Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

[Stuvanè]

When I read history soon I have a substrate, but I don't remember the details. Let's see I remember that the Goths are divided and those who enter Spain are called Visigoths and those of Italy do not remember anymore. A few years ago I was talking to a biologist and he told me that these people are all the same despite their names, they would refer to their most ancestral origin, I don't know.


With regard to the Visigoths or Goths in Spain, it acquires all the epic and historical significance as something of ours in perceiving the situation as soon as they are part of us, we are going to mix. Bone as they are part of the Spanish genetic heritage so that we understand each other, as with the rest of the ethnic groups that have to do with the history of Spain. We do not have a vision of the typical "pure" goth in reference to our history or as part of us. It is like any historical event of a Norwegian princess who travels to the court of Castile to marry, it is like drinking a glass of water, but her descendant or knowing that El Cid disdained Goths, Latinos or whatever it is when we acquire all the relevance for putting an imaginary example. I don't know if I have understood. So when it is part of us, what is known by history, archeology e.t.c. It is when it makes sense for a migration to our historic country and won by hand that integrates into the whole contributing.


I hope it is understood, it is not about idolizing a blonde hair and blue eyes riding towards Spain, it is the history of a country, it is beyond that.

In the sample that I obtained from the hillock of the pig at the beginning it appeared as vascones e.t.c. Well, now he's like Iberian, Latin ...
The ilergetes also appeared at the beginning as Vascones / ilergetes

I think there were people who would tell you something and they may be super bundled. If the term vascones refers to the Iberian peninsula in times of the bronze age, it would be an appropriate term for samples of the entire peninsula provided that the results correspond. It is not about modern Basques.


I think we are going to waste a lot of time today if in MTA they begin to pay attention to current socio-political issues because in a matter of 10 years all this will be clarified almost 100% I imagine when the calculators are ready. So why waste time today if in a few years the whole truth is going to be known? We lose the current time.

In the case of the Moorish era, for example, there are other totally different circumstances when it comes to sociology, religion, e.t.c. There are Spaniards who do not show their results because the small percentage of North Africa is not seen, but even that I think has a socio-political motive, historical religious or whatever you want to call it. Even when the news came out that the percentage of Spaniards in North Africa could be that it did not respond to the Muslim era, I saw that they still did not show their results, I do not understand it sincerely, sharing snp with Moors or Goths does not make you moro or goth, it It is about what I explained above, it is about knowing our Spanish genetic heritage, one thing or the other will not make us more Spanish or less modern Spanish.

In some forum to get from the Red Sea I think or North East Africa another Spanish said it was black, then you could only answer: Eat my cock, you think: what do you care about and ignore it like a jerk. And yet these types of people do not show their results, it is what I do not see proportional in the forums, some give everything and others comfortably allow themselves to judge others by their ethnical results that obviously does not show so that they insult him but for the general knowledge, beyond politics etc. In short, the truth that will be found sooner or later.

I would confirm that the difference between the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths was essentially nothing, an ancient division based mostly on the respective dominant dynasties, where the Thervingi (predecessors of the Visigoths) were led by the Balts, and the Greutungi (the pre-Ostrogoths) ruled by the Amali by which Theoderic the Great would have descended.
The Goths in many ways were a sort of nebula in Eastern Europe, a centripetal group assimilating with relative ease the neighbours, nor should we forget that - although more secluded - even the Gepids were "Goths". Certainly the eastern branch of the Goths was more exposed to the influences of the steppe civilizations, assimilating protoslavs and even more sarmatic groups, to the point that Byzantine military treaty at the beginning of the VIIth century as the "Strategikon" by Mauritius didn't classify the Goths anymore between the Germans (the so-called "blond peoples" / "Xantha Ethne"), but among the "Huns", given their acquired and brilliant ability to fight on horseback. Even if it will certainly be updated, the study by Vernadsky remains fundamental:

https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/sa...ulum.1951.2.jg.340/saeculum.1951.2.jg.340.xml


Now I don't remember which other scholar affirmed it, if Wolfram or Heather, in any case the members of the two groups - at least until the first half of the IVth century - moved rather freely from one tribe to another. The event that broke and fractured the Goth macro-group was the advent of the Huns. The Goths who managed to escape definitively became the Visigoths, while most of Greutungi, which was blocked by the Asian invaders and became a vassal for at least 70-80 years, until the death of Attila in the middle of the Vth century, would have become the Ostrogoths, with a long gestation that would have ended after a few decades, bringing together several Eastern Germans scattered along the Danube and in Balkan area

 

[halfalp]

You don't understand the topic. You seem not to be interested in science. So, I don't know why you're posting or on this site at all.

Really, some people just belong on ignore.

That is extremely mean and pretentious. One could ask himself if you actually are a good human being with some of your response to other beings.

 

[torzio]

I would confirm that the difference between the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths was essentially nothing, an ancient division based mostly on the respective dominant dynasties, where the Thervingi (predecessors of the Visigoths) were led by the Balts, and the Greutungi (the pre-Ostrogoths) ruled by the Amali by which Theoderic the Great would have descended.
The Goths in many ways were a sort of nebula in Eastern Europe, a centripetal group assimilating with relative ease the neighbours, nor should we forget that - although more secluded - even the Gepids were "Goths". Certainly the eastern branch of the Goths was more exposed to the influences of the steppe civilizations, assimilating protoslavs and even more sarmatic groups, to the point that Byzantine military treaty at the beginning of the VIIth century as the "Strategikon" by Mauritius didn't classify the Goths anymore between the Germans (the so-called "blond peoples" / "Xantha Ethne"), but among the "Huns", given their acquired and brilliant ability to fight on horseback. Even if it will certainly be updated, the study by Vernadsky remains fundamental:

https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/sa...ulum.1951.2.jg.340/saeculum.1951.2.jg.340.xml


Now I don't remember which other scholar affirmed it, if Wolfram or Heather, in any case the members of the two groups - at least until the first half of the IVth century - moved rather freely from one tribe to another. The event that broke and fractured the Goth macro-group was the advent of the Huns. The Goths who managed to escape definitively became the Visigoths, while most of Greutungi, which was blocked by the Asian invaders and became a vassal for at least 70-80 years, until the death of Attila in the middle of the Vth century, would have become the Ostrogoths, with a long gestation that would have ended after a few decades, bringing together several Eastern Germans scattered along the Danube and in Balkan area

I think there are genetic differences , especially since the ostrogoths where in the area of black sea Ukraine, Moldova ( and crimea) for over 500 years.........clearly, plenty of time to get some steppe admixture into their society

 

[Angela]

We have only one sample from an Ostrogoth burial, and he was a chieftain.

He was not, however, very steppe like. He was like a Pontic Greek.

That's why having "Gothic" samples in your country doesn't necessarily tell you what you might expect in terms of "ethnic" composition or impact.

The "Gothic" samples from Spain are either more "Slavic-like" according to mta, or "Spaniard like". So, if that's correct, they picked up some "Slavic" as well, and they intermarried so much so quickly that many "lost" their "Germanic" signature very, very early.

That makes complete sense according to the history of the period as I understand it, which always postulated they were a small, mostly male dominated group, not like the Langobards, who were family groups, and at least 60-100,000 of them arrived on the Italian peninsula.

Has anyone run these "Spanish" Goths with the programs used above for comparison?

 

[Carlos]

I would confirm that the difference between the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths was essentially nothing, an ancient division based mostly on the respective dominant dynasties, where the Thervingi (predecessors of the Visigoths) were led by the Balts, and the Greutungi (the pre-Ostrogoths) ruled by the Amali by which Theoderic the Great would have descended.
The Goths in many ways were a sort of nebula in Eastern Europe, a centripetal group assimilating with relative ease the neighbours, nor should we forget that - although more secluded - even the Gepids were "Goths". Certainly the eastern branch of the Goths was more exposed to the influences of the steppe civilizations, assimilating protoslavs and even more sarmatic groups, to the point that Byzantine military treaty at the beginning of the VIIth century as the "Strategikon" by Mauritius didn't classify the Goths anymore between the Germans (the so-called "blond peoples" / "Xantha Ethne"), but among the "Huns", given their acquired and brilliant ability to fight on horseback. Even if it will certainly be updated, the study by Vernadsky remains fundamental:

https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/sa...ulum.1951.2.jg.340/saeculum.1951.2.jg.340.xml


Now I don't remember which other scholar affirmed it, if Wolfram or Heather, in any case the members of the two groups - at least until the first half of the IVth century - moved rather freely from one tribe to another. The event that broke and fractured the Goth macro-group was the advent of the Huns. The Goths who managed to escape definitively became the Visigoths, while most of Greutungi, which was blocked by the Asian invaders and became a vassal for at least 70-80 years, until the death of Attila in the middle of the Vth century, would have become the Ostrogoths, with a long gestation that would have ended after a few decades, bringing together several Eastern Germans scattered along the Danube and in Balkan area

If you're right, it had been commented more times, I think Angela. Nothing changes, more or less Germanic, if they were mixed with Eastern Europe or much more we still like them more because of the historical events that led them to us, contributing undoubtedly to the creation of modern Spanish.


It is really very complicated and sometimes we don't know each other very well among Europeans, there is one out there that is surprising that Spanish regions appear in their Germanic lists of modern populations, possibly think we are pure Iberians, I wonder the Iberians were a pure ethnic group ...


As soon as there are more samples and the calculators are improving, I think that many history books will be rewritten and those who do not like or do not like certain results will have to endure. I think it's seeing a lot, but maybe in a few years from what I'm seeing is infallible.

I do not understand why MTA does not charge Andalusian visigoths and many other regions. Sometimes I like to see some ancient ethnic groups regardless of whether I get results or not.

 

[Angela]

That is extremely mean and pretentious. One could ask himself if you actually are a good human being with some of your response to other beings.

Look, you're on a site where we want people to base their interpretations on "SCIENCE" and "HISTORY", not agenda, myths and fantasy. If you're not going to read the science and history as it relates to the topic at hand, and have no interest in learning from the relevant scientific and historical material we present here, then what's the point pray tell?

All you're doing is repeating over and over again misunderstood information from t-rolls, or just dreaming up hypotheses with no basis in fact.

I don't know how old you are, but this is not kindergarten, and we're not your parents.

In the real world if you want someone to listen to your opinions they have to be informed ones.

We have a lot of problems in modern society precisely because young people are not held to the same standards that we had to meet.

You have to do your homework before forming opinions, and still those opinions will get criticized, and you have to learn from the criticism too instead of just having hurt feelings. The thing not to do is to ignore the facts and to refuse to absorb where you went wrong. If you want to challenge the facts with different facts that's fine, but that's not what you're doing.

I complained about my post graduate education, saying it was too tough, the professors too unfeeling. Nobody wants to see 25 year old men crying under interrogation. You know what? They were like Mama Bear compared to what I had to deal with at work.

It was good preparation.

Even parents have to practice "tough love" more than occasionally. You're not always going to be around to act as protector. You have to teach them how to function in the real world without you when the time comes, and that means facing the consequences of the things they do, although it probably hurts you as much if not more than them.

 

[Pax Augusta]

Do you mean this one? All the others I match get Tuscans as the closest modern population.


It's the same reason they label some of the samples from Cordoba Spaniard from Cordoba, or the ones from the Visigothic site either Slavic Visigothic or Spaniard Visigothic.

Actually, I think it's probably helpful for people who don't know the samples. They're trying to show the "ethnic" composition of the samples. Clearly, there were a lot of Tuscan like people in that particular burial in that particular era, versus Aegean like people or Spanish like people or on and on .

Some of them are not great matches, of course. All that it indicates, I think, is that people in Lazio might have been closer to Tuscans in the Middle Ages. Migration from Abruzzo and other southern regions might have changed them so that now they skew further south. Of course, who knows, it could have been a bunch of southern Tuscans.

Without more context from the burials everything is speculative to one degree or another.

I don't find a plausible reason to use these labels. Those in Villa Magna or from Cancelleria Basilica are not Tuscan and not all of these samples really come out like the Tuscans. For example, people believe that those labelled as Central Roman and found in the Longobard cemetery in Hungary or Collegno were Roman. There's no evidence of that. The many erroneous readings arise precisely from the accumulation of erroneous starting assumptions. In my opinion, this way of doing things only contributes to further confusion, and you can already see that there is a great deal of confusion anywhere. And MTA is not very precise about placing these ancient samples.

You may be right. I should have gone back to the graphic in the paper.

Still a difference between the categorizations in terms of similarity to Tuscans, however.

These samples from Medieval Villa Magna, to which I get hits, are all labeled as closest to modern Tuscans by mta, but the paper has them in the South Italian cluster: 60, 57, 59, 54, 52.

Normally, I'd say that of course the academic paper has to have it more right than something based on K=15, but this paper is so disappointing in so many ways that I'm not sure.

Even if this academic paper is disappointing I wouldn't trust more MTA than this paper.

 

[Angela]

If you're right, it had been commented more times, I think Angela. Nothing changes, more or less Germanic, if they were mixed with Eastern Europe or much more we still like them more because of the historical events that led them to us, contributing undoubtedly to the creation of modern Spanish.


It is really very complicated and sometimes we don't know each other very well among Europeans, there is one out there that is surprising that Spanish regions appear in their Germanic lists of modern populations, possibly think we are pure Iberians, I wonder the Iberians were a pure ethnic group ...


As soon as there are more samples and the calculators are improving, I think that many history books will be rewritten and those who do not like or do not like certain results will have to endure. I think it's seeing a lot, but maybe in a few years from what I'm seeing is infallible.

I do not understand why MTA does not charge Andalusian visigoths and many other regions. Sometimes I like to see some ancient ethnic groups regardless of whether I get results or not.

I'm only in the business of finding out what's "true", even if the truth is that I'm not very similar to ancient groups I "like", and I'm quite similar, or at least influenced by ancient groups I don't "like".

It is what it is.

I'm not going to fiddle with results or blind myself to reality the way people do on certain other sites. I think it's dishonest and dishonorable.

If you want to know how many Visigothic males invaded Iberia, one way to check is to look for the frequency of "Germanic" and perhaps "Slavic" yDna markers. I1, U-106, and Slavic R1a could be combined for a rough estimate. You can also look at IBD analysis per Ralph and Coop et al. There is also the autosomal analysis done by various papers. Spain is not a Germanic country no matter what Spanish Nordicists might like to believe.

As I tried to explain to Half Alp, the discussions here should be based on scientific and historical fact, not preferences.

 

[Angela]

@Pax,

Yes, the labelling is sometimes a problem. What mta does is sometimes helpful, sometimes not. I'm not doing their PR.

It would be helpful if people knew that the Ostrogoth from the Crimea they're matching is not very Germanic like and is, in fact, Pontic Greek like, or, in the case of the "Gothic" samples from Spain, they're getting a match not to "Germanic" ancestry, but to Spanish ancestry.

As for the "Central Romans" in Szolad, I think I've always made it clear in these discussions that we have no way of knowing whether these people were holdover "Romans" still in this Roman province because it held on for a very long time, or people who arrived there during the time of Byzantine rule, or whether it's just serendipity.

As for Collegno, we have a similar issue, although there the samples are at least in the Italian peninsula.

Perhaps they should just label them "Italian like". I don't know.

The fact remains that SOME of the samples buried at Medieval Magna, whether located in Lazio or not, are "more" like MODERN Tuscans than like MODERN Southern Italians, although most of the similarities aren't very good. Others are equally distant from Tuscans and Southern Italians, and some definitely lean more Southern Italian.

I don't see the big problem here. Is it because some samples which are more modern "Southern Italian like" are labelled "Tuscan"?

If it concerns you, take it up with them.

When we actually get Tuscans from the Medieval period we'll find out what they were like at the time of the Villa Magna samples. Only then will we know if some of those people might actually have been from Tuscany. People are, after all, not always buried where they were born or lived. One of the samples comes out as being closest to Catalans. I doubt he was either Roman or Tuscan.

 

[brick]

Actually, I think it may have been an opposite trajectory. People from Lazio were more Southern-Italian-like on average in the Middle Ages, and were pulled more northern towards the position of modern Central Italy. However, some of them were in fact Tuscan-like, according to figure C.

I did a PCA with everyone from Medieval Age and Renaissance Rome.

 

[Angela]

I did a PCA with everyone from Medieval Age and Renaissance Rome.

Where do you have R60 plotting? It doesn't look like anything lands in modern Tuscany, which is where K=15 puts it.

So, even Eurogenes' two own programs don't agree.

 

[brick]

Here are mine:

3. Tuscan Medieval Villa Magna Italy (905 AD) ..... 6.017 - R60 -
Ancient GroupModern GroupSimiliar SamplesHaplogroups (NEW!)PCA AncientPCA ModernResearch Link
1. Tuscan (5.034)
2. Italian_Abruzzo (7.080)
3. West_Sicilian (8.330)
4. East_Sicilian (10.69)
5. Central_Greek (10.77)
6. North_Italian (11.17)
7. Greek (11.32)
8. Kosovan (11.35)

18. Tuscan Medieval Villa Magna Italy (1110 AD) ..... 10.37 - R57 -
Ancient GroupModern GroupSimiliar SamplesHaplogroups (NEW!)PCA AncientPCA ModernResearch Link
1. Tuscan (9.781)
2. Italian_Abruzzo (11.51)
3. West_Sicilian (12.69)
4. North_Italian (13.42)
5. Central_Greek (14.03)
6. East_Sicilian (14.32)
7. South_Italian (14.46)
8. Greek (15.09)

25. Medieval Villa Magna Italy (905 AD) ..... 10.87 - R59 -
Ancient GroupModern GroupSimiliar SamplesHaplogroups (NEW!)PCA AncientPCA ModernResearch Link
1. Tuscan (10.70)
2. West_Sicilian (11.21)
3. Italian_Abruzzo (13.10)
4. Maltese (13.70)
5. North_Italian (13.98)
6. South_Italian (15.72)
7. East_Sicilian (16.12)
8. Central_Greek (16.71)




31. Tuscan Late Medieval Villa Magna Italy (1355 AD) ..... 12.19 - R54 -
Ancient GroupModern GroupSimiliar SamplesHaplogroups (NEW!)PCA AncientPCA ModernResearch Link
1. Tuscan (8.612)
2. West_Sicilian (9.976)
3. Italian_Abruzzo (10.72)
4. East_Sicilian (11.97)
5. South_Italian (12.22)
6. Central_Greek (12.57)
7. North_Italian (13.75)
8. Greek_Thessaly (14.61)

37. Late Medieval Villa Magna Italy (1355 AD) ..... 12.76 - R52 -
Ancient GroupModern GroupSimiliar SamplesHaplogroups (NEW!)PCA AncientPCA ModernResearch Link
1. Tuscan (11.30)
2. West_Sicilian (12.07)
3. North_Italian (13.82)
4. Maltese (15.23)
5. Italian_Abruzzo (15.41)
6. South_Italian (16.62)
7. East_Sicilian (16.94)
8. Spanish_Andalucia (17.33)

Their G25 distances

R60

R57

R59

R54

R52

Can we get a split of only republican or earlier samples and leave roman empire samples or later for another thread/post?

They're all part of the same paper.

 

[brick]

Where do you have R60 plotting? It doesn't look like anything lands in modern Tuscany, which is where K=15 puts it.

So, even Eurogenes' two own programs don't agree.

R60 plotting close to south Italy.

K15 is older than G25. That's probably the reason.

 

[Angela]

R60 plotting with south Italy.

K15 is older than G25. That's probably the reason.

They give it a genetic fit of 5 to modern Tuscans.

That's quite a flaw in K15.

I've never gotten a genetic fit of 6 with a Southern Italian in my life, which is what I get to this person. Another member, from Emilia Romagna, also gets a good fit.

Something is definitely wrong somewhere.

 

[brick]

They give it a genetic fit of 5 to modern Tuscans.

That's quite a flaw in K15.

I've never gotten a genetic fit of 6 with a Southern Italian in my life, which is what I get to this person. Another member, from Emilia Romagna, also gets a good fit.

Something is definitely wrong somewhere.

K15 flaw and probably a bad conversion of the ancient samples on Mytrueancestry.com

In my PCA R60 has a similar position to the paper's PCA

South Italy towards Greece

 

[Angela]

Well, somebody had better get on the horn to mta.

For the price, we expect better.

 

[Stuvanè]

I think there are genetic differences , especially since the ostrogoths where in the area of black sea Ukraine, Moldova ( and crimea) for over 500 years.........clearly, plenty of time to get some steppe admixture into their society

Personally, in the first periods, I imagine a fairly gradual cline between the western and eastern Goths, since - as mentioned - at least until the arrival of the Huns the two branches were quite permeable with one another and almost homogeneous.
However, there were already foreign elements, in some way assimilated, such as various Pontic / Anatolian Greeks, including some of the relatives or ancestors of Wulfila, the translator of the Gothic Bible.
I believe that the main differences have become more marked precisely during and after the Hun domain, with the Ostrogoths assimilating groups from Eastern Europe, and at this juncture there is some name-giving clue in the sources:


- in the Variae, IV, 27 by Cassiodorus, dating back to 507/11, a Theoderic's official named Tutizar is quoted, who should refer to an alanic/hun origin or influence https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/RE:Tutizar ;


- the same applies to Tucza, mentioned in a letter by pope Pelagius I, a gothic woman residing in Rieti, already wife of the Roman Maximinus, who decides to leave her husband to become a nun: even here her name would have an iranic root;


- finally, there is Ragnaris, a Goth commander active in southern Italy in the last years of the Greek-Gothic war - official with a Germanic name -, quoted in the sources of Procopius and Agathias. Agathias, however, insists on defining it "Hun"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragnaris

 

[Pax Augusta]

@Pax,

Yes, the labelling is sometimes a problem. What mta does is sometimes helpful, sometimes not. I'm not doing their PR. .

What it concerns me, as usual, is the lack of accuracy. All these tools are inaccurate, even academic papers sometimes are, but MTA is really very inaccurate.


Since I see that MTA is a little game that people like, I don't want to be the usual party pooper, so I leave the party.

 

[Jovialis]

This is the kind of filth we have to deal with day after day. This deranged Romanian is a perfect example of it.

I'm leaving it up so you can see the kind of ethnic slurs and racism that come bubbling up when people can hide behind sock accounts on the internet.

This retard thinks I'm a peasant... I'm actually a 1%-er

This drag on the human race should be allowed to fail, and perish from the face of the earth.

 

[coțoflendură]

I am a disgrace to humanity, laugh at the burning car wreck that is my life.