Eurogenes K12b thread

[Ben Dover]

@ImHere let's just say that the commonality between Ashkenazi Jews and Yemenite Jews is only 10% and that amount comes from the southern levantine/samaritan like source in both groups. Should both of these groups be considered the same ethnicity as they are now? 10% is just a single water molecule in the ocean. It isn't sensible to claim that just because 2 ethnicities have the ancestry from the same region/same population source that only makes up 10% of one of the group's ancestry enough for them to be considered under the same ethnic lable

 

[Nassbean]

By mizrahis I meant mesopotamian, iranian, caucasus and uzbek Jews.

Most mesopotamian and iranian jews descend from exiled judeans and genetically they are the closest jews to ancient israelites.

Mizrahis logically include all middle eastern and most north african jews (I suppose Megorachim in North Africa are sephardic but not Tochavim logically)

 

[Ben Dover]

The fact that jews are an heterogeneous community from a genetic standpoint and that there isn't any "pure" jewish people today except groups like samaritans or iraqi jews

Iraqi Jews are probably even more non- southern levantine than Ashkenazis and Sephardics or are at the same level as them in terms of non- southern levantine admix

 

[Nassbean]

Iraqi Jews are probably even more non- southern levantine than Ashkenazis and Sephardics or are at the same level as them in terms of non- southern levantine admix

no that's absolutely not true they are actually very similar to the ancient southern levantine samples we have

 

[Ben Dover]

Most mesopotamian and iranian jews descend from exiled judeans and genetically they are the closest jews to ancient israelites.

Mizrahis logically include all middle eastern and most north african jews (I suppose Megorachim in North Africa are sephardic but not Tochavim logically)

Mizrahis are descended heavily from converts. Also, it is questionable if ALL the mizrahi groups are the direct descendants of those Judeans that were exiled by Babylonians. There is a good chance that some of them were Assyrian exiles a little while back. However, just because on PCAs mizrahi jews re closer to northern levantines doesn't mean that they are more southern-levantine in ancestry than Sephardics and ashkenazis. It means that Sephardics and ashkenazis have admix from sources that are very different from southern levantines. Most of the non-southern levantine admix in mizrahis could be ancient mesopotamian admix that babylonian jews acquired. Iraqi jews are quite possible the living babylonian jews of modern times.

 

[Ben Dover]

no that's absolutely not true they are actually very similar to the ancient southern levantine samples we have

Nope. They are more similar to northern levantines than to southern levantines and they are even closer to some northern west asian ethnicities than to samaritans. So no.

 

[Nassbean]

Mizrahis are descended heavily from converts. Also, it is questionable if ALL the mizrahi groups are the direct descendants of those Judeans that were exiled by Babylonians. There is a good chance that some of them were Assyrian exiles a little while back. However, just because on PCAs mizrahi jews re closer to northern levantines doesn't mean that they are more southern-levantine in ancestry than Sephardics and ashkenazis. It means that Sephardics and ashkenazis have admix from sources that are very different from southern levantines. Most of the non-southern levantine admix in mizrahis could be ancient mesopotamian admix that babylonian jews acquired. Iraqi jews are quite possible the living babylonian jews of modern times.

Nope. They are more similar to northern levantines than to southern levantines and they are even closer to some northern west asian ethnicities than to samaritans. So no.

That's simply not what I saw whether from their autosomal ancestry or uniparental markers but obviously some mizrahis descend from converts especially communities like yemenite jews but anyway even if they all were what's the problem ? I'm pretty sure your ancient mesopotamian from the iron age wasn't much different from it's levantine neighbours.

 

[ImHere]

@ImHere let's just say that the commonality between Ashkenazi Jews and Yemenite Jews is only 10% and that amount comes from the southern levantine/samaritan like source in both groups. Should both of these groups be considered the same ethnicity as they are now? 10% is just a single water molecule in the ocean. It isn't sensible to claim that just because 2 ethnicities have the ancestry from the same region/same population source that only makes up 10% of one of the group's ancestry enough for them to be considered under the same ethnic lable

Having certain amount ancestry and identifying are 2 different things.

Neither can claim to be "pure jews", but if people didnt randomly converted to judaism, and jews had the same social structure like pashtuns, then yes, both can be considered jews.
You have to look past genetics, and look at culture + family tree/heritage. Some ethnicities are just like that. Father's identity matters the most. And if his son consider himself the same thing(lets say pashtun) as his father, while father is "pashtun" from his father's side, then so is the son. And same can be said for his future descendants


THough i will say, im not arguing for jews now, since people could randomly convert to judaism, and even today. Rather just arguing for this concept: Father's heritage matters most, and you can identify as ethnicity "ZX", no matter the amount of admix from "ZX"

 

[Ben Dover]

That's simply not what I saw whether from their autosomal ancestry or uniparental markers but obviously some mizrahis descend from converts especially communities like yemenite jews but anyway even if they all were what's the problem ? I'm pretty sure your ancient mesopotamian from the iron age wasn't much different from it's levantine neighbours.

Not some but all Mizrahis are descended from converts and their ancient Judean/southern levantine/SW asian ancestry also varies in individuals and in sub-groups. However, even if you take a look at the local mesopotamian populations of nowadays, they are extremely similar to mesopotamian jews. By locals I don't mean iraqi arabs. Take mandeans for example who are native to central-south mesopotamia and even speak aramaic with babylonian dialect. They score very similarly to iraqi jews and iranian & kurdish jews but with elevated zagros ancestry

 

[Nassbean]

Having certain amount ancestry and identifying are 2 different things.

Neither can claim to be "pure jews", but if people didnt randomly converted to judaism, and jews had the same social structure like pashtuns, then yes, both can be considered jews.
You have to look past genetics, and look at culture + family tree/heritage. Some ethnicities are just like that. Father's identity matters the most. And if his son consider himself the same thing(lets say pashtun) as his father, while father is "pashtun" from his father's side, then so is the son. And same can be said for his future descendants

yes obviously the whole genetic debate is a very recent thing and people usually don't identify based on a commercial test. Technically in Morocco I'm considered an Arab.

 

[Ben Dover]

Having certain amount ancestry and identifying are 2 different things.

Neither can claim to be "pure jews", but if people didnt randomly converted to judaism, and jews had the same social structure like pashtuns, then yes, both can be considered jews.
You have to look past genetics, and look at culture + family tree/heritage. Some ethnicities are just like that. Father's identity matters the most. And if his son consider himself the same thing(lets say pashtun) as his father, while father is "pashtun" from his father's side, then so is the son. And same can be said for his future descendants

Traditions and other things don't really matter as long as the actual ancestry and the bloodline is concerned. You are close to something if there is more similarity in structure than the belief system😉

 

[ImHere]

Traditions and other things don't really matter as long as the actual ancestry and the bloodline is concerned. You are close to something if there is more similarity in structure than the belief system😉

Thats the thing. If they have such ancestry(at least from dad's side, considering the tribal social structure. I assume in some other cultures, mother's side matter more?), no matter how distant, then they can be considered "ZX" (though as i said, im not arguing for jews anymore)

 

[Nassbean]

Not some but all Mizrahis are descended from converts and their ancient Judean/southern levantine/SW asian ancestry also varies in individuals and in sub-groups. However, even if you take a look at the local mesopotamian populations of nowadays, they are extremely similar to mesopotamian jews. By locals I don't mean iraqi arabs. Take mandeans for example who are native to central-south mesopotamia and even speak aramaic with babylonian dialect. They score very similarly to iraqi jews and iranian & kurdish jews but with elevated zagros ancestry

I don't see the point of making such division when it comes to genetics, it won't change the fact that whether mixed or not some mizrahi communities are very similar to ancient jews and I'm not surprised some SSA signals have been detected for such communities.

 

[Nassbean]

Thats the thing. If they have such ancestry(at least from dad's side, considering the tribal social structure. I assume in some other cultures, mother's side matter more?), no matter how distant, then they can be considered "ZX" (though as i said, im not arguing for jews anymore)

Well many jews really believe they are basically the same as ancient judeans and you often see them on the internet posting middle eastern looking jews in order to back up their narrative and when you point out that they actually look much more european than other middle eastern communities they start cherrypicking euro looking levantines or blond haired levantines like ahed tamimi lol

 

[Ben Dover]

Thats the thing. If they have such ancestry(at least from dad's side, considering the tribal social structure. I assume in some other cultures, mother's side matter more?), no matter how distant, then they can be considered "ZX" (though as i said, im not arguing for jews anymore)

They don't even care if that small ancestry ks from paternal or maternal side. They assign their whole ethnic identity to Judaism which is a religion🙂

 

[ImHere]

Well many jews really believe they are basically the same as ancient judeans and you often see them on the internet posting middle eastern looking jews in order to back up their narrative and when you point out that they actually look much more european than other middle eastern communities they start cherrypicking euro looking levantines or blond haired levantines like ahed tamimi lol

This is new to me, lol

People usually post lighter people of their ethnicity to prove some point, then there are these jews who do the opposite,

 

[ImHere]

They don't even care if that small ancestry ks from paternal or maternal side. They assign their whole ethnic identity to Judaism which is a religion🙂

Thats why i said i dont longer argue for jews. Just for the concept

 

[Ben Dover]

This is new to me, lol

People usually post lighter people of their ethnicity to prove some point, then there are these jews who do the opposite,

That's basically Ashkenazis in a nutshell

 

[Nassbean]

btw Loki the admin of TA banned me because I said ancient Jews weren't white like he said (saying "they look european because they were basically white ; implying modern middle easterners are mixed with arabs and black slaves lol)

 

[Ben Dover]

In my opinion, Ashkenazis as a group look like what one would expect taking their autosomal DNA into consideration. Most of them to me at least look southern euro with some looking more levant shifted and the others more northern shifted