Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 681

Thread: Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

  1. #101
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,834
    Points
    309,571
    Level
    100
    Points: 309,571, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Two-way mixture models for individuals from 300-700 AD, Table S24:

    Germany_Late_Roman was that Roman soldier FN_2 who resembled genetically Republican Era Romans, or maybe Celtiberians:



    ^^^ So Romans from ca. 300-700 AD can be modelled as 60% Romans from 0-300 AD + 40% Roman soldiers similar to FN_2:





    Table S23, F4 stats: https://science.sciencemag.org/conte...Antonio_SM.pdf
    Yes, and as a lot of other mixtures.

    He was a combination of IBS and TSI, using the 1000 genomes that the authors of that paper used as a reference.

    So?

    Sorry, you've lost me a bit. How do you know where FN_2 would plot? I'm looking at the PCA of the ancient Italian samples and other published ancient samples, and I don't see him near the Republican Era Romans, or, actually on that plot at all, unless he was given a new number. Am I going blind? :)




    As to why they modeled that way, you've got me. Why didn't they get some samples from Bronze Age and Iron Age Southern Italy before coming to some of these conclusions?


    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. #102
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,579
    Points
    65,324
    Level
    79
    Points: 65,324, Level: 79
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 1,126
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    They should have checked a model assuming the resurgence of local (pre-Imperial) population:

    Target: Rome_LA [300-700 AD]

    Source 1: Rome_IR [0-300 AD]
    Source 2: Rome_IA [900-0 BC]

    Not sure why they didn't do this. Just like they didn't check any Germanic models for Rome_LA.

    High P value indicates that a model is good / probable.

    If there was no resurgence they would get low P value.

  3. #103
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    05-01-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,012
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,012, Level: 12
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 138
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Ethnic group
    Irish/British
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    In Greece, you couldn't legally marry non-citizens, and a child produced with a non-citizen, even one resident in the city-state, had no citizenship rights.[...]
    That might have been true later in Athens (under Pericles?), but Cleisthenes, considered to be the founder of Athenian democracy, was the son of Megacles (of the powerful Alcmaeonid family) and Agariste, daughter of Cleisthenes, tyrant of Sicyon, and there was no question about his citizenship at the time.
    "I think Marija's 'kurgan hypothesis' has been magnificently vindicated by recent work." --Lord Colin Renfrew, 4/18/2018.

  4. #104
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award
    Salento's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-05-17
    Posts
    2,994
    Points
    41,580
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,580, Level: 62
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 99.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H12a

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by torzio View Post
    R850....T1a1-L208.........mtdna T2c1f
    R1543...T1a1-Z709.........H1e
    R120....T1a2-L446.....I1c
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    imho y T is not an outlier, y T is rare, but proportionally and coincidentally it’s the only non y R Haplogroup among the Iron-age Roman-Italics.

    Match (outlier? Lost Tourist :)
    I don’t think so:

    y T-L208 (R850) Latin Tribe Ardea 650 BC





  5. #105
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    294
    Points
    4,778
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,778, Level: 20
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 272
    Overall activity: 26.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-M84

    Country: Uruguay



    We need more samples from other areas of italy south of rome but also north of it ...
    3 samples of etruscan is not enough .....
    6-8 latin samples also hard to know ....

  6. #106
    Regular Member Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points

    Join Date
    19-09-19
    Age
    31
    Posts
    53
    Points
    343
    Level
    3
    Points: 343, Level: 3
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 7
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Country: Armenia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    Are you so sure? The Liburnian language shows more ties to a proto-Italic or archaic Italic language close to Venetic than to Illyrian. Even the maps about Illyrian ethny put their borders a bit too far north, i think.
    They were Illyrian before the Roman expansion, just because Romans colonised it doesn’t make it theirs, original Liburnians were Illyrian.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #107
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,411
    Points
    6,704
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,704, Level: 24
    Level completed: 31%, Points required for next Level: 346
    Overall activity: 23.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Mtdna Haplogroup D in Imperial Roma, Mesolithic people were all y-dna I2a2(a) and mtdna U5 and U8 and probably one Neolithic sample was R1b-V88. They say the intriguing y-dna I1 in Late Antiquity... not so intriguiging for the time to be honest.

    Looking forward to see the history of mtdna D and if the U8 sample is U8a.

    Even tho slight, the Iberomaurusian admixture is kind of interesting, we can actually make a lot of assumptions on it. But if it came from Phoenicians, why would they bring only Morocco Hunter-Gatherer ancestry and not both with Morocco Neolithic ancestry?

  8. #108
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,041
    Points
    104,822
    Level
    100
    Points: 104,822, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.3%

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

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    Match (outlier? Lost Tourist :)
    I don’t think so:

    y T-L208 (R850) Latin Tribe Ardea 650 BC




    Here's mine :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post

    I now get Latin Tribe Ardea as a new sample, and it is right before Anatolian Copper age. I think these are the two most important samples I get, as I speculate it I am roughly a merger of these two groups, ultimately.



    I used to get Copper Age Anatolian as my 4th sample by these settings, now it has been bumped down to 5, by Latin Tribe Ardea that took it's place.



    What a glorious revelation :)

  9. #109
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,579
    Points
    65,324
    Level
    79
    Points: 65,324, Level: 79
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 1,126
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    During upheavals etc. cities suffer more than countryside.

    Here is example from two regions of Poland during the "Deluge" (disastrous wars of 1648-1667):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(history)

    Population change of these two regions is estimated as:

    In years 1578-1580:

    Rural population (non-Jewish) - 1,676,000
    Non-Jewish urban population - 650,200
    Jewish (all urban population) - 26,500

    In years 1662-1676:

    Rural population (non-Jewish) - 1,531,600
    Non-Jewish urban population - 308,200
    Jewish (all urban population) - 43,500

    Summary of the decline:

    Non-Jewish urban population changed from 650 thousand to 300 thousand (decline by 54%).

    Non-Jewish rural population changed from 1676 thousand to 1532 thousand (decline by 9%).

    Urban population suffered much more than rural.

    Jewish (vast majority urban) population increased, mainly due to their super high natural growth rates (which is already known from AJ genetics).

    SOURCES (two books):

    Bogucka, Samsonowicz, "Dzieje miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce" [History of cities in Poland]
    Schiper, Tartakower, Hafftka, "Żydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej" [Jews in the Reborn Poland]

  10. #110
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,438
    Points
    41,095
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,095, Level: 62
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 18.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by valentinavalley2 View Post
    They were Illyrian before the Roman expansion, just because Romans colonised it doesn’t make it theirs, original Liburnians were Illyrian.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    In fact the question is a bit more complicated. It depends if you speak of a politic "state" or if you speak of ethnicity or language. The Liburnian language is closer to Venetic, as say Bernard SERGENT and WIKIPEDIA. B. SERGENT explains that at le anthroponymic level, the "Illyrian" territory (according to later Roman naming?) was divided into three parts (at least). One of them checks geographically the zone where Greeks had signaled their "Illyrians", it's to say in the N-W of Greece, where they localized the Taulantians, Enkhelai, Piraei: their lands correspond well enough to the southern anthroponymic zone of the author KATICIC (KATICHICH') 1976. It would be the true linguistic original Illyrian zone. The later in between Dalmatian zone had anthroponyms seeming formed on pan-italic languages descendant as Venetic, someones call it Pannono-Italic (let's not forget the Italics differenciation could have occurred around Panninia). It seems all that was already settled before Roman occupation and the changes it caused. It's out of discussion that Liburni(ans) were not true Illyrians, if they were, maybe, unde Illyrian control at some stage of history.

