Lombard DNA in Italy

Taranis said:
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.



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

I just realized in my profile I am insulted with a reprimand like a child.

Please remove my account from this site, I will not be back again. thank you.
 
For Dorianfinder:
I'm R1b-U152 myself so I'm very curious about your theory, that's very interesting. Could you tell me more about it? If you've got some articles that suggest this theory, could you send me them privately, please?
I'd be very pleased. Thank you
 
Dorianfinder said:
Lombard lands c.750-785

The Lombards could have carried more R1b-U152 than R1b-U106 if we consider for a moment their migration routes into Italy. I do not deny that there had already been a significant R1b-U152 presence in Italy before their arrival but the R1b-U152 homeland was on the Lombardic migratory route to Italy. What we find today in Northern Italy appears to correspond with a Lombard expansion with an almost bottle-neck on the Lombardy southern border where R1b-U152 frequencies are highest. This explains high R1b-U152 levels on the Sicilian north coast as it was a Lombard colony and resulted in turning Sicily into what later became an anti-papist stronghold with Swabian rulers and Lombard aristocracy.
Click to expand...

This is the theory I'm referring to :)
 
Hi Gallia and welcome on board.

No U152 is an Italic and Celtic lineage native of Italy. Some Germans have it too of course.

Early_R1b_Copper_Age_Migrations_v02.png
 
As for Lombards,that is clear they settled in massive numbers in Italy,since there is a zone called "Lombardia".
I think there is not hard to search the Lombardia dialects for Germanic origin words.
As for what Y DNA the Lombards were carrying,they came quite late to Italy,so I think would be hard to link Lombards with mostly only one haplogroup.
Think they were quite mixed people,from genetics point of view.
 
mihaitzateo said:
As for Lombards,that is clear they settled in massive numbers in Italy,since there is a zone called "Lombardia".
I think there is not hard to search the Lombardia dialects for Germanic origin words.
As for what Y DNA the Lombards were carrying,they came quite late to Italy,so I think would be hard to link Lombards with mostly only one haplogroup.
Think they were quite mixed people,from genetics point of view.
Click to expand...


The fact that Italy has a province named Lombardia doesn't mean the historical Langobardi came to Italy in "massive" numbers. The names given to certain areas do not constitute proof of ancestry of the people living in those areas today. America was called America after the explorer Amerigo Vespucci, who was a Tuscan. That doesn't mean most Americans are Tuscans...quite the contrary. Likewise, New Orleans is not inhabited by people of majority French stock from Orleans.

The only actual report we have about the Lombard invasion is from Paul the Deacon, written two hundred years after the event. From that account it seems that the "Lombards", who were accompanied by affiliated peoples, numbered no more than 150,000 people in total. It would be nice if we had a contemporaneous report, and ancient writers didn't operate under the constraints that apply to modern ones, but Paul the Deacon was a Lombard functionary of the Lombard court, and if he were going to exaggerate the numbers, one would think that he would inflate rather than deflate the numbers. Then we have to consider that some of these people, particularly the groups of men unaccompanied by their families, returned to the north.

This was at a time when, despite the fact that the Lombards claimed the land around their initial entry was "relatively" depopulated, (how convenient) Italy's population still numbered in the millions, if lower than before the invasions, and certainly lower than before the Gothic Wars. Now, perhaps in the initial areas of encounter in north eastern and north central northern Italy (including Lombarida), the invaders would have formed a bigger percentage of the population, but I see no evidence anywhere in the record that they came in "massive" numbers. The actual autosomal impact on the northern Italians prior to the dislocations attendant upon industrialization will have to await ancient Dna, in my opinion, but I tend to doubt it will be large. Input from north of the Alps in general is another matter, and I'm starting to think we're going to have quite a bit of trouble distinguishing between the two.

I would just mention that the Wiki article on the Lombard Invasion of Italy has been massively edited by some agenda driven internet warrior in my opinion. However, luckily, such people can't take actual academic texts and papers out of circulation.

This is a good one:The early Medieval World From the Fall of Rome To The Time of Charlemagne, by Michael Frassetto. There are quite a few others, but this one is exhaustive in its coverage.

It is a google book. The number of Lombard invaders can be found on page 382.
https://books.google.com/books?id=6...feKsQTF9YDgAQ&ved=0CDoQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=the early medieval world from the fall of rome to the time of charlemagne&f=false

That said, there are numerous subclades of U-152. I don't know where all this certainty comes from that some of them couldn't have come with the Lombards. They did, after all, as someone pointed out, pass through areas where there is U152 today in order to reach Italy.

Any attempt to tie certain specific subclades to certain specific migrations will have to await ancient Dna, in my opinion.

Even should rather large portions of yDna U-152 be tied to "Lombards", that wouldn't change the fact that their percentage of autosomal input might be substantially less than their yDna input. I think we've all seen the disconnect that can exist between yDna percentages and the autosomal input of the initial yDna clade bearers, whatever the clade involved in the matter.
 
@Angela: you are avoiding the subject "German origin words in Lombard dialects".
I have talked to people from Lombardia and they have told me that the dialects (or even languages) spoken in Lombardia are not that mutually intelligible with Italian.
If someone looks on an autosomal admixture map of Italy,is clearly seen that in North Italy NW European admixture (which has the maximum in South Sweden,South Norway and Denmark) is much higher that in South Italy.If that is not a proof that a significant number of German people settled there ,how else that admixture got there?
As a comparison in Spanish language there a lot of words of Germanic origin.And also,plenty of NW admixture.However,I do not see too much talked on this forum about the Germanic blood of Spaniards.
EDIT:
Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emilian_dialect
Actually the languages spoken in Lombardia are from Gallo-Italic group of languages being more closed to French,than to Italian.
Now,Italian is the official language and people needs to learn it,even if they are willing or not.
Now,I do not think there is anyone denying French are mixed with Franks at least -I think they are also mixed with other Germanic people. Would be interesting to research if Lombards are more Celto-Germanic,than Celto-Italic.
 
^^

No those "admixtures" come from mesoltich/neoltich migrations for the most part, not from Celts, Germanics and the like.

About 8% of the Spanish dictionary is made of Arabic words.

http://www.transpanish.biz/translation_blog/the-influence-of-arabic-on-the-spanish-language/

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans. Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....
 
mihaitzateo said:
@Angela: you are avoiding the subject "German origin words in Lombard dialects".
I have talked to people from Lombardia and they have told me that the dialects (or even languages) spoken in Lombardia are not that mutually intelligible with Italian.
If someone looks on an autosomal admixture map of Italy,is clearly seen that in North Italy NW European admixture (which has the maximum in South Sweden,South Norway and Denmark) is much higher that in South Italy.If that is not a proof that a significant number of German people settled there ,how else that admixture got there?
As a comparison in Spanish language there a lot of words of Germanic origin.And also,plenty of NW admixture.However,I do not see too much talked on this forum about the Germanic blood of Spaniards.
EDIT:
Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emilian_dialect
Actually the languages spoken in Lombardia are from Gallo-Italic group of languages being more closed to French,than to Italian.
Now,Italian is the official language and people needs to learn it,even if they are willing or not.
Now,I do not think there is anyone denying French are mixed with Franks at least -I think they are also mixed with other Germanic people. Would be interesting to research if Lombards are more Celto-Germanic,than Celto-Italic.
Click to expand...

The presence of a few loan words from German into Italian prove nothing. Italian has recently adopted a lot of English words because English is becoming a lingua franca necessary for computers, certain kinds of finance etc. and it is also omnipresent in the media, both music and film. That doesn't mean there is a big impact of Anglo genes in Italy.

The division in Italy in terms of dialects can be seen on the following maps and it precedes the arrival of the Lombards. As you can see from the first map, Romanian, like Tuscan and the dialects of the south, is an Eastern Romance language. Generally, the areas north of the red La-Spezia-Rimini line, drawn by some linguists from Massa to Senigallia, speak Gallic Italian dialects.

Ed. Sorry, I have to post the maps separately, as they are too large.

Western_and_Eastern_Romania.PNG
 
This graphic explains the relationship between the different Romance language groups more clearly. I have a little real life experience with these similarities. When I studied in Barcelona I discovered that some Catalans preferred, if possible, not to speak standard Spanish. It didn't present any difficulty. They would speak to me in Catalan, and I understood them quite well. I think it may have something to do with the fact that Catalan (and Occitan) and Ligurian, which I heard all around me as a child, have some close ties.

Romance-lg-classification-en.png
 
I have also included a map of the Italian dialects; it is extremely accurate, in my opinion. . In my maternal grandmother's area, which is where you can see light blue, yellow and dark blue, all three variants were indeed spoken. The Tuscan dialect arrived in the area a few hundred years ago because part of the area came into the possession of the Medici. The rest are older. (My paternal side spoke only Emiliano, and my maternal grandfather's family came from the hinterlands above La Spezia, and spoke Ligurian.) I have never found any of the northern Italian dialects totally unintelligible. I don't speak any of them because I was only allowed to speak standard Italian, but I can understand most of what I am hearing. The southern ones are a bit more difficult, but anyone with a decent ear, in my opinion, who knows standard Italian, can pick up at least the gist of what is being said. Regardless, the issue doesn't arise because people will just switch to standard Italian. The only Italian you're going to find nowadays who doesn't speak standard Italian is going to be some 90 year old illiterate peasant or some diaspora Italian whose ancestors departed before education became compulsory. (Indeed, despite the Slavic additions to Romanian, I can often get the gist of that as well, as I discovered on a business trip to Romania, which unfortunately took place before Ceaucescu was booted from power.)

