GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1176831161


From: "Alfred A. Aburto Jr." <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Malaspina et al (2001)'s Cohens -- an answer ?
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:32:41 -0700
References: <501994.22099.qm@web52105.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <501994.22099.qm@web52105.mail.re2.yahoo.com>


Wow Ellen, I'm baffled that you are baffled too. I try to give my
thoughts as clearly as possible but it isn't working :-(

> ellen Levy wrote:

>Al:
>
>I'm equally baffled by your response. What in the
>world is a "true" Cohanim?
>[snip,snip]
>Are you
>observations and suggestions invalid because they have
>not yet been published by a geneticist? Are Steven
>Bird's observations and suggestions about E3b invalid
>because they are not published (or even contradict the
>studies out there)? How about Ken N's research on
>haplogroup I? Or William Hurst's mtDNA on haplogroup
>K?
>
>

No, they are very valid, and your insight and publications too. But
inorder to more or less establish or set things in concrete one needs to
pursue the methods or work just as Hammer, Thomas, Behar and others do
without question. You know we refer to these documents and many others
constantly. I have almost 500 of these documents myself. I use them, I
study them, I try to learn, I go back and re-read them all the time. I
do that alot. They form the basis from which others start and move ahead
even further just as you all are doing. I don't want that process to
stop. It needs to be continued. That is all that I am saying. It is not
personal at all as I have great respect for your thoughts and
information you provide.


>Are you saying that when you look at Ysearch for the
>CMH, you are finding primarily "Ashkenazi Jews" as
>opposed to "Cohanim"? Not everyone identifies their
>Jewish caste membership at Ysearch, Al.
>

>You allege that because some of the 81% of Cohanim
>from the early study are in haplogroup J, why not some
>in J2. I think Bonnie already dissected this
>possibility very thoroughly as well. I'd refer to her
>previous postings on this issue.
>
>

But you discount my thoughts and don't tell me why?

I won't go further here Ellen. It is like I said and that is we need to
follow the scientific method and proceed exactly as Hammer, Thomas and
Behar and others have for these "official" studies that form the basis
for alot of what we do here.

>More troubling is the continuing disregard for
>personal DNA results. My grandfather is J1. He is
>Cohanim. He matches many other Cohanim in J1 with the
>CMH-12, both Sephardim and Ashkenazim.
>
>I keep saying it because no one seems to hear it.
>

I hear you and I _believe_ and I trust you, but still, a study of this
would have for example Dr Hammer collecting your data and the data from
many more and then doing Y-DNA tests and analysis and then publishing
all that and the results and conclusions in a scienific journal. Your
information is just at the first step of that process and I know it is
absolutely correct.

>But
>let's make it more of a reality for the list, OK?
>Since I have access to FTDNA's database on CMH matches
>and, furthermore, can contact my grandfather's matches
>(and there are quite a lot - over 150 exact 12 marker
>matches), I will simply write to matches about the
>allegations being made concerning whether they are
>"true" Cohanim (ie, please state your Cohanim
>tradition or surname), whether they have been SNP'd
>J1, whether they are of Ashkenazic or Sephardic
>descent (or none of the above), etc. I'll see who has
>expanded beyond 12 markers as well - someone recently
>suggested this to the group. Before that even
>happens, though, I'd like to see as many SNP'd as
>possible.
>
>For those who insist that the CMH isn't tied to the
>Cohanim caste, here's a quick list of some of the
>surnames from my genetic matches at FTDNA. I'll list
>only the ones that have obvious Cohanim connotations.
>There will obviously be many repeats and variations of
>the same surname. Here they are:
>
>Kahhan
>Colman
>Cohn
>cahn
>Kaplan
>Kaplan
>Cohen
>Kashner
>Cohen
>Cohn
>Kohl
>Cohen
>Conahim
>Katz
>Cohen
>Kolnick
>Katzman
>Carmen
>Koen
>Cohen
>Katz
>Conn
>Katzman
>Katzman
>Cohen
>Katzman
>Kaplan
>Cosman
>Katzman
>Krastman
>Katzman
>Katzman
>Cohen
>Carvin
>
>Genetic Distance of One
>Cohen
>Cohen
>Cohen
>Kahan
>Cohen
>
>Most of the other matches appears to be of Jewish
>ancestry judging from the surname. I'll try to
>determine which have Cohanim traditions and what
>everyone's SNP results look like.
>
>Ellen Coffman
>
>

I have known, worked with, some Cohen's but I have not thought of them
as Jewish Priests so I am naturally cautious about using the surnames
all by themselves. We can draw all kinds of conclusions, but it is
difficult to be accurate, which that is why we value so much those
documents such as Hammer's, ... It is hard work making sure everything
is as accurate as you can make it. Even then, many mistakes are made.
Look at Dr. Behar. Mr Greenspan told me more than a year ago (may 2
years ago) that Behar has been trying to get his recent paper published
but there has been problems. Maybe he has given up? I don't know ...

Maybe you could publish your results in Wikipedia or JOGG?
Al

This thread: