GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1176826767


From: "Dienekes Pontikos" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Malaspina et al (2001)'s Cohens -- an answer ?
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:19:27 -0700
References: <f3f05ce80704170331r6e3f5c31y2aa5686750644ac0@mail.gmail.com><654550.18730.qm@web52103.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <654550.18730.qm@web52103.mail.re2.yahoo.com>


The conclusions of the earlier studies regarding the dating of the
CMH-6 cluster which would make it compatible with "Old Testament
priests" are no longer persuasive. There are two reasons why this is
the case:

1. It is now known that the CMH-6 occurs in both J1 and J2. This means
that the calculation of the age in Cohanim needs to be redone
separately for J1 and J2, and indeeed at even finer phylogenetic
detail.

2. The mutation rate of 0.0021 used in that paper is no longer widely
used, while a slower one proposed by Zhivotovsky is now used. (I have
my reservations about the applicability of both to diverse
populations, but that is not relevant here). Thus, the original
Bronze-Age-compatible date is now suspect.

I am not sure why you mention Cruciani, since his three papers are to
me a model of the unfolding of scientific progress; Cruciani was
cautious in 2004 when he discovered the haplotype clusters within
E-M78 and very soon afterwards proved which of them corresponded to
clades of the phylogeny and which of them did not. One would hope that
such a rigorous methodology could be applied to the Cohen problem
which has had a much longer history and publicity.

On 4/17/07, ellen Levy <> wrote:
> Dienekes:
>
> I don't think the earlier studies on the CMH have been
> invalidated (for an analogy, I don't think Cruciani's
> new E3b study has invalidated his earlier studies on
> E3b and its sub-clades). What is being sought is an
> update with the expanded markers and a more extensive
> dating of the group. That part seems perfectly
> reasonable. But to simply say that there is no
> obvious CMH-12 cluster within Jewish groups with
> Cohanim traditions or a Cohanim surname is not
> supported by the evidence.
>
> Ellen Coffman
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> -------------------------------
> 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
>


--

Dienekes' Anthropology Blog
http://dienekes.blogspot.com

This thread: