I am Anatolian Neolithic Farmer descendant from Eastern Romans and Cumans i am half Mongoloid half Caucasoid my father look typical pure Roman Anatolian Neolithic Farmer with little Türkic ancestry, real Romans have very brown skin, black hair and brown eyes
My earliest ancestors were living in Rome, Italy (Roma, Italia) in Lazio Province, Italy ( Southern Italy ) for very, long time when my late close paternal uncle who was the physician with M.D. and Ph.D. had told me as I was in early teen years of my life. Still my family relatives in the D’Auria Family Tree reside in Rome, Italy , Naples, Italy, in anywhere in all of rest of Italy including Sicily and Sardinia. Recent DNA test results have shown that my stronger ancestry is: Italy including Sicily and Sardinia in very very long lineage.
Well, in some cases it did absolutely create diversity. One side of my family is the product of such diversity, being what were termed Indos (probably short for Indonesian-European or Indo-European), a class of people who were descended from European (mainly, but not exclusively Dutch) men and native people (mainly women). In the early days of process of Dutch colonization, few European women accompanied the men engaged in commercial, political, and military activities in what became the Dutch East Indies, and eventually Indonesia. Quite a few of them ended up cohabiting with local women, as did one of my Dutch ancestors. After his death in a shipwreck, the woman he had a son with petitioned the Dutch authorities to legitimize their child. My grandfather was descended from this child. My grandmothers ancestry I know less about, but her maiden name was Cook, so possibly an English or Scottish ancestor somewhere? Anyway, both my grandparents were from a class of mixed people, who had been mixed for generations. That meets the literal definition of diversity, and it existed in the Dutch East Indies explicitly and only because of European colonization. Just because colonization and Imperialism are ‘bad,’ does not make it incompatible or inconsistent with diversity. The word diversity does not always imply something exclusively good and positive, nor its it always caused by some kind of ideal policies and practices. There is no direct moral value connected to the word.
So in the end, the foreign tribes will attack them and their population will migrate south and their race will go back to the mix of diversity it had before?! Not a bad ending, to be honest! 😂
This video's argument that diversity is strength is mere ideology and flies in the face of the evidence. Rome was strongest in its earlier years when its internal diversity was moderate. Growing diversity coincided with economic crisis, civil war and plague. When it finally collapsed under these afflictions it's diversity fell because immigrants found it easier to re-emigrate than did the indigenous population, who were more tied to their land and thereafter eked out a miserable existence among the ruins that remained. The historical evidence simply does not support the conclusion.
Greek is an ethnicity with documented origins since 3000 BC, Macedonia is the name of 1 of the Greek kingdoms, there is no Macedonian nation or ethnicity.
@@themisvoul1045 A Kingdom that is independent can be considered a nation. So when Macedonia was a kingdom, there certainly was a Macedonian nation. A modern nation named for a region that was in Ancient times a nation/independent kingdom, can indeed also name its citizens as Macedonians. The modern state of Macedonia was called so even in modern times, before it was independent, and Macedonian could thus be used a demonym for the people who inhabited the constituent republic of Yugoslavia bearing that name, as well as the independent nation it has become since that federation fell apart. Slightly similar to how it is perfectly okay for another nation bit further to the north-east to cal itself Romania, with out people in Italy and Rome getting all but-hurt about it. Or how a country even closer to Macedonia can call itself Bulgaria, after the ancient Bulgars, a Turkic speaking people,, despite having virtually no genetic or linguistic connection to that ancient people. Ironically, most Bulgarians I have known (I had a few Bulgarian housemates for a number of years) all consider the neighboring (obviously Turkic!) nation of Turkey, as their arch-enemies. So yes, there is a modern Macedonian nation. Now cit is called North Macedonia, due to the delicate feelings of Greece, which makes no logical sense at all. If Greece can’t accept that Macedonia is at all Macedonian then how can it logically accept that it is North Macedonian? As for ethnicity, a shared ethnicity, or an ethnicity genetically derived from some ancient people who used to live in the region is in now way whatsoever needed for nationhood. Also, the ethnic nature of ancient Macedonia is still debated. The language they (or at least some of them) originally spoke almost certainly was related to the other various greed dialects, but how closely? Nobody knows. And even if it was known, whether they would have been two closely related languages or two dialects of the same language is more of a political issue than a linguistic one, similarly to the question of if Dutch and German are the same language, or Swedish and Norwegian, or Mandarin and Cantonese. We do know that the elites in Macedonia eventually adopted a form of ancient Greek by the 5th Century BC. Furthermore, what happened to the ancient Macedonian population? Were they all wiped out? Or, did at least some portion of them live on, and assimilate into arriving ethnic groups (much like the Celts in what became England, where a very large proportion of the DNA is derived not from the Anglo-Saxons, but from the celts who preceded them)? I would contend that with many centuries of assimilation and mixing, inevitably, almost all people in that region have at least some DNA derived from those who lived there when Alexander the Great roamed the world. So in other words, though they mainly have a slavic identity and ancestry, I put the chances that they are not partially descended from Ancient Macedonians at roughly zero percent.
@@fordhouse8b you use the word nation for a country. Countries can be created out of nowhere an ethnic group cannot. There is no Macedonian ethnicity defined in history.
@@themisvoul1045 And there need not be. The ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians is ambiguous, and the ethnicities of Modern (Northern) Macedonians is varied and mixed, with most of them being closest linguistically and ethnically to Bulgarians. But just as (English speaking) Canadians and most (colonial) Americans were very close ethnically and linguistically, history, circumstance, and preference, has molded them into two countries and two nations. The Indian nation is composed of many ethnicities and languages, with some languages not even being in the same language family. Still both a Hindi speakers and people who speak Bengali or Gujarati can all be ardent Indian nationalists, and belong to the same Indian nation, despite speaking different languages and having different ethnicities. There is NO contradiction in (North) Macedonians not being culturally related to Ancient Macedonians, or not even all speaking the same language, and them belonging to the same nation. A nation called (North) Macedonia. perhaps some day in a distant future, they will fuse into one linguistically united ethnicity, or perhaps, like the German, French, Italian, and Romansch speakers in Switzerland, they will happily cohabit in a multiethnic and multilingual nation.
Appears to be AI-generated. There is something wrong with the nature of the transcript.
I am Anatolian Neolithic Farmer descendant from Eastern Romans and Cumans i am half Mongoloid half Caucasoid my father look typical pure Roman Anatolian Neolithic Farmer with little Türkic ancestry, real Romans have very brown skin, black hair and brown eyes
My earliest ancestors were living in Rome, Italy (Roma, Italia) in Lazio Province, Italy ( Southern Italy ) for very, long time when my late close paternal uncle who was the physician with M.D. and Ph.D. had told me as I was in early teen years of my life. Still my family relatives in the D’Auria Family Tree reside in Rome, Italy , Naples, Italy, in anywhere in all of rest of Italy including Sicily and Sardinia. Recent DNA test results have shown that my stronger ancestry is: Italy including Sicily and Sardinia in very very long lineage.
If we are going to call imperialism "diversity", we might as well consider European colonization diverse.
Well, in some cases it did absolutely create diversity. One side of my family is the product of such diversity, being what were termed Indos (probably short for Indonesian-European or Indo-European), a class of people who were descended from European (mainly, but not exclusively Dutch) men and native people (mainly women). In the early days of process of Dutch colonization, few European women accompanied the men engaged in commercial, political, and military activities in what became the Dutch East Indies, and eventually Indonesia. Quite a few of them ended up cohabiting with local women, as did one of my Dutch ancestors. After his death in a shipwreck, the woman he had a son with petitioned the Dutch authorities to legitimize their child. My grandfather was descended from this child. My grandmothers ancestry I know less about, but her maiden name was Cook, so possibly an English or Scottish ancestor somewhere? Anyway, both my grandparents were from a class of mixed people, who had been mixed for generations. That meets the literal definition of diversity, and it existed in the Dutch East Indies explicitly and only because of European colonization. Just because colonization and Imperialism are ‘bad,’ does not make it incompatible or inconsistent with diversity. The word diversity does not always imply something exclusively good and positive, nor its it always caused by some kind of ideal policies and practices. There is no direct moral value connected to the word.
So that is why it it fall , A good warning for the U.S.A. & Europe today.
So in the end, the foreign tribes will attack them and their population will migrate south and their race will go back to the mix of diversity it had before?! Not a bad ending, to be honest! 😂
No DEI or affirmative action during Rome's accent. If you didn't work, you got squat. When bread and circus appeared it signaled Romes eventual fall.
Dear AI programmer: please soften the "s" phoics in words. It is like a snake was reading thisssss.
This video's argument that diversity is strength is mere ideology and flies in the face of the evidence. Rome was strongest in its earlier years when its internal diversity was moderate. Growing diversity coincided with economic crisis, civil war and plague. When it finally collapsed under these afflictions it's diversity fell because immigrants found it easier to re-emigrate than did the indigenous population, who were more tied to their land and thereafter eked out a miserable existence among the ruins that remained. The historical evidence simply does not support the conclusion.
What about the Macedonians... No such thing as Greeks in the time ...
Greek is an ethnicity with documented origins since 3000 BC, Macedonia is the name of 1 of the Greek kingdoms, there is no Macedonian nation or ethnicity.
@@themisvoul1045 A Kingdom that is independent can be considered a nation. So when Macedonia was a kingdom, there certainly was a Macedonian nation. A modern nation named for a region that was in Ancient times a nation/independent kingdom, can indeed also name its citizens as Macedonians. The modern state of Macedonia was called so even in modern times, before it was independent, and Macedonian could thus be used a demonym for the people who inhabited the constituent republic of Yugoslavia bearing that name, as well as the independent nation it has become since that federation fell apart. Slightly similar to how it is perfectly okay for another nation bit further to the north-east to cal itself Romania, with out people in Italy and Rome getting all but-hurt about it. Or how a country even closer to Macedonia can call itself Bulgaria, after the ancient Bulgars, a Turkic speaking people,, despite having virtually no genetic or linguistic connection to that ancient people. Ironically, most Bulgarians I have known (I had a few Bulgarian housemates for a number of years) all consider the neighboring (obviously Turkic!) nation of Turkey, as their arch-enemies. So yes, there is a modern Macedonian nation. Now cit is called North Macedonia, due to the delicate feelings of Greece, which makes no logical sense at all. If Greece can’t accept that Macedonia is at all Macedonian then how can it logically accept that it is North Macedonian? As for ethnicity, a shared ethnicity, or an ethnicity genetically derived from some ancient people who used to live in the region is in now way whatsoever needed for nationhood.
Also, the ethnic nature of ancient Macedonia is still debated. The language they (or at least some of them) originally spoke almost certainly was related to the other various greed dialects, but how closely? Nobody knows. And even if it was known, whether they would have been two closely related languages or two dialects of the same language is more of a political issue than a linguistic one, similarly to the question of if Dutch and German are the same language, or Swedish and Norwegian, or Mandarin and Cantonese. We do know that the elites in Macedonia eventually adopted a form of ancient Greek by the 5th Century BC. Furthermore, what happened to the ancient Macedonian population? Were they all wiped out? Or, did at least some portion of them live on, and assimilate into arriving ethnic groups (much like the Celts in what became England, where a very large proportion of the DNA is derived not from the Anglo-Saxons, but from the celts who preceded them)? I would contend that with many centuries of assimilation and mixing, inevitably, almost all people in that region have at least some DNA derived from those who lived there when Alexander the Great roamed the world. So in other words, though they mainly have a slavic identity and ancestry, I put the chances that they are not partially descended from Ancient Macedonians at roughly zero percent.
@@fordhouse8b you use the word nation for a country. Countries can be created out of nowhere an ethnic group cannot. There is no Macedonian ethnicity defined in history.
@@themisvoul1045 And there need not be. The ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians is ambiguous, and the ethnicities of Modern (Northern) Macedonians is varied and mixed, with most of them being closest linguistically and ethnically to Bulgarians. But just as (English speaking) Canadians and most (colonial) Americans were very close ethnically and linguistically, history, circumstance, and preference, has molded them into two countries and two nations. The Indian nation is composed of many ethnicities and languages, with some languages not even being in the same language family. Still both a Hindi speakers and people who speak Bengali or Gujarati can all be ardent Indian nationalists, and belong to the same Indian nation, despite speaking different languages and having different ethnicities. There is NO contradiction in (North) Macedonians not being culturally related to Ancient Macedonians, or not even all speaking the same language, and them belonging to the same nation. A nation called (North) Macedonia. perhaps some day in a distant future, they will fuse into one linguistically united ethnicity, or perhaps, like the German, French, Italian, and Romansch speakers in Switzerland, they will happily cohabit in a multiethnic and multilingual nation.
What Y chromosome?
Wow good melting pot , more heathers genes .