Who are the current peoples residing in Italy, are they the descendants of roman tribes, or are they mainly descended from a mixture of Germanic tribes like the Ostrogoths and Visigoths.
Native populations with some germanic mixed in more in the north I'd imagine with added greek and saracen and norman elements in the south I guess
But despite the language and culture changing over time, I'd say they're still genetically mostly the same people they were since before Roman unification of the peninsula
The funny thing aout the people who ask if Italians are the same people who lived in Italy during the Roman Empire, is that the Roman Empire was the time period in which Italy received the most people from all over the world.
>>1418522
The core is Roman/Italic with some sprinkling of Germanic, Arabic and maybe Celtic blood depending on where you go.
>>1418562
Who were the goths, were they like another germanic tribe like the Saxons, also what about that fall of rome, didn't a lot of women get "enriched".
>>1419911
Some probably, but that doesn't mean they all got pregnant.
>>1419999
What about Lombards, I thought they settled in northern Italy
>>1418522
>roman tribes
ITALIC tribes. The romans were a subset of a subset. And yeah, that's what makes up most of italians. Add some gaulic blood in the north west and greek blood in Sicily and Calabria and that's it.
Germanic tribes had a lot less influence than you'd imagine, there just weren't that many of them.
>>1420188
>I thought they settled in northern Italy
Their power base was in northern Italy because that's where the capital and the king's demesne was, but they were pretty evenly spread on the peninsula. In fact, after the franks came, longobards families were more commonly found in the centre and the south (until the normans came). The north east in particular was much more frankish than lombard, because the frankish kings of Italy basically went William the conqueror to the saxons on the area.
>>1419911
>also what about that fall of rome, didn't a lot of women get "enriched"
People on this site massively overstate the genetic influence of rape.
It's not like every rape is a pregnancy, and it's not like every pregnancy is successful.
And unless the woman gets taken captive by the rapist, you can be pretty sure that the rapebabby is getting birthed straight into the river even if he manages to be born.
>Roman tribes
Roman is a nationality
Not an ethnicity
>>1420365
So when people talk about lots of east germany taken by the soviets, a lot of the people living there identify as slavic due to the influx of slavs after ww2, but in reality the rapes of german women didn't affect the general population?
>>1420426
...what?
>>1420427
You know how people call Germans slav rape babies, after the events of ww2, so that's mostly just unfounded claims and banter
>>1420433
Duh
German women killed the fuck out of the rape babies
It's a combination of Moors, niggers and Gypsies. Some Slavs in the north.
>>1420344
Were the Gauls the celtic tribes living in northern France, are most native french more celtic or latin?
>>1420188
they didn't stay there, they went to germany eventually
>>1420600
latin
Italy is pretty much the same as it was in the Iron age minus some small differences at the peripheries.
t. Ralph&Coop
Latins were just another one of the various Latino-Faliscan tribes spanning from north-east Italy(Veneti) to Sicily(Sicels).
![1024px-Linguistic_Landscape_of_Central_Italy[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/8lIOx7g.png "1024px-Linguistic_Landscape_of_Central_Italy[1].png")
>>1420600
>Were the Gauls the celtic tribes living in northern France
Some came from Gallia Celtica between 500-350BC. Others, well it's unclear. Some tribes might have been gaulicized indo europeans rather than proper gauls. It's hard to tell because the romans pretty much went out of their way to downright genocide them, due to often revolting like with Hannibal and Vercingetorix and being a general nuisance to the far more civilized Veneti and Etruscan allies.
Most frenchmen nowadays would be celtic I'd imagine. The roman influence was more cultural than genetical, and it was mostly limited to southern France. I'd imagine the contribution would be comparable to the germanic element after the migration.
>>1420927
>Latins were just another one of the various Latino-Faliscan tribes spanning from north-east Italy(Veneti) to Sicily(Sicels).
Latino faliscans were a sub group of the italic family not even the largest one (that would be the Osco-Umbrian group), and they were pretty much just Latins and Faliscans in Latium. Maybe the Veneti but it's unclear, most people just consider them their own group, like the Sicels. Really the Veneti are considered Latino-Faliscan more due to the romans traditionally considering them kin rather than any definitive linguistic proof.
