Hey Aga, love what you’ve been writing. Just wanted to let you know, independent of the announcement on Twitter, I just stumbled upon the Alasfar sample in match lists for 2 members of J-BY55414, at GD 3-4 at Y37. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve never seen xZS222 people match ZS222 members at that GD threshold. It might be chancey to assume a specific ID with BY55414, but I’m inclined to believe this is a case of Z18271.
Post updated! Then this could be FT157560, would still be interesting to know whether the genealogy is correct and whether we can expect to see BY55414 in Egyptian Jews.
BY143137 however is probably going to be Egyptian regardless at this stage.
I have a question about another topic. There is a new Jewish sample in J-Y3087 (YFull) . I wonder if the new Jewish sample means anything about the overall CMH, even though the connection is prehistoric according to YFull dates.
One thing to note is that it is a new sample, it is unclear if they will remain basal.
I'm aware of the new Mountain Jew under Y3087. I think YFull's estimates are less reliable than FTDNA's when it comes to P58 in general, so the MRCA should have lived during the EBA.
Whether that changes anything about the CMH is a question of perspective, my educated guess (and this is just my opinion) is that most of the xL858 branches are Amorite in a broad sense, for ZS241 there is support for this in the form of I10268. I also suspect that ZS241 originated in what is now Syria (and so I would expect it to show up in sites like Qatna, Ugarit and others still). Taken together, this leaves enough room for an early presence in Mesopotamia, an area that was the target of several waves of Amorite migrants, so you could still make an argument for a Mesopotamian origin. The Arabian lines below I suspect could be tied to the existence of NWS-speaking nomads in NW Arabia, for which we have epigraphic evidence in the form of Taymanitic.
It is much safer to assume, for the time being (and provided this remains xZS227) that the line is Israelite and that most of the ancient ZS241 from Israel is going to xZS227;ZS222 (the latter being a minority line that was selected for status). What this might change is that it could reinforce a local origin for Z18271 and eventually the notion of a Zadokite or "Jebusite" origin (which, regardless of personal preference, I have a hard time believing).
Aga, great post and in general a great substack blog !
Considering the perpetual existence of Jews in EY (as a minority in the last ~15 centuries), even when the population there dwindled following disease outbreaks, wars and invasions in the last millennium, I expect we'll see several recent Jewish lineages, even with recent MRCAs, among Muslim Palestinians (less so among Christian Palestinians), especially in families in region with less foreign ancestry (so, mostly in the rural areas of Judea and Samaria, or the Galilee). That would be the result miniscule but steady influx of converts to Islam from the Jewish communities which were constantly being replenished with Aliyah over the centuries. In fact, I'd be surprised if we won't find some SJ and AJ maternal lineages (as that influx would probably suffer from gender bias as a result of pogroms and Islamic law of intermarrying non-Muslims) among Muslim Palestinians. What is your take on this?
I completely agree with this, I think most of the local pre-Arab lines found in Palestinian Arabs (Muslims and Druze especially) are going to be under well-defined Jewish (& Samaritan) sub-branches including Sephardic and Ashkenazi ones. Al Asfar might even turn out to be an example of this, if they're BY55414 they might easily fall under one of the Sephardic or Mizrahi subclades but again their tradition of Egyptian descent in the 1830s complicates things (Z18271 is a bit different and I very much doubt we'll be seeing a sub-branch uniquely made up of Palestinian Arab exits, ironically though our only confirmed Palestinian Arab Z18271 case so far is a Christian under J-BY64521). Branches like E-Y158312 (<L1250<V22) and J-ZS2622 (<Z18297) are better candidates for this. What is striking though is how rare such branches really are. There's also a subset of local Y-lines, such as J-L829 or E-BY63615 that are a bit more ambiguous despite having clear Jewish connections (same thing with at least two of the Palestinian Arab lines under J-M205).
The mtDNA is a bit more ambiguous, but I also agree we should expect some Western Jewish mt-lines.
By the way, I recently found that the J-ZS241 individual from Imperial Roman Civitanova is + for J-BY143137, - for J-Y155708. Not sure if this is a completely novel find, but had never heard it reported. Meanwhile, couldn’t find positive hits downstream of J-ZS241 for either Megiddo individual (though plenty of negatives).
I think there were several Exodoi, only one of which was tied to the victory of Ahmose over the Hyksos at Sharuhen. My suspicion is that ZS222/Y3088 is Aaronide and that the Exodus group with which this pedigree is associated departed from Egypt in the first quarter of the 12th century BCE. They probably would have entered Egypt together with the Aamu ("Asiatics", really Amorites) who would later rule Egypt, I don't think we can equate the Hyksos with the Aaronides (and the Levites more broadly) who seem to have been Egyptianised to a much greater degree than the Hyksos (the Aaronides in the Exodus & Wilderness narratives tend to have Egyptian names, "Aaron" itself has an Egyptian etymology).
It could be that I'm wrong and that ZS227, despite being Amorite, never made it to Egypt, and that the theory of a Jebusite pedigree for that line makes the most sense. The issue is convoluted because you had different priestly houses in IA Israel (Aaronides, but also Mushites [descendants of Moses], Zadokites [theoretically of Jebusite descent, might also be from Hebron] and Levites who themselves were a mixed bag). My personal preference would in fact be a local Jebusite origin, but I'm not seeing it so far for ZS222.
Hey Aga, love what you’ve been writing. Just wanted to let you know, independent of the announcement on Twitter, I just stumbled upon the Alasfar sample in match lists for 2 members of J-BY55414, at GD 3-4 at Y37. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve never seen xZS222 people match ZS222 members at that GD threshold. It might be chancey to assume a specific ID with BY55414, but I’m inclined to believe this is a case of Z18271.
Post updated! Then this could be FT157560, would still be interesting to know whether the genealogy is correct and whether we can expect to see BY55414 in Egyptian Jews.
BY143137 however is probably going to be Egyptian regardless at this stage.
Great read as always- thanks!!
I have a question about another topic. There is a new Jewish sample in J-Y3087 (YFull) . I wonder if the new Jewish sample means anything about the overall CMH, even though the connection is prehistoric according to YFull dates.
One thing to note is that it is a new sample, it is unclear if they will remain basal.
I'm aware of the new Mountain Jew under Y3087. I think YFull's estimates are less reliable than FTDNA's when it comes to P58 in general, so the MRCA should have lived during the EBA.
Whether that changes anything about the CMH is a question of perspective, my educated guess (and this is just my opinion) is that most of the xL858 branches are Amorite in a broad sense, for ZS241 there is support for this in the form of I10268. I also suspect that ZS241 originated in what is now Syria (and so I would expect it to show up in sites like Qatna, Ugarit and others still). Taken together, this leaves enough room for an early presence in Mesopotamia, an area that was the target of several waves of Amorite migrants, so you could still make an argument for a Mesopotamian origin. The Arabian lines below I suspect could be tied to the existence of NWS-speaking nomads in NW Arabia, for which we have epigraphic evidence in the form of Taymanitic.
It is much safer to assume, for the time being (and provided this remains xZS227) that the line is Israelite and that most of the ancient ZS241 from Israel is going to xZS227;ZS222 (the latter being a minority line that was selected for status). What this might change is that it could reinforce a local origin for Z18271 and eventually the notion of a Zadokite or "Jebusite" origin (which, regardless of personal preference, I have a hard time believing).
Aga, great post and in general a great substack blog !
Considering the perpetual existence of Jews in EY (as a minority in the last ~15 centuries), even when the population there dwindled following disease outbreaks, wars and invasions in the last millennium, I expect we'll see several recent Jewish lineages, even with recent MRCAs, among Muslim Palestinians (less so among Christian Palestinians), especially in families in region with less foreign ancestry (so, mostly in the rural areas of Judea and Samaria, or the Galilee). That would be the result miniscule but steady influx of converts to Islam from the Jewish communities which were constantly being replenished with Aliyah over the centuries. In fact, I'd be surprised if we won't find some SJ and AJ maternal lineages (as that influx would probably suffer from gender bias as a result of pogroms and Islamic law of intermarrying non-Muslims) among Muslim Palestinians. What is your take on this?
I completely agree with this, I think most of the local pre-Arab lines found in Palestinian Arabs (Muslims and Druze especially) are going to be under well-defined Jewish (& Samaritan) sub-branches including Sephardic and Ashkenazi ones. Al Asfar might even turn out to be an example of this, if they're BY55414 they might easily fall under one of the Sephardic or Mizrahi subclades but again their tradition of Egyptian descent in the 1830s complicates things (Z18271 is a bit different and I very much doubt we'll be seeing a sub-branch uniquely made up of Palestinian Arab exits, ironically though our only confirmed Palestinian Arab Z18271 case so far is a Christian under J-BY64521). Branches like E-Y158312 (<L1250<V22) and J-ZS2622 (<Z18297) are better candidates for this. What is striking though is how rare such branches really are. There's also a subset of local Y-lines, such as J-L829 or E-BY63615 that are a bit more ambiguous despite having clear Jewish connections (same thing with at least two of the Palestinian Arab lines under J-M205).
The mtDNA is a bit more ambiguous, but I also agree we should expect some Western Jewish mt-lines.
Baladi Misr
- Sinwar in his bathroom
By the way, I recently found that the J-ZS241 individual from Imperial Roman Civitanova is + for J-BY143137, - for J-Y155708. Not sure if this is a completely novel find, but had never heard it reported. Meanwhile, couldn’t find positive hits downstream of J-ZS241 for either Megiddo individual (though plenty of negatives).
Interesting and well-written post as usual, Agamemnon. Thanks for your effort and thought.
I have some questions in general, could you check your DMs on twitter?
Great piece as always Aga.
Quick question- did I misread or are you of the opinion that the CMH is Hyksos in origin?
Which would explain the Exodus narrative?
I think there were several Exodoi, only one of which was tied to the victory of Ahmose over the Hyksos at Sharuhen. My suspicion is that ZS222/Y3088 is Aaronide and that the Exodus group with which this pedigree is associated departed from Egypt in the first quarter of the 12th century BCE. They probably would have entered Egypt together with the Aamu ("Asiatics", really Amorites) who would later rule Egypt, I don't think we can equate the Hyksos with the Aaronides (and the Levites more broadly) who seem to have been Egyptianised to a much greater degree than the Hyksos (the Aaronides in the Exodus & Wilderness narratives tend to have Egyptian names, "Aaron" itself has an Egyptian etymology).
It could be that I'm wrong and that ZS227, despite being Amorite, never made it to Egypt, and that the theory of a Jebusite pedigree for that line makes the most sense. The issue is convoluted because you had different priestly houses in IA Israel (Aaronides, but also Mushites [descendants of Moses], Zadokites [theoretically of Jebusite descent, might also be from Hebron] and Levites who themselves were a mixed bag). My personal preference would in fact be a local Jebusite origin, but I'm not seeing it so far for ZS222.
Thanks Aga.
Where can I find information about the existence of Mushites?