PDA

View Full Version : Khazar Y-dna?



Angela
18-01-17, 18:29
See:
http://file.scirp.org/pdf/AA_2017011815275855.pdf

This isn't a respected scientific journal (it's basically self-published), one of the authors is Klyosov, and their methodology is iffy, so...

"To understand a biological tribal affiliation (in terms of Y-chromosomal haplogroups,subclades, and haplotypes) of two excavated Khazar bone remainsin the lower Don region in the south of Russia,we have extracted and analyzedtheir DNA and showed that both belonged to haplogroup R1a and itssubclade Z93. The pattern could be considered typically “Turkic”, and not aJewish DNA lineage.Their haplotypes were also identified and reported here.The haplotypes indicate that both Khazars were unrelated to each other in asense that their common ancestor lived as long as 1500 - 2500 years earlierthan them, in the middle of the II millennium BC—beginning of the I millenniumBC, during typically Scythian times or somewhat earlier. Theirhaplotypes are unrelated to well-known Jewish haplotypes of haplogroupR1a."

So in this scenario it would come from Scythians absorbed by Turkic tribes, I guess.

I definitely wouldn't take this to the bank, even though it seems highly plausible.

bicicleur
18-01-17, 19:06
Indeed plausible.
What method do they use? If I understand well it is oldfashioned STR classification, not SNP checking.
I read something once about Khazars converted to Judaism.
I'm not sure. Is it so, or is it a hoax?

Angela
18-01-17, 19:33
Indeed plausible.
What method do they use? If I understand well it is oldfashioned STR classification, not SNP checking.
I read something once about Khazars converted to Judaism.
I'm not sure. Is it so, or is it a hoax?

That was part of the original discredited Elhaik proposition. Supposedly, at least the elites among the Khazars converted to Judaism. The R1a found among the Levites was held to be proof. It's my understanding the "Jewish" R1a clade is more likely to be from admixture in the Near East from people like the Mitanni.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars

The "Jewish" Levite R1a is R1a-M582, which is found in "significant frequency in Near Eastern regions Iranian Kerman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerman), Iranian Azeri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Azerbaijanis), the Kurds from Cilician Anatolia and Kazakhstan, and among Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi Jews."

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry#Genetics_a nd_the_Khazar_theory

bicicleur
19-01-17, 01:05
That was part of the original discredited Elhaik proposition. Supposedly, at least the elites among the Khazars converted to Judaism. The R1a found among the Levites was held to be proof. It's my understanding the "Jewish" R1a clade is more likely to be from admixture in the Near East from people like the Mitanni.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars

The "Jewish" Levite R1a is R1a-M582, which is found in "significant frequency in Near Eastern regions Iranian Kerman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerman), Iranian Azeri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Azerbaijanis), the Kurds from Cilician Anatolia and Kazakhstan, and among Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi Jews."

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry#Genetics_a nd_the_Khazar_theory

the whole thing seems mere specualtion to me

Angela
19-01-17, 01:42
the whole thing seems mere specualtion to me

People held onto it for the longest time, but it's clear to me now after the resolution of the Jewish R1a clade, and after reading that embarrassing last Elhaik paper where he was reduced to claiming that Yiddish isn't a German language that it was just a fantasy, latched onto to by some for political reasons.

That one report in a Jewish chronicle written much later is like the claim of some Americans that Pochahontas was their great.....grandma. It just ain't so.

Maciamo
19-01-17, 12:53
R1a-Z93 is the most common type of R1a found among Turkic people, so the results are not a big surprise.

I would be worth analysing geographic distribution of the various Z93 subclades. I am planning to update the R1a phylogenetic tree soon. Based on what I have seen the Jewish R1a-Z93 is typically Middle Eastern and would have come alongside Q1b and R1b-Z2103 (among others) from Central Asia during the Middle to Late Bronze Age with the Proto-Iranian migrations.

IronSide
21-01-17, 11:12
My Y-dna which exists in the Caucasus with observable frequencies (1 - 5%) but below that everywhere else includes a good chunk of eastern European Jews, and I always explained it as originally Khazar and not Jewish, as the Khazars converted to Judaism many ethnic Jews travelled to Khazaria to escape prosecution and live under the protection of a Jewish king, this is my theory to explain the origin of Ashkenazi Jews as a mixing of middle eastern Jews and converted Turkic Khazars.

Some Jews hate this theory and consider it anti-semitism as it contradicts the biblical narrative of the twelve sons of Jacob. However, Jacob cant be E1b1b, J1, and J2 at the same time can he ? it's time that modern day Jews realise genetics has proved that Jacob was after all just a story.

Angela
21-01-17, 15:33
My Y-dna which exists in the Caucasus with observable frequencies (1 - 5%) but below that everywhere else includes a good chunk of eastern European Jews, and I always explained it as originally Khazar and not Jewish, as the Khazars converted to Judaism many ethnic Jews travelled to Khazaria to escape prosecution and live under the protection of a Jewish king, this is my theory to explain the origin of Ashkenazi Jews as a mixing of middle eastern Jews and converted Turkic Khazars.

Some Jews hate this theory and consider it anti-semitism as it contradicts the biblical narrative of the twelve sons of Jacob. However, Jacob cant be E1b1b, J1, and J2 at the same time can he ? it's time that modern day Jews realise genetics has proved that Jacob was after all just a story.

It's more than past time to realize that the Khazar theory is dead in the water, and it is genetics, including but not limited to the resolution of the Jewish R1a clade that disproved it. That clade is typically Middle Eastern, and absorbed in the Middle East probably some time in the Bronze Age. The latest Elhaik papers were a total embarrassment, roundly criticized by the population genetics research community, although the lapses in logic and proof should be obvious to anyone who read them.

If you use the search engine you should be able to find all the threads where these matters are discussed.

IronSide
21-01-17, 18:10
Khazar rulers had biblical Jewish names : Obadiah, Hezekiah, Benjamin, Aaron, Joseph etc, yet they spoke Khazar, were they ethnically Jews from the middle east ? were all the Khazars Jews from the middle east ? and is the I2c2 among the Jews from Israel/Palestine and not the Caucasus ?

A. Papadimitriou
21-01-17, 19:56
It can be "Near Eastern" but not Levantine though.

A. Papadimitriou
21-01-17, 19:57
It's more than past time to realize that the Khazar theory is dead in the water, and it is genetics, including but not limited to the resolution of the Jewish R1a clade that disproved it. That clade is typically Middle Eastern, and absorbed in the Middle East probably some time in the Bronze Age. The latest Elhaik papers were a total embarrassment, roundly criticized by the population genetics research community, although the lapses in logic and proof should be obvious to anyone who read them.

If you use the search engine you should be able to find all the threads where these matters are discussed.
It can be "Near Eastern" but not Levantine though.

Angela
21-01-17, 22:12
It can be "Near Eastern" but not Levantine though.

I'm sorry, but I'm not following. What can be Near Eastern but not Levantine? That particular "Jewish" R1a clade?

I think it's likely that this clade moved into the Near East, including the Levant, from the North at some time in the Bronze Age.It is just one more of the many examples in the Near East of the numerous internal migrations which "scrambled" the dna of the entire area since the Early Neolithic. Thus, it has nothing to do with Khazars. It appears in other groups in the Middle East at about the same frequency as it appears in Jews.

We should be aware, moreover, that it seems to be a founder effect primarily in Levites, who themselves constitute only a percentage of all Jews. (Jews are divided into Cohens, Levites, and Israel, with Israel being by far the most numerous. ) The bottom line is that this R1a clade is present in only 6% of Jewish males, and it entered their genomes in the Middle East, not in Europe.
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms3928

Now, whether or not some Khazar elites converted to Judaism, the evidence for which is extraordinarily sparse imo for a theory that's made so many waves, it has nothing to do with this R1a clade, and any admixture of this group into the Ashkenazim would have had minimal impact. Plausible explanations for the ethnogenesis of the Ashkenazim lie elsewhere.

Rethel
01-04-17, 14:48
...........................................