The Mafia without godfathers

The Mafia without godfathers

In a controlled study of Mafia marriages in Corleone, I found that Mafia members are historically more closely related to their brides than their non-mafiosi neighbors in Corleone. What are the implications, genetic and otherwise?

The rates of consanguinity among Corleone’s families, even its Mafia families, are not likely to represent an existential threat due to inbreeding. According to Cavalli-Sforza and his co-authors, nowhere in human civilization do we find sufficient rates of consanguineous marriage to threaten a population from pedigree collapse, even one as small and insular as Mafia families in Corleone. While the rate of consanguineous marriage approaches 50% in some populations today, in Sicily, it has not risen above ten percent. (Cavalli-Sforza 2004)

On the other hand, cousin marriage could represent a different kind of danger to a free society. Jonathan F. Shulz (2016) has shown that not only is consanguineous marriage highly significantly correlated with mafia activity, “cousin marriage is a highly significant and robust predictor of democracy.” Even controlling for a variety of other factors, including the year of onset of the Neolithic revolution, and duration of Church bans on consanguineous marriage, a ten percentage point higher rate of cousin marriage is associated with an approximately three points lower score on the Polity democracy index (a 21 point scale, from -10 to 10). This is equivalent to the difference between the “full” democracies of Italy and the United States (which both scored a “10” in 2015), and the more limited democracy found in countries like Bolivia, Kyrgystan, and Nigeria (which scored a “7” that year).

Another way of looking at it would be to compare the United States’ score in 2015, under Democratic President Barack Obama, and the current rating (2016) as a “Flawed Democracy” on The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index under Republican Donald Trump, who won the electoral vote in November. (Data for 2016 are not yet available from Polity IV.)

The Mafia has cultivated an image of itself that is indivisible from Catholicism and Sicilian culture. One way the two institutions are allied, is in sharing authoritarian values—which is to say, undemocratic ones. The Church authors and then reinforces the religious values and rituals which bind together Sicilians from different families and towns, even those living halfway around the world. And it does so while at the same time, honoring the local: the daily miracle of transubstantiation, the vision, the miracle, the saint who lived close by. The Cursa Santu Luca, celebrating the anniversary of a miraculous retreat by Bourbon forces at Corleone, is one such local, religious celebration.

Another local ritual reinforced by the Church is the “inchino,” where the effigies of saints are made to curtsy or bow, by the confraternity members holding them, in front of the homes of honored families. Not infrequently in Italy, the honorees are at the top echelons of local mafias. When the San Giovann’Battista confraternity in Corleone conducted the inchino in front of the home of Toto Riina’s wife, Ninetta Bagarella, last year, the resulting investigation brought down the corrupt city government, and dissolved the city council.

Collusion between members of the Catholic Church and the Mafia in Sicily has existed, and been overlooked, for decades. Toto Riina was married by a priest in a Palermo church, while living as a fugitive. Rome’s position on organized crime began to change in 1993, when the Pope denounced the Mafia. In 2014, the Vatican declared that Mafia members are to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. Yet this has not completely severed relations between Church and Mafia, as recent events in Corleone demonstrate.

Complicating these institutional associations are the most personal of connections, those among family members. The Catholic Church holds a monopoly on the sacraments that quite literally create Catholic families. Exercising its right to refuse the sacraments could strike a mortal blow to the organization whose own mythology centers the Catholic family. After all, what is the mafia without godfathers?

The recent objection of the archbishop in Monreale, to a known mafia associate standing as godfather to his niece, may be part of a growing movement to uphold the 2014 Vatican position against mafia activity. Giuseppe Salvatore “Salvo” Riina, the son of Toto Riina, has served an eight-year sentence for Mafia association. Yet last December, Salvo stood as godfather to his niece, an honor Archbishop of Monreale Michele Pennisi has since publicly opposed. It is well understood by Catholics that godparents are obliged to uphold the faith and set an example for their godchildren, facts the archbishop repeated in his objections. “I am not aware that the young man has ever expressed words of repentance for his conduct,” Pennisi says of Riina.

People marry in for reasons other than a lack of opportunity to marry outside one’s extended family. And people who marry their close kin at higher than average rates, do not do so randomly. People who marry their cousins do so not in ignorance, but in concert with their own values, and they do so for legitimate social and economic reasons, such as to preserve inherited wealth, strengthen family ties, and increase one’s personal prospects. One reason for marrying in that cannot be casually discounted, is to preserve power accumulated through generations of mafia activity.

Marriages between close relations are not normally permitted by the Church. For first and second cousins to marry in Sicily requires dispensation from the local archbishop. In the past, dispensations were granted whenever possible: the lack of a dowry, the danger of unmarried cohabitation, and even the risk of social embarrassment to a family at having to break an engagement, were all considered valid reasons to permit a marriage that would otherwise be prohibited due to consanguinity. Unlike the selection of a godparent, which is approved by the local priests, the dispensation process puts each archbishop in position to decide, on a case by case basis, whether a marriage might go forward. While dowry is, hopefully, no longer a deciding factor in granting dispensations to marry, perhaps mafia association will soon become one.

 

Cited:

  1. Colleen Barry. “Italy: Mafia stronghold of Corleone has new ‘godfather’ saga.” Published 2 February 2017. Accessed 3 February 2017 at http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Italy-Mafia-stronghold-of-Corleone-has-new-10903127.php
  2. Colleen Barry. “Italy: Mafia stronghold of Corleone has new ‘godfather’ saga.” Published and accessed 5 February 2017 at http://siouxcityjournal.com/news/weird-news/italy-mafia-stronghold-of-corleone-has-new-godfather-saga/article_6265cfb9-8275-5823-8249-6f1cf9867f69.html
  3. Jonathan F. Schulz. The Churches’ Bans on Consanguineous Marriages, Kin-Networks and Democracy (December 14, 2016). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2877828 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2877828
  4. Alexander Stille. The Pope Excommunicates the Mafia, Finally. Published 24 June 2014. Accessed 8 February 2017 at http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-pope-excommunicates-the-mafia-finally

 

Image credit: Rogier van der Weyden (1399/1400–1464). “Baptism, Confirmation, Penance.”

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 4

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 4

 

In a controlled study of Mafia marriages in Corleone, I find evidence supporting the hypothesis that Mafia members are more closely related to their brides than their non-mafiosi neighbors in Corleone.

See Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of this series.

Conclusions

On average, Mafia members and their wives in this study are more than twice as closely related as the control group grooms and their brides.

Average coefficient of relationship and rate of consanguineous marriage

Average coefficient of relationship between bride and groom, out to fourth cousins Percent of marriages that are consanguineous in this set, out to third cousins
Mafia couples 0.008 0.147
Control couples 0.003 0.059
Difference 0.005 0.088
Average 0.005 0.103

The differences in marital consanguinity between the two groups are pronounced. Compared to the control group, Mafia couples are almost three times as likely to have a close degree of kinship: third cousins or closer, which is to say, having in common at least one set of twice-great grandparents or a nearer direct ancestor.

Although the coefficient of relationship (CoR) of the control group, on average, is less than half of the average CoR for the Mafia group, the difference between these two figures is slight, in genealogical terms. A coefficient of relationship of 0.008, the average for Mafia couples in this study, is between that of a fourth cousin, once removed (0.1) and the CoR of fifth cousins (0.0004). (See the table in Part 1.) This is as good an illustration as any, of the practicality of researching only three or four generations to determine CoR. The decrease in CoR is exponential, and becomes vanishingly small beyond the degree of fourth cousins.

Relationships more distant than fourth cousins are not included in calculations of average CoR or in the percentage of consanguineous marriages. One Mafia marriage (Marco Maggiore, 1908) is between fifth cousins, and one marriage from each set, the Mafia group and the control group, are between fifth cousins, once removed (Giuseppe Morello, 1903, and Giuseppe Verro, 1902).

Out of the 35 marriages of Mafia members (named in Part 2), five are consanguineous. Nicolo’ Ciravolo  and his second wife (married in 1834) are third cousins. Paolino Streva married his first cousin, once removed, in 1894, as did Antonino Cascio in 1906. Luciano Labruzzo and his wife, who married in 1897, are in a double in law marriage and are both first and third cousins, for a CoR of 13.28%. Luciano Gagliano (1880) and Carlo Taverna (1904) are also in double in law marriages, though not related by common ancestry to their wives. Luciano Crapisi, who married in 1880, is related to his wife three different ways: they are fourth cousins, fifth cousins, and fifth cousins, once removed, for a CoF of .20%.

Among the 35 control marriages, the most closely related are Salvatore Pomilla (1893) and his wife, who are are first cousins, once removed. Carmelo d’Anna and his wife (1880) are both second and third cousins. Calogero Pecoraro marries twice, to sisters who are his third cousins, once removed. If Calogero had children with each of his wives, they would be more closely related than typical half-siblings, with a CoR of 37.5%.

Next week, a discussion of the implications of this research.

 

Feature image: Interior of Monreale Cathedral, by Bernhard J. Scheuvens aka Bjs [CC BY-SA 2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5)%5D, via Wikimedia Commons

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 3

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 3

Do members of the Mafia share more common ancestors with their brides than their non-mafiosi neighbors in Corleone? To answer this question, I created a study of Mafia marriages with a control group of randomly selected marriages performed in Corleone. I hypothesized that the control group would have a rate of consanguineous marriage close to that found throughout Sicily by Cavalli-Sforza et al (2004), and that the study group would have a higher rate than the control.

See Part 1 of this series here, and Part 2 here.

Control Group Selection

For each marriage in the study group, a marriage was randomly selected from those performed by the Catholic Church in Corleone in the same year. On average, there were 115 marriages per year. To generate one or more random record numbers for the control group, the range of record numbers used in the year a Mafia couple married was entered into an online random series generator, random.org, and the number of records needed for the control group from that year (either one or two) were returned. None of the random numbers generated matched the marriage record number of a Mafia couple already being studied.

The grooms from the control set of marriages appear in the table below:

Control grooms with profile IDs

Groom Wikitree ID Year of Marriage
Sebastiano Ciravolo Ciravolo-38 1815
Salvatore Fratello Fratello-66 1834
Mariano Cutrone Cutrone-76 1843
Biagio Saporito Saporito-34 1852
Luciano Provenzano Provenzano-178 1859
Giovanni Catania Catania-80 1862
Biagio Provenzano Provenzano-191 1870
Antonio Ala Ala-4 1872
Giovanni Costantino Costantino-41 1873
Carmelo d’Anna D’Anna-50 1880
Matteo Mangiameli Mangiameli-67 1880
Domenico Zangara Zangara-39 1881
Francesco di Puma Di_Puma-1 1883
Antonino Grizzaffi Grizzaffi-182 1884
Antonio Sartella Sartella-1 1884
Giuseppe Cimino Cimino-84 1887
Pietro d’Anna D’Anna-74 1889
Giuseppe Trombaturi Trombaturi-11 1889
Giuseppe la Cava La_Cava-2 1893
Salvatore Pomilla Pomilla-60 1893
Leoluca Morello Morello-72 1894
Giuseppe Carlino Carlino-37 1895
Bernardo Cutrone Cutrone-79 1897
Nicolo’ di Gregorio Di_Gregorio-26 1897
Mariano Provenzano Provenzano-192 1898
Calogero Pecoraro Pecoraro-32 1900
Silvestre Vajana Vajana-1 1902
Giuseppe Verro Verro-46 1902
Onofrio Azzara Azzara-3 1903
Gaetano Mangano Mangano-57 1904
Giuseppe Labruzzo Labruzzo-39 1906
Rocco Rao Rao-299 1906
Giuseppe di Vita Di_Vita-2 1908
Andrea Coniglio Coniglio-67 1909

Although some of these men and their brides married multiple times, for the purposes of this study, only one of their marriages is being compared to the study group.

Of note, Sebastiano Ciravolo (Ciravolo-38), the first groom listed in the table above, is the brother of Nicolo’ “Puntillo” Ciravolo (Ciravolo-20), from Rapanzino’s gang, and a member of the study group. Leoluca Morello (Morello-72) is a third cousin of gang leader Giuseppe Morello (Morello-35), whose two marriages are both included in the study group. Giuseppe Verro (Verro-46) is a third cousin of the trade unionist, Bernardino Verro (Verro-22), who did not marry before his assassination in 1915, and so is not a part of this study.

Family Trees

The next challenge was to create family trees for the bride and groom in each marriage being studied, in both the study and control groups. Typically a family’s genealogy is only traced 3-4 generations to determine the coefficient of relationship, a convention initially established for reasons of convenience. (Vogel and Motulsky 2010) Dispensations for marriage between closely related individuals were only required out to the degree of second cousins, who share great-grandparents, three generations back. Cavalli-Sforza et al (2004) note that the Church’s documentation, used to determine degree of consanguinity, would typically only chart family trees going back three generations. However, their published results combine all consanguineous marriages out to the degree of third cousins, who share a common ancestor four generations back, among their twice-great grandparents (great-great grandparents, or 2GG).

For each marriage in this study, family trees were built for the bride and the groom, to the fourth generation, in order to match the results of Cavalli-Sforza. Using vital records, primarily marriage records kept by the Catholic Church, individual profiles for brides, grooms, and their ancestors, have been maintained on Wikitree.com, an open source genealogy website. The Wikitree Relationship Finder was used to find common lines of descent.

Limitations

Not all family trees could be completed. The supporting documentation that Cavalli-Sforza et al used for their study are unindexed, making them unsuitable for this research project. Instead, matrimonial records for Corleone, which are indexed (and which were presumably consulted in constructing the supporting documentation), were the primary resource. Other records consulted include a Church census, baptismal and death records, immigration records, contemporary newspapers of record, and the Italian Senate and trial records mentioned in Part 2.

In some cases, the bride, groom, or one of their direct ancestors is officially illegitimate, or has moved to Corleone from another town. In other cases, the parents of the bride, groom, or one of their direct ancestors, cannot be identified, because their vital records have not been found in a diligent search.

Parents % known Grandparents % known G-Grandparents % known 2GG % known
Mafia couples 1.000 0.868 0.790 0.680
Control couples 0.971 0.827 0.733 0.594
Difference 0.029 0.040 0.057 0.086
Average 0.985 0.847 0.762 0.637

In theory, 100% completion of this study, as designed, would mean finding 1,050 marriage records: fifteen ancestral marriages for of each of the seventy marriages in the study. In reality, that number is somewhat lower than 1,050, because some of the individuals in the study share common ancestors.

Overall, 98.5% of parents, and close to two-thirds of great-great grandparents are known.The rate of completion is slightly higher for the family trees of Mafia couples compared with the control group. The most common reason for an ancestor being unknown was because they were born outside of Corleone. The other two reasons were formal illegitimacy and other genealogical “brick walls.”

Next week, I will share the results.

Sources:

  1. Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Antonio Moroni, and Gianna Zei. Consanguinity, Inbreeding, and Genetic Drift in Italy. Princeton University Press, 2004.
  2. Michael Speicher et al, Eds. Vogel and Motulsky’s Human Genetics: Problems and Approaches. 4th Ed. Springer, 2010.

 

Image credit: Il Pozzoserrato, Pleasure garden with a maze

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 2

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 2

To study mafia marriages, first, you need to find the mafiosi.

See Part 1 of this series.

To study the marriages of Mafia members requires several steps. First, there is the identification of members of a secret, criminal organization. A few, like members of Giuseppe Morello’s family, and the bosses of Corleone, have been written about many times, and a wealth of biographical information is available on them.

The identities of some members of the Mafia are unambiguous: they are named in trial records that give the defendants’ birthdates, hometowns, and parents’ names. Adding to the names of known members are Mafia historians Dino Paternostro, John Alcorn, and Richard Wagner, and others, who have named dozens of mafiosi from Corleone, and the time periods during which they were active, both in Sicily and in the United States.

Following accepted genealogical standards, I have built cases for the identities of over a hundred individuals named in connection to the mafia in Corleone. You can find them on Wikitree, categorized as “Corleone Mafia.” Occasionally, my work overlaps with that of other “Arborists” on the site. I am not the only one who has done genealogical research on, and written biographies for, the many thousands of people from Corleone on Wikitree, but I have done a lot of it. Each profile has a history, so if you’re curious, and a Wikitree member (it’s free to join), you can find out exactly what I contributed and when on the “Changes” tab of any profile. You can also see what I’ve been doing most recently on Wikitree, on my activity feed. For the last several months, much of my activity has been the genealogical research for this consanguinity study.

Of the Mafia members who were either born or married in Corleone, thirty-five of their marriages, performed between 1815 and 1909, were selected for this study. I cut off the study at 1909 because after that year, full marriage records are not available online, making the selection of controls a degree more difficult. The earliest marriages come from the first documented, organized criminals from Corleone that I’ve yet found.

The median year of marriage is 1889. Three of the mafiosi (Nicolo’ Ciravolo, Marco Maggiore, and Giuseppe Morello) married twice, and in each case, both of their marriages are included, so they each appear twice in the test group, below.

Mafia members included in study, with profile IDs on Wikitree

Mafia Member Wikitree ID Year of Marriage
Giuseppe Battaglia Battaglia-103 1870
Antonino Cascio Cascio-157 1906
Carmelo Cascio Cascio-432 1902
Biagio Ciancimino Ciancimino-10 1852
Nicolo’ Ciravolo Ciravolo-20 1815
Nicolo’ Ciravolo Ciravolo-20 1834
Mariano Colletto Colletto-38 1898
Luciano Crapisi Crapisi-12 1880
Salvatore Cutrera Cutrera-34 1859
Bernardo di Miceli Di_Miceli-100 1862
Domenico di Miceli Di_Miceli-128 1881
Angelo Gagliano Gagliano-50 1902
Calogero Gagliano Gagliano-52 1906
Luciano Gagliano Gagliano-9 1880
Michaelangelo Gennaro Gennaro-85 1884
Biagio Jannazzo Jannazzo-1 1843
Luciano Labruzzo Labruzzo-55 1897
Antonino lo Jacono Lo_Jacono-16 1872
Calogero lo Jacono Lo_Jacono-18 1884
Marco Maggiore Maggiore-8 1893
Marco Maggiore Maggiore-8 1908
Calogero Majuri Majuri-23 1893
Pietro Majuri Majuri-6 1897
Giovanni Mancuso Mancuso-307 1887
Francesco Mancuso Mancuso-313 1883
Antonio Mariano Mancuso Mancuso-77 1889
Giuseppe Morello Morello-35 1889
Giuseppe Morello Morello-35 1903
Paolino Streva Streva-64 1894
Carlo Taverna Taverna-7 1904
Bernardo Terranova Terranova-29 1873
Ciro Terranova Terranova-31 1909
Pasquale Vasi Vasi-2 1895
Francesco Zito Zito-78 1900

Of the Mafia members included in this study, the oldest are Nicolo’ Ciravolo and Biagio Jannazzo, members of Rapanzino’s gang of cattle rustlers who were nearly all killed by police in 1835. (Real 1836)

Biagio Ciancimino; Luciano Crapisi; Salvatore Cutrera; brothers Antonino and Calogero lo Jacono; Marco Maggiore and his uncle Calogero Majuri (note the two spellings of the same surname); Francesco, Giovanni, and Mariano Mancuso (all three of no known relation); first cousins Bernardo and Domenico di Miceli; and Carlo Taverna; are all named among Fratuzzi membership around 1900, by the journalist Dino Paternostro. (2004)

Giuseppe Morello, his stepfather Bernardo Terranova, and his stepbrother Ciro Terranova, all founding members of the Morello gang in New York, a predecessor of the Genovese crime family, are well documented, most famously by William J. Flynn in “The Barrel Mystery.” (Flynn 1919) Other New York City gangsters from Corleone include the counterfeiter Pasquale Vasi, who is described by Richard Wagner et al (2014), and in contemporary newspapers.

The criminal activities of Carmelo Cascio, Mariano Colletto, and brothers Calogero and Luciano Gagliano, contemporaries of Bernardino Verro, have been written about by John Alcorn and Dino Paternostro.

Fratuzzi bosses Giuseppe Battaglia, Angelo Gagliano, Michaelangelo Gennaro, and Luciano Labruzzo are known from multiple sources, including Flynn (1919) and Paternostro, and from Italian Senate inquest and trial records, which also name Antonino Cascio (a distant cousin of Carmelo) and Francesco Zito. Flynn also describes the young Mafia captain, Paolino Streva, who collaborates as a cattle thief with Morello in Corleone, under Battaglia’s leadership.

Next week, this series continues with more on my methods, including selection of a control group.

Sources

  1. John Alcorn. “Revolutionary Mafiosi: Voice and Exit in the 1890s.” Accessed http://www.comune.corleone.pa.it/file%20da%20scaricare/Saggi%20palermo1_Saggi%20palermo1.pdf 5 May 2016.
  2. Archivio di Stato di Palermo, GP, aa. 1906-1925, b. 267, f. 3, Associazione per delinquere scopertosi in Corleone, 13 Agosto 1916.
  3. Dino Paternostro. «Fratuzzi», antenati di Liggio e Riina. La Sicilia: 8 August 2004.
  4. Dino Paternostro. La «punciuta» di Bernardino Verro. La Sicilia: 1 August 2004.
  5. William J. Flynn. The Barrel Mystery. The James A. McCann Co.: New York, 1919.
  6. Real Segreteria di Stato presso il Luogotenente Generale in Sicilia Ripartimento Polizia Repertorio anno 1836. Accessed http://archiviodistatodipalermo.it/files/inventari/file/1263903377anno1836.pdf 6 August 2015.
  7. Senato della Repubblica VII Legislatura. Documentazione allegata alla relazione conclusiva della commissione parlamentare d’inchiesta sul fenomeno della mafia in Sicilia. Accessed http://legislature.camera.it/_dati/leg08/lavori/stampati/pdf/023_001011.pdf 13 May 2016.
  8. Richard Wagner, Angelo Santino, and Lennert Van ‘t Riet. “The Early New York Mafia: An Alternative Theory.” The Informer: May 2014. Accessed https://www.scribd.com/doc/222924210/2014-02-Informer-May-2014 11 January 2016.

Feature image: Giorgio Sommer [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 1

Are Corleone’s Mafiosi more likely to marry close relations? Part 1

Over the next several weeks, I will share the results of my first study, into the rates of consanguineous marriage among known members of the Mafia in Corleone, and a control group matched by year of marriage.

I’ve noticed that Mafia members in Corleone appear to marry into other known Mafia families, engage in double in law marriages, and marry close blood relations, all at higher rates than is typical for the town as a whole. A few months ago, I decided to quantify my observations beginning with a controlled study of the blood relations between members of the Fratuzzi and their wives.

Cavalli-Sforza and his co-authors have written the definitive text on consanguineous marriage in Italy, and have paid special attention to Sicily which, owing to its geography and political history, is more isolated than the Italian peninsula. I planned to use their results as a baseline for my own research.

The genealogical documentation that accompanies every marriage is created by a priest, using the baptismal and marriage records. The results were used by the Church to determine degree of relation, which it labeled in degrees I through IV. First degree is the closest relations that are ever allowed to marry, and fourth is the most distant relations still requiring dispensation to marry.

Cavalli-Sforza et al’s research is based on these marriage records created by the Church. The authors are geneticists, with different research aims, and so their categories are slightly different, but map neatly onto the Church’s:

Church degrees of relation Cavalli-Sforza
I. uncle-niece/aunt-nephew 12
II. first cousins 22
III. first cousins once removed 23
IV. second cousins 33

consanguineous-marriages-percentageIn this table from the Cavalli-Sforza text, you can see the types of consanguineous marriages are coded by number. The last two categories, “34” and “44,” are second cousins once removed and third cousins, respectively.

At first, I interpreted this table as saying that half of all marriages required dispensation, due to the bride and groom being first cousins (“22”). In fact, that column shows not the percentage of all marriages, but of all marriages requiring dispensation. The total percentage of marriages that were consanguineous is in the second to last column of this table.

rate-of-consanguineous-marriage

Overall, the incidence of marriage in Sicily between third cousins or closer relations has historically been around five percent of all marriages, according to Cavalli-Sforza’s figures, peaking at around ten percent, and returning to those levels later in the century.

Typically, 25% of your genes will also be found in any one of your aunts’ or uncles’ DNA. You share half as much of your DNA with one of your parents’ siblings as you do with one of your own brothers or sisters. If you have a half-sibling, your coefficient of relationship is also 25%. In other words, you have as much in common with a half-sibling, genetically, as you do with one of your parents’ full siblings. Half-siblings were not allowed to marry, but uncle-niece or aunt-nephew pairings were, with a dispensation from the Church.

Double first cousins are the products of double in-law marriages. When two siblings from one set of parents marry two siblings from another set of parents, the offspring of these marriages are not just first cousins, but double first cousins. They share as much in common, genetically, as half-siblings, or a man and his niece, or a woman and her nephew. While you and your first cousins share just one set of grandparents in common, double first cousins have both sets of grandparents in common. The Church does not restrict double in-law marriages.

Degree of

relationship

Relationship Coefficient of

relationship (r)

0 identical twins; clones 100%
1 parent-offspring 50% (2−1)
2 full siblings 50% (2−2+2−2)
2 3/4 siblings or sibling-cousins 37.5% (2−2+2−3)
2 grandparent-grandchild 25% (2−2)
2 half siblings 25% (2−2)
3 aunt/uncle-nephew/niece 25% (2⋅2−3)
4 double first cousins 25% (4⋅2−4)
3 great grandparent-great grandchild 12.5% (2−3)
4 first cousins 12.5% (2⋅2−4)
6 quadruple second cousins 12.5% (8⋅2−6)
6 triple second cousins 9.38% (6⋅2−6)
4 half-first cousins 6.25% (2−4)
5 first cousins once removed 6.25% (2⋅2−5)
6 double second cousins 6.25% (4⋅2−6)
6 second cousins 3.13% (2⋅2−6)
8 third cousins 0.78% (2⋅2−8)
10 fourth cousins 0.20% (2⋅2−10)

Table source: Wikipedia

Cavalli-Sforza categorize marriages between double first cousins as “Multiple,” indicating that the bride and groom are related through multiple common ancestors.

Since the priests would go back at most three or four generations to complete the documentation supporting a marriage, any common ancestors revealed by the supporting documentation are close enough relations to have a significant impact on a potential couple’s shared coefficient of relation. While discussion of the existing research has focused on the rates of marriage in the first two categories (uncle-niece and first cousin marriages, respectively), and Cavalli-Sforza describe the first category as having an unusually high number of marriages, there’s no telling how much consanguinity lies unmeasured under the heading of “Multiple,” especially if, as I have observed, double in-law marriages are common in the populations being studied.

I have hypothesized that my control group in Corleone would turn out to “marry in” at roughly the same frequency as the rest of Sicily, i.e. around 5-10%, and that Mafia marriages would prove more consanguineous, on average, than the control group. Now, the genealogical research is complete. Over the next several weeks, I will share the results.

Sources:

  1. Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Antonio Moroni, and Gianna Zei. Consanguinity, Inbreeding, and Genetic Drift in Italy. Princeton University Press, 2004.
  2. “Coefficient of relationship.” Wikipedia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_relationship Accessed 19 August 2016.

 

Featured Image: “The Olive Trees,” by Vincent Van Gogh

Cousins, many times over

Cousins, many times over

There’s a classic illustration of exponential growth, that goes something like this: a king agrees to play a chess match for a prize: a single grain of rice on the first square of the chessboard, two grains on the second square, and so on, doubling the number for each of the 64 squares. The king loses the match, and soon realizes that the amount of rice he would have to pay is far higher than he imagined: 18,446,744,073,709,551,615, or more than eighteen quintillion grains of rice in total. That’s a lot of rice.

Every genealogist who has gotten very far in charting all of their own ancestors has discovered that doubled numbers get large, very quickly. We all have two parents, four grandparents, and so on: the number of ancestors grows exponentially with each generation.

My closest common ancestor with Salvatore “Toto” Riina is through his mother, Maria Concetta Rizzo. We’re both descended from Giovanni Todaro and Antonina Russo, who married in 1750. Maria Concetta is the fourth great granddaughter of their son, Filippo. Filippo’s sister, Emmanuela, married Leoluca Cascio in 1770, and they are my 5GG. Of my 128 fifth-great grandparents, thirty-two are through my paternal grandfather, and lived in Corleone.

Toto and I are also related through his father, Giovanni Riina. Michaele Giunta and Innocenza Papania, who married in 1729, are Toto’s 5GG and my 7GG. So in addition to being sixth cousins, once removed, on his mother’s side, we are also sixth cousins, twice removed, on his father’s side.

Giuseppe Sangiorgi and Filippa lo Munti, who married in 1683, are also Toto Riina’s direct ancestors and mine: they are his 6GG and my 7GG, which makes us fifth cousins, once removed. We’re also seventh cousins, twice removed, three different ways. Pietro Mannina and Gioachina Biscuso, who married in 1673, are his 6GG and my 8GG. So are Giuseppe Sciacchitano and Caterina Lanza, who married in 1703, and Giovanni Sciortino and Mattea Russo (of no known relation to Antonina), who married in 1689.

Giovanni Fruja and his wife, Giuseppa, who I estimate married sometime before 1650, are my 9GG and Toto Riina’s 7GG, making us 8th cousins, twice removed, through this pair of common ancestors. Another of our common ancestors is Tommaso Cimino (my 6GG, his 8GG), who married twice, first to Toto’s ancestor, and then to mine, making us half-seventh cousins, twice removed.

In population genetics, degree of consanguinity is measured as a percentage of one’s genetic inheritance held in common with another, called a coefficient of relationship (CoR). The more closely related you are to someone, the higher your CoR. Identical twins have a CoR of 100%. You and your mother have a coefficient of 50%, and so do you and any of your full siblings. Half siblings share a coefficient with aunt/uncle-nephew/niece relationships, of 25%.

In the same way the number of grains of rice grows exponentially larger, from one chessboard square to the next, the CoF gets exponentially smaller, the more distant the relationship. Fourth cousins share a coefficient of relationship of only 0.20%. Sixth cousins, once removed, have a CoR of 0.000061035156%

I have multiple ancestors in common with another Corleone Mafia boss, Michelangelo Gennaro. We’re second cousins, four times removed. My fifth-great grandparents, Leoluca Cascio and Emmanuela Todaro, are Michelangelo’s great grandparents.

Michelangelo and Toto are also multiply related. They’re third cousins, three times removed, both being descended from Giovanni Todaro and Antonina Russo. They are also fifth cousins, twice removed, through Domenico Saggio and Domenica Mondello, who married in 1651: they are Michelangelo Gennaro’s 4GG and Toto Riina’s 6GG. And all three of us are descended from my 9GG, Giovanni and Giuseppa Fruja, who are Gennaro’s 5GG and Riina’s 7GG.

Image credit: Giulio Campi, “The Chess Players”

Ten percent of Mafia wives

Ten percent of Mafia wives

Research reveals a common ancestor shared by six Mafia wives, two Mafiosi, and one mafia genealogist.

I’ve identified 101 men who are (or were) known to be involved in organized crime in Corleone. I found them using a selection of primary and secondary sources, in combination with genealogical sleuthing around. News reports, trial records, police blotters, and senate hearings were some of my most important sources for the vital statistics of known Mafia members. I also used the published works of journalists who have written extensively on the subject of the Mafia in Corleone, such as John Alcorn, Mike Dash, and Dino Paternostro. By following the clues of ages and known relationships in these accounts of criminal activity, I’ve been able to connect these individuals with their vital records in Corleone, New York, and elsewhere.

Along with the men, I’ve found three women who are known associates of the Mafia, although the organization does not admit them as full members. Of these, two are wives of known mafiosi. Epifania Scardino was implicated with her husband, Vito Ciancimino, in an S&L fraud. Maria Concetta Leggio, who was a defendant at Bari, is the wife, sister, and daughter of other defendants at the Corleonesi Mafia trial. The third woman is Leoluchina Sorisi, who sheltered Luciano Leggio and who eventually married, away from Corleone.

Three of the men marry twice: Nicolo’ “Puntillo” Ciravolo, a Rapanzino associate, in 1815 and 1834; Giuseppe Morello, who led a gang in New York, in 1889 and 1903, the second time in New York; and Marco Maggiore, active around 1900, who married in 1893 and 1908. A few of the mafiosi, I can confirm, never married. But others were born so late that I haven’t found their marriages in public records. So far, I’ve documented fifty-six marriages of known mafiosi in Corleone, performed between 1815 and 1953.

At least a dozen of these marriages are consanguineous. Half of them, about ten percent of the total, are between relatives closer than second cousins. As I’ve noted previously in this blog, my first attempts at finding a baseline of consanguinity in Corleone have not come close to the percentages that Cavalli-Sforza, Moroni, and Zei report for the province of Palermo, which is why I’m planning a control study, in which I will select a marriage record at random from the same year as each of the mafia marriages. I’ll work out the family trees for these control grooms and brides, and report their rate of consanguinity, for comparison.

One fact that has emerged from the study group is unrelated to my current hypothesis on consanguinity, but will certainly play a part in future research I have planned into the cosci of Corleone. Six of the fifty-six marriages I’ve documented were between known mafiosi and women with the surname Cascio. Their shared name is not a coincidence, either: these six women are all closely related to one another, as well as to the two Cascio men I’ve learned were in the Mafia, Antonino and Carmelo.

The six marriages:

  1. Biagio Jannazzo, a member of Rapanzino‘s gang, married Rosalia Cascio in 1843, several years after most of his associates were killed by the police.
  2. Mariano Mancuso, named by Dino Paternostro as an active member of the Mafia around 1900 in Corleone, married Maria Concetta Cascio in 1889. She is the sister of Carmelo Cascio, who served as mayor after Bernardino Verro’s assassination.
  3. Pietro Majuri married Giovanna Cascio in 1897. He and two of their sons are named in a 1962 Italian Senate hearing on the Mafia.
  4. Carlo Taverna and Angela Cascio married in 1904. Carlo and his brother in law, Giuliano, are both named by Dino Paternostro.
  5. Giuliano Riela married Angela’s sister, Salvatrice, in 1907. Angela and Salvatrice’s parents are second cousins in a double in-law marriage.
  6. Dr. Michele Navarra was the boss of the Mafia in Corleone until his assassination by Luciano Leggio. Navarra married his first cousin, Tommasa Cascio, in 1936. Tommasa is the daughter of first cousins, once removed.

Tommasa and her second cousins, the sisters Angela and Salvatrice, are all grandnieces of Rosalia, Biagio Jannazzo’s wife. And they are all descendants of Vito lo Cascio and Antonia la Rosa, a married couple who are the sixth-great-grandparents (6GG) of Maria Concetta and Carmelo, the 5GG of Giovanna, Angela, and Salvatrice, the 4GG of Antonino, and the 3GG of Rosalia. Vito and Antonina are my ancestors, too: they are my eighth-great-grandparents.

 

Of Note: My study of the kinships among known bosses of the Fratuzzi, the Corleonesi mafia, appears in this month’s issue of Informer, a journal of the history of American crime and law enforcement.

 

Image credit: Portrait of Lucrezia de’ Medici di Cosimo by Bronzino. Public Domain. Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1202867