PDA

View Full Version : Canaanite dna



Angela
28-07-17, 17:54
According to the paper the Canaanites are alive and well. They're the Lebanese. :) I could make an argument that perhaps the Jews share a lot of that ancestry too.



The actual paper: Marc Haber et al
"Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences"
http://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(17)30276-8

"The Canaanites inhabited the Levant region during the Bronze Age and established a culture that became influential in the Near East and beyond. However, the Canaanites, unlike most other ancient Near Easterners of this period, left few surviving textual records and thus their origin and relationship to ancient and present-day populations remain unclear. In this study, we sequenced five whole genomes from ∼3,700-year-old individuals from the city of Sidon, a major Canaanite city-state on the Eastern Mediterranean coast. We also sequenced the genomes of 99 individuals from present-day Lebanon to catalog modern Levantine genetic diversity. 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. We show that present-day Lebanese derive most of their ancestry from a Canaanite-related population, which therefore implies substantial genetic continuity in the Levant since at least the Bronze Age. In addition, we find Eurasian ancestry in the Lebanese not present in Bronze Age or earlier Levantines. We estimate that this Eurasian ancestry arrived in the Levant around 3,750–2,170 years ago during a period of successive conquests by distant populations."



To me that would seem to indicate not very much admixture from either the Philistines or the Crusaders or the Arab conquest, yes? See also:
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-dna-offers-clues-canaanites-fate

"“You’d need a lot of migration for roughly half of the population to be replaced by the incoming Iranian-related populations,” says Iosif Lazaridis, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School who was not involved in the study. “This must have been some important event in the history of the Near East.” One possibility is the spread of the Akkadian Empire, which controlled a region spanning from the Levant to Iran between 4,400 and 4,200 years ago. That connection may have presented the opportunity for interbreeding between these far-flung populations.The researchers also determined that modern Lebanese people can attribute about 93 percent of their ancestry to the Canaanites. The other 7 percent comes from Eurasians who probably arrived in the Levant 3,700 to 2,200 years ago. Study coauthor Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Hinxton, England, was surprised by how much Canaanite heritage dominated modern Lebanese DNA. He says he expected to see a more mixed gene pool because so many populations have crossed through the Levant in the last few thousand years."


This seems to be one where the Greek historians got it wrong:

"Greek historians thought the Canaanites originated near the Persian Gulf, whereas archaeological records suggest they arose from farming communities that settled the Levant up to 10,000 years ago. For another, the Old Testament makes reference to the destruction of Canaanite communities, but some of their cities, such as Sidon in Lebanon, appear to have been continually inhabited through the present day. "


I'll have to drill down into the paper and see if they compared the remains to Jewish groups.

Angela
28-07-17, 18:19
Interesting PCA from this Haber paper. So, these Canaanite samples are very close to Jordan Bronze Age.

I wonder if the one European Bronze Age sample which clusters near the European Chalcolithic/Neolithic is the Hungarian Bronze Age sample? If anyone finds out could you report back?

Is it most of Spain and Portugal which has no European Bronze Age samples near it? That would correlate with the new paper which came out.

Click to enlarge.

8977

This is perhaps a better graphic:
http://pichoster.net/images/2017/05/26/a8c11f94b5eb80e6e2c2f343e39b2dcc.jpg

LeBrok
28-07-17, 19:23
Bronze Age Levant/Jordan comes again in center of Semitic people.

Angela
28-07-17, 19:36
Bronze Age Levant/Jordan comes again in center of Semitic people.

Indeed. This is their admixture chart:
http://gnxp.nofe.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/sidon_BA.jpg
Sidon Canaanites are very similar to Jordan Bronze Age.

Interestingly, they don't show that Iran Neolithic/Chl, CHG like ancestry in the steppe or Indo-European populations, just Anatolia Neolithic. That's confusing.

Also confusing, since the Bronze Age the Lebanese have gotten a chunk of EHG. With whom? Or, rather, from whom? Also, it looks like a bit more than 10% of their total ancestry.

They're not showing much difference between Anatolia Neolithic and Levant Neolithic either, which there was.

Kingslav
28-07-17, 19:50
Here is modern sample. 2 populations. 7/8 Slavic 1/8 Canaanite


1 80.7% Estonian + 19.3% Greek_Thessaly @ 5.72
2 87.1% Estonian + 12.9% Libyan_Jewish @ 5.8
3 88.7% Estonian + 11.3% Samaritan @ 5.88
4 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.91
5 70.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 29.1% Estonian @ 5.94
6 87.9% Estonian + 12.1% Cyprian @ 5.95
7 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Druze @ 5.99
8 77.4% Ukrainian + 22.6% Estonian @ 6.06
9 87% Estonian + 13% Algerian_Jewish @ 6.14
10 86.7% Estonian + 13.3% Italian_Jewish @ 6.15
11 84.7% Estonian + 15.3% Central_Greek @ 6.17
12 85.9% Estonian + 14.1% South_Italian @ 6.18
13 84.2% Estonian + 15.8% Ashkenazi @ 6.18
14 97.9% Ukrainian + 2.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.21
15 85.1% Estonian + 14.9% East_Sicilian @ 6.23
16 89% Estonian + 11% Palestinian @ 6.23
17 89.6% Ukrainian + 10.4% Lithuanian @ 6.26
18 88.8% Estonian + 11.2% Jordanian @ 6.27
19 98.3% Ukrainian + 1.7% Lebanese_Druze @ 6.28
20 84.1% Ukrainian_Lviv + 15.9% Lithuanian @ 6.29


1 62.7% Hungarians + 37.3% Russian @ 1.4
2 81.3% Mixed_Slav + 18.7% Andalucia @ 1.52
3 73.6% Russian_B + 26.4% Cataluna @ 1.61
4 75.2% Hungarians + 24.8% Finnish @ 1.62
5 74.1% Hungarians + 25.9% Lithuanians @ 1.64
6 74.8% Russian + 25.2% Baleares @ 1.65
7 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Baleares @ 1.67
8 74.5% Russian_B + 25.5% Spaniards @ 1.7
9 57.2% Ukranians + 42.8% German @ 1.73
10 71.1% Hungarians + 28.9% Lithuanian @ 1.73
11 56.6% Hungarians + 43.4% Mixed_Slav @ 1.74
12 75.6% Russian_B + 24.4% Castilla_La_Mancha @ 1.75
13 68.2% Ukranians + 31.8% Mixed_Germanic @ 1.79
14 74% Hungarians + 26% FIN30 @ 1.8
15 80.2% Mixed_Slav + 19.8% Spaniards @ 1.81
16 66% Russian_B + 34% French @ 1.82
17 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Extremadura @ 1.83
18 83.7% Russian + 16.3% Sardinian @ 1.84
19 74% Russian + 26% North_Italian @ 1.88
20 75.5% Russian_B + 24.5% Valencia @ 1.88

LeBrok
28-07-17, 19:51
Interestingly, they don't show that Iran Neolithic/Chl, CHG like ancestry in the steppe or Indo-European populations, just Anatolia Neolithic. That's confusing.They probably associated this part of CHG to Steppe/Yamnaya component first, and subtracted this similarity from Iran Neolithic. I wish they produced Iranian Neolithic first, according to timeline, before they worked on Steppe.

This is probably the reason why so much Steppe shows in Armenian Bronze and modern Lebanon. In reality it should be half of it.



Also confusing, since the Bronze Age the Lebanese have gotten a chunk of EHG. With whom? Or, rather, from whom? Also, it looks like a bit more than 10% of their total ancestry.
EHG and Steppe EMBA is the same for them.




They're not showing much difference between Anatolia Neolithic and Levant Neolithic either, which there was.
Exactly. They were not careful enough.

Angela
28-07-17, 20:05
They probably associated this part of CHG to Steppe/Yamnaya component first, and subtracted this similarity from Iran Neolithic. I wish they produced Iranian Neolithic first, according to timeline, before they worked on Steppe.

This is probably the reason why so much Steppe shows in Armenian Bronze and modern Lebanon. In reality it should be half of it.



EHG and Steppe EMBA is the same for them.




Exactly. They were not careful enough.

I agree with all of that. It sheds doubt on some of their conclusions, at least as to the population movements of the past. I wish Lazaridis/the Reich group would get involved again.

LeBrok
28-07-17, 21:25
I agree with all of that. It sheds doubt on some of their conclusions, at least as to the population movements of the past. I wish Lazaridis/the Reich group would get involved again.Yes, and they might be leaving out Anatolian Neolithic contribution to Levant Bronze, using these grossly simplified ancestry.

Rethel
28-07-17, 21:50
According to the paper the Canaanites are alive and well. They're the Lebanese. :)

According to this page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml) (I guess authoritative page), not more than 17.5%.

Kingslav
28-07-17, 22:09
Interesting PCA from this Haber paper. So, these Canaanite samples are very close to Jordan Bronze Age.

I wonder if the one European Bronze Age sample which clusters near the European Chalcolithic/Neolithic is the Hungarian Bronze Age sample? If anyone finds out could you report back?

Is it most of Spain and Portugal which has no European Bronze Age samples near it? That would correlate with the new paper which came out.

Click to enlarge.

8977

This is perhaps a better graphic:
http://pichoster.net/images/2017/05/26/a8c11f94b5eb80e6e2c2f343e39b2dcc.jpg

Yes they surely are the Lebanese and Sephardics, Canaanites are however not Ashkenazi, Khazarians based off DNA findings.


Here is modern sample. 2 populations. 7/8 Slavic 1/8 Canaanite


1 80.7% Estonian + 19.3% Greek_Thessaly @ 5.72
2 87.1% Estonian + 12.9% Libyan_Jewish @ 5.8
3 88.7% Estonian + 11.3% Samaritan @ 5.88
4 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.91
5 70.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 29.1% Estonian @ 5.94
6 87.9% Estonian + 12.1% Cyprian @ 5.95
7 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Druze @ 5.99
8 77.4% Ukrainian + 22.6% Estonian @ 6.06
9 87% Estonian + 13% Algerian_Jewish @ 6.14
10 86.7% Estonian + 13.3% Italian_Jewish @ 6.15
11 84.7% Estonian + 15.3% Central_Greek @ 6.17
12 85.9% Estonian + 14.1% South_Italian @ 6.18
13 84.2% Estonian + 15.8% Ashkenazi @ 6.18
14 97.9% Ukrainian + 2.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.21
15 85.1% Estonian + 14.9% East_Sicilian @ 6.23
16 89% Estonian + 11% Palestinian @ 6.23
17 89.6% Ukrainian + 10.4% Lithuanian @ 6.26
18 88.8% Estonian + 11.2% Jordanian @ 6.27
19 98.3% Ukrainian + 1.7% Lebanese_Druze @ 6.28
20 84.1% Ukrainian_Lviv + 15.9% Lithuanian @ 6.29


1 62.7% Hungarians + 37.3% Russian @ 1.4
2 81.3% Mixed_Slav + 18.7% Andalucia @ 1.52
3 73.6% Russian_B + 26.4% Cataluna @ 1.61
4 75.2% Hungarians + 24.8% Finnish @ 1.62
5 74.1% Hungarians + 25.9% Lithuanians @ 1.64
6 74.8% Russian + 25.2% Baleares @ 1.65
7 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Baleares @ 1.67
8 74.5% Russian_B + 25.5% Spaniards @ 1.7
9 57.2% Ukranians + 42.8% German @ 1.73
10 71.1% Hungarians + 28.9% Lithuanian @ 1.73
11 56.6% Hungarians + 43.4% Mixed_Slav @ 1.74
12 75.6% Russian_B + 24.4% Castilla_La_Mancha @ 1.75
13 68.2% Ukranians + 31.8% Mixed_Germanic @ 1.79
14 74% Hungarians + 26% FIN30 @ 1.8
15 80.2% Mixed_Slav + 19.8% Spaniards @ 1.81
16 66% Russian_B + 34% French @ 1.82
17 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Extremadura @ 1.83
18 83.7% Russian + 16.3% Sardinian @ 1.84
19 74% Russian + 26% North_Italian @ 1.88
20 75.5% Russian_B + 24.5% Valencia @ 1.88

Angela
28-07-17, 22:22
Yes they surely are the Lebanese and Sephardics, Canaanites are however not Ashkenazi, Khazarians based off DNA findings.


Here is modern sample. 2 populations. 7/8 Slavic 1/8 Canaanite


1 80.7% Estonian + 19.3% Greek_Thessaly @ 5.72
2 87.1% Estonian + 12.9% Libyan_Jewish @ 5.8
3 88.7% Estonian + 11.3% Samaritan @ 5.88
4 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.91
5 70.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 29.1% Estonian @ 5.94
6 87.9% Estonian + 12.1% Cyprian @ 5.95
7 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Druze @ 5.99
8 77.4% Ukrainian + 22.6% Estonian @ 6.06
9 87% Estonian + 13% Algerian_Jewish @ 6.14
10 86.7% Estonian + 13.3% Italian_Jewish @ 6.15
11 84.7% Estonian + 15.3% Central_Greek @ 6.17
12 85.9% Estonian + 14.1% South_Italian @ 6.18
13 84.2% Estonian + 15.8% Ashkenazi @ 6.18
14 97.9% Ukrainian + 2.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.21
15 85.1% Estonian + 14.9% East_Sicilian @ 6.23
16 89% Estonian + 11% Palestinian @ 6.23
17 89.6% Ukrainian + 10.4% Lithuanian @ 6.26
18 88.8% Estonian + 11.2% Jordanian @ 6.27
19 98.3% Ukrainian + 1.7% Lebanese_Druze @ 6.28
20 84.1% Ukrainian_Lviv + 15.9% Lithuanian @ 6.29


1 62.7% Hungarians + 37.3% Russian @ 1.4
2 81.3% Mixed_Slav + 18.7% Andalucia @ 1.52
3 73.6% Russian_B + 26.4% Cataluna @ 1.61
4 75.2% Hungarians + 24.8% Finnish @ 1.62
5 74.1% Hungarians + 25.9% Lithuanians @ 1.64
6 74.8% Russian + 25.2% Baleares @ 1.65
7 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Baleares @ 1.67
8 74.5% Russian_B + 25.5% Spaniards @ 1.7
9 57.2% Ukranians + 42.8% German @ 1.73
10 71.1% Hungarians + 28.9% Lithuanian @ 1.73
11 56.6% Hungarians + 43.4% Mixed_Slav @ 1.74
12 75.6% Russian_B + 24.4% Castilla_La_Mancha @ 1.75
13 68.2% Ukranians + 31.8% Mixed_Germanic @ 1.79
14 74% Hungarians + 26% FIN30 @ 1.8
15 80.2% Mixed_Slav + 19.8% Spaniards @ 1.81
16 66% Russian_B + 34% French @ 1.82
17 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Extremadura @ 1.83
18 83.7% Russian + 16.3% Sardinian @ 1.84
19 74% Russian + 26% North_Italian @ 1.88
20 75.5% Russian_B + 24.5% Valencia @ 1.88


Modern samples from which populations? Which calculators? What do these people have to do with Canaanites?

Ashkenazim have too much European ancestry to be as close as Christian Lebanese, which I believe is the sample which was used here in the subject paper.

However, I've seen Ashkenazi results from calculators which show them to be about 50% Canaanite/Lebanese.

Kingslav
28-07-17, 22:51
Modern samples from which populations? Which calculators? What do these people have to do with Canaanites?

Ashkenazim have too much European ancestry to be as close as Christian Lebanese, which I believe is the sample which was used here in the subject paper.

However, I've seen Ashkenazi results from calculators which show them to be about 50% Canaanite/Lebanese.

I posted oracles for modern Southwestern Ukrainian, with 7/8 Slavic 1/8 Sephardic/Canaanite

First oracle Eurogenes K13, second oracle Dodecad K12b

As for Ashkenazi/Khazarians they share much of their ethnic roots with Italic people, from settling northern and central Italy. However this Italic input, does not make them related to biblical Canaanites, and they often will use Gedmatch oracles and slick manuevering to trick the less educated to believe that Khazars are rooted from Levant.

Angela
28-07-17, 23:13
I posted oracles for modern Southwestern Ukrainian, with 7/8 Slavic 1/8 Sephardic/Canaanite

First oracle Eurogenes K13, second oracle Dodecad K12b

As for Ashkenazi/Khazarians they share much of their ethnic roots with Italic people, from settling northern and central Italy. However this Italic input, does not make them related to biblical Canaanites, and they often will use Gedmatch oracles and slick manuevering to trick the less educated to believe that Khazars are rooted from Levant.

What relevance do Ukrainians and their calculator results have to a paper about ancient Canaanite dna or even its relationship to Jews?

I really would suggest using the search engine to read up on these topics. You seem to be pretty confused about population genetics. Nothing wrong with that. It takes a while to get a handle on all these papers.

Ashkenazim are not Khazarians. That is a now totally discredited idea which was put forth by one Israeli academic. It was resoundingly disputed by many Jewish researchers including Behar.

Ashkenazim are descendants of a Levantine population mixed with a European population. This has been proved over and over again, including with IBD analysis. Italics didn't "settle" the Near East, and Ashkenazim didn't "settle" Italy. Ashkenazim formed as a population somewhere in the Rhineland or further east in eastern Europe. Some of the people who contributed to their ethnogenesis may have been Jews who had spent some time on the Italian peninsula. The problem with this very popular theory is that there is no particular IBD sharing between Italians and Ashkenazim, so the mixing population may have been Greek like or Islander like instead.

Ancient dna and time will tell.

You can start with this thread. If you want older ones just let me know.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34002-Ashkenazi-ethnogenesis-redux-Xue-et-al?highlight=Jewish+ethnogenesis

This is by no means settled. Without simulations, Xue et al found it just as likely that Ashkenazim are a straight mix between Middle Easterners and East Europeans.

Kingslav
28-07-17, 23:36
What relevance do Ukrainians and their calculator results have to a paper about ancient Canaanite dna or even its relationship to Jews?

I really would suggest using the search engine to read up on these topics. You seem to be pretty confused about population genetics. Nothing wrong with that. It takes a while to get a handle on all these papers.

Ashkenazim are not Khazarians. That is a now totally discredited idea which was put forth by one Israeli academic. It was resoundingly disputed by many Jewish researchers including Behar.

Ashkenazim are descendants of a Levantine population mixed with a European population. This has been proved over and over again, including with IBD analysis. Italics didn't "settle" the Near East, and Ashkenazim didn't "settle" Italy. Ashkenazim formed as a population somewhere in the Rhineland or further east in eastern Europe. Some of the people who contributed to their ethnogenesis may have been Jews who had spent some time on the Italian peninsula. The problem with this very popular theory is that there is no particular IBD sharing between Italians and Ashkenazim, so the mixing population may have been Greek like or Islander like instead.

Ancient dna and time will tell.

You can start with this thread. If you want older ones just let me know.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34002-Ashkenazi-ethnogenesis-redux-Xue-et-al?highlight=Jewish+ethnogenesis

This is by no means settled. Without simulations, Xue et al found it just as likely that Ashkenazim are a straight mix between Middle Easterners and East Europeans.

This not true, they score very High Italian admix on K36 that peaks in Tuscany, Italy. This Italian score % is indicitive of AJ settling within Italian peninsula. They are also far less Levantine/Mediterranean shifted than Sephardi or mixed Jews.

Ashkenazi K36- Highest region, 17.43 Italian

Population
Amerindian -
Arabian 2.43%
Armenian 6.08%
Basque 1.91%
Central_African -
Central_Euro 1.74%
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 3.11%
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 1.11%
East_Med 15.86%
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
French 4.88%
Iberian 13.16%
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 17.43%
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 12.77%
North_African 2.08%
North_Atlantic 6.17%
North_Caucasian 6.93%
North_Sea -
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian 1.59%
West_Med 2.73%

Angela
28-07-17, 23:46
This not true, they score very High Italian admix on K36 that peaks in Tuscany, Italy. This Italian score % is indicitive of AJ settling within Italian peninsula. They are also far less Levantine/Mediterranean shifted than Sephardi or mixed Jews.

This is another thing you'll have to explore...the difference between IBS sharing and IBD sharing. The best thing is to google the terms.

IBS sharing is similar sharing of admixture from ancient population groups. IBD sharing is actual DESCENT. The calculator you're speaking about has nothing to do with IBD sharing-it isn't measuring that.

The 2016 thread just posted is too old. Better start with the link I provided, which is where Xue updates her earlier analysis. The 2016 one is good for background, however.

davef
28-07-17, 23:47
This not true, they score very High Italian admix on K36 that peaks in Tuscany, Italy. This Italian score % is indicitive of AJ settling within Italian peninsula. They are also far less Levantine/Mediterranean shifted than Sephardi or mixed Jews.

This is the best thread here regarding Ashkenazim genetics:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32446-Time-and-place-of-European-admixture-into-the-Ashkenazim-Xue-et-al

Kingslav
28-07-17, 23:53
This is the best thread here regarding Ashkenazim genetics:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32446-Time-and-place-of-European-admixture-into-the-Ashkenazim-Xue-et-al

I study this group already, can you explain the high Italian % within Ashkenazi population?

Angela
29-07-17, 00:00
@Kingslav,
I would suggest you read it again after you find out the difference between IBS and IBD.

This is a graphic for IBD sharing between Ashkenazim and other populations:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8neaeiS52o/UwncbDA6GXI/AAAAAAAAcdA/OR7avrsY6lg/s1600/genetic.png

Perennially interesting as this topic is, it's not the topic of this thread. You can continue this discussion here...

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34002-Ashkenazi-ethnogenesis-redux-Xue-et-al?highlight=Jewish+ethnogenesis

I was always rather fond of the Northern Italian/Tuscan wives theory of Ashkenazi ethnogenesis, but some researcher is going to have to figure out why there's no sign of it through IBD analysis, which there should be if it happened within the last 1000 or even 1500 years. That's not so far back that it couldn't be detected.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 00:21
@Kingslav,
I would suggest you read it again after you find out the difference between IBS and IBD.

This is a graphic for IBD sharing between Ashkenazim and other populations:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-j8neaeiS52o/UwncbDA6GXI/AAAAAAAAcdA/OR7avrsY6lg/s1600/genetic.png

Perennially interesting as this topic is, it's not the topic of this thread. You can continue this discussion here...

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34002-Ashkenazi-ethnogenesis-redux-Xue-et-al?highlight=Jewish+ethnogenesis

I was always rather fond of the Northern Italian/Tuscan wives theory of Ashkenazi ethnogenesis, but some researcher is going to have to figure out why there's no sign of it through IBD analysis, which there should be if it happened within the last 1000 or even 1500 years. That's not so far back that it couldn't be detected.

Ok back to Canaanites, it is true Lebanese are likely closest to Canaanites, also there close relatives Sephardics continue to carry this genetic though slightly diluted amount than Lebanese. Sephardic settled Iberia, South France, eventually Ottoman Region, East Europe, Dutch, others and blended into population. There Levantine genetics live in some modern Euro population but is usually forgotten or undermined by many western historical chroniclers.

Angela
29-07-17, 00:32
Ok back to Canaanites, it is true Lebanese are likely closest to Canaanites, also there close relatives Sephardics continue to carry this genetic though slightly diluted amount than Lebanese. Sephardic settled Iberia, South France, eventually Ottoman Region, East Europe, Dutch, others and blended into population. There Levantine genetics live in some modern Euro population but is usually forgotten or undermined by many western historical chroniclers.


I think that generally speaking real changes in the genome (autosomal dna) are the result of mass folk migrations. However, it's certainly true that individuals may have unknown ancestors in their family tree from some much smaller migration.

At the same time, any actual autosomal trace of some specific individual from a distant place could disappear within two-three hundred years of admixture solely with "natives". Depending on the individual case, person X might have absolutely no dna even from a great-great grandparent.

That's why although I have a very extensive family tree I'm not very interested in most of the people on it. I may have none or extremely little of their "specific" dna at all, i.e. no IBD sharing with them, although in broad terms we share ancestry from the same clusters of people.

https://dna-explained.com/2017/04/21/concepts-percentage-of-ancestors-dna/

Btw, no reason you can't discuss Ashkenazi genesis if you're interested. Just go to the thread to which I linked.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 00:46
I think that generally speaking real changes in the genome (autosomal dna) are the result of mass folk migrations. However, it's certainly true that individuals may have unknown ancestors in their family tree from some much smaller migration.

At the same time, any actual autosomal trace of some specific individual from a distant place could disappear within two-three hundred years of admixture solely with "natives". Depending on the individual case, person X might have absolutely no dna even from a great-great grandparent.

That's why although I have a very extensive family tree I'm not very interested in most of the people on it. I may have none or extremely little of their "specific" dna at all, i.e. no IBD sharing with them, although in broad terms we share ancestry from the same clusters of people.

https://dna-explained.com/2017/04/21/concepts-percentage-of-ancestors-dna/

Btw, no reason you can't discuss Ashkenazi genesis if you're interested. Just go to the thread to which I linked.

I am mostly Sephardi, Canaanite. My Ashkenazi could be 1.2% Mediterranean Islander from DNALAND says Cypriot, Sicilian. That 1.2% is only bit I show among all DNA tests. This goes parallel with my extremely low 1.11 Italian in K36. My Sephardic ancestors would have mixed potentially with Romaniote, Italkim, Ashkenazi.

Angela
29-07-17, 01:04
@Kingslav,
If those are your results, you are not mostly Canaanite. You're a run of the mill Ukrainian.

Until you get serious in your comments, prepare to be ignored.

When people are willfully uninformed, they waste other peoples' time.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 01:21
@Kingslav,
If those are your results, you are not mostly Canaanite. You're a run of the mill Ukrainian.

Until you get serious in your comments, prepare to be ignored.

When people are willfully uninformed, they waste other peoples' time.

Why am I wasting time, I am here to discuss Canaanite genetics of my own, I invite you to examine my oracles with closer scope, I am firstly more South Slavic shifted over majority if not all Ukrainians, I also score over double East Med and West Med than Ukrainian average this proves my Mediterranean shift from Ukrainians. Also I score Levant, Caucasus which less likely in Ukraine. I also am first sample from Ukraine with K36 African from 55 samples tested. Or I can be generalized "run of mill Ukrainian"

Rethel
29-07-17, 01:26
So now you are not pure Slav, but a Jew, Turk and Canaanite? https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR4s8_IIXEkSWl7JQBWAL3slaxWFJPku 6UkFhBsFFcRCP94sOCk9HwcR94

Kingslav
29-07-17, 01:32
So now you are not pure Slav, but a Jew, Turk and Canaanite? https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR4s8_IIXEkSWl7JQBWAL3slaxWFJPku 6UkFhBsFFcRCP94sOCk9HwcR94

Sure I am, dont forget Tatar,

With my 99.5% East Europe I am higher than you Rethel

Kingslav
29-07-17, 01:42
Why does majority of society believe Khazars are Canaanites this relevant topic for this thread? Just a suggestion

LeBrok
29-07-17, 02:27
Sure I am, dont forget Tatar,

With my 99.5% East Europe I am higher than you RethelHere is how to measure a "better man". Bravo!
Why don't you study population genetics for couple of years then (maybe) you will understand and we will talk. Right now you are trying to "teach us" what you don't get. And this is saying politely.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 02:54
Here is how to measure a "better man". Bravo!
Why don't you study population genetics for couple of years then (maybe) you will understand and we will talk. Right now you are trying to "teach us" what you don't get. And this is saying politely.

This is how you measure the purest Slavs we using %, this is discussion board also no reason to get personal this is only discussion, I already got banned on Anthrogenica today for speaking truth against Khazarians

LeBrok
29-07-17, 03:23
This is how you measure the purest Slavs we using %, this is discussion board also no reason to get personal this is only discussion, I already got banned on Anthrogenica today for speaking truth against Khazarians Nope, I think that you were banned for being rude, condescending and bluntly ignoring what people with years of experience in population genetics trying to explain. Think about this. It is free advise and might save you from banning on this site one day for exactly the same reason.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 03:35
Nope, I think that you were banned for being rude, condescending and bluntly ignoring what people with years of experience in population genetics trying to explain. Think about this. It is free advise and might save you from banning on this site one day for exactly the same reason.

I have done nothing here or Anthrogenica to be ban. Khazarians are stealing Levantine history, they go around saying theyre Levites cause they had an unfortunate bottleneck, Real Levites is Lebanese, Palestinians, Jordanians, Sephardics, Ethiopian Jews

1 80.7% Estonian + 19.3% Greek_Thessaly @ 5.72
2 87.1% Estonian + 12.9% Libyan_Jewish @ 5.8
3 88.7% Estonian + 11.3% Samaritan @ 5.88
4 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.91
5 70.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 29.1% Estonian @ 5.94
6 87.9% Estonian + 12.1% Cyprian @ 5.95
7 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Druze @ 5.99
8 77.4% Ukrainian + 22.6% Estonian @ 6.06
9 87% Estonian + 13% Algerian_Jewish @ 6.14
10 86.7% Estonian + 13.3% Italian_Jewish @ 6.15
11 84.7% Estonian + 15.3% Central_Greek @ 6.17
12 85.9% Estonian + 14.1% South_Italian @ 6.18
13 84.2% Estonian + 15.8% Ashkenazi @ 6.18
14 97.9% Ukrainian + 2.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.21
15 85.1% Estonian + 14.9% East_Sicilian @ 6.23
16 89% Estonian + 11% Palestinian @ 6.23
17 89.6% Ukrainian + 10.4% Lithuanian @ 6.26
18 88.8% Estonian + 11.2% Jordanian @ 6.27
19 98.3% Ukrainian + 1.7% Lebanese_Druze @ 6.28
20 84.1% Ukrainian_Lviv + 15.9% Lithuanian @ 6.29


This is sample of 7/8 Ukrainian 1/8 Canaanite

Kingslav
29-07-17, 03:43
There was people on anthrogenica that debunked the Khazar stories they are leading in anthrogenica. They are liars at will regardless. And using trickery with oracles to tell their own alternate story

bicicleur
29-07-17, 09:50
analysing the Y-DNA, Ted Kendall sees J1 Amorites as the source of the Canaanites, who would be ancestral to the Arabs :

The Middle Bronze Age Canaanite Phoenician ERS179733 from Sidon Lebanon from 1650 BCE is J-FGC11.
That's right, overwhelmingly "Arab" J-FGC11 is Canaanite.
A link to a screenshot of the UCSC Genome Browser showing the derived read for FGC11 is on the condensed YFull tree below, next to the position of the sample. The YFull tMRCA is 2000 BCE, which is just right (yet again).
This means that the main Arab expansion starts with the nomadic Amorites, who used donkeys, not camels, at the 4.2 Kiloyear Event (2200 BCE).
The Amorites included the Bronze Age I1705 in J-Z2324* from 'Ain Ghazal (Amman) Jordan, c. 2050 BCE. Others were the Canaanite Egyptians of the 14th and 15th Dynasty starting around 1700 BCE who had later descendants among the Saite Period Egyptians such as the Abusir mummy JK2314 in J-Z2313, as well as the present day Copts of Egypt. These Canaanite descendants in Egypt also included the Delta Seth-worshipping (the Semitic Baal Hadad) ancestors of the 19th Dynasty Seti I and Rameses II.
The J-FGC11's then become part of the Middle Bronze Age Canaanites in J-Z1884 (J1-L858), and then move off into Arabia as J-S21237 with the domestication of the camel around the time of the Late Bronze Age Collapse c.1200 - c.1150 BCE.
The evidence is below:
http://www.open-genomes.org/…/J-Z2324_condensed_YFull_5.04_… (http://www.open-genomes.org/analysis/J1-P58/J-Z2324_condensed_YFull_5.04_tree_with_Bronze_Age_Ca naanite_ERS1790733_1700_BCE_J1-FGC11.html)

bicicleur
29-07-17, 12:40
Revisiting the Philistines


A new paper maintains they weren't Aegean Islanders, but instead were local Anatolians.

See:
http://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/1.802928

This is another one that only ancient dna will settle as far as I'm concerned, or maybe not. :)

here we have some possible hints from DNA, not conclusive yet though :

We next tested a model of the present-day Lebanese as a mixture of Sidon_BA and any other ancient Eurasian population using qpAdm. We found that the Lebanese can be best modeled as Sidon_BA 93% ± 1.6% and a Steppe Bronze Age population 7% ± 1.6% (Figure 3 (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2101574577/2080017552/gr3.jpg)C; Table S6 (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2101574577/2080017559/mmc1.pdf)). To estimate the time when the Steppe ancestry penetrated the Levant, we used, as above, LD-based inference and set the Lebanese as admixed test population with Natufians, Levant_N, Sidon_BA, Steppe_EMBA, and Steppe_MLBA as reference populations. We found support (p = 0.00017) for a mixture between Sidon_BA and Steppe_EMBA which has occurred around 2,950 ± 790 ya (Figure S13 (http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2101574577/2080017559/mmc1.pdf)B). It is important to note here that Bronze Age Steppe populations used in the model need not be the actual ancestral mixing populations, and the admixture could have involved a population which was itself admixed with a Steppe-like ancestry population. The time period of this mixture overlaps with the decline of the Egyptian empire and its domination over the Levant, leading some of the coastal cities to thrive, including Sidon and Tyre, which established at this time a successful maritime trade network throughout the Mediterranean. The decline in Egypt’s power was also followed by a succession of conquests of the region by distant populations such as the Assyrians, Persians, and Macedonians, any or all of whom could have carried the Steppe-like ancestry observed here in the Levant after the Bronze Age.

http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2101574577/2080017550/gr4.jpg

Rethel
29-07-17, 16:35
Sure I am, dont forget Tatar,

With my 99.5% East Europe I am higher than you Rethel

What higher?

Kingslav
29-07-17, 17:27
What higher?

My Slavness %, when Ancestry DNA was making their test, they used my sample in their Utah laboratory, and they named my sample "perfect Slav". Likely this sample will be genetically manufactered and duplicated to make an army of perfect Slavs in the future. They were solely in search of I2A sample for this as the R1A and R1B samples were deemed as altered samples. They only were accepting sample 99% and above. One thing is certain Khazarians are not Canaanites, evidence is still pointing in direction of populations now inhabiting around Levant, North Africa and Mediterranean Sea Farers have widen this gene pool.

Johane Derite
29-07-17, 17:45
My Slavness %, when Ancestry DNA was making there test they used my sample in their Utah laboratory, and they named my sample "perfect slav". Likely this sample will be genetically manufactered and duplicated to make an army of perfect Slavs lol.

Show us a photo of yourself for science, I'm curious what the perfect Slav phenotype is

Kingslav
29-07-17, 18:31
Show us a photo of yourself for science, I'm curious what the perfect Slav phenotype is

I will give you a summary perfect Slav 99% or above.

This person will inherit long limbs, long arms and legs, superior over all races at covering distance in short time due to width of their limbs, this long limbs inherited from proto-southern Europeans who survived the last ice age in Balkans, braced cold conditions which made them grow taller, haplogroup I. With long limbs, they inherit short torso, very compact and strong core, unlikely to build up excess fat when eating McDonald's diet. In terms of hands and feet will be oversized similar with limbs. The foot will have specific mutation called Greek foot, sometimes also referred as "Morton Toe" or "Thracian Foot" where the second toe is pointing the longest on the foot. Science has proved this mutation as being able to exert explosive force to your upper leg muscles even from relaxed position giving unfair advantage over most humans. This Greek foot is usually found in Balkans population but can be noticed in some who walk with toes pointed to side. Superstar player Lebron James has been found to have this mutation. The perfect Slav will also be tall, 190cm or more, with large skull for fighting. Usually this person will have elite cardio-respiratory breathing due to their other elite traits. Other specific less important mutations, variety of hair color, variety of eye color usually is impacted by Levantine genes. On my maternal side everyone has green or brown eyes, I have dark green shade. Also swarthy beard is grown early into adulthood

LeBrok
29-07-17, 18:41
Show us a photo of yourself for science, I'm curious what the perfect Slav phenotype isNot only he is super Slav, the KingSlav, the highest Slav, the pure Slav, but now he also has Slav super toe! It is so ridiculous, that I'm sure, it has to have a psychiatric disorder name.

Angela
29-07-17, 19:26
analysing the Y-DNA, Ted Kendall sees J1 Amorites as the source of the Canaanites, who would be ancestral to the Arabs :

The Middle Bronze Age Canaanite Phoenician ERS179733 from Sidon Lebanon from 1650 BCE is J-FGC11.
That's right, overwhelmingly "Arab" J-FGC11 is Canaanite.
A link to a screenshot of the UCSC Genome Browser showing the derived read for FGC11 is on the condensed YFull tree below, next to the position of the sample. The YFull tMRCA is 2000 BCE, which is just right (yet again).
This means that the main Arab expansion starts with the nomadic Amorites, who used donkeys, not camels, at the 4.2 Kiloyear Event (2200 BCE).
The Amorites included the Bronze Age I1705 in J-Z2324* from 'Ain Ghazal (Amman) Jordan, c. 2050 BCE. Others were the Canaanite Egyptians of the 14th and 15th Dynasty starting around 1700 BCE who had later descendants among the Saite Period Egyptians such as the Abusir mummy JK2314 in J-Z2313, as well as the present day Copts of Egypt. These Canaanite descendants in Egypt also included the Delta Seth-worshipping (the Semitic Baal Hadad) ancestors of the 19th Dynasty Seti I and Rameses II.
The J-FGC11's then become part of the Middle Bronze Age Canaanites in J-Z1884 (J1-L858), and then move off into Arabia as J-S21237 with the domestication of the camel around the time of the Late Bronze Age Collapse c.1200 - c.1150 BCE.
The evidence is below:
http://www.open-genomes.org/…/J-Z2324_condensed_YFull_5.04_… (http://www.open-genomes.org/analysis/J1-P58/J-Z2324_condensed_YFull_5.04_tree_with_Bronze_Age_Ca naanite_ERS1790733_1700_BCE_J1-FGC11.html)




Well, this certainly calls into question the often proposed idea (even by some of the authors of this paper) that the Canaanite/Phoenicians were all J2. Remember the paper tracing settlements around the Mediterranean by following spikes in J2?

I think Kandell is moving into pretty speculative territory with the Egyptian Pharaohs of the New Dynasty, however. (He would have to include Rameses I as well, yes?) It's certainly interesting that this "new man" from near the Hyksos areas in the Delta suddenly catapults into the chair of Pharaoh, but we have no ancient dna. Even if he descended from the invaders, and the invaders carried a lot of this type of J1, I'm sure they would have carried other haplogroups as well. Besides "E" groups, wouldn't J2 have also been in place already? I always find Kandell's work interesting and very much worth reading, back to the old days at 23andme, but he has his own lens, shall we say.

If, as he proposes, the "Arab" expansion started with the Amorites, then we're looking at the mountainous areas around Syria and the Levant in general. How did J1 get there, and from where? When did J2 arrive, and from where and with whom? This was "E" and "G2a2" territory, yes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorites

Ironic that they founded Babylon, and then Babylon enslaved them.

Also ironic how much virtual "ink" was spent in trying, even very recently, to prove that all the J2 in Italy came from Phoenicians whose only footprint was two emporia in Sicily.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 19:40
Well, this certainly calls into question the often proposed idea (even by some of the authors of this paper) that the Canaanite/Phoenicians were all J2. Remember the paper tracing settlements around the Mediterranean by following spikes in J2?

I think Kandell is moving into pretty speculative territory with the Egyptian Pharaohs of the New Dynasty, however. (He would have to include Rameses I as well, yes?) It's certainly interesting that this "new man" from near the Hyksos areas in the Delta suddenly catapults into the chair of Pharaoh, but we have no ancient dna. Even if he descended from the invaders, and the invaders carried a lot of this type of J1, I'm sure they would have carried other haplogroups as well. Besides "E" groups, wouldn't J2 have also been in place already? I always find Kandell's work interesting and very much worth reading, back to the old days at 23andme, but he has his own lens, shall we say.

If, as he proposes, the "Arab" expansion started with the Amorites, then we're looking at the mountainous areas around Syria and the Levant in general. How did J1 get there, and from where? When did J2 arrive, and from where and with whom? This was "E" and "G2a2" territory, yes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorites

Ironic that they founded Babylon, and then Babylon enslaved them.

Also ironic how much virtual "ink" was spent in trying, even very recently, to prove that all the J2 in Italy came from Phoenicians whose only footprint was two emporia in Sicily.

Highly unlikely modern Italians will descend from Canaanites unless they have Sephardic ancestors, which many from northern and central Italian peninsula are lacking.

Angela
29-07-17, 19:41
The Slavs are not the topic of this thread. Can we get back to the Canaanites and stop cluttering it up?

Angela
29-07-17, 19:48
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Angela http://www.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=515771#post515771)
Well, this certainly calls into question the often proposed idea (even by some of the authors of this paper) that the Canaanite/Phoenicians were all J2. Remember the paper tracing settlements around the Mediterranean by following spikes in J2?

I think Kandell is moving into pretty speculative territory with the Egyptian Pharaohs of the New Dynasty, however. (He would have to include Rameses I as well, yes?) It's certainly interesting that this "new man" from near the Hyksos areas in the Delta suddenly catapults into the chair of Pharaoh, but we have no ancient dna. Even if he descended from the invaders, and the invaders carried a lot of this type of J1, I'm sure they would have carried other haplogroups as well. Besides "E" groups, wouldn't J2 have also been in place already? I always find Kandell's work interesting and very much worth reading, back to the old days at 23andme, but he has his own lens, shall we say.

If, as he proposes, the "Arab" expansion started with the Amorites, then we're looking at the mountainous areas around Syria and the Levant in general. How did J1 get there, and from where? When did J2 arrive, and from where and with whom? This was "E" and "G2a2" territory, yes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorites

Ironic that they founded Babylon, and then Babylon enslaved them.

Also ironic how much virtual "ink" was spent in trying, even very recently, to prove that all the J2 in Italy came from Phoenicians whose only footprint was two emporia in Sicily.




King Slav: Higly unlikely modern Italians will descend from Canaanites unless they have Sephardic ancestors, which many from northern and central Italian peninsula are lacking.

My point was that speculations based on modern distributions of yDna and speculative attribution of certain specific ydna to ancient peoples has quite often been trumped by ancient dna.

Angela
29-07-17, 19:50
Slavs descend from Canaanites also Angela, often misinterpreted by the Western chroniclers

All Europeans carry ancestry from the Near East, but this is not the thread to discuss it. I've given you a lot of leeway. Don't drag this thread off topic.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 19:56
All Europeans carry ancestry from the Near East, but this is not the thread to discuss it. I've given you a lot of leeway. Don't drag this thread off topic.

Not all Europeans carry ancestry from Levant, some Slavs do, giving me birth in this discussion. Now some Europeans carry ancestry from Caucasus and why cough cough American elites are fighting in Kurdistan to get there ancient land back, which belongs to Kurds

IronSide
29-07-17, 20:14
Well, this certainly calls into question the often proposed idea (even by some of the authors of this paper) that the Canaanite/Phoenicians were all J2. Remember the paper tracing settlements around the Mediterranean by following spikes in J2?

I think Kandell is moving into pretty speculative territory with the Egyptian Pharaohs of the New Dynasty, however. (He would have to include Rameses I as well, yes?) It's certainly interesting that this "new man" from near the Hyksos areas in the Delta suddenly catapults into the chair of Pharaoh, but we have no ancient dna. Even if he descended from the invaders, and the invaders carried a lot of this type of J1, I'm sure they would have carried other haplogroups as well. Besides "E" groups, wouldn't J2 have also been in place already? I always find Kandell's work interesting and very much worth reading, back to the old days at 23andme, but he has his own lens, shall we say.

If, as he proposes, the "Arab" expansion started with the Amorites, then we're looking at the mountainous areas around Syria and the Levant in general. How did J1 get there, and from where? When did J2 arrive, and from where and with whom? This was "E" and "G2a2" territory, yes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorites

Ironic that they founded Babylon, and then Babylon enslaved them.

Also ironic how much virtual "ink" was spent in trying, even very recently, to prove that all the J2 in Italy came from Phoenicians whose only footprint was two emporia in Sicily.

Many subclades of J2 start to expand from the beginning of the Bronze age, I think the Kura Araxes expansion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture#Expansion) spread J2 from the Caucasus into the fertile crescent and the Aegean, I'd say they are responsible for the increaese in Caucasian admixture in Bronze age Levant.

Their admixture is ok, this is an early BA sample from Armenia (Kura Araxes culture) GEDmatch ID M731608


#
Population
Percent


1
Caucasian
55.69


2
Baloch
29.04


3
SW-Asian
5.24


4
Mediterranean
4.85


5
NE-Euro
4.09


6
S-Indian
0.61


7
W-African
0.49



The map of J2 correlates with Caucasian admixture

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/West-Asian-admixture.gif

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-J2.jpg


Now I want to clarify as of this moment no J2 sample was collected from Kura-Araxes, but there weren't many samples anyway.

Angela
29-07-17, 20:25
@Ironside,
J2 certainly seems to correlate with a "Caucasus-like" component. It's also true that the influence archaeologically seems to reach northern Syrian, and so some people have been tying it to Kura Araxes for a long time. Odd, though, that none of the ancient samples carry J2.

For those unfamiliar with the culture:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

Sile
29-07-17, 20:39
Many subclades of J2 start to expand from the beginning of the Bronze age, I think the Kura Araxes expansion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture#Expansion) spread J2 from the Caucasus into the fertile crescent and the Aegean, I'd say they are responsible for the increaese in Caucasian admixture in Bronze age Levant.

Their admixture is ok, this is an early BA sample from Armenia (Kura Araxes culture) GEDmatch ID M731608


#
Population
Percent


1
Caucasian
55.69


2
Baloch
29.04


3
SW-Asian
5.24


4
Mediterranean
4.85


5
NE-Euro
4.09


6
S-Indian
0.61


7
W-African
0.49



The map of J2 correlates with Caucasian admixture

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/West-Asian-admixture.gif

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-J2.jpg


Now I want to clarify as of this moment no J2 sample was collected from Kura-Araxes, but there weren't many samples anyway.

The paper has flaws

it separates lebanese from Levant north , that one point

the 2 x natgeno genetic survey in the past has shown phoenician J2 dna is found in only 1 of 17 lebanese and also J2 came from the caucasus, but the paper states lebanese are canaanite which come from the levant south

Angela
29-07-17, 20:42
@Ironside,
J2 certainly seems to correlate with a "Caucasus-like" component. It's also true that the influence archaeologically seems to reach northern Syrian, and so some people have been tying it to Kura Araxes for a long time. Odd, though, that none of the ancient samples carry J2.

For those unfamiliar with the culture:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

Why couldn't Kura Araxes have been J1? We've known for a long time that J1 probably originated somewhere around the Caucasus, given the parent IJ, the presence of I in Europe, and the presence of an ancient J1 all the way up in Karelia.

It's already clear how wrong the speculation has been about a lot of this, including where the so called "Arabian" clades arose, although most knowledgeable people did hold that J1 moved from north to south.

Kingslav
29-07-17, 20:53
Why couldn't Kura Araxes have been J1? We've known for a long time that J1 probably originated somewhere around the Caucasus, given the parent IJ, the presence of I in Europe, and the presence of an ancient J1 all the way up in Karelia.

It's already clear how wrong the speculation has been about a lot of this, including where the so called "Arabian" clades arose, although most knowledgeable people did hold that J1 moved from north to south.

J1 in Karelia? Link for this sample?

IronSide
29-07-17, 20:55
Why couldn't Kura Araxes have been J1? We've known for a long time that J1 probably originated somewhere around the Caucasus, given the parent IJ, the presence of I in Europe, and the presence of an ancient J1 all the way up in Karelia.

It's already clear how wrong the speculation has been about a lot of this, including where the so called "Arabian" clades arose, although most knowledgeable people did hold that J1 moved from north to south.

As for J1, and this is my opinion, the super clade that moved from north to south is J1-L136 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-L136/), father to all subsequent Fertile Crescent "lowlands" subclades as opposed to the Zagros and Taurus "highland" subclades. The age of L136 is 12500 ybp, and TMRCA is 11700 ybp, I say it was there from this time, early Neolithic Levant, could even be Natufian.

Angela
29-07-17, 21:02
As for J1, and this is my opinion, the super clade that moved from north to south is J1-L136 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-L136/), father to all subsequent Fertile Crescent "lowlands" subclades as opposed to the Zagros and Taurus "highland" subclades. The age of L136 is 12500 ybp, and TMRCA is 11700 ybp, I say it was there from this time, early Neolithic Levant, could even be Natufian.

Except that we've got quite a bit of Natufian and other early Levant dna, and it's not there.

IronSide
29-07-17, 21:31
Except that we've got quite a bit of Natufian and other early Levant dnaWell , and it's not there.

Well that's disappointing :sad-2:

I find it interesting that this mass migration that elevated Caucasian admixture in the Levant didn't cause any kind of language change, the area is still Afro-Asiatic territory, maybe it is connected with the birth of Semitic languages ? if this theory is correct then we should find a stratum of some Caucasian language in proto-Semitic.

Angela
29-07-17, 23:13
Well that's disappointing :sad-2:

I find it interesting that this mass migration that elevated Caucasian admixture in the Levant didn't cause any kind of language change, the area is still Afro-Asiatic territory, maybe it is connected with the birth of Semitic languages ? if this theory is correct then we should find a stratum of some Caucasian language in proto-Semitic.

You can see a lot of the ancient dna results already found at this site:
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/wasianneolithicdna.shtml


As you can see, J2a was already in Barcin Turkey 6500-6200 BC, but nothing south of that as of yet for those early time periods. There's also a "T" from Jordan and lots of "E".
Older "J" samples can be found in the pages for the earlier time periods. Look at the upper left.


Does anyone know if the CT samples from Jordan at that early time period has been further resolved by amateur analysts?


Although people who have spent a lot of time promoting the idea that Semitic arose in Africa are still resisting new ideas, it seems to me increasingly likely that Semitic developed probably somewhere in the Levant and moved south with migration groups.

bicicleur
29-07-17, 23:38
Well, this certainly calls into question the often proposed idea (even by some of the authors of this paper) that the Canaanite/Phoenicians were all J2. Remember the paper tracing settlements around the Mediterranean by following spikes in J2?

I think Kandell is moving into pretty speculative territory with the Egyptian Pharaohs of the New Dynasty, however. (He would have to include Rameses I as well, yes?) It's certainly interesting that this "new man" from near the Hyksos areas in the Delta suddenly catapults into the chair of Pharaoh, but we have no ancient dna. Even if he descended from the invaders, and the invaders carried a lot of this type of J1, I'm sure they would have carried other haplogroups as well. Besides "E" groups, wouldn't J2 have also been in place already? I always find Kandell's work interesting and very much worth reading, back to the old days at 23andme, but he has his own lens, shall we say.

If, as he proposes, the "Arab" expansion started with the Amorites, then we're looking at the mountainous areas around Syria and the Levant in general. How did J1 get there, and from where? When did J2 arrive, and from where and with whom? This was "E" and "G2a2" territory, yes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorites

Ironic that they founded Babylon, and then Babylon enslaved them.

Also ironic how much virtual "ink" was spent in trying, even very recently, to prove that all the J2 in Italy came from Phoenicians whose only footprint was two emporia in Sicily.

I agree it is very speculative
afaik the new dynasty were the ones that had beaten the Hyksos
but wat is unmistakingly true is that J was not present in the Levant before the bronze age and then suddenly becomes one of the major haplogroups

http://gnxp.nofe.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Y-1.png

I like reading Ted Kendalls speculations.
It is true however that many speculations from the past based on present day have proven completely wrong.
There is a new element today though, that didn't exist in the time of these speculations, at least IMO.
Today we have some quite reliable estimates of TMRCA dates in the Y-DNA pedigree.

Angela
29-07-17, 23:55
I agree it is very speculative
afaik the new dynasty were the ones that had beaten the Hyksos
but wat is unmistakingly true is that J was not present in the Levant before the bronze age and then suddenly becomes one of the major haplogroups

http://gnxp.nofe.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Y-1.png

I like reading Ted Kendalls speculations.
It is true however that many speculations from the past based on present day have proven completely wrong.
There is a new element today though, that didn't exist in the time of these speculations, at least IMO.
Today we have some quite reliable estimates of TMRCA dates in the Y-DNA pedigree.

Yes, I agree with all of that. The Bronze Age saw big changes in yDna not only in Europe but also in the Near/Middle East.

I just don't know specifically which groups brought either J1 or J2. (The J2, as I pointed out above, was already in Anatolia very early, but not, apparently, in the Levant.)

Sile
30-07-17, 00:32
I agree it is very speculative
afaik the new dynasty were the ones that had beaten the Hyksos
but wat is unmistakingly true is that J was not present in the Levant before the bronze age and then suddenly becomes one of the major haplogroups

http://gnxp.nofe.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Y-1.png

I like reading Ted Kendalls speculations.
It is true however that many speculations from the past based on present day have proven completely wrong.
There is a new element today though, that didn't exist in the time of these speculations, at least IMO.
Today we have some quite reliable estimates of TMRCA dates in the Y-DNA pedigree.

are we giving up on Laz data on Natufians?

According to ancient DNA analyses conducted by Lazaridis et al. (2016) on six Natufian skeletal remains from present-day northern Israel, the Natufians carried the Y-DNA haplogroup E-Z830 or E1b1b1b2, which is an ancestor of E1b1b-M123, a Y-DNA haplogroup commonly found among modern Semitic peoples. One Natufian individual was also found to belong to the N1b mtDNA haplogroup and two others belonged to the J2a2 mtDNA haplogroup.[29] In terms of autosomal DNA, these Natufians carried around 50% of the Basal Eurasian (BE) and 50% of Western Eurasian Unknown Hunter Gather (UHG) components. However, they were slightly distinct from the northern Anatolian populations that contributed to the peopling of Europe, who had higher Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG) inferred ancestry. Natufians were strongly genetically differentiated[30] from Neolithic Iranian farmers from the Zagros Mountains, who were a mix of Basal Eurasians (up to 62%) and Ancient North Eurasians (ANE). This might suggest that different strains of Basal Eurasians contributed to Natufians and Zagros farmers,[31][32][33] as both Natufians and Zagros farmers descended from different populations of local hunter gatherers. Mating between Natufians, other Neolithic Levantines, Caucasus Hunter Gatherers (CHG), Anatolian and Iranian farmers is believed to have decreased genetic variability among later populations in the Middle East. The scientists suggest that the Levantine early farmers may have spread southward into East Africa, bringing along Western Eurasian and Basal Eurasian ancestral components separate from that which would arrive later in North Africa. No affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in the genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians.[19]

Angela
30-07-17, 00:58
are we giving up on Laz data on Natufians?

According to ancient DNA analyses conducted by Lazaridis et al. (2016) on six Natufian skeletal remains from present-day northern Israel, the Natufians carried the Y-DNA haplogroup E-Z830 or E1b1b1b2, which is an ancestor of E1b1b-M123, a Y-DNA haplogroup commonly found among modern Semitic peoples. One Natufian individual was also found to belong to the N1b mtDNA haplogroup and two others belonged to the J2a2 mtDNA haplogroup.[29] In terms of autosomal DNA, these Natufians carried around 50% of the Basal Eurasian (BE) and 50% of Western Eurasian Unknown Hunter Gather (UHG) components. However, they were slightly distinct from the northern Anatolian populations that contributed to the peopling of Europe, who had higher Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG) inferred ancestry. Natufians were strongly genetically differentiated[30] from Neolithic Iranian farmers from the Zagros Mountains, who were a mix of Basal Eurasians (up to 62%) and Ancient North Eurasians (ANE). This might suggest that different strains of Basal Eurasians contributed to Natufians and Zagros farmers,[31][32][33] as both Natufians and Zagros farmers descended from different populations of local hunter gatherers. Mating between Natufians, other Neolithic Levantines, Caucasus Hunter Gatherers (CHG), Anatolian and Iranian farmers is believed to have decreased genetic variability among later populations in the Middle East. The scientists suggest that the Levantine early farmers may have spread southward into East Africa, bringing along Western Eurasian and Basal Eurasian ancestral components separate from that which would arrive later in North Africa. No affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in the genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians.[19]


Who is giving up on it, and why would we? Nothing we've been saying contradicts any of this.

LeBrok
30-07-17, 02:35
Came back home and what a farce. One super slav the other super IE. Bunch of halfwits. I'm glad they are banned.

Angela
30-07-17, 03:18
Came back home and what a farce. One super slav the other super IE. Bunch of halfwits. I'm glad they are banned.

As you have so eloquently said in the past, some people only understand the hammer. :)

What amazes me is that people who post:

-insane, inane, off-topic posts about being Super Slav or Mega IE
-ethnic insults about how other groups are shady or sneaky
-demands for apologies for past wars or disputes in genetics threads
-insults against other members who have never insulted them
-insults against moderators who are reminding them of the rules

Who are warned not to engage in that behavior again, proceed to do so regardless, and then when they get infractions for the same, which ultimately results in infraction totals which result in automatic bans, they go and whine and complain and cry about it on other sites as if they were 10 years old. (Between the infractions issued by you and by me, some of these people have 15 infraction points. Can you believe it? I think they want to be banned.)

Oh, and they also seem to try to hang around here and down vote moderators in some juvenile tit for tat revenge.

The average age of these people is probably chronologically about 20 something, but as I said, emotionally, we're at pre-teen levels.

It's a good thing I have a sense of humor.
-

Angela
31-07-17, 18:10
Just for some cultural context, this is one representation of Baal, the major god of the Canaanites:

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/A8FEW4/ancient-phoenician-or-canaanite-deity-baal-A8FEW4.jpg

You can see the source of Judeo-Christian depictions of Satan. He is holding a child because one of the central rites of the Canaanite religion was the practice of child sacrifice, with the chosen child being fed down a chute into the flames.

This practice was particularly hated by the Jews. There are some Biblical scholars who hold this is the purpose of the Isaac story in the OT where God stays the hand of Abraham when he is about to sacrifice his son, indicating that God wishes no child sacrifices.

The other practices the Jews abominated had to do with the fertility rites in the Temples to Astarte, which often involved intercourse with the male and female temple prostitutes. There are untold passages in the OT promising damnation to the Jews who went to these celebrations, and it was fear that "Canaanite" wives would tempt their men to worship Astarte that was part of the fear of "foreign" wives.

Runofmillsukrainian
31-07-17, 19:19
This lifestyle seems to also be savage, similar with Sarmatians, imagine if these savage races bred with eachother likely they descendants would be some tough customers

curiouscat
15-08-17, 11:08
This lifestyle seems to also be savage, similar with Sarmatians, imagine if these savage races bred with eachother likely they descendants would be some tough customers Human sacrifice was practiced also by Mayans, Celts, Romans. It's not unique to any ethnicity but was a norm in many parts of Europe and the Middle East a long time ago.

ihype02
21-08-17, 23:22
Canaanite was a cultural border not a genetic one. Bible never claimed they were genetically wiped only the pagans. There is no historical data for the continuation of Canaaites.

Twilight
25-08-17, 12:28
Canaanite was a cultural border not a genetic one. Bible never claimed they were genetically wiped only the pagans. There is no historical data for the continuation of Canaaites.

The pagan Canaanite religion lived on and strong until roughly the 6th century BC when the Romans took over the Carthaginian Empire. The Canaanites and Phoenicians both came from Lebanon so the Lebanonese do hold a strong claim to Canaanite ancestry. :) Both Punic and Phoenician languages come from the Canaanite language.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia

ihype02
25-08-17, 15:25
I am sorry I did not know about Proto-Canaanite alphabet and others. I need to do more research.

Phoenician was a language originally spoken in the coastal (Mediterranean) region then called "Canaan" in Phoenician, Hebrew, Old Arabic, and Aramaic, "Phoenicia" in Greek and Latin, and "Pūt" in the Egyptian language. It is a part of the Canaanite subgroup of the Northwest Semitic languages. Other members of the family are Hebrew, Ammonite, Moabite and Edomite.

Twilight
26-08-17, 02:34
I am sorry I did not know about Proto-Canaanite alphabet and others. I need to do more research.

Phoenician was a language originally spoken in the coastal (Mediterranean) region then called "Canaan" in Phoenician, Hebrew, Old Arabic, and Aramaic, "Phoenicia" in Greek and Latin, and "Pūt" in the Egyptian language. It is a part of the Canaanite subgroup of the Northwest Semitic languages. Other members of the family are Hebrew, Ammonite, Moabite and Edomite.


Not a problem, it happens to the best of us. To me the beauty of history is to learn and to rediscover a long ago land; like a children's story in a way. No matter how many years you study history, there are always more to uncover and learn. :) Here is a little quote one of our Moderators wrote a couple of years ago on Canaanite DNA.

The Phoenicians

The unique colonization pattern of the Phoenicians and the isolation of some of their colonies (Ibiza, Sardinia, Malta) have made it easy to identify their genetic signature. The Phoenician population was already very mixed 3000 years ago : E-V22, J1, J2, J2a4b, J2a4b1, G2a, R1a and R1b1a. E-V22 and R1b1a are quite specific to Levantines (Syrians, Lebanese, Druzes, Jews, Palestinians).
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25163-Y-DNA-haplogroups-of-ancient-civilizations