Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We might learn DNA of Philistines

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

  • We might learn DNA of Philistines

    The press release announces many places one can read about it in many languages.

    I am recommending one that was written by a member of the Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon
    http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...d-at-ashkelon/
    Bone samples of the cemetery’s population are undergoing DNA testing, radiocarbon dating and biological distance studies (the degree of genetic relatedness).

    Mr W

  • #2
    Any update on the DNA results yet?

    Any update on the DNA results yet?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by LPeer View Post
      Any update on the DNA results yet?
      Somewhat surprisingly, essentially a total silence...

      On 19 May 2017, it was reported in Science that
      Researchers are trying to extract DNA from skeletons buried in the ancient Philistine cemetery of Ashkelon, in what is now Israel

      But nothing beyond that.


      Mr. W

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you, Mr W !!

        Your posts are always interesting I'm so pleased you're posting again.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dna View Post
          Somewhat surprisingly, essentially a total silence...

          On 19 May 2017, it was reported in Science that
          Researchers are trying to extract DNA from skeletons buried in the ancient Philistine cemetery of Ashkelon, in what is now Israel

          But nothing beyond that.


          Mr. W

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dna View Post
            Somewhat surprisingly, essentially a total silence...

            On 19 May 2017, it was reported in Science that
            Researchers are trying to extract DNA from skeletons buried in the ancient Philistine cemetery of Ashkelon, in what is now Israel

            But nothing beyond that.


            Mr. W
            There has been a study of Lebanese Canaanites. They had a fair amount of Natufian lines. Philistines should have less Natufian. (I visited a Canaanite site in Ashkelon)

            Comment


            • #7
              How will we know a dead Philistine when we find one?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
                How will we know a dead Philistine when we find one?
                Archeology
                Last edited by dna; 13th March 2018, 03:17 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  OK, so how does an archaeologist know a dead Philistine when he or she sees one?

                  In other words, is a Philistine just any skeleton of a particular age that if found in a particular location, or are there specific cultural or other markers that distinguish dead Philistines from other people who happened to die in the same area about the same time?
                  Last edited by John McCoy; 13th March 2018, 05:05 PM. Reason: !

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
                    OK, so how does an archaeologist know a dead Philistine when he or she sees one?

                    In other words, is a Philistine just any skeleton of a particular age that if found in a particular location, or are there specific cultural or other markers that distinguish dead Philistines from other people who happened to die in the same area about the same time?
                    Yes, there must be many factors to connect some skeleton to a specific culture. That can be seen easily seen when comparing burials of Ancient Egypt with say Egtved Girl or Ötzi that are roughly the same age. The Egyptian mummies, thanks to many markers, are often not only precisely dated, but also associated to a specific social class, etc. Egtved Girl and Ötzi were found in a total cultural vacuum, and thus were just assigned to a time period.

                    I have to admit that archeology used to be a little bit unscientific by modern standards. Some archeological museums were clearly started by artifacts ripped out from their environment by what Hollywood glorifies today as treasure hunters.

                    Modern archeology would not only use radiocarbon dating for human remains, but would also try to assign each layer above and below to a date or a material culture or some culture. The best would be to have both date and the culture for each layer. And that is why there are specializations like Archeology of Someplace.

                    I have no idea what is/was specifically being used to qualify a skeleton, as a Philistine skeleton. Surely time and place are good starting points, but usually I read that a type of burial or artifacts found with a skeleton matched some culture, so the remains were assigned to it.


                    Mr. W.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dna View Post
                      Yes, there must be many factors to connect some skeleton to a specific culture. That can be seen easily seen when comparing burials of Ancient Egypt with say Egtved Girl or Ötzi that are roughly the same age. The Egyptian mummies, thanks to many markers, are often not only precisely dated, but also associated to a specific social class, etc. Egtved Girl and Ötzi were found in a total cultural vacuum, and thus were just assigned to a time period.

                      I have to admit that archeology used to be a little bit unscientific by modern standards. Some archeological museums were clearly started by artifacts ripped out from their environment by what Hollywood glorifies today as treasure hunters.

                      Modern archeology would not only use radiocarbon dating for human remains, but would also try to assign each layer above and below to a date or a material culture or some culture. The best would be to have both date and the culture for each layer. And that is why there are specializations like Archeology of Someplace.

                      I have no idea what is/was specifically being used to qualify a skeleton, as a Philistine skeleton. Surely time and place are good starting points, but usually I read that a type of burial or artifacts found with a skeleton matched some culture, so the remains were assigned to it.


                      Mr. W.
                      The Ashkelon Philistines had distinctive artifacts and burial arrangements. Unfortunately the project director recently passed away. I presume the project is still continuing.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The article I read doesn't say how they know the people are Philistines, except that they came from a Philistine cemetery. That would be the context of hte cemetery - timing, place, culture. It shouldn't be too hard to know if the cemetery was Philistine!

                        Now, for how to tell people apart, I too am wondering if it's possible to discern a Natufian from a Cretan/ Aegean/ Mediterranean. These cultures weren't far apart in distance. You'd expect genetic overlap to say the least.

                        [QUOTE=dna;449622]Yes, there must be many factors to connect some skeleton to a specific culture. That can be seen easily seen when comparing burials of Ancient Egypt with say

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          [QUOTE=villandra;451312]The article I read doesn't say how they know the people are Philistines, except that they came from a Philistine cemetery. That would be the context of hte cemetery - timing, place, culture. It shouldn't be too hard to know if the cemetery was Philistine!

                          Now, for how to tell people apart, I too am wondering if it's possible to discern a Natufian from a Cretan/ Aegean/ Mediterranean. These cultures weren't far apart in distance. You'd expect genetic overlap to say the least.

                          Originally posted by dna View Post
                          Yes, there must be many factors to connect some skeleton to a specific culture. That can be seen easily seen when comparing burials of Ancient Egypt with say
                          In what is now a classic study Lazaridis and Reich (and others) were able to separate Natufian, Asia Minor and Iranian Neolithic lines as of 10 kya. Later there was significant admixture among the three groups. Nevertheless, the main Neolithic pathway to Europe came from Asia Minor and entered Europe in the Black Sea area.
                          My guess is that Aegean lines reflected this Neolithic pathway more than the other two Neolithic locations

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            [QUOTE=josh w.;451319]
                            Originally posted by villandra View Post
                            The article I read doesn't say how they know the people are Philistines, except that they came from a Philistine cemetery. That would be the context of hte cemetery - timing, place, culture. It shouldn't be too hard to know if the cemetery was Philistine!

                            Now, for how to tell people apart, I too am wondering if it's possible to discern a Natufian from a Cretan/ Aegean/ Mediterranean. These cultures weren't far apart in distance. You'd expect genetic overlap to say the least.



                            In what is now a classic study Lazaridis and Reich (and others) were able to separate Natufian, Asia Minor and Iranian Neolithic lines as of 10 kya. Later there was significant admixture among the three groups. Nevertheless, the main Neolithic pathway to Europe came from Asia Minor and entered Europe in the Black Sea area.
                            My guess is that Aegean lines reflected this Neolithic pathway more than the other two Neolithic locations
                            It may be important to separate Cyprus from Greece and Turkey. Cypriots have always had a connection to the Levant. Modern Cypriots have a significant Natufian component. Modern Greeks and Turks have a lower Natufian component.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ancient DNA from Chalcolithic Israel

                              https://www.nature.com/articles/s414...ByQhIEjg%3D%3D

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X