Lombard DNA in Italy

For me is very logic that Latins could not mostly carry R1b-U152,since in Catania only 1 sample from 50 samples is R1b-U152.
Explain that please and I would believe that Latins were carrying mostly R1b-U152.
As for Lombards,is clear they come in Italy and settled at least in North East,since there is so much I1 there.

Perhaps you didn't read my post carefully enough:
"As to the "Romans", we would first of all have to decide the relevant time period. The "Romans" of the first settlements on the seven hills, the Republican era, the era of Augustus? Should it be extended to all of Lazio? What about the Sabine era? Where are you going to draw the line geographically as well as temporally? The people of Sicily, in addition to Italic influence (and prior Neolithic influence, and perhaps slightly different Bronze Age migrations) would have had much more influence from the direction of Greece, and so their "mix" would have been different than that in central Italy, in my opinion, but these are all speculations."

Italian is indisputably an Indo-European language of the Italo-Celtic variety. The Romans spoke Italic. They are therefore presumed to be descended at least in part from the Indo-Europeans. The Indo-European languages in Europe track with R1b and R1a. Therefore, the Romans almost certainly carried R1b. This is not news, people. We're supposed to be beyond the basics now of having to explain what the Indo-European languages are, or basic undisputed facts about history. Even in terms of genetics, if you're going to debate a topic like the one that is the subject of this thread you should have read and tried to understand Haak et al.

See Haak et al 2015
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433
 
The English language is not at fault, trust me on this. Lombard has always been Lombard in any language. Langobardi is a poor rendition of the word that refers to the Germanic Lombards. A corruption of the correct term 'Lombard'.

You're completely wrong. Lombard is a corruption of the word Langobardi and not the opposite (please, read the Paul the Deacon's Historia Langobardorum).


The question is why would one need to corrupt a perfectly fine name such as Lombard into Langobardi or Longobardi? It is not as if the correct term does not exist in Italian. It is being used to describe the citizens of Lombardy. It is quite silly if you ask me. If there are two countries with the same name then the people would be called the same name. Two Lombardies makes no difference. It's Lombardy in Germany and Lombardy in Italy ... therefore the citizen of Lombardy in Germany is a Lombard and the citizen of Lombardy in Italy is a Lombard.

In Italy, there is confusion because the region of Lombardy speaks a dialect which is called Lombardo but bares no resemblance to Germanic, rather it is Gallo-Italian. Similarly, in Sicily where the Lombards established themselves ... there are Gallo-Italian dialects.

All of this suggests that the Lombards were from Northwestern Italy and Southeastern France, not Germany as the term Lombardi suggests. This is the problem and it is easy to rectify, simply name them Northwestern Italian, Ligurii, Genovesi or anything that resembles their origins. Lombards they definitely were NOT.

There is no confusion in Italy about the modern-day Lombards and the Langobardi. The only confusion here is in your posts.
 
You base this opinion on what exactly? You are a native speaker of Italian perhaps? Any native speaker knows the difference. Or perhaps you are a linguist with a specialty in Italian who has detailed knowledge of the derivation of these terms? Or maybe you are an expert on historical texts written in Italian over the centuries about these invasions? I somehow think not.

The Langobardi invaded Italy from the northeast around 560AD...

I could go on for two pages. Do I have to go all the way back to Gibbons' Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire?

Lombard is not Italian, it is a word that is accepted in every language to be of Germanic origin. Langobardi/Longobardi is simply a corruption of the same word because the early authors and people of Italy corrupted the word. Later generations were more literate and realized that Lombard should be written as Lombardi in Italian. This is a simple fact, there is no need for personal insults. I think you are better than that, nationalism has no place in such discussions and makes for partial moderation.

To assume that I am not Italian and therefore I cannot possibly understand is nationalistic and sentimental. Similarly, to assume that I do not know where the term Lombard originated from and therefore have nothing meaningful to contribute goes to show just how emotionally caught-up you have become. You lack self-control and expose yourself by insulting others in such a nasty manner.

Despite this discussion being in English you have consistently used the Italian term Langobardi for the Germanic Lombards. Why would you prefer to use the corruption in another language when the correct term exists in English. I can go on for 2 pages ... but it would be futile to discuss Italian history with you as you have proven yourself incapable of impartiality and basic courtesy.

Angela, I would like you to stop bullying and participate in the discussion. If you cannot respect the opinions of others on this forum then you should at least provide the space for discussion.
 
This is all unsubstantiated fantasy, and unworthy of debate. We don't make up history here.

Please see post #237 and read the articles and texts to which I have provided links. Then, if you wish, we can discuss the probable genetic impact on the Italian people.

If you want one volume that does a very good job explaining the invasion of the "Langobardi" I would recommend the following
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0631211977.html
 
Last edited:
Lombard is not Italian, it is a word that is accepted in every language to be of Germanic origin. Langobardi/Longobardi is simply a corruption of the same word because the early authors and people of Italy corrupted the word. Later generations were more literate and realized that Lombard should be written as Lombardi in Italian. This is a simple fact, there is no need for personal insults. I think you are better than that, nationalism has no place in such discussions and makes for partial moderation.

To assume that I am not Italian and therefore I cannot possibly understand is nationalistic and sentimental. Similarly, to assume that I do not know where the term Lombard originated from and therefore have nothing meaningful to contribute goes to show just how emotionally caught-up you have become and lack of self-control.

Despite this discussion being in English you have consistently used the Italian term Langobardi for the Germanic Lombards. Why would you prefer to use the corruption in another language when the correct term exists in English. I can go on for 2 pages ... but it would be futile to discuss Italian history with you as you have proven yourself incapable of impartiality and basic courtesy.

Angela, I would like you to stop bullying and participate in the discussion. If you cannot respect the opinions of others on this forum then you should at least provide the space for discussion.


That is a very novel interpretation of what is going on here. I have asked you to provide any reference by academics....historians, linguists, geneticists...to support your speculations, speculations that are in direct contradiction to accepted history and linguistics. For example, there is a trail of archaeological evidence showing the movement of the Langobardi from Pannonia into Italy through the eastern corridor. I have seen no reference anywhere, by anyone, to them entering Italy from the northwest as a mostly Gaullish force of all things.* The Italian word for these people is Langobardi, Langobards if you prefer, which is the English term used in the Neil Christie book, and this is derived from the original Latin term, which is "Langobardum".

You haven't provided any academic proof calling any of this into question. Are we supposed to go against all excepted history and archaeology because you say so? You're free, of course, to keep writing these things. Just don't expect me to debate them with you.

You list yourself as a Hellene. Are you misrepresenting yourself?
 
Last edited:
Let me approach the question differently, seeing as it is quite a sensitive issue and seems to make some individuals rather defensive.

Does the term Lombard in Italy (or similar context) refer to:
1. The Lombard peoples from Northern Europe (Germanic).
2. The people in Lombardia, Italy.
3. The people who speak/spoke the Western and/or Eastern Lombard dialect, a member of the Gallo-Italic language group.

After answering the above question, now keep in mind the following:
- Did the population movement into Lombardy occur over time or mostly at one specific period in history?
- Did the population(s) moving into Lombardy travel alone or did they bring other populations with them, and if so who?
- If we refer to Germanic-speaking Lombards, are there linguistic traces in the Lombard dialect (Italy)?

For what's its worth .
Mr Hammer ( less than a year ago ) claims U152 born in central Germany near the rhine river , he also placed the birth of U106 in the harz mountains ( border of czech and germany today ). Clearly then U152 is celtic firstly then italiac via celtic migration and U106 is lombard who also settled in eastern austria where 15% of U106 is found......but of the U106 , lombard are not the only tribe that carried this, as old-germanic tribes settled in frisia ( netherlands)


in regards to your points
#1 - some say longbards origins are in scania sweden
#3 - western longbards speak the original milanese dialect, east-lombards speaks with a venetian dialect ( bergamo, brescia, cremona etc ) where under Venice longer than they have been under Milan ( Bergamo is the best place to see this and also the least contaminated (< is this the best word ) by Italian language or customs
 
This is all unsubstantiated fantasy, and unworthy of debate. We don't make up history here.

Please see post #237 and read the articles and texts to which I have provided links. Then, if you wish, we can discuss the probable genetic impact on the Italian people.

This is bullying and intimidation. Nobody should be ridiculed like this on a public forum.
 
The Franco-Provençal language, a distinct from French language that shares features of both French and Provençal. This is different to the Provencal dialect which is very different and not applicable to our discussion.

This Franco-Provençal is also referred to as Arpitan or Romand. It is strictly speaking not Gallo-Italic but rather Gallo-Romance language spoken in east-central France, western Switzerland, northwestern Italy, and in enclaves in the Province of Foggia in Apulia, Italy.

Franco-Provençal has several distinct dialects and is separate from but closely related to neighboring Romance languages such as Gallo-Italic, Occitan, Gallo-Italian and Romansh. The Gallo-Italic languages have characteristics both of the Gallo-Romance languages to the northwest (including French and Occitan) and the Italo-Romance languages to the south (including standard Italian).

Occitan belongs to the L'Oc family and has no frankish ties ( germanic )...........it is in southern france.
Northern France speak L'Oil lanuguage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provençal_dialect
 
For what's its worth .
Mr Hammer ( less than a year ago ) claims U152 born in central Germany near the rhine river , he also placed the birth of U106 in the harz mountains ( border of czech and germany today ). Clearly then U152 is celtic firstly then italiac via celtic migration and U106 is lombard who also settled in eastern austria where 15% of U106 is found......but of the U106 , lombard are not the only tribe that carried this as old-germanic tribes settled in frisia ( netherlands)


in regards to your points
#1 - some say longbards origins are in scania sweden
#3 - western longbards speak the original milanese dialect, east-lombards speaks with a venetian dialect ( bergamo, brescia, cremona etc ) where under Venice longer than they have been under Milan ( Bergamo is the best place to see this and also the least contaminated (< the the best word ) by Italian language nor customs

I too think that R1b-U106 is a Lombard marker. Is there a trace of the language from Scania or any Germanic influence in the Milanese dialect?
 
Lombard is not Italian, it is a word that is accepted in every language to be of Germanic origin. Langobardi/Longobardi is simply a corruption of the same word because the early authors and people of Italy corrupted the word. Later generations were more literate and realized that Lombard should be written as Lombardi in Italian. This is a simple fact, there is no need for personal insults. I think you are better than that, nationalism has no place in such discussions and makes for partial moderation.

To assume that I am not Italian and therefore I cannot possibly understand is nationalistic and sentimental. Similarly, to assume that I do not know where the term Lombard originated from and therefore have nothing meaningful to contribute goes to show just how emotionally caught-up you have become. You lack self-control and expose yourself by insulting others in such a nasty manner.

Despite this discussion being in English you have consistently used the Italian term Langobardi for the Germanic Lombards. Why would you prefer to use the corruption in another language when the correct term exists in English. I can go on for 2 pages ... but it would be futile to discuss Italian history with you as you have proven yourself incapable of impartiality and basic courtesy.

Angela, I would like you to stop bullying and participate in the discussion. If you cannot respect the opinions of others on this forum then you should at least provide the space for discussion.


Just to "refresh" the too hot soup and to make me sure of the right terms I opened my Oxford Dictionary (I ought to do it more often) and I red, in front of the Lombard entry:
"-from It Lombards, late L. Longo--/Langobardus (Teut. Lang- "long" Bardi, L. name of the people). One of the Teutonic Longobards who conquered Italy ..."
 
This is bullying and intimidation. Nobody should be ridiculed like this on a public forum.

I will repeat: " I have asked you to provide any reference by academics....historians, linguists, geneticists...to support your speculations, speculations that are in direct contradiction to accepted history and linguistics. For example, there is a mountain of archaeological evidence showing the trail of the Langobardi into Italy through the eastern corridor. The original word is "Langobardum".

You haven't provided any academic proof calling any of this into question. How is it improper to point this out? Your speculations are just that...speculations unsupported by academic data. I thought I was being helpful by posting links to sources you may not have read.

You're free to post your speculations, of course. I am free to find them totally unpersuasive and to point that out. It's also true that unsubstantiated claims generally, anywhere, aren't given much credence.
 
Is there a Germanic dialect of Italian?

There are the 7 towns of the cimbri in Veneto, but these are not lombard , but east-bavarian in genetics and dialect.
the association with the cimbri of Denmark has been proven as wrong.
 
Occitan belongs to the L'Oc family and has no frankish ties ( germanic )...........it is in southern france.
Northern France speak L'Oil lanuguage

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

Very interesting, thank-you for pointing this out. I naturally assumed it being Franco-Provencal that it would have Germanic influence, so it has none.
 
There are the 7 towns of the cimbri in Veneto, but these are not lombard , but east-bavarian in genetics and dialect.
the association with the cimbri of Denmark has been proven as wrong.

I see, the Veneto region includes South-Tyrol if I am not mistaken i.e. Belluno (Cadore). The border became quite porous during the Austro-Hungarian Empire. East-Bavarian sounds right!

Paul the Deacon referred to the Bavarians who sang the Lombard Alboin, a foreign tragic-heroic king (Paul the Deacon I, 27)
 
There was an off topic comment upthread about the impact of Franco-Provencal on the development of the Italian language. It belongs more properly in the Italian language thread, but I would just point out that the fact that the troubadours had some impact on the development of the Italian language does not mean that the so-called "Gallo-Italic" languages are derived from Franco-Provencal. Any interested parties can just check general Wiki articles on the Romance languages, the Italian language etc and follow the appropriate links. It could be discussed on the Italian language thread.
 
It's a legend that Romans stole from the Etruscans according to some scholars. If you know the rise of the power of the Romans and the history of Etruscans, you will agree with that.

If we view the land of lombardy and do a summary , then it was
Etruscan owned until 500BC when the celts invaded and held it, it was then taken by the Romans after the Hannibal wars.
it was then invaded by goths and other barbarians and lastly it was settled by lombards from eastern germany. these people did not replace the existing, etruscan, celtic, roman nor goth populace entirely
 
If we view the land of lombardy and do a summary , then it was
Etruscan owned until 500BC when the celts invaded and held it, it was then taken by the Romans after the Hannibal wars.
it was then invaded by goths and other barbarians and lastly it was settled by lombards from eastern germany. these people did not replace the existing, etruscan, celtic, roman nor goth populace entirely

One can go back further. There were hunter gatherers, then Neolithic farmers, and then various Indo-European cultures, all before the arrival of the Etruscans.
 
The Lombards may have been ruling Italy in the 6th century but it is a real possibility that they used disgruntled Gauls who were unhappy with the Roman occupation of their lands and forced military service and taxes.

The border with France and the border with Austria and perhaps Switzerland may have been where these mercenaries were originally from, passing into Italy ... and therefore they would have been a mix of European haplogroups, the majority of which would have had to have been U152.

We can speculate that a sizable amount of U152 already existed in Italy from c.1200BC and the Roman periods, but then more entered with the Lombards and little more with the Angevins.

The question this raises is one of social class and status. Was it an economic revolution, were the Lombards 'liberators' of the masses that lived in the outskirts. Farmers and peasants who joined the fight with a small elite force of mercenaries from Northwestern Italy and Southeastern France. Did Genoa become wealthy because of these expeditions? One thing is certain, it was not a German invasion of Italy ... it was probably more like the USA using the Kurds to establish economic control in Iraq.

I think you can also state a medieval migration of U152 in to these north italian areas......the frankish-salian group stayed a short time ( they spoke a franconian language and where from modern day Hesse and Nassua lands) , but the swabians of the upper rhine area migrated in great numbers to lombardy and veneto in particular , families like the scaliger, ezzelini, carrara brought swabian people and military personnel to govern these lands for very many decades. they where only replaced in the 15th century by italians.................I do not mean they where not italian, but that there swabian genes stopped coming
 

This thread has been viewed 235762 times.

Back
Top