Genetic study The role of emerging elites in the formation and development of communities after the fall of the Roman Empire

Tautalus

Active member
Messages
315
Reaction score
538
Points
93
Ethnic group
Portuguese
Y-DNA haplogroup
I2-M223 / I-FTB15368
mtDNA haplogroup
H6a1b2
Significance
Elites played a pivotal role in the formation of post-Roman Europe on both macro- and microlevels during the Early Medieval period. Our approach combines history and archaeology with paleogenomic and isotopic data to explore the role of elite groups in the development of a 6 to 8th-century community at Collegno, Italy. Analyzing 28 new genomes with 24 previous ones revealed that the site was formed around biologically and socially connected high-ranking groups. The community also integrated newcomers and embraced individuals with diverse genetic ancestries. This study highlights how power shifts and migration after the fall of the Roman Empire influenced community formation in the rural areas in one of the core territories of the former Western Roman Empire.

Abstract

Elites played a pivotal role in the formation of post-Roman Europe on both macro- and microlevels during the Early Medieval period. History and archaeology have long focused on their description and identification based on written sources or through their archaeological record. We provide a different perspective on this topic by integrating paleogenomic, archaeological, and isotopic data to gain insights into the role of one such elite group in a Langobard period community near Collegno, Italy dated to the 6-8th centuries CE. Our analysis of 28 newly sequenced genomes together with 24 previously published ones combined with isotope (Sr, C, N) measurements revealed that this community was established by and organized around a network of biologically and socially related individuals likely composed of multiple elite families that over time developed into a single extended pedigree. The community also included individuals with diverse genetic ancestries, maintaining its diversity by integrating newcomers and groups in later stages of its existence. This study highlights how shifts in political power and migration impacted the formation and development of a small rural community within a key region of the former Western Roman Empire after its dissolution and the emergence of a new kingdom. Furthermore, it suggests that Early Medieval elites had the capacity to incorporate individuals from varied backgrounds and that these elites were the result of (political) agency rather than belonging to biologically homogeneous groups.​


Ancestry proportions from individuals from Collegno:

Fd17eqX.jpg
 
Haplogroups of the 28 new individuals analyzed in the present study.

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]Individual ID[/TD]
[TD]Genetic Sex[/TD]
[TD]Mitochondrial haplogroup[/TD]
[TD]NRY haplogroup[/TD]
[TD]Branch[/TD]
[TD]Source for isotopes[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_130[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]U1b[/TD]
[TD]E1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_126[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD]G2a3b1a2[/TD]
[TD]G-L497[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_136[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD]G2a3b1a2[/TD]
[TD]G-L497[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_106[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]L1b1a13[/TD]
[TD]NA[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_050[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]HV0, HV0b, HV0c, HV0d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_098[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]J2a1a1[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_128[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H6a1a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_143[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_017[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b[/TD]
[TD]M269[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_142[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]K1b2a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b[/TD]
[TD]M269[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_150[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]T2b[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b1a1[/TD]
[TD]P310[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_069[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]K1b2a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b1a1a1c[/TD]
[TD]R-U106 -> S263/Z381[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_034[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H50[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a2a1a1[/TD]
[TD]R-M343 -> R-CTS5330[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_002[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_008[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_020[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H, H9, H46, H52, H69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_033[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H1au[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_035[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_039[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H, H9, H46, H52, H69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_056[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]K2a3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_077[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]J1c5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_079[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]X[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_081[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]U4a1a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_095[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]T2b, T2b21[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_099[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H15a1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_112[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]K1b2[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_140[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_148[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
Significance
Elites played a pivotal role in the formation of post-Roman Europe on both macro- and microlevels during the Early Medieval period. Our approach combines history and archaeology with paleogenomic and isotopic data to explore the role of elite groups in the development of a 6 to 8th-century community at Collegno, Italy. Analyzing 28 new genomes with 24 previous ones revealed that the site was formed around biologically and socially connected high-ranking groups. The community also integrated newcomers and embraced individuals with diverse genetic ancestries. This study highlights how power shifts and migration after the fall of the Roman Empire influenced community formation in the rural areas in one of the core territories of the former Western Roman Empire.

Abstract
Elites played a pivotal role in the formation of post-Roman Europe on both macro- and microlevels during the Early Medieval period. History and archaeology have long focused on their description and identification based on written sources or through their archaeological record. We provide a different perspective on this topic by integrating paleogenomic, archaeological, and isotopic data to gain insights into the role of one such elite group in a Langobard period community near Collegno, Italy dated to the 6-8th centuries CE. Our analysis of 28 newly sequenced genomes together with 24 previously published ones combined with isotope (Sr, C, N) measurements revealed that this community was established by and organized around a network of biologically and socially related individuals likely composed of multiple elite families that over time developed into a single extended pedigree. The community also included individuals with diverse genetic ancestries, maintaining its diversity by integrating newcomers and groups in later stages of its existence. This study highlights how shifts in political power and migration impacted the formation and development of a small rural community within a key region of the former Western Roman Empire after its dissolution and the emergence of a new kingdom. Furthermore, it suggests that Early Medieval elites had the capacity to incorporate individuals from varied backgrounds and that these elites were the result of (political) agency rather than belonging to biologically homogeneous groups.​



Ancestry proportions from individuals from Collegno:

Fd17eqX.jpg
The fact that authors continue to model using Tuscany as their only Italian source instead of any northern Italian population for these admixture results really boggles the mind.
 
1724210270010.png

Based on modern populations it looks like the entirety of Pedigree II looks Southern Italian-like, most of Pedigree I looks British-like with a few outliers, and the entirety of Pedigree III looks Spanish like. All the rest without an assigned pedigree look mostly Northern Italian like with perhaps a few outliers.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 16493
Based on modern populations it looks like the entirety of Pedigree II looks Southern Italian-like, most of Pedigree I looks British-like with a few outliers, and the entirety of Pedigree III looks Spanish like. All the rest without an assigned pedigree look mostly Northern Italian like with perhaps a few outliers.
What's your take on the two E samples, C0L_38 (old sample) and COL_130. Based on the paper 38 is completely Southern, while 130 is more mixed/Iberian like.
 
The fact that authors continue to model using Tuscany as their only Italian source instead of any northern Italian population for these admixture results really boggles the mind.

Because geneticists are lazy and continue to use samples, for convenience, from 1000 Genomes Project (TSI is a subset of 1000 Genomes), and then also because using samples from 1000 genomes costs nothing.These genetic studies should never be taken literally, especially the admixture results.

This paper in the introduction claims that their "approach combines history and archaeology with paleogenomic and isotopic data." It is an approach that is too ambitious; it needs interdisciplinary knowledge that the paper's authors may not have. Checking their CVs, someone is still a PHD candidate, none of them seems to have either a deep archaeological or historical training.

Many of these genetic studies always start with a group of newly analyzed ancient genomes, and then have to build a paper around them, often embracing an already existing thesis.
 
Haplogroups of the 28 new individuals analyzed in the present study.

