>The non-Levantine origin of AJs is further supported by an ancient DNA analysis of six Natufians and a Levantine Neolithic (Lazaridis et al., 2016), some of the most likely Judaean progenitors (Finkelstein and Silberman, 2002; Frendo, 2004). In a principle component analysis (PCA), the ancient Levantines clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and Bedouins and marginally overlapped with Arabian Jews, whereas AJs clustered away from Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians and Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Europeans. To evaluate these findings, we inferred the ancient ancestries of AJs using the admixture analysis described in Marshall et al. (2016). Briefly, we analyzed 18,757 autosomal SNPs genotyped in 46 Palestinians, 45 Bedouins, 16 Syrians, and eight Lebanese (Li et al., 2008) alongside 467 AJs [367 AJs previously analyzed and 100 individuals with AJ mother) (Das et al., 2016) that overlapped with both the GenoChip (Elhaik et al., 2013) and ancient DNA data (Lazaridis et al., 2016). We then carried out a supervised ADMIXTURE analysis (Alexander and Lange, 2011) using three East European Hunter Gatherers from Russia (EHGs) alongside six Epipaleolithic Levantines, 24 Neolithic Anatolians, and six Neolithic Iranians as reference populations (Table S0). Remarkably, AJs exhibit a dominant Iranian (88%˜) and residual Levantine (3%˜) ancestries, as opposed to Bedouins (14%˜ and 68%˜, respectively) and Palestinians (18%˜ and 58%˜, respectively). Only two AJs exhibit Levantine ancestries typical to Levantine populations.
This research also shows that most Palestinians have been living in the land of Palestine for at least 5000 years (Early Bronze age Levant).
>jews are iranian larpers >Israel wants to nuke Iran So is, dare i say, Bibi /ourguy/?
Jaxon Morgan
This study is inaccurate. Actual jewish admixture. Askhenzai Jews have much lower Iranian admixture than you average modern Arab and about as much as modern Europeans.
>Ashkenazi has lower admixture than the Arabs What a surprise. The Ashkenazi Jews are from the Talmudics who fled North from the retribution of the Seleucid Persians and then gathered all the European Talmudic converts to them. Shia Muslims are the Talmudics who fled to Arabia from the retribution of the Seleucid Persians, and then returned as conquerors at the head of an Talmudic Arab army to conquer them.
Adrian Jones
Askhenazi are heavily mixed with South and East Europeans but all modern Euroepans have prehistoric near eastern admixture already but mostly of anatolian type whereas arabs are mostly of irano-caucasian type or north african type.
Juan Rodriguez
No, I bet you're a dimwitted Arab conspiracy nut to think Shiite Muslims have any ancestry with Jews.
Stop posting this, faggot. Neolithic Iranians =/= Iron Age Iranians. If anything, Neolithic Iranians are more like Afghans.
Isaiah Rogers
Read the link in this post to understand what happened between 70AD and 700AD and why Muslims and Jews are one and the same satan worshipping beast
Logan Diaz
Ashkenazis are also inbred like hell. It's why they have all the crazy genetic defects, like Tay Sachs, Crohn's, etc.
Brody Campbell
Modern Askhenazi Jews are almost the same genetically as modern South Europeans. Italians and Greek Islanders are closest.
Gabriel King
>whereas AJs clustered away from Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians
this is the key here, jews are not iranian they are northern mesopatamian in origin they are most closely related to northern mesopatamian groups like kurds, druze, armenians, if they test those groups they'll get the same or similar results as the jews in this study. Kurds and druze do live in the levant by the way they are just a different race to say palestinians or bedouins. That jews aren't related to any given ancient levantine specimen like the neolithic levantine in this study doesnt mean they aren't levantine. It means not all levantine ethnicities are the same.
David Moore
>they are most closely related to northern mesopatamian groups like kurds, druze, armenians, * and anatolians/turks
Owen James
>are more like Afghans
Some pakis(balochis and tribal pakis near the border with afghanistan) seem to be closest.
Brandon Howard
because israel, greece and italy are all mediterranean countries. Specifically, the closest relative to the jews are the sardinians along with northern mesopatamian groups. Sardinians are genetically identical to the middle eastern farmer population that brought farming to europe. Its all the same stock of people who lived in southern europe and the levant before the bedouin/arab types came out of the desert and showed up in the levant later
Wyatt Myers
Sardinians are neolithic nearly genetic isolate. No other modern population is close them to them. Jews almost the same as Sicilians.
Parker Flores
ashkenazi are the prehistoric anatolain type. They actually have very little eastern european admixture. They are thought to have lots of southern european admixture because of the similarity between southern europeans and the prehistoric anatolian type you're referring to. Its their mdna, that looks southern european compared to their ydna. But thats no different to syrians and lebanese too. Particularly the lebanese as syrians have much more gulf arab admixture from the islamic expansion/invasion/migrations
Logan Fisher
>whereas AJs clustered away from Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians
Both of you misunderstand history. The study is not wrong, the problem is how you try to tie it to history.
Neolithic means the New Stone Age, which in the middle east started in 10000 BCE and ended in about 4500 BCE. The Levantines like Canaanites were not identitical to the Natufians and other Neolithic Levantines. There's a massive gap in time so it is ridiculous to assume populations remain.
The Canaanites of Phoenicia which is today's Lebanon were not the closest to Natufians. Same with the Israelites. The closest to Natufians in the Middle East are Arabians, particularly Northern Arabians. The Canaanites could have had Neolithic Levantine ancestors or maybe they were a recent wave of migrants. In either cases, they have a strong foreign admixture which is from population(s) that weren't living in the Levant during the Neolithic. They probably have more Caucasian.
In other words, yes the Askhenazi Jews are less related to Neolithic Levantines... And so were the ancient Israelites. This is true for modern day Lebanese who are the closest related population to the Phoenicians (Canaanites of the North). They are less related to Neolithic Levantines as well and so were the Phoenicians.
Tyler Hernandez
Jews are very close as well look it up. When studies say jews are closely related to italians, they're referring to sardinians, who are actually very distinct from the rest of italians
Adrian King
No dumbass, the only genetic study that was ever conducted on a lot of Ashkenazis is one from 2014 (carried out by other Jews in Colombia University) to study diseases.
It proved the 10 million Ashkenazis today descent from a tribe of 300 levantine immigrants to europe.
>The results of the detailed study show that today's 10 million Ashkenazi Jews descend from a population of only 350 individuals who lived about 600–800 years ago.
Isaiah Jones
Also the problem with that study is that it mixes recent studies with very outdated one. Sorry but genetic science was lacking a lot more than today just a decade ago. The 2002 and 2004 studies should be ignored.
Lazaridis et al 2016 is decent though.
Ryan Ramirez
This makes sense considering the fact that Jews were very inbred in terms of cousin relationships and faced serious selective pressures which led to a bottleneck. It also explains the hypothesis about the higher IQ in Askhenazi Jews as the smarter Jews survived because they were able to get into finance in Europe, since Christians were barred from that field until much later.
Nolan Long
Elhaik is a retard Iraqi Mizrahi Jew with genetically and historically illiterate, ressentiment-filled takes on everything (but he is fixated on Ashkenazi Jews, who run israel and make him feel insecure)
yes you're making exactly my point and I agree with you 100%.
>The Canaanites could have had Neolithic Levantine ancestors or maybe they were a recent wave of migrants. In either cases, they have a strong foreign admixture which is from population(s) that weren't living in the Levant during the Neolithic.
yes, the foreign admixture/origin is northern mesopatamian hinted at or pretty much spelled out by the story of abraham migrating from ur. Traditionally this is interpreted to be an ur which is much further south in iraq from where abraham really came from which is an ur that was/is in northern mesopatamia. Canaanites/phonecians were the closest related people to israelites and closest neighbhours. In fact some historians think that for a big chunk of history, they were the same people and the israelites were just canaanites who split off to do their own thing.
Aaron Ward
Jews aren't any closer to sardinians than other south europeans.
Joshua Wright
>300 levantine immigrants to europe. Who got heavily admixed over time, however.
Hudson Lewis
>Judean priests Rabbis, there is no such thing as jewish priesthood thanks to based Vespasian, they are larpers at the core since they larp as a dead religion, ever waiting for the messiah that won´t come to build the templed and restore the priesthood
Dylan Cox
True, that's better to say. Neolithic Iranians are like Balochis*
the study makes some accurate observations it just comes to the wrong conclusions. AJ are probably the best representatives of the original jewish stock and they are not iranians. AJ are the same stock as armenians, druze, kurds and lebanese. And its obvious from the physical resemblance, you even get druze that look straight up white with blue eyes, european faces and light brown hair.
Jordan Taylor
I have always thought of myself as white and Jews as just another subset of white.
