PDA

View Full Version : L2 scarcity in Italy



Orobicus
08-02-2014, 09:30 AM
After Boattini, the peak of R1b-U152 in Italy is Brescia (51.3%). Mostly Z36. But the L2 is only 22.2%. In Italy is 39% and the maximum is outside it, Ukraine, Hungary, Poland but Western Europe as well (Uk, France, Low Countries). I come from Bergamo, near Brescia. I'm U152 but negative for L2 and L20, in facts.
The maximum in Italy is Treviso (80%) and this fact make me think a junction between Venetics-Wends (Baltic area): no Celts in Veneto if I don't mistaken. They don't speak a Gallo-Italic dialect while in Friuli is Rhaeto-Romance.
In the other hand, is high in Lunigiana (La Spezia-Massa), NW Italy, a typical Ligurs' site. And in Como too, 66%, Western Lombardy. Brescia is Eastern Lombardy. Brescia looks pretty isolated then.
What does that mean? L2 is Indo-European while U152* is pre-Indo-European and "Italian"? Is this possible?

Thanks for your help.

Orobicus
08-02-2014, 09:31 AM
Ops, sorry, I didn't see the specific sub-forum on L2.

DMXX
08-02-2014, 10:13 AM
Don't worry Orobicus; it's just been moved by a member of staff.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-02-2014, 10:18 AM
L2 clade is a very old and not all L2 came in Italy at the same time.
There are some L2 (perhaps as FGC10543) who came to Italy in prehistoric times.
Other L2 (perhaps as DF103) that came in Italy with the Lombards or the Franks.
Perhaps also L2 + L20 + came to Italy with the Lombards.

So you can not generalize.
The only thing that seems certain is the origin of L2 in the Lorraine / Rhine Valley
Here the percentage presence is too high to be able to think of a different origin.

Orobicus
08-02-2014, 10:37 AM
L2 clade is a very old and not all L2 came in Italy at the same time.
There are some L2 (perhaps as FGC10543) who came to Italy in prehistoric times.
Other L2 (perhaps as DF103) that came in Italy with the Lombards or the Franks.
Perhaps also L2 + L20 + came to Italy with the Lombards.

So you can not generalize.
The only thing that seems certain is the origin of L2 in the Lorraine / Rhine Valley
Here the percentage presence is too high to be able to think of a different origin.

What do you think about the lack of L2 in Brescia? And the origin of the Brixian Z36, ofc.

R.Rocca
08-02-2014, 01:45 PM
Guys, let's ground ourselves here a little bit...there have been quite a few academic studies that have tested for U152(xL2) and L2 in the last few years, and the top overall frequencies are:

Badia, South Tyrol (Coia 2013) = 0.477
Sauris, Friuli (Coia 2013) = 0.345
Fassa, Trentino (Coia 2013) = 0.255
LaSpezia/Massa (Boattini 2013) = 0.250
Treviso (Boattini 2013) = 0.242
Fiemme,Trentino (Coia 2013) = 0.205

The highest frequency outside of Italy "so far" is Limburg, Belgium (Larmuseau 2013) with 0.097. The highest in Germany "so far" is Bavaria, Germany (Rebala 2012) with 0.064. While we don't have many areas along the Rhine specifically tested for L2, we know that U152 itself does not reach more than ~20-22% in East France, SW Germany and northern Switzerland (Busby 2011). We know that L2 is nowhere near 100% in any of those locations based on FTDNA testing, so none of them will approach the NE Italy numbers. Using FTDNA frequency overall from the Middle Rhine however is of no use to us, since German-Americans from that region make up FTDNA's second largest testing group after Britain and Ireland.

So, while there may be a reduced L2 presence of U152 overall in most of Italy, that isn't the case in the north-east.

Orobicus
08-02-2014, 02:55 PM
Guys, let's ground ourselves here a little bit...there have been quite a few academic studies that have tested for U152(xL2) and L2 in the last few years, and the top overall frequencies are:

Badia, South Tyrol (Coia 2013) = 0.477
Sauris, Friuli (Coia 2013) = 0.345
Fassa, Trentino (Coia 2013) = 0.255
LaSpezia/Massa (Boattini 2013) = 0.250
Treviso (Boattini 2013) = 0.242
Fiemme,Trentino (Coia 2013) = 0.205

The highest frequency outside of Italy "so far" is Limburg, Belgium (Larmuseau 2013) with 0.097. The highest in Germany "so far" is Bavaria, Germany (Rebala 2012) with 0.064. While we don't have many areas along the Rhine specifically tested for L2, we know that U152 itself does not reach more than ~20-22% in East France, SW Germany and northern Switzerland (Busby 2011). We know that L2 is nowhere near 100% in any of those locations based on FTDNA testing, so none of them will approach the NE Italy numbers. Using FTDNA frequency overall from the Middle Rhine however is of no use to us, since German-Americans from that region make up FTDNA's second largest testing group after Britain and Ireland.

So, while there may be a reduced L2 presence of U152 overall in most of Italy, that isn't the case in the north-east.

You're right, but as a whole Italy is not the first place, NE is just a sector of Italy and where U152 is strong (Brescia) L2 looks weak. Which peoples carried the U152 in Brescia and the L2 in NE Italy, in your opinion?

R.Rocca
08-02-2014, 03:04 PM
You're right, but as a whole Italy is not the first place, NE is just a sector of Italy and where U152 is strong (Brescia) L2 looks weak. Which peoples carried the U152 in Brescia and the L2 in NE Italy, in your opinion?

In Brescia, it is mostly likely Z36, which is likely to be Ligurian and Golaseccan, but likely derived from Bell Beaker expansions. However, some of it is likely Z56 or PF6658 or other smaller subclades which are impossible to classify into cultures right now.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-02-2014, 03:19 PM
I believe that L2 may be even more ancient than we think.
In past years we have made many calculations with YSTR but these could be wrong.

For example, if this mutation was originated 6000-7000 years ago, it would have no sense to connect it with the cultures of 1000-2000 years ago.

Maybe it would be best to first discuss mutations that are found one or two levels below..

Orobicus
08-02-2014, 05:02 PM
In Brescia, it is mostly likely Z36, which is likely to be Ligurian and Golaseccan, but likely derived from Bell Beaker expansions. However, some of it is likely Z56 or PF6658 or other smaller subclades which are impossible to classify into cultures right now.

Ok. It's quite curious the presence of high L2 in Lunigiana (Spezia/Massa), Ligurian territories (NW Italy), and NE Italy. If the Brixian U152 is Ligurian why is so poor of L2 in comparison with La Spezia (core of the Ligures)?

R.Rocca
08-02-2014, 07:12 PM
Ok. It's quite curious the presence of high L2 in Lunigiana (Spezia/Massa), Ligurian territories (NW Italy), and NE Italy. If the Brixian U152 is Ligurian why is so poor of L2 in comparison with La Spezia (core of the Ligures)?

As per Bertoncini 2012, U152(xL2) makes up almost the entirety of M269 in the valleys of the Liguri Apuani, and its L2 subclade is poorly represented.

R.Rocca
08-03-2014, 08:54 PM
I believe that L2 may be even more ancient than we think.
In past years we have made many calculations with YSTR but these could be wrong.

For example, if this mutation was originated 6000-7000 years ago, it would have no sense to connect it with the cultures of 1000-2000 years ago.

Maybe it would be best to first discuss mutations that are found one or two levels below..

Based on all of the ancient DNA I've seen thus far, I don't think U152 and L2 arose any earlier than ~3500 BC, and even that is likely too old by 500-1000 years. If my guess is right, that L2 is associated with the Beglietkeramik Bell Beaker tradition in Central Europe and Italy and ensuing Bronze Age Cultures (Arbon Culture, Polada Culture), then the SNPs one level down from L2 may have expanded during the Middle Bronze Age.

Orobicus
08-03-2014, 09:17 PM
Based on all of the ancient DNA I've seen thus far, I don't think U152 and L2 arose any earlier than ~3500 BC, and even that is likely too old by 500-1000 years. If my guess is right, that L2 is associated with the Beglietkeramik Bell Beaker tradition in Central Europe and Italy and ensuing Bronze Age Cultures (Arbon Culture, Polada Culture), then the SNPs one level down from L2 may have expanded during the Middle Bronze Age.

Do you think the entire R1b-U152 was spread by Indo-Europeans?

Cascio
08-04-2014, 11:29 AM
In Brescia, it is mostly likely Z36, which is likely to be Ligurian and Golaseccan, but likely derived from Bell Beaker expansions. However, some of it is likely Z56 or PF6658 or other smaller subclades which are impossible to classify into cultures right now.

Z36 is still common in modern Val D'Aosta and Piedmont on the edge of ancient "Golaseccan" cultural territory.

Orobicus
08-04-2014, 02:24 PM
Well, Brescia wasn't Golasecca; it was Remedello and later Polada. The Bergamask Orumbovii-Orobii instead were Golaseccan, like the Insubres of Western Lombardy.

Orobicus
08-04-2014, 02:30 PM
Btw, I was watching this: http://r1b.org/?page_id=242.

Bolgeris
08-04-2014, 05:28 PM
Btw, I was watching this: http://r1b.org/?page_id=242.
A look at this map ..
To me it is always the doubt that L20 has arrived in Italy with the Langobards (Lombards)?
If L20 it were a Celtic marker would spread in northern Italy in all areas populated by the Gauls ..
but L20 is not even in the South and only in areas colonized by settlers Lombards.

Where I see L20 in Italy ....
Duchy of Benevento and Spoleto, Como, Brescia, Vicenza .. are always Lombards settled lands?
True..!?. At least some L20 subclade as CTS9733 ..?

What seems to me that L20 should have arrived in Italy after the period of the Gallic invasion of Italy.
Or not?
What do you think ..?

Cascio
08-04-2014, 06:10 PM
Well, Brescia wasn't Golasecca; it was Remedello and later Polada. The Bergamask Orumbovii-Orobii instead were Golaseccan, like the Insubres of Western Lombardy.

I did not mention Brescia.

Cascio
08-04-2014, 06:11 PM
As per Bertoncini 2012, U152(xL2) makes up almost the entirety of M269 in the valleys of the Liguri Apuani, and its L2 subclade is poorly represented.

Do you have a link to this Bertoncini study?

Orobicus
08-04-2014, 06:18 PM
I did not mention Brescia.

It wasn't to you, just a consideration.

vettor
08-04-2014, 06:18 PM
A look at this map ..
To me it is always the doubt that L20 has arrived in Italy with the Langobards (Lombards)?
If L20 it were a Celtic marker would spread in northern Italy in all areas populated by the Gauls ..
but L20 is not even in the South and only in areas colonized by settlers Lombards.

Where I see L20 in Italy ....
Duchy of Benevento and Spoleto, Como, Brescia, Vicenza .. are always Lombards settled lands?
True..!?. At least some L20 subclade as CTS9733 ..?

What seems to me that L20 should have arrived in Italy after the period of the Gallic invasion of Italy.
Or not?
What do you think ..?

the celts entered Italy from the North, the Gauls entered Italy from the West .........there is a difference

vettor
08-04-2014, 06:21 PM
It wasn't to you, just a consideration.

Brescia to Verona was settled by the gallic Cenomani people coming from southern France. Before arriving in Southern France, the Cenomani came from Vendee area in North West France

Orobicus
08-04-2014, 06:26 PM
Brescia to Verona was settled by the gallic Cenomani people coming from southern France. Before arriving in Southern France, the Cenomani came from Vendee area in North West France

And how can you distinguish the two, genetically (I mean Celts and Gauls, sorry). I think that the main impact on NW Italy was brought by Ligurians, on Central Italy by Etruscans (an indigenous, and not Anatolian, people).

vettor
08-04-2014, 06:57 PM
And how can you distinguish the two, genetically (I mean Celts and Gauls, sorry). I think that the main impact on NW Italy was brought by Ligurians, on Central Italy by Etruscans (an indigenous, and not Anatolian, people).

I see a late bronze-age and early age difference between celts and gauls .

ancient ligures stretched from the Rhone river to NW Italy ( Italian historians state Ligures where in all northern Italy........I doubt this ).
2013 Etruscan paper states the Etruscans came from southern germany.......but migrated from Anatolia to southern germany 7000 years ago

Orobicus
08-04-2014, 07:44 PM
I see a late bronze-age and early age difference between celts and gauls .

ancient ligures stretched from the Rhone river to NW Italy ( Italian historians state Ligures where in all northern Italy........I doubt this ).
2013 Etruscan paper states the Etruscans came from southern germany.......but migrated from Anatolia to southern germany 7000 years ago

In Brescia probably the L2 are Gauls while the U152(xL2) are Ligurians-like (Remedello). No Celtic people in Brescia before Cenomani. Quite Rhaeto-Ligurian, like Euganei or Camunni.
Barbujani et al. instead see Etruscans as indigenous people of Tuscany, Emilia, Romagna and Umbria (Rinaldone culture). So, probably, Z36 is Ligurian, while Z56 Etruscan.

Bolgeris
08-04-2014, 10:40 PM
QUOTE=vettor;47695]the celts entered Italy from the North, the Gauls entered Italy from the West .........there is a difference[/QUOTE]


Not only did the Celts 3000 years ago .. but also the Lombards invaded Italy from the north. Precisely from Friuli.
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227

vettor
08-05-2014, 06:19 AM
In Brescia probably the L2 are Gauls while the U152(xL2) are Ligurians-like (Remedello). No Celtic people in Brescia before Cenomani. Quite Rhaeto-Ligurian, like Euganei or Camunni.
Barbujani et al. instead see Etruscans as indigenous people of Tuscany, Emilia, Romagna and Umbria (Rinaldone culture). So, probably, Z36 is Ligurian, while Z56 Etruscan.

as per mike hammer theory late last year, and R-U152 origin in central germany..........my theory is that the celts brought it to Italy.

Orobicus
08-05-2014, 06:20 AM
Lombards carried I1 and R1a1a, mainly. I don't know if R1b-U106 too, I've always thought at it as a Normannic or Frankish haplogroup, quite Western.

vettor
08-05-2014, 06:21 AM
QUOTE=vettor;47695]the celts entered Italy from the North, the Gauls entered Italy from the West .........there is a difference


Not only did the Celts 3000 years ago .. but also the Lombards invaded Italy from the north. Precisely from Friuli.
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227[/QUOTE]

you do know that the lombards only arrived ~500AD , I think they brought HG I and maybe I-u106

Alessio B. Bedini
08-05-2014, 11:45 AM
The genetic history of Europe is very complicated.
To greatly simplify, we can say that the Lombards who arrived in Italy in the sixth century had made a long tour of Europe.
It's now accepted by modern historiography the fact that the starting point of the Lombards is the southern Scandinavia.

This starting point is also confirmed by genetic data, because the Y chromosome carried by a significant part of this population is the comosoma I1 haplogroup which is few branched. This means that it remained for several millennia isolated from other populations, in a so-called shelter, and suffered a "bottleneck".
The refuge of the people who carried the chromosome I1 is thought to have been just Scandinavia.

Around the first century BC began the migratory movement of this population that consequently collided and merged with several other people. It's at this time that entered into the Lombard population (though not yet called that way) many R1b-U106 (Scandinavian) and later R1b-U152 (Central Europe) or even R1a (Slavs). When they came to Italy in the sixth century, however, already formed a single people.

2229

vettor
08-05-2014, 06:55 PM
The genetic history of Europe is very complicated.
To greatly simplify, we can say that the Lombards who arrived in Italy in the sixth century had made a long tour of Europe.
It's now accepted by modern historiography the fact that the starting point of the Lombards is the southern Scandinavia.

This starting point is also confirmed by genetic data, because the Y chromosome carried by a significant part of this population is the comosoma I1 haplogroup which is few branched. This means that it remained for several millennia isolated from other populations, in a so-called shelter, and suffered a "bottleneck".
The refuge of the people who carried the chromosome I1 is thought to have been just Scandinavia.

Around the first century BC began the migratory movement of this population that consequently collided and merged with several other people. It's at this time that entered into the Lombard population (though not yet called that way) many R1b-U106 (Scandinavian) and later R1b-U152 (Central Europe) or even R1a (Slavs). When they came to Italy in the sixth century, however, already formed a single people.

2229

ok, the lombards from what I recall where always known as east-germanic people along with burgundians, vandals and goths. Last year the lombards got reclassified to west-germanic due to linguistic traits. I never recall any Scandinavian link .
The lombards settled for a long time in vienna Austria area before being replaced by the rugii people from modern coastal poland

vettor
08-05-2014, 06:58 PM
Lombards carried I1 and R1a1a, mainly. I don't know if R1b-U106 too, I've always thought at it as a Normannic or Frankish haplogroup, quite Western.

there is around 15% of R-u106 in east austria area.

Mr. hammer claims R-U106 origins as in the harz mountains ( bordering czech and old east german area )

Bolgeris
08-06-2014, 05:20 PM
Dear Alessio,
thank you..
You are able to explain exactly what I meant to say, when I say that L20 in Italy must have (or should be) arrived at a period subsequent to that of the Gallic invasion.

So why not by the Lombards?
"Longobardi" (Langbärte in ancient germanic, latinized in Langobardi)..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origo_Gentis_Langobardorum
Seen that the areas in which is located L20 in Italy, are areas of Langobards colonization?

In a depopulated Italy after the Gothic wars,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_War_(535%E2%80%93554)
why not see what big impact it may have had an invasion of a people in arms as were the Lombards ..?

I believe it is not so necessary, that only I1 are of Lombard origin in Italy.

Only this.
ciao.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-06-2014, 05:26 PM
In a depopulated Italy after the Gothic wars,
why not see what big impact it may have had an invasion of a people in arms as were the Lombards ..?

Yes, I too think that L20 arrived in Italy with the Lombards or the Franks.

vettor
08-06-2014, 06:58 PM
Dear Alessio,
thank you..
You are able to explain exactly what I meant to say, when I say that L20 in Italy must have (or should be) arrived at a period subsequent to that of the Gallic invasion.

So why not by the Lombards?
"Longobardi" (Langbärte in ancient germanic, latinized in Langobardi)..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origo_Gentis_Langobardorum
Seen that the areas in which is located L20 in Italy, are areas of Langobards colonization?

In a depopulated Italy after the Gothic wars,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_War_(535%E2%80%93554)
why not see what big impact it may have had an invasion of a people in arms as were the Lombards ..?

I believe it is not so necessary, that only I1 are of Lombard origin in Italy.

Only this.
ciao.

I doubt this. Most L20 is ( apart from britain ) runs from flanders to the region of Piedmont and liguria ..........the ancient merger of celtic and gallic in this area produced the belgii who's area in roman times stretched from flanders to switzerland ( includes french regions of alsace and Lorraine )

Your cognome Bolgeri today is present in NW italy ( maybe it was Bolgheri in italian form ), but having a veneto flag, you could have come form the mercenary hirings of the Republic of Venice. They hired from the 16th century only from the regions of Lorraine, the german regions of saxony, thuringia and brunswick and also the swiss bordering region of the grison people. ( I did not include the italian or corsican group )

I cannot see an ancient frank invasion of italy but a later one with the ottonian frankish dynasty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottonian_dynasty
from kings otto I, II and III

Bolgeris
08-06-2014, 07:47 PM
Now I live in Veneto and my mother's family was of Veneto ..

But my Bolgeri surname is originally from Civenna, close to Switzerland and Lake Como ..

Territory of colonization of an armed group Lombard .. FARA

But my family could be reached Civenna from Switzerland at the time of the Black Death.
And perhaps the surname was Bilgeri from Zurich ..

