Moots: Ancient Rome Paper

I saw another map where Western Turkey, around Bosporus channel, Asian side, has autosomal similar with Italians. This creates the impression that people from this area migrated to Italy through sea ways, not necessary through Greece, but circumventing it. That's entirely possible since those people were navigating keeping the land in their sight, not necessary stellar navigation. That could be the source of Italian J///

It's very unlikely that Western Turks are autosomally similar to to Italians.
 
I saw another map where Western Turkey, around Bosporus channel, Asian side, has autosomal similar with Italians. This creates the impression that people from this area migrated to Italy through sea ways, not necessary through Greece, but circumventing it. That's entirely possible since those people were navigating keeping the land in their sight, not necessary stellar navigation. That could be the source of Italian J///

On ancestry.com, that slice of northwestern Turkey and the western coastal areas and the islands off them are considered part of "Greece". So the people must be very "Greek like".

That area was settled by Greeks and they established a lot of city states there. A few city states from there set up colonies in Italy. Just look at Ionic Greece, and the areas in Magna Graecia which spoke Ionic dialects.

I've posted about this often.

main-qimg-f8fcf036ceb18ea612f99c5ebc3f58ef



816px-Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg.png


So, I don't think we need any convoluted scenarios.

Of course, some probably arrived in the Bronze Age. We'll have to wait and see.
 
On ancestry.com, that slice of northwestern Turkey and the western coastal areas and the islands off them are considered part of "Greece". So the people must be very "Greek like".

That area was settled by Greeks and they established a lot of city states there. A few city states from there set up colonies in Italy. Just look at Ionic Greece, and the areas in Magna Graecia which spoke Ionic dialects.

I've posted about this often.

main-qimg-f8fcf036ceb18ea612f99c5ebc3f58ef



816px-Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg.png


So, I don't think we need any convoluted scenarios.

Of course, some probably arrived in the Bronze Age. We'll have to wait and see.

Especially not an absurd scenario, like saying R850, and R437 are half-"Phoenician"-like. Which is probably why the paper never suggested something like that.
 
Especially not an absurd scenario, like saying R850, and R437 are half-"Phoenician"-like. Which is probably why the paper never suggested something like that.

I thought the paper said R850 was half Bronze Age Anatolian like or something? The Ydna was T1a1a, right? Totally unremarkable Neolithic lineage. Who knows, maybe there was mixture on the female side with an Ionian Greek or someone with that kind of ancestry from Southern Italy . They might have presented as having something approximating that profile. That's a long way from Phoenicia or Carthage. One of their dubious "models" says different, and we're supposed to believe them when they've cheated before?

I'll have to look up R437. The yDna is U152, right?


They just are obsessed with Semites and making every sample Semitic and therefore every Southern Italian Semitic. Honestly, it all comes down to that. These people are sick you know whats.
 
R850 Y T-L208 - mtDNA T2c1f
R437 Y R-P312 - mtDNA H10

R850 Y line is a “Remarkable” line, there aren't many of us, but we are everywhere :)

R850 is a y T1a1... - I’m a y T1a2...

Nobody shares more DNA with R850 than me (as of now), though I share even more with R437.


nxB3LzM.jpg

8RotnRJ.jpg
 
You're an American; more specifically a mix of the second wave of immigrants that came over in the 20 century. I think that would be a viable cultural identity. You were born in the American Century (post-WWII 20th century) a time when the United States reached the zenith of power and prestige; truly becoming a new Roman empire.

But also, there's quite a lot of Irish/Italians; almost every Italian-American I know is either marrying an Irish person, or is partly Irish. They can pretty much be an ethnicity on to themselves, imo

Jewish people I know tend to stay with each other. But they will also consort and sometimes marry other groups primarily from the second wave of working-class immigrants.
That is correct and a very interesting and smart perspective. I know I was being overly harsh with that post (I can be very self deprecating at times though I don't usually show it, especially here in this forum) and i over did it with the vodka so I wasn't thinking straight
 
You have Ardea and Prenestrini. The 100 with Ardea by the sea, I don't know what to think, Ardea, Ardea... I mean the moves that might have been there, not the remote origins, they wouldn't even know.

The mood is very hot. In any case, these are first studies, more will come and eventually things will be clarified, the lies will have a short life and the truth will end up being known sooner or later.

They have also said that there is a sample of an Etruscan pseudo-African woman. I understand with some ancestor of North Africa I suppose. In a culture as developed as Etruscan with imports and exports should have relations with other peoples. I don't see what the problem would be?
 
I thought the paper said R850 was half Bronze Age Anatolian like or something? The Ydna was T1a1a, right? Totally unremarkable Neolithic lineage. Who knows, maybe there was mixture on the female side with an Ionian Greek or someone with that kind of ancestry from Southern Italy . They might have presented as having something approximating that profile. That's a long way from Phoenicia or Carthage. One of their dubious "models" says different, and we're supposed to believe them when they've cheated before?

I'll have to look up R437. The yDna is U152, right?


They just are obsessed with Semites and making every sample Semitic and therefore every Southern Italian Semitic. Honestly, it all comes down to that. These people are sick you know whats.
I read the paths the Phoenicians took across the Mediterranean and they landed in some corner of western Sicily but other than that they never touched Italy. And I don't see why they would travel miles to climb steep mountains to find women to have sex with
 
That is correct and a very interesting and smart perspective. I know I was being overly harsh with that post (I can be very self deprecating at times though I don't usually show it, especially here in this forum) and i over did it with the vodka so I wasn't thinking straight

Lose the booze, take some Calcium instead to Fortify your Bones,

Who knows, in a few thousand years a scientist in search for an Ancient New Yorker, might Sample your Bones. You'll be known as: NY_Davef :grin:

Stay Strong :)
 
On ancestry.com, that slice of northwestern Turkey and the western coastal areas and the islands off them are considered part of "Greece". So the people must be very "Greek like".

That area was settled by Greeks and they established a lot of city states there. A few city states from there set up colonies in Italy. Just look at Ionic Greece, and the areas in Magna Graecia which spoke Ionic dialects.

I've posted about this often.

main-qimg-f8fcf036ceb18ea612f99c5ebc3f58ef



816px-Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg.png


So, I don't think we need any convoluted scenarios.

Of course, some probably arrived in the Bronze Age. We'll have to wait and see.
6cbWHne.png

I was talking about this scientific map, not the one drawn in Athens you just published. It is not Romans who spread Italian genes, its this people from this areas who emigrated to Italy in antiquity using land sight navigation. Romans founded Istanbul, had Romans left genetic imprint Istanbul should have had traces but it does not. Had this DNA being Greek mainland Greece should have had some. At the time dna samples are taken in this are there are only Turks living since Greeks were expelled.
 
6cbWHne.png

I was talking about this scientific map, not the one drawn in Athens you just published. It is not Romans who spread Italian genes, its this people from this areas who emigrated to Italy in antiquity using land sight navigation. Romans founded Istanbul, had Romans left genetic imprint Istanbul should have had traces but it does not. Had this DNA being Greek mainland Greece should have had some. At the time dna samples are taken in this are there are only Turks living since Greeks were expelled.

That makes absolutely no sense, and I'm restraining myself in responding. Perhaps you should get glasses or learn how to comprehend maps. To begin with, the first map is from Woodward et al. So, get your facts straight before mouthing off. Also, get over your Albanian nationalistic hatred of everything Greek. It makes everything you post immediately suspect.

The areas in Turkey from the second map are areas of Greek colonization. People went from there to Southern Italy/Sicily. Learn some history before opining. Or is everyone who has written about Greek Colonization for the last one hundred years secretly Greek?

Now, have you embarrassed yourself enough for one day?
 
Well, my paternal line is G2a and they were good farmers, coming from Yorkshire c1686, and moving through west Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and on into Iowa. My father was the last farm boy. My mother's line is also descended from Neolithic farmers, K1a4h, from Holstein, Germany, but later, in the early 1850's.

Both Y-DNA and mtDNA are easy to understand and somehow satisfying because you can tie them to identifiable individuals.

In many ways, Germany is considered the Heartland of Europe. The upcoming paper by David Reich and Isolf Lazaridis models Germans as predominately Paleolithic Caucasian, which is similar to Anatolian_Neolthic:

0gHNs9u.png
 
That makes absolutely no sense, and I'm restraining myself in responding. Perhaps you should get glasses or learn how to comprehend maps. To begin with, the first map is from Woodward et al. So, get your facts straight before mouthing off. Also, get over your Albanian nationalistic hatred of everything Greek. It makes everything you post immediately suspect.

The areas in Turkey from the second map are areas of Greek colonization. People went from there to Southern Italy/Sicily. Learn some history before opining. Or is everyone who has written about Greek Colonization for the last one hundred years secretly Greek?

Now, have you embarrassed yourself enough for one day?

I am a class B surveyor, from Gulfport Mississippi, surveying school. I can post you a copy of my diploma if you request it. That means not only I can read maps, but I can make them for others to read. The map I showed you is the areas where Italian autosomal is strong. It does not quite look Greek related. There is no history of Roman or Italian settlement in those areas. So it could be people from those areas visited Italy sometimes in the past. I don't quite get your aggravation. I know you don't do anything on purpose, but the first map you published (whoever produce it) is false.
 
You have Ardea and Prenestrini. The 100 with Ardea by the sea, I don't know what to think, Ardea, Ardea... I mean the moves that might have been there, not the remote origins, they wouldn't even know.

The mood is very hot. In any case, these are first studies, more will come and eventually things will be clarified, the lies will have a short life and the truth will end up being known sooner or later.

They have also said that there is a sample of an Etruscan pseudo-African woman. I understand with some ancestor of North Africa I suppose. In a culture as developed as Etruscan with imports and exports should have relations with other peoples. I don't see what the problem would be?


The necropolis from which three Etruscan samples come is right on the sea, and had trade relations with Sardinia and Sardinia was home to the Phoenician colonies. So, archeoligically, it's possible to find someone with Phoenician ancestry. Obviously only further samples tested can tell us how common it was.

For the two Latin outliers, however, it does not seem to me that the study suggests that they had Phoenician ancestry.
 
R850 Y T-L208 - mtDNA T2c1f
R437 Y R-P312 - mtDNA H10

R850 Y line is a “Remarkable” line, there aren't many of us, but we are everywhere :)

R850 is a y T1a1... - I’m a y T1a2...

Nobody shares more DNA with R850 than me (as of now), though I share even more with R437.


nxB3LzM.jpg

8RotnRJ.jpg

As to sample 850 (650 BC), it seems to be, as I said, a Neolithic line in Europe. The mtDna is found in Central Europe and Iran. The paper finds it to be half local Copper Age, and half Anatolian/Armenian Late Bronze/Iron Age. Cumae, near Capua and Naples, was founded by Greeks in the 8th century.

The conclusions of the paper make sense.

Sample 437 has a U-152 yDna. Unremarkable for a Latin tribe. The mtdna is H10:
"H10[edit]

Haplogroup H10 is subclade which came into existence between 6,300 and 10,900 years ago. Its descendant branches are H10a H10b H10c H10d H10e H10f H10g and H10h.[37]
Haplogroup H10e has been found at a neolithic site, namely the Bom Santo cave near Lisbon. This is the oldest sample of H10 which has ever been found and it has been dated to 3735 BCE (+- 45 years).[38] "

The paper models the sample as half "Iron Age Croatian", which means one of the samples mta calls "Illyrian" or local Copper Age and half, again, Anatolian Bronze/Iron whatever.

Again, it makes sense.

The paper didn't find any "Phoenician", and none of the data we have would support that.

As for 475, no doubt there's some North African in her, but using Ibero-Maurisian to model her is silly.

Per Carlos' post, is it so surprising that trade centers like Civitavecchia picked up some foreign ancestry? What's the big deal here??? That makes all Etruscans Carthaginians or Phoenicians?
 
In many ways, Germany is considered the Heartland of Europe. The upcoming paper by David Reich and Isolf Lazaridis models Germans as predominately Paleolithic Caucasian, which is similar to Anatolian_Neolthic:

0gHNs9u.png

It's a whole different way of looking at European ethnicities, isn't it?

What strikes me the most is that the differences between countries in central and western Europe, including Germany and Italy, are so small.
 
Does anyone have a complete list of the samples from this paper which are in what the authors call the Near Eastern cluster?

I've pulled some sample numbers from the PCA, and my husband, who couldn't be more Southern Italian, has hits on only two, and not at a close distance at all, and both are labeled as close to Hittites and Cretans by mta.
 
Is that Mbuti suppose to be African?
How come Albania and slavic countries dont have it, but every other country does?
 

This thread has been viewed 357142 times.

Back
Top