So @sccit is an open zionist on a black hip hop forum?

[Koichos]

This is based on recent data, data that is in support with older data. Let's not play games. You yourself stated earlier on that conversion has been a dominant factor. It can't be both and it isn't both.

Conversion has been a factor since (and is the very essence of) the coalescence of the Jewish nation 3,332 years ago. That does not substantiate Elhaik's conclusions on the genetic and linguistic origins of Ashkenazim and Yiddish, both of which are untrue.

This is what is published, which can be found in the paper. And there is a newer paper out confirming even more, which is all in support of earlier papers like "Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin - The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms".

Spoiler

(Xue et al., 2017)

(Behar et al., 2013)

Finally, the fifth and largest Jewish group unites Ashkenazi, North African, and Sephardi Jews. While these populations do differ slightly in the proportions of clusters k2 (light red), k4, and k5, their genetic similarity is striking. Minimal distinction is visible between the Western and Eastern Ashkenazi Jews, but a minutely elevated membership is visible in the Eastern Ashkenazi group for the largely East Asian clusters k9 (yellow) and k10 (orange) . . . For the Jewish populations included in a large group containing Ashkenazi, North African, and Sephardi Jews, most of the populations with the highest similarity of cluster membership coefficients are other Jewish populations . . . The similarity of the genetic membership proportions suggests a common origin of the Jewish populations in this group and limited or comparable levels of admixture with closely related host populations . . . considering the Ashkenazi Jewish population in relation to other populations, Ashkenazi Jews show the greatest genetic similarity to Sephardi Jews and, to a lesser extent, North African Jews.

(Ostrer, 2013)

By principal component analysis, it was observed that the Jewish populations of Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East formed a tight cluster that distinguished them from their non-Jewish neighbors (Fig. 1). Within this central cluster, each of these Jewish populations formed its own subcluster. The observation of a major central tight cluster was supported by statistical metrics for genetic distances (Fst, allelic sharing distances). Nearest neighbor-joining analysis robustly supported shared origins of most Jewish populations with clearly discernible European/Syrian/North African and Middle Eastern branches. Turkish, Greek, and Italian Jews shared a common branch, with Ashkenazi and Syrian Jews forming connections to this branch. The North African Jewish populations added a sub-branch to the European/Syrian branch . . . Notably, the degree of sharing between Jewish populations was also greater than the sharing between Jewish and non-Jewish populations. These studies showed that Jews have a tapestry of shared DNA threads with other Jews and that no one thread is sufficient to define Jewish ancestry.

(Campbell et al., 2012)

Two major subgroups were identified by principal component, neighbor joining tree, and identity-by-descent analysis—Moroccan/ Algerian and Djerban/Libyan—that varied in their degree of European admixture. These populations showed a high degree of endogamy and were part of a larger Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jewish group . . . using genome-wide SNP and copy number variation data, we demonstrated that Sephardic (Greek and Turkish), Ashkenazi (Eastern European), and Mizrahi (Iranian, Iraqi, and Syrian) Jews were more related to each other than to their non-Jewish contemporary neighbors (16). We showed that this relatedness could be explained on the basis of sharing DNA segments identical by descent (IBD) within and between populations . . . A global study of Jewish population genetics from 2010 partitioned most Jewish genomes into Ashkenazi–North African–Sephardic, Caucasus–Middle Eastern, and Yemenite subclusters.

(Behar et al., 2010)

Most Jewish samples form a remarkably tight subcluster that overlies Druze and Cypriot samples but not samples from other Levantine populations or paired Diaspora host populations. In contrast, Ethiopian Jews (Beta Israel) and Indian Jews (Bene Israel and Cochini) cluster with neighbouring autochthonous populations in Ethiopia and western India, respectively, despite a clear paternal link between the Bene Israel and the Levant. These results cast light on the variegated genetic architecture of the Middle East, and trace the origins of most Jewish Diaspora communities to the Levant.

An illustrative example at K = 8 (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Note 3) is the pattern of membership of Ashkenazi, Caucasus (Azerbaijani and Georgian), Middle Eastern (Iranian and Iraqi), north African (Moroccan), Sephardi (Bulgarian and Turkish) and Yemenite Jewish communities . . . which is similar to that observed for Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations, suggesting a shared regional origin of these Jewish communities. This inference is consistent with historical records describing the dispersion of the people of ancient Israel throughout the Old World. Most Jewish samples, other than those from Ethiopia and India, overlie non-Jewish samples from the Levant (Fig. 1b). The tight cluster comprising the Ashkenazi, Caucasus, Middle Eastern, north African and Sephardi Jewish communities, as well as Samaritans, strongly overlaps Israeli Druze and is centrally located on the principal component analysis (PCA) plot when compared with Middle Eastern, European Mediterranean, Anatolian and Caucasus non-Jewish populations (Fig. 1) . . . These analyses reveal three distinct Near Eastern Jewish subclusters: the first group consists of Ashkenazi, Moroccan and Sephardi Jews.

(Shen et al., 2004)

Comparative sequence analysis was carried out on 12 Samaritan Y-chromosome, and mtDNA samples from nine male and seven female Samaritans separated by at least two generations. In addition, 18–20 male individuals were analyzed, each representing Ethiopian, Ashkenazi, Iraqi, Libyan, Moroccan, and Yemenite Jews, as well as Druze and Palestinians, all currently living in Israel. For the Y-chromosome, all Jewish groups, except for the Ethiopians, are closely related to each other. They do not differ significantly from Samaritans (0.041) and Druze (0.033), but are different from Palestinians (0.163), Africans (0.219), and Europeans (0.111). Figure 2A shows a principal component analysis using population frequencies of the Y-chromosome haplotypes displayed in Figure 1. Samaritans and Jewish populations, except Ethiopian Jews, form a cluster separated from Palestinians and Druze. Ethiopian Jews are related more closely to Africans.

(Botticini and Eckstein, 2003)

Interestingly, studies by biologists and genetics have shown that contemporary Jewish populations show a closer genetic link to Jews from far away locations than to their neighboring non-Jewish populations. This is especially true for the Ashkenazi Jews of eastern Europe who are genetically closer to Jews from the Middle East and North Africa, as well as to other Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations, than to eastern European non-Jewish populations.

(Hammer et al., 2000)

A set of 18 biallelic polymorphisms was genotyped in 1,371 males from 29 populations, including 7 Jewish (Ashkenazi, Roman, North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern, Yemenite, and Ethiopian) and 16 non-Jewish groups from similar geographic locations. Despite their long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level. A multidimensional scaling plot placed six of the seven Jewish populations in a relatively tight cluster that was interspersed with Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations, including Palestinians and Syrians. Pairwise differentiation tests further indicated that these Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations were not statistically different . . . despite their high degree of geographic dispersion, Jewish populations from Europe, North Africa, and the Near East were less diverged genetically from each other than any other group of populations in this study.

 

[Koichos]

This is what is published, which can be found in the paper. And there is a newer paper out confirming even more, which is all in support of earlier papers like "Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin - The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms".

Spoiler

(Lower = closer)

Palestinian Arabs, Ashkenazi Jews: *.026
Palestinian Arabs, Kurdish Jews: .030
Palestinian Arabs, Bedouin: .043
Palestinian Arabs, Sephardic Jews: .059
Palestinian Arabs, Muslim Kurds: .069

Muslim Kurds, Ashkenazi Jews: *.016
Muslim Kurds, Sephardic Jews: .023
Muslim Kurds, Kurdish Jews: .032
Muslim Kurds, Palestinian Arabs: .069
Muslim Kurds, Bedouin: .183

(Higher = closer)

Palestinian Arabs, Ashkenazi Jews: *.198 / .225
Palestinian Arabs, Bedouin: .157 / .217
Palestinian Arabs, Kurdish Jews: .142 / .198
Palestinian Arabs, Sephardic Jews: .153 / .167
Palestinian Arabs, Muslim Kurds: .133 / .160

Muslim Kurds, Ashkenazi Jews: *.263 / .345
Muslim Kurds, Kurdish Jews: .213 / .314
Muslim Kurds, Sephardic Jews: .208 / .289
Muslim Kurds, Palestinian Arabs: .133 / .160
Muslim Kurds, Bedouin: .024 / .016

Afr - African
Eth - Ethiopian
Pal - Palestinian
Dru - Druze
Eur - European

Ash - Ashkenazi Jew
Mor - Moroccan Jew
Irq - Iraqi Jew
Ymn - Teimani Jew
Lby - Libyan Jew
Sam - Samaritan

Spoiler

(Qiu et al., 2019)

Here we explore the ethnic composition of the Khazars, and also specifically test the hypothesis of their relatedness to contemporary Ashkenazi Jews, by sequencing nine genomes from Khazar kurgans in southern Russia. Based on physical anthropological investigations, these burials belong to a range of ethnic types and provide a window into the genetic makeup of the society . . . We found no significant trace of Ashkenazi genetic composition in either nuclear, mitochondrial or Y-chromosome data, strongly indicating that Khazars were generally not related to them . . . Genetic data allow us to conclusively answer the question of whether Judaized Khazars may have migrated to Eastern Europe to give rise to the present-day Ashkenazim, as proposed by the Khazarian Hypothesis. This scenario seems highly doubtful in the face of genomic data based on four lines of evidence . . . no significant Ashkenazi genetic affinity was detected in any of the sequenced individuals . . . all of the studied Khazars, even those with significant Caucasian ancestry, had significant Asiatic nuclear genetic contributions, which are missing from present-day Jewish populations . . . none of the identified mitochondrial haplotypes are present in present-day Ashkenazi Jews . . . the European genetic components of the Khazars derive from the Caucasus tribes that were under control of the Khaganate, rather than from more distant Levantine populations more closely related to Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.

(Faleeva, 2017)

We report here what seems to be the first case of an ancient DNA study from Khazar burial mounds . . . To understand a biological tribal affiliation (in terms of Y-chromosomal haplogroups, subclades, and haplotypes) of two excavated Khazar bone remains in the lower Don region in the south of Russia, we have extracted and analyzed their DNA and showed that both belonged to haplogroup R1a and its subclade Z93. The pattern could be considered typically “Turkic”, and not a Jewish DNA lineage. Their haplotypes were also identified and reported here. The haplotypes indicate that both Khazars were unrelated to each other in a sense that their common ancestor lived as long as 1500 - 2500 years earlier than them, in the middle of the II millennium BC—beginning of the I millennium BC, during typically Scythian times or somewhat earlier . . . It should be noted that according to DNA genealogy data none of the two ancient Khazars belonged to the Jewish YDNA (Y-chromosomal DNA) lineage.

