GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-09 > 1158890119
From: "Dora Smith" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Roman genetic footprints
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:55:19 -0500
Whoops! I never thought of it!
That is true. Large numbers of Germanic peoples fought for the Romans, and
I think they were actually particularly likely to be rewarded with land in
Gaul and in Britain.
We now know why there could be alot of German haplogroups in central France.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Bird" <>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:54 PM
Subject: [DNA] Roman genetic footprints
>> >> > Although the Romans ruled from AD 43 until 410, they left a
>> >> > tiny genetic footprint. For the first 200 years occupying
>> >> > forces were forbidden from marrying locally.
> Sorry, but what is the factual basis for this statement? (I think that
> must be quoting Sykes?) There were 5,500 Sarmatian cavalry ALONE, and
> was only ONE out of hundreds of alia and cohors stationed to the British
> Isles over 300 years' time. Only 500 Sarmatians have been accounted for,
> leaving 5,000 cavalry unaccounted. See www.roman-britain.org for detailed
> lists of military units found in Britain during the Roman period. (No
> individual names, sorry!)
> Among Thracian and Dacian units alone, there were at least 20 "cohors" of
> (nominally) 1,000 men each (really more like 800 typically). All would
> been E3b, since all of these units were recruited from the Balkans and the
> Carpathians near and south of the lower Danube. Then there were all the
> Pannonian and Spanish units, and of course there were just plain Roman
> Legionnaires. They lived, died and retired there for three centuries.
> There are military diplomata from the first and second centuries that
> the retirements of dozens of units (for example the Malpas diploma found
> the British Museum, which lists 14 seperate units retiring simultaneously.
> They AND their families and descendants were granted citizenship and land
> upon retirement. Many of the men had "local" wives. Even if their wives
> were from their own lands of origin, they would have remained and raised
> their families in Britain. Their descendants would have lived on in
> too. See the grave marker of Longinus Sdapeze (stating that "his heirs
> this done") now in the Colchester Museum. Clearly, he had descendants.
> There is ample archaelogical evidence to show that the Roman British lived
> alongside the Anglo-Saxons in some parts of Britain (for example, Saffron
> Walden, Essex) until the 7th century, well after the A-S invasion. The
> Roman villas were INTACT at this late date. So they weren't necessarily
> killed or driven out by the invaders. Sometimes, they just blended in.
>> >> Uh, is this G? Professor Sykes is awarding haplogroup G to the
>> >> Romans?
> Probably the Sarmatians, who were haplogroup G (they were from the region
> corresponding to the modern Republic of Georgia).
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/395 - Release Date: 7/21/2006
|Re: [DNA] Roman genetic footprints by "Dora Smith" <>|