Jewish people, where they are from?

[John Doe]

Once more, the main problem with a model proposing such a high amount of alledgedly Mesolithic European ancestry is the paucity (not so say absence) of WHG.
Another problem we face is the lack of IBD sharing between Jews & Italians, that's the most problematic part of the story if you ask me.

I'd take Alan's K20 admix with a few tons of salt if I were you, not exactly the gospel so to speak.

Also, there is no archeologic evidence for the Exodus, so it's highly unlikely that the Proto-Israelites spent 40 years in the desert... In fact, the present concensus is that the Israelites were Canaanites themselves.
What might've happened is that they incorporated the neighbouring Shasu cattle nomads (resulting in high frequencies of J1 & E-M34?).

Finally, I wouldn't assume a 1/1 correlation between genes and language, though there are some fits they simply don't work the same way.
All in all, I think Cyprus might've retained much of the pre-Islamic Levant's genetic make up, and this would explain why Western (Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Syrian, etc) and Iraqi Jews cline towards Lebanese-leaning Cypriots.

I thought Ashkenazis plot along with Sicilians and Maltese, in the gap between Cypriots and Greeks, the gap between Europe and the Near East, not next to Cypriots. I wonder why Sicilians and Maltese have no WHG either.

 

[FrankN]

Once more, the main problem with a model proposing such a high amount of alledgedly Mesolithic European ancestry is the paucity (not so say absence) of WHG.Another problem we face is the lack of IBD sharing between Jews & Italians, that's the most problematic part of the story if you ask me.I'd take Alan's K20 admix with a few tons of salt if I were you, not exactly the gospel so to speak.Also, there is no archeologic evidence for the Exodus, so it's highly unlikely that the Proto-Israelites spent 40 years in the desert... In fact, the present concensus is that the Israelites were Canaanites themselves.What might've happened is that they incorporated the neighbouring Shasu cattle nomads (resulting in high frequencies of J1 & E-M34?).Finally, I wouldn't assume a 1/1 correlation between genes and language, though there are some fits they simply don't work the same way.All in all, I think Cyprus might've retained much of the pre-Islamic Levant's genetic make up, and this would explain why Western (Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Syrian, etc) and Iraqi Jews cline towards Lebanese-leaning Cypriots.

Whether it's Alan's admix, the original Lazarides one (as I said- on visual inspection identical to Alan's, you just can't spot smaller admixture elements that well there), or the admix Excel table that JS Bach has linked to, they all show AJs genetically very close to Sicilians, and further away from Cypriots. Below are, for easy comparison, the respective results from JS Bach's table (smaller admix components combined; AJ1 from Dodecad, AJ2 from Behar):

[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Component
[/TD]
[TD]

AJ1​

[/TD]
[TD]

AJ2​

[/TD]
[TD]

Sic​

[/TD]
[TD]

Cyp​

[/TD]
[TD]

Pal​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean (peak: Basques)
[/TD]
[TD]37.8
[/TD]
[TD]37.5
[/TD]
[TD]40.4
[/TD]
[TD]36.6
[/TD]
[TD]25.6
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW Asian (peak: Yemen Jews)
[/TD]
[TD]20.6
[/TD]
[TD]20.4
[/TD]
[TD]17.6
[/TD]
[TD]23.9
[/TD]
[TD]36.4
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W Asian (peak: Georgians)
[/TD]
[TD]22.4
[/TD]
[TD]23.1
[/TD]
[TD]23.7
[/TD]
[TD]33.6
[/TD]
[TD]29.2
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North European (peak: Lithuanians)
[/TD]
[TD]16.7
[/TD]
[TD]16.0
[/TD]
[TD]16.5
[/TD]
[TD] 5.1
[/TD]
[TD] 0.7
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Arctic, Siberian, Amerindian, East Asian
[/TD]
[TD] 1.4
[/TD]
[TD] 1.8
[/TD]
[TD] 0.2
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E African, Australasian
[/TD]
[TD] 1.1
[/TD]
[TD] 1.3
[/TD]
[TD] 1.1
[/TD]
[TD] 0.8
[/TD]
[TD] 4.6
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W African, Paleo-African
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] 0.4
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] 2.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S Asian (peak: Paniya)
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] 0.6
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Clearly, AJ are as "northern European" as Sicilians, and much more than Cypriots. Whether that means they were originally like the Cypriots, and picked up another 10% of "northern Europeaness" in the Rhineland & CE Europe (JS Bach's assumption), or obtained that mix in Sicily / Southern Italy, and maintained it mostly unchanged, except for a bit of North Eurasian inflow, in CE Europe - who knows. Admixture analysis can't tell it.