(Behar et al., 2017)

The R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levite cluster does not have origins in Khazaria. Not only did that line have origins in the Middle East as of 3,000 years ago, but the line was Jewish (and Levite) as of 1,750 years ago, more than 500 years before the Khazars (or, in some accounts, Khazarian royalty) are said to have converted to Judaism.

(Peretz, 1997)

Previous studies showed that factor XI (FXI) deficiency commonly observed in Ashkenazi Jews is caused by two similarly frequent mutations, type II (Glu117stop) and type III (Phe283Leu) with allele frequencies of 0.0217 and 0.0254, respectively. In Iraqi Jews, who represent the ancient gene pool of Jews, only the type II mutation was observed with an allele frequency of 0.0167 . . . All 103 independent chromosomes bearing the type II mutation in patients of Ashkenazi, Iraqi, Yemenite, Syrian, and Moroccan Jewish origin and of Arab origin were characterized by another distinct haplotype that was rare among normal Ashkenazi Jewish, Iraqi Jewish, and Arab chromosomes. These findings constitute the first example of a mutation common to Ashkenazi Jews, non-Ashkenazi Jews, and Arabs and are consistent with the origin of type II mutation in a founder before the divergence of the major segments of Jews. Our findings also indicate that the type III mutation arose more recently in an Ashkenazi Jewish individual . . . Unlike the type III mutation, the type II mutation is not confined to Ashkenazi Jews. In a previous study we showed that the allele frequency of the type II mutation was quite similar in Ashkenazi (0.0217) and Iraqi Jews (0.0167), the latter representing the original gene pool of Jews who have remained in the Middle East for 2,500 years . . . Of great interest was the finding that all 103 informative independent chromosomes bearing the type II mutation of Ashkenazi, Iraqi, Yemenite, Syrian, and Moroccan Jews and of Arabs were characterized by one haplotype. This 1-2-2-2 haplotype (Fig 2) was observed in only 8% to 12% of normal chromosomes in Ashkenazi Jews, Iraqi Jews, and Arabs and hence the data are consistent with a founder effect.

 

[chief_keef_stan]

@Box Factory you mad white boi. Even if you "black" probably sound like a cac

 

[Box Factory]

@Box Factory you mad white boi. Even if you "black" probably sound like a cac

Ok retard

 

[chief_keef_stan]

Ok retard

"retard" CAC insults

 

[Box Factory]

"retard" CAC insults

Ok

 

[Ish Gibor]

Conversion has been a factor since (and is the very essence of) the coalescence of the Jewish nation 3,332 years ago. That does not substantiate Elhaik's conclusions on the genetic and linguistic origins of Ashkenazim and Yiddish, both of which are untrue.

Spoiler

(Xue et al., 2017)

(Behar et al., 2013)


(Ostrer, 2013)


(Campbell et al., 2012)


(Behar et al., 2010)



(Shen et al., 2004)


(Botticini and Eckstein, 2003)


(Hammer et al., 2000)

I looked into the first few paper, because the older papers do not contribute to anything. That data was basically reiterated in later papers. What these papers are saying is that Ashkenazim stem from the Eurasian Steppe region, Central Asia, South Asia and Southwest Asia, where they mostly cluster within R1a1 and R1b. They clusters with other Jewish populations in admixture over time, due to religious isolation.

“The central Eurasian Silk Roads were controlled by Iranian polities, which provided opportunities for Iranian-speaking Jews, who constituted the overwhelming bulk of the world's Jews from the time of Christ to the Eleventh century (Baron, 1952). It should not come as a surprise to find that Yiddish (and other Old Jewish languages) contains components and rules from a large variety of languages, all of them spoken on the Silk Roads (Khordadhbeh, 1889; Wexler, 2011, 2012, 2017).

In addition to language contacts, the Silk Roads also provided the motivation for widespread conversion to Judaism by populations eager to participate in the extremely lucrative trade, which had become a Jewish quasi-monopoly along the trade routes (Rabinowitz, 1945, 1948; Baron, 1957). These conversions are discussed in Jewish literature between the Sixth and Eleventh centuries, both in Europe and Iraq (Sand, 2009; Kraemer, 2010).”

"Remarkably, AJs exhibit a dominant Iranian (88%˜) and residual Levantine (3%˜) ancestries, as opposed to Bedouins (14%˜ and 68%˜, respectively) and Palestinians (18%˜ and 58%˜, respectively)."

The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish

“Most major genome-wide population-genetic studies of Ashkenazi Jews have detected evidence that the population has elements of ancestry both from Europe and from the Middle East (Atzmon et al. 2010; Behar et al. 2010; Campbell et al. 2012; Kopelman et al. 2009).
North African Jews show slightly elevated membership in the k2 component prevalent in African populations. Similarly, in the Ashkenazi Jews, the proportion of the largely European k5 component is somewhat larger than that in the Sephardi Jews (23% vs. 16%). Within the Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern and Central Europe, we do see a signal (2.2%) of components common in East Asia that are less visible in Ashkenazi Jews from Western Europe or European Sephardi Jews (0.6%).”
[…]
“These components also appear in Eastern Europeans and in some Middle Eastern populations, such as Yemenis, so it is difcult to attribute their minor elevation in Eastern Ashkenazi Jews to a particular origin.“
[…]
“Cumulatively, our analyses point strongly to ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews primarily from European and Middle Eastern populations and not from populations in or near the Caucasus region.”
[…]
“The most common Ashkenazi Jewish Y chromosomal types of European origin are R1a1 and R1b with frequencies of 7.5 and 10 %, respectively.“

(Behar et al., 2013)

“Previously, using genome-wide SNP and copy number varia- tion data, we demonstrated that Sephardic (Greek and Turkish), Ashkenazi (Eastern European), and Mizrahi (Iranian, Iraqi, and Syrian) Jews with origins in Europe and the Middle East were more related to each other than to their non-Jewish contempo- rary neighbors (16).“
[…]
“The Yemenite and Ethiopian Jews were on distinctive branches with the Yemenite Jews on a branch between Pales- tinians and Bedouins.“
[…]
"Pairwise FST analysis indicated that each of the North African Jewish populations was distinct and, by bootstrap analysis, sta- tistically different from all of the others"
[…]
"This increase in European ancestry and corresponding decrease in Maghrebi ancestry may be interpreted in several ways: (i) This increase may be due to the inherently higher European ancestry of Jewish segments planted into the genomes of non-Jewish populations."
[…]
“Isolation began for Jews when Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and made it the state religion of the Roman Empire. In the process, Jews were deprived of their right to convert pagans or accept proselytes.”

(Campbell et al., 2012)

 

[Ish Gibor]

Spoiler

(Lower = closer)

Palestinian Arabs, Ashkenazi Jews: *.026
Palestinian Arabs, Kurdish Jews: .030
Palestinian Arabs, Bedouin: .043
Palestinian Arabs, Sephardic Jews: .059
Palestinian Arabs, Muslim Kurds: .069

Muslim Kurds, Ashkenazi Jews: *.016
Muslim Kurds, Sephardic Jews: .023
Muslim Kurds, Kurdish Jews: .032
Muslim Kurds, Palestinian Arabs: .069
Muslim Kurds, Bedouin: .183

(Higher = closer)

Palestinian Arabs, Ashkenazi Jews: *.198 / .225
Palestinian Arabs, Bedouin: .157 / .217
Palestinian Arabs, Kurdish Jews: .142 / .198
Palestinian Arabs, Sephardic Jews: .153 / .167
Palestinian Arabs, Muslim Kurds: .133 / .160

Muslim Kurds, Ashkenazi Jews: *.263 / .345
Muslim Kurds, Kurdish Jews: .213 / .314
Muslim Kurds, Sephardic Jews: .208 / .289
Muslim Kurds, Palestinian Arabs: .133 / .160
Muslim Kurds, Bedouin: .024 / .016

Afr - African
Eth - Ethiopian
Pal - Palestinian
Dru - Druze
Eur - European

Ash - Ashkenazi Jew
Mor - Moroccan Jew
Irq - Iraqi Jew
Ymn - Teimani Jew
Lby - Libyan Jew
Sam - Samaritan

Spoiler

(Qiu et al., 2019)

(Faleeva, 2017)

(Behar et al., 2017)

(Peretz, 1997)

These papers are only confirmed the data that is out now, in these more recent papers. The cluster is that 3% of Middle Eastern-Levant heritage, that is being expounded upon in the papers you’ve cited.

"We also used a combination of well-established Admixture, GPS, and reAdmix methods using a separate database to examine the geographic origins of individuals while accounting for admixture (see Analysis using admixture vectors) [25, 26]. This analysis was conducted using present-day data and data from Bronze-age populations from the first century BC to control for any geographical changes that may have occurred in the past three thousand years. We found that these different approaches produced a consistent assessment of Khazar provenance."
[…]
The genetic homogeneity of the worldwide Jewish population is also problematic [11, 12]. Consequently, given the paucity of historical records, and the complexity of migration patterns by Jews and the nomadic steppe tribes, this hypothesis is only testable by examining evidence of genetic relatedness between Ashkenazim and the Khazars using genomic analysis of archaeological remains."

(Qiu et al., 2019)

"To understand a biological tribal affiliation (in terms of Y-chromosomal hap- logroups, subclades, and haplotypes) of two excavated Khazar bone remains in the lower Don region in the south of Russia, we have extracted and ana- lyzed their DNA and showed that both belonged to haplogroup R1a and its subclade Z93."
[...]
"Their haplotypes are unrelated to well-known Jewish haplotypes of haplogroup R1a."

(Faleeva, 2017)

This (Behar et al., 2017) paper is interesting, as is separated the strains of clusters and subclusters R1a M582 into the subcluster Y2619. The It's an Iranian lineage that came from Central- South Asia, but due migrations of this particular strain we see them having a higher cluster in Eastern Europe. It’s predominantly there, thus it’s being seen as Eastern European. The R1a-M582 cluster falls within the R1a-F1345, which shares a direct male ancestor who lived about 4,600 years ago. The ISOGG tree identified the SNPs Z2124+ Z2122+ F1345+ CTS6+ as the SNPs that define, in that order, what this website now designates as the R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levite subclade.

About 20% of Jewish people belong haplogroup J1-P58,

Eupedia

“R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in Central Asia, South Asia and Southwest Asia (including among Ashkenazi Jews). R1a-Z93 is the marker of historical peoples such as the Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mitanni, or Tatars. Z93 also pervaded the genetic pool of the Arabs and Jews.”

Eupedia

"All known members of the R1a1a Ashkenazi Levite cluster share the SNP Y2619"
[…]
"The men in the R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levite cluster are all descended from a single man (sometimes referred to on this website, but not in the paper, as the R1a-Y2619 progenitor."
[…]
Based upon an Ashkenazi population of about 4,000,000 males (about 7.9% of whom are R1a-M582)
[…]
"The fact that each of the three clusters other than the R1a-Y2619 cluster includes men with geographic origins in Iran suggests strongly that the R1a-M582 progenitor lived in that area. (The 2013 Rootsi & Behar paper had identified Near Eastern origins for R1a1a Ashkenazi Levites based upon the presence of M582 in various R1a1a populations, “with the highest frequency occurring within Iranians collected from the southeastern Kerman population who self-identified as Persians, northwestern Iranian Azeri, and in Cilician Anatolian Kurds.”)"
[…]
Thus, the new paper states that “While the highest frequencies of haplogroup R1a are found in Eastern Europe, our data revealed a rich variation of haplogroup R1a outside of Europe which is phylogenetically separate from the typically European R1a branches.”)
[...]
Other haplogroups reported among Ashkenazi Levites demonstrated no additional significant founding event, and the haplogroup R1a-M198 founder event was not shared with Sephardi Levites."
[…]
Importantly, the initial genetic analyses suggested in this first publication incorrectly attributed this Ashkenazi Levite lineage’s origin to Eastern Europe18. A follow up study, summarizing information from whole Y chromosome sequencing, focused specifically on this Ashkenazi Levite lineage and confirmed that that 65% of the 97 randomly assembled Ashkenazi Levites carried haplogroup R1a-M19820.

(Behar et al., 2017)

The second part by Behar et al., 2017:

The paper addressed branching in the following Ashkenazi haplogroups: (1) haplogroup J (38% of the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool), with a focus on the Cohen lineage nested within haplogroup J1-P58 but also considering Cohen haplogroups within haplogroups J2-M12 and J-M318; (2) haplogroup E (20.4% of the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool), with a focus on lineages within haplogroups E-Z838, E-PF3780, E-B923, and E-B933; (3) haplogroup G-M537 (9.7% of the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool), refined to haplogroup G-BY764; (4) haplogroup Q-M378 (5.2% of the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool); (5) haplogroup T-M70; and (6) haplogroup R1b-M269.

(Behar et al., 2017)

“Finally, a total of 316 samples, of which 78 are first reported herein, carrying haplogroups known to be prevalent among Ashkenazi Jews were selected including E-M123, E-M78, E-M81, E-M35*, G-M377, J-M12, J-M267, J-M318, J-M410, J-P58, T-M70, Q-M378, and R-M269.” These samples represent the variation found among Jews against the background of a wide set of West Eurasian samples.

These are “Bayesian estimations”, which are in support of the paper by Raphael Falk “Genetic markers cannot determine Jewish descent'”.

The genetic variation in the R1a clade among the Ashkenazi Levites’ Y chromosome

Haplogroup J grants the largest overall contribution to the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool, accounting for 38% of the total variation19,21,22. The haplogroup J phylogeny, including its two major sub-branches J1 and J2. We first focused on J1-M267 and particularly on the Cohen lineage nested with haplogroup J1-P58
[…]
“We further compared the most frequent founding lineage found among Ashkenazi Cohen males, nested within haplogroup J1a-P58, to the Ashkenazi Levite R1a-Y2619 lineage. Evidently, members of the R1a-Y2619 Levite caste and the J1a-P58 Cohen caste do not share a common male ancestor within the time frame of the Biblical narrative.”
[…]
Furthermore, ancient DNA studies of the Levant may offer direct information. Indeed, a recent study revealed the presence of both J1a-P58 and J2-M12 Y-chromosomes, frequent among contemporary Jews, in two Canaanite samples date to 3,700 ybp
[…]
Indeed, reconstruction of the recent Ashkenazi Jewish history from whole genomes suggested a bottleneck of merely 350 individuals. It is important to note that while this bottleneck does not necessarily coincide with the founding effective male population size and events for Ashkenazi Jews, it does tell us that the Ashkenazi Levite R1a-Y2619 ancestor was likely among the founding males upon whom the bottleneck applied.
[…]
It can be strongly argued that contemporary R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levites descend from a single Levite ancestor who arrived in Europe from the Levant.

(Behar et al., 2017)

Southwest Asian J1-P58

J1-P58 (J1a2b on the ISOGG tree, formerly known as J1e, then as J1c3) is by far the most widespread subclade of J1. It is a typically Semitic haplogroup, making up most of the population of the Arabian peninsula, where it accounts for approximately 40% to 75% of male lineages.

About 20% of Jewish people belong haplogroup J1-P58,

Eupedia

All in all,

"Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry is under the umbrella of “European ancestry,” but it's clear from numerous studies that people of Ashkenazi ancestry are distinct from the European population at large. Most people with Ashkenazi ancestry trace their DNA to Eastern and Central Europe."

The Uniqueness of Ashkenazi Jewish Ancestry is Important for Health - 23andMe Blog

 

[Ish Gibor]

Ashkenazim are no more reluctant towards black converts than Sefardim or any other tzibbur.

I am speaking of person conversations I've had over many years. These are not my opinions. Still, recently I have heard people complain about racism by white jews. And I am not even hopping on religion anymore like that. I am secular.

I have been a Jew my entire life and am familiar with both communities. It may not be your opinion, but it's an opinion that I and many others would disagree with.

You don't know who is on the other end of the line, you only assume things. I am familiar with the Sephardim, but I have heard others state what I told earlier. Of course we can't generalize, but overall what I have seen it's true.

Ashkenazim fall under the 'European' rubric because the Ancestry Composition only goes back so many years and the Middle Eastern origin from which Ashkenazim stem is older than that. Doug McDonald's calculator goes back 'forever' which is why Ashkenazim with four Ashkenazic grandparents always demonstrate substantial Middle Eastern ancestry with his analysis. Same with Dodecad and others.

The origin indeed goes back to Iran (Middle Eastern), and that is what I suspected in the first place. This is why in some of the papers you've posted they explain the linguistic relationship between Yiddish and languages in the Steppe region,

Israel, where it's been since Yoshiyohu Hamelech hid it.

It's still your opinion, since there is no evidence for what you claim. But I feel we are getting to crux of the matter.

It seems that Falashim might be descended from Teimanim (Yemeni Jews) and locals, the former of which descend from a pre-Himyarite Teimani population as well as Himyarite converts. In any case, contact was certainly had between the two.

They indeed do cluster, but the Falashim genetic markers go back thousands of years prior. So something is off about that theory.

Aramaic.

Did they speak Western Aramaic, or another form?

 

[Koichos]

I am speaking of person conversations I've had over many years. These are not my opinions. Still, recently I have heard people complain about racism by white jews. And I am not even hopping on religion anymore like that. I am secular.

My contention is not that it does not exist, only that it is not any worse by Ashkenazim than Sefardim. It seems to be the standard 'absolute' over 'per capita' reporting.

You don't know who is on the other end of the line, you only assume things. I am familiar with the Sephardim, but I have heard others state what I told earlier. Of course we can't generalize, but overall what I have seen it's true.

It is only true in the frum world, not in general. And even then, it isn't so much about complexion as it is yichus, especially when it comes to marriage. Unfortunately, 'the lonely convert' is not for nothing.

The origin indeed goes back to Iran (Middle Eastern), and that is what I suspected in the first place. This is why in some of the papers you've posted they explain the linguistic relationship between Yiddish and languages in the Steppe region,

Iran as the geographical origin of Ashkenazi Jews is accepted by no one other than Elhaik et al. Moreover, 'Ashkenaz' is the medieval Hebrew word for German lands, and is attested to by the ninth-century Franco-German Latin epistle Contra Judaeos by Amulo of Lyon which mentions clearly that the Jews referred to the Rhineland as Ashkenaz. Not to mention the fact that it is used as such in Targum Yerushalmi, Talmud Bavli and Yerushalmi, and Medrish Rabbo. By the middle Aramaic period Chaza"l in their literature were identifying Ashkenaz with what we know today as Germany. Their origins for Yiddish are even more absurd, as Western Yiddish flourished for centuries before there was even a single Slavic-derived word in the language. Read some Dovid Katz and Max Weinrech. Also, Pitfalls of the GPS and A Response to Das et al., 2016. Yiddish demonstrates linguistic similarities to various languages as it is itself a fusion language; but to claim that Yiddish is an Irano-Turkic-Slavic language with Slavic origins is to ignore ALL evidence of historical linguistics.

It's still your opinion, since there is no evidence for what you claim. But I feel we are getting to crux of the matter.

It is the words of Chaza"l: va'mi gonzu [aron hakoidesh]? yoshiyohu gonzu...olayich omad va'gonzu. And we don't need 'evidence' for such a claim, just emunas chochumim.

They indeed do cluster, but the Falashim genetic markers go back thousands of years prior. So something is off about that theory.

The descent would be in part, if at all. Nonetheless, contact between the two can certainly account for Falashim's knowledge of certain ancient Jewish practices. After all, Teimanim were some of the first Diasporic Jews, entering golus before the second Bais Hamikdosh was rebuilt. Still, I highly suggest you take a look at 'The Beta Israel (Falasha) in Ethiopia' by Steve Kaplan. When examining the religious history of Ethiopia the main question one must ask themselves is: What is the difference between Ethiopian Notzrus and Ethiopian Judaism? This is not as ridiculous a statement as it may seem. As Kaplan states: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has remained more faithful to the letter of the 'Old Testament' than any other church in the world. Historically, there has been little to no difference between Falashim and Ethiopian Notzrim in terms of fundamental Jewish observance (bris miloh, shabes, kashrus, etc). Not to mention the fact that prior to the second half of the nineteenth century Falashim did not commonly refer to themselves as Yehudim or Yehuda'in, Jews.

Did they speak Western Aramaic, or another form?

I'm not sure that Aramaic had split into western and eastern dialects by that point (assuming we are talking about the Assyrians who lived during the time of Tenach).

 

[Ish Gibor]

My contention is not that it does not exist, only that it is not any worse by Ashkenazim than Sefardim. It seems to be the standard 'absolute' over 'per capita' reporting.

I am not doing this back-and-forth, yes and no thing. I speak of what I personally have heard people say on multiple occasion in Sephardic chatrooms during the days of Yahoo chartrooms. I am not saying that every Ashkenazi person is the same. But the overall tendency is just that. There is much evidence for this as well that was shown to me, like commercials published articles etc.

It is only true in the frum world, not in general. And even then, it isn't so much about complexion as it is yichus, especially when it comes to marriage. Unfortunately, 'the lonely convert' is not for nothing.

So the word schvartze was never a thing?

Iran as the geographical origin of Ashkenazi Jews is accepted by no one other than Elhaik et al. Moreover, 'Ashkenaz' is the medieval Hebrew word for German lands, and is attested to by the ninth-century Franco-German Latin epistle Contra Judaeos by Amulo of Lyon which mentions clearly that the Jews referred to the Rhineland as Ashkenaz. Not to mention the fact that it is used as such in Targum Yerushalmi, Talmud Bavli and Yerushalmi, and Medrish Rabbo. By the middle Aramaic period Chaza"l in their literature were identifying Ashkenaz with what we know today as Germany. Their origins for Yiddish are even more absurd, as Western Yiddish flourished for centuries before there was even a single Slavic-derived word in the language. Read some Dovid Katz and Max Weinrech. Also, Pitfalls of the GPS and A Response to Das et al., 2016. Yiddish demonstrates linguistic similarities to various languages as it is itself a fusion language; but to claim that Yiddish is an Irano-Turkic-Slavic language with Slavic origins is to ignore ALL evidence of historical linguistics.

It was you who posted data on the geographical origin. It clearly shows Hg R1a as the oldest strain in Iran bottleneck. The timing was also intriguing. I am not saying it makes them less Jahudi. But it's ironic how all pieces fall in place with the Neo-Assyrians. I'd never expected this.

Birthdate: circa -2700
Birthplace: BC. Eurasian Steppe
(Mr. R1a-F1345 Founder)


Glottolog 4.2.1 - Yiddish

"A large-scale study based on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) has also found no evidence for the Khazar hypothesis, estimating that >80% of Ashkenazi mtDNAs were probably assimilated within Europe, and virtually no mtDNAs were traced to the North Caucasus ( Costa et al. 2013 ). A study focused on the Y chromosome has found strong support for the Near Eastern origin of a significant portion of Ashkenazi Y chromosomes ( Rootsi et al. 2013 )."

(Pavel Flegontov, Pitfalls of the GPS., 07 July 2016)

The supplemental data:

"Although there is indeed a sizeable amount of Slavic words in Yiddish, Slavic languages are not the main lexifier of modern Yiddish. According to various experts, the bulk of Yiddish vocabulary is of High German origin; Hebrew and Aramaic come in second (hereafter the Semitic portion will be labeled simply Hebrew for the sake of brevity), and Slavic occupies the third place.
[…]
The situation with Slavic elements (both lexical and grammatical) is more definite. Slavicization affects the core of Yiddish vocabulary and grammar to a small degree, being characteristic of cultural vocabulary and secondary grammatical features. Thus the available linguistic evidence can only speak in favor of a heavy influence on Yiddish of some Slavic languages (mostly Polish, Ukrainian and Belarusian; pace Wexler, the Sorbian component is very modest) during its usage by the Ashkenazi community. In other words, the typology of language contact definitely suggests that Slavic languages functioned as adstrate and superstrate for Yiddish, rather than an underlying substrate (see also Pereltsvaig 2016, where some more complicated sociolinguistic scenarios are discussed)."

(Supplemental information, Pavel Flegontov)

Pavel Flegontov wrote (Pitfalls of the GPS), also peer reviewed the paper (The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish 21.,June 2017). I feel like we are getting in circles here. We are now arguing over things that already have been consolidated. By this logic, Yiddish would be part of the Uralic branch, which is impart Indo-European. Yiddish is also part of the Germanic phylum, with root words in Indo European. German has a relation to Iranian, while Slavic has a relation to Turkic. Both are Uralic. In Proto-Uralic there's Indo-Iranian

I don't want to argue over the word Ashkenaz. Some say it's medieval, others say not. Nor did I make these linguistic claims, it was in the papers you've posted.

"The grammatical system of Yiddish, however, looks far more Germanic than Slavic: Yiddish has definite and indefinite articles, which express gender and case; its case system is Germanic too (none of the peculiarities of Slavic case system, like the Genitive of Negation, are present in Yiddish); and its word order is subject to rules like Verb-Second, not information structure."

(Asya Pereltsvaig., Jun 10, 2016)

The above explains the Iranian findings of R1a, which is no problem. It is what it is.

It is the words of Chaza"l: va'mi gonzu [aron hakoidesh]? yoshiyohu gonzu...olayich omad va'gonzu. And we don't need 'evidence' for such a claim, just emunas chochumim.

Sorry, but "emunas chochumim" is an opinion based on personal believes. And I don't even want to go over this back-and-forth, because it doesn't make any sense. It's a baseless conversation based on yes and no.

