Lombard DNA in Italy

[Vallicanus]

Also if you study the map on the U152.org site the frequency of R1b U-152 decreases eastwards in both northern and central Italy. Southern Italy has less than most of France.

The highest concentration is towards the North-West from Lombardy down to western Tuscany and Corsica.

North-east Italy and east-central Italy has a much lower frequency as does the south.

 

[corinth]

i know where you got your theory on this lombardic issues, from Wiki as well as cavalli book,

I am not familiar nor interested in either of the attributions you are assuming I gained my ideas from. These are my own opinion, not gleaned from what someone else told me or posited- I have said repeatedly what others here have not, which is that the verdict will not come from me or some other theorist, it will come from ancient Y-results, because the history of this region and the limited range of U-152 do not allow any definitive conclusions to be asserted as fact, in the way that some other Hg/SNP with in-situ 'donor' populations permit.
The limited regions in which U-152 is significant have too complicated and tumultuous a history.
The one thing I have noted is that the obvious consideration that the potential Lombardic period attribution would obligate consideration of a localised SNP that is localized at its markedly highest pct within this specific range,
have been dealt short shrift and swept aside with extreme prejudice, and this is simply not supported by what little is known of the eastern migrants, the Lombardic composition, or any ancient Y dna to base it upon.
The sole basis for without any discussion automatically disregarding U-152 as "lombardic" is a unrealistic prejudice that any lombardic y-dna has to be I1, R1a, or U-106, which is not based on a scientific or supported argument but upon a LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS.

but as stated other germanic people entered norhern italy after the goths and lombards, like the swabians, ottonians etc etc, but the lombardic was too few to tilt the dna

The "Lombardic" population was not "too few" to succesfully hold a large region of land that was surrounded and under near constant attack by Slavs, Italics, Byzantine armies, Saracens.. etc..
You are again making a personal assumption that is not supported by the fact that enough Lombardic fighting males exist within a breeding population of Lombards to constantly confound and defeat the super-power Byzantines.

 

[zanipolo]

I am not familiar nor interested in either of the attributions you are assuming I gained my ideas from. These are my own opinion, not gleaned from what someone else told me or posited- I have said repeatedly what others here have not, which is that the verdict will not come from me or some other theorist, it will come from ancient Y-results, because the history of this region and the limited range of U-152 do not allow any definitive conclusions to be asserted as fact, in the way that some other Hg/SNP with in-situ 'donor' populations permit.
The limited regions in which U-152 is significant have too complicated and tumultuous a history.
The one thing I have noted is that the obvious consideration that the potential Lombardic period attribution would obligate consideration of a localised SNP that is localized at its markedly highest pct within this specific range,
have been dealt short shrift and swept aside with extreme prejudice, and this is simply not supported by what little is known of the eastern migrants, the Lombardic composition, or any ancient Y dna to base it upon.
The sole basis for without any discussion automatically disregarding U-152 as "lombardic" is a unrealistic prejudice that any lombardic y-dna has to be I1, R1a, or U-106, which is not based on a scientific or supported argument but upon a LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS.



The "Lombardic" population was not "too few" to succesfully hold a large region of land that was surrounded and under near constant attack by Slavs, Italics, Byzantine armies, Saracens.. etc..
You are again making a personal assumption that is not supported by the fact that enough Lombardic fighting males exist within a breeding population of Lombards to constantly confound and defeat the super-power Byzantines.

firstly, I comment in this froum with ZERO nationalistic ideas because its useless and besides the borders today are not the borders of yesterday.

I never mentioned that I recall what I thought the lombardic dna was, my theory is that all tribes where already mixed in DNA.

The lombardic people that migrated, numbered according to historians a max of 500000 and these also incorporated macromanni, quadi and osi tribes. Historians say the ventic peopl in NE Italy in the year 520 BC had 50 cities and 1.5 MIllion people. The celts in lombardy invaded with 200000 and did not touch the venetics because of there numbers. we are already into very high numbers which increased under roman rule. how do you cater for 55% of north italy as R1b U-152 today

also note the ligurians and some other italic tribes called themselves lombardic after the lombard invasions even though they where not

 

[Vallicanus]

Plus all recent genetic studies show that all of Italy INCLUDING NORTHERN ITALY has less North European admixture than anywhere else west of the Balkans.

Corinth is just some sort of Padanian nationalist and his historical knowledge is superficial.

I bet he is of North Italian extraction.

 

[zanipolo]

Plus all recent genetic studies show that all of Italy INCLUDING NORTHERN ITALY has less North European admixture than anywhere else west of the Balkans.

Corinth is just some sort of Padanian nationalist and his historical knowledge is superficial.

I bet he is of North Italian extraction.

i do not understand your comments, I am of north italian extraction ( traced family back to 1744 so far ) , i do not believe in the lombadic padanian ( from the padus , roman word means from the po valley ) system, but i do believe there is a huge difference between north italians and the other italians.
i believe north italian where alpine people originally , mixed with gallic, venetic, ligurian, illyrian, frankish, gothic, raeti, germanic, celtic, helvetic and much later some slavic and french peoples. basically a "soup of cultures".
As the ancient Greeks stated, Italy starts at the toe and finishes at the Po, the rest are barbarians.

maybe Corinth is , but does it matter?

 

[MOESAN]

Many of us contest this.

The Lombards were a tiny elite in Corsica and a small minority all over Italy.

That is why Corsicans and North Italians are usually dark-haired and owe little to the Longobards either in genotype or phenotype.

I agree with the first part of this post but I like "castrate the lice" ('spazhañ laou') as we say in breton:
things are not always so simple (without offense to you) - yet Corsicans are a mixt where dark pigmentation overruns the ligh one, but is very lighter than Sardigna for instance, or than Portugal, South Italy or others mediterranean regions - genuine (before internal emigration of workers from Mezzogiorno, very recent) people of Lombardia are lighter yet than Corsicans, even if dark is commoner than light - some relatively reliable but based on the same criteria %s for comparison:
Corsica : dark hues: 52-55% / middle: 41-43% / light (blond): 4-5% [red: 0,6-0,8%]
Sardigna: " " : 80-82% / " : 17-19% / " " : < 1% [red: 0,3-0,5%]
Lombardia: " " : 38-40% / " : 49-50% / " " : 10-11% [red: 1,0%-1,2%]
I suspect on small sample that center Corsica is a little bit mor often dark - the same for some regions of Lombardia (according to scholars works because I lack precise data for that: maybe near Pô districts occupied by Roman Empire men) - what is not without weight, it seams that North-Eastern Italy is a very litlle bit more often light than Lombardia - the less 'blond' being Piemonte...
even staying with pigmentation, it appears to me that in these rough categories of hues, black hair is commoner among Corsicans, very-dark-brown among Lombardians - and dark brown is commoner among Corsicans opposed to middle-light brown commoner among Lombardians (and other North italians) -
put along with cranial index, it makes a big enough difference between Corsicans an Lombardians -
$: light hairs in Corsica SEAMS TO ME (a bet) linked more to several demic light contacts with Liguria and Toscana, and other people of other parts of North Italy but not the result of an unique big impact of Lombards or ANY other ruling people... A Corsican in Paris told me that some rare villages of Corsica was populated by Austrians soldiers or colons about the XVIII/XIX°C. I'm not aware of that and it will be well if someone could send some data on that)
I SUPPOSE (waiting more downstream SNP of it) that rhe most of the MALE presence linked to Y-R-U152 in Corsica is from the Bell Beaker period resently I don't believe that this SNP is linked to the first B.B. bearers but i think this B.B. "teachers" had a big success among previoulsy settled populations rich for R-U152 (between Switzerland, Bavaria, E-France and N/N-W Italy - sure the Genova ruling period could have send somones else to Corsica as the Lombardic period but not the bulk of it (even I think Riviera is not the better for Y-R1b whatever the SNP... But i am not a Corsica specialist at all concerning History!
If you have more items about the Italy's question
read you again, maybe

 

[Vallicanus]

i do not understand your comments, I am of north italian extraction ( traced family back to 1744 so far ) , i do not believe in the lombadic padanian ( from the padus , roman word means from the po valley ) system, but i do believe there is a huge difference between north italians and the other italians.
i believe north italian where alpine people originally , mixed with gallic, venetic, ligurian, illyrian, frankish, gothic, raeti, germanic, celtic, helvetic and much later some slavic and french peoples. basically a "soup of cultures".
As the ancient Greeks stated, Italy starts at the toe and finishes at the Po, the rest are barbarians.

maybe Corinth is , but does it matter?

Don't worry, I'm not attacking North Italians.

I just don't see the close link trumpeted by Corinth between R1b-U152 and the Lombards or any other Germanic invaders of Italy.

Corinth seems to think that Lombard invaders were numerous and introduced most of the Y chromosomes in medieval northern Italy even though NE Italy has no more U-152 than most of the south (see U152.org site maps).

 

[Yetos]

Your history is very poor.

When the Goths invaded Roman Dacia in the 3rd century, most of the Romanised population fled south of the Danube to safety.

Most "Roman" settlers in Dacia came from all over the Roman Empire and few were from Italy itself. Even surviving Dacians were absorbed so your Italy-Romania link is invalid.

How sure are you,

it seems like Goths were autochthonus in Dacia, and from spread to North and West,

 

[Taranis]

How sure are you,

it seems like Goths were autochthonus in Dacia, and from spread to North and West,

Yetos, stop confusing the Getae (a Dacian people) and the Goths (a Germanic people). It's clear that the Goths only arrived in Dacia during the migration period.

 

[corinth]

Yetos, stop confusing the Getae (a Dacian people) and the Goths (a Germanic people). It's clear that the Goths only arrived in Dacia during the migration period.

He is not confusing anything. I showed you the list of half a dozen ancient historians of the time who all used the terms Getae and Goth interchangeably for the same population. These goth/getae are also sharing the same historic territories.
The question becomes whether we are wrong in assuming these conflations of tribal names are mistakes, or whether these ancient attributions were made in error.

This is why I earlier said that I do not think the Goths or Lombards, who share a common migration myth, even set foot in Scandinavia. I think they adopted common myths to explain who they were, as "lost tribes" that related them to the obviously culturally and linguisticallly similar populations to the west that they come into contact with as the asiatic onslaught forces the surviving, free populations of Getae/Goths to the west.

The remarks that the "getae and dacians share the same language" is not really meaningful, given that the lombards in Italy also cooperate with Slavic and Avar tribes on regular occasions, meaning that at least some portions of one or both groups are Bi-lingual and able to concert actions with one another.

The native or internal language of some or all portions of the Getae may be a eastern germanic-related tongue, while in cooperation with the Dacian populations they used the lingua-franca of that population.

There is a trail through thrace and greece of U-152 that is quite noticeable today, particularly with known gothic introgression and settlements in these areas, and no history of Ligurians.

 

[Vallicanus]

All speculation and pseudo-history and not a trace of evidence.

U-152 was a mutation that arose around the Swiss Alps about 3,500 years ago.

 

[corinth]

All speculation and pseudo-history and not a trace of evidence.

U-152 was a mutation that arose around the Swiss Alps about 3,500 years ago.

Guess you can take that up with Maciamo then, genius.

In my opinion, the Bashkirs R1b descend directly from the Bronze-age Proto-Indo-Europeans. The only place where both M73 and M269 are both common is around the Caucasus and Anatolia. Based on my theory of the PIE moving to the Pontic steppes in the Neolithic, the first steppe invaders would have belonged to both M73 and M269, although the latter would have been much more dominant. It is possible that all the subclades as far as S116 and even S28/U152 developed in the steppes before migrating to Europe. The Bashkirs could represent the last leftovers from these PIE R1b, who would later been overwhelmed by neighbouring R1a from further north and east.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26878-Bashkirs-What-Subclades-of-R1b-Were-They

ancient Bakshir proverb=
"He who put foot in mouth, regret taste of shoe"

 

[Vallicanus]

All your verbiage does not link U-152 to the Lombards.

Still waiting for sound evidence that U-152 in northern or ( rather more) north-west Italy is of any origin other than what 152.0rg and Maciamo state.

 

[corinth]

All your verbiage does not link U-152 to the Lombards.

Still waiting for sound evidence that U-152 in northern or ( rather more) north-west Italy is of any origin other than what 152.0rg and Maciamo state.

Originally Posted by Maciamo
In my opinion, the Bashkirs R1b descend directly from the Bronze-age Proto-Indo-Europeans. The only place where both M73 and M269 are both common is around the Caucasus and Anatolia. Based on my theory of the PIE moving to the Pontic steppes in the Neolithic, the first steppe invaders would have belonged to both M73 and M269, although the latter would have been much more dominant. It is possible that all the subclades as far as S116 and even S28/U152 developed in the steppes before migrating to Europe. The Bashkirs could represent the last leftovers from these PIE R1b, who would later been overwhelmed by neighbouring R1a from further north and east.

you are a whining spammer. tell your complaints to maciamo with his statement that is identical in opinion to my own steppe origin theory.

 

[Taranis]

Guess you can take that up with Maciamo then, genius.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26878-Bashkirs-What-Subclades-of-R1b-Were-They

ancient Bakshir proverb=
"He who put foot in mouth, regret taste of shoe"

you are a whining spammer. tell your complaints to maciamo with his statement that is identical in opinion to my own steppe origin theory.

I've warned you more than once for your rude and provocative behaviour towards other board members. This time around you get points for an infraction.

All your verbiage does not link U-152 to the Lombards.

Still waiting for sound evidence that U-152 in northern or ( rather more) north-west Italy is of any origin other than what 152.0rg and Maciamo state.

And there's no reason for you to provoke others, either. Please don't do that.

 

[MOESAN]

There is no way to tell, honestly, if the eastern U-152 is-

1)a remnant Scythian/Getae native europid presence who are in traditional lands that are in fact within historical Scythian/Getic lands-

2)a relocated foreign import europid population(if so it seems to predate the rise of Islam and would likely denote western europeans captured and relocated by Hunnic or Mongol captors)

While one cannot discount the known fact that a lot of enslaved europeans were moved east by Hunnic captors, its just as possible and fits within my theory concerning the Getic/Getae/Scythian populations that this is a remnant population that managed to hang-on after asiatic conquest, probably because they were not any longer Europid in appearance due to maternal asiatic/hunnic ancestry,
and thus did not stand out until modern Y-dna testing from any other local Hunnic-turkic genetics populations.

While either above scenario could be the case, its likely that some small, localized (racially-maternally intermixed) reservoir population of europid Y-line natives would still exist even if the majority of the host population were destroyed or migrated west, and this Bashkortostan population would be that concealed remnant.



Trying to resurrect Phrenology or give it credit as a valid (beyond racial conclusions = mongoloid, europid, negroid) pursuit that is remotely worthy of desecrating and polluting rare ancient burials so that a clown can take measurements of the skulls, NO it is not in remote way a positive, valuable or rational usage or exploitation of these ancient artifacts or remains.

It is a schlock-quackery that is rooted (and should be left to) in the 19th century, and is fully nonsensical. Any phenotype promoter, or person asserting that they can divine anything beyond the assignment to the three basic racial groups or some bone-related diseases (leprosy ) from examining skulls is a complete and total fraud, who is perpetuating something akin to palm-reading or fortune-telling.

There are many black americans for instance (33%) who are in a non-african paternal Hg.. Almost all of these persons have a negroid phenotype, and appear from and Phrenology to be Negroid.
There are many of these black americans in Hg I1 and Hg R1b in particular, which did not come from a african male ancestor, even though the phenotype of the person possessing the Hg is black-skinned and of a Negroid bone/facial/skull structure. This is because- over hundreds of years of slavery, the african females were giving birth to children often fathered by the white slave owner, who was R1b or I1 paternal Hg.

To look at this candidate the way that some in this thread irrationally do, we would need to assert that the I1 in these black americans most likely comes from a negroid male paternal ancestor who brought the Hg with him from a African population, since the primary phenotype in these persons is Negroid.
The reality is, the Hg will remain perpetually, while a fair complexion or other recessive traits will be lost after only one generation of intermixture..

For the reason, judging a population simply and primarily by its phenotype and asserting the prevailing phenotype is indicative of the paternal ancestry does not work- especially for Europids with recessive traits.



One would expect to see significant U-152 in Romanian populations if it were a founding element in Italic populations. In fact, Romanians do not possess more than 1% of U-152, which is a immigrant-intermixure degree of introgression.
We have historical documentation of the Lombards taking possession of a region that was depleted in population by the Gothic wars, which consumed all the food resources and led to starvation in the area along with the war dead,

it was then hit with at least two severe plagues that were concentrated within Italy and do not cross into the German lands,

most of the (surviving) population fled their homes as the Lombards approached and ran to the byzantine south, or to ravenna.

This was a good call on their part, because most of the catholic church leadership and many civilians were mass-murdered by the arian-christian Lombardic host.

Next, the Lombards are able over hundreds of years to repell repeated attempts by the Byzantines to sack and defeat them, which was assisted by local Italic populations.. this means the breeding population of 'Lombards' was great enough to meet the superpower of its time and completely defeat them on multiple occasions.

Lombard males would be continually introgressing into the Italic gene pool as they have free access to Italic females, and would over hundreds of years be producing offspring either intentionally or unintentionally with them, while Italic males are restricted by law from marrying or consorting with 'Lombardic' females-
This is a 'prerfect storm' for the Y-line genetics of the Lombardic population to come to a majority of the resident population, while the Italic Y-line genetics are deliberately suppressed.

Hi!
It is my last post to you
You did not put in your answer my whole explanation concerning the meaning of 'recessive' gene (gene that do not express himself everytime in association with others (and yet it is more complicated than that) # not obligatory a seldom gene or gene in way to disappear)
when skeletons changed, we have to search why: the answer is not always simple, it is true, but it is a fact and IT CAN VERY OFTEN signal demiC changes based on genetic changes, whatever the names you give to them... (they are for me ONLY a argument among others maybe stronger
You do not untderstand the links between genotype and phenotype
I am tired - I am not laughing at you even if a prefer my thoughts FOR THE MOMENT - they can change (and the Bashkirs could be an element or that when I know more about them)
I note that you was kind enough with me, more than with others forumers - just a little disprising about sciences you know nothing deep about them and their evolution...

 

[Vallicanus]

The likely steppe origin of R1b-U152 does not prove a link to the Lombards.

 

[corinth]

Hi!
It is my last post to you
You did not put in your answer my whole explanation concerning the meaning of 'recessive' gene (gene that do not express himself everytime in association with others (and yet it is more complicated than that) # not obligatory a seldom gene or gene in way to disappear)
when skeletons changed, we have to search why: the answer is not always simple, it is true, but it is a fact and IT CAN VERY OFTEN signal demiC changes based on genetic changes, whatever the names you give to them... (they are for me ONLY a argument among others maybe stronger
You do not untderstand the links between genotype and phenotype
I am tired - I am not laughing at you even if a prefer my thoughts FOR THE MOMENT - they can change (and the Bashkirs could be an element or that when I know more about them)
I note that you was kind enough with me, more than with others forumers - just a little disprising about sciences you know nothing deep about them and their evolution...

when I use the term "recessive" I mean it in the mendellian sense.

A northern europid phenotype is 'recessive' in that if it is cross-bred with a "dominant" genetics phenotype, the dominant genetics prevail over the recessive features.

A lot of brazilians, argentinians, LIGURIANS, etc.. for example,
(see pic attached of 15th century Ligurian Simonetta Vespucci for instance for phenotype advocates who claim
that a modern dominant phenotype in Liguria means no historical introgression)

may have a (usually) paternal ancestry from Europe that includes 'recessive' genetics features in their genome (blue/green/gray eyes, blonde/red hair, pink or pale skin)
If this person mates and produces offspring with a person of 'dominant' genetics their recessive genes usually cannot manifest in a person who is the product of intermixing with a 'dominant' genetics mate (black/brown hair, brown eyes, brown/black/yellow skin)
Recessive features like listed above recede unless they are in a breeding pool that reinforces these features.

"In heterozygous individuals the only allele that is expressed is the dominant. The recessive allele is present but its expression is hidden."

If the trait in question is determined by simple (complete) dominance, a heterozygote will express only the trait coded by the dominant allele and the trait coded by the recessive allele will not be present. In more complex dominance schemes the results of heterozygosity can be more complex.

Read= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendelian_inheritance

View attachment 5483
This is a 'Ligurian' Genoan from the 15th century, which also happens to have been incorporated into the Lombardic Kingdom, btw.

I did not mean to refuse a answer to you, I simply did not understand, and probably still do not fully understand, what exactly you were asking of me. If you have some other request please do not 'bold' the entire paragraph, and I will reply as best I can. thanks.

 

[zanipolo]

when I use the term "recessive" I mean it in the mendellian sense.

A northern europid phenotype is 'recessive' in that if it is cross-bred with a "dominant" genetics phenotype, the dominant genetics prevail over the recessive features.

A lot of brazilians, argentinians, LIGURIANS, etc.. for example,
(see pic attached of 15th century Ligurian Simonetta Vespucci for instance for phenotype advocates who claim
that a modern dominant phenotype in Liguria means no historical introgression)

may have a (usually) paternal ancestry from Europe that includes 'recessive' genetics features in their genome (blue/green/gray eyes, blonde/red hair, pink or pale skin)
If this person mates and produces offspring with a person of 'dominant' genetics their recessive genes usually cannot manifest in a person who is the product of intermixing with a 'dominant' genetics mate (black/brown hair, brown eyes, brown/black/yellow skin)
Recessive features like listed above recede unless they are in a breeding pool that reinforces these features.





Read= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendelian_inheritance

View attachment 5483
This is a 'Ligurian' Genoan from the 15th century, which also happens to have been incorporated into the Lombardic Kingdom, btw.

I did not mean to refuse a answer to you, I simply did not understand, and probably still do not fully understand, what exactly you were asking of me. If you have some other request please do not 'bold' the entire paragraph, and I will reply as best I can. thanks.

i do not know where you are going with this , but italians which went to southern brazil ( and there where 3M veneti from 1870-1950 )still to this day retain the same looks as when they left. There is also a german contingent there
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talian_dialect

vespucci drawing is what the northern look like yesterday and today, its only mussolini who mixed the italian population by force, 40,000 friuli to sardinia, 250000 sicilians to istria, 30000 veneti to lazio etc etc

You have proved nothing

besides some of your link do not work

 

[corinth]

i do not know where you are going with this , but italians which went to southern brazil ( and there where 3M veneti from 1870-1950 )still to this day retain the same looks as when they left.

You have proved nothing

besides some of your link do not work

mtDNA Composition of the Brazilian Population
We analyzed 247 unrelated Brazilian individuals (mainly classified as “white” in Brazil and belonging to the middle and upper-middle classes) who came from four of the five major geographic regions of the country (fig. 1). According to the Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia Estatística, responsible for the census in Brazil, 51.6% of Brazilians in 1996 classified themselves as 'white'.

The 247 Brazilian mtDNA lineages, yielding 170 different HVS-I haplotypes, can be perfectly allocated to the known haplogroups (tables​(tables22​222​2​​ and ​and33 and fig. 2). Altogether, 82 mtDNA lineages fall into the Native American/Asian haplogroups, A–D (with one A lineage of confirmed western-Asian ancestry), whereas 69 belong to various African haplogroups and 96 belong to European haplogroups.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1287189/