Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

I'm hoping for better things from the Reich group.

Me too, I recall this thread:

"The bones we're looking at right now are about five or six thousand year old samples from Italy. And we’re trying to understand population transformations in Italy over time.” -David Reich

He says this right off the bat in this PBS video. This came out on June 6th.


https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-ancient-dna-revolution-unlocks-how-connected-we-all-are
 
R850....T1a1-L208.........mtdna T2c1f

R1543...T1a1-Z709.........H1e

R120....T1a2-L446.....I1c
 
I was wrong about all the Imperial Roman samples coming from Isola Sacra near Ostia, although a good number do. They're actually from some necropoli around the city of Rome itself as well. So, not like future archaeologists excavating just in Flushing. It's like archaeologists excavating in New York City as a whole, or London.

However, the burial contexts tell us nothing. There's no grave goods, no inscriptions, not even names from what I can see, and there's been disturbances at a lot of the sites.

Interestingly enough, some of the samples come from the Catacombs of Peter and Paul. I have to check tomorrow and see if those are more "East Med", i.e. the samples south and east of modern Southern Italians. It would make sense. The first Christians, and the only Christians for a long time were Jews.

In that regard, look what happens to the J1 in ancient Italy after the Imperial Era.

tDTYRF2.png

Razib Khan continues to get it:
https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2019...e-more/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"A combination of the wars of the 6th-century, which are recorded to have depopulated much of Italy, and the overall decentering of Rome from the Mediterranean system after the ending of the Western Empire, probably resulted in the inevitable contraction of the Eternal City.Of course, Rome grew again over the centuries. But the new Romans were not the same Romans as those of the Roman Empire, who left few descendants. In addition to far off cosmopolitans, the bulk of the population was probably derived from northern Lazio and southern Tuscany. Rural people whose genetic makeup resembled the Iron Age Italians from whom they descended."
syrian-orontes-has-long-since-dried-up-to-be-replaced-by-the-tiber-once-more
 
Any ideas who were these Iran Neolithic people in Italy?

I sincerely doubt they were CHG/Iran Neo people straight from south of the Caucasus. It was mixed in with Anatolian Neo. This ancestry was already in Italy in the Neolithic, as the paper points out, along with J2 lineages. We saw it in the period of the Anatolian Neolithic too, and in Greece. It increased in Italy as time went on.

What I want to see is if its arrival in the area around Rome already by the time of the Republic was via Southern Italy or directly from the East. In either case, again, of course, mixed in with Anatolian Neolithic.

It's just a matter of differing percentages.
 
PCA of ancient Italian samples along with other ancient samples.

Well, now I know why mytrueancestry result show all that sharing with the Scythian from Moldova.


9kNMI62.png


Look how close the Mycenaeans are to those ancient Imperial samples.
 
This is very interesting, but I'd like to see one for each of the Imperial Era burial sites to see if there are differences.

ZtPNvx5.png
 
 
This is very interesting, but I'd like to see one for each of the Imperial Era burial sites to see if there are differences.

ZtPNvx5.png
Interesting, so the samples that were South of Southern Italians, which disappeared after the fall of the Roman Empire, only came from one grave site.

I don't know how they can use that to make the claim that the entire Italian genome was changed by this kind of ethnicity. Especially when their own data shows that it disappears after Late Antiquity.


Thanks for sharing, it kind of illustrates how naive the inferences in this study are.

NOTHING from Bronze age Italy???

No wonder there is a massive jump in Iran-like ancestry. It must have come from the South, via Greeks and previous Bronze Age populations there.
 
Interesting, so the samples that were South of Southern Italians, which disappeared after the fall of the Roman Empire, only came from one grave site.

I don't know how they can use that to make the claim that the entire Italian genome was changed by this kind of ethnicity. Especially when their own data shows that it disappears after Late Antiquity.



Thanks for sharing, it kind of illustrates how naive the inferences in this study are.

NOTHING from Bronze age Italy???

No wonder there is a massive jump in Iran-like ancestry. It must have come from the South, via Greeks and previous Bronze Age populations there.

hoJGz1l.png
 
@Tomenable

Take a look at figure C in the chart provided by Angela, these are the rustic native Italian peasantry that re-populated this part of Italy. They look overwhelmingly Southern Italian-like to me, with some Northern Italian-like people, in the mix. These kinds of people mixed in the middle ages, and pulled them slightly more north to where central Italians are today.

Isola Sacra was a necropolis for immigrants. There is a northern cluster of the Imperial samples that matches with these samples from Villa Magna. I think it is rather that Imperial era native Italians were formed out of the Romans expanding into an already Iran-like rich population in the south (Magna Grecia, and Bronze-Age South Italians). While these exotic people, in these places like Isola Sacra were these South of southern Italian-like people, who disappeared after the end of the Imperial era.

r5urnqH.png
 
The map for 300-700 AD shows immigration from the direction of Gallia and Britannia, not Central Europe:

See the blue arrow, which shows North-Western (rather than just northern) source of the bulk of this shift:

atwMG40.png


Looks like after the loss of Eastern provinces, people from Western provinces started migrating to Rome.

We are talking mostly about immigrants who were citizens of the Roman Empire, rather than barbarians.

Perhaps it included Roman citizens evacuated from Britain to Italy: https://www.jstor.org/stable/297204
 
Is it true that not only one female Etruscan but all Etruscans, including the male had Iberomaurusian signals? Did Etruscans have cultural or genetical ties to Berbers, Phoenicians, Cathargians from North Africa? Besides what happened to the R1b and I1 Etruscans?
 
Is it true that not only one female Etruscans but all Etruscans, including the male had
Iberomaurusian
signals? Did Etruscans have cultural or genetical ties to Berbers,Phoencians, Cathargians from North Africa? Besides what happened to the R1b and I1 Etruscans?
 
PCA of ancient Italian samples along with other ancient samples.

Well, now I know why mytrueancestry result show all that sharing with the Scythian from Moldova.


9kNMI62.png


Look how close the Mycenaeans are to those ancient Imperial samples.

Also they are in-between the Neolithic era Italians from this area, and Imperial Roman-to-modern era Central/South Italians

BQ5EoGy.png
 
if part of the CHG/iran neo in central italy did not come to italy during roman times, then who brought it? considering that south italy might have had more during bronze age before migrations from the north happened, how would it compare to anatolian bronze age people?

if the region of rome was completely depopulated why did the morocco HG not disappear in the region? it might have already been introduced in the bronze age too at lower levels? or maybe a large part of the population in rome survived or the ancestry diffused before rome was depopulated.
 
1. Given that this L283 sample is a downstream branch of the older Croatian clade, this is not a good candidate for being a local Etruscan clade, but rather having it's origins in the Illyrian coast.

2. Unlikely scenario with no precedence to propose some shared ancestor for both Illyrian and "Etruscan" J2b2-l283. There is not tradition, mention, or archaeological presence of Etruscans on the Illyrian coast. Whereas the post Trojan war Illyrian presence in Italy is attested in myth, presence of Illyric languages, etc.

3. The Illyrian coast, today among Albanians, is also where we find the highest diversity and frequency of L283 clades.

Etruscan and Illyrian are two different langauges, this is not a claim that Etruscan is Illyrian. This is evidence that points to the post Trojan war entry of Illyrian speakers into Italy, where they mingled with the Italics and Etruscans, that were already there.

cOGDNEM.png
 
The map for 300-700 AD shows immigration from the direction of Gallia and Britannia, not Central Europe:

See the blue arrow, which shows North-Western (rather than just northern) source of the bulk of this shift:



Looks like after the loss of Eastern provinces, people from Western provinces started migrating to Rome.

We are talking mostly about immigrants who were citizens of the Roman Empire, rather than barbarians.

Perhaps it included Roman citizens evacuated from Britain to Italy: https://www.jstor.org/stable/297204

Very possible. Someones speak of a 'mass immigration' when it could very well have been a continual "centralization" of peripheric citizens
 
if part of the CHG/iran neo in central italy did not come to italy during roman times, then who brought it? considering that south italy might have had more during bronze age before migrations from the north happened, how would it compare to anatolian bronze age people?
if the region of rome was completely depopulated why did the morocco HG not disappear in the region? it might have already been introduced in the bronze age too at lower levels? or maybe a large part of the population in rome survived or the ancestry diffused before rome was depopulated.
Good questions. Considering my closer relation to the copper anatolian, the presence of Iran-like ancestry in neolthic Italy, a survey of the southern Italian bronze-age is key.

Also, I am curious to see them modeled differently.
 

This thread has been viewed 357931 times.

Back
Top