So any hypothesis is valid ..

Bolgeris
08-06-2014, 08:13 PM
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne

About Frank invasion..

Italian campaigns[edit]
Conquest of the Lombard kingdom[edit]


The Frankish king Charlemagne was a devout Catholic and maintained a close relationship with the papacy throughout his life. In 772, when Pope Adrian I was threatened by invaders, the king rushed to Rome to provide assistance. Shown here, the pope asks Charlemagne for help at a meeting near Rome.
At his succession in 772, Pope Adrian I demanded the return of certain cities in the former exarchate of Ravenna in accordance with a promise at the succession of Desiderius. Instead, Desiderius took over certain papal cities and invaded the Pentapolis, heading for Rome. Adrian sent embassies to Charlemagne in autumn requesting he enforce the policies of his father, Pepin. Desiderius sent his own embassies denying the pope's charges. The embassies both met at Thionville, and Charlemagne upheld the pope's side. Charlemagne demanded what the pope had requested, and Desiderius promptly swore never to comply. Charlemagne and his uncle Bernard crossed the Alps in 773 and chased the Lombards back to Pavia, which they then besieged.[31] Charlemagne temporarily left the siege to deal with Adelchis, son of Desiderius, who was raising an army at Verona. The young prince was chased to the Adriatic littoral, and he fled to Constantinople to plead for assistance from Constantine V, who was waging war with Bulgaria.[32][33]

The siege lasted until the spring of 774, when Charlemagne visited the pope in Rome. There he confirmed his father's grants of land,[34] with some later chronicles claiming—falsely—that he also expanded them, granting Tuscany, Emilia, Venice, and Corsica. The pope granted him the title patrician. He then returned to Pavia, where the Lombards were on the verge of surrendering. In return for their lives, the Lombards surrendered and opened the gates in early summer. Desiderius was sent to the abbey of Corbie, and his son Adelchis died in Constantinople a patrician. Charles, unusually, had himself crowned with the Iron Crown and made the magnates of Lombardy do homage to him at Pavia. Only Duke Arechis II of Benevento refused to submit and proclaimed independence. Charlemagne was then master of Italy as king of the Lombards. He left Italy with a garrison in Pavia and a few Frankish counts in place the same year.

There was still instability, however, in Italy. In 776, Dukes Hrodgaud of Friuli and Hildeprand of Spoleto rebelled. Charlemagne rushed back from Saxony and defeated the duke of Friuli in battle; the duke was slain.[33] The duke of Spoleto signed a treaty. Their co-conspirator, Arechis, was not subdued, and Adelchis, their candidate in Byzantium, never left that city. Northern Italy was now faithfully his.

Southern Italy[edit]
In 787 Charlemagne directed his attention toward the Duchy of Benevento, where Arechis was reigning independently. Charlemagne besieged Salerno, and Arechis submitted to vassalage. However, with his death in 792, Benevento again proclaimed independence under his son Grimoald III. Grimoald was attacked by armies of Charles or his sons many times, but Charlemagne himself never returned to the Mezzogiorno, and Grimoald never was forced to surrender to Frankish suzerainty.

Agamemnon
08-10-2014, 12:15 PM
And how can you distinguish the two, genetically (I mean Celts and Gauls, sorry). I think that the main impact on NW Italy was brought by Ligurians, on Central Italy by Etruscans (an indigenous, and not Anatolian, people).

I seriously doubt that, to be perfectly honest.


Z36 is Ligurian, while Z56 Etruscan.

That doesn't even come close to explaining Z36's occurrence in Switzerland and Z56's occurrence in non-Etruscan (not to say Italic) areas.

Orobicus
08-10-2014, 02:38 PM
^ The core of the Etruscan people was Proto-Italic; J2 is the main haplogroup only in Calabria (a non-Etruscan zone). So, probably, Etruscans were an indigenous people with an Anatolian élite.
As for Z36, well, not so impossibile an Italian origin. The Ligures weren't an isolated tribe of modern Liguria.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-10-2014, 02:52 PM
A people never belongs to a single haplogroup because within it there is a bit of variability.

In the case of the Etruscans, probably were formed by very much J2 but also E, G and probably R1b arrived in the Middle East with The Dorians or before.

Agamemnon
08-10-2014, 05:01 PM
^ The core of the Etruscan people was Proto-Italic; J2 is the main haplogroup only in Calabria (a non-Etruscan zone). So, probably, Etruscans were an indigenous people with an Anatolian élite.
As for Z36, well, not so impossibile an Italian origin. The Ligures weren't an isolated tribe of modern Liguria.

There's no way you can label a non-IE speaking people with clear links to the Aegean "Proto-Italic", that just doesn't make any sense.
I think J2a made its appearance with Tyrsenian-speaking people in Italy, probably as early as the Bronze Age.
The elite dominance model for the emergence of Etruscan (and Rhaetian as well) doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing one, added to the fact that there's no clear break between the Villanovan and Etruscan cultures we end up with a very complicated puzzle to solve.

I suspect that Tyrsenian speakers were isolated for quite some time in the Apennine mountains (which isn't difficult to picture since the Apennine mountains have some of the highest J2a, J1, G2a and E-M35 frequencies in Italy) before settling the plains and taking control of the local Villanovan-descended population (high in Z56) during the Iron age... Which is similar to what happened in Mesopotamia when the Kassites left the Zagros, took control of Babylon (and established a dynasty which would last for over 500 years) after the Hittites sacked the city in the 16th century BCE.
But this is just my take and I could be wrong.

Regarding Z36, which is the most important U152 lineage in Switzerland-Eastern France (Franche-Comté), I have a very hard time picturing how Ligurians could've brought it there.

vettor
08-10-2014, 07:01 PM
Now I live in Veneto and my mother's family was of Veneto ..

But my Bolgeri surname is originally from Civenna, close to Switzerland and Lake Como ..

Territory of colonization of an armed group Lombard .. FARA

But my family could be reached Civenna from Switzerland at the time of the Black Death.
And perhaps the surname was Bilgeri from Zurich ..

So any hypothesis is valid ..

So, do all my 1st cousins etc on both sides live in Veneto

You also have the swabian/alemanni migration into lombardia and Veneto with the Scaliger family ( la Scala in Italian ..........poor italy , always name changing!), or the ezzelini families from Bavaria

vettor
08-10-2014, 07:18 PM
There's no way you can label a non-IE speaking people with clear links to the Aegean "Proto-Italic", that just doesn't make any sense.
I think J2a made its appearance with Tyrsenian-speaking people in Italy, probably as early as the Bronze Age.
The elite dominance model for the emergence of Etruscan (and Rhaetian as well) doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing one, added to the fact that there's no clear break between the Villanovan and Etruscan cultures we end up with a very complicated puzzle to solve.

I suspect that Tyrsenian speakers were isolated for quite some time in the Apennine mountains (which isn't difficult to picture since the Apennine mountains have some of the highest J2a, J1, G2a and E-M35 frequencies in Italy) before settling the plains and taking control of the local Villanovan-descended population (high in Z56) during the Iron age... Which is similar to what happened in Mesopotamia when the Kassites left the Zagros, took control of Babylon (and established a dynasty which would last for over 500 years) after the Hittites sacked the city in the 16th century BCE.
But this is just my take and I could be wrong.

Regarding Z36, which is the most important U152 lineage in Switzerland-Eastern France (Franche-Comté), I have a very hard time picturing how Ligurians could've brought it there.

since we know the etruscans first appeared in Italy ~800BC and some say they are related to the Raetians......and.......we know the Raetians have been in the alps at least as far back as the late bronze-age or before , then logically the Etruscans are a group of Raetians who migrated south into Etruria and became Etruscans due to the name etruria.

The Romans did count 45 raetian tribes in the alps..........so they where a very big populace

Orobicus
08-10-2014, 09:07 PM
A people never belongs to a single haplogroup because within it there is a bit of variability.

In the case of the Etruscans, probably were formed by very much J2 but also E, G and probably R1b arrived in the Middle East with The Dorians or before.

In Tuscany the R1b is 52.5%, J2 11.5%, J1 2%. Only a small part of Etruscans were Anatolian. Otherwise, who carried all that R1b (U152) in Tuscany? Ligures in Lunigiana, for sure, but in the rest of the region?

Orobicus
08-10-2014, 09:25 PM
There's no way you can label a non-IE speaking people with clear links to the Aegean "Proto-Italic", that just doesn't make any sense.
I think J2a made its appearance with Tyrsenian-speaking people in Italy, probably as early as the Bronze Age.
The elite dominance model for the emergence of Etruscan (and Rhaetian as well) doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing one, added to the fact that there's no clear break between the Villanovan and Etruscan cultures we end up with a very complicated puzzle to solve.

I suspect that Tyrsenian speakers were isolated for quite some time in the Apennine mountains (which isn't difficult to picture since the Apennine mountains have some of the highest J2a, J1, G2a and E-M35 frequencies in Italy) before settling the plains and taking control of the local Villanovan-descended population (high in Z56) during the Iron age... Which is similar to what happened in Mesopotamia when the Kassites left the Zagros, took control of Babylon (and established a dynasty which would last for over 500 years) after the Hittites sacked the city in the 16th century BCE.
But this is just my take and I could be wrong.

Regarding Z36, which is the most important U152 lineage in Switzerland-Eastern France (Franche-Comté), I have a very hard time picturing how Ligurians could've brought it there.

Actually, in Italy, modern scholars consider Etruscan an Anatolian (Indo-European) variety. You join R1b to Indo-European speakers but maybe it was pre-Indo-European (Bell Beaker) spread from Iberia into Italy.
The R1b is very strong in Basqueland, a non-IE country.
S28 could be an Italian mutation spread northwards; after all Ligures, Etruscans, Italics, Romans and so on are just labels.

Bolgeris
08-10-2014, 09:45 PM
Arche scaligere in Verona..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaliger_Tombs

Alessio B. Bedini
08-10-2014, 11:07 PM
In Tuscany the R1b is 52.5%, J2 11.5%, J1 2%. Only a small part of Etruscans were Anatolian. Otherwise, who carried all that R1b (U152) in Tuscany? Ligures in Lunigiana, for sure, but in the rest of the region?

First of all, I do not believe that in Tuscany R1b or U152 are 52%

Secondly, it is wrong to generalize with R1b or U152 or L2.
These are arrived in Italy in very different periods.
Better to talk about the subclade of L2

Agamemnon
08-11-2014, 12:26 AM
Actually, in Italy, modern scholars consider Etruscan an Anatolian (Indo-European) variety.

I'm a student in linguistics, as you might realise there are many scholars saying very different things.
Some Italian scholars even claim that Basque is IE.

Needless to say, these are fringe theories: Etruscan is non-IE and belongs to the Tyrsenian family along with Rhaetian & Lemnian.


You join R1b to Indo-European speakers but maybe it was pre-Indo-European (Bell Beaker) spread from Iberia into Italy.
The R1b is very strong in Basqueland, a non-IE country.
S28 could be an Italian mutation spread northwards; after all Ligures, Etruscans, Italics, Romans and so on are just labels.

R1b-L11's phylogeny and absence in pre-Copper Age Europe doesn't really strengthen the case for some sort of pre-IE association.
For instance, I seriously doubt BBs were non-IE speaking, most scholars usually tend to label the Bell Beaker horizon Proto-Italo-Celtic and it remains a strong candidate for the spread of Celtic along the Atlantic façade.
It is my understanding that R1b has very low diversity in the Basque country and that most subclades are rather young (L21 and M153). So it doesn't really strike me as a plausible departure point for R1b in Western Europe.

S28/U152 probably emerged around the northern slopes of the Alps, between Bavaria and Switzerland.
Labels indeed, yet labels count in this field and shouldn't be used lightly.

Orobicus
08-11-2014, 06:44 AM
First of all, I do not believe that in Tuscany R1b or U152 are 52%

Secondly, it is wrong to generalize with R1b or U152 or L2.
These are arrived in Italy in very different periods.
Better to talk about the subclade of L2

Eupedia data. Even in Grosseto/Siena, after Boattini, U152 is 37.2%. I think the label "Etruscans" could comprehend not only the Anatolian settlers but the indigenous (Villanovan) too.

Orobicus
08-11-2014, 06:54 AM
@Agamemnon: the so called "Atlantic façade" is a scientific concept? I've only read this in anthroforums as The Apricity, before, and only from Iberian users.
As for R1b, we know is not a PIE haplogroup, the only one is R1a, so I don't think it was necessarily spread by Indo-European speakers from Central/Eastern Europe (even if I know the Unetice theory).

Alessio B. Bedini
08-11-2014, 11:41 AM
Eupedia data. Even in Grosseto/Siena, after Boattini, U152 is 37.2%. I think the label "Etruscans" could comprehend not only the Anatolian settlers but the indigenous (Villanovan) too.

Boattini's study has a sample too small.
It's interesting but I do not think it can be taken at face value ..
I'll wait more substantial studies on U152 and its subgroups before making judgments

R.Rocca
08-11-2014, 12:01 PM
@Agamemnon: the so called "Atlantic façade" is a scientific concept? I've only read this in anthroforums as The Apricity, before, and only from Iberian users.
As for R1b, we know is not a PIE haplogroup, the only one is R1a, so I don't think it was necessarily spread by Indo-European speakers from Central/Eastern Europe (even if I know the Unetice theory).

Says who? And before you mention Basques, please know that Ireland is as high, if not higher in R1b than Basque Country, and the Irish have never spoken anything but IE. Creating a rule of thumb based on a minority is a big mistake IMO. Also, the map of modern IE languages fits R1a and R1b but neither on their own.

The biggest ancient DNA surprise thus far is not that R1b only shows in the Copper Age, but that there is still not a single case of haplogroup J from the Mesolithic to the Copper Age. If Herodotus' theory is correct, that the Etruscans came from Anatolia and overlaid an indigenous IE-Italic Umbrian population, then it doesn't matter what the U152+ men in Etruria spoke when the Romans conquered them, because a hundreds (or even thousands) of years earlier, they may have spoken something completely different.

Orobicus
08-11-2014, 02:01 PM
Says who? And before you mention Basques, please know that Ireland is as high, if not higher in R1b than Basque Country, and the Irish have never spoken anything but IE. Creating a rule of thumb based on a minority is a big mistake IMO. Also, the map of modern IE languages fits R1a and R1b but neither on their own.

The biggest ancient DNA surprise thus far is not that R1b only shows in the Copper Age, but that there is still not a single case of haplogroup J from the Mesolithic to the Copper Age. If Herodotus' theory is correct, that the Etruscans came from Anatolia and overlaid an indigenous IE-Italic Umbrian population, then it doesn't matter what the U152+ men in Etruria spoke when the Romans conquered them, because a hundreds (or even thousands) of years earlier, they may have spoken something completely different.

