Announcement

**josh w.** · 6 August 2007, 12:44 PM

That would be interesting. Going by Behar's research featured by FTDNA in the FTDNA library, the most frequent Ashkenazi line is a subclade of K. The subclade was described as Hebrew-Levantine. So far it has only been found among Jewish women but not in other Levantine groups. (It has been found among non-Jewish European women--conversion?) On the other hand, Lebanese and Palestinian women have not been fully sampled.

**josh w.** · 6 August 2007, 08:03 PM

Correction--a few subclades of K and to a lesser extent a subclade of N are found in Ashkenazi women. The other common haplogroups common in Ashkenazi women such as H, T or J are not unique to the Levant and could have entered the Jewish population after the Diaspora.

**johnraciti** · 8 August 2007, 04:15 AM

Mitosearch - Haplosearch on 278T

Yeshua bar Yehosef
270G, 278T

It's pointing to - Haplogroup H - 278T

**johnraciti** · 8 August 2007, 04:31 AM

Yeshua bar Yehosef - DNA is one of these three Haplogroups...

Yeshua bar Yehosef - DNA is one of these three Haplogroups...

H is seen in the east: Saudi Arabia and Kashmir and in the west: France and Scotland.

N is seen in Israel.

U is seen in Jordan, Egypt and in Greece.

**lgmayka** · 8 August 2007, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by josh w.

Correction--a few subclades of K and to a lesser extent a subclade of N are found in Ashkenazi women.

Note that there is no strong evidence that the 4 "Founding Mothers" subclades are of Levantine origin. The 3 K subclades could easily be from central Europe, where the Ashkenazi community was founded, and the N1b subclade (with the 16176A mutation) could easily be eastern European, where the Ashkenazi community grew so immensely.

**josh w.** · 8 August 2007, 12:20 PM

Lawrence I agree. I have always wondered about the designation of "Hebrew-Levantine". The only reason I could see was that their research did not find any of the K subclades in non-Jewish European samples. However I get the impression that the Mtdna K project did have non-Jewish members with these subclades. (In my own case I am Mtdna J1 which originated in the Near East. However the particular mutations of Ashkenazi J1 suggests that it is of European rather than Near Eastern origin--in terms of recent mutations)

**josh w.** · 8 August 2007, 12:24 PM

P.S. there was a prior post which suggested that "Mary's" mutations were found in a number of different haplogroups and thus could not be tied to a specific one.

**josh w.** · 8 August 2007, 01:13 PM

P.P.S. The post on "Mary" was by Ann Turner. My mistake-- the K project does not cover ethnicity and its results are not inconsistent with that of Behar. There was an "Ashkenazi" subclade in project members from Ireland but Jewish origins cannot be ruled out.

**johnraciti** · 12 August 2007, 04:08 AM

Could Yeshua bar Yehosef - been of Near Eastern origin?

Could Yeshua bar Yehosef - been of Near Eastern origin? This may mean we need to consider Yeshua bar Yehosef - possible of European origin in the last 2 thousands years.

**Jim Denning** · 12 August 2007, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by johnraciti

Is Yeshua bar Yehosef, Israel, 2000 years ago likely to be Haplogroup N or U?

The Talpiot Tomb (or Talpiyot Tomb) is a tomb discovered in 1980.

I WOULD BE WILLING TO BET
that he didnt because i believe the miracle was marys male organs were reawakened and that sperm impregnated her so your guess is as good as mine what haplogroup that would be. since both joseph and mary were of two lines from david.mary's being the more blessed one

**jaynegen** · 21 August 2007, 11:49 AM

K Ashkenazi women

Originally posted by josh w.

That would be interesting. Going by Behar's research featured by FTDNA in the FTDNA library, the most frequent Ashkenazi line is a subclade of K. The subclade was described as Hebrew-Levantine. So far it has only been found among Jewish women but not in other Levantine groups. (It has been found among non-Jewish European women--conversion?) On the other hand, Lebanese and Palestinian women have not been fully sampled.

I find this an interesting thread, especially your quote about: "It has been found among non-Jewish European women--conversion?"

Here's my story. I found out a few months ago that some of my distant ancestors were most likely Ashkenazi Jewish from Germany, about 450 years ago. While there is no conclusive evidence (only one jewish cemetery from more recent times, and they were in the Lutheran church), someone I corresponded to in jewishgen.org assured me that they were indeed Jewish and most likely converted to fit in and be trusted in the small town I found them in. Many of the surnames along that particular line (which is close to my mother's mother's mother's ... line but veers off a bit) are found in great numbers on the jewishgen site.

So with that in mind I tested mtdna and am a K. I am awaiting mtdna refinement, although I am not clear what that will tell me, if anything.

Comments? Thoughts?

**josh w.** · 21 August 2007, 02:10 PM

Firstly, I should repeat the correction I made to my original post. Both the Behar study and the K project mention K subjects whose religion was not identified. The K project had members from Ireland but Jewish origins could not be ruled out, i.e. I am not aware of non-Jews showing Behar's subclades. It is possible that the subclades came from the "host" population in eastern Europe but so far there is no evidence to support this view. For the K project the rates of Behar's subclades reduce as one moves toward western Europe. Given all this, it is likely that the presence of Behar's subclades in Germany is related to Jewish origins.
The key question is whether you belong to one of the K subclades that Behar identified. Also of importance is whether your present matches have surnames that might be Ashkenazi. In the 1500's many Jews were expelled from Germany. Some may have preferred to convert rather than move. Since anti-Semitism was a constant threat all over Europe, conversion could have happened at any time. There may be other explanations, but if your surname is common among Ashkenazi the JewishGen information seems on target. Good luck in your search and K subclade testing should provide clarity.

**jaynegen** · 21 August 2007, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by josh w.

The key question is whether you belong to one of the K subclades that Behar identified. Also of importance is whether your present matches have surnames that might be Ashkenazi. In the 1500's many Jews were expelled from Germany. Some may have preferred to convert rather than move. Since anti-Semitism was a constant threat all over Europe, conversion could have happened at any time. There may be other explanations, but if your surname is common among Ashkenazi the JewishGen information seems on target. Good luck in your search and K subclade testing should provide clarity.

Yes, many of my hvr1 matches have such surnames, but I will have to get subclade testing done. Is it enough to do hvr2, for which I am waiting results? Or do I need full mtdna testing?

Thanks for your help!

**josh w.** · 21 August 2007, 08:22 PM

Jaynegen, I wish I could be of more help on this. Perhaps other forum readers might know more. What you need is a very specific test--a Mtdna K subclade test. However I am not aware if anyone offers such a test. FTDNA claims it compares individual results with Behar's K subclade findings. However they do not advertise any such test. My suggestion would be to contact the FTDNA staff or the K project.