R1b-U152/S28 : more Gaulish or Roman ?

Who spead R-U152 ?

  • The (Proto-)Italo-Celts

    Votes: 34 28.6%
  • The Hallstatt/La Tène Celts

    Votes: 31 26.1%
  • Italic people, including the Romans

    Votes: 15 12.6%
  • Hallstatt/La Tène Celts AND Italic people

    Votes: 26 21.8%
  • Earlier Neolithic or Mesolithic people

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 9 7.6%

  • Total voters
    119
There is no proof that Romans were all R1b which is what you are implying.

Of course they were not all R1b, but it would have been the majority.
 
Romans were not J2, they were R1b and R1b is still the most common lineage in Southern Italy but barely (it depends in some areas it can 40% in others as low as 20-22%), R1b-U152>Z36 is Gallic and R1b-U152>Z56>Z145 is Roman. Maybe even L2 is Roman.

The Romans would have picked up R1b in numbers once they became an empire and not when they where a republic............they would have had similar Markers to Campania areas
 
The Romans would have picked up R1b in numbers once they became an empire and not when they where a republic............they would have had similar Markers to Campania areas

I think the opposite, I think Republic would have been heavily R1b and they would pickup E and J2 as they expanded as an empire.
 
Romans were not J2, they were R1b and R1b is still the most common lineage in Southern Italy but barely (it depends in some areas it can 40% in others as low as 20-22%), R1b-U152>Z36 is Gallic and R1b-U152>Z56>Z145 is Roman. Maybe even L2 is Roman.

There is absolutely no way to know that definitively as we don't have a single Roman genome. Plus, it depends on the era. Already even in Republican times there would have been admixture from the Etruscans and whatever "Y" they carried. Many very famous Roman gens had Etruscan roots. In fact, any nomina ending in arna, erna, ena, enna, ina or inna are characteristic of an Etruscan family.

I could make an argument that everything that made Rome great was actually Etruscan in origin.
 
There is absolutely no way to know that definitively as we don't have a single Roman genome. Plus, it depends on the era. Already even in Republican times there would have been admixture from the Etruscans and whatever "Y" they carried. Many very famous Roman gens had Etruscan roots. In fact, any nomina ending in arna, erna, ena, enna, ina or inna are characteristic of an Etruscan family.

I could make an argument that everything that made Rome great was actually Etruscan in origin.

I base off based on how its distributed, for me Z145 is a Roman marker, and I will have this opinion until or if ancient dna proves otherwise.

I would agree with your argument that everything that made Rome great was indeed Etruscan, the J2 if Romans had any, I talking Republic times would have probably came from the Etruscans.
 
I base off based on how its distributed, for me Z145 is a Roman marker, and I will have this opinion until or if ancient dna proves otherwise.

I would agree with your argument that everything that made Rome great was indeed Etruscan, the J2 if Romans had any, I talking Republic times would have probably came from the Etruscans.

There isn't any proof either that J2 was a distinctive Etruscan haplogroup. J2 is more common in Italy in non-Etruscan regions. So according to you, Calabrians must be of Etruscan origin, being that J2 is more common in Calabria than in Tuscany.

And to begin with, the Etruscans were a civilization, not a race. And Romans were the citizens of Rome. At least let's use the more appropriate term: Latins.
 
There isn't any proof either that J2 was a distinctive Etruscan haplogroup. J2 is more common in Italy in non-Etruscan regions. So according to you, Calabrians must be of Etruscan origin, being that J2 is more common in Calabria than in Tuscany.

And to begin with, the Etruscans were a civilization, not a race. And Romans were the citizens of Rome. At least let's use the more appropriate term: Latins.

There is many J2 subclades, the ones that the Etruscans carried would have been different than Calabrians, your comment is insulting, stick to your threads and your opinions stop quoting me.

secondly whoever said the Etruscans were a race??? I definately never said that, you always assume.
 
There is many J2 subclades, the ones that the Etruscans carried would have been different than Calabrians, your comment is insulting, stick to your threads and your opinions stop quoting me.

There is freedom of speech, I am free to quote you as often as I want. And please, don't play the role of the victim, try to hide yourself behind this victimism and make it personal, this is the real insult. I understand that you do not like being contradicted but welcome in the real world.
 
What is irritating to some members, Azzurro, is that you present your speculations as if they were facts, when obviously they're not. Speculations based on modern distributions have sometimes been correct, and have sometimes been wrong. It's not a personal attack to say so. When we get the ancient dna results from both the Latins and the Etruscans, we'll know.

I don't see any reason for the aggressiveness in your tone when responding to that post by Pax. Back off and chill.
 
There is freedom of speech, I am free to quote you as often as I want. And please, don't play the role of the victim, try to hide yourself behind this victimism and make it personal, this is the real insult. I understand that you do not like being contradicted but welcome in the real world.

Freedom of speech is important yes, I am not playing the victim card at all, what you wrote was insulting, come on you've seen many of my posts here and at Anthrogenica, you know I talk about the various subclades of J2, In fact its my main research, especially discussing deep subclades, and you would think I would cluelessly dub Etruscan and Calabrian J2 as being the same?! Even with the Etruscan race comment, you think I'm an ignorant and would actually think that? I study Classical History at University. We disagree on many things and it's fine, but don't take me for a fool, as I don't with you.
 
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.
 
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.

Thanks very much, to me that too that makes sense, also a good point even for L2 how could it end up in Algeria and Turkey if not the Romans? Sure people can say the Galatians could have brought it to Turkey but being found in Algeria rules it out, for Z56 it is so strongely Italian oriented how can it not be Romano-Italic.
 
I got back Y37 markers at ftdna (I needed these in order to do the Big Y, which is the next step! I am aware of the existence of Y Elite); The closest matches within U152 seem to be two men from the Jewish clade beneath Z145 (though with a GD of 5). My paternal line has likely an origin in Brabant. I don't want to jump to conclusions, since STR's are really prone to divergence and convergence, but wow, I am now considering a Roman background. Of course, if I indeed belong to Z145 or a lineage close to it, this lineage could have come to Brabant between the Roman era and ca. 1600. I will have more information this autumn when the Big Y results will give much more certainty. This is an exciting journey.
 
I think AZZURO is right because one should take into account that Etruscans had non indo-european language and romans/latins language was indo-european so they were the main carriers of U152.

Please explain how modern Tuscany which was ancient Etruscan territory certainly as far north as the Arno has more R-U152 than the Lazio area around Rome.
 
Please explain how modern Tuscany which was ancient Etruscan territory certainly as far north as the Arno has more R-U152 than the Lazio area around Rome.

Because Tuscans descend from the proto Villanovians. Latins could have been descended from the proto Villanovians as well but Lazio was inhabited by other tribes and Latins occupied a very small portion of Lazio. And of course the area around Rome is more historically altered than Tuscany.
 
I view Etruscans as similar to the Magyar elite, leaving a language and culture, but not much Y-dna.
 
I view Etruscans as similar to the Magyar elite, leaving a language and culture, but not much Y-dna.
They could have had some elite foreigners, but the etruscans comprised of only 12 main cities who where not united except for a yearly religious festival..............IMO , the etruscans are umbrian people who took the name of the land etruria and said they where etruscans ................over time the Apennines mountains separated them linguistically
 
" when a people no longer dares to defend it's language it is ripe for slavery" well I hope the Gaelic language doesn't disappear! Especially considering the advanced culture and people that gave so much to Europe and now to North America and the rest of the world. The fighting Celtic spirit!
 
Greetings to all on this amazing site, I'm a newbie. I have little knowledge of genes and subclades but I am knowledgeable in history of people and culture that would've spread these genes with wave after wave of invading tribes
 

This thread has been viewed 381725 times.

Back
Top