Page 11 of 32 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 319

Thread: The genetic origin of Daunians and the Pan-Mediterranean southern Italian Iron Age

  1. #101
    Registered Users
    Posts
    528
    Sex

    We can approach the issue of pre-Roman Eastern influence mathematically through estimations, for example using those questions:

    1. By 350 BCE how many Italiotes were there in comparison to native Messapians, Samnites, Lucanians, Bruttians and native Sicilians?
    2. How much local admixture did the Greek population have?
    3. How much Eastern/Southern(Greek, Punic and Anatolian) admixture did the Italic and other native populations have?
    4. How big was the population of southern Italy(Kingdom of the 2 Sicilies without modern Abruzzo) compared to the rest of peninsular Italy(Latium, Umbria, Marche and Etruria)?


    For example let's use those figures(that shouldn't be TOO far from the mark):

    1. In Southern Italy 50% of the population was still local and not Punic/Greek.
    2. Greeks(and Punics) had 50% local admixture.
    3. Southern Natives had 10% foreign admixture. Northern Italian(peninsula) natives 5%.
    4. Southern Italy had 50% of the population of peninsular Italy(+ Sicily).

    If we plug in the figures the result would be that peninsular Italy would have had 15-20% Punic/Greek admixture as a whole by 350 BCE. This is just an example of the mentality I'm operating by, I think that the natives were still prominent in Southern Italy and shouldn't have had much Eastern admixture at this point in time.
    Last edited by Granary; 08-01-2021 at 05:42 PM.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Granary For This Useful Post:

     Claudio (08-06-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021)

  3. #102
    Registered Users
    Posts
    500
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-L283

    Albania United States of America Kosovo European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Principe View Post
    Did you see SAL001, Salapia, 9th-3rd cal BCE, is J-Z1297+
    I searched for Z638/Z1296 and there was nothing, and didn't look downstream, so that's a good catch!

    I see this SNP (7405970 G>T) along with another one (17214536 G>A) are labeled as "J2-Z1297 sing", with SAL001 being positive for the first, while ORD014 being positive for the second. I checked some J-Z1297 modern samples and they are all negative for these SNPs, so I'm not sure about their phylogenetic placement, etc. Further investigation may help. In any case, these may be some Z1297 singleton/private SNPs not reported in public haplotrees, and these samples may indeed be Z1297+, which would be not surprising at all. I'm sure we'll be able to clarify it once the BAM files are published.

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Trojet For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (08-01-2021),  Archetype0ne (08-01-2021),  Bruzmi (08-01-2021),  ChrisR (08-01-2021),  JMcB (08-01-2021),  Kelmendasi (08-01-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021),  Principe (08-01-2021)

  5. #103
    Registered Users
    Posts
    499
    Sex
    Location
    Rome
    Ethnicity
    Veneto\Toscano
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152-L2-Z367
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1

    Republic of Venice Italy Veneto Italy Tuscany Italy 1861-1946 European Union Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Cascio View Post
    The genetic change in Roman Italy took centuries and involved both free and slave incomers over a huge period of time from Late Republic to Late Empire.

    However the change from North-Italian-like to east Med Cypriot/Island Greek-like had occurred by the Late Empire in the West (Western Roman Empire CE/AD 395-476)).
    Where is the evidence that Rome became progessively more east-med during the Empire? There is none, there is evidence of the contrary. The first samples that we have from 1century CE are already entirely east-med, in fact they are the most east-med of all the samples. Rome shifted the other way around, from 2century CE there are less outliers, and Rome became progressively more germanic over time. Many Late antiquity samples look Northern Italian. Everyone here is repeting something that is simply not true, but no matter how many times you say it, it's still false.
    Last edited by Ariel90; 08-01-2021 at 06:18 PM.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ariel90 For This Useful Post:

     Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021),  Nino90 (08-01-2021)

  7. #104
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,677
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel90 View Post
    The key point here, I think, is that a lot of these phenomena happened when Rome was still a Republic. Our Imperial samples, even from 0-100CE, are all east-med. It's reasonable to think that you will need literally hundreds of years to perfectly mix a population like that. The idea that the trasformation to an Empire immediately changed the population of urban Rome in a short period of time, a theory that people here think is "confirmed", is wacky and unsubstantiated. Now, as soon I saw the first paper on Rome, I tought, wow, something big happened between 500-100 BCE in the Italian peninsula demographically. Since by year 0 CE, the previous population was genetically nowhere to be found. But many people here tought: "overnight the entire population of the Italian peninsula was replaced by slaves". It's the power of ideology and preconceived ideas.
    I certainly never said that, because the free Italic farmer class was largely broke and down or in military service long before the Republic ended. Actually this is one of the major reasons why the Republic was no longer sustainable and did end in the first place, because the population, its structure and social stratification was transformed while Rome evolved. It just culiminated in the Empire, which kind of is the completion of the process. Well, actually it went on, in the same direction, but it was no fundamental change of the trajectory any more.

    All of this had two sides, one being the immigration, the other being the decline of the native Latins and Italians. Its not just about absolute numbers flowing in, but relative numbers shifting too. Some of the colonies to the West in particular, so in parts of Iberia, I expect to have more old Italian ancestry by 300 AD than most of the city of Rome.

    Quote Originally Posted by alexfritz View Post
    the fact that cluster C4 Near-East abruptly dissapears, with the change of power to constantinople, with limited to no influence on the other clusters C5/C6, underscorse that movements within the roman empire was again of a complete diff. nature
    That's something I noticed too. I don't think it really disappeared though, but it just being unrecognisable in the mixture afterwards. Its mainly recognisable by the current methods of detection, if there is a constant fresh influx, creating recognisable ancestral components over and over again. Just like the Northern admixture, which increased in Late Antiquity already, before the Fall of Rome, was better recognisable as long as it was "fresh".
    So what this showed was just that there was an end of the constant immigration of newly incoming people from the Near East, after the break up and the rise of Constantinople. Its like "no new deliveries any more", while the "deliveries" from the North increased, and became the main source of replacement in the region.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     alexfritz (08-01-2021),  Ariel90 (08-01-2021),  Gab the Gaul (08-01-2021)

  9. #105
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,134
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    NW Tuscan/Italian
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152+Z36+
    mtDNA (M)
    U6a7a

    Scotland Italy Tuscany
    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel90 View Post
    Where is the evidence that Rome became progessively more east-med during the Empire? There is none, there is evidence of the contrary. The first samples that we have from 1century CE are already entirely east-med, in fact they are the most east-med of all the samples. Rome shifted the other way around, from 2century CE there are less outliers, and Rome became progressively more germanic over time. Many Late antiquity samples look Northern Italian. Everyone here is repeting something that is simply not true, but no matter how many times you say it, it's still false.
    So, you are suggesting that no more East Mediterranean people entered Rome after about the start of the Principate.

    Remarkable. Sources?

    Progressively more Germanic?

    Only after the 5th century CE.
    Last edited by Cascio; 08-01-2021 at 07:06 PM.

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Cascio For This Useful Post:

     Erikl86 (08-01-2021),  Principe (08-01-2021),  Riverman (08-01-2021),  Ryukendo (08-01-2021)

  11. #106
    Registered Users
    Posts
    499
    Sex
    Location
    Rome
    Ethnicity
    Veneto\Toscano
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152-L2-Z367
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1

    Republic of Venice Italy Veneto Italy Tuscany Italy 1861-1946 European Union Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Cascio View Post
    So, you are suggesting that no more East Mediterranean people entered Rome after about the start of the Principate.

    Remarkable. Sources?

    Progressively more Germanic?

    Only after the 5th century CE.
    Nonsense. You all can like his replies, but there is factual data that we already have that disproofs it.

    DATES OF IMPERIAL SAMPLES:


     

    R42
    SCR; 67; Isola Sacra
    U1a1
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    22 - 120 calCE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R80
    Viale Rossini; US 201
    U6a5
    --
    Viale Rossini (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    23 - 130 calCE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R39
    SCR; 444; Isola Sacra
    J2b1c1
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    68 - 130 calCE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R436
    Palestrina Antina; I - II AD
    U5b3a
    --
    Palestrina Antina
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R111
    burial 45
    H
    R-PF7589
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R113
    burial 79
    H26a1
    E-V12
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R114
    burial 114
    U1b1
    --
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R115
    burial 132
    U4
    J-M92
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R116
    Via Paisiello; US 491
    U3a2
    J-Z631
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R131
    Via Paisiello; US 491
    T1a12
    G-FGC5089
    Via Paisiello (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R75
    Viale Rossini; US 120
    H14a
    --
    Viale Rossini (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R76
    Viale Rossini; US 121
    T2c1a
    J-L26
    Viale Rossini (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R78
    Viale Rossini; US 152 (sample and label were wet when bag arrived)
    D4j11
    --
    Viale Rossini (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R81
    Viale Rossini; US 206
    K1b1c
    J-M304
    Viale Rossini (Necropoli Salaria)
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 200 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R1551
    Monterotondo Imperial T.7 L.petrous 2.5.18
    H
    J-L26
    Monterotondo
    Roman Imperial
    55 - 211 calCE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R835
    T.16A R.petrous, 2.5.2018
    H2a5
    J-P58
    Civitanova Marche
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R836
    T.19C, L. petrous, 2.5.2018
    H5n
    --
    Civitanova Marche
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1547
    Monterotondo Imperial T.1 R petrous 2.5.18
    K1a7
    J-CTS5368
    Monterotondo
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1548
    Monterotondo Imperial T.10 L. petrous 2.5.18
    H2a
    R-F1345
    Monterotondo
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1549
    Monterotondo Imperial T.2A R. petrous 2.5.18
    U5b2b3
    J-CTS5368
    Monterotondo
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1550
    Monterotondo Imperial T.5A 2.5.18
    T2c1c
    J-M67
    Monterotondo
    Roman Imperial
    27 BCE - 300 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R123
    9
    T2a1b
    R-M269
    Casale del dolce
    Roman Imperial
    77- 213 calCE
    Imperial Rome/Late Antiquity
    Imperial

    R66
    t. 6; Anas; Petrosa
    T2
    R-M207
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R67
    t. 15; Anas; Petrosa
    T2c1
    --
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R68
    t. 34; Anas; Petrosa
    U7a4a1a
    J-L26
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R69
    t. 44; Anas; Petrosa
    X2l
    --
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R70
    t. 71; Anas; Petrosa
    T1a
    G-P303
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R71
    Anas; Setl. H; T. 79
    H5+709
    --
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R72
    t. 83; Anas; Petrosa
    T2g
    --
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R73
    Anas; Setl. H; T. 88
    J2a1a1a
    --
    ANAS (Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strada)
    Roman Imperial
    100-300 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R50
    Centocelle; ADL 2355; T.24
    H5
    J-M172
    Centocelle
    Roman Imperial
    135 - 244 calCE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R125
    25
    T2k
    --
    Casale del dolce
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome/Late Antiquity
    Imperial

    R128
    65
    HV+16311
    J-CTS5368
    Casale del dolce
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome/Late Antiquity
    Imperial

    R132
    Marcellino & Pietro; A
    R0a2j
    G-Z3428
    Marcellino & Pietro
    Roman Imperial
    136 - 326 calCE
    Late Antiquity
    Imperial

    R49
    Centocelle; ADL 2000; US 2335; T. 20
    H1u
    --
    Centocelle
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R51
    Centocelle; ADL; 2616
    U3b1
    --
    Centocelle
    Roman Imperial
    0 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R37
    SCR; 426; Isola Sacra
    U6a6a1
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R38
    SCR; 711; Isola Sacra
    T2d2
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R40
    SCR; 479; Isola Sacra
    K1a4a
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R41
    SCR; 306; Isola Sacra
    H5a1
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R43
    SCR; 148; Isola Sacra
    H7f
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R44
    SCR; 201; Isola Sacra
    T2
    J-M304
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R45
    SCR; 510; Isola Sacra
    U3b1
    --
    Isola Sacra
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R1543
    Mazzano Romano Cranio 3
    H1e
    T-Z709
    Mazzano Romano
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1544
    Mazzano Romano T.1
    J1c
    --
    Mazzano Romano
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R1545
    Mazzano Romana Tomba Camera Cranio 1
    H8c
    G-CTS9909
    Mazzano Romano
    Roman Imperial
    1 - 400 CE
    Imperial
    Imperial

    R47
    Centocelle; ADL 2000; US 2288; T 16
    J1c1c
    G-M406
    Centocelle
    Roman Imperial
    232 - 333 calCE
    Imperial Rome
    Imperial

    R126
    27
    U6a7c1
    --
    Casale del dolce
    Roman Imperial
    240 - 334 calCE
    Imperial Rome/Late Antiquity
    Imperial


    Closer populations for the older samples from 0-200CE

     
    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR81
    0.02652630 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.02724349 Greek_Kos
    0.02837481 Cypriot_B
    0.03420966 Cypriot
    0.03492268 Romaniote_Jew

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR78
    0.03533127 Cypriot_B
    0.03894324 Cypriot
    0.03931554 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.04185105 Greek_Cappadocia
    0.04367629 Greek_Kos

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR76
    0.03552978 Cypriot_B
    0.03728908 Cypriot
    0.03873798 Druze
    0.04059230 Greek_Central_Anatolia
    0.04072603 Lebanese_Druze

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR75
    0.02509775 Cypriot_B
    0.02620138 Cypriot
    0.03392417 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.03473326 Romaniote_Jew
    0.03667830 Syrian_Jew

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR131
    0.02601231 Italian_Campania
    0.02645610 Italian_Basilicata
    0.02764389 Italian_Apulia
    0.02773970 Italian_Calabria
    0.02780067 Italian_Abruzzo

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR116
    0.01467455 French_Occitanie
    0.01651898 French_Auvergne
    0.02161204 Swiss_German
    0.02198333 French_Paris
    0.02218830 French_Nord

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR115
    0.02061844 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.02122213 Greek_Kos
    0.02351407 Cypriot_B
    0.02818725 Greek_Crete
    0.02994344 Cypriot

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR114
    0.02922621 Greek_Crete
    0.03237557 Italian_Calabria
    0.03253531 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.03261994 Italian_Apulia
    0.03265927 Italian_Campania

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR113
    0.03926898 Italian_Apulia
    0.04002030 Italian_Abruzzo
    0.04087693 Sicilian_East
    0.04097213 Italian_Lazio
    0.04117567 Italian_Campania

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR111
    0.03394784 Italian_Umbria
    0.03583923 Italian_Lazio
    0.03592189 French_Corsica
    0.03629133 Italian_Tuscany
    0.03876166 Italian_Marche

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR436
    0.02888646 Greek_Kos
    0.03026886 Italian_Basilicata
    0.03052961 Greek_Izmir
    0.03106774 Italian_Campania
    0.03154245 Greek_Crete

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR39
    0.02234914 Greek_Kos
    0.02274595 Greek_Dodecanese
    0.02510504 Cypriot_B
    0.03120844 Romaniote_Jew
    0.03232448 Cypriot

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR80
    0.03492403 Moroccan_Jew
    0.03583118 Libyan_Jew
    0.03666790 Tunisian_Jew
    0.04855543 Italian_Jew
    0.04892654 Sephardic_Jew

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Imperial:RMPR42
    0.02363433 Samaritan
    0.02455281 Lebanese_Christian_Greek_Orthodox
    0.02523012 Lebanese_Christian
    0.02537991 Palestinian_Beit_Sahour
    0.02594418 Lebanese_Christian_Maronite



    Literally everyone is east-med outside of a French outlier. One is Jewish-like, and one is Samaritan-like. Where are the Italics? This looks like a relatively homogeneous group, already fully east-med, today's people are less east-med. Why would we think that in 2,3 century more east-med was added to the mix? It's literally the contrary of what we are seeing?


    Now, the samples from Marcellino e Pietro, are still Imperial, 3,4 century CE.

     
    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR137
    0.02589486 Greek_Kos
    0.02812517 Greek_Dodecanese

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR136
    0.01635912 Greek_Crete
    0.01646052 Italian_Campania

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR134
    0.02168228 Romaniote_Jew
    0.02370379 Cypriot_B

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR133
    0.02434908 Greek_Kos
    0.03016181 Greek_Dodecanese

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR130
    0.02846520 Cypriot
    0.02918553 Cypriot_B

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR36
    0.02068740 Italian_Marche
    0.02131700 Italian_Umbria


    They are basically indentical. Not suggestive of a continuous influx.

    But in Mausoleo di Augusto: 332 - 419 calCE

    you have this guy:

    Distance to: ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR31
    0.03482264 Danish
    0.03609285 English
    0.03618391 Dutch
    0.03625664 Norwegian

    The empire was falling apart, germanic warriors were used to replenish the army. Not surprising to see this guy.

    Edit: If Rome was already east-med by 1 century CE. How is it possible to have modern central Italians that have obviously more Italic and less east-med and at the same time have an influx of people in the 2,3 century that shifted Rome ever more east? Is it reasonable to think that there was a continuous influx of people in a city with a shrinking population? If anything, there was an influx of more Italic like individual, like we see in Late Antiquity samples.
    Last edited by Ariel90; 08-01-2021 at 08:26 PM.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ariel90 For This Useful Post:

     Claudio (08-06-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021)

  13. #107
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,629
    Sex

    A couple of questions to the thread:
    1. Can someone remind me how the Greece MBA Helladic people look like? Are they part of the West Med or East Med continuum?
    2. In the other thread, people were modelling present-day Slavic-speaking Balkanites as Croatia_IA (which resembles present-day North Italians) + Medieval Slavic. How did present-day North Balkanites get their East-Med-type ancestry if there's only a West-Med-like and Slavic-like contribution? Or does Croatia_IA contain such an East-Med-like substrate already? Not questioning the models, just feel like I'm missing something--are Balkanites not as East-Med-rich as I thought?
    Quoted from this Forum:

    "Which superman haplogroup is the toughest - R1a or R1b? And which SNP mutation spoke Indo-European first? There's only one way for us to find out ... fight!"

    " A Basal Eurasian and an Aurignacian walk into a bar... "

    " No, you are in the wrong... I really hope that you are not jumping on my thread with intent to harass me, just like other "receiving comitee", that unites in classic bullying unity, which makes me sad about such people, deprived of love etc.... "

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ryukendo For This Useful Post:

     pegasus (08-01-2021),  peloponnesian (08-02-2021)

  15. #108
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,629
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel90 View Post
    The key point here, I think, is that a lot of these phenomena happened when Rome was still a Republic. Our Imperial samples, even from 0-100CE, are all east-med. It's reasonable to think that you will need literally hundreds of years to perfectly mix a population like that. The idea that the trasformation to an Empire immediately changed the population of urban Rome in a short period of time, a theory that people here think is "confirmed", is wacky and unsubstantiated. Now, as soon I saw the first paper on Rome, I tought, wow, something big happened between 500-100 BCE in the Italian peninsula demographically. Since by year 0 CE, the previous population was genetically nowhere to be found. But many people here tought: "overnight the entire population of the Italian peninsula was replaced by slaves". It's the power of ideology and preconceived ideas.
    The people in Rome in the Late Republic were not part of a homogeneous cluster, but were very spread apart and had affinities with a wide range of locations across the Eastern Mediterranean. Whatever process was bringing Eastern-Mediterranean type people into Rome was still occuring at the time of the Late Republic samples, and was occurring recently enough and with enough magnitude that most people retained genetic signatures of their heterogeneous origins. If the process was a trickle over a long period of time, we would see a slightly different picture.
    Quoted from this Forum:

    "Which superman haplogroup is the toughest - R1a or R1b? And which SNP mutation spoke Indo-European first? There's only one way for us to find out ... fight!"

    " A Basal Eurasian and an Aurignacian walk into a bar... "

    " No, you are in the wrong... I really hope that you are not jumping on my thread with intent to harass me, just like other "receiving comitee", that unites in classic bullying unity, which makes me sad about such people, deprived of love etc.... "

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Ryukendo For This Useful Post:

     alexfritz (08-01-2021),  Claudio (08-02-2021),  Erikl86 (08-01-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021),  pegasus (08-01-2021)

  17. #109
    Registered Users
    Posts
    499
    Sex
    Location
    Rome
    Ethnicity
    Veneto\Toscano
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152-L2-Z367
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1

    Republic of Venice Italy Veneto Italy Tuscany Italy 1861-1946 European Union Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    The people in Rome in the Late Republic were not part of a homogeneous cluster, but were very spread apart and had affinities with a wide range of locations across the Eastern Mediterranean. Whatever process was bringing Eastern-Mediterranean type people into Rome was still occuring at the time of the Late Republic samples, and was occurring recently enough and with enough magnitude that most people retained genetic signatures of their heterogeneous origins. If the process was a trickle over a long period of time, we would see a slightly different picture.
    I don't even know what to say. If every single Imperial sample that we have it's not even close to Italics. In fact, not any closer than more Latians. How that is even possible that this was a rapid phenomena? What are we talking here? One century? At least we are talking two, three century, Right? So, by early Empire there are no Italic-like samples, thusly, we have to go back 2 or 3 centuries. Interesting, no? Where big demographic changes were happening in Rome. Where the city got really big. Where there were a bunch of slaves revolts. From Wikipedia: "The First Servile War of 135–132 BC was a slave rebellion against the Roman Republic, which took place in Sicily. The revolt started in 135 when Eunus, a slave from Syria who claimed to be a prophet. Soon after, Cleon, a Cilician slave, stormed the city of Agrigentum on the southern coast, slaughtered the population" I'm surprised that people ignore the fact that in middle-late Republic there was a bunch of problems with both slaves and lower class populace. But in the imperial era, nothing of that magnitude. There is evidence that the biggeste influx of people and slaves was in those centuries.
    Last edited by Ariel90; 08-01-2021 at 08:41 PM.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ariel90 For This Useful Post:

     Claudio (08-02-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021)

  19. #110
    Registered Users
    Posts
    499
    Sex
    Location
    Rome
    Ethnicity
    Veneto\Toscano
    Nationality
    Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152-L2-Z367
    mtDNA (M)
    T1a1

    Republic of Venice Italy Veneto Italy Tuscany Italy 1861-1946 European Union Italy
    The population of Imperial Rome was remarkably homogeneous. (People here are saying things like Rome was heterogenous and they are getting likes, literally not true, there were more diversity as a % of the population in the Iron age)




    There are 3 Euro outliers, and 7 Middle eastern outliers, there are some 30-40 east-med.
    The fact that this isn't the homogeneity that people expected, doesn't change this fact. Imperial Rome, since the start, had an east-med genetic profile. It's a fact, it's fact, it's fact. If you don't like it, it's still a fact.
    Last edited by Ariel90; 08-01-2021 at 08:43 PM.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ariel90 For This Useful Post:

     Claudio (08-06-2021),  Michalis Moriopoulos (08-02-2021)

Page 11 of 32 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Were Iron Age Celts North Italian-like?
    By Echo in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 345
    Last Post: 11-22-2020, 09:31 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-11-2019, 11:14 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-17-2018, 03:48 AM
  4. Iron Age Fort In Southern Israel Reveals Its Secrets
    By MfA in forum History (Ancient)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2017, 09:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •