GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1176741943


From: ellen Levy <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Malaspina et al (2001)'s Cohens -- an answer ?
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4622E960.4000306@comcast.net>


Bonnie asked: "I don't really understand the fierce,
die-hard resistance to the simple, scientific reality
of the J haplogroup's structure. If religion is not
the issue, what's provoking such opposition?"

I be interested in hearing an response to this as
well, because the debate does appear to be tinged with
an unexpected emotionality to it that I find curious.
And it is not just expressing "doubts," as Sasson has
suggested, or expressing a desire for "unambiguous
results," as Dienekes suggests. It seems too heated a
debate to indicate a simple expression of doubt or
desire for further research.

Furthermore, it is not just that some are suggesting
further DNA research needs to be performed for
validation of earlier theories (which seems to be
Dienekes stance), but for others, there seems to a
rather fierce suggestion that J2 rather than J1 with
the CMH represents the "original" Israelite Cohanim
lineage.

A question that I'm hoping Bonnie to answer for me:
What is the frequency of J2a1 (and J2a1b) within
non-Jewish European populations versuses the J1 with
the CMH?

On one hand, I do agree with Dienekes that further
research and studies need to be performed and
published. This provides increased validity to
various theories. I also agree that an accurate SNP
testing and dating of the CMH cluster must be
performed.

In the meanwhile, however, I tend to agree with Bonnie
that there is actually quite a bit of evidence, from
lay research and significant ancedotal information,
suggesting that the CMH-12 is more frequent than other
haplotypes among Cohanim and that it is found
primarily among those in J1. Very much more
frequently, in fact.

When a statement is made that "only" 54 samples out of
group of 89 Cohanim were in haplogroup J, then I begin
to wonder: what is the desire (and why is so strong)
to invalidate this very high frequency of haplogroup J
among Cohanim? As Bonnie pointed out, that is a huge
group. The next largest cluster had only six members,
and smaller clusters with four members, yet those
clusters seem to be the intense focus of Sasson, who
argues they are "real McCoy."

According to the research that Bonnie and James posted
over the last few days, there appears to be a much
smaller J2 Cohanim cluster. Correct me if I'm wrong,
it seems to have primarily Sephardic members (I know
the six in Thomas's study were noted to be Sephardic
Cohanim). There does not appear to be any further
notable Cohanim clusters of any size in J2.

I did want to respond to the suggeston by Dienekes
that the CMH-12 may be deterring Cohens who do not
possess it from coming forward as Cohens. This is
highly speculative, Dienekes. A lot of Cohens can be
identified just by surname only (Cohen, Katz, etc).
And I think it rather unreasonable to suggest that
because someone is a 9 or 10 out of 12 marker match to
my grandfather's CMH rather than matching all 12
markers, that person will assume he is not a "genuine"
Cohanim and refuse to share Cohanim family traditions
or history for fear of being labeled "non-genuine."
Only people on this list are suggesting that certain
lineages or haplotypes represent "non-genuine"
Cohanim.

I note, Dienekes, that you wrote about this in 2005 on
your blog, entitling your posting "What was REALLY
Aaron's lineage?" Is this what you think the debate
is really about, determining who gets to claim descent
from the biblical figure Aaron? I hope not.

Your blog post suggests that because some group of
Cohanim may belong to J2 rather than J1, this somehow
invalidates the J1's claims to be the "real priestly
lineage" (and no, I don't think that is the claim.
You yourself have indicated in this thread that the
interjection of religious stories into the discussion
is unfortunate). I don't think that is what is at
issue. I agree with your assertions that the CMH
cannot necessarily be used as definitive evidence of
either Jewish ancestry or Cohanim heritage. But just
because there may be smaller clusters of Cohanim in J2
or R1b or any other haplogroup doesn't equate to an
invalidation of the CMH in the much larger cluster of
probable J1 Cohanim.

No one is looking for perfectly "pure" caste
membership, at least I hope no one is doing that.

Ellen Coffman





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

This thread: