Were early Romans and ancient Italians WHITE?

[savvas]

Definition of white: Being genetically closer to all NW Europeans (Brits, Scandinavians and Dutch/North Germans) than to Ashkenazi Jews.
Answer: No, only one sample (1 out of 8, the Prenestinian) is genetically closer to NW Europeans than to Ashkenazi Jews.

ITA_Proto-Villanovan:RMPR1 (Proto-Picene?):



ITA_Villanovan:RMPR1015 (early Etruscan):



ITA_Etruscan:RMPR473 (Etruscan):



ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b (Etruscan):



ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA:RMPR435b (Latin?):



ITA_Boville_Ernica_Latini_IA:RMPR1021 (Latin):



ITA_Ardea_Latini_IA:RMPR851 (Latin):



ITA_Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016 (Latin):

[Karol Klačansky]

Ancient and early Roman's were European and whitex imperial Roman's were east med/Levantine.

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Karol Klačansky]

Ancient and early Roman's were European and white, imperial Roman's were east med/Levantine so just depends what you classify as white. They for sure weren't Scandinavian or Sub-Saharan African

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Blondie]

Romans were white europeans, and northern or northwestern europeans are not perfect population to determine average europeans, light hair doesn't make you more european. I think average europeans are central euros who are between north and south, west and east.

[MinervaItalica]

Reading the title it sounds like one of those dumb Quora question.

And wtf is that definition of "white"? Completely wrong.

[Samnium]

Definition of white: Being genetically closer to all NW Europeans (Brits, Scandinavians and Dutch/North Germans) than to Ashkenazi Jews.

This is a ridiculous definition.

Ashkenazi anyway aren't Middle-Easterners so I don't know where is your point.

[Calpurnius]

Seems unfair to use Ashkenazi, they are in great part European themselves. Comparison should be between Anglos and maybe Lebanese or Syrians.

[Samnium]

Seems unfair to use Ashkenazi, they are in great part European themselves. Comparison should be between Anglos and maybe Lebanese or Syrians.

Yes. And Ancient Romans were closer to anybody from Europe than Lebanese.

[Kamal900]

This is a ridiculous definition.

Ashkenazi anyway aren't Middle-Easterners so I don't know where is your point.

Well, not really. Ashkenazi Jews are 45% genetically Canaanites on average which is on the same level as Palestinian Muslims. Not to mention that they do have Berber admixture as well. In other words, Ashkenazi Jews are genetically over 50% MENA on average.

[ninjaboy]

Ancient and early Roman's were European and whitex imperial Roman's were east med/Levantine.

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

What many fail to understand is that this study doesn't tell the whole story. I'm sure that in imperial Rome there were tons of Gallic and other Northern European people too, their remains were just not found and sampled yet. I wouldn't be surprised when Latin or Etruscan outliers with Nordic/Celtic admixture would pop out too. So we are dealing here with biased samples. Ancient Rome had like modern cities different quarters and areas where migrants from the same origin lived and were buried together. Juvenal, Cicero and Tacitus did not consider these "Imperial Romans" to be proper or real Romans unlike this study that wants people to believe that. We don't even have the burial context for having a better understanding about who these "imperial Romans" were and what they were doing in Rome. When people pretend that scientists have no bias whatsover they are naive. Keep in mind that the academic world leans heavily to progressive liberalism. Besides "whiteness" is not determined by Nordic genes. The original Romans were without a doubt white and European regardless whether they were closely related to Northern Europeans or not. Nordic, Slavic, Mediterranean or Celtic people are the different stocks of the same race.