Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
For me is very logic that Latins could not mostly carry R1b-U152,since in Catania only 1 sample from 50 samples is R1b-U152.
Explain that please and I would believe that Latins were carrying mostly R1b-U152.
As for Lombards,is clear they come in Italy and settled at least in North East,since there is so much I1 there.
Perhaps you didn't read my post carefully enough:
"As to the "Romans", we would first of all have to decide the relevant time period. The "Romans" of the first settlements on the seven hills, the Republican era, the era of Augustus? Should it be extended to all of Lazio? What about the Sabine era? Where are you going to draw the line geographically as well as temporally? The people of Sicily, in addition to Italic influence (and prior Neolithic influence, and perhaps slightly different Bronze Age migrations) would have had much more influence from the direction of Greece, and so their "mix" would have been different than that in central Italy, in my opinion, but these are all speculations."
Italian is indisputably an Indo-European language of the Italo-Celtic variety. The Romans spoke Italic. They are therefore presumed to be descended at least in part from the Indo-Europeans. The Indo-European languages in Europe track with R1b and R1a. Therefore, the Romans almost certainly carried R1b. This is not news, people. We're supposed to be beyond the basics now of having to explain what the Indo-European languages are, or basic undisputed facts about history. Even in terms of genetics, if you're going to debate a topic like the one that is the subject of this thread you should have read and tried to understand Haak et al.
See Haak et al 2015
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433