Canaanite dna

[Angela]

The Slavs are not the topic of this thread. Can we get back to the Canaanites and stop cluttering it up?

 

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Angela
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]

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]

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]

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 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

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]

@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–Araxes_culture

 

[Sile]

Many subclades of J2 start to expand from the beginning of the Bronze age, I think the Kura Araxes 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

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]

@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–Araxes_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]

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]

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, 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]

As for J1, and this is my opinion, the super clade that moved from north to south is J1-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]

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]

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 2]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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]

Came back home and what a farce. One super slav the other super IE. Bunch of halfwits. I'm glad they are banned.

 

[Angela]

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]

Just for some cultural context, this is one representation of Baal, the major god of the Canaanites:

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.