Yes, I do consider Ashkenazim to be culturally European and "white"
No, I do not consider Ashkenazim to be culturally European nor "white"
Yes, I do consider Ashkenazim to be culturally European but not "white".
No, I do not consider Ashkenazim to be culturally European but I do consider them "white".
With the exception of the Hengest story (which has at least something of a historical kernel), these things are clearly fictitious.It's really no more romantic a yarn than some of the stories about Hengest, Horsa and the Anglo-Saxon lads- the ancestors of whom fought in Alexander the Great's army (as one of the tall-tales tells) or who were the Saka people in the area of ancient Iran.
The 'romance' I was talking about isn't the historical existence of Khazaria, just its image in the mind of the Jew Koestler, who wanted to provide his people with a rather more glorious pedigree than Rhineland tradesmen and slavers, expelled eastward to become Polish cobblers and pawnbrokers.
Yiddish itself is proof enough.
Ashkenazim probably derive from a mixture of Near Eastern (Semitic) people and northern Europeans. They can be distinguished from both northern Europeans and southeastern Europeans (themselves an ancient stabilized mixture of Near Eastern and European ancestry).
There seems to be evidence of bottlenecks and founder effects in the early period of their history, and then they practiced endogamy for religious reasons until recent times.
Other populations that were subject to founder effect (e.g. Sardinians and northern Finns) have also remained genetically distinct (they don't cluster tightly with other Mediterranean or Nordic populations, respectively) but in that case the distinct characteristics were preserved by geography rather than religion.
(1) MtDNA evidence for a genetic bottleneck in the early
history of the Ashkenazi Jewish population
(2) Contrasting patters of Y chromosome variation in Ashkenazi Jewish and non-Jewish European populations
With the expulsion from their lands after the uprising towards the Romans, they where scattered around in small enclaves around north Africa, Europe and Middle East...
For 600 000 Jews living in the diaspora in hard strain and in small communities to count up for 15 million Jews in the beginning of the 1900, it's just impossible, and this alone credits the Khazar theory of large amount of Turcic people (Khazars) adapting Judaism, and from modern Russia spreading westward into Europe.
What was the population like in England in 150 AD? England went from 1.1 million in 1066 to almost 50 million (over 40 million of that English) by 1991, plus at least an equal number of English in the US, plus all the English people in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere.
As for the poll: like I said, I don't really care if they're considered "white" or not. White is an American concept - and thus not my problem - but I voted that they aren't.
http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/346genetics.htmlDespite the Ashkenazi Jews' long residence in Europe, their Y signature has remained distinct from that of non-Jewish Europeans.
On the assumption that there have been 80 generations since the founding of the Ashkenazi population, Dr. Hammer and colleagues calculate that the rate of genetic admixture with Europeans has been less than half a percent per generation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)