March of the Titans

[Falkata]

If Spaniards are not even as light as the Ashkenazim it indicates Kemp is onto something. But I see that elsewhere in this thread you concede there is mixing, so it's become moot.

Being lighter doesn´t mean that you´re more european





Anyway, Coon´s pigmentation is similar to any random spaniard

[Guapo]

They're still not as mixed as the Portuguese.

So a political border stops teh Spaniards from being not as mixed as their Iberian neighbor lol

[Ibericus]

I'm speaking of the population of Israel, not global Jewry. Ashkenazi Jews are a minority of Israeli Jewry, nevermind the Israeli population as a whole.

No. Israel is about 50% ashkenazim. Btw we are still waiting for a source on the lighter skin of Ashkenazies compared to Spaniards. Btw the gene responsible for the white skin of Europeans is found in 99.9 % of Europeans and rarely found outside of Europe. Oh, and skin ligthning has nothing to do with admixture, the darker skin of southern europeans has to do with climate, adaptation and selection to environment, not foreign admixture.

That there is African admixture in the Spanish is not controversial. It varies by region but the real question is whether it occurred in prehistoric times or during the slave trade and Moorish occupation.

The Spanish can take heart though. They're still not as mixed as the Portuguese.

On a side note, to head off all of this 'you guys are mixed too' stuff I'm seeing on this thread, let it be said that Iberia contains high levels of African admixture rarely seen elsewhere in Europe. If you don't believe me plug in 'African admixture in Europe' into Google and start reading.

Not really. The african admixture in Southern Europe is pretty much the same as in all Europe.

[TheSeeker]

Still waiting for someone to refute the DNA evidence. . . . maybe I should not hold my breath.

[Lábaru]

[Osweo]

That there is African admixture in the Spanish is not controversial. It varies by region but the real question is whether it occurred in prehistoric times or during the slave trade and Moorish occupation.

The way you use the word 'African' and treat the three 'alternatives' you offer as though they were identical, marks your position out as woefully simplistic.

Ahem;
in prehistoric times
There are slight indications of possible substrate commonalities between Berber and Basque. The syntax of Welsh (and possibly through that even English) has been said to display the same.
What are we dealing with here? Hamitic speakers up the Atlantic facade? Personally, I'm inclined to suppose a common substrate along that facade that predates Vasconic in Iberia AND Hamitic speech in the Maghreb. Hamitic is a cousin of Semitic, various Ethiopian languages and Ancient Egyptian, and the common ancestor probably lived around the Red Sea. From that, it seems to me that Hamitic spread across North Africa at some point in prehistory, naturally displacing earlier languages. These earlier languages left their imprint on Berber and the other languages above. Basque's vocabulary has more in common with other language groups than Hamitic, so the connection is clearly a tenuous one, for which the shared substrate hypothesis might make a lot of sense.

or during the slave trade
Black slaves, from Guinea, Angola and the Congo. These have NOTHING in common with Berbers, proto Berbers, or anything. How you can lump them in the same sentence astounds me. Given that your argument cites genetics, it's all the more absurd, as these slaves differed from the Berbers almost as much as from you or I!
and Moorish occupation
Again, an utterly different kettle of fish.
What is a 'Moor' in Spain in 1200 AD? Often nothing like the proto/pre-Hamites or negro slaves above. It could be a pure Arab from Mecca. It could be a pure Berber. It could EVEN be a converted Visigoth! If we include all islamicised peoples between Mecca and Toledo into this list, and add every possible mix of them into the question, there you have your 'Moor'. Considering the later Moriscos, the local Iberian stock was of perhaps even majority proportion here. Arabs and Arabicised Berbers were the initial upper class, but thanks to their repellent harem slavery breeding strategy every subsequent generation was less and less African. Given that the Spanish did their best to expel even the slightly Moorish descendants, we can see that the 'leakage' into the modern population of Iberia will be very minor.

The Spanish can take heart though. They're still not as mixed as the Portuguese.

This is such tiresome nonsense. According to your supposed quantity of mixing, Portuguese should look in many cases like Wentworth Miller. I went to Portugal, to the very southernmost part in the Algarve, when I was a boy, and I didn't see such people, nor have I noticed them since in Portuguese ex-pats and diplomats that I've met in London, Dover, Moscow and Minsk.

On a side note, to head off all of this 'you guys are mixed too' stuff I'm seeing on this thread, let it be said that Iberia contains high levels of African admixture rarely seen elsewhere in Europe. If you don't believe me plug in 'African admixture in Europe' into Google and start reading.

I trust my own eyes better, thanks.

Anyway, Coon´s pigmentation is similar to any random spaniard

Mine too (I was in Granada this year, and met many Spaniards). This is all surreal.

[Loki]

I think that's enough for now. We've re-hashed this subject over and over again on this forum.