|
|
|
|
Y-chromosomal Aaron
|
| |
|
| |
Y-chromosomal Aaron is the name given to the hypothesised most recent common ancestor of many of the patrilineal Jewish priestly caste known as Kohanim (singular "Kohen", "Cohen", or Kohane). In the Hebrew Bible this ancestor is identified as Aaron, the brother of Moses.
Research published in 1997 and thereafter has indicated that a large proportion of contemporary Jewish Kohanim share Y-chromosomal Haplogroup J1 (Y-DNA) with a set of genetic markers, known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype, which may well derive from a single common ancestor.
"The Samaritan M267 lineages differed from the classical Cohen modal haplotype at DYS391, carrying 11 rather than 10 repeats".
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Y-chromosomal Aaron' Start a new discussion about 'Y-chromosomal Aaron' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
Y-chromosomal Aaron is the name given to the hypothesised most recent common ancestor of many of the patrilineal Jewish priestly caste known as Kohanim (singular "Kohen", "Cohen", or Kohane). In the Hebrew Bible this ancestor is identified as Aaron, the brother of Moses.
Research published in 1997 and thereafter has indicated that a large proportion of contemporary Jewish Kohanim share Y-chromosomal Haplogroup J1 (Y-DNA) with a set of genetic markers, known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype, which may well derive from a single common ancestor.
"The Samaritan M267 lineages differed from the classical Cohen modal haplotype at DYS391, carrying 11 rather than 10 repeats". Samaritan Kohanim descend from a different patrilineal family line, having haplogroup E1b1b1a (M78) (formerly E3b1a).
Background
Although membership in the Jewish community has, since at least the second century CE, been passed maternally (see: Who is a Jew?), membership in the group that originally comprised the Jewish priesthood ("Cohen" or "Kohen"; plural: Kohanim), is patrilineal. Modern Kohens claim descent from a biblical person, Aaron, brother of Moses, in the direct lineage from Levi, the patriarch of the Tribe of Levi, greatgrandson of Abraham, according to the tradition codified in the Tanakh (???? / Sh'mot/Exodus 6). DNA testing is aiding scholars to trace the lineages found among modern Jewish populations, including contemporary Cohen families, to decipher origins of the people groups that were joined to the ancient Israelites and to identify genetic admixture and genetic drift.
For human beings, the normal number of chromosomes is 46, of which 23 are inherited from each parent. Two chromosomes, the X chromosome and Y chromosome, determine sex. Women have two X chromosomes, one inherited from their mother, and one inherited from their father. Men have an X chromosome inherited from their mother, and the Y chromosome inherited from their father.
Males who share a common patrilineal ancestor should also share a Y chromosome, diverging only with respect to accumulated mutations. Since Y-chromosomes are passed from father to son, all Kohanim men should theoretically have almost identical Y chromosomes; this can be tested with a genealogical DNA test. As the rate that mutations accumulate on the Y chromosome is relatively constant, scientists can estimate the elapsed time since two men had a common ancestor. (See molecular clock.)
Initial studies
The Cohen hypothesis was first tested by Prof. Karl Skorecki and collaborators from Haifa, Israel, in 1997. In their study, "Y chromosomes of Jewish priests," published in the journal Nature, they found that the Kohanim appeared to share a different probability distribution compared to the rest of the Jewish population for the two Y-chromosome markers they tested (YAP and DYS 19). They also found that the probabilities appeared to be shared by both Sephardi and Ashkenazi Cohens, pointing to a common Cohen population origin before the Jewish diaspora under the Roman empire.
In a subsequent study the next year (Thomas MG et al, 1998), the team increased the number of Y-STR markers tested to six, as well as testing more SNP markers. Again, they found that a clear difference was observable between the Cohanim population and the general Jewish population, with many of the Cohen STR results clustered around a single pattern they named the Cohen Modal Haplotype:
| | xDE | xDE,PR | Hg J | CMH.1 | CMH | | CMH.1/HgJ | CMH/HgJ |
|---|
|
| Ashkenazi Cohanim (AC):
| 98.5% | 96% | 87% | 69% | 45% | | 79% | 52% |
|---|
| Sephardi Cohanim (SC):
| 100% | 88% | 75% | 61% | 56% | | 81% | 75% |
|---|
|
| Ashkenazi Israelites (AI):
| 82% | 62% | 37% | 15% | 13% | | 40% | 35% |
|---|
| Sephardi Israelites (SI):
| 85% | 63% | 37% | 14% | 10% | | 38% | 27% |
|---|
Here, becoming increasingly specific, xDE is the proportion who were not in Haplogroups D or E (from the original paper); xDE,PR is the proportion who were not in haplogroups D, E, P, Q or R; Hg J is the proportion who were in Haplogroup J (from the slightly larger panel studied by Behar et al (2003)); CMH.1 means "within one marker of the CMH-6"; and CMH is the proportion with a 6/6 match. The final two columns show the conditional proportions for CMH.1 and CMH, given membership of Haplogroup J.
The data shows that the Cohanim were more than twice as likely to belong to Haplogroup J than the average non-Cohen Jew. Of those who did belong to Haplogroup J, the Cohanim were more than twice as likely to have an STR pattern close to the CMH-6, suggesting a much more recent common ancestry for most of them compared to an average non-Cohen Jew of Haplogroup J.
Thomas, et al. dated the origin of the shared DNA to approximately 3,000 years ago (with variance arising from different generation lengths). The techniques used to find Y-chromosomal Aaron were first popularized in relation to the search for the patrilineal ancestor of all contemporary living humans, Y-chromosomal Adam.
Responses
The finding led to excitement in religious circles, with some seeing it as providing some "proof" of the historical veracity of the Bible. or other religious convictions, There was also criticism that the paper's evidence was being overstated.
Cohens in other haplogroups
Behar's 2003 data points to the following Haplogroup distribution for Ashkenazi Cohens (AC) and Sephardic Cohens (SC) as a whole:
| Hg: | E3b | G2c | H | I1b | J | K2 | Q | R1a1 | R1b | | Total |
|---|
| AC | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 67 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | | 76 |
|---|
| 4% | | 1½% | | 88% | 2½% | | 1½% | 2½% | | 100% |
|---|
| SC | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 52 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 68 |
|---|
| 4½% | 1½% | | 1½% | 76% | 3% | 3% | 4½% | 6% | | 100% |
|---|
The detailed breakdown by 6-marker haplotype (the paper's online-only table B) suggests that some at least of these groups (eg E3b, R1b) contain more than one distinct Cohen lineage. It is possible that other lineages may also exist, but were not captured in the sample.
Does a CMH prove Cohen ancestry?
One source of early confusion was a widespread popular notion that only Cohens or only Jews could have the Cohen Modal Haplotype. It is now clear that this is not the case. The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH), whilst notably frequent amongst Cohens, is also far from unusual in the general populations of haplogroups J1 and J2 with no particular link to the Cohen ancestry. These haplogroups occur widely throughout the Middle East and beyond ,. So whilst many Cohens have haplotypes close to the CMH, a greater number of such haplotypes worldwide belong to people with no likely Cohen connection at all.
Statistically the value of matching the CMH can be assessed using Bayes' theorem, which in its odds form can be written:
In words, this says that the odds in favour of Cohen ancestry C (i.e., the probability of having Cohen ancestry, divided by the probability of not having Cohen ancestry), having observed some piece of data D, is given by the odds one would assign given only one's initial information I, multiplied by the probability of having observed D if C is true, divided by the probability of having observed D if C is false.
(In fact, for convenience we shall work with the reciprocal of this equation, ie work in terms of odds against, rather than odds on).
The proportion of the whole male Jewish population that has Cohen ancestry has been estimated at 5%. So if we take that 5% as our initial estimate of the probability of shared Cohen ancestry, then on the basis of the data above:
- Not belonging to haplogroups D or E improves the odds for a Sephardi Jew from 19/1 against to (19/1)*(0.85/1.00) = 16.2/1 against (a 5.8% probability)
- Not belonging to haplogroups D,E,P,Q or R takes the odds to (19/1)*(0.63/0.88) = 13.6/1 against (6.8% probability).
- Membership of Haplogroup J improves the odds to (19/1)*(0.37/0.75) = 9.4/1 against (9.6% probability).
- Being within the CMH.1 group takes the odds to (19/1)*(0.14/0.61) = 4.4/1 against (18.7% probability).
- A full 6/6 match takes the odds to (19/1)*(0.10/0.56) = 3.4/1. (22.7% probability).
Even a full 6/6 match for the 6 marker CMH thus cannot "prove" Cohen ancestry. It can only somewhat strengthen a previously existing belief. But for populations where the background probability assessment of shared Cohen ancestry must be vanishingly low, such as almost all non-Jews, even a full 6/6 match makes only a small difference. For individuals in such populations, the CMH likely indicates Haplogroup J, but a completely different ancestry to the Cohanim.
Higher resolution
The discussion above applies to the published scientific papers. In principle, additional resolution could be obtained by determining the Cohen haplogroup more narrowly, and/or testing more Y-STR markers to determine whether there is an extended characteristic Cohen haplotype.
Haplogroup placement
The largest population of Kohanim which most closely match the Cohen haplotype cluster are believed to belong to subgroup J1 of haplogroup J, thus identified as Y-Aaron.
Note, some lineages of subgroup J2 also, coincidentally, developed a similar set of genetic markers corresponding to the Cohen Modal Haplotype. Low frequencies of individuals with these lineages even exist among Jewish Kohanim, albeit they do not descend from Y-Aaron.
The subdivision of J2 which most closely matches the genetic signature of the J1 Cohens is subclade J2a1b, a large fraction of members of which will also have a 6/6 match for the 6-marker CMH. However, this is an example of haplotype convergence:
Basically the haplotype "distribution" within one lineage (Haplogroup) overlaps with the haplotype "distribution" of another lineage - it is like overlapping branches from two different trees.
The more likely reason for the match is convergence (coincidence) or sharing a common haplotype in the same lineage (Haplogroup). Convergence: Mutation is a random process and over thousands of years can occur in different lines so that by coincidence, different "lines" end up with "matching" haplotypes. This accidental agreement is called convergence of different genetic lines, which it is believed have been not been closely related for at least the last 10,000 years; the group in J2a1b who have the 6-marker CMH are devoid of any Cohen traditions in their families.
On the other hand, there are families in Haplogroup J2 who do have a Cohen religious tradition and are proud of it (as there are in several other haplogroups, including Haplogroup R1b). The haplotypes of these Haplotype J2 Kohanim cluster in a unique, small offshoot of J2a1*, close to haplotypes of the J2a1k clade, not the J2a1b clade. These J2 Kohanim typically have a 4/6 match for the 6-marker CMH (with DYS19=15 rather than 14, and DYS388=15 rather than 16). The J1 and the J2 Kohanim may be both descended from unbroken lines of priests going back to the time of Ezra or even earlier. The J2 Cohens do not match the 12-marker J1-extended CMH. The important difference is the two SNP mutations, M172 and M267. These mutations are believed to be at least 10-15,000 years old; but they are equal co-inheritors of a patrilineal tradition which appears to date back well before the Diaspora.
As it happens, three of the four markers for which they do match the CMH-6 were the markers tested by Malaspina et al (2001). This appears to explain the finding of that paper that "typing a limited number of Italian Cohanim (A. Novelletto unpublished obs.) for the STRs used here, we determined that the Cohen Modal Haplotype ('an important component in the sharing of Ashkenazic and Sephardic Israelite Y chromosomes', Thomas et al. 2000) does indeed belong to network 1.2" (ie the population having DYS413a,b<=18, which is the signature of the J2a1 subclades).
More detailed Cohen haplotypes
In the table below, the first line gives the original 6 marker Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH-6), which was the basis for the original published papers. The second gives an extended 12 marker haplotype (CMH-12) informally released by the private company Family Tree DNA (FTDNA), based on further work by much of the same research team. It has not yet been peer group reviewed by other scientists or published in the open technical literature.
The next sequence of rows identify other 6-marker haplotypes in haplogroup J found to occur more than once in the sample of 145 Cohanim tested in Behar et al (2003) (table B (web-only) in that paper). Probable extensions of these haplotypes to 12 markers are shown, where it has been possible to find corresponding clusters of Cohen-type names in publicly accessible DNA databases, together with the apparent sub-clade of haplogroup J. This is more possible for the apparently Ashkenazi clusters than for Sephardis, who are much less strongly represented in the databases.
>| Hg | Clade or cluster | DYS
393 | DYS
390 | DYS
19 | DYS
391 | DYS
385a | DYS
385b | DYS
426 | DYS
388 | DYS
439 | DYS
389i | DYS
392 | DYS
389ii | | AC | SC | Some DNA
matches |
|---|
| | CMH-6 | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | | | | 16 | | | 11 | | | | | | J1 | CMH-12 | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | 13 | 15 | 11 | 16 | 12 | 13 | 11 | 30 | | 47% | 52% | | | J2 | J2a1k* (L24,L25) | 12 | 23 | 15 | 10 | 14 | 17 | 11 | 16 | 12 | 14 | 11 | 30 | | 13% | 0 | | | J2 | J2a1k* (L24,L25) | 12 | 23 | 15 | 10 | 14 | 17 | 11 | 15 | 12 | 13 | 11 | 29 | | 5% | 0 | | | J2 | J2b2e (M241) | 12 | 24 | 15 | 10 | 15 | 17 | 11 | 15 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 29 | | 11% | 0 | | | J2 | J2a1k1 ? | 12 | 24 | 15 | 9 | | | | 16 | | 13 | 11 | 29 | | 0 | 6% | | | J1 | J1 "388=13" | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | | | | 13 | | | 11 | | | 0 | 6% | | | J1 | modal | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | 13 | 15 | 11 | 16 | 11 | 13 | 11 | 30 | | | | | | J2 | modal | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | 13 | 15 | 11 | 15 | 11 | 13 | 11 | 30 | | | | | J2 | J2a1b | 12 | 23 | 14 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 11 | 16 | 11 | 13 | 11 | 30 | | | | | |
Finally, for comparison, the 12-marker modal haplotypes for the haplogroups J1 and J2 are also shown. It is apparent that in both cases, their haplotype clusters are also centred very close to the Cohen modal haplotype. However, because of the much greater time that has elapsed since the mutations occurred that define the haplogroups, there has been much more time for Y-STR mutations to build up; so, although they have almost the same centre as the Cohen cluster, the J1 and J2 haplotype clusters are much more diffusely spread out. Thus although the CMH-6 is also very near to the most probable haplotype for both J1 and J2, its occurrence frequency is only about 1 to 8% amongst arbitrary members of haplogroup J with no particular Cohen connection.
Other carriers of the DNA
Following the discovery of the very high prevalence of 6/6 CMH matches amongst Cohens, others were quick to look for it, and often to see it as a signpost for possible Jewish ancestry.
News of 6/6 matches in the Lemba of Southern Africa were seen as confirming a possible Jewish lineage (Thomas MG et al 2000); possible links were discussed between the Jews and the Kurds;
and some suggested that 4/4 matches in non-Jewish Italians might be a genetic inheritance from Jewish slaves, deported by Emperor Titus in large numbers after the fall of the Temple in AD 70, some of whom were put to work building the Colosseum in Rome.
Such speculation was to some extent tempered when it was realised that Haplogroups J1 and J2 represented at least two different lineages which could be associated with the CMH, (the Italians mostly belong to Haplogroup J2); and that
individuals with at least 5/6 matches for the original 6 marker Cohen Modal Haplotype occur widely across the Middle East, with significant frequencies in various Arab populations mainly with J1 Haplogroup, "that are not traditionally considered admixed with mainstream Jewish populations" -- notably Yemen (34.2%), Oman (22.8%), Negev (21.9%), and Iraq (19.2%); and amongst Muslim Kurds (22.1%), Bedouins (21.9%), and Armenians (12.7%).
On the other hand, Jewish populations were found to have a "markedly higher" proportion of full 6/6 matches, according to the same (2005) meta-analysis, compared to these non-Jewish populations, where "individuals matching at only 5/6 markers are most commonly observed".
The authors nevertheless warn however that "using the current CMH definition to a infer relation of individuals or groups to the Cohen or ancient Hebrew populations would produce many false-positive results," and note that "it is possible that the originally defined CMH represents a slight permutation of a more general Middle Eastern type that was established early on in the population prior to the divergence of haplogroup J. Under such conditions, parallel convergence in divergent clades to the same STR haplotype would be possible."
Y-DNA patterns from around the Gulf of Oman were analysed in more detail by Cadenas et al in 2007. The detailed data confirms that the main cluster of haplogroup J1 haplotypes from the Yemen appears to be some genetic distance different from the CMH-12 pattern typical of Eastern European Ashkenazi Cohens.
J2 Cohanim Haplotype Tree
Dr. Karl Skorecki, the founder of CMH, reported during a Conference for Kohanim in Jerusalem 2007, that he and his research team have discovered not one but two Cohen Modal Haplotypes, which he called J1 and J2. “Pinchas the zealot mentioned in the Bible may be the origin of J2” said Skorecki. According to the observed mutations rates, certain J2 haplotypes found on FTDNA database projects share a common ancestor who lived 3100+/-200 years bp, as Skorecki revealed to the public. Below we can see the J2 Cohanim haplotype tree formed by 12 different traditional surnames related to Cohanim lineages in both Askenazi and Sephardi respective communities. This is how Joseph Felsenstein`s scientific genetic computer software placed them, considering their haplotypes. Only one different Cohanim surname was used in this case to represent the closest haplotype found in each family that can best stand for the exclusive cluster below formed by these 12 haplotypes.
The upper branch (12,13,14) is the Sephardim branch. All three J2 Cohanim families listed are from Portugal and have a surname and tradition directly related to Sephardi Cohanim, as Askenazim Cohanim also carry in their respective communities. In this case ilustrated above with table and graphic, Joseph Felsenstein`s methods for making coalescense statistically independent comparisons using 12 familiar markers haplotypes shows that J2 Ashkenazim branch have two low branches. One branch has a common ancestor who lived 275 years ago, in 18th century. There is only 1 mutation in 48 markers. The second branch came from one common ancestor who lived around 925 years ago. They have 4 mutations on 60 markers. Also in this scenario, Sephardim Cohanim have five mutations per 36 markers, or 2075 years from a common ancestor. In fact, all three lineages of Cohanim are coming from one common ancestor. The height of the branch shows how early the common ancestor lived compared to other branches. The Cohanim Sephardim is the oldest lineage compared to Cohanim Ashkenazim. The common ancestor for all J2 Cohanim branches listed above formed by Cohanim Askenazi and Cohanim Sephardi lived 2175 years ago, according to their 12 markers presented in this section.
Y-chromosomal Levi?
A similar investigation was made with men who consider themselves Levites. Whereas the priestly Kohanim are considered descendants of Aaron, who in turn was a descendant of Levi, son of Jacob, the Levites (a lower rank of the Temple) are considered descendants of Levi through other lineages. Levites should also therefore share common Y-chromosomal DNA.
The investigation of Levites found high frequencies of multiple distinct markers, suggestive of multiple origins for the majority of non-Aaronid Levite families. One marker, however, present in more than 50% of Eastern European (Ashkenazi) Jewish Levites points to a common male ancestor or very few male ancestors within the last 2000 years for many Levites of the Ashkenazi community. This common ancestor belonged to the haplogroup R1a1 which is typical of Eastern Europeans, rather than the haplogroup J of the Cohen modal haplotype, and most likely lived at the time of the Ashkenazi settlement in Eastern Europe. .
The E1b1b1 haplogroup (formerly known as haplogroup E3b1) has been observed in all Jewish groups worldwide. It is considered to be the second most prevalent haplogroup among the Jewish population. According to one major paper
it has also been observed in moderate numbers among individuals from Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Samaritan communities having traditions of descending from the tribe of Levi, suggesting that the E1b1b1 Levites may have existed in Israel before the Diaspora of 70 C.E.
The Samaritan community is a small, isolated, and highly endogamous group today, numbering some 650 members who have maintained extensive genealogical records for the past 13–15 generations. Since the Samaritans maintain extensive and detailed genealogical records, it is possible to construct accurate pedigrees and specific maternal and paternal lineages. The Samaritan community in the Middle East survives as a distinct religious and cultural sect and constitutes one of the oldest and smallest ethnic minorities in the world. Y-Chromosome studies have shown that the majority of Samaritans belong to haplogroups J1 and J2, while the Samaritan Cohanim belong to haplogroup E1b1b1a, formerly E3b1a.. In 1623-1624 the last member of the High-Priestly family, which claimed descent from Eleazar, the son of Aaron, died.
The office was then given to a Levite branch, descended from Uzziel, the son of Kohath. Since that date the priest has called himself "Ha-Kohen Ha-Lewi", which means the Priest-Levite, instead of "Ha-Kohen Ha-Gadol", a title which referred to the High-Priest as in previous times. The approximately 650 individuals comprising the total group of present-day Samaritans trace their ancestry over a period of more than 2,000 years to the Biblical Israelite tribes of Ephraim, Menashe and Levi. As a religious sect, the Samaritans broke away from the main stream of Judaism around the fifth century B.C.E.
The biblical tradition of the origin of the Cohen family among the Samaritans is found in 2 Kings 17:27-28, where it indicates that only one Israelite Cohen was sent back from exile in Assyria, circa 722 BCE, by the King of Assyria to teach those living in the Northern Kingdom of Israel (Samaria). This suggests a strong association of haplogroup E3b1a with the biblical Cohanim who authored and compiled the biblical text of the Book of Kings. In the same period that the Northern Tribes were exiled to Assyria, the Assyrians relocated those non-Israelites to the region around Samaria. The latter people appointed other non-Israelite Cohanim from their own people. They performed non-Israelite-authorized priestly functions as observed by the biblical, priestly author at the time of the composition of the Book of Second Kings (cf. 2 Kings 17:32-34). This sequence of population may have been an origin for some among the J1 and J2 Cohanim haplotypes observed among Jewish populations today.
See also
External links
-
-
- (Family Tree DNA)
- (Family Tree DNA)
-
|
| |
|
|