At any rate, the important point in terms of this thread is that the major division into dialects in Italy has nothing to do with the Lombards. It precedes them.

2000px-Languages_spoken_in_Italy.svg.png
 
giuseppe rossi said:
^^

No those "admixtures" come from mesoltich/neoltich migrations for the most part, not from Celts, Germanics and the like.

About 8% of the Spanish dictionary is made of Arabic words.

http://www.transpanish.biz/translation_blog/the-influence-of-arabic-on-the-spanish-language/

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans. Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you are including Paul the Deacon in the group of agenda driven charlatans, although he doubtless had an agenda of sorts. His account says about 100,000 Lombards invaded Italy. He's certainly not describing a tidal wave of people who could have had a massive impact on the Italian genome, even if it had some effect on ydna or mtDna, and despite some depopulation after the Gothic Wars. (Reputable scholars, Italians among them, have increased it to about 150,000 to take account of affiliated peoples, women and children, as sourced above. Again, not a "massive" influx of genes.)
 
As you have said Paul lived centuries after those events had took place, so he is also pulling those numbers out of his ass.
 
giuseppe rossi said:
^^

No those "admixtures" come from mesoltich/neoltich migrations for the most part, not from Celts, Germanics and the like.

About 8% of the Spanish dictionary is made of Arabic words.

http://www.transpanish.biz/translation_blog/the-influence-of-arabic-on-the-spanish-language/

About the numbers of Lombards and like, those are all estimates out of ass, which were made by agenda driven charlatans. Moreover Lombards were not the only people who migrated to Italy. Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Alemans, Vandals... just to name a few, and later also Normans, Arbereshe, Swabians, Croats....
Click to expand...
North Italy have like 40% if not more light eyes (blue/green eyes).
There is also an area with a higher percentage of R1b-L21 in Northern Italy.
Even according to outdated Maciamo datas from here:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml
there is about 15% Y DNA - 7% I1,3.5% I2b,4.5% R1A which should be of Germanic origins.
But I think the real percentages of Germanic paternal lines from Northern Italy is like 25% or so.
Please see results here:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/northitaly/default.aspx?section=ysnp

You can notice there is also some R1b-U105 ,which means that Maciamo should be thinking to update his maps.
R1b-U152 percentages from Maciamo maps do not correspond at all with the results from the above link,from family tree dna.
And a surprise there are Italian carrying even I-P109 which is of origins from Western Finland and which could only be brought by Scandinavian Germanic speakers.
 
The highest percentage of R-L21 is in Sicily AFAIK.

Germanic ydna lineages are also quite common in parts of Central and Southern Italy, up to 40% of Campobasso Molise.
 
giuseppe rossi said:
As you have said Paul lived centuries after those events had took place, so he is also pulling those numbers out of his ass.
Click to expand...

As you are not a native English speaker, nor obviously a long time resident of a country where English is the standard language, and may be drawing your English expressions from movies, I would point out that phrases like this are not commonly used in academic or scientific discussions. Indeed, in most cases they are not used in polite mixed company. Clean up your act and reserve expressions like this for the bar or among your "hopefully" male friends.
 
Angela said:
This discussion of "Germanic" yDna lineages is all very interesting, but it may not have much to do with autosomal proportions in Italians. I had hoped that the analysis going on of actual ancient Lombard DNA would give us some answers, but so far they haven't.

See the following dedicated thread to the subject:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-Northern-Italy-(Piemonte)?highlight=Lombards
Click to expand...
Well why would you take the percentages of Germanic Mtdna in North Italy?
It is supposed that most Germanic people coming in North Italy and settling there were males.
It should be something logic,that since Roman Empire had such an aggressive external policy with taking males and putting them in the army,lots of Romans died .
I understand that only after lots of years in military services Roman males were allowed to settle and than ,they could marry and have children.
So I think it was a serious shortage of Roman males in whole Italy.
And in North Italy,Germanic males took mostly native Italic women as wives and got assimilated to Italic ethnicity.
If Roman Empire would not have encountered a serious shortage of males,than Germanic tribes could have not overrun Italy and conquer it.
Cause Roman Empire army was much more superior as fighting techniques and equipment ,compared to Germanic tribes.
There is the legend of "great Germanic warriors" or "great Vikings warriors",come on,those are fairy tales.
These people were not even having metal shields,were disorganized. Any serious army would have beat hard the "great Vikings".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 238370 times.

Back
Top