I don't get the WHG argument, but that may be because I don't think you can trace such old ancestry via admix analysis. Over the last 8,000 years, mankind has grown from a few 100,000 to close to 10 billion - just too much additional genetic diversity to find that handful of original HGs in the mix. I mean, look at that tiny "Australasian" element that always pops up alongside "East African", even in cases (e.g. AJ) where such an admixture is extremely implausible. Of course, there are very basal, Palaeolithic lines that East Africans and Australasians (and for all we know, all other humans) share. For some reason, admix analysis seems to recognise these lines as Australasian instead of East African. In a similar way, European Mesolithic ancestry gets somehow pooled into "Mediterranean" and/ or "North European" (probably into both), but that does not mean that every "North European" has Mesolithic ancestors.

I certainly don't believe that genes and language are 1/1 correlated. Otherwise, Germany would have around 1/3 each speakers of German, Celtic and Slavic, with the remainder speaking Latin. Those figures actually represent quite well what was going on German territory at certain points during the last 3,000 years, but they are linguistically absolutely meaningless today. My point was simply that AJ must have learnt (Middle Low) German somewhere before turning it into Yiddish, and that was most likely neither on Cyprus nor on Sicily...

 

[Semitic Duwa]

I thought Ashkenazis plot along with Sicilians and Maltese, in the gap between Cypriots and Greeks, the gap between Europe and the Near East, not next to Cypriots. I wonder why Sicilians and Maltese have no WHG either.

They do plot with them, between Greeks & Cypriots. In the meantime, they cline towards Cypriots like most Jewish populations (even Iraqi Jews) for that matter... Which is suggestive of some sort of divergence from a source population lying at the end of this cline.

 

[Semitic Duwa]

Whether it's Alan's admix, the original Lazarides one (as I said- on visual inspection identical to Alan's, you just can't spot smaller admixture elements that well there), or the admix Excel table that JS Bach has linked to, they all show AJs genetically very close to Sicilians, and further away from Cypriots. Below are, for easy comparison, the respective results from JS Bach's table (smaller admix components combined; AJ1 from Dodecad, AJ2 from Behar):

[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Component[/TD]
[TD]

AJ1​

[/TD]
[TD]

AJ2​

[/TD]
[TD]

Sic​

[/TD]
[TD]

Cyp​

[/TD]
[TD]

Pal​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mediterranean (peak: Basques)[/TD]
[TD]37.8[/TD]
[TD]37.5[/TD]
[TD]40.4[/TD]
[TD]36.6[/TD]
[TD]25.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]SW Asian (peak: Yemen Jews)[/TD]
[TD]20.6[/TD]
[TD]20.4[/TD]
[TD]17.6[/TD]
[TD]23.9[/TD]
[TD]36.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W Asian (peak: Georgians)[/TD]
[TD]22.4[/TD]
[TD]23.1[/TD]
[TD]23.7[/TD]
[TD]33.6[/TD]
[TD]29.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North European (peak: Lithuanians)
[/TD]
[TD]16.7[/TD]
[TD]16.0[/TD]
[TD]16.5[/TD]
[TD]

5.1
​

[/TD]
[TD]

0.7
​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Arctic, Siberian, Amerindian, East Asian[/TD]
[TD]

1.4
​

[/TD]
[TD]

1.8
​

[/TD]
[TD]

0.2
​

[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]E African, Australasian[/TD]
[TD]

1.1
​

[/TD]
[TD]

1.3
​

[/TD]
[TD]

