Page 3 of 418 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 4179

Thread: Could Western Jews (Ash. and Seph.) descend from Aegeans and Levantine admixture?

  1. #21
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    I think this exercise is rather futile, using the exact same method one could easily argue that the present-day Lebanese owe the vast majority of their ancestry to an Anatolia_BA source for example (this is more likely to be the case in Cyprus however). In the same vein, it's very likely the Philistines will turn out to be very similar to the Mycenaean samples we have, if that's the case one could also make the argument that Western Jews owe most of their ancestry to the Philistines. On closer inspection, such models are undoubtedly bound to fall apart, which is exactly what I expect to see once we get more ancient data from the Mediterranean.

    Also in many of the fits you've obtained for Levantine populations, replacing Iran_Chl and Levant_N with Levant_BA would be more accurate when populations such as the Mycenaeans and the Minoans are thrown in (for Palestinians though, additional African admixture is absolutely necessary to obtain convincing fits).

    Edit: I can understand the appeal of such models, after all these ancient Eastern Mediterranean populations are extremely close to Western Jews (I was able to model my father as ~90% Mycenaean for example) and could potentially provide a straightforward explanation for the ethnogenesis of Western Jewry (which was Greek-speaking after all). We are literally grasping at straws with the limited data however, this is just the beginning and I have no doubt that future ancient data from the Mediterranean will make things a lot clearer.
    First, I absolutely agree we need more Mediterranean ancient data.

    However, I've seen people using modern populations as admixture to try and find the right fit for Western Jews.

    For me, this model actually fits historical logic, not only pure numbers.

    I would be very surprised if there was no Mycenean or Minoan admixture among other Levantines.

    I think that using modern populations, other than Northern Europeans for Ashkenazi (because that admixture got added in the last 750-1000 years, and populations in Western Europe did not change a lot since then), mixed with ancient ones, to try to show how the Mediterranean admixture is actually Italian, also requiring some exotic Caucasus admixture, is inaccurate.

    These admixtures would happen +2000 years ago. This is my case - that Western Jews were already admixed when they left the Levant after 70 AD.

    So there is no point in saying Samaritan + Tuscan + Caucasian population = Jewish, or replacing Samaritan with Druze or Christian Lebanese.

    I've already mentioned my personal problems with using modern Mediterranean populations in such models - Tuscans today might resemble Romans from +2000 years ago, but they might not.

    Mycenaean and Minoans, lacking significant Neolithic Levantine admixture, provide better sample - and they seem to yield good results as well.

    Also, I have thought about using Bronze Age Levantines, instead of the model of Neolithic Levantine and CHL Iranian, but there's a problem with it: Bronze Age in the Levant ended around the 13th century BC. There were already Greek colonies and Phoenician (Bronze Age Levantine) colonies spread throughout Eastern Mediterranean, and there were already Bronze Age Anatolians infiltrating the Levant (Hurrians, Mittani etc.). So to make sure they don't overlap, I adopted this model (which I didn't invent, but took from the article "Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences").

  2. #22
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    And finally all the conclusions by Erikl86 are already biased because he tries to interpret/justifiy the results by assumed historical events.
    Erm, nope. I try to assume what would be the result, based on known historical events. Using Tuscans to model ancient Mediterraneans and claim they must have mixed with Jews to form Western Jews, thus ignoring mass conversions of Hellenistic and Roman Greeks to Judaism, is much worse science. Also, ignoring the fact that southern Italians and Sicilians are heavily Greek and mixed with Levantines, thus perhaps cluster close to Western Jews rather than the fact that they resemble Romans, is also bad science.

    I am really confused. Why are Iran_ChL is considered part of Levant? Why Sidon samples are not used
    I've explained I don't use the Sidon (which is bronze age Levantine) for the following reasons:

    I have thought about using Bronze Age Levantines, instead of the model of Neolithic Levantine and CHL Iranian, but there's a problem with it: Bronze Age in the Levant ended around the 13th century BC. There were already Greek colonies and Phoenician (Bronze Age Levantine) colonies spread throughout Eastern Mediterranean, and there were already Bronze Age Anatolians infiltrating the Levant (Hurrians, Mittani etc.). So to make sure they don't overlap, I adopted this model (which I didn't invent, but took from the article "Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences").
    Also, the reason for using Neolithic Levantine and CHL Iranian is from that Hebar et al article, "Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences":

