PDA

View Full Version : Ancient DNA England: Iron age, Roman-Gladiator, and Anglo Saxon



Fire Haired14
19-01-16, 22:33
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Retiarius_stabs_secutor_(color).jpg

Today the third paper this year with ancient British/Irish DNA was published: Genomic signals of migration and continuity in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons (http://Genomic signals of migration and continuity in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons). (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/full/ncomms10326.html)

Table 1. (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_T1.html) Gives a Description of all the samples. All of them come from York, England (https://www.google.com/maps/place/York,+UK/@53.8102273,-3.5778174,6.25z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4878c340e19865f1:0x4774ab898a54e 4d1). One an Iron age Celtic-Briton woman, 6 are Roman-era men(>45 years old) who were gladiators or Roman soldiers, and one is an Anglo Saxon male.

Most Interesting News: 5/6 of the gladiators/soldiers were native Britons and one was from SouthWest Asia(ID=3DRIF-26). In PCA he clusters with Jordanians/Palestinians and in ADMIXTURE he scores most similar to Jordanians/Palestinians. He also belonged to typical West Asian Y DNA J2. Furthermore, Isotope analysis confirm he was born in the Levant or Africa, and not anywhere in Europe.

This is interesting because this is an example of a man who traveled from the SouthEastern-tip(Syria, Palestine, etc.) of the Roman empire to the NorthWestern tip(Britain) of the Roman empire. He reveals that in the Roman empire there was cross-Continental travel which was pretty much unheard of till modern times.

More Interesting News: 5/5 of the Briton males belonged to R1b1a2a1a-L51, but two belonged to typical German R1b-U106 and on belonged to typical Italian/Central European R1b-U152. Only one was confirmed to belong to typical British/Irish R1b-L21.

Here are the first two.
Neolithic and Bronze Age migration to Ireland and establishment of the insular Atlantic (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/12/22/1518445113)
Iron Age and Anglo-Saxon genomes from East England reveal British migration history (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10408/full/ncomms10408.html)

Summary of What We've Learned from Those two Papers.
In 3000 BC the British Isles were inhabited by "EEF/MN" people who were roughly 70% Neolithic Anatolian and 30% Mesolithic European. Then around 2000 BC a new people from mainland Europe who were mostly from mainland European"EEF/MNs" but also had significant(~1/3) from Bronze age Pontic-Caspien Steppe. Those new people did admix with the natives but not very much. From 2000 BC to 0 AD no significant genetic changes occurred in the British Isles. Then around 500 AD Anglo Saxons, who were closest to modern Danish and Dutch, arrived. The Anglo Saxon contribution to modern English is estimated at 30-40%, and the rest should be mostly from Celtic-Britons.

Angela
19-01-16, 23:27
I just got alerted to it by this article in archaeology news:
http://archaeology.org/news/4081-160119-driffield-terrace-skeletons

That led me to this University of York article and then to the paper.
http://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2016/research/headless-romans/

Maybe it's because I've only quickly skimmed the actual paper, but while the "gladiators" or "soldiers" are similar to the Iron Age sample, the isotope analysis shows that they may have been raised outside of Britain.

That might have implications for understanding that 2/6 carried U-106, usually held to signal "Germanic" migrations. Either they came from nearby on the continent, from similar people, or U-106 arrived before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, perhaps with the Belgae?

How interesting also that we find our first Roman Era Middle Eastern sample in Britain! We need to see a comparison of him to early Anatolian farmers and to various Jewish populations. Just from a quick look through he's less SSA than modern Palestinians, yes? That would be pretty much as expected. He's also pretty close to both Saudi's and UAE and modern Syrians depending on the tool used. We really need a better fix through isotope analysis as to precisely where he originated. If he's actually Roman Era Syrian versus Idumean or Judean it makes a difference to the analysis. Also it's important to see if better resolution can be achieved for his yDna J2.

Athiudisc
20-01-16, 00:06
I'll be interested in seeing if we find more U106 in less-military (or less gladiatorial) contexts; the presence of Frisian auxiliaries in northern England is generally acceptable (if not completely accepted), and Romans would throw anything into an arena, but there is still the Belgae question Angela mentions.

Fire Haired14
20-01-16, 02:26
Maybe it's because I've only quickly skimmed the actual paper, but while the "gladiators" or "soldiers" are similar to the Iron Age sample, the isotope analysis shows that they may have been raised outside of Britain.

That might have implications for understanding that 2/6 carried U-106, usually held to signal "Germanic" migrations. Either they came from nearby on the continent, from similar people, or U-106 arrived before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, perhaps with the Belgae?

In the Supp. Info they give detailed description of Isotope Analysis. All except one(6DRIF­21) genetically British individual is consistent with being born and raised in NorthEast England. Those articles must have not received detailed info. It is surprising one genetically British might not have been local, but the rest were locals. The gladiators died in 200-400 AD.

Angela
20-01-16, 03:32
Imputation and phenotype determination

"Using a similar approach to that of Gamba et al.15 (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/full/ncomms10326.html#ref15), we used phased reference genomes from the 1000 Genomes Project to impute genotypes associated with phenotypic traits. In particular, we inferred genotypes at SNP positions to predict eye and hair pigmentation29 (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/full/ncomms10326.html#ref29). The most common predicted phenotype in the Roman burial samples is brown eyes and black/brown hair. However, one sample, 6DRIF-18, was estimated to have had a distinctive appearance with blue eyes and blonde hair, as did the single Anglo-Saxon individual. We also inferred that blood group O is the most common in the Roman samples (Supplementary Table 17 (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/full/ncomms10326.html#supplementary-information)). The Iron-Age sample is also estimated as blood type O and the Anglo-Saxon is likely to have been type B or possibly type A. Five samples returned imputed lactase persistence genotypes: two Roman burials and the Iron-Age individual were likely to have been lactase persistent, while two Romans, 6DRIF-22 and the suspected migrant 3DRIF-26 were homozygous for the ancestral non-persistence variant."

Interesting that only one of the Roman Era samples was blond and blue eyed and that not only were the rest black or dark brown haired, but they were also dark eyed. The Bronze Age samples were also mainly brown eyed, or am I remembering that wrong? The coming of the Anglo-Saxons probably had an impact on that, which makes sense for England given the percentages of admixture in England and even parts of Wales, but I'm not sure about what went on in Ireland.

I took a look at SLC45A2 derived, and 2/6 were not yet homozygous derived, although they carried one derived allele. That's very rare today not only in England, but even in Ireland. Forget about the Spanish Armada sailors. There were Colin Farrell and Aiden Turner types running around long before that, or maybe, given the Welsh similarity, Jonathan Price? :)
http://media.baselineresearch.com/images/112047/112047_full.jpg

Aiden Turner...oh yes, indeed. :)
http://images.radiotimes.com/namedimage/Where_have_you_seen_Poldark_s_Aidan_Turner_before_ .jpg?quality=85&mode=crop&width=620&height=374&404=tv&url=/uploads/images/original/71577.jpg


Also interesting that lactase persistence was not yet a done deal, although there was a lot of it.

LeBrok
20-01-16, 04:02
That might have implications for understanding that 2/6 carried U-106, usually held to signal "Germanic" migrations. Either they came from nearby on the continent, from similar people, or U-106 arrived before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, perhaps with the Belgae?

I don't remember who, but one of british historians in one of documentaries I watched, had a hypothesis, that before Saxon invasion there was rather long and slow migration (in Roman period) from area of today's Holland, I think he said related to Frisian language speakers. That could have been potential source of U-106 before Saxons came.

LeBrok
20-01-16, 04:14
Also interesting that lactase persistence was not yet a done deal, although there was a lot of it.That's good. According to my hypothesis the process was ongoing to end of Little Ice Age around 19 hundreds AD. This is when it has achieved maximum for Northern and Central Europe. Every time crops failed in Northern Europe the number of people with LP rose. I'm expecting that climatic disaster of Dark Ages was a major event in positive selection of LP. There should be a big jump in LP numbers in population between 400 and 800 AD.

Angela
20-01-16, 05:30
Just some fun facts. I knew there were famous Thracian and Gallic gladiators, but I didn't know if there were any Middle Eastern ones.

There were...Flamma, a Syrian.

"Flamma (http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=fUoLHH7dFLUC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=flamma+gladiator&source=bl&ots=BA0ZqMvv-e&sig=Os7mHgjJT1umn2ftQMNeUh_gM2s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AYZaUbLmJuiNiAfV4YG4Dw&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=flamma%20gladiator&f=false), a Syrian slave, died at the age of thirty—having fought thirty-four times and having won twenty-one of those bouts. Nine battles ended in a draw, and he was defeated just four times. Most notably, Flamma was awarded the rudis a total of four times. When the rudis was given to a gladiator, he was usually freed from his shackles, and allowed to live normally among the Roman citizens. But Flamma refused the rudis, opting instead to continue fighting."
http://listverse.com/2013/04/02/10-famous-gladiators-from-ancient-rome/

What possessed him?

From another source I learned he was a Secutor:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secutor

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/b2/45/26/b245268b763272843c8b16a078f16311.jpg

As the picture Fire-Haired posted shows, a Secutor would fight a Retiarius.

Oh, I see someone has suggested he might have been a Nabataen. It's certainly possible in terms of climate and flora and fauna, and the genetics would work, I think.

Vukodav
20-01-16, 10:04
Modern Britons are descended from Levantine slaves. It's official.

Fire Haired14
20-01-16, 12:03
They might not have all been 100% Briton. In PCA some pull towards East Europe. It's possible they had some East German(Vandals, Goths) ancestry and that's where they got their R1b-U106 from.

@Angela,

Yeah, the results are unexpected. 2/5 had rs12913832 AA which only 1-5% in England and Ireland have today. The Iron age Hinxton guy also had AA.

Drac II
20-01-16, 13:09
Historians have known for a long time (even as far back as the 19th century) that there were considerable numbers of foreigners, including Middle Easterners, in Roman Britain simply by examining the available historical evidence:

https://books.google.com/books?id=yC7CCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA130&dq=%22He+is+a+reminder+that+Roman+Britain,+with+it s+exotic+mix+of+peoples,+was+also+a+place+where+pe ople+spoke+anything+from+the+variant+forms+of+indi genous+dialects+to+eastern+languages.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj7sLyknrjKAhVBQSYKHaRtBvYQ6AEIHTAA#v=on epage&q=%22He%20is%20a%20reminder%20that%20Roman%20Brita in%2C%20with%20its%20exotic%20mix%20of%20peoples%2 C%20was%20also%20a%20place%20where%20people%20spok e%20anything%20from%20the%20variant%20forms%20of%2 0indigenous%20dialects%20to%20eastern%20languages. %22&f=false

Britain was a "frontier" place, never fully conquered and pacified, so it was in constant need of soldiers at a time when the Roman armies themselves had already become predominantly composed of foreigners. It is hardly surprising, therefore, to find evidence of such diverse groups of foreigners there.

LeBrok
20-01-16, 17:50
They might not have all been 100% Briton. In PCA some pull towards East Europe. It's possible they had some East German(Vandals, Goths) ancestry and that's where they got their R1b-U106 from.

@Angela,

Yeah, the results are unexpected. 2/5 had rs12913832 AA which only 1-5% in England and Ireland have today. The Iron age Hinxton guy also had AA. That's because many fail to see it as an evolutionary process which changes amount of positive mutations in time. I bet that LP and skin whitening process is pretty much ongoing till our times in Northern Europe, therefore their levels are only growing with time, being positive mutations. Aside from physical population movements.

berun
20-01-16, 20:36
Maybe it's because I've only quickly skimmed the actual paper, but while the "gladiators" or "soldiers" are similar to the Iron Age sample, the isotope analysis shows that they may have been raised outside of Britain.

Good question; in fact I have very big doubts that all five gladiators would be locals; there are a lot of academic references but Wikipedia has the basics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian%27s_Wall


Simon Schama (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Schama) says that our understanding of everyday life for soldiers at the wall forts & the population around them have been “transformed” by "one of the most astonishing finds of recent Roman archaeology": the excavations at Vindolanda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindolanda) and the Vindolanda tablets (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindolanda_tablets). Schama cites an inspection on 18 May between AD92 and AD97 where only 456 of the full quota of 756 Dutch and Belgian troops were present, the rest being sick or otherwise absent

Romans were not dumb; the worst idea would be to put britons defending Britania... as they could take arms to fight the southerner invasors (Romans); it was common to defend frontiers with cohorts from other regions: the soldiers got their salary, becoming also the enemies of the locals, so their Roman loyalty increased.

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


In the Late Republic, about half the gladiators (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator) who fought in Roman arenas were slaves, though the most skilled were often free volunteers.

It makes sense to find two "Germanic" U106 beacuse many slaves were before that prisoners of war (Germania, Arabia...).

To use this biased data as to understand ancient genetics is a bad deal.

Angela
20-01-16, 22:42
I don't think these men would have been rebel gladiators of any kind. The slaves and gladiators executed during the Servile Wars were almost always crucified. Decapitation was a relatively more "honorable" form of execution, usually reserved for citizens, and I think there's a certain respect in the way the heads were placed near the bodies. (Other methods of execution in Republican Rome involved being pushed off the Tarpeian rocks or just being placed in a sack and thrown into the Tiber or, often, strangulation. For parricide, the worst of sins in Rome, you were flayed alive and then sewn into a sack with wild animals and tossed into the river. Later on, they probably were just tossed into the local Circus for the wild animals.)

As for cowardice in battle, the punishment probably varied, but most often it was stoning or being flogged to death. In extreme circumstances of mass cowardice or desertion, sometimes the decimatio was used where the custom was for the men to be rounded up in groups of ten, one man then being chosen by lot from among the ten, and the other nine were forced to beat him to death. Horrific, but probably effective. Theft was often punished by clubbing or whipping or being put into a sack with snakes and then thrown into a nearby lake or river.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_military_decorations_and_punishments#Punishm ents

It doesn't make much sense to me that they were rebels against Roman rule, either, or even marauders or raiders from north of the Wall. The enemy dead weren't treated in this way. The leaders were brought to Rome in chains, strangled and then tossed into the Cloaxa or the Tiber, and the "commoners" were either killed in battle and dumped into mass graves, or enslaved. I don't think we'd see cemeteries or this kind of care taken with the remains.

Also, we have to consider that from what I can tell, these burials stretched over the entire 100-300 AD period. (It would be important to know if the tested remains all date from the same time period, but I can't find a break-out by precise date for them, much less for the remainder of them.)

If the beheaded samples, which are a little more than 50% of the 80 or so found, all bore marks of battle in one form or another, but stem from various periods, then perhaps it was a gladiator cemetery, although I still have a hard time accepting that dead gladiators would be treated with this kind of respect. Perhaps it's more likely that they were soldiers, drawn indeed from around the Empire and then executed relatively painlessly for some infraction?

It's pretty clear that some were native Britons, however, which shouldn't be surprising. Some tribes allied with Rome pretty early, and more and more as time went on. There are dozens of books on the topic, but you can see the following for a description of the work of the British auxiliaries. Of course, some of them wound up in legions on the continent.
https://books.google.com/books?id=yfPYAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA330&dq=native+Britons+serving+in+the+Roman+legions+in+ Britain&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitrpXcmLnKAhXMVD4KHXdfBkcQ6AEITDAH#v=on epage&q=native%20Britons%20serving%20in%20the%20Roman%20 legions%20in%20Britain&f=false

Perhaps some were executed by their leaders for one infraction or another, but it's also possible they were soldiers killed in border skirmishes whose bodies were retrieved and buried, some with their heads still nearby but others where they couldn't find the head. The "Celts" were well known for taking the heads of their enemies.

"Siculus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diodorus_Siculus), in his 1st-century History had this to say about Celtic head-hunting:
They cut off the heads of enemies slain in battle and attach them to the necks of their horses. The blood-stained spoils they hand over to their attendants and striking up a paean and singing a song of victory; and they nail up these first fruits upon their houses, just as do those who lay low wild animals in certain kinds of hunting. They embalm in cedar oil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedar_oil) the heads of the most distinguished enemies, and preserve them carefully in a chest, and display them with pride to strangers, saying that for this head one of their ancestors, or his father, or the man himself, refused the offer of a large sum of money. They say that some of them boast that they refused the weight of the head in gold."



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decapitation#Celts

Of course, some of this may have been standard trash talking about the enemy.

To return to the subject of the "British" origin of these particular samples, this article in the National Geographic shows that they knew in 2010 that many of the 80 men were of "foreign" origin.

"Oxygen and strontium isotopes in the bones of the headless Romans indicate that just 5 of the 18 individuals tested came from the York area, the team reports in the new study, published in the current issue of the Journal of Archaeological Science (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622854/description#description).
The rest of the men came from elsewhere in England or mainland Europe, possibly from France, Germany, the Balkans, or the Mediterranean."

These must be among those included in the study, right?

"Traces of carbon and nitrogen show that five of the headless Romans ate very different foods from York's local population. And two individuals had a carbon signature from a group of food plants—including sorghum, sugarcane, and maize—not known to have been cultivated in England at that time."

Other than the "Syrian", I don't think any of these would have been included, right?

Where the heck did they grow sorghum, sugarcane and maize at this time period in or around Europe?

"In fact, millet is the only food plant from this group that was being grown anywhere in mainland Europe, she added.

The archaeologist noted that "the Romans were not very fond of millet, and often, when they established a new province, other cereals such as wheat would replace millet as the principally grown crop.

Müldner's team thinks the headless millet-eaters hailed from colder climates, perhaps parts of Eastern Europe that were beyond the borders of the Roman Empire.

It might have been the Alps as well, or any higher mountains," Müldner said."

The Romans did eat millet, in porridge form, but preferred wheat. In fact, in the legions you were downgraded from wheat to millet rations for minor infractions. I know it can't be used with leavening agents.

Anyway: "It was a staple of the Sumerians and treasured plant grown in the hanging gardens of Babylon...There is evidence that millet was grown during the Stone Age by lake dwellers in Switzerland and was eaten in Northern Europe at least since the Iron Age. It was a staple in arid areas of India and Africa for thousands of years."
http://www.edenfoods.com/articles/view.php?articles_id=122

In the Middle Ages it was consumed more than wheat.

You'd think they might have informed readers of the paper of the yDna signature of the sample(s) in the study which shows millet consumption in childhood or the isotope signature of the continent.

However, the remains tested here, other than the "Syrian", overlap with the Welsh above all. Now, one could say, well, maybe people in France and central Europe were all "Welsh like" at that time. That's possible, I suppose, but doesn't the isotope analysis make it clear that of the tested samples in the paper all but the Near Easterner and one other were born and raised not only in Britain, but in the northeast of Britain?

Vukodav
20-01-16, 23:00
It's obvious that modern Britons have nothing to do with ancient ones. Millions of Levantine slaves settled in Britain and turned it in a racially mixed country.

berun
20-01-16, 23:33
Of course ancient Germans could be more similar to Welsh than today's Germans; the last 2000 years have left a lot of admixture in Europe. About the isotopes this theme it's quite new to me but the testings done are allways local, there are not comparisions with other European regions so my doubt is yet there... moreover after reading in Supplementary:

1.2.3 Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotope Results
δ 13 C and δ 15 N values of five of the genotyped individuals fall within or marginally outside (6DRIF3) ±2
SD of the mean for RomanoBritish humans from York (n=173) (Supplementary Fig. 4). These data are
consistent with the local RomanoBritish diet which was very predominantly based on terrestrial
C3 resources, but probably with small contributions of marine protein to the diet of at least parts of the
population 7,8 . Two of the individuals (3DRIF26 and 6DRIF18)
have dentine δ 15 N values which are higher than the York mean +3 SD (or further than 1.5 interquartile ranges from the median).
Consequently, neither individual was consuming the typical York diet, at the time when the sampled tooth
roots were forming, between c. 7 and 14 years of age 71. Indeed, the two datapoints are equally unusual
when compared with the sizeable human dataset available from all of Roman Britain (mean δ 13 C 19.6
±0.7 and δ 15 N 10.2 ± 1.3‰ (1 SD)).

Maybe this difference could be explained by the different gladiator's diet, or maybe that their diet was from another region. All is under doubts.

Fire Haired14
20-01-16, 23:38
@Angela, thanks for the info.


I don't think these men would have been rebel gladiators of any kind. The slaves and gladiators executed during the Servile Wars were almost always crucified. Decapitation was a relatively more "honorable" form of execution, and I think there's a certain respect in the way the heads were placed near the bodies. (Other methods of execution in Republican Rome involved being pushed off the Tarpeian rocks or just being placed in a sack and thrown into the Tiber or, often, strangulation. For parricide, the worst of sins in Rome, you were flayed alive and then sewn into a sack with wild animals and tossed into the river. Later on, they probably were just tossed into the local Circus for the wild animals.

LOL, Holy Crap!!! That's the maximum capacity of savageness. Um, I wonder how Rome would deal with ISIS.
https://i.imgflip.com/xoy3y.jpg



Müldner's team thinks the headless millet-eaters hailed from colder climates, perhaps parts of Eastern Europe that were beyond the borders of the Roman Empire.

Besides Irish/Welsh/Scottish they had the most IBS with Lithuania and Poland.

Angela
21-01-16, 00:24
It's obvious that modern Britons have nothing to do with ancient ones. Millions of Levantine slaves settled in Britain and turned it in a racially mixed country.

I get your point, Vukodav. I think the comments will be very different when a "Syrian" or "Egyptian" merchant or manumitted slave is found in ancient Rome. However, you've already made it once before in this thread.

No matter how many soldiers, or gladiators, or slaves, or traders, or whatever migrate to a country, if their genetic signature is pretty close to that of the "natives" it won't make much of a ripple, and it will be difficult to quantify the number of people involved in these "foreign" migrations. If it's really different, but there isn't a mass invasion, their signature will get diluted.

Now let's move on.

Angela
21-01-16, 01:16
@Angela, thanks for the info.



LOL, Holy Crap!!! That's the maximum capacity of savageness. Um, I wonder how Rome would deal with ISIS.
https://i.imgflip.com/xoy3y.jpg



They took being a patriarchy seriously. :)

Execution was relatively rare for Roman citizens because it was supposed to be only for treason, and only after a trial and their concept of due process. Patricide was, however, seen as treason to one's father, and Christianity as treason to the state. Rape of a boy or a woman, if they were citizens, also resulted in a death sentence, although I don't remember the logic of making it treason. There were even statutes providing that the victims could not be held to be at fault. (Rape of slaves was a different matter, and I suppose the rape of the women of enemy tribes.) Of course, when it was a case of a mad, bad, emperor, he could decide pretty menial acts against him, even writing satires, were treason to the state as he embodied the state. Then there was always making up evidence to seize the estates. Still, if you didn't move in his circles, normal rules applied.

As for ISIS and related issues,

"According to the Historia Augusta (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Augusta) [10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_military_decorations_and_punishments#cite_no te-10) the future Emperor Aurelian once ordered a man who was convicted of raping the wife of the man on whom he had been billeted to be attached to two trees drawn together so that when the restraining ropes were cut, they sprang apart and the unfortunate victim was torn asunder."

One can see the logic, even if the punishment is incredibly brutal. If that kind of thing was permitted, there would be constant rebellion in subjugated provinces.

The following site describes the various punishments meted out in the military. It obviously was very different from the civilian world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_military_decorations_and_punishments#Punishm ents_for_crimes

Flogging was a biggie; it's what happened to Jesus as well. Flogging remained a biggie down the centuries; flogging a man until he died was still practiced in the militaries of European countries in the 19th century.

I just remembered something else. Gladiators were in certain periods not executed for losing, but even when they were, it was by a sword thrust from behind down through the neck. It was considered more merciful than hacking with a dull blade or hatchet. It's depicted in "The Gladiator" if you saw it. It's another point against them being gladiators.

Greying Wanderer
21-01-16, 01:26
IIRC the Hinxton samples were too northern european and required some kind of mixture to match the modern British population and the argument was over whether this mixture came from a pre-existing Welsh-like substrate or some later continental population movement. Seems to me these gladiators / soldiers being close to modern Welsh answers that question.

So to my mind its: "Welsh" substrate with waves of invaders from the north sea over many centuries with some culturally Celtic (Belgae) and some culturally Germanic (A-S) but with similar genetics to confuse everyone.

(Where Welsh = Celtic + Atlantic Megalith?)

(Makes me wonder if the Belgae (or some similar tribe) came all the way from the Baltic i.e. Caesar says they were German looking and crossed the Rhine early but were they living just across the Rhine previously or had they come on a long tribal wandering from much further away?)

@Angela

"There were Colin Farrell and Aiden Turner types running around long before that, or maybe, given the Welsh similarity, Jonathan Price? :)"

Silures - if the gladiator / soldiers were typical of darker substrate + northern Celts and the substrate proportions increased to the west then the Silures would likely be noticably darker.

#

edit:

removed some stuff not sure of

Angela
21-01-16, 01:29
Of course ancient Germans could be more similar to Welsh than today's Germans; the last 2000 years have left a lot of admixture in Europe. About the isotopes this theme it's quite new to me but the testings done are allways local, there are not comparisions with other European regions so my doubt is yet there... moreover after reading in Supplementary:

1.2.3 Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotope Results
δ 13 C and δ 15 N values of five of the genotyped individuals fall within or marginally outside (6DRIF3) ±2
SD of the mean for RomanoBritish humans from York (n=173) (Supplementary Fig. 4). These data are
consistent with the local RomanoBritish diet which was very predominantly based on terrestrial
C3 resources, but probably with small contributions of marine protein to the diet of at least parts of the
population 7,8 . Two of the individuals (3DRIF26 and 6DRIF18)
have dentine δ 15 N values which are higher than the York mean +3 SD (or further than 1.5 interquartile ranges from the median).
Consequently, neither individual was consuming the typical York diet, at the time when the sampled tooth
roots were forming, between c. 7 and 14 years of age 71. Indeed, the two datapoints are equally unusual
when compared with the sizeable human dataset available from all of Roman Britain (mean δ 13 C 19.6
±0.7 and δ 15 N 10.2 ± 1.3‰ (1 SD)).

Maybe this difference could be explained by the different gladiator's diet, or maybe that their diet was from another region. All is under doubts.

I'm not sure that I follow; the diet was consumed when they were children, and the foods weren't grown in England, or even in Europe for some of them.

Sample 3DRIF26 is the Syrian (or Nabataen) autosomally, so his results make sense. I'd like to know the yDna of sample 6DRIF18 and if he was one of the millet eaters.

Ed. Isn't 6DRIF18, one of the two "foreigners" in this tested group, the only one of the Iron Age and Roman era samples who is blonde and blue eyed?

Greying Wanderer
21-01-16, 02:30
Also interesting that lactase persistence was not yet a done deal, although there was a lot of it.

I'm wondering about this now.

The Rastlin island dudes are all R1b-L21 and LP dating from 2026–1534 cal BC.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.abstract

This is a long time before the historical Celtic expansion from La Tene / Halstatt or Belgae.

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

In this new paper two of the roman era samples are R1b-L21
- 3DRIF-16
- 6DRIF-3
plus the earlier iron age woman

Table 16 in the supplementaries shows LP

5/9 samples have results for LP, 3 positive and 2 negative.


Five samples returned imputed lactase persistence genotypes: two Roman burials and the Iron-Age individual were likely to have been lactase persistent, while two Romans, 6DRIF-22 and the suspected migrant 3DRIF-26 were homozygous for the ancestral non-persistence variant.

So effectively 3/5 LP or 3/4 LP if you exclude the east med guy and
- Iron age woman and one of the two L21 males are LP (and the other L21 is blank not negative)
- other LP is 6DRIF-23

So?

Not inconsistent with the BB celts having a much higher rate of LP and later arrivals of (La Tene / Hallstat / Belgae) reducing the percentage.

#

edited a lot cos late and dumb

Vukodav
21-01-16, 05:45
There is no Baltic ancestry in any of those samples. Celtic and Germanic nobles had more Steppe admixture than commoners, which pulls them towards EHG-rich populations like Balts and Finns.

Angela
21-01-16, 07:03
I'm wondering about this now.

The Rastlin island dudes are all R1b-L21 and LP dating from 2026–1534 cal BC.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.abstract

This is a long time before the historical Celtic expansion from La Tene / Halstatt or Belgae.

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

In this new paper two of the roman era samples are R1b-L21
- 3DRIF-16
- 6DRIF-3
plus the earlier iron age woman

Table 16 in the supplementaries shows LP

I may be misreading this somehow but it seems to only have five results with four left blank yet in the text it says



6DRIF-22 and 3DRIF-26 are the ones marked in the table as two yellow bars which I assume means both ancestral alleles.

So the five positive for LP should include the three mentioned in the quote plus two more?

Either way my main point is the iron age woman and one of the two L21 males are LP and the other L21 is blank.

So?

Not inconsistent with the BB celts having a much higher rate of LP and later arrivals of (La Tene / Hallstat / Belgae) reducing the percentage.

For Romano Britons they got results for only 3 of them. Then they have results for the Jordanian (homozygous ancestral) and for the Iron Age woman, who was heterozygous, so she was probably LP.

Of the three Roman-Briton samples where they were able to get results, one (# 3-L21+) was homozygous derived, one (#22 U-152) was homozygous ancestral, and one, #23, is heterozygous, so probably lactase persistent, which means 2/3 Romano-Briton samples with results were already LP, or 3/4 of all the British samples if you count the Iron Age woman. However, 2 of those three were only heterozygous. Don't take any of this to the bank; it's late. :)

IF this is representative, levels are higher now, I think. Has anyone looked at homozygosity rates in Britain for LP?

I'm even less comfortable making broad generalizations about La Tene Celts (if that's even where the ancestors of some of these men came from) versus the prior inhabitants, when we don't have results for the other 3 samples, and have so few samples in total.

(I don't remember; were the Rathlin samples homozygous or were they also heterozygous?)

As far as the pigmentation is concerned, north east Britain wasn't exactly home turf for the Silures was it? I'm not saying there might not have been movement within Britain, but I don't know why you'd assume they were Silures.

@Fire-Haired,

Unless I'm misreading it, it's number 18 who might have spent his childhood elsewhere, yes? He's also the only one of the Romano Britons who is blonde and blue-eyed.

@Vukodav,
I'm not following you. These samples are either soldiers in the Roman army, or gladiators. What do Celtic and Germanic nobles have to do with it?

Greying Wanderer
21-01-16, 08:24
@Angela


IF this is representative, levels are higher now, I think.

Yes. It's not important but on first reading the frequency looked low and therefore made me lean more towards the idea of a gradual increase over time but then it struck me the results were still consistent with the idea of a dramatic increase during BB times and a reduction in the frequency in eastern Britain from the earlier BB layer being pushed back by later Celtic invasions.


As far as the pigmentation is concerned, north east Britain wasn't exactly home turf for the Silures was it? I'm not saying there might not have been movement within Britain, but I don't know why you'd assume they were Silures.

I wasn't clear. I meant that if the York people were a mixture of a darker Welsh-like substrate and more recent north sea Celts coming from the east then if there was a higher proportion of the Welsh substrate further west then it would fit with the Romans thinking the Silures in Wales were noticably darker.


Unless I'm misreading it, it's number 18 who might have spent his childhood elsewhere, yes? He's also the only one of the Romano Britons who is blonde and blue-eyed.

Of the three tests Strontium, Oxygen and Carbon/Nitrogen
- 6/7 are within the British range for Strontium (outlier the J2 guy)
- 5/7 within previous British range for oxygen (outliers the J2 guy and 6DRIF-21)(but they think the range might need to be revised upward)
- 5/7 within previous British range for the Carbon/Nitrogen test (outliers J2 guy and 6DRIF-18)

6DRIF-18 is discussed more in another paper here

http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Mueldner-et-al-2011-Headless-Romans-JAS-Accepted.pdf

which says he had a lot of Nitrogen as a kid so either he ate a lot of freshwater fish or may have come from elsewhere with his genetics implying Britain.

The York diet apparently had some fish so maybe he was just a fisherman's kid?

Greying Wanderer
21-01-16, 10:05
Three carriers of the rs2228479 red hair gene
- M1439 (iron age woman)
- 3DRIF-16 (one of the R1b-L21)
- 6DRIF-22 (R1b-DF23)

Alan
21-01-16, 13:52
How interesting also that we find our first Roman Era Middle Eastern sample in Britain! We need to see a comparison of him to early Anatolian farmers and to various Jewish populations. Just from a quick look through he's less SSA than modern Palestinians, yes? That would be pretty much as expected. He's also pretty close to both Saudi's and UAE and modern Syrians depending on the tool used. We really need a better fix through isotope analysis as to precisely where he originated. If he's actually Roman Era Syrian versus Idumean or Judean it makes a difference to the analysis. Also it's important to see if better resolution can be achieved for his yDna J2.

Something tells me he might have been a Ghassanid. That he had somehow less SSA is also a confirmation of what we know, that post Islamic expansion SSA admixture rised slightly.

berun
21-01-16, 18:25
The diet of the gladiators is quite expressive: thw two "British" L21 are inside York's parameters for Nitrogen/Carbon, the other tell other histories (Figure 4): 6DRIF-22, the "Gaulish" U152 as said had more N intake when young (change of diet? change of place...?); the blondy 6DRIF-18 is out of the parameters as said; same for our "Arab" J2; and for 6DRIF-23 he had less C intake when adult. So it is unexpected to have such figures for a kind of people (gladiators) that mainly came from a market of prisoners of war dedicated to make fun from their fights and deads? Nothing unusual. But what to do when the parameters of York are very similar to that of South Germany? how to distinguish migrations like that? The archaeologists found that they had and stronguer right arm, one of the beheaded had a bear o lion's mark, and the way to finish their lives fits well for gladiators that lost the fight in the arena.

Even so, it's no matter if they were locals or foreigners, the case is that the kind of samples are the worst to get conclusions about local britons as such samples are by sure biased, as the Arab guy clearly demonstrates. OK for foreign "gaulish" U152 and "German" U106 in the burial (Occam's razor), being also possible for the matter that they were sons of foreign slaves, or being even possible that they were local britons: the Atlantic Bronze Age ties to Hallstadt and the La Tène Culture some centuries later could be good moments for the introduction of such clades, cultures, and Celtic languages.

Fire Haired14
21-01-16, 18:52
Three carriers of the rs2228479 red hair gene
- M1439 (iron age woman)
- 3DRIF-16 (one of the R1b-L21)
- 6DRIF-22 (R1b-DF23)

That isn't a red hair variant. 0/7(xArab) had a Red hair variant. That's abnormal for modern Isles Celts. But I don't think it means anything, Tacitus said many British Celts had Red hair.

Tomenable
21-01-16, 23:49
Great study.

What is interesting is that some gladiators/soldiers were significantly "Eastern-shifted" with their closest matching modern populations being - apart from Welsh, Irish and Scottish - Lithuanian and Polish (while for example German and Austrian far behind). One also ate millet grains as a child and grew up in a more continental, colder climate (according to authors). Another interesting thing (I expected this because I did not believe that U106 is only Germanic) is the discovery of U106 in Roman-era men who were determined to be autosomally of Native Briton origin (though it's possible that their ancestors were Belgae or some other continental sub-group of Celts).

The Anglo-Saxon sample was I1-M253, further strengthening long-predicted Germanic links of this haplogroup.

While Germanic affiliations of R1b-U106 with this study turn out to be weaker than previously thought.

Tomenable
22-01-16, 00:11
They might not have all been 100% Briton. In PCA some pull towards East Europe.

Actually they do not pull towards some "generic East Europe".

They pull toward Lithuania and Poland, but not towards Belarus, which is much lower:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/images/ncomms10326-f2.jpg

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/images/ncomms10326-f2.jpg

Tomenable
22-01-16, 00:20
You can't claim that those gladiators/soldiers are "pulling towards East Europe".

They are not pulling towards East Europe as a whole. They are pulling very specifically towards LT-PL, then towards North-West Europe, then towards Belarus, then France/North Italy, and only then the rest of East Europe, to a much lesser extent than LT-PL:

(too bad, that in case of the rest of East Europe, they did not describe which country is which):

http://s21.postimg.org/d751mlrc7/East_Europe.png

Authors also claim that those Eastern-pulling individuals were eating millet grains in childhood - quote:


analysis of chemical signatures in the bones and teeth of other skeletons from the cemetery had determined that some of the men grew up in colder climates, perhaps Germany or further east in continental Europe. The chemical evidence also indicated some of them ate millet grain—a crop that was unavailable in Britain—as children.

Millet was for sure unavailable in Britain and was also unavailable in Scandinavia.

Millet is always associated very strongly with Slavic expansion, but also East Germanics* had it according to new findings.

As for the association of millet with Slavic migrations and expansion - such an excerpt:

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu1330969837

"(...) [millet is] a uniquely Slavic cultigen in Europe that may be useful in studying Slavic migrations (...)"

*Millet was found in Gothic Wielbark culture and Vandal Przeworsk culture in the area of Poland - see these publications:

"Diet and society in Poland before the state: stable isotope evidence from a Wielbark population (2nd c. AD)":

http://www.ptantropologiczne.pl/en/ckfinder/userfiles/images/AR/vol76/AR_76-1-001-022.pdf

"Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis of Human Diet Change in Prehistoric and Historic Poland":

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=osu1330969837&disposition=inline

"Preliminary evidence for medieval Polish diet from carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes":

https://www.academia.edu/324137/Preliminary_evidence_for_medieval_Polish_diet_from _carbon_and_nitrogen_stable_isotopes

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 00:40
That isn't a red hair variant. 0/7(xArab) had a Red hair variant. That's abnormal for modern Isles Celts. But I don't think it means anything, Tacitus said many British Celts had Red hair.

http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs2228479


rs2228479, known as Val92Met or V92M, is one of several SNPs in the MC1R (http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/MC1R) gene commonly associated with red (or blond) hair and poor tanning, but note its high presence in one Asian population


But I don't think it means anything

Probably not but one of my pet theories involves red hair as a marker for early metal working.

Tomenable
22-01-16, 00:45
So it seems that milet is now a "uniquely Slavic AND East Germanic (Gothic)", not just Slavic.

==========================

Another hint is the similarity of Poles to prehistoric genomes from the island of Gothland:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/prehistoric-scandinavians-genetically.html

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 01:02
Great study.

What is interesting is that some gladiators/soldiers were significantly "Eastern-shifted" with their closest matching modern populations being - apart from Welsh, Irish and Scottish - Lithuanian and Polish (while for example German and Austrian far behind). One also ate millet grains as a child and grew up in a more continental, colder climate (according to authors). Another interesting thing (I expected this because I did not believe that U106 is only Germanic) is the discovery of U106 in Roman-era men who were determined to be autosomally of Native Briton origin (though it's possible that their ancestors were Belgae or some other continental sub-group of Celts).

The Anglo-Saxon sample was I1-M253, further strengthening long-predicted Germanic links of this haplogroup.

While Germanic affiliations of R1b-U106 with this study turn out to be weaker than previously thought.

For me those things all point at a rolling maritime source: Baltic -> North Sea, with individuals and tribes kinda sliding along the coast.

#


Millet was for sure unavailable in Britain and was also unavailable in Scandinavia.

This paper discusses the diet tests further - they mention millet has sometimes been found in Britain in the context of barracks supplies - maybe imported for auxilia from regions used to it?

http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Mueldner-et-al-2011-Headless-Romans-JAS-Accepted.pdf

#

@Angela

They recruited a lot of Syrian archer auxiliaries

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxilia#Archers

#

@Tomenable

Gothland always struck me as a possibly significant given the geography

Tomenable
22-01-16, 01:12
So those with "Polish-Lithuanian" affinities had U106 or U152 ???

I wonder which subclade of U106 and / or U152 did they have:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-U106/

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-U152/

Perhaps soon Genetiker or someone else will post Y-SNP calls.

Tomenable
22-01-16, 01:16
This paper discusses the diet tests further - they mention millet has sometimes been found in Britain in the context of barracks supplies - maybe imported for auxilia from regions used to it?

Thank you! Here is the excerpt:

http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Mueldner-et-al-2011-Headless-Romans-JAS-Accepted.pdf


Of particular interest were two individuals whose diet contained asignificant proportion of C4-plant (probably millet) –based protein. These are the first such isotope values observed in Britain from any archaeological time-period. Millet was not cultivated in the British Isles in antiquity and the results therefore demonstrate the value of palaeodietary data for assisting in isotopic mobility studies.

But the authors say that they ate millet in childhood, long before living in military barracks:

"The chemical evidence also indicated some of them ate millet grain—a crop that was unavailable in Britain—as children."

However:


maybe imported for auxilia from regions used to it?

Maybe those children were mixed children of Auxilia men from millet-eating regions with local British women ???

And that's why they ate millet in childhood.

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 01:47
Thank you! Here is the excerpt:

http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Mueldner-et-al-2011-Headless-Romans-JAS-Accepted.pdf



But the authors say that they ate millet in childhood, long before living in military barracks:

"The chemical evidence also indicated some of them ate millet grain—a crop that was unavailable in Britain—as children."

However:



Maybe those children were mixed children of Auxilia men from millet-eating regions with local British women ???

And that's why they ate millet in childhood.

I need to read it again because it's a bit confusing but...

I think it says some of the 80+ samples from the graveyard had a high millet diet but if you check the labels those samples *aren't* from the ones in the current paper - they are from other samples in the graveyard.

IIRC the only one of the seven roman era samples in the current paper (excluding the east med guy) who is outside the range on the Carbon/Nitrogen test is 6DRIF-18 who is outside the range on Nitrogen (from fish) rather than Carbon (from millet).

You have to double check the sample label because the samples in the earlier paper are different.

#

Otherwise yes - maybe it's somehow connected to soldiers being fed millet in barracks. Just a guess though.

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 01:50
So those with "Polish-Lithuanian" affinities had U106 or U152 ???

I wonder which subclade of U106 and / or U152 did they have:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-U106/

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-U152/

Perhaps soon Genetiker or someone else will post Y-SNP calls.

It makes you wonder where the Belgae came from originally.

Angela
22-01-16, 04:05
I need to read it again because it's a bit confusing but...

I think it says some of the 80+ samples from the graveyard had a high millet diet but if you check the labels those samples *aren't* from the ones in the current paper - they are from other samples in the graveyard.

IIRC the only one of the seven roman era samples in the current paper (excluding the east med guy) who is outside the range on the Carbon/Nitrogen test is 6DRIF-18 who is outside the range on Nitrogen (from fish) rather than Carbon (from millet).

You have to double check the sample label because the samples in the earlier paper are different.

#

Otherwise yes - maybe it's somehow connected to soldiers being fed millet in barracks. Just a guess though.

That's how I interpret it as well. The millet eating wasn't in reference to the autosomally Romano-British samples.

Plus, I don't understand some of the comments in both the paper and the studies posted above since growing and even eating millet was very common in the Roman World. It's just that, going by the ancient authors, although some people liked it if cooked in certain ways, including boiled in milk, most well to do Romans much preferred wheat and only used millet for animal fodder and bird seed unless the wheat crops failed. Poorer people would eat it, of course, and as I mentioned above, when soldiers were punished they were sometimes given millet rations instead of wheat rations. So, even if not grown specifically in Britain in that time period, I'm sure it was imported.

See: Millet in the Roman World-Charlene Murphy
https://www.academia.edu/12839687/Finding_Millet_in_the_Roman_World

7606


Until corn was brought in from the New World, millet was used in Northern Italy to make polenta, just as during the Roman Era they used it to make puls. The most common way I've eaten it is in thick soups with farro and lentils.

If you search google.it for "ricette con miglio" there are dozens and dozens.

Fire Haired14
22-01-16, 04:39
http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs2228479

rs2228479 is not usually considered a variant. The Red hair variants are: rs1805007 and rs1805008 and then many much more rare variants(inclu. rs1805006, rs1805009, rs1110400, and others).

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 05:18
rs2228479 is not usually considered a variant. The Red hair variants are: rs1805007 and rs1805008 and then many much more rare variants(inclu. rs1805006, rs1805009, rs1110400, and others).

There's a lot of them for sure.

Tomenable
22-01-16, 11:32
Those people were not soldiers, but gladiators - here is a documentary about them (in total 80, but DNA of 6 was tested):

http://watchdocumentary.org/watch/gladiators-back-from-the-dead-video_13d4008d0.html

Angela is right that millet wasn't totally unknown to the Romans, also user Vettor from Anthrogenica noticed this - quote:

(however, this refers to Republican times, several centuries before the lifetime of those gladiators from York):


the Romans where eating millet mixed with either chestnut flour or with spelt in the republican days of the empire ( BC times ). it was called Pulmentu ( polenta ).
History of Polenta
In Roman times, polenta (or as they knew it, pulmentu) was the staple of the mighty Roman Legions and would eat it in either a porridge or in a hard cake like form, much like today. commonly eaten since Roman times. Before the introduction of corn (maize) from the New World in the 16th century,[2] polenta was made with such starchy ingredients as farro, chestnut flour, millet, spelt, and chickpeas.[3]

Granted, modern Polenta is made by maize imtroduced into Europe in the 16th century from South America.

So unless those gladiators were 300 years old (and they were less than 45 years old), they did not spend childhood in BC times.

Moreover - the fact remains, that in PCA (Figure 1.) one of gladiators clusters autosomally firmly within E.Europe (Ru - Russia?):

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F1.html

And in IBS (Figure 2.) the combined sample of gladiators (excluding Near Easterner) shows similarities to Lithuanians and Poles:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F2.html

Tomenable
22-01-16, 11:40
This paper says:

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/28535/


There are no native C4-cultigens in Britain, and although the first finds of millet date from the Roman period, these are so rare that they have been interpreted as ‘exotic’ imports, rather than widely available crops

Tomenable
22-01-16, 13:42
(Ru - Russia?)

Sorry, that is not Ru, but Hu - Hungary.

Milan
22-01-16, 15:24
Growing and eating millet was common in the Thracian world also;
FOOD AND NUTRITION (LATE 2nd - 1st MILLENNIUM BC)
Roumyana Georgieva


During the period under consideration, vegetarian food predominated in Thracian cuisine. Leavened and unleavened bread was used, as well as porridge made of barley and wheat groats.Other foods were: milk, cheese, broad beans - mashed and in the form of soup, fresh and dried peas, and lentil. During the warmer months the food was diversified with fresh vegetables (dock, sorrel, cabbage, etc.), mushrooms and fruits (apples, peaches, grapes, etc.). Fresh fish, game and domestic animals were the source of animal proteins. Meat food was consumed rarely, moreover predominantly in the cold months, when it was possible to conserve it. The Thracians usually had two meals per day.
There were foods that attributed a special image to Thracian cuisine: dairy products (yoghurt, butter, cheese, curd), the drinks and dishes made of millet, consumptions of onion and garlic, use of wine undiluted with water.

While Millet made its way from China to the Black Sea region of Europe by 5000 BC.

MOESAN
22-01-16, 16:05
That's because many fail to see it as an evolutionary process which changes amount of positive mutations in time. I bet that LP and skin whitening process is pretty much ongoing till our times in Northern Europe, therefore their levels are only growing with time, being positive mutations. Aside from physical population movements.

I 've some difficulty to swallow an only evolutionary process in so a short time. Based on what? what drastic climatic difference distinguishes northern and southern Europe or other places at those times? I'm almost sre we are missing something. I have no answer just now but... a linkage with other genetic peculiarities selecting for other traits???
Not I deny natural selection but I don't understand this speed of selection there... Sure we 'll have the explanation someday.

MOESAN
22-01-16, 16:11
It's obvious that modern Britons have nothing to do with ancient ones. Millions of Levantine slaves settled in Britain and turned it in a racially mixed country.

Where and when did you picked all that? Or it's a humor tentavie of yours?

MOESAN
22-01-16, 16:32
[QUOTE=Greying Wanderer;474563]IIRC the Hinxton samples were too northern european and required some kind of mixture to match the modern British population and the argument was over whether this mixture came from a pre-existing Welsh-like substrate or some later continental population movement. Seems to me these gladiators / soldiers being close to modern Welsh answers that question.

So to my mind its: "Welsh" substrate with waves of invaders from the north sea over many centuries with some culturally Celtic (Belgae) and some culturally Germanic (A-S) but with similar genetics to confuse everyone.

(Where Welsh = Celtic + Atlantic Megalith?)

(Makes me wonder if the Belgae (or some similar tribe) came all the way from the Baltic i.e. Caesar says they were German looking and crossed the Rhine early but were they living just across the Rhine previously or had they come on a long tribal wandering from much further away?)

I was told (red) sometime Caesar - as good politic as he was good general - trying to put Roman people to believe he had vanquishied Germans had selected the higher statured Belgae he had at hand to have them to ressemble to Germans, so they were maybe not so closed (confirming Coon). Some old scientists thought for Belgae were come late enough (not eARLY iRON° from Bohemia/East Bavaria.
That said it seems that in the Belgae territory there were some Germanics tribes: geographic mixture is not by force ethnic mixture.
Spite I think Y-R1b-U152 was the dominant haplo among Belgae, I don't exclude some Y-R1b-U106 element among them.
The 'germanic' look was more based upon morals and dressing (more archaic) than something else.

Angela
22-01-16, 18:05
Those people were not soldiers, but gladiators - here is a documentary about them (in total 80, but DNA of 6 was tested):

http://watchdocumentary.org/watch/gladiators-back-from-the-dead-video_13d4008d0.html

Angela is right that millet wasn't totally unknown to the Romans, also user Vettor from Anthrogenica noticed this - quote:

(however, this refers to Republican times, several centuries before the lifetime of those gladiators from York):



So unless those gladiators were 300 years old (and they were less than 45 years old), they did not spend childhood in BC times.

Moreover - the fact remains, that in PCA (Figure 1.) one of gladiators clusters autosomally firmly within E.Europe (Ru - Russia?):

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F1.html

And in IBS (Figure 2.) the combined sample of gladiators (excluding Near Easterner) shows similarities to Lithuanians and Poles:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F2.html

The following is from the description of the documentary at the site to which you linked:

"The men were also all buried with some respect and their final resting places included grave goods as well as large joints of meat – making it less likely they were executed criminals.

But the theory they were gladiators is still open to dispute. As yet there has been no evidence of an amphitheatre found in York and there is nothing conclusive about the men’s injuries.

They could have been inflicted in battle and there were no injuries from weapons like the three-pointed trident which were specifically used by certain types of gladiator.

Because of this York Archaeological Trust has set up a website offering the public the chance to have their say. Opinions can be left at at headlessromans.co.uk.

John Walker, York Archaeological Trust’s chief executive, said: “This is a fascinating discovery that gives a real insight into the world of interpreting archaeology.”

“With archaeology, you are very rarely dealing in the definite. There are almost always elements of ‘possibly’ and ‘probably’ and the archaeologist’s job is to weigh up the evidence and make an informed judgment on the most likely explanation.”

Journalists sensationalize; scholars usually don't. I'll add again that the usual method of execution for gladiators was a single sword thrust from behind down through the neck, not hacking repeatedly with dull blades, which is what these remains show. Also, I find it unusual that the remains had grave goods; the run of the mill gladiator wasn't treated with this kind of respect. The puncture wounds could be post-mortem for all we know, from a bear. That would be very likely if these men were auxiliaries who were killed somewhere nearer the wall and left there before being retrieved. On the other hand, if they were auxiliaries one would think there would be some military paraphernalia buried with them, unless their bodies were stripped after their death.This discussion reminds me of the ones that surrounded the discovery of Oetzi; lots of conjecture but little proof.

I'm keeping an open mind.

As to the millet, perhaps you didn't have time to read the paper I posted, Tomenable, or look at the map of where it was grown. It wasn't grown just in Republican times, and the Romans raised a lot of it, as the ancient literature indicates. It's just that they gave it to animals and the poor. The fact that there aren't that many finds is probably due to the fact that it was usually pounded, turned into flour, and then boiled for human consumption. To eat it in bread form was unpopular because the bread was so dense and so hard on the teeth. There are pictures of what the teeth look like after a life time of eating bread made from it.
http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/037/235/i02/ET20-mandible-130227.jpg?1361993604

This is how it was usually eaten by humans in the Roman world.
http://p-fst1.pixstatic.com/52556de9697ab06b29000f92._w.540_h.360_s.fit_.jpg


The important fact is that the six Romano-Brits cluster with each other and with the Iron Age British sample and with the modern Welsh most of all. Now, maybe that autosomal signature also existed in France and nearby areas, and maybe there was some variation among them, with one sample having picked up some ancestry, maybe through the Belgae, that had more of an "eastern" leaning, but none of those six, who aren't even the ones who show evidence of having eaten millet, shows evidence of recent ancestry from Russia.

I mean, I understand wanting to identify with ancient people, Tomenable, and for men, perhaps with soldiers or gladiators, but it's as if you want the Slavs to be like Forest Gump, present and crucial at every stage of human history. :) It doesn't work like that for any group.

Angela
22-01-16, 18:25
Where and when did you picked all that? Or it's a humor tentavie of yours?

I shouldn't speak for him, but it's sarcasm. That's the meme about Italians on anthrofora. One of the usual suspects is already hinting it's a done deal for Italy, but then he's on record as saying we're, or at least southern and perhaps central Italians, aren't European and should be kicked out of the "club", so for now it's just wishful thinking. :) I always wonder why he reserves this for us and never mentions the Spaniards with their North African and SSA and the Balkanites with their West Asian. Perhaps, since he's not actually European, some Italian kid of the diaspora beat him up and took his lunch money, or stole his girlfriend? :) More likely it's tied to anti-Semitism. Ah well, the workings of unbalanced minds are always a mystery to some extent.

Immaterial to me but it gets under the skin of some Italians. They should know better, in my opinion.

Sorry for the off-topic comment. I apologize.

Angela
22-01-16, 21:40
Unless I've totally misread the paper, the reference to millet eating had nothing to do with the Romano Brits whose genetic results were published; it has to do with other remains not analyzed for autosomal or uniparental dna, or, if analyzed, not published.

Therefore, it has no probative value for a possible eastern European origin for the ancestry of the more "eastern" plotting Romano Brit.

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 23:30
Unless I've totally misread the paper, the reference to millet eating had nothing to do with the Romano Brits whose genetic results were published; it has to do with other remains not analyzed for autosomal or uniparental dna, or, if analyzed, not published.

Therefore, it has no probative value for a possible eastern European origin for the ancestry of the more "eastern" plotting Romano Brit.

Yes the millet thing is a red herring. It's mentioned in the second paper but when you check the labels of the millet samples they're not the Romano-British samples.

So yes there may have been east Europeans in the grave yard but they weren't these six samples - the two outliers among the romano-british samples (excluding the middle eastern guy) were one had too much Oxygen and one had too much Nitrogen (from fish apparently).

Greying Wanderer
22-01-16, 23:37
@Tomenable


Those people were not soldiers, but gladiators

died as gladiators maybe but what were they when their teeth were growing?


Moreover - the fact remains, that in PCA (Figure 1.) one of gladiators clusters autosomally firmly within E.Europe (Ru - Russia?):

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F1.html

And in IBS (Figure 2.) the combined sample of gladiators (excluding Near Easterner) shows similarities to Lithuanians and Poles:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160119/ncomms10326/fig_tab/ncomms10326_F2.html

That is significant but they also cluster with each other and modern Welsh which implies to me they were from a local population who had already mixed with people originally from the Baltic-Poland so maybe some of the Belgae had rolled down the coast from there?

(Another possibility might be Wales and Lithuania both have some rare component which pulls them together. IIRC there was something like that mentioned on a very old Dionekes thread?)

LeBrok
23-01-16, 05:28
I 've some difficulty to swallow an only evolutionary process in so a short time. Based on what? what drastic climatic difference distinguishes northern and southern Europe or other places at those times? I'm almost sre we are missing something. I have no answer just now but... a linkage with other genetic peculiarities selecting for other traits???
Not I deny natural selection but I don't understand this speed of selection there... Sure we 'll have the explanation someday.

I sort of did in one of my posts:


That's good. According to my hypothesis the process was ongoing to end of Little Ice Age around 19 hundreds AD. This is when it has achieved maximum for Northern and Central Europe. Every time crops failed in Northern Europe the number of people with LP rose. I'm expecting that climatic disaster of Dark Ages was a major event in positive selection of LP. There should be a big jump in LP numbers in population between 400 and 800 AD.
European type of LP and whitening of skin started pretty much 10-6 thousand years ago. Is this too short for you to achieve majority of population in Northern Europe? That's something like 400-300 generations. I think it it doable under strong environmental forcing.

LeBrok
23-01-16, 05:37
As to the millet, perhaps you didn't have time to read the paper I posted, Tomenable, or look at the map of where it was grown. It wasn't grown just in Republican times, and the Romans raised a lot of it, as the ancient literature indicates. It's just that they gave it to animals and the poor. The fact that there aren't that many finds is probably due to the fact that it was usually pounded, turned into flour, and then boiled for human consumption. To eat it in bread form was unpopular because the bread was so dense and so hard on the teeth. There are pictures of what the teeth look like after a life time of eating bread made from it. I noticed that too. Millet was more popular among poor and used as animal feed. I think it grows easily everywhere but it doesn't taste too good. I don't remember eating it, or if I did it didn't make a mark in my memory.

I remember my aunt used millet to feed chickens in Poland.

Fire Haired14
23-01-16, 09:11
I sort of did in one of my posts:
European type of LP and whitening of skin started pretty much 10-6 thousand years ago. Is this too short for you to achieve majority of population in Northern Europe? That's something like 400-300 generations. I think it it doable under strong environmental forcing.

Quick correction, not being know it all jerk.

The "European skin became white 6,000-10,000 years ago" theory is false and based on rs1426654(AA) which was very popular in EHG/SHG/CHG/EEF 8,000 years ago. That theory was destined to be false because genetics often ignore the Middle East. Middle Easterners have 100% rs1426654(AA), but genetics continued to treat this as a European-specific mutation.

With the markers associated with skin color, it suggests white-skin lightening in Europe happened when Steppe/EEF mixed around 2800 BC. Then after that it continued to be selected all over Europe into the Bronze age. We have no sizable databases of DNA from before 8,000 years ago. EHG, SHG, and EEF 8,000 years ago had decent frequencies of both Light skin-mutations, and I wouldn't be surprised if their ancestors did 10,000 years before.

There's no evidence any process began 10-6k years ago that made things differnt than they were 1,000s of years before. There's just documentation that rs16891982(GG) tripled in frequency between 3000 and 2800 BC. rs16891982(GG) is what was selected for, and no one predicted what we're finding in ancient DNA. That's the only evidence of a skin-lightning process going on. Late Neolithic Europe in 2800 BC is a totally differnt world than Mesolithic/Neolithic Europe in 8000-4000 BC.

The same goes for Lactose-persistence SNPs. The first confirmed existence is in Late Neolithic Europe, but there's also old studies which document it in Neolithic Spain and Sweden. There's other SNPs associated with foods only farming/herding people could create that only appear in EEF or later in EEF/WHG/Steppe.

Angela
23-01-16, 19:45
I shouldn't speak for him, but it's sarcasm. That's the meme about Italians on anthrofora. One of the usual suspects is already hinting it's a done deal for Italy, but then he's on record as saying we're, or at least southern and perhaps central Italians, aren't European and should be kicked out of the "club", so for now it's just wishful thinking. :) I always wonder why he reserves this for us and never mentions the Spaniards with their North African and SSA and the Balkanites with their West Asian. Perhaps, since he's not actually European, some Italian kid of the diaspora beat him up and took his lunch money, or stole his girlfriend? :) More likely it's tied to anti-Semitism. Ah well, the workings of unbalanced minds are always a mystery to some extent.

Immaterial to me but it gets under the skin of some Italians. They should know better, in my opinion.

Sorry for the off-topic comment. I apologize.

Drac, I just noticed that you give a negative rating to virtually everything I post. Well, anything that at all hints that Spaniards might not be twins of Scandinavians or the Irish, anyway. :) Maybe when I have a chance I'll add them up and keep a running tally which I'll have posted instead of my quote.

My father always told me that someone's enemies say even more about them than their friends. I'm more than pleased with what mine say about me.

LeBrok
23-01-16, 20:13
Quick correction, not being know it all jerk.

The "European skin became white 6,000-10,000 years ago" theory is false and based on rs1426654(AA) which was very popular in EHG/SHG/CHG/EEF 8,000 years ago. That theory was destined to be false because genetics often ignore the Middle East. Middle Easterners have 100% rs1426654(AA), but genetics continued to treat this as a European-specific mutation.

With the markers associated with skin color, it suggests white-skin lightening in Europe happened when Steppe/EEF mixed around 2800 BC. Then after that it continued to be selected all over Europe into the Bronze age. We have no sizable databases of DNA from before 8,000 years ago. EHG, SHG, and EEF 8,000 years ago had decent frequencies of both Light skin-mutations, and I wouldn't be surprised if their ancestors did 10,000 years before.

There's no evidence any process began 10-6k years ago that made things differnt than they were 1,000s of years before. There's just documentation that rs16891982(GG) tripled in frequency between 3000 and 2800 BC. rs16891982(GG) is what was selected for, and no one predicted what we're finding in ancient DNA. That's the only evidence of a skin-lightning process going on. Late Neolithic Europe in 2800 BC is a totally differnt world than Mesolithic/Neolithic Europe in 8000-4000 BC.

The same goes for Lactose-persistence SNPs. The first confirmed existence is in Late Neolithic Europe, but there's also old studies which document it in Neolithic Spain and Sweden. There's other SNPs associated with foods only farming/herding people could create that only appear in EEF or later in EEF/WHG/SteppeI meant that the process started 6-10 ky ago. That's what we see from ancient dna, that first alleles related to these processes show up in European genome at about this time. I hope you agree that it was a slow long process in both cases, which lasted till today, and that it was not a sudden revolution?

Sile
23-01-16, 20:55
deleted by poster

Greying Wanderer
23-01-16, 23:17
I meant that the process started 6-10 ky ago. That's what we see from ancient dna, that first alleles related to these processes show up in European genome at about this time. I hope you agree that it was a slow long process in both cases, which lasted till today, and that it was not a sudden revolution?

I think both processes were likely long but I'm not so sure about slow.

With skin lightening I think it was more likely a sequence of rapid changes with long gaps. So for example I think there was some extra skin lightening in the far north very early - multiple regional versions - and then a lull until people became more mobile and the different groups mixed (edit: and thus picked up multiple ones) and then maybe a second lull until agriculture.

#

On LP although intuitively it makes sense that it would increase slowly over time personally I don't think it did exactly.

I think the gene evolved wherever a long time ago but didn't expand much until it arrived at the atlantic coast because it was necessary there for permanent settlement (cos rainfall -> acid soils -> low wheat yield). Neolithic farmers settled but couldn't sustain their usual population density without the extra calorie boost from LP imo so the first people who arrived who had it expanded dramatically into both Britain and Ireland. I think later invasions from the continent reduced the level of LP in Britain from its Irish peak of 90%+ and then it slowly went up again from there.

One the reasons behind thinking this is it looks to me from Maciamo's maps like the "Irish" R1b was initially more widespread and was pushed back by the continental and north sea streams.

"Irish" http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L21.gif
"Alpine" http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif
"North Sea" https://thecampblogbymike.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/haplogroup-r1b-s21.gif

Obviously that's just a guess without much evidence yet but i think we'll find that Bronze Age samples with the "Irish" clade of R1b will have a substantially higher percentage of LP than the continental clades and the eventual pattern will be
- neolithic farmers: none
- Irish R1b: very high
- continental R1b and A-S: lower
- moderns: high again

#

nb if the conifer line was further south back then the same argument could apply to northern Europe as conifers make the soil acid as well so farmers coming up from the south might have hit a wall when they crossed the conifer line

#

edit

all speculation of course but easily disprovable if early Irish clade samples don't have much higher rates of LP than later mixed clades.

Fire Haired14
23-01-16, 23:59
I meant that the process started 6-10 ky ago. That's what we see from ancient dna, that first alleles related to these processes show up in European genome at about this time. I hope you agree that it was a slow long process in both cases, which lasted till today, and that it was not a sudden revolution?

We don't have any sizable data-sets from before 8,000 years ago, so we don't know if it began 6-10k. We know that SHG/EHG/EEF had a decent amount of both skin-lightening mutations 8,000 years ago, and that nothing dramatic changed till 2800 BC. Of course there's lots of wholes in data. And because of this there's nothing suggesting a process began or didn't 6-10k.

LeBrok
24-01-16, 01:01
I think you are trying to confuse us:

We don't have any sizable data-sets from before 8,000 years ago, so we don't know if it began 6-10k. and that nothing dramatic changed till 2800 BC. Of course there's lots of wholes in data. And because of this there's nothing suggesting a process began or didn't 6-10k.


We know that SHG/EHG/EEF had a decent amount of both skin-lightening mutations 8,000 years ago,

LeBrok
24-01-16, 08:21
I think both processes were likely long but I'm not so sure about slow.

With skin lightening I think it was more likely a sequence of rapid changes with long gaps. So for example I think there was some extra skin lightening in the far north very early - multiple regional versions - and then a lull until people became more mobile and the different groups mixed and then maybe a second lull until agriculture.Yes, different populations had input into this process. Lightening of skin is a combination multi ethnic genome, many mutations, coming in to the right place, the northern Europe. Once they were in the right place, the natural selection took over, forcing positive mutation to be more popular. The lighter skin more popular.


#

On LP although intuitively it makes sense that it would increase slowly over time personally I don't think it did exactly.

I think the gene evolved wherever a long time ago but didn't expand much until it arrived at the atlantic coast because it was necessary there for permanent settlement (cos rainfall -> acid soils -> low wheat yield). Neolithic farmers settled but couldn't sustain their usual population density without the extra calorie boost from LP imo so the first people who arrived who had it expanded dramatically into both Britain and Ireland. I think later invasions from the continent reduced the level of LP in Britain from its Irish peak of 90%+ and then it slowly went up again from there.

One the reasons behind thinking this is it looks to me from Maciamo's maps like the "Irish" R1b was initially more widespread and was pushed back by the continental and north sea streams.

"Irish" http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L21.gif
"Alpine" http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif
"North Sea" https://thecampblogbymike.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/haplogroup-r1b-s21.gif

Obviously that's just a guess without much evidence yet but i think we'll find that Bronze Age samples with the "Irish" clade of R1b will have a substantially higher percentage of LP than the continental clades and the eventual pattern will be
- neolithic farmers: none
- Irish R1b: very high
- continental R1b and A-S: lower
- moderns: high again
Maybe R1b herders brought the LP mutation to Northern Europe, why not? However once in the right place, this mutation flourished there in Northern Europe. It wasn't a linear evolution though. When the wheat crops were good the mutation wasn't important. But in times of cold weather and failed crops, milk calories became important and LP mutation was selected in greater numbers. That's why I think that during the Little Ice Age and Dark Ages, the LP was selected positively. LP selection wasn't linear but more like jumps to higher level in times of cold climate times.

#

nb if the conifer line was further south back then the same argument could apply to northern Europe as conifers make the soil acid as well so farmers coming up from the south might have hit a wall when they crossed the conifer line

#

I don't see it in terms of "depleted" soil, but more of a factor of cold climatic change.


all speculation of course but easily disprovable if early Irish clade samples don't have much higher rates of LP than later mixed clades.That's because LP gene is not attached to Y chromosome, and can "infect" every human being. It just needs to be in the right place and right time, the Northern Europe during cold climate.

Drac II
24-01-16, 08:57
Drac, I just noticed that you give a negative rating to virtually everything I post. Well, anything that at all hints that Spaniards might not be twins of Scandinavians or the Irish, anyway. :) Maybe when I have a chance I'll add them up and keep a running tally which I'll have posted instead of my quote.

My father always told me that someone's enemies say even more about them than their friends. I'm more than pleased with what mine say about me.

How strange, you taunting certain forum members again? Why am I not surprised?

You mean like you and your Italian friends around here giving negative ratings to all my posts addressing your little distortions, manipulations and innuendos about Spaniards while at the same time trying to portray Italians as the brothers of Scandinavians and Germans? Shouldn't you actually be doing your real job as an administrator and keeping the likes of real trouble-makers like "Joey" off of these forums? Unlike the very dubious "infractions" you keep giving me any chance you can, he has actually gotten banned a bunch of times and opened other accounts to bypass sanctions for his real infractions, and there is an actual written rule here that says you are not supposed to do that. Funny, somehow I feel that if I did that you would waste no time whatsoever closing down any of my other accounts.

Drac II
24-01-16, 09:07
I shouldn't speak for him, but it's sarcasm. That's the meme about Italians on anthrofora. One of the usual suspects is already hinting it's a done deal for Italy, but then he's on record as saying we're, or at least southern and perhaps central Italians, aren't European and should be kicked out of the "club", so for now it's just wishful thinking. :) I always wonder why he reserves this for us and never mentions the Spaniards with their North African and SSA and the Balkanites with their West Asian. Perhaps, since he's not actually European, some Italian kid of the diaspora beat him up and took his lunch money, or stole his girlfriend? :) More likely it's tied to anti-Semitism. Ah well, the workings of unbalanced minds are always a mystery to some extent.

Immaterial to me but it gets under the skin of some Italians. They should know better, in my opinion.

Sorry for the off-topic comment. I apologize.

Maybe what bothers this person you keep disparaging is the unbalanced minds of certain Italian characters around anthro forums who go around posting nonsense about other Europeans instead of concerning themselves with all the North African, SSA and West Asian of Italians. Very ironic, really.

Sorry for the off-topic digression. I apologize.

Sile
24-01-16, 10:21
deleted by poster

MOESAN
24-01-16, 14:24
I meant that the process started 6-10 ky ago. That's what we see from ancient dna, that first alleles related to these processes show up in European genome at about this time. I hope you agree that it was a slow long process in both cases, which lasted till today, and that it was not a sudden revolution?

I think I've to check the data about the mutated alleles for light pigmentation OF ALL SORTS -
I don't argue about the date of first apparition of mutatons but about their rising to overwhelming majority in relatively few generations (60-80?) WITHOUT EVIDENT NATURAL PRESSURE for light pigmentation. LT is (at first sight) another thing, except could be linked to pigmentation by some process still unkown to me.
maybe I'll have to separate basic exclusive skin mutations from complentary hairs/eyes ones? If natural pressure for pigmentation of hairs and eyes produced always the same results, why other Northern populations (Inuit, Samoyedes and other Siberians...) don't present the same results? The crossings in East-Eurasia/West SIberia were sufficiant to permit to advantageous mutations to rise up if climate and way of life were then only cause...
just my present point. Can change but?

MOESAN
24-01-16, 14:32
Concerning the "Brittons" 3DRIF-16 and 3DRIF-3 having if I red well Y-R1b-U106, they are shift a bit towards N-East Europe, supposedly Poland and Lithiania. Eurogenes Davidsky thinks Sweden population could make well the job too. It recall me the U106 of Bronze Scandinavia, centered arond Norway, as opposed to the Y-R1aZ645 shifted towards Volga region.
concerning the 2 "Brittons" the ground iis still open. THat said, Belgae apart, it recalls me other remnants and archeologic traces in East England at Iron time, evocating something Germanic ( they ware taken as Viking remnants at first time). I'll try to find data.

Greying Wanderer
25-01-16, 09:43
@LeBrok


Maybe R1b herders brought the LP mutation to Northern Europe, why not?

Yes, could be. I am neutral on where it came from originally.


That's because LP gene is not attached to Y chromosome

Yes, I have a bet with myself that older "Irish" R1b clade samples in Britain and Ireland will have a higher frequency of LP than later continental samples. Just a guess, could be wrong.

Alan
25-01-16, 14:09
edited by poster

Alan
28-01-16, 23:43
Turns out the Gladiator of Middle Eastern origin belonged to J2b subclade, which is nowadays rare in Arabia and the Levant as far as I know.

LeBrok
29-01-16, 03:14
Turns out the Gladiator of Middle Eastern origin belonged to J2b subclade, which is nowadays rare in Arabia and the Levant as far as I know.
He could have been Greek living in Near East or maybe Thracian?

Fire Haired14
29-01-16, 04:22
He could have been Greek living in Near East or maybe Thracian?

J2b1 does exist in West Asia. There's 0% chance he was North African, European, Mesoptamian, or Caucasian. He was from the Levant or Arabia.

Tomenable
29-01-16, 04:34
Someone even suggested that he was probably born behind "Limes Arabicus", outside of the Roman Empire - that's because he was like modern Palestinians and Jordanians, and it is unlikely that before Early Medieval Arab immigration to the region, people in Palestine and Jordan were already so similar to modern Palestinians and Jordanians - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Arabicus

He could be an ethnic Nabataean (Northern Arab) - they lived just next to the Roman border:

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


The Nabataeans, also Nabateans (/ˌnæbəˈtiːənz/; Arabic: الأنباط‎ al-ʾAnbāṭ , compare to Ancient Greek: Ναβαταίος, Latin: Nabatæus), were an Arabic[1] people who inhabited northern Arabia and the Southern Levant, and whose settlements, most prominently the assumed capital city of Petra,[1] in AD 37 – c. 100, gave the name of Nabatene to the borderland between Arabia and Syria, from the Euphrates to the Red Sea.

They could be like modern Palestinians, who are a mixture of Pre-Arab locals with Arabs (including Southern Arabs?).

Greying Wanderer
30-01-16, 09:19
Someone even suggested that he was probably born behind "Limes Arabicus", outside of the Roman Empire - that's because he was like modern Palestinians and Jordanians, and it is unlikely that before Early Medieval Arab immigration to the region, people in Palestine and Jordan were already so similar to modern Palestinians and Jordanians - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Arabicus

He could be an ethnic Nabataean (Northern Arab) - they lived just next to the Roman border:

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



They could be like modern Palestinians, who are a mixture of Pre-Arab locals with Arabs (including Southern Arabs?).

someone on eurogenes mentioned these dudes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghassanids

Alan
30-01-16, 13:42
He could have been Greek living in Near East or maybe Thracian?

Very unlikely he looks most closely related to Samaritans. Maybe some sort of Samaritan south Levantine possibly close to some sort of "Proto Arab". I still suspect a Ghassanid.

Alan
30-01-16, 13:45
Someone even suggested that he was probably born behind "Limes Arabicus", outside of the Roman Empire - that's because he was like modern Palestinians and Jordanians, and it is unlikely that before Early Medieval Arab immigration to the region, people in Palestine and Jordan were already so similar to modern Palestinians and Jordanians - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Arabicus

He could be an ethnic Nabataean (Northern Arab) - they lived just next to the Roman border:

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



They could be like modern Palestinians, who are a mixture of Pre-Arab locals with Arabs (including Southern Arabs?).

He could and was probably simply a Ghassanid. Those lived in Jordan and the Syrian desert of Southeast Syria. It's not like the Roman Empire did not stretch all the way into South Levant.

He was most akine to Samaritans and Saudis. He looks to have some origin in the Sinai Peninsula he most likely represents some sort of "Proto Arab". Therefore Ghassanids fit because they came from the Arabian Peninsula (where the Arab ethnicity probably evolved) and settled in Southern Levant.

Sile
30-01-16, 20:36
Turns out the Gladiator of Middle Eastern origin belonged to J2b subclade, which is nowadays rare in Arabia and the Levant as far as I know.

This legionnaire was most likely recruited from the 22nd legion from Galatia Anatolia and his "regiment" was detached from the 22nd and sent to Britain to topup the 9th legion in Britain after the 9th had major losses in the campaigns of 64AD ( in Britain )

these burials are all legionnaire burials
- single burial instead of the typical gladiator mass burial
- buried with legionnaire marching sandals, every uncomfortable to wear unless on the march.
- all decapitated........most likely an execution of every 10th legionnaire due to some form of disgrace for the legion.
- all skeletons are same minimum height and build ............gladiators do not fit any of these

LeBrok
30-01-16, 23:37
Very unlikely he looks most closely related to Samaritans. Maybe some sort of Samaritan south Levantine possibly close to some sort of "Proto Arab". I still suspect a Ghassanid.
Yes I see my mistake, I didn't know about his admixtures.

Alan
31-01-16, 00:41
This legionnaire was most likely recruited from the 22nd legion from Galatia Anatolia and his "regiment" was detached from the 22nd and sent to Britain to topup the 9th legion in Britain after the 9th had major losses in the campaigns of 64AD ( in Britain )

these burials are all legionnaire burials
- single burial instead of the typical gladiator mass burial
- buried with legionnaire marching sandals, every uncomfortable to wear unless on the march.
- all decapitated........most likely an execution of every 10th legionnaire due to some form of disgrace for the legion.
- all skeletons are same minimum height and build ............gladiators do not fit any of these

well he might have been a legionnaire point. But I doubt a Galatian because his aDNA is very typical modern South Levantine screams Ghassanid who were known to be allied to the Roman Empire.

Vukodav
31-01-16, 12:43
He was a special anti guerrilla warfare unit. Septimius Severus used small groups of similar units from Lybia to fight against Britons in Scotland.

Alan
31-01-16, 17:30
He was a special anti guerrilla warfare unit. Septimius Severus used small groups of similar units from Lybia to fight against Britons in Scotland.

If he was indeed from Lybia that would indicate, that ancient North Africa was more South Levant Semite like and received aditional SSA admixture. However I still believe he was Ghassanid.

Greying Wanderer
01-02-16, 15:42
If he was indeed from Lybia that would indicate, that ancient North Africa was more South Levant Semite like and received aditional SSA admixture. However I still believe he was Ghassanid.

and the Romans did recruit a lot of archer auxilia from Syria.

Could they estimate the age of death - if 40+ maybe retired soldiers turned gladiators?

Angela
01-02-16, 18:08
You didn't really "turn" gladiator. You were either a slave or it was a punishment, although there are some reports of people volunteering or in effect selling themselves to an "agent" because of extreme debt.

I think it's important to know the precise dates for the bodies they studied. I couldn't find that information in the paper. They gave a broad time span that covered two centuries I think. If the bodies covered that whole time period it couldn't have been a case of some group rebellion of soldiers who were executed, although it could still have been individual soldiers from various time periods who were executed. However, I can't imagine burying a rebel of deserter with grave goods like that. Also, hacking away with a sword is not typically the way rebellious soldiers were killed, as I've mentioned before. They were normally stoned or beaten to death, as beheading or a death by the sword was considered an honorable way to die. Also, they tended to kill with a sword thrust from behind down through the neck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decapitation#Classical_Antiquity

The bodies and the burials don't fit what would have happened after a death in the arena either. Why behead someone who had been clawed to death by an animal or speared or slashed to death already? You died there if you lost. If you were a rebellious gladiator I suppose you might have been executed, but again, the method seems wrong for the Romans as far as gladiators were concerned. They were on the bottom of the social ladder, not deserving of a mode of death used for citizens. There are numerous examples of rebellious gladiators being crucified.

Still, if these were soldiers killed and beheaded by the Britons north of the wall, you'd think they would have buried some insignia or tokens of their service with them.

It's very mysterious.

LeBrok
01-02-16, 19:21
You didn't really "turn" gladiator. You were either a slave or it was a punishment, although there are some reports of people volunteering or in effect selling themselves to an "agent" because of extreme debt.

I think it's important to know the precise dates for the bodies they studied. I couldn't find that information in the paper. They gave a broad time span that covered two centuries I think. If the bodies covered that whole time period it couldn't have been a case of some group rebellion of soldiers who were executed, although it could still have been individual soldiers from various time periods who were executed. However, I can't imagine burying a rebel of deserter with grave goods like that. Also, hacking away with a sword is not typically the way rebellious soldiers were killed, as I've mentioned before. They were normally stoned or beaten to death, as beheading or a death by the sword was considered an honorable way to die. Also, they tended to kill with a sword thrust from behind down through the neck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decapitation#Classical_Antiquity

The bodies and the burials don't fit what would have happened after a death in the arena either. Why behead someone who had been clawed to death by an animal or speared or slashed to death already? You died there if you lost. If you were a rebellious gladiator I suppose you might have been executed, but again, the method seems wrong for the Romans as far as gladiators were concerned. They were on the bottom of the social ladder, not deserving of a mode of death used for citizens. There are numerous examples of rebellious gladiators being crucified.

Still, if these were soldiers killed and beheaded by the Britons north of the wall, you'd think they would have buried some insignia or tokens of their service with them.

It's very mysterious. You have convinced me. It fits better the disgraced soldier scenario.

Angela
01-02-16, 21:38
You have convinced me. It fits better the disgraced soldier scenario.

I haven't convinced myself yet, although I'm leaning toward soldiers. :) Too many holes in the evidence.

berun
02-02-16, 21:14
Gladiators' games also fit well; the people that paid to see "shows" like these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zliten_mosaic#/media/File:Bestiarii.jpg

needed to be fed with more blood and more shows when there weren't available Christians or whatsoever "punishable" people (somehow like actual TV shares... but without 0 ethics or humanity)

if you are a circus' manager, and you have a mortal wounded gladiator in the arena (he will die slowly and any care will be costly), an "option" would be to profit the case, so that the winner would behead the loser displaying the prize publicly: more blood and more show, the populace will come back by sure... or if they could decide to spare or not the life of the loser, maybe they decided also how to finish it.

The inhumations were done separately and with respect, maybe by their own companions.

berun
29-02-16, 02:01
The case of Thumelicus could explain quite well the bias about gladiators:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumelicus

Being a germanic prisioner he could be U106; some short-view genetists could test his Y DNA saying that such haplo was in Italy before lombards...

Bollox79
14-03-16, 06:38
Hello everyone! Was hoping to bump this thread a bit... as I have a personal "interest" in it - I'll explain why!

I've been a participant in DNA testing for a while now, and it appears to have finally "paid off!" I am most interested in Y-DNA for now since I lost my father in an accident at work, so I am doing this in honor of him. Also I love history - especially Roman and Greek history!

First off, I'm a member of the subgroup DF98 under U106, which I share with the House of Wettin - a lot of research has been done by my group leader Dr. McDonald (he's also in DF98). That was a surprise. Also we have the descendants of the Norman Odard de Dutton in my subgroup under DF98 - S1911 (which does have a connection to France via Y-DNA with a tester from Poitou-Charentes - we really need MORE testing in France - especially NE France!). Dr. McDonald used the matching Y-DNA profile of the Dutton and Warburton families of Cheshire to date their split and it lines up very well with the traditional inheritance of the Warburton estate by a Dutton. Keep in mind Dr. McDonald's dates for Big Y SNPs have been back up by ancient dna results from R1b and also fit nicely with the U106 result from Southern Sweden and these two Romano-British U106ers (6drif-3 and 3drif-16)... so he's on the right track.

My personal interest is in the cemetery as a whole (very interesting!) and especially the two U106ers! I match 6drif-3 at some SNP markers first found in my y-chromosome! My line of descent in common with him goes like this: U106-Z381-Z156-Z304/305/306/307-DF98-S1911-S1900/S1894-FGC14818/FGC14823/S4004-FGC14816/FGC14817! He's listed under Alex Williamson's big tree in a block of five SNPs including FGC14816 and FGC14817 that I share with a few other families. A Jarman family probably from Powys in Wales, and a Via family (possibly a NE French origin) who is a close match with a Staples (probably English) - Staples and Via both probably share a common ancestor/NPE event in the early American colonies in Virginia and Jarman is also an early American colonial immigrant who "may have been from Wales." Also the S4004 level clusters in Northern England and especially in Scotland. My "closest" match that has an Isles (or European) origin for sure is this 6drif-3 skeleton as funny as that sounds. I KNOW where he was from - or at least where he was buried ;-). Also interesting that my small subgroups starting with S1894 and S4004 have a lot of Scots in them... but generally from where the Romans would have been like in the East and Lowlands etc.

I have read all the reports... and it appears the Driffield cemetery was a good mix of people based on isotope and lead analysis... and while I'm very excited with the "Gladiator" theory and have watched the Channel 4 program "Gladiator:Back from the dead." That was pretty cool - I managed to figure out my ancestor's skeleton was examined and presented as the "heavyweight" or Murmillo gladiator because he was the tallest at about 183 cm and had that butterfly fracture on his right ulna etc - read that on the osteology report)... I have trouble drawing a parallel to the pit grave style cemetery of the known Gladiator cemetery in Ephesus. Many of our Driffield guys were buried in coffins and my 6drif-3 guy was buried very close to a possible grave mound that had the three guys in it with the bones from the four horses and evidence for possible feasting and also funeral monuments - chunks of worked stone. Also more evidence for some post holes and features that were probably not graves, but marked boundaries etc. The lack of grave goods and tombstones doesn't really bother me too much - I often wonder if they have been picked over by the residents of York in the preceding 1800 years since they were buried, and also there is great evidence for re-use of many tombstones in walls in the late Roman period aka tombstones from Chester (I think that is the right one... the biggest collection of Roman era tombstones - whichever English town in the North that has that)... so these guys could have had some type of marker and we would never know. Besides there have been plenty of tombstones found near Driffield and even a burial vault...

I have a hard time explaining the decapitations - whether they were ritual in nature as there is plenty of evidence for decapitation burial rites particularly in the NW of Southern England in the Oxfordshire region... or inflicted in interpersonal violent/battle/the arena etc.

At least for my guy 6drif-3... his pathology parallels some of the skeletons from the Battle of Visby mass grave (in particular the mass grave with the most armor in it - the nine mail hauberks etc) in that he has defensive wounds to his right arm in the form of sharp force trauma from a bladed weapon - 3 on his right ulna - and also the blunt force trauma butterfly fracture of the right ulna - almost like they hit it with a shield or something like on the channel 4 program. He lacked sharp force trauma to his cranial bones (helmet?) and many other skeletons I've read about at from execution cemeteries and unarmored combatants have a great deal of sharp force trauma to the skull - a very good target indeed. The armored skeletons from Visby (apparently at least the author's informed conclusion in a paper on sharp force trauma patterns in medieval battlefield graves) had most of their wounds on their arms, hands, and neck... just like my guy. I am unaware if he had any sharp force trauma to his torso. The pathology for his skeleton said about 90% complete so I'm pretty sure he had most of his ribs etc... and they don't list any sharp force trauma to the torso... so perhaps he also had armor on? The unarmored skeletons from Visby apparently had plenty of wounds to the torso. I try to interpret the data in a practical or realistic manner. Why chop a guy's arm several times and smash it... if you could instead stab him somewhere else or in his head? Also in some studies his decapitation is regarded as the manner of death and he is listed as a "possible" decapitation - so more likely dealt in combat since the head wasn't completely removed - part of the vertebrae was fractured etc.

Based on a lot of the stuff I've read like the different reports on battlefield trauma on existing medieval skeletons... and the isotope/lead analysis and the "exotic" background of many of these guys... and their stature and trauma etc etc... I tend to interpret them more as some type of soldier or auxiliary... also considering where my Y-DNA group DF98 clusters - around Mannheim and Worms along the Upper Rhine - though that is usually House of Wettin's subgroup S18823... my group branches off from Df98 at S1911 and is only really connected loosely to France. Or was his male line Iron Age migrants to Britain? There is evidence of locals being recruited into the Roman army in Britain around about 150AD (my guy 6drif-3 was "local" in his autosomal/admixture signature - so Ancient Briton, but he had a strange Carbon value when younger - teeth sample - 2 standard deviations from the local York average - in Britain this had been interpreted with eating more seafood - not millet according to a study in 2013 I think)... and evidence that units of British Roman units taking part in the Pius' Mauretanian war in the mid 2nd century AD (see Vivien G Swan's The Twentieth Legion and the history of the Antonine Wall reconsidered for pretty good evidence of North Africans serving in the Roman Army along Hardian's or Antonine Wall - a few of the Driffield guys according to their lead sample were most likely from the Medditerrean basin and of black or mixed ancestry - so possibly North African? We know the 3drif-26 guy was probably from the Near East/Syria area?).

Also interesting is that there were 4 out of six inhumations that were decapitated and buried much like the Driffield guys buried next to the Roman Fort at Inveresk in East Lothion, Scotland. There was also a burial near those inhumations of a whole horse... though they stated they were not positive it was wasn't Iron Age... but probably Roman since it was very close to the Roman period graves etc. This forst was used by a cavalry unit up until 160ish AD... it was a part of the Antonine Wall and a port in the East I'm sure for the Roman forces. There has to be a connection between that... but I can't say fore sure!

Ok I've probably taken up enough space with my hypothesis... and of course I would be equally excited if they were in fact Gladiators... I don't really buy the "criminal or slave" idea not beause of personal bias... but because I can't find a parallel of slaves or criminals buried in a coffin and with apparent respect in a prominent (based on surrounding graves etc) Roman cemetery - which I suppose just adds to the mystery of this cemetery right!

Cheers!

Charlie

Ed the Red
23-11-17, 16:40
I just got alerted to it by this article in archaeology news:
http://archaeology.org/news/4081-160119-driffield-terrace-skeletons

That led me to this University of York article and then to the paper.
http://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2016/research/headless-romans/

Maybe it's because I've only quickly skimmed the actual paper, but while the "gladiators" or "soldiers" are similar to the Iron Age sample, the isotope analysis shows that they may have been raised outside of Britain.

That might have implications for understanding that 2/6 carried U-106, usually held to signal "Germanic" migrations. Either they came from nearby on the continent, from similar people, or U-106 arrived before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, perhaps with the Belgae?

How interesting also that we find our first Roman Era Middle Eastern sample in Britain! We need to see a comparison of him to early Anatolian farmers and to various Jewish populations. Just from a quick look through he's less SSA than modern Palestinians, yes? That would be pretty much as expected. He's also pretty close to both Saudi's and UAE and modern Syrians depending on the tool used. We really need a better fix through isotope analysis as to precisely where he originated. If he's actually Roman Era Syrian versus Idumean or Judean it makes a difference to the analysis. Also it's important to see if better resolution can be achieved for his yDna J2.

I was just discussing this theory on another post that Julius Caesar noted the Belgae were present in Britain as well. Also other Belgic tribes of Atrebates and Menapii.
So the haplogroup of R1b U106 if present with these tribes it was re-established again with Anglo-Saxons. The presence of it in southern Scotland then could easily be attributed also with early Belgic tribes. I wonder how far they spread, did they make it to Ireland? Very possible