J-L70 - a much needed update

Within the Empire. Many of the regions where we notice greater concentrations, I've noticed these units wound up.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but to my understanding, each Auxiliary unit had several thousand men, giving ample opportunity for many L70 men amongst them. This is the only explanation I've found that can explain J-L70's phylogeny (ignoring the evidence of J-L70's origin within the Levant).
J-L70 was likely already present throughout the Levant, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia before Rome.

It is not impossible, but I think it is unlikely that it should account for the entirety of Europe. I only contend that it is within the realm of possibility that it could have spread from a source outside the levant, given that J1 groups likely come from the Caucasus. Moreover, it was in a time when there was significant CHG/IN ancestry coming to the Levant, as well as Anatolia, and Greece. Perhaps it was just more successful in the Levant.
 
My maternal grandmother’s father Harold George Walker’s ancestry was Colonial European American Colonial. A few years back, I found out that my maternal grandmother’s father Harold George Walker’s Y DNA haplogroup is J2a4h2 which is known as J-L25. A descendant of his 2nd Great Grandfather Peyton Walker, son of William Walker took the Y DNA test which resulted in finding out that he was J-L25. The haplogroup assignment has been refined, and it is now J-PH3125. There are six haplogroups in the branch before J-PH3125. In exact order, they are J-CTS1192>J-L70>J-Z435>J-CTS3601>J-PF5456>J-FGC54172.



Both 5th Great Grandpa Peyton Walker and 6th Grandpa William Walker were born in Virginia.



I am already around 1/8 Ashkenazi Jewish from my maternal grandmother’s mother Ruth Sarah Rosenthal who was a first generation American born to a father from Romania and a mother from Latvia.
My maternal grandfather's father was the son of Cape Verdean immigrants. My maternal grandfather's maternal grandfather was Puerto Rican. My maternal grandfather's maternal grandmother was the Hawaiian born daughter of Madeiran immigrants, and her paternal grandfather was from the Azores. Therefore, I suspect some Sephardic Jewish on my maternal grandfather's side.

My African American father was born and raised in New Orleans, and his paternal grandmother had some Acadian ancestry. One of her Acadian ancestors was Abraham Dugas who was suspected by some to be Sephardic Jewish, and his Y DNA haplogroup J-Y25793. His closest match is a Druze man in Lebanon.
 
There are many new L70 samples from Turkey in YFull, with old MRCA’s.

Yes, they're all from a WGS study. Nothing too unexpected. The samples themselves appear to be a mixed bag (i.e. Balkan Turks, Anatolian Turks, Armenians, and the very first J-L70 Pontian). Regarding their MRCA's, these are of course subject to change over time - I can easily see them forming clades in the future that will not have such an old TMRCA. Two of these samples are reasonably close to Jewish branches, particularly in J-Y24651.

One has already formed a clade with a Sephardic Jewish line, with the Turk most likely being a Jewish exit.

Hopefully we'll get a similar study from the Levant at some point.
 
Yes, they're all from a WGS study. Nothing too unexpected. The samples themselves appear to be a mixed bag (i.e. Balkan Turks, Anatolian Turks, Armenians, and the very first J-L70 Pontian). Regarding their MRCA's, these are of course subject to change over time - I can easily see them forming clades in the future that will not have such an old TMRCA. Two of these samples are reasonably close to Jewish branches, particularly in J-Y24651.

One has already formed a clade with a Sephardic Jewish line, with the Turk most likely being a Jewish exit.

Hopefully we'll get a similar study from the Levant at some point.

Good points


according to Jewish Virtual Library


Turkey has a Jewish history dating back possibly to the 4th century B.C.E.


The history of the Jews in Anatolia, however, started many centuries before the migration of Sephardic Jews. Remnants of Jewish settlement from the 4th century B.C.E. have been uncovered in the Aegean region, where Jews lived and traded in the ancient cities of Ephesus, Sardis, Pergamon, and Smyrna (renamed Izmir by the Turks). The historian Josephus Flavius relates that Aristotle "met Jewish people with whom he had an exchange of views during his trip across Asia Minor."


