Central italian mountain communities' genetic origins

[Crow]

Since my I descend from one of those communities (Trevi nel Lazio) from father's side, I decided to analyze the yDna of the village, and the yDna of the surrounding villages, to later compare the results to the average italian results. The sample is composed of 170 people.

 

Filettino
G2a - 2
I1 - 4
I2 - 2
J2 - 1
R1b - 6
T - 2

Jenne
E1b1b - 19
G2a - 22
J1 - 2
J2 - 12
Q - 6
R1b - 1
R - 3

Piglio
E1b1 - 10
G2a - 5
I1 - 3
I2 - 1
J1 - 3
J2 - 8
R1b - 17

Trevi nel Lazio
E1b1b - 3
G2a - 2
I1 - 2
I2 - 1
J1 - 1
J2 - 7
R1a - 3
R1b - 4

Vallepietra
E1b1 - 3
I1 - 5
J2 - 2
R1b - 6
T - 2

Haplogroup - Number of people - Percentage of people - (National percentage)

E1b1b - 35 - 20,58% - (13,50%)
G2a - 31 - 18,23% - ( 9,00%)
I1 - 14 - 8,23% - ( 4,50%)
I2 - 4 - 2,35% - ( 5,50%)
J1 - 6 - 3,52% - ( 3,00%)
J2 - 30 - 17,64% - (15,50%)
R1a - 3 - 1,76% - ( 4,00%)
R1b - 34 - 20,00% - (39,00%)
T - 7 - 4,11% - ( 2,50%)
Q - 6 - 3,52% - ( 0,00%)

The interesting part is that the neolithic migrants all are present in double (or nearly double) percentages in comparisions to the rest of Italy, while the indoeuropean (mainly roman, in this case) R1b is half the national percentage. This means that the romans just put those communities under roman political control, without ever really migrating in great quantities to those places (which was already the most likely possibility, but I still expected some more migrations from R1b during those millennia). J2 is still quite present, but I relate (probably wrongly) this haplogroup more to merchant communities, in comparision to the belligerent and power driven romans.
It makes a lot of sense for farmers and herders to prosper so well in such territories, since farming and herding was still the main activity of the population since not so long ago. And it's also important to note that neolithic farmers present in more plain territories probably had the find more isolated and secure place with the indoeuropean arrival.

The fact that ALL the neolithic farmers are present in great numbers doesn't only mean that the R1b didn't have much interest in those territories. It also means that neolithic migrants were able to form STRONG AND COMPACT farming and herding based communities, who let no space for the older native I2 groups.

That's kind of the reason why in Sardinia I2 is so strongly present, while both neolithic and bronze age migrants ain't: the place was difficult too reach and the oldest community was too solid.


The other interesting part of this analysis is the high I1 percentages, which are even higher if we consider the central italian percentages in place than the national ones. 8,23% vs 1,5% is quite a big difference. The germanic invasions ain't considered as a main factor for modern italian genetic composition, but it's quite likely that those peoples had a bigger impact at least on some territories. And in some cases they probably had to retreat in more isolated communities.


P.S. I'm not an expert. I'm new to haplogroups, so I accept criticism in order to learn how things really are, but don't insult.

[Acque agitate]

I and other friends are studying the situation in the Tuscan-Emilian Apennines. First of all I'd like to get in touch with you. Secondly, I ask you what tests did you do and with which company (I am interested in the level of detail).
A brief consideration: many genetic lines (of each haplogroup) have been preserved only in the Italian Apennines. This complicates our work since the available databases are mainly based on samples of central and northern Europe that are less diversified.

Since my I descend from one of those communities (Trevi nel Lazio) from father's side, I decided to analyze the yDna of the village, and the yDna of the surrounding villages, to later compare the results to the average italian results. The sample is composed of 170 people.

 

Filettino
G2a - 2
I1 - 4
I2 - 2
J2 - 1
R1b - 6
T - 2

Jenne
E1b1b - 19
G2a - 22
J1 - 2
J2 - 12
Q - 6
R1b - 1
R - 3

Piglio
E1b1 - 10
G2a - 5
I1 - 3
I2 - 1
J1 - 3
J2 - 8
R1b - 17

Trevi nel Lazio
E1b1b - 3
G2a - 2
I1 - 2
I2 - 1
J1 - 1
J2 - 7
R1a - 3
R1b - 4

Vallepietra
E1b1 - 3
I1 - 5
J2 - 2
R1b - 6
T - 2

Haplogroup - Number of people - Percentage of people - (National percentage)

E1b1b - 35 - 20,58% - (13,50%)
G2a - 31 - 18,23% - ( 9,00%)
I1 - 14 - 8,23% - ( 4,50%)
I2 - 4 - 2,35% - ( 5,50%)
I1 - 6 - 3,52% - ( 3,00%)
J2 - 30 - 17,64% - (15,50%)
R1a - 3 - 1,76% - ( 4,00%)
R1b - 34 - 20,00% - (39,00%)
T - 7 - 4,11% - ( 2,50%)
Q - 6 - 3,52% - ( 0,00%)

The interesting part is that the neolithic migrants all are present in double (or nearly double) percentages in comparisions to the rest of Italy, while the indoeuropean (mainly roman, in this case) R1b is half the national percentage. This means that the romans just put those communities under roman political control, without ever really migrating in great quantities to those places (which was already the most likely possibility, but I still expected some more migrations from R1b during those millennia). J2 is still quite present, but I relate (probably wrongly) this haplogroup more to merchant communities, in comparision to the belligerent and power driven romans.
It makes a lot of sense for farmers and herders to prosper so well in such territories, since farming and herding was still the main activity of the population since not so long ago. And it's also important to note that neolithic farmers present in more plain territories probably had the find more isolated and secure place with the indoeuropean arrival.

The fact that ALL the neolithic farmers are present in great numbers doesn't only mean that the R1b didn't have much interest in those territories. It also means that neolithic migrants were able to form STRONG AND COMPACT farming and herding based communities, who let no space for the older native I2 groups.

That's kind of the reason why in Sardinia I2 is so strongly present, while both neolithic and bronze age migrants ain't: the place was difficult too reach and the oldest community was too solid.


The other interesting part of this analysis is the high I1 percentages, which are even higher if we consider the central italian percentages in place than the national ones. 8,23% vs 1,5% is quite a big difference. The germanic invasions ain't considered as a main factor for modern italian genetic composition, but it's quite likely that those peoples had a bigger impact at least on some territories. And in some cases they probably had to retreat in more isolated communities.


P.S. I'm not an expert. I'm new to haplogroups, so I accept criticism in order to learn how things really are, but don't insult.

[Crow]

I and other friends are studying the situation in the Tuscan-Emilian Apennines. First of all I'd like to get in touch with you. Secondly, I ask you what tests did you do and with which company (I am interested in the level of detail).
A brief consideration: many genetic lines (of each haplogroup) have been preserved only in the Italian Apennines. This complicates our work since the available databases are mainly based on samples of central and northern Europe that are less diversified.

I'm currently waiting for the 23andme result. I'll keep you updated.

[JonikW]

Since my I descend from one of those communities (Trevi nel Lazio) from father's side, I decided to analyze the yDna of the village, and the yDna of the surrounding villages, to later compare the results to the average italian results. The sample is composed of 170 people.

 

Filettino
G2a - 2
I1 - 4
I2 - 2
J2 - 1
R1b - 6
T - 2

Jenne
E1b1b - 19
G2a - 22
J1 - 2
J2 - 12
Q - 6
R1b - 1
R - 3

Piglio
E1b1 - 10
G2a - 5
I1 - 3
I2 - 1
J1 - 3
J2 - 8
R1b - 17

Trevi nel Lazio
E1b1b - 3
G2a - 2
I1 - 2
I2 - 1
J1 - 1
J2 - 7
R1a - 3
R1b - 4

Vallepietra
E1b1 - 3
I1 - 5
J2 - 2
R1b - 6
T - 2

Haplogroup - Number of people - Percentage of people - (National percentage)

E1b1b - 35 - 20,58% - (13,50%)
G2a - 31 - 18,23% - ( 9,00%)
I1 - 14 - 8,23% - ( 4,50%)
I2 - 4 - 2,35% - ( 5,50%)
I1 - 6 - 3,52% - ( 3,00%)
J2 - 30 - 17,64% - (15,50%)
R1a - 3 - 1,76% - ( 4,00%)
R1b - 34 - 20,00% - (39,00%)
T - 7 - 4,11% - ( 2,50%)
Q - 6 - 3,52% - ( 0,00%)

The interesting part is that the neolithic migrants all are present in double (or nearly double) percentages in comparisions to the rest of Italy, while the indoeuropean (mainly roman, in this case) R1b is half the national percentage. This means that the romans just put those communities under roman political control, without ever really migrating in great quantities to those places (which was already the most likely possibility, but I still expected some more migrations from R1b during those millennia). J2 is still quite present, but I relate (probably wrongly) this haplogroup more to merchant communities, in comparision to the belligerent and power driven romans.
It makes a lot of sense for farmers and herders to prosper so well in such territories, since farming and herding was still the main activity of the population since not so long ago. And it's also important to note that neolithic farmers present in more plain territories probably had the find more isolated and secure place with the indoeuropean arrival.

The fact that ALL the neolithic farmers are present in great numbers doesn't only mean that the R1b didn't have much interest in those territories. It also means that neolithic migrants were able to form STRONG AND COMPACT farming and herding based communities, who let no space for the older native I2 groups.

That's kind of the reason why in Sardinia I2 is so strongly present, while both neolithic and bronze age migrants ain't: the place was difficult too reach and the oldest community was too solid.


The other interesting part of this analysis is the high I1 percentages, which are even higher if we consider the central italian percentages in place than the national ones. 8,23% vs 1,5% is quite a big difference. The germanic invasions ain't considered as a main factor for modern italian genetic composition, but it's quite likely that those peoples had a bigger impact at least on some territories. And in some cases they probably had to retreat in more isolated communities.


P.S. I'm not an expert. I'm new to haplogroups, so I accept criticism in order to learn how things really are, but don't insult.

Nice work and a fascinating project. Is there a reason why you have two separate lists for I1?

[Crow]

Nice work and a fascinating project. Is there a reason why you have two separate lists for I1?

Thank you. I mistyped. The second one was J1. I edited with the corrected haplogroup.


I also just found out Lombards destroyed and plundered Trevi nel Lazio in the VII century, and the saracens did the same in the IX. I think this justifies the numbers of I1 and J1, since I didn't find other invasions and plunderings.

[JonikW]

Thank you. I mistyped. The second one was J1. I edited with the corrected haplogroup.


I also just found out Lombards destroyed and plundered Trevi nel Lazio in the VII century, and the saracens did the same in the IX. I think this justifies the numbers of I1 and J1, since I didn't find other invasions and plunderings.

Thanks. Do you have subclades for any of the haplogroups?

[Crow]

Thanks. Do you have subclades for any of the haplogroups?

Unfortunately no. I used the numbers of this research: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...mation-section

Here are two more villages I didn't include because I don't think I'm related to them (this originated as a speculation on my past on a word file. It wasn't my initial intention to share the results):

Cappadocia (n = 54)
5.6% E1b1b
35.2% I1
3.7% J1
14.8% J2
31.5% R1b
9.3% T

Saracinesco (n = 13)
30.8% E1b1b
7.7% I2
7.7% J2
46.1% R1b
7.7% T

[patrizio22]

Thank you. I mistyped. The second one was J1. I edited with the corrected haplogroup.


I also just found out Lombards destroyed and plundered Trevi nel Lazio in the VII century, and the saracens did the same in the IX. I think this justifies the numbers of I1 and J1, since I didn't find other invasions and plunderings.

This is a detail of a map by the archaeologist Massimo Pallottino:


carta italia protostorica.png

He placed three archaeological cultures in the area of Central Italy about the 10th century B.C.: the Villanovan culture, the Latial culture and the Terni culture. The Terni culture is the Necropolis of the Acciaierie di Terni, which is supposed to be the oldest Umbrian (or Proto-Umbrian?) Necropolis. These are supposed to have come out of the Proto-Villanovan culture.

These are the phases of the Terni Culture compared to the Villanovan and Latial.

terni culture.png

We should wait for the paper about the Romans before taking for granted their Y haplogroups.

P.S. Dionigi di Alicarnasso talked about Umbrians, Pelasgians and Aborigines living in this area between Southern Umbria and Latium.

[Crow]

This is a detail of a map by the archaeologist Massimo Pallottino:


carta italia protostorica.png

He placed three archaeological cultures in the area of Central Italy about the 10th century B.C.: the Villanovan culture, the Latial culture and the Terni culture. The Terni culture is the Necropolis of the Acciaierie di Terni, which is supposed to be the oldest Umbrian (or Proto-Umbrian?) Necropolis. These are supposed to have come out of the Proto-Villanovan culture.

These are the phases of the Terni Culture compared to the Villanovan and Latial.

terni culture.png

We should wait for the paper about the Romans before taking for granted their Y haplogroups.

Do you know around how long it will take for the paper to get published? Did some informations already leak?

[Nino90]

North Tuscan so not really central Italy.
But R1b-u152/R-L2.