1.1
​

[/TD]
[TD]

0.8
​

[/TD]
[TD]

4.6
​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]W African, Paleo-African[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]

0.4
​

[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]

2.8
​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]S Asian (peak: Paniya)[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]

0.6
​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Clearly, AJ are as "northern European" as Sicilians, and much more than Cypriots. Whether that means they were originally like the Cypriots, and picked up another 10% of "northern Europeaness" in the Rhineland & CE Europe (JS Bach's assumption), or obtained that mix in Sicily / Southern Italy, and maintained it mostly unchanged, except for a bit of North Eurasian inflow, in CE Europe - who knows. Admixture analysis can't tell it.

I don't get the WHG argument, but that may be because I don't think you can trace such old ancestry via admix analysis. Over the last 8,000 years, mankind has grown from a few 100,000 to close to 10 billion - just too much additional genetic diversity to find that handful of original HGs in the mix. I mean, look at that tiny "Australasian" element that always pops up alongside "East African", even in cases (e.g. AJ) where such an admixture is extremely implausible. Of course, there are very basal, Palaeolithic lines that East Africans and Australasians (and for all we know, all other humans) share. For some reason, admix analysis seems to recognise these lines as Australasian instead of East African. In a similar way, European Mesolithic ancestry gets somehow pooled into "Mediterranean" and/ or "North European" (probably into both), but that does not mean that every "North European" has Mesolithic ancestors.

I certainly don't believe that genes and language are 1/1 correlated. Otherwise, Germany would have around 1/3 each speakers of German, Celtic and Slavic, with the remainder speaking Latin. Those figures actually represent quite well what was going on German territory at certain points during the last 3,000 years, but they are linguistically absolutely meaningless today. My point was simply that AJ must have learnt (Middle Low) German somewhere before turning it into Yiddish, and that was most likely neither on Cyprus nor on Sicily...

The K20 analysis makes little sense since the components are derived from WHG, ANE, EEF, BE, ENA, etc... Which is why these ancestral components are so crucial to our understanding.
The paucity of WHG in Jews makes any amount of Northern European ancestry highly doubtful, unless you're willing to count the WHG contained within EEF... And even then, you'd have to weed it out perfectly so as to avoid mixing it up with other HG components.
I seriously doubt Cypriots have any Northern European ancestry, especially since they get negative WHG scores.

The lack of WHG in Ashkenazim above noise level is the biggest problem with any model implying a high amount of N. Euro admixture.

As you pointed out, Yiddish is merely Middle Low German infused with Hebrew & Aramaic expressions written in the Aramaic script... Which fits precisely in the pattern of Jewish languages, consider Ladino for instance, pretty much the same story, yet another language frozen in time with Hebrew & Aramaic expressions.
Same thing for Judaeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Berber, Judaeo-Georgian and so on.
So Yiddish isn't really that odd, it merely reflects classic linguistic patterns Jews exhibit in diaspora.

 

[FrankN]

The K20 analysis makes little sense since the components are derived from WHG, ANE, EEF, BE, ENA, etc... Which is why these ancestral components are so crucial to our understanding.The paucity of WHG in Jews makes any amount of Northern European ancestry highly doubtful, unless you're willing to count the WHG contained within EEF... And even then, you'd have to weed it out perfectly so as to avoid mixing it up with other HG components.

Considering that Sardinians are the prototypical EEF (80% or so) - yes, I think that a lot of Cantabrian LGM refuge HG DNA is contained within EEF. Sardinians were ne ver really famous for farming. Instead, they exported their obsidian across most of the Western Mediterranean during the early Neolithic, and supplied their copper to most of Europe, including Scandinavia and Greece, during the Bronze Age. So, to me, EEF looks more like EEMT (Early European Miner & Trader). And that might blend quite well into Jewish traditions (the trading part more than the mining part, obviously). Remembering furthermore that a good part of the show was later on run by Phoenicians and Punics, the link gets even more obvious.

North Europeans, especially those in the admix in my table above, which peak in Lithuanians, are some kind of mix of Steppe people, NHG (the Motala DNA, not considered further by Lazarides), HG from the Pontic refuge, and those early farmers that didn't enter Europe along the Mediterranean coast, but along the Danube (split at latest around 6.500 BC, sufficient to develop a different genetic profile). They would have come to the Mediterranean as retired Germanic / British / Belgian legionnaires, with the Goths and Vandals, as Varangian traders, Normans, and Crusaders. Possibly, the Celtic incursion into the Balkans and Anatolia in the 4th century BC, and Avars and Slavs on / near the Dalmatian coast also played a role. And, don't forget that the Motala NHGs had yDNA I2a-Din, which today peaks on the Dalmatian coast. Some of these "North Europeans" must have gotten there rather early, or the other way round - anyway, "North European" has quite a bit of Balkan in it.

 

[John Doe]

They do plot with them, between Greeks & Cypriots. In the meantime, they cline towards Cypriots like most Jewish populations (even Iraqi Jews) for that matter... Which is suggestive of some sort of divergence from a source population lying at the end of this cline.

I see. I heard that that divergence between Ashkenazi/Sephardi Jews and Mizrahi Jews happened around 2,500 years ago in the Middle east/Mesopotamia, perhaps during the Babylonian captivity?

 

[John Doe]

The K20 analysis makes little sense since the components are derived from WHG, ANE, EEF, BE, ENA, etc... Which is why these ancestral components are so crucial to our understanding.
The paucity of WHG in Jews makes any amount of Northern European ancestry highly doubtful, unless you're willing to count the WHG contained within EEF... And even then, you'd have to weed it out perfectly so as to avoid mixing it up with other HG components.
I seriously doubt Cypriots have any Northern European ancestry, especially since they get negative WHG scores.

The lack of WHG in Ashkenazim above noise level is the biggest problem with any model implying a high amount of N. Euro admixture.

As you pointed out, Yiddish is merely Middle Low German infused with Hebrew & Aramaic expressions written in the Aramaic script... Which fits precisely in the pattern of Jewish languages, consider Ladino for instance, pretty much the same story, yet another language frozen in time with Hebrew & Aramaic expressions.
Same thing for Judaeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Berber, Judaeo-Georgian and so on.
So Yiddish isn't really that odd, it merely reflects classic linguistic patterns Jews exhibit in diaspora.

The authors of the study did say that the WHG component isn't exactly absent from Ashkenazi Jews/Maltese/Sicilians, but that it's inside the EEF ancestry.
As for the second part, it's true, Yiddish is basically Judeo-German, just like there's Judeo-French, Judeo-Provence, Judeo-Latin, Judeo-Greek etc.

 

[Semitic Duwa]

I see. I heard that that divergence between Ashkenazi/Sephardi Jews and Mizrahi Jews happened around 2,500 years ago in the Middle east/Mesopotamia, perhaps during the Babylonian captivity?

Indeed, the Babylonian captivity probably resulted in the current split we can observe between Mizrahim & Western Jews... That's the best explanation as to why they overlap with Assyrians & Syriac Orthodox christians.

 

[Semitic Duwa]

The authors of the study did say that the WHG component isn't exactly absent from Ashkenazi Jews/Maltese/Sicilians, but that it's inside the EEF ancestry.
As for the second part, it's true, Yiddish is basically Judeo-German, just like there's Judeo-French, Judeo-Provence, Judeo-Latin, Judeo-Greek etc.

Absolutely, yet the fact that WHG doesn't actually show up per se in AJs/Maltese/Sicilians is very troubling, since other Near Eastern populations also end up having high amounts of EEF even though we're pretty much sure they don't have any WHG. In some populations, WHG are even negative... Populations such as Cypriots for instance (or N. Caucasians).

Either way, if we are to quantify the total amount of WHG in Jews we barely end up with an amount warranting any large-scale N. Euro contribution. Which is why I think most of the admixture took place in the Eastern Mediterranean (there clearly was a lot of intermarriage going on prior to the Tanna'im's shift to matrilineal descent, which led to the emergence of sizeable Jewish communities in the Mediterranean along with the subsequent Kitos war).

As I said, Yiddish is underwhelmingly normal in regards to other Jewish languages, it's basically the same story in a different place from a purely linguistic POV.

 

[John Doe]

Either way, if we are to quantify the total amount of WHG in Jews we barely end up with an amount warranting any large-scale N. Euro contribution. Which is why I think most of the admixture took place in the Eastern Mediterranean (there clearly was a lot of intermarriage going on prior to the Tanna'im's shift to matrilineal descent, which led to the emergence of sizeable Jewish communities in the Mediterranean along with the subsequent Kitos war).

Which leads us back to the high possibility of the European admixture in Western Jews (as well as Sicilians and Maltese) being mainly pre Slavic migration Hellenistic East Mediterranean like pre Slavic migration Hellenistic period South Greeks or Pre Slavic migration Hellenistic Greek Islanders, as a reminder, during that time many Jews followed the Hellenistic denomination of Judaism, known as "Hellenistic Judaism" (which tried to mix Jewish and Greek religious and philosophical outlooks yet falling short of completely severing the Jewish roots as Christianity did later), the day to day languages of most Jews by that time were Aramaic and Greek, and usually many Jews back then had both Hebrew and Greek names, and of course the fact that back then Judaism passed from the Dad, making it much easier to marry non Jewish women, and in this case, possibly Greek women.

Indeed, the Babylonian captivity probably resulted in the current split we can observe between Mizrahim & Western Jews... That's the best explanation as to why they overlap with Assyrians & Syriac Orthodox christians.

Thanks for the clarification. BTW when you said "That's the best explanation as to why they overlap with Assyrians & Syriac Orthodox Christians" did you imply the Mizrahis when you said "they"?

 

[Semitic Duwa]

Which leads us back to the high possibility of the European admixture in Western Jews (as well as Sicilians and Maltese) being mainly pre Slavic migration Hellenistic East Mediterranean like pre Slavic migration Hellenistic period South Greeks or Pre Slavic migration Hellenistic Greek Islanders, as a reminder, during that time many Jews followed the Hellenistic denomination of Judaism, known as "Hellenistic Judaism" (which tried to mix Jewish and Greek religious and philosophical outlooks yet falling short of completely severing the Jewish roots as Christianity did later), the day to day languages of most Jews by that time were Aramaic and Greek, and usually many Jews back then had both Hebrew and Greek names, and of course the fact that back then Judaism passed from the Dad, making it much easier to marry non Jewish women, and in this case, possibly Greek women.

Absolutely, that's definitely a possibility we must entertain and the fact that many Jews had Greek names when they appear in Europe's historical record for the first time further reinforces such a model if you ask me.
Which is troubling in the end as well because we'll end up splitting hairs: We'll be dealing with Eastern Mediterranean populations all the way through, it would be much easier to distinguish between them if there were clear traces of N. European introgression.

Thanks for the clarification. BTW when you said "That's the best explanation as to why they overlap with Assyrians & Syriac Orthodox Christians" did you imply the Mizrahis when you said "they"?

Absolutely, you can see for yourself:

Iraqi Jews are contained within the red cluster, Iranian Jews in grey, Kurdish Jews in light blue and Assyrians+Iraqi Mandeans in pink.
Keep in mind that Syriac Orthodox cline towards the west and end up just within the reaches of the Iraqi Jewish cluster.
I think Mizrahim absorbed a lot of Mandean-like admixture, since Mandaens probably fit right where Babylonians once were.

So I think it's anything but delusional to assume that Mizrahim have absorbed a fair deal of Mesopotamian genes, in fact that's the most likely scenario.
Not really surprising, they had at least a thousand years to intermarry prior to the emergence of christendom & Islam, by then they probably plotted the way they do nowadays.

 

[John Doe]

Absolutely, that's definitely a possibility we must entertain and the fact that many Jews had Greek names when they appear in Europe's historical record for the first time further reinforces such a model if you ask me.
Which is troubling in the end as well because we'll end up splitting hairs: We'll be dealing with Eastern Mediterranean populations all the way through, it would be much easier to distinguish between them if there were clear traces of N. European introgression.



Absolutely, you can see for yourself:

Iraqi Jews are contained within the red cluster, Iranian Jews in grey, Kurdish Jews in light blue and Assyrians+Iraqi Mandeans in pink.
Keep in mind that Syriac Orthodox cline towards the west and end up just within the reaches of the Iraqi Jewish cluster.
I think Mizrahim absorbed a lot of Mandean-like admixture, since Mandaens probably fit right where Babylonians once were.

So I think it's anything but delusional to assume that Mizrahim have absorbed a fair deal of Mesopotamian genes, in fact that's the most likely scenario.
Not really surprising, they had at least a thousand years to intermarry prior to the emergence of christendom & Islam, by then they probably plotted the way they do nowadays.

Thanks for the explanations and confirmations.

 

[John Doe]

Absolutely, that's definitely a possibility we must entertain and the fact that many Jews had Greek names when they appear in Europe's historical record for the first time further reinforces such a model if you ask me.
Which is troubling in the end as well because we'll end up splitting hairs: We'll be dealing with Eastern Mediterranean populations all the way through, it would be much easier to distinguish between them if there were clear traces of N. European introgression.

Well there is a way to distinguish Western Jews/Maltese/Sicilians from other Pre Islamic East Mediterraneans, the fact that they plot between Europe and the Near East (between Greeks and Cypriots), not in the Near East (While not in Europe either). Suggesting perhaps that if at first they (Western Jews) were next to Cypriots on the tip of the Near East, something got them into the gap between Europe and the Near East, and I guess the best answer would be intermarriage with Greeks during the Hellenistic period, because if modern Greeks have around 6% of visible WHG ancestry i.e after the Slavic migrations during the early middle ages, then the Greeks of the Hellenistic period would probably have even lower WHG ancestry, so low that it would not be visible in the case of intermarriage, let's not forget that Western Jews/Maltese/Sicilians, while having 0 WHG ancestry, don't have negative ancestry like for example the Cypriots, who provide the best example of pre Islamic East Mediterranean Near Easterners. Also, of course, they have WHG ancestry in their EEF ancestry, and they (Western Jews/Sicilians/Maltese) do seem to have more WHG ancestry than for example the Stuttgart bloke who also plots in the gap between Europe and the Near East.

 

[Semitic Duwa]

Well there is a way to distinguish Western Jews/Maltese/Sicilians from other Pre Islamic East Mediterraneans, the fact that they plot between Europe and the Near East (between Greeks and Cypriots), not in the Near East (While not in Europe either). Suggesting perhaps that if at first they (Western Jews) were next to Cypriots on the tip of the Near East, something got them into the gap between Europe and the Near East, and I guess the best answer would be intermarriage with Greeks during the Hellenistic period, because if modern Greeks have around 6% of visible WHG ancestry i.e after the Slavic migrations during the early middle ages, then the Greeks of the Hellenistic period would probably have even lower WHG ancestry, so low that it would not be visible in the case of intermarriage, let's not forget that Western Jews/Maltese/Sicilians, while having 0 WHG ancestry, don't have negative ancestry like for example the Cypriots, who provide the best example of pre Islamic East Mediterranean Near Easterners. Also, of course, they have WHG ancestry in their EEF ancestry, and they (Western Jews/Sicilians/Maltese) do seem to have more WHG ancestry than for example the Stuttgart bloke who also plots in the gap between Europe and the Near East.

There must be a way, of course... And if you ask me, the best way to do so is to get good coverage of the Eastern Mediterranean archeogenetic record.
The main problem when quantifying the actual amount of admixture, especially if pre-exilic Judeans were Cypriot-like as I suspect they were, is that we'll have to split hairs since we're dealing with fairly similar populations here... That is to say that the actual amount of admixture will not be easy to uncover since it will've come from a similar Eastern Mediterranean population in the first place.

Depending on the admixture models we'll end up with using a Cypriot-like population mixed with a Hellenistic proxy, estimates can vary from ~75% "Judean" + ~25 "Hellene" to ~80% "Hellene" + ~20 "Judean"...
^^ That's not good news if you ask me... I'd rather have Jews with obvious amounts of European admixture, at least it would give clear estimates and the mystery would finally be solved.

 

[FrankN]

The issue of Yiddish has been brushed away a bit lightly here as "well, just another adaptation to the local language such as Judeo-Georgian or Judeo-Berber". It's actually not as simple as that:

1. In Eastern Europe, which was the prime settlement area of Ashkenazi from the 14th century onwards, the dominating local language wasn't German, but Slavic (Polish/ Ukranian) or Baltic (Lithuanian). However, Ashkenazi didn't develop Judeo-Polish or Judeo-Lithuanian, but Yiddish. This means they must either (a) have previously settled in Germany, or (b) have come to Eastern Europe together with German colonists, or (c) if already present in Eastern Europe since Khazar times, their settlement focus must have come under significant German cultural influence. Option (c) implies concentration on the major cities, many of which (including Kiev) adopted German law in the 14th/15th century and attracted significant German merchant and craftsmen communities. From a linguistic point of view, I think we can exclude the possibility of a significant spread of Judaism into rural CE Europe under the Khazars.
2. German language is far from being homogeneous. It is split into various dialects. A simplified division runs from north to south. Low (northern) German has preserved the original Germanic consonants that are still found in English or Dutch today, e.g. English "to eat"->Low German "eten", but High German "essen". Conversely, Upper (southern) German has undergone a number of consonant shifts. Dialects spoken in the area in-between are classified as "Middle German" but in fact consist of several zones that have adopted some, but not all of the High German consonant shifts. In addition, a special feature of most Middle German dialects is replacing "g" by "j", e.g. Berlinish "jut" for "gut" (good).
   As the German colonialisation of Eastern Europe has been carried out by settlers from specific regions, the dialect differentiation was also transferred into Eastern Europe. Below is a simplified Wikipedia map of the German dialect landscape that had emerged around the late 19th century. As we know that Yiddish was derived from Middle German, we can conclude it didn't form in Bavaria, Austria or Hungary, nor north of Warszaw.
   
   
3. In addition to the north-south division, there are a number of features that change from west to east. I save you the details, but instead invite you to watch the video below. The Bavarian origin of the German guy is easily detectable (at least for a German), so I hope at least the Jewish guy has a half-way authentic pronunciation. Pay attention to Yiddish "ich" (I), the pronunciation of "g" (e.g. "morgen"(tomorrow) at 1:50), and the Yiddish vowel shifts in otherwise similar German words:
   
   Let's start with the Yiddish vowel shifts: They are typical for (now mostly extinct) East German dialects that used to be spoken in Silesia and East Prussia (Ost-Preussen->"Ast-Preissen", schön->"scheen"), and probably reflect sound adaptation to local Slavic and Baltic dialects. Another feature of Silesian German was its maintenance of the "g" sound, instead of the shift to "j" that is found in most other Middle German dialects. Both features attest that Yiddish has mostly been formed in CE Europe.
   Yiddish has hardened the "ch" sound into "kh", which is uncommon in German dialects. Most dialects have either dropped the sound completely, similar to English (Bavarian, Austrian), use the "k" instead (Low German), or have "celticised" the sound into "sh" (Rhineland, Hesse, Swabian). The High German "ch" is actually only found in Saxon-Thuringian and Silesian dialects. And there is only one dialect region, namely Alemannic (Swiss German, Alsatian, Baden) that uses the hardened "kh" instead of the softer "ch". So, if the guy in the video really speaks authentic Yiddish, then I an quite certain that AJ must have spent some time along the upper Rhine before moving on into CE Europe. I assume Hebrew has a similar 'kh' sound, which helped Ashkenazi to maintain that Alemannic feature amidst German colonists that used the softer "ch" instead. If they had come directly into CE Europe from somewhere in the Mediterranean, they would most likely have taken over the local soft "ch", as they have done with most other features of Eastern German dialects.

Anybody wanting to get a feel how Swiss German sounds can use the link below (I am only allowed to embed one video per post):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_HilyK7YAE

Otherwise, I assume people are acquainted with this thread: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26803-I2c-frequency-and-diversity-maps
As Sparkey notes:

Eastern Europe data came entirely from the FTDNA Project. Eastern European I2c is dominated by Jews, many of whom are diaspora who have taken tests on their own

 

[John Doe]

There must be a way, of course... And if you ask me, the best way to do so is to get good coverage of the Eastern Mediterranean archeogenetic record.
The main problem when quantifying the actual amount of admixture, especially if pre-exilic Judeans were Cypriot-like as I suspect they were, is that we'll have to split hairs since we're dealing with fairly similar populations here... That is to say that the actual amount of admixture will not be easy to uncover since it will've come from a similar Eastern Mediterranean population in the first place.

Depending on the admixture models we'll end up with using a Cypriot-like population mixed with a Hellenistic proxy, estimates can vary from ~75% "Judean" + ~25 "Hellene" to ~80% "Hellene" + ~20 "Judean"...
^^ That's not good news if you ask me... I'd rather have Jews with obvious amounts of European admixture, at least it would give clear estimates and the mystery would finally be solved.

I see. Thanks again for the deep explanation.

 

[Semitic Duwa]

FrankN:

There actually was a Judaeo-slavic language, Knaanic... But it became extinct during the late middle ages & was eventually replaced by Yiddish.
The retention of Yiddish was mainly due to the fact that Ashkenazim were highly endogamous and rarely interacted with the locals, they kept to themselves for the most.

 

[LeBrok]

The retention of Yiddish was mainly due to the fact that Ashkenazim were highly endogamous and rarely interacted with the locals, they kept to themselves for the most.

For exactly same reason we can wonder why they switched to Yiddish in first place?

Perhaps in the future will see two separate Jewish migrations to Central Europe. One (Yiddish) mainly the city dwellers and other population who came from South/East and lived mainly in rural area. I have no clues myself just thinking outloud. In many Polish cities official language was German till pretty much 17-18 century, making Yiddish very useful in the cities.

Did rural Jews from Ukraine and Russia (east part of Siolo) use Yiddish or Hebrew?

 

[AgnusDei]

For exactly same reason we can wonder why they switched to Yiddish in first place?

Perhaps in the future will see two separate Jewish migrations to Central Europe. One (Yiddish) mainly the city dwellers and other population who came from South/East and lived mainly in rural area. I have no clues myself just thinking outloud. In many Polish cities official language was German till pretty much 17-18 century, making Yiddish very useful in the cities.

Did rural Jews from Ukraine and Russia (east part of Siolo) use Yiddish or Hebrew?

As far as I know,Hebrew was a dead language only used during services,in fact it is the only dead language that has been successfully revived .

 

[John Doe]

As far as I know,Hebrew was a dead language only used during services,in fact it is the only dead language that has been successfully revived .

Possibly, it's been basically dead as a day to day language from the Babylonian captivity to the 19th century. The language which replaced Hebrew was Aramaic, soon after another language was added to the Jewish vocabulary, Greek. In fact, I read somewhere that an early Ashkenazi Jewish community leader in the Rhineland, during the times of the 1st Crusade, wanted to fight back at those that rioted against the Jews, he gathered the men and they fought until they had to "sanctify the name", the connection is, that his name was Greek, Kalykomos or something like that.
Perhaps the Ashkenazi Jews adopted Old High German and mixed it with Hebrew/Aramaic and some Greek/Latin before the first Crusade, i.e before the great persecutions began, while it's true that under the Frankish empire (including East Francia which would turn into the Holy Roman empire), Jews were regarded as foreigners, property of the king/kaiser, and as heretics by the church, but before the Crusades, until the late 11th century, the church still had a difficult time placing it's authority in the region (in fact, one of the reasons Pope Urban the II called for a Crusade in response to the request of a few experienced mercenaries was to expand his authority), and so Jews had it easier until that time, and perhaps they adopted the local language by interacting with the locals via trade, money landing etc.