  11. #111
    Regular Member Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points

    Join Date
    19-09-19
    Age
    31
    Posts
    53
    Points
    343
    Level
    3
    Points: 343, Level: 3
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 7
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Country: Armenia



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    In fact the question is a bit more complicated. It depends if you speak of a politic "state" or if you speak of ethnicity or language. The Liburnian language is closer to Venetic, as say Bernard SERGENT and WIKIPEDIA. B. SERGENT explains that at le anthroponymic level, the "Illyrian" territory (according to later Roman naming?) was divided into three parts (at least). One of them checks geographically the zone where Greeks had signaled their "Illyrians", it's to say in the N-W of Greece, where they localized the Taulantians, Enkhelai, Piraei: their lands correspond well enough to the southern anthroponymic zone of the author KATICIC (KATICHICH') 1976. It would be the true linguistic original Illyrian zone. The later in between Dalmatian zone had anthroponyms seeming formed on pan-italic languages descendant as Venetic, someones call it Pannono-Italic (let's not forget the Italics differenciation could have occurred around Panninia). It seems all that was already settled before Roman occupation and the changes it caused. It's out of discussion that Liburni(ans) were not true Illyrians, if they were, maybe, unde Illyrian control at some stage of history.
    Both the Liburnians and Dalmatians before the Roman Empire were Illyrian, it’s stupid to say weren’t when original Greek sources say they were. You can’t compare modern scholars to ancient ones, because one only “guess” and take sources out of Romans who had an “agenda” to spread their people to replace them with the natives, the others were here to hear the language they spoke.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #112
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,579
    Points
    65,324
    Level
    79
    Points: 65,324, Level: 79
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 1,126
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    IIRC, in the Olalde 2019 study the authors claimed Iberia has almost no Germanic admixture after modelling Visigoths with use of very "northern" Pre-Roman samples as a source (while samples from times of the Roman rule in Iberia were no longer as northern-shifted as those Pre-Roman, due to admixtures from the east).

    And that made no sense, because Celtiberian genetics got altered during Roman period. The authors used a biased model to prove lack of Germanic DNA.

    Here the authors have the opposite agenda - and are also using biased models. In this case it would actually make sense to use Republican samples, because - unlike Celtiberians in Iberia - Republican Romans could survive Imperial era unaltered. Imperial samples so far are only from Rome and vicinity, not from all over Italy.

    We should wait for a comprehensive study with samples from all over Italy including various rural areas, just like Olalde 2019 sampled most of Iberia.

  13. #113
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,720
    Points
    709,244
    Level
    100
    Points: 709,244, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 18.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    Match (outlier? Lost Tourist :)
    I don’t think so:

    y T-L208 (R850) Latin Tribe Ardea 650 BC
    What I meant by outlier was that it is the only Iron Age sample that plots with South Italians and Greeks, while the others plot with North Italians. Clearly there must have been a merger of two populations. I assume that T-L208 sample was of Greek origin.

    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  14. #114
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    294
    Points
    4,778
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,778, Level: 20
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 272
    Overall activity: 26.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-M84

    Country: Uruguay



    macaimo
    where do you think most of the roman emperors would cluster ?
    with northwest italian like most iron age samples or
    with central italians mainland greeks like most of the imperial samples ?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors
    regards
    adam

  15. #115
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Community Award
    Salento's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-05-17
    Posts
    2,994
    Points
    41,580
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,580, Level: 62
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 70
    Overall activity: 99.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H12a

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    What I meant by outlier was that it is the only Iron Age sample that plots with South Italians and Greeks, while the others plot with North Italians. Clearly there must have been a merger of two populations. I assume that T-L208 sample was of Greek origin.

    It could be Greek hg, but I should add that a Parent of y T-L208, T-L162 (CTS880) was found in 7000 year old Karsdorf burials in Germany.







    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184

  16. #116
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,579
    Points
    65,324
    Level
    79
    Points: 65,324, Level: 79
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 1,126
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    This shows for period 300-700 CE the direction of gene flow into Lazio from areas between Spain and Germany:



    ^^^
    Those Bronze Age Anatolians were genetically a lot like modern Cyprus.

    Imperial Rome is modelled as 20% Republic Romans plus 80% Cyprus:



    ^^^
    This is 4/5 replacement. Do you really believe countryside was also 80% replaced?

  17. #117
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,834
    Points
    309,571
    Level
    100
    Points: 309,571, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    IIRC, in the Olalde 2019 study the authors claimed Iberia has almost no Germanic admixture after modelling Visigoths with use of very "northern" Pre-Roman samples as a source (while samples from times of the Roman rule in Iberia were no longer as northern-shifted as those Pre-Roman, due to admixtures from the east).

    And that made no sense, because Celtiberian genetics got altered during Roman period. The authors used a biased model to prove lack of Germanic DNA.

    Here the authors have the opposite agenda - and are also using biased models. In this case it would actually make sense to use Republican samples, because - unlike Celtiberians in Iberia - Republican Romans could survive Imperial era unaltered. Imperial samples so far are only from Rome and vicinity, not from all over Italy.

    We should wait for a comprehensive study with samples from all over Italy including various rural areas, just like Olalde 2019 sampled most of Iberia.
    I don't think they're necessarily biased. That will and is coming from the amateur community. :) I just don't think they thought things through, and they have a high schoolers understanding of Roman history and that of Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, if that. Some of their commentary sounded like a study note card from Middle School.

    They also don't seem as conversant with the findings of other papers as we are, which is indeed worrying.

    Still, at least, unlike Hellenthal and his group, they get that the "Southern" group was already there and didn't arrive with the Byzantines. I wonder if that group remembers the texts I sent! :) Indeed, I wonder if the group over at Anthrogenica and Polako remember all the arguments they put forward for a huge movement from the east during Late Antiquity. I mean, it couldn't be more ironic. The change was the other way.

    I have no problem with the change in Central Italy coming about because of input from Goths and Lombards. Well, I have a personal problem with it, as I don't like the idea of these destroyers entering our bloodlines, but I try to keep personal feelings out of it. I've accepted the Indo-Europeans, after all. :) I had little choice. My father carried U-152, and unlike certain dead enders, I don't think it derives from WHG. Then there's my U2e, so there's that as well. They came, and that's an end to it.

    I just don't see the evidence for this, however.

    The Lombards' own chronicler, Paul the Deacon, said there were only 60,000 of them, including women and children. All the samples we have so far are U-106. Now, in the Veneto, and to a lesser extent in the rest of Northern Italy, we do see settlement patterns, some of which have survived, indeed, the very holdings have survived, and we do see U-106. We also see I1. Whether that came from other types of Lombards or from Goths or Franks from later on I don't know. Now, there isn't a lot of it, but it's there.

    It's true that the Lombards established kingdoms elsewhere in Italy, including further south. However, those were some knights and their retinues. It was in no way a mass migration. You can get spikes of yDna because of founder effects, but for substantial autosomal change, which this was, you need a lot of it. I'll repeat my example of my area of Italy. The people plot firmly as north/central Italians, and yet they're over 70% R1b.

    Where is all that U-106 and I1 in modern Lazio?

    Now let's turn to IBD analysis. It's unlike IBS and more reliable in my opinion. So, unlike you, I don't think Olalde was wrong about there being very few signs of Germanic dna intrusion in Spain. Ralph and Coop found the exact same thing, i.e. very little sign of genetic change coming from the Germanic tribes in either Spain or Italy. I do think it makes sense. These were elite invasions, not mass invasions.

    So, how did the change come about? Could there be other factors? I do think looking at Italians further north is a possibility which should have been explored. The change doesn't seem to be stemming from central/east Europe, but rather from northwestern Europe. Isn't that precisely what was more present in northern, especially northwestern Italy.

    I'm not at all saying, by the way, as I tried to explain upthread, that Central Italy didn't remain more "southern" than it was at the time of the Republic. There's a great deal of Greek like ancestry in Italy. However, I just don't see evidence yet that the change was because of Goths and Lombards.

    The disappearance of that "tail" into the Levant is a different matter. The mass decline in J1 should tell part of the story. The authors should have looked at the differences in ancestry per each burial site, as I tried to do in a quick and dirty way. There seems to be a difference, which would support their own statement about the heterogeneity of these Roman populations. It wasn't a melting pot; it was more like a stew. :) There were probably ethnic "enclaves", as there are in any great city where there's been a lot of migration from foreign parts. Look at London, or New York. In a couple of hundred years those differences aren't going to disappear. As trade dried up, people moved to more advantageous locations, and then there was the sacks and mass destruction. Those who had the ability or contacts elsewhere fled. The others would have died.

    These are patterns which are repeated over and over again in history. You just have to read it, a lot of it, and try to learn from it, from it and archaeology, and not just play with algorithms. I tried telling the usual suspects not to include Messina in their attempts to figure out ancient migrations specifically to particular areas of Sicily. There was a massive earthquake at the beginning of the 20th century. Very few people survived. Where did most of the resettlement come from? Calabria across the water.

  18. #118
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-06-17
    Posts
    1,016
    Points
    15,873
    Level
    38
    Points: 15,873, Level: 38
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 577
    Overall activity: 12.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    Sample R1016 seems to be R1b-Z2103. This, like L283 is one of the 3 main Albanian paternal lineages, thus increasing possibility that it has shared recent origin on the Illyrian coast from the same movement that brought the L283 into Rome.
    "As we have already stressed, the mass evacuation of the Albanians from their triangle is the only effective course we can take. In order to relocate a whole people, the first prerequisite is the creation of a suitable psychosis. This can be done in various ways." - Vaso Cubrilovic

  19. #119
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,720
    Points
    709,244
    Level
    100
    Points: 709,244, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 18.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    macaimo
    where do you think most of the roman emperors would cluster ?
    with northwest italian like most iron age samples or
    with central italians mainland greeks like most of the imperial samples ?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors
    regards
    adam
    That's an odd question considering that over half of the Roman emperors were not from Italy. From the 3rd century onwards, the majority were from the Balkans (including the Tetrachs and the Constantinian dynasty). Some were from Spain (Trajan, Hadrian, Theodosius), from North Africa (Macrinus, Septimius Severus), mixed North Africa and Syria (Geta, Caracalla), Syria (Elagabalus, Severus Alexander).

    If you refer to early emperors of Patrician descent, it's hard to tell because Rome was multicultural from the start. It wasn't purely Italic (Latin and Sabine), but also incorporated families of Greek and Etruscan descent. But considering that the Etruscan appear to be autosomally similar to Italics, and that the Greek ancestry was the lowest in the lot during the Kingdom and Republic, I'd say that Republican patrician and plebeian families from Rome itself were most probably like the Iron Age samples in this study, but plotting slightly more south toward southern Italy.

  20. #120
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,834
    Points
    309,571
    Level
    100
    Points: 309,571, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    This shows for period 300-700 CE the direction of gene flow into Lazio from areas between Spain and Germany:



    ^^^
    Those Bronze Age Anatolians were genetically a lot like modern Cyprus.

    Imperial Rome is modelled as 20% Republic Romans plus 80% Cyprus:



    ^^^
    This is 4/5 replacement. Do you really believe countryside was also 80% replaced?
    This is where you are going wrong. The "Cyprus" part is an AVERAGE. Plus, they're using modern Cypriots.

    Even they themselves state that it's an average, and it doesn't mean that there was this big migration from Cyprus.

    What do you get if you combine people from a community of Mycenaean like people, which is probably what most Greeks were like at the time, or Southern Italians of the time who had such ancestry, with people from some transplanted Jewish or Syrian like community, with a sprinkling of some locals? You get people who might approximate modern Cypriots.

    The thing is, you can't average people from different communities like this and get some sort of good information about ancient genetics.

    Think about it: if we were talking about New York City, would it be a good idea to average Hasidic Jews from Borough Park, Middle Class Jews from Forest Hills and Manhattan, Puerto Ricans from the Bronx, Italians from Bay Ridge, and East Asians from Flushing? This is going on 120 years after some of them migrated from Europe.

    Well, you may not know those places, but I assure you that they're "ethnic" strongholds, and there are others.

    Did you read my post number 117? You're preaching to the choir. :)

    There was no mass migration from Spain to Rome. I don't know how that got past peer review. I guess no one knows ancient history anymore. Going by Ralph and Coop there's literally no input from Spain to Italy for thousands of years.

  21. #121
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-04-18
    Posts
    153
    Points
    6,615
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,615, Level: 24
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 435
    Overall activity: 20.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Johane Derite View Post
    Sample R1016 seems to be R1b-Z2103. This, like L283 is one of the 3 main Albanian paternal lineages, thus increasing possibility that it has shared recent origin on the Illyrian coast from the same movement that brought the L283 into Rome.

    R1b-Z2103 and L283 are older than any supposed Illyrian movement into Rome.

    So no evidence for what you claim.

  22. #122
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,834
    Points
    309,571
    Level
    100
    Points: 309,571, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    The garbage that some people are posting is literally insane. Somebody could look at these results and say Etruscans came to Italy from AFRICA???? And Polako leaves posts like that there but deletes ones with which he disagrees?

    Meanwhile, posters from anthrogenica come here to read our content, but prohibit one of our members from doing the same?

    Honestly, I knew things were bad out there, but this is unbelievable.

    As for all this "Illyrian" stuff, groups of mixed Indo-European and "local" ancestry may have passed through the Balkans and then into Italy. Others might have come down through Hungary. Some of these yDna lines were all over the Balkans and probably Hungary and southern Germany. We just can't untangle all of it completely yet, so I don't see the point of some of this commentary.

  23. #123
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-06-17
    Posts
    1,016
    Points
    15,873
    Level
    38
    Points: 15,873, Level: 38
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 577
    Overall activity: 12.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by brick View Post
    R1b-Z2103 and L283 are older than any supposed Illyrian movement into Rome.

    So no evidence for what you claim.
    The L283 in Rome is downstream of the exact same clade as the 1000 year older Illyrian coast sample.

    R1b-Z2013 is one of the 3 main Albanian paternal lineages, and it is a Balkan R1b, not really present among Italics or Celts or Slavs.

  24. #124
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    294
    Points
    4,778
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,778, Level: 20
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 272
    Overall activity: 26.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-M84

    Country: Uruguay



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    That's an odd question considering that over half of the Roman emperors were not from Italy. From the 3rd century onwards, the majority were from the Balkans (including the Tetrachs and the Constantinian dynasty). Some were from Spain (Trajan, Hadrian, Theodosius), from North Africa (Macrinus, Septimius Severus), mixed North Africa and Syria (Geta, Caracalla), Syria (Elagabalus, Severus Alexander).



    If you refer to early emperors of Patrician descent, it's hard to tell because Rome was multicultural from the start. It wasn't purely Italic (Latin and Sabine), but also incorporated families of Greek and Etruscan descent. But considering that the Etruscan appear to be autosomally similar to Italics, and that the Greek ancestry was the lowest in the lot during the Kingdom and Republic, I'd say that Republican patrician and plebeian families from Rome itself were most probably like the Iron Age samples in this study, but plotting slightly more south toward southern Italy.

    ok thanks for your answere
    yes i meant the early ones
    i agree with your answer
    regards
    adam

    p.s
    septimus severus was only half north african his mom was italian but overall i get the point

  25. #125
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered5000 Experience Points
    torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    518
    Points
    5,782
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,782, Level: 22
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 268
    Overall activity: 62.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2-Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    What I meant by outlier was that it is the only Iron Age sample that plots with South Italians and Greeks, while the others plot with North Italians. Clearly there must have been a merger of two populations. I assume that T-L208 sample was of Greek origin.
    That T sample came with the R1b from ancient LBK areas of central europe...i will check if it also matches the neolithic T samples from malek bulgaria
    Fathers mtdna T2b17
    Grandfather mtdna T1a1e
    Sons mtdna K1a4o
    Mum paternal line R1b-S8172
    Grandmum paternal side I1d1-P109
    Wife paternal line R1a-Z282

Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •