Philistine DNA!

All I said is PCA proximity cannot necessarily shared ancestry, which is true. I did not oppose or back any views on the relationship between Ashkenazi Jews and South Europeans. However, making historical inferences from autosomal similarity is also very problematic and the authors actually emphasize the difficulties several times through the paper, even just in regard to their own conclusions, let alone these unrelated theories here.

the strange is that this can not be done,
that little 0-5 % that is found in people who have major even Balkan heritage,
is enough to open theories, until is full analyzed,
and this 0-5% is found notin low % of populations,
But in big %
and I doupt that population in Greece or balkans have origins from AJ's
but that 0-5% is reaching numbers above expected in this area, (unoffially i hear about 40-60%)
 
All I said is PCA proximity cannot necessarily shared ancestry, which is true. I did not oppose or back any views on the relationship between Ashkenazi Jews and South Europeans. However, making historical inferences from autosomal similarity is also very problematic and the authors actually emphasize the difficulties several times through the paper, even just in regard to their own conclusions, let alone these unrelated theories here.

If two countries are adjacent to each other geographically and plot genetically next to each other on a PCA, then the same ancient populations contributed to both or they contributed to each other genetically. Probably it's both.

That's how it normally works and everyone knows it. It's completely different from the offspring of two parents from far corners of the world, i.e. China and Britain, winding up next to Uighurs.
 
If two countries are adjacent to each other geographically and plot genetically next to each other on a PCA, then the same ancient populations contributed to both or they contributed to each other genetically. Probably it's both.

That's how it normally works and everyone knows it. It's completely different from the offspring of two parents from far corners of the world, i.e. China and Britain, winding up next to Uighurs.

Yes, but without a full autosomal record of all the populations that have existed in the surrounding region from the time in question until today, it is impossible to confidently determine which populations contributed and when. The data is still thin and there are several competing theories even about the temporary European contribution to Philistines. The permanent European component of a population that lived in Europe for centuries and might have neighbored Philistines 3000 years ago... it might be an entirely unrelated matter, who knows.
 
Basically, Khazars and to some extent Indo-Iranians amongst the Hyksos (which definitely would have had a larger contribution in Israel than in say Lebanon). Khazars wouldn't be like Eastern Europeans (very WHG rich) but they would be more like other Steppe pastoralists genetically. With a non-insignificant Mongoloid contribution too, so probably similar to the Scythians. Something needs to explain Ashkenazi pigmentation - to some extent things like red hair has been present in Israel for a long time even preceding the Indo-Iranians (basically Kura-Araxes presumably of the same source as modern North Caucasian rufosity (Google "Chechen redhead"), e.g. I1730 in Jordan dates back to 2400 BC and was a light redhead with blue eyes), though the Indo-Iranian contribution imo is more responsible for the original Israelite rufosity. You can see examples in the Samaritans but all other non-AJ Western Jews have red hair to a decent degree (enough that in medieval Italy and Spain it was associated with Jews). For Ashkenazim it's a whole different level though.

The Khazars, after all, were described by Islamic sources as having white skin, red hair and blue eyes. To me, it's a perfect fit for people like this:

1024px-Seth_Green_Comic-Con_2011.jpg


hqdefault.jpg

Ashkenazim are heavily admixed with Europeans.
One can't look at modern Arabians or Arabized populations of the Levant to infer what ancient Jews may have looked like.

Phenotype does not equal genotype.
Natalie Portman (left) is Ashkenazi Jewish, right is Keira Knightly, she is English, Scottish, Welsh.
Both look like sisters, despite the fact that their genetic backgrounds are quite divergent.
Portman.jpg
 
I am still a firm believer that you have to take "origins" with a grain of salt. In one family, father and mother show zero Jewish ancestry (99% and 98% eu results), and one of five children shows 9%. Other four children show 0% (97-100% eu results). It is the combination of inherited gene's that gives the appearance of origin. Until we have a much greater database
 
I am still a firm believer that you have to take "origins" with a grain of salt. In one family, father and mother show zero Jewish ancestry (99% and 98% eu results), and one of five children shows 9%. Other four children show 0% (97-100% eu results). It is the combination of inherited gene's that gives the appearance of origin. Until we have a much greater database

Did they test with 23andme, Wheal? One thing they're excellent at is finding Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. I've never seen it wrong. Other companies, like Geno etc., or that stupid Eurogenes "J" test, are TERRIBLE. :)
 
No Angela, they tested with FTdna. and all of the children are dna confirmed. I think it is just a combination of early Spanish, German and Russian maybe. It's just odd that no one else in the family shows any percentage at all
 
Last edited:
please people don't make this thread to aschenazi jews origin one
enough in anthrogenica a 750 paper thread on the origin of western jews :(
 
Sorry @kingjohn, only meant it as an example of origins, and the hope that old dna samples will increase to give a more clear picture
 
No Angela, they tested with FTdna. and all of the children are dna confirmed. I think it is just a combination of early Spanish, German and Russian maybe. It's just odd that no one else in the family shows any percentage at all

Same people did the algorithms for both and they both show strange results. No one should take them seriously. Only trust 23andme for that one.
 
please people don't make this thread to aschenazi jews origin one
enough in anthrogenica a 750 paper thread on the origin of western jews :(

Well, Philistines did live right next to Jews, and there's always been a theory they might have bequeathed some more "western" ancestry to "European" Jews. So it's absolutely not really "off topic".

I totally take your point, however. Some people are deranged on the subject. Don't necessarily believe those people claiming to be Jews on that site, either. Half of it is about Sicilians and Southern Italians. Anthrogenica is teeming with old theapricity users who are secret Nordicists or Orienalists for various bizarre reasons. Now they ruined the reputation of that site they needed a new "home", and they migrated there and especially to that thread.

Don't worry. I won't let that happen to this thread, or to the Italian genetics one either.
 
Aegean is what the archaeology strongly suggested as well so when taken together with the DNA it's a home run, which also probably means that the Sea Peoples were from the Aegean too. This not only made intuitive sense but the sparse evidence hinted at this as well.

My hunch is that this did have something to do with the actual events underpinning the Trojan War stories. Whatever this event was it was far reaching. There's several myths revolving around it including the Odyssey, which is nothing more than Trojan War vets getting tangled up in adventure after the War. This is so awesome.
 
Basically, Khazars and to some extent Indo-Iranians amongst the Hyksos (which definitely would have had a larger contribution in Israel than in say Lebanon). Khazars wouldn't be like Eastern Europeans (very WHG rich) but they would be more like other Steppe pastoralists genetically. With a non-insignificant Mongoloid contribution too, so probably similar to the Scythians. Something needs to explain Ashkenazi pigmentation - to some extent things like red hair has been present in Israel for a long time even preceding the Indo-Iranians (basically Kura-Araxes presumably of the same source as modern North Caucasian rufosity (Google "Chechen redhead"), e.g. I1730 in Jordan dates back to 2400 BC and was a light redhead with blue eyes), though the Indo-Iranian contribution imo is more responsible for the original Israelite rufosity. You can see examples in the Samaritans but all other non-AJ Western Jews have red hair to a decent degree (enough that in medieval Italy and Spain it was associated with Jews). For Ashkenazim it's a whole different level though.

The Khazars, after all, were described by Islamic sources as having white skin, red hair and blue eyes. To me, it's a perfect fit for people like this:
The Samaritans have the highest known carrier rate of R151C in the world. They also have the highest confirmed carrier rate of red hair outside of Northwest Europe. The carrier rate of R151C at 20.5% according the Samaritan sample (n=78) on ALFRED database, while with the Irish sample (n=226) the carrier rate is only 8.9%. According to the Samaritan sample (also n=72) from Krefter/Sammy Issac released on Forum Biodiversity originally 42% of Samaritans carry R151C. In the British Isles and among the Anglo-Celtic diaspora the maximum carrier rate of R151C appears to be 25%. The overall carrier rate of MC1R Variants associated with red hair among Samaritans in the British Isles is similar according to the Krefter spreadsheet.

It is important to notice that the Samaritans currently lack any other MC1R variants, while other Levantine also carry R160W at low frequencies. This clearly points towards the loss of diversity as result of the severe bottleneck the Samaritans population has gone through over the last century, growing eightfold from barely a hundred in the late 19th century to over 800 today. There population was once much larger, reaching 1.2 million in the 4th century. Now only four of the original families exist: Levi, Menasseh, Itamar and Ephraim. These families must have carried R151C at a much higher rate than the general Samaritan population, while lacking R160W. This is the explanation of the Samaritan anomaly.

Back in the early 20th century the Samaritans were found to have a conspicuously high rate of rufosity. In his work Zur Anthropologie der Samaritaner, published in 1927, Polish-Jewish Anthropologist Henryk Szpidbaum found that he observed 29.6% of Samaritan men as having red beards and 7.4% of Samaritan women being red-haired. These figures can match some parts of the British Isles associated most with red hair like Abeerdeenshire. With the four families having such pronounced rufosity it is not unexpected at all that they would have the very high carrier rate of R151C that they do today.

There are plenty of isolated tribes in the mountains of North Africa, West Asia, South/Central, or Central Asia, but no one has gone through the same set of circumstances as the Samaritans. Some of these groups may have preserved more recessive traits than the surrounding population, but none have undergone founder effect specifically with R151C. If the founder effect applied to R160W instead the population would be less rufous as that variant is correlated with red hair 2-3x less.

Jews have a much lower tendency towards red hair than the Modern Samaritans, although historically Samaritans were much less rufous. According to German Biologist Harry Conitzer who studied the inheritance of red hair (Die Rothaarigkeit), the frequency of red hair among Sephardic Jews is .92%. That is based on adult 869 observations from other Anthropologists, who he does not name. This fits into the 0-1% range he gives for Southern Europe. For Ashkenazi Jews he gives 3.36% based on adult 10,665 observations from other Anthropologists which he does not name. Most of these do come from Maurice Fishberg though, or else he could not reach 10,665 based on adult observations. Conitzer states that the 3.36% May be higher than Southern or Central Europeans overall, this is certainly not the case for Northwest Europe, as represented by the Dutch, as Dutch Jews have roughly the exact frequency of red hair as native Dutch based on the extensive 1907 pigmentation survey of Dutch schoolchildren by Louis Bolk (2.56% for Dutch Jews and 2.45% for Dutch gentiles).

The general impression is that rufosity among modern Samaritians is much higher than related peoples.
 
Last edited:
The Samaritans have the highest known carrier rate of R151C in the world. They also have the highest confirmed carrier rate of red hair outside of Northwest Europe. The carrier rate of R151C at 20.5% according the Samaritan sample (n=78) on ALFRED database, while with the Irish sample (n=226) the carrier rate is only 8.9%. According to the Samaritan sample (also n=72) from Krefter/Sammy Issac released on Forum Biodiversity originally 42% of Samaritans carry R151C. In the British Isles and among the Anglo-Celtic diaspora the maximum carrier rate of R151C appears to be 25%. The overall carrier rate of MC1R Variants associated with red hair among Samaritans in the British Isles is similar according to the Krefter sample.

It is important to notice that the Samaritans currently lack any other MC1R variants, while other Levantine also carry R160W at low frequencies. This clearly points towards the loss of diversity as a result of the severe bottleneck the Samaritans population has gone through over the last century, growing eightfold from barely a hundred in the late 19th century to over 800 today. There population was once much larger, reaching 1.2 million in the 4th century. Now only four of the original families exist: Levi, Menasseh, Itamar and Ephraim. These families must have carried R151C at a much higher rate than the general Samaritan population, while lacking R160W. This is the explanation of the Samaritan anomaly.

Back in the early 20th century the Samaritans were found to have a conspicuously high rate of rufosity. In his work Zur Anthropologie der Samaritaner, published in 1927, Polish-Jewish Anthropologist Henryk Szpidbaum found that he observed 26.9% of Samaritan men as having red beards and 7.4% of Samaritan women being red-haired. These figures can match some parts of the British Isles associated most with red hair like Abeerdeenshire. With the four families having such pronounced rufosity it is not unexpected at all that they would have the very high carrier rate of R151C that they do today.

There are plenty of isolated tribes in the mountains of North Africa, West Asia, South/Central, or Central Asia, but no one has gone through the same set of circumstances as the Samaritans. Some of these groups may have preserved more recessive traits than the surrounding population, but none have undergone founder effect specifically with R151C. If the founder effect applied to R160W instead the population would be less rufous as that variant is correlated with red hair 2-3x less.

Jews have a much lower tendency towards red hair than the Modern Samaritans, although historically Samaritans were much less rufous. According to German Biologist Harry Conitzer who studied the inheritance of red hair (Die Rothaarigkeit), the frequency of red hair among Sephardic Jews is .92%. That is based on adult 869 observations from other Anthropologists, who he does not name. This fits into the 0-1% range he gives for Southern Europe. For Ashkenazi Jews he gives 3.36% based on adult 10,665 observations from other Anthropologists which he does not name. Most of these do come from Maurice Fishberg though, or else he could not reach 10,665 based on adult observations. Conitzer states that 3.36% May be higher than Southern or Central Europeans overall, this is certainly not the case in contiental Northwest Europe, as represented by the Dutch, as Dutch Jews have roughly the exact frequency of red hair as native Dutch based on the extensive 1907 pigmentation survey of Dutch schoolchildren by Louis Bolk (2.56% for Dutch Jews and 2.45% for Dutch gentiles).

The general impression is that rufosity among modern Samaritians is much higher than related peoples.

I really do not trust those statistics, there’s absolutely no way Samaritans are more redhaired than AJs.
 
Ashkenazim are heavily admixed with Europeans.
One can't look at modern Arabians or Arabized populations of the Levant to infer what ancient Jews may have looked like.

Phenotype does not equal genotype.
Natalie Portman (left) is Ashkenazi Jewish, right is Keira Knightly, she is English, Scottish, Welsh.


Both look like sisters, despite the fact that their genetic backgrounds are quite divergent.
Portman.jpg

only partly right, above: under different angles, and their hair cut, these two pretty woman would look less "identical" (skull) - that said, I agree, yes, phenotype at individual level can confuse us, almost everybdy knows that, or ought to know that -
curiously enough, Portman has a skull and face association, and eyes/orbits settling which evocate furiously the 'long barrow' type of Coon, of a 'mediter' subtype or mean-type which was dominant in Neolithical Britain before BB's, and was well exemplarified among some remote Welsh regions spite not truly dominant there and then!
 
Some details from B. Sergent, which can clear out or complicate the « tableau » (it's not completely out of topic)

digest of mine :
some authors spoke of « proto-latin » languages in southern Italy ; in fact, not «genuine Proto-Latins but a population layer which has preceded the Sabellians expansion, and seemed a link between Latins and Sicules – this layer had been compared by someones to Illyrians when every tribe of the Roman Illyricum was considered Illyrian when in fact, this great West-Adriatic administrative region was the room of three langages, a Venetic (North-Italic), a South-Italic one and the genuine Illyrian, akin to modern Albanian, to ancient Messapian and to other south-central Balkan rather satem langauges – the Khônes tribe of southern Italy would be linked to Khàones of Epirus, and the Sùbaris town would be linked too to towns of Greece. Seemingly there has been a migration from the Balkans to Italy without link with the Apulian one – tribes pushed later by the Messapian arrival – it’s the confusion between true Illyrians or Messapians and these South-Italic people which pushed someones to speake of Illyrian presence in the Elymes country in Southern Italy and Sicily -
on another side, the palaist- root found in Greece, Epirus, Western Thrace, is not a greek term and some authors think the Phillistines would have been the same thing as the Pelasgians – the Pelasgoi name seems come from the so called Pelasgikon, supposed to have been spelled Pelastikon by the Attic people – an hypothesis is that Pelasgians were in fact *Pelastaî, *Pelaistani, the -g- coming from the attraction of the greek word pélagos, the sea – others think in a change of suffixe, but the temptation is great to link Pelastaî/Pelaistani and Pelasgoi, and to see South-Italics in the Pelaistani, or Phillistins -
Egyptians called ‘the North and Sea People a group of pops (pirates) from Egea ; they mentioned a p-r-[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]š[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]-t[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] people, something like [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Pula[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]šati [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif](Peleset?)[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]; [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]the Bible speaks of the [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Caphtorim[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] island = Creta, source of the Sea People ; ancient Greeks considered [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]some [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Pelasgians were living in Creta and even were dispersed in diverse places of the Mediterranea sea. [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]The [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Pula[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]šati[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]raided Egypt under Ramses the 3th around 1153 BC, along with [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Danuna[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif], surely enough Greeks (Danaeans), and the other people who attacked Egypt were the [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Šardana[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] (South Balkans too?),[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] Wa[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]š[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]a[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]š[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]a[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] (somewhere in Greece or Egee ?, more than a close town [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]name [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]or region name there), [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Sakalu[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]š[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]a[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] (Sekeles ?, from Sagalassos, S-W Anatolia?) : ATW, it seems sure the Sea People were from North, close to Greece and W-Anatolia, [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]and Egea of course[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] – [/FONT]
[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]« Pelasgians » were associated with Tyrsenians in sea plundering around Egea, before their dispersion and fading out, leaving their name [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]as generic term for every bad known[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] ancient pop [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]of[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] the surroundings [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif](in Greek at least)[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] – before disappearing complely they took part in Tyrsenian moves and considered as founders of the Agylla town or Caere (= Cerveteri today) in Etruria (Italy)… [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]T[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]he evident ressemblances with the modern names like [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Sardinia[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif], [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Sicil[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]y[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] and [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Tyrrhen[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]s[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]points to Italy: were these [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]folks[/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif] already settled in Italy then ? [/FONT][FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]If Yes, maybe they kept some counters in their regions of origin, more in East ?[/FONT]
[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]To come back to the Italics, their coming from Balkans into Italy are confusing : South Italics came first, but did they come from N-E by land, or straight away by sea from Epirus or Albania, like their successors Messapians of Illyrian filiation ? Charles, physical anthropologist, thought a pop he called ‘balkano-mediterraneans’ came by North to Italy from the Central Balkans at Chalcolithic (since 2200 BC?): is there a link ? Or is this too early ?[/FONT]
[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Pelastaî (so Phillistins alias Pelasgians?) had rather Italic personal names, and would have been South-Italics too, despite I don’t think they come with this first colonisation by N-E lands ; Hubert said Illyrians cut off Celts from Italics at or a bit before IA (somewhere around the margins of Austria/Croatia/Hungary?) but Sergent thinks furthermore that Illyrians or Illyrianlike tribes (so more akin to Dacians and Thracians) cut off the Balkan South Italics from other Italics akin to Veneti and Dalmatians-Liburnians - [/FONT]


[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]It seems founding out affiliation of pops and languages, despite it’s difficult, is less hard than to follow accurately the moves of the concerned pops. Italy seems to have been a very agitated place as well as Balkans during Antiquity, and if general moves and directions may be expected, it remains there have surely been a lot of smaller moves of every sort on every direction.[/FONT]


[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Another question : the Y-R1b-U152/L28 in « Archaic Creta » ? When and where from ?[/FONT]
 
only partly right, above: under different angles, and their hair cut, these two pretty woman would look less "identical" (skull) - that said, I agree, yes, phenotype at individual level can confuse us, almost everybdy knows that, or ought to know that -
curiously enough, Portman has a skull and face association, and eyes/orbits settling which evocate furiously the 'long barrow' type of Coon, of a 'mediter' subtype or mean-type which was dominant in Neolithical Britain before BB's, and was well exemplarified among some remote Welsh regions spite not truly dominant there and then!

Why did you put the word "identical" in quotes?
Did I say that Natalie Portman was "identical" to Keira Knightly?

I attempted to make a simple point...And it was straightforward, or so I thought...
You probably would have been better off engaging the poster that I was responding to if you were sincerely trying to have a rational or productive dialog.
I didn't join this site to *****.
I'm making a mistake even responding to you right now.
I wont make it twice.
Have a nice day.
 
Why did you put the word "identical" in quotes?
Did I say that Natalie Portman was "identical" to is Keira Knightly?

I attempted to make a simple point...And it was straightforward, or so I thought...
You probably would have been better off engaging the poster that I was responding to if you were sincerely trying to have a rational or productive dialog.
I didn't join this site to *****.
I'm making a mistake even responding to you right now.
I wont make it twice.
Have a nice day.

You have a very thin skin, man.
Don't take my words so strictly; I was rather agreeing with you, but my aim was to point to some possible mistakes, concerning your "readers" more than yourself, when speaking about actresses whose facial aspect can be converging or diverging according to make-up. I never said your examples were 'bad' - You made your point and what I wrote did not contradict it, at the contrary, concerning phenotype and COMPLETE geotype (because phenotypes are greatly genetic too).
I have no reason to offense you, but I like split hairs sometimes, and I accept when my posts are submitted to the same treatment.
I 'll have a nice night.
 
Ashkenazim are heavily admixed with Europeans.
One can't look at modern Arabians or Arabized populations of the Levant to infer what ancient Jews may have looked like.

Phenotype does not equal genotype.
Natalie Portman (left) is Ashkenazi Jewish, right is Keira Knightly, she is English, Scottish, Welsh.
Both look like sisters, despite the fact that their genetic backgrounds are quite divergent.
Portman.jpg

There is a Northern Mediterranean element in both Anglos and AJs but the rufosity is much more unexpected given AJs have such little WHG this element surely was acquired from a Steppe pastoralist population such as the Khazars (who presumably looked similar to Scythians).

Also, Natalie Portman is just way better than Keira Knightly - not even close
 

This thread has been viewed 68175 times.

Back
Top