Early Medieval Migrations into Northern Italy through uniparental markers

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,329
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
This is another Boattini, Sarno et al paper. They use uniparental markers, especially the "Y" chromosome (str and snp markers), surname analysis, and extensive genealogical records to attempt a recreation of early medieval historical migration patterns into a subset of the Emilia-Romagna population, i.e. the members of "Partecipenze" near Bologna.

See:
Traces of medieval migrations in a socially stratified population from Northern Italy. Evidence from uniparental markers and deep-rooted pedigrees

http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v114/n2/full/hdy201477a.html

"Social and cultural factors had a critical role in determining the genetic structure of Europe. Therefore, socially stratified populations may help to focus on specific episodes of European demographic history. In this study, we use uniparental markers to analyse the genetic structure ofPartecipanza in San Giovanni in Persiceto (Northern Italy), a peculiar institution whose origins date back to the Middle Ages and whose members form the patrilineal descent of a group of founder families. From a maternal point of view (mtDNA), Partecipanza is genetically homogeneous with the rest of the population. However, we observed a significant differentiation for Y-chromosomes. In addition, by comparing 17 Y-STR profiles with deep-rooted paternal pedigrees, we estimated a Y-STR mutation rate equal to 3.90 * 10−3 mutations per STR per generation and an average generation duration time of 33.38 years. When we used these values for tentative dating, we estimated 1300-600 years ago for the origins of the Partecipanza. These results, together with a peculiar Y-chromosomal composition and historical evidence, suggest that Germanic populations (Lombards in particular) settled in the area during the Migration Period (400–800 ad, approximately) and may have had an important role in the foundation of this community."

"Partecipanze are an absolutely idiosyncratic way of sharing and devolving collective lands. These institutions originated in the Middle Ages and are still present in some areas of Northern Italy. The privilege to participate (i.e., to share the leased assets) is inherited following a gene-like pattern through exclusive admission granted to the descent of a group of founder families, usually following the paternal line (Zanarelli, 1992). In this way, the members of Partecipanza conserved through the centuries their social and economic identity, potentially together with some of their genetic features."

The Supplementary Info can be found here:http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v114/n2/suppinfo/hdy201477s1.html

Among the people of this area near Bologna two y haplogroups have higher frequency among the elite "partecipanza" group than in the control group from the same area: I-L22 (16% vs 0), and J-M67(xM92) (14% vs 3%). U-152, although the most numerous both among the elite group and the control group, is lower among the elite group than among the control group (27% vs. 44%),

View attachment 7675

Given the history of the partecipenza system in the area and its ties to a monastery established by the Lombards, plus the dating they've done, the authors have the following to say:

"Putting it all together, it seems plausible to relate historical and archaeological information with our molecular results, suggesting that a Lombard component may have had a key role in the foundation of Partecipanza."

I do think they're right in saying this is not some fossil population of Lombards. For one thing, as they put it, "Their [the Lombard] original genetic variability is still unknown and probably varied in time and space", and for another, the mtDna seems to be similar across all groups, so autosomally I doubt there would be much difference.

I find the yDna J-M67(xM22) particularly interesting. There are two clusters, one which they date to about 6000 BC, and which is present in both the "Partecipanza group" and the control group, and also in Germany, and one represented only in the elite group and only in one pedigree, whose closest modal haplotype they found in Apulia. I'm unsure what to make of this. Was the "J" found in the Indo-European warrior J-M67? Could it have entered Italy from the north? Or is this group in both Italy and Germany from the same migration that brought J2 to Sopot? I think that was also J-M67. What of the southern affiliated group?

Fwiw: this is what I could find on J-M67. If someone knows anything more specific, especially about the xM22 group, that would be great.

