Nephite research - and the source(s)

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

...........................................

53? By my reckoning, the distance between Alma 63 and the 1st chapter of 3 Nephi is a bit longer - at ca. 55 years.

And 55 years before 5 BC (if we opt to accept that as a valid reckoning point) brings us to an initial departure northward from a Nephite port during 60 BC, approximately. Two years before Caesar began his march north.

Only one system of reckoning will close the distance between the first year of King Zedekiah (597 BC) and the birth of Christ in 5 BC, and that is the 360-day year Long Count which was standard in Mesoamerica -- the only place in the Americas where literate, high civilization, with large populations existed.  One can hem and haw all day long about other possible correlations, but none has survived close scrutiny.  Do the math.

Quote

...........................................  

For starters, see footnotes 2 & 3 here: http://www.candlestickstudio.com/EarliestGermans.html 

The etymology of the word "German" does not fit your concept.  For example, "The English word German comes from Latin germanus, germani 'German,' originally the name of a specific tribe. The name was eventually applied by the Romans to all Germans, and the name Germania was given to the land of the Germans. A possible etymology for this tribal name is 'spear men' gari 'spear' + mann 'man'."  http://linguaphiles.livejournal.com/344988.html , citing André Cherpillod, Dictionnaire étymologique des noms géographiques,

The Germanic peoples include Angles, Saxons, Teutons, Norsemen, etc.  They are closely related not only in language, but also in genetics.  Their presence in Europe can be tracked for thousands of years.  They are not new arrivals when Caesar meets them for the first time.  If you can show otherwise, please cite your factual sources in archeology, history, linguistics, and genetics.

Edited May 25, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[probablyHagoth7]

On 5/25/2017 at 11:28 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

Only one system of reckoning will close the distance between the first year of King Zedekiah (597 BC) and the birth of Christ in 5 BC, and that is the 360-day year...Do the math.

I did similar math...long ago.  http://candlestickstudio.com/files/1844inProphecy.pdf#page=102 

(page 102, if mobile device can't parse link)

 

Assuming that kind of year for the span in question, my Canadian math arrives at approximately 54.2 years, 54 years plus a couple of months (into the first part of a 55th year). Which aligns with what I said earlier.

Perhaps I overlooked something simple? (Happens often enough)

On 5/25/2017 at 11:28 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

The etymology of the word "German" does not fit your concept.....Latin germanus, germani ...

It fits. Quite well.

If you prefer other meanings, fine. 

On 5/25/2017 at 11:28 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

The Germanic peoples...closely related not only in language, but also in genetics....presence in Europe can be tracked for thousands of years.  They are not new arrivals when Caesar meets them for the first time.  If you can show otherwise, please cite your factual sources in archeology, history, linguistics, and genetics.

If you prefer a broad-stroke answer to your objection, here goes the earliest of drafts: 

Nephites and European DNA 

(I intend to address fun genetic outliers at a later time.)

If you prefer notes, in addition to the longer version of NiE, I am also rolling out two things related to archaeology/language very soon - and those do have a few notes. Fair enough?

[aprorianalysis]

I enjoy reading that which is a sign of Laminates verse Nephites.  How similar to those that are natural man instead of unnatural.  Is it no wonder there is so many naturalism type people who want to go back to nature, tribalism. verse unnatural men that want to have a country or a nation to respond to protect freedom and liberty of there members who should think with an enlightened reason that nation  is founded under god. Boy, the tribulation we face if we go back to primitive tribalism, such subversive elements that will bring down civilization.  I guess I would liken this to Lamanite wars and pursuit of the natural man theories.  such beliefs in natural man as it  let your intellectualness or analytical thinking take over, what happens will we go back to tribalism as did the Lamanites very war like and primative.  The hope of normal people to do something, is to take ahold of it and weld it for right thinking and be faithful and trust god for his way is the only way that is unnatural.  tidy ho, and be holistic thinking does mean that your self righteous, every position of fact that is true has a thread of truth that flows from the facts.  Just be more logical, philosophical and insightful.  thanks.

[probablyHagoth7]

 

7 hours ago, aprorianalysis said:

Just be more logical, philosophical and insightful.  thanks.

Working on the first and the last. But with the middle philosophical part...I'm not yet sure what you mean. Can't imagine you mean one should lean more towards philosophies of men. Perhaps you mean the opposite: philo (affinity or preference for) sophia. If so, I agree there is considerable room for improvement there.   

Thanks for contributing to the discussion. 

[Robert F. Smith]

11 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

I did similar math...long ago.  http://candlestickstudio.com/files/1844inProphecy.pdf#page=102 

(page 102, if mobile device can't parse link)

Glad to see you examining a wide range of options, willing to use footnotes, etc., but pagination is absent throughout -- should be on each page.  I and my younger brother provided a spreadsheet of Book of Mormon dates already a decade earlier (also using the Sorenson correlation) in my three-volume Book of Mormon Critical Text published by FARMS.  It is the only approach which works, so am glad to see you provide a full discussion of alternatives.

11 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

Assuming that kind of year for the span in question, my Canadian math arrives at approximately 54.2 years, 54 years plus a couple of months (into the first part of a 55th year). Which aligns with what I said earlier.

Perhaps I overlooked something simple? (Happens often enough)

Since you have mentioned the year 27/28 AD as significant, bear in mind that Jesus begins his ministry by publicly announcing that year as the beginning of a Sabbatical year in Luke 4:18-21 (Isa 61).  In fact it was the regular Jewish Sabbatical year, and this was a deliberate Messianic claim.

11 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

.....................................

If you prefer a broad-stroke answer to your objection, here goes the earliest of drafts: 

Nephites and European DNA 

(I intend to address fun genetic outliers at a later time.)

If you prefer notes, in addition to the longer version of NiE, I am also rolling out two things related to archaeology/language very soon - and those do have a few notes. Fair enough?

I will be happy to read about that, but bear in mind that DNA testing now is full spectrum -- whole genome testing can disclose a great deal now about ancestry.  Any real Nephite DNA would have to match what we know of ancient Israelite and Canaanite DNA generally, and we would need ancient skeletal remains.

[probablyHagoth7]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Glad to see you...willing to use footnotes...

I generally do prefer notes... 

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

... Any real Nephite DNA would have to match what we know of ancient Israelite and Canaanite DNA generally, and we would need ancient skeletal remains.

Yep. It *would* need to be a general match.

Which brings us back to the temporary dead end I mentioned earlier...which is why I currently don't give the science extensive interest. Without baselines from known Nephites (and it wouldn't surprise me if you were one of the three) I don't see how DNA analysis could parse one cohort (Nephite-Israelite) from another (ten-tribe Israelite). 

Do you?

Edited May 27, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

I generally do prefer notes... 

Yep. It *would* need to be a general match.

Which brings us back to the temporary dead end I mentioned earlier...which is why I currently don't give the science extensive interest. Without baselines from known Nephites (and it wouldn't surprise me if you were one of the three) I don't see how DNA analysis could parse one cohort (Nephite-Israelite) from another (ten-tribe Israelite). 

Do you?

You can draw a Venn diagram of Canaanite DNA, and all Israelite DNA would fit within that larger grouping.  Lehites are merely Manassites, while Mulekites are Judahites (with possible admixtures of other Mediterranean crew members, which can also be sought for via DNA -- Phoenicians are Canaanites, but even Greek or Egyptian crew may have been involved).  For this we need modern whole genome sequencing (autosomal) in order to get the full ancient picture (or genetic palette).  There is no "dead end."

[Rajah Manchou]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You can draw a Venn diagram of Canaanite DNA, and all Israelite DNA would fit within that larger grouping.  Lehites are merely Manassites, while Mulekites are Judahites (with possible admixtures of other Mediterranean crew members, which can also be sought for via DNA -- Phoenicians are Canaanites, but even Greek or Egyptian crew may have been involved).  For this we need modern whole genome sequencing (autosomal) in order to get the full ancient picture (or genetic palette).  There is no "dead end."

Good timing. The "first ancient whole-genome sequence data from a Levantine civilization" was just posted yesterday. Five Bronze Age Canaanites (from Sidon) look to be a mixture of preexisting Levantine populations and "Iranian" migrants.