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]Individual ID[/TD]
[TD]Genetic Sex[/TD]
[TD]Mitochondrial haplogroup[/TD]
[TD]NRY haplogroup[/TD]
[TD]Branch[/TD]
[TD]Source for isotopes[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_130[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]U1b[/TD]
[TD]E1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_126[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD]G2a3b1a2[/TD]
[TD]G-L497[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_136[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD]G2a3b1a2[/TD]
[TD]G-L497[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_106[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]L1b1a13[/TD]
[TD]NA[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_050[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]HV0, HV0b, HV0c, HV0d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_098[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]J2a1a1[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_128[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H6a1a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_143[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_017[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b[/TD]
[TD]M269[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_142[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]K1b2a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b[/TD]
[TD]M269[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_150[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]T2b[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b1a1[/TD]
[TD]P310[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_069[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]K1b2a[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a1b1a1a1c[/TD]
[TD]R-U106 -> S263/Z381[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_034[/TD]
[TD]male[/TD]
[TD]H50[/TD]
[TD]R1b1a2a1a1[/TD]
[TD]R-M343 -> R-CTS5330[/TD]
[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_002[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_008[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H82[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_020[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H, H9, H46, H52, H69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_033[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H1au[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_035[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_039[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H, H9, H46, H52, H69[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_056[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]K2a3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_077[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]J1c5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_079[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]X[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_081[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]U4a1a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_095[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]T2b, T2b21[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_099[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H15a1[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_112[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]K1b2[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_140[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]I2d[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]COL_148[/TD]
[TD]female[/TD]
[TD]H2b[/TD]
[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Present Study[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


This is the most valuable part of the study. Thanks for posting.
 
View attachment 16493
Based on modern populations it looks like the entirety of Pedigree II looks Southern Italian-like, most of Pedigree I looks British-like with a few outliers, and the entirety of Pedigree III looks Spanish like. All the rest without an assigned pedigree look mostly Northern Italian like with perhaps a few outliers.

In my opinion, using terms like northern Italian or southern Italian in this context doesn't really make sense.
 
In my opinion, using terms like northern Italian or southern Italian in this context doesn't really make sense.
You're always free to your opinion, but I use the suffix "like" to denote the reality that in many cases these may not be literal southern Italians or Britons, etc. but simply populations that would plot with them today. It's very possible that many of the S. Italian like populations actually are urban imperial holdovers from Northern Italy for example.
 
Because geneticists are lazy and continue to use samples, for convenience, from 1000 Genomes Project (TSI is a subset of 1000 Genomes), and then also because using samples from 1000 genomes costs nothing.These genetic studies should never be taken literally, especially the admixture results.

This paper in the introduction claims that their "approach combines history and archaeology with paleogenomic and isotopic data." It is an approach that is too ambitious; it needs interdisciplinary knowledge that the paper's authors may not have. Checking their CVs, someone is still a PHD candidate, none of them seems to have either a deep archaeological or historical training.

Many of these genetic studies always start with a group of newly analyzed ancient genomes, and then have to build a paper around them, often embracing an already existing thesis.
They should've instead used the combined available samples from Bardonecchia and the Non-Langobard associated burial in Torino as a source population. These score characteristically of moderns and are certainly representative of a local profile. They also span 550-650AD meaning they are contemporary populations to the Collegno individuals. For whatever reason they were willing to use it in their supplementary PCAs so why not as a source population? A modern comparison in admixture could also be done as well but there's still no reason to pick TSI over Piemontese sources for local ancestry.
 
What's your take on the two E samples, C0L_38 (old sample) and COL_130. Based on the paper 38 is completely Southern, while 130 is more mixed/Iberian like.
Between the poor admixture sources used and their lack of individual sample labeling on the PCA provided it's really hard to tell if I'm being honest with you. If I had to guess, a typical admixture result for a northwestern Italian with source limitations such as this would look something akin to half Iberian and half Tuscan - especially for slightly WHG drifted types like the Bardonecchia cluster. I would assume COL_130 would fit that category somewhere within or very near bardonecchia.

COL_38 almost certainly is one of the three non pedigree samples that fits neatly into a modern like S. Italian norm. They give it full TSI ancestry because that's the southernmost european ancestry source they offer, but in reality it's fully Imperial C. Italian/Bonze age Aegean shifted.
 
They should've instead used the combined available samples from Bardonecchia and the Non-Langobard associated burial in Torino as a source population. These score characteristically of moderns and are certainly representative of a local profile. They also span 550-650AD meaning they are contemporary populations to the Collegno individuals. For whatever reason they were willing to use it in their supplementary PCAs so why not as a source population? A modern comparison in admixture could also be done as well but there's still no reason to pick TSI over Piemontese sources for local ancestry.

I am not aware of any modern samples from Bardonecchia area. There are modern samples of Piedmontese in Raveane 2019, to date the most comprehensive study of modern Italians, but the laboratory, from which the analyses of the Raveane 2019 samples come. has never released the Piedmontese samples, so much so that even in G25 it's used a sample of modern Piedmontese from previous studies (Val Borbera). So, because geneticists are clearly lazy and analisys of new samples are expensive, they settled once again for using the 1000 genomes samples. As has happened in the past, and as seen in the past the admixuture results are very approximate, and this may be evident when the samples from this study will be released and can be downloaded and analyzed.
 
I am not aware of any modern samples from Bardonecchia area. There are modern samples of Piedmontese in Raveane 2019, to date the most comprehensive study of modern Italians, but the laboratory, from which the analyses of the Raveane 2019 samples come. has never released the Piedmontese samples, so much so that even in G25 it's used a sample of modern Piedmontese from previous studies (Val Borbera). So, because geneticists are clearly lazy and analisys of new samples are expensive, they settled once again for using the 1000 genomes samples. As has happened in the past, and as seen in the past the admixuture results are very approximate, and this may be evident when the samples from this study will be released and can be downloaded and analyzed.
The Bardonecchia samples are from 650AD. The moderns I was referring to would just be Piedmontese since as you've said there are no known specifically available samples from modern Bardonecchia. I think we can both agree that there are far better source populations to model this site with than than Tuscans is all I'm getting at.
 
The Bardonecchia samples are from 650AD. The moderns I was referring to would just be Piedmontese since as you've said there are no known specifically available samples from modern Bardonecchia. I think we can both agree that there are far better source populations to model this site with than than Tuscans is all I'm getting at.

Of course, I agree with you that there would be better modern populations, but they have been using 1000 genomes samples for more than 10 years. What I am trying to tell you is that geneticists do not really care about accuracy. The authors of this study did not even consider the problem.

I have been following genetic studies for more than 10 years, and there are more genetic studies that can be trashed than those that really provide valid conclusions.
 
Of course, I agree with you that there would be better modern populations, but they have been using 1000 genomes samples for more than 10 years. What I am trying to tell you is that geneticists do not really care about accuracy. The authors of this study did not even consider the problem.

I have been following genetic studies for more than 10 years, and there are more genetic studies that can be trashed than those that really provide valid conclusions.
Why are the geneticists so indifferent to accuracy which is their duty as scientists?

Woke agenda?
 
Why are the geneticists so indifferent to accuracy which is their duty as scientists?

Woke agenda?

In this case, I do not think it has anything to do with the woke agenda. Many of these studies are done by PhD students, so they are the first steps in an academic career by researchers without much experience and without much funding, and also for this reason they follow theses that already exist or have already been embraced by their team. Not to mention the fact, that many of these studies would require academic knowledge of archaeology, history, anthropology, which many of the geneticists, trained in biology and chemistry, cannot have.
 
I've caught a mistake in the AADR list. It labels CL121 a "Langobard".

Maybe it was erroneously labeled as such because it was from a Langobard cemetery. But this person is genetically Central/South Italian from the middle ages.

ydICrNA.png


This is not the first time I've caught a mistake in AADR. It listed the medieval SGR sample from Apulia in Aneli et al. 2021, as an IA sample.
 
I've caught a mistake in the AADR list. It labels CL121 a "Langobard".

Maybe it was erroneously labeled as such because it was from a Langobard cemetery. But this person is genetically Central/South Italian from the middle ages.

ydICrNA.png


This is not the first time I've caught a mistake in AADR. It listed the medieval SGR sample from Apulia in Aneli et al. 2021, as an IA sample.
looks like you are another that never wants to include sample CL23, a lombard buried in a lombard cemetary in Italy
 
Back
Top