Page 50 of 51 FirstFirst ... 40464748495051 LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 510

Thread: Were the ancient Romans Nordic?

  1. #491
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Last Online
    11-03-2018 @ 10:48 PM
    Ethnicity
    Italian
    Country
    Italy
    Gender
    Posts
    745
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 236/6
    Given: 244/6

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veslan View Post
    Let's start with the obvious fact that Roman Emperors were predominantly light pigmented:
    Spoiler!
    The real question is, where would these 18 emperors plot in this PCA map?


    Consider that, in Italy, you can potentially find all these phenotypes (30 pics):

    Spoiler!

  2. #492
    Senior Member Arch Hades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    12-15-2018 @ 07:18 PM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    'White American'
    Ethnicity
    Greco-Mediterranean
    Ancestry
    Europe of course
    Country
    United States
    Y-DNA
    J2b2*
    mtDNA
    H1
    Taxonomy
    Alpo-EasternMed
    Politics
    I don't do politics
    Hero
    Spartacus
    Religion
    Scientific Naturalist + Philosophical and Spiritual Panentheist.
    Age
    30
    Gender
    Posts
    968
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 486/58
    Given: 108/16

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veslan View Post
    Let's start with the obvious fact that Roman Emperors were predominantly light pigmented:


    If you haven't noticed: Firstly, Yamna as the first urheimat is highly disputed, as there is no proof that e. g. they formed the Corded Ware, Bell-Beaker or later Unetice cultures. They also had 25% autosomal Iranian influence that everyone forgets to mention. Secondly, there is a difference between 3500 B.C. and ~1200 B.C. when the first Italic peoples migrated to the peninsula. They were derived from the Unetice culture, and was closely related to the Hallstatt culture, which I hope you already know was Nordic (that's where the "Hallstatt Nordic" term comes from).
    Let's start with the obvious fact that All of those sources are trash except for Pliny and Seutonius. Please don't tell me the Byzantine Greek Malalus who lived 4 to 6 centuries after they lived knew what they looked like or actually saw them. I think I'll write a book on what the Pilgrims of Plymouth Rock looked like. And Sieglin? A 19th century German Nordicist? Seriously?

    So we only have real descriptions of the first few emperors. Who are described as light pigmented sure..

    Secondly sure 1200 BC central Europeans were probably starting to genetically and phenotypically resemble modern ones absolutely..... but has the Unetice culture even been found in Italy? Not to mention a 'culture' and pots and pans and tools does not necessarily equate to genes. So when I see genomes of people resembling modern central or East Europeans in Italy then i'll lend these hypothesis a little more credulity. I'm not even asking for Roman Patrician genomes...just any genomes from 1500-500 BC people South of the Alps IN ITALY resembling Central Europeans.

    Bell Beakers are associated with Indo-European and Celtic and Italic speech too and the Bell Beakers of Italy genomes we have are not Northern or Central Europeans...they resemble North Italians and Spanish. Nordicists were saying the same thing with earlier Remedello culture in Italy and those people are near pure Neolithic farmers via Allentoft 2015.

    So yeah all I really see is a bunch of conjecture, far reaching speculation, etc.

    You really think people in Southern Europe are going to believe these far reaching theories without real proof? And instead base it on the Nordicist interpretation of Sieglin or Malalus who lived 500 years after the Roman emperors did? This isnt 'denial' this is healthy skepticism and a demand for a real burden of proof.

    Look how full of shit the Nordicists turned out to be on Mycenaean Greece. Now I don't expect Roman Patricians to be anywhere near that damn Mediterranean but I have a hard time seeing them as Central European without real proof. The first demand is to find genetically Central European people in Bronze or Iron age Italy. Not North Italian or Spaniard like but CENTRAL EUROPEAN LIKE [Polish-German-Czech]. There hasnt been a single ancient bronze or Iron age Italian genome sequenced to date that has shown that.

    Last edited by Arch Hades; 10-10-2018 at 11:08 PM.

  3. #493
    Veteran Member The Blade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Thracian/Germanic/Scythian
    Ethnicity
    Bulgarian
    Country
    Bulgaria
    Taxonomy
    Faelid/Corded
    Politics
    Fuck agendas
    Hero
    None.
    Age
    27
    Gender
    Posts
    11,559
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 7,041/72
    Given: 5,745/135

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    I believe they were mostly of Mediterranean type but mixed with various other elements at certain points of their history and interaction with other ancient peoples. These elements seem to have been mostly Dinaric and Alpine but to some extent also Nordic.

    Being dumb is only painful for others because you don't know you are.

  4. #494
    Member GabrielZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Online
    11-13-2018 @ 04:42 PM
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic
    Ethnicity
    Luso-Brazilian
    Ancestry
    Portuguese, Sephardic Jews, Lombard, Amerindian, German/English(?)
    Country
    Brazil
    Region
    Lombardy
    Taxonomy
    Atlantid + Armenoid + residual CM
    Politics
    Traditionalist
    Hero
    Jesus Christ
    Religion
    Roman Catholic Apostolic
    Relationship Status
    Married
    Age
    17
    Gender
    Posts
    163
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 90/1
    Given: 70/1

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    they were dinaromeds mostly, and had connections with the greeks and trojans.

  5. #495
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Last Online
    12-14-2018 @ 06:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    Human
    Country
    Antarctica
    Gender
    Posts
    45
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 12/1
    Given: 30/0

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    There is no proof yet as to U152 being the main Italic branch. We simply do not know what is their main branch without massive samples taken from all over Rome. Evidence from the Latial culture burian mounds seem to suggest they were related to the Balkans, perhaps Balkan migrants from the Carpathians, where the vague "Italo-Celtic" theory comes in and claims that place as the location of the split between Italic and Celtic languages.

    Needless to mention of the various Celtic/Gallic immigrations that occurred curing the pre-Roman and Roman era, that's not mentioning how much slaves/laborers from Gaul were sent to Rome after the surrender of Vercingetorix. As well as the many later senators of Rome who had Gaulish origins.

    This massive genetic influx of Celts, and later Germanic Goths and other European tribes north of the Alps, may have caused a founder effect of R1b-U152 holders. The area of modern-day Latium (homeland of the Latins and partly the Etruscans) has a percentage of 29% of R1b, approx. 19% of J-M172 (J2) and 17% of E-M35 (E1b1b). Also E1b1b is the second most dominant lineage in Central Italy.

    So to conclude, we can't know if R1b-U152 is really the main lineage of the Italics. Some argue R1b-Z2103 is most likely their lineage along J2a-L70 and E-V13.

    Error: More proof needed!
    Last edited by Brutus; 12-02-2018 at 11:23 AM.

  6. #496
    Veteran Member Veslan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Last Online
    12-11-2018 @ 07:51 PM
    Location
    Poland
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Slavic, Indo-European
    Ethnicity
    Central Polish
    Ancestry
    Corded-Beaker mix.
    Country
    Poland
    Region
    Masovia
    Y-DNA
    R1a-M458
    mtDNA
    U4
    Taxonomy
    Noric
    Politics
    Communists, Germans and Jews have no place behind the eastern bank of Łaba river
    Gender
    Posts
    1,798
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 821/60
    Given: 360/156

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Let's start with the obvious fact that All of those sources are trash except for Pliny and Seutonius.
    This is just your little butthurt opinion my swarthy friend.
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Please don't tell me the Byzantine Greek Malalus who lived 4 to 6 centuries after they lived knew what they looked like or actually saw them.
    Ah yes, "Malalas was an evil Nordicist who made it up", I know this one
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    And Sieglin? A 19th century German Nordicist? Seriously?
    He based it on Roman sources and titles, don't act stupid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    So we only have real descriptions of the first few emperors. Who are described as light pigmented sure..
    Yes they were.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Secondly sure 1200 BC central Europeans were probably starting to genetically and phenotypically resemble modern ones absolutely..... but has the Unetice culture even been found in Italy? Not to mention a 'culture' and pots and pans and tools does not necessarily equate to genes. So when I see genomes of people resembling modern central or East Europeans in Italy then i'll lend these hypothesis a little more credulity. I'm not even asking for Roman Patrician genomes...just any genomes from 1500-500 BC people South of the Alps IN ITALY resembling Central Europeans. the Unetice culture even been found in Italy? Not to mention a 'culture' and pots and pans and tools does not necessarily equate to genes. So when I see genomes of people resembling modern central or East Europeans in Italy then i'll lend hypothesis a little more credulity. I'm not even asking for Roman Patrician genomes...just any genomes from 1500-500 BC people South of the Alps IN ITALY resembling Central Europeans.
    You are just coping. Unetice culture is Proto-Italo-Celtic, Italo-Celtic peoples who migrated southwards certainly lived in Italy. It's not just "pots and pans", the most of haplogroup R1b mutations are also a proof, AND THE LATIN LANGUAGE WHICH IS INDO-EUROPEAN, SO NOT NATIVE TO ITALY.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Bell Beakers are associated with Indo-European and Celtic and Italic speech too and the Bell Beakers of Italy genomes we have are not Northern or Central Europeans...they resemble North Italians and Spanish. Nordicists were saying the same thing with earlier Remedello culture in Italy and those people are near pure Neolithic farmers via Allentoft 2015.
    Italian Bell-Beakers predate the Italo-Celtic migration. They are irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    You really think people in Southern Europe are going to believe these far reaching theories
    They should, because Italo-Celtic migration from the North is a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Look how full of shit the Nordicists turned out to be on Mycenaean Greece. Now I don't expect Roman Patricians to be anywhere near that damn Mediterranean but I have a hard time seeing them as Central European without real proof. The first demand is to find genetically Central European people in Bronze or Iron age Italy. Not North Italian or Spaniard like but CENTRAL EUROPEAN LIKE [Polish-German-Czech]. There hasnt been a single ancient bronze or Iron age Italian genome sequenced to date that has shown that.
    Even a bigger dose of coping. Let's start with aDNA =/= phenotype, there are a lot of "Italians" who are racially Nordic.

  7. #497
    Veteran Member Pausanias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:18 AM
    Location
    Southern Europe
    Ethnicity
    Hellenic, Iberian
    Ancestry
    Iberia, Hellas
    Country
    Quebec
    Y-DNA
    E-V13
    Gender
    Posts
    1,847
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,783/168
    Given: 1,102/295

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Yes they were nordics.

    Then an UFO fleet took people from northen Africa and puted them in Italy, while another UFO fleet took the nordic superior race's Romans and puted them in Scandinavia.

  8. #498
    Veteran Member Bosniensis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:29 AM
    Location
    Western Bosnia
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Daco-Romans, Romanians, Serbs
    Ethnicity
    Bosnian Vlach
    Ancestry
    Herzegovina, Montenegro, Romania
    Country
    Bosnia
    Region
    Wallachia
    Y-DNA
    I2 (Proto-European)
    mtDNA
    H28
    Taxonomy
    Dinarid + Pontid
    Gender
    Posts
    10,690
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 4,265/855
    Given: 2,999/434

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Nordics are not Romans nor Celts.

    Romans are Anatolians, Greeks and Balkan people (thracians & illyrians).

    Italy was our colony up to 5th century A.D. when nordics obliterated everything.

    Out of jelousy they want to pose as Romans & Celts... sick people.

    Be proud German.


    Dio Cassius would say, "let us not forget that Trajan was a true-born Thracian.
    The fights between Trajan and Decebalus were fratricidal wars, and the Thracians were Dacians."


  9. #499
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Last Online
    12-14-2018 @ 06:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    Human
    Country
    Antarctica
    Gender
    Posts
    45
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 12/1
    Given: 30/0

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Deli Iskender View Post
    Nordics are not Romans nor Celts.

    Romans are Anatolians, Greeks and Balkan people (thracians & illyrians).

    Italy was our colony up to 5th century A.D. when nordics obliterated everything.

    Out of jelousy they want to pose as Romans & Celts... sick people.

    Be proud German.
    What you said is somewhat right. The Romans did inhabit in Anatolia and the Balkans. But we do not know where did the Italics (ancestors of Latins and other Italic tribes) come from exactly. The most likely scenario is a group of Steppe invaders crossing to Central Europe and migrating to the south of alps circa 1200 BCE and lastly settling in Italy. They would mix with E1b1b-G2a-T-J2 locals and form an extended family of Italic tribes.

    We can't confirm what the Romans were. They might have been R-U152, but others suggest they were Anatolian farmers who adopted the IE-culture and languages later at the Balkans.

    Another scenario is that the Italics (who were something under R1b), migrated to the Balkans. And from the Balkans, they would mix and intermarry for hundreds-or-thousands of years with the local folk, producing a nation of R1b-J2-E1b1b-G-T men and migrating later to the Italian peninsula through the Adriatic sea or crossing a narrow strait next to the Alps.

  10. #500
    Veteran Member IncelSlayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:37 AM
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    United States
    Region
    California
    Y-DNA
    JM92>CTS2906>S8230>Z38463
    mtDNA
    J1c
    Gender
    Posts
    1,749
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1,311/322
    Given: 2,950/524

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    What you said is somewhat right. The Romans did inhabit in Anatolia and the Balkans. But we do not know where did the Italics (ancestors of Latins and other Italic tribes) come from exactly. The most likely scenario is a group of Steppe invaders crossing to Central Europe and migrating to the south of alps circa 1200 BCE and lastly settling in Italy. They would mix with E1b1b-G2a-T-J2 locals and form an extended family of Italic tribes.

    We can't confirm what the Romans were. They might have been R-U152, but others suggest they were Anatolian farmers who adopted the IE-culture and languages later at the Balkans.

    Another scenario is that the Italics (who were something under R1b), migrated to the Balkans. And from the Balkans, they would mix and intermarry for hundreds-or-thousands of years with the local folk, producing a nation of R1b-J2-E1b1b-G-T men and migrating later to the Italian peninsula through the Adriatic sea or crossing a narrow strait next to the Alps.
    Romans, according to the legend, were a mix of trojans who conquered the local latins,etruscans,sabines, there is no point in finding a single ydna in them.

Page 50 of 51 FirstFirst ... 40464748495051 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Race of the ancient Romans?
    By Curtis24 in forum Anthropology
    Replies: 673
    Last Post: 07-23-2018, 05:48 AM
  2. Replies: 82
    Last Post: 01-25-2015, 03:00 PM
  3. Classify Ancient Romans
    By Gregorios in forum Taxonomy
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-26-2013, 06:33 PM
  4. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-31-2010, 02:41 AM
  5. Race of the ancient Romans?
    By Curtis24 in forum Race and Society
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-23-2010, 11:20 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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