"J-M67J-M67 (Called J2f in older papers) has its highest frequencies associated with Nakh peoples. Found at very high (majority) frequencies among Ingush in Malgobek (87.4%), Chechens in Dagestan (58%), Chechens in Chechnya (56.8%) and Chechens in Malgobek, Ingushetia (50.9%) (Balanovsky 2011). In the Caucasus, it is found at significant frequencies among Georgians (13.3%) (Semino 2004), Iron Ossetes (11.3%), South Caucasian Balkars (6.3%) (Semino 2004), Digor Ossetes (5.5%), Abkhaz (6.9%), and Cherkess (5.6%) (Balanovsky 2011). It is also found at notable frequencies in the Mediterranean and Middle East, including Cretans (10.2%), North-central Italians (9.6%), Southern Italians (4.2%; only 0.8% among N. Italians), Anatolian Turks (2.7-5.4%), Greeks (4-4.3%), Albanians (3.6%), Ashkenazi Jews (4.9%), Sephardis (2.4%), Catalans (3.9%), Andalusians (3.2%), Calabrians (3.3%), Albanian Calabrians (8.9%) (see Di Giacomo 2004 and Semino 2004)."

There are many groups of U-152, all dating to 5,000-4000 years ago.

As interesting as this is in terms of migrations, it's also interesting about what it says about social stratification. Are we looking at an ascendancy in this area at least since the 1500s, and probably back at least a thousand or fifteen hundred years before that?

This is part of what I meant when I said that the New World offered an opportunity for upward mobility that wasn't present in the Old World.
 

Attachments

  • Y haplogroups Partecipanza group vs control group-San Giovanni Persiceto-Bologna-Boattini.png
    Y haplogroups Partecipanza group vs control group-San Giovanni Persiceto-Bologna-Boattini.png
    54.3 KB · Views: 97
Last edited:


There are many groups of U-152, all dating to 5,000-4000 years ago.


U-152 today is a very important clade in the northern half of Italy.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml

It is unlikely to be the consequence of arrival of a single founding father in Italy 4-5000 years ago.
More likely is a more recent arrival of a large U-152 tribe in Italy with different subclades whose TMRCA is 5-4000 years ago.

The Lombards are a Germanic tribe, probably not U-152, I1-L22 and others is very possible.
Probably U-152 was there before and got well integrated into the Lombard community.
 
For my liking Germanics wouldn't pull it off. Not with their numbers. I think U152 is due to Italics and Celtic invasion of the North. Even if they didn't replace half of population, there was enough time since for U152 to grow in numbers by some evolutionary advantage. Time and numbers point to Italo-Celts. Germanics, especially the ones from south, could have brought additional U152.
 
Interesting also the virtual wipe out of "G" and "E" in this area.

View attachment 7677
Attachment is not displaying correctly.

It might be the case that IE invaders too over best agricultural lands therefore majority of food production. After all they were farmers too. Perhaps this food access by U152 folks and hunger and malnutrition on G and E families could be responsible for U152 rise and G and E decline with time?

I and J of elite class could belong to couple of Germanic families, which continually had sons to our times. It might not be proportionally representative of Germanics. Just 2 lacky clades in privileged environment.
 
Attachment is not displaying correctly.

It might be the case that IE invaders too over best agricultural lands therefore majority of food production. After all they were farmers too. Perhaps this food access by U152 folks and hunger and malnutrition on G and E families could be responsible for U152 rise and G and E decline with time?

I and J of elite class could belong to couple of Germanic families, which continually had sons to our times. It might not be proportionally representative of Germanics. Just 2 lacky clades in privileged environment.

I tried to fix the attachment twice. When I just clicked on it, it worked. If not, it's showing up as an attached thumbnail on post 1.

That may be true. They were careful to say that this is all tentative because we don't yet know what yDna was present among the Lombards. I think I1 is a pretty good bet , though.

I think you're right about U-152. Some southern Germanics might have carried some sub-clades of it, but I think a lot of it came with the Italics.

Just taking another look at the chart, about 67% various forms of R and I in the general population. Various forms of "J" from who knows where total about 19%.
 
For my liking Germanics wouldn't pull it off. Not with their numbers. I think U152 is due to Italics and Celtic invasion of the North. Even if they didn't replace half of population, there was enough time since for U152 to grow in numbers by some evolutionary advantage. Time and numbers point to Italo-Celts. Germanics, especially the ones from south, could have brought additional U152.

