HereToLearn
Regular Member
So much space in fact a whole empire to put the slaves and yet according to these people the Romans only put slaves to work in a space corresponding to the modern borders of Italy…
Genetic study The arrival of the Near Eastern ancestry in Central Italy predates the onset of the Roman Empire
- Thread starter Tautalus
- Start date
Jovialis
Advisor
- Messages
- 9,597
- Reaction score
- 6,370
- Points
- 113
- Location
- New York Metropolitan Area
- Ethnic group
- Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-PF7566 (R-Y227216)
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H6a1b7
It is also incredibly disingenuous to say the Greeks had a negligible impact, despite the fact they've been coming there since the Bronze age, and there's clear genetic affinity, according to studies like Raveane et al. 2022. Yet in total contravention of the findings of Antonio et al. 2019, that demonstrated exotic immigrants from the Near East no longer existed in Rome since Late Antiquity; it is those people that left the biggest genetic impact. The whole thing is absurd on it's face, when people actually read the raw information of what the studies demonstrate. It is merely a perceived-flex, and a trolling campaign by bizarre malcontents.
kingdavid
Regular Member
- Messages
- 2,417
- Reaction score
- 1,477
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Mizrahi e-FGC7391
Out yesterday :
his g25 values:
Scaled
roman:BSP71,0.106994,0.152329,-0.048649,-0.07429,-0.008617,-0.025937,0,-0.003231,-0.020861,0.017312,0.003248,0.003147,-0.009663,0.003165,-0.014115,-0.015115,-0.00691,-0.004561,0.001885,-0.00025,-0.003494,0.001237,0.000246,0.002169,0.000599
his (g25 values) similarity map according to user ph2ter from genArchivist
Most similar to Anatolian Greek:
his g25 values:
Scaled
roman:BSP71,0.106994,0.152329,-0.048649,-0.07429,-0.008617,-0.025937,0,-0.003231,-0.020861,0.017312,0.003248,0.003147,-0.009663,0.003165,-0.014115,-0.015115,-0.00691,-0.004561,0.001885,-0.00025,-0.003494,0.001237,0.000246,0.002169,0.000599
his (g25 values) similarity map according to user ph2ter from genArchivist
Most similar to Anatolian Greek:
Last edited:
kingdavid
Regular Member
- Messages
- 2,417
- Reaction score
- 1,477
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Mizrahi e-FGC7391
at theytree:
www.theytree.com
BSP71 - 176–101 calBCE - R-PH2731 / T1a1 - 祖源树TheYtree
祖源树TheYtree样本：BSP71 - 176–101 calBCE
Pax Augusta
Elite member
He might indeed have been an Eastern Greek or Anatolian Greek.
Since BSP71 is dated to 176-101 cal BCE, it can be situated within the Roman period for Tarquinia. The Romanization of southern Etruria (northern Latium), owing to its proximity to Rome, started earlier than in the rest of Etruria. This individual could belong to any background. The archaeological context offers little assistance: if memory serves, he was discovered without grave goods or accompanying artifacts in the Villa Bruschi Falgari necropolis, a site with a broad chronological span, in use since Villanovan times and featuring both cremation and inhumation tombs (the older cremation burials, from a time when the population was entirely local, yielded no skeletal remains). Radiocarbon analysis places this individual at the close of the Roman Republican era.
Tarquinia, from around 600-500 BCE, likely stood as the most cosmopolitan of the Etruscan cities, yet there is no evidence to suggest that, prior to Romanization, its local populace underwent significant demographic shifts. Indeed, the very image Moots persistently employs in her rants about the Etruscans—one of the Archaic-era frescoes from the Monterozzi necropolis at Tarquinia—is thought by archaeologists to reflect Greek artistic influence, at times Attic, at others broadly Eastern Greek (or Anatolian Greek, from the Ionian Greeks of Phocaea). Scholars speak of small groups of foreign artists and merchants active in Etruria, who, nonetheless, could not claim political rights in Etruscan society (the tale of Tarquinius Priscus is telling: a native of Tarquinia, born to a Greek father and an Etruscan mother, he was compelled to relocate to Rome, as his father’s ethnicity—Demaratus, hailing from the Greek city of Corinth—barred him from political office in Tarquinia, Etruria. In Rome he became, instead, the King). Yet, as we know, BSP71 lived many centuries later.
at theytree:
BSP71 - 176–101 calBCE - R-PH2731 / T1a1 - 祖源树TheYtree
祖源树TheYtree样本：BSP71 - 176–101 calBCE
according to YFull this R1b hasn't been found in Italy so far
R-PH2731 YTree
The idea that any person found dead in Italy contributed to the formation of modern Italians is a very simplistic idea.
Basing an entire paper on one individual then makes one smile.
Last edited:
Palermo Trapani
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,690
- Reaction score
- 1,004
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian-Sicily-South
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- I2-M223>I-Y5362
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H2A3
Pax Augusta: I agree using 1 sample to then generalize to all modern Italy is a very simplistic notion. I have not read the paper, but I think if you take this sample from the Late Republic Period and add it to the 11 from the Antonio et al 2019 paper, that gives us now 12 Republican era Roman samples. So it would be interesting to see how this sample relates to those 11. 1 Sample R437 was very Southern Italian and part of the C6 while R850 was in the C5 cluster (Eastern Mediterranean). So if this new sample is very close to Anatolian Greek, one would think it could be close to R850 from Antonio et al 2019. R850 using the old Dodecad modern coordinates has distances < 5 for 3 modern Greek populations.
Then there are also the Republican era samples from the Etruscan paper (Posth et al 2021) that could also be used to see where this new sample fits.
Cheers
Then there are also the Republican era samples from the Etruscan paper (Posth et al 2021) that could also be used to see where this new sample fits.
Cheers
—BoNe—
Regular Member
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 18
What a garbage article.
The Romans were Iranians? LOL
U152 is the genetic backbone of the Italians.
According to the online DNA companies, U152 has an estimated average birth date around 2600 BCE, BASED ON AN AVERAGE meant to please all their users.
But if you look at the derived lines, many go back as far as 4200 BCE, so until, I don’t know, the 80 million living U152 lineages today report their DNA…
Forget the idea that U152 was born in Germany just because of one empirical corpse with a poorly refined subclade. They didn’t extract a subclade matching the date because those are extinct lines with more Atlantic-Mediterranean ancestry than they “should” have to be originally German.
Modern Italians do not descend from the Bell Beakers of Germany — I say this as an absolute truth. Scientific consensus is not absolute reality; the bias some people inject into these topics borders on delusion.
The lineages from which modern Italians descend have been in the region continuously since at least 2500 BCE. If that weren’t the case, there wouldn’t be exclusive, older lines. Before those dates, they were simply fewer in number, and little by little, they became dominant — uninterrupted. That doesn’t mean there weren’t U152* lineages across other parts of Europe too.
In that process, many lineages migrated throughout the peninsula, assimilating cultures and languages, like Phoenician and Greek. People who argue that they weren’t Indo-European just because they spoke other languages clearly don’t understand what a continuous Y-lineage means. The over 10,000 consecutive years from L51 to M343 are “welded” — they can’t be erased. That’s what really shaped their behavior: father teaches son how to be a man.
From all the ancient samples we have, only a small percentage of those U152 lineages found are the ones that the entire modern population descends from. It’s possible that all Italians descend from just 2,000 elite U152 men of the Roman Empire.
This is exactly the same case as Iberia — absolute apex predators of their peninsula since 2500 BCE, aside from absorbing maybe 5–10% Phoenician and Greek influence until the Empire began.
This forced multicultural narrative they’re pushing onto everything just shows the illiteracy of these “researchers” with political agendas. Positive discrimination is the worst cancer of favoritism.
U152 is literally Mars.
The Romans were Iranians? LOL
U152 is the genetic backbone of the Italians.
According to the online DNA companies, U152 has an estimated average birth date around 2600 BCE, BASED ON AN AVERAGE meant to please all their users.
But if you look at the derived lines, many go back as far as 4200 BCE, so until, I don’t know, the 80 million living U152 lineages today report their DNA…
Forget the idea that U152 was born in Germany just because of one empirical corpse with a poorly refined subclade. They didn’t extract a subclade matching the date because those are extinct lines with more Atlantic-Mediterranean ancestry than they “should” have to be originally German.
Modern Italians do not descend from the Bell Beakers of Germany — I say this as an absolute truth. Scientific consensus is not absolute reality; the bias some people inject into these topics borders on delusion.
The lineages from which modern Italians descend have been in the region continuously since at least 2500 BCE. If that weren’t the case, there wouldn’t be exclusive, older lines. Before those dates, they were simply fewer in number, and little by little, they became dominant — uninterrupted. That doesn’t mean there weren’t U152* lineages across other parts of Europe too.
In that process, many lineages migrated throughout the peninsula, assimilating cultures and languages, like Phoenician and Greek. People who argue that they weren’t Indo-European just because they spoke other languages clearly don’t understand what a continuous Y-lineage means. The over 10,000 consecutive years from L51 to M343 are “welded” — they can’t be erased. That’s what really shaped their behavior: father teaches son how to be a man.
From all the ancient samples we have, only a small percentage of those U152 lineages found are the ones that the entire modern population descends from. It’s possible that all Italians descend from just 2,000 elite U152 men of the Roman Empire.
This is exactly the same case as Iberia — absolute apex predators of their peninsula since 2500 BCE, aside from absorbing maybe 5–10% Phoenician and Greek influence until the Empire began.
This forced multicultural narrative they’re pushing onto everything just shows the illiteracy of these “researchers” with political agendas. Positive discrimination is the worst cancer of favoritism.
U152 is literally Mars.
The Romans were an Indo-European people and according to almost all recent genetic studies, the original Indo-Europeans had CHG/Iranian ancestry.
Vallicanus
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,431
- Reaction score
- 775
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b Z36
Don't you mean all Italian U152 men are so descended.
There are other haplogroups in Italy. J2, G2 and E1b subclades are common, especially in the south of Italy.
norbert
Regular Member
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction score
- 292
- Points
- 63
U152 is associated with the broader Alpine area encompassing southeastern France, southern Germany, Switzerland, northern Italy and southwestern Austria. I doubt it came from Germany but it didn't originate in Italy either. U152 certainly came from the north and brought the Italic languages, maybe along with G2a which has a relatively high concentration in the Alps (and it is the line of the EEFs after all who were there before) but the latter was obviously in the minority. J2a arrived with later migrations, at least the bulk of it. E1b, if it's E-V13, was a marginal haplogroup all over Europe, so it's hard to say who brought it and when. The point that is being made here is that the principal haplogroup that ca be associated with early Italic tribes is R1b-U152 and it came from the north.
—BoNe—
Regular Member
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 18
Using Neolithic admixtures to analyze the Roman Empire period is anachronistic—it’s a tactic they use to avoid getting into trouble, but in the end, they end up getting completely tangled up.
We know very well by now that the haplogroups with ancestry from Neolithic Iran are: J2-PF5116, T-M70, some J1, and some G.
But the most likely migration route for all of these is:
Kura-Araxes > Anatolia (4000–2000 BC) > Aegean (1800–1200 BC) > Italy (1200 BC – 500 AD)
They are simply misclassified due to Neolithic bias, which creates the false impression that the Roman Empire was overrun by Iranians—but that has nothing to do with reality.
What we can infer from current studies is that the northern and central regions had higher frequencies of U152, and it was that part of the population that expanded, while educating and dominating the rest. If someone behaved like a Roman, they were Roman (rights always come with obligations), and those who didn’t… became slaves.
The continuity of U152 since 2500 BC is the only thing we can say for sure about the history of the Italian Peninsula. The rest of the lineages are still under question—and that’s what these kinds of studies are supposed to clarify. But it all just keeps getting more confusing. We do know there’s some continuity for other lineages too, but since they represent a smaller percentage, it will take a much larger number of samples to get a clear picture.
Everything they classify as “eastern” or “Iranian” is in fact more often related to the peoples of the Aegean Sea and Phoenicians (mixed) than to populations of 100% eastern origin.
—BoNe—
Regular Member
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 18
In that part, I was specifically referring to the U152, which we can estimate numbered around 1 million by 0 AD (assuming the total population of Italy at the time was about 4 million), with around 4,000 surviving lines. From that bottleneck, only about 2,000 may have survived to this day. That is, during growth phases, many get purged by “natural selection” or simply didn’t have male offspring. In the end, haplogroups behave more like dynasties—lines that may have survived for 1,000 years by having an average of 2 or 3 sons, could later consolidate through someone who had 20, and then many of those descendants grew fond of having families of 20 themselves. By the Roman era, in military contexts, men who focused on having large families had much higher chances of survival and success. They didn’t know the Roman Empire was going to triumph, but many of them acted as if it would.
Surviving natural selection for 4,000 years can only mean that only those who behaved like elites are the ones whose lineages endured. People often imagine themselves in those times as some random peasant—no, in that era you were the Roman legionary who was sodomizing other peoples. No one descends from slaves; only the useless were enslaved. The peoples that were absorbed became Romanized quickly because life improvement was drastic. The mere construction of aqueducts represented a 5,000-year evolutionary leap. No matter how much people try to paint Rome as the bad guy, it was the best thing that ever happened to humanity.
As for the other lines that make up the Italian mix, there could be E-V13 lines arriving around 2000 BC, G lines dating back to 6000 BC, like L457 which is associated with Celtic elites, or I2 lines that have been around for 10,000 years. Due to lack of data, we still don’t know clearly which ones are which.
The fact that some haplogroups were present in a region doesn’t mean others weren’t too—whether as friends, enemies, or relatives (even speaking different languages, yet being relatives and enemies). But the case of P312 descendants is very unusual: they’ve remained a very high percentage in the most life-friendly regions continuously for about 4,500 years. So we ended up absorbing the rest, and we are the statistical foundation. R1b-L151> and H> mt together account for nearly 50% of the autosomal DNA of Western Europeans, and the rest is split among the 12 most common Y haplogroups and 16 mt haplogroups in Europe.
Ancestrally, it’s as if L151> had kidnapped all the daughters from the past 25,000 years of the other 12 dominant European haplogroups between 3500–2500 BC.
Which makes the genesis of Celtic-Greco-Roman mythology more empirical than the biblical Genesis.
That’s why Yisus has the face of a Celtic-Greco-Roman.
He died as an IJK*, but resurrected as an L151.
Anatolia (4000–2000 BC) = Proto-Anatolian, Aegean (1800–1200 BC) = Proto-Hellenic, Italy (1200 BC – 500 AD) = Proto-Italic
It is important to know where the culture originated, for example read it: WOLF MYTHS IN ANCIENT ROME & ITALY - Ralph Häussler It has mentioned Near East (Iran) where this myth originated.
Description: Stone stamp-seal in the form of a stone ring; large perforation; engraved on flat surface with wolf to left (right when impressed) suckling two children (Romulus and Remus?); to the left is a crescent and to the right is a star, with above an inscription; complete.
The 'Romulus and Remus' theme of this seal implies familiarity with classical mythology. It may be a product of a glyptic workshop in a more western region of the Sasanian empire such as Mesopotamia.
Last edited:
Pax Augusta
Elite member
There is no consensus that Proto-Italic could follow that path and that those equivalences and dates are valid. Certainly, Proto-Italic does not derive directly from either Greek or the Anatolian Indo-European languages.
Nothing you have posted proves the origin of the 'culture.'
The she-wolf theme is one of the arguments used in bogus reconstructions by Turkish nationalists, rooted in Turanism, to claim the origins of Rome. You behave similarly. Attempting to elevate your own country's history by appropriating the history of another nation today is always a sign of low self-esteem.
Wolf deities, wolf myths, and even she-wolf-related myths, are found across multiple civilizations and do not imply shared origins.
It does not seem to me that Ralph Häussler identified Iran as the origin of this myth. Certainly, he did not do so to support an Iranian origin of ancient Rome.
This object proves nothing; it is dated 4 century A.D., many centuries after the appearance of the she-wolf in mythology in Italy.
On the contrary, that object might show that myths also spread from west to east: “The ‘Romulus and Remus’ theme of this seal implies familiarity with classical mythology. ”
MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 6,196
- Reaction score
- 1,516
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Myths
Italic languages have too much ties with Celtic, Germanic and Slavic (spite possible contacts with other languages in central Europe) to be analysed as a language passed directly across the Mediterranea from Anatolia or Greece.
Myths are often very old and travel through more than a way - and they can be adopted later by other ethnies after contacts (the mythic Scythian origin of the Scots!); so they aren't out of worth but they aren't too solid markers either.
Italic languages have too much ties with Celtic, Germanic and Slavic (spite possible contacts with other languages in central Europe) to be analysed as a language passed directly across the Mediterranea from Anatolia or Greece.
Proto-Italic was a Centum language, like Greek and Anatolian languages,
according to The Arrival of Steppe and Iranian Related Ancestry in the Islands of the Western Mediterranean: "In Sicily, Iranian-related ancestry also arrived by the Middle Bronze Age, thus revealing that this ancestry type, which was ubiquitous in the Aegean by this time, also spread further west prior to the classical period of Greek expansion.", in fact in the Middle Bronze Age they were Proto-Indo-Europeans who migrated to the South of Italy, not Greeks or Anatolians.
—BoNe—
Regular Member
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 18
Goat’s head… neck and body of a horse… limbs and tail of a lion…
You have some very strange wolves in Iran.
The seal is from the 4th century BC—most likely, Trajan told you the story of the she-wolf when he visited three centuries earlier.
MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 6,196
- Reaction score
- 1,516
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
Myths
Italic languages have too much ties with Celtic, Germanic and Slavic (spite possible contacts with other languages in central Europe) to be analysed as a language passed directly across the Mediterranea from Anatolia or Greece.
Myths are often very old and travel through more than a way - and they can be adopted later by other ethnies after contacts (the mythic Scythian origin of the Scots!); so they aren't out of worth but they aren't too solid markers either.
Italic languages have too much ties with Celtic, Germanic and Slavic (spite possible contacts with other languages in central Europe) to be analysed as a language passed directly across the Mediterranea from Anatolia or Greece.
For the Centum aspect of Anatolian languages I am not sure but I am not very knowledged about them! ATW the IE question is very fuzzy in mediterranea. It seems Greece knew diverse families of IE languages and that at least some Anatolian dialect has been spoken before what began to be Greek dialects, then different. Italy knew - with high probability - more than an IE language in its south, so on what we know we cannot affirm that DIVERSE IE families didn't coexisted there since BA, come from south as well as from north plus later others come from east Adriatic. A simple trait as centum aspect isn't a sufficient criteria here.
Pax Augusta
Elite member
Celtic and Germanic languages were also Centum languages. Being Centum does not imply what you would like it to be. Indo-Iranic and Balto-Slavic were Satem. In contrast, there is no agreement for the Anatolian languages..
This has nothing to do with the Proto-Italic languages.
Pax Augusta
Elite member
Most likely you meant the 4th century AD. The seal is from the early Sasanian period and the date of production is about the 4th century, according to the British Museum, possibly made in Mesopotamia, so yes, we are clearly in the Roman Imperial period.
The Sasanian Empire succeeded the Parthian Empire, there are some examples of Sasanian seals with references to Greek mythology, especially in the area inhabited by Assyrians. So nothing strange if a myth prevalent in Rome could have come so far, given that we are just a step away from the southeastern borders of the Roman Empire.