Second and third century Greek inscriptions tell of a flourishing Jewish community in Smyrna. Ancient synagogue ruins have also been found in Sardis, near Izmir, dating from 220 B.C.E. and traces of other Jewish settlements have been discovered near Bursa, in the southeast and along the Aegean, Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts. A bronze column found in Ankara confirms the rights the Emperor Augustus accorded the Jews of Asia Minor.
 
I don't understand the relevance of autosomal DNA here. This is why I find your argument flawed:

There are a handful of Greek J-L70 lines identified currently. For this, let's assume they all arrived in Greece via an Anatolia route (I don't believe all the Greek L70 necessarily passed through Anatolia). After leaving the Levant for Anatolia (some time between 1600 BCE and 1300 BCE), these men would ultimately assimilate amongst the Anatolians, so that by the time they would have arrived in Greece during the LBA, they would be entirely LBA Anatolian in their autosomal ancestry, but their Y's would still be J-L70. It doesn't stop there, they would have continued mixing in Greece, ultimately becoming autosomally modern Greek today, with their lines remaining J-L70. Obviously when their ancestors would have arrived from the Levant, it is unlikely that they would remain Levantine - point being people are bound to mix and mingle, with the "original" autosomal ancestry dying out. [An exception would be the Jewish populations, who have always retained a large proportion of "original" ancestry]

Additionally, by the time J-L70 men from the Levant arrived in Anatolia, they would not have been 100% Levantine farmer. They would have ancestry from several sources, being Natufian, Anatolian Farmer, Iranian Farmer, CHG, even some Steppe. So one can easily say some of the non-Levantine Farmer ancestry in BA Anatolians could have been from them. But ultimately I have no interest in debating on whether Italians and Greeks have Levantine ancestry (although given the presence of J-L70 among them - not to mention other Levantine uniparentals in these regions, we can basically confirm they had Levantine ancestors at some point).

It is not clear on what basis you think J-L70 came from the Caucasus - is it just due to autosomal ancestry? In which case, you'd make a stronger argument by saying it just originated in Anatolia.

You might say that the first point I raised can easily be flipped around, with Caucasian men arriving in the Levant, assimilating, and being responsible for the J-L70 in the Levant. But we can dismiss this for several reasons (which doubles as evidence J-L70 never came from the Caucasus):
1) J-L70 is a rare clade in the Caucasus, except amongst Jews (Mizrahi - Juhurim) and Armenians, however Herrera et al, (2011) concluded that most of the paternal lineages studied amongst Armenians were introduced from the Levant. In this specific paper, they found J-M318 in 5% of Armenians from Lake Van - J-M318 is Jewish in origin, reinforcing that at least some of Armenian J-L70 is Levantine. Several other Armenian lineages fall under J-Z40772, which shares a common ancestor will several Jewish branches at 2700 ybp, and with a large Jewish branch at 2900 ybp, reinforcing once again a Levantine origin. We also need to remember that the Caucasus is a more heavily tested region, particularly than the Levant and Anatolia.
2) Considering the greater number of Caucasian men tested, we find no Basal branches of J-L70 amongst them
3) Considering the greater number of Caucasian men tested, we don't find any significant diversity of J-L70 branches amongst them
4) J-L70's main growth period ends abruptly with the Late Bronze Age collapse, solidifying J-L70 being heavily nested within the Eastern Mediterranean - I don't suppose the Sea People's invaded the Caucasus as well?



Having dismissed coming from the Caucasus, the next thing to address is spreading from Anatolia. While more likely than the Caucasus, there still is not convincing evidence for this. J-L70 is not a Neolithic marker, and could not have spread via Neolithic movements. J-Z387 is a different story, with it likely arriving in the Levant via Late Neolithic Mesopotamians (with the ancestor, J-L24 and J-L25 originating in Iran). I did address in my first post why it's not really possible for J-L70 to have spread from Anatolia, with one set of branches going to Greece, while another went to the Levant. The phylogeny simply tells a different story. It's not like we see a clear cluster of Greek branches, and then a clear cluster of Levantine branches - all of J-L70's branches are mixed. This suggests J-L70 diversified amongst a certain culture, or in a certain region before spreading all over. Additionally, we find Jewish branches throughout J-L70, whereas we would need Jewish branches in just one neck of the woods for a spread from Anatolia to work. The presence of Jewish branches throughout the phylogeny strongly supports a spread from the Levant, especially since Jews tended to remain insular.

I'll just repost why a Levantine origin for J-L70 is most likely, and has the greatest evidence:

"A Levantine origin for J-L70 makes the most sense given the great branch diversity, higher frequencies than other regions, and presence of several layers of Basal branches (J-L70* in Jordan, J-FT340863 in an Sinai Egyptian and Palestinian, J-Z387* in several Sephardic Jews, and two different J-FGC35503* branches in Lebanon). Should J-L70 not originate in the Levant, this is all very coincidental. The nail on the hammer for a Levantine origin for J-L70 are the
15 distinct, distant Jewish branches. No similarly aged clade has as many distinct Jewish lineages - save for perhaps J-Y2919, but that's 600 years older."

So pretty much, this is the likely migration path we're dealing with: J-L25 (Iran) >...> J-Z387 (Mesopotamia) > J-L70 (Levant)
Jewish diversity of J-L70 is to be expected.
Modern Jews Literally came from all over the Middle east and Europe.Jews from Ethiopia, Jews from Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Kurdistan, Caucasus, Egyptian, Tunisian, Algerian, Spain, Italy, Greece(ancient Jewish communities) etc etc. There isn't a place around Mediterranean than hasn't lend its Genetics to Jews.
Levant is also a bad place for seek genetic answers. Just in the the last 3000 it experienced extreme levels of both with-in MENA and outside of MENA colonization. Just enumerate how many MENA ethnic groups poured into the space modern Israel/Palestine/Jordan occupies leaving their genetic footprint on the Population between 2000 to 200-300 A.D, and since J2a is one of the main lineages in all the surrounding populations, it introduced many new clades into the the Jewish Space.Jewish Genetic expansion seems to occurred in late classical and in the antiquities as Judaism became the second biggest religion in the Roman Empire and Middle East experiencing and extrovert and syncretic phase(which gave birth both to Christianity and Islam and facilitated their expansions) both in Israel proper and Jewish communities through out the empire, spamming from the Yemen to South Europe. The liquidity of Judaism in this era facilitated the genetic interactions. Lets not forget that the major Jewish revolts are characterize by many historians as Jewish civil wars between ''new age'' Jews(either Hellenistic-Judaic or Grekoroman-Mithradist-Judaic religious Syncretism) and Zealots orthodox. With the Jewish Revolts (and zealots dominance) and the rise of (''jew-critical'')Christianity and Islam, Jewish Genetic interactions with their hosting populations seem to have Closed up, or Greatly reduced. For the next 2000 years Diaspora practice mainly In-breading that made those lines distinguishable for the same reason more (and definitely)European Lines are distinguishable in Jews.
So why wouldn't be the Jewish L70 lines be diverse and distinct?
 
My maternal 6th Great Grandfather William Walker's Y DNA haplogroup is J-PH3125 which is a branch of J-FGC54172 which is a branch of J-PF5456 which is a branch of J-L70.

His closest matches are men in United States with their sharing J-PH3125.

The closest matches after that are men with paternal origins in United States, Belarus, Poland, Germany, Ukraine, Scotland, Hungary, Armenia, Italy, Greece, Czech Republic, Lithuania, France, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Ireland, Canada, Russian Federation, Romania, Austria, England with their sharing J-FGC54172.

William Walker was a Colonial British Virginian who lived from 1725 to 1806 and is listed as having origins in England.
He's a 3rd great grandfather of my maternal grandmother's father Harold George Walker.
 
There is new information at YFull. Equador and Albania samples are now in the basal position of J-L70*.

https://yfull.com/tree/J-L70/

Yes,

They've been Basal on the tree for some time now (live tree). Thankfully they removed J-Z2148, which was giving problems.

The Ecuadorian is J-FT67656 on FamilyTreeDNA (closest relative is a Dutchman based on the tree) - no idea if the Albanian falls under an existing branch. I do find it intriguing that the Ecuadorian individual matches an undefined Sephardic branch at 25 markers. It could hint the Sephardic branch is Z435-.
 
Hi all!

I am a new member to this forum - but I am active on others. I feel that this forum would benefit from an up-to-date take on J-L70. For those interested, I do have threads dedicated to J-L70 on Anthrogenica that have evolved over time - but I'm not sure on the stance of posting links from other forums, so I will refrain from doing so.

As many of you are aware, J-L70 is a very widely spread branch of J2a. This has led to some controversy of where it originated, spread from, and so on.

So I'll start with where is J-L70 most common?

I have taken the liberty of gathering data from FamilyTreeDNA - and have reasonably large sample sizes, so these figures are likely a good reflection of J-L70's distribution in these regions. No surprise, J-L70 is most common in the Central-East Mediterranean and the Near East. These are the regions with the greatest frequencies:

Syria: 3.34% (12/359)
Italy and Malta: 3.19% (97/3040)
Lebanon: 2.12% (9/424)
Palestinian Territories: 2% (4/200)
Jordan: 1.64% (3/183)
Turkey: 1.53% (13/847) -- out of interest, quite a decent chunk are Armenians
Iraq: 1.52% (18/1184)
Greece: 1.47% (10/682)
Armenia: 1.25% (7/562)


As for which individual group has the most J-L70, it would be the Djerban Cohanim (~60%), limited to one subclade.

As we head away from these regions, we find the frequency of J-L70 drop dramatically, with most of Europe, North Africa, the Caucasus, Arabia, Central Asia etc... being <0.5%.

Within Italy, we do notice a trend of J-L70 being more common in Central Italy and Sicily/Southern Italy than the north - and there may be a reason for this, which I'll get to.

In J-L70, we find virtually all branches have a close Near Eastern relative.

The next question to address is where is J-L70 most diverse?

Here we find a pretty stark contrast between two regions and the rest of the world. The two regions with the greatest branch diversity by far are the Levant and Italy. Considering Italy's history, their diversity makes sense in context. As for the Levant, the diversity is striking given the lower levels of testing in this region, as compared to Italy and the rest of Europe

The next question to address is where did J-L70 likely originate and spread from?

The only thing we can say with utmost certainty is that J-L70 originated and spread from the Near East. Now as for specifically where, the two options that hold weight are the Levant (more so the north) and Anatolia (more so the east).

From what I have researched, a Levantine origin for J-L70 carries the most evidence, but should this not come to fruition (for whatever reason), an origin in East Anatolia would likely be the next best guess. A Levantine origin for J-L70 makes the most sense given the great branch diversity, higher frequencies than other regions, and presence of several layers of Basal branches (J-L70* in Jordan, J-FT340863 in an Sinai Egyptian and Palestinian, J-Z387* in several Sephardic Jews, and two different J-FGC35503* branches in Lebanon). Should J-L70 not originate in the Levant, this is all very coincidental. The nail on the hammer for a Levantine origin for J-L70 are the 15 distinct, distant Jewish branches. No similarly aged clade has as many distinct Jewish lineages - save for perhaps J-Y2919, but that's 600 years older. These Jewish branches are spread throughout J-L70's phylogeny, and are present in the following groups: Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardic Jews (Spain, Portugal, Italy), Sephardic Jews (Balkans, Turkey), Libyan Jews, Tunisian Jews, Djerban Cohanim, New World Conversos, Canadian Anousim, Moroccan Jews, Algerian Jews, Mountain Jews, Bukharan Jews, Italian Conversos, and Romaniote Jews. Not to mention that there are individuals from all 3 major branches of J-L70 (i.e. J-Z2177, J-CTS3601, J-PH3882) who are Cohanim. Considering Jews are a very endogamous group, and considering most conversions were on the female line, this suggests to me that the TMRCA of J-Z2148 was related to the ancestral population of all these Jewish groups in some way.

Now what about Anatolia? Anatolia doesn't display the same diversity as the Levant, nor the same level of Basal branches given similar levels of testing. The sheer number of Jewish branches contradicts an Anatolian origin. A notion of J-L70 originating in Anatolia, with some branches going to the Levant and some going to Europe isn't supported by the phylogeny we see.

What about J-Z387? J-Z387's TMRCA (7100 ybp) may be congruent with the first infusion of Late Neolithic Mesopotamians into the Levant or signals the adoption of Afroasiatic speech. An origin in Mesopotamia would make the most sense.