Iron_Age_Italy 600 BC.png

Italic people arrived in Italy - supposedly from the north of the Carpathian basin - before the Etrusks i.e. late bronze age, they lived south of the Etruscs.
First Celts - the Golaseccans arrived same time as Etruscs - early iron age and lived north of them (Lepontic language?)
So, Italics were not U-152, but probably mainly other R1b clades.
IMO U-152 were Celtic, maybe Gallic.
 
View attachment 7678

Italic people arrived in Italy - supposedly from the north of the Carpathian basin - before the Etrusks i.e. late bronze age, they lived south of the Etruscs.
First Celts - the Golaseccans arrived same time as Etruscs - early iron age and lived north of them (Lepontic language?)
So, Italics were not U-152, but probably mainly other R1b clades.
IMO U-152 were Celtic, maybe Gallic.

Possible, although Etruscan cities developed first in a core area south of the Arno, and then spread to the north and south, with cities around the Po being established very late and as a later strata. Felsina, for example, now Bologna, which is the area discussed in the paper, wasn' t settled until 510 BC. In less than 200 years, the Celts had arrived.

600_405216682.jpeg


http://www.britannica.com/place/Felsina

For all we know they might have been speaking something related to Ligurian before the arrival of the Etruscans and then later still the Celts.



This is an interactive map that shows all the Etruscan cities:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zd7uIZeuVwZM.ksNhzjmsKAkM&hl=en
 
Y-chromosomal hg I1-L22 is the distinctive mark of PAR, being highly frequent here (15.91%) whereas completely absent in SGP. A DAPC-based exploration of I1-L22 haplotypes from PAR and from comparison European populations revealed three well-differentiated clusters (Figure 2, Supplementary Table S5). Interestingly, all PAR I1-L22 haplotypes fall within the same cluster (cluster 2) together with a few haplotypes from South-Eastern Italy (1), Germany (1), Poland and Slovakia (4). Other clusters (1 and 3) are composed mainly by haplotypes from Germany and Poland, but cluster 1 includes most of the I1-L22 haplotypes from South-Eastern Italy and the Balkans, while cluster 3 is enriched in Brabant and North-Western Italy haplotypes. These results suggest that I1-L22 individuals from PAR share a recent common ancestor that could have been living around the age when the Partecipanza was established.

The Lombards originated in Scandinavia and invaded Italy in 568 CE, setting up the Lombard Kingdom in northern Italy. I1-L22 is the northern branch of hg I1 commonly found in Sweden and Norway and I1-L22 in Italy has Scandinavian roots as the authors tentatively speculated. Haplogroup R-U152 (R1b1b2a1b4) is most frequent (20-44%) in Switzerland, Italy and France and R-U152 is likely to be indigenous to northern Italy and other southern European countries. It's plausible that the Lombards or I1-L22 people (16%) admixed with the local Italian population with J-M67* (13%) and R-U152 (27%) in the Partecipanze (PAR), when the Lombard Kingdom was established.

These facts lead us to our second aim that was to reconstruct the time and the genetic origin of Partecipanza, as well as its implications for the genetic history of Italy and Europe. Differences between PAR and SGP are mainly determined by three Y-hgs: I1-L22, J2-M67* and R-U152. Frequency of Y-hg I1-L22 reaches 15.91% in PAR, being completely absent in SGP and rare in Italy (0.79%; Boattini et al., 2013). Furthermore, its frequency does not exceed 5% in all the considered comparison populations. As in the case of its parental clade I1-M253, I1-L22 is most frequently found in Northern Europe, around the Baltic sea, where it probably originated (Soares et al., 2010; Underhill et al., 2007).
 
Italic people arrived in Italy - supposedly from the north of the Carpathian basin - before the Etrusks i.e. late bronze age, they lived south of the Etruscs.

Etruscans were a civiization not a ethnicity and they do descended mostly from the proto-Villanovans. The proto-Villanovan culture and people branched from the Urnfield culture of Central Europe. Etruscan cities correspond exactly to the previous proto-Villanovans cities.
 
Etruscans were a civiization not a ethnicity and they do descended mostly from the proto-Villanovans. The proto-Villanovan culture and people branched from the Urnfield culture of Central Europe. Etruscan cities correspond exactly to the previous proto-Villanovans cities.

