Italy than any other region of S Europe;
Now take a wild guess why thats the case;

Or dont you believe in the existence of the historical Samnites - Bruttii - Lucani,

They existed...doesn't prove they were predominantly R1b-U152.

If this haplogroup is present in southern Italy and Sicily it may be due to the settlement of "Lombards", ie North Italians, often actually Ligurian or Piedmontese, during the Middle Ages. They must have brought some U152.

So-called Gallo-Italian dialects still survive in pockets of Basilicata, Calabria and Sicily.

binx
06-06-13, 18:15
existence of the historical Samnites - Bruttii - Lucani,

As recorded on the Fasti Triumphales Romans defeated Samnites at least 30 times between 343 BC and 272 BC. Bruttii and Lucani at least 7 times, between 282 BC and 272 BC. You may very well think that they were decimated by the Romans.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 18:18
Statistics of people killed or enslaved in Roman times were a matter of rhetoric not precise calculation.

These tribes existed...fact.

Their predominant R1b-U152 affiliation is mere speculation.

How convenient for your argument...the Romans killed most of them..this explains low U152 in Southern Italy.
LOL

binx
06-06-13, 18:19
They existed...doesn't prove they were predominantly R1b-U152.

If this haplogroup is present in southern Italy and Sicily it may be due to the settlement of "Lombards", ie North Italians, often actually Ligurian or Piedmontese, during the Middle Ages. They must have brought some U152.

So-called Gallo-Italian dialects still survive in pockets of Basilicata, Calabria and Sicily.

There are no Gallo-Italics dialects communities in Calabria. In Calabria there is only an Occitan language village, Guardia Piemontese (In the past there were many more Occitan language villages in Calabria, but They were decimated by the Catholic Church because these villages were Protestant).

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 18:31
There are no Gallo-Italics dialects communities in Calabria. In Calabria there is only an Occitan language village, Guardia Piemontese (In the past there were many more Occitan language villages in Calabria, but They were decimated by the Catholic Church because these villages were Protestant).


Occitan speakers brought R1b U152 also.

binx
06-06-13, 18:42
Occitan speakers brought R1b U152 also.

Probable They are R1b U152, but They are not anyway a Gallo-Italics community.

Guardia Piemontese has today 1546 residents, only few of them are of Occitan origins. Because They were really decimated by Roman Catholic Church, It's an historical fact, and surely not a "convenient argument".

Hard to think that They had an important role in spreading the R1b U152 in Calabria.

Vallicanus
06-06-13, 20:10
North Italian artisans and merchants settled all over southern Italy and Sicily and Franco-Provencal speakers were settled by Charles of Anjou in the old Samnite areas of southern Italy.

Hence more R1b-U152.

This Arpitan area in the mountains of southern Italy was once bigger, from Ariano and Montaguto northwards to Volturara and Castelluccio.

MOESAN
06-06-13, 20:40
@Vallicanus

This is the Biasutti map on Percentage of blonds in Italy. Very high percentage in Benevento area.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/BiasuttiMappa.png/502px-BiasuttiMappa.png

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/10/BiasuttiMappa.png/502px-BiasuttiMappa.png)

this map is reliable, roughly said (or WAS...) - but he counted moderate light browns (mix) into his blonds: Italy HAD as a whole a bit less blonds, almost everywhere: but the general relative opposition of regions remains valuable I think - but 'blonds' is not the miraculous unique key to understand Italy populating
good evening

MOESAN
06-06-13, 20:56
in History, very few tribes were decimated, spite the affirmations of "winners" or "loosers" -
concerning U152 among Samnites or close tribes, keep in mind they colonized regions which were already well populated - upstreams SNPs of Y6R1b were and are still common enough in S-Italy, more than in N-Italy, a,d these "old" R1b's are balanced or overflood by S-E Europe (and Near-Eastern) HGs - and Greeks maintained a strong presence too, with the same SE HGs -
the new survey presented by Dienekes about Italy mix a lot of regions in N-Central and S-Central+S-Italy, so, no possibility to go into details about History
all the way, I noted: U152 compared with others
NCIt: U152/total : 19,5% - U152/all R1b : 51,7% - U152/P312 downstreams: 65,2%: not negligeable
SC+SIt : 8,6% - : 33,5% - : 50,3%: " "

adamo
11-07-13, 01:36
most people now believe ligurians where not aboriginal and that they where celtic , possibly gaulish in origin, peoples such as the Ingauni/Euganei, Stoeni, Statielli, Taurini, Vertamocorii, Lepontii, Libici, Salluvi, Llvates even apuani and Friniates, Salassi, where all of celtic, even gallic stock, all dating from different invasion eras (other than the etruscan extension into swiss alps raeti people.)

adamo
11-07-13, 01:46
there was golasecca celts, polada culture, several other celtic cultures in the Veneto region, then villanovan culture, several gallic invasions (Bellovesus and his many gallic tribes from all across France.) Most of italian R1b is u152 which peaks in the north-central italy,half of swiss males and 20% of french males. the focal point is switzerland and the La tene culture which spread out of the original home of gauls (switzerland). think of the ligures tribes, which had long dwelt in extreme north-western italy. Ligurian toponyms and place names can be found across northwest italy, parts of switzerland and southeastern france, near the Var regions.

zanipolo
11-07-13, 01:49
there was golasecca celts, polada culture, several other celtic cultures in the Veneto region, then villanovan culture, several gallic invasions (Bellovesus and his many gallic tribes from all across France.) Most of italian R1b is u152 which peaks in the north-central italy,half of swiss males and 20% of french males. the focal point is switzerland and the La tene culture which spread out of the original home of gauls (switzerland). think of the ligures tribes, which had long dwelt in extreme north-western italy. Ligurian toponyms and place names can be found across northwest italy, parts of switzerland and southeastern france, near the Var regions.

you forgot the important este culture

adamo
11-07-13, 01:50
somewhere near switzerland/east central france is where the particular subgroup of R1b most italians have originated. Este was an important celtic culture in Veneto not far from where the Veneti would arrive, the adriatic veneti where either paphlagonian (north-central) turks arrived from the east mediterranean by boat, or where also gallic celts from Britanny, France, as their northern neighbors the Carni where descended from the western french Carnutes , and many tribes from western france (carnutes,aulerci cenomani and possibly veneti) descended to italy, from there.

zanipolo
11-07-13, 03:11
somewhere near switzerland/east central france is where the particular subgroup of R1b most italians have originated. Este was an important celtic culture in Veneto not far from where the Veneti would arrive, the adriatic veneti where either paphlagonian (north-central) turks arrived from the east mediterranean by boat, or where also gallic celts from Britanny, France, as their northern neighbors the Carni where descended from the western french Carnutes , and many tribes from western france (carnutes,aulerci cenomani and possibly veneti) descended to italy, from there.

NO turks in anatolia before 600AD.

only people in anatolia around the late bronze-age where hittite, trojans, thracians, myceneans, assyrians, mysians and colchisians and others i failed to mention

cenomani where from southern france , neighbours of the volcae

yes, carni where from western france, modern gascony area.

adamo
11-07-13, 11:28
u know thats what i meant man, those anatolian cultures, and cenomani main group was from northwestern france then migrated to Bresci area lombardy/emilia romagna where they settled withe insubres gauls.

adamo
03-08-13, 07:42
According to Livy (v. 34), they (Aedui) took part in the expedition of Bellovesus into Italy in the 6th century BC.
Before Caesar's time they had attached themselves to the Romans, and were honoured with the title of brothers and kinsmen of the Roman people. When the Sequani, their hereditary rivals, with the assistance of a Germanic chieftain named Ariovistus defeated and massacred the Aedui at the Battle of Magetobriga, the Aedui sent Diviciacus, the druid, to Rome to appeal to the senate for help. But his mission was unsuccessful.


An extract speaking of the aedui, Gauls of east-central France. Long before bellovesus's invasion with the aedui, and long before cesar's time, they had attached themselves and had been honoured with the title of brothers and kinsmen of the roman people. Also the Ambarri, who where considered kinsmen/brothers of the aedui made the journey to Italy as well.

They are mentioned by Livy (v. 34) with the Aedui among those Galli who were said to have crossed the Alps into Italy in the time of Tarquinius Priscus.

It seems quite clear at this point that most invaders from the alps to Italy where, in their quasi totality, Gallic types.

adamo
03-08-13, 08:09
Also, when bellovesus arrived in north Italy he moved to the Lombardy region where he founded mediolanum (modern day milan) which was the name of a capital city from where some of his men or he had come from. There where two other cities, both in France, called mediolanum. Mediolanum Santorum (modern day Saintes in extreme west-central France in ancient bituriges vivisci territory.) the other was mediolanum aulercorum ( modern day Evreux in north-central France near aulerci/cenomani territory, the French department of Eure). I personally also suspect the extreme western veneti Gauls of France to be ancestors of some Celtic invaders (Gallic) to modern day veneto province Italy, even though there is no concrete evidence, I feel the western French veneti Gauls must have migrated to northeastern Italy.

Sile
12-11-13, 03:57
http://www.ancestorcentral.com/archives/821

As per the conference yesterday, it was announced that

U152 Originated in Central Germany ...................seems like prior to Germanic people in the north

U106 Originated in East Germany ............southern East Germany, next to Czech

Z195 Originated in Central France ..............seems like Dijon area

P312 originated in Hungary ..................old Pannonian area

L21 originated in Kent England ............

M222 originated in Ireland

L11 originated in Bulgaria

P311 originated in Romania

M269 Originated in Western Anatolia

Angela
12-11-13, 08:42
http://www.ancestorcentral.com/archives/821

As per the conference yesterday, it was announced that

U152 Originated in Central Germany ...................seems like prior to Germanic people in the north

U106 Originated in East Germany ............southern East Germany, next to Czech

Z195 Originated in Central France ..............seems like Dijon area

P312 originated in Hungary ..................old Pannonian area

L21 originated in Kent England ............

M222 originated in Ireland

L11 originated in Bulgaria

P311 originated in Romania

M269 Originated in Western Anatolia

Sile, do you have text other than what appears in the blog post? Or are you taking this from the map?

It's true that the movement into Europe seems to be directly from Anatolia into south eastern Europe. (I don't see any indication in the map of any steppe movement.) However, the trajectory for M269 appears from the angle to go back toward perhaps the northern Levant. If we follow the map, and the poster is correct that Dr. Hammer is saying it was in the Caucasus in the early Neolithic, then aren't we talking about a group that moved south and then later north west, but somehow got stalled in the area of the Balkans? It seems a little odd if that was indeed the path; a movement south after the Neolithic right into the heart of farming territory and yet the clade couldn't expand...moved into the Balkans, and still didn't undergo expansion until the Bronze Age. It will be interesting to see how it is explained.

I'd also love to know the dates and subclades for those sites near the French caves...

Sile
12-11-13, 09:43
Sile, do you have text other than what appears in the blog post? Or are you taking this from the map?

It's true that the movement into Europe seems to be directly from Anatolia into south eastern Europe. (I don't see any indication in the map of any steppe movement.) However, the trajectory for M269 appears from the angle to go back toward perhaps the northern Levant. If we follow the map, and the poster is correct that Dr. Hammer is saying it was in the Caucasus in the early Neolithic, then aren't we talking about a group that moved south and then later north west, but somehow got stalled in the area of the Balkans? It seems a little odd if that was indeed the path; a movement south after the Neolithic right into the heart of farming territory and yet the clade couldn't expand...moved into the Balkans, and still didn't undergo expansion until the Bronze Age. It will be interesting to see how it is explained.

I'd also love to know the dates and subclades for those sites near the French caves...

on text....not yet....need about a week or 2

The praise on G2a is interesting

and also the emphasis on K ( ydna)

and ..what is E1bibi?
The cave in France yielded 20 G2a samples and 2 I2a samples. The cave in Spain yielded 5 G2a samples and 1 E1bibi. In Germany 1 G2a3 and 2 F*.

adamo
12-11-13, 13:03
So it seems according to that map that U-152 and U-106 originated not far from each other; u-106 originating in the north and east of Germany towards Czech Republic and Poland. From here it would eventually spread to Austria, Czech Republic, Germany,Denmark,England,holland; parts of Norway and Sweden. U-152 though seems to have originated in central Germany and moved towards Italy,france and the Iberian peninsula. U-152 would turn into L-21 near England and finally M222 by the time we reach Ireland. Clades of R-S28 would travel from France to he Iberian peninsula.

adamo
12-11-13, 19:39
Don't know were L11 originated but it is most frequent in south-central England

adamo
12-11-13, 19:41
It seems that south-central English in General have more Germanic lineages whereas the Irish and scots (particularly and by far more the Irish) belong to Italo-Celtic S116 lineages.

American Idiot
19-11-13, 11:07
it is not present in parts of UK & Ireland that were Celtic, .

EVERY part of the UK and Ireland was Celtic at one time or another and yes R1b-S28 is found in southern Ireland, in the Scottish Highlands and various other parts of the Isles at low frequencies. Different types of Celts settled in the Isles at various times. Some came from Gaul, again at various stages, and this accounts for much of the _R1b-S28 found in Britain plus the fact that there were a minority of British tribes in Ireland too, like the Brigantes. Not to mention that names of some tribes were common in both Gaul and Britain like the Parisi (Paris) and Atrebates (Belgic tribe)

As for R1b-S28 found in the south and east of England, while some of it may be possibly attributed to Romans,there is no doubt that much of it also would be from both the Gaullish La Tene tribes who settled there earlier and the Gallo-Belgic tribes who came in not much later.

There have been artifacts such as chariot burials in the north of England (Yorkshire) that prove to archeologists there was at least a definite cultural connection between that part of England and the Marne region of France/Gaul in pre-Roman Britain.

You may be trying to say that R1b-S28 had highest concentration in the East of Britain which was where most Germanic tribes settled the heaviest too. But it's also where the Gaulish and La Tene tribes who migrated to Britain were concentrated the most as well. And they would have carried R1b-S28 in large number.

Since the Anglo-Saxons came from NW Germany/Netherlands it doesnt make sense that a large portion of the R1b-S28 found in Britain came from them, although I do agree that at least some of them would have carried it just for the fact it can be found throughout Germany at varying frequencies.

American Idiot
19-11-13, 11:17
It seems that south-central English in General have more Germanic lineages whereas the Irish and scots (particularly and by far more the Irish) belong to Italo-Celtic S116 lineages.

southern England also had the highest concentration of Gaullish and Gallo-Belgic Celtic lineages.

American Idiot
19-11-13, 11:22
http://www.ancestorcentral.com/archives/821

As per the conference yesterday, it was announced that

U152 Originated in Central Germany ...................seems like prior to Germanic people in the north

U106 Originated in East Germany ............southern East Germany, next to Czech

Z195 Originated in Central France ..............seems like Dijon area

P312 originated in Hungary ..................old Pannonian area

L21 originated in Kent England ............

M222 originated in Ireland

L11 originated in Bulgaria

P311 originated in Romania

M269 Originated in Western Anatolia

R1b-L21 didnt originate within the British Isles.

adamo
19-11-13, 18:14
False. R-S28 peaks in the entire British islands at 15% in southern England; if another 35% are L21 that makes 45% for Italo-Celtic lineages whereas Portuguese and Spanish belong 85%+ to basically almost all basal R1b-P312*. Irish have about as much-Italo Celtic lineages as Iberia ,and Italy must have about 50%; France I would say around 75%. As for England's genetic composition, I believe the original celts of the island (Scottish,Picts) to have been R-L21 whereas the later invading angles,Jutes and Saxons brought a slew of Germanic lineages (I1, R-S21 predominantly though) via holland and/or Denmark. There was also attested minor Viking presence which could explain some of the I1.

American Idiot
20-11-13, 10:24
False. R-S28 peaks in the entire British islands at 15% in southern England; if another 35% are L21 that makes 45% for Italo-Celtic lineages whereas Portuguese and Spanish belong 85%+ to basically almost all basal R1b-P312*. Irish have about as much-Italo Celtic lineages as Iberia ,and Italy must have about 50%; France I would say around 75%. As for England's genetic composition, I believe the original celts of the island (Scottish,Picts) to have been R-L21 whereas the later invading angles,Jutes and Saxons brought a slew of Germanic lineages (I1, R-S21 predominantly though) via holland and/or Denmark. There was also attested minor Viking presence which could explain some of the I1.
I agree with what you are saying..... so what is false?

my statement was that alot of the Gaullish and Belgic Celts brought in R1b-S28 to the Isles. Since, as you said, R1b-S28 peaks in southern England, that would make sense.

R1b-L21 did not actually originate in the Isles, as it is found in France,Germany, Iberia, etc.. at varying degrees. So, unless British Celts migrated throughout the Continent, there is no reason to assume R1b-L21 actually originated in the Isles itself. It was the lineage of the earliest, bronze age Celtic peoples to come into Western Europe and brought to the Isles at a very early date which is why it's the pre-dominant marker of Atlantic Celts.

And I completely agree with what you say about the genes brought in to the Isles by Anglo-Saxons and Vikings.

American Idiot
20-11-13, 10:47
U-152 would turn into L-21 near England and finally M222 by the time we reach Ireland. Clades of R-S28 would travel from France to he Iberian peninsula.
U152 (R1b-S28) never turned into R1b-L21. P116 turned into R1b-L21. It also turned into U152 (R1b-S28).
P116 is the parent clade of both R1b-L21 and of U152

Nobody1
20-11-13, 13:30
U152 in the south of England corresponds perfectly with the Gallic tribes from Belgae (Caesar V/XII) that occupied especially the maritime areas; Strange is only that U152 was not also pushed west like L21 by the Germanic and U106 but remained in its location;

American Idiot
20-11-13, 13:42
U152 in the south of England corresponds perfectly with the Gallic tribes from Belgae (Caesar V/XII) that occupied especially the maritime areas; Strange is only that U152 was not also pushed west like L21 by the Germanic and U106 but remained in its location;

I dont think R1b-L21 was pushed west by incoming Saxons. Yeah, on a small level, it was probably pushed west, but the majority of R1b-L21 found in the western areas of Britain were already in that part of the Isles long before the Germanic migration to Britain, IMO.

R1b-L21 covered all the Isles before the Saxons came. It is still found in the eastern part, though at much lower frequency and in the central part of England too, which shows there was mixing between the 2 groups and no one was "pushed west" in any large scale migration.
The native Celts of those areas were merely subjugated, as well as being killed in the earliest part of the Germanic migration to Britain.

There have been artifacts such as spearheads found in the Thames valley that show Saxons of that area of England had native Celtic metal smiths working for them as they continued their expansion.The artifacts show influences from both Saxon and Celtic smiths.
So, the Celts of that area were not wiped out or pushed west, but adapted to the new pecking order.

adamo
20-11-13, 18:26
Not "a lot" of them brought over R-S28, primordialy just a few tribes such as the Belgae who were a Belgic tribe well attested of having crossed the English Channel to southern England. In all, there is a 15% U-152 maximum in southern England. R-L21 is not really "found" in those regions (not above 5-10% anyways) it truly is a clade dedicated primarily with its highest concentrations in the British isles. They are zeroing in on an origin area somewhere in/near the England portion of the United Kingdom. It's downstream M-222 clade DID originate on Ireland. It probably was NOT the earliest Atlantic Bronze Age lineage as in my opinion this title goes to R-P312*. Thank you for stating the obvious in your next post.

Nobody1
21-11-13, 07:36
I dont think R1b-L21 was pushed west by incoming Saxons. Yeah, on a small level, it was probably pushed west, but the majority of R1b-L21 found in the western areas of Britain were already in that part of the Isles long before the Germanic migration to Britain, IMO.

R1b-L21 covered all the Isles before the Saxons came. It is still found in the eastern part, though at much lower frequency and in the central part of England too, which shows there was mixing between the 2 groups and no one was "pushed west" in any large scale migration.
The native Celts of those areas were merely subjugated, as well as being killed in the earliest part of the Germanic migration to Britain.

There have been artifacts such as spearheads found in the Thames valley that show Saxons of that area of England had native Celtic metal smiths working for them as they continued their expansion.The artifacts show influences from both Saxon and Celtic smiths.
So, the Celts of that area were not wiped out or pushed west, but adapted to the new pecking order.

i think some of them even fled to Armorica
hence its called Brittany now;

American Idiot
21-11-13, 08:48
Not "a lot" of them brought over R-S28, primordialy just a few tribes such as the Belgae who were a Belgic tribe well attested of having crossed the English Channel to southern England. In all, there is a 15% U-152 maximum in southern England. R-L21 is not really "found" in those regions (not above 5-10% anyways) it truly is a clade dedicated primarily with its highest concentrations in the British isles. They are zeroing in on an origin area somewhere in/near the England portion of the United Kingdom. It's downstream M-222 clade DID originate on Ireland. It probably was NOT the earliest Atlantic Bronze Age lineage as in my opinion this title goes to R-P312*. Thank you for stating the obvious in your next post.
you're an idiot. R1b-L21 is found from the British Isles to France(not just western France/Brittany) and even some in Germany and Iberia.It didnt originate in the Isles, it was brought there by early Celts. Have you ever seen an actual map of the spread of R1b-L21? if it originated in Britain how did it get to be so widespread on the European continent? yes of course its highest concentration is in the Isles, but it's found, in low frequency, all throughout western europe.

as for R1b-S28, since many of the Gallo-Belgic, Hallstatt era, and La Tene Celts came from Gaul then yes, alot of those peoples would have carried R1b-S28 into Britain since it's still found in France, & Central Europe today at fairly high levels.

I never said R-M222 didn't originate in Ireland, so thanks for misreading my earlier post.

And when you say "They" are zeroing in on England for a point of origin for R1b-L21, who are "they" exactly?
every thing I have ever seen or read shows most experts claim it separated from R-P312 on the continent in the early Bronze age, then was carried by Atlantic Bronze age Celtic ancestors to France, Iberia, British Isles, Western Europe. And finally, over time, it left it's highest concentration in the British Isles for obvious reasons.

I guess you're entitled to your opinions, even if they are obviously wrong. Have a good day.

adamo
21-11-13, 08:54
R-L21 is found in 5-10% of German, Spanish men (even less for Portuguese).France has above 40% in the Brittany region but most of the country has no more than 5-15% as well (even LESS than 15% on a national level) . England has 40% and Wales and Scotland have about 55-60% each whereas Ireland has more than 75%. And I can't wait for a moderator to read what you called me right there.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:02
The highest frequencies of R-L21 In the Iberian peninsula is in the northernmost 1/6 of the peninsula with a small 5-10% coat; it's barely present on Iberia: totally maxing out at 10%. Both Germany and Portugal have no more than 1-5% R-L21 each. Most of France has 5-10% but in the Brittany region as many as 40% of the males can have it; this high wanes out quickly though as in just neighbouring provinces the percentages drop to 10-15% and quickly lower.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:04
Ireland (75%), (Wales 55%) (Scotland 45%) England (35%) France (8%; maybe 10% but I doubt it) those would be your world's highest frequencies.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:04
In significant concentrations; it can only be found on the British isles. And the M-222 subclade is even more reserved; it's origins in Ireland are confirmed and it dominates there.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:06
And I can't wait for a moderator to read what you called me right there.

you are an actual adult, aren't you?

adamo
21-11-13, 09:09
Yes; I am, and you will probably receive an infraction at Eupedia forums : ) try not to get too many though! ; ). So basically 3/4 of Irish men, more or less 1/2 welsh and Scottish men and about 2/5 to 1/3 of English men are R-L21. The next highest frequencies I believe is France; at around 1/10 if not even slightly less.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:14
In significant concentrations; it can only be found on the British isles.
thank you for stating the obvious yourself......yet it's not found ONLY in the Isles. And you still have not explained why? if it originated in the Isles,as you claim, then why is it spread so far throughout Western Europe? Of course it's in lower frequency on the continent since many of the earlier Celts in Europe were overrun by various other incoming groups at many stages, and for a much longer period then the Celts of the Isles were.

Ireland was never fully overrun by any outsider in historical times. So it makes perfect sense that it's very high there to this day.
And obviously the Saxons never wiped out the native Britons, but, on the whole, assimilated them....with a few regional exceptions.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:17
I find it ironic how the region of France is named "Brittany" (sounds oddly familiar to Great Britain) in French they say Bretagne and England is grande-Bretagne; I believe this western province of France in particular was colonized by either English or Irish me at some point....,the evidence points towards the Irish as they, similar to the French, lack the Germanic lineages of the English (in what concerns R-S21 in particular) but who knows the migration may have been done via England BEFORE the arrival of the continental Germanics to England. I whole-hearted lay are with Nobody's comment on Armoria that he stated above; there's a special connection between France's Brittany region ad I assume England.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:22
Yes; I am, and you will probably receive an infraction at Eupedia forums : ) try not to get too many though! ; ). So basically 3/4 of Irish men, more or less 1/2 welsh and Scottish men and about 2/5 to 1/3 of English men are R-L21. The next highest frequencies I believe is France; at around 1/10 if not even slightly less.

that is nice but still doesnt actually back up your theory about R1b-L21 originating in England.........

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:27
I find it ironic how the region of France is named "Brittany" (sounds oddly familiar to Great Britain) in French they say Bretagne and England is grande-Bretagne; I believe this western province of France in particular was colonized by either English or Irish me at some point....,the evidence points towards the Irish as they, similar to the French, lack the Germanic lineages of the English (in what concerns R-S21 in particular) but who knows the migration may have been done via England BEFORE the arrival of the continental Germanics to England. I whole-hearted lay are with Nobody's comment on Armoria that he stated above; there's a special connection between France's Brittany region ad I assume England.

yeah like I said,,, regional exceptions, like the west country where the British-Celtic ancestors of Bretons came from.

now you are just making stuff up... there is NO evidence what so ever that Brittany was significantly colonized by the Irish.

it was settled by Old British speaking Celts from England and perhaps Wales also, at the time of the Germanic invasions to Britain and maybe started earlier. You should try to catch up with what has been established for a long time now.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:28
There is a very high probability that it did

adamo
21-11-13, 09:29
No: you were saying its common lineage of spaniards, Germans and French men on national levels dude. What is important is to see where L-21's highest age and diversity are obviously. Right now there's a good chance that it originated within Europe somewhere near england; M-222's origins ON Ireland HAVE been confirmed. I also suspect L-21 of having originated nearby probably on England.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:33
There is a very high probability that it did
according to who? besides you? what actual source has ever made such a claim ?

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:35
No: you were saying its common lineage of spaniards, Germans and French men on national levels dude.

again thank you for misreading my post . I clearly said it was found in LOW FREQUENCY in those areas, meaning it's not common, just not completely unheard of either...........dude
and I explained my thought as to why it's found in lower frequency in most of western Europe too.


still waiting your theory on how R1b-L21 went from the Isles and spread throughout Western Europe? if it originated in the Isles.
guess you didnt think that far ahead in your theory?

adamo
21-11-13, 09:43
It didn't spread throughout Western Europe, is my point; just the British isles. You have to understand that it was still R-P312* during the LGM in the franco-Cantabrian refuge.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:50
It didn't spread throughout Western Europe, is my point; just the British isles. You have to understand that it was still R-P312* during the LGM in the franco-Cantabrian refuge.
OMG, you should SERIOUSLY stop going by such outdated and incorrect info. No wonder you are so wrong about R1b-L21!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


just to humor you though......if it didnt spread throughout western europe then why is it found all throughout western europe?

because the same sub-clades dont usually just pop-up independently at various locations? they usually have ONE main general source and if found in other areas, it's usually from migration in one form or another.

adamo
21-11-13, 09:56
It is t found "all over" west Europe, only in considerable frequencies on the British isles.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 09:59
It is t found "all over" west Europe, only in considerable frequencies on the British isles.

yeah actually it IS found throughout western europe at lower frequencies as I obviosuly already stated. So my question to you.....how did it get to other areas of western europe if it came from England? and there was no major pre-historical migration from the Isles throughout France, Germany, or Iberia?
I know its highest frequency is in the Isles but Britain does not have a monopoly on R1b-L21.

maybe you should go back to reading outdated books by Bryan Sykes (LOL!)

adamo
21-11-13, 10:08
5-10% isn't what I call significant presence; it probably originated on the British isles; that explains it's low spread virtually everywhere else; same for M-222.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 10:11
it probably originated on the British isles; that explains it's low spread virtually everywhere else; same for M-222.


exactly what explains it's low spread everywhere else? Just the fact it supposedly came from the British Isles doesnt actually EXPLAIN anything?

So,how did it go from Britain to all the other areas of western europe?



http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#L21

here's some help

adamo
21-11-13, 10:21
It didn't and that's why all areas of continental Europe excluding France's Brittany province have equally low levels (5-10% at max). If it had originated and stayed on continental Europe; it would more frequent there today. But it just isn't.

adamo
21-11-13, 10:37
If you don't see a link between high R-L21 frequencies all across the British isles (high in Ireland and the lowest in England) and the fact that the only region of continental Europe with significant L21 frequencies is a portion of France called "Brittany" then I feel bad for your mother the day you were born; no, it's not just cause of the name; it's because of what I know of the histories of the region.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 10:37
If it had originated and stayed on continental Europe; it would more frequent there today.


not when all those other areas of Europe have a long history of being overrun and conquered by various other groups at many various times. As well as a much longer history of assimilation.

As I said earlier, Ireland was never overrun by any major conquering force historically so it remained isolated. As for Britain it was not truly overrun by the Romans until all other areas of western Europe, like Gaul, Iberia, had been fully romanized and assimilated. Britain was never fully romanized to the extent Gaul was. And since R1b-L21 is found in England at moderate to high levels, obviously the Saxons didnt commit genocide against the native Britons either.

as for R1b-L21 being found in western Europe, just because a population was once in a place in more larger numbers doesnt mean it stays that way forever.

There are virutally no Native AMericans left in the part of the U.S. I live in although at one time it was overrun with them.

population movements, wars, and various other factors change the demographic make up of an area if they go on for a long time and on a large scale.

Although the Isles experienced those things like the rest of western europe they didnt experience them on the same scale or for as long a time as other areas of western europe.

That makes sense as to why R1b-L21 is still found in the Isles at higher frequency today than anywhere else, especially those parts of the Isles with little outside intrusion
historically.


but again, you still have no explanation as to why R1b-L21 is found in other areas of Europe besides Britain. Yeah, its found at lower frequency but, again, how did it get there at all?

If it originated from England, (which it didn't), then how did it reach other areas of western europe? The frequency maybe low but the spread is wide in other parts of western europe, so what is the reason for that since there was no major historical migration from ancient Britain to various other areas of western europe?

American Idiot
21-11-13, 10:43
If you don't see a link between high R-L21 frequencies all across the British isles (high in Ireland and the lowest in England) and the fact that the only region of continental Europe with significant L21 frequencies is a portion of France called "Brittany" then I feel bad for your mother the day you were born; no, it's not just cause of the name; it's because of what I know of the histories of the region.
I feel bad for you if you still believe grossly outdated and incorrect info based on Bryan Sykes and other idiots.

you still havent explained as to why R1b-L21 is found in other parts of western europe besides just Britain and NW France.

you're the one with the stupid theory it originated in England,......so back it up! how did it get to other areas of western europe if it originated in england?

that link shows an explanation to my theory and my post does too.....what is yours?
I do see a link as to why its so high in the Isles and Brittany. In fact I have explained it twice as to why R1b-L21 is high in those areas and lower elsewhere. Do you even read the posts?

I KNOW why its found so high in the Isles and NW France but you still have not told your thoughts as to why it's found elsewhere. If it originated in England, then who spread it to Iberia, Germany, and other parts of France besides Brittany?

American Idiot
21-11-13, 10:47
it's because of what I know of the histories of the region. but you obviously dont know jack about the early history of the rest of western europe and I feel bad for you since you live there!


you have not given any explanation as to how R1b-L21 (supposedly) originated in England then was carried into Iberia, France-not just in Brittany, Germany, Italy, etc.... you cant just dismiss it's presence in other areas of western europe simply because its found in lower frequency. If it originated from England, as you mistakenly claim, then how did it spread to other areas of Europe?

adamo
21-11-13, 11:15
The romanization of gaul explains NOTHING about France's modern genetic make-up you baffoon; same for England; England received migrations from Germanics that Ireland didn't which due to higher I1 and R-S21 levels explains why L21 is found at a lower frequency. So you are telling me that L21 was more widespread across continental Europe in ancient times? And they were all killed off or replaced by other R1b lineages? Why do I have trouble believing that.

adamo
21-11-13, 11:17
R1b P312* lineages have been in France since long before your little "romanization" same as virtually the rest of the entire French haplogroups. You keep mentioning this "wide spread" of R-L21 across continental Europe as if it's even frequent anywhere other than the British isles, but it isn't. This has nothing to do with age diversity and point of origin of course; It could have originated in western France for all we know.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 11:23
The romanization of gaul explains NOTHING about France's modern genetic make-up you baffoon;.
so you are saying that no population in modern France has any major genetic similarity to Italians and other southern Europeans?......

adamo
21-11-13, 11:29
The R-S28 DESCENDED from south-central Germany and the Marne region of France (la tene core areas) TOWARDS Switzerland and eventually north italy. The Italians DID NOT during romanization bring the R-S28 to France. Nor any other haplogroups for that matter; maybe around less than 5%; same for England.

adamo
21-11-13, 11:31
Note south-central Germany is a Halstatt area not la tene; la tene culture succeeded and developed out f Halstatt culture. The romanization of England and France DID NOt change these region's ancient genetic structures (although there may today be a few more E-V13 or hg T men walking around in England but trust me this genetic impact was extremely minimal).

