Ancient East Asian Found in Roman Empire

[Nasturtium 500]

Some people of Italian ancestry, like me, might have a surprise in the family tree—a man of east Asian descent, who was living and working 2,000 years ago in the boondocks near the heel of the Italian boot. The discovery is the first good evidence of an Asian living in Italy during Roman times.

Researchers found his body on an imperial Roman estate and took dental samples. Why examine teeth? Well, the water you drink at birth leaves a distinct signature in your teeth. That water signature is in the form of oxygen isotopes, atoms of oxygen with different numbers of neutrons. Isotopes say something about the latitude and elevation of your birthplace—which in the case of our mystery man definitely wasn't southern Italy.

Then the researchers tested his mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down through your maternal lineage. And this fellow had east Asian genes. The finding appears in the Journal of Roman Archaeology.

It's impossible to say if the man trekked to Italy himself or one of his ancestors did. But it's clear that this first known Roman Asian wasn't some aristocratic diplomat. He was just a poor worker, buried with a single pot.

—Christopher Intagliata

link

But clearly, at least based on this article, the man would not have appeared Asian unless they are stating that they determined he was asian from the get-go and decided to test his isotopes and mitochondrial DNA in response to that as additional evidence.. Asians have specific dentition and you wouldn't need a test to figure out that someone was Asian if they were full east Asian. Native Americans and Pacific Islanders share this dentition.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

the real reason why he was there:

he got lost and like most guys, refused to ask for directions.

[Calypso 465]

Roast ducks are my favorite!

I ate a shark too. Sharks eat humans too.

But there are really small sharks, too. Rats that live in wetlands are also part of the exotic Philippine cuisine and snake soup in Hongkong are becoming really popular. I won't even go close to where these are found.

[scandal 951]

But clearly, at least based on this article, the man would not have appeared Asian unless they are stating that they determined he was asian from the get-go and decided to test his isotopes and mitochondrial DNA in response to that as additional evidence.. Asians have specific dentition and you wouldn't need a test to figure out that someone was Asian if they were full east Asian. Native Americans and Pacific Islanders share this dentition.

Maybe this fella was a Native American. Proving the point that in fact it was Native Americans that discovered Italy, and not the Genoese Christopher Columbus who discovered them.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Wait.

Native Americans and Pacific Islanders are Asian.

[scandal 951]

Wait.

Native Americans and Pacific Islanders are Asian.

Reading comprehension is a very useful skill. Try it some time.

Asians have specific dentition and you wouldn't need a test to figure out that someone was Asian if they were full east Asian. Native Americans and Pacific Islanders share this dentition.

[Niels Bohr 72]

When they used the word share. It's as if they're separating the Pacific Islanders, and the Native Americans from the Asians. I don't understand. Is it trying to say that Pacific Islanders and the Native Americans aren't Asians, but share the skull characteristics?

[scandal 951]

When they used the word share. It's as if they're separating the Pacific Islanders, and the Native Americans from the Asians. I don't understand. Is it trying to say that Pacific Islanders and the Native Americans aren't Asians, but share the skull characteristics?

Well, in reality Native Americans and Pacific Islanders are NOT Asians. They do not live in Asia. They were not born on the continent of Asia. Their culture and language are not related to any Asian culture or language. Their ancestors were separated from the Asian mainland thousands of years ago. (Native Americans ~ 10,000-40,000 years ago, Polynesians more recently).

They DO share an ancestry with modern ethnic east Asian peoples. Hence, their genomes are more closely related to that of modern east Asian peoples, and consequently they have physical appearances (and other traits, e.g. Mongolian spot ) that are more similar to those of east Asian peoples, than, say, people native to Africa or Nordic areas of Europe.

From a genetic standpoint, you can claim that Polynesians and Native Americans "are" Asians. It's really more like saying that they are somewhat distant cousins though.

[Nasturtium 500]

NA and PI are of Asian decent, but have their own genetic characteristics you can look for if you want to go looking... depending on which groups. It's not as clear-cut as it would seem. It's obviously not a NA or PI which is why I stated it in such terms, also due to our location if you just looked at shovel shaped incising, and declared it to be an Asian, you'd be possibly if not probably wrong depending on the time-period. Thus, the need to include all 3. It's also not a skull characteristic. It's only incisors. Although this is a crappily labeled slide, it does show a good side-to-side comparison:

If you want to look for a probable European via dentition, you're going to use Carabelli's cusp on the first upper molar. It's in 75% of our population. It's not a guarantee though, and is far less uselful than the shoveling trait, which is in over 99% of the Asian decendants. I have Carabelli's cusp.

When they used the word share. It's as if they're separating the Pacific Islanders, and the Native Americans from the Asians. I don't understand. Is it trying to say that Pacific Islanders and the Native Americans aren't Asians, but share the skull characteristics?

Because we're talking identification of an individual. You most certainly would never ID remains as Asian when they were NA.

[justashooter 430]

Well, in reality Native Americans and Pacific Islanders are NOT Asians. They do not live in Asia. They were not born on the continent of Asia. Their culture and language are not related to any Asian culture or language. Their ancestors were separated from the Asian mainland thousands of years ago. (Native Americans ~ 10,000-40,000 years ago, Polynesians more recently).

really? chinese and korean both have the mono-sylabisc structure that navaho and similar amerind languages use. the sounds may have different meanings, but you get this in different regions of china, too. the structure is the same.