    We find that a Bronze Age Canaanite-related ancestry was widespread in the region, shared among urban populations inhabiting the coast (Sidon) and inland populations (Jordan) who likely lived in farming societies or were pastoral nomads. This Canaanite-related ancestry derived from mixture between local Neolithic populations and eastern migrants genetically related to Chalcolithic Iranians. We estimate, using linkage-disequilibrium decay patterns, that admixture occurred 6,600–3,550 years ago, coinciding with recorded massive population movements in Mesopotamia during the mid-Holocene.
    And also:

    Lazaridis et al.13 reported that Jordan_BA can be modeled as mixture of Neolithic Levant (Levant_N) and Chalcolithic Iran (Iran_ChL). We computed the statistic f4(Levant_N, Sidon_BA; Ancient Eurasian, Chimpanzee) and found that populations from the Caucasus and ancient Iran shared more alleles with Sidon_BA than with Neolithic Levant (Figure 2A and S10). We then used qpAdm8 (with parameter allsnps: YES) to test whether Sidon_BA can be modeled as mixture of Levant_N and any other ancient population in the dataset and found good support for the model of Sidon_BA being a mixture of Levant_N (48.4% 4.2%) and Iran_ChL (51.6% 4.2%) (Figure 2B; Table S3).
    As for your other question:
    why some populations prefer Minoan over Mycenaean?
    I think that it's because Minoans and Mycenaeans are very close genetically, with Mycenaeans basically being 75% Minoans + Eurasian Steppes people. If to quote Lazaridis himself, the author of the study of the remains of those Mycenaeans and Minoans:

    "The study results show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically highly similar — but not identical — and that modern Greeks descend from these populations.

    The Minoans and Mycenaeans descended mainly from early Neolithic farmers, likely migrating thousands of years prior to the Bronze Age from Anatolia, in what is today modern Turkey.

    “Minoans, Mycenaeans, and modern Greeks also had some ancestry related to the ancient people of the Caucasus, Armenia, and Iran,” said co-lead author Dr. Iosif Lazaridis, a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School."
    So perhaps nMonte is having difficulties distinguishing between the two.
    Another possibility, is that most admixture occurred between Aegean Islanders, rather than immigrants from mainland Greece, because they were closer to the Levant geographically. These people would be basically Minoans which have been "Mycenaean" linguistically and culturally, such as the people of Crete.
    Another possibility, is that some of those populations above, especially Christian Palestinians, are descendants from Judeans, which according to my theory, their first admixture with Aegean people would be Philistines, which according to most popular theories, originated from Crete and thus would be genetically Minoan.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Erikl86 For This Useful Post:

     eolien (06-06-2018)

  4. #23
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,573
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    Please explain why is it just over-fit to you? And why unlikely?
    For largely the same reason a fit such as this should be considered overfitted (if not downright inaccurate)... G25 w/ pen=0:

    [1] "distance%=1.554"

    Lebanese_Druze

    Armenia_EBA,37.2
    BedouinB,26.8
    Mycenaean,21.2
    Sidon_BA,10.8
    Minoan_Lasithi,4


    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    Also, consider all the quotes I gave, and that Jewish proselytism was very active at the time.
    Jewish proselytism was restricted to very specific episodes, such as the expansion of the Hasmonean kingdom (which brought about the forced conversions of the Idumeans, the Itureans and many Samaritans), the conversion of the Himyarites to Judaism or the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism. Such episodes were the exception, not the rule. As a rule of thumb, Judaism was (and still is) much more akin to the religions of the ancient world since the entry was primarily biological.

    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    First, I absolutely agree we need more Mediterranean ancient data.

    However, I've seen people using modern populations as admixture to try and find the right fit for Western Jews.

    For me, this model actually fits historical logic, not only pure numbers.

    I would be very surprised if there was no Mycenean or Minoan admixture among other Levantines.

    I think that using modern populations, other than Northern Europeans for Ashkenazi (because that admixture got added in the last 750-1000 years, and populations in Western Europe did not change a lot since then), mixed with ancient ones, to try to show how the Mediterranean admixture is actually Italian, also requiring some exotic Caucasus admixture, is inaccurate.

    These admixtures would happen +2000 years ago. This is my case - that Western Jews were already admixed when they left the Levant after 70 AD.

    So there is no point in saying Samaritan + Tuscan + Caucasian population = Jewish, or replacing Samaritan with Druze or Christian Lebanese.

    I've already mentioned my personal problems with using modern Mediterranean populations in such models - Tuscans today might resemble Romans from +2000 years ago, but they might not.

    Mycenaean and Minoans, lacking significant Neolithic Levantine admixture, provide better sample - and they seem to yield good results as well.

    Also, I have thought about using Bronze Age Levantines, instead of the model of Neolithic Levantine and CHL Iranian, but there's a problem with it: Bronze Age in the Levant ended around the 13th century BC. There were already Greek colonies and Phoenician (Bronze Age Levantine) colonies spread throughout Eastern Mediterranean, and there were already Bronze Age Anatolians infiltrating the Levant (Hurrians, Mittani etc.). So to make sure they don't overlap, I adopted this model (which I didn't invent, but took from the article "Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences").
    I think you might be overestimating the impact the Greeks had in the Levant, I mean outside the Philistine coast (which was heavily colonised by Aegean settlers) and some cities like Caesarea I very much doubt we're dealing with a massive phenomenon. The fact of the matter is that the most parsimonious model remains a mixture of Levantines and North-Central Italians with additional local admixture. I've also managed to replicate Haber et al.'s model (Levant_N + Iran_Chl) to proxy the Levantine ancestry of Western Jews using the very same mixture.

    Also, there is no reason to assume that the Philistines were genetically Minoan, if anything they'll probably be somewhere between Mycenaeans and Anatolia_EBA.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 06-06-2018 at 12:37 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  5. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     alexfritz (06-06-2018),  Awale (06-06-2018),  Michalis Moriopoulos (06-06-2018),  Noa (06-10-2018),  Power77 (06-06-2018),  Principe (06-06-2018),  Targum (06-07-2018),  Tz85 (06-06-2018)

  6. #24
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    For largely the same reason a fit such as this should be considered overfitted (if not downright inaccurate)... G25 w/ pen=0:

    [1] "distance%=1.554"

    Lebanese_Druze

    Armenia_EBA,37.2
    BedouinB,26.8
    Mycenaean,21.2
    Sidon_BA,10.8
    Minoan_Lasithi,4


    And what about these:
    [1] "distance%=0.3129 / distance=0.003129"

    Ashkenazi_Jew:average

    Samaritan 52.70
    Italian_Bergamo:average 31.55
    Lithuanian:average 8.35
    Avar:average 7.40


    [1] "distance%=0.3732 / distance=0.003732"

    Ashkenazi_Jew:average

    Druze:average 61
    Italian_Bergamo:average 39
    Are they more accurate? Are they less over-fitted? Why would you have modern Avar admixture in Western Jews? Can you model Sephardic Jews in similar ways (just without the Lithuanian)? And 60/40 for Samaritans/Bergamo-Italians is way, way inaccurate, plus Bergamo Italians would have a lot of Celtic and even some Germanic admixture - they are not a good example of Mediterranean component.

    I actually thank the member which requested me to check the other populations (Druze, Samaritans etc.), because it shows consistence. I would be very surprised, if after +3000 years of Aegean interactions with the Levant, from ancient Greece to Hellenistic times all the way to Eastern Roman Empire, there would be little Aegean admixture.

    I'm all for refuting these findings - but just claiming they are inaccurate, without explaining why, or claim they have no historical proof - tell me, why. My basic assumption is that the main admixture of Western Jews with Europeans, happened before they even left the Levant, and before the Roman abolition of the 2nd Temple.

    Jewish proselytism was restricted to very specific episodes, such as the expansion of the Hasmonean kingdom (which brought about the forced conversions of the Idumeans, the Itureans and many Samaritans), the conversion of the Himyarites to Judaism or the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism. Such episodes were the exception, not the rule. As a rule of thumb, Judaism was (and still is) much more akin to the religions of the ancient world since the entry was primarily biological.
    Agreed, but Judaism and semi-Judaism was very popular among Greeks in late Hellenistic times and 1st centuries. This is very well documented, including in the Talmud. I've brought numerous sources about it. It's actually more documented than either Himyar or Khazaria.
    Last edited by Erikl86; 06-06-2018 at 12:40 PM.

  7. #25
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,573
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    And what about these:


    Are they more accurate? Are they less over-fitted? Why would you have modern Avar admixture in Western Jews? Can you model Sephardic Jews in similar ways (just without the Lithuanian)? And 60/40 for Samaritans/Bergamo-Italians is way, way inaccurate, plus Bergamo Italians would have a lot of Celtic and even some Germanic admixture - they are not a good example of Mediterranean component.
    They're actually far more accurate, just like this fit (which is the same as the one I posted above, just without pen=0) is more accurate:

    [1] "distance%=2.1309"

    Lebanese_Druze

    Sidon_BA,65.8
    Armenia_EBA,16.4
    Anatolia_BA,9.8
    BedouinB,7.2
    Mycenaean,0.8


    ^^Notice how the distance is greater than in the first fit.

    As for the Avar admixture, it is in many cases necessary. Samaritans closely resemble BA_Canaanites, in comparison modern-day Levantines are shifted towards the Caucasus, this is why the inclusion of the Avars enables us to obtain a better fit. Another way of doing this is by adding Armenia_EBA, just look at the fit above. What we will probably see in upcoming results is that the post-LBA collapse Levant saw a slight shift in the direction of the Caucasus and Mesopotamia. The inclusion of the Druze instead of the Samaritans was meant to demonstrate both this shift and the fact that Eastern European admixture might vary according to the Levantine proxy being used. You will also notice that I am only using present-day populations in these fits, as opposed to mixing ancient and modern ones. And yes, you can actually proxy other Western Jewish populations using the exact same model.

    I actually thank the member which requested me to check the other populations (Druze, Samaritans etc.), because it shows consistence. I would be very surprised, if after +3000 years of Aegean interactions with the Levant, from ancient Greece to Hellenistic times all the way to Eastern Roman Empire, there would be little Aegean admixture.
    Many of the fits you obtained are extremely overfitted, that's the only consistence to be found actually.

    Agreed, but Judaism and semi-Judaism was very popular among Greeks in late Hellenistic times and 1st centuries. This is very well documented, including in the Talmud. I've brought numerous sources about it. It's actually more documented than either Himyar or Khazaria.
    "Semi-Judaism" is a rather ambiguous term, for example Josephus described the Samaritans as "half-Jews".
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     Noa (06-10-2018),  Power77 (06-06-2018),  Principe (06-06-2018),  Targum (06-07-2018)

  9. #26
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    They're actually far more accurate, just like this fit (which is the same as the one I posted above, just without pen=0) is more accurate:

    [1] "distance%=2.1309"

    Lebanese_Druze

    Sidon_BA,65.8
    Armenia_EBA,16.4
    Anatolia_BA,9.8
    BedouinB,7.2
    Mycenaean,0.8


    ^^Notice how the distance is greater than in the first fit.

    As for the Avar admixture, it is in many cases necessary. Samaritans closely resemble BA_Canaanites, in comparison modern-day Levantines are shifted towards the Caucasus, this is why the inclusion of the Avars enables us to obtain a better fit. Another way of doing this is by adding Armenia_EBA, just look at the fit above. What we will probably see in upcoming results is that the post-LBA collapse Levant saw a slight shift in the direction of the Caucasus and Mesopotamia. The inclusion of the Druze instead of the Samaritans was meant to demonstrate both this shift and the fact that Eastern European admixture might vary according to the Levantine proxy being used. You will also notice that I am only using present-day populations in these fits, as opposed to mixing ancient and modern ones. And yes, you can actually proxy other Western Jewish populations using the exact same model.
    I strongly disagree regarding the model for Druze. First, Bedouins are a modern population. Second - why would you add Mycenaean ? on what grounds? Also, Early Bronze Age Armenians and Bronze Age Anatolians highly resemble Aegean and Minoans. Also 25% Bronze Age Caucasians and Anatolians is too high, IMO, and Mycenaean and Minoan admixture gives you much better results.

    I wonder, how do people explain admixture of Levantines among modern Greek Islanders, while tend to reject the notion of Greek admixture with Levantines, when in fact Greek colonization in the Eastern Mediterranean was very prominent from at least the 10th century BC, onward.

    As for the Avars - do you know they are mainly Caucasian and haven't mixed with Turks or Iranians or Eurasian Steppes people in the last +2500 years? Why not use Dagestani? Or Circassians? Because it just gives you a better %% ? Also, this model might be more seasonable than the ones I've quoted which you provided more than a year ago - Samaritans & Bergamo Italians? and 60 / 40 ? Bergamo are highly Celtic. And the result you got 0.31% - is, according to the standards you provide, a very good example of over-fitting. To me, just throwing a bunch of different ethnicities without any historical background, or very far-fetched historical background, is just inaccurate.

    The only modern ones I care to use, is the Northern European admixture, for a very good reason - according to the study I've quoted in the original post, the admixture with Northern Europeans happened just after the population bottleneck Ashkenazi Jews suffered from - in the last 20 generations. After the 10th century, there were very little mass movements of whole ethnic groups into Western Europe. So basically, German from 750 years ago would resemble genetically a German today. Modern Avars would very likely not resemble BA Armenians and Anatolians.


    Many of the fits you obtained are extremely overfitted, that's the only consistence to be found actually.
    Nope, they're also pretty consistent. Aegean and Levantine admixture is consistent in all of them. If I would see in Druze 60% Aegean but Lebanese Christians would have 20%, I would say there is some inconsistency. This is not the case. And Samaritans, according to my model, are indeed pretty much identical to Bronze Age Canaanites (and seem to lack any Aegean admixture).


    "Semi-Judaism" is a rather ambiguous term, for example Josephus described the Samaritans as "half-Jews".
    Samaritans are not the half Jews. I'm talking about Greek "God fearers" and Greek converts which joined Hellenistic Jewish communities all around the East Mediterranean. Or do you deny their existence?
    Last edited by Erikl86; 06-06-2018 at 02:18 PM.

  10. #27
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    Quote Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
    I think you might be overestimating the impact the Greeks had in the Levant, I mean outside the Philistine coast (which was heavily colonised by Aegean settlers) and some cities like Caesarea I very much doubt we're dealing with a massive phenomenon.
    Actually, I don't know how they couldn't have a demographic impact on the Levant. They have been colonizing it since at least the 10th century BC, and there was even a Minoan settlement found in Northern Israel:
    The Minoans were traders, and their cultural contacts reached Egypt's Old Kingdom, copper-containing Cyprus, Canaan and the Levantine coast and Anatolia. In late 2009 Minoan-style frescoes and other artifacts were discovered during excavations of the Canaanite palace at Tel Kabri, Israel, leading archaeologists to conclude that the Minoan influence was the strongest on the Canaanite city-state.
    Source: wikipedia's article on Minoan civilization.

    And also second wave of Greek colonization:

    More than thirty Greek city-states had multiple colonies around the Mediterranean world, with the most active being Miletus, of the Ionian League, with ninety colonies stretching throughout the Mediterranean Sea, from the shores of the Black Sea and Anatolia (modern Turkey) in the east, to the southern coast of the Iberian Peninsula in the west, as well as several colonies on the Libyan coast of northern Africa,[11] from the late 9th to the 5th centuries BC.

    There were two similar types of colony, one known as an ἀποικία - apoikia (pl.: ἀποικίαι, apoikiai) and the other as an ἐμπόριov - emporion (pl.: ἐμπόρια, emporia). The first type of colony was a city-state on its own; the second was a Greek trading-colony.

    The Greek city-states began establishing colonies around 900[12] - 800 BC, at first at Al Mina on the coast of Syria and the Greek emporium Pithekoussai at Ischia in the Bay of Naples, both established about 800 BC by Euboeans.[13]
    Attachment 23709

    While indeed, before the 4th century BC, most Greek colonization in East Mediterranean was not in specifically in the Levant (but also existed there), after the 4th century BC, and all the way to the 8th century AD, for more than 1200 years, there have been Greek people coming to the Levant.

    After 300 BC, the Hellenistic colonization began. Dark Blue - Greek-majority areas, Pale Blue - highly Hellenized local population, around 300 BC:

    Attachment 23708

    And this is what wikipedia has to say:

    The history of Greeks in Syria traditionally begins with Alexander the Great's conquest of the Persian Empire. In the aftermath of Alexander's death, his empire was divided into several successor states, and thus ushering in the beginning of the Hellenistic Age. For the Levant and Mesopotamia, it meant coming under the control of Seleucus I Nicator and the Seleucid Empire. The Hellenistic period was characterized by a new wave of Greek colonization.[5] Ethnic Greek colonists came from all parts of the Greek world, not, as before, from a specific "mother city".[6] The main centers of this new cultural expansion of Hellenism in the Levant were cities like Antioch, and the other cities of the Tetrapolis Seleukis. The mixture of Greek-speakers gave birth to a common Attic-based dialect, known as Koine Greek, which became the lingua franca throughout the Hellenistic world.
    And:

    The Seleucid Empire was a major empire of Hellenistic culture that maintained the pre-eminence of Greek customs in which a Greek political elite dominated, in newly founded urban areas.[7][8][9][10] The Greek population of the cities who formed the dominant elite were reinforced by emigration from Greece.[7][8] The creation of new Greek cities were aided by the fact that the Greek mainland was overpopulated and therefore made the vast Seleucid Empire ripe for colonization. Apart from these cities, there were also a large number of Seleucid garrisons (choria), military colonies (katoikiai) and Greek villages (komai) which the Seleucids planted throughout the empire to cement their rule.

    Come to think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense why Samaritans lack any significant Greek admixture. By the 4th century BC, they were already a closed group of people, separated from Jews. Any ethnic admixture of Jews or non-Samaritans with Greeks would not affect them genetically that much.


    Also, there is no reason to assume that the Philistines were genetically Minoan, if anything they'll probably be somewhere between Mycenaeans and Anatolia_EBA.
    We won't know until they finish analyze the samples from that cemetery. If they originate in Crete, and arrived to the Levant at around 11th-12th centuries BC, then surely, they would be genetically Minoan. The Minoans completely disappeared as a separate culture around the 15th century, their latest cultural presence would be Crete.
    Mycenaeans didn't totally replace them, they just culturally assimilated them.
    Last edited by Erikl86; 06-06-2018 at 02:17 PM.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Erikl86 For This Useful Post:

     Patarames (06-14-2018)

  12. #28
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    3,573
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish & British
    Y-DNA
    J1-YSC234 (Z18271+)
    mtDNA
    J1c5

    Israel Israel Jerusalem United Kingdom England Scotland Isle of Man
    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    I strongly disagree regarding the model for Druze. First, Bedouins are a modern population. Second - why would you add Mycenaean ? on what grounds? Also, Early Bronze Age Armenians and Bronze Age Anatolians highly resemble Aegean and Minoans. Also 25% Bronze Age Caucasians and Anatolians is too high, IMO, and Mycenaean and Minoan admixture gives you much better results.
    I was talking about the fits you quoted, not the one I just posted. You're asking the wrong question: Why should we not add Mycenaeans?

    EBA Armenians most definitely do not resemble Aegean populations, this is basically Kura-Araxes we're dealing with here.

    I wonder, how do people explain admixture of Levantines among modern Greek Islanders, while tend to reject the notion of Greek admixture with Levantines, when in fact Greek colonization in the Eastern Mediterranean was very prominent from at least the 10th century BC, onward.
    There's no compelling evidence in favour of Levantine admixture among Aegean Greeks, if that's what you're talking about.

    As for the Avars - do you know they are mainly Caucasian and haven't mixed with Turks or Iranians or Eurasian Steppes people in the last +2500 years? Why not use Dagestani? Or Circassians? Because it just gives you a better %% ? Also, this model might be more seasonable than the ones I've quoted which you provided more than a year ago - Samaritans & Bergamo Italians? and 60 / 40 ? Bergamo are highly Celtic. And the result you got 0.31% - is, according to the standards you provide, a very good example of over-fitting. To me, just throwing a bunch of different ethnicities without any historical background, or very far-fetched historical background, is just inaccurate.
    I've used Kabardians, Lezgins and Chechens as well, I don't really understand why you're so fixated on the Avars quite frankly. Same thing for Bergamo, at best they derive 25% of their ancestry from a (non-Italian and non-Iberian) Bell Beaker-like source, the rest is Tuscan-like.

    Just throwing a bunch of different ethnicities without any historical background, eh? Well, truth be told, that's more or less what your fits look like for the time being.

    The only modern ones I care to use, is the Northern European admixture, for a very good reason - according to the study I've quoted in the original post, the admixture with Northern Europeans happened just after the population bottleneck Ashkenazi Jews suffered from - in the last 20 generations. After the 10th century, there were very little mass movements of whole ethnic groups into Western Europe. So basically, German from 750 years ago would resemble genetically a German today. Modern Avars would very likely not resemble BA Armenians and Anatolians.
    You don't have much of an excuse here either as we have a lot of ancient samples from Europe, including medieval samples from Germany.

    Nope, they're also pretty consistent. Aegean and Levantine admixture is consistent. If I would see in Druze 60% Aegean but Lebanese Christians would have 20%, I would say there is some inconsistency. This is not the case. And Samaritans, according to my model, are indeed pretty much identical to Bronze Age Canaanites (and seem to lack any Aegean admixture).
    Not quite, one merely needs to look at the distance of the fits you posted to notice that something just doesn't add up here. It looks like you're trying very hard to produce fits that fit a certain narrative, in this case one of widespread Greek settlement in the Levant.


    Samaritans are not the half Jews. I'm talking about Greek "God fearers" and Greek converts which joined Hellenistic Jewish communities all around the East Mediterranean. Or do you deny their existence?
    I am merely stating that we should not make much out of such terms, as they were used very liberally by ancient writers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Erikl86 View Post
    Actually, I don't know how they couldn't have a demographic impact on the Levant. They have been colonizing it since at least the 10th century BC, and there was even a Minoan settlement found in Northern Israel:

    Source: wikipedia's article on Minoan civilization.

    And also second wave of Greek colonization:



    Attachment 23709

    While indeed, before the 4th century BC, most Greek colonization in East Mediterranean was not in specifically in the Levant (but also existed there), after the 4th century BC, and all the way to the 8th century AD, for more than 1200 years, there have been Greek people coming to the Levant.

    After 300 BC, the Hellenistic colonization began. Dark Blue - Greek-majority areas, Pale Blue - highly Hellenized local population, around 300 BC:

    Attachment 23708

    And this is what wikipedia has to say:



    And:




    Come to think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense why Samaritans lack any significant Greek admixture. By the 4th century BC, they were already a closed group of people, separated from Jews. Any ethnic admixture of Jews or non-Samaritans with Greeks would not affect them genetically that much.



    We won't know until they finish analyze the samples from that cemetery. If they originate in Crete, and arrived to the Levant at around 11th-12th centuries BC, then surely, they would be genetically Minoan. The Minoans completely disappeared as a separate culture around the 15th century, their latest cultural presence would be Crete.
    Mycenaeans didn't totally replace them, they just culturally assimilated them.
    We've also found evidence of Minoan presence in Egypt, for some odd reason I don't see you claiming that the Copts derive a substantial portion of their ancestry from a Minoan source... Why is that? As a matter of fact, the Greek presence was arguably far more important in Egypt than it ever was in the Levant.

    The Philistines spoke an IE language, arguably an early form of Greek, which they wrote down using the Cypro-Minoan script. This alone makes any theory according to which they were genetically identical to the Minoans very doubtful. Furthermore, you're ignoring the outlier from Armenoi, as well as the fact that the Mycenaeans form a tight cluster despite coming from different parts of Greece.
    Last edited by Agamemnon; 06-06-2018 at 02:30 PM.
    ᾽Άλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν:
    κρύβδην, μηδ᾽ ἀναφανδά, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
    νῆα κατισχέμεναι: ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι πιστὰ γυναιξίν.


    -Αγαμέμνων; H Οδύσσεια, Ραψωδία λ

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Agamemnon For This Useful Post:

     alexfritz (06-06-2018),  Power77 (06-06-2018),  Principe (06-06-2018)

  14. #29
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    To everyone asking why re-modelling Bronze Age Canaanite according to Hebar et al. model (Neolithic Levantines + CHL Iranians), instead of using sampled from Bronze Age Levant.

    There were series of mass immigrations of Bronze Age Anatolian people, forming empires that controlled the Levant, and mixed with the Bronze Age Levantines, from the 21st century BC, all the way to the 12th century BC.

    Hurrians (circa 2300 BC):

    Orientmitja2300aC.png

    Hittites (established their empire circa 1600 BC):

    1024px-AlterOrient2.png

    And Mitanni (circa 1400 BC):

    Near_East_1400_BCE.png

    And, the Phoenicians themselves started establishing colonies all throughout the Mediterranean around 1200 BC, perhaps mixing with other Mediterranean people.

    So, just to be on the safe side, that those samples which are dated from 2000 BC - 1500 BC, are not "contaminated" (bad phrase, I know) with non-Levantine, Indo-European people, and separating the Levantine component from the Mycenaean and Minoan admixture which would also be related to Neolithic Anatolians (so we can see exactly how much is Levantine, and how much is Aegean), which themselves would be close to BA Anatolians to some degree, and might confuse the calculations. I've used the model of Neolithic Levant + CHL Iranian, an mixture which happened around 6000 years ago, long before these empires existed.

    Also, as I've said before:
    "The Minoans could be modelled as a mixture of the Anatolia
    Neolithic-related substratum with additional ‘eastern’ ancestry, but
    the other two groups had additional ancestry: the Mycenaeans had
    approximately 4–16% ancestry from a ‘northern’ ultimate source related
    to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia (Table 1), while
    the Bronze Age southwestern Anatolians may have had ~ 6% ancestry
    related to Neolithic Levantine populations. "
    Come to think about it, perhaps, the fact that many get high percentage of Minoans, and less so of Mycenaean, might also show that the admixture comes from Aegean people, because Mycenaeans were mixed with Bronze Age Anatolians to a small degree, and Minoans were not, and this might actually be from Bronze Age Hittite, Mitanni or Hurrian admixture with Levantines (so maybe 20% Mycenaean is actually 7% Bronze Age Anatolian, 13% Aegean, for example). But this is just an assumption.

