DNA testing is frequently showing that the Syrian Christians or Nazaranis are Jewish in paternal bloodline.

There are far too many Cohen and Levy DNAs in us. The average Nazarani is incapable of fathoming the meaning of this.

One laughed at my talk on this, that I felt like an idiot. Our culture seems to make us think that we are largely converts from Hinduism. Bishop Menezes of AD1599 has won.

He made us believe that we are Hindu converts and not of Jewish bloodline. And to make matters worst, many of our fair skinned Nazaranis believe that we are ‘Namboodhiries’.

We are not just talking about one Haplogroup. There are other indications also. Is it that all those 27 people who tested are some kind of kins of west asian migration.

It is quick to make a conclusion at this stage with the initial set of results. Even if some concludes that’s better as far as evidences are concerned than the conclusions hundreds of family historians made in our community on stupid boasting of Brahmin origin.

May I ask you the reverse question on Nasrani Menorah. How do you claim Nasrani Menorah as Persian Cross ? Have this been excavated anywhere in Iraq ? On what basis we can make this link as it is of Church of East. Since when lotus is part of Assyrian or Chadleon motif?

I think people are a little quick to claim Jewish ancestry. While I think it would be interesting if this is the case, the Haplogroup J2 (M172) that many of us Syrian Christians have simply points to West Asia and not necessarily to the Jews. That we have west asian ancestry is no surprise due to immigration to Kerala from West Asian–as the article indicates.

But I think what’s happening is people are amplifying one small fact (the presence of the J2 Haplogroup in our blood) into a gigantic story of how the Syrian Christians of Kerala were Jews, and how the Persian Crosses are actually “Nasrani Menorahs”. Since when is the cross of the Church of the East a menorah? It is a cross. Its interesting pattern is a common motif of the Church of the East. Take a look at pictures of the old Assyrian churches in Iraq, and the Nestorian stele in China — they have a similar design.

Hey,

I agree that George Mathew on our coming from the middle east but not necessarily jewish. The most likely explanation consistent with the rise of Islam, is the exile of many communities around the world fleeing their homelands to escape persecution, from the jews to parsees and definitely syrian christians. Basically it would be comfortable to say that we are actually Semites from the still surviving Assyrian christian areas like syria-jordan-iraq-iran. The predominance of the J2 haplotype sort of confirmed what the British felt too during the ethnographic surveys of India, where they compared the Nasrani facial measurements with those of the Armenoids (not necessarily armenian but semitic).

I wish our history wasn’t so hazy, is it reasonable to say that we are still not 100% sure of our origins yet?

There is a syrian christian project at family tree dna (www.ftdna.com) which has some interesting results. Lets get one thing straight, we might have some brahmin descent, but we shouldn’t crow and make that our whole identity as we should identify more with the dravidian culture we are from. Plus lets get rid of this high caste, low caste mentality, we are christians, in Christ there is no difference and becoming christian should uplift anyone who wants to do so. O.k. now the results of the ftdna are very enlightening. So far of the participants paternal ancenstry haplogroup; a quarter have R1A which is a Indo-european marker, a quarter have J2 which is possilby jewish or middle easter, and a quarter have L(1 or 2) which is a dravidian marker, while the rest were a variety of other markers. Our ancestry is very mixed and shows indigenous dravidian converts, local jewish or immigrant middle eastern descent, and brahmin converts or possibly armenian or persian and/or greek descents. These are the possiblities, but one thing is for certain, many people came to christ from many sections of society and many parts of the world, lets keep that heritage proud by treating others like we treat ourselves, and be peacemakers in the world, like our Christ told us to.

You seem to be a true Christian Jim.

I have friends from most part of India. Other than Punjabis and Anglo-indians, the Syrian Christians are the next sect who keep on telecasting their ancestry like a weather forecast in a radio. This can been seen with punjabis too, they speak as if they are the best in India, whilst propagating the message of their fair skin, bravery and promoting Gurunanak who according to them is second to nothing. I quiet often get embarrassed by their attitude towards brown looking madrasees(as they call both kerala, karnataka and tamilnadu people). They praise our education coupled with our industrial backwardness which is obviously true. I am also not happy to talk anything about Anglo-Indians which I feel is really worthless – the concubine parental histories, with not even a micro pinch of pride to claim. Quite often I can easily draw parallels with these three communities.

Punjabi – Warriors & Fair Skin
Anglo-Indians – British and European parental claims
Syrian Christians – Brahmanical and Jewish claims

Meanwhile the above two has some sort of phenotype evidence to support, but the latter sections claim resembles a puzzle, equipped with vibrant folklores and fantasy stories.

A simple logical question is this. Why do we need a Brahminical shadow to support our identity. Cant we say that “we are Christians” or do we feel it isn’t fetching an appropriate level of respect. As Anglo-Indians say “We have a white ancestry” so we need a separate parking space! or like treat as masters!

SHAME! to see this third world attitude.

Dear BG

You doesnot seem to be a Nasrani or a Christian. Here are my thoughts on your comments raised in some posts.

The comparison of Syrian Chrsitians with Punjabi’s and Anglo Indians are illogical and ludicrous.

Guru Nanak Dev, the founder of Sikhism lifespan is from 1469–1538. Anglo Indians starts further in time line 1812 and 1813 ( legalised). These are kind of pretty open periods in Indian history. We do have records straight. Even the Nasranis has records from 6th century onwards as proff in this soil. (The six Pahlavi crosses). There are magna carta of privileges ranging from 3rd century till the plates whose pictures are given in the article.

What is the puzzle and vibrant folklore in this ? Every vibrant community has folklores and in 2000 years of existiance its quite natural to have many folklores. Is there anything wrong in that ?

Secondly NSC NETWORK has a pre defined position. Please read the objectives. Did you find anything offensive in that to be of concern. Did you find anything in this article as fantasy stories ?

Oh, man in our cyberspace we have more than a dozen sites dedicated to Christian bashings in India from pariwar fraternity making crooked stories.

Its live and let live brother as long as there is nothing offensive against anyone, no one need to be extra cautious about NSC objectives.

Last but not least, you seem to be unware of the most of the catchy discussions happening in these community. The creme le de mas of this community and preachers are talking about introducing “Om” to replace “Amen” in prayer for the obuvious reason you can assume.

On the bottom level the active participants in NSC are just trying to provide intellectual support to tackle the issues with in the community before it get spread out and become a dangerous situation in socio political scene in India.

Hey BGfromNZ

Actually the reason why we are concerned about the background of syrian christians is that no one knows the truth and there are little details in our traditions and names and few words that are totally of ancient syriac origin, that one cannot ignore this. I do NOT believe at all in the brahminical origins, as there is absolutely no proof that brahmins were even in Kerala back in AD 42.

The history behind the origins of Punjabis and Anglo indians are very certain and it really isn’t that hazy since their traditions can be explained and there is no particular aspect of their culture that makes it so mysterious.

Now, lets say another christian in India say the Latin Christians of kerala, they were either anglo-indians or the fisherfolk, when they goto church they follow exactly the Roman catholic rites. Their mass is exactly like the roman catholic mass, etc. And if they use Roman words, none of us would be surprised, since it would have been obtained directly from the Roman catholic bible.
For the Konkani Catholics, its very easy too, they follow a roman catholic rite, but they are originally Saraswat brahmins, and the conversions just took place after the Portuguese came, so it is well documented and whatever claims that are made of their ancestry are verifiable.

For us nasranis, we use named like Varghese, chacko, etc (gewargis-geevarghese-varghese, yakub-chacko, yohan-john, etc etc in ancient syrian). Words like Qurbana, Pesaha (same words are still used by the syrian christians in the middle east). When I told my palestinian christian friend that we call ourselves nasranis, he was surprised as heck. He said that Nazareth in palestine is actually called Nasra by the arabs even now, and nasrani even now in the arab language would mean “From nazareth”. I mean how suspicious is this? Do I just listen to this and just completely think of these as coincidence…. well no… obviously are are still not certain of our history, and it is very unsettling to know that as well. So people came up with bullshit like brahmin conversion and stuff.

Let me tell you something, if you follow known migrations of communities from one place to another and if in isolation, then most of the traditions are lost, but the only words preserved would be the ones that denotes acts of high importance. Qurbana = mass, pesaha = passover, boths word that would be of utmost importance to a christian community due to the connection with the church, was left completely unaltered. Same thing even when you compare Zoroastrian and Vedic faiths, the stories are all different and teachings are different but even then you can tell there is a connection between the 2 due to similarities in some of the names of the gods, like Mitra, Indra, etc.

I know some of you may not have known this, but I am sure some of your grandmas or your mothers would have told you at some point that you should not have yoghurt with Fish. This is also a little known jewish tradition even followed now.

Now look at konkani catholics or anglo-indians or most other communities, they do not have any inconsistencies in their culture that have an undocumented out-of-country origin. We have archaic words that are remnants of an assyrian culture in the middle east that has been relatively well documented as opposed to our community of nasranis where everything is based on theories and speculations without solid evidence.

So look at the peculiarities of these people somewhere in the south of india, in kerala who call themselves syrian christians. And if someone told you all of the above, and you still said that there could be nothing interesting about the origin of the community, well then I would have no words to say to you.

Dear BG,

It was a bit odd to read your reply asking not to speak about your faith and religion. Not that I think it is some ones business to speak about your faith, but i am amused by the non- parallel consideration to talk about Nasrani history with allegations but at the same time questioning anyone who speaks about your belief rudely. Nasrani history is not political history, it is the history of a Christian community.

Questions on general policies

We have explained our policies in About NSC page and if you are ready to adhere to our policies from time to time ( as it stands ) you are most welcome to participate irrespective of you following any faith, religion or views or what ever be your intention of being here. It is a privilege for us to have active enthusiasts on Nasrani history from outside ( if you are ) the community.

Recently we removed the moderation on discussions. We have received few complaints from people with in and outside the community that we are moderating anti oriental comments as well as criticisms.

As rightly pointed out, NSC Network has a pre defined position. We are pro- Orientals. The collaborators and participants here are from different denominations with in the Nasrani community. We have difference of opinions in many but we work together with mutual respect despite of the differences. Our Pro- Oriental stand doesn’t mean that we don’t tolerate criticism. Positive criticism are most welcomed in a neat language.

There is absolutely nothing wrong in calling fake, forgery etc if there are absolute reasons to call. We can not tolerate over enthusiasm to use Pariwar trademarked verbology for blind allegations just by the reason that this is a Christian forum.

What ever yours or anyone’s intention you are most welcome if you talk in neat language of mutual respect. We doesn’t have any interest to bring in stupid allegations and counter allegations or the north Indian syndromes of minority- majority hatred here. My only request is to understand that you are talking about the culture, history of a community and be choosy on the language you use. If you cant take criticism please don’t vomit the same.

It is our intention to run this as a non – moderated forum. Our position stand as it is. It is what it is and there are no compromises on that.

No one, including me or collaborators has any grandness on opinions on debates. You are most welcome to criticise,correct, point out errors and mistakes but please do that in a language suited in a forum running on Christian principles.

[ I just outlined this as a general guideline for smooth discussions and that doesnot mean that BG, you were very offensive. I must say your criticism was positive than many ]

The first concept that needs to be made clear is- Who is/was a jew ? Jews were/are the followers of the religion of the Southern Kingdom of Israel. Today’s jews we see are least Hebraic and have much European/Khazarian blood in them. But still they are called Jews. Why ? Because the term ‘Jew’ has been generalized for all practicing Judaism, wrongly and this arose from the English translated version of the Bible.