American Idiot
21-11-13, 11:34
R1b P312* lineages have been in France since long before your little "romanization" same as virtually the rest of the entire French hap.
I NEVER said the Romans brought P312 into France. again thank you for misreading my post.its like the 3rd or 4th time you've done that.

I said the reason why R1b-L21 is so low in most of France today, not including Brittany, is because R1b-L21 was in France before the Romans but due to assimilation with them as well as with other Celts (R1b-S28) who were coming in from Central Europe in pre-Roman times, then R1b-L21 is found at significantly lower percent in France today than in the British Isles.

again, you still have no explanation as to how R1b-L21 supposedly originated in England and somehow ended up in other part s of western europe (besides Brittany)

you keep avoiding the main question......maybe you're getting a headache, must be hard having a theory based on complete B.S.

and you obviosuly arent even reading most of my posts and replies as you seem to be misquoting much of what I have said already.



al the name callng in the world still doesnt help you explain how R1b-L21 is found from Iberia to France to Germany if it originated in England, as you claim.

yeah, for the 50th time I know its in low frequency I am the one who said it was in low freqency if you read my posts you'd see that instead of repeating yourself 50 times in a row.
but it is found, in LOW Frequency, in Iberia, Italy, France (not just Brittany), Belgium, Germany. so if it originated in England as you say then how did it spread to all these other areas of western europe? just answer the question why dont you?

adamo
21-11-13, 11:39
Cause maybe very little of it ever arrived in france, or spain, or germany. No. Not also due to assimilation with romans. R1b u152 may have ORIGINATED in france or nearby. I already explained to you , Romanization did not affect the genetics of france. : )

American Idiot
21-11-13, 11:42
Note south-central Germany is a Halstatt area not la tene; la tene culture succeeded and developed out f Halstatt culture. The romanization of England and France DID NOt change these region's ancient genetic structures (although there may today be a few more E-V13 or hg T men walking around in England but trust me this genetic impact was extremely minimal).
that part of Germany was also part of the La Tene culture as well, later on. The La Tene culture was widespread and included part of Southern and Central Germany.

if you seriously think the romanization of France had no impact on the genetic make up of its inhabitants then you have never seen a modern day Frenchman and I really do feel sorry for you since you live in Italy of all places.

and I already said the romanization of Englad had no impact on it's genes. That is one reason why R1b-L21 is common in England today, again thank you for stating what I already said in a previous post.

adamo
21-11-13, 11:50
Again with your continuation on la tene culture, stating the obvious. No. The romans did not significantly alter french genetics at all, its more like the other way around, with historically multiple gallic invasions of northern italy. Yes, thats exactly what im telling you. I didnt say north italians or italians in general are not genetically similar to french, in many ways, what i said is the Romanization of france didnt significantly alter its original genetic history .

American Idiot
21-11-13, 11:50
I already explained to you idiot, Romanization did not affect the genetics of france. : )


how can you seriously say that?
now you are just playing dumb.....you are PLAYING dumb, right?

you seriously mean to tell me, that no significant part of the population of France shares their genes in any major way with Italians or other southern-Euros today?

ok, you are just ignorant as hell. go back to reading Bryan Sykes

what makes you think the Romanisation of Gaul had no major genetic impact on the population?

everything else says otherwise

American Idiot
21-11-13, 11:53
Cause maybe very little of it ever arrived in france, or spain, or germany.
not a real explanation.....you are just fishing, obviously

adamo
21-11-13, 11:55
Its as appropriate an answer as you could get, what if there never was any\much l21 in portugal, germany or central france to begin with, it IS the youngest branch of r1b p312, estimates say it originated only 3,500-2,500 years ago, i personally believe it originated near the west atlantic of course , towards england.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:00
The R-S28 DESCENDED from south-central Germany and the Marne region of France (la tene core areas) TOWARDS Switzerland and eventually north italy. The Italians DID NOT during romanization bring the R-S28 to France. Nor any other haplogroups for that matter; maybe around less than 5%; same for England.

again you are stating what I said in my posts already. Thank you for copying me.

I agree with you on this. If you actual learn to READ then you would know that:)

adamo
21-11-13, 12:03
U are a liar, look into every r1b thread including r-s28 an see how long ive been saying this. U are only embarassing yourself here.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:07
Its as appropriate an answer as you could get, what if there never was any\much l21 in portugal, germany or central france to begin with, it IS the youngest branch of r1b p312, estimates say it originated only 3,500-2,500 years ago, i personally believe it originated near the west atlantic of course , towards england.

yeah it is the youngest, and it's found from Britain to Iberia to Germany in VARIOUS frequencies. It seems like it was once wide spread in the early Bronze age in western europe, but due to other factors such as invasions, war, assimilation etc..., it had a major decline in it's frequency on the continent. It thrived in the British Isles because they were isolated from alot of the wars and invasions going on in the rest of western europe until later. Britain being an Island and all, that makes sense.

It's the same reason, its found at highest frequency in the WEST of Britain and Scotland etc... because those areas were not impacted as much by Saxon invasions and others as the East of Britain was,. The same thing for the continent. It's higher in Britain than on the continent today (except for Brittany) because Britain was not impacted as much by the invasions and wars and stuff that took place on the continent, historically. Makes perfect sense.
That is is why its still found at lower frequency on the continent but at much higher percent in Britain, IMO

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:11
U are a liar, look into every r1b thread including r-s28 an see how long ive been saying this. U are only embarassing yourself here.


I never said you didnt say it. Again, thank you for misreading my post. You really seem to be making it a habit now.

adamo
21-11-13, 12:11
Prove that they were once more widespread across western europe but then they were killed off or assimilated. To me the basal p312 seems like this atlantic coast iberian group u mention, whereas the youngest l21 always had a center of weight in the british isles.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:19
Prove that they were once more widespread across western europe but then they were killed off or assimilated. To me the basal p312 seems like this atlanti coast iberian group u mention, whereas the youngest l21 always had a center of weight in the british isles.

its the widely accepted view of most experts. I take their word over yours or that idiot Bryan Sykes you seem to love so much. And they make sense.
why dont you prove it originated in England and spread out?

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:19
whereas the youngest l21 always had a center of weight in the british isles.

prove it. where are the sources?

adamo
21-11-13, 12:24
Oh alright, because the experts said so. I know for a fact that m222 originated on ireland, thats one of the only places in the world with m222 and its older in ireland than in the rare english\scottish samples so it is heavily assumed by bias almost to have an irish origin and having slightly spread nearby .

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:33
Oh alright, because the experts said so.
well they are experts, after all
and it is the most widely held view among EXPERTS

there is no actual proof R1b-L21 originated in England either or that R1b of ANY kind had anything to do with the Franco-Catabrian refuge in the LGM, for that matter

so why are your views based on those ideas?

adamo
21-11-13, 12:37
Who are thesde experts, which studies?

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:40
you first?..., you're the one claiming R1b-L21 came from England. The burden of proof falls on you. and while you're at it, prove or show the experts who still claim a LGM origin for R1b.....


I know the whole LGM theory on R1b is incorrect and widely dis-proven. and that is your basis for an Atlantic/ British Isle origin for R1b-L21

keep believing grossly outdated BS if you want....that's your problem.
and YES the Oldest clades of R1b are the East, not in Western Europe.


but you also said the Romanisation of Gaul had no major impact on the genetic make up o France today (ha)... so I dont expect a serious answer from you.

adamo
21-11-13, 12:52
If i had to theorize on the subject, id associate rl21 with the atlantic regions of bell beaker culture, i thought early iberian bell-beaker was r1b p312 star.

adamo
21-11-13, 12:54
Yes the oldest clades are in the east as r1b first originated in russia probably.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 12:58
If i had to theorize on the subject, id associate rl21 with the atlantic regions of bell beaker culture, i thought early iberian bell-beaker was r1b p312 star.

I agree with you that R1b-L21 is associated with the Bell Beaker culture. But Bell Beaker culture was spread all over the Atlantic part of Europe and even in Germany. To me, that explains the early presence of R1b-L21 and it's wide spread over much of western Europe. But it flourished in frequency in the British Isles and diminished in frequency on the continent for reasons I already stated. I cant PROVE invasions and assimilation are the exact reasons why R1b-L21 is found at lower frequency on the continent, but that is what makes the most sense to me. Its just my opinion.

adamo
21-11-13, 13:23
The 2 most likely candidates for bell-beaker culture are r-l21 and rp312, ive always thought early bell beaker of iberia to have spread via p312 but only l21 can explain bell beaker presnceon the british isles . I suspect early bell-beaker to have been p312 with later l21 expansions to the british isles etc.

American Idiot
21-11-13, 13:29
The 2 most likely candidates for bell-beaker culture are r-l21 and rp312, ive always thought early bell beaker of iberia to have spread via p312 but only l21 can explain bell beaker presnceon the british isles . I suspect early bell-beaker to have been p312 with later l21 expansions to the british isles etc.


I agree with that.

Greying Wanderer
23-01-14, 17:37
The distribution of R1a and R1b doesn't make sense if they both came *together* from the east. If they'd come *together* the proportions would be similar across Europe

I've been imagining all sorts of odd routes R1b could have come that could explain the distribution but the simplest explanation I hadn't thought of was simply they didn't come *together*. Either R1b expanded first followed later by R1a or R1a *pushed* R1b westwards.

This scenario would fit an initally I Europe with G farmers coming through the middle swamping the I in the center and separating the remaining I into refuges north and south followed by R1b first and then later R1a also coming through the middle and swamping G.

#

"here is no actual proof R1b-L21 originated in England either or that R1b of ANY kind had anything to do with the Franco-Catabrian refuge in the LGM, for that matter"

Except if some clades of R1b were spread by a metalsmith/trader caste then they might follow the same trade network created by the megalithic culture and if they entered a region with very low population density like Ireland they might have a dramatic founder effect.

Sile
19-06-14, 20:50
The distribution of R1a and R1b doesn't make sense if they both came *together* from the east. If they'd come *together* the proportions would be similar across Europe

I've been imagining all sorts of odd routes R1b could have come that could explain the distribution but the simplest explanation I hadn't thought of was simply they didn't come *together*. Either R1b expanded first followed later by R1a or R1a *pushed* R1b westwards.

This scenario would fit an initally I Europe with G farmers coming through the middle swamping the I in the center and separating the remaining I into refuges north and south followed by R1b first and then later R1a also coming through the middle and swamping G.

#

"here is no actual proof R1b-L21 originated in England either or that R1b of ANY kind had anything to do with the Franco-Catabrian refuge in the LGM, for that matter"

Except if some clades of R1b were spread by a metalsmith/trader caste then they might follow the same trade network created by the megalithic culture and if they entered a region with very low population density like Ireland they might have a dramatic founder effect.



with this paper below clearly indicating that R parent P formed in south-east Asia

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/refined-structure-in-haplogroup-k-m526.html

then the clearest 2 options are
1- R also formed in SE-Asia
2- P back tracked to the north-india area and R formed , it then went in 2 directions ....north to form R1a and south to form R1b

Clearly you need to deal with the linked paper first to then move forward to see where R originated from.

Tomenable
18-04-15, 00:42
Let's remember that ca. 6000 years ago (4000 BC) those people were few in numbers. Rb-M269 and R1a-M198 formed respectively ca. 13600 and 14300 years ago, but for more than half of their history they remained very few in numbers, most likely undergoing many demographic bottlenecks during that time. Only later, in period ca. 6000 - 4000 years ago (4000-2000 BC), they - apparently together (at least at the beginning) - underwent a huge a demographic expansion, greatly propagating both in numbers (begetting dozens of new very successful lineages) and in geographic extent (spreading over most of Eurasia, as we know from aDNA and modern distribution).

Probable TMRCA shows when a given male lineage started to expand in numbers after the last severe bottleneck:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

R-M269 formed 13600 ybp, TMRCA 7000 ybp
================================
R-L23 formed 7000 ybp, TMRCA 6300 ybp
R-Z2103 formed 6300 ybp, TMRCA 6100 ybp
R-L51 formed 6300 ybp, TMRCA 5700 ybp
R-L151 formed 5700 ybp, TMRCA 5100 ybp
R-U106 formed 5100 ybp, TMRCA 5100 ybp
R-P312 formed 5100 ybp, TMRCA 4900 ybp
R-DF27 formed 4900 ybp, TMRCA 4900 ybp
R-L21 formed 4900 ybp, TMRCA 4700 ybp
R-U152 formed 4900 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1a/

M-198 formed 14300 ybp, TMRCA 8400 ybp
================================
R-M417 formed 8400 ybp, TMRCA 5400 ybp
R-Z645 formed 5400 ybp, TMRCA 5000 ybp
R-Z282 formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 5000 ybp
R-Z280 formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 4800 ybp
R-Z93 formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp
R-Z94 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp
R-Z2124 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp
R-M458 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4500 ybp
R-Z284 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4300 ybp

Between ca. 6000-5500 ybp (4000-3500 BC) and ca. 4500-4000 ybp (2500-2000 BC) things get rapid.

In that period a lot of new successful descendant lineages "pop up" in a short timespan.

But expansions of those male lineages were not necessarily massive migrations of numerically large populations. Those could be patriarchal clans ruled by powerful chieftains, migratng and propagating their offspring after having settled/conquered.

Twilight
06-05-15, 20:07
Do you guyS know how far North and West in England the Italic people(R1b-U152 Z56 and Z192) penetrated.

Despite R1b-U152 being of partial Italic origin, they don't seem to form a triangle geographically speaking like Haplogroup E-M123 for example;also a Roman Haplogroup.

Angela
07-05-15, 01:08
Do you guyS know how far North and West in England the Italic people(R1b-U152 Z56 and Z192) penetrated.

Despite R1b-U152 being of partial Italic origin, they don't seem to form a triangle geographically speaking like Haplogroup E-M123 for example;also a Roman Haplogroup.

I have no idea what that means...

There are numerous maps of U-152 in Europe, including Britain.

This is Eupedia's:
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

I believe I saw the following map on Anthrogenica:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c7/3e/c9/c73ec94f1560c6049b8767ac0278d477.jpg
Which group(s) brought it to Britain is an open question.

See the following for Maciamo's position:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#S28-U152

Twilight
07-05-15, 03:23
I have no idea what that means...

There are numerous maps of U-152 in Europe, including Britain.

This is Eupedia's:
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

I believe I saw the following map on Anthrogenica:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c7/3e/c9/c73ec94f1560c6049b8767ac0278d477.jpg
Which group(s) brought it to Britain is an open question.

See the following for Maciamo's position:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#S28-U152

True, but there is no map for R1b-z56, R1b-z192, R1B-L2 and R1b-z36 (All haplotypes are daughter clades of R1b-U152

It would be interesting to see how the Gauls and Belgae faired in populated Britania vs the direct descendants of Italic tribes living in England.

For example, can Ydna prove that the R1B-U152 Romanizd Gauls/Belgae trbes made it to Lancashire or even scotlad, if so what percentage of people from Lancashire have the R1b-z56 or R1b-z192 subclades that went with the Gauls?

My sources:
I'm getting my info from the end of the 2nd paragraph: http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/britain_ireland_dna.shtml#romans
Here is the polygenetic tree of R1b-U152: https://www.google.com/search?biw=1032&bih=479&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=R1b-U152+polygenetic+tree&oq=R1b-U152+polygenetic+tree&gs_l=img.12...24440.28982.0.31252.17.17.0.0.0.0.12 5.1631.7j9.16.0.msedr...0...1c.1.64.img..16.1.124. WeGDMQQc39s#imgrc=c_WC_-IJ8cLjwM%253A%3B1I0IkY7E2Z-KRM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.eupedia.com%252Fimage s%252Fdesign%252FR1b-S28-tree.png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.eupedia.com%252F forum%252Fthreads%252F28944-Updated-phylogenetic-trees-of-R1b-L21-R1b-DF27-and-R1b-U152%3B780%3B426

brianco
08-05-15, 02:45
Latest maps for U152 subclades including Z36, Z56 etc

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=ymap


True, but there is no map for R1b-z56, R1b-z192, R1B-L2 and R1b-z36 (All haplotypes are daughter clades of R1b-U152

Potentia
07-09-15, 09:56
Right. Well. I have a question. My have U152 as my haplogroup, and my last name originates in the region of Galicia. How did U152 manage to get there?

Tomenable
07-09-15, 15:06
Which Galicia ???

Iberian Galicia, or what used to be one of Austrian Habsburg crownlands - the Kingdom of Galicia-Lodomeria?:

Habsburg Galicia encompassed 2 historical regions - Lesser Poland (West Galicia) and Halychyna (East Galicia).

According to Supplementary Table S4 from Myres 2010, frequency of R1b-U152 is:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v19/n1/suppinfo/ejhg2010146s1.html

In Poland 3,47% (n=202), in Czech Rep. 3,4% (n=87), in Slovakia 2,5% (n=276), in West Ukraine 1,92% (n=156).

Potentia
08-09-15, 02:25
Which Galicia ???

Iberian Galicia, or what used to be one of Austrian Habsburg crownlands - the Kingdom of Galicia-Lodomeria?:

Habsburg Galicia encompassed 2 historical regions - Lesser Poland (West Galicia) and Halychyna (East Galicia).

According to Supplementary Table S4 from Myres 2010, frequency of R1b-U152 is:


In Poland 3,47% (n=202), in Czech Rep. 3,4% (n=87), in Slovakia 2,5% (n=276), in West Ukraine 1,92% (n=156).

Iberian Galicia. U152 seems to fairly rare there.

RobertColumbia
08-09-15, 17:16
Iberian Galicia. U152 seems to fairly rare there.

I would guess that a Roman connection is likely. Your ancestor may have been a Roman soldier from Italy who was assigned to Galicia and decided to settle down there.

Potentia
09-09-15, 02:35
I would guess that a Roman connection is likely. Your ancestor may have been a Roman soldier from Italy who was assigned to Galicia and decided to settle down there.

Right. I've been thinking that is one possible explanation. However, since U152 has a fair presence in Great Britain, I was thinking that it may come from some Romano-Britons who escaped Britain when the Anglo-Saxons invaded. Going off of this map, is it a possibility that one of those people that escaped carried U152?


http://i.imgur.com/r20uo5E.png

MOESAN
11-09-15, 00:32
subclades could tell us; U152 were carried by more than a population; in Britain I suppose the late Gauls and Belgae send some, after them some Saxons could have send some. and Romans too. I think too the ancient Ligurians could have had high enough proportions....

Potentia
11-09-15, 03:19
subclades could tell us; U152 were carried by more than a population; in Britain I suppose the late Gauls and Belgae send some, after them some Saxons could have send some. and Romans too. I think too the ancient Ligurians could have had high enough proportions....

Right. Subclade. Based on my research. I think my subclade may be U152 L20. L20 is a subclade of L2, which, according to this site, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln had. So, is it possible it came with the Briton migration to Galicia?

brianco
14-09-15, 13:09
My 'new' SNPs May prove useful eventually :)


PF6658, Z193 found in quite a few European samples. Unfortunately this SNP is unreliable in testing and is only found by SNPs downstream of it (I think)!


S20550 found in the Netherlands and UK.


FGC30121, Y6354 and Z10676 all UK.


The sample RISE563 from the Allentoft 2015 study has been found to be U152+ all SNPs were negative or no-calls. It was found in a Bell Beaker grave from Osterhofen-Altenmarkt, Germany.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/RISE_Price_Migrant_Local_Compare.png

mr_y82
21-03-16, 19:48
A very interesting read!

American Idiot and adamo, I enjoyed the banter even though it was a little hostile! I know it´s been a while, but after reading all 8 pages I felt entitled to respond! haha. I tend to think the evidence agrees with the Idiot (the American one, since they were both called that at at least one point!), lol... The high concentration of L21 in the British Isles can, I think, be explained as American Idiot did (and Maciamo), but I am new to this and just trying to learn and understand it! I also agree that the smaller L21 legacy on continental Europe does indicate its likely origin there, possibly closer to the area of higher concentration today, and then it diffused in both directions, but favored the West and also got diluted as per American Idiot´s description? That is a question, not a statement of fact.... I am not qualified to make a statement of fact... :grin:

In recent times my ancestors came from Germany; my subclade is R1b1b2a1a2d* (23&me, I think its nomenclature is outdated) seems to represent, in my case, Swiss Anabaptist ancestry (surname Yutzy... interestingly, my direct line was with an Anabaptist group that migrated into Poland and later my direct line migrated back to Central Germany... maybe they left a little R1b in Poland too? :)

I used to think I knew what words like ¨Celtic,¨¨German,¨ and¨Roman¨ meant, and now I am starting to realize how much more complex it is! The wealth of knowledge that people here, of very different persuasions, seem to have impresses me. I appreciate the conversation and just wanted to say thanks to all that contributed.

Being U152, I thought I post up what my 23&me test revealed (this is on the ¨speculative¨ setting):
-only a very small fraction (.2%) of Italian DNA (one reason I personally favor ¨Gaulish¨ origin)
-a slightly larger fraction of Iberian and Scandinavian (~2% each)
-mostly German/French, (it does not differentiate)
-the genetic legacy (~15%) of a few Scots/Scotch Irish ancestors...
-a smidgen (.2%) of North African... Moorish invasion?)...

