MyTrueAncestry Mytrueancestry.com

...................

I wonder the same. Me and my father are closest to Roman/Ancient Greeks/Hellenic Romans. The Roman samples I am close to are apparently early middle ages. I would love to know if they're on GEDMATCH for comparison.
 
Your closest Ancient populations...

Roman (7.957)

Gallo-Roman + Roman (8.832)
Gallo-Roman + Hellenic Roman (10.58)
Gallo-Roman (12.61)
Hellenic Roman (15.09)

Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...

1. Central Roman (590 AD) (7.957)
3. Central Roman (590 AD) (9.448)
5. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (12.61)
7. Hellenic Roman (670 AD) (15.09)
9. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (15.37)

Your closest genetic modern populations...

1. Kosovan (3.825)
2. Bulgarian (6.513)
3. Greek (8.016)
4. Bosnian (8.594)

Gallo Roman. Theres a first. Haven't seen any Albanian get it so far. Pretty cool.
 
At first sight, It looks similar.

The algorithm randomly hides some populations, probably the Illyrians are hidden in our case, especially if we don't carry as much.

Yea. Someone who did the upgrade mentioned it doesn't actually change the breakdown. It just reveals hidden matches that are more distant, both on the stats and map itself with pinpointed samples. Thracian is not astronomically far by itself, but I am closer to the "Central Roman" samples from the early middle ages. Do we know where these Roman samples can be found? Gedmatch?
 
Salento, are you closer to the 590 AD sample or the 670 AD sample?

Is anyone closer to the 670 AD sample?

The "Roman" samples from 670 AD have to be the ones from the Langobard cemetery in Piemonte, who were very modern "southern" Italian like. The 570 AD samples are the non-Langobard samples from their settlement in modern day Hungary?

I've got that fst of 3. something with only one of those 590 AD samples. The others are higher.

@Dibran,
I think the Gallo Roman number shows Celtic/Gallic admixture. It makes sense given my ancestral areas. They were called Celt/Ligurians.

Ed. Here is where we discussed the Amorim/Krause paper on the Langobards:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...thru-Paleogenomics?highlight=Lombard+cemetery

Whether the "southern" people in the cemetery in Szolad were actual Romans, possible because there were Roman forts and villas in the area, or this genotype was common in the whole area, I don't know.

I wonder if the company would adjust the results to include the sample number?
 
Central Roman 590 AD is my top match, a bit like yours, but not as close.
My 3rd is a Hellenic Roman 670 AD.

uvtpA0m.jpg
 
........................

....................

Central Roman 590AD is my closest. I am assuming these are the Pannonian Romans? So they're Southern shifted? Wouldn't make sense if they're actually Barbarian related samples. If they're Tuscan/Italian like southerners I guess it makes sense since I shift a bit that way.

Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...


1. Central Roman (590 AD) (7.169)
2. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (9.684)
3. Mycenaean (1350 BC) (11.61)
4. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (12.27)
5. Central Roman (670 AD) (13.04)
6. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (13.92)
7. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) (13.96)
8. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (14.09)
9. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (14.09)
 
Someone posted this on Anthro:

The relevant Archeogenetic matches and details from map are:

1 and 3 and 8... Central Roman (590AD) in Pannonia ...SZ43, SZ36, SZ32 (Szolad samples from Amorim Longobard paper)

2. Central Roman (670AD) in NW Italy (Collegno)...CL36 (Collegno samples from Amorim Longobard paper)

17.Central Roman/Mixed (590AD) in Pannonia...SZ19 (Szolad sample)
 
I get the same map and similar populations. lol

Cgyl1CW.jpg


1ZcxiQ4.jpg
Hellenic Romans

In the 8th century BC (before the Roman Republic), Greeks began a large colonization drive to southern Italy to populate Sicily, Campania, Calabria, Apulia and Bascilicata. The romans referred to this region which includes the boot of Italy as Magna Graecia (Greater Greece). This large scale migration was underway by the time of the Trojan War and lasted several centuries. The settlers brought Hellenic civilization which had a lasting impact on the culture of Ancient Rome. The Hellenic civilization interacted with the native Italic civilization. The Greek cities were one by one absorbed into the Roman Republic starting with Neapolis in 327 BC. Sicily was conqureed by Rome during the first Punic War against Carthage.
Sicily was initially populated by Phoenicians but then heavily colonized and settled by Greeks. Syracuse (Sicily) became the most populous greek city in the world by the 3rd century BC. The population of the island remained mostly unchanged.

Hellenic Romans seems to refer specifically to the Classical Greek colonization of Southern Italy; Magna Graecia. So I think it makes sense to for it to be Hellenic Roman + Roman for our first population.

Mine:

wkLhNJR.png
 
According to the Amorim charts of genetic structure at Szolad and Collegno: These were the Pannonian Roman samples

SZ43 is mostly TSI or Tuscan-like with about 30pc IBS (Iberian-like), with less than 10pc CEU+GBR (North European);

SZ36 is about 75pc Tuscan-like and 25pc Iberian (IBS);

SZ32 is about 60pc TSI and 40pc IBS;

SZ19 is 100pc TSI or Tuscan-like.
 
I get the same map and similar populations. lol

Cgyl1CW.jpg


1ZcxiQ4.jpg
Very cool calculator. I'm confused as to how Angela scored 9.x for Hellenic Roman, closer than your 11.64.
 
They have both Hellenic Romans and Romans in the Pannonia area on the map, so the ones they've labelled Hellenic Romans must be more "southern"? Wish they'd put the numbers of the samples. As I said I'm very close to one, approximately 3, and further from others, i.e. approximately 9.

Dibran:
"According to the Amorim charts of genetic structure at Szolad and Collegno: These were the Pannonian Roman samples

SZ43 is mostly TSI or Tuscan-like with about 30pc IBS (Iberian-like), with less than 10pc CEU+GBR (North European);

SZ36 is about 75pc Tuscan-like and 25pc Iberian (IBS);

SZ32 is about 60pc TSI and 40pc IBS;

SZ19 is 100pc TSI or Tuscan-like."
yb3FkZC.png


yBzmeco.png


Fwiw, my Scythian similarity is a little weird. It showed up in that other ancients similarity calculator too. Those Avar and Hun re-settlements?

Maybe I have higher similarity to these ancient samples than to modern Italian samples because both my lines come from very isolated areas? I don't know. Maybe this is just a terrible calculator. I mean, can you just assume that because the samples come from an area with lots of Roman villas and Roman forts this is what the Romans of the early Empire looked like?
 
Another comparison. This time with Popres:
20nx3eO.png
 
Very cool calculator. I'm confused as to how Angela scored 9.x for Hellenic Roman, closer than your 11.64.

She’s obviously genetically closer to that sample than me.
 
Seems like a glorious ancestry to me :)

Our Glorious Ancestors changed the World, and their Legacy is still strong.

Now it’s our turn. We shall not disappoint them. :)
 
Now they're trying to make something out of the fact that I'm closer to one of the Hellenic Roman samples than Salento is. There's a wide variation according to individual sample, and they're not using all of them. Jovialis, for example, is 8.288 with one such sample, while my distance is 9.734 to another.

Just stop with the t-rolling, people, accept the evidence as it comes in, and adjust your "theories" accordingly.
 

This thread has been viewed 1263690 times.

Back
Top