Brody Hill
different sources say different things. I swear I've seen sources say AJ and sephardi jews are most closely related to sardinians or the sardinians closest relatives. But theres also sources saying that jews are most closely related to northern italians followed by sardinians
Cooper Johnson
Modern Iranians are different because they have like 30-40% EEF+~10% Natufian and they also have CHG instead of Gedrosian ancestry. Iran had almost 100% population replacement since neolithic but nonetheless overall they are still much closer to their neolithic than modern Europeans are to WHG.
Wyatt Davis
Jews may have mixed with Italians when they were enslaved in the Italian peninsula and later freed.
There does not seem to be evidence to suggest Sardinians being the closest to Ashkenazi Jews.
>he foreign admixture/origin is northern Mesopotamian hinted at or pretty much spelled out by the story of Abraham migrating from Ur. Perhaps there is truth about Abraham story, not when ti comes to an individual giving birth to nations but to a Mesopotamian origin. Albeit I am not sure if the Abrahamic faiths claim he is from Ur. There are claims he is Semitic and from Chaldea. Of course Abraham being a Semitic Mesopotamian posits a problem since the Semitic expansion into Mesopotamia happened in the 3rd millenium BCE.
Ur is in South Mesopotamia.
>Canaanites/phonecians were the closest related people to israelites and closest neighbhours. In fact some historians think that for a big chunk of history, they were the same people and the israelites were just canaanites who split off to do their own thing.
Yes there is that idea of Israelites being rebellious Canaanites who started a different culture. Israelites could have been migrants as well and adopted parts of Canaanite culture like the language. Or maybe they were like proto-Canaanites who mixed with migrants. The evidence points to Israelites splitting off from Canaanites however.
Alexander Gutierrez
>jews are most closely related to northern italians followed by sardinians
More likely as jews weren't as isolated as sardinians.
Ethan Jones
traditionally abraham is thought to be in south mesopatamia, but there is a case for it actually being a place in north mesopatamia instead, which would match the genetics. I have seen it all outlined. I could try and find it with google. Basically there are or were two places called ur, or something like that. One in north and one in south. And the migration route that abraham took, would make more sense if he were coming from the north then the south.
It does say in the old testament that he's from Ur of the chaldees and that is what is traditionally interpreted to be in southern iraq/mesopatamia
Luke Reed
Suposedly they settled around iberian peninsula, were they came know as sephardites (spaniards), untill they were eventually expeled into the protestant countries such as Holland, England, north german duchies.. and to the americas and asian trade depots also, from those countries i supose they mixed with khazars
Caleb Reyes
>Jews may have mixed with Italians when they were enslaved in the Italian peninsula and later freed. thats the popular interpretation for the genetic affinity. But it could be a much older genetic connection. Other levantine populations' mDNA also looks southern european in comparison to the yDNA but their mDNA is thought to be very archaic.
There was an ancient population in the levant and southern european that were genetically related or the same and later, another genetic stock came to the levant imparting the yDNA (J haplogroup) by the traditional means (the men invade and kill of the native men and take the native women as wives/rape victims/sex slaves)
Gabriel Wright
>There was an ancient population in the levant and southern european that were genetically related or the same and later, another genetic stock came to the levant imparting the yDNA (J haplogroup) by the traditional means (the men invade and kill of the native men and take the native women as wives/rape victims/sex slaves)
I meant to say that this is my belief/interpretation, I think the popular interpretation is possible but a bit too myopic. I think heavily swayed by the assumption that AJ have to have significant european admixture because of their appearance, because of a western misunderstanding / ignorance that everyone in the levant is brown like osama bin laden (a saudi/gulf arab).
Carter Ward
Many Jews were enslaved. There were so many Jewish slaves captured by the Romans after one of the two destructions of Judea by Rome, that the cost of a Jewish slave was lower than a horse as a result of too much supply in the market. Slaves were very costly things so this indicates a very large (in the tens of thousands) number of Jews in the Italian peninsula as slaves.
Many would probably die, and some would remain. Eventually they'd get freed as Jews were typically more educated than other slaves. They don't seem to have integrated into the Roman empire so that is the problem with this idea. However, the Jews, being ethnocentric and anti Roman, would have not wanted to integrate into Rome and eventually venture elsewhere in the generations to come. Many Jews remained in the Italian peninsula whilst others moved elsewhere.
The Jews you are talking about retained Sephardic identity. They were in places like Amsterdam. Most of them that were kicked out from Iberia went to the Ottoman empire.
They could have been similar from Askhenazis in that they went from Italy to Iberian peninsula. But they are not Ashkenazis who probably went from Italy to the East Europe and Germany.
Brandon Stewart
What coutry is FB?
Grayson Myers
Are askhenazi jews closest to romanians on this pca?
