| Forum | Europe Travel Guide | Ecology | Facts & Trivia | Genetics | History | Linguistics |
| Austria | France | Germany | Ireland | Italy | Portugal | Spain | Switzerland |
 Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
|
I imagined it, but the orientalizing period it's not linked to the Fertile Crescent, it's just an aegean influence.Originally Posted by Pax Augusta
The roots of orientalising are clearly in some way in the Fertile Crescent, I don't think there is much doubt about this, further east than the Aegean area, the Aegean area being the first area to adopt orientalising before it arrived in the central and western Mediterranean.
That would line up with the L23+ group discussed in this paper that links NW Iran and Armenia to the steppes, L51+ would have sprung from a similar group westwards. A few individual keep trying to split up M269's descendants as if they are very distantly related, this is not the case at all. We're not comparing V88 and PH155 who are separated by thousands of years, but Z2103 and L51+ spring from someone who was only separated by a few centuries and was unlikely to have been geographically very distant.There are actually huge similarities between them, for example look at this book:
What you see on the cover of this book is a golden Celtic torc which has been found in Gilan and dates back to the second millennium BC (Bronze age).
Gilan is a long way from the heart of Sintashta culture, just take a look at a map. Unless the torc is misattributed to ancient cultures of Gilan, I have no idea. Definitely this region is one of the ones where R1b peaks in Iran, N-NW region in general.
Never did I claim that map was the holy Bible or revealed Truth. As Angela explained It is only a first support tool to identify ancient Js and subclades of J scattered across the Eurasian continent, including the steppes.
I point out that by clicking on each sample, a cross-reference to the scientific publication in which it is mentioned appears (many of them with a link). You are free to check them one by one for errors, inaccuracies or omissions.
I will not go into their nomenclature, which is now updated with every breath we take: on the contrary, if anyone wants to update the whole tool, putting it in place or wants to propose a more precise and functional one, he is welcome to do so.
We are all here to learn
Central Italian Iron Age samples cluster relatively close to those who lived there 1000 years earlier. There is no shift, ethnically speaking, to Central Europe although there are Celtic outliers among the Etruscans.
Dodecad K12b PCA
Code:ITA_Central_IA,2.2925926,0.21037037,1.6964815,0.34777778,46.316111,24.35,0.1912963,0.12518519,5.1264815,0.21962963,18.739074,0.38592593 ITA_Central_MBA,2.2266667,0.33833333,1.1583333,0.665,48.94,26.398333,0,0,4.82,0.068333333,14.985,0.39833333
So am I, RE, whether you mean the steppe people or the Celts and Germanics, just as you are a descendant of the civilized core people of "Old Europe". No offense is intended, but I notice a "forgetfulness" in some northern Europeans that many of them, especially in northwestern and Central Europe, are 40-50% Anatolian Neolithic like through admixture by the steppe people with people of the "civilized core" in "Old Europe". Even the Balts have a significant amount of Anatolian Neo. Then there's the Iran Neo like ancestry in steppe people, varying by area, of course. We're all a mash up of the same groups, RE, just in different proportions.
However, being the civilized core doesn't always translate into being more humane, peaceful, and less violent or cruel.
Not necessarily, yes.
Well, I'm glad you agree there are empires and then there are empires. They might all be equally "bad" in that they accrue other lands by force if necessary, but there are differences among them.It would be a very narrow approach to see only the predators in the "Barbarians" and not also in the "civilized ones". In that regard, it must be pointed out that Roman expansionism was predatory to its core. The Roman Empire was predatory in nature, meaning that it believed in military-based practices and growth. In addition, like many empires in the ancient world, was, at least partially, a system of the predatory type, with an economy widely based on slave labor.
Of course, living under the Romans was way better than living under the Hun, Mongol, Assyrian, or Aztec rule. Nonetheless, the Romans viewed and prided themselves on being Apex predators so to speak: It's for a reason that in Rome several icons such as the Eagle, Wolf, Bear, Minotaur, and later Lion were carried as the symbols of Roman Legions.
As was pointed out by a later post, Rome initially fought defensive wars, but yes, it eventually became an empire seeking expansion, an expansion that was sometimes to protect its trade routes(Etruria and Greece), or for grain (Egypt), and other raw materials, for a very simplistic summary of its wars. Then it became about reaching defensible borders. In the case of my own Liguria, Rome already had absorbed part of southern France, but the Ligures had proved so obstreperous that they had to use the sea routes. The campaign against them was to gain a land route to Gaul. Better for the Ligures if they had just become allies of Rome. Better for Rome, too. What states wants to waste its soldiers in a needless war.
As someone pointed out, that's actually an Etruscan symbol.Furthermore one of the defining symbols of ancient Rome is a remarkable piece of animal folklore. The image of it is still to be seen everywhere in Rome: The twins Romulus and Remus crouching beneath a she-wolf and suckling her milk. Mythology is a way of understanding the world. It is not always right in all aspects.
The stories people tell about themselves are most revealing. The parts of folklore which appeal to us are deeply revealing. For the Romans wolves played a vital part in their myths, about the world and about themselves.
For the Romans what did they see when they looked at the babies and the she-wolf? The sons of a warlike god and a mortal imbibing animal strength from their adopted mother. Their descendents, those who looked on the statue, would know that they had the best of all worlds – human wit, animal power, and that divine spark which would give them Imperium sine fine – An Empire without end!
I do, btw, agree that mythology says a lot about a culture. In that regard, what do the sculptures of the Neolithic world tell us about their mythology and their view of the world? To the best of my recollection most of them were symbols of fertility, a "mother goddess" spent and misshapen through giving fertility to people and to the natural world. There was also a great emphasis on cattle, with cattle heads decorating their homes, tied to, it would seem, the domestication of animals, to food. There were male gods too, but again also based on fertility, whose symbol was a phallus. Then we have storm gods who brought the rain, and eventually war gods too.
So, I by no means believe that "Old Europe", for example, was a peaceful paradise, a la Gimbutas. We have evidence of warfare which occurred in times of scarcity, for example, which makes sense given the nature of all human beings.
However, can you deny that the balance in favor of a mythology of war and conquest is higher in steppe culture? Don't some in the amateur pop gen community admire the steppe people specifically because they were a war-like people who claimed to be superior to other groups and therefore entitled to conquer them, slaughter those who needed to be slaughtered, enslave the rest, and take all the women for themselves?
If the Etruscans and the Latins, both a mixture of people from local Neolithic farming communities and groups from Central Europe who were themselves of European farmer stock but admixed with steppe people, had a mythology glorifying conquest, isn't it more likely it came by way of the steppe than from the Neolithic farmers of Europe?
In that regard, the Etruscans were warlike as well. A certain period of the Classical Era could be described as a time of conflict between three powers for the control of the Mediterranean: Etruria, Greece, and Rome. Later, it was the Greek kingdom of Egypt and Rome.
I spent a good part of my life having to decide matters in a black and white manner: guilty or innocent. I learned that reality isn't always that simple. We have to pretend it is in legal systems, because there must be punishment for harm to others, removal of predators from society, but the reality is so much more complex.
The same is true for history. When looking at certain periods, states in conflict, it's often not a question of black and white, good versus evil, but shades of grey. Look at World War I. I studied it in great depth at university and after, and it was a senseless war where there were "only" shades of grey
I also think it's undeniable that as empires go, Rome was a pretty good one, and not just because of the Monty Python list of the advancements it brought to conquered peoples. :)
Despite your implication that Rome too was "racist" or, shall we make up a word and call it "ethnicist", that isn't true in any way that affected the real lives of the people in the Roman world. If you accepted the conquest and paid your taxes, usually to your old headman, your people weren't slaughtered, and even if you resisted, everybody wasn't enslaved, all the women weren't taken for the Latin-Romans etc. Everything went on as before. With time, non-Latins or Italics of any kind could acquire property, honors, eventually become accepted into the Equestrian Order, become Senators, or go the military route, enlist, and eventually become generals and even Emperors. With time, anyone living in the Empire became a Roman citizen and could aspire to any office.
It's called Romanization. There are dozens of books about it and goodness knows how many papers. You should read about it.
For now, for the sake of argument, take my word for it. What empire of the ancient world, before or after, was comparable?
Yes, slavery is one of the absolute evils imo, but tell me which state or kingdom or group of people DIDN'T practice it in the ancient world? Did the Gauls whom the Romans conquered not practice slavery and fight wars for land or booty? Why else did they fight the Etruscans in north-central Italy and sack the city of Rome itself? What about the Britons or the Germani? What, as a matter of fact, about the Lombards and what they did to the "Romans" they conquered, or the Anglo-Saxons and the way they treated the Britons, or the Vikings? Wasn't most of the wealth of the latter from the slave trade they ran all over Europe? The Lombard and AS Laws make very interesting reading.
It always amazes me when Northern Europeans bemoan the slavery of the Roman Empire without ever mentioning any of that. Slavery was, unfortunately, the NORM in the ancient world. At least under the Romans you could escape it through manumission or buying your freedom, and rising as high in society as your abilities would dictate.
Also, when the Germanic tribes took down Rome, and with it all its advancements, setting civilization back for hundreds of years, they slaughtered people too, because they were fleeing the Huns and needed land and food. To get those things they slaughtered the people inside the core, and also, unfortunately, burned and looted and pulled down most of the public buildings, and left the rest and the roads to crumble into ruin. They also created a permanent underclass, codified under law, a status from which they could not escape. Whole swaths of Europe remained basically kingdoms of serfs tied to the land ruled over by a small illiterate and ignorant elite.
That's the grand synthesis which came about as a result of the Barbarian invasions?
I'm sorry, but I think it is "your" view of the past, and that of those who post similar opinions, which is romanticized and doesn't comport with the facts of the situation.
My God, the Nazi Empire of what, eighty to ninety years ago, slaughtered millions of people in a war of conquest, not just to get territories which contained German minorities but for "lebensraum", land to breathe, or land needed for natural development, and not just Jews and gypsies and the infirm or deficient, but many Eastern Europeans. In Poland they decimated most of their elites and officer corps, and subjected the rest to virtual slavery. The plan was to completely exterminate all Slavic peoples. In my own Italy, my great uncle had to carve caves in the grape terraces to hide young boys and men, because after 1943 when Italy surrendered, it became occupied territory, and any able bodied men were sent to work as slaves on German farms and in German factories. The same thing happened in France to a lesser extent because of Vichy. As for the Italian military, they were surrounded and forced to give up their weapons, and many were executed as "traitors", as happened in Greece, for example, unless they swore to follow the new kingdom of Salo under Mussolini. Some of them, in the King's service, not Fascist regiments, wouldn't do that, or if they did, later escaped and also had to be hidden. How does "that" compare to the Roman Empire, RE? Don't they teach any of this in German schools?
That doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that I would want to have lived in ancient Rome, even as a free male of the elites. There was too much danger from diseases we have now conquered, if nothing else, and even upper middle class people today live more comfortable lives than the elites of the time. Forget the Dark and Middle Ages which the invasions brought about; life was barely worth living in those periods.
I would say that civilization and advancement came, in most cases, despite the blood and tears shed in endless wars. Conquests don't always bring civilization with them. Sometimes the conquest just destroys civilization, and from the rubble people have to start and build it up again. That's what happened with the invasions which brought down Rome, and the confluence of events including the warfare brought by people from the Italic peninsula which brought down Bronze Age Greece.Civilization and Advancement came along with lots of suffering and sacrifices. Think of all the millions of slaves who under inhumane conditions worked in mines, in agriculture, or who were forced to build all these impressive huge monuments and buildings. The blood, sweat, and tears of past generations throughout Europe are what gave us the advanced Western societies we enjoy today.
Last edited by Angela; 06-08-22 at 19:19.
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
Now the Latins and Etruscans don't have steppe ancestry?Central Italian Iron Age samples cluster relatively close to those who lived there 1000 years earlier. There is no shift, ethnically speaking, to Central Europe although there are Celtic outliers among the Etruscans.
Dodecad K12b PCA
Code:ITA_Central_IA,2.2925926,0.21037037,1.6964815,0.34777778,46.316111,24.35,0.1912963,0.12518519,5.1264815,0.21962963,18.739074,0.38592593 ITA_Central_MBA,2.2266667,0.33833333,1.1583333,0.665,48.94,26.398333,0,0,4.82,0.068333333,14.985,0.39833333
Did you come to this site only to t-roll and spread disinformation?
Latin--fascis ---Latins R1b L51 and Z2103
Italian: fascio littorio) is a bound bundle of wooden rods, sometimes including an axe (occasionally two axes) with its blade emergingEtymology[edit]
From Proto-Indo-European *bʰask- (“bundle, band”), see also Proto-Celtic *baskis (“bundle, load”), Ancient Greek φάκελος (phákelos, “bundle”), Albanian bashkë (“together”), Old English bæst (“inner bark of the linden tree”), Welsh baich (“load, burden”), Middle Irish basc (“neckband”).
Steppe Stele
Kernosovskiy idol
Kurgan stele dating from the mid–3rd millennium BC. It was discovered in 1973 in the village of Kernosivka [uk], in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, Ukraine. It is held in the collection of the Dmytro Yavornytsky National Historical Museum of Dnipro.
All four sides of the figure are covered with numerous drawings, sculpted in low relief. One interpretation of the artwork on the back of the figure is that it depicts a tree of life. Regular circles and squares above the ribs, symbolise the sun and the moon. These images testify to the ritual, sacred purpose of the stele. Other illustrations include: weaponry - a bow and arrow and a mace; tools - axes, a hoe, a crucible; animals - a bull, two horse and turtles; on one side a man and a woman are
Suum cuique-ancient ochre elite burial cultures in Seredny Stih phase II, Yamnaya - ochre burials with wagons, copper cudgel ,tanged daggers,iron-powder, beads, iron tools -weapons. Turganik Dom2 -horses; horse head shaped scepters, Kernosovkiy idol horse .
@Silesian and real expert
Give it a rest.
The Latins and Etruscans were both far more EEF than Steppe genetically.
From this message, where exactly do you draw the conclusion that they don't have Steppe ancestry?
Both ITA_Central_MBA and ITA_Central_IA were Steppe-admixed, just look at their intermediate position between Sardinia and Central Europe in the PCA.Central Italian Iron Age samples cluster relatively close to those who lived there 1000 years earlier. There is no shift, ethnically speaking, to Central Europe although there are Celtic outliers among the Etruscans.
How come all this butthurtness?
Latin--fascis ---Latins R1b L51 and Z2103
From Proto-Indo-European *bʰask- (“bundle, band”), see also Proto-Celtic *baskis (“bundle, load”), Ancient Greek φάκελος (phákelos, “bundle”), Albanian bashkë (“together”), Old English bæst (“inner bark of the linden tree”), Welsh baich (“load, burden”), Middle Irish basc (“neckband”).
Steppe Stele
Kernosovskiy idol
Silesian, I don't understand what point you want to make, but it is very well known that the Fasces is Etruscan and the Romans borrows it from the Etruscans.
"The symbol of the fasces originated with the Etruscans, the earliest being found an iron set in an Etruscan tomb of the 7th century BC at Vetulonia."
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1983-1229-1
If I misunderstood your meaning in this particular case, my apologies. I posted too hastily, not thinking the matter through. However, this isn't twitter, and we're not using texts; a few sentences explaining one's meaning clearly wouldn't go amiss, especially when there's no apparent relation of the post to the current conversation.
Also, try to express yourself without the coarse language of some younger males. Next time you use inappropriate language you'll get an infraction for it. You're not talking in a bar or club or in someone's home with your male friends. It also isn't eurogenes.
Think of it as an intellectual salon of the French type. :)
Good grief, Silesian, what does Abraham Lincoln have to do with any of this?Latin--fascis ---Latins R1b L51 and Z2103
From Proto-Indo-European *bʰask- (“bundle, band”), see also Proto-Celtic *baskis (“bundle, load”), Ancient Greek φάκελος (phákelos, “bundle”), Albanian bashkë (“together”), Old English bæst (“inner bark of the linden tree”), Welsh baich (“load, burden”), Middle Irish basc (“neckband”).
Steppe Stele
Kernosovskiy idol
Be careful now, he's one of my absolute heroes! :)
The roots of orientalising are clearly in some way in the Fertile Crescent, I don't think there is much doubt about this, further east than the Aegean area, the Aegean area being the first area to adopt orientalising before it arrived in the central and western Mediterranean.
I always thought the origin of the orientalizing style was the Aegean. My bad, thanks for clarifying that.
I understand that, just wanted to point out that there are some further samples missing and that the nomenclatures are rather vague. This site might be helpful to you https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map...#4/46.10/15.03
Just put in the nomenclature of a haplogroup whose aDNA coverage you want to see and it gives you a list of samples with the linked papers. Dislaimer: it does have some errors in portraying the map properly not sure if it has just been the case when using my devices and might be totally okay for others. Nonetheless you'll get a list on the side with the info you are looking for (id of samples, haplogroups, archeological data, links to studies etc.). It is also fairly often updated.
In regards to „J2“ or „J1“ on the steppe: we have also known for quite a while now of rumored due to be published Chalcolithic J2b-L283 (J2b2a1) samples from the Western steppe.
Nor did I intend to accuse you of doing that. I have made my intention clear in my response to Angela above. Agreed. I am here to learn too
I once had links to really good J2a-L70 and J2a-M67 aDNA interactive maps but seem to have not saved them. I think I picked them up at this website: https://j2-m172.info/ Since you're J2 this could interest you (in case you didn't already know). There are volunteer scientists from the genetics field over there and admins of FTDNA groups too. It is a great source, IMO.
Also, a great up to date map of aDNA coverage of J2b-L283 (J2b2a1) in case you are interested. (Courtesy of Veseli)
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...4999999966&z=5
Sorry not interested in Etruscans, unless they used an axe in hand to hand challenges for dominance and or combat like the R1b steppe ancestors of the Latins. As far as iron use, unless it is older than Yamnaya/Afanasievo/Catacombe(proto Latins-) R1b-Z2103/L51+ steppe not interested, sorry.Silesian, I don't understand what point you want to make, but it is very well known that the Fasces is Etruscan and the Romans borrows it from the Etruscans.
"The symbol of the fasces originated with the Etruscans, the earliest being found an iron set in an Etruscan tomb of the 7th century BC at Vetulonia."
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1983-1229-1
I’m super interested in the Steppe admixture of Classical Greeks particularly Laconians.
Sorry not interested in Etruscans, unless they used an axe in hand to hand challenges for dominance and or combat like the R1b steppe ancestors of the Latins. As far as iron use, unless it is older than Yamnaya/Afanasievo/Catacombe(proto Latins-) R1b-Z2103/L51+ steppe not interested, sorry.
In my opinion, these are topics that deserve reasoning ability and a minimum of effort and knowledge. Your answer is meaningless. What answer would be "I am not interested"? You brought up the example of Fasces. Just saying, even the Etruscans were predominantly R1b. The fact remains that the Latins/Romans borrowed Fasces from the Etruscans, whether you are interested or not.
. A long time ago (10years)I used to debate the origins of R1b with someone who contributed to the Grugni et al paper2012. He was very adamant that R1b was from the location around the Near East similar to what some of the poster's are posting. He made really good images of frequency rates-R1b-Z2103 in Sicily and Southern Italy and connected it with the Near East. Last I heard he took up a new hobby, something like gardening. Sometimes our understanding changes. Trying to extrapolate R1b from the Near East is nothing new. The difference this time around is how it relates to PIE.
Grugni et al 2012 do you mean this? I don't hold the Italian geneticists involved in that study in high esteem, so I have no trouble thinking they were wrong.
Grugni, V., Battaglia, V., Hooshiar Kashani, B., Parolo, S., Al-Zahery, N., Achilli, A., Olivieri, A., Gandini, F., Houshmand, M., Sanati, M. H., Torroni, A., & Semino, O. (2012). Ancient migratory events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-chromosome variation of modern Iranians. PLoS One, 7(7), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041252
No I made a mistake, that was the study with Lurs sampling. It was a Meyers et al study showing L23. Those were the good ol'day's. It's when I met a poster on another forum who was from the Samara region in Russia with R1b-L277+. One Polish blogger with a horse riding Connan like personality would debate R1b from the Southern Arc, as well as one well known South Asian, and a Armenian who made a YouTube video as well as one Russian who labeled R1b as Arbins. One by one they have all been proven wrong.
Last edited by Silesian; 07-08-22 at 01:18.
The owner of Eupedia believes that R-M269 descends from the Southern Arc and crossed the Caucasus on to the steppe sometime in the 5th millennium BC.
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplo...1b_Y-DNA.shtml
Sorry, not interested in your pseudo-Nordicist Steppe fetish.Sorry not interested in Etruscans, unless they used an axe in hand to hand challenges for dominance and or combat like the R1b steppe ancestors of the Latins. As far as iron use, unless it is older than Yamnaya/Afanasievo/Catacombe(proto Latins-) R1b-Z2103/L51+ steppe not interested, sorry.
The Etruscans were largely R1b, including R-L2 which is pretty European, just like the IE-speaking Latins and Etruscans and Latins were similar at the autosomal level too..both groups were much more EEF than Steppe.
. At one time I use to debate the R1b-V88 deep ancestral roots in Africa. One be one these ideas are being overturned when one looks at the SNPs connected lineages from ancient genetic samples.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
