Ancient Lombard Dna from Szolad and Collegno

Johane Derite

Regular Member
Messages
1,851
Reaction score
885
Points
113
Y-DNA haplogroup
E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
mtDNA haplogroup
U1a1a
New paper out: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/02/20/268250

[FONT=&quot][h=2]Abstract[/h]Despite centuries of research, much about the barbarian migrations that took place between the fourth and sixth centuries in Europe remains hotly debated. To better understand this key era that marks the dawn of modern European societies, we obtained ancient genomic DNA from 63 samples from two cemeteries (from Hungary and Northern Italy) that have been previously associated with the Longobards, a barbarian people that ruled large parts of Italy for over 200 years after invading from Pannonia in 568 CE. Our dense cemetery-based sampling revealed that each cemetery was primarily organized around one large pedigree, suggesting that biological relationships played an important role in these early Medieval societies. Moreover, we identified genetic structure in each cemetery involving at least two groups with different ancestry that were very distinct in terms of their funerary customs. Finally, our data was consistent with the proposed long-distance migration from Pannonia to Northern Italy.







[/FONT]
 
"Analysis of Y chromosomes in males generally reveals a highly concordant pattern to the autosomes, with haplogroups that are most predominant in modern central/northern Europeans along with a smaller set of southern European-associated haplogroups in both cemeteries (Supplementary Text 9,Figures S9.1-3, Table S9.2). "

bTI5fBo.png
 
Thanks, Johan. I was just reading it too.

Well, much ado about nothing in some ways, except for the uniparental data. Northerners invaded Italy. They incorporated some "southerners" they picked up along the way, but other than mating with some of the women, these people relegated these "Tuscan like" and "Spanish like" people to inferior status, with less food, no weapons, doubtless no power etc. The same pattern continued in northern Italy, with the local, indigenous people relegated to lower status.

We can see the codification of this social structure in the Lombard laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edictum_Rothari

Different laws for different "ethnicities", or as anthrofora members would see it: races. How different from the Roman world where any free man could be an equal Roman citizen.

So, my dislike of them appears eminently justified. I will admit this part is personal. :)
 
I must admit I'm surprised there's so little I1. I wonder if different groups had different signatures? Otherwise, where did the I1 in the northeast come from?

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

When I'm less tired I want to compare the y lines with the autosomal placement.

I'm also interested to see how Tuscan like, as in modern Tuscan like some of the samples in Pannonia might be. If they are, then what does this do to the theory that modern Tuscans show all these signs of a lot of additional "West Asian" from slaves, or, later on, from Byzantines? Was there a modern "Tuscan like" group living somewhere in Pannonia or the northern Balkans, perhaps since the Bronze Age, as there were people who were "modern Tuscan like" in the Iron Age in, was it Thrace?

Also, while the R1b is very northern, perhaps near Jutland, where did the I2a2 come from?

This is our prior discussion on the poster:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34923-Ancient-Lombard-DNA?highlight=Collegno
 
One needs to understand that the Romans where not around in Pannonia at the time when the lombards decided to move to Italy, the Romans where in Pannonia ony at the time of the Lombard arrival.......one need to consider that the Ostrogoths where in Italy for 200 years before the lombards, so logically , the lombards could have sat in Pannonia for over 200 years .
In regards to T marker SZ36 is a male child most likely born in Pannonia ........and is also stated as being a border sample between southern and northern ........pannonia is a northern area and the balkans next to them is described as southern.

while SZ36 and SZ43 were placed closest to the root of the tree separating northern and southern Europe, presumably because of their increased southern ancestry.
 
^^I don't know what you're talking about...

It seems to me that SZ36 lands right on TSI Tuscany. You don't get much more "southern" than that.
 
How much of the R1b in Collegno is of northern origin (U106)?
 
Different laws for different "ethnicities", or as anthrofora members would see it: races. How different from the Roman world where any free man could be an equal Roman citizen.

sorry Angela, but explain that to the tribes that were genocided by conquerors like Ceasar

it is true that they often granted citizinship to non-Romans, but only because of purely opportunistic reasons, not because they believed the autochtones had such rights
 
sorry Angela, but explain that to the tribes that were genocided by conquerors like Ceasar

it is true that they often granted citizinship to non-Romans, but only because of purely opportunistic reasons, not because they believed the autochtones had such rights

I'm sorry that I let myself get personal for a moment, Bicicleur. It was a mistake.

We agree on virtually everything, but we don't agree on this, or ever will, apparently. To my mind, what the Romans did, which I don't deny, and while horrible, was what conquering civilizations did. It's also what the various Celtic tribes did to one another. You made war, you killed, and those you didn't kill you enslaved.

Btw, they did it to my own Apuani and other Celt-Ligurians. Those ancestors of mine made a mistake in not allying themselves with Rome. Those that survived war and relocation were much better off than their ancestors had been, imo.

However, it was all about taxes. If you didn't resist, and became an ally, and even if you didn't, you could be absorbed very quickly and achieve equal citizenship with all other Romans . Whatever else they were or weren't, they weren't racists. Slavery wasn't reserved for blacks, and full equality wasn't based on ethnicity or "blood".

Now, I'm going to go back to discussing the paper.

Sorry for the digression.
 
So we can understand better their findings, This is the Ydna. The green is R1b, the brown is G2, the blue is I1, but mostly I2a2, the purple is R1a, and the yellow is E1b1b

BObkZ6e.png
[/IMG]

Of the E1b1b samples, the one in Italy could be E-V13, but on other sites they've called the one in Hungary as perhaps pre-E-V22?
 
FcnpcMc.png
[/IMG]
 
zUUSUhJ.png
[/IMG]

pxtaaOZ.png
[/IMG]

So, should we take this to mean that prior to the Lombard invasions, the inhabitants of northwestern Italy were Tuscan like? No, I take that back. The Colegno "native" samples are much more southern than that, plotting in the study's PCAs variously in Southern Italy or Sicily:
CL30
CL25
CL38
CL121

CL36, which is Bergamo "like", is from a later period and has more of the "northern" like ancestry, so perhaps some admixture.

Are the following more Piemontese like?
CL23
SZ28

Some of the Szolad samples were also not "Tuscan" like, but more "southern". Again, either southern Italy or Greece.
SZ19
SZ40

Again, the Tuscan like Szolad sample is SZ36. Does SZ32 fit in there too?

I think the SZ31 seems Albanian like. What about SZ43?
 
Last edited:
4DyRTlW.png
[/IMG]

This is very interesting because it's based on 10 whole genomes. SZ36 seems to land right on the Tuscans. On other PCAs, it would appear perhaps right on TSI. SZ43 is perhaps around the Romagna? SZ1 Bulgarian like.

Are we looking at populations picked up in the northern Balkans?

When the Thracian paper came out, my proposal on this thread that perhaps the "elite" graves were giving us a false impression of what was going on in the Balkans, and that very "Tuscan like", i.e. Southern European like populations survived in the Balkans into the late Iron Age, was disputed, and, in some circles, ridiculed. Maybe I was right, eh, "gentlemen"?
 
l78KZZf.png
[/IMG]

I find this very, very interesting. Does it look as if for the Collegno and Szolad samples the steppe component is about the same, and the real difference is the level of WHG vs EFF?

From the paper:
"The Medieval samples showed no strong evidence of being closer to any particular ancestral population compared to modern or Bronze Age samples, with overlap between all three and modern samples reiterating the geographic structure observed previously. It is also noteworthy that samples from Szólád do not appear to be clustered next to Neolithic, Bronze Age or modern samples from Hungary."
 
Kx2fi4Z.png

kA73p4K.png
 
Angela I can't find the "color coding from Figs 1 and 2". Is it reffering to the "E1b =yellow; G2a = red; I1a = light blue; I2a = blue; T1a = light green; R1a = purple; R1b = green." ?

EDIT

Scrap that I found it : /:

On3zs1m.png
 


Interesting to also note how autosomally different the two E1b samples SZ18 and Cl38 are (I know one seems to be pre v22 while the other V13). Also from the article it is stipulated
that

"The following relationships arelikely: SZ18/SZ23=half siblings."

abEv2Xm.png
 
So, should we take this to mean that prior to the Lombard invasions, the inhabitants of northwestern Italy were Tuscan like? No, I take that back. The Colegno "native" samples are much more southern than that, plotting in the study's PCAs variously in Southern Italy or Sicily:
CL30
CL25
CL38
CL121

CL36, which is Bergamo "like", is from a later period and has more of the "northern" like ancestry, so perhaps some admixture.

Some of the Szolad samples were also not "Tuscan" like, but more "southern". Again, either southern Italy or Greece.
SZ19
SZ40

Again, the Tuscan like Szolad sample is SZ36. Does SZ32 fit in there too?

I think the SZ31 seems Albanian like. What about SZ43?

Figure S7.3 seems to agree with what you are saying:

SS78ciK.png


(Also note the Cl38 Ev13's position vs the SZ18 Ev22)
 
Figure S7.3 seems to agree with what you are saying:

SS78ciK.png


(Also note the Cl38 Ev13's position vs the SZ18 Ev22)

Amazing, right? So much for yDna necessarily letting you predict autosomal composition.

So, how did it get there? To be so "northern", it must have been there for a very long time. Perhaps part of the Neolithic migrations? Or maybe some "Roman" soldier?

Some of the autosomal "ethnicity" assignments differ slightly depending on which PCA using which modern samples is used. On the one above in post number 17, the following look more Piemontese perhaps, or even Ligurian? On that one the shift is more to the west, yes?

CL23
SZ28

The genomes are available, right? So, I'm sure the modelers will be trying to get a finer fix on them.

However, the basic information presented should stay the same.
 
zUUSUhJ.png
[/IMG]

pxtaaOZ.png
[/IMG]

So, should we take this to mean that prior to the Lombard invasions, the inhabitants of northwestern Italy were Tuscan like? No, I take that back. The Colegno "native" samples are much more southern than that, plotting in the study's PCAs variously in Southern Italy or Sicily:
CL30
CL25
CL38
CL121

CL36, which is Bergamo "like", is from a later period and has more of the "northern" like ancestry, so perhaps some admixture.

Are the following more Piemontese like?
CL23
SZ28

Some of the Szolad samples were also not "Tuscan" like, but more "southern". Again, either southern Italy or Greece.
SZ19
SZ40

Again, the Tuscan like Szolad sample is SZ36. Does SZ32 fit in there too?

I think the SZ31 seems Albanian like. What about SZ43?

Since SZ36 is a male child , and stated not form Collegno although buried there, was he born in Pannonia
 

This thread has been viewed 100672 times.

Back
Top