Continuity and admixture in the last five millennia of Levantine history from ancient Canaanite and present-day Lebanese genome sequences

These samples are from individuals that would have likely spoken a northern Semitic language, and I suspect these are the closest examples we have of what the northern tribes (Samaritans/Manassites/Lehites) would have looked like around 600 BC. One thing to keep in mind is that this study shows an influx of Eurasian DNA into the Levant just previous to the Book of Mormon period.

This supports my argument that the Lehites/Mulekites very well could have substantial north eurasian (ANE) admixture via the steppe. If this is true, then they would more easily blend in with the north eurasian found in the Americas. One example is the Yemenite Jews who show genetic similarities with these new Sidonian samples and with haplogroup Q-L53 spread across Eurasia and the Americas. If the Lehites/Mulekites in 600 BC had more steppe-related ancestry (the blue in the diagram below) they could have looked more like Amerindians than modern-day Lebanese and Israelis. The Jaredites were also likely a mix of Eurasian steppe (ANE/EHG/WHG/CHG) and Iran neolithic, so they could also look more Eurasian/Amerindian than Levantine/Semitic.

Edited May 28, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[Robert F. Smith]

25 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Good timing. The "first ancient whole-genome sequence data from a Levantine civilization" was just posted yesterday. Five Bronze Age Canaanites (from Sidon) look to be a mixture of preexisting Levantine populations and "Iranian" migrants.

Continuity and admixture in the last five millennia of Levantine history from ancient Canaanite and present-day Lebanese genome sequences

These samples are from individuals that would have likely spoken a northern Semitic language, and I suspect these are the closest examples we have of what the northern tribes (Samaritans/Manassites/Lehites) would have looked like around 600 BC. One thing to keep in mind is that this study shows an influx of Eurasian DNA into the Levant just previous to the Book of Mormon period.

This supports my argument that the Lehites/Mulekites very well could have substantial north eurasian (ANE) admixture via the steppe. If this is true, then they would more easily blend in with the north eurasian found in the Americas. One example is the Yemenite Jews who show genetic similarities with these new Sidonian samples and with haplogroup Q-L53 spread across Eurasia and the Americas. If the Lehites/Mulekites in 600 BC had more steppe-related ancestry (the blue in the diagram below) they could have looked more like Amerindians than modern-day Lebanese and Israelis. The Jaredites were also likely a mix of Eurasian steppe (ANE/EHG/WHG/CHG) and Iran neolithic, so they could also look more Eurasian/Amerindian than Levantine/Semitic.

Thank you for that, Rajah.  Very helpful.  Of course the Indo-Iranians, Hittites, Hurrians, Philistines & other Sea Peoples, and later non-Semitic peoples are known for their presence in the Levant before the time of Lehi.  Since we already have a lot of Jewish DNA, it will be interesting to see what autosomal comparisons reveal.

[Rajah Manchou]

32 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Thank you for that, Rajah.  Very helpful.  Of course the Indo-Iranians, Hittites, Hurrians, Philistines & other Sea Peoples, and later non-Semitic peoples are known for their presence in the Levant before the time of Lehi.  Since we already have a lot of Jewish DNA, it will be interesting to see what autosomal comparisons reveal.

This graphic explains it better than I did. See how Anatolia and the Caucasus regions just north of the Levant are more similar to Central Asian (light blue), North Eurasia (green) and most importantly American (dark gray). Any admixture from the Caucasus and the Steppe begins to look more American than Levantine (brown), and apparently there was plenty of steppe-related admixture in Sidonians and Canaanites just previous to the Lehites and Mulekites. So if we assume the Jaredites, Lehites and/or Mulekites were genetically similar to these Indo-Iranian Caucasus groups, then they would look more Eurasian-American farmer than anything else. In fact, the area where the Jaredites originated is marked with an American Farmer dot. Go figure.

Edited May 28, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[Robert F. Smith]

20 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

This graphic explains it better than I did. See how Anatolia and the Caucasus regions just north of the Levant are more similar to Central Asian (light blue), North Eurasia (green) and most importantly American (dark gray). Any admixture from the Caucasus and the Steppe begins to look more American than Levantine, and apparently there was plenty of admixture from that area in Sidonians around the time of the Lehites and Mulekites.

Where did you get that graphic?

[Rajah Manchou]

11 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Where did you get that graphic?

Modern Europeans descend from FOUR groups of hunter-gatherers: New strand of DNA discovered in the Caucasus is the 'missing piece in the ancestry puzzle'

But the Daily Mail (lame source) lifted it from a paper in Nature:

Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians
 

Edited May 28, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[probablyHagoth7]

On 5/27/2017 at 6:41 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

You can draw a Venn diagram...

I'll simply address part of the DNA issue briefly here.

Edited May 29, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[probablyHagoth7]

And further specifics on the art/science of genealogical DNA spelunking here, to round out one's family tree.

"So Judy, take heart, in another 22 years you’ll be up to 37%, about one third of the way there.  It looks like one gains about 1% per year, so at this rate you’ll only need to live for another 88 years to be done.  I can die when I’m only 119.  I sure hope my retirement money holds out that long"!

https://dna-explained.com/2012/08/22/the-dna-pedigree-chart-mining-for-ancestors/

[theplains]

On 2017-5-23 at 11:10 PM, probablyHagoth7 said:

Your posts suggest you are of First Nations / Native American heritage. Is that accurate? 

No. I am not.

Jim

[Rajah Manchou]

8 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

I'll simply address part of the DNA issue briefly here.

"There are additional DNA examples of so-called Native-American DNA in Europe, and so-called European DNA in ancient America, which further sustains the premise of Nephites in Europe."

What looks like Native-American DNA in Europe, Eurasia and even down into the Caucasus and northern Mesopotamia (as shown in the map above) is not "Native American". It is Ancient North Eurasian (ANE), the genetic source of much of what we find in native populations of America and Europe.

Traces of ANE can be found in many places, and most of it predates Nephites and Jaredites. For example, here's a sample taken from a hunter-gatherer who lived in what is now Luxembourg 8000 years ago: 

• 86.40% European
• 12.72% Amerindian
• 0.87% African
• 0.01% Asian

Its safe to assume this guy never set foot in America. More likely, about 16,000 years ago his ancestors broke up. Some went east to the Americas and some went west to Europe. 8000 years later their common ancestry can be found in their DNA. Even 16,000 years later we can still find common ancestry in native americans, europeans and west eurasians. The map above shows this clearly. Look at the American Farmer dot right in the middle of Iran. That doesn't mean that farmer was from America, rather it means that there are some commonalities between all the groups that branched off from ANE a very long time ago.

If the Jaredites resembled American Farmers before they left 5000 years ago, its very likely that they resembled Americans when they arrived and blended in. I think this is critical to resolving the DNA problems in the Book of Mormon. The Jaredites were "Americans" before they even left.

But as you know, I don't believe these long voyages were possible in those days. You are proposing that Israelites sailed from Oman to Guatemala and then 550 years later sailed to Europe. Even if it was statistically possible, I don't see why it would have been necessary. If God wanted Israelites in Europe, He sure took the long way around.

Edited May 30, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[probablyHagoth7]

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

What looks like Native-American DNA in Europe, Eurasia and even down into the Caucasus and northern Mesopotamia (as shown in the map above) is not "Native American". It is Ancient North Eurasian (ANE), the genetic source of much of what we find in native populations of America and Europe.

Largely true, but not always. If you read the surrounding context in the article I cited, you'l see it is saying the same thing as you. However that general truth is a mask, that some of the more relevant data is hiding behind, or more accurately, being swept behind....through ongoing secular disbelief.

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

If the Jaredites resembled American Farmers before they left 5000 years ago, its very likely that they resembled Americans when they arrived and blended in. I think this is critical to resolving the DNA problems in the Book of Mormon. The Jaredites were "Americans" before they even left.

I agree. It is a helpful key.

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

But as you know, I don't believe these long voyages were possible in those days. You are proposing that Israelites sailed from Oman to Guatemala...

I don't yet pretend to know precisely where the lands of Bountiful/Zarahemla/Desolation were or what route they took. And I have no initial issues with your assertion that they had extensive layovers along the way. 

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

But as you know, I don't believe these long voyages were possible in those days. You are proposing that Israelites....then 550 years later sailed to Europe. Even if it was....possible, I don't see why it would have been necessary.

You know, brethren, that a very large ship is benefited very much by a very small helm in the time of a storm, by being kept workways with the wind and the waves.

Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us cheerfully do all things that lie in our power; and then may we stand still, with the utmost assurance, to see the salvation of God, and for his arm to be revealed.

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

If God wanted Israelites in Europe, He sure took the long way around.

If God's primary concern was expediency, Lehi wouldn't have had to send his sons back to Jerusalem to get the plates. Or to get Ishmael and family. They would have been instructed instead to gather everything together and would have left just once. The plates behind the 116 pages would have largely not been needed, and ditto with their translation. Etc., etc. A supposedly-straight bee line isn't always the most effective/beneficial route (as your own research claims).

...Last I checked, a bee actually doesn't take a straight line, but instead takes a seemingly ambling, roundabout course, pollinating and gathering here and there along the way. But hey, I was never taught as a Beehive, so what do I know about such things.

...And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved.

...For the time cometh, saith the Lamb of God, that I will work a great and a marvelous work among the children of men; a work which shall be everlasting, either on the one hand or on the other—either to the convincing of them unto peace and life eternal, or unto the deliverance of them to the hardness of their hearts and the blindness of their minds...  

Edited May 30, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[probablyHagoth7]

9 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

You are proposing that Israelites sailed from Oman to Guatemala and then 550 years later sailed to Europe. Even if it was statistically possible, I don't see why it would have been necessary. If God wanted Israelites in Europe, He sure took the long way around.

Part of why it was necessary:

A brief synopsis of why.

Also, the message of such a noble birthright to the parents and youth of the Restoration today is a bulwark for that rising generation, beset by a raging storm, to help encourage them to put their umph to the oars, and to "that other thing" (as the Vizzini in each of us might appreciate ), to help bring us second star to the right, to safe harbor.

Took the long way around?  Reminds me of a few songs from bands growing up...This one...and another called Take the Long Way Home, and another called Long Long Way from Home.

...And also it is an imperative duty that we owe to all the rising generation, and to all the pure in heart...For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it...

These events disclose God's sweeping hand in history, demonstrating his overriding love and concern for mankind, pointing towards the core message of the Book of Mormon, a loving Savior of mankind, living apostles, and covenants to bring us home. 

That's a partial explanation for why such things are necessary.

Fair 'nuf?

Edited May 30, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[probablyHagoth7]

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

...Even if...

That happens to be one of my favorite songs.

What I really like is how your research about the East, and this research about the West, combine to expand the stakes of Zion, offering to make the Book of Mormon mankind's family history - a latter-day message relevant to our entire age/world.

On that note, I'll wrap up with another favorite song.

Edited May 30, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[RevTestament]

5 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

Largely true, but not always. If you read the surrounding context in the article I cited, you'l see it is saying the same thing as you. However that general truth is a mask, that some of the more relevant data is hiding behind, or more accurately, being swept behind....through ongoing secular disbelief.

What do you see as "the more relevant data" being swept aside?

[probablyHagoth7]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

What do you see as "the more relevant data" being swept aside?

Nephite presence/influence in Western Civilization.

Evidence from multiple sources attest that key elements of north-European culture point westward, across the Atlantic.

The more relevant data, or that is more relevant to mankind's origins, future, and mission, is simply urging people that if they want further light on such things to initially look/"Go west young man/woman."

Edited May 30, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[RevTestament]

32 minutes ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

Nephite presence/influence in Western Civilization.

Evidence from multiple sources attest that key elements of north-European culture point westward, across the Atlantic.

I agree. I guess I am wondering what specifics you may be speaking of "across the Atlantic." I see specifics tying in a specific "European" culture and Jaredite culture in the New World. Although I have also found at least one element of this culture in the Levant. I have also found cultural ties between Judaic culture and the New World... To insist that all the ties I have found arose independently starts really pushing the realm of believability. In other words it forms a convincing case that there were direct links, and that these cultural ties did not independently arise. Only a handful of early anthropologists even note these links, which are now ignored seemingly completely.

[probablyHagoth7]

26 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I agree. I guess I am wondering what specifics you may be speaking of "across the Atlantic."

Known elements of early European society that strongly suggest an origin westward, among Nephite/Ammonite culture. 

A very lengthy and still-growing list. Some of which is documented here:

http://candlestickstudio.com/files/NephitesLongerVersion.pdf

http://candlestickstudio.com/files/Nephites.pdf (shorter version)

http://candlestickstudio.com/files/Freemasonry.pdf

http://candlestickstudio.com/files/Shield.pdf

http://candlestickstudio.com/files/lostRoad.pdf

http://www.candlestickstudio.com/EarliestGermans.html

http://www.candlestickstudio.com/Tiro.html

http://www.candlestickstudio.com/EarliestTiro.html

http://www.candlestickstudio.com/Ogham.html (be gentle...a *very* rough draft)

http://www.candlestickstudio.com/files/CementRaw.pdf (even rougher than a very rough draft)

http://beowulfinstitute.com/files/Elves.pdf

http://beowulfinstitute.com/files/Lombards.pdf

http://beowulfinstitute.com/LombardExtras.html

Plus things I've posted elsewhere, and things written in the margins of books I've read, and things notated in other not-yet-public places, and a few substantive things still on simmer that I haven't yet committed to writing.

26 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

...have also found at least one element of this culture in the Levant. I have also found cultural ties between Judaic culture and the New World... To insist that all the ties I have found arose independently starts really pushing the realm of believability. In other words it forms a convincing case that there were direct links, and that these cultural ties did not independently arise...

Bizactly. 

26 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Only a handful of early anthropologists even note these links, which are now ignored seemingly completely.

Hoping to help change that...for reasons stated yesterday and today, in this thread and at least 2 others.

Edited May 30, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[Rajah Manchou]

On 5/28/2017 at 1:29 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

I will be happy to read about that, but bear in mind that DNA testing now is full spectrum -- whole genome testing can disclose a great deal now about ancestry.  Any real Nephite DNA would have to match what we know of ancient Israelite and Canaanite DNA generally, and we would need ancient skeletal remains.

Another interesting aDNA paper was published yesterday:

Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods

"The ancient DNA data revealed a high level of affinity between the ancient inhabitants of Abusir el-Meleq and modern populations from the Near East and the Levant. This finding is pertinent in the light of the hypotheses advanced by Pagani and colleagues, who estimated that the average proportion of non-African ancestry in Egyptians was 80% and dated the midpoint of this admixture event to around 750 years ago. Our data seem to indicate close admixture and affinity at a much earlier date, which is unsurprising given the long and complex connections between Egypt and the Middle East. These connections date back to Prehistory and occurred at a variety of scales, including overland and maritime commerce, diplomacy, immigration, invasion and deportation. Especially from the second millennium BCE onwards, there were intense, historically- and archaeologically documented contacts, including the large-scale immigration of Canaanite populations, known as the Hyksos, into Lower Egypt, whose origins lie in the Middle Bronze Age Levant."

The high levels of light blue (Iranian-like) and blue (Anatolian-like) are somewhat surprising.

[Rajah Manchou]

3 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

The high levels of light blue (Iranian-like) and blue (Anatolian-like) are somewhat surprising.

After reading the two recent ancient DNA papers (Sidon and Egypt) I was struck by what looks like an expansion from Mesopotamia around the time of the Jaredites. Sure enough, others are seeing the same thing. Could it be we are seeing indications of a Tower of Babel event? 

"It seems increasingly likely that ancient DNA has identified a massive expansion, or a series of expansions, from Mesopotamia and/or surrounds in basically all directions ... It's an interesting and important question who these likely Mesopotamian migrants and their descendants were in terms of linguistic affinities. It seems that they left a massive genetic imprint on the Near East and much of North Africa, and perhaps also Central Asia and Southeastern Europe, so they probably also left some sort of linguistic legacy. Obviously, it's highly improbable that most of them were Indo-European speakers. So if most of them weren't Indo-Europeans, then the phenomenon I'm describing here can't be related to the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) expansion. Forget the idea of an West Asian linguistic hot spot spewing out different, distantly related language families, including Indo-European, via the migrations of closely related Iran_ChL-like populations over a span of a few thousand years; it's plain stupid. So who were they?" (source)

Interesting he conjures up the image of a linguistic hotspot "spewing out languages" and then quickly dismisses it. But I'd say the jury is still out, and we'll learn much more as aDNA results from Mesopotamia are posted sometime this year.

(Apologies probablyhagoth, I'm not trying to hijack this thread. But since this also relates to European populations, I thought it might fit here)