Ancient Lombard Dna from Szolad and Collegno

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

SS78ciK.png


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

I note that in popres regional CL23 is noted as BUL same as above.......clearly the paper notes the balkans as southern european including Bulgaria
 
This terminology of Roman in Italy on the arrival of the lombards seems strange when the Romans where already under the Goths and vandals for over 200 Years........clearly the term Roman should have ceased by then and regional italian terminology to have begun
 
Since SZ36 is a male child , and stated not form Collegno although buried there, was he born in Pannonia

How do you get that he was buried in COLEGNO? The prefix is SZ. That means he was buried in SZABO in Hungary or Pannonia as it was known then. Get it now?
 
How do you get that he was buried in Colegno? The prefix is SZ. That means he was buried in SZABO in Hungary or Pannonia as it was known then.

let me look it up ....I might be in error
 
Also, while the R1b is very northern, perhaps near Jutland, where did the I2a2 come from?

Can it be Slavic? This is around the time of the Slavic migration and this area might have been one of the starting points to cross the Danube. I was actually expecting some I2a2, but also a little more R1a, so the lack of it seems a little strange to me, although the sample is small to tell for sure. Maybe within the Slavic "home" areas I2a2 was more southwestern than R1a, so as there were many waves going South, heavily I2a2 waves crossed the Danube first, followed then by slightly more balanced I2a2-R1a waves later.
 
Can it be Slavic? This is around the time of the Slavic migration and this area might have been one of the starting points to cross the Danube. I was actually expecting some I2a2, but also a little more R1a, so the lack of it seems a little strange to me, although the sample is small to tell for sure. Maybe within the Slavic "home" areas I2a2 was more southwestern than R1a, so as there were many waves going South, heavily I2a2 waves crossed the Danube first, followed then by slightly more balanced I2a2-R1a waves later.

Are you sure that you didn't mean I2a1 instead of I2a2?

I2a2 is not the typical Slavic clade: https://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_Y-DNA_haplogroups.shtml#I2b
 
Can it be Slavic? This is around the time of the Slavic migration and this area might have been one of the starting points to cross the Danube. I was actually expecting some I2a2, but also a little more R1a, so the lack of it seems a little strange to me, although the sample is small to tell for sure. Maybe within the Slavic "home" areas I2a2 was more southwestern than R1a, so as there were many waves going South, heavily I2a2 waves crossed the Danube first, followed then by slightly more balanced I2a2-R1a waves later.

Yeah, I was thinking about this too. The people with these precise haplogroups aren't coming out very "Slavic" at all in terms of autosomal make up, however, They come out as closest to Cerman or English, French etc. You'll see what I mean in the next post.

Of course, that's not dispositive as yDna and autosomal can be discordant to some degree.

This is what they say in the paper:

". A consistent percentage of haplotypes belongs to the I haplogroup (26.4%), both in the I1a and, more abundantly, in I2a2 sub-haplogroups. They are particularly frequent in the northern Balkans with a westward gradient in central and western Europe, with some lineages belonging to I2a2a1b particularly common in the Germanic region."

Ed. No one has held it's a particularly "Slavic" clade.
 
Actually yes, I thought I saw I2a2 :). My bad!

I guess it's not nearly as Slavic as I thought it would be. I2a1 fits their supposed original territory better though.

However, there are 2 "Avar" samples that appear to be of Slavic origin. Autosomally, no Y-DNA.
 
For those who doubt there were people in Northwest Italy who were proposed by the authors as Southern Italian like/Sicilian like, they might want to take a look at the following. The ones who weren't that "southern" were Tuscan like, so even if some of that is because of movement from the south, it seems that unless the modeling shows this is wrong, northern Italy was more "southern" before the Lombards came than it was afterwards. So, as I proposed when that paper came out by Hellenthal et al (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/343/6172/747, and to some extent Sarno et al), the mixing agent might be "Northern" at the beginning of the medieval period, not Byzantine like or whatever they were claiming, and they got the timing as well as the direction of flow wrong.

In fact, there were Sicilian like people buried in Szolad.

None of these very "southern" men carry very "exotic" y, either, not even J2, much less J1, except for one E-13. In fact, in Colegno, you have one E-V13, one G2a1, one I1a3,, and one T1a2b. All the rest are R1b1.

Anyway, here it is:

TCwzPF5.png
[/IMG]

ESdFG8O.png
[/IMG]

nq78nmr.png
[/IMG]

X4un04P.png
[/IMG]
 
Wow I had no idea Sicilian like people were in northwest Italy at that time, that's cool info, thanks!
 
Results vary by reference sample used, and we really need more detailed analysis.

My point was that I wasn't incorrect in saying that some parts of the paper do show this.
 
Some of the y calls are very interesting indeed:

Look at all the R1b U-106 in the Lombard cemetery in Pannonia

SZ16, SZ23, SZ22, SZ2, SZ11 and SZ4.

I only see one CL U-106: CL84.

Was it diluted as they picked up more men after they left Pannonia, or did it vary by area in Italy and we'll find more elsewhere? I ask because there's much more U-106 in Italy than that would indicate.

OK, the Lombards have worn me out. Back to real life.
 
POPRES means Population Reference Sample. And what does HellBus mean?

"HellBus​: The same imputation procedure was carried out on 512,368 SNPs in 1,582European and Asian individuals from Hellenthal et al.72(henceforth the HellBus dataset).52Following imputation, biallelic SNPs were filtered to be >=5% minor allele frequencywith a r2imputation of value of >=0.9, resulting in a final imputed SNP set of 4,883,514SNPs. 779,577 SNPs overlapped with the autosomal SNPs included in the 1240K captureand were thus used for downstream statistical analyses."

Page 52 of the Supplementary Text.
 
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?

There is a linguistic assumption by some scholars that Daco-Thracian certainly came from somewhere to the north much nearer to where Baltic and Slavic (particularly the former) were initially spoken. Assuming that most of Poland, Belarus and North Ukraine were most probably Balto-Slavic-speaking in the Iron Age, Daco-Thracians could realistically have come from north/northwest of the Carpathians, near or even in Pannonia. Of course their "Southern-looking" genetic makeup can have been an artifact of their arrival in the Balkans and eventual heavy admixture with the local peoples, but what if they were already more "Southern European" than "Northern European" in their homeland?
 
We solved the mistery of the origin of Etruscians.

They came with Langobards!!!

(just kidding...)
 
There is a linguistic assumption by some scholars that Daco-Thracian certainly came from somewhere to the north much nearer to where Baltic and Slavic (particularly the former) were initially spoken. Assuming that most of Poland, Belarus and North Ukraine were most probably Balto-Slavic-speaking in the Iron Age, Daco-Thracians could realistically have come from north/northwest of the Carpathians, near or even in Pannonia. Of course their "Southern-looking" genetic makeup can have been an artifact of their arrival in the Balkans and eventual heavy admixture with the local peoples, but what if they were already more "Southern European" than "Northern European" in their homeland?

I think it depends on which "Thracians" we're discussing.

Ages ago, there was a paper that did an analysis on samples from elite graves, and then a sample from a poor grave, who might have been a sacrifice. The samples from the "elite" graves (some from the Bronze Age, but also some from the Iron Age) came out looking "French" and also "British, so basically Western and Northwestern European. The man who was sacrificed was, however, variously "Tuscan" like or "Oetzi" like, but at any rate much more EEF like.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29957-Genome-of-Iron-Age-Thracian?highlight=Thracian+samples


That finding was ridiculed, but I wonder if those same samples were retested in Mathiesen et al.

Might we be seeing something similar in Szabo, i.e. people who didn't really stay and put down roots, and really change the local gene pool? Maybe they passed through after a couple of hundred years, or, even if they stayed, maybe they just didn't change the gene pool because there weren't enough of them.

Maybe the majority or at least a big chunk of the population remained or became "Tuscan like", i.e. maybe even Mycenaean like originally, changed a bit, maybe 1/4 of them, to become "Tuscan like", although some remained even more southern, only to really change later on with the arrival of the Slavic migrations, which might have been more numerous.

In Hungary, yesterday's Pannonia, you also have lots of "Germanic" migrations east to change the people even more.

This is all speculation. We need more samples, and I really should start delving into the Mathiesen samples, but I think it's worth investigating. Those people in Szolad who were not only Tuscan like, but Sicilian like, couldn't have been the odd person descended from Roman soldiers. There was a community of them, and we know about them.

It's all in this thread:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34923-Ancient-Lombard-DNA?highlight=Lombard+dna

I still think this statement is valid:
"I doubt there were any Tuscans in Pannonia, though, so I have a feeling perhaps it's that people pretty similar to modern Tuscans were still living in Pannonia all the way into the post Roman era? Perhaps it's like the fact that Globular Amphora people were pretty close to modern Tuscans, or Spain Chalcolithic? "

"Tuscan like" genetically means a very "southern" Neolithic like population admixed with perhaps 1/4 to 1/3 more northern elements?

This is the group we were talking about. Wonomyro brought it to our attention:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keszthely_culture

@Wonomyro,
Wash out your mouth with soap! :)

I'll make a prediction, though: I think their elites might be more "northern" than people expected, going by that one PCA we have. That could still mean they were a mix of some sort, with perhaps some extra southeastern ancestry arriving in the late Bronze Age, to overlay the ruling more northern perhaps more IE like elite. None of that will tell us what average Etruscans were like, however, because they didn't get big grandiose graves.
 
How accurate is this data and whether these are the final results of Y haplotype research for R1b.?

https://i.imgur.com/bTI5fBo.png

According to this data in Italia Collegno exist ancestor subclades
R1b1a2a
R1b1a2a1a etc..
and in Hungaria Szólád exist descendants subclades
R1b1a2a1a1b
R1b1a2a1a1c etc..

If this is final then migration goes from Italy to Hungary at least for this peoples ?
 
It would be strange if ancient northern italians were really so southern genetically considering that in the Bronze Age North Italy was almost a prolongation of the Danube valley (Beaker, Polada, Wieselburg-Gàta in Friuli, Terramare, Canegrate/Golasecca all show influences from the north of the Alps)..not to mention the later Gaulish invasion
 

This thread has been viewed 99738 times.

Back
Top