Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

[Archetype0ne]

That article had me laughing from the very first line... Comic, bordering ridiculous.
Surely that was the aim of the writer starting with ""THE ITALIANS DO NOT EXIST": the DNA of Imperial Rome comes from Syria and Lebanon" "
I mean who writes like that without the aim of triggering people, tr0ll style.


Using the same analogy the writer used, it would be like stating "THE AMERICANS DO NOT EXIST": the DNA of the USA comes from Bangladesh and India.
I hope the writer does not take himself seriously, and the editor was drunk when he let that through.

Edit: Clicked the link... its a blogpost, doubt there was even an editor, or editing for that matter...

 

[Carlos]

What you posted is a good example of how, for different reasons, right and left propaganda have much more in common than they think, and are roughly the same thing.


What you posted is the mix of a copy and paste from various different sources, that Italians don't exist is an old article from an Italian newspaper referring to an old studio. Funny that to confirm that Italians do not exist is David Pettener, an Italian biologist who does not even have an Italian surname.


Given how obsessed the rest of the world is with us Italians, because there is no doubt that the rest of the world is obsessed with our history when the average Italian generally doesn't give a damn about what exists outside of Italy, I begin to believe that maybe we really do exist. I had some doubts until a few years ago, but now I have less doubts about this.

Well, what you said has sounded very familiar to me because that happens in Andalusia, they don't really criticize anyone, they are watching their lives and they don't talk about those from outside and if they do it is positive, unlike other places that are constantly talking about others but always negative, so when you have made that comment I thought it should be an inheritance because that is also the case.

 

[Duarte]

We are living the age of fake news. Lies are propagated as absolute truths and many unwary people believe them. Joseph Goebbels, German Nazi Party Propaganda Minister said: “A lie repeated a thousand times becomes true.” This sentence summarizes the tragic consequence of the spread of illegitimate news.

 

[LTG]

The paper represents a decent preliminary effort but much more needs to be done. I think we need a good deal of samples from the Bronze Age, as well as from the more rural areas of Italy during the Imperial Age. It is bizarre that the researchers would decide to focus so heavily on the city of Rome and its immediate surroundings such as the port towns. These areas would have been the pinnacle of cosmopolitan life and heavily populated with foreign merchants, tradesmen and slaves from across the Mediterranean during the height of the Roman Empire; we know this from the writings of the Romans themselves, as well as observing modern migration patterns in the West, where you have "international cities" like London, New York and Toronto that have a disproportionate number of foreign citizens compared to the nation as a whole. I find it hard to believe that they would not retroactively understand that the legitimacy of the Imperial Age findings would be called into question because of these location choices.

It is satisfying to finally put the Etruscan origin theories to bed for good. I always found them to be manifestations of questionable sentiments among many people i.e. assuming that the locals were incapable of their own prosperity, and thus had to have been physically subdued by a foreign Asiatic elite who were the ?real? Etruscans. This turned out to be completely false. The Italic tribes were ultimately of very similar stock to the Etruscans; both groups being heavily Indo-European in their genetic origins irrespective of ethnolinguistics. Romans being the progressive evolution of Latins were also grass-roots and indigenous to the Italian Peninsula. That now places the Minoan, Mycenaean, Classical & Hellenistic Greek, Etruscan and Roman peoples and cultures as indigenous to their respective regions of Southern Europe. This must be excruciatingly painful for those interlopers who always try to insert themselves into the narrative of European civilization.

Rome is a good example of the cycle most civilizations inevitably experience. It was founded by men who resembled Northern Italians and Spaniards, and who from the Kingdom, to the Republic, to the early Empire established Roman civilization and its many gifts to us in the realms of law, politics, philosophy, art, civil engineering and warfare. Sometime after Augustus Caesar there appears to have been an influx of foreigners who became overrepresented demographically in the city of Rome relative to the Italian Peninsula. They likely arrived from across the Roman Empire, but the genetics point strongly towards an Eastern Mediterranean origin for most migrants as their profile is similar to Greeks and Bronze Age Anatolians. The Roman population of the city was either displaced, or moved to the countryside of their own volition; their genetic profile persisting in large part throughout the Imperial Age in rural farms and villages.

[1] "distance%=0.7252"

ITA_Rome_Imperial

Cypriot,40.6
Greek_Crete,33.4
Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,15.6
ITA_Latini_IA,10.4

Rome declines in Late Antiquity due to war, disease and general stagnation. There is emigration of merchants to Constantinople and other trading hubs; the city experiences a 90% drop in population. This hurts the bourgeoisie, city dwelling Eastern Mediterranean population in a massively disproportionate way due to their over reliance on the megalopolis and it?s many comforts and vices. The rural folk who are more traditional, healthy and fertile, begin to repopulate Rome en masse now that the ethnic balance has tipped in their favor; they absorb most of the leftover residents leading to a significant resurgence of Latin admixture in the city; the study proxies this using Basques. There also exists a minor input from Germanic tribes after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire.

[1] "distance%=0.8182"

ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity

ITA_Rome_Imperial,57
ITA_Latini_IA,37.6
Germany_MA,5.4

This increase in both Latin and Northern European admixture continues into the Middle Ages and Renaissance where the full variation of the modern Central Italian genome is formed as a result of various compounding historical events.

[1] "distance%=1.2671"

ITA_Rome_MA

ITA_Rome_Imperial,47.6
ITA_Latini_IA,42.2
Germany_MA,10.2

That's my take on the results, anyway. I see that many people, including Davidski, have stated that the Prenestini outlier is half Phoenician; this is nonsense. This individual almost certainly derives their eastern half from the Balkans and Anatolia. Here is how they come back when running them against the full modern G25 datasheet. Could it be any more obvious?

[1] "distance%=1.8397"

ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

Greek_Central_Anatolia,42
Sardinian,19.8
Spanish_La_Rioja,13.8
Italian_Piedmont_o,12.2
Greek,8.6
Italian_Umbria,3.6

 

[torzio]

What you posted is a good example of how, for different reasons, right and left propaganda have much more in common than they think, and are roughly the same thing.


What you posted is the mix of a copy and paste from various different sources, that Italians don't exist is an old article from an Italian newspaper referring to an old studio. Funny that to confirm that Italians do not exist is David Pettener, an Italian biologist who does not even have an Italian surname.


Given how obsessed the rest of the world is with us Italians, because there is no doubt that the rest of the world is obsessed with our history when the average Italian generally doesn't give a damn about what exists outside of Italy, I begin to believe that maybe we really do exist. I had some doubts until a few years ago, but now I have less doubts about this.

Pettener surname originates in padova, and was first recorded initially spelt petenar in the year 1138 ,....it means " to have combed"......the bulk of the 95 households in in friuli italy now.....about 70% of the 95

 

[torzio]

What you posted is a good example of how, for different reasons, right and left propaganda have much more in common than they think, and are roughly the same thing.


What you posted is the mix of a copy and paste from various different sources, that Italians don't exist is an old article from an Italian newspaper referring to an old studio. Funny that to confirm that Italians do not exist is David Pettener, an Italian biologist who does not even have an Italian surname.


Given how obsessed the rest of the world is with us Italians, because there is no doubt that the rest of the world is obsessed with our history when the average Italian generally doesn't give a damn about what exists outside of Italy, I begin to believe that maybe we really do exist. I had some doubts until a few years ago, but now I have less doubts about this.

Pettener surname originates in padova, and was first recorded initially spelt petenar in the year 1138 ,....it means " to have combed"......the bulk of the 95 households live in friuli italy now.....about 70% of the 95

How do you think it is not an italian surname?

 

[Angela]

Any need to write two virtually identical posts, Torzio????

 

[torzio]

Any need to write two virtually identical posts, Torzio????

Unsure what happened, i opened it up to add the last sentence abd when i saved it came out as it is....

 

[Pax Augusta]

Pettener surname originates in padova, and was first recorded initially spelt petenar in the year 1138 ,....it means " to have combed"......the bulk of the 95 households live in friuli italy now.....about 70% of the 95

How do you think it is not an italian surname?

Pettener are from Istria, modern-day Slovenia, later moved to Trieste.

 

[Jovialis]

I see that many people, including Davidski, have stated that the Prenestini outlier is half Phoenician; this is nonsense.

Most importantly, the authors of the paper did not say that. He is the only one I have seen say that, actually. The others parroting that, must get their interpretation straight from him.

 

[Jovialis]

I think it is very curious, that some hobbyists are not forthcoming with heat maps of samples like 850, and 437. Why no heat maps, or Gedmatch kit numbers posted? I would like to analyze the data myself, but unfortunately the original files have been removed from the Stanford site.

I bet they would show an affinity to southern Italian populations.

 

[brick]

The averages of Rome_Imperial, Rome_Late_Antiquity, Rome_MA, Rome_Renaissance, and Tivoli_Renaissance, in the PCA with modern populations.

I'm using the G25 because it's the only one available.

 

[Angela]

Most importantly, the authors of the paper did not say that. He is the only one I have seen say that, actually. The others parroting that, must get their interpretation straight from him.

Does anyone want to tell me again that his "interpretations" aren't agenda driven?

To deny general access to the two samples he's virtually lied about even going by his own tools is really a new low, however.

I think we've also seen that you have to be careful who you read on the internet. People who write the kind of garbage found on that blog are not just racists; they're certifiably insane.

 

[Jovialis]

I found this:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB32566

850:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/ERS3573760

437:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/ERS3573767

I'm not sure how it works to convert the files to gedmatch-friendly format. However, I see there is a VCF converter on DNAkit Studio.

 

[Angela]

Even well intentioned, honest analysis of ancient samples using these tools has to be undertaken and interpreted cautiously.

Let's take a look at one analysis published upthread.

ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o

Greek_Central_Anatolia,42
Sardinian,19.8
Spanish_La_Rioja,13.8
Italian_Piedmont_o,12.2
Greek,8.6
Italian_Umbria,3.6

This does clear up the absurd assertion that the sample is "half Phoenician", but then what are we to conclude from this about the "Latin" Prenestini? In terms of modern populations were they adjusted percentages of Sardinian, Spanish La Rioja, Piemontese, Greeks and Umbrians?

Sounds fine to me for what it's worth, although I'm sure it's not the "Latin" tribes signature for which Stormfront was waiting.

As for Rome Imperial, I'm assuming this is an average?

ITA_Rome_Imperial

Cypriot,40.6
Greek_Crete,33.4
Anatolia_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,15.6
ITA_Latini_IA,10.4

Right off the bat, whether this is an average or a particular sample, I think it's difficult to determine how "accurate" it is when it's a mixture of modern and ancient samples.

What we really need to understand these changes is not only Bronze Age but Iron Age and post Greek colonization samples from southern Italy.

Even going with the samples we have, did anyone try to model this group using the Sicily non Beaker "Beaker" sample, for example, or samples from Sardinia?

Some Szolad samples (Langobard cemetery in Hungary), in addition to the expected "Germanic" samples, or in some cases admixed samples that look a bit western shifted in modern terms, are described as "Tuscan like"( in a 1000 genomes context) in the Amorim paper. Now, that particular area had been a late hold out of local "Romans", and then re-taken by the Byzantines, so there is that to consider, but could it have anything to do with the older paper on the Bronze and Iron Age in the Balkans which found some people there who were still "Tuscan like" after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans and admixture with them?

Does anyone have gedmatch numbers for those samples? Otherwise, I'll have to go digging through all my files for at least the link to the paper and to our threads of numbers for ancient kits.

My question is: how much "Anatolia" would that sample get just from Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age migrations?

A related question would be about the similarity of this "Tuscan like" sample to the Szolad "Tuscan" samples, and perhaps then to actual Tuscans.

Let's see how much "Anatolian"these programs assign to the Balkan and Hungarian samples versus modern Tuscans.


I think these tools have a very difficult time separating out the Neolithic data with its already perhaps 10% CHG/Iran Neo ancestry, the Bronze Age data which may have more, the Iron Age data which may have more yet, and the Imperial Age data which may owe something to more recent migrations.

Even the Reich Lab, imo, did not do a sterling job with that in their Sardinian paper, so I hope they do better this time around.

 

[brick]

Even well intentioned, honest analysis of ancient samples using these tools has to be undertaken and interpreted cautiously.

Let's take a look at one analysis published upthread.

A plausible model could be this. nMonte with G25 is not very precise although and if inappropriate models are used the results can be very misleading.


All the samples from Rome and the surrounding area, from Proto-Villanovan to the Renaissance period.

The ancient Greek samples. The first two are two Greeks found at Empuries.

Right off the bat, whether this is an average or a particular sample, I think it's difficult to determine how "accurate" it is when it's a mixture of modern and ancient samples.

What we really need to understand these changes is not only Bronze Age but Iron Age and post Greek colonization samples from southern Italy.

Even going with the samples we have, did anyone try to model this group using the Sicily non Beaker "Beaker" sample, for example, or samples from Sardinia?

Some Szolad samples (Langobard cemetery in Hungary), in addition to the expected "Germanic" samples, or in some cases admixed samples that look a bit western shifted in modern terms, are described as "Tuscan like"( in a 1000 genomes context) in the Amorim paper. Now, that particular area had been a late hold out of local "Romans", and then re-taken by the Byzantines, so there is that to consider, but could it have anything to do with the older paper on the Bronze and Iron Age in the Balkans which found some people there who were still "Tuscan like" after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans and admixture with them?

Does anyone have gedmatch numbers for those samples? Otherwise, I'll have to go digging through all my files for at least the link to the paper and to our threads of numbers for ancient kits.

My question is: how much "Anatolia" would that sample get just from Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age migrations?

A related question would be about the similarity of this "Tuscan like" sample to the Szolad "Tuscan" samples, and perhaps then to actual Tuscans.

Let's see how much "Anatolian"these programs assign to the Balkan and Hungarian samples versus modern Tuscans.


I think these tools have a very difficult time separating out the Neolithic data with its already perhaps 10% CHG/Iran Neo ancestry, the Bronze Age data which may have more, the Iron Age data which may have more yet, and the Imperial Age data which may owe something to more recent migrations.

Even the Reich Lab, imo, did not do a sterling job with that in their Sardinian paper, so I hope they do better this time around.

What Anatolia? Anatolia BA?

all samples from Bronze Age Anatolia

 

[MOESAN]

The fact that we don't know EVERYTHING doesn't mean that we know NOTHING. That's completely fallacious reasoning. We know a lot about the Etruscans now from that data: we know that regardless of the fact that they didn't speak an Indo-European language they were Indo-European, steppe admixed people, like the Basques, similar to the early Italics, and similar to modern Spaniards and Northern Italians.

The Herodotus theory is dead in the water. Somebody fish it out and bury it.

Agree for the most.
Just to come back to Herodotus, here is maybe some facts or old writings which could excuse him?
my translation from NK Sandars about Sea People:
Sorry for the english:
"An Hittit text of Tuddaliyas (1520-1220?) mentions Tar(u)i-sa' ('Taruisha'), maybe the 'Teresh' who took part in the attack against Merneptah in 1220 BC, maybe (again) the Tyrsenoi well known in the Greeks world. THe name is new in the Egyptians texts. But, in opposition to the 'Ekwesh's case, the 'Teresh' would have been present in the attack of 1186 BC. Ramses III doesn't mention them expressly, but a 'Teresh' chief is among the prisoniers. The Hittits placed the 'Taruishi' in the North of Assuwa, close to the Troad, but they have been localized also near the country which become Lydia. [...] where, according to Herodotus, the Tyrrhenians migrated towards Central Italy. This hypothesis should show a link between the 'Teresh'/'Taruisha'/'Tyrsenoi' and the Etruscans. On the relief of Medinet Habu dated to Ramses III the 'Teresh' prince distinguishes himself from the other prisoniers by a very different physical look. The sculptor has gaven him a short and thick nose, thick lips, a beard and no helmet."
I know we have firstly to be sure of the identity between these diverse names in T-R-S with Etruscan/'Rasenna'. Some "maybe's" I avow.
Just to say, we know little: even if "autochtones" in Italy, these seemingly good sailors could have had some "bridges heads" or small settlements in West coastal Anatolia at some stage of History.
Their mt-DNA showed some ancient links with Anatolia (since 5000 years): either a MN to LN central European heritage as a lot of European tribes, + in some case some females taken here and there on travels?

Other question (always the same): were the commoners the same as the elites? ATW the social transformation between Proto-Villanovans and Villanovans is rather fast and strong. The very same people? I have no answer. If external influence, I does not seem come from the first Italics of Rome.
My proper post which "amused" a forumer here was just kind of fancy. But some things are still curious in the links of Italy and its Islands and Western Anatolia/Egea at the Sea People's time.

 

[torzio]

Pettener are from Istria, modern-day Slovenia, later moved to Trieste.

Istria was italian for 1000 plus years
Until 1975 treaty between italy and yugoslavia...treaty of osimo...
Istria then returned to italy in 1991 and slovenia and croatia paid the remaining fee to italy that remained because yugoslavia defaulted on their payments

 

[davef]

A plausible model could be this. nMonte with G25 is not very precise although and if inappropriate models are used the results can be very misleading.


All the samples from Rome and the surrounding area, from Proto-Villanovan to the Renaissance period.

The ancient Greek samples. The first two are two Greeks found at Empuries.

These models are some of the most logical models I've seen on Ancient Greeks and Romans using this tool.
And I knew the Greek Empuries had more Iran than the Mycenaean average bc it seemed to plot a bit eastward in
that study and it shows in its high Armenia score of 25 percent. Some Greeks may have had more Caucasus
than others (and most or all of it from Bronze Age/copper age Anatolian ancestry)

 

[torzio]

Agree for the most.
Just to come back to Herodotus, here is maybe some facts or old writings which could excuse him?
my translation from NK Sandars about Sea People:
Sorry for the english:
"An Hittit text of Tuddaliyas (1520-1220?) mentions Tar(u)i-sa' ('Taruisha'), maybe the 'Teresh' who took part in the attack against Merneptah in 1220 BC, maybe (again) the Tyrsenoi well known in the Greeks world. THe name is new in the Egyptians texts. But, in opposition to the 'Ekwesh's case, the 'Teresh' would have been present in the attack of 1186 BC. Ramses III doesn't mention them expressly, but a 'Teresh' chief is among the prisoniers. The Hittits placed the 'Taruishi' in the North of Assuwa, close to the Troad, but they have been localized also near the country which become Lydia. [...] where, according to Herodotus, the Tyrrhenians migrated towards Central Italy. This hypothesis should show a link between the 'Teresh'/'Taruisha'/'Tyrsenoi' and the Etruscans. On the relief of Medinet Habu dated to Ramses III the 'Teresh' prince distinguishes himself from the other prisoniers by a very different physical look. The sculptor has gaven him a short and thick nose, thick lips, a beard and no helmet."
I know we have firstly to be sure of the identity between these diverse names in T-R-S with Etruscan/'Rasenna'. Some "maybe's" I avow.
Just to say, we know little: even if "autochtones" in Italy, these seemingly good sailors could have had some "bridges heads" or small settlements in West coastal Anatolia at some stage of History.
Their mt-DNA showed some ancient links with Anatolia (since 5000 years): either a MN to LN central European heritage as a lot of European tribes, + in some case some females taken here and there on travels?

Other question (always the same): were the commoners the same as the elites? ATW the social transformation between Proto-Villanovans and Villanovans is rather fast and strong. The very same people? I have no answer. If external influence, I does not seem come from the first Italics of Rome.
My proper post which "amused" a forumer here was just kind of fancy. But some things are still curious in the links of Italy and its Islands and Western Anatolia/Egea at the Sea People's time.

There is no linguistic association between the etruscans and lydians of anatolia......the lydians where still in anatolia circa 500bc fighting against phyrgians.....still no association with etruscans......we should expect something berween the 2 if they are linked