About R1a as PIE haplogroup, Anatole Klyosov for example. It seems to me that only amateurs figure R1b as PIE haplogroup, though the evidence of R1a distribution in place like India, Irano-Afghan plateau, the steppes, Eastern Europe, Baltic states and Corded ware area (NE Europe). It makes sense to me, according to Gimbutas/Kurgan theory.
About Etruscans, I'm not saying they weren't Anatolian but that only a part of them was this. Etruscans, as other people like Ligures or Camunni, has different historical strata.

ADW_1981
08-11-2014, 02:40 PM
About R1a as PIE haplogroup, Anatole Klyosov for example. It seems to me that only amateurs figure R1b as PIE haplogroup,

And this guy isn't an amateur?
.

Agamemnon
08-11-2014, 02:43 PM
@Agamemnon: the so called "Atlantic façade" is a scientific concept? I've only read this in anthroforums as The Apricity, before, and only from Iberian users.
As for R1b, we know is not a PIE haplogroup, the only one is R1a, so I don't think it was necessarily spread by Indo-European speakers from Central/Eastern Europe (even if I know the Unetice theory).

The Atlantic façade is a geographical concept, no more no less.

I also fail to understand the underlying logic here, you discard R1b as PIE because of its high frequency in the Basque country yet claim that R1a is "the only one".
We could easily reverse this and start claiming that R1a is non-IE because of its very high frequencies in Turkic speakers (Kyrgyz for instance).

This is a double-edged sword.

I reiterate, R1b's absence prior to the Copper Age is a big blow to any Basque/Vasconic refugium theory. In the same way, R1b-L11's phylogeny does a big disfavour to any theory trying to dissociate it from the spread of IE to Western Europe, this should be pretty obvious to everyone by now.

As Richard said, J's absence in the archeogenetic record from the Mesolithic to the Copper Age as of now is even more telling (especially if we recall all of the Neolithic models which surrounded this haplogroup and were designed to explain its distibution) and, IMHO, further strengthens the case for a Copper Age (if not a later, Bronze Age) arrival probably associated with the spread of Tyrsenian speakers from the Apennines to the Alps.


And this guy isn't an amateur?
.

I'm still amazed at how popular he is, it has to do with the fact that he endorses fringe theories I'm afraid.

R.Rocca
08-11-2014, 02:55 PM
About R1a as PIE haplogroup, Anatole Klyosov for example. It seems to me that only amateurs figure R1b as PIE haplogroup, though the evidence of R1a distribution in place like India, Irano-Afghan plateau, the steppes, Eastern Europe, Baltic states and Corded ware area (NE Europe). It makes sense to me, according to Gimbutas/Kurgan theory.
About Etruscans, I'm not saying they weren't Anatolian but that only a part of them was this. Etruscans, as other people like Ligures or Camunni, has different historical strata.

Again, nobody is doubting R1a's involvement in R1a. And Klyosov has yet to publish a paper that is peer-reviewed by a serious publication.

Orobicus
08-11-2014, 03:24 PM
The Atlantic façade is a geographical concept, no more no less.

I also fail to understand the underlying logic here, you discard R1b as PIE because of its high frequency in the Basque country yet claim that R1a is "the only one".
We could easily reverse this and start claiming that R1a is non-IE because of its very high frequencies in Turkic speakers (Kyrgyz for instance).

This is a double-edged sword.

I reiterate, R1b's absence prior to the Copper Age is a big blow to any Basque/Vasconic refugium theory. In the same way, R1b-L11's phylogeny does a big disfavour to any theory trying to dissociate it from the spread of IE to Western Europe, this should be pretty obvious to everyone by now.

As Richard said, J's absence in the archeogenetic record from the Mesolithic to the Copper Age as of now is even more telling (especially if we recall all of the Neolithic models which surrounded this haplogroup and were designed to explain its distibution) and, IMHO, further strengthens the case for a Copper Age (if not a later, Bronze Age) arrival probably associated with the spread of Tyrsenian speakers from the Apennines to the Alps.

I said that R1b is not Proto-Indo-European, the original Indoeuropean haplogroup, I mean. I think that only R1a is PIE (no R1b in ancient remains associated with Indo-European cultures of the steppes).
R1b looks more Eurasian (in Western Europe is usually associated with Gedrosian admixture, from modern Balochistan, absent in Eastern Europe) than PIE, typical among Western Indo-European speakers and Central Asiatic peoples like Turkic folks.

Orobicus
08-11-2014, 03:46 PM
And this guy isn't an amateur?
.

Well, is not a scientist? People like Maciamo are amateurs.

R.Rocca
08-11-2014, 09:57 PM
Well, is not a scientist? People like Maciamo are amateurs.

You might want to continue the IE discussion in this other forum because this thread is veering way off topic... http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1716-R1b-and-IE-branching