World Families Forums

General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse. => R1b General => Topic started by: rms2 on April 22, 2011, 12:13:16 PM



Title: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on April 22, 2011, 12:13:16 PM
Quote from: Maliclavelli
. . . Ligurians are amongst the most ancient Indo-Europeans present in Italy and now we know that R-U152 has its highest percentage among Ligurians who were probably at the origin also of this haplogroup.

The quote above is from the first post on this thread (http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=9875.0).

I found it intriguing, especially after seeing the U152 distribution map at U152.org (http://u152.org/).

U152 does in fact reach its highest frequency in the old Ligurian region of Italy, especially when we consider that the Ligurians spread into neighboring Corsica and Sardinia.

Could U152 be the signature of the old Ligures, who were once spread throughout much of Europe?

I have more to add, but I'll wait and see if there are any responses.

Here's a question for Mike. Where are U152 haplotypes oldest?


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 22, 2011, 01:58:23 PM
U152 does in fact reach its highest frequency in the old Ligurian region of Italy, especially when we consider that the Ligurians spread into neighboring Corsica and Sardinia.

Could U152 be the signature of the old Ligures, who were once spread throughout much of Europe?

I have more to add, but I'll wait and see if there are any responses.

Here's a question for Mike. Where are U152 haplotypes oldest?
Here is what the Myres data shows....
I've been looking for R-U152 haplotypes from Italy, Switzerland and Austria (well, France and Germany too) to see if the variance in N.Italy is high like I use to always think it was.  I'm not find any variance numbers in studies on this, just frequency data. Does anybody have this? I was told the Underhill study found R-U152 was "ancient" in Italy, but I hope they were evaluating diversity and not just frequency.

Tibor F calculated the variance of R-U152 from the Myres published haplotypes.  Here are the top countries.
(Top countries for R-U152 variance)

Germany_____ 2.42 (N=33)
England_____ 2.33 (N=9)
Slovenia____ 2.33 (N=6)
Turkey______ 2.33 (N=3)
Poland______ 2.20 (N=3)
Slovakia____ 2.14 (N=5)
France______ 2.11 (N=19)
Italy_______ 2.00 (N=57)
Greece______ 1.86 (N=7)
Switzerland_ 1.79 (N=29)


Most of the countries have a limited number of ht's, but Italy, Switzerland, Germany and perhaps France have enough to consider.

I'm just not detecting high variance in Italy for R-U152.  This doesn't mean that R-L23* or R-L51* was not there long before U152, but it's beginning to look like the majority of R-M269 in Italy came from the north.

Even if France is a cross-roads or destination for R-U152 types, it shouldn't have more variance than the original source location so between north** of the Alps or south of the Alps, the south seems to be eliminated as the source for U152.

** EDIT: What I  meant is just outside the Alps and Cisalpine Gaul.

Here is what our 67 marker DNA project data shows....
Quote from: Mike on Jan 19
I'll try to peel the onion back on R-P312's largest subclades. R-U152 appears to be the oldest identified subclade of R-P312. Remember to focus on the "Rel.Var." column. It is the variance relative to all of R-P312 (=1.00). Ignore NVar.

COUNTRY/REGION Rel.Var._ N.Rel.Var.__ GD to COUNTRY Modal _ No. Ht's

All U152_______: Var=1.01, NVar=1.17 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=30 @67 (N=312)

France_________: Var=1.25, NVar=1.68 @50; AvgGD=16, MaxGD=25 @67 (N=26)
_NC France_____: Var=1.51, NVar=1.15 @50; AvgGD=17, MaxGD=25 @67 (N=7)<<
_NE France_____: Var=1.14, NVar=3.06 @50; AvgGD=14, MaxGD=17 @67 (N=6)<<

Low Countries__: Var=1.25, NVar=1.06 @50; AvgGD=16, MaxGD=21 @67 (N=10)

Nordic Area____: Var=1.06, NVar=0.60 @50; AvgGD=13, MaxGD=20 @67 (N=6)<<

East/Cent Eur*_: Var=1.05, NVar=1.38 @50; AvgGD=17, MaxGD=29 @67 (N=22)

Germany________: Var=1.00, NVar=1.23 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=23 @67 (N=42)
_Mid Germany___: Var=1.05, NVar=1.28 @50; AvgGD=16, MaxGD=18 @67 (N=14)
_S.Germany_____: Var=1.01, NVar=1.27 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=19 @67 (N=17)

England________: Var=1.00, NVar=1.15 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=23 @67 (N=50)

Switzerland____: Var=0.98, NVar=1.18 @50; AvgGD=14, MaxGD=22 @67 (N=19)

Alpine Area**__: Var=0.97, NVar=1.06 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=22 @67 (N=32)

Ireland________: Var=0.97, NVar=0.98 @50; AvgGD=14, MaxGD=21 @67 (N=16)

Scotland_______: Var=0.97, NVar=0.96 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=23 @67 (N=17)

Italy__________: Var=0.91, NVar=0.90 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=22 @67 (N=22)
_N.Italy_______: Var=0.93, NVar=0.82 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=22 @67 (N=11)
_S.Italy_______: Var=0.85, NVar=0.93 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=21 @67 (N=8)<<

Spain & Port.__: Var=0.88, NVar=0.95 @50; AvgGD=14, MaxGD=19 @67 (N=7)<<

* Belarus, Czech Republic (6), Estonia, Hungary (2), Latvia, Lithania, Poland (6), Slovakia, Russia, Ukraine
** Switzerland, Austria & N. Italy

<< small samples

Here is what appears to be the oldest subclade of R-U152, R-L2.

All L2_________: Var=1.00, NVar=1.09 @50; AvgGD=16, MaxGD=31 @67 (N=146)

L2 Germany_____: Var=1.10, NVar=1.41 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=21 @67 (N=16)

L2 Italy_______: Var=1.06, NVar=0.89 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=22 @67 (N=7)<<

L2 East/Cen Eu_: Var=1.01, NVar=1.37 @50; AvgGD=17, MaxGD=27 @67 (N=10)

L2 France______: Var=0.96, NVar=0.83 @50; AvgGD=14, MaxGD=21 @67 (N=16)

L2 England_____: Var=0.93, NVar=1.20 @50; AvgGD=15, MaxGD=25 @67 (N=25)

This isn't really what I was expecting for R-U152. N.Italy had lower variance than I would have thought, although if you get down to the level of L2 you'll see N.Italy has somewhat higher variance.

Also, keep in mind that as the sample sizes shrink, chances for error go up.

Unfortunately, Myres did not do a good job of surveying France - just the location in SE France - Vaucluse.

If I put on my blinders to history, archaeology and linguistics and just look at the data and geography, my opinion is:

U152's initial large expansion was from the Rhine Valley, particularly the lower (northern) Rhine. U152 expanded over the Alps into Italy, though, and L2 was the primary subclade of U152 driving this.

Although I'm sure there was some mixing, I think L21 blocked U152 to the west and northwest whereas U106/I1/R1a1 blocked it to the north and east although parts of U152 did an end around and made it a long way east.

Of course, if you look at history and archaelogy (and the east to west patterns) you could interpret that U152 came from quite a distance to the east, but just didn't exploded until it hit the Rhine Valley.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on April 22, 2011, 06:28:25 PM
Very hard to match the movement from the Lower Rhine (mainly low countries west of the Rhine??) down to Rhine and into Italy in archaeology.  If someone described that to me with no reference to variance or dates I would think of Germanci movements at the end of the Roman empire sooner than I could think of any match in prehistory.  A few years ago the old beaker theory that placed their origin in the Low Countries might have fitted but noone seems to believe that theory now.  

It is interesting if (as variance suggests)  S116 first expanded in the SE France area and U152 in the Belgium area and L21 in western half of northern France and U106 around the south Baltic coast.  These are all areas which were not settled by the LBK farmers who sort of bypassed these spots, treating them as undesirable.  They were areas of major expansion of farming in the middle Neolithic. In fact the other strong areas of these clades all have a resememble a map of the areas of western Europe that were not yet settled by farmers until not much before c. 4000BC.  L21-Atlantic France and the isles, U152-Belgium, Alpine areas, north Italy, Massive Central, U106-the north European Plain (Funnel Beaker/TRB area).  Maybe those areas that were peripheral to the earliest farmers preferences still presented opportunity in the middle Neolithic because they were not settled.  Each of these clade epicentres could represent L11 moving into an area with real expansion opportunities although I suppose they are really just two events - U106 in NE Europe and S116 and clades in and around France.  If this is correct then their should be identifiable middle Neolithic matches for these expansions.  For U106 it would probably be TRB/Funnel beaker.  For L21 perhaps the Carninated Bowl tradition of France and the isles, for U152 I need to do my homework!! Ehm Maybe Rossen or the like or maybe something to do with Chassee.  They all (depending on who you believe-there seems to be disagreement) have roots in the late LBK cultures but perhaps with something extra.  Its the only correlation I can think of as an alternatvie to the beaker model.  I would personally see the rise of language groups and ethnic identities as down to interaction networks forming identities some time after the initial dispersal of L11.  I would see all the L11 clades at the points of spread into these areas as linguistically being undifferentiated west IE or maybe proto-Italo-Celtic, including Ligurians.  I personally think clade patterns were dictated by geography and oppotunity during their dispersal and language groups were also dictated by contact networks that were in turn dictated partly by geography but also other considerations such as trade items, ores etc.  The two things would have at best an imperfect correlation.  



Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 23, 2011, 04:57:16 AM
Rich, I thank you for having quoted me. About Ligurians I’d add that the map of U152.org. demonstrates also the highest percentage of R-U152 also in Lunigiana, Versilia till Pisa and the Monti Pisani, which were Ligurian territory more than Etruscan, even though there were Etruscan settlements (Chiavari, the same Genoa, many places in Versilia which have an Etruscan name: Vietina, etc.) Ancient Ligurians weren’t in to-day Liguria alone, but also in Piedmont and all South France: the “Provincia” before being Roman was Ligurian). The same Spain was peopled by Ligurians (or Indo-Europeans from Italy) and also to-day Iberians, Tuscans and North Italians are pretty the same at an autosomal level (see Dienekes’s Dodecad). The percentage of R1b in Garfagnana is at the level of Basque Countries or Ireland. If I can say something personal, I’ve found a cousin of 4th grade in California whose ancestors came from Colle di Compito (Monti Pisani) and he is R-U152*: one of the few tested in my zone, but probably the percentage is very high. Etruscan zone till Modena province (see Ferri’s paper, where R1b was at 67%) has more of R-L23 – and + like me. Unfortunately Ferri couldn’t put me in contact with the persons tested who were very close to me.
I find very interesting what Alan Trowel Hands has said: that R1b shouldn’t be tried in East Europe, but in West Europe, in the peripheral regions to LBK, where R1b wasn’t found in DNA tested. I remember to you all my first theory: Italian refugium during the Younger Dryas of R-L23 – and +, R-L51 in the Alpine zone, differentiation of the IE languages from the Etruscan-Rhaetian-Camun, out of Italy of the hunter-gatherers who took agriculture from the Anatolians arrived to the Balkans… for the following I agree completely with Alan. I also remember what I have said many times about the Celtic languages (it is clear that existed at a precise time a German-Celtic-Italic unity), that the most ancient forms of Celt are found in Italy: the “Stele di Novilara”, in the Marches, the same Lepontian language etc. Ligurian isn’t a Celt language, but an autonomous branch of IE. The most recent studies are saying that also the most ancient forms of R-P312 aren’t in Spain (where this haplogroup has the highest percentage), but in Italy, NW Europe and in the British Isles.
What about the satem languages? Probably they separated very early, perhaps when agriculturalists from the Balkans gave life to the LBK: centum languages in West Europe (hg. R1b) and satem languages in Central-East Europe (hg. R1a).


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 23, 2011, 12:07:10 PM
Very hard to match the movement from the Lower Rhine (mainly low countries west of the Rhine??) down to Rhine and into Italy in archaeology.  If someone described that to me with no reference to variance or dates I would think of Germanci movements at the end of the Roman empire sooner than I could think of any match in prehistory.  A few years ago the old beaker theory that placed their origin in the Low Countries might have fitted but noone seems to believe that theory now.  
My speculation based soley on looking at the variance and hg diversity was not intended to imply the Low Countries or Belgium with any specificity.  Our DNA project does not show U152 in Germany as very high variance but Myres does. I just meant to speculate the lower "half" of the Rhine so I could include Alsace-Lorraine and North-Westphalia as well as perhaps the Rhineland-Palentinate as an early point of expansion for U152.
Quote from: alan trowel hands
It is interesting if (as variance suggests)  S116 first expanded in the SE France area and U152 in the Belgium area and L21 in western half of northern France and U106 around the south Baltic coast.  These are all areas which were not settled by the LBK farmers who sort of bypassed these spots, treating them as undesirable.  They were areas of major expansion of farming in the middle Neolithic. In fact the other strong areas of these clades all have a resememble a map of the areas of western Europe that were not yet settled by farmers until not much before c. 4000BC.  L21-Atlantic France and the isles, U152-Belgium, Alpine areas, north Italy, Massive Central, U106-the north European Plain (Funnel Beaker/TRB area).  Maybe those areas that were peripheral to the earliest farmers preferences still presented opportunity in the middle Neolithic because they were not settled.  Each of these clade epicentres could represent L11 moving into an area with real expansion opportunities although I suppose they are really just two events - U106 in NE Europe and S116 and clades in and around France.  If this is correct then their should be identifiable middle Neolithic matches for these expansions.  For U106 it would probably be TRB/Funnel beaker.  For L21 perhaps the Carninated Bowl tradition of France and the isles, for U152 I need to do my homework!! Ehm Maybe Rossen or the like or maybe something to do with Chassee.  They all (depending on who you believe-there seems to be disagreement) have roots in the late LBK cultures but perhaps with something extra.  Its the only correlation I can think of as an alternatvie to the beaker model.  I would personally see the rise of language groups and ethnic identities as down to interaction networks forming identities some time after the initial dispersal of L11.  I would see all the L11 clades at the points of spread into these areas as linguistically being undifferentiated west IE or maybe proto-Italo-Celtic, including Ligurians.  I personally think clade patterns were dictated by geography and oppotunity during their dispersal and language groups were also dictated by contact networks that were in turn dictated partly by geography but also other considerations such as trade items, ores etc.  The two things would have at best an imperfect correlation.  
I am curious as to why Myres et al picked only one place in France to survey - Vaucluse.  I see it is a site for some of the primary Chasséen finds. I suppose they thought it was an area that was key to look in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chass%C3%A9en_culture

It really would help to have a true representative sampling of France!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 23, 2011, 12:15:59 PM
Rich, I thank you for having quoted me. About Ligurians I’d add that the map of U152.org. demonstrates also the highest percentage of R-U152 also in Lunigiana, Versilia till Pisa and the Monti Pisani, which were Ligurian territory... The percentage of R1b in Garfagnana is at the level of Basque Countries or Ireland.
Don't get carried away with frequency percentages. They don't necessarily have a correlation with ancient origins.  If we thought frequency percentage was the key, it is an "open and shut" case that all of R1b originated in Ireland... or maybe even parts of Boston or O'Neill, Nebraska.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 23, 2011, 01:35:24 PM
We know who peopled Boston and O’Neill and when. We also know who peopled Ireland and when: there weren’t people before these last millennia. You could say that the highest percentage in Liguria could be due to the fact that it, like Ireland, is a “cul de sac” where a wave of advance stopped, but Italy isn’t Ireland. Italy has people from at least 35.000 YBP and a wave of advance didn’t advance in a “waste land” and here April isn’t “the cruellest month”. If a similar percentage is here it does mean something very different from Ireland: i.e. that that haplogroup was born here.
I think that all your Celticism will be won, it has already been won. I have given infinite proofs of my theories and the aDNA will demonstrate them, first of all Otzi we are waiting for.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 23, 2011, 03:34:01 PM
We know who peopled Boston and O’Neill and when. We also know who peopled Ireland and when: there weren’t people before these last millennia. You could say that the highest percentage in Liguria could be due to the fact that it, like Ireland, is a “cul de sac” where a wave of advance stopped, but Italy isn’t Ireland. Italy has people from at least 35.000 YBP
That's what I'm saying, R-P312 looks like it found Italy to be a "cul de sac".  The big difference between O'Neill and Italy is we have a much better idea of an historic migration to align with....  but as you say Italy has been inhabited for 35,000 years and since R-P312 looks to be around 4000 years old, so why would we assume R-P312 had an early origin there. We just don't know the history as it is a prehistoric timeframe.  On the other hand, P312 variance is greater elsewhere.

As far as R1b-L11* and L11- it is too scattered across Europe to be able to tell much.  We do know L23* is prominent in the Caucasus.  Other than that, everything is quite scattered and rare.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 23, 2011, 04:15:22 PM
I have fought from many years the theories of the Nordtvedts and Vizacheros etc. about the mutation rate and I think with good arguments: the mutations around the modal etc. None of the geneticists is now following these amateurs. Cruciani proposed a calibrated mutation rate between Zhivotovsky and some his own theories and was about 0,001.
Vizachero said that I was for some time in the wilderness. It seems to me that he is more than in the wilderness in the desert without water. It seems to me he is losing all his battles.
Re. R-P312 I have written in this forum that the last results of the 1000Genome Project is demonstrating that Italy (with North-West Europe and the British isles) has the most ancient haplotypes of this haplogroup that Spain hasn’t, then R-P312 migrated from Italy to Spain and I think before to NW Europe and the British Isles. That it is only 4000 years old we shall see next when the aDNA will be tested. I am always waiting Oetzi, who will be able to say something decisive.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 23, 2011, 11:58:00 PM
I have fought from many years the theories of the Nordtvedts and Vizacheros etc. about the mutation rate and I think with good arguments: the mutations around the modal etc. None of the geneticists is now following these amateurs. Cruciani proposed a calibrated mutation rate between Zhivotovsky and some his own theories and was about 0,001....
I don't expect to convince you of anything new, but I do want the general readership to get logical information. I'm not a statistician but do have a stat minor. IMHO, Dr. Nordtvedt is truly providing innovative TMRCA estimation methodologies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Nordtvedt  Although Nordtvedt's methods can use multiple mutation rates, even FTDNA uses mutation rates more in-line with "germ-line" rates.  Dienekes, who definitely has his own mind, advocates "germ-line" rates, http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/06/yhrd-updated-germline-mutation-rates.html and not "evolutionary" rates like Zhivotovsky.

Quote from: Maliclavelli
Re. R-P312 I have written in this forum that the last results of the 1000Genome Project is demonstrating that Italy (with North-West Europe and the British isles) has the most ancient haplotypes of this haplogroup that Spain hasn’t, then R-P312 migrated from Italy to Spain and I think before to NW Europe and the British Isles. That it is only 4000 years old we shall see next when the aDNA will be tested. I am always waiting Oetzi, who will be able to say something decisive.

You mention the 1000 Genomes project.  Did you see their commentary?
"A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing" by The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium - 2010.
Quote from: Consortium
A striking pattern indicative of a recent rapid expansion specific to haplogroup R1b was observed, consistent with the postulated Neolithic origin of this haplogroup in Europe.

Here is "A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for European Paternal Lineages" by Balaresque et al - 2010...
Quote from: Balaresque
Haplogroup R1b1b2 (R-M269) is the commonest European Y-chromosomal lineage, increasing in frequency from east to west, and carried by 110 million European men. Previous studies suggested a Paleolithic origin, but here we show that the geographical distribution of its microsatellite diversity is best explained by spread from a single source in the Near East via Anatolia during the Neolithic.

"A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe" by Myres et al - 2010....
Quote from: Myres
The phylogenetic relationships of numerous branches within the core Y-chromosome haplogroup R-M207 support a West Asian origin of haplogroup R1b(M343), its initial differentiation there followed by a rapid spread of one of its sub-clades carrying the M269 mutation to Europe.

Nothing is impossible, but it definitely appears the majority of R1b's expansion didn't happen until the Neolithic, at the earliest. This also clearly appears to be an east to west movement from SW Asia and/or the Caucasus and Steppes. In that regards, Vizacherro, Nordtvedt, etc. look like they are on target.

What are you fighting these folks with, your beliefs?  Do you have any scientific derived alternative, or just an "ancient" and isolated haplotype here and there?

I'm convinced you are a sincere man. I'm not pro or con Celtic or Italic. I'd be proud of either ancestry or both. My kids are a quarter Italian no matter what I am. I'm fine with R1b expanding through Italy. I'm just not convinced. Pray tell, please direct me to your specific data and reasoning as to your hypothesis.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 24, 2011, 12:28:31 AM
Back to U152.  I don't know if it is connected with Ligurians or not but the genetic evidence seems to show that U152's great expansion began north of the Alps. It did expand into North Italy in a big way.. it just didn't start there.

Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry.  He has assembled http://www.u152.org/
Quote from: RRocca
It seems that out of all of the theories that have been brought up regarding U152, the distribution that most matches this U152 map is that of the Urnfield Culture.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 24, 2011, 03:00:06 AM
This is a posting of Janet on Rotsweb:

"I don't know if this will ever help anyone finding "Italian" DNA in Ireland,
but here it is from the Grove Notes to Cork Past & Present, pgs 48 & 49 re:
Lombardstown:

"In the Irish official records of the 13th & 14th centuries frequent
reference is made to the trading corporations of the "Societies of
Merchants" from Northern Italy which had established themselves at the ports
of Dublin, Ross, Waterford, Youghal, Cork and Limerick, and also at
Kilkenny.
Their principal business was in the export of wool to North Italy (chiefly
to Florence and Lucca), the import of wines and other East European
merchandise, money-lending, farming the King's customs, and acting as agents
to the Pope for the transmission of the Papal Tithes.
The various Merchant Societies operating in Ireland included the
Frescobaldi..., the Spini, Cerchi Neri, Mozzi and Pigoletti, all of
Florence; the Ricardi and Bettori of Lucca, and the Bonsignori, Bernardini
and Jacopi of Siena.
The Northern Italian merchants were commonly known as "The Lombards" "

There is much more on these people in Co. Cork here:

http://www.corkpastandpresent.ie/places/northcork/grovewhitenotes/labbamolagatomilltowncastle/gw4_46_58.pdf

Janet"


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 24, 2011, 03:18:08 AM
This to say what? That the unique way to run is, like I say to my friend Belgieri and others, to reconstruct the haplotype of our ancestors step by step. STRs have mutations forwards and backwards (what I call the “mutations around the modal”) and without reconstructing them step by step we wont be able to now anything about our past. To reconstruct the modal of thousands of years ago like R-P312 and R-U106 without doing this is misleading.
I am doing this. My closest relative is Giancarlo Tognoni: MRCA during the 15th century. We have the SNP S136. The next I have found after him (apart an anonymous Brazilian I couldn’t contact) is the Fluckiger/Flickinger family from Switzerland (MRCA during the first centuries after Christ: they come from Weissenburg/Biriciana on the Roman “Limes”, then probably Etruscans or Romans) and I am testing him for S136 etc. etc.

What Nordtvedt, Klyosov, Vizachero etc. are doing is completely wrong. Genetics isn’t Chemistry and DNA isn’t a phosphate.

Certainly after the posting of Janet the Irishmen close to me (R1b1b2a/S136+) could be also descendants of these “Lombards” who were pretty all Tuscans.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on April 24, 2011, 10:00:23 AM
I don't think the fact that the oldest U152 haplotypes (as currently known) are in south Germany necessarily precludes U152 from a close connection to the ancient Ligurians. After all, at one time, the Ligurians were spread all over western Europe, and not merely confined to old Liguria in Italy.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on April 24, 2011, 11:18:38 AM
Not only, but he high percentage in Vaucluse is certainly due to the ancient Ligurians, who inhabited there.
Vaucluse, the land of Laura and Petrarca:

Chiare, fresche et dolci acque,
ove le belle membra
pose colei che sola a me par donna...


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 25, 2011, 11:11:01 AM
This to say what? That the unique way to run is, like I say to my friend Belgieri and others, to reconstruct the haplotype of our ancestors step by step. STRs have mutations forwards and backwards (what I call the “mutations around the modal”) and without reconstructing them step by step we wont be able to now anything about our past. To reconstruct the modal of thousands of years ago like R-P312 and R-U106 without doing this is misleading.
I am doing this. My closest relative is Giancarlo Tognoni: MRCA during the 15th century. We have the SNP S136. The next I have found after him (apart an anonymous Brazilian I couldn’t contact) is the Fluckiger/Flickinger family from Switzerland (MRCA during the first centuries after Christ: they come from Weissenburg/Biriciana on the Roman “Limes”, then probably Etruscans or Romans) and I am testing him for S136 etc. etc.

What Nordtvedt, Klyosov, Vizachero etc. are doing is completely wrong. Genetics isn’t Chemistry and DNA isn’t a phosphate.

Certainly after the posting of Janet the Irishmen close to me (R1b1b2a/S136+) could be also descendants of these “Lombards” who were pretty all Tuscans.
MHammers has looked at R-L23+ L11- and I'll try to look a little harder at it myself.  I do agree that understanding the distribution and diversity of the L11- folks is critical and Italy is definitely not out of the picture as an expansion point. It's just hard to pull together enough haplotypes to do any reasonable statistical calculations by geography.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on April 25, 2011, 11:42:27 AM
Back to U152.  I don't know if it is connected with Ligurians or not but the genetic evidence seems to show that U152's great expansion began north of the Alps. It did expand into North Italy in a big way.. it just didn't start there.
Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry.  He has assembled http://www.u152.org/
Quote from: RRocca
It seems that out of all of the theories that have been brought up regarding U152, the distribution that most matches this U152 map is that of the Urnfield Culture.

Rocca is a tremendous resource for U152. He has surpassed some of the original U152 data collectors... and he is objective, IMHO.

I'll try to get him over here on this forum but below are two posts in the last day or two that are on topic for us on this thread.
Quote from: RRocca
Iberian urnfields are almost entirely concentrated in the north-eastern quadrant of the peninsula (Catalonia, northern Valencia, and the Ebro Valley). Myres found that U152 is two to three times more frequent in Valencia (6.2%) than anywhere else in Iberia (0-3.1%). Catalonia was not tested, but Ramos-Luis showed U152 even higher in Midi-Pyrénées, also a hot-spot for French SRY2627. So, isn't it likely that U152 and SRY2627 entered NE Iberia together? If not by Urnfielders, then perhaps by an earlier proto-Iberian/proto-Ligurian migration?
http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/12773-r-sry2627-m167-r1b1b2a1a2c1-r1b1a2a1a1b5/page__view__findpost__p__252131

Quote from: RRocca
In northern Italy, there is a similar progression of 'Celticization' (see timeline), so a similar pattern for Iberia seems likely. The Canegrate Culture from the XIII-XIIc BC. were proto-Celts who introduced cremation (Urnfield) into the Po Valley. They themselves melted with the Ligurians to form the Golasecca culture who had strong Hallstatt ties. The La Tene migrations, most are already familiar with.
The Ligurians however, we know less about. They were aboriginal Indo-Europeans and quite possibly proto-Celts. They colonized Corsica and the high levels of U152 there may someday prove that link.
http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11463-atlantic-celts-research/page__view__findpost__p__252016

See how Golasecca is right below Hallstatt in North Italy on the map at Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golasecca_culture

For RRocca's time-line for "Celticization" of N. Italy, click on the below link:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17907527/Golasecca_Timeline.png

This would seem to line up with U152's expansion at least as far as the genetic trail (variance and distribution) left behind.*

Those darn Urnfield guys didn't help us any, cremating their bodies and not writing stuff down...LOL

* Another topic, but....  if one starts to become convinced that U152 is associated with these movements then don't forget that U152 is as old as P312 and L21 is only slightly younger.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Arch Y. on April 26, 2011, 04:20:41 AM
I don't think the fact that the oldest U152 haplotypes (as currently known) are in south Germany necessarily precludes U152 from a close connection to the ancient Ligurians. After all, at one time, the Ligurians were spread all over western Europe, and not merely confined to old Liguria in Italy.

Yes, the Ligurians were even in Africa (Carthage) and along the whole length of the Pyrenees, but they must have had a sort of regional "homeland" to expand from. I'm not sure if this would be an area of high frequency, high variance or both.

It almost makes me wonder if the younger the subclade, could it be high frequency does play a role of nearby origins where we find it today. I'm specifically talking about subclades that are around 3,000 years old or less.

How far east, or how long in situ does a subclade need to be in order to migrate to different regions over vast distances or even short distances? Just seems odd that subclades would spring forth from one region over vast time frame, and not move.

Or a subclade that is very young in Western Europe would have origins so far east and show a marked difference in variation. All I can think of is very rapid movement and a long isolation between place of origin and place of high frequency. But long isolation means the subclade doesn't fit very well for being a young subclade. A rapid movement would show no to very little variation for a young subclade no matter the distance involved but could be easily confusing as to which region is the place of origin since its uniform in variance. Of course the parent subclade doesn't help if its widespread over a vast region. What a dilemma!

Do the Ligurians suffer this kind of issue?

Arch


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on April 29, 2011, 12:21:38 PM
One interesting thing about the Ligurians is that the Ora Maritima of Rufus Festus Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of Britain by the Celts.

Quote from: Avienus
If anybody has the courage to urge his boat into the waves away from the Oestrymnides under the pole of Lycaon (in the Northern sky) where the air is freezing, he comes to the Ligurian land, deserted by its people: for it has been emptied by the power of the Celts a long time since in many battles. The Ligurians, displaced, as fate often does to people, have come to these regions.

Avienus based his writing on much earlier Greek sources.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on April 30, 2011, 01:29:55 AM
. . .
Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry.  He has assembled http://www.u152.org/
. . .

I noticed in one of his "editorials", on U152 in southern England, he attributes the U152 there to the Belgae from across the Channel and not to the Anglo-Saxons or Vikings. In fact, if I recall correctly, in that article he even points out that there isn't much U152 in the old homelands of the Anglo-Saxons or the Vikings.

That's certainly a step in the right direction (toward what has been obvious for a long time).


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: susanrosine on May 04, 2011, 11:56:08 AM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on May 04, 2011, 07:17:19 PM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan

Probably http://www.u152.org/ (http://www.u152.org/) would be best.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 05, 2011, 06:35:47 AM
Rich, I thank you again for your willingness. Mr Rocca says:

“Very little can be made of the potential SNP’s geographical distribution, except for the fact that the Tuscany, Italy samples have a higher frequency of U152* (11 of 14) and that Northern/Western European and Great Britain samples have a higher frequency of L2+ (7 of 9)”.

What does it mean? That the little Tuscany (less than 4 million inhabitants) has 14 R-U152 in the 1000 Genomes Project and that Northern/Western Europe and Great Britain. (100fold inhabited) have 9 ones. Not only, but the 14 Tuscan are 11 U152* (the ancestor) and the latter 7 out 9 L2* (the derived). Rocca’s map says that the Ligurian highest percentage all over the world of this haplogroup arrives till not only the ancient Ligurian Tuscany (till Versilia and Pisa) but till the Maremma, full Etruscan zone, then the presence of this haplogroup is very ancient I think, and not linked to historic movements.

Mr Celtigan and Mr Celtier will perceive the rabbit-punch only when it will arrive upon their head.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: susanrosine on May 05, 2011, 05:01:41 PM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan

Probably http://www.u152.org/ (http://www.u152.org/) would be best.
Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.
If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on May 05, 2011, 07:16:59 PM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan

Probably http://www.u152.org/ (http://www.u152.org/) would be best.
Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.
If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

I believe L2 is common in Italy, so I guess it could have gotten to Wales with the Romans.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: GoldenHind on May 05, 2011, 11:32:37 PM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan

Probably http://www.u152.org/ (http://www.u152.org/) would be best.
Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.
If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

I believe L2 is common in Italy, so I guess it could have gotten to Wales with the Romans.

I agree that it is possible, but  I wouldn't rule out an arrival of various types of U152 to Britain long before the f the Romans.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 06, 2011, 03:51:08 AM
Within the 1000 Genomes Project Rocca & Magoon have found 32 R-U152: 14 Tuscans, 9 CEU+GBR, 9 of probably Spanish descent (2 CLM-Colombians, 1 Spaniard, 4 MXL-Mexicans, 2PUR-Puertorican).
Actually Tuscan R-U152* aren’t 11 but 3 out of 4: the other is from GBR.
Tuscans have practically all the subclades found, and this is another element in favor of their ancientness. Probably all the others are derived from there, not only R-L2 supposed by Rich (Stevens) for Cymrycs and British.
I think it should be deepen the case of the 2 Mexicans with 18 SNPs defined by Rocca “familial”. 18 SNPs are many, which no other sample has. We should think to an ancient Spanish haplotype (and we should think again to the Cantabrian Refugium) or to the possibility that R-U152 could have arrived to America before Columbus, through routes to be determined.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: susanrosine on May 06, 2011, 03:42:37 PM
I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?
Thank you, Susan

Probably http://www.u152.org/ (http://www.u152.org/) would be best.
Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.
If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales?
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

I believe L2 is common in Italy, so I guess it could have gotten to Wales with the Romans.

I agree that it is possible, but  I wouldn't rule out an arrival of various types of U152 to Britain long before the f the Romans.
Well I feel silly--let me retract my previous statement. ALL my P312 men have tested NEGATIVE for U152 except for one. I have just a few P312 men who haven't tested L21, but they are negative for U152. So, I really do have just one man derived for U152 and L2 in the Wales project.  With it being so rare in Wales (both on the map on u152.org and in my project), wouldn't it make more sense that it came with the Romans, than earlier? If it was in Wales before the Romans, I would think there would be a higher occurance. Haplogroups I and R-L21 are overpowering all other haplogroups in Wales. I think Hg I might have been there before the Beaker folk and before the Romans. But now I'm getting off topic. I will have to refer my one U152/L2 man to this discussion group.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on May 06, 2011, 07:16:25 PM
There's no telling. Could be a Roman, but it could be almost anything. I agree that L2 is fairly rare in Wales.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on May 08, 2011, 05:11:00 AM
 The telling thing is it didnt make it up the Atlantic coasts of the isles.  It must have been very rare in NW France at the time when people were moving from that area to the Atlantic parts of the isles.  I think this is a strong indicator that L21 was the earliest R1b clade to make it to NW France. However, Moffat and Wilson's idea that it came from S116* in Iberia or southern France seems to be them trying to fit things to the Milesian myth and also taking the asterisk too literally on S116*  The more I hear about the latter, the less I think of it as an upstream clade.  Its likely really parallel clades rather than ancestral.  For now, the evidence of variance strongly points to S116 originating somewhere near the west Alpine area, as did U152.  Somehow L21 or it S116 ancestor won the race to the Atlantic but otherwise I dont think it should be seen as different in origin from U152 in deep time terms.  My guess is a lot of the pattern of L11 west of the Rhine was set in an initial period of expansion when in different clades got in first in different areas.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 18, 2011, 03:40:36 AM
“In conclusion, the Cardial phenomenon is an immeasurably sharper event than was understood 20 years ago. In its new guise it conforms with what we would expect from a migration: cultural derivation from northwest Italy, not the local Mesolithic; a very rapid spread, with the transplantation of the entire agricultural system; and the means in place to assure its spread and survival”. From (Westward Ho! The Spread of Agriculture from Central Europe to the Atlantic by Peter Rowley-Conwy, Current Anthropology http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/658368).




“cultural derivation from northwest Italy, not the local Mesolithic”. What does it mean? Mesolithic from Italy or from Iberia? I do note that from Ligurian R-U152 derived many peoples of South and Central Europe and this is in line with my theory of an Italian refugium.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: M.A.B. on May 18, 2011, 09:49:40 AM

Hello everyone,

First time posting on this site. Very interesting stuff.

As to this Rowley-Conwy article, I think what he's trying to say is that the Cardial neolithic  was spread to southern France and Iberia  from northwestern Italy by means of migrating farmers, and wasn't  soley? mainly? a case of the "Mesolithic" populations of those areas adopting agriculture through cultural transmission.

However, he also seems to be saying that the migrating population was a  "mixed" population; "neolithic male migrants who had interbred with local "mesolithic" women.

This is a layperson's analysis; if this is wrong, I hope the experts will chime in.

He doesn't present any genetic evidence other than a reference to a mtdna study showing that divergence of "European" lineages began 15,000 ybp, i.e. late paleolithic.

He also doesn't say what Ydna these neolithic migrants would have carried. 

Were these ancient ligures who transmitted the Neolithic package "E" or "J2a" or is it possible that they were some early form of "R1b"? I don't know, but if you're looking for a very rapid progress of a "Y" that would diversify somewhere in eastern France, could this movement of the Neolithic along the coast and up the Rhone for example be part of the discussion?

As for U-152, if you accept the "young" dates for it, it would be way too young for this, wouldn't it?   


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 18, 2011, 01:46:26 PM
I have already heard the story of migrant males who wed local women: it is that told by Ted Kandall on 23andMe about Jews who migrated from Italy to the Rhine Valley. I don’t know, but it seems to me an attempt to mitigate a previous denying position.
About the paper, it doesn’t seem to me that it excludes that, after a diffusion of agriculture from Anatolia by a demic point of view, it is happened that early Neolithic men (and women) from Italy are become agriculturalists and have diffused with agriculture themselves to Western Europe, becoming from South France and Spain and after till the British Isles, where we find now hg. R1b.
Who knows me knows that I have always fought against the theory of the “young” date of R1b1b2, even though it was supported by respectable persons like Nordtvedt, Klyosov, Vizachero and others. I am curious, like every you all I think, to read the paper of Cristian Capelli and a colleague of his about this matter. I theorized the “mutations around the modal” and the few friends of mine are reconstructing step by step the modal of their line, I think the unique way to understand something about this matter.
Yes, said between us, I think just I am winning all along the line.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 27, 2011, 03:46:15 AM
The last ytree of FTDNA has been published: http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=root. Also hg. R-U152 has been reorganized following the 1000 Genomes Project results.
Not only I reaffirm what I said before (Tuscany, then Italy and above all the Ligurian zone, is the origin of this haplogroup), but probably also the mysterious R-L4, thought specific of European Jews with its particular haplotype, finds its likely source.
Now it is labelled R1b1a2a1a1b3d (ISOGG: R1b1b2a1a2d4) and is “Approx. hg: R-Z42”. From the 1000 Genomes Project these are the lines:
U152(NA20512, NA20754, NA20755, HG00152)>Z42,Z43>Z56>S47,Z45>Z46 (NA20810)>Z44(NA12342,NA19652)
From Z56>Z71,Z144,Z145,Z146(NA20509)>Z72(NA20581,NA20814).
As S47 is a sister clade of L4, we can think that L4 is on the line of Z71…
In black are the Tuscans tested.



Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Bren123 on July 28, 2011, 05:22:56 PM
One interesting thing about the Ligurians is that the Ora Maritima of Rufus Festus Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of Britain by the Celts.

Quote from: Avienus
If anybody has the courage to urge his boat into the waves away from the Oestrymnides under the pole of Lycaon (in the Northern sky) where the air is freezing, he comes to the Ligurian land, deserted by its people: for it has been emptied by the power of the Celts a long time since in many battles. The Ligurians, displaced, as fate often does to people, have come to these regions.

Avienus based his writing on much earlier Greek sources.

Do you have an original link? Weren't the britons once thought of has cimmerians,it was mentioned on another thread,can't remember which.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on July 28, 2011, 09:45:52 PM
The quote above can be found in David Rankin's Celts and the Classical World, an excellent work full of primary source material. I don't have the page number handy, but if you are interested in the Celts, you really need to get a copy of Rankin's book.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on July 29, 2011, 10:48:43 AM
One interesting thing about the Ligurians is that the Ora Maritima of Rufus Festus Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of Britain by the Celts.

Quote from: Avienus
If anybody has the courage to urge his boat into the waves away from the Oestrymnides under the pole of Lycaon (in the Northern sky) where the air is freezing, he comes to the Ligurian land, deserted by its people: for it has been emptied by the power of the Celts a long time since in many battles. The Ligurians, displaced, as fate often does to people, have come to these regions.

Avienus based his writing on much earlier Greek sources.

Do you have an original link? Weren't the britons once thought of has cimmerians,it was mentioned on another thread,can't remember which.

Yes, Poseidonius referred to the Britons as Cimmerians. He's quoted in Diodorus 5.32-3 and Strabo 4.43. The passage is quoted in David Rankin's Celts and the Classical World, page 78.

Here it is.

The women [of the Celts] are as large as the men and as brave. They are mostly very fair-headed when they are born. The tribes of the north are extremely ferocious. The Irish and British are cannibals. They used to be known as Cimmerioi; now they are called Cimbroi. They captured Rome and plundered Delphi and ended by dominating a great part of Europe and Asia. They mixed easily with the Greeks and this section of them became known as the Gallograeci or Hellenogalatai.

But the Britons were not Ligurians. Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of a land beyond the "Oestrymnides" by the Celts. As I recall, Rankin and Cunliffe say the Oestrymnides were Brittany, its neighboring islands, and possibly Cornwall. It's not certain exactly from where the Celts expelled the Ligurians, but it is possible that Avienus was referring to the British Isles.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 29, 2011, 12:40:58 PM
It is interesting that from early post-Roman times the term Cymri (from Combrogi) was used by the Welsh to refer to themselves and related peoples of north Britain. I think it meant something like fellow countrymen although the Welsh form of the word 'Briton' (Brython or something - sorry cant spell it) was only superseded around Norman times.  I think though that linguists have trashed the idea of any link to Cimbri   


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Jdean on July 29, 2011, 12:50:22 PM
It is interesting that from early post-Roman times the term Cymri (from Combrogi) was used by the Welsh to refer to themselves and related peoples of north Britain. I think it meant something like fellow countrymen although the Welsh form of the word 'Briton' (Brython or something - sorry cant spell it) was only superseded around Norman times.  I think though that linguists have trashed the idea of any link to Cimbri   

Where as Welsh came from the Saxon word for foreigner :)


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 29, 2011, 04:21:00 PM
Welsh, like other words, derives from Latin Volcae, a people who became synonimus of Stranger, the next people.
In Hungarian Italy is Olasz-orszag, and also Olasz derives from this word.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on July 29, 2011, 05:03:52 PM
The Volcae were a Celtic tribe. The ancient Germans generalized and applied their name to all Celts. It took various forms, becoming Welsh in the English tongue.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Bren123 on July 29, 2011, 07:25:18 PM
The Volcae were a Celtic tribe. The ancient Germans generalized and applied their name to all Celts. It took various forms, becoming Welsh in the English tongue.

Didn't the Volcae inhabit Southern Germany?


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on July 29, 2011, 07:55:11 PM
The Volcae were a Celtic tribe. The ancient Germans generalized and applied their name to all Celts. It took various forms, becoming Welsh in the English tongue.
I thought Welsh is derived from a word literrally meaning outside the wall as in the wall of the city.
Is stranger also applicable in that it connotates a person out side the city wall?


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on July 30, 2011, 02:16:14 AM
I thought Welsh is derived from a word literrally meaning outside the wall as in the wall of the city.
Is stranger also applicable in that it connotates a person out side the city wall?

German Linguists would call it a “Volksetymologie”.
From Latin Volcae , Germanic *Walhos, Ancient English Wealas, Wealhas, Modern English Wales, Cornwall, welsh (see C. Tagliavini, Le origini delle lingue neolatine, Bologna 1969, pages 163-4, footnote 13, and also Wartburg, FEW, 747-752).
Linguistics, like Genetics and every other science, is exactly a science, and doesn’t need amateurishness and improvisations.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 30, 2011, 06:33:31 AM
One interesting thing about the Ligurians is that the Ora Maritima of Rufus Festus Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of Britain by the Celts.

Quote from: Avienus
If anybody has the courage to urge his boat into the waves away from the Oestrymnides under the pole of Lycaon (in the Northern sky) where the air is freezing, he comes to the Ligurian land, deserted by its people: for it has been emptied by the power of the Celts a long time since in many battles. The Ligurians, displaced, as fate often does to people, have come to these regions.

Avienus based his writing on much earlier Greek sources.

Do you have an original link? Weren't the britons once thought of has cimmerians,it was mentioned on another thread,can't remember which.

Yes, Poseidonius referred to the Britons as Cimmerians. He's quoted in Diodorus 5.32-3 and Strabo 4.43. The passage is quoted in David Rankin's Celts and the Classical World, page 78.

Here it is.

The women [of the Celts] are as large as the men and as brave. They are mostly very fair-headed when they are born. The tribes of the north are extremely ferocious. The Irish and British are cannibals. They used to be known as Cimmerioi; now they are called Cimbroi. They captured Rome and plundered Delphi and ended by dominating a great part of Europe and Asia. They mixed easily with the Greeks and this section of them became known as the Gallograeci or Hellenogalatai.

But the Britons were not Ligurians. Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of a land beyond the "Oestrymnides" by the Celts. As I recall, Rankin and Cunliffe say the Oestrymnides were Brittany, its neighboring islands, and possibly Cornwall. It's not certain exactly from where the Celts expelled the Ligurians, but it is possible that Avienus was referring to the British Isles.

Strange though.  While its totally clear there is no link with the Cimbri the tribe associated with the Teutones or the Cimmerians of the steppes etc, it does make me wonder if that Poseidonius reference to Cimbroi is some sort of early noting of the later name the Welsh used.  He does specifically say its what the Britons were called after all.  Probably not though.  There must be a major linguistic objection to that link. 

I agree that the Ligurians are interesting.  I kind of buy into the idea that they are an Italic-like branch of the Celto-Italic peoples.  As such they also put me in mind of the Lusitanians and other peoples of Atlantic Iberia.  I wonder if in the broadest sense the term refers to peoples who were connected in the early-mid Bronze Age by a network that linked from Italy to southern France to Atlantic Iberia and maybe even SW France.  To develop Italic-like dialects these areas must have been in some sort of shared contact network and I understand from some articles on the e-keltoi site about the Celts of Iberia that there was such a network of contact in the early-mid Bronze Age.  I certainly believe that Celtic developed along a more northerly network that linked France, the isles and west central Europe etc together from the Early Bronze Age. 

I often wonder about the references to the Ligurians having been chased out by the Celts and think perhaps these sources are recalling events that happened many centuries before in the late Bronze Age.  In a sense these Ligurian/Lusitanian speaking areas around the west Med and Atlantic Iberia were intruded in the late Bronze Age era by more northerly influences coming from the twin prongs of the urnfield and Atlantic Bronze Age networks which may well have been Celtic speaking.  I use networks as a neutral terms as we dont know how much was trade and how much involved population movement.  So, in a nutshell I tend to see the Ligures as the creation of links from Atlantic Iberia to italy that were strong in the Early to mid Bronze Age and their demise as a result of intrusion of Celtic influences in the late Bronze Age.  That is complete guesswork of course. 


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 30, 2011, 06:38:33 AM
It is interesting that from early post-Roman times the term Cymri (from Combrogi) was used by the Welsh to refer to themselves and related peoples of north Britain. I think it meant something like fellow countrymen although the Welsh form of the word 'Briton' (Brython or something - sorry cant spell it) was only superseded around Norman times.  I think though that linguists have trashed the idea of any link to Cimbri   

Where as Welsh came from the Saxon word for foreigner :)

..and the term Gael comes from a 6th century AD (or thereabouts) Welsh word meaning 'wild men of the woods' or something like that.   


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: rms2 on July 30, 2011, 07:56:23 AM
It is interesting that from early post-Roman times the term Cymri (from Combrogi) was used by the Welsh to refer to themselves and related peoples of north Britain. I think it meant something like fellow countrymen although the Welsh form of the word 'Briton' (Brython or something - sorry cant spell it) was only superseded around Norman times.  I think though that linguists have trashed the idea of any link to Cimbri   

Where as Welsh came from the Saxon word for foreigner :)

..and the term Gael comes from a 6th century AD (or thereabouts) Welsh word meaning 'wild men of the woods' or something like that.   

I am working from memory, but as I recall the Welsh had the term Gwyddel, which came to simply mean Irishman. I seem to remember that that Welsh word had a hand in the coining of the term Goidel.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 30, 2011, 09:34:10 AM
It is interesting that from early post-Roman times the term Cymri (from Combrogi) was used by the Welsh to refer to themselves and related peoples of north Britain. I think it meant something like fellow countrymen although the Welsh form of the word 'Briton' (Brython or something - sorry cant spell it) was only superseded around Norman times.  I think though that linguists have trashed the idea of any link to Cimbri   

Where as Welsh came from the Saxon word for foreigner :)

..and the term Gael comes from a 6th century AD (or thereabouts) Welsh word meaning 'wild men of the woods' or something like that.   

I am working from memory, but as I recall the Welsh had the term Gwyddel, which came to simply mean Irishman. I seem to remember that that Welsh word had a hand in the coining of the term Goidel.

Yes that is the origin of the word Gael.  A lot of people wrongly think its linked to the word Gaul but early forms make it clear its from Goidel which comes from Welsh Gwyddel, a term meaning wild men of the woods or something like that.  Probably originally a pejorative term for Irish raiders/settlers in Wales in the post-Roman era. 


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: alan trowel hands. on July 30, 2011, 01:59:27 PM
my own feeling is that S116 spread at a time before individual IE languages had formed (perhaps spreading an undifferentiated IE) and that the separate languages or branches of IE evolved later through elite networks linking areas together but probably involved limited movement of yDNA.  So, as the spread of S116 and the evolution of separate languages were separate processes, I dont think there will ever be any sort of near correlation of S116 clades and languages.  Where there is some partial correlation I would feel its down to the same geographical factors effecting both rather than a causal link.   

IF (and its still a big IF) the clades were spread by the beakers, I have a hunch that the period where the contact networks began to move undifferentiated IE into the language groups we now know was probably the immediate post-beaker Early Bronze Age.  My feeling is that Celtic started to evolve c. 2000BC in the Unetice-Wessex-Armorican contact network which also included a range of other Early Bronze Age cultures in Ireland and the Low Countries.  I think in the meanwhile the areas of western Europe outside that network largely fell into an contact zone that included Atlantic and Med. Iberia, Med. France and Italy and in which evolved Italic type dialects including those of Italy, Ligurian and also Lusitanian and other related dialects in coastal Iberia. 

I suspect that that remained the case until c. 1200BC or thereabouts when parts of the Celtic speaking world started to intrude into the Italic world.  The early manifestation of that could have been the appearance of Urnfield influences from the east in north Italy, southern France and eastern Spain and also the linking of Atlantic Iberia with NW France, the isles etc through the Atlantic Bronze Age (which may have been a north to south thing rather than the other way round).  I think these could have been a two-pronged intrusion of Celtic into the Italic world.  The process of the intrusion of the Celtic world into the Italic world of course continued for centuries (until the Roman's reversed this trend) and was partial and not complete even in the Iron Age when classical writers noted the decline of the Ligurians. 


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: A.D. on July 31, 2011, 01:24:59 PM
I was speaking to an Irish language teacher who also has done celtic studies. He says that the word Gael comes from Gealge the name of the Irish language. This has been spelt various ways over time So Gael and all its variations just mean someone who speaks the language. How other people used the term may have just been a reference to where the language was most spoken. He also thought it likely that were more multi- lingual people than thought.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Bren123 on August 01, 2011, 09:08:24 AM
Welsh, like other words, derives from Latin Volcae, a people who became synonimus of Stranger, the next people.


You mean the latinized name of the celtic tribe!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Arch Y. on August 01, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
The Volcae were a Celtic tribe. The ancient Germans generalized and applied their name to all Celts. It took various forms, becoming Welsh in the English tongue.

Didn't the Volcae inhabit Southern Germany?

Yes, they established Tolosa (Toulouse) as their chief city long before the Visigoths did after their sacking of Rome. My understanding is that Volcae means wolf, not stranger. Tectosages, meaning treasure seekers.

Wallea, Wallia, Walea or whatever is very similar to Wales is the Germanic term meaning "Stranger". Obviously, Wales and Cornwall are indicative of this.

Arch


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on August 01, 2011, 02:57:50 PM
See reply 26:

“We should think to an ancient Spanish haplotype (and we should think again to the Cantabrian Refugium) or to the possibility that R-U152 could have arrived to America before Columbus, through routes to be determined”.

In another thread I have hypothesized that there is no need to resurrect the Cantabrian refugium of R1b1b2: if South Western Europeans derive from the Cardial agriculturalists from Italy, amongst them, with above all R-P312*, probably there already was some R-U152*, found mostly by 1000 Genomes Project amongst Tuscans, then Italians, above all Ligurians.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Bren123 on August 04, 2011, 01:55:06 PM
The Volcae were a Celtic tribe. The ancient Germans generalized and applied their name to all Celts. It took various forms, becoming Welsh in the English tongue.

Didn't the Volcae inhabit Southern Germany?

Yes, they established Tolosa (Toulouse) as their chief city long before the Visigoths did after their sacking of Rome. My understanding is that Volcae means wolf, not stranger. Tectosages, meaning treasure seekers.

Wallea, Wallia, Walea or whatever is very similar to Wales is the Germanic term meaning "Stranger". Obviously, Wales and Cornwall are indicative of this.

Arch

Most celticists have linked the word Uolc with hawk rather than wolf,from Wikipedia:

Etymology
 
Traditional etymologies have attributed Volcae to a word akin to Welsh golchi 'to wash' and Irish folc 'to bathe' (Proto-Celtic *wolkiō), making this tribe the 'river people' after a rough semantic adjustment. A more likely scenario is that this or a cognate in Pannonian Illyrian was used to name the river Volcos, from which the Volcae took their name.[citation needed] C. W. von Glück[18] derived the name from a word related to Old Irish folg 'agile, energetic'.[19]
 
Most Celticists today seem to agree that the tribal name Uolcae is related to Welsh gwalch 'hawk', akin to Latin falco 'hawk', (and they compare the Gaulish personal name Catuuolcus to Welsh cadwalch 'hero', literally 'battle-hawk'), though some prefer to translate Gaulish *uolco- as 'wolf' and, by semantic extension, 'errant warrior'.[20] There seems to be indication that their name is related to their breed of war greyhounds since before the 600 BC when the Tectosages and Tolistobogii Celts sacked Delphi. Survivors left accounts of the fierce Celts and the huge dogs who fought with them and at their side. They were described by Julius Caesar in his war reports, The Gallic Wars.
 
The name Tectosages, literally 'possession-seekers', meant 'claim-stakers', perhaps closer in sense to 'claim-jumper' or 'land grabber', and a direct cognate is found in Old Irish techtaigidir 'he/she seeks to (re)establish a land claim'.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: A.D. on August 04, 2011, 10:20:47 PM
I ve posted about this before the 'war greyhounds' are not  grey hounds but closer to bull dogs there are quite detailed descriptions of 'war dogs' biting the noses of horses like bulldogs did. Large Irish hunting dogs  (wolf hounds) were known and prized in Rome, These  could be described as grey hounds. There are quite a few things about dogs who breed them and what they were used for in different cultures.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on August 26, 2011, 01:04:38 AM
I invite you all to guess very carefully the map of R-U152 in the last paper of Busby et al. The first 5 levels of intensity of population are pretty exclusively in Central-North Italy. It is clear that this place is at the origin of this haplogroup.
It is scandalous how they don't recognize this and my complete victory. Some theorists, specially those of Italian descent even though not properly of this zone, are repulsive.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Mike Walsh on August 26, 2011, 11:45:54 AM
I invite you all to guess very carefully the map of R-U152 in the last paper of Busby et al. The first 5 levels of intensity of population are pretty exclusively in Central-North Italy. It is clear that this place is at the origin of this haplogroup.
It is scandalous how they don't recognize this and my complete victory. Some theorists, specially those of Italian descent even though not properly of this zone, are repulsive.
I think by "intensity" you mean high frequency. That's what the map in Figure 3 is showing, frequency.  If so, I disagree that this "intensity" clearly indicates origin.

I do think Cisalpine Gaul is the possible origin of U152, but if you look at the diversity it is higher "outside" to the north and west of the Alps. France has the highest diversity.  Even Busby agrees that diversity indicates age. Busby et al just think STR variance is not linearly associated with age. Its too erratic as used by Balaresque is the point.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on August 26, 2011, 06:03:13 PM
Of course the history of an haplogroup is complex, of every haplogroup. From what we know so far, specially from the 1000 Genomes Project (and I don’t want to repeat what I have said many times on many forums), I think it is clear that R-U152 was born in Italy (3 out 4 R-U152* in Tuscany) and a pretty exclusively presence of DYS492=14. R-L2 was probably born out of Italy and returned to Italy after (perhaps). The frequency of R-U152 in Italy demonstrates not only to be the highest, but that this haplogroup exists here from very ancient time, before the known historic peoples.
That some Italian R-U152-s, like my friends Belgieri and also Grassi, can descend from Medieval Germans is possible and even likely, but I think that this doesn’t change the truth of my theory.

Cisalpine Gaul? R-U152 was in Italy many thousands of years before the names "Cisalpine" and "Gaul" were pronounced.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on November 08, 2011, 12:25:45 PM
Hello Maliclavelli!!!

  I just came across your post!  I have to tell you that My family have been in Italy (Central Italy) since before Rome existed!  We are from Rome, Oriveto and Palestrina, (Umbria).

  I have only only had 25 markers tested for my eldest brother but have had his DYS492 tested as well as Deepclade and Z56.

   So, he is DYS492=14 and just found out Z56+.  He is kit 113856 on the U152 project.  Richard, Steve and team have been so helpful.  I feel lucky to be with such a proactive group of individuals!

  I would like to throw out there the possibility of the us being descendants of the Sabines.

  Diana


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on November 08, 2011, 07:18:23 PM
The data of your brother are very interesting. I have studied them a little and I have found (probably) the closest to them in two Italians tested by SMGF, that I have extracted and put on ySearch: Giobatta Filippozzi (5VQTZ) and an anonymous Italian I have named Italiano Qualunque: 75R8V. On ySearch there are other Italians, tested for only 12 markers, I think close to your brother: 2JMCM, 4NQV7, Y854Z.
Your brother’s data are interesting not only for getting DYS492=14, then R-Z42, Z43, Z56 (and we shall see the other SNPs under these), but also for the high value of DYS385b (17), DYS439=14, DYS464=14-15-17-18. If the persons I cited above are actually linked, they have also DYS461=11 and DYS635=24. Of course an extension of your test would be useful. If you have read my postings, on this thread but also some of the many thousands I have written elsewhere, certainly you know what I think about R-U152: that it was born in Italy and the most ancient is your brother’s subclade. The Tuscans tested by 1000 Genomes Project are demonstrating this.
Re: the ancient origin of your family I wouldn’t exclude an Etruscan origin (Umbria was in great part Etruscan), but probably this haplogroup is in Italy before that the Etruscan, the Roman, the Sabine name was used.
Re: Facebook I use it only like a World Phone (or better e-mail) Directory and about the other forum which banned me it and who writes on it are dead for me for ever. I fight my battles elsewhere and I fight to win.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on November 09, 2011, 05:51:43 AM
Where we can clearly see that the haplotype of Panara, excluding the probably R1a of Eastern Europe and including South Americans of probably Italian extraction, is certainly centred in Italy.
These are the most ancient R-U152-s (DYS492=14).

Panara
1 14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,17 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 >>
1 14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,17 12 12 15 19 15 17 23 12 >>
1 of 766 Australia [Aboriginal] Australian Aboriginal Oceania / Australia
1 of 99 Strasbourg, France [French] Eurasian - European - Western European Europe

14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,18 4 >>
14 13 29 24 11 13 13 11,17 24 >>
14 14 30 23 11 13 13 11,17 2 >>
14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,16 17 >>
14 14 29 24 11 13 13 11,17 1 >>
14 14 30 24 12 13 13 11,17 1 >>
14 14 30 24 11 12 13 11,17 1 >>

4 14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 >>
1 of 88 Lugansk, Ukraine [Ukrainian] Eurasian - European - Eastern European Europe
1 of 157 Bialystok, Poland [Belarusian] Eurasian - European - Eastern European Europe
1 of 46 Virginia, United States [Hispanic American] Admixed North America
1 of 342 Bogotá, Colombia [Mestizo] Admixed Latin America
14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,17 2 >> 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 11,18 1 >> 13 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,18 0 >>
1 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 11,18 12 13 15 19 15 17 25 13 >>
1 of 243 Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil [Admixed] Admixed Latin America
14 14 30 24 11 13 13 11,18 4 >> 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,18 3 >> 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 11,17 24 >> 14 13 28 24 11 13 13 11,18 1 >> 14 13 29 24 11 13 14 11,18 1 >>
2 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,18 12 12 14 20 15 17 24 12 >>
1 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,18 12 12 15 19 15 17 24 12 >>
3 of 384 Ravenna, Italy [Italian] Eurasian - European - Western European Europe
14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,17 3 >>
14 13 29 24 11 13 13 11,18 1 >>
2 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,17 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 >>
1 14 13 29 24 11 13 13 10,17 12 12 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 >>
1 of 447 Sao Paulo, Brazil [European] Eurasian - European Latin America
1 of 811 Leipzig, Germany [German] Eurasian - European - Western European Europe
1 of 106 Brescia, Italy [Italian] Eurasian - European - Western European Europe
(From YHRD)


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on November 09, 2011, 12:58:26 PM
Grazie amico mio!!  I am so happy to have met you!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on December 17, 2011, 03:12:51 PM
Update,

  I am now confirmed Z145 and still waiting on Z156!!!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on September 30, 2012, 11:20:31 AM
Posting deleted


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Richard Rocca on September 30, 2012, 01:11:49 PM
The author of that paper has been working hard on it for years and I'm sure he would be extremely annoyed/disappointed to know that something he told someone via a private email is being revealed to the world.

The right thing to do is for you to remove the post above.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on September 30, 2012, 02:18:09 PM
This is on a facebook group which I am on.....


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on October 01, 2012, 02:28:22 AM
The author of that paper has been working hard on it for years and I'm sure he would be extremely annoyed/disappointed to know that something he told someone via a private email is being revealed to the world.

The right thing to do is for you to remove the post above.

Why? I have had a news, I esteem interesting, and I have given it to everybody. I don’t know who this person is, but it seems you know him very well. By revealing some data, I have only revealed a percentage, that, if it will be confirmed, will be very important for our theories. I haven’t these samples, I don’t publish a paper. I have been banned many times from many forums for my theories which would be confirmed by data like these. If you know something more, you can say it. Or are you that person? And you (or another person) why are hiding these important data?


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Maliclavelli on October 01, 2012, 12:36:02 PM
Posting deleted.  14day ban.  Terry


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Richard Rocca on October 01, 2012, 04:12:04 PM

I understand that Richard Rocca has no contact with Italy and if comes here he pitches Southward, but newspapers here are plenty, from many years,  of conferences of Sergio Tofanelli and what I said is known by everyone:

“Quindi Sergio Tofanelli, ricercatore dell’Università di Pisa, parlerà dell’”Indagine genetica del territorio: la mappatura del Dna nelle aree liguri-apuane alla luce delle ricerche in corso”.


Wrong on multiple fronts - In fact I have weekly contact with Italy and 75% of my travels there have been to the north and center.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Gens Galeria alias Marco Grassi on October 05, 2012, 02:23:29 AM
R. Rocca, I'm Marco Grassi,
about the latest controversy, I reported the facts that where in all the papers maybe I added a little more, my passion for genetics went beyond these particular. Hawever I have already apologized to Sergio Tofanelli and I promised that I will not speak more.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Gens Galeria alias Marco Grassi on October 05, 2012, 02:49:58 AM
Sorry " however"


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Jean M on October 05, 2012, 05:38:27 AM
I have been banned many times from many forums for my theories

How many forums of this type ban people for their theories? I suppose there might be some weird places run by administrators who insist on a particular point of view, but I doubt if they would be very successful. Successful forums have a set of rules conducive to lively but civil discourse and enforce them. People get banned eventually if they do not abide by the rules, for example PERSONAL ATTACKS ARE NOT ALLOWED (http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=11107.0).  

As I understand this rule, that includes personal sniping intended to smear your opponent as ignorant, such as " I understand that X has no contact with Italy and if comes here he pitches Southward.."


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 06, 2012, 01:16:25 PM
Let me guess, he was removed.....



I have been banned many times from many forums for my theories

How many forums of this type ban people for their theories? I suppose there might be some weird places run by administrators who insist on a particular point of view, but I doubt if they would be very successful. Successful forums have a set of rules conducive to lively but civil discourse and enforce them. People get banned eventually if they do not abide by the rules, for example PERSONAL ATTACKS ARE NOT ALLOWED (http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=11107.0).  

As I understand this rule, that includes personal sniping intended to smear your opponent as ignorant, such as " I understand that X has no contact with Italy and if comes here he pitches Southward.."


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 06, 2012, 01:23:18 PM

Marco, I am going to contact Sergio directly.  Thank you for trying to share information for our better understanding. I am certain it was done without malice.

R. Rocca, I'm Marco Grassi,
about the latest controversy, I reported the facts that where in all the papers maybe I added a little more, my passion for genetics went beyond these particular. Hawever I have already apologized to Sergio Tofanelli and I promised that I will not speak more.



Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 06, 2012, 01:48:38 PM

Ridiculous that information regarding this theory be wiped out!  Like he said, nothing was revealed which wasn't already published.

  I can't believe the censorship here.

 
Posting deleted


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Richard Rocca on October 06, 2012, 02:19:53 PM

Ridiculous that information regarding this theory be wiped out!  Like he said, nothing was revealed which wasn't already published.

  I can't believe the censorship here.

 
Posting deleted


As Marco said, he said a little more than what was public and he apologized to the appropriate person for it. Let's not forget that no matter how passionate we are about genetics, for all of us here this is nothing more than a hobby. For academics, it is more than that, it is how they make their living. They are judged by the quality of the studies they put out. If someone beats them to the punch, then their accomplishments are diminished.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 06, 2012, 04:41:00 PM

  I totally get that Richard and I accept the hard work of others.

  The public part of it should at the very least be up for discussion.
  I posted it on the group on FB so Marco would know that it was here but have since deleted it as not to offend anyone.

  I don't know what part was public and what part was private...

 

Ridiculous that information regarding this theory be wiped out!  Like he said, nothing was revealed which wasn't already published.

  I can't believe the censorship here.

 
Posting deleted


As Marco said, he said a little more than what was public and he apologized to the appropriate person for it. Let's not forget that no matter how passionate we are about genetics, for all of us here this is nothing more than a hobby. For academics, it is more than that, it is how they make their living. They are judged by the quality of the studies they put out. If someone beats them to the punch, then their accomplishments are diminished.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Gens Galeria alias Marco Grassi on October 08, 2012, 12:27:11 AM
I think that Gioiello's banishment is excessive and unfair! I hope everything will come back as before! In Italy we say : mettiamoci una pietra sopra, I hope that the translation is correct:  Let's put a stone on top!
Best regards to all.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Jean M on October 08, 2012, 05:04:48 AM
I think that Gioiello's banishment is excessive and unfair!

A 14 day ban is excessive? You think it should have been five minutes, perhaps?


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Gens Galeria alias Marco Grassi on October 08, 2012, 05:30:37 AM
Your irony is too!
However, I did not know  a 14-day ban.
But  let's talk about genetic only! We must put an end to the controversy!
My best regards!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Jean M on October 08, 2012, 05:51:14 AM
However, I did not know  a 14-day ban.

See #67 above. Terry Barton, the owner of the forum, removed a post and imposed a 14 day ban.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 08, 2012, 02:46:38 PM
Jean, I have a great respect for your work. You have an obvious distain for Gio.
 Stop adding insult to injury! I respect Gio's opinions although I do not always agree with his low blows towards my fellow project leaders. I think his messages are sometimes lost in translation. The way they communicate in Italy is always filled with much more emotion.

Coming here to point that out to him with your initial post about insults was rather unnecessary.

I Look forward to his return!!

  Happy thanksgiving to all my fellow Canadians!


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 08, 2012, 03:08:30 PM


  Yes Marco,

  That's correct, let's talk about genetics and the origins of what this thread is entitled.

  All my best!


Your irony is too!
However, I did not know  a 14-day ban.
But  let's talk about genetic only! We must put an end to the controversy!
My best regards!



Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Diana on October 13, 2012, 04:36:53 PM
To get this thread back on topic I am adding a post from Richard from a thread he started about U152 age estimates.  Anyone interested can follow up on that thread if they like..

  "I've run the age estimates for U152's three main sub-clades (L2, Z36 and Z56) using Kenneth Nordtvedt's Generations 7 method.

L2 Clade MRCA Age   4.1 ybp (4.4-3.8)  N=224
L2 Clade Coalescence Age   3.6 ybp (4.0-3.3)  N=224
Z36 Clade MRCA Age   3.6 ybp (3.9-3.3)  N=29
Z36 Clade Coalescence Age   3.2 ybp (3.5-2.9)  N=29
Z56 Clade MRCA Age   6.3 ybp (6.7-5.9)  N=26
Z56 Clade Coalescence Age   5.6 ybp (6.0-5.2)  N=26
Z56 Clade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   5.1 ybp (5.4-4.8)  N=43
Z56 Clade Coalescence Age (incl. DYS492=14)   4.7 ybp (5.0-4.4)  N=43
L2 and Z36 Interclade MRCA Age   4.0 ybp (4.2-3.8)  N=253
L2 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age   9.2 ybp (9.7-8.6)  N=250
L2 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   7.8 ybp (8.3-7.2)  N=267
Z36 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age   9.1 ybp (9.7-8.5)  N=55
Z36 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   7.7 ybp (8.3-7.1)  N=72

Based on these estimates, the MRCA for all three sub-clades would date to the Copper Age, with major expansions during the Early-Middle Bronze Ages.

Z56 seems to be a good deal older than either L2 or Z36. L2 and Z36 look to be about the same age, seem to have expanded at about the same time, and their MRCA ages with Z56 are almost identical."


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Solothurn on November 11, 2012, 12:19:16 PM
I am not sure who quoted this so please forgive me if I have misquoted

I thought this may interest some on here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viroconium_Cornoviorum

[/quote]

I believe L2 is common in Italy, so I guess it could have gotten to Wales with the Romans.
[/quote]


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Curtis Pigman(Pigmon) on November 11, 2012, 12:50:18 PM
To get this thread back on topic I am adding a post from Richard from a thread he started about U152 age estimates.  Anyone interested can follow up on that thread if they like..

  "I've run the age estimates for U152's three main sub-clades (L2, Z36 and Z56) using Kenneth Nordtvedt's Generations 7 method.

L2 Clade MRCA Age   4.1 ybp (4.4-3.8)  N=224
L2 Clade Coalescence Age   3.6 ybp (4.0-3.3)  N=224
Z36 Clade MRCA Age   3.6 ybp (3.9-3.3)  N=29
Z36 Clade Coalescence Age   3.2 ybp (3.5-2.9)  N=29
Z56 Clade MRCA Age   6.3 ybp (6.7-5.9)  N=26
Z56 Clade Coalescence Age   5.6 ybp (6.0-5.2)  N=26
Z56 Clade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   5.1 ybp (5.4-4.8)  N=43
Z56 Clade Coalescence Age (incl. DYS492=14)   4.7 ybp (5.0-4.4)  N=43
L2 and Z36 Interclade MRCA Age   4.0 ybp (4.2-3.8)  N=253
L2 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age   9.2 ybp (9.7-8.6)  N=250
L2 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   7.8 ybp (8.3-7.2)  N=267
Z36 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age   9.1 ybp (9.7-8.5)  N=55
Z36 and Z56 Interclade MRCA Age (incl. DYS492=14)   7.7 ybp (8.3-7.1)  N=72

Based on these estimates, the MRCA for all three sub-clades would date to the Copper Age, with major expansions during the Early-Middle Bronze Ages.

Z56 seems to be a good deal older than either L2 or Z36. L2 and Z36 look to be about the same age, seem to have expanded at about the same time, and their MRCA ages with Z56 are almost identical."

Does anyone know the age of L2+ Z49?  I finally ordered it.


Title: Re: U152 and the Ancient Ligures or Ligurians
Post by: Solothurn on November 11, 2012, 01:35:17 PM
 It maybe on here

Fluxus Phylogenetic Networks and TMRCA Estimates (by Tibor Fehér)

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=results

[/quote]
Does anyone know the age of L2+ Z49?  I finally ordered it.
[/quote]