Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 82

Thread: Tuscany had a middle age admixture event?

  1. #51
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,260


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Arame View Post
    The reason that Tuscan's data behaves in such way is perhaps this peculiarity.



    Tuscans lack any distinct WHG. They are basicaly ENF + Steppe.
    Some event is detected in Middle Ages ( perhaps a Nordic invasion maybe also some southern )
    The calculator search a population that can simulate the ENF and picks the Near Eastern populations. It favours the Armenians because they have also Caucasic, which is part of Steppe component.

    So the real admixture event is much much smaller. Perhaps smaller than 10% or even 5%. The rest is just a desperate search to simulate the unique Tuscan population.

    This method's main limitation is that they have no aDNA. If the existing aDNA data is added to this type of calculations we could get very good results consistent with historic events.
    As I mentioned before, what we need is some MN from further south in Italy than Remedello. Was it even more "farmer" like than Remedello? It might at least have been "different". We have J2 and E-V13 in Lengyel and Sopot in the mid/late Neolithic. How different were the people of this "second wave" of the Neolithic? When did they make their way to central and southern Italy? When did the "Indo-Europeans" actually make their way into Italy? What was their autosomal make-up when they arrived? Did some of them, at least, come from across the Adriatic? Were those Indo-Europeans different from those who came by way of central Europe? What actually happened in Tuscany during the "Etruscan" era? Some people are determined to see a large migration from Anatolia or at least the northern Aegean around 1000 BC. However, preliminary reports are that the Etruscans, at least the elite ones, who would be presumed to have more of that ancestry, were just "southern European". (In this case perhaps the actual paper will be more illuminating.) We know that there are attested Celtic migrations throughout all of northern Italy that went all the way down to northern Tuscany, and even occasionally to Rome. We know the date for those migrations and for those from the Greek colonizations, whose genetic signature would be stronger in the south but could diffuse northward.

    At the end of all that, what would have been the autosomal signature in various parts of Italy during the Republican era, let's say? How much would it have been changed by slavery from all the areas from which slaves were drawn and who were allowed to reproduce? How much change was there in Lombard areas after those folk migrations? There was a substantial Lombard settlement in Tuscany.

    It is beyond me how, without ancient dna from these periods, anyone can presume to make blanket statements about the ethnogenesis of the various Italian "peoples". Hellenthal et al is a fail when it comes to the ethnogenesis of the Tuscans.

    As to this matter of the lack of WHG in Tuscans, I can't totally explain it. It may indeed be that there were very few local foragers in that area when the neolithic peoples arrived. However, Tuscany was indeed impacted by the Celts and the Lombards. In addition, they have Yamnaya ancestry, which would presumably include some WHG. I have wondered if it's possible that the algorithm is, in this case, having difficulty distinguishing between the WHG and the EHG in Tuscans.

    Also, to say that Tuscans lack WHG is, in fact, not precisely correct, as there is WHG inside EEF, whether it became part of the mix in the Near East or in Europe.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #52
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,117

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Drac II View Post
    It is not "********", it is stated by a great number of historians specializing in Rome that there was a significant amount of both slaves and free citizens that came from other areas of the empire. The funerary inscriptions of the majority of these people strongly suggest an Eastern origin.

    No one is denying prehistoric Near Eastern in Italy either. However, we are talking about the admixture that Hellenthal et al. finds to be from historical times, which according to their calculations goes from late Roman to medieval times. People have been talking about military invaders, as usual, but for some reason they simply forget about other people who came to other lands by other means, in this case either as slaves or free citizens. Since Hellenthal et al.'s calculation includes late Roman times, there is no reason why we should deny outright this possible source. So if anything it is other people who have clear agendas, not me. I am simply offering a possible explanation based on Hellenthal et al.'s calculations. If their calculations had excluded Roman times then we would have to confine ourselves to trying to find any other possible explanations for it.

    Hellenthal et al. also records Near Eastern admixture from what their calculations say are historical times in other parts of Italy, not just Tuscany.
    Barcin in today's modern turkey was always, in ancient times, Thracian pre-trojan war time, it was the only area always known as Thracian, it sits under Bithnyia.

    Find what Asia Minor meant to the ancient Greek historians and then see it it has the same meaning as near eastern
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    @Drac

    Are you seriously suggesting that IBD analysis is not a correct methodology?
    At least do you know how it works or are you just going in circles?

    The Hellenthal et al paper received critics from many professional genetists because of its methodology. AFAIK none has criticized the Ralph and Coop et al or the IBD analysis, so I stand right.

  4. #54
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,260


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Drac II View Post
    Manumision was for all slaves, obviously, not just the eastern ones, but since the eastern ones seem to have been more common, at least in the later days of the empire, then it is hardly outlandish to expect to perhaps see more contribution from them. Also, you keep forgetting that there was also a large presence of free citizens, usually called "peregrini" by the Romans. As in the case of the slaves and freedmen, these free citizens also seem to have more commonly come from the eastern parts of the empire, once again at least since the early Christian centuries. Christianity itself spread to Rome from these immigrants.



    That study used IBDs, as you yourself said. As interesting as they may be, the conclusions derived from IBDs are not infrequently at odds with other forms of DNA analysis. We are witnessing one right here in the subject of this thread. Apparently Hellenthal et al. were not totally convinced by previous IBD analysis and stuck to their guns that the admixture in question seems to be from historical times.



    But by the same token names of eastern origin would have also been foreign to the Romans. So why this common usage of eastern names for slaves? Surely, this was not the result of some strange "fashion" of the day. I don't see many Romans adopting such names. You would think that if this was merely a product of some vogue historians would have pointed it out already, but the majority of them take these names as very suggestive regarding the provenance of these slaves. Obviously these names were not common among the Romans and serve as a distinguishing factor.



    The dates you are citing from the same paper (522 AD at earliest for Tuscany and 550 AD at latest for northern Italy) easily fit into Roman times as well, so I fail to see what your objections are. There is nothing in such earliest to latest estimates that excludes the Roman period. The only place in Italy where they seem to have excluded the Roman period in their estimated admixture time frames is Western Sicily. Here the admixture is claimed to be exclusively medieval (914CE - 1362CE)

    This is the last time I will respond to your posts on this matter. It's a waste of time.

    Nowhere do you provide any actual empirical evidence for your claims about the number, condition, or ethnic origin of the slaves in the area of Tuscany, or anywhere in Italy for that matter. The trivial matter of "slave" names has been sufficiently addressed. American slave owners didn't write down their reasons for naming slaves Homer and Venus. However, we're supposed to be intelligent enough not to draw the inference that they were necessarily Greek.

    You obviously have not actually read the entire Hellenthal et al paper, , which I today read for the second time, or you would know that they didn't opine about the source of any "new" gene flow into Tuscany in the period starting in 522 AD. Given that all historical evidence indicates that the major new gene flow came from northern and western Europe in the form of actual folk migrations from Gaul, central Europe, and then northern Europe in the form of the Lombards, perhaps they didn't feel it was necessary to even address your bizarre interpretation of the event.

    Any other interpretation is groundless and would have us believe that prior to that date all the "Tuscans" were 100% northern and western European.

    Also, if you had read the paper, you would know that rather than deprecating IBD analysis, in their discussion of the ethnogenesis of eastern Europeans they specifically state that their work supports the findings of IBD analysis.

    Of course, if you claim you did read it, am I supposed to infer you deliberately distorted the findings? I'd be happy to accept that, because then I can give you another infraction.

  5. #55
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,260


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc View Post
    @Drac

    Are you seriously suggesting that IBD analysis is not a correct methodology?
    At least do you know how it works or are you just going in circles?

    The Hellenthal et al paper received critics from many professional genetists because of its methodology. AFAIK none has criticized the Ralph and Coop et al or the IBD analysis, so I stand right.
    Hellenthal et al drew numerous incorrect conclusions:

    Among the many such:
    1.Japanese are not shown to be an admixture of Jomon and mainland people, which has recently been shown to be the case.

    2.No signal of admixture between "Celts" and "Anglo-Saxons" in Britain was picked up, although better and more extensive testing of modern samples in Leslie et al, and the recent analysis of ancient samples proves it did occur.

    3. Sardinians are not a mixture of the French and Egyptians and the admixture most definitely didn't take place in the Byzantine era. They are the closest we have to ancient EEF farmers.

    4. The Kalash are not 23% of Scots descent.

    Need we go on?

  6. #56
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    Angela
    Well recent Treemix calculations by Davidski show European ancestry in Kalash.
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o...dSd2RLZDg/view

    2.No signal of admixture between "Celts" and "Anglo-Saxons" in Britain was picked up, although better and more extensive testing of modern samples in Leslie et al, and the recent analysis of ancient samples proves it did occur.
    The interesting thing about "Celts" and "Anglo-Saxons" is the fact that modern Britons are much closer to Celts than to the 'newcomers', it seems there was a 'native' gene resurgence after the invasion so the reason why it doesn't find any admixture is perhaps this phenomena.

    As I repeated many times my purpose is not to prove any massive influx from Anatolia. I believe that Etruscans are natives of Italy. I open this thread because there was other amazing things. For example 2 of 3 paternal descendants of LBA_Kapan_Armenia live in Italy (one in Sardinia and one in Sicily). Why Italy? If You look at Lazaridis et al. then Tuscans are close to Greeks, and Albanians. Their SWA being small but is higher than for Albanians.


  7. #57
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    joeyc

    Armenians can't have a Mesopotamian origin, Armenians can only assimilate some 'semitic' populations.
    Concerning Allentoft paper. If You a make big zoom on the PCA1 high resolution file of Allentoft, You will be surprised to see that BA Armenians are close to modern Armenians. The difference that You pinpoint is from autosomal components.
    So before we see the autosomal components of ancient Tuscans compared to modern one, one can't be sure on anything. The PCA that You posted can't tell the full story.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    No no. The samples from Allentoft are now public and Polako has uploaded them on his Eurogenes project. Bronze and Iron Age Armenians have a huge amount of steppe and native European ancestry, while modern Armenians are impossible to tell apart from Mesopotamiam/Semitic peoples like Assyrians, Chaldeans, Iraqi Jews, ....

  9. #59
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    joeyc

    I understand what You are saying. But I am speaking about PCA and not autosomal components. Of course in autosomal they had a lot off EHG and no SWA. But the PCA is different.
    You can look the Allentoft's PCA here.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwi...ew?usp=sharing

    That's why I am saying that PCA can't tell the whole story about ancient Tuscans.

    This is zoomed portion with some modern populations.

    PCA1-Allentoftetal2015.jpg

  10. #60
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    In Europe there is a clear correlation between IE languages and the Caucasus-Gedrosia component.
    Look Basques, Sardinians have no that component. Spanish and Fins have very little.
    This mean that Etruscans as non-IE people will also have a small amount of that component most probably, but the modern Tuscans have the Caucasus-Gedrosia of Lazaridis.
    Last edited by Arame; 24-07-15 at 14:57.

  11. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    As to this matter of the lack of WHG in Tuscans, I can't totally explain it. It may indeed be that there were very few local foragers in that area when the neolithic peoples arrived. However, Tuscany was indeed impacted by the Celts and the Lombards. In addition, they have Yamnaya ancestry, which would presumably include some WHG. I have wondered if it's possible that the algorithm is, in this case, having difficulty distinguishing between the WHG and the EHG in Tuscans.
    There is no lack of WHG in Tuscans. The Yamna component is over 50% WHG and EEF is 30-40% WHG as well.

    Indeed Tuscans fall in the North-South Euro cline in this plot from Lazaridis et al.


  12. #62
    Elite member Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Joseph it's funny to read how many bullshits american historians write about our history especially for Roman Italy and Medieval Sicily.
    According to them Roman Italy was at least 50-60% of middle eastern slaves who replaced ethnic italians and the short and insignificant muslim period of Sicily who according to them imported 300.000 arabs from Gulf lol
    Of course they didn't write that Normans, Latins and Swabians expelled them and the few remained were often used in the Latin pogroms and Frederick II deported the last remnants. Lol

    Luckily there are Y-Cromosome studies and IBD sharings that of course make them funny and ludicrous. Lol
    Sicilians and mainlander Southern Italian phenotype galleries.

    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/1111/Re-Groups-of-Sicilians
    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/375/Southern-italians-how-we-really-look

  13. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    Even funnier are those Indo European Iraqis with an OWD who try to connect themselves with Europeans.

  14. #64
    Elite member Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Because of american historian bullshits about Italy.

  15. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

    In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.

  16. #66
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    joeyc
    Of course Tuscans have WHG. Either within ENF or Yamna. You can see that in Lazaridis et al K=20. I posted that Haak graph not to prove that Tuscans don't have WHG but that they have another sort of difference.. Maybe due to Caucasus Gedrosia of Lazaridis.

  17. #67
    Regular Member Arame's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-03-15
    Posts
    182


    Country: Armenia



    Concerning Iraq. Iraq is the Babylon (on the basis of Sumerian civilization ). Perhaps You don't know that the first legendary Haykazuni dinasty of Armenia is from Babylon. Babylon for Armenians is like Troy for Romans. So Your sentence with some disguised negative connotation is quite funny for an educated Armenian. :)

    I expected from a person who has the great legacy of Roman civilization to be more confident and open minded, but it seems I was wrong.
    I think further discussion is meaningless. We just need to wait the autosomal components of pre-Roman Tuscany to find who was right who was wrong.

  18. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    12-10-11
    Posts
    713


    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc View Post
    @Drac

    Are you seriously suggesting that IBD analysis is not a correct methodology?
    At least do you know how it works or are you just going in circles?

    The Hellenthal et al paper received critics from many professional genetists because of its methodology. AFAIK none has criticized the Ralph and Coop et al or the IBD analysis, so I stand right.
    Even if the methodology is not inherently incorrect, it also has limitations, and the fact still remains that the claimed results for at least some IBD papers has been contradicted by papers using other methods.

  19. #69
    Elite member Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc View Post
    LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

    In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.
    Eheh i have recent read a book of an american who said that in Roman Italy there were a lot of black africans. What? lol
    Totally invention of history

  20. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    12-10-11
    Posts
    713


    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    This is the last time I will respond to your posts on this matter. It's a waste of time.

    Nowhere do you provide any actual empirical evidence for your claims about the number, condition, or ethnic origin of the slaves in the area of Tuscany, or anywhere in Italy for that matter. The trivial matter of "slave" names has been sufficiently addressed. American slave owners didn't write down their reasons for naming slaves Homer and Venus. However, we're supposed to be intelligent enough not to draw the inference that they were necessarily Greek.

    You obviously have not actually read the entire Hellenthal et al paper, , which I today read for the second time, or you would know that they didn't opine about the source of any "new" gene flow into Tuscany in the period starting in 522 AD. Given that all historical evidence indicates that the major new gene flow came from northern and western Europe in the form of actual folk migrations from Gaul, central Europe, and then northern Europe in the form of the Lombards, perhaps they didn't feel it was necessary to even address your bizarre interpretation of the event.

    Any other interpretation is groundless and would have us believe that prior to that date all the "Tuscans" were 100% northern and western European.

    Also, if you had read the paper, you would know that rather than deprecating IBD analysis, in their discussion of the ethnogenesis of eastern Europeans they specifically state that their work supports the findings of IBD analysis.

    Of course, if you claim you did read it, am I supposed to infer you deliberately distorted the findings? I'd be happy to accept that, because then I can give you another infraction.
    I hope you do realize how futile would be to compare the naming practices of 18th-19th century European and American slave traders and holders with those of Roman times. In any event, such an anachronistic comparison is even more in favor of what I am pointing out: American and English slave traders and holders gave their slaves predominantly English names, just like the Spanish, Portuguese and French ones did with their respective languages. Now I ask again: then why don't we see more Roman-era slaves with Roman names and instead the majority have the names more typical among the Hellenized peoples of the eastern parts of the empire? There are several reasons why so many historians have become convinced that this area was the most important supplier of slaves for the Romans, at least for a certain period of time (usually said to be the early Christian era.) One of them is this issue with the names. Such evidence can't be so casually dismissed. The name "Syrus" (Syrian), for example, was a generic slave name in Roman comedies.

    The Hellenthal et al. paper does not seem to give any explanations regarding Tuscany in particular:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209567/

    And yes, the authors are well aware of the Ralph & Coop paper and refer to it, but this is in fact more incriminating when it comes to certain regions other than Eastern Europe. Judging by the fact that in their "Genetic Atlas" companion web site they list all parts of Italy as having had admixture from more recent times than 2500 years ago, it does not seem that at least in some cases they were convinced by the IBD-based results of Ralph & Coop's paper.

  21. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    12-10-11
    Posts
    713


    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    That excerpt has absolutely nothing to do with your argument that Greek names in slaves indicate that most of them came from the Near East. I told you what would happen if you misrepresented academic papers. DO IT ONE MORE TIME and I'll give you an infraction. I am really lax in handing them out, but that can be remedied. Am I sufficiently clear?
    Read carefully before making accusations and threats. I did not restrict my comments to slaves (you are the one who keeps doing that.) The passage is about Caracalla's edict granting citizenship to most free people in the empire, including the Christians, and the provenance of these early Christians in Rome, which the source clearly says came from the eastern parts of the empire and North Africa. That's what I said historians conclude regarding this subject, so no one is "misrepresenting" anything. It wasn't meant as a specific example of how common the Hellenized names were among these free peoples or the slaves. It goes without saying that most of these people would have had the names typical of their areas of provenance, which in the case of the easterners would have been Hellenized names. Just some logic and common sense thrown in. Or do you really expect these foreigners to have had the Latin names common among the Romans?

  22. #72
    Elite member Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Luckily we have IBD sharing and Y-Chromosome studies and all of them said that the only West Asian input in the whole Italy including the south and the islands came from Neolithic times to Bronze age collapse and not from historical times.
    The fact that you have slaves with Greek names or muslims and jew means nothing, they can easily be a local people converted.
    You must look at the ethnic cleansing of the muslim remnants in Sicily by Frederick II to begin with and again I don't believe in no one modern american pseudo-historian sources about Roman empire.

  23. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    11-04-14
    Posts
    258


    Country: Italy



    The Italian ethnogenesis can simply explained by this model:

    50% Barcin farmer + 25% German Bell Beaker + 25% Yamnaya.

    Similar to the model by Haak et al.

  24. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    12-10-11
    Posts
    713


    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Hauteville View Post
    Luckily we have IBD sharing and Y-Chromosome studies and all of them said that the only West Asian input in the whole Italy including the south and the islands came from Neolithic times to Bronze age collapse and not from historical times.
    The fact that you have slaves with Greek names or muslims and jew means nothing, they can easily be a local people converted.
    You must look at the ethnic cleansing of the muslim remnants in Sicily by Frederick II to begin with and again I don't believe in no one modern american pseudo-historian sources about Roman empire.
    Neither one of those methods can give definitive or infallible answers. For example, haplogroups are all thousands of years old, and IBDs can't tell gene flow direction. Even Ralph & Coop themselves admit that genetics can't do without other disciplines, like archaeology or linguistics.

    Also, the issue with the preponderance of Greek names among slaves in Rome is not the only evidence. The statements of Roman and Greek authors afford other evidence for the presence of large numbers of foreigners (both slaves and free people, who migrated to Italy out of their own will) in Rome and their provenance. Tacitus, Seneca, Martial, Strabo, Juvenal, Cicero, Petronius, etc. mention or talk about such subjects (some of these writers were in fact themselves foreigners living in Italy.) Combined with the epigraphical evidence it is rather unquestionable that there was a large foreign population, and very likely that the eastern parts of the empire (which includes Greece and the southern Balkans, by the way, not only the Near East and Egypt) was where the majority of them came from.

    The American sources are not by "pseudo-historians" but normal historians, plus Italian historians have also talked about this subject (this whole business of large numbers of foreigners in Rome was a sort of "nightmare" scenario for fascist Italian thinkers and some of them spoke about their "corrupting" influence on ancient Rome), so it is not any "American" invention. In fact, many historians who have talked about this subject are German, French and English.

  25. #75
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-04-15
    Posts
    44


    Country: United States



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc View Post
    LOL Americans think that ancient Italy was some kind of modern Sweden where every Arab could get a house, a job and everything else free from the local taxpayers. Hahahahaha

    In my town Jews and Saracens where expelled and hunted down multiple times in the last 1000 years or so. Even the few thousands of Marranos (Iberians converted to Islam) we got in 1610, were quickly deported to Turkey and North Africa from the local Spanish and papal authorities. Middle Eastern Slaves would have had a similar fate.
    They wouldn't have necessarily been kicked out if they converted to Christianity or were Christian.

    Not all Levantines were Muslim.
    Not all Jews stayed Jews, many converted.

    Not all Levantines arrived in the Middle Ages, some were probably there since the Roman Empire though Carthage, Syria, North Africa.




    Quote Originally Posted by Hauteville View Post
    Joseph it's funny to read how many bullshits american historians write about our history especially for Roman Italy and Medieval Sicily.
    According to them Roman Italy was at least 50-60% of middle eastern slaves who replaced ethnic italians and the short and insignificant muslim period of Sicily who according to them imported 300.000 arabs from Gulf lol
    Of course they didn't write that Normans, Latins and Swabians expelled them and the few remained were often used in the Latin pogroms and Frederick II deported the last remnants. Lol

    Luckily there are Y-Cromosome studies and IBD sharings that of course make them funny and ludicrous. Lol
    Rome occupied the provinces of Syria, Egypt, and Africa. They absorbed Carthaginians, Arabs, etc.

    There was a Roman Emperor named Phillip the Arab. He was born in Syria.

    A provincial from Syria, North Africa, and Egypt could work his way up the ranks of the Roman Army and gain Roman citizenship, earn himself a ticket to Italy.

    Italy was a magnet for pronvincials, particularly those of non-Roman descent. It was a center of wealth and trade for a long time.

    The first Christians were Levantines. Constantine imported the Levantine religion known as Christianity to Italy and made Italy the center of Christianity. Levantine Christians may have rolled in.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •