Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 58

Thread: 4th Century BC Privileged Social Class Roman Skeletons to undergo DNA Testing

  1. #26
    Princess davef's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-06-16
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,239


    Ethnic group
    Italian,Irish,Jewish
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    Disregard all the Legends.
    This is very simple.
    Rome is in Italy, so the Romans are Italics.
    Add or subtract any gene you want, the Romans are still Italics because Rome is in Italy.
    Spin all you want. Still Italians. :)
    K.I.S.S.-> keep it simple stupid lol. Yeah I'll go as far to say I would expect the Romans to be more like people who live in extreme southern Tuscany or Lazio (where Rome actually is)

    Nah screw it. They were more like Proto Greco Dorician Mycenaetruscic Celtoids from the lower upper Caucasian proto steppe
    mmmmmmmmm dooouuughhhnuuuutz

  2. #27
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    15-12-17
    Posts
    73


    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I'm not sure about Roman aDNA but Reich has confirmed his lab is analyzing data from Italy between 4000BC-3000BC:
    https://youtu.be/o0txUv9ei5I
    "The bones that we're looking at right now are about 5,000- or 6,000-year-old samples from Italy and we're trying to understand population transformations in Italy over time. "

    That's very good news, I think that's the time frame in which Italy was IEzed, they should find R1b ancestral to Bell Beaker together with other south Caucasus Y-DNA like J2, etc.

  3. #28
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    5,035

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by davef View Post

    Nah screw it. They were more like Proto Greco Dorician Mycenaetruscic Celtoids from the lower upper Caucasian proto steppe
    I'm warning you to not turn this thread into a dumping ground for these kind of ridiculous posts. This is not a humor thread.

  4. #29
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Saetrus View Post
    I'm not sure about Roman aDNA but Reich has confirmed his lab is analyzing data from Italy between 4000BC-3000BC:
    https://youtu.be/o0txUv9ei5I
    "The bones that we're looking at right now are about 5,000- or 6,000-year-old samples from Italy and we're trying to understand population transformations in Italy over time. "
    That's very good news, I think that's the time frame in which Italy was IEzed, they should find R1b ancestral to Bell Beaker together with other south Caucasus Y-DNA like J2, etc.
    I guess first IE people arrived in Italy only 4-5000 years ago.
    But let's wait and see what comes out of this.

  5. #30
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,236


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saetrus View Post
    I'm not sure about Roman aDNA but Reich has confirmed his lab is analyzing data from Italy between 4000BC-3000BC:
    https://youtu.be/o0txUv9ei5I
    "The bones that we're looking at right now are about 5,000- or 6,000-year-old samples from Italy and we're trying to understand population transformations in Italy over time. "

    That's very good news, I think that's the time frame in which Italy was IEzed, they should find R1b ancestral to Bell Beaker together with other south Caucasus Y-DNA like J2, etc.
    I certainly hope they're not looking only at 4-3,000 BC. For one thing, I agree with Maciamo that a lot of the movement of the Indo-Europeans into Italy is later than that. I'm going to contact them today just to make sure someone has informed them, and they can be the ones to analyze these and the others that have been found recently. I do hope also that they took note of the Lombard paper. That kind of close work with archaeologists is essential.

    Should be very interesting, but I have little doubt that by 300 BC they were well and truly mixed. If you give physical anthropology any credence, you just have to look at the portrait busts.


    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

  6. #31
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    5,035

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I certainly hope they're not looking only at 4-3,000 BC. For one thing, I agree with Maciamo that a lot of the movement of the Indo-Europeans into Italy is later than that. I'm going to contact them today just to make sure someone has informed them, and they can be the ones to analyze these and the others that have been found recently. I do hope also that they took note of the Lombard paper. That kind of close work with archaeologists is essential.

    Should be very interesting, but I have little doubt that by 300 BC they were well and truly mixed. If you give physical anthropology any credence, you just have to look at the portrait busts.
    I fully agree.

  7. #32
    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 bicicleur View Post
    Well, Etruscans were not Italic, at least language-wise.
    Alltough the 'Etruscan DNA' hasn't been found yet, so it won't be that different from Italian DNA.
    But like you say it here, it sounds like we shouldn't bother taking DNA, as we know on beforehand what it will be.
    the Etruscans have been noted in the Italian peninsula before the Romans ..........so what are you trying to say?
    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.

  8. #33
    Regular Member Cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-08-12
    Posts
    423


    Country: Italy



    I would like to know if Appenninic culture was already influenced by Central Europe/Steppe mix, so already Italic.

    But 3000 BC is still interesting beacuse it could confirm the movements of prospectors from the East (CHG/EEF mix ? J2?). According to Puglisi they were the ancestors of the Italics but i don't know if it's still reliable (1959)

    Utilizzando Tapatalk

  9. #34
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    the Etruscans have been noted in the Italian peninsula before the Romans ..........so what are you trying to say?
    when Rome was founded, not all people in the area were Italic

  10. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    15-12-17
    Posts
    121


    Country: Germany - Bayern



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    when Rome was founded, not all people in the area were Italic
    Agree.
    And one should also take note that the etruscans expanded far southwards before Rome even had started to expand. They actually expanded further south than Rome is located.
    So by the time Rome started its expansion, it was inevitable not to assimilate some etruscans into the latin speaking communities, because etruscan communities would have been present everywhere in the area.

    Beside that, when the romanization of etruria proper started, the etruscans were actually pretty good at rising to the top. For example Gaius Maecenas (Augustus closest friend and adviser) was etruscan. And Augustus actually left him in charge of Italy for a while(which shows how prominent Gaius was). I have even read in a book that there is a chance that Augustus mother was etruscan too, althoug its just from the top of my head, i could be thinking of another emperor.

    So it seems the etruscan noble famlies actually just changed their language to latin and became noble romans instead. There a tomb which paints the perfect picture about this. I think its the tomb of the anina family(if i remember correctly). They have their inscriptions in etruscan in the beginning, but later on as more family members got buried and at the same time romanization was happening, suddenly the names start to be written in latin, although its still the same family.
    This points towards that the family never lost their high status(being able to afford huge tombs and so on), but they just changed their language to latin.

    People in Italy has mixed extensively throughout time. So IMO we should not expect big differences between IE and non IE italics when we get ancient DNA. At least not after 1000BC. But probably even earlier too.

  11. #36
    Moderator Pax Augusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-06-14
    Location
    Ara Pacis
    Posts
    1,285


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    when Rome was founded, not all people in the area were Italic
    I should find the data somewhere, but I think Rome in the 4th century BC had already begun its great demographic expansion.

    But one thing is the inhabitants of Rome, one thing is the Latins. If we want to know who the Latins really were and came from, we should analyze bones from the Iron Age. But the majority of proto-Latins during the Iron age practiced, I believe, the cremation (although there are interesting exceptions in the Latin world). We have a similar problem with all the protohistoric cultures that settled in Italy and came from the Urnfield culture.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cato View Post
    I would like to know if Appenninic culture was already influenced by Central Europe/Steppe mix, so already Italic.

    But 3000 BC is still interesting beacuse it could confirm the movements of prospectors from the East (CHG/EEF mix ? J2?). According to Puglisi they were the ancestors of the Italics but i don't know if it's still reliable (1959)
    Excellent question, Cato.

    Salvatore M. Puglisi was a very good scholar, but his most important scientific production dates back to 50/60 years ago.

    The Apennine culture is usually divided into two phases: the proto-Apennine and the sub-Apennine. For most of its life, the most common practice in the Apennine culture is the inhumation/burial. But in the sub-Apennine there is an increasing number of examples of cremation. The arrival of the incineration marks the beginning of the arrival of the first proto-Villanovans or contacts with Terramare? If I remember correctly, these examples of incineration in the sub-Apennine were found between Romagna and Umbria, in what then became the territory of the Umbrians. But there are also examples south of Rome and in other places. Maybe I remember badly, and the incineration in the sub-Apennine phase is spread everywhere, and has nothing to do with the Proto-Villanovans. Cremation in Italy spreads mostly from the north, from the Urnfield culture, as it is testified by the burials of the Proto-Villanovan, but the beginning of its diffusion is earlier: Terramare, Polada ...

    At this point the original question is: who are the Italics?

    If we follow the linguistic division, there are two distinct Italic linguistic families: on the one hand the Latins, who are usually grouped together with the Faliscans, and sometimes with Veneti and Siculi. The other group is made up of all the Osco-Umbrian languages. Does this division imply that they belong to two distinct migrations? The separation of these two families took place outside or inside Italy?

    This is even more complicated, because these languages ​​influenced each other, and of course we have more recent inscriptions and less archaic inscriptions. And so the linguistic division is really accurate and also follows an ethnic division? Or is something accurate and something not?

  12. #37
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,236


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernekar View Post
    Agree.
    And one should also take note that the etruscans expanded far southwards before Rome even had started to expand. They actually expanded further south than Rome is located.
    So by the time Rome started its expansion, it was inevitable not to assimilate some etruscans into the latin speaking communities, because etruscan communities would have been present everywhere in the area.

    Beside that, when the romanization of etruria proper started, the etruscans were actually pretty good at rising to the top. For example Gaius Maecenas (Augustus closest friend and adviser) was etruscan. And Augustus actually left him in charge of Italy for a while(which shows how prominent Gaius was). I have even read in a book that there is a chance that Augustus mother was etruscan too, althoug its just from the top of my head, i could be thinking of another emperor.

    So it seems the etruscan noble famlies actually just changed their language to latin and became noble romans instead. There a tomb which paints the perfect picture about this. I think its the tomb of the anina family(if i remember correctly). They have their inscriptions in etruscan in the beginning, but later on as more family members got buried and at the same time romanization was happening, suddenly the names start to be written in latin, although its still the same family.
    This points towards that the family never lost their high status(being able to afford huge tombs and so on), but they just changed their language to latin.

    People in Italy has mixed extensively throughout time. So IMO we should not expect big differences between IE and non IE italics when we get ancient DNA. At least not after 1000BC. But probably even earlier too.
    Not that it matters to your wider point, but I'm not aware of any putative Etruscan ancestry in Augustus' mother. His mother was Atia, the niece of Julius Caesar (his sister's daughter), and his father was Gaius Octavius, a descendant of an equestrian branch of the gens Octavia. They were a very wealthy family, with a military tribune during the Punic Wars, municipal magistrates, etc. but plebian, not patrician, and not senatorial. I don't recall anything about them being of Etruscan descent, or Julius' brother in law, although it's certainly possible.

    The Juli were among the most ancient of the patrician gens, and of Alban origin, coming to Rome after the destruction of Alba Longa during the 7th century. Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome, supposedly also came from Alba Longa.

    Perhaps you were thinking of the Claudians? One scholar, back in 1988 speculated that the patrician Claudi were originally of Etruscan origin. I don't remember that being based on any actual data, and it seemed to me he believed it largely because of Claudius' obsession with and extensive knowledge of the Etruscans. He was probably the last person who could still read and write it, I think. Anyway, it is true that his first wife, whom he detested, by the way, Urgulania, was of noble Etruscan descent.


    The gens Claudia itself, however, one of the most celebrated, and perhaps the haughtiest and most arrogant of the highest level of patrician gens in Rome, was actually of Sabine origin.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_(gens)

    As you said, the Etruscans seem to have been rather seamlessly incorporated into Roman society, and some reverence was sometimes paid to their culture, particularly, perhaps, in the area of religion. At least one reputable scholar believes that although he was a philhellene, building Rome to a basically Greek model, when it came time to choose his final resting place, his mausoleum. Augustus modeled it after Etruscan tumuli.

    This is an excerpt of a speech the scholar gave:
    https://www.coursera.org/learn/roman...um-of-augustus

    However, although the Etruscans were one of the three streams of ancestry which went into creating the "Romans", along with the Latins and the Sabines, some scholars believe there was always some "ethnic" disparagement of them, with popular opinion holding that they were too decadent, too effeminate (like the Greeks), too wealthy, villainous, not like the simple, virtuous, Romans. :) So, supposedly, "Relatively few securely Etruscan families made their way into the senate before the close of the third century, with a few additional families joining the domi nobiles before the Social War.".
    http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2008/2008-04-25.htmlIt depends on which scholar you follow ultimately. If you follow these scholars, it might go some way toward explaining why the Etruscans, from ruling over the Romans, and being a force in the Mediterranean World, gave up their language and specific "ethnic" identity. Perhaps they wanted to back the winning horse. On the other hand, Claudius and Augustus certainly held them in high regard, and for good reason. Whether they wanted to acknowledge it or not, Latin Rome owed much of what it was to the Etruscans.

  13. #38
    Regular Member Cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-08-12
    Posts
    423


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    I should find the data somewhere, but I think Rome in the 4th century BC had already begun its great demographic expansion.

    But one thing is the inhabitants of Rome, one thing is the Latins. If we want to know who the Latins really were and came from, we should analyze bones from the Iron Age. But the majority of proto-Latins during the Iron age practiced, I believe, the cremation (although there are interesting exceptions in the Latin world). We have a similar problem with all the protohistoric cultures that settled in Italy and came from the Urnfield culture.




    Excellent question, Cato.

    Salvatore M. Puglisi was a very good scholar, but his most important scientific production dates back to 50/60 years ago.

    The Apennine culture is usually divided into two phases: the proto-Apennine and the sub-Apennine. For most of its life, the most common practice in the Apennine culture is the inhumation/burial. But in the sub-Apennine there is an increasing number of examples of cremation. The arrival of the incineration marks the beginning of the arrival of the first proto-Villanovans or contacts with Terramare? If I remember correctly, these examples of incineration in the sub-Apennine were found between Romagna and Umbria, in what then became the territory of the Umbrians. But there are also examples south of Rome and in other places. Maybe I remember badly, and the incineration in the sub-Apennine phase is spread everywhere, and has nothing to do with the Proto-Villanovans. Cremation in Italy spreads mostly from the north, from the Urnfield culture, as it is testified by the burials of the Proto-Villanovan, but the beginning of its diffusion is earlier: Terramare, Polada ...

    At this point the original question is: who are the Italics?

    If we follow the linguistic division, there are two distinct Italic linguistic families: on the one hand the Latins, who are usually grouped together with the Faliscans, and sometimes with Veneti and Siculi. The other group is made up of all the Osco-Umbrian languages. Does this division imply that they belong to two distinct migrations? The separation of these two families took place outside or inside Italy?

    This is even more complicated, because these languages ​​influenced each other, and of course we have more recent inscriptions and less archaic inscriptions. And so the linguistic division is really accurate and also follows an ethnic division? Or is something accurate and something not?
    It seems that cremation spread in Central Italy and in Southern Italy (isolate cases) after the collapse of the terramare, part of the population left the Po Valley and settled south. According to Puglisi however they weren't dominators but simple immigrants (farmers), the shepherds of the Appenninic culture mantained their leadership even after their arrival.

    The Sub Appenninic facies succeded the Classic Appenninic in the recent bronze age (after 1300 BC) and it's spread was a North to South movement (we know that Sub Appenninic warriors invaded South Italy, see that video about the Sea Peoples and Italy), if i remember correctly cremation is absent or rare but it show already some influences from North Italy in ceramics and metallurgy

    "Con il Bronzo Recente (XIII e parte del XII sec.; rappresenta, nell'ambito dello sviluppo della civiltà a., il momento a un tempo di massima espansione geografica, e di massima unitarietà culturale), alla facies appenninica propriamente detta segue la facies subappenninica, caratterizzata, per quanto riguarda la ceramica - ora quasi costantemente inornata - dalla molteplice e spesso fantasiosa elaborazione plastica delle anse (cornute, cilindrorette, ornitomorfe, ecc.), e, per ciò che concerne la metallurgia (ma anche parecchie altre attività produttive, come la lavorazione di oggetti in osso e corno), da una koinè che la accomuna per un verso con le facies padane e transalpine, per l'altro, in qualche misura, con la stessa civiltà micenea".

    After a while we have the Protovillanovan facies, it's spread was again a North->South movement.

    Cremation in North east Italy is older than most Central Europe, it appeared in the Middle Bronze Age (from Hungary?), ex. Olmo di Nogara. In Apulia there are rare examples of cremation burials of the Appenninic culture (Canosa? i don't remember).

    My guess is that Italic branch entered the peninsula in the 2500-1500 BC time frame. Central Italy received immigration from the North with Bell Beaker and later Polada influences. Appenninic started in 1800 BC circa and i'm starting to believe that it was Italic already. Later Terramare waves introduced innovation and maybe Latin-Faliscan? Cremation among Osco Umbrians is rare and short lived.

    Regarding Urnfields the idea that small tribes from Germany or Austria invaded and conquered all the peninsula like Gimbutas wrote in 1965 is, as Mallory said in 1989 (in search of the Indoeuropeans), not convincing. Real Urnfields are those of Scamozzina-Canegrate.

    Utilizzando Tapatalk
    Last edited by Cato; 08-06-18 at 14:58.

  14. #39
    Regular Member New Englander's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-16
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    373

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b U-152
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c8

    Ethnic group
    Italian, Jewish, British
    Country: United States



    Sub Appenninic warriors, are they responsible for U152 s28 in the South?

  15. #40
    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 bicicleur View Post
    when Rome was founded, not all people in the area were Italic
    How long does a people need to be in an area to be classified as part of that area , etruscans where already more than 300 years in italy..........when the Veneti arrived and mixed with the indigenous Euganei , archeolology states the year was circa 1150BC
    https://journals.openedition.org/mefra/2503
    ...............the ligurians where in NW italy and southern frnace up to the rhone river in the bronze age...........the sabines, sabellic where in south central italy at the same time as the etruscans
    Rome did not make the italic people

  16. #41
    Regular Member Cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-08-12
    Posts
    423


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by New Englander View Post
    Sub Appenninic warriors, are they responsible for U152 s28 in the South?
    My guess, them and/or the Protovillanovans.

    They came from Romagna/Marche according to: https://youtu.be/skRuzlCA8Yo (14:40)

    They sieged and burned Roca Vecchia in Apulia, marched toward Calabria and founded a new village in Lipari (Ausonio I)..fascinating. Their material culture is already clearly influenced by that of the Terramare and distinct from Classic Appenninic.

    Utilizzando Tapatalk

  17. #42
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,236


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Alyan View Post
    So between a paper on these new remains, a paper on the Neolithic remains, and de Angelis' paper on Imperial Rome, when you have combined them with older papers we should know know enough Italy's population history from Rome onward.
    Why would you think that? What about southern Italy as just one example? What were the Neolithic like people there like? How did it change in the Bronze Age after migration from both the north and the the east, probably also by way of Greece, or perhaps the Aegean islands? How were the southern Italians of that time different pre and post Greek migration of the first millennium BC, pre and post the Byzantine Era, or the Moorish invasions for Sicily?

    Turning to the North, how much change did the people from the Central Europe make, after all, we only have two or is it three Bell Beakers samples, and only from Parma if I remember correctly. How about the Celtic migrations of the first millennium BC?

    As for this paper on "Imperial Rome", if it's a lot of remains of slaves or the lowest rung of society in the cities, I'm not convinced those people had a big impact on the total genome. It all depends on the quality of the paper too. I wish one of the big three labs was doing it.

  18. #43
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    196


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by New Englander View Post
    Sub Appenninic warriors, are they responsible for U152 s28 in the South?
    U152 s28 carriers migrated from Central Europe.


  19. #44
    Regular Member Cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-08-12
    Posts
    423


    Country: Italy



    Yes but in Southern Italy U152 likely arrived in the MBA-LBA. No significant Beaker settlements there, except in W.Sicily

    IMO it became common in N.Italy (and maybe C.Italy) since the Beaker/Polada period, then spread south slowly.

    Utilizzando Tapatalk

  20. #45
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    5,035

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    The tomb was discovered in the Case Rosse area west of the center of Rome by an earthmover working to extend an aqueduct about 6 feet underground. Inside lay the undisturbed remains of four people, including a man in his 30s, a man in his 50s, a man between the age of 35 to 45, and a woman of undetermined age.

    ...

    The discovery also unearthed an assortment of jugs and dishes, a bronze coin, along with dishes of chicken, rabbit and another animal believed to be a lamb or goat, likely offerings to sustain them in the afterlife.

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ome-180969247/
    Here's a little more information about the grave goods, and the occupants.

  21. #46
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Here's a little more information about the grave goods, and the occupants.
    are the broken bones on the pic human?
    they seem scattered in a strange way

  22. #47
    Moderator Pax Augusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-06-14
    Location
    Ara Pacis
    Posts
    1,285


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Here's a little more information about the grave goods, and the occupants.
    Based on some Italian articles, it's east of Rome, outside Rome, near Via Tiburtina, the ancient Roman road leading east-northeast from Rome to Tivoli (Latin Tibur), and then to Pescara (Latin Aternum) in Abruzzo.

    This was definitely the start of the territories of ancient Sabines and Aequians.


  23. #48
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,236


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    Here's a little more information about the grave goods, and the occupants.
    A picture with the human remains:

    [IMG][/IMG]


  24. #49
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-01-09
    Posts
    634


    Country: UK - Scotland



    Quote Originally Posted by Pax Augusta View Post
    Based on some Italian articles, it's east of Rome, outside Rome, near Via Tiburtina, the ancient Roman road leading east-northeast from Rome to Tivoli (Latin Tibur), and then to Pescara (Latin Aternum) in Abruzzo.

    This was definitely the start of the territories of ancient Sabines and Aequians.

    Well, some Roman patrician gentes were Sabine like the Claudii, Valerii and possibly others like the Fabii.

    So we may still learn something about the earliest Romans from these finds.

  25. #50
    Baron
    Join Date
    19-05-12
    Posts
    310


    Country: Canada



    I've stated this before, but whenever I see Roman busts, I don't see any similarity between the large immigrant communities of Italians in places like Canada and USA. I'm not sure why this is, perhaps because those immigrants came largely from the south of Italy.

    The bust Angela posted looks more like a modern French male, and to a lesser extent a English male (of the non-Nordic variety).

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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