PDA

View Full Version : Map of Germanic Y-DNA in Italy by Passa



Morges
07-26-2016, 04:04 PM
"Map of Germanic Italy, based on the frequency of R-U106, I-M253, I-M223."

https://s32.postimg.org/acvuzf9np/13709823_690252044462447_8329495196490145252_n.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/4opk8j5b5/)

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 04:58 PM
Most of this in Sicily is due to Swabians and Goths, I suspect.

This is probably what makes the genetic difference between Sicilians and Calabrese. Calabria has been virtually untouched for the last 3000 years, including Germanic mixture, and most Greek ancestry is via the Hellenization of the natives. This is why Calabria neither shifts northwest nor northeast.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 05:06 PM
Nice!

Obviously though, the Mitochondrial contribution must have been much smaller than the Y chromosomal one so i would guess that autosomally, the Germanic contribution is probably not that large.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 05:15 PM
Nice!

Obviously though, the Mitochondrial contribution must have been much smaller than the Y chromosomal one so i would guess that autosomally, the Germanic contribution is probably not that large.

Judging by Dodecad K12b, which has a "North European" component, it is usually around 6-10% in Calabrese, and around 10-12% in Sicilians. So Sicilians may have around 4% Germanic admixture autosomally, or if in an area with higher Greek influence some additional NE European.

For northern Italy, they have much more Celtic ancestry than Germanic.

Morges
07-26-2016, 05:16 PM
Most of this in Sicily is due to Swabians and Goths, I suspect.

This is probably what makes the genetic difference between Sicilians and Calabrese. Calabria has been virtually untouched for the last 3000 years, including Germanic mixture, and most Greek ancestry is via the Hellenization of the natives. This is why Calabria neither shifts northwest nor northeast.

Swabians yes, Goths (and Vandals) I think less. Normans made their contribution around Palermo-Trapani while North Italian and Tuscan settlements to Sicily are the key of the little differences between the two regions.

Morges
07-26-2016, 05:19 PM
Judging by Dodecad K12b, which has a "North European" component, it is usually around 6-10% in Calabrese, and around 10-12% in Sicilians. So Sicilians may have around 4% Germanic admixture autosomally, or if in an area with higher Greek influence some additional NE European.

For northern Italy, they have much more Celtic ancestry than Germanic.

I've seen many Sicilians who score 14-15% on the same calculator and many Calabrians with 13, more than people with 6%.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 05:52 PM
I've seen many Sicilians who score 14-15% on the same calculator and many Calabrians with 13, more than people with 6%.

I have not. Most Sicilians I see score 12-13%.

What I do notice is usually, North Euro and SW Asian are equal magnitude in Sicily, but Calabrese almost always have higher SW Asian.

I do see autosomal impact of Normans in Trapani, but I have seen many, many Palermitan results and it does not appear to make much impact in them.

Morges
07-26-2016, 06:52 PM
13% is the medium average score I've seen indeed.

vettor
07-26-2016, 06:57 PM
https://s32.postimg.org/acvuzf9np/13709823_690252044462447_8329495196490145252_n.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/4opk8j5b5/)

most of north italy would be ostrogoths, lombards, swabians ( suebi )and Salians

I was informed that the Suebi of Galicia in Iberia are the same as the swabians from SW Germany

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 06:57 PM
13% is the medium average score I've seen indeed.

Yes.

I think the Calabrese results scoring below 10% (lowest I've seen is 6%) is what we would have seen in Sicily before any historical groups bringing North European had arrived.

Morges
07-26-2016, 07:54 PM
most of north italy would be ostrogoths, lombards, swabians ( suebi )and Salians

I was informed that the Suebi of Galicia in Iberia are the same as the swabians from SW Germany

The Swabian presence during Enrico VI, Federico II, Manfredi, Corrado and Corradino was bigger in South Italy than North Italy, especially Sicily and Puglia. The presence in North Italy of Swabian was precedent to Barbarossa.

Tomenable
07-26-2016, 08:00 PM
Passa can you post a link to the table with data like you did in the Greek thread?

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 08:01 PM
The important point is no matter how much Germanic in southern Italy, there is greater North European affinity in northern Italy from other sources. But yes, actual Germanic DNA may be higher in the south.

Bernard Marx
07-27-2016, 10:57 PM
But yes, actual Germanic DNA may be higher in the south.
It doesn't make sense. Just because the Swabian and Norman presence was more significant in the south it doesn't make southern Italy more Germanic than the north.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:59 PM
It doesn't make sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Sicily#History

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 11:04 PM
Nice
But I think I2a2 will be found in Bronze Age possibly even late Neolithic/ Copper age Italy
(But it's probably the lest frequent of the 3 (?))

Bernard Marx
07-27-2016, 11:05 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Sicily#History
Is that supposed to demonstrate that the south is more Germanic in DNA than the north? Are you guys for real?

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:06 PM
Nice
But I think I2a2 will be found in Bronze Age possibly even late Neolithic/ Copper age Italy

^^^ Indeed. I'm not sure why is I-M223 counted as Germanic.

Ancient DNA evidence shows that I-M223 was not Germanic.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:08 PM
Are you guys for real?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HilECKqdte8

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 11:09 PM
^^^ Indeed. I'm not sure why is I-M223 counted as Germanic.

Ancient DNA evidence shows that I-M223 was not Germanic.

Well some might have moved with Germanic groups, given that it is highest in NW Germany and Holland, so we'd need specific subclades

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:15 PM
given that it is highest in NW Germany and Holland

Usually modern frequencies =/= ancient frequencies.

Indeed, some could be moving as Germanic-speakers.

However, I doubt that all / most of it came with them.

Bernard Marx
07-27-2016, 11:19 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HilECKqdte8
Uh uh I see. So we get Krauts almost as far as Trento, near Vicenza people speak a German dialect and people has German surnames even in Milan from the days of Austrian domination but Germanic DNA is magically higher in the south. Cool stuff.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:23 PM
So we get Krauts almost as far as Trento, near Vicenza people speak a German dialect

A good amount of Germans and Austrians have Non-Germanic Y-DNA haplogroups.


people has German surnames even in Milan from the days of Austrian domination

If an Austrian clerk gave someone a German surname, it did not change his Y-DNA.

Just like Jews with German surnames (= most of Jews) don't have Germanic Y-DNA:

http://jewishdna.net

Sikeliot
07-28-2016, 12:16 AM
Y'all still less Germanic than Greeks are Slavic.

Larth
07-28-2016, 01:29 AM
A good amount of Germans and Austrians have Non-Germanic Y-DNA haplogroups.

Indeed.

Larth
07-28-2016, 01:40 AM
near Vicenza people speak a German dialect and people.

Cimbrian people?

JohnHowellsTyrfro
07-28-2016, 06:23 AM
most of north italy would be ostrogoths, lombards, swabians ( suebi )and Salians

I was informed that the Suebi of Galicia in Iberia are the same as the swabians from SW Germany

I'm in the UK, U 106, S11136 and I'm told it was first found in a Tuscan man. I've been wondering about this connection.
I've read one theory that residual elements of the Swabians may have migrated to the UK with the Saxons. Am I right in thinking that the Swabians and Lombards are basically of the same origin?

Tomenable
07-28-2016, 06:33 AM
Cimbrian people?

Cimbrians were Celtic, though (at least originally):

http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf

Thunor
07-28-2016, 06:39 AM
Uh uh I see. So we get Krauts almost as far as Trento, near Vicenza people speak a German dialect and people has German surnames even in Milan from the days of Austrian domination but Germanic DNA is magically higher in the south. Cool stuff.

No it isn't. Eupedia maps which used thousands of samples from peer reviewed studies is surely much more reliable.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Germanic_Europe.gif

Still it has some problems:

1) It didn't consider R1a as a Germanic haplo,

2) It lacks few hot spots

- Cosenza has 6% of M223
- Catania has 12% of U106 and other 2% of I-M223
- Campobasso has 16% of I1, 10.5% of R1b-U106 and 3.5% of I2a2a

etc...

vettor
07-28-2016, 06:47 AM
No it isn't. Eupedia maps which used thousands of samples from peer reviewed studies is surely much more reliable.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Germanic_Europe.gif

Still it has some problems:

1) It didn't consider R1a as a Germanic haplo,

2) It lacks few hot spots

- Cosenza has 6% of M223
- Catania has 12% of U106 and other 2% of I-M223
- Campobasso has 16% of I1, 10.5% of R1b-U106 and 3.5% of I2a2a

etc...

That map and data is over 3 years old..........is it still relevant?

Larth
07-28-2016, 01:39 PM
Cimbrians were Celtic, though (at least originally):

http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf

I was not referring to the ancient Cimbri people who were either Germanic or Celtic (and btw they likely settled in North-West Italy and East France), but to another people who live today in North-East Italy and they are thought to be originated from medieval migrations from Germany to Italy. We still don't know if these two homonymous people are related.

In northern Italy there are German language minorities present from the North-West to North-East. Apart from the obvious German-speaking South Tyroleans, there are also Mocheni (Bersntol), the Walser, the Val Canale's Carinthians, the Sappadini, the Saurani (Zahrisch)... and, as already stated, the Cimbri (Zimbar) who live around Vicenza, Verona, Treviso and Belluno in Veneto and around Trento in Trentino. Most of these minorities are said to be medieval migrations, the Walser from the German Cantons in Switzerland, the Mocheni from Germany or Austria and the Cimbri from Germany as well. Most of them have been assimilated in the Italian people and only a tiny portion of them still speak nowadays their own Germanic languages, but in every case as second language, because they all speak Italian as native language. A couple of friends of mine have these roots.


No it isn't. Eupedia maps which used thousands of samples from peer reviewed studies is surely much more reliable.

Yes, but likely outdated.

GoldenHind
07-29-2016, 08:30 PM
Cimbrians were Celtic, though (at least originally):

http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf

This is a pet theory of the author which is not accepted by many historians. It has been the subject of endless arguments.

vettor
07-29-2016, 09:32 PM
I was not referring to the ancient Cimbri people who were either Germanic or Celtic (and btw they likely settled in North-West Italy and East France), but to another people who live today in North-East Italy and they are thought to be originated from medieval migrations from Germany to Italy. We still don't know if these two homonymous people are related.

In northern Italy there are German language minorities present from the North-West to North-East. Apart from the obvious German-speaking South Tyroleans, there are also Mocheni (Bersntol), the Walser, the Val Canale's Carinthians, the Sappadini, the Saurani (Zahrisch)... and, as already stated, the Cimbri (Zimbar) who live around Vicenza, Verona, Treviso and Belluno in Veneto and around Trento in Trentino. Most of these minorities are said to be medieval migrations, the Walser from the German Cantons in Switzerland, the Mocheni from Germany or Austria and the Cimbri from Germany as well. Most of them have been assimilated in the Italian people and only a tiny portion of them still speak nowadays their own Germanic languages, but in every case as second language, because they all speak Italian as native language. A couple of friends of mine have these roots.



Yes, but likely outdated.

The cimbrian towns and people in the Veneto and trentino are from German Thuringia and not from Danish jutland

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

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133438

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6666037_No_signature_of_Y_chromosomal_resemblance_ between_possible_descendants_of_the_Cimbri_in_Denm ark_and_Northern_Italy

Thunor
07-29-2016, 11:07 PM
That map and data is over 3 years old..........is it still relevant?

The map was updated in 2015.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28866-Map-of-Germanic-paternal-lineages?p=451883&viewfull=1#post451883

Sikeliot
07-30-2016, 12:20 AM
I suspect Lombard ancestry in the south is also partially responsible for the Germanic y-dna there.

rms2
07-30-2016, 12:55 AM
This is a pet theory of the author which is not accepted by many historians. It has been the subject of endless arguments.

Yes, and it is really seriously dated now and was pretty much demolished by the relative dearth of U152 in Scandinavia.

Arch Hades
08-01-2016, 08:18 PM
Can these paternal lineages be said to be strickly "Germanic"?...For what reason? How can we know they were not in Italy before the Barbarian invasions?

Larth
08-02-2016, 01:00 PM
The cimbrian towns and people in the Veneto and trentino are from German Thuringia and not from Danish jutland

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

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133438

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6666037_No_signature_of_Y_chromosomal_resemblance_ between_possible_descendants_of_the_Cimbri_in_Denm ark_and_Northern_Italy

Yes, and anyway the two people have lived in two different historical periods.

Morges
08-02-2016, 01:47 PM
The map has not included Germanic R1a that is founded in Italy too, otherwise the percentages would be increased.

Michał
08-02-2016, 02:05 PM
The map has not included Germanic R1a that is founded in Italy too, otherwise the percentages would be increased.
I doubt so. The only relatively large R1a subclades that are undoubtedly associated with ancient Germanic (though not necessarily Proto-Germanic) ancestry are Y2395>Z284 and CTS4385>L664 and they both seem to be extremely rare in Italy (close to non-existent or at least <0.5%).

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 02:13 PM
R1a in Sicily, at least, is more likely due to either ancient Indo-European input, or it arrived indirectly from Greece. R1a is higher in the east of the island, not the Trapani area where Germanic influence is highest.

Larth
08-02-2016, 02:38 PM
I suspect Lombard ancestry in the south is also partially responsible for the Germanic y-dna there.

Lombard ancestry do you mean the Langobards or the North Italian Lombards (who inherited their name from the latter)?

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 04:14 PM
Lombard ancestry do you mean the Langobards or the North Italian Lombards (who inherited their name from the latter)?

I mean the movement of people from northern Italy to the south (mostly to Sicily).

Thunor
08-02-2016, 04:52 PM
@Michal there is not a single study which had focused on R1a subclades in Italy, beside Underhill et al which has very few samples (from Apulia and Veneto if I remember).

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 05:01 PM
@Michal there is not a single study which had focused on R1a subclades in Italy, beside Underhill et al which has very few samples (from Apulia and Veneto if I remember).

I know your comment is not directed toward me but I will add that the distribution of R1a in Italy follows that of Byzantine Greek settlement, not Germanic.

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 06:23 PM
Here is a map of R1a in Italy. The presence of R1a equal in Calabria as Sicily, when the former never experienced Germanic input in any significant amount, shows it is likely not from there.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_dsGYkxd7z_E/RbzJpCLLk1I/AAAAAAAAABI/IdIx2Kwz6DQ/s320/R1a-low.png

Larth
08-02-2016, 06:31 PM
I know your comment is not directed toward me but I will add that the distribution of R1a in Italy follows that of Byzantine Greek settlement, not Germanic.

Likely you're right but surely except most of north East Italy where according to your map R1a is spread also in the Alps (both in the Italian-Romance speaking Alps and in German-speaking South Tyrol as well) and it is higher than 9%. In the Alps there were never Byzantine Greek settlements, who were more coastal.

Domini bizantini= Byzantine Greeks

Dominizi longobardi = Germanic Langobards/Lombards

http://www.educazionealtalento.com/facilitascuola/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/italia-longobarda-e-bizantina.jpg

Larth
08-02-2016, 06:41 PM
I mean the movement of people from northern Italy to the south (mostly to Sicily).

Got it. Mostly Sicily, yes, but Basilicata as well, around the Gulf of Policastro. I agree that probably these movements can be partially responsible for the Germanic y-dna there but in my opinion in Sicily most of U-106 is due to the Swabians, as I-M253 is most probably Norman.

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 07:14 PM
Got it. Mostly Sicily, yes, but Basilicata as well, around the Gulf of Policastro. I agree that probably these movements can be partially responsible for the Germanic y-dna there but in my opinion in Sicily most of U-106 is due to the Swabians, as I-M253 is most probably Norman.

I agree with this. I also think the Germanic input in Sicily explains the autosomal difference between Sicily and Calabria, as well as Messina being slightly outlying for the island (less foreign input overall than the rest of Sicily).

Also about R1a, I think NE Italy would have more due to geography, even though there was no Greek input. My y-dna is R1a1a and I suspect it is from a Greek ancestor.

Dimanto
08-02-2016, 07:35 PM
It doesn't make sense. Just because the Swabian and Norman presence was more significant in the south it doesn't make southern Italy more Germanic than the north.

You are right.

Dimanto
08-02-2016, 07:37 PM
Well some might have moved with Germanic groups, given that it is highest in NW Germany and Holland, so we'd need specific subclades

Holland is only a part of the Netherlands. Are you sure you meant Holland and not the Netherlands as a whole?

vettor
08-02-2016, 07:48 PM
@Michal there is not a single study which had focused on R1a subclades in Italy, beside Underhill et al which has very few samples (from Apulia and Veneto if I remember).

Veneto initially got most of their grain from Apulia until the ottoman invasion of Apulia in 1480ish, so Veneto merchant colonies kept a steady supply of goods and people back and forward from apulia to Venice for over 200 years
after 1490....Venice grew enough grain to feed themselves.

vettor
08-02-2016, 07:54 PM
R1a in Sicily, at least, is more likely due to either ancient Indo-European input, or it arrived indirectly from Greece. R1a is higher in the east of the island, not the Trapani area where Germanic influence is highest.

see link ............made by italians .............it might have some value for you

http://tipologieeuropidi.altervista.org/template/files/template/genitaly.html

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 07:56 PM
see link ............made by italians .............it might have some value for you

http://tipologieeuropidi.altervista.org/template/files/template/genitaly.html


I disagree with their assertion that J2 is Greek, when it is higher in southern (and even much of central) Italy than in Greece.

It should have put E1b1b in its place.

Morges
08-02-2016, 08:27 PM
Here is a map of R1a in Italy. The presence of R1a equal in Calabria as Sicily, when the former never experienced Germanic input in any significant amount, shows it is likely not from there.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_dsGYkxd7z_E/RbzJpCLLk1I/AAAAAAAAABI/IdIx2Kwz6DQ/s320/R1a-low.png

It is one of the most outdated maps you can find. Eupedia has better maps even if also these are old.

Sikeliot
08-02-2016, 08:27 PM
It is one of the most outdated maps you can find. Eupedia has better maps even if also these are old.

Do you have an example of a better one? I cannot seem to find one.

Morges
08-02-2016, 08:28 PM
I doubt so. The only relatively large R1a subclades that are undoubtedly associated with ancient Germanic (though not necessarily Proto-Germanic) ancestry are Y2395>Z284 and CTS4385>L664 and they both seem to be extremely rare in Italy (close to non-existent or at least <0.5%).

Italian R1a is not studied in our subclades, even Sarno et al. and Boattini et al. has not explored our subclades and haplotypes.

Morges
08-02-2016, 08:31 PM
Do you have an example of a better one? I cannot seem to find one.

Eupedia's maps.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml

Morges
08-02-2016, 08:35 PM
Here is R1a frequency by regions, even if some regions have a lot of samples and others have very little.

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

Bane
08-02-2016, 09:01 PM
Are you sure that I-M223 branches in Italy are those that are found in Germany and that they are indeed of Germanic origin?
One argument which brings that into question are locations of ancient M223 samples which implies as possible that this haplogroup predates invasion of Germanic tribes in Italy.

Tomenable
08-02-2016, 09:57 PM
Italian R1a is not studied in our subclades, even Sarno et al. and Boattini et al. has not explored our subclades and haplotypes.

Maybe checking what types of R1a can be found in Italians from FTDNA (R1a Project, Italian projects) can help?

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 10:01 AM
Cimbrians were Celtic, though (at least originally):

http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf

This is a pet theory of the author which is not accepted by many historians. It has been the subject of endless arguments.
Yes, and it is really seriously dated now and was pretty much demolished by the relative dearth of U152 in Scandinavia.

Not true when it comes to Denmark (where the Cimbri lived). In some samples from Denmark there is more P312 than U106:


Incidentally, I count more P312+ men (21) in the Denmark Y-DNA project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Denmark?iframe=yresults) than U106+ men (16)

In Sweden and Norway - yes, there U106 dominates by far. In Norway there is some L21 from imported British-Irish slaves.

Jessie
08-03-2016, 11:23 AM
Not true when it comes to Denmark (where the Cimbri lived). In some samples from Denmark there is more P312 than U106:



In Sweden and Norway - yes, there U106 dominates by far. In Norway there is some L21 from imported British-Irish slaves.

I wouldn't be surprised if L21 in places like Norway is older than Vikings and has nothing to do with British-Irish slaves. I wonder what subclades of L21 there is in Norway? This would help in deciphering how old it is and possibly where it came from. L21 is quite common in places like Normandy and Brittany. Also Europe (ex Britain and Ireland) needs a lot more testing.

evon
08-03-2016, 11:53 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if L21 in places like Norway is older than Vikings and has nothing to do with British-Irish slaves. I wonder what subclades of L21 there is in Norway? This would help in deciphering how old it is and possibly where it came from. L21 is quite common in places like Normandy and Brittany. Also Europe (ex Britain and Ireland) needs a lot more testing.

It could be that L21+ entered Norway during the Bronze age, as Norway traded Bronze/Copper with much of Europe, with trade routes going as far south as the Med region.. But Norway also had allot of Scottish immigration from the 1500 onwards, so that too is a potential source for L21+.

My closest matches are all L21+ or DF13+ like myself and we form a cluster in the region where my YDNA line comes from (With the exception of one match in Northern Norway):
https://i.imgsafe.org/1ccdc87f68.png

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 11:57 AM
Brittany is named after Britons, who migrated there from Britain after the Anglo-Saxon invasion. So no surprise that it has a lot of L21.

There is also a substantial amount of L21 in Iceland. 1/4 of Icelanders have British-Irish Y-DNA haplogroups. Historical sources also confirm the presence of Irishmen and of people with Celtic names in Iceland.

So far there is no evidence that there was any L21 in Norway before the Viking Age. On the other hand there is evidence that there was some U106 in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons (two samples from Eboracum).

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 12:03 PM
Also 2/3 of Icelanders have British-Irish mtDNA.

Vikings were kidnapping wives from that region.

MitchellSince1893
08-03-2016, 01:11 PM
Not true when it comes to Denmark (where the Cimbri lived). In some samples from Denmark there is more P312...

Obviously P312 is not the same as U152. In the Myres study only 3%, 3 samples out of 91, were U152 in Denmark.

Jessie
08-03-2016, 01:26 PM
Brittany is named after Britons, who migrated there from Britain after the Anglo-Saxon invasion. So no surprise that it has a lot of L21.

There is also a substantial amount of L21 in Iceland. 1/4 of Icelanders have British-Irish Y-DNA haplogroups. Historical sources also confirm the presence of Irishmen and of people with Celtic names in Iceland.

So far there is no evidence that there was any L21 in Norway before the Viking Age. On the other hand there is evidence that there was some U106 in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons (two samples from Eboracum).

I really think that L21 was spread in the Bronze Age as were other subclades of R1b. I really doubt it has anything to do with Vikings and their slaves. I know that Brittany has some connection with the British Isles but L21 is present at quite high percentages in places like Normandy. France is very under-represented in dna studies. I've also seen L21 in places like Sweden. I don't think it can be put down to Gaelic slaves in the Viking era. A lot of these connections go back to the Bronze Age and possibly earlier.

Something to consider is that the Irish have a high amount of M222 so if L21 was due to Irish/British slaves there would be a relatively high percentage of M222 in that L21. I don't think the ratios show this.

evon
08-03-2016, 02:47 PM
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8150-Source-of-L21-in-Norway&p=176283#post176283

Made a thread for L21+ in Norway etc...

Michał
08-03-2016, 02:52 PM
@Michal there is not a single study which had focused on R1a subclades in Italy, beside Underhill et al which has very few samples (from Apulia and Veneto if I remember).

Italian R1a is not studied in our subclades, even Sarno et al. and Boattini et al. has not explored our subclades and haplotypes.
Underhill (2014) investigated a sample of 287 Italians, so if the contribution of "Germanic R1a" (ie. L664+Z284) substantially exceeded 0.5%, he should have noticed it. However, he found not a single case of L664 nor Z284, which is perfectly consistent with what I wrote in my post. We also have the data from the FTDNA projects, and they confirm the absence of L664 and Z284 in Italy quite strongly (see below).

Additionally, we have the full sequencing data for 1200 Sardinians (Francalacci, et al., 2013) where 15 R1a samples were found and neither of them was from a "Germanic" clade. Instead, this group included 6 very closely related lineages from the "Slavic" clade M458 (probably a result of a local founder effect), 5 lineages from branch Z280 (all from subclades commonly associated with Slavic (3xY2902, YP371) or Baltic (CTS4648) ancestry), and 4 lineages from the Asian branch Z93 (Z93* and 3xZ2123).

This is not meant to demonstrate that there was no Germanic contribution to the Italian gene pool, only that the Germanic tribes that invaded Italy were very unlikely to show any substantial proportion of haplogroup R1a, and more specifically no typically "Germanic" R1a species, like L664 or Z284. This is best illustrated by the fact that these clades are practically absent in both Austria and Southern Germany, where typically Slavic clades dominate today. Another finding confirming this absence of "Germanic R1a" in the discussed region is that the ancient DNA for Germanic mercenaries in Roman service (in Bavaria) does not show any STR haplotypes typical for R1a, showing instead haplogroups I (4/8), R1b (2/8) and E1b (2/8). See this paper for more details: http://www.degruyter.com/view/books/9783110266306/9783110266306.113/9783110266306.113.xml

All this is of course consistent with my hypothesis that R1a was not a significant part of a hypothetical Proto-Germanic population residing in Northern Germany and Denmark (Jastorf), although clades Z284 and L664 were relatively early included into the expanding Early Germanic community, so they are today associated nearly exclusively with Germanic-speaking populations. I have already discussed these issues in some earlier threads:
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1027-Correlations-of-various-R1a-and-I-subclades-that-might-link-with-R1b-subclades&p=8038&viewfull=1#post8038
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5605-R1b-in-Corded-Ware&p=125962&viewfull=1#post125962


Likely you're right but surely except most of north East Italy where according to your map R1a is spread also in the Alps (both in the Italian-Romance speaking Alps and in German-speaking South Tyrol as well) and it is higher than 9%. In the Alps there were never Byzantine Greek settlements, who were more coastal.

As for the Alpine region (or at least for East Tyrol where significant proportion of R1a is found), there was a paper showing that East Alpine R1a (more than one fourth of which seems to be L260+) can be safely attributed to the Slavic admixture: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041885.


Maybe checking what types of R1a can be found in Italians from FTDNA (R1a Project, Italian projects) can help?
In the R1a project, we have 51 STR haplotypes originating from Italy (or 49 when excluding closely related lineages associated with the same surname). A relatively large proportion of these haplotypes (11, so more than 1/5) are undertested and thus cannot be reliably assigned to any specific branch or clade below M417. However, we can securely exclude L664 in all these cases (based on the DYS388 result in the 12 STR panel), and some of them are also strongly predicted to be negative for Z284. The remaining 38 haplotypes are mostly from clade Z280 (22 lineages, including 18xCTS1211, 3xZ92 and 1xS24902), while the contribution of Z93 (8 cases), PF6155/M458 (5 cases) and some rare very early diverged clades (3 cases, including YP4141, YP1272 and Y17491) is much smaller. Again, not a single case of L664 or Z284, so when assuming that the overall frequency of R1a in Itally is about 2-5%, we can safely assume that these Germanic R1a subclades constitute much less than 0.5% (and probably less than 0.1%).

Another question is whether any of the typically Baltic or Slavic clades under Z280 could have been brought in to Italy with the East Germanic tribes, and this is certainly something we cannot rule out at the moment. It is commonly assumed that the East Germanic tribes had intensive contacts with both the Balts and Proto-Slavs, so some of the originally Balto-Slavic Y-DNA lineages could have been assimilated by their Germanic neighbors. However, it will be extremely difficult to determine whether a given Balto-Slavic lineage found in Italy got there with any East Germanic tribe (mostly with the Goths or Vandals) or rather with a slightly later wave of Early Slavic newcomers. Personally, I suspect that the majority of those Z280 and M458 lineages in Italy are a result of a "direct" Slavic contribution, but a minor involvement of "Germanic mediators" seems quite likely, as well.

Dimanto
08-03-2016, 05:18 PM
see link ............made by italians .............it might have some value for you

http://tipologieeuropidi.altervista.org/template/files/template/genitaly.html

http://tipologieeuropidi.altervista.org/template/files/template/chisiamo.html

This basically makes Sikeliot very uncomfortable haha.

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 07:15 PM
What about that Corfanti from Veneto, born in 1619 - he was most likely R1a-L664:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1516-R1a-and-Corded-Ware&p=156257&viewfull=1#post156257

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 07:23 PM
Obviously P312 is not the same as U152.

Obviously not, but all of P312 correlates with Celts, not just U152. U152 also correlates with Italics.

And, by the way:

If the Cimbri emigrated from Denmark (as we know they did), then their Y-DNA emigrated with them. DNA is not preserved in the soil... ;) So, modern shortage of U152 =/= lack of U152 before the Cimbrian War.

vettor
08-03-2016, 07:26 PM
What about that Corfanti from Veneto, born in 1619 - he was most likely R1a-L664:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1516-R1a-and-Corded-Ware&p=156257&viewfull=1#post156257

There is more chance to find R1a in italy in the below studies

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0056371

The Ydna data is below from same site.
R1b 20
E1b1b 16
R1a 13
I2b 8
I1 6
G2c 4
J2b 4
G2a 3
I2a 2
T1a 1


or

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23249956

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 07:27 PM
I really think that L21 was spread in the Bronze Age as were other subclades of R1b.

L21 was spreading during the Bronze Age in Ireland and in Britain.

However, outside of Britain it spread only later. Not in the Bronze Age.

Also in North America L21 spread after 1600 AD, not in the Bronze Age... :)

MitchellSince1893
08-03-2016, 08:26 PM
Usually modern frequencies =/= ancient frequencies.

Cimbrians were Celtic, though (at least originally):

Not true when it comes to Denmark (where the Cimbri lived). In some samples from Denmark there is more P312 than U106...

Obviously not, but all of P312 correlates with Celts , not just U152. U152 also correlates with Italics.
And, by the way:
If the Cimbri emigrated from Denmark (as we know they did), then their Y-DNA emigrated with them. DNA is not preserved in the soil... ;) So, modern shortage of U152 =/= lack of U152 before the Cimbrian War.

So let me get this straight.

"Cimbrians were Celtic", and "all P312 correlates with Celts", and in current "samples from Denmark there is more P312 than U106"; thus proving that historically Denmark was Celtic even though "Usually modern frequencies =/= ancient frequencies."; however, when the Celtic Cimbri left Denmark circa 100 BC, only the U152 Celtic Cimbri guys "emigrated from Denmark (as we know they did)", leaving behind the other P312 Celtic guys, thus explaining why today there is still a lot of P312 in Denmark and why there is little U152?

ChrisR
08-03-2016, 09:56 PM
I was not referring to the ancient Cimbri people who were either Germanic or Celtic (and btw they likely settled in North-West Italy and East France), but to another people who live today in North-East Italy and they are thought to be originated from medieval migrations from Germany to Italy. We still don't know if these two homonymous people are related.

In northern Italy there are German language minorities present from the North-West to North-East. Apart from the obvious German-speaking South Tyroleans, there are also Mocheni (Bersntol), the Walser, the Val Canale's Carinthians, the Sappadini, the Saurani (Zahrisch)... and, as already stated, the Cimbri (Zimbar) who live around Vicenza, Verona, Treviso and Belluno in Veneto and around Trento in Trentino. Most of these minorities are said to be medieval migrations, the Walser from the German Cantons in Switzerland, the Mocheni from Germany or Austria and the Cimbri from Germany as well. Most of them have been assimilated in the Italian people and only a tiny portion of them still speak nowadays their own Germanic languages, but in every case as second language, because they all speak Italian as native language. A couple of friends of mine have these roots.


The cimbrian towns and people in the Veneto and trentino are from German Thuringia and not from Danish jutland

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

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133438

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6666037_No_signature_of_Y_chromosomal_resemblance_ between_possible_descendants_of_the_Cimbri_in_Denm ark_and_Northern_Italy

In 2015 I went to Lusern region with the secretary of the Sprachinseln organisation (Luis Thomas Prader) and among others met with Luigi Nicolussi-Castellan (former major of Lusern). The topic of the "deutschen Sprachinseln" (German language isles) in Italy is very interesting and I learned a lot. See http://www.sprachinseln.it/de/wer-wir-sind.html (German and Italian). Ironically the organisation uses Italian as lingua franca because even close language isolates have so strong dialects, that they can not understand each other easily and the knowledge of Standard German is not common.
Another interesting article with map: https://www.salto.bz/article/14062016/verborgener-kulturschatz 10778

Lusern people origins: 20 new farms (usually housing 2-3 families) were founded 1216 by Odolric & Henric de Posen (Bozen, was under Bavarian influence) in the Folgaria(Vielgereuth)/Centa area and needed to pay tribute to the bishop of Trento. Later settling is associated with Lavarone and 1442 also connections with Asiago are noted. The three most common modern surnames were dominant already in 1698. The living language is clearly associated with Medieval Bavarian (I can understand half of this more ancient then modern Bavarian/Tyrolean language) and the closest variants (probably ancestral) are from Asiago plateu (7 Gemeinden).

Zimbern (Cimbri) people origins: the connection to the ancient Cimbri (barbaric invasion in 113 and 101 BC into Roman Empire) was made by Italian Humanists and has no scientific backing but still is common belief. The Langobardi ruled in North Italy (including modern Trentino and some Southern Parts of South Tyrol) from 568 to 774. The Bavarii noblemen did claim Tyrolean land from the 7th to 10th century. Known migrations of Bavarian settlers did occur later as documented for the Zimbern area 1050 in the Codex lat. 4547 of the Bavarian Monastery Benediktbeuern. The Zimbern call themself Tzimbar or Cimbarn which could come from old german zimbar which is carpenter, a profession for which Zimbern were well known in Tyrol. Settlers coming from the Vicentine Alps (previously Bavarians) to Lavarone are associated with wood working and carbon making (traditional business up to modern times).
You can read more by translating https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbern#Geschichte
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavarone#Storia

Y-Kits in Alpine DNA (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Alpine_DNA_Project_AlpGen_Genealogy?iframe=yresult s) from the Zimbern area:
349062, Basso 1778 Asiago, E1b-V13 Alpine-Danube?
N96626, Paganin 1822 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E18044, Rigoni 1854 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E10868 Alberti 1350 Foza (Vicenza), R1b-DF27-SRY2627 over S.German migration?
Very new result of a private Lusern sample R1b-Z2103-PH2789 Moravia/Veneto

GoldenHind
08-03-2016, 10:25 PM
In Sweden and Norway - yes, there U106 dominates by far. In Norway there is some L21 from imported British-Irish slaves.

The Myres II study in Norway (sample size 138) found 28 U106 (20.3%) versus 31 P312 (22.5%).

The same study in Sweden (Malmo area) (sample size 139) found 6 U106 (4.3%) versus 16 P312 (11.5%).

While I wouldn't claim these figures necessarily accurately reflect the correct percentages across the two countries, this is hardly support for your claim that U106 "dominates by far" in these two countries.

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 10:58 PM
The Cimbri have a Celtic ethnonym, Celtic material culture (cauldrons, etc.), chieftains with Celtic names, etc. Yes, pretty much everything indicates that they were Celtic, except for strange location (geographical outliers). But look at Asia Minor and those outliers, the Galatians. Also a strange location for a Celtic tribe.

I haven't seen or read any convincing rebuttal of David Faux's book so far.

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 11:02 PM
And nobody is arguing that the Galatians spoke Turkic just because Turks may not like that there were Celts there. So why should we argue that the Cimbri spoke Germanic just because today people there speak it, like people speak Turkic in former Galatia. I personally find arguments of David Faux rather convincing.

Even contemporary Roman authors described the Cimbri as Celts. And Faux listed these authors.

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 11:09 PM
I once met a Pan-Turanid nationalist who claimed that all of Y-DNA haplogroup F is originally Turkic.

Because he couldn't find any common genetic denominator for all Turkich peoples younger than F.

So he concluded that all of F (including everything F+, so 2/3 of all humans) is originally Turkic.

There are also similar people who claim that every haplogroup carried by modern Germanic-speakers must be originally Germanic. But fortunately they are usually not as insane as these Pan-Turanids. :P

vettor
08-04-2016, 07:32 AM
In 2015 I went to Lusern region with the secretary of the Sprachinseln organisation (Luis Thomas Prader) and among others met with Luigi Nicolussi-Castellan (former major of Lusern). The topic of the "deutschen Sprachinseln" (German language isles) in Italy is very interesting and I learned a lot. See http://www.sprachinseln.it/de/wer-wir-sind.html (German and Italian). Ironically the organisation uses Italian as lingua franca because even close language isolates have so strong dialects, that they can not understand each other easily and the knowledge of High German is not common.
Another interesting article with map: https://www.salto.bz/article/14062016/verborgener-kulturschatz 10778

Lusern people origins: 20 new farms (usually housing 2-3 families) were founded 1216 by Odolric & Henric de Posen (Bozen, was under Bavarian influence) in the Folgaria(Vielgereuth)/Centa area and needed to pay tribute to the bishop of Trento. Later settling is associated with Lavarone and 1442 also connections with Asiago are noted. The three most common modern surnames were dominant already in 1698. The living language is clearly associated with Medieval Bavarian (I can understand half of this more ancient then modern Bavarian/Tyrolean language) and the closest variants (probably ancestral) are from Asiago plateu (7 Gemeinden).

Zimbern (Cimbri) people origins: the connection to the ancient Cimbri (barbaric invasion in 113 and 101 BC into Roman Empire) was made by Italian Humanists and has no scientific backing but still is common belief. The Langobardi ruled in North Italy (including modern Trentino and some Southern Parts of South Tyrol) from 568 to 774. The Bavarii noblemen did claim Tyrolean land from the 7th to 10th century. Known migrations of Bavarian settlers did occur later as documented for the Zimbern area 1050 in the Codex lat. 4547 of the Bavarian Monastery Benediktbeuern. The Zimbern call themself Tzimbar or Cimbarn which could come from old german zimbar which is carpenter, a profession for which Zimbern were well known in Tyrol. Settlers coming from the Vicentine Alps (previously Bavarians) to Lavarone are associated with wood working and carbon making (traditional business up to modern times).
You can read more by translating https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbern#Geschichte
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavarone#Storia

Y-Kits in Alpine DNA (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Alpine_DNA_Project_AlpGen_Genealogy?iframe=yresult s) from the Zimbern area:
349062, Basso 1778 Asiago, E1b-V13 Alpine-Danube?
N96626, Paganin 1822 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E18044, Rigoni 1854 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E10868 Alberti 1350 Foza (Vicenza), R1b-DF27-SRY2627 over S.German migration?
Very new result of a private Lusern sample R1b-Z2103-PH2789 Moravia/Veneto


All common north-italian surnames ..............Asiago was also a depository of Veneti who lived prior to WW2 , in slovene and istrian lands and migrated there after WW2 due to Tito policies................2 old friends of mine are from there , Hero and Zoccoler where their surnames

Thunor
08-04-2016, 07:51 PM
The Cimbri have a Celtic ethnonym, Celtic material culture (cauldrons, etc.), chieftains with Celtic names, etc. Yes, pretty much everything indicates that they were Celtic, except for strange location (geographical outliers). But look at Asia Minor and those outliers, the Galatians. Also a strange location for a Celtic tribe.

I haven't seen or read any convincing rebuttal of David Faux's book so far.

You could say the same thing about the Suebi who fought against Ceasar, but none would claim them to be Celtic.

Tomenable
08-06-2016, 12:27 AM
No - we couldn't say the same about the Suebi. Except for their chief with a Celtic name.

Which probably indicates that they simply had a chieftain or a ruling class of Celtic origin.

Most importantly, the Suebi were called "Germanic" by the Romans. The Cimbri were not.

Larth
08-29-2016, 11:07 PM
In 2015 I went to Lusern region with the secretary of the Sprachinseln organisation (Luis Thomas Prader) and among others met with Luigi Nicolussi-Castellan (former major of Lusern). The topic of the "deutschen Sprachinseln" (German language isles) in Italy is very interesting and I learned a lot. See http://www.sprachinseln.it/de/wer-wir-sind.html (German and Italian). Ironically the organisation uses Italian as lingua franca because even close language isolates have so strong dialects, that they can not understand each other easily and the knowledge of Standard German is not common.
Another interesting article with map: https://www.salto.bz/article/14062016/verborgener-kulturschatz 10778

Lusern people origins: 20 new farms (usually housing 2-3 families) were founded 1216 by Odolric & Henric de Posen (Bozen, was under Bavarian influence) in the Folgaria(Vielgereuth)/Centa area and needed to pay tribute to the bishop of Trento. Later settling is associated with Lavarone and 1442 also connections with Asiago are noted. The three most common modern surnames were dominant already in 1698. The living language is clearly associated with Medieval Bavarian (I can understand half of this more ancient then modern Bavarian/Tyrolean language) and the closest variants (probably ancestral) are from Asiago plateu (7 Gemeinden).

Zimbern (Cimbri) people origins: the connection to the ancient Cimbri (barbaric invasion in 113 and 101 BC into Roman Empire) was made by Italian Humanists and has no scientific backing but still is common belief. The Langobardi ruled in North Italy (including modern Trentino and some Southern Parts of South Tyrol) from 568 to 774. The Bavarii noblemen did claim Tyrolean land from the 7th to 10th century. Known migrations of Bavarian settlers did occur later as documented for the Zimbern area 1050 in the Codex lat. 4547 of the Bavarian Monastery Benediktbeuern. The Zimbern call themself Tzimbar or Cimbarn which could come from old german zimbar which is carpenter, a profession for which Zimbern were well known in Tyrol. Settlers coming from the Vicentine Alps (previously Bavarians) to Lavarone are associated with wood working and carbon making (traditional business up to modern times).
You can read more by translating https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbern#Geschichte
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavarone#Storia

Y-Kits in Alpine DNA (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Alpine_DNA_Project_AlpGen_Genealogy?iframe=yresult s) from the Zimbern area:
349062, Basso 1778 Asiago, E1b-V13 Alpine-Danube?
N96626, Paganin 1822 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E18044, Rigoni 1854 Asiago, I1-Z140 S.German/Veneto-Sloven
E10868 Alberti 1350 Foza (Vicenza), R1b-DF27-SRY2627 over S.German migration?
Very new result of a private Lusern sample R1b-Z2103-PH2789 Moravia/Veneto

Thanks ChrisR for your post! Surnames are all northern Italian but Asiago and Foza are undoubtedly places with a large Cimbrian inheritance. I think this is a good example of Cimbrian language in north Italy (Zimbar earde)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdOjq5eZSu8

Tomenable
09-03-2016, 01:51 PM
Sicily:

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v17/n1/fig_tab/ejhg2008120t1.html

https://i.snag.gy/vNHeRA.jpg
https://i.snag.gy/EHiGFa.jpg