Pompei, capsula del tempo dell'Impero Romano: analisi paleogenomica dei resti umani rinvenuti nell'antica città

[Vitruvius]

Those ancient quotes about the population of cities are obviously not accurate. Remember the Byzantine historian said 270,000 out of 500,000 people in Peloponnese were Albanians in 15th century.

Syracuse had a population at 30,000-40,000 according to archeologists and it was the most populated city in Magna Grecia.

The estimates concerning the Greek cities are modern estimates first of all, not ancient. Syracuse is estimated based on the size encircled by its walls (120 hectacres) to have 250,000 individuals by Ian Morris (https://books.google.com/books?id=6vnkts2rOJUC&pg=PT134#v=onepage&q&f=false). It had a far larger demography than you are assuming here. Sybaris by comparison was even larger. These would've been enormous population centers in the ancient world.

 

[ihype02]

The estimates concerning the Greek cities are modern estimates first of all, not ancient. Syracuse is estimated based on the size encircled by its walls (120 hectacres) to have 250,000 individuals by Ian Morris (https://books.google.com/books?id=6vnkts2rOJUC&pg=PT134#v=onepage&q&f=false). It had a far larger demography than you are assuming here. Sybaris by comparison was even larger. These would've been enormous population centers in the ancient world.

This book is specifically dedicated to urbanism and population and estimates the population of the city up to 40,000.

Urbanism in the Preindustrial World

The growth of Greek cities in the first millennium BC / Ian Morris -- Did the population of imperial Rome reproduce itself? / Elio Lo Cascio -- Epidemics, age at death, and mortality in ancient Rome / Richard R. Paine and Glenn R. Storey -- Seasonal mortality in imperial Rome and the...

books.google.com

Some estimate the total population to 125,000 after Syracuse absorbed some other of the Greek polises in Sicily.

Very probable Greek were in majority at some point in Sicily maybe up to 70% (which decreased over the time with Punic wars and other migrations) but this was not the case in Apulia, Campania and Basilicata.

I am curious to see Ancient Greeks in Southern Italy not because I believe anything will change about Imperial Romans but more about their Y-DNA.

 

[ihype02]

Either way I have done quite some research on the Greek polises in Sicily but unfortunately I have lost the PDF which I collected. Roughly half of Greek polises in Sicily were sacked by either each other, or Romans or Carthage. Carthage faced a worse fate where they were totally annihilated.

All the information is available in Italian or English wikipedia.


And Syracuse's population plummeted after 200BC.

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

Here is another new paper : ( etruscans, picene)
( pre-print )

The Genomic portrait of the Picene culture: new insights into the Italic Iron Age and the legacy of the Roman expansion in Central Italy

Background The Italic Iron Age was characterized by the presence of various ethnic groups partially examined from a genomic perspective. To explore the evolution of Iron Age Italic populations and the genetic impact of Romanization, we focused on the Picenes, one of the most fascinating...

www.biorxiv.org

P.s
Not even 1 E
I do see 1 j1 case at the picene from novilara

Also a j-m304 which could be j1 at Novilara iron age

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

Very interesting, however I don't know if relatively small samples may harbour sample bias. Even in modern Italy you can see a slight west -east phenotypical cline imho whereas in the east possbly lighter hair and eyes are slightly more common.


Yet 21% blond hair is high for anywhere in modern day southern Europe.

On the other hand the percentages for light eyes look a bit too low to be realistic, especially among Etruscans (2.6%).

I see a lot of dark and intermediate/dark skin in pre middle age South Europe, looks like the Slavs and Germans must have made a big difference in migration period as South Europeans today are not this dark

Not sure why you think Etruscans should have had light eyes, blue eyes were common in people who had a lot of WHG ancestry (Germanic, Slavic) and increased recently due to natural selection

 

[HereToLearn]

I see a lot of dark and intermediate/dark skin in pre middle age South Europe, looks like the Slavs and Germans must have made a big difference in migration period as South Europeans today are not this dark

Not sure why you think Etruscans should have had light eyes, blue eyes were common in people who had a lot of WHG ancestry (Germanic, Slavs) and increased recently due to natural selection

Funny how you people always take the chance to underline the big impact from Levantines in the Imperial Age... then the big impact from Germanics and Slavs in the migration period... Yet, at the end of the day, guess what? Ancient Italics from central and central-northern Italy end up overlapping in DNA charts with modern northern Italians.

After all these huge impacts from froreigners what a coincidence uh? And how annoying it must be for you!

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

Funny how you people always take the chance to underline the big impact from Levantines in the Imperial Age... then the big impact from Germanics and Slavs in the migration period... Yet, at the end of the day, guess what? Ancient Italics from central and central-northern Italy end up overlapping in DNA charts with northern Italians.

After all these huge impacts from froreigners what a coincidence uh? And how annoying it must be for you!

I never suggested as big levantine impact as some others, I think ancient Greek input is understated and levantine input is overstated

They overlap but that doesn't mean there wasn't a Greek/Anatolian like input into central Italy during Roman era and Germanic following, this would keep the cline similar to iron age. I don't think the Roman era Anatolian/levantine input was as big as some people like to claim and it was a case of J2a, even some j1 being native to Italy in iron age (some of it was ancient greek)

 

[HereToLearn]

Not sure why you think Etruscans should have had light eyes, blue eyes were common in people who had a lot of WHG ancestry (Germanic, Slavs) and increased recently due to natural selection

By this line of reasoning there must be a lot of WHG ancestry in modern Italians too, since light eyes are so common.

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

By this line of reasoning there must be a lot of WHG ancestry in modern Italians too, since light eyes are so common.

There isn't and Italians don't have as much blue eyes as Germanic people, English, Slavs etc.

This happened -
"Increased recently due to natural selection"

 

[HereToLearn]

There isn't and Italians don't have as much blue eyes as Germanic people, English, Slavs etc.

So what? That does not mean light eyes are uncommon, not in the least. In fact light eyes are common in Italy definitely much more so than the figure for the Etruscans.

This happened -
"Increased recently due to natural selection"

Says who? The Urnfield obsessed guy from the Internet?

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

So what? That does not mean light eyes are uncommon, not in the least. In fact light eyes are common in Italy definitely much more so than the figure for the Etruscans.

So what nothing, I was just pointing out some facts. Etruscans were not the only people in Italy so didn't determine the entire italian genetic composition into the modern age. I think the recent Germanic input into north Italy increased blue eye frequency. Would you say blue eyes are more frequent in north Italy?

I wouldn't say I'm obsessed with anything, just don't like when people spread clear misinformation about the history of Europe. Maybe you are obsessed with light eyes as you keep mentioning it.

 

[HereToLearn]

I think the recent Germanic input into north Italy increased blue eye frequency. Would you say blue eyes are more frequent in north Italy?

I'm not sure to what "recent Germanic input" into northern Italy you refer to.

If you refer to the "recent" Germanic migrations of 15 centuries ago, I don't have any evidence of the actual numbers of this migration so as to be able to conclude whether they had any real impact or not (and here's a R-U106+ speaking...). Neither do I see any evidence that those migrations impacted the north any more considerably than the centre and south.

I wouldn't say I'm obsessed with anything, just don't like when people spread clear misinformation about the history of Europe. Maybe you are obsessed with light eyes as you keep mentioning it.

That's strange because it seems like yet another one of your obsessions since you felt the need to go and reply to my very uncontroversial statement that the Etruscan sample shows a noticeably low percentage of light eyed individuals.

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

I'm not sure to what "recent Germanic input" into northern Italy you refer to.

If you refer to the "recent" Germanic migrations of 15 centuries ago, I don't have any evidence of the actual numbers of this migration so as to be able to conclude whether they had any real impact or not (and here's a R-U106+ speaking...). Neither do I see any evidence that those migrations impacted the north any more considerably than the centre and south.

How much i1 in iron age Italy?
31 samples on yfull in modern Italy -

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I1/

How much r-u106 in iron age Italy?
13 samples on yfull in modern Italy -

R-U106 YTree

www.yfull.com

Balkans had a lot of Slavic input and a bit of Germanic, Italy had Germanic input but very little/zero Slavic. During this similar period Germanic people invaded Britain and it's name was changed to England - land of the Angles, Germanic people.

You bring up light eyes about Etruscans and then get annoyed at me for questioning you, on what basis do you know more about Etruscans eye colour? Like I said blue eyes have increased recently in Europe due to natural selection

 

[HereToLearn]

You bring up light eyes about Etruscans and then get annoyed at me for questioning you, on what basis do you know more about Etruscans eye colour? Like I said blue eyes have increased recently in Europe due to natural selection

If for you it is realistic to think that while the Piceni (who live just on the other coast and look a lot like the Etruscans genetically speaking) have 30% of light eyes, then be my guest.

I'm not saying that the figure for the Piceni is necessarily correct either, I'm just saying I don't see such a phenotypical difference realistic for such overall genetically (and geographically) similar populations.

 

[thejoker]

Not sure why you think Etruscans should have had light eyes, blue eyes were common in people who had a lot of WHG ancestry (Germanic, Slavic) and increased recently due to natural selection

He never said that Etruscans should have 100% light eyes he said that 2,4 % is ridicolously low and it is infact. Such figures would be a ridicolous statement even for modern day Levantines go figure for Etruscans.

 

[Vallicanus]

He never said that Etruscans should have 100% light eyes he said that 2,4 % is ridicolously low and it is infact. Such figures would be a ridicolous statement even for modern day Levantines go figure for Etruscans.

What do you think about the hair and eye colour statistics in the Picene paper concerning Picenes, Etruscans and IA Romans?

 

[kingjohn]

could be that the pompeii samples results from the italian thesis in the beginning posts of this thread
might at least partly related to this future dna paper abstract