Were early Romans and ancient Italians WHITE?

[Samnium]

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.

They can be modeled as roughly 50% european so it's not fair saying that romans weren't white because closer to them than extreme-north europeans (like scandinavians)

[Samnium]

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.

Ancient Romans from republican era were similar to modern Iberians and N.Italians I think, maybe with a little bit less East-Med, in this study the Iron Age samples are very close to these populations. The Neolithic samples are sardinian-like.

"Celtic" doesn't means nothing by the way genetically. Iron Age celts were probably similar to Iron Age Italics.

[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.

[savvas]

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.

Definition of white?

[TheMaestro]

Si

[ninjaboy]

When you read what traditional Romans thought about being flooded with foreign people, their fear to lose their identity and "Romaness", you would think you are reading modern conservative criticism on mass- immigration. Tacitus and Cicero wrote many things about Jews that today would be considered antisemitic. Juvenal was complaining about the Greek(also Syrian) migrants and didn't even consider many of them to be proper Greeks. Many genetics studies are being used to promote and push diversity and multiculturalism. However what these studies don't tell is that people back then whether Romans, Greeks, Celts, Germanics, Phoenicians or Jews were tribalistic and ethnocentric to the bones. Hence conflicts and ethnic tensions were programmed. For example in Alexandria there was lots of ethnic tension between Greeks and Jews that ended in revolts. The Romans that ruled in Egypt preferred the Greeks over the native Egyptians, because for them the Greeks were more like them, etc.



Tacitus doesn’t just demonize the Jews for rejecting Roman religion; he also targets them as a “race” that is “hateful to the gods,” laying the groundwork for an anti-Semitism that consistently conflates race and faith. Moreover, his screed against the Jewish people resounds with some painfully familiar anti-Semitic stereotypes.


Despite his assertion that Jews are essentially eternal foreigners who want to be left alone, Tacitus feeds on a common Roman fear that foreigners will grow to outnumber “true” Roman citizens by asserting that Jews
“…take thought to increase their numbers; for they regard it as a crime to kill any late-born child, and they believe that the souls of those who are killed in battle or by the executioner are immortal: hence comes their passion for begetting children and their scorn of death.”

https://www.publicmedievalist.com/an...m-older-think/

[Adamastor]

White is a dumb term, who cares. They were still closer to modern Italians and that's all that matters.

[TheOldNorth]

If you consider the EEF to be white then yes

[Karol Klačansky]

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.

Problem is, is that modern Italians show up with a lot p imperial Roman heritage so it wasnt just in the cities it affected all of Italy, how long that took exactly, looks like only a couple of hundred years.

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Smeagol]

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.

Ashkenazi Jews don't score that much Berber though. Definitely not over 5%.