Gal Gadot defends Cleopatra casting after 'whitewashing' controversy

[Jovialis]

^^

What I think the Dzudzuana cave samples are going to show is that Paleolithic Caucasians and European Hunter-Gatherers created this genetic plane on the Z-axis.

 

[Alyan]

Steppe Nomad/Conqueror consists out of "iranian related" too. seems pretty hard to accept when even now people ignore that the whole time. and the "Levant" is also a close relative.

The recorded relevant Steppe populations don't cluster with Iranian Farmer largely admixed populations. There is minimal help from that.

... who said ... Let my people go ... to the Pharaoh ?
... Who were those people?

Could It be that some of Gal Gadot’s ancestors took part in the Exodus?

What if her people left genetic traces in Egypt, ... and if in the remote case Cleopatra’s ancestry was mixed, she could have also carry some of Moses DNA.

... either way its a win win for Gal Gadot and she would make a great Cleopatra,

... imho Cleopatra would totally agree with that, I think,

... Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord, “Let my people go, ... But if you refuse to let them go, behold, I will Plague all your country ...

yep !

... Afterward Moses and Aaron went and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Let my people go ...

The Exodus is a fairy tale.

 

[Ailchu]

^^

What I think the Dzudzuana cave samples are going to show is that Paleolithic Caucasians and European Hunter-Gatherers created this genetic plane on the Z-axis.

never said greeks and people in near east are the same. what is the red circle supposed to mean? if you wanted to make a straight horizontal line why not include the levant plus why not make it a bit wider to include more of the variation? and look at the relative distance, the distance from greeks to people in levant is way smaller than the one to iran neolithic, it's also smaller to people on the opposite end of your plane. and beeing apart here doesn't mean that you would be "alien" to a different region since all those populations are really close together in relative terms. what a about Nefertiti? does she look alien to greece?
i personally know an egyptian women and people who meet her, myself included, often think that she is of south eastern european descent. there are a lot more of these people in the levant. or maybe you could also say that a lot of europeans pass in the levant however you want it. it's just a little bit strange to say that someone from there necessarily looks "alien" to europeans and that the fact that the deptiction do not show "alien" looks must mean that Cleopatra was of full macedonian descent. and again i don't care if she was "arab" or macedonianor even sub-saharan. if most people agree that she was fully macedonian then so be it. but the argument with her depictions doesn't work imo.

 

[Ailchu]

The recorded relevant Steppe populations don't cluster with Iranian Farmer largely admixed populations. There is minimal help from that.

still, if it wasn't for the iranian farmer admixture in them they would cluster double their current distance away from Iran_N.

 

[Angela]

The Exodus is not necessarily a complete fairy tale. Is every word "fact"? No. However, we have archaeological evidence of shepherds from the Levant settling in large numbers in the Delta and then they disappear. The more archaeology that is done the more it becomes clear that in the basics (not miracles etc.), the Old Testament is a good guide to the history of the Levant and neighboring regions.

If you read a lot about archaeology in the region you'd know that.

Sorry, while beautiful, Nefertiti is alien to Greece. The Copts of Egypt are the closest to the population in Egypt in the times we're discussing. Good luck finding a Cleopatra look alike.

Are you so desperate to give black admixed people something to be proud of that you'd appropriate a woman with a well known history and all her ancestors?

On the other hand, I get a whiff of Nordicism in some of the comments. The Mycenaeans had a very minor steppe admixture, and, let us not forget, Cleopatra's people came from an age before the Slavic invasions, so she's no standard bearer for the steppe.

This is what happens when people argue from agendas instead of fact: stupid nonsense.

It would be a historical travesty to have an African admixed or Arab woman play her.

 

[Jovialis]

never said greeks and people in near east are the same. what is the red circle supposed to mean? if you wanted to make a straight horizontal line why not include the levant plus why not make it a bit wider to include more of the variation? and look at the relative distance, the distance from greeks to people in levant is way smaller than the one to iran neolithic, it's also smaller to people on the opposite end of your plane. and beeing apart here doesn't mean that you would be "alien" to a different region since all those populations are really close together in relative terms. what a about Nefertiti? does she look alien to greece?
i personally know an egyptian women and people who meet her, myself included, often think that she is of south eastern european descent. there are a lot more of these people in the levant. or maybe you could also say that a lot of europeans pass in the levant however you want it. it's just a little bit strange to say that someone from there necessarily looks "alien" to europeans and that the fact that the deptiction do not show "alien" looks must mean that Cleopatra was of full macedonian descent. and again i don't care if she was "arab" or macedonianor even sub-saharan. if most people agree that she was fully macedonian then so be it. but the argument with her depictions doesn't work imo.

The circle is just an approximation, Levantines weren't circled because as I said, they have a significant amount of Natufian:

Natufians themselves are mostly Paleo-Caucasian with Ancient North African DNA. While CHG/IN is roughly mostly Paleo-Caucasian with Ancestral North Eurasian.

Anatolian_N and Paleo-Caucasian is very similar; which is Basal Eurasian with Villabruna-like populations.

 

[Ailchu]

Are you so desperate to give black admixed people something to be proud of that you'd appropriate a woman with a well known history and all her ancestors?

i'm not really sure what you are trying to say here. who do you mean with black admixed people? the egyptians? as if they had nothing else to be proud of except Cleopatra.

It would be a historical travesty to have an African admixed or Arab woman play her.

well i get that the question of her ethnicity is quite important for some people and the current discussions in the US. But if her ethnicity is that important then who should play her? as you say modern macedonians aren't really accurate either. Elizabeth Taylor was an equal historical travesty. and i don't think there are no arab speaking actresses who could fit in that role. not saying that they should look for one but i think it wouldn't matter that much and it wouldn't be such a special historical travesty. there is definitly too much identity politics involved here, not just from the "woke" side.

 

[Salento]

The recorded relevant Steppe populations don't cluster with Iranian Farmer largely admixed populations. There is minimal help from that.



The Exodus is a fairy tale.

I don’t dwell on the validity of the Scriptures,
...I take a Leap of Faith on it.

... though I’m reasonable and my Faith coexists with my common sense.

 

[Jovialis]

The recorded relevant Steppe populations don't cluster with Iranian Farmer largely admixed populations. There is minimal help from that.



The Exodus is a fairy tale.

Steppe populations are almost half CHG/Iran_N (about 40%), the other half is EHG (about 60%), which has some eastern elements. They cluster roughly between these groups.

Also,

The bible was able to tell us about the Hittites before archeology. It also accurately said that the Philistines come from Crete, which was verified by aDNA. So you cannot completely discount it.

 

[Jovialis]

^^

What I think the Dzudzuana cave samples are going to show is that Paleolithic Caucasians and European Hunter-Gatherers created this genetic plane on the Z-axis.

The deviation from this Z-axis from Aegean-like populations to Central Europeans on the right-side can be explained from Nganasan admixture post-Bronze Age. Germans, according to the pre-print can be modeled as mostly Paleo-Caucasian/Dzudzuana-like:

 

[Salento]

... that’s how I picture Cleopatra right before she met Caesar.

If I remember correctly the red bust was made in Rome during her visit, shortly after she had a child with him,
... (temporary physiological change)

 

[Ailchu]

The circle is just an approximation, Levantines weren't circled because as I said, they have a significant amount of Natufian:

Natufians themselves are mostly Paleo-Caucasian with Ancient North African DNA. While CHG/IN is roughly mostly Paleo-Caucasian with Ancestral North Eurasian.

Anatolian_N and Paleo-Caucasian is very similar; which is Basal Eurasian with Villabruna-like populations.

why is Natufian a reason to not circle them, when some of them are on the same height in the Z-Axis? either that plane doesn't have to do something with paleo-caucasian or that part of the levant is similar to whole europe in that regard. their excess Natufian doesn't seem to change that.

 

[Carlos]

Cleopatra was 5'4" tall, had a markedly dark skin and was slightly overweight. Her face was characterized by a large nose, very thin lips and a pointed jaw.

https://www.infobae.com/2009/03/16/...que-cleopatra-descenderia-africa-y-no-grecia/

Cleopatra (69 BC-30 BC), of the Ptolemaic dynasty and queen of ancient Egypt, had African rather than Greco-Caucasian roots
according to a research of the Austrian Academy of Science that will be presented on March 23rd in a documentary of the BBC London

I think Cleopatra must have had some African mixture, maybe her nose and some features were not African because of the mixture but her skin was probably darker than usually depicted in the West

 

[Jovialis]

why is Natufian a reason to not circle them, when some of them are on the same height in the Z-Axis? either that plane doesn't have to do something with paleo-caucasian or that part of the levant is similar to whole europe in that regard. their excess Natufian doesn't seem to change that.

Because Natufian is not a significant and/or existent in the other source population in the one that I did circle. I don't understand, are you suggesting that it should glossed over? If that's the case, why should we examine nuances in genetics at all? Those levantine populations just by the virtue of them being mostly between Iran_N, and Natufian place them in that position; not because they are the same as the others.

Here is the difference:

The earliest ancient DNA data of modern humans from Europe dates to ∼40 thousand years ago1-4, but that from the Caucasus and the Near East to only ∼14 thousand years ago5,6, from populations who lived long after the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) ∼26.5-19 thousand years ago7. To address this imbalance and to better understand the relationship of Europeans and Near Easterners, we report genome-wide data from two ∼26 thousand year old individuals from Dzudzuana Cave in Georgia in the Caucasus from around the beginning of the LGM. Surprisingly, the Dzudzuana population was more closely related to early agriculturalists from western Anatolia ∼8 thousand years ago8 than to the hunter-gatherers of the Caucasus from the same region of western Georgia of ∼13-10 thousand years ago5. Most of the Dzudzuana population’s ancestry was deeply related to the post-glacial western European hunter-gatherers of the ‘Villabruna cluster’3, but it also had ancestry from a lineage that had separated from the great majority of non-African populations before they separated from each other, proving that such ‘Basal Eurasians’6,9 were present in West Eurasia twice as early as previously recorded5,6. We document major population turnover in the Near East after the time of Dzudzuana, showing that the highly differentiated Holocene populations of the region6 were formed by ‘Ancient North Eurasian’3,9,10 admixture into the Caucasus and Iran and North African11,12 admixture into the Natufians of the Levant. We finally show that the Dzudzuana population contributed the majority of the ancestry of post-Ice Age people in the Near East, North Africa, and even parts of Europe, thereby becoming the largest single contributor of ancestry of all present-day West Eurasians.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/423079v1

These nuances cannot be ignored, not matter how you slice it, and dice it.

 

[Jovialis]

Cleopatra was 5'4" tall, had a markedly dark skin and was slightly overweight. Her face was characterized by a large nose, very thin lips and a pointed jaw.

https://www.infobae.com/2009/03/16/...que-cleopatra-descenderia-africa-y-no-grecia/

Cleopatra (69 BC-30 BC), of the Ptolemaic dynasty and queen of ancient Egypt, had African rather than Greco-Caucasian roots
according to a research of the Austrian Academy of Science that will be presented on March 23rd in a documentary of the BBC London

I think Cleopatra must have had some African mixture, maybe her nose and some features were not African because of the mixture but her skin was probably darker than usually depicted in the West

That's 11 years old, the more recent scholarly work from Boston University asserts that she was indeed a European person with Macedonian roots.

 

[Alyan]

That's 11 years old, the more recent scholarly work from Boston University asserts that she was indeed a European person with Macedonian roots.

You don't need to yak about some random university filled with revisionists/crackpots. Just the primary sources and her depictions are enough.

Not a single source mentions Cleopatra having admixture from Egypt. If she was racially alien enough that she wouldn't pass as a native in Greece then it would be reflected in her depictions and sources. And Subsaharan populations never had a significant presence in Egypt for foreign royalty to have such admixture.

 

[Jovialis]

Because Natufian is not a significant and/or existent in the other source population in the one that I did circle. I don't understand, are you suggesting that it should glossed over? If that's the case, why should we examine nuances in genetics at all? Those levantine populations just by the virtue of them being mostly between Iran_N, and Natufian place them in that position; not because they are the same as the others.

Here is the difference:



These nuances cannot be ignored, not matter how you slice it, and dice it.

Furthermore, it is actually some excess Natufian-like, and Iran_N-like DNA that pulls some of these populations up or down on the z-axis on that plane. For example, despite the fact that Canary Islanders are as "North" as they are, they are pulled down on the Z-axis towards North African populations, due to Natufian-like admixture. Or if you examine Moorish-admixed populations verified by grave goods, from the middle ages, they are as "North" as many southern European populations, but are clearly distinguished on the Z-axis from them. Or if you look at a sample, like R475, it is clearly pulled in the Z-axis towards north African-like populations.

 

[Ailchu]

Because Natufian is not a significant and/or existent in the other source population in the one that I did circle. I don't understand, are you suggesting that it should glossed over? If that's the case, why should we examine nuances in genetics at all? Those levantine populations just by the virtue of them being mostly between Iran_N, and Natufian place them in that position; not because they are the same as the others.

Here is the difference:



These nuances cannot be ignored, not matter how you slice it, and dice it.

if nuances are important, why even circle the other populations? they aren't the same either as it's pretty obvious. however in this z dimension of your pca they are and if you say that the people in the levant are just in that position on the Z axis for a different reason than europeans then what exactly is your pca showing? how can you be certain that the europeans are not plotting in that position for the same reason as the people in the levant and are affected by the exact same pulls. that dimension would be quite inconsistent.

 

[Jovialis]

if nuances are important, why even circle the other populations? they aren't the same either as it's pretty obvious. however in this z dimension of your pca they are and if you say that the people in the levant are just in that position on the Z axis for a different reason than europeans then what exactly is your pca showing? how can you be certain that the europeans are not plotting in that position for the same reason as the people in the levant and are affected by the exact same pulls. that dimension would be quite inconsistent.

Follow my logic:

Anatolian_N exists on that Z axis; Anatolian_N is very similar to Dzudzuna; The pre-preprint suggests Dzudzuna is the majority of West Eurasian ancestry; the plane visualizes where those elements are prominent; the plane is a gradient between Dzudzuna(Basal Eurasian + European HGs)to European HGs; other populations variation are explained Holocene admixture events, which is also visualized by the PCA.

 

[Jovialis]

You don't need to yak about some random university filled with revisionists/crackpots. Just the primary sources and her depictions are enough.

Not a single source mentions Cleopatra having admixture from Egypt. If she was racially alien enough that she wouldn't pass as a native in Greece then it would be reflected in her depictions and sources. And Subsaharan populations never had a significant presence in Egypt for foreign royalty to have such admixture.

We do not generalize all academics as crack pots. This is not a conspiracy theroist website!