The descent would be in part, if at all. Nonetheless, contact between the two can certainly account for Falashim's knowledge of certain ancient Jewish practices. After all, Teimanim were some of the first Diasporic Jews, entering golus before the second Bais Hamikdosh was rebuilt. Still, I highly suggest you take a look at 'The Beta Israel (Falasha) in Ethiopia' by Steve Kaplan. When examining the religious history of Ethiopia the main question one must ask themselves is: What is the difference between Ethiopian Notzrus and Ethiopian Judaism? This is not as ridiculous a statement as it may seem. As Kaplan states: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has remained more faithful to the letter of the 'Old Testament' than any other church in the world. Historically, there has been little to no difference between Falashim and Ethiopian Notzrim in terms of fundamental Jewish observance (bris miloh, shabes, kashrus, etc). Not to mention the fact that prior to the second half of the nineteenth century Falashim did not commonly refer to themselves as Yehudim or Yehuda'in, Jews.

East African and namely Ethiopian traces have been found in the Levent dating back to at least the earliest Bronze Age. This is synonyms with the spread of Proto-Afrasan into the Levant. Meaning that the fundamental knowledge of cultural development predates the scriptures. And in fact even older traces going back to the earliest of the Natufian, based on genetic and archeological prints. Bar-Josef wrote extensively on this. All the data combined gives a clear picture.

I'm not sure that Aramaic had split into western and eastern dialects by that point (assuming we are talking about the Assyrians who lived during the time of Tenach).

Yes, the purpose is to trace back the timing of the Tenach, Talmud and the Assyrian dialects. They lived amongst neighboring populations like Gutians, Sumerians, Lullubians, Khurrites, Hittites etc. in Mesopotamia, who all adopted Assyrian. My hypothesis is that Assyrian dialects emerged there as a lingua franca. The region was know for brutal warmongering, so I think some of the dialects died out along with the people, while others survived.

 

[pickles]

I am not doing this back-and-forth, yes and no thing. I speak of what I personally have heard people say on multiple occasion in Sephardic chatrooms during the days of Yahoo chartrooms. I am not saying that every Ashkenazi person is the same. But the overall tendency is just that. There is much evidence for this as well that was shown to me, like commercials published articles etc.



So the word schvartze was never a thing?



It was you who posted data on the geographical origin. It clearly shows Hg R1a as the oldest strain in Iran bottleneck. The timing was also intriguing. I am not saying it makes them less Jahudi. But it's ironic how all pieces fall in place with the Neo-Assyrians. I'd never expected this.

Birthdate: circa -2700
Birthplace: BC. Eurasian Steppe
Mr. R1a-F1345 Founder


Glottolog 4.2.1 - Yiddish


(Pavel Flegontov, Pitfalls of the GPS., 07 July 2016)

The supplemental data:


Supplemental information, Pavel Flegontov

Pavel Flegontov wrote (Pitfalls of the GPS), also peer reviewed the paper (The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish 21.,June 2017). I feel like we are getting in circles here. We are now arguing over things that already have been consolidated. By this logic, Yiddish would be part of the Uralic branch, which is impart Indo-European. Yiddish is also part of the Germanic phylum, with root words in Indo European. German has a relation to Iranian, while Slavic has a relation to Turkic. Both are Uralic.

I don't want to argue over the word Ashkenaz. Some say it's medieval, others say not. Nor did I make these linguistic claims, it was in the papers you've posted.


(Asya Pereltsvaig., Jun 10, 2016)

The above explains the Iranian findings of R1a, which is no problem. It is what it is.



Sorry, but "emunas chochumim" is an opinion based on personal believes. And I don't even want to go over this back-and-forth, because it doesn't make any sense. It's a baseless conversation based on yes and no.



East African and namely Ethiopian traces have been found in the Levent dating back to the at least the earliest Bronze Age. This is synonyms with the spread of Afrasan into the Levant. Meaning the knowledge predates the scriptures. And in fact even older traces going back to the earliest of the Natufian. Genetic and archeological prints. Bar-Josef wrote extensively on this. All the data combined gives a clear picture.



Yes, the purpose is to trace back the timing of the Tenach, Talmud and the Assyrian dialects. They lived amongst neighboring populations like Gutians, Sumerians, Lullubians, Khurrites, Hittites in Mesopotamia, who all adopted Assyrian. My hypothesis is that Assyrian dialects emerged there as a lingua franca.

What the fukk are you posting? No one gives a shyt.

Go back to your Sephardic chatrooms. What the fukk?



I have to say one thing about Jews () they will admonish Hitler for his ideology but at times it seems like they agree with him.

 

[Ish Gibor]

What the fukk are you posting? No one gives a shyt.

Go back to your Sephardic chatrooms. What the fukk?



I have to say one thing about Jews () they will admonish Hitler for his ideology but at times it seems like they agree with him.

I take it you have nothing intelligent to post here?

Astronomers of Babylon Story

 

[pickles]

I take it you have nothing intelligent to post here?

Astronomers of Babylon Story

Why are jews so self loathing if they consider themselves the "chosen ones"?

 

[Ish Gibor]

Why are jews so self loathing if they consider themselves the "chosen ones"?

That is what we are figuring out in this thread.

Panel (900–700 BC), excavated at ‘Fort Shalmaneser’, Nimrud, Iraq. Photo: © The Trustees of the British Museum

plaque; furniture-fitting | British Museum


Palace of Zimri Lim Room 132

Mari Palace, small reception hall
The libation scenes in front of Sin and Ishtar
5. frieze: fisherman
Old Babylon

Mari Palace, small reception hall
The libation scenes in front of Sin and Ishtar
2nd frieze: the spear fisherman (?)
Old Babylon