Lombard DNA in Italy

Where did the 40-50% R1b-U152 distributed throughout Lombardy come from?

@ Leonardo

Who were the ancient Italics who carried R1b-U152?
 
Where did the 40-50% R1b-U152 distributed throughout Lombardy come from?

@ Leonardo

Who were the ancient Italics who carried R1b-U152?

The Italics were one family who spoke different dialects, and there were not big differences between them, so it is conceivable that all more or less, were carriers off U152.

The spread of U152 in Lombardy is almost certainly to be charged as a percentage (roughly) to 30% in the presence of the Gauls, and the huge amount to 70% of settlers sent from Rome to Lombardy.
 
The Italics were one family who spoke different dialects, and there were not big differences between them, so it is conceivable that all more or less, were carriers off U152.

The spread of U152 in Lombardy is almost certainly to be charged as a percentage (roughly) to 30% in the presence of the Gauls, and the huge amount to 70% of settlers sent from Rome to Lombardy.

Can you name the Italic tribes who you claim to have all carried R1b-U152?
 
Can you name the Italic tribes who you claim to have all carried R1b-U152?

Osco-Umbrian, Picenum, Samnites (and all the tribes of the Abruzzo), Lucanians, Bruzi, Latins, Sabines (and all the Latium Italic tribes), Sicles and may be Venetics. Not everyone had the U152, but I think that a good proportion of them belong there.
 
J2 as pre-Etruscan, I would say that pre-Etruscan is supposed to be ancestral Etruscan so we agree here. Concerning J1 I am not sure if it was a majority in any Italian population really and think the J1 distribution maps shades of green are misleading as the scale is small.

No. By "pre-Etruscan" I meant "arrived before the Etruscans".

Specifically, the Etruscan language is unlikely to be originally native to Italy because of it's similarities with the Anatolian languages. Let me elaborate this: obviously Etruscan was a fundamentally non-Indo-European language, whereas the Anatolian family obviously was Indo-European, but the point is that there are some other features which suggest areal proximity towards the Anatolian languages.

Another issue is that there is no evidence for Etruscan being spoken outside of the area of Etruscan rule, in particular not in southern Italy.

To get back to the original thread topic:

In addition to R1b-U106, other Y-Haplogroups in Italy of likely Lombardic (or at least otherwise Germanic) origin are I1 and I2b:

I1
Northern Italy - 6%
Central Italy - 3%
Suthern Italy - 2.5%

I2b
Northern Italy - 2.5%
Central Italy - 5.0%
Southern Italy - 2.5%

There's also the possibility that some R1a in Italy might be Germanic, but given the distribution of R1a in Italy, it's likely most Italian R1a is either actually natively Italic (as in, from the Proto-Italic peoples, the most likely source) or Greek.
 
Last edited:
No. By "pre-Etruscan" I meant "arrived before the Etruscans".

Specifically, the Etruscan language is unlikely to be originally native to Italy because of it's similarities with the Anatolian languages. Let me elaborate this: obviously Etruscan was a fundamentally non-Indo-European language, whereas the Anatolian family obviously was Indo-European, but the point is that there are some other features which suggest areal proximity towards the Anatolian languages.

Another issue is that there is no evidence for Etruscan being spoken outside of the area of Etruscan rule, in particular not in southern Italy.

To get back to the original thread topic:

In addition to R1b-U106, other Y-Haplogroups in Italy of likely Lombardic (or at least otherwise Germanic) origin are I1 and I2b:

I1
Northern Italy - 6%
Central Italy - 3%
Suthern Italy - 2.5%

I2b
Northern Italy - 2.5%
Central Italy - 5.0%
Southern Italy - 2.5%

There's also the possibility that some R1a in Italy might be Germanic, but given the distribution of R1a in Italy, it's likely most Italian R1a is either actually natively Italic (as in, from the Proto-Italic peoples, the most likely source) or Greek.

Concerning the Etruscan language, any correlates with other languages that may be linked to J1?

I2b distribution appears to have been introduced via the East Adriatic coast. Yes, I can definitely see Germanic origins for R1b-U106. I1 in Italy I believe has two main sources, the North Sicily I1 suggests Norse origins however most Italian I1 has a similar distribution to Greece.

I1 can be found throughout Greece at 2% suggesting that the even distribution throughout Italy also may be of an earlier introduction. Greek Macedonia has 7% I1 where Greek R1a is concentrated, these two haplogroups could be considered typical of the Greek Macedonians.

The R1a in Italy does appear to be in the Italo-Greek population with some recent Balkan Slavic R1a as well.
 
Concerning the Etruscan language, any correlates with other languages that may be linked to J1?

Not really. It would be helpful if there was a reliable map of just J1c3d alone. I think we would start to see a similar phenomenon as with R1b. For instance, I know that there are a lot of concentrations of J1c3d in southern Italy and especially Sicily, mirroring Arabic influence in Sicily.

I2b distribution appears to have been introduced via the East Adriatic coast. Yes, I can definitely see Germanic origins for R1b-U106. I1 in Italy I believe has two main sources, the North Sicily I1 suggests Norse origins however most Italian I1 has a similar distribution to Greece.

I1 can be found throughout Greece at 2% suggesting that the even distribution throughout Italy also may be of an earlier introduction. Greek Macedonia has 7% I1 where Greek R1a is concentrated, these two haplogroups could be considered typical of the Greek Macedonians.

Regarding I1, the most likely source for I1 is a single Mesolithic male lineage that by pure coincident survived the Neolithic/Chalcolithic in Scandinavia. As a result, I1 has become associated with the Germanic (and to a lesser degree, Finnic) peoples and expanded outwards with later migrations. However, I have my doubts that I1 couldn't have arrived in other parts of Europe before the migrations period, and it might already have been in Central Europe in small concentrations by the Bronze Age. The reason I came to think about this is because Germanic influence doesn't quite explain the concentrations of I1 we see for instance in Ireland, and I would argue that you can apply the same argument for Greece.

The R1a in Italy does appear to be in the Italo-Greek population with some recent Balkan Slavic R1a as well.

I just said that I don't exclude that some Italian R1a could be Germanic. Given the concentrations of R1a in northern Germany. I agree however that an Italic or Greek origin is more likely.
 
Everyone seems to neglect the Raetians in all of this, what was there haplogroup, did they not have some influence in northern italy, did they not bring the gallic-celts into italy.
Question needs to be asked is - the mixture of people between the ligurians ( natives of Italy) and the gallic of the alps must have produced something in the 1000 years.

p312 is now quoted as being Italic instead of iberic. what is the fallout for this in regards to R1B?
 
However, I have my doubts that I1 couldn't have arrived in other parts of Europe before the migrations period, and it might already have been in Central Europe in small concentrations by the Bronze Age. The reason I came to think about this is because Germanic influence doesn't quite explain the concentrations of I1 we see for instance in Ireland, and I would argue that you can apply the same argument for Greece.

I tend to agree with the age estimates by Dienekes regarding a possible Bronze Age introduction of I1 into the Southern Balkans. I believe Italy may share some of this Bronze Age I1.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-y-str-variance-accumulates-comment.html

I just said that I don't exclude that some Italian R1a could be Germanic. Given the concentrations of R1a in northern Germany. I agree however that an Italic or Greek origin is more likely.

Two 1000 genome Z93+ samples of R1a were discovered in a Spaniard and a Tuscan man. This Z93+ is a new SNP that appears to have spread from the southeast region of the Kyrgyz plains. We need more European R1a tests for the Z93 marker though. Interestingly, Balkan R1a M458- samples have all been Z93- so far.
 
Everyone seems to neglect the Raetians in all of this, what was there haplogroup, did they not have some influence in northern italy, did they not bring the gallic-celts into italy.
Question needs to be asked is - the mixture of people between the ligurians ( natives of Italy) and the gallic of the alps must have produced something in the 1000 years.

p312 is now quoted as being Italic instead of iberic. what is the fallout for this in regards to R1B?

The Raeti are definitely pre-Lombard. I have posted this in the Veneti thread but I will repeat myself as a courtesy to you. Archaeological evidence confirms early historical sources that state the Raeti were of Etruscan descent.
 
The frequency off I1 and I2b in Italy is not necessarily linked to a Germanic presence, many Sardinians belong to haplogroup I, and some of them, in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, were literally "bought" by the various Italian states for thickening populations of some depressed areas, is therefore likely that many of these stem from the Sardinians in Italy. Anyway I haplogroup is also common in earlier times to the coming of the Indo-Europeans, so it is very likely that only a small part of the frequency of I in Italy belongs to the Germans.

I should add that in Italy to find a Nordic characters is very difficult, the biondismo (blonde hair), although reasonably common, is associated with anthropological mediterranean, or whataver indo-european, characteristics (shape of the face, skin color etc. ..).
 
The frequency off I1 and I2b in Italy is not necessarily linked to a Germanic presence, many Sardinians belong to haplogroup I, and some of them, in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, were literally "bought" by the various Italian states for thickening populations of some depressed areas, is therefore likely that many of these stem from the Sardinians in Italy. Anyway I haplogroup is also common in earlier times to the coming of the Indo-Europeans, so it is very likely that only a small part of the frequency of I in Italy belongs to the Germans.

I should add that in Italy to find a Nordic characters is very difficult, the biondismo (blonde hair), although reasonably common, is associated with anthropological mediterranean, or whataver indo-european, characteristics (shape of the face, skin color etc. ..).

Yes, it is true that Sardinians have a lot of Haplogroup I. However, you are ignoring the specific subclade of Haplogroup I: Sardinian I is almost exclusively I2a1 (which is indeed very likely native, at least since Neolithic times), and not I1 or I2b. As far as I know, there is virtually no I1 or I2b in Sardinia.

I think it is absolutely certain that I1 and I2b in Italy is not of Sardinian origin. It is indeed most likely to be Germanic (or otherwise from Europe north of the Alps).
 
Demographics of Italy:
1460 - 4 500 000
1675 - 12 500 000
1861 - 22 200 000
1901 - 33 000 000
1961 - 50 000 000
2010 - 60 500 000

Where do you get a population of 8 million in 6th century Italy?

The population of Italy before the Lombards was probably not more that between 400 000 and 600 000.

your numbers are in error, in 1450 there where 13 Million italians, second to france with 16 million, german/ies 11 million , Castile 4 million, aragon 1.5 million
duchy of Milan had 2.2 million
Rep. of venice had 2.1 Million ( 400,000) was colonies in the adriatic -dalmatians, venetians and greeks ) , so figure would be 1.7 million
K. of Nalpes 2.0 million
etc etc for others
 
The Raeti are definitely pre-Lombard. I have posted this in the Veneti thread but I will repeat myself as a courtesy to you. Archaeological evidence confirms early historical sources that state the Raeti were of Etruscan descent.

where do you get this from?

If you are correct, then when did these raetians become gallic-celts?
 
where do you get this from?

If you are correct, then when did these raetians become gallic-celts?

The Raetians were not a unified ethnic group. Many of the Raetic tribes were clearly Celtic and Ligurian (from their tribal names, at least), but the language recorded in the "Raetian" inscriptions is similar to Etruscan. So, the situation is confusing. There is also the annecdote (I think by Livy or Pliny, but I'm not sure) that claims that the Raetians are the descendants of Etruscans that fled into the Alps when the Gauls invaded northern Italy.
 
The Raetians were not a unified ethnic group. Many of the Raetic tribes were clearly Celtic and Ligurian (from their tribal names, at least), but the language recorded in the "Raetian" inscriptions is similar to Etruscan. So, the situation is confusing. There is also the annecdote (I think by Livy or Pliny, but I'm not sure) that claims that the Raetians are the descendants of Etruscans that fled into the Alps when the Gauls invaded northern Italy.

this story of livy only represents 5% of raetian tribes. The raetian in acient times dominated the alps from helvetica to trieste
 
your numbers are in error, in 1450 there where 13 Million italians, second to france with 16 million, german/ies 11 million , Castile 4 million, aragon 1.5 million
duchy of Milan had 2.2 million
Rep. of venice had 2.1 Million ( 400,000) was colonies in the adriatic -dalmatians, venetians and greeks ) , so figure would be 1.7 million
K. of Nalpes 2.0 million
etc etc for others

Good numbers, do you take these?
 
@ Leonardo & Sile

Anybody is welcome to start a thread about the demographics of Italy in the History forum. It is not very relevant to this thread. Thank-you

@ Sile

The Raeti are not relevant as they were already well documented before the Lombard invasion of Italy. If they were Celtic then it would have been confirmed long ago as much is written about them as the Valley dwellers of the Veneto, who fled to the mountains when the Celts arrived.

Nobody claims the Raeti were unified or homogeneous ... they just don't appear to be R1b-U152.
 
I'd like to reiterate that unlike I2a1, which is very likely to be native to Italy, I1 and I2b are not, and are good candidates to have arrived with the Langobards, or are otherwise Germanic in origin.
 

This thread has been viewed 235762 times.

Back
Top