Talk:Ashkenazi Jews

Iberia or Hispania - Spain is an anachronism

Hello, Spain is a political state, that did not existe in the times referred in these 3 sentences. So, it is an absolute anachronism. It is simply wrong. Thanks for your attention Henrique Soares Oliveira « onforming to the custom of designating areas of Jewish settlement with biblical names, Spain was denominated Sefarad (Obadiah 20),»

« while some Ashkenazi Jews joined Sephardic Jewry in Spain.»

«  the centers of Jewish religious authority were in the Islamic world, at Baghdad and in Islamic Spain. » 78.137.210.80 (talk) 01:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

Spain is a political state, that did not existe in the times referred in these 3 sentences. So, it is an absolute anachronism. It is simply wrong.

Thanks for your attention Henrique Soares Oliveira

« onforming to the custom of designating areas of Jewish settlement with biblical names, Spain was denominated Sefarad (Obadiah 20),»

« while some Ashkenazi Jews joined Sephardic Jewry in Spain.»

«  the centers of Jewish religious authority were in the Islamic world, at Baghdad and in Islamic Spain. » Henrique Soares Oliveira (talk) 01:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

While this is correct, it is common on Wikipedia articles to use present day place or region names when it is less confusing, and to follow what sources do. Many sources refer to Sephardic Jews coming from Spain or Portugal even though at the time, in Moorish Spain the places were more likely to be called al-Andalus by the inhabitants or Sepharad, and when they were Christian they were more likely to refer to specific locations like Castile or Aragon since the present-day political units didn't exist. Still, this probably exists throughout historical sources and Wikipedia. There was no Germany or France but they still refer to the Rhineland or Provence or Narbonne as being part of Germany or France, or parts of then-Russia as Ukraine or Poland or Romania etc. So anyway, you are right but I am not sure we really need to change it because it is just understood that these modern-day place names can be used regionally anachronistically. Andre🚐 03:08, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2025

Change A "2025 study by Joseph Livni and Karl Skorecki examined mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in the Ashkenazi Jewish population and found that most maternal lineages trace back to a small founding group of around 150 individuals" to "A 2025 study by Joseph Livni and Karl Skorecki examined mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in the Ashkenazi Jewish population and found that the maternal ancestry of most Ashkenazi Jews traces back to a small founding group of around 150 women. Yossilivni (talk) 15:18, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

This request comes from user Yossilivni. Yours truly, Yossilivni is Joseph Livni, one of the co-authors of the study in question.

1. The correction is necessary. Our study did not find that most maternal lineages trace back to the 150 founders. It did find that the maternal ancestry of most Ashkenazi Jews traces back to the founders. There is a difference: About 8.5 million Jews trace back their ancestry to the founders. The maternal ancestry of about 1.5 million Ashkenazi Jews does not consist of founders. On the other hand, the 1.5 million matrilineal descendants of European women are grouped in about 10,000 lineages (150 Jews/lineage). The 8.5 million descendants of the founders are grouped in 54 founder lineages (about 157,400 Jews/lineage). 10,000 lineages do not trace back to the founders, while 54 do. Now you can see why it is wrong to claim that most maternal lineages trace back to the founders.

2. Replacing the word "individuals" with "women" is just for the sake of clarity. Obviously, matrilineal lineages trace back to women. I still feel that calling mothers individuals may lead to confusion. Karl Skorecki, my co-author also agrees that women, or mothers is more appropriate than individuals. Yossilivni (talk) 13:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@Yossilivni Was a pleasure to change the text. Chajm (talk) 14:47, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Were they really 92% of all Jews?

At the beginning of the fourth paragraph, it says, As a proportion of the world Jewish population, Ashkenazim were estimated to be 3% in the 11th century, rising to 92% in 1930 near the population's peak.

I find it hard to believe they were such a high proportion of all Jews. I know there is a source, but is this claim really credible? Jack Redfield (talk) 02:45, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

It is probably an overestimate, but who knows by how much. If you can find a few other sources that provide a range of estimates, we can modify the text to represent that range more accurately. Andre🚐 03:04, 3 August 2025 (UTC)