Many theories about the Etruscans, nobody knows realy.
These people spoke an isolate language, and out of the blue they had knowledge of iron smelting.
It is hard to believe there was no influence from outside.

Urnfield was Celtic or Italo-Celtic.
 
Could it be that this is another astonishing proof that HG # Ethnicities?? oh my... :startled:
 
Many theories about the Etruscans, nobody knows realy.
These people spoke an isolate language, and out of the blue they had knowledge of iron smelting.
It is hard to believe there was no influence from outside.

Urnfield was Celtic or Italo-Celtic.

We already know enough to exclude many unfounded theories.
 
This is another Boattini, Sarno et al paper. They use uniparental markers, especially the "Y" chromosome (str and snp markers), surname analysis, and extensive genealogical records to attempt a recreation of early medieval historical migration patterns into a subset of the Emilia-Romagna population, i.e. the members of "Partecipenze" near Bologna.

The I1-L22 is probably significant with respect to Lombards, the J2 probably not. It's unlikely J2 was part of any migration movement of northern European peoples, at least not in any numeric strength. Perhaps the J2 belonged to some significant families that earned their rank through money. Perhaps early Christian missionary or some other means. Perhaps Rome? I don't know...

We've seen a I1 amongst early English Saxons (1 of 1). Some early aDNA (possibly a Germanic camp) from NE Italy, which I don't have the citation right now was I1. We've also seen early Migration period aDNA from STR predicted as I1. I think it's pretty clear, as predicted years ago, I1 was rich amongst the northern barbarian invaders.
 
What is Partecipanza? Is it a form of land ownership, where generation after generation, a select few families defined by paternal lineages are Partecipanza? If so, this is interesting, because it still exists and is evident in Y DNA. The I1-L22 is evident Lombards were involved in the begging of this system, but the rest of their Y DNA is typical for Italy.

Here's frequency of other Y DNA the Lombards probably had a lot of, in Partecipanza and non-Partecipanza.

Partecipanza: R1b M269(xU152) 12.5%(11), R1a 3.4%(3), I2a2a-M223 3.4%(3)

Control: R1b M269(xU152) 10%(6), R1a 3.3%(2), I2a2a-M223 1.7%(1)
 
Very interesting thread.

I1a1b (L22) was indeed most likely the main haplogroup of the Lombards:

J2a1b (M67) could be Iranics or Huns who came together with Germanics:

Despite relatively wide CIs (Table 3), our estimates confirm with what is currently known about the historic origins of Partecipanza, pointing at a period comprised between 1300 and 600 years ago. Interestingly, the upper bound coincides with the Migration Period, and in particular with the settling of Ostrogoths and Lombards in Italy (493 AD and 568 AD, respectively). (...)

The area of San Giovanni in Persiceto became part of the Lombard kingdom relatively late (728 ad, under King Aistulf) and their rule lasted only half a century, after having been defeated by the French King Charlemagne in 776 ad (Capitani, 2009). Nevertheless, a number of historical facts seem to link this area with Lombard settlements. Among them, the most relevant involves the Abbey of Nonantola, one of the most powerful monastic centres of the area. The Abbey was founded by Lombard kings in 752 ad (Bottazzi, 2003). Since then, emphyteutic grants from Nonantola (first documented in 1170 ad) had a relevant role in the formation of the assets of Partecipanza. San Giovanni in Persiceto, according to some scholars, was the seat of a Lombard Duchy in the second half of the eighth century (Bottazzi, 2003; Santos Salazar, 2006). Eventually, the case of a burial site discovered in the early 1960s but originally misinterpreted as a recent mass grave has been reported. This funerary evidence exhibits a number of Germanic features and has been recently radiocarbon dated to ~1000 years ago (D'Adamo and Pedrini, 2013).

Putting it all together, it seems plausible to relate historical and archaeological information with our molecular results, suggesting that a Lombard component may have had a key role in the foundation of Partecipanza.

As it is obvious, we are not implying that hg I1-L22 coincides with ancient Lombards. Their original genetic variability is still unknown and probably varied in time and space. It is anyway reasonable to believe that I1-L22 was an important part of this [Lombard] background.

Presumed Lombard migration route:

220px-Lombard_Migration.jpg


On the other hand, frequency of R1b-U152 is almost two times lower in the control group than in the elite group:

Y+haplogroups+Partecipanza+group+vs+control+grou.png
 
Aaron1981 said:
We've also seen early Migration period aDNA from STR predicted as I1

Can you give a link to that?
 
Very interesting thread.

I1a1b (L22) was indeed most likely the main haplogroup of the Lombards:

J2a1b (M67) could be Iranics or Huns who came together with Germanics:

Despite relatively wide CIs (Table 3), our estimates confirm with what is currently known about the historic origins of Partecipanza, pointing at a period comprised between 1300 and 600 years ago. Interestingly, the upper bound coincides with the Migration Period, and in particular with the settling of Ostrogoths and Lombards in Italy (493 AD and 568 AD, respectively). (...)

The area of San Giovanni in Persiceto became part of the Lombard kingdom relatively late (728 ad, under King Aistulf) and their rule lasted only half a century, after having been defeated by the French King Charlemagne in 776 ad (Capitani, 2009). Nevertheless, a number of historical facts seem to link this area with Lombard settlements. Among them, the most relevant involves the Abbey of Nonantola, one of the most powerful monastic centres of the area. The Abbey was founded by Lombard kings in 752 ad (Bottazzi, 2003). Since then, emphyteutic grants from Nonantola (first documented in 1170 ad) had a relevant role in the formation of the assets of Partecipanza. San Giovanni in Persiceto, according to some scholars, was the seat of a Lombard Duchy in the second half of the eighth century (Bottazzi, 2003; Santos Salazar, 2006). Eventually, the case of a burial site discovered in the early 1960s but originally misinterpreted as a recent mass grave has been reported. This funerary evidence exhibits a number of Germanic features and has been recently radiocarbon dated to ~1000 years ago (D'Adamo and Pedrini, 2013).

Putting it all together, it seems plausible to relate historical and archaeological information with our molecular results, suggesting that a Lombard component may have had a key role in the foundation of Partecipanza.

As it is obvious, we are not implying that hg I1-L22 coincides with ancient Lombards. Their original genetic variability is still unknown and probably varied in time and space. It is anyway reasonable to believe that I1-L22 was an important part of this [Lombard] background.

Presumed Lombard migration route:

220px-Lombard_Migration.jpg


On the other hand, frequency of R1b-U152 is almost two times lower in the control group than in the elite group:

Y+haplogroups+Partecipanza+group+vs+control+grou.png


All the PAR group should be looked at for any lombard descendants not jut I-L22
 
All the PAR group should be looked at for any lombard descendants not jut I-L22

The others don't differ from the general population, so they are probably due to Non-Paternity Events, nobilitation of locals, descent from Non-Lombard barbarians, etc. From the beginning of its existence the group could contain locals (see what historians write about the formation of elites in barbarian kingdoms). Only lineages statistically different from the control group are informative.

Paul the Deacon wrote that Lombards incorporated men from various other tribes and peoples to their community:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_the_Deacon

Those other haplogroups are likely from such peoples (including also natives of Italy), not from "original" Lombards.
 
The others don't differ from the general population, so they are probably due to Non-Paternity Events, nobilitation of locals, descent from Non-Lombard barbarians, etc. From the beginning of its existence the group could contain locals (see what historians write about the formation of elites in barbarian kingdoms). Only lineages statistically different from the control group are informative.

Paul the Deacon wrote that Lombards incorporated men from various other tribes and peoples to their community:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_the_Deacon

Those other haplogroups are likely from such peoples (including also natives of Italy), not from "original" Lombards.

while the goths had no issue with north-eastern Italy, they devastated the people in Lombardy Before the Lombards arrived a generation later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_War_(535–554)

Basically a generation after these wars the lombards arrived to a place which was named after them which was bare of the local populace. The lombards after settling there bagame a significant percentage of the people
 

This thread has been viewed 22561 times.

Back
Top