  15. #30
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    1,397
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Jewish (Ashkenazi)
    Y-DNA
    Q-YP3924 (Q-M378)
    mtDNA
    K1a1b1a

    Israel
    I was talking about the fits you quoted, not the one I just posted. You're asking the wrong question: Why should we not add Mycenaeans?

    EBA Armenians most definitely do not resemble Aegean populations, this is basically Kura-Araxes we're dealing with here.
    Why would you add Mycenaean? If there was no significant Greek admixture among Levantines?

    There's no compelling evidence in favour of Levantine admixture among Aegean Greeks, if that's what you're talking about.
    Not ancient, but modern Island Greeks. Also, Modern Cypriot Greeks are heavily admixed with Levantines.

    I've used Kabardians, Lezgins and Chechens as well, I don't really understand why you're so fixated on the Avars quite frankly. Same thing for Bergamo, at best they derive 25% of their ancestry from a (non-Italian and non-Iberian) Bell Beaker-like source, the rest is Tuscan-like.
    And? What did you get for those? These are all very different people. Modern Caucasus is extremely different from Bronze Age Caucasus. Bell-Beaker like source is too old for any talk about Jews in Italy. Currently, Northern Italians so up north are mixed with Celts (and I would assume Germanic people as well). Also, all of modern Italians are mixed with assimilated Greeks from south Italy after it was completely Latinized in early Medieval times.

    Well, truth be told, that's more or less what your fits look like for the time being.

    You don't have much of an excuse here either as we have a lot of ancient samples from Europe, including medieval samples from Germany.
    Nope, I do not - I use the same admixture of Bronze Age Aegeans and a model of Bronze Age Levantines. Also, for non-Mediterranean admixture, I've used in the Basal-rich K7 French, because I had no stats for Basal-rich K7 results for Medieval Germans, and East French made the most sense, other than Lithuanians alone (which you used as a model. Btw, you got a very low result for Northern European admixture).

    Not quite, one merely needs to look at the distance of the fits you posted to notice that something just doesn't add up here. It looks like you're trying very hard to produce fits that fit a certain narrative, in this case one of widespread Greek settlement in the Levant.
    I don't really. I just examined a lot of different combinations, including in K36 calculations, and found out that ancient Aegean Greeks give the best fit. Lacking ancient Roman samples, they would also provide a pretty "clean" sample of ancient Mediterranean people that existed during the formation of the Jews as a nation, or close enough to those (I would assume Greeks from the 4th century BC would be pretty similar genetically speaking to Myceneans).

    Then, I've tried to find historical justifications for this. I've found that Greek colonization was extremely substantial in the East Mediterranean and also in South Italy, and that happened to be where Western Jews cluster today as well, genetically speaking.

    It seems there is enough historical background to support this idea.

    And other then insisting that my results do not reflect the reality, without any explanation, you have yet to bust this claim. I suspect your "attack" on this theory is subjective, not objective.

    We've also found evidence of Minoan presence in Egypt, for some odd reason I don't see you claiming that the Copts derive a substantial portion of their ancestry from a Minoan source... Why is that? As a matter of fact, the Greek presence was arguably far more important in Egypt than it ever was in the Levant.
    Oh but I do ! I do believe Copts should appear to be admixed with Greeks. Actually, I would believe many Copts would probably have higher admixture with ancient Greeks than Christian Lebanese.
    I have yet to examine it - because sadly, I don't have their Basal-rich K7 stats.

    The Philistines spoke an IE language, arguably an early form of Greek, which they wrote down using the Cypro-Minoan script. This alone makes any theory according to which they were genetically identical to the Minoans very doubtful.
    True, we will need to wait for their result. This is just one theory I got. Also, there is also some historical evidence connecting them to Crete - which would also make the case for them being genetically Minoan.
    Last edited by Erikl86; 06-06-2018 at 03:07 PM.

Page 3 of 418 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-07-2018, 12:52 AM
  2. Present-day Lebanese descend from Biblical Canaanites
    By MikeWhalen in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2017, 07:49 PM
  3. Early farmers from across Europe were direct descendants of Aegeans
    By rock hunter in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-21-2016, 10:43 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-14-2016, 01:02 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-26-2015, 05:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •