Is it reasonable for Americans to say that the United States and the ancient Romans have a certain k

There is a certain amount of truth that most of the Americans are the descendants of the British colonists, and England, the main part of the United Kingdom, was once part of the ancient Roman Empire, although it was occupied by the ancient Roman Empire, but there must have been a part of the aborigines of England and the people of the ancient Roman Empire who fused, so there is no problem to say that the Americans and the ancient Romans have a certain blood relationship. Hope this helps.

The first Romans were black-haired and brown-eyed, but as Rome expanded, half of the Romans were blonde in the 5th century, when Germanic, Greek, and Thracian people ...... around the MediterraneanThey can all be considered Romans.

The Romans were not of a single race, but of a multi-ethnic state. Americans were originally immigrants from Europe, and it makes sense that they had some Roman ancestry.

The United States was once a British colony, and now speaks English, which is naturally related to the British.

Inaccurate.

The descendants of the Roman Empire, the purest bloodline are the Sicilian and the mountainous people of southern Italy. However, most of them were descendants of Roman slaves. As for the people around the city of Rome, there have been several different nationalities.

The true descendants of the Roman aristocracy fled to the Eastern Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, after the defeat of the Western Roman Empire in Moscow and Kiev. The history of the Eastern Roman Empire was long, until the Muslims captured Constantinople in 1453.

After the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire, the nobles of the empire fled north to the Rus' region. They are all literate Orthodox Christians. Kyiv and Moscow became their new settlements. The Orthodox Church also became a patriarchate in 1589.

Because the Romans moved north, brought culture with them, established a new center of Orthodox Christianity, and the Slavs suddenly became cultured and connotative Russians.

Inaccurately, the Italians were formed by the ancient Roman and Latin peoples, and by the Etruscans, Latins, Lombards, Goths (including Ostrogoths, Visigoths) and other ethnic groups for a long time.

Only a small number of Italians have Roman ancestry, descendants of the Roman Empire, and the purest blood is Sicilian and the mountainous people of southern Italy. However, most of them were descendants of Roman slaves.

Since the 70s of the 19th century, a large number of people have migrated abroad, some of which are distributed in the United States, Argentina, France, Canada, Germany, Brazil, Switzerland, and Australia. It belongs to the Europa race, mostly Alpine type in the north and Mediterranean type in the south.

Inaccurate, about the ancient Romans: according to current research, the Italian peninsula was inhabited by humans in the Paleolithic period, and by the Neolithic period, the Ligurians came to Italy from Africa through Spain, France. During the Bronze Age around 2000 BC, a number of Indo-European tribes crossed the Alps from the Danube and the Carpathians into Italy, and one of the Latins entered the Latium Plain and moved to the site of the later Roman city around 800 BC, where they settled in the Palatium and other hills.

At the same time or later, the Sabines inhabited the neighboring hills. Later, the Etruscans also came here. Between the 8th and 6th centuries BC, the Greeks migrated to southern Italy and established city-states.

In the 7th century B.C., the process of tribal union began with Paratium as the center, and the Roman commune was formed by a single Latin tribe uniting three tribes, including the Sabines and the Etruscans. From the end of the 7th century BC to the end of the 6th century BC, the Roman communes were under the rule of the Etruscans. At this time, the transition from a clan-tribal commune to a city-state was completed.

Modern Italians: It can be said that it has little to do with the ancient Romans, after the fall of the ancient Roman Empire (Western Roman Empire), the entire empire was forced to migrate to the east to build the capital Istanbul, and form the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire). Later, the Byzantine Empire was also destroyed, and its peoples had been assimilated by most of the peoples of West Asia.

The current Italians are a combination of those who did not migrate with the empire when the Western Roman Empire fell, and other European peoples (Gauls, Dadars, Goths, etc.) who attacked and migrated to the empire at that time and later. In other words, a heterozygous nation cannot only recognize the most powerful ancestors, as soon as ancient Rome is finished, Westerners will enter the dark, barbaric, and ignorant Middle Ages, and civilization will have long been broken.

It cannot be said that there is no blood relationship at all, but the ethnic groups of the modern Western nation-states are different from the ethnic minorities we understand, and they all have a certain degree of blood exclusion, for example, the Han nationality and the Korean nationality are more inclined to be a culturally homologous nation, while the Korean nationality is a blood nation, and the modern definition of nationality is different from the ancient definition of blood relationship.

Almost all of the United States has British aristocratic blood, this is an unspoken rule, and it is almost impossible to be a ** without this bloodline! No matter what the bloodline, everything comes first in the interests of the United States!

Except for Martin Van Buren, who is of Dutch royal blood, all ** in the United States have British royal blood, and so is Obama's maternal line.

Who doesn't have a seven aunts and eight aunts, there are thousands of so-called aristocratic blood, and it is normal to have a few ** and ask for food, in fact, if you look through the family tree, you will find that n years ago, we were all born of a monkey.

I don't think it's a genetic thing.

Einstein was also stupid as a child.

But also became a great scientist.

Ability is not innate, it is the result of hard work.

It should be a family tradition that cultivates individual abilities.

It's okay if you think so.

The Romans were not a race, the first Romans were the Latins, then the Sabines, then the Irutrians, then the Greeks; And then. Then after the beginning of the province, no other ethnic group joined on a large scale for nearly 400 years, but after Caracalla, the Arabs, Numidians, Germans, and Thracians could all be Romans.

In the 5th century B.C., most of the Romans on the streets of Rome were black-haired and brown-eyed, but by the 5th century A.D., more than half of the Romans on the streets of Rome were blonde and blue-eyed; But all of these people consider themselves Romans, and there is no doubt that they are Romans.

No, most of the current Italians are descendants of barbarians and other ethnic mixtures in ancient Roman times, and the hair color of Italians is mostly yellow-brown and blue eyes, which is a typical barbarian characteristic in ancient Roman times, and ancient Romans have black hair and eyes.

Ancient Romans, with black hair and black eyes, and very three-dimensional facial features, are relatively short.

The mercenaries of the ancient Romans, the Germanic barbarians, rebelled, and the Germanic barbarians invaded.

It is similar to the invasion of the Hu people in the Jin Dynasty of China, and as a result, you know, the Hu people went south to cause the mass extinction of the Chinese, and after the Hu people went south, China's vitality was greatly injured and suffered heavy casualties.

The fate of the ancient Romans was even worse, they were directly extinct, and now there are no descendants of the ancient Romans in the world.

And the strange guy upstairs, according to you, after China was occupied by the barbarians, Korea, Vietnam, Japan, etc., all once thought that China was stolen by the barbarians and lost the qualification of China, and they all took the name of China to think that they were the successors of China.

According to your logic, they are all Chinese.

At least Bulgaria still belongs to Byzantium, Romania was called Dacia in ancient times, and the Roman Empire built the Great Wall here to isolate the Roman world from the barbarians in the north However, later the barbarian migration, Germanic people, Slavs and nomadic Huns, Parmatians, and Alans all came here, so the ethnic composition of Dacia is very complex, and the barbarian blood is far more than the Roman blood.

No, Romania is actually the Latin Empire, a state founded by the Crusaders.

In terms of geographical concept, of course not.

Politically, no.

Conceptually, it could be.

Culturally ...... conceptuallyBroadly speaking, including the Frankish Renaissance, since the establishment of the Roman Empire, the whole of Europe, except for the Northern European Virginos and the Eastern Slavs, should all be from the same source, right? After all, Roman culture itself encompassed the culture of most of the city-states that it absorbed, and even the mythological system itself was partially integrated with the Greek ......

Romania had nothing to do with Western Rome and Eastern Rome, China defeated the Huns, the Southern Huns joined the Chinese family, the Northern Huns migrated westward to Russia and to the vicinity of present-day Hungary, and Eastern Europe was squeezed and forced to shoot the territory of Western Europe, the leader of the Huns was called Attila by the Europeans, and Western Rome collapsed, and the Romans either stayed in their birthplace and were enslaved, or fled to Eastern Rome, alias Byzantium.

If you were a Roman at that time, where would you go? 》

Before the collapse of the Eastern Romans, the Russian royal family married the Eastern Roman princesses, and the Romans could later obtain first-class citizens in Russia.

After the collapse of Eastern Rome, the Romans either became second-class citizens of the Ottomans in their birthplace or went to Russia as first-class citizens.

If you were a Roman at that time, where would you go? 》