All Jews today are not descendents of ancient Hebrews or Israelites. There were periodic conversions into Judaism from other religions as seen in Ashkenazis who have much of khazarian blood. Judaism was a religion of those of Judah, Benjamin and other Southern tribes. What about the Northern tribes of North Israel ? They were not called Jews atleast till recent times. They had their own kingdom after Solomon’s time. They were just called Hebrew Israelites. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob…. They were never Jews but Hebrews. And after Jacob and his 12 sons came the term ‘Israelite’.

Then if Nasranis are showing J2 hgps. with Cohens and R1a with levite matches then it cannot be generalized to call all of them Jews but more rightly Hebrew Israelites if the Lost Tribes origin of Nasranis by Asahel Grant is proved by science. This Israelite stock may also contain Judahite Jews too. Cohens and levites are historically not from Judah tribe hence not jews …. But Israelites from tribe of Levi. Again what about other tribes ? They were also J2, E, etc… but with general West Asian DNA minus Cohens or levite matches.

It is only to avoid confusion and for convenience that the term Jew is generalized for all Israelites today.

Similarly if Cohen and levite DNAs are found in Nasranis then it is logical to an extent that the other middle-eastern DNA match results could indicate Israelite ancestry, since genetic relation between samples is seen in the project results even of people who are not familialy related. Otherwise, exclusively Levites and Cohen priests settling in Kerala or anywhere else, is beyond logic and common sense. The other tribes should have also come with these priests here with the latter to perform priestly duties of the entire Israelite community and thus most probably the general J2s and West Asian DNAs we see in the project could be of other Israelite tribes. This is the major probability.

Dear John,

Perhaps you got a point in your comment. It may be too much of a ‘generalization’ to call all Syrian Christians’ as Jewish and the Archbishop may be wrong.

Dr. Grant’s book should be given weightage. i would not say ‘heavy’ but moderate. In the book the members of the COE is called ‘Nazerenes’. Now whether you agree or not, Nazerenes are Hebrew as against Gentiles who are called Christians.

Dear John,

I am not a good debater because I am now falling back a little ashamed of myself. I should not have so readily admitted that the ‘Orthodox Archbiship’ may be wrong. He may be for all we know, but one can’t say it for we really don’t know. We should have given weightage to the fact that he know every pulse of the middle east and he speaks from experience. Also, the person who was interviewing the Archbishop was Bernstein, one of the leading young anthropologist. who is himself a Jew and his grandfather and others in the family lie buried in the middle east.

If we decide to say that the ARchbishop was wrong, then the whole reputation of Bernstein is gone with the wind. For it was his reserach/chase of the ‘Holy Grail’ matter that let to all this. This means his methods are also flawed.

Since I felt that I held the winning card of the members of the COE being called ‘Nazerenes, I will willing to forego pushing on to the Archbishop/Besrnstein matter. I sacrificed that point for a sure knowledge that all Nazerenes are Hebru.

Let us not rush to conclusions. Let us respect other’ s views also. It is better to be aware
of facts ,than to be blind followers. hence let us welcome the views of all intersted.

people of arakuzha,kothamangalam,milakompe(thodupuzha) – a small confined area of eastern part of ernakulam district.- we got ourselves the history of st.thomas who visited these places to convert a small number of brahmin families.the syrian catholic/jacobite population of this places -follows mun-kudummi etc until a century back.and there is the martial arts training followed by syrian christians here(kalaripayat).dear jackson et al ,is there some DNA tests that you conducted on the Syrian Christian families of these places?please do take the samples.it will be very interesting to see the results.

I heard ,apart from Arakuzha ,some parts of thrissur district also claims namboodiri origins.I am interested in knowing more.
Thanks!

Dear All,

Many of you in this forum will remember me as the ‘Yehudi fanatic’. FTDNA has sent my DNA for a free ‘Cohen’ testing and now it is confirmed 100% that I am Cohenaim and so also 4 other J2s in Jacob’s list. So, there is now good Cohen representation. As you know, Jacob is Admin for the ‘Syrian Christian DNA’ and Bonnie for ‘J2s’ and below Debbie Katz is for ‘Cohen’.

She has written a letter to a new member to the ‘Cohen’ club. Her name is Ari. Full copy of this letter is with Jacob and Jackson. Pleasae note the reference to us ‘The Syrian Christians of India’.

For privacy reasons, I am not including the email addresses of dozens of Cohens. Let us be happy that now in that list are 5 Malabar Nasranis.
Cohen = Thirumeni=Namboothiri. I think the equation has been solved.
To those who are new to the name ‘Cohen’, it means the direct blood descendent of ‘Aarron’ the brother of Moses. They alone could hold the post of ‘High Priest of Israel’.

***************************

Shalom, Ari! I just noticed you are a 12 marker match with my father (William Katz, but listed under my name as I’m the genetic genealogy fanatic!).

I’m wondering…are you a relative of Robert Schottenstein (of the Ohio Schottensteins), also in our group, who descends from Ephraim Schottenstein of Suwalki, Lithuania?

If not, I’d love to get info from you on what you know of your paternal family history (father’s name/birthplace, his father, and so on, as far back as you have traced)and I’m wondering if you have a cohanim tradition in your family.

Your timing is perfect…with the help of Henry Kaplan, my co-administrator, I’ve been organizing this group of matches for years and I’m just now developing a new set of comparison charts and biographical information to send out to everyone. I will be delighted to include you. (We have a formal “group” at ftdna which you can join, but many of our matches are not in that group but still on my email list so they can get information from me.)

Ours is a fascinating set of matches, mostly of cohanim Jewish descent, but with a smattering of Italian Catholics and even some Syrian Christians from India….all of which has helped us put together our clans long-term migration story. You are a valuable piece to our puzzle, although as I’ve mentioned to Robert also, we won’t be able to figure out exactly where you fit in until you’ve tested more markers (37 or ideally, 67). You’ll see what I mean when you see the group’s chart, which I hope to get out this week.

I can give you much more info, but don’t want to scare you away with a too long email! I look forward to hearing from you,

Debra Katz
Los Altos CA USA

Dear George,

So as u said the Cohen population in Syrian Christian database stands at 5 (actually 6 if its proved further, since Dr. Kuruvilla also seems to be closer to the Cohen cluster, im not yet sure) which is roughly 15% of the total sample results. This is indeed a high frequency (though as of now).

Even among the world jewish community the frequency of Cohens is only 3-5% of the total of any given jewish community/population as per established researched database.

Nevertheless, its too early to conclude even a trend, since sample size in our project is small. Let’s wait and watch, since its voluntary self-paid test order it takes time.

Dear Jackson,

Is there any correlation between priestly families and the presence of this gene? I thought that in the past, priestly vocations were reserved for only certain families — or perhaps, this is fiction.

Do the results include samples from Pakallomattom and/or other families with a long history of priests?

Just wondering …

Hi Jackson

As a naive observer, I am just skeptical about our West Asian Origin.

So far all the DNA results have yielded R1a, R2, J2, H and L , all of which are found commonly in South Indian populations. No samples are found of E3b, R1b, and G, which are common across the Middle East. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/archaeogenetics/1547718128/) We could say that these were a result of Late migration to those areas (i.e, after Nasranis emigrated). Then the earlier stock of Nasranis would have consisted of only J2, R1a (and probably L and H if you take Iran),

But that would be a kind of coincidence. Also, if J2 Cohen is claimed to be unique to Nasranis among South Indians, we should find out whether there are any J2 Cohens in other populations of South india.

Maybe we should wait for still more samples, however, looking at the current sample(with the possible exception of J2 Cohen), the first hypothesis would be of an Indian upper/middle caste population.

As for mtDNA, I guess there are almost no doubts that M* and R* are native to India from the Paleolithic.

Do the ‘red’ haplogroups indicate that they are not at all tested? Are they predicted fully on family tree?
In any case, I think we should be looking for one sample from each patrilineal family line rather than individuals, and count the no of samples, if we are interested in the haplo % of our topmost ancestors. In that case, N = 39 -19(red haplo) = 20.

Dear John Mathew,

The co-relation between the unique ‘Cohen’ gene sequence or signature and its relation to the Hebrew Priestly class male have been establishes by research which started long back. This has proven to be more than a fiction wherein Jewish males claiming and in fact of Priestly oral traditions were tested and confirmed to carry this common set of genetic signature that sets them apart from the rest of the Jewish population.

Why this sequence is so unique ? Well as we know the Aaronite (Cohens) and non-aaronite Levites were Priestly Hebrew class with common distant ancestor(s)… whoever He may be. This commonality passed on to their sons which we call the ‘Cohen sequence’ or Cohen Modal Haplotype, CMH found in J1 and J2 groups or Levite Modal Haplotype, LMH found almost in R1a group and also few others.

How can such a sequence of markers be found in common in such a high percentage of Priestly class Jews (or Israelites) unless it actually was passed on and preserved without major mutations ! Genes dont lie and research has established. There are plenty of papers out there which describe the findings and substantiate with evidence, tradition-wise and scientifically. These are the two inseparable parts of genealogy studies.

So what the Bible all along describes that only Aharon’s sons were given High Priestly duties and other Levites to be their “assistants” is not just fables but as u see scientifically true !

So its not a mere co-incidence that most of the J2 and R1a samples in our database are matches to the Modal Haplotypes carrying the signatures or their variants. Had it been a sample or two with a little vague similarity I would have been sceptical. But thats not the case as I have been describing all along this forum.

A very high proportion of our samples are either perfect or close matches to the CMH and LMH as the case may be and that too inter-related, though familialy they may be different. That speaks volumes if u read well. It shows there are few and common contributors to our paternal gene pool and we may not be that genetically distinct from each other as we thought we are. As I said we need more samples for any conclusion but the trends are surely establishing.

And yes, the Nasrani genetic database does include Pakalomattam and such males who claimed “Brahminical” origins.

I had earlier told on NSC that the project administrator himself is from Pakalomattam family and is confirmed tested to be a J2a Cohen with genetic relations with Ashkenazi Jewish Priestly families today. This news has gone around long back in research circles.

So also 5-6 other J2 samples are confirmed with Cohen ancestry and already there in the world Cohen database list. And again this is a news that has taken even the Jews across the globe by surprise, though not I am surprised. George Mathew was not bluffing when he presented his test results here as been a Cohen tested and confirmed !

Thanks

Jackson

Dear SV,

I just thought of replying to ur comments individually….

“As a naive observer, I am just skeptical about our West Asian Origin.”

Well you are one of the many. No worries, u will learn. Thats good actually if you are positively sceptical. Go around this forum and threads wherein I have posted much info on the DNA test results.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-

“So far all the DNA results have yielded R1a, R2, J2, H and L , all of which are found commonly in South Indian populations. No samples are found of E3b, R1b, and G, which are common across the Middle East. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/archaeogenetics/1547718128/) We could say that these were a result of Late migration to those areas (i.e, after Nasranis emigrated). Then the earlier stock of Nasranis would have consisted of only J2, R1a (and probably L and H if you take Iran)”

Yeah haplorgoups AS SUCH are found across the globe. But thats not genealogy genetics comments and predicts on ancestries. We have things like haplotypes, marker values, matches, etc… And after having done all this the concerned research persons are opinionating that the Nasrani samples are nowhere near nor related to the other Indian populations, paternally. Yes the only exceptions are the H and few of the L samples which are indeed indicative of local origins for the corresponding families.

R1b, E3b and G are NOT so very “common” across the middle-east ! R1b is almost absent there and is concentrated around western european, the british isles, etc. E3b is originally from North African ancestry and also is afro-semitic in origin and common in Jews as it entered the Hebrew population after the Exodus period from Egypt. It is genetically come from outside into the original Hebrew race though it doesnt matter religion-wise. And its frequency decreases eastwards this region into middle-east.

G is also NOT of middle-eastern “origin”. Its highest frequency and therefore u can say its possible origin is around Turkey and Caucasia (Georgia, Azerbaijan, etc.) and the Russian steppes. Yes, many Jews also have the G haplogroup and if Im not wrong as far as I have read and know its specifically G2c which is found in Jews.

WHy all the above admixtures ? Because Jews and Hebrews were never a endogamous people and Judaism was a highly proselytizing religion in ancient times. Therefore the Jews have developed a common set of genetic markers after having come together from varied original inputs and formed what we have a mosaic yet unique and distinct set today. Because after they joined in they were endogamous within the community and preserved paternal lines.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-

“But that would be a kind of coincidence. Also, if J2 Cohen is claimed to be unique to Nasranis among South Indians, we should find out whether there are any J2 Cohens in other populations of South india.”

Yeah they are already finding out and have found out. J2 Cohens are absent in the other populations from the research work done so far by different scientists. Actually it was the so-called other populations that had been studied earlier while our community hadnt gone into scientific search. Now even that has started and results are coming out. The paternal lineage/origin results say we are distinct from the others around. You may believe it or not. I have commented on the few exceptions. Also read my reply to Mr. John Mathew which also is relevant for you.

“Maybe we should wait for still more samples, however, looking at the current sample(with the possible exception of J2 Cohen), the first hypothesis would be of an Indian upper/middle caste population.”

You may hypothesize as u like but thats not acceptable as far as the results say. And yes, sample size is low to conclude anything which is already stated on the project homepage as u must have definitely read. And I dont understand what u mean by “upper-caste” still. That tag is difficult to leave behind I know. No worries again.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-

“As for mtDNA, I guess there are almost no doubts that M* and R* are native to India from the Paleolithic.”

Now u sound like a person who knows some genetics or atleast has read something. Yes, true, M*type of mtDNA is Asian/Indian/Indo-Persian or whatever u may call it. R* type mtDNA is not local Indian. It is of course common in the so-called upper-caste Indians (North and South) but has been originated from the Near East and Persia, outside India. It has further subsets again. R* is a parent haplogroup of more sub-sets in mtDNA types. So it “could be” again from the Indian maternal pool as u said.

Well one of R* type mtDNA in our database is of a west asian type. Its not Indian anyway for sure. But exactly what needs confirmation since the project is now concentrating on Y-DNA results.

But maternal ancestry more or less is local in origin from the huge trend seen, whatever caste is not the point of genetic studies.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-

“Do the ‘red’ haplogroups indicate that they are not at all tested? Are they predicted fully on family tree?
In any case, I think we should be looking for one sample from each patrilineal family line rather than individuals, and count the no of samples, if we are interested in the haplo % of our topmost ancestors. In that case, N = 39 -19(red haplo) = 20.”

For the red marked haplogroups u can read on the project results page. It is a tested result. Well I couldnt understand or digest your “formula/equation”. Sorry, I have no idea what it means. Is that from a established source or your own thought ? You urself said we should wait for more samples then why do u come up with such equations and % ratios now ? Well those results displayed are for individual distinct paternal families. And a Y-DNA result speaks for an entire male lineage of a paternal side family not just the tested individual. There is one sample exception, you may minus it in the total.

Finally u can contact the project admin for more details and doubts if any. Also read the reply to John Mathew on R1a and J2, etc.

Thanks

Jackson

Dear Jackson,

Thanks. To be clear, I was not contesting the Cohen Priestly class concept. I was asking about whether there is any correlation between Kerala Syrian Christian priestly families (i.e., the Pakallomattams, and other key priestly families of the Syriac Catholics and Orthodox of Kerala) and the Cohen marker. Thanks for confirming Pakallomattam is J2 — this saves some of us some cash!

Hopefully some Kollam Muthalallys and Thulassery Manapurathu descendants take this test so we can get some more details on the Mar Sabor / Mar Aphroth migration (since those two families, and possibly others, claim to descent from immigrants of that migration).

By the way, there are records of the East Syriac Catholicos/Patriarch authorizing the marriage of Persian Christians and Indians way back. I think many of these Persian Christians were ethnic Persian and not Syriacs since Pahlavi is older than Syriac in Kerala. Is there anything in the