The newborn swedish princess got me thinking.
What happened in the old days if an heir had physical defects or perhaps had Downs syndrom? Did they just not survive childhood or were they killed?
Quote from: Threviel on February 23, 2012, 03:37:48 AM
The newborn swedish princess got me thinking.
What happened in the old days if an heir had physical defects or perhaps had Downs syndrom? Did they just not survive childhood or were they killed?
Thew were sent to Austria to be raised by the Hapsburg.
There were many kings who were kinda soft in the head. In such cases, usually the power rested with the regent or the royal council.
George W. Bush
Quote from: Martinus on February 23, 2012, 04:39:00 AM
There were many kings who were kinda soft in the head. In such cases, usually the power rested with the regent or the royal council.
We all know that there were lots of more or less crazy and unstable royals. But what happened to the heirs with a few more or less chromosomes?
Quote from: Threviel on February 23, 2012, 05:01:12 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 23, 2012, 04:39:00 AM
There were many kings who were kinda soft in the head. In such cases, usually the power rested with the regent or the royal council.
We all know that there were lots of more or less crazy and unstable royals. But what happened to the heirs with a few more or less chromosomes?
Then you had Carlos II of Spain, posterboy of why inbreeding for generations is a huge no-no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain)
Quote from: The Larch on February 23, 2012, 05:35:40 AM
Then you had Carlos II of Spain, posterboy of why inbreeding for generations is a huge no-no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain)
I remember hearing about the Spaniard who was
sooo retarded....
that the other Spaniards noticed!
Quote from: grumbler on February 23, 2012, 07:42:59 AM
Quote from: The Larch on February 23, 2012, 05:35:40 AM
Then you had Carlos II of Spain, posterboy of why inbreeding for generations is a huge no-no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain)
I remember hearing about the Spaniard who was sooo retarded....
that the other Spaniards noticed!
That family tree is one big circle.... :lol:
Quote from: 11B4V on February 23, 2012, 10:17:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 23, 2012, 07:42:59 AM
Quote from: The Larch on February 23, 2012, 05:35:40 AM
Then you had Carlos II of Spain, posterboy of why inbreeding for generations is a huge no-no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain)
I remember hearing about the Spaniard who was sooo retarded....
that the other Spaniards noticed!
That family tree is one big circle.... :lol:
Royals: the only people who go to family reunions to pick up chicks. ;)
Quote from: 11B4V on February 23, 2012, 10:17:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 23, 2012, 07:42:59 AM
Quote from: The Larch on February 23, 2012, 05:35:40 AM
Then you had Carlos II of Spain, posterboy of why inbreeding for generations is a huge no-no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_II_of_Spain)
I remember hearing about the Spaniard who was sooo retarded....
that the other Spaniards noticed!
That family tree is one big circle.... :lol:
The Spanish Habsburgs were huge on the inbreeding. Carlos II had no external genetic inputs into his gene pool from around 100 years before he was born or so.
Carlos II's story is more tragic than anything. The guy couldn't even chew his food.
To answer OP's questions, I know of no monarch in the Western world at least, in the past, that was plain autistic or suffering from a child syndrome. Times were so harsh back then that these were usually dying in infancy or casted aside, like Philip II of Spain's Don Carlos, who was a psychopathic manchild.
The only truely moronic monarch from childhood that reigned that comes to my mind, aside from Carlos Dos, is Feodor I and Ivan V of Russia. These tended to pullulate in the Ottoman Empire, though, like Mad Ibrahim, Mad Mustafa, and even Murad IV, but these were because of extreme living in the Cage at Topkapi palace all their lives, fearing to be strangled any time by the Sultan.
Physical defects, these were usually ignored as long as he/she was sane in mind and spirit. I mean, have you seen Charles Quint's jaw in monoliths?
Quote from: Drakken on February 23, 2012, 10:51:59 AM
Physical defects, these were usually ignored as long as he/she was sane in mind and spirit. I mean, have you seen Charles Quint's jaw in monoliths?
I think the Byzantines were the exception, right, as the Basileois, being the Successor to the Apostles, could have no physical deformities.
Incidentally, does being a dwarf or a hunchback remove you from Byzantine inheritance in CK2? :P
Quote from: Martinus on February 23, 2012, 11:17:57 AM
Incidentally, does being a dwarf or a hunchback remove you from Byzantine inheritance in CK2? :P
Not that I know. Now that could be a good idea for a minimod, including excluding brothers from the succession by blinding them or mutilating them. :hmm:
Quote from: 11B4V on February 23, 2012, 10:17:27 AM
That family tree is one big circle.... :lol:
Yeah, every time I go to that page, I :blink: at his family tree even though I've seen it before and know what the deal was, etc.
Truth be told, I think there's more to Carlos II lack of mental and physical health than simple result of inbreeding, although it surely didn't help.
Compare with the Lagid dynasty in Egypt, whose inbreeding was much worse, literally among siblings and other close parents. And yet most of the known defects in the Ptolemies were only physical and most of them could rule on their own - if they survived the cutthroat nature of their family relationships.
QuoteA number of the Ptolemaic dynasty are described as being extremely obese, whilst sculptures and coins reveal prominent eyes and swollen necks. Familial Graves' disease could explain the swollen necks and eye prominence (exophthalmos), although this is unlikely to occur in the presence of morbid obesity.
In view of the familial nature of these findings, members of this dynasty likely suffered from a multi-organ fibrotic condition such as Erdheim–Chester disease or a familial multifocal fibrosclerosis where thyroiditis, obesity and ocular proptosis may have all occurred concurrently.[6]
Hey, they produced Cleopatra.
Quote from: Solmyr on February 23, 2012, 11:42:53 AM
Hey, they produced Cleopatra.
Cleopatra wasn't exactly a retard at birth. She ruthlessly killed her own siblings and played two Roman top leaders and politicians like they were fools.
In fact, she's the proof that inbreeding doesn't always produce morons.
That's what I meant. Even if the Lagids were all fatasses, clearly they did something right with Cleo. ;)
Quote from: Solmyr on February 23, 2012, 12:30:55 PM
That's what I meant. Even if the Lagids were all fatasses, clearly they did something right with Cleo. ;)
All accounts of the time, and her face on the coins, point that she wasn't specially physically attractive either. She had the Lagid protruding eyes and thick neck as well. ;)
Wait, the future Queen of Sweden has Downs?
Quote from: Fireblade on February 23, 2012, 01:12:08 PM
Wait, the future Queen of Sweden has Downs?
Who knows, she was born today.
Quote from: Drakken on February 23, 2012, 11:31:11 AM
Truth be told, I think there's more to Carlos II lack of mental and physical health than simple result of inbreeding, although it surely didn't help.
Compare with the Lagid dynasty in Egypt, whose inbreeding was much worse, literally among siblings and other close parents. And yet most of the known defects in the Ptolemies were only physical and most of them could rule on their own - if they survived the cutthroat nature of their family relationships.
QuoteA number of the Ptolemaic dynasty are described as being extremely obese, whilst sculptures and coins reveal prominent eyes and swollen necks. Familial Graves' disease could explain the swollen necks and eye prominence (exophthalmos), although this is unlikely to occur in the presence of morbid obesity.
In view of the familial nature of these findings, members of this dynasty likely suffered from a multi-organ fibrotic condition such as Erdheim–Chester disease or a familial multifocal fibrosclerosis where thyroiditis, obesity and ocular proptosis may have all occurred concurrently.[6]
You get what you put in. Ultimately, every life form on Earth is inbred. Iirc, the problem with close relatives producing offspring is that it increases the chances of deleterious recessive traits coming to the fore and over long periods developing new deleterious recessive traits. That is, in theory, if you had ideal humans with no problematic recessive traits, you could have them reproduce indefinitely, and other than novel mutations, their descendants would be okay.
Quote from: Drakken on February 23, 2012, 11:47:33 AM
Quote from: Solmyr on February 23, 2012, 11:42:53 AM
Hey, they produced Cleopatra.
Cleopatra wasn't exactly a retard at birth. She ruthlessly killed her own siblings and played two Roman top leaders and politicians like they were fools.
In fact, she's the proof that inbreeding doesn't always produce morons.
And sometimes it produces hot bitches.
Oh is it not safe for work, huh? If your boss don't understand art, you don't need that job. Though maybe you should be more productive.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Cleopatra_and_Caesar_by_Jean-Leon-Gerome.jpg
Quote from: Drakken on February 23, 2012, 12:34:04 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on February 23, 2012, 12:30:55 PM
That's what I meant. Even if the Lagids were all fatasses, clearly they did something right with Cleo. ;)
All accounts of the time, and her face on the coins, point that she wasn't specially physically attractive either. She had the Lagid protruding eyes and thick neck as well. ;)
Modern reconstruction:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7004%2F6691177953_1c9f24f4bd_b.jpg&hash=bf36f8cf4192171642465f0d89bc09549ea6c5c1)
People always look like shit on ancient coins.
She was also supposed to have a beautiful voice iirc.
That cunt was the worst thing to happen to Mark Antony. THINK WITH THE BIG BRAIN.
Lol, I googled "Cleopatra VII modern reconstruction" ('cause I want to see where the photo is from, and determine if there's a good reason why that necklace is so badly photoshopped on), and one of the first hits is this about.com article:
Quote from: retardstalk.comThat Cleopatra was an African queen is certain -- Egypt is, after all, in Africa -- but was Cleopatra black?
Yeah. OK.
My dad knew some African Studies professor back in the 70s who claimed that Hannibal was black. See, back then, you didn't actually have to know shit to be a professor. Oh, how times have... changed?
I want to read the companion articles, "Was Ivan Grozny Japanese?" "Was Hernan Cortez an Australian aborigine?", "Was Ronald Reagan an alien from Nebula Space Hunter M?", and "Was Franklin Roosevelt an angel sent by God?"
Quote from: Ideologue on February 23, 2012, 04:23:16 PM
Lol, I googled "Cleopatra VII modern reconstruction" ('cause I want to see where the photo is from, and determine if there's a good reason why that necklace is so badly photoshopped on), and one of the first hits is this about.com article:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=What%20Did%20The%20Julio%20Claudians%20Really%20Look%20Like%20%20Reconstructions-%20Joe%20Geranio
Marcus Agrippa looks like Moose from Archie.
So I guess the explanation is "Fuck it, this has to be done by 5." :P
What's with nero's neck beard
Quote from: HVC on February 23, 2012, 05:01:31 PM
What's with nero's neck beard
History's first hipster.
Quote from: Sahib on February 23, 2012, 04:07:07 PM
Quote from: Drakken on February 23, 2012, 12:34:04 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on February 23, 2012, 12:30:55 PM
That's what I meant. Even if the Lagids were all fatasses, clearly they did something right with Cleo. ;)
All accounts of the time, and her face on the coins, point that she wasn't specially physically attractive either. She had the Lagid protruding eyes and thick neck as well. ;)
Modern reconstruction:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7004%2F6691177953_1c9f24f4bd_b.jpg&hash=bf36f8cf4192171642465f0d89bc09549ea6c5c1)
Cleopatra was ... a Jewish American Princess? :D
This bust of Cleopatra, currently in the Altes Museum in Berlin, was made during her lifetime and presented to her, so it's a safe bet to assume it's a quasi-pic (it also used to be painted, like all ancient statues/busts):
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eidola.eu%2Fdata%2F062b06ba8e755765c6b049809b7430fd54fe5b21%2F1485bac448b525097578ab16af45080ab78bdd90_full.jpg&hash=0ed2691928afbc7bc6168b4b0e5ea4fca5db0e51)
Quote from: HVC on February 23, 2012, 05:01:31 PM
What's with nero's neck beard
Nero used a beard to hide as best as possible the fact that his body had a nasty skin disease that made it spotted. It also made him smell bad, regardless of how many baths he took. But his head was undamaged, and he tried to focus people's attentions to it.
Inbreeding is worse than I thought. She had no pupils. :(
Quote from: Ideologue on February 23, 2012, 04:20:04 PM
People always look like shit on ancient coins.
She was also supposed to have a beautiful voice iirc.
Ask grumbler about it.
Estelle is a stupid name for royalty.
Quote from: Fireblade on February 24, 2012, 09:14:42 AM
Estelle is a stupid name for royalty.
And Mary for that sake, the english form of Maria, not a swedish name at all.
So the consensus of the thread seems to be that no one know of any case of Downs or Cerebral Palsy or the like among old royalty.
For that matter, why does Sweden even bother having a monarchy these days? It's too polluted with common blood. :yuk:
I mean, damn, it's already bad enough some French peasant is on the throne, now you've got the offspring of a personal trainer, of all things, set to inherit the crown.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtFX5a.png&hash=113137c6d54dea35966dc3ed8a34183e30bc8c41)
Quote from: Fireblade on February 24, 2012, 10:59:41 AM
For that matter, why does Sweden even bother having a monarchy these days? It's too polluted with common blood. :yuk:
I mean, damn, it's already bad enough some French peasant is on the throne, now you've got the offspring of a personal trainer, of all things, set to inherit the crown.
Because having retired politician as presidents in Sweden would be a worse lot, and the King of Sweden has been so thoroughly castrated of his residual powers in 1974 that there's no reason to remove him. Besides, that French peasant was
Maréchal d'Empire and one of the few generals Napoleon, by then, was scared of.
That said, that guy doesn't look like a gym trainer at all, more like a computer geek to me.
Quote from: Fireblade on February 24, 2012, 11:05:22 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtFX5a.png&hash=113137c6d54dea35966dc3ed8a34183e30bc8c41)
The fuck! How do you know what that says?
I understood "Swedish Kingdom" and "therefore."
Quote from: Fireblade on February 24, 2012, 10:59:41 AM
For that matter, why does Sweden even bother having a monarchy these days? It's too polluted with common blood. :yuk:
FB, you forgot to sign in as Lettow.
Quote from: Threviel on February 24, 2012, 03:41:38 PM
The fuck! How do you know what that says?
Jag är från Skåne, ditt jävla pucko. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Ideologue on February 24, 2012, 04:39:45 PM
I understood "Swedish Kingdom" and "therefore."
I imagine Fabrikdirektor means something like factory boss. The "Chips" part might refer to microchips.
IKEA meatball maker
Most of it is understandable if you know German.
Quote from: Sahib on February 23, 2012, 04:25:24 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 23, 2012, 04:23:16 PM
Lol, I googled "Cleopatra VII modern reconstruction" ('cause I want to see where the photo is from, and determine if there's a good reason why that necklace is so badly photoshopped on), and one of the first hits is this about.com article:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=What%20Did%20The%20Julio%20Claudians%20Really%20Look%20Like%20%20Reconstructions-%20Joe%20Geranio
Caligula is the only one in this who is remotely hot.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 24, 2012, 05:09:56 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 24, 2012, 04:39:45 PM
I understood "Swedish Kingdom" and "therefore."
I imagine Fabrikdirektor means something like factory boss. The "Chips" part might refer to microchips.
It refers to potato chips, actually. Specifically, the Swedish Estrella brand. Which apparently the princess was named after.
Quote from: Solmyr on February 25, 2012, 06:24:01 AM
It refers to potato chips, actually. Specifically, the Swedish Estrella brand. Which apparently the princess was named after.
The baby was named after the wife of Folke Bernadotte.
So is that Swedish princess with the big tits still single?
Quote from: Fireblade on February 25, 2012, 09:36:25 AM
So is that Swedish princess with the big tits still single?
Nope. Rather than go with the Princess Margaret schtick, she sticks with the millionnaire businessman type.
Quote from: Sahib on February 23, 2012, 04:25:24 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 23, 2012, 04:23:16 PM
Lol, I googled "Cleopatra VII modern reconstruction" ('cause I want to see where the photo is from, and determine if there's a good reason why that necklace is so badly photoshopped on), and one of the first hits is this about.com article:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=What%20Did%20The%20Julio%20Claudians%20Really%20Look%20Like%20%20Reconstructions-%20Joe%20Geranio
That's crap. You cannot tell skin and eye color from coins and sculptures.
I doubt romans had clear eyes, and I doubt Cleapathra was that dark skinned.
Fortunately, there are historical descriptions. What do you mean by "Clear eyes"?
I'm pretty sure Cleopatra is described as "tawny," yeah. I've seen white people that tanned. Chick did live in Egypt.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 25, 2012, 10:45:17 PM
I'm pretty sure Cleopatra is described as "tawny," yeah. I've seen white people that tanned. Chick did live in Egypt.
Cleopatra was Macedonian, and Macedonians were white back then, before the slavic and later ottoman invasions.
Have you seen white people in tropical countries?
They don't become dark because sun exposion.
Only mixing with the locals change your descendance's skin colour, like the spaniards did in mexico.
Quote from: Siege on February 26, 2012, 08:12:11 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 25, 2012, 10:45:17 PM
I'm pretty sure Cleopatra is described as "tawny," yeah. I've seen white people that tanned. Chick did live in Egypt.
Cleopatra was Macedonian, and Macedonians were white back then, before the slavic and later ottoman invasions.
Have you seen white people in tropical countries?
They don't become dark because sun exposion.
Only mixing with the locals change your descendance's skin colour, like the spaniards did in mexico.
You're an idiot. Plus she had Iranian blood besides Macedonian.
Quote from: Siege on February 26, 2012, 08:12:11 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 25, 2012, 10:45:17 PM
I'm pretty sure Cleopatra is described as "tawny," yeah. I've seen white people that tanned. Chick did live in Egypt.
Cleopatra was Macedonian, and Macedonians were white back then, before the slavic and later ottoman invasions.
Have you seen white people in tropical countries?
They don't become dark because sun exposion.
Only mixing with the locals change your descendance's skin colour, like the spaniards did in mexico.
Exhibit A:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.pictures.fp.zimbio.com%2F30th%2BAnniversary%2BCarousel%2BHope%2BBall%2B2%2Becx2b-shTzWl.jpg&hash=f5e6bbc9ab20fbbadcc5b63a911f59ce7cb33de4)
Ugh. It's like a walking malignant tumor.
Quote from: Siege on February 26, 2012, 08:12:11 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 25, 2012, 10:45:17 PM
I'm pretty sure Cleopatra is described as "tawny," yeah. I've seen white people that tanned. Chick did live in Egypt.
Cleopatra was Macedonian, and Macedonians were white back then, before the slavic and later ottoman invasions.
Have you seen white people in tropical countries?
They don't become dark because sun exposion.
Yes, we do.
And Macedonians are a Mediterranean people anyway. If anything, I would expect they were probably a shade darker, all things--like insolation--being equal, than the present-day inhabitants of the region, as the snow-white populations from the Black Sea and Volga steppe hadn't arrived yet.
Invasions really don't change the genetic makeup of the conquer people very much. The people of the UK probably look little different then the people of the Roman Briton. There are exceptions of course, such as the US.
Yeah Raz, because the conquerors don't rape the women of the conquered, nor do they kill and displace them.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 26, 2012, 10:41:29 PM
Invasions really don't change the genetic makeup of the conquer people very much. The people of the UK probably look little different then the people of the Roman Briton. There are exceptions of course, such as the US.
Well, Celts and Germans didn't look all that different in the first place afaik. One group wore golf pants, there's that, but that's probably not genetic.
I was about to call Siege a retard because I'm white and I get just as dark as shopped Cleopatra when I've been out in the sun all summer, but then I remembered that I'm mixed. :blush:
First: Interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup)
Second: I don't buy that there wasn't some mixing somewhere along the line in the Ptolomies. Ten generations of sibling incest? That would result in a genetic horror show even more disturbing than Carlos II, or Santorum's baby with six chromosomes or whatever it has. I'd be willing to bet that one of her female ancestors got something on the side, somewhere along the way.
Quote from: Fireblade on February 27, 2012, 08:10:26 AM
Second: I don't buy that there wasn't some mixing somewhere along the line in the Ptolomies. Ten generations of sibling incest? That would result in a genetic horror show even more disturbing than Carlos II, or Santorum's baby with six chromosomes or whatever it has. I'd be willing to bet that one of her female ancestors got something on the side, somewhere along the way.
The Lagid made it a point that only full descendants of Ptolemy could become Pharoah, and they would probably take ways to have their children in check. While Lagids most probably had bastards with the native Egyptians the only who would "count" were those born of siblings. However, we can't discount that one Cleopatra, Berenice, or Arsinoe might have have an Egyptian lover, but there's no way to verify. That said, we know that Cleopatra wasn't black, she had Macedonian and Mediterranean traits.
Like I argued earlier, inbreeding doesn't necessarily lead to mental disease. Although inbreeding most probably didn't help his case, Carlos II's mental defects could have have been caused by syphillis due to his Philippe IV's constant whoring in the Madrid brothels. Plus, the physical consequences of the Lagid inbreeding (protuding eyes, large neck, etc.) has been noted even by contemporaries, but obviously it hadn't reached the point of pedigree collapse.
Also, the Lagid were a notoriously cutthroat family to live in, and brothers and sisters would routinely conspire against one another for the Egyptian succession. In that situation, weaker and dumber siblings would probably being weeded out. Carlos II couldn't, because he was the
only scion of the Spanish Habsburg and was pampered to remain alive as long as possible to avert a succession crisis.
Philippe, really?
Quote from: Siege on February 26, 2012, 11:11:45 PM
Yeah Raz, because the conquerors don't rape the women of the conquered, nor do they kill and displace them.
Less then you think. People also tended to get conquered by people who live next door and are genetically similar anyway. Or are you talking from experience? Were you out raping women in Lebanon and Iraq? You really shouldn't do that.
Quote from: Drakken on February 27, 2012, 10:28:08 AM
Quote from: Fireblade on February 27, 2012, 08:10:26 AM
Second: I don't buy that there wasn't some mixing somewhere along the line in the Ptolomies. Ten generations of sibling incest? That would result in a genetic horror show even more disturbing than Carlos II, or Santorum's baby with six chromosomes or whatever it has. I'd be willing to bet that one of her female ancestors got something on the side, somewhere along the way.
The Lagid made it a point that only full descendants of Ptolemy could become Pharoah, and they would probably take ways to have their children in check. While Lagids most probably had bastards with the native Egyptians the only who would "count" were those born of siblings. However, we can't discount that one Cleopatra, Berenice, or Arsinoe might have have an Egyptian lover, but there's no way to verify. That said, we know that Cleopatra wasn't black, she had Macedonian and Mediterranean traits.
Like I argued earlier, inbreeding doesn't necessarily lead to mental disease. Although inbreeding most probably didn't help his case, Carlos II's mental defects could have have been caused by syphillis due to his Philippe IV's constant whoring in the Madrid brothels. Plus, the physical consequences of the Lagid inbreeding (protuding eyes, large neck, etc.) has been noted even by contemporaries, but obviously it hadn't reached the point of pedigree collapse.
Also, the Lagid were a notoriously cutthroat family to live in, and brothers and sisters would routinely conspire against one another for the Egyptian succession. In that situation, weaker and dumber siblings would probably being weeded out. Carlos II couldn't, because he was the only scion of the Spanish Habsburg and was pampered to remain alive as long as possible to avert a succession crisis.
Oh, I wasn't arguing that Cleopatra was black or anything. I just have serious doubts that ten generations of incest wouldn't have resulted in complete pedigree collapse long before Cleopatra came on the scene.
So how "dark" are Greeks, anyway?
Quote from: Razgovory on February 26, 2012, 10:41:29 PM
There are exceptions of course, such as the US.
All of the Americas/Australia for one(?).
Quote from: Razgovory on February 27, 2012, 12:58:29 PM
Quote from: Siege on February 26, 2012, 11:11:45 PM
Yeah Raz, because the conquerors don't rape the women of the conquered, nor do they kill and displace them.
Less then you think. People also tended to get conquered by people who live next door and are genetically similar anyway. Or are you talking from experience? Were you out raping women in Lebanon and Iraq? You really shouldn't do that.
:nod:
In the Saxon's case, I think the combined numbers of ALL the Germanic tribes that invaded England (Saxons, Jutes, and Angles) was something like 30,000, compared to 500,000 or so Britons. Same with the Norman invasion, except I think even fewer Normans came over. There just haven't been enough immigrants to England (until recent times, I suppose) to make a huge impact on the genetic makeup of the English people as a whole.
Quote from: garbon on February 27, 2012, 01:00:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 26, 2012, 10:41:29 PM
There are exceptions of course, such as the US.
All of the Americas/Australia for one(?).
Yes the colonization of the New World was a bit different as it was accompanied a mass die off of the natives followed by a series of wars in which stone age societies with tiny populations fought guys with guns. Compare this to the Norman invasion of England where an army of less then 10,000 conquered an area with a population of probably around two million.
Some support for Raz's position.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0719_050719_britishgene_2.html
QuoteMany historians now believe subsequent invaders from mainland Europe had little genetic impact on the British.
The notion that large-scale migrations caused drastic change in early Britain has been widely discredited, according to Simon James, an archaeologist at Leicester University, England.
"The gene pool of the island has changed, but more slowly and far less completely than implied by the old invasion model," James writes in an article for the website BBC History.
For the English, their defining period was the arrival of Germanic tribes known collectively as the Anglo-Saxons. Some researchers suggest this invasion consisted of as few as 10,000 to 25,000 people—not enough to displace existing inhabitants.
Analysis of human remains unearthed at an ancient cemetery near Abingdon, England, indicates that Saxon immigrants and native Britons lived side by side.
"Probably what we're dealing with is a majority of British people who were dominated politically by a new elite," Miles said. "They were swamped culturally but not genetically."