GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1176608115


From: "Doug Turner" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ten Lost Tribes, Far East, esp. Japan
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:35:37 -0500
References: <BAY133-DAV294A41DF09C828C650D60D05E0@phx.gbl><320527.33901.qm@web52108.mail.re2.yahoo.com><3b2a446a0704121750v22ff4d6dma0455eaf197ec37b@mail.gmail.com>


Sasson, your following proposal just came to my attention in the past couple
of days, with the following post actually.

Your proposal has merit. This is the direction we should be going.

There is a possible problem, not with your proposal, but with the haplogroup
categories themselves. For example, my wife's mtDNA haplogroup is H, while
mine is K. However our HVR1 and HVR2 markers are closely enough associated
that we could be part of the same clan. My wife has a number of mainstream
Jewish matches at the HVR2 level, while I have about 33% mainstream Jewish
matches at the HVR1 level and no matches whatever at the HVR2 level. In our
families, there is no record of Jewish practice in either of these lineages
as far as we have discovered, as a matter of fact.

One of my correspondents, who is also a match to my markers, once suggested
that haplogroup categories are not the best. This match to my markers is
Jewish, and his Jewish wife matches my wife. It appears from this anecdotal
information that a subset of K belongs to H, or visa versa.The categories
appear to be arbitrary, and if they can be reworked to be more homogeneous,
then they would lend themselves very well to the type of division you
proposed. Perhaps the arrangement you seek could be accomplished within
the framework of the current categories, but using subcategories. It
appears that off and on listers have been doing just that, but not in a
systematic way. Do you have any suggestions?

As far as British Israelism or Brit Am, a definition is needed before
evaluating them. However I am diametrically opposed to what is called
replacement theology, that is, the opinion that Christendom, or British
peoples, or any other group has replaced the physical descendants of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in G-d's plan, or in entitlement to the Land of
Israel in the Middle East. This is the most fundamental kind of
anti-semitism.

However, sometimes folks can come close to the correct conclusion for the
wrong reasons. My wife's ethnicity is "English-Irish", but she has the
above-mentioned Jewish matches which have yet to be explained. The only
plausible explanations that come to me are some fairly recent Converso
effect (last 400-500 years) or otherwise some very ancient dispersed
northern Israelite tribes effect. There is a slim chance of finding a paper
trail for the former case. To support the latter case would take some
really big DNA studies, combined with the fragmentary evidence, and all
under the watchful eyes of the skeptical genealogists.

Doug Turner

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sasson Margaliot" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 7:50 PM

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

This thread: