2000 words
(“Quick” compared to my other articles).


Contents

  1. Introduction: Mr Shart’s anti-White propaganda
  2. Nordicism, Africanism, Semitism
  3. The ethnogenesis of modern Europeans
  4. Indo-European invasion
  5. The origin of the Bell Beakers
  6. The appearance of Southern EEF populations
  7. Genetics of Iron Age Italy
  8. Complexion of ancient Romans
  9. Nordicist revisionism
  10. The genetics of Imperial Rome and the non-impact of non-European DNA
  11. Summary
  12. Appendix: Condensed Timeline

1. Introduction: Mr Shart’s anti-White propaganda

I’ve seen a lot of big leftist accounts railing against the Italians on Twitter recently, attempting to distort and erase their history.

This upsurge in shilling is likely a result of new propaganda dreamed up by one “Daniel Voshart.” Mr Shart, a rabid leftist who has posted virulent anti-White rants on Twitter, has already admitted that his work is “totally speculative” and an “artistic interpretation” (i.e., fictional propaganda) — but that won’t stop Leftoids from taking it as gospel. He even went as far as to claim that others have been “distorting primary and secondary sources to push a pernicious White supremacist agenda.” Does that mean that Mr Shart is pushing a pernicious Southeast Asian Supremacist agenda, given that most of his reconstructions look like Australoids from the Indian Subcontinent?

A compilation of evidence on Mr Shart:

Fundamentally, the Left does not care about the truth. Their only interest in history is warping and revising it to justify modern perversions and their current political stances. Their attempt to paint Rome as a multi-racial, bourgeois, LGBT-friendly, open-bordered wonderland, that welcomed and respected minorities, exemplifies this to a tee. Ancient Rome — a brutal, Italian-supremacist, imperialist, colonialist state, fueled by slavery, and founded on war and genocide — couldn’t be further from their fantasy. Maybe they’re trying to stop nationalists from taking inspiration? Rome did last for almost two millennia, after all (510 BC – 1453 AD). Obviously, they were doing something right.

Anyway, onto the article.

2. Nordicism, Africanism, Semitism

The poor Italians are stuck in the middle of a never-ending tug of war between various factions attempting to take credit for (or discredit) their historical achievements. It’s either Africans claiming that the Emperors wuz Kangz, Leftists claiming that they were ‘BIPOCS,’ Nordicists claiming that they were all blond-haired, blue-eyed Aryans, or Varg types claiming that the Italians as a whole are non-White, Semitic Middle Easterners.

None of these things are true. Rome as kangz is especially untrue. There were no black emperors, period. As for the Nordicism vs Semitism argument, the truth lies somewhere in between, but is obviously shifted towards Nordicism, since Italians are not Semitic at all. But, again, I have to emphasize: none of these things are true.

3. The ethnogenesis of modern Europeans

I’ll try to keep this brief because I’ve already written an extensive article that tells you the whole story in detail (read it here).

All modern Europeans are descended from three populations, and our phenotypes are dependent on the proportions of ancestry that we’ve inherited from these populations. Firstly, the Mesolithic Western European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), secondly, the Neolithic Early European Farmers (EEF) who moved into Europe and absorbed the WHG population, and finally, the warlike Bronze Age Proto-Indo-Europeans (PIE), who conquered the mixed WHG+EEF population.

The PIE were mostly of Mesolithic Eastern European Hunter-Gatherer descent (EHG, ~70%), with some admixture from women of the EEF and Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer (CHG) populations — they did a lot of bride kidnapping.

The EEF+WHG mixed population occupied the entirety of Europe to the west of the Black Sea, while the PIE originally inhabited Eastern Europe (as implied by “Eastern Hunter-Gatherer”). We could call these two populations “Neolithic Western Europeans” and “Neolithic Eastern Europeans.”

Genetically speaking, most regions of Europe have changed little over the past 2000–4000 years.

  • Proto-Indo-European facial reconstructions:

The principal component analysis (PCA) below displays the genetic relationship between these three ancestral populations (EEF are listed as ‘Early Neolithic’ on this image, and PIE as ‘Corded Ware’ and ‘Yamnaya’).

Compare to the below PCA featuring present-day West Eurasian (non-East-Asian) populations. In Europe, more North = more PIE/WHG ancestry, more South = more EEF ancestry. These graphs basically plot like geographic maps.

Note that if we take Ashkenazi Jews out of the above PCA (they’re a mixed-race population of mostly Semitic and some Southern European ancestry), there is a clear and definitive distinction between the MENA and European genetic clusters.

4. Indo-European invasion

The original Italic tribes — who settled Italy in waves between 1800–1000 BC and from whom Italy acquired its namesake — were Central Europeans, descended from the Bell Beaker people (2800–1800 BC). It was these invaders who brought Indo-European language, culture, and religion into the Italian peninsula.

  • Above: Jupiter, head of the Italic pantheon. His name comes from Proto-Indo-European ‘Dyḗus ph₂tḗr,’ meaning ‘Sky Father.’

The genetics of Northwestern and Central Europe haven’t changed a great deal since the Beaker period. So, for an idea of what these original Italics looked like, take a look at present-day central Europeans: Swiss, Austrians, Germans, Czechs, etc. It isn’t a direct 1:1 comparison, since phenotypes do change over time (especially in our modern world, filled with estrogenic poisons) but it will give you a general idea of pigmentation, facial structure, hair color, and so on. The early Italics were not exactly ‘Nordic’ as the term is used today (ultra-blond, ultra-pale), but were obviously more Northern than present-day Italians, given that they belonged to the same ancestral population that present-day Northwestern Europeans are directly descended from.

5. The origin of the Bell Beakers

The Bell Beakers were a mix of north and central European EEF peoples, such as the Globular Amphora Culture and Funnelbeakers, and the Late Proto-Indo-European Corded Ware and Yamnaya peoples.

With regards to complexion, both the Corded ware and central European EEF populations had a significant proportion of blonds and redheads. However, these populations weren’t entirely blond, just as people of Northern Europe aren’t entirely blond today, even the Nords. My guess is that around 30% of both populations were blond, but that’s an educated shot in the dark – don’t quote me on it.

6. The appearance of Southern EEF populations

Blondism (and lighter complexions in general) were more prevalent among EEF populations in Northern and Central Europe than those of Southern Europe. Why this occurred is still a mystery. For an idea of what Southern European EEF peoples looked like, take a look at present-day Sardinians, who are ~95% genetically identical to the EEF of Neolithic Italy.

  • See also: The Nuragic civilization (1800 BC – 240 BC) of ancient Sardinia. They built medieval-style architecture 3,000 years ago:

Self-depictions from the Minoan civilization of Crete offers more insight into the complexion of Southern European EEF populations. As you can see, they had predominantly dark features, though the red-haired woman indicates that some may have had lighter hair.

  • Note: For some reason, the Minoans depicted women as pale as possible, and men as tanned as possible. (I don’t know why and I haven’t looked into it yet).

It was from these native European EEF peoples that Southern Europeans inherited their Meditteranean phenotype, not from Middle Easterners nor North Africans, as anthropologically illiterate Leftists, Vargites, and Nordicists often claim. Even before the EEF arrived in Europe, they had lived in Anatolia — which was European until the Turks invaded it in the Second Millennium AD — since the Ice Age. They were not Middle Easterners or North Africans.

7. Genetics of Iron Age Italy

In 2019, a genetic study on six Latins (the Italic tribe that founded Rome), dated 900–200 BC, discovered that they had ~30-40% ‘Steppe ancestry’ (Early Proto-Indo-European), which was ~10-20% less than their Bell Beaker ancestors. So, even by the Roman Republic era, the Italic tribes were genetically different from the populations of North and Central Europe, after having intermixed with the EEF of Italy.

8. Complexion of ancient Romans

Self-depictions in ancient Roman artwork show a range of European phenotypes, which includes some people with lighter complexions — no different to present-day Italy.

We find similar phenotypes represented in the artwork of the Etruscans, who were, more or less, genetically identical to the Italics; although, they spoke an EEF language and were culturally non-Indo-European.

9. Nordicist revisionism

The image and quotes below are often shared by Nordicists to prove that the ancient Romans were radically different from present-day Italians, presumably because they want to take credit for the Roman Empire.

While the skin pigmentation is reasonably accurate, it’s evident that the artist responsible for creating these reconstructions has completely overstated the blondness of Roman emperors by choosing the lightest possible color within the ranges described. Nero, for example, is a redhead, yet the artist has depicted him with light strawberry blond hair. Augustus is described as having ‘sub-flavum’ hair, literally meaning “under blond” (“yellowish,” or “somewhat yellow”), which could be anything from light brown to dirty blond — yet the artist has depicted him with vibrant sunshine blond hair.

  • Below is the most accurate reconstruction of Augustus produced to date.

It is absolutely true that many Emperors had light eyes and lighter hair, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they were all blond, and it certainly doesn’t mean that they were bleach-blond, as this artist’s reconstructions imply. Indo-European society was caste-based, so higher caste people (i.e., Emperors) may have had more Indo-European (or North/Central European) DNA, which would explain an increased prevalence of blondism among Rome’s ruling elite.

These Nordicist reconstructions aren’t quite as bad as Mr Shart’s scandalous anti-White propaganda, but they are still misrepresentative and dishonest.

10. The genetics of Imperial Rome and the non-impact of non-European DNA

This study on the city of Rome demonstrates how the DNA of its population changed over time. As shown in the PCA gif below, the genetics of Rome were radically shifted during the multi-racial Imperial period, with many sampled individuals laying outside of the European genetic cluster. They likely belonged to MENA populations, such as the Egyptians and Syrians. However, these non-European samples are probably over-represented, due to European Italians cremating their dead.

Bear in mind that Rome was the wealthy capital of a multi-racial empire that spanned the entirety of the Middle East and the North African coast. Of course, it would attract grifters, merchants, and economic opportunists from around the empire. This does not mean that the true Romans, the Italians, were not European.

Some intermixing likely occurred between native Italians and non-European immigrant populations, but the lasting impact of this foreign genetic influx is insignificant. The overall genetic contribution of non-Europeans to modern Italians is minuscule; that of Sub-Saharan Africans is less than 1% (in most places 0%), and North Africans less than 2% (in many places 0%) [source]. The only outlier is Sicily, the southern tip of Italy that was conquered and occupied by North African Saracens, whose DNA contribution maxes out at 6% [source]. The largest non-Italian genetic legacy found in Italy is that of the Greeks in Sicily, who made a significant genetic contribution of 37%.

11. Summary

  • The ancient Italic tribes (Bronze Age Indo-Europeans) were initially genetically and phenotypically very similar to present-day Central Europeans, such as the Germanic peoples.
  • Genetic evidence indicates that this changed pretty quickly, as they mixed with the non-Indo-European native Neolithic population of Italy (Early European Farmers) while invading the peninsula.
  • The Early European Farmers of Italy were genetically and phenotypically very similar to present-day Sardinians. They had darker pigmentation than the Early European Farmers of North and Central Europe; which is where Southern Europeans get their Mediterranean phenotype — not from Middle Easterners and North Africans!
  • The ancient Romans and modern Italians are a mix of these two populations, in an roughly 30:70 ratio of PIE to EEF on a North-South gradient, with increased EEF ancestry in the South.
  • The majority of Italian DNA has been native to Italy for ~6,000 years and present in Europe for ~9,000 years
  • Non-European races contributed an insignificant amount to the DNA of modern Italians.
  • The ancient Romans were not Nords, nor North Africans, nor Middle Easterners, and certainly not Kangz, but White Southern Europeans who were genetically almost identical to modern Italians.

The answer to the question “What race were the ancient Romans?” is: “The same race as the modern Romans.”


12. Appendix: Condensed Timeline

Condensed genetic timeline from the aforementioned study on Rome.

  1. WHG inhabit the entirety of Europe
  2. EEF arrive from Anatolia and absorb WHG population
  3. Resurgence of WHG ancestry beginning in Middle Neolithic
  4. Indo-European Italics arrive in Italy
  5. Present-day Italian population formed
  6. Imperial Rome results in a multi-racial society
  7. Rome collapses and multi-racialism slowly fades away
  8. Italy returns to original EEF+WHG+PIE population (present-day Italian genetics) with little to no genetic impact from the multi-racial population of Imperial Rome