Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 12-10-2017, 08:10 AM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,040
Sage Rat:

Quote:
It would take DNA testing to confirm, but my expectation would be that the Palestinians are Canaanites who converted to Islam.
Pretty unlikely. The conquests of Israel and Judah by the Assyrians and Babylonians pretty much wiped out the local population, and by the time the Persian kings gave the Jews permission to return to Judah en masse, the Samaritans, an entirely new peoples, were the main inhabitants. And there is still a distinct, though small, population of those, so I don't know if many of them were converted to Islam in the early days, or if they kept separate all these centuries and the Arabs are completely imports from Arabia, post-Muhammad. But I doubt they go back to the original, original Canaanites.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #102  
Old 12-10-2017, 09:18 AM
Ramira's Avatar
Ramira Ramira is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,325
The DNA evidence says there is great genetic continuity across the Levant, the stories in the religious texts are by the genetic evidence great exagerations in terms of the degrees of change of the mass of the population.

And no the "arabs" meaning the mass of the arabic speakers are not imports from Arabia, that is myth again as the genetic evidence demonstrates.
  #103  
Old 12-10-2017, 09:40 AM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramira View Post
And no the "arabs" meaning the mass of the arabic speakers are not imports from Arabia, that is myth again as the genetic evidence demonstrates.
Obviously not. I think it's obvious to anyone with a smidgen of education that the current inhabitants of the Middle East are the same Aramaic/Coptic/whatever-speaking inhabitants who lived there before the Caliphate; when most people say "Arabs", they mean Arabic speakers, and nothing more.

That said, the Middle East, and Israel in particular, are the crossroads of the world, and many people from many places have migrated to and from there over the millennia. No Palestinian is "purely" the descendant of the original inhabitants of the region - and no Jew is, either.
  #104  
Old 12-10-2017, 10:30 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I was speaking about a hypothetical situation where the Palestinians had accepted Israeli rule, not the current situation which is more akin to having a long-term Occupational Government. (I believe that) you have misunderstood what I wrote.
I was speaking of the type of nation Israel has chosen to be, whether they have faced it or not - if they do indeed claim all of the West Bank, as some here have assured us they do, then they take all of its residents as well. If there's only a single state there, then it's one that practices apartheid. Just like white South Africans, they can choose either ethnic supremacy or democracy but they cannot claim both. The Bantustan approach didn't work there either, as you know.
  #105  
Old 12-10-2017, 11:38 AM
Ramira's Avatar
Ramira Ramira is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Obviously not. I think it's obvious to anyone with a smidgen of education that the current inhabitants of the Middle East are the same Aramaic/Coptic/whatever-speaking inhabitants who lived there before the Caliphate; when most people say "Arabs", they mean Arabic speakers, and nothing more.

That said, the Middle East, and Israel in particular, are the crossroads of the world, and many people from many places have migrated to and from there over the millennia. No Palestinian is "purely" the descendant of the original inhabitants of the region - and no Jew is, either.
Yes Alessan but .... unofrtunately as we see several times in this very thread it seems not obvious as many persons claim or like to imply the opposite where several posters seem to think the current Arabes are immigrants from the Arabia. The replly of Cmkeller for example seems to indicate he has the false understanding that some how the populations were replaced which the DNA says did not in truth happen.

There is of course no pure bloods and it is very sterile discussions on both sides when they try to use such arguments.
  #106  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:34 PM
Ibn Warraq Ibn Warraq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
The words used to describe the people all carry historical connotations.

The term Palestinian may be a version of Philistine. This implies that the modern Palestinians are the same people as the ancient Philistines. The ancient Philistines lived alongside the ancient Hebrews in the region that's now Israel.

The Arabs, obviously, originated in Arabia. They didn't live in the region that's now Israel until the era of the Muslim conquests in the seventh century CE.

I've seen some Palestinians identify themselves with the Canaanites. As the Bible relates, the Canaanites were the people the Hebrews encountered when they first migrated into the region after fleeing Egypt under Moses. The Canaanites eventually became known as the Phoenicians and these people claim that this is the origin of the terms Philistines and Palestinians.

So the terms have modern political connotations. If you identify the people as Arabs, you're implying that the Jews were there first and the Arabs came along much later as foreign invaders. If you identify the people as Canaanites, you're implying that they were there first and the Jews were the ones who came along later as foreign invaders. Both sides have their own identity which backs up a claim that they were the original settlers and the region is their homeland.
Actually, I think the reason behind the use of such words has far more to with modern politics.

Arab national consciousness is a very recent phenomenon. People in Lebanon and Syria may now call themselves Arabs but their ancestors from 150 years ago identified themselves either by their religion or where they came from. They spoke Arabic(or at least a dialect of Arabic) but didn't think of themselves as Arabs. Similar to the way people in Haiti or the Ivory Coast may speak French(or at least a dialect) but don't view themselves as French.

However, in the late 19th Century many in the Levant and elsewhere started to identify themselves as Arabs. This was especially prominent among Christians and was largely an attempt to create unity particularly against those viewed as outsiders, the Ottoman Empire, Europeans etc.

Now, by the time Ottoman Empire was broken up following the end of WWI, most of the Arab speakers in the region viewed themselves as "Arabs" but didn't really view themselves as "Palestinians", "Iraqis", "Transjordanians" etc.

In fact, in testifying before the Peel Commission in 1936, Amin Al Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who is now viewed as the Father of Palestinian Nationalism by Palestinians said the British should never have set up "the Palestinian Mandate" separate from Syria since as far as he was concerned they were all Syrians.

And during Israel's War for Independence the Palestinians Arabs referred to their military forces as "the Arab High Command" and "the Arab Liberation Army".

None of what I'm saying is meant to strengthen the old Israeli talking point that the Palestinians don't exist or they're an invention to shame the Jews but the position that they were just part of a great Arab masses and that "there are 22 Arab nations so what's wrong with just 1 Jewish nation!" is somewhat understandable.

That I think is why Eban would have referred to them as "the Arabs" rather than "the Palestinians". He certainly wouldn't want to strengthen the case for the creation of a Palestinian state.
  #107  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:41 PM
Ibn Warraq Ibn Warraq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
The Arabs, obviously, originated in Arabia.
That's a little like saying "Hispanics come from Spain."

Dominicans and Hondurans are Hispanics and certainly some are descendants of Spanish descent but many if not most are descendants of the original Indian inhabitants or African immigrants or both.

Most Arabs in Morocco are probably descendants of original inhabitants who became "Arabacised" and the same is true of man of the Levant Arabs.
  #108  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:47 PM
Ramira's Avatar
Ramira Ramira is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
Actually, I think the reason behind the use of such words has far more to with modern politics.

Arab national consciousness is a very recent phenomenon.
The idea of the linguistic ethnicity indeed is a 19th century european invention.

Quote:
People in Lebanon and Syria may now call themselves Arabs but their ancestors from 150 years ago identified themselves either by their religion or where they came from. They spoke Arabic(or at least a dialect of Arabic) but didn't think of themselves as Arabs.
The word Arab at that time had the connotation of bedouine. Indeed in my dialect, there is a form of the word that still has the meaning of "uncultured ignorant rural idiot"

The identity before the importation in the late 19th century was the mixture of the religion and the tribe or the region (if there was the difference) or the city area. You can see it in the form of the modern family names adopted with the modern state bureaucracy, and the frequence of the regional name like al basri or al iraqi or al fasi.

But this is not really different from the creation of the European national identities, except some decades later and not very successful for the pan arab effort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
That's a little like saying "Hispanics come from Spain."

Dominicans and Hondurans are Hispanics and certainly some are descendants of Spanish descent but many if not most are descendants of the original Indian inhabitants or African immigrants or both.

Most Arabs in Morocco are probably descendants of original inhabitants who became "Arabacised" and the same is true of man of the Levant Arabs.
yes.

In fact the genetics show it.

assimilation not replacement.

Last edited by Ramira; 12-10-2017 at 03:49 PM.
  #109  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:51 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 78,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
That's a little like saying "Hispanics come from Spain."
I didn't say Arabs come from Arabia. I said Arabs originated in Arabia. I'm standing by that just as I would stand by saying that Hispanics originated in Spain. There are obviously now plenty of Arabs and plenty of Hispanics living outside of the regions where their ancestors started out.
  #110  
Old 12-10-2017, 04:15 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,040
Ramira:

Quote:
The DNA evidence says there is great genetic continuity across the Levant, the stories in the religious texts are by the genetic evidence great exargerations in terms of the degrees of change of the mass of the population.
Really? Because the stories in the religious texts actually accord well with the notion that all the local tribes are somewhat related...just not by way of Canaan. Arameans, Ishmaelites, Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites are all descended from Abraham or his brothers, like the Jews. To say that people are Arabs is not to say they are not genetically related to the other sub-populations in the region. Quite the contrary.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #111  
Old 12-10-2017, 04:20 PM
Ramira's Avatar
Ramira Ramira is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,325
Yes really.
The levantine populations show the continuity with themselves.

the mythological texts are not evidence of anything but the ancient oral histories.
  #112  
Old 12-10-2017, 04:58 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,040
Maybe not, but they don't contradict anything known about the demographics of the area. They say that all these locals are descended from the same genetic stock, just like the DNA studies do. It's just that (according to the texts) the origin of it is Semitic, not pre-Judaic Canaanite.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #113  
Old 12-11-2017, 12:41 AM
AI Proofreader AI Proofreader is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Are you kidding? Israel never claimed otherwise. Rabin, Peres and most of the rest of the peace camp never believed that they were giving the Palestinians their land "back" - instead, the way they saw it was that they were giving Israeli land to the Palestinians for the sake of peace, security and human rights. They were always very clear-eyed about it.... and yet, they still got things done. Because really, what difference does it make? Ideally, we'll believe that we're giving them our land, they'll believe that they're getting their land back, and in the end, God willing, both sides will be happy.
It worked out great here in the U.S. with the Native American tribes.

We "gave" them reservations while still basically claiming those regions as part of our nation, shoved them in, and meanwhile spread around everywhere outside those boundaries, then slowly encroached inward, shrinking the reservation borders and ignoring all of our treaties with them.

I don't see that much of a difference between our history and that of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the ever increasing Settlements, frankly. It'll lead to a one-state solution, but I think it'll be largely condemned by historians.

Last edited by AI Proofreader; 12-11-2017 at 12:42 AM.
  #114  
Old 12-11-2017, 03:34 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkeller View Post
Maybe not, but they don't contradict anything known about the demographics of the area. They say that all these locals are descended from the same genetic stock, just like the DNA studies do. It's just that (according to the texts) the origin of it is Semitic, not pre-Judaic Canaanite.
The Wikipedia summary of "Canaanite" in the Bible is that it refers to the Amorites (who were a group of people that migrated Southwest from an area near the Syria/Iraq/Turkey border about 800 years before the Old Testament was written) and those were not a group that were descended from Abraham, according to the Bible. And so the Conquest of Canaan was a giant murderfest of them.

The problems with that:

1) The Amorites largely worshiped the same gods as the people who were in the Jordan Rift Valley, spoke a related language, etc. Canaanites are today considered to be everyone South of Turkey, East of Egypt, West of Sumer/Babylon, and North of Arabia.
2) Abraham is described as coming from an area near the Syria/Iraq/Turkey border. The tale of his migration appears to be the tale of the Amorites migrating 800 years before the Old Testament was written. The mountain that Noah ended up on, for example, is in Eastern Turkey - Amorite land. Ancient Israelite mythology would seem to strongly indicate that they are Amorites themselves.
3) There are no wars that can be seen in the archaeological record that would match up with an Israelite conquest of the Jordan Rift Valley. It's currently believed that the Israelites were a Southern group of Canaanites that migrated up into the valley area and peacefully rose to the top of the heap over the course of many generations, eventually becoming the ruling class.

Basically, the Bible is inconsistent. After Abraham, it talks about Moab splitting off and Edom splitting off, etc. and we see kingdoms start some centuries after the Amorite immigration into the Jordan Valley, just off the edge of the Valley. That seems to match archaeology. But the Exodus from Egypt doesn't match anything in the archaeological record. A Canaanitic people were expelled from Northern Egypt, after conquering it, and later Egypt took over the Jordan Valley and made it a vassal state, from which they were freed. Neither matches the story. As said, the Bible is only occasionally correct.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 12-11-2017 at 03:39 AM.
  #115  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:22 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Basically, the Bible is inconsistent.
(A) Wow, really?

(B) What does any of that matter today, unless you're trying to make a case that "they" have no right to be somewhere and should be happy with whatever "we" the rightful residents allow them to have. There is not a good set of precedents for that one working out well, btw.
  #116  
Old 12-11-2017, 10:05 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
What does any of that matter today
Stating things that are true and making opinionated arguments are two discrete acts that do not always overlap.
  #117  
Old 12-11-2017, 01:13 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,040
Sage Rat:

Quote:
Basically, the Bible is inconsistent. After Abraham, it talks about Moab splitting off and Edom splitting off, etc. and we see kingdoms start some centuries after the Amorite immigration into the Jordan Valley, just off the edge of the Valley. That seems to match archaeology. But the Exodus from Egypt doesn't match anything in the archaeological record. A Canaanitic people were expelled from Northern Egypt, after conquering it, and later Egypt took over the Jordan Valley and made it a vassal state, from which they were freed. Neither matches the story. As said, the Bible is only occasionally correct.
I'm not going to argue the general historicity of the Bible. Of course, as my religious affiliation on this board is well-known, I believe it, and could argue it elsewhere, but I'm not interested in hijacking this thread. My point was only in response to Ramira, who implied that DNA studies that show common ancestry across the Levant region run counter to the Bible's assertion that the Israelites were a distinct population from the Canaanites who they supplanted in Palestine. All I am saying (here) is that indications of common ancestry in the Levant and Arabia do not contradict the Biblical narrative, because the Biblical narrative implies common ancestry as well, i.e., from Abraham's family.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #118  
Old 12-11-2017, 04:25 PM
Ibn Warraq Ibn Warraq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by AI Proofreader View Post
I don't see that much of a difference between our history and that of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the ever increasing Settlements, frankly.
Other than of course the fact that there are far more Arabs living in Palestine than prior to 1948.

By contrast there are vastly viewer Native Americans now than in the past.

That's pretty profound difference between the two situations wouldn't you say.
  #119  
Old 12-11-2017, 04:46 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I didn't say Arabs come from Arabia. I said Arabs originated in Arabia. I'm standing by that just as I would stand by saying that Hispanics originated in Spain. There are obviously now plenty of Arabs and plenty of Hispanics living outside of the regions where their ancestors started out.
Except many people whom we call Arabs or Hispanics today have 0 ancestors from Arabia or Spain, respectively. That's the problem. It's like saying people who speak English originated in England. Many did not. "Arab", as used today, means "Speakers of Arabic", not "descended from folks originally from the Arabian peninsula".

Last edited by John Mace; 12-11-2017 at 04:46 PM.
  #120  
Old 12-11-2017, 10:16 PM
AI Proofreader AI Proofreader is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
Other than of course the fact that there are far more Arabs living in Palestine than prior to 1948.

By contrast there are vastly viewer Native Americans now than in the past.

That's pretty profound difference between the two situations wouldn't you say.
Fortunately there haven't been any smallpox blankets involved.
  #121  
Old 12-12-2017, 02:50 AM
Ramira's Avatar
Ramira Ramira is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkeller View Post
All I am saying (here) is that indications of common ancestry in the Levant and Arabia .
common ancenstry in the Levant not & arabia. In the levant.

the point being your doubting about descent based on the mythes of the religious texts is without any good foundations (as sage rate indeed himself found).

The incorrect addition of and arabia ... is incorrect, it is common Levantine ancestry of, not common "arabian" ancestry"

Last edited by Ramira; 12-12-2017 at 02:53 AM.
  #122  
Old 01-20-2018, 10:35 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Attack on the Kurds by Turkey begins:

http://thehill.com/policy/internatio...kurdish-forces
  #123  
Old 01-20-2018, 11:27 AM
voltaire's Avatar
voltaire voltaire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 6,043
Heck of a job Kushie!
  #124  
Old 01-23-2018, 02:21 PM
up_the_junction up_the_junction is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: South London
Posts: 4,746
The art of the deal.
__________________
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who believes themselves free Goethe
  #125  
Old 01-23-2018, 03:27 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
So far, Iran is purportedly supporting the Kurds (or at least the President of Iran, Rouhani, is) so potentially my hypothesis was incorrect and this is really just a Turkish deal. We'll have to see.
  #126  
Old 02-14-2018, 11:35 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Iran and Israel are beginning to fight a bit in Syria:

https://lawfareblog.com/iran-and-isr...licated-enough

I'm venturing to guess that Syria is about to become a bit smaller. Turkey seems set to take a chunk. I don't know whether Israel will try to expand at all.

I'm curious what the route is that the Iranians take to get to Syria, whether it goes over Iraq or Turkey?
  #127  
Old 02-14-2018, 01:53 PM
wguy123 wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Iran and Israel are beginning to fight a bit in Syria:

https://lawfareblog.com/iran-and-isr...licated-enough

I'm venturing to guess that Syria is about to become a bit smaller. Turkey seems set to take a chunk. I don't know whether Israel will try to expand at all.

I'm curious what the route is that the Iranians take to get to Syria, whether it goes over Iraq or Turkey?
Either way Iran picks to go, it's sure to help with Kushy's peace plan. It looks like it's closer than ever! You might as well check that one off the list of accomplishments now.
  #128  
Old 02-20-2018, 07:26 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Looks like everyone's decided that they're going to focus less on land-grabs and more on genocide of people they don't like and can easily beat up on:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...amascus-suburb
  #129  
Old 02-21-2018, 12:06 AM
voltaire's Avatar
voltaire voltaire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 6,043
The health, safety and human rights of the natives always take the back seat when the Cold War starts heating up.

(Bookmark that site. Looks to be Uncle Sam's version of the straight dope.)
  #130  
Old 04-30-2018, 02:32 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 19,966
Israel publishes Iranian documents about secret nuclear research project, probably launches missiles directly into Iran:

http://www.businessinsider.com/israe...ing-war-2018-4
  #131  
Old 05-01-2018, 10:08 AM
wguy123 wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,318
Nobody knew Middle East peace could be so complicated!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017