Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Living descendants of Mark Antony

antigonejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#91

Post by krmboya »

jl6 wrote: post #14

If the average age of giving birth is 25, Mark Antony would be about 80 generations ago. With each generation back doubling the number of ancestors (2 parents, 4 grandparents, …), this person has a theoretical 2^80 ancestors - somewhat more than the number of people that have ever lived. So clearly that logic is flawed, and the family tree must in fact be a family web - but potentially a very, very wide one. I wouldn…

Nice breakdown. Maybe it works the other way too.. that a large percentage of the population alive today can count rulership/prominence in their ancestry.

I speculate that when times were hard for humans in the course of history, those who were better off were more likely to successfully raise kids to adulthood, who in turn had better chances of establishing their own families

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#92

Post by irrational »

jl6 wrote: post #14

If the average age of giving birth is 25, Mark Antony would be about 80 generations ago. With each generation back doubling the number of ancestors (2 parents, 4 grandparents, …), this person has a theoretical 2^80 ancestors - somewhat more than the number of people that have ever lived. So clearly that logic is flawed, and the family tree must in fact be a family web - but potentially a very, very wide one. I wouldn…

You should read up on family trees. This is an extremely well known thing and you can find a lot of articles that answer this question.

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#93

Post by irrational »

krmboya wrote: post #91
jl6 wrote: post #14

If the average age of giving birth is 25, Mark Antony would be about 80 generations ago. With each generation back doubling the number of ancestors (2 parents, 4 grandparents, …), this person has a theoretical 2^80 ancestors - somewhat more than the number of people that have ever lived. So clearly that logic is flawed, and the family tree must in fact be a family web - but potentially a very, very wide one. I wouldn…

Nice breakdown. Maybe it works the other way too.. that a large percentage of the population alive today can count rulership/prominence in their ancestry. I speculate that when times were hard for humans in the course of history, those who were better off were more likely to successfully raise kids to adulthood, who in turn had better chances of establishing their own families

Yes, every single person alive that has any ancestry from Western Europe is a direct descendant of William the conqueror and Charlemagne and others. But they are also all direct descendants of the servant who cleaned out their potty every morning (presuming that servant had descendants). Claiming royal descent is not a big deal since we are all descended from everyone that lived back then and has descendants to this day.

https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/01/your-family-past-present-and-...

https://nautil.us/youre-descended-from-royalty-and-so-is-eve...

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#94

Post by irrational »

photochemsyn wrote: post #55
jl6 wrote: post #14

If the average age of giving birth is 25, Mark Antony would be about 80 generations ago. With each generation back doubling the number of ancestors (2 parents, 4 grandparents, …), this person has a theoretical 2^80 ancestors - somewhat more than the number of people that have ever lived. So clearly that logic is flawed, and the family tree must in fact be a family web - but potentially a very, very wide one. I wouldn…

There also wasn't much mixing of isolated populations of humans, leading to a relatively large amount of inbreeding. Sort of like a graph with clusters of heavily linked nodes and only a few links between the clusters. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029453-500-inbreedi... > "“In the distant past, human populations were probably only in the thousands or at best tens of thousands, and lived locally, exchangin…

All it took was a single person who was a wanderer from each isolated community. I’ve read a number of articles that estimate, based on genetics, that every person living has a common ancestor who lived 2000-4000 years ago. It could have been a peasant in rural Tibet or a South Pacific Islander or someone(s) else entirely.

https://sci-hub.st/10.1038/nature02842

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#95

Post by hinkley »

eesmith wrote: post #17
hinkley wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still want someone to explain how Firenze got rendered as Florence.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/Florence > The city name is from Roman Colonia Florentia, "flowering colony," either literal or figurative, and became Old Italian Fiorenze, modern Italian Firenze. https://italyinview.com/italian-places/italian-cities/floren... elaborates: > The Romans were the founders of Florence. Realizing the importance of a thoroughfare towards the Po plain, Ceasar in 59 B.C. ordered the establis…

> Old Italian Fiorenze, modern Italian Firenze.

That I can follow.

> Florentia, [...] became Old Italian Fiorenze

Still lost. I know accents are thick and an ex used to wax poetic about the fluidity of names, especially at the intersection of thick regional accents and illiteracy. But this one is still a bit of a stretch.

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#96

Post by bin_bash »

irrational wrote: post #92
jl6 wrote: post #14

If the average age of giving birth is 25, Mark Antony would be about 80 generations ago. With each generation back doubling the number of ancestors (2 parents, 4 grandparents, …), this person has a theoretical 2^80 ancestors - somewhat more than the number of people that have ever lived. So clearly that logic is flawed, and the family tree must in fact be a family web - but potentially a very, very wide one. I wouldn…

You should read up on family trees. This is an extremely well known thing and you can find a lot of articles that answer this question.

This comment is begging for a link—or at least a description of this "extremely well known thing"

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#97

Post by kgwgk »

kgwgk wrote: post #49
pmontra wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latin name was Mediolanum. Apparently it comes from Celtic Medhelan, in the middle of the plain, and it should be a common name also on the northern side of the Alps (any French person can confirm?). I googled a bit to find when the name switched from Latin to Italian with no success. You could check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Milan but I suggest to give a look at the Italian version of the page wit…

I was thinking about the name in Lombard - Milan - which is the same name used in some other European languages. But I don’t know when Italian became the main language in the region.

Just like the name in the local language is also the one used across Europe for Turin - by the way.

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#98

Post by dangerbird2 »

tokai wrote: post #28

Unrelated to the genealogy; but at what point does it become ridiculous to claim yourself a prince? With over a century of no power for the family and no obvious way back to it as the kingdom is well dissolved, it feels like dress-up to style yourself a prince.

Maybe ridiculous, but not totally unprecedented. Aga Khan IV is generally considered to be royalty despite the fact that his family hasn't held secular power (outside of the occasional governorship) since [1095](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizar_ibn_al-Mustansir). Of course, they held religious leadership as Imams of the Nizari branch of Islam.

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#99

Post by saalweachter »

ch4s3 wrote: post #90
samatman wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of which is true, but Mark Anthony gets us well into the historical period. We have a pretty good sense from that of who did and who didn't get around. It's surely the case that the vast majority of Japanese on Hokkaido are not descendants of Mark Anthony. On Kyshu, maybe, the Portuguese contributed some genes there. We can really only be detailed about this with a Y chromosome for a man, or mitochondrial lineage…

Yeah, of course the math makes sense but one can clearly find pockets of people it likely doesn't apply to. And for sure, trying to point to specific ancestors isn't really possible you don't even need to go back 12 generations in some cases if memory serves. My main point is that its becoming clear that many supposedly very isolated populations have in fact had gene mixture with outside groups in the not distant pas…

If I'm recalling the numbers correctly, there's somewhere between a one in a million and one in a billion chance of not inheriting any DNA from one of your grandparents -- unlikely, but not so unlikely that there aren't dozens or hundreds of people walking around for whom that is true.

Re: Living descendants of Mark Antony

#100

Post by naniwaduni »

jdlyga wrote: post #82

Is Marc Anthony a descendent of Mark Antony?

It's one of those classical names that are traditionally "translated" to the language of discourse. If you can accept that Mark Antony indicates the same name as MARCVSANTONIVS, it's not exactly a great stretch to identify that with Marc Anthony as well.
Post reply on HN