Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sephardim

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by SeanMSilver
    I've actually been told by a well-regarded Sephardic resource I have that being tied to Jewish lineage is quite prestigious in Portugal and Spain. Its a societal badge, or so I'm told.

    I will say that our project, the R1b Jewish project, only focuses on those with (to our knowledge) uninterrupted Jewish paternal lineage with no history of conversion. We have about 38 members now and what we've at least initially seen seems to be significant. We're consulting with a well-regarded geneticist on their initial impressions on our data.

    Coincidentally, if anyone does fit our project criteria, PLEASE do feel free to join! The more data we can get, the closer we might be able to get to the truth.
    Being tied to Jewish lineage, quite prestigious in Spain?

    Let's see what the Stephen Roth Institute For the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism says about that issue:

    "There is tremendous ignorance in Spanish society about Judaism and the Jews. This pertains not only to their historical presence for 15 centuries but also to the Jewish reality of today. The majority of Spaniards do not even know a Jew. Therefore, their knowledge of Jews is very limited and distorted by anti-Jewish stereotypes and prejudices that have persisted until today.

    Surveys from the 1980s and 1990s showed that the Spanish image of the Jews was ambivalent: pejorative stereotypes such as avariciousness, treachery and deicide contrasted with positive evaluations such as their work ethic and their sense of responsibility (see, for example, “Racism in Spain,” DYM-Cambio 16, Dec. 1987; Center for Sociological Research, “Immigration and Racism,” Studies, Sep. 1990, April–May 1991; and Center for Sociological Research, “Attitudes towards Immigration,” Study 2051, May 1993). However, a survey conducted by the ADL in 2002 was less ambivalent: 34 percent of Spaniards revealed antisemitic attitudes, the highest score among ten European countries covered (see ASW 2002/3)."

    The link to this report: http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2003-4/spain.htm

    Comment


    • #47
      Being tied to Jewish lineage, quite prestigious in Spain?

      More on the same issue:

      http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-perednik-f03.htm

      Comment


      • #48
        Sean -

        There is a considerable proportion of R1b in the old Khazar stomping grounds.

        Have you considered the Khazars as a possible source of Jewish R1b, as well as R1a?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by robe3b
          Being tied to Jewish lineage, quite prestigious in Spain?

          More on the same issue:

          http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-perednik-f03.htm

          I'm going on little sleep, here, since we just had our second child, so I might've included Spain in error in that statement. She might have only said Portugal. I'll have to check my mail archives.

          The statement was aided by many Portuguese trying to prove such links existed through genetics.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Stevo
            Sean -

            There is a considerable proportion of R1b in the old Khazar stomping grounds.

            Have you considered the Khazars as a possible source of Jewish R1b, as well as R1a?
            Actually, there is little R1b in the area formerly known as Khazaria. Rather, R1a is far more prevalent in that region. Furthermore, contrary to what some have said on these forums, there is only evidence that a portion of the Khazar nobles converted to Judaism while the country, itself, maintained a liberal stance on religious freedoms.

            Furthermore, the genetic variance hinted in our project base speaks of an admixture that would have preceded the time of the Khazars.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by dentate
              If you think R1b is interesting, consider that my mother's brother--Litvak Jewish origin--is R2. He has about 6 matches at 12/12 in the FTDNA database, all Ashkenazi. R2 is supposed to be from Sri Lanka and India, but is scattered through the Middle East as well. Is this Khazar? Persian? Rroma? Ancient Judean?

              The "twelve tribes" of ancient Israel could well have represented a national recollection of diverse tribal origins. However, admixture did occur and was relatively encouraged up until 1000 years ago or so. Jews are more a nationality than anything else--a nationality that granted citizenship if you passed certain requirements, just like American nationality. The fact that Americans accreted around an original English core and that Jews accreted around an original "Hebrew" core should not be misinterpreted to mean that those cores were definitive of the nationality. As for Cohen tradition, some on this forum have claimed special ability to determine Cohen status--but tradition is suggestion, not proof. I match a large number of people claiming Cohen status with an MRCA of around 1000 years ago, but many other matches who do not claim the status. Any model proposing common ancestry for Cohanim has to explain observations like this.
              Coincidentally, my great aunt has told me that our family was also Litvak, which as you likely know ascribes to a school of Judaism contrasting old world Hasidism beyond just the geographic area of Lithuania. Many Jews who immigrated to the United States and stated they came from Lithuania weren't necessarily from that geographic region.

              Comment


              • #52
                Regarding Jewish haplogroup diversity, it is reasonable to assume that the area was quite diverse prior to the development of the Jewish religion. Its geographical location places ancient Israel on many trade routes e.g. from the Fertile Crescent, from Egypt and from the Red Sea. The Natufians were there prior to the expansion of agriculture from the Middle East. All this is reflected in the diversity common to both Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, a diversity that presumably predates the Diaspora.
                Most Jews of ancient Israel were probably Jews by conversion; not everyone came over on the Mayflower. According to the archeological record, Judaism began among hill dwellers or Bedouin near the Dead Sea area. It is unreasonable to conclude that all Jews are descendants of this fairly small group. The only real question is whether the rest of Israel converted through peaceful means.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by SeanMSilver
                  Actually, there is little R1b in the area formerly known as Khazaria. Rather, R1a is far more prevalent in that region. Furthermore, contrary to what some have said on these forums, there is only evidence that a portion of the Khazar nobles converted to Judaism while the country, itself, maintained a liberal stance on religious freedoms.

                  Furthermore, the genetic variance hinted in our project base speaks of an admixture that would have preceded the time of the Khazars.
                  Sean -

                  That is not what the y-haplogroup map at http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/Wo...groupsMaps.pdf seems to show.

                  The map here also shows a locus for R1b just east of the Black Sea in the old Khazar beat.

                  There is also a fairly significant R1b presence among some of the Central Asian Turkic groups, like the Uyghurs and the Uzbeks.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by josh w.
                    Regarding Jewish haplogroup diversity, it is reasonable to assume that the area was quite diverse prior to the development of the Jewish religion. Its geographical location places ancient Israel on many trade routes e.g. from the Fertile Crescent, from Egypt and from the Red Sea. The Natufians were there prior to the expansion of agriculture from the Middle East. All this is reflected in the diversity common to both Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, a diversity that presumably predates the Diaspora.
                    Most Jews of ancient Israel were probably Jews by conversion; not everyone came over on the Mayflower. According to the archeological record, Judaism began among hill dwellers or Bedouin near the Dead Sea area. It is unreasonable to conclude that all Jews are descendants of this fairly small group. The only real question is whether the rest of Israel converted through peaceful means.
                    In terms of genetic diversity, it is presumed that the predominant people were still Semetic, which would place most of them in J2. However, if we could prove that the area _was_ more diverse than merely the difference between Semetic tribes, that would be significant. Given that Cinnioglu has found considerable genetic diversity in R1b within Anatolia, and that Abraham's family was actually said to be travelling to the Western portions of Anatolia when he had his 'divine' relevation, he could well have interacted with these R1b peoples.

                    In terms of conversion through peaceful means, the Hebrews really didn't have sufficient numbers, nor the military arms, to forcibly convert anyone at the time. Besides, the bible is chock full of examples where the later in the story the Hebrews forced others out of the lands intended for them. It was only during the time of the Romans that there was any forced prostelization and this was really only the work of one man. Rather, most converts came to Judaism out of respect, which was seen during Roman times. Prior to the advent of Christianity, Max Dimont (author of Jews, God and History) states that roughly 10 million of the seventy million citizens of Rome were Jewish, yet only four to six million of those were descended from the Hebrews.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Stevo
                      Sean -

                      That is not what the y-haplogroup map at http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/Wo...groupsMaps.pdf seems to show.

                      The map here also shows a locus for R1b just east of the Black Sea in the old Khazar beat.

                      There is also a fairly significant R1b presence among some of the Central Asian Turkic groups, like the Uyghurs and the Uzbeks.
                      Thanks for sharing those two maps, Stevo. I'm of course open to correction, yet I've yet to see any studies which seem to support those maps. Rather, all the studies I've read note that the greatest genetic diversity and frequency occur within Anatolia and Armenia, which at most would be included in the Southern-most section of Khazaria (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/3976/webmap1.jpg). That the Relative Genetics map counters the Anatolian theory, from which I've seen papers and raw data supporting, would beg to question what data they based this map off of? I've not seen much data on Eastern R1b in YHRD.ORG or Sorensen outside of Anatolia and surrounding vicinities and Cinnioglu had found that the further southeast you go into the Middle East and the further northwest into Europe, your frequency and genetic variance of the eastern R1b drops. It is noted that I believe I read Iraqi Kurds have a high rate of R1b.

                      As noted, I'm perfectly willing to revise my thoughts! That's what this intellectual discussion and learning are all about?

                      However, neither map counters the matter of a genetic diversity that likely preceeds the Khazar Empire. Given that the Khazars pretty much 'appeared' in history and weren't a discernible people before, and that data may hint that those among my project members may have had a common ancestor predating Roman times, it does leave a gap. Another matter to think of is that if R1a is more prevalent in the region, then perhaps the R1b there could also have been the result of Jewish migration into the area. A country not only tolerant of Judaism, but also whose rulers adopted it as their own, would have likely attracted the Jewish wealthy, the disposessed and the learned.

                      Thanks again for sharing! I just have to maintain a healthy skepticism of any theory, even my own. Its the only way we can come close to finding the truth?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Sean, the reason I raised the conversion issue is that the original Joshua conquered some of the area by force which may have resulted in some conversions (if one accepts the biblical account even figuratively). I share the view that conversion in Israel was primarily peaceful.

                        As for haplogroup diversity both J1 and J2 reflect migration from the Middle East. The earliest inhabitants however may have come from elsewhere. Some archaeologists have suggested that the Natufians migrated from northeast Africa and carried the E3b haplogroup. This goes along with a recent view that the afroasiatic languages (which include Semitic) began in the same region. As you note both R1a and R1b may also have been present in ancient Israel especially given the conquests of the area by more northern peoples. Haplogroup G was probably present as well. In sum, given its central location ancient Israel was probably quite genetically diverse. In this respect the Jews did not differ from the other residents of the area who shared the same haplogroups.
                        Last edited by josh w.; 21 June 2006, 07:15 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by josh w.
                          Sean, the reason I raised the conversion issue is that the original Joshua conquered some of the area by force which may have resulted in some conversions (if one accepts the biblical account even figuratively). I share the view that conversion in Israel was primarily peaceful.

                          As for haplogroup diversity both J1 and J2 reflect migration from the Middle East. The earliest inhabitants however may have come from elsewhere. Some archaeologists have suggested that the Natufians migrated from northeast Africa and carried the E3b haplogroup. This goes along with a recent view that the afroasiatic languages (which include Semitic) began in the same region. As you note both R1a and R1b may also have been present in ancient Israel especially given the conquests of the area by more northern peoples. Haplogroup G was probably present as well. In sum, given its central location ancient Israel was probably quite genetically diverse. In this respect the Jews did not differ from the other residents of the area who shared the same haplogroups.
                          You've a very good arguement there, Josh.

                          Its been noted throughout history that Canaan/Palestine/Judah/Israel has had the unfortunate honor of being the crossroads between many of the dominant civilizations. The Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Phillistines, Macedonians, Romans and Persians, just to name a bunch.

                          Given the prevailence and genetic diversity of R1b around the Caucasus and Anatolia, its perfectly reasonable to make those assumptions you've listed.

                          As far as the original Joshua, I assume you meant the the successor to Moses as opposed to yourself. Kidding, kidding!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Sean, appreciate your comment. Before I edited it out my phrase was "the original Josh".

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I think Josh is giving the only reasonable interpretation. Even the ultra-Orthodox Chasidim don't take the words of Torah at face value alone--it has always been about interpretation--that's what the Talmud is, unless you happen to be a Karaite and reject that stuff. "Families" and "tribes" may always have been understood as symbolic and allegorical, at least to some extent. Moreover, the Torah is full of references to intermarriage, including Moses himself (Zipporah was a Midianite) and of course Ruth. Hittites, Canaanites, and others are mentioned. The large number of commandments and instructions related to intermarriage make it certain that this was a common event. The traditional prayers even today frequently mention "children of Israel and faithful proselytes."

                              The difficulty is in sorting out what this means. I think that without saying it, most people consider that anyone who was living in Judea and practicing Judaism in Roman times was an "original" Jew regardless of previous ancestry while any non-Jew who joined the community after the destruction of the temple and subsequent diaspora (remember, there was a very large diaspora community in ancient times as well, from Egypt to Greece to Mesopotamia and beyond) is considered an "admixture." This is therefore a vaguely political and geographic rather than an ethnic argument.

                              As I said, I think the best way to think of Jews is very much in the same sense as what Americans are. They are a "nation" founded by a dominant ethnic group--but with minority members of other groups right from the start--and they continue to allow full "citizenship" to those who meet the right qualifications. There is an almost frightening analogy between the American illegal immigration argument and the ongoing dispute between Israeli and Orthodox policies on the one hand, and Conservative and Reform policies on the other, about what constitutes legitimate conversion or "citizenship."

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Dentate, there was even more diversity. Zipporah was a Cu****e raised by Midanites. I wonder why this hasn't received more attention.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X