So, I am inclined to lean towards a Celtic/Gaulish origin for U152, in or around Switzerland/Austria... but I am new to this and have very little clue what I am talking about! I suppose it could have moved up into the Alps from northern Italy instead? I´m relying on you guys to find that out for me, haha. :)



There are virutally no Native AMericans left in the part of the U.S. I live in although at one time it was overrun with them.


This cracked me up... I think your general logic elsewhere makes a great deal of sense, and I am inclined to agree with your many posts, but the above statement made me laugh! It´s almost as if it implies that the Americas were an overpopulated cesspool of indigenous peoples! lol... I know you didn´t mean it like that... I live in NC near the Cherokee reservation... The fate of the Natives is far from a laughing matter, but your statement was humorous! Speaking of which... According to family folkore, I should be 1/64th Cherokee, but my genetic test could not confirm this... As I am sure you are aware, it was common for Southerners to use that as a cover story for Sub-Saharan African genetic influence, which was common in the South (about 2/3rd carry the legacy of the Slave Trade), but not commonly accepted! Not sure how many Cherokee were available in Pennsylvania, but that´s the supposed family history, lol... I am first generation North Carolinian, and accordingly don´t seem to have that Sub-Saharan influence (my wife does, her family has much deeper roots here).


The R-S28 DESCENDED from south-central Germany and the Marne region of France (la tene core areas) TOWARDS Switzerland and eventually north italy. The Italians DID NOT during romanization bring the R-S28 to France. Nor any other haplogroups for that matter; maybe around less than 5%; same for England.

I think most agree on the direction, and even time period of spread, but I guess the ancient origin won´t be know until more data is available... I have no clue as to these specifics, and even being able to converse about it makes you way more qualified than me to have an opinion! Seems to be a lot of smart people here with a wealth of knowledge and differing opinions that leave me feeling mildly confused!

Pax Augusta
21-11-16, 16:49
I have no idea what that means...

There are numerous maps of U-152 in Europe, including Britain.

This is Eupedia's:
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif

I believe I saw the following map on Anthrogenica:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c7/3e/c9/c73ec94f1560c6049b8767ac0278d477.jpg
Which group(s) brought it to Britain is an open question.

See the following for Maciamo's position:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#S28-U152


True, but there is no map for R1b-z56, R1b-z192, R1B-L2 and R1b-z36 (All haplotypes are daughter clades of R1b-U152

It would be interesting to see how the Gauls and Belgae faired in populated Britania vs the direct descendants of Italic tribes living in England.

These maps were made by Anthrogenica's user Passa.

R1b-U152 and its subclades Z56, Z36, L2. Unfortunately, no map of Z192.

Z56 is considered Italic, Z36 Gaulish and L2 more continental Celtic or Italo-Celtic.

Given the R1-U152 subclades distribution in Passa's maps, it seems reasonable to suppose:

Z56 is likely a proto-Villanovan/Italic subclade, as its higher distribution in Central-Southern Lombardy, Emilia, Tuscany, Umbria and Northern Lazio shows.

Z36 is likely a Gaulish subclade, the last wave of Gaul-Celtic people who settled Northern Italy, and to some extent Central Italy (modern-day Northern Marche)?

L2 is likely the oldest Celtic or Italo-Celtic subclade in Italy. In Northwestern Tuscany, Southeastern Liguria and Southwestern Emilia L2 is clearly a Celto-Ligurian subclade. Also very high its distribution in Northwestern Piedmont, and Northeastern Italy (Trentino-Alto Adige, Veneto, Northern Friuli).

https://s32.postimg.org/as6e4xhcl/R1b_Z56.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/l9338hgej/R1b_Z36.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/ianqvmzqj/R1b_L2.png

Maciamo's phylogenetic tree of R1b-U152.

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/design/R1b-S28-tree.png

Hauteville
21-11-16, 18:40
Passa's Z36 map coincide with the Apuani deportation in the Sannio in Roman era, while Z56 with mainland Italian repopulation of Sicily in the Norman age. The peak of L2 in Crotone is interesting too.

Angela
21-11-16, 19:39
Given the U-152 profile in the area inhabited by the Apuani it would seem to make more sense that they brought Z56 and L2 rather than Z36 to the Sannio. Or at least those should also show up, and at higher frequencies.

What is the source of the samples? Is it representative?

razyn
21-11-16, 20:21
Passa's three maps don't show anything north of the Italian border, so whatever they represent, it isn't U152 more broadly considered (e.g. relative proportion of U152 vis a vis DF27, among FTDNA customers with MDKA in England, by counties, has also been mapped). Oldest U152 yet discovered in aDNA was in Germany. DF27 and U152 are brother clades below ZZ11. And so on.

Pax Augusta
21-11-16, 21:07
Passa's Z36 map coincide with the Apuani deportation in the Sannio in Roman era, while Z56 with mainland Italian repopulation of Sicily in the Norman age. The peak of L2 in Crotone is interesting too.

Apuani have more Z56 and L2 rather than Z36. In Sicily all these subclades should exist at low frequencies because of the repopulation from Northwestern Italy. Piedmont and North-Western Liguria have Z-36 and L2 but not Z56, and Passa's Sicily map doesn't show it.



Given the U-152 profile in the area inhabited by the Apuani it would seem to make more sense that they brought Z56 and L2 rather than Z36 to the Sannio. Or at least those should also show up, and at higher frequencies.

What is the source of the samples? Is it representative?

According to Passa himself, Boattini et al. (2013) + U152 FTDNA Project. I don't know if these maps are accurate. In any case we still lack data I guess.

Distribution map of Y-DNA R-Z36 in Italy
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7886-Distribution-map-of-Y-DNA-R-Z36-in-Italy

Distribution map of Y-DNA R-Z56 in Italy
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7887-Distribution-map-of-Y-DNA-R-Z56-in-Italy

Distribution map of Y-DNA R-L2 in Italy
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7892-Distribution-map-of-Y-DNA-R-L2-in-Italy

Angela
21-11-16, 21:33
Didn't the subsequent paper, Sarno et al, add new samples at least for southern Italy?

Anyway, I don't think the results from one paper and a self-selected group of testers from FTDNA is necessarily representative. It might be, but it might not.

The problem is that perhaps because of lack of funding the papers that come out try to use the Italian samples from the many papers that were done in the past, but at that time these downstream snps were unknown. We need a large scale representative yDna study of the entire mainland plus Sicily and detailed subclade testing for all the ydna lineages, like "E", not just U-152.

Maciamo
22-11-16, 08:38
These maps were made by Anthrogenica's user Passa.


R1b-U152 and its subclades Z56, Z36, L2. Unfortunately, no map of Z192.


Z56 is considered Italic, Z36 Gaulish and L2 more continental Celtic or Italo-Celtic.


Given the R1-U152 subclades distribution in Passa's maps, it seems reasonable to suppose:

Z56 is likely a proto-Villanovan/Italic subclade, as its higher distribution in Central-Southern Lombardy, Emilia, Tuscany, Umbria and Northern Lazio shows.


Z36 is likely a Gaulish subclade, the last wave of Gaul-Celtic people who settled Northern Italy, and to some extent Central Italy (modern-day Northern Marche)?


L2 is likely the oldest Celtic or Italo-Celtic subclade in Italy. In Northwestern Tuscany, Southeastern Liguria and Southwestern Emilia L2 is clearly a Celto-Ligurian subclade. Also very high its distribution in Northwestern Piedmont, and Northeastern Italy (Trentino-Alto Adige, Veneto, Northern Friuli).


https://s32.postimg.org/as6e4xhcl/R1b_Z56.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/l9338hgej/R1b_Z36.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/ianqvmzqj/R1b_L2.png


Maciamo's phylogenetic tree of R1b-U152.


http://cache.eupedia.com/images/design/R1b-S28-tree.png

Thanks for sharing these maps. It nicely confirms what I mentioned on the S28 tree in 2013, doesn't it?

It is also interesting that the small number of Ashkenazi Jews who belong to R1b-S28 fit into the Italo-Roman Z56 clade. This is in agreement with the presumption that Ashkenazi Jews descend from a small group of Jews who settled in ancient Rome, then moved to Germany in the Middle Ages, and later to Central and Eastern Europe.

brianco
22-11-16, 16:23
Thanks Maciamo

Any thoughts on Z193 yet?

http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=435&labels=1&star=&STR=DYS447


Thanks for sharing these maps. It nicely confirms what I mentioned on the S28 tree in 2013, doesn't it?

It is also interesting that the small number of Ashkenazi Jews who belong to R1b-S28 fit into the Italo-Roman Z56 clade. This is in agreement with the presumption that Ashkenazi Jews descend from a small group of Jews who settled in ancient Rome, then moved to Germany in the Middle Ages, and later to Central and Eastern Europe.

mesola
27-02-17, 01:50
As a mere conjecture, the catalans who belong to R1b-U152 could bedescendants of the Catalauni, celtic tribe from Belgiumthat settled north of the Seine(their capital, Duro Catalaunum is nowadays Châlons-en-Chmpagne) Some of themwent south since the beginning of the fourth century BC, and establishedthemselves in territories of the actual Catalogne

Azzurro
04-03-17, 22:13
I think it would make sense that all U152 were descendants of the Unetice culture. Would continue on through the Tumulus Culture, where they split in the Urnfield Culture, as the Proto-Villanovans would be the Proto-Italics, and the later Hallstatt who would become the Celtics. The Urnfield Culture practiced cremation so did the Villanovans and later the Romans, it just makes too much sense.

Maciamo
05-03-17, 09:53
Just in case anybody checking this thread hasn't seen the new U152 phylogenetic tree (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#R1b-subclades), here is a copy.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-U152-tree.png

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-L2-tree.png

The new data confirms the Z56 branch as overwhelmingly Italic and the Z36 branch are emanating chiefly from Switzerland and southern Baden-Württemberg, making it look distinctly linked to the La Tène culture. Unfortunately L2 and Z193 aren't so clear cut. In my opinion, L2 expanded across western Europe much earlier, perhaps with the first Proto-Celtic migrations between 2300 and 1800 BCE, alongside L21 and DF27. We see an explosion of new DF27 and L2 lineages taking place right under the top of the tree, so closer to 2300 BCE (± 300 years). Even the large Z49, Z34 and L20 subclades are only a couple of centuries younger (2100 BCE according to Yfull), and indeed they are distributed all over western Europe, and sometimes also Poland. This all suggests a major Unetice dispersal of L2 (+ DF27 and L21) subclades. This was the big Bronze Age PIE wave that marked the collapse of Megalithic cultures in central and western Europe.

During that time, Z36 remained around Switzerland and Z56 probably more around Austria and Bavaria, until the Urnfield and Hallstatt expansions. Some L2 subclades would also have remained around the Alps and some would even have participated to the Italic invasion of the Italian peninsula (e.g. ZZ48).

There is little data about Z193, which makes it difficult to spot distribution patterns, but some subclades are probably Italic too (e.g. PF6693).

ngc598
05-03-17, 15:01
Keeping an eye on the northern border of Italy, the 'invasion' of the Z36-branch is strongest where L2 is weaker. With some good will this may indicate that both groups came into Italy roughly at the same time.

The L2-branch accumulates around La Spezia. It looks as if they were held up by people of the Tuscany region (Z56 that probably is). Not to say that the latter are in some way related to Etruscans, but I'm not trying to deny it either. The fact that the Z56-map doesn't touch northern borders, but the clade might have been able to hold back L2 would imply that U152 'prime' went into Italy first, and that the Z56 developed their defining mutation on Italian grounds. Only after that L2 arrived. Without an additional STR diversity map for testing the probability that's of course mere speculation.

Another interesting feature is a nice frequency distibution coincidence of Z56 and L2 at Sicily and Calabria. Were there some mutual interests between those two tribes in that region?

MattL
10-03-17, 05:41
Very interesting. Though the sample size is so far extremely limited so this is all speculation, some of us are noticing that U152 -> L2 -> Z49 -> Z142 is so far showing up a lot in Britain.

My own breakdown is

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> FGC22963,FGC22969> FGC22968,ZP67> FGC22942,S18325 et al.> BY5692 et al.> BY5694,BY5700 et al.

Unfortunately my own Langley ancestry hasn't lead back to an immigrant ancestor to America yet, though they were very likely from England. Some speculation is they were from the Buckinghamshire, England Langleys (though pure speculation).

A post outlining some of the current people tested and their possible origins is on ahtrogenica U152 -> L2 thread "Branches of Z142" post number 156206. (Just created my account here so can't post links)


mesola, you mentioned above

"As a mere conjecture, the catalans who belong to R1b-U152 could bedescendants of the Catalauni, celtic tribe from Belgiumthat settled north of the Seine(their capital, Duro Catalaunum is nowadays Châlons-en-Chmpagne) Some of themwent south since the beginning of the fourth century BC, and establishedthemselves in territories of the actual Catalogne"

June of last year I posted this in the above linked thread

"
So going down the rabbit whole of reading far too much into modern population dispersal what pops out to me is the Catuvellauni tribal region in correlation to R-FGC22963 and R-L562 in particular. Purely out of speculative interest:

From the wikipedia Catuvellauni page


The Catuvellauni are part of the Aylesford-Swarling archaeological group in Southern England often linked to Belgic Gaul and possibly to an actual Belgic conquest of the region alluded to by Caesar. John T. Koch conjectures that the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains and the modern name of Châlons-en-Champagne.[1] preserves the name of an original continental tribe of Catuvellauni, a name he derives from a compound of the ancient Celtic roots *katu- ("battle") and *wer-lo ("better"), thus meaning "excelling in battle", the same source as that of the later British and Breton personal name Cadwallon.
"

Obviously pure speculation, but I do find the current clustering in that region of England with Z142 with the potential historical ties to Belgic Gaul interesting.

alef37
21-07-17, 20:09
New member here!

Y haplogroup: R-U152, subclade RL2.

Since I'm an historian I traced back to the Renaissance all my family tree, and they all come from the centre of the Emilia region in Northern Italy. So, confirmed way back in the DNA.

I know that almost everything we have here was founded by the Celts, and so was my hometown, but I didn't know Celts played such a big role in genetics too. I thought we were more Germanic..

Of course, we can exclude any Southern/Roman explanation about this haplogroup I suppose.

Pax Augusta
21-07-17, 20:20
New member here!

Y haplogroup: R-U152, subclade RL2.

Since I'm an historian I traced back to the Renaissance all my family tree, and they all come from the centre of the Emilia region in Northern Italy. So, confirmed way back in the DNA.

I know that almost everything we have here was founded by the Celts, and so was my hometown, but I didn't know Celts played such a big role in genetics too. I thought we were more Germanic..

Of course, we can exclude any Southern/Roman explanation about this haplogroup I suppose.

Welcome! From where in Emilia?

Angela
21-07-17, 21:01
Most cities in Emilia were settled by various groups. Modena, for example, had Villanovans, Liguri, Etruscans, and Boi. Then it was abandoned and after a span of time re-founded by the Romans.
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modena

I'd be surprised to learn of any town that has only a "Gallic" history.

alef37
21-07-17, 23:28
Welcome! From where in Emilia?

Thanks!
I was born right in the middle between Modena and Bologna, in the southern hills. My paternal family line comes from Cadelbosco and Roncocesi (North-West of Reggio), then settled in Castelvetro (south of Modena) in the aftermath of the Napoleonic fall. Maternal family line, half indigenous of the hills between what are now Vignola, Guiglia, Marano and so on, the other half indigenous of the southernmost Appennines (right on the border with Tuscany, around Fiumalbo and Fanano). That part of my family is phenotipically very different from all the other parts, but they haven't moved from the mountains since at least 1550 B.C. so I can assume that even before they were settled there, as their rare surnames confirm.

Anyways, I live in Vignola but my parents were born in Savignano and Castelvetro :)


Most cities in Emilia were settled by various groups. Modena, for example, had Villanovans, Liguri, Etruscans, and Boi. Then it was abandoned and after a span of time re-founded by the Romans.

I'd be surprised to learn of any town that has only a "Gallic" history.

No, I never said that our cities have only a Celtic history. It would not be possible! With the Roman invasions, and the Germanic settlements after them! My two academical degrees are in history and I'm specialized in medieval and local history, and genealogy, so I don't know that much about archaeology or prehistorical subjects, but I made my career as a local historian :)

For what concerns my hometown, the Roman sources themselves conquering Gallia Cisalpina wrote that there was a Celtic settlement on a hill, and going up in a north-western direction one could still see many Celtic signs, even if many of them now are only natural/oral sightings of course..

We are very lucky that we had many local historians here throughout the centuries, mainly thanks to the independence of the Duchy of Modena, but unfortunately most of them are completely unknown to those who don't delve into these kind of historical studies.

Parafarne
23-07-17, 07:06
Hi there, in my view R1b-U152 is just gallo-roman but because when this lineage reached italy a rich culture was present and they comengled so the gallic tribal identity were lost for the roman branch and other celts/gauls faced little tribes of I2 and managed to keep their tribal celtic identity so today we can safely describe irish, french and spanish with celtic tribes but not so easily the romans! so in my view northern romans and french equally share this haplogroup but with romans their southern countrymen make them little distant from the big celtic/gallic ethnic groups of irish, french and spanish.

Sile
23-07-17, 19:13
Hi there, in my view R1b-U152 is just gallo-roman but because when this lineage reached italy a rich culture was present and they comengled so the gallic tribal identity were lost for the roman branch and other celts/gauls faced little tribes of I2 and managed to keep their tribal celtic identity so today we can safely describe irish, french and spanish with celtic tribes but not so easily the romans! so in my view northern romans and french equally share this haplogroup but with romans their southern countrymen make them little distant from the big celtic/gallic ethnic groups of irish, french and spanish.

R1b-U152 is more Gallic than gallo-Roman ...................Romans would be more J2 ...............You can even see it in todays marker split for Italy

Azzurro
23-07-17, 19:32
R1b-U152 is more Gallic than gallo-Roman ...................Romans would be more J2 ...............You can even see it in todays marker split for Italy


Romans were not J2, they were R1b and R1b is still the most common lineage in Southern Italy but barely (it depends in some areas it can 40% in others as low as 20-22%), R1b-U152>Z36 is Gallic and R1b-U152>Z56>Z145 is Roman. Maybe even L2 is Roman.

Vallicanus
23-07-17, 20:13
There is no proof that Romans were all R1b which is what you are implying.

Azzurro
23-07-17, 20:23
There is no proof that Romans were all R1b which is what you are implying.

Of course they were not all R1b, but it would have been the majority.

Sile
23-07-17, 20:53
Romans were not J2, they were R1b and R1b is still the most common lineage in Southern Italy but barely (it depends in some areas it can 40% in others as low as 20-22%), R1b-U152>Z36 is Gallic and R1b-U152>Z56>Z145 is Roman. Maybe even L2 is Roman.

The Romans would have picked up R1b in numbers once they became an empire and not when they where a republic............they would have had similar Markers to Campania areas

Azzurro
23-07-17, 21:26
The Romans would have picked up R1b in numbers once they became an empire and not when they where a republic............they would have had similar Markers to Campania areas

I think the opposite, I think Republic would have been heavily R1b and they would pickup E and J2 as they expanded as an empire.

Angela
23-07-17, 21:29
Romans were not J2, they were R1b and R1b is still the most common lineage in Southern Italy but barely (it depends in some areas it can 40% in others as low as 20-22%), R1b-U152>Z36 is Gallic and R1b-U152>Z56>Z145 is Roman. Maybe even L2 is Roman.

There is absolutely no way to know that definitively as we don't have a single Roman genome. Plus, it depends on the era. Already even in Republican times there would have been admixture from the Etruscans and whatever "Y" they carried. Many very famous Roman gens had Etruscan roots. In fact, any nomina ending in arna, erna, ena, enna, ina or inna are characteristic of an Etruscan family.

I could make an argument that everything that made Rome great was actually Etruscan in origin.

Azzurro
23-07-17, 21:57
There is absolutely no way to know that definitively as we don't have a single Roman genome. Plus, it depends on the era. Already even in Republican times there would have been admixture from the Etruscans and whatever "Y" they carried. Many very famous Roman gens had Etruscan roots. In fact, any nomina ending in arna, erna, ena, enna, ina or inna are characteristic of an Etruscan family.

I could make an argument that everything that made Rome great was actually Etruscan in origin.

I base off based on how its distributed, for me Z145 is a Roman marker, and I will have this opinion until or if ancient dna proves otherwise.

I would agree with your argument that everything that made Rome great was indeed Etruscan, the J2 if Romans had any, I talking Republic times would have probably came from the Etruscans.

Pax Augusta
23-07-17, 23:24
I base off based on how its distributed, for me Z145 is a Roman marker, and I will have this opinion until or if ancient dna proves otherwise.

I would agree with your argument that everything that made Rome great was indeed Etruscan, the J2 if Romans had any, I talking Republic times would have probably came from the Etruscans.

There isn't any proof either that J2 was a distinctive Etruscan haplogroup. J2 is more common in Italy in non-Etruscan regions. So according to you, Calabrians must be of Etruscan origin, being that J2 is more common in Calabria than in Tuscany.

And to begin with, the Etruscans were a civilization, not a race. And Romans were the citizens of Rome. At least let's use the more appropriate term: Latins.

Azzurro
23-07-17, 23:41
There isn't any proof either that J2 was a distinctive Etruscan haplogroup. J2 is more common in Italy in non-Etruscan regions. So according to you, Calabrians must be of Etruscan origin, being that J2 is more common in Calabria than in Tuscany.

And to begin with, the Etruscans were a civilization, not a race. And Romans were the citizens of Rome. At least let's use the more appropriate term: Latins.

There is many J2 subclades, the ones that the Etruscans carried would have been different than Calabrians, your comment is insulting, stick to your threads and your opinions stop quoting me.

secondly whoever said the Etruscans were a race??? I definately never said that, you always assume.

Pax Augusta
23-07-17, 23:50
There is many J2 subclades, the ones that the Etruscans carried would have been different than Calabrians, your comment is insulting, stick to your threads and your opinions stop quoting me.

There is freedom of speech, I am free to quote you as often as I want. And please, don't play the role of the victim, try to hide yourself behind this victimism and make it personal, this is the real insult. I understand that you do not like being contradicted but welcome in the real world.

Angela
24-07-17, 00:09
What is irritating to some members, Azzurro, is that you present your speculations as if they were facts, when obviously they're not. Speculations based on modern distributions have sometimes been correct, and have sometimes been wrong. It's not a personal attack to say so. When we get the ancient dna results from both the Latins and the Etruscans, we'll know.

I don't see any reason for the aggressiveness in your tone when responding to that post by Pax. Back off and chill.

Azzurro
24-07-17, 00:19
There is freedom of speech, I am free to quote you as often as I want. And please, don't play the role of the victim, try to hide yourself behind this victimism and make it personal, this is the real insult. I understand that you do not like being contradicted but welcome in the real world.

Freedom of speech is important yes, I am not playing the victim card at all, what you wrote was insulting, come on you've seen many of my posts here and at Anthrogenica, you know I talk about the various subclades of J2, In fact its my main research, especially discussing deep subclades, and you would think I would cluelessly dub Etruscan and Calabrian J2 as being the same?! Even with the Etruscan race comment, you think I'm an ignorant and would actually think that? I study Classical History at University. We disagree on many things and it's fine, but don't take me for a fool, as I don't with you.

Parafarne
24-07-17, 05:52
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.

Azzurro
24-07-17, 18:31
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.

Thanks very much, to me that too that makes sense, also a good point even for L2 how could it end up in Algeria and Turkey if not the Romans? Sure people can say the Galatians could have brought it to Turkey but being found in Algeria rules it out, for Z56 it is so strongely Italian oriented how can it not be Romano-Italic.

Sennevini
14-08-17, 14:45
I got back Y37 markers at ftdna (I needed these in order to do the Big Y, which is the next step! I am aware of the existence of Y Elite); The closest matches within U152 seem to be two men from the Jewish clade beneath Z145 (though with a GD of 5). My paternal line has likely an origin in Brabant. I don't want to jump to conclusions, since STR's are really prone to divergence and convergence, but wow, I am now considering a Roman background. Of course, if I indeed belong to Z145 or a lineage close to it, this lineage could have come to Brabant between the Roman era and ca. 1600. I will have more information this autumn when the Big Y results will give much more certainty. This is an exciting journey.

Vallicanus
14-08-17, 14:57
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.

Please explain how modern Tuscany which was ancient Etruscan territory certainly as far north as the Arno has more R-U152 than the Lazio area around Rome.

Pax Augusta
14-08-17, 15:10
Please explain how modern Tuscany which was ancient Etruscan territory certainly as far north as the Arno has more R-U152 than the Lazio area around Rome.

Because Tuscans descend from the proto Villanovians. Latins could have been descended from the proto Villanovians as well but Lazio was inhabited by other tribes and Latins occupied a very small portion of Lazio. And of course the area around Rome is more historically altered than Tuscany.

Sennevini
14-08-17, 15:16
I view Etruscans as similar to the Magyar elite, leaving a language and culture, but not much Y-dna.

Sile
14-08-17, 20:12
I view Etruscans as similar to the Magyar elite, leaving a language and culture, but not much Y-dna.
They could have had some elite foreigners, but the etruscans comprised of only 12 main cities who where not united except for a yearly religious festival..............IMO , the etruscans are umbrian people who took the name of the land etruria and said they where etruscans ................over time the Apennines mountains separated them linguistically

Ed the Red
16-08-17, 17:58
" when a people no longer dares to defend it's language it is ripe for slavery" well I hope the Gaelic language doesn't disappear! Especially considering the advanced culture and people that gave so much to Europe and now to North America and the rest of the world. The fighting Celtic spirit!

Ed the Red
16-08-17, 18:00
As far as I know the Celts dispersed Etruscans before sacking Rome

Ed the Red
16-08-17, 18:28
Greetings to all on this amazing site, I'm a newbie. I have little knowledge of genes and subclades but I am knowledgeable in history of people and culture that would've spread these genes with wave after wave of invading tribes

Vallicanus
16-08-17, 20:18
As far as I know the Celts dispersed Etruscans before sacking Rome

And the Romans got revenge by conquering the Gauls and other Celts south of Hadrian's Wall.

Ed the Red
16-08-17, 22:50
For sure the Romans took revenge. That was an ongoing war for centuries. Don't forget that Hannibal used Celts in his army and Elephants coming through the Alps (Celtic homeland) to attack Rome again.
Yes Rome conquered almost all Celts but didn't quite make it to North scotland or Ireland. There was also a second wall even above Hadrian's, it was Antonine wall to keep out those pesky Picts! Haha. Scottish/Irish Gaels were one of the strongest celtic tribes, I mean after all that's why they remain to this day. And basically were totally used to help England in forming Britain to be a world powerhouse.

Ed the Red
16-08-17, 23:26
But obviously mentioning powerhouse, Rome was unmatched at a point. But that's what happens when an empire gets spread thin. Funny how their motto of "Divide and Conquer" is ultimately what brought their demise.

Parafarne
17-08-17, 10:20
Please explain how modern Tuscany which was ancient Etruscan territory certainly as far north as the Arno has more R-U152 than the Lazio area around Rome.
Look Romans were a central italian IE speaking group that shared the region with other haplogroups too, remember I said romans were originaly R1b-u152 but not the only group, north italy were peopled by other groups too that belonged to u152 so we should know that at the time of Roman republic italy was a tribal society, you are right that italy were a mix of different haplogroups in that time but the discussion is which haplogroup they belonged ORIGINALLY!

Parafarne
15-09-17, 06:39
Another good logic that U152 is equally Gaulish and Roman is that in division of newly conquered Europe Germanics got N Europe, L21 moved to NW Europe, DF27 got SW Europe so Alps vicinity would have been left void of IEs if U152 would have moved to N. Italia, so it makes sense that they occupied eastern France, Alps and N. Italia from early on.

Ed the Red
27-10-17, 05:18
My guess is Gaulish from the settlement of cisapline Gaul. If there is anyway to test a sample in the right area of Italy before Celts were even established then you have your answer. The Celts were in Rome for a very long time though, I think it was in the 300's B.C. that they apparently sacked Rome!

Ed the Red
27-10-17, 05:22
I just googled, apparently it was 390 B.C. so basically 400 B.C.

spqr
10-12-17, 19:25
I used to post here under another handle, but I may be remembered under my pf 4363 designnation.
I am 73, and have been a spiritualist and shaman for many years, so, take the following with a roman grain of salt. I am certain of its truth.
I was born in England, and we come from Yorkshire, near Hadrians wall.
Once on a " journey", I was given three questions that would be answered truthfully.
Again, I am u 152 pf4363.
1. Who was my original British forefather answer: Quintus Petillius Ceriallis, Commander of the 9th Legion, governor of Roman Britania.
2. Who was my original British mother?
Answer.. She was Selgovae, a tribe by Hadrians Wall.
I had another question, but does not pertain to this.

So, perhaps someone wants to check the home town of Ceriallis, which is on wikipedia.
There is also a Roman legionaries grave in britain, which is apparently u 152.. But service in the Legions, does not mean roman.
A " royal" family should be of some interest. I think Cerialis may have been an adopted Etruscan, notsure. Anyway, just wanted to mention this, as it is important to me.
Rich

Salento
10-12-17, 20:29
I used to post here under another handle, but I may be remembered under my pf 4363 designnation.
I am 73, and have been a spiritualist and shaman for many years, so, take the following with a roman grain of salt. I am certain of its truth.
I was born in England, and we come from Yorkshire, near Hadrians wall.
Once on a " journey", I was given three questions that would be answered truthfully.
Again, I am u 152 pf4363.
1. Who was my original British forefather answer: Quintus Petillius Ceriallis, Commander of the 9th Legion, governor of Roman Britania.
2. Who was my original British mother?
Answer.. She was Selgovae, a tribe by Hadrians Wall.
I had another question, but does not pertain to this.

So, perhaps someone wants to check the home town of Ceriallis, which is on wikipedia.
There is also a Roman legionaries grave in britain, which is apparently u 152.. But service in the Legions, does not mean roman.
A " royal" family should be of some interest. I think Cerialis may have been an adopted Etruscan, notsure. Anyway, just wanted to mention this, as it is important to me.
Rich

I respect your spirituality, and your beliefs. I’m Italian. This are my Brit results from LivingDNA, who knows, maybe our Ancestors knew each other, served on the same Legion, and were drinking buddies.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171210/958f898d242a4da0fc33e48b84bdbb45.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171210/37dbc4ae7cdc1799654ded4135810623.jpg

howyesno
28-12-17, 12:26
https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif
it doesnot look Celtic at all due to UK spread where it looks as a force opposing/conquering Celtic settlements from east towards west...
its either Germanic or it spread with Romans..

its unlikely that we would see Romanic settlements in Ireland or in UK north from Hadrian's wall, so Romanic spread is also questionable.
furthermore it is strong in parts of Germany that were never part of Roman empire...


so it looks mostly germanic to me...
imprint on UK looks more germanic than celtic
Iberia hotspots match Suebi and Vandals..
Vandals being pushed by conquering Visigoths somewhat to west and also to south to north Africa (see rightmost picture showing kingdom of Vandals in north Africa, Sardinia and Sicily) and note some spread present in north Africa, Sardinia and Sicily as well)
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-e7d5c17e63f80640ab4d0a4008976da1 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Vandal_Kingdom_at_its_maximum_extent_in_the_470s.p ng/300px-Vandal_Kingdom_at_its_maximum_extent_in_the_470s.p ng

from Germany to France could be spread by Franks.. note here that Corsica with high spread was part of frankish kingdom while neighbouring Sardinia with low spread was not part of Frankish kingdom..
note that north Italy, Croatia and Slovenia with somewhat elevated spread were as well parts of frankish kingdom..note that Vasconia which was not integral part of frankish kingdom has low spread as well
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Europe_814.png/1280px-Europe_814.png
north Italy was also conquered and settled by several Germanic tribes..


Asia minor, Greece, Romania and Albania is original starting point of the spread 3-5000 years ago ..as witnessed by older R1b (see the map of ht35 bellow) and also by myth of origin of Franks that relates them to Asia minor and Troy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks#Mythological_origins)

https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-Z2103.png

spread from Asia minor suggests that Etruscans carried it as welll (not necesserilly as dominant)...
north Italy is thus explained as multiple waves of settlement...first Etruscans later Lombards, Franks and others..

https://s32.postimg.org/as6e4xhcl/R1b_Z56.png https://s31.postimg.org/ianqvmzqj/R1b_L2.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/l9338hgej/R1b_Z36.png

for instance R-Z56 being spread by people from Asia minor mostly Etruscan, R-L2 spread by Franks and Vandals and R-Z36 by Langobards

Etruscans https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/Etruscan_civilization_map.png/300px-Etruscan_civilization_map.png Lombardy 9581