R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?

Who spead R-U152 ?

  • The (Proto-)Italo-Celts

    Votes: 34 28.6%
  • The Hallstatt/La Tène Celts

    Votes: 31 26.1%
  • Italic people, including the Romans

    Votes: 15 12.6%
  • Hallstatt/La Tène Celts AND Italic people

    Votes: 26 21.8%
  • Earlier Neolithic or Mesolithic people

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 9 7.6%

  • Total voters
    119
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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).


R1b_Z56.png
R1b_Z36.png
R1b_L2.png



Maciamo's phylogenetic tree of R1b-U152.


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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
Just in case anybody checking this thread hasn't seen the new U152 phylogenetic tree, here is a copy.

R1b-U152-tree.png


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).
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
There is no proof that Romans were all R1b which is what you are implying.
 

This thread has been viewed 380264 times.

Back
Top