An origin for J-L70 amongst Romans or Greeks does not make any sense - especially given that the expansions of these civilizations occurred after J-L70's expansion period (when the greatest diversification of branches occurred). But that doesn't mean they weren't partially responsible for it's spread. Meanwhile J-L70's expansion period does correspond with the commercial prosperity of the cities of the northern Levant, with trade likely being key to J-L70's growth.

I believe J-L70 originated in Syria.

How did J-L70 spread?

There are likely many sources attributable to J-L70's spread. The primary force to Europe was likely the Syrian Auxiliaries. Much of the J-L70 we find in continental Europe and the British Isles is more than likely attributable to them. The regional trends we see do correspond with where these groups wound up. The other forces were likely less significant, being the Jewish Diaspora (for the branches surrounding existing Jewish branches), the Phoenicians (we see similar trends with other clades associated with the Phoenicians), the Greeks (via Anatolia), and the Aghlabid Dynasty (responsible for J-FGC32147 in Sicily) to name a few. Most of the J-L70 in Europe likely arrived during the Roman Period, with Rome seeing the branches spread throughout.

When it comes to Italy, I mentioned earlier that we see clear spikes in Central Italy and Southern Italy. Central Italy is likely attributed to an influx of Near Eastern ancestry during Imperial Rome. As for Sicily, J-Z387 is the highest in areas of Phoenician settlement (Mazara del Vallo and Trapani) but does display higher frequencies on the rest of the island as well. As mentioned J-FGC32147 in Sicily is more than likely attributed to the Bani Tamim (Aghlabid Dynasty).

As more how it spread throughout the Near East (which occurred before it spread to Europe), I imagine groups like the Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, and Amorites are all responsible for it's spread throughout.
Hello,

I have a question for this forum. To start I'm going to give context before asking. Beginning: Two months ago I took a genetic ancestry test in order to learn a little about my origins. The genetic results showed that my paternal haplogroup is JL70 and that my Iberian percentage is 66.4%. Some people to whom I showed the results say that I am a Sephardic Jew, but my 23andMe results do not say anything about that, what they do say and with certainty is that I am 0.3% Ashkenazi. Now I ask my question: Being Iberian means being Jewish, does having the JL70 haplogroup mean being Sephardic? I also want to highlight that I have 16% Irish, 0.1% Ethiopian and Eritrean, I also have from Nigeria, Greece and the Balkans, in addition to Asia but I am not going to say the percentages that will be extended and I want to be as concise as possible in This is my question and concern. Thank you very much in advance for responding.
 
Hello,

I have a question for this forum. To start I'm going to give context before asking. Beginning: Two months ago I took a genetic ancestry test in order to learn a little about my origins. The genetic results showed that my paternal haplogroup is JL70 and that my Iberian percentage is 66.4%. Some people to whom I showed the results say that I am a Sephardic Jew, but my 23andMe results do not say anything about that, what they do say and with certainty is that I am 0.3% Ashkenazi. Now I ask my question: Being Iberian means being Jewish, does having the JL70 haplogroup mean being Sephardic? I also want to highlight that I have 16% Irish, 0.1% Ethiopian and Eritrean, I also have from Nigeria, Greece and the Balkans, in addition to Asia but I am not going to say the percentages that will be extended and I want to be as concise as possible in This is my question and concern. Thank you very much in advance for responding.
Hi Yosef,
Thanks for your comment. Being Iberian and JL70 could be related to many cultures and/or religions. The oldest JL70 we have until now in the Iberian peninsula was found on a man buried on Northern East Spain, that belonged to the Visigothic culture.
To have further details, you should try to determine your subclade, so you can compare your results with others from Spain and elsewhere.
JL70 probably arrived in Iberia with different cultures, and on different period of times. Romans, for example, considering the relevant presence of this clade in central/southern Italy and some ancient roman samples found in Rome and the Marche region, could be a relevant source of this J2 subclade in Hispania. But we need further ancient samples to have further answers. Best Regards
 
Hi Yosef,
Thanks for your comment. Being Iberian and JL70 could be related to many cultures and/or religions. The oldest JL70 we have until now in the Iberian peninsula was found on a man buried on Northern East Spain, that belonged to the Visigothic culture.
To have further details, you should try to determine your subclade, so you can compare your results with others from Spain and elsewhere.
JL70 probably arrived in Iberia with different cultures, and on different period of times. Romans, for example, considering the relevant presence of this clade in central/southern Italy and some ancient roman samples found in Rome and the Marche region, could be a relevant source of this J2 subclade in Hispania. But we need further ancient samples to have further answers. Best Regards
Thank you for your response, I really appreciate it. I will attend to your recommendations. Thanks again.
 
On Y-full in addition to Italians and Greeks, among the J-L70 there are also English, Irish, Scottish, Polish, Bulgarian, Swiss-German, Portuguese, Spanish, German, Albanian, Austrian, Ukrainian, Swedish, Belgian, Dutch, French, Lithuanian, Belorussian, Czech users. Actually, the area of its distribution in Europe is wider than the Roman Empire, I have doubts all of J-L70 can be attributed to the Roman imperial era. Since many areas of Europe are not yet heavily sampled, it is possible that it is a bit more widespread in Europe than we think. A Viking (VK42) from Sweden is also J-L70.
We are the de Vere Hunts who are under J-Z39061 (which are otherwise completely Jewish families today) , orginally from England before becoming the famous Anglo Irish family with their own poem written by Tennyson, Lady Clara Vere de Vere.

We have one other common family that splits genetically at around 1000 CE, in time for us to go to England likely around 1070. The Wingos (their Americanized name) remained evidently in France until 1620 as Huguenots to Virginia and then down to South Carolina due to experience in wine production. Their name refers to wine growers in the area of Vienne, France.

While it is perhaps coincidence, the first sighting of Jews in France and considerably earlier than others were in Vienne France.

Yet another detail has come to our Hunts who are by marriage to the de Veres rightful carriers of the name in Ireland as their male line is no longer extant. In parsing the original Aubrey de Veres which once were mingled to the original who was in charge of WIlliam the Conqueror's project to create wineries in England, I understand that they went from zero to forty. As an aside, we know that Jewish wine was at the forefront of their trading and some of those brought in were Jews (or pehaps also early anusims under Robert II who conducted the most rigid and lengthy convert or die program in French history.

Finally then, the wineries were important to the Jewish economy but they mitigated against the exceptionally urban impulse of our brother clade that went to Eastern Europe and all still remain Jews.

I am currently reading this book which seems to provide the information that fits well with this interpretation of the different ways in which things went for us two and all the rest

The Chosen Few: How Education Shaped Jewish History, 70-1492 (The Princeton Economic History of the Western World Book 42)
 
We are the de Vere Hunts who are under J-Z39061 (which are otherwise completely Jewish families today) , orginally from England before becoming the famous Anglo Irish family with their own poem written by Tennyson, Lady Clara Vere de Vere.

We have one other common family that splits genetically at around 1000 CE, in time for us to go to England likely around 1070. The Wingos (their Americanized name) remained evidently in France until 1620 as Huguenots to Virginia and then down to South Carolina due to experience in wine production. Their name refers to wine growers in the area of Vienne, France.

While it is perhaps coincidence, the first sighting of Jews in France and considerably earlier than others were in Vienne France.

Yet another detail has come to our Hunts who are by marriage to the de Veres rightful carriers of the name in Ireland as their male line is no longer extant. In parsing the original Aubrey de Veres which once were mingled to the original who was in charge of WIlliam the Conqueror's project to create wineries in England, I understand that they went from zero to forty. As an aside, we know that Jewish wine was at the forefront of their trading and some of those brought in were Jews (or pehaps also early anusims under Robert II who conducted the most rigid and lengthy convert or die program in French history.

Finally then, the wineries were important to the Jewish economy but they mitigated against the exceptionally urban impulse of our brother clade that went to Eastern Europe and all still remain Jews.

I am currently reading this book which seems to provide the information that fits well with this interpretation of the different ways in which things went for us two and all the rest

The Chosen Few: How Education Shaped Jewish History, 70-1492 (The Princeton Economic History of the Western World Book 42)
From what I understand your MRCA ancestor with the Ashkenazic clade, J-Z39055, is more than 2.700 ybp, so is difficult to establish if your line is jewish or not, specially considering that that clade has a common male ancestor on the IXth century CE and you have no records of your ancestors being jewish. There is still a discussion if some Ashkenazi lines, are descendants of greeks and/or romans converted to judaism. The bottle neck of many Ashkenazi lines, was on the Early middle ages. Until now, the oldest JL70's found were not jewish. Of course the question is still open, and further ancient samples will help us to have a clearer picture. Regarding winery, it was practice in southern France since the VI Century BCE, with the arrival of the greeks, and it was indeed important for all Mediterranean cultures, from all cultures and religions, including jewish of course. Good luck with your research
 
Last edited:
From what

From what I understand your MRCA ancestor with the Ashkenazic clade, J-Z39055, is more than 2.700 ybp, so is difficult to establish if your line is jewish or not, specially considering that that clade has a common male ancestor on the IXth century CE and you have no records of your ancestors being jewish. There is still a discussion if some Ashkenazi lines, are descendants of greeks and/or romans converted to judaism. The bottle neck of many Ashkenazi lines, was on the Early middle ages. Until now, the oldest JL70's found were not jewish. Of course the question is still open, and further ancient samples will help us to have a clearer picture. Regarding winery, it was practice in southern France since the VI Century BCE, with the arrival of the greeks, and it was indeed important for all Mediterranean cultures, from all cultures and religions, including jewish of course. Good luck with your research
 
From what

From what I understand your MRCA ancestor with the Ashkenazic clade, J-Z39055, is more than 2.700 ybp, so is difficult to establish if your line is jewish or not, specially considering that that clade has a common male ancestor on the IXth century CE and you have no records of your ancestors being jewish. There is still a discussion if some Ashkenazi lines, are descendants of greeks and/or romans converted to judaism. The bottle neck of many Ashkenazi lines, was on the Early middle ages. Until now, the oldest JL70's found were not jewish. Of course the question is still open, and further ancient samples will help us to have a clearer picture. Regarding winery, it was practice in southern France since the VI Century BCE, with the arrival of the greeks, and it was indeed important for all Mediterranean cultures, from all cultures and religions, including jewish of course. Good luck with your research
From what

From what I understand your MRCA ancestor with the Ashkenazic clade, J-Z39055, is more than 2.700 ybp, so is difficult to establish if your line is jewish or not, specially considering that that clade has a common male ancestor on the IXth century CE and you have no records of your ancestors being jewish. There is still a discussion if some Ashkenazi lines, are descendants of greeks and/or romans converted to judaism. The bottle neck of many Ashkenazi lines, was on the Early middle ages. Until now, the oldest JL70's found were not jewish. Of course the question is still open, and further ancient samples will help us to have a clearer picture. Regarding winery, it was practice in southern France since the VI Century BCE, with the arrival of the greeks, and it was indeed important for all Mediterranean cultures, from all cultures and religions, including jewish of course. Good luck with your research
Thanks for your reply. We recoginize our join is back about 700-600 BCE. In discussion with those in our brother clade z-39055, we feel that at this point, that we would relate specifically to the Northern Kingdom and J1C more to the southern kingdom. It is fair to say, I imagine that that the Jewish-come latelies would be the R Jews.

We have tried to promote some of the lower level matches at 25 and 37 sometimes through a bit of sponsorship but always found them to be way above the join and took some of the SNPs upstream with them rather than downstream.

We found one that looked pretty Roman but careful etymology of their rare name proved to be mostly Albanian but have been unable to get in contact with them to move them up.

One of the WIngo families has a tradition that their name was originally a translation of Yayin and the word carries throughout the area that we find settlement.

It has been my general observation that trade routes are not considered enough in creating hypothesis and a man was needed in every port to conduct business and that in part can explain low density settlement. Additionally. the apparent "silent years" have been noted by other Js who almost all have a defined route into their new western world - suggesting something catastrophic happened - so much about the "one that got away" and those on trade are the most likely to have simply been away.

Nevertheless, I take into perspective your comments and appreciate that there are other perspectives. And in essence, some of the difficulty comes from different historical models adopted by Jewish, Christian, Islam and the rest of the prehistory


. Whether we find out more in our lifetime, at least our family and the Wingos have left a solid indellible footprint which will hopefully be available for those that follow us. And it has been very interesting on the homefront for sure.
 

This thread has been viewed 34847 times.

Back
Top