Modern peoples related to ancient counterparts?

Hi, all:

I have a question regarding ancient vs. modern people. For instance, are modern Italians related in any way to ancient Romans? What about modern Greeks and relation to ancient Greeks? Is it possible for someone to be related to the Emperor Nero, for example?

My own guess is that a more isolated people like the Japanese might be very related over the centuries, but invasions and intermarriage have all but obliterated the genes of ancient Greeks and Romans. As for the Hebrews vs. modern Israelis, the Hebrews were taken to other lands and often intermarried with the peoples who lived with them, so I’d expect no real relation.

Anybody understand what I’m trying to ask? It doesn’t sound right, for some reason.

Anne

It doesn’t sound right because it… isn’t right. Heck, it isnt even wrong.

There have been genetic changes over the years in most cases, simply because of interbreeding and all, but modern peoples can certainly trace their ancestry to sundry ancient peoples. Some ancient peopes were more successful and prolific than others. Some settled wide reagions sparsely, or their cultures weren’t attractive.

Genetic studies generally imply a great deal of continuity between modern populations and those which inhabited the same region thousands of years ago. Invasions may have introduced some foreign genes; but the bulk of the population is pretty much the same. Invasions only very rarely result in wholesale replacement of populations.

If you are of European ancestry, you are certainly related to Nero (or at least to his family) as well as to Charlemagne, Attila the Hun, and William the Conqueror. Once you get to beyond a thousand years or so ago most lineages coalesce.

I saw a TV documentary once, where they tested wether or not the people in a small comunity (in Scotland maybe? It looked decidedly british atleast) were related to a an 8000-year-old mumified corpse found in a nearby cave. Turned out, lots of them were; the local schoolteacher and the corpse shared a common female ancestor if I remember correctly. Not really relevant, but interesting. Incidentaly, has anyone else seen this? Was it real?

how appropriate!
Here is a story that relates to the OP.

I think you’re thinking of the DNA studies of the residents of Cheddar and Cheddar Man.

Septima, that does sound familiar to me.

That looks familiar, yes. Thank you. (Ok, I was 5000 years off. Numbers aren’t my thing.)

It is possible to be related to Nero if you’re from that region. I don’t know if Nero had many children and grandchildren, but if he did, it’d be almost certain somebody whose ancestors are from that region descended from him.

I descend from the Germans and the English and the French, and Charlemaigne had many grandchildren who spread out across the Continent. Therefore, I probably have thousands or millions of ancestry lines leading to him. I was born about 800 years after him, which is about 40 generations, so I have 2^40 or 10^14 separate ancestral lines back to his day. There were perhaps 10^7.5 Europeans in his day, so on average I’d have 3,000,000 lines to each person in his day. He appears to have been more prolific than average, so I probably have more than 3,000,000 lines to him. Note that lines going back hundreds of years are increasingly likely to meet; depending on your idea of incest, we’re all almost completely inbred.

19th century travellers to Greece weren’t that impressed by the modern population who were somewhat short and swarthy, rather than living up to the tall, athletic, classical ideal. This started the idea that modern Greeks were in fact the offspring of various Slav invasions from the north, and bore no relationship to Pericles and co.

Modern scholarship has pretty much reversed this notion. Whilst there was a certain amount of mixing in with the Slavs (quite a few villages are still called by Slavic names), the modern Greeks do descend from the classical Greeks. As Colibri says:

It is probable that the classical ‘ideal’ was probably exactly that. Take a look at this fellow if you want a more ‘average’ looking Greek: Sokrates

Welcome to the board, Mr Duncan Mc Leod. :wink:

Should have spotted this one! Charlemagne had his coronation on Xmas Day 800, which is one of the few easy dates to remember in history. That means Napier must have been born in the 16th century. Good going!

I don’t know about the rest of his/her maths, but the point is still pretty valid.

Heh. Reminds me of a line from Rossanne:

*When I met you, you had the body of a Greek god. Now you have the body of some Greek guy. *

Here is a picture from a recent genetic map of Europe. Very interesting how it lines up with the countries.

This map has also been recently featured on Strange Maps. Some of the comments on the blog make interesting points, for example, both Italian samples appear to have been taken in Central Italy, with no sample from the other parts of the country. Italy is one of those countries that’s likely to show a wide genetic variation from region to region.

In the end…there can be only one.

DAAAAAANNGG! DAAAAAANNGGG! DAAAAANGGG! DAAAAAANG! I am immortal! I have inside me blood of kings!

Any show with a theme song by Queen, is pretty much aces in my book.

Whatever you do, when talking to a Sicilian don, don’t expound upon your theories about the Moors . . .

If you’re interested on whether people can actually trace their lineage back to specific ancient persons, they do try: check out the Wikipedia article on descent from antiquity.

My father traced our surname to his part of the world going back to about 600AD, presumably then I have some genetic link with the inhabitants of that part of this island back then.

I would expect most Italians to look like the people of ancient Italy, most Spaniards to look like those of ancient Spain, and so on, with the caveat that then, as now, they didn’t look as homogeneous as people tend to think. Italy, in particular, shows variation in the North, where one meets people with blue eyes and red or blond hair more frequently. In fact, Frank Sinatra’s mother was from the north, accounting for the Old Blue Eyes. Some of this ‘blue-eye’ blood comes from the Lombard invasions, and the south was similarly affected, presumably, by the Norman invasions around 1000.

Still, would any of the Germanic invaders have altered the gene pool all that much? Did the number of incoming barbarian invaders and settlers more than an appreciable fraction of the established, Latin-speaking population? In Italy as in Spain, the barbarians seem to have forgotten their languages within a century or two and begun speaking proto-Italian, proto-French, or proto-Spanish. Much the same thing would happen a few hundred years later, when one group of Vikings migrated to Russia and founded the first Russian dynasty. This leads me to think that in a contest of languages, the language of the larger population usually wins.