GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1176429520


From: "C. Koch" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ten Lost Tribes, Far East, esp. Japan
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 18:58:40 -0700
References: <BAY133-DAV294A41DF09C828C650D60D05E0@phx.gbl><320527.33901.qm@web52108.mail.re2.yahoo.com><3b2a446a0704121750v22ff4d6dma0455eaf197ec37b@mail.gmail.com>


Hi Ellen, Sasson,

That is not why the question was asked. I have never seen that information
before on the Brit-Am site, and I assure you, I am not a cultist...and I
don't even have any church affiliation. That aside, I was just trying to
figure out for the very first time in my own understanding what you [Ellen]
were saying -- because I had never known before this time exactly what was
the position of DNA experts re the Cohanim and the Levites.

Nevertheless, while responding to what you were saying in your post today, I
had flying fingers and mistyped - what I meant to ask/say was wouldn't it
turn the mutation tables upside down to have the son of Hpg. R being Hpg. J?
Aaron was the son of Levi, so J coming from R...in other words.

Probably from your point of view, this might be a difference w/o a
distinction. I was just asking because it does not seem logical - that's
all.

Sasson wrote and proposed some suggestions as to why:

>In fact, of course, the non-J Levites are coming from additional lineages.
>Maybe some Eastern Jews had the last name Levy and were assumed to be a
>Levites.

>It is even possible that at ancient times some non-J people were officially
>assigned Levitic status - this is a serious qestion for Torah scolars and
>is
>beyond the domain of genetic genealogy community expertise in Judaism.


There has to be an explanation - of course - because it doesn't flow
logically. I was asking what that logic was, in your opinion. And you
answered.

I am just trying to understand it. Several weeks ago I saw a website that
proposed pretty much the same division of Haplogroups between Shem, Ham and
Japheth....it was on a website re Africa, I believe. I'm not sure that the
concept you proposed is original or unique, but I could be wrong. I only
know that I never saw it on Brit-Am's site...!

Regards,

Cherie




----- Original Message -----
From: "Sasson Margaliot" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ten Lost Tribes, Far East, esp. Japan


In order to explain out how what they consider various Tribes of Israel
can belong to very different Haplogroups, BritAm attempted "refutation" of
the SNP tree on their website.

They say:

" This is however a bit difficult for us ... to agree with DNA "science" in
accepting the above divisions "

Instead they propose that each SNP can take place multiple times!

They quote Ellen Coffman and others and others from the list. They also
quote without attribution my proposal to divide of haplogrous into Shem ( F
to J ), Ham ( A to E ), and Japhet ( K to R ).

Then they go on and reject entire YCC tree.

This is why the following question was asked:

>> Would that not either turn the time frames for mutations upside-down
>> or would there be another alternative explanation?

If some Cohanim are in J1 or J2, and some Levitic men are in R1a, it
"proves" that the entire YDNA Tree does not work !

In fact, of course, the non-J Levites are coming from additional lineages.
Maybe some Eastern Jews had the last name Levy and were assumed to be a
Levites.

It is even possible that at ancient times some non-J people were officially
assigned Levitic status - this is a serious qestion for Torah scolars and is
beyond the domain of genetic genealogy community expertise in Judaism.



Sasson


On 4/13/07, ellen Levy <> wrote:
>
> Hi Cherie:
>
> I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question
> regarding the timeframes for mutations (genetic?) at
> the end of your post. Could you clarify?
>
> Ellen Coffman

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: