R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?

Who spead R-U152 ?

  • The (Proto-)Italo-Celts

    Votes: 34 28.6%
  • The Hallstatt/La Tène Celts

    Votes: 31 26.1%
  • Italic people, including the Romans

    Votes: 15 12.6%
  • Hallstatt/La Tène Celts AND Italic people

    Votes: 26 21.8%
  • Earlier Neolithic or Mesolithic people

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 9 7.6%

  • Total voters
    119
Mind you, U-106 must have been also very common in northern Germany. Indeed, in the Lichtenstein Cave (which we cannot yield to be too representative of the time/area, anyways), we find R1b-U106 inside the Urnfield context. Still, it's conceivable that (Proto-?) Celtic influences was responsible for shaping the Germanic languages, and perhaps also responsible for the split between North Germanic and South Germanic (which would have happened in the Jastorf area, anyways).

Also, what still eludes me regarding the distribution of R1b-U152 is Corsica and Sardinia. I have no explanation for that yet. :startled:
 
Also, what still eludes me regarding the distribution of R1b-U152 is Corsica and Sardinia. I have no explanation for that yet. :startled:
Ich can say you why in corsica and sardinia were so much R1b-U152. Because when corsica would a part of france, many french people come to corsica.

The demography of the native-corsican is very bad, so the genes of the french (with most R1b-U152) are dominant of corsica. Its fact.
A friend of my parents is a real corsican (with french ancestors) and his wife a austrian. So many corsican with french ancestors, live on corsica.
The statistics about the haplogroup distribution are from the new-time.
So do you understand what i want so say?

How exact it is on sardinia, i dont know. But i think we must include modern migrations, because all the haplogroup statistics, dont exclude this migrations f.e. since the 18. century.
 
I came across the Maghreb Y-DNA Project and had a look at the R1b results. The presence of 1 to 5% of R1b in North Africa is still fairly mysterious due to the absence of detailed study on the subclades of R1b found in that region. This is why I was glad to find that one of the project members tested for subclades and happens to be R1b1b2a1b4c (U152+, L2+). I checked the STR values of other R1b's and they all seemed quite similar and could well be R-U152+. That is what I expected. In other words it means that Maghreban R1b is of Roman/Italian origin.

The presence of U152+ in the Maghreb also reinforce the hypothesis that the Romans carried this haplogroup, and that the U152 in Italy is not exclusively of Celtic origin.

Further evidence that R1b1b2 in Europe is neither of Paleolithic nor of Neolithic origin

If R1b1b2 had come to Europe during the Neolithic expansion, it would most likely also have reached North Africa during that time, based on the pattern of diffusion of agriculture along the Mediterranean (see map). We would therefore expect to find a trail from southern Turkey to Greece, Italy, the Maghreb and southern Iberia. The only common trail is the presence of E1b1b, J2 and G2a. R1b is present in all these regions, but in very different proportions and the subclades are completely different. U152+ is very rare in southern Turkey, minor in Greece, omnipresent in Italy, apparently the major type of R1b in the Maghreb but very low in frequency, and minor in Iberia despite the huge percentage of R1b.

A Neolithic spread of R1b would involve that all the older subclades of R1b1b2 be found in the places settled earliest, and a new trail showing an northward expansion from southern to northern Iberia, southern to northern France and across the Channel to Britain. That is simply not the case.

The fact that U152+ appears to be the main subclade in the Maghreb is enough to rule out the presence of R1b among the Neolithic migrants that left Greece for Italy, North Africa and Iberia. Otherwise southern Spain and Portugal would also abound with U152+, but they don't.

If R1b1b2 originated in Western Europe during the Paleolithic or Mesolithic, the highest diversity of R1b subclades would be found in Iberia and southern France, and all subclades would radiate from there. Instead what we see is that the oldest subclades of R1b1b2 are found around Anatolia, the Caucasus and Central Asia, then all subclades from R1b1b2a1 radiate from the Alps, along with the diffusion of Indo-European languages.

The Italic language branch is the most distinctive in the Italo-Celtic group, and matches U152+. Once again, if R1b-U152 is the main type of R1b in the Maghreb, it fits the Indo-European migration model best because Tunisia and Algeria were heavily colonised by the Romans, the main carriers of U152+. The low overall percentage of R1b in the Maghreb (max. 5% + the Roman J1, J2, G2 and E1b1b, for a total of perhaps 10%) is also consistent with a colonisation pattern, rather than a massive migration or resettlement.

The Phoenician having settled in the Maghreb too, I would expect to find the typically Levantine type of R1b too (namely R1b1a, M18+).
 
it is for sure not Roman..I am inclined to see it as Celtic....in Gaul there are many candidates, in north Italy it can be Celtic Boii and there can be some spread from that hotspot with spread Roman empire, but complete lack of it in Bohemia/Bavaria indicates that this might not be related to Celtic Boii, so I think later germanic invasions are worth exploring...

U152-Myres.jpg
looks like a spread that started somewhere from 2 hotspots one within east germanic tribes, and one within west germanic tribes, and that later spread over areas of Frankish empire..

299px-Franks_expansion.gif




perhaps Burgundians, Langobards and Franks carried a lot of this type....

Burgundians explain initial hotspot in west Poland and their movement fits well in pattern, but doesnot make whole shape...
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/300/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/600/entity_706.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/800/entity_1225.html

The Burgundians were extending their power over southeastern Gaul; that is, northern Italy, western Switzerland, and southeastern France. In 493 Clovis, king of the Franks, married the Burgundian princess Clotilda (daughter of Chilperic), who converted him to the Catholic faith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgundians

Langobards/Lombards explain well north Italy and together with Franks southwest Germany
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/100/entity_792.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/400/entity_792.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/700/entity_792.html

and Franks/Franci
800px-Frankish_Empire_481_to_814-en.svg.png
 
What origin is Scottish Borders, U152+, L2+, L20- (L2*), then?
 
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.
 
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.

it is not present in parts of UK & Ireland that were Celtic, also absent from Wales where according to Steven Bird one can expect more people originating from Roman soldiers... and it is present in Germanic settled parts of UK...

and it was not only Langobards, north Italy was also settled by other Germanic people who could have carried it...e.g. Goths and Franks, Gepids...

north Italy was for long time under control of various Germanic tribes...
 
The Goths were mostly eradicated in Italy and the Gepids were confined to a few villages.

The Franks only influenced the aristocracy, and slightly at that.
 
I doubt if U-152 is due mainly due to Germanic Langobards who may have been as few as 20,000 in an Italian population of millions.
Maciamo's "Italic" theory seems to be the most economical and probable.

The Goths were mostly eradicated in Italy and the Gepids were confined to a few villages.

The Franks only influenced the aristocracy, and slightly at that.

you give numbers, you speak as pretty sure in what you claim...
what historical sources make you so sure of Germanic tribes not being populous in north Italy?
 
you give numbers, you speak as pretty sure in what you claim...
what historical sources make you so sure of Germanic tribes not being populous in north Italy?

Whatever their numbers in antiquity they have left surprisingly few descendants in modern Northern Italy.:unsure:
 
Whatever their numbers in antiquity they have left surprisingly few descendants in modern Northern Italy.:unsure:
that is something else...

people do change language...e.g. 2500 year ago latin was spoken only around Rome...today languages derived from latin are spoken in France, Spain, Portugal, Romania, latin America...

many germanic people were already speaking latin, as it was widespread as english today...

therefore, latin was likely lingua franca in occupied parts of Italy
languages that are in use survive...

besides, germanic settlements were in several waves... so the waves might have always merged into majority that speaks italian...

also Y-DNA is about small part of genes that is inhereted in direct male line from grandgrandfather to grandfather, from grandfather to father, from father to son, and invading tribes often leave much higher imprint in Y-DNA than in the rest of the genes...
 
Last edited:
I came across the Maghreb Y-DNA Project and had a look at the R1b results. The presence of 1 to 5% of R1b in North Africa is still fairly mysterious due to the absence of detailed study on the subclades of R1b found in that region. This is why I was glad to find that one of the project members tested for subclades and happens to be R1b1b2a1b4c (U152+, L2+). I checked the STR values of other R1b's and they all seemed quite similar and could well be R-U152+. That is what I expected. In other words it means that Maghreban R1b is of Roman/Italian origin.

This is a faulty conclusion for this reason.. the Visigoths conquered this area in ancient times and have certainly left descendants into modern times within the local population and they are brothers to the Ostrogoths, Gepids, Heruli, and Lombards who controlled U-152 regions in Italy with elevated pct of U-152 into modern times.

Secondly, up to ONE MILLION westerners were held as white slaves in the nations of the Mahgreb for hundreds of years. Entire villages were emptied by barbary raids for white slaves from england, france, iceland.. etc..
The one way within a strict interpretation of Islam for a slave to escape a brutal and short life as a slave was to convert to Islam at which point he was (supposed to be) freed.. There are countless cases of many tens of thousands of western european males in this region converting to Islam and being freed into the local population to one degree or the other.

Any R1b found in a modern sample from the barbary coast could very easily trace to a slave-convert of which countless are known to exist in this region from the barbary pirate/white slavery days of Islamic raids.

There is really no mystery at all about low levels of M-269 varieties of R1b on the barbary lands, given the massive enslavement of european males there and the habit of some to convert and 'go native' to end their torment and mistreatment.

see=White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves
 
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.

WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.

Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.
 
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.

WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.

Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.

I really dont have to, in order to dispell this particular conclusion, because I can show clearly that a massive number of western european males were taken as slaves into the Mahgreb over many hundreds of years and that they produced offspring and settled with families into the local populations to easily account for a significant portion of the R1b in the Barbary coast populations that does not in any way require ancient Italic introgression of U-152 or any other SNP of R1b.

I cited a good book in "White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves" that anyone who wants additional information of this topic can read to gain additional information to verify my claims.

Now.. all that said - I am going to be polite and simply ask you not to respond to me, nor will I do so to you in the future.
I do not think the rest of this site wants to waste time with bickering, and I do not say this as a insult to you, but merely as a statement of fact borne out in your posts..
Your statements and insistence on constant references based NOT in Y-dna (which is what this particular message board is concerned with) but largely related to discredited racialist nonsense skull measurements and constant references to Phenotypes as being somehow relevant to Y-dna in any way shape or form makes your posts of no value but to spur arguments and bickering.

I appreciate your right to your opinion, but when you are clearly deviating into phrenology and skin/hair/eye color instead of concentrating on Y-dna, I simply have no time to spare with such nonsense. I hope you can understand this, and lets discontinue contact, please.
I promise that in return I will not post in response to any opinion you offer in any other thread and we can both express our opinion without pointless conflict that is not even related to the topic of Y-dna.
thank you.
 
You have presented no valid evidence even in terms of Y-dna.

THe Lombards, always a minority even in Northern Italy, brought in a lot of U-106 not U-152!
 
Vallicanus said:
You have presented no proof that East Germanic peoples like the Goths (likely East) and Lombards (doubtful East) were strongly U-152.
WE are entitled to our opinion too especially since you have only faulty historical sources and pious hope to go by.
Where is the genetic journal or blog that supports your theory and it is only your theory.

You have presented no valid evidence even in terms of Y-dna.
THe Lombards, always a minority even in Northern Italy, brought in a lot of U-106 not U-152!

Vallicanus said:
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.

You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to spam-post the same thing over and over while adding no new content or thought, and simply repeating nearly exactly what you ranted as total opinion previously.

You are acting like 'babby' who wants attention and cries until someone picks it up.

I have numerous times declined to address something that I have already addressed in detail in a previous post because I thought it would be abusive to reiterate the exact same thoughts for someone who failed to read previous posts.

You are a 'babby' who does nothing but spam-post and throw tantrums, after I specifically asked you not to bother responding to me with your nonsense about hair/skin color and skull measurements, on a DNA-based board.
 
You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to spam-post the same thing over and over while adding no new content or thought, and simply repeating nearly exactly what you ranted as total opinion previously.

You are acting like 'babby' who wants attention and cries until someone picks it up.

I have numerous times declined to address something that I have already addressed in detail in a previous post because I thought it would be abusive to reiterate the exact same thoughts for someone who failed to read previous posts.

You are a 'babby' who does nothing but spam-post and throw tantrums, after I specifically asked you not to bother responding to me with your nonsense about hair/skin color and skull measurements, on a DNA-based board.


Do the facts lose their value through repetition?

I hate to see facts twisted by people with agendas.

I think you are the spam merchant on this thread and your views are somewhat at variance with general opinion on this site.

You are entitled to your view but all your arguments are weak to say the least.

You add nothing relevant and new to the genetic debate and you were the first to throw a tantrum because you don't understand physical anthropology and call it phrenology "a la Lombroso"!

You don't even understand the latest peer-reviewed genetic studies which point up the Northern Italians as more South European than the Spaniards and much more South European than North European.

Are you suggesting Lombards were mainly South European genetically even though they originally spoke a Germanic language???
 
Do the facts lose their value through repetition?

I hate to see facts twisted by people with agendas.

I think you are the spam merchant on this thread and your views are somewhat at variance with general opinion on this site.

You are entitled to your view but all your arguments are weak to say the least.

You add nothing relevant and new to the genetic debate and you were the first to throw a tantrum because you don't understand physical anthropology and call it phrenology "a la Lombroso"!

You don't even understand the latest peer-reviewed genetic studies which point up the Northern Italians as more South European than the Spaniards and much more South European than North European.

Are you suggesting Lombards were mainly South European genetically even though they originally spoke a Germanic language???

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.

I have no intent to carry on any discussion with you. I feel you are a lay-about with too much time on your hands who is unbalanced and fixates on phenotypes and skull measuring while trying to bring this medieval nonsense onto a DNA based board.

Take it up with Maciamo. You assert on his site that - not as theory- but as certain fact, that U-152 arises in switzerland 3500 years ago. So you challenge the site owners own theory, not me.
 

This thread has been viewed 382854 times.

Back
Top