Tracing back Phoenician & Arabic DNA in modern Spaniards using Haak 2015's admixtures

I really meant Near Eastern/North African; as a whole. Not Semitic. ​That is only part of what I am saying. Correction.
 
I don't need someone to tell me whether or not Southern Spaniards and Portuguese have Semitic admixture; I KNOW this to be true. ;)

And my whole point being, is that Afro-Asiatic is spoken in Maltese; an island of Europe. How did it get there; if it is not European language in origin? Obviously through Near Eastern conquest...just like the Phoenician and Moorish conquests.


View attachment 7090

E-M123 is the most common Y-DNA haplogroup in Jewish people. It seems heavily concentrated in the region of Extremadura; which may suggest Sephardic Jewish assimilation.

View attachment 7091

And Mtdna U6 is obviously and evidently Sephardic Jewish in origin as well. All the people I met with this mtdna have Sephardic Jewish ancestry.

The Basque people look more like Celts (Irish, Scottish, Breton French, Western French) because they basically are. They are Celtiberians that are homogeneous but speak a non-IE language. They look nothing like Andalusians; and have a high percentage of Blondism in their population. While in Andalusia you will find people with mostly dark black hair; and usually straight.

Autosomal studies on the genetics of Jews do not show any particular relationship between Spaniards and any Jews, including Sephardics:

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100603/full/news.2010.277.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/s...-be-with-european-women-study-finds.html?_r=0

Basques are not, and never were, "Celts". Basques would be more like the pre-Celtic Iberians or the Aquitanians of France. The Celtic-influenced peoples of Spain would be from these regions (light blue):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Ethnographic_Iberia_200_BCE.PNG

So mostly Galicians, Asturians, Cantabrians and Castilian-Leonese.

The reason why Brits & Irish have some anthropological and genetic connections to Spaniards and French is probably more due to the fact that the British Isles also had a pre-Celtic population, who were similar to the Iberians and Aquitanians.

mtDNA U6 has very disputed origins (either Middle Eastern or North African), and in either case it's way older than any "Jews". We are talking about a prehistoric marker here, nothing remotely "recent". Plus it has been found even as far north as the British Isles.

About the "Afro-Asiatic" language thing: I still fail to see your point, as there was no "Afro-Asiatic" language spoken by any native inhabitants of Iberia. The pre-Celtic, pre-Roman populations spoke languages like Iberian and Basque, which have no relationship to either Indo-European or Semitic languages. Modern Iberians speak Indo-European languages derived from Latin due to the Roman empire imposing its language on the native populations, and the only pre-Indo-European language that has survived anywhere in Europe is Basque.
 
Autosomal studies on the genetics of Jews do not show any particular relationship between Spaniards and any Jews, including Sephardics:

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100603/full/news.2010.277.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/s...-be-with-european-women-study-finds.html?_r=0

Basques are not, and never were, "Celts". Basques would be more like the pre-Celtic Iberians or the Aquitanians of France. The Celtic-influenced peoples of Spain would be from these regions (light blue)

Nope. All people in Europe are mixed with pre-Indo-European and indigenous peoples; even Germanic people. There are traces of non Indo-European words in Germanic dialects. The Basques are merely Celtiberians that mixed with indigenous women; more so than other Spaniards. Spaniards are mixed with Visigoth Germanic, Roman and even something like Alan. (Ossetian) etc. Meaning that they take in heritage from all kinds of peoples. (heterogeneous) If you study the Basque people; you will find that they may have recently; what is called a "Population bottleneck". Which means the Basques descended from a small, relatively isolated population.

Even though Basques are mixed with Celtiberian and indigenous peoples; they are also homogeneous, meaning they share relatives a few generations back. While the rest of the Iberians tend to be heterogeneous. (Descending from all kinds of peoples.) It may seem contradictory; but it isn't.

Anthropology is a science that requires deep-thinking and logic that contains extreme concentration; like Math.

In fact; I can prove this with the Celtiberian Y-DNA that is most prominent in Basque people; but also has a small residual in Southwest France; where the Aquitanians were believed to have thrived:

Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.jpg
 
Nope. All people in Europe are mixed with pre-Indo-European and indigenous peoples; even Germanic people. There are traces of non Indo-European words in Germanic dialects. The Basques are merely Celtiberians that mixed with indigenous women; more so than other Spaniards. Spaniards are mixed with Visigoth Germanic, Roman and even something like Alan. (Ossetian) etc. Meaning that they take in heritage from all kinds of peoples. (heterogeneous) If you study the Basque people; you will find that they may have recently; what is called a "Population bottleneck". Which means the Basques descended from a small, relatively isolated population.

Even though Basques are mixed with Celtiberian and indigenous peoples; they are also homogeneous, meaning they share relatives a few generations back. While the rest of the Iberians tend to be heterogeneous. (Descending from all kinds of peoples.) It may seem contradictory; but it isn't.

Anthropology is a science that requires deep-thinking and logic that contains extreme concentration; like Math.

In fact; I can prove this with the Celtiberian Y-DNA that is most prominent in Basque people; but also has a small residual in Southwest France; where the Aquitanians were believed to have thrived:

View attachment 7092

I have never seen any historians, linguists or ethnologists suggest that Basques had any particularly strong Celtic influence. Basques are widely regarded as the only mostly pre-Indo-European people left in Europe (in fact they speak the only surviving pre-Indo-European language, none other in Europe survived Romanization), all others, as you say, have different degrees of Indo-European influence.

That Y-DNA marker seems more common in the non-Celtic areas of both France and Iberia, so it is very likely not "Celtiberian". Eupedia itself calls it the "Gascon & Iberian" branch, in fact.
 
I have never seen any historians, linguists or ethnologists suggest that Basques had any particularly strong Celtic influence. Basques are widely regarded as the only mostly pre-Indo-European people left in Europe (in fact they speak the only surviving pre-Indo-European language, none other in Europe survived Romanization), all others, as you say, have different degrees of Indo-European influence.
That is because you are misinformed...the R1b is Celtiberian in origin and arrived during the Bronze Age. With the invasion of Hallstatt Celts into Iberia.

See Maciamo's theory, How did the Basques become R1b?: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28386-How-did-the-Basques-become-R1b

You can also notice a small I2 residual around the Basque country; which suggests a Neolithic population once spoke Basque / Aquitanian, but the majority of the original I2 men were slaughtered by R1b invaders:

Haplogroup_I2a.jpg
 
hypothesis and scientific facts are not the same thing.




This thread is not about Maltese Language (which has been discussed before) but you can always read more about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_language

If you find it interesting you can always start a new thread or visit the older ones

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ltese-people/page3?highlight=Maltese+language

page 3 post 15
hypothesis and scientific facts are not the same thing. I know they aren't. Who said they were? You did. In fact, your country is the only country in Europe that has a non-European language; meaning it did not develop in Europe. Afro-Asiatic. You refer to an article from Wikipedia that has no scientific background and is only a hypothesis. You are basically calling me out for the same acts that you are: Contradicting yourself and being a hypocrite. This is called Baseless accusation and self-projection.

Don't think I am setting you up, attacking or arguing against you Maleth. I am just stating a fact.
 
I forgot to mention that the Jews could also have brought the same admixture and haplogroups as the Phoenicians and the Arabs.
Well, essentially; they were all Afro-Asiatic speaking peoples with origins in the Levant and Near East. So am I not completely wrong here? If you are talking about the same percentages, then yes I may be correct.

Basques look nothing like Andalusians in terms of phenotype; and Basques are more Northern European while Andalusians would fit Mediterranean. And it is in my personal opinion; from experience; that some Andalusian Spaniards look very similar to Near Easterners like the Lebanese and Syrians; and may have picked up some of those genetics.

I was a bit taken aback by some of the people posting here, arguing against and claiming that they were in complete discordance in their analogies with mine. I was expecting the opposite. Lots of Southern Iberians have non-European ancestry; it's no secret to me.
 
The presence of E-M81 is certainly pre-islamic. Because the frequencies do not correlate with the islamic historical events taking place in Iberia. The morisco theory in Galicia is ridiculous, and makes no historical sense, not only because morsicos were natives converted to Islam living in Christian territory, but because the presence of moriscos in Galicia was very small (compared to other places like Aragón or Valencia, were they made a large percent of the population) , so that cannot account for the 5-6% presence of E-M81 in Galicia. There is also high percentage in Cantabria and other non-southern areas. Also, there fact you find some E-M81 in other parts of Europe, so everything points to a pre-islamic incoming from Northern-Africa. In France, there are areas with 4-5% of E-M81 also (Auvergne, Ile-de-France).
This subclade could have come from a migration of ancient peoples originating from North Africa who arrived in the peninsula before the Mesolithic; centuries longer than the Phoenicians and even the Moors.

I don't believe E-M81 is European; and I cannot find any other explanation. Unless it was an ancient European Y-DNA such as C6 or pre-I that was replaced by Neolithic or Bronze Age Y-DNA. But someone would have to prove that.
 
This subclade could have come from a migration of ancient peoples originating from North Africa who arrived in the peninsula before the Mesolithic; centuries longer than the Phoenicians and even the Moors.

I don't believe E-M81 is European; and I cannot find any other explanation. Unless it was an ancient European Y-DNA such as C6 or pre-I that was replaced by Neolithic or Bronze Age Y-DNA. But someone would have to prove that.

you can clearly see who are the phoenicians by seeing this link .............look at the lebanese

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/SopYW19qzQI/AAAAAAAAB9U/6cdlguuye-k/s1600-h/FigureS1.jpg
 
you can clearly see who are the phoenicians by seeing this link .............look at the lebanese

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/SopYW19qzQI/AAAAAAAAB9U/6cdlguuye-k/s1600-h/FigureS1.jpg

Seems the Lebanese are very high in abundance of J2; which interestingly seems to peak in Southern Iberia. And also seems to be extremely high along the coastlines of North Africa:

Haplogroup-J2.jpg

Wonder if these subclade(s) of J2 are Phoenician in origin. The Phoenicians are believed to be relative to the modern Lebanese; and possibly the Syrians.

Haplogroup J1 also seems to have a similar distribution:

Haplogroup-J1.jpg

It seems to me like some of the people here are in-denial of Spain and Portugal's obvious Near Eastern heritage. Interestingly; the distribution of Y-DNA J1 seems kind of similar to that of mtdna U6.
 
hypothesis and scientific facts are not the same thing. I know they aren't. Who said they were? You did. In fact,

Facts? :)... if you call Cavalli-Sforza's scientific work as I quoted you a hypothesis(! what next?) and its going with a mainstream definition of European based on a hypothesis that might not even be true, then I am not sure if anyone can take anything you say seriously and worth of any debate. No offense please.
 
Facts? :)... if you call Cavalli-Sforza's scientific work as I quoted you a hypothesis(! what next?) and its going with a mainstream definition of European based on a hypothesis that might not even be true, then I am not sure if anyone can take anything you say seriously and worth of any debate. No offense please.
If he is the source of the DNA acquisition project HGDP then I can agree that he is inaccurate. lmao.

Don't get too cocky just yet.

I've noticed that HGDP have the least accurate and most erroneous DNA sampling; along with FTDNA geneticist Doron Behar.
 
Seems the Lebanese are very high in abundance of J2; which interestingly seems to peak in Southern Iberia. And also seems to be extremely high along the coastlines of North Africa:

View attachment 7094

Wonder if these subclade(s) of J2 are Phoenician in origin. The Phoenicians are believed to be relative to the modern Lebanese; and possibly the Syrians.

J2 has been in the area much prior to when Phoenicia (Who gave Europe its name) or classical Greece were created. Yes there are high concentrations in the regions (Asian Med / East and West Med and beyond and lesser in North African Med) but labeling J2 Phoenician is not correct (since many other geographical regions have it) as much as labeling R1b is Basque (Since many other geographical regions have it). Testing further downstream can give better routes and migration and possibilities of arrival in a particular region.
 
J2 has been in the area much prior to when Phoenicia (Who gave Europe its name) or classical Greece were created. Yes there are high concentrations in the regions (Asian Med / East and West Med and beyond and lesser in North African Med) but labeling J2 Phoenician is not correct (since many other geographical regions have it) as much as labeling R1b is Basque (Since many other geographical regions have it). Testing further downstream can give better routes and migration and possibilities of arrival in a particular region.
Can you give me a link with evidence to this claim? It sounds uninformed...I never labeled J2 as Phoenician. As some subclades can also exist in Balkanic and Caucasian people. But I would not be surprised if the J2 subclade(s) that are there; have a Phoenician origin.
 
Can you give me a link with evidence to this claim? It sounds uninformed...I never labeled J2 as Phoenician. As some subclades can also exist in Balkanic and Caucasian people. But I would not be surprised if the J2 subclade(s) that are there; have a Phoenician origin.

I will not be either, and of course it is even documented that like Greeks, Phoenicians also settled in some areas away from their original homelands namely Tyre and Sidon, even though they are much better known to trade rather then colonise. Cartage is maybe the best documented Phoenician settlement to the point that unlike their forefathers they became more warlike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal and posed one of the biggest threats to the Roman expansion. But look at J2 in that area. Its hardly any genetic evidence of any Phoenician settlement if one has to use the J2 ruler as a measuring stick.

You can visit and read what other posters had to say on this subject and maybe revive some of them if you find it interesting. http://www.eupedia.com/forum/forums/232-J2 Enjoy
 
That is because you are misinformed...the R1b is Celtiberian in origin and arrived during the Bronze Age. With the invasion of Hallstatt Celts into Iberia.

See Maciamo's theory, How did the Basques become R1b?: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28386-How-did-the-Basques-become-R1b

You can also notice a small I2 residual around the Basque country; which suggests a Neolithic population once spoke Basque / Aquitanian, but the majority of the original I2 men were slaughtered by R1b invaders:

View attachment 7093

It's all very well to have theories, but I prefer facts when I can get them. And we do not yet have one single example of Iberian BB Y DNA. We do have three BB Y DNA samples from Germany that are all R1b and one is specifically P312, which is the immediate precursor to DF27, the most common form of R1b among modern Iberians. So it's beginning to look as if Iberian BB folk could have been at least partly R1b.
 
Seems the Lebanese are very high in abundance of J2; which interestingly seems to peak in Southern Iberia. And also seems to be extremely high along the coastlines of North Africa:

View attachment 7094

Wonder if these subclade(s) of J2 are Phoenician in origin. The Phoenicians are believed to be relative to the modern Lebanese; and possibly the Syrians.

Haplogroup J1 also seems to have a similar distribution:

View attachment 7095

It seems to me like some of the people here are in-denial of Spain and Portugal's obvious Near Eastern heritage. Interestingly; the distribution of Y-DNA J1 seems kind of similar to that of mtdna U6.

As you can see from those "maps", these markers are found all over southern Europe, many times in fact at higher levels than in southern Spain. Should we attribute it all to "Phoenicians", "Jews" and other Middle Easterners in those places as well, or do we arbitrarily only reserve this "privilege" to southern Spaniards? You do realize how unrealistic and contrary to actual historical evidence that would be, do you? Ancient empires like the Greek and Roman ones were in contact with more people from those places than "Al-Andalus" was during the Middle Ages.
 
As you can see from those "maps", these markers are found all over southern Europe, many times in fact at higher levels than in southern Spain. Should we attribute it all to "Phoenicians", "Jews" and other Middle Easterners in those places as well, or do we arbitrarily only reserve this "privilege" to southern Spaniards? You do realize how unrealistic and contrary to actual historical evidence that would be, do you? Ancient empires like the Greek and Roman ones were in contact with more people from those places than "Al-Andalus" was during the Middle Ages.
It seems to me that phoenicians had airplanes, and they flew directly from the Levant to Spain, without leaving any trace in the rest of Europe.
 

This thread has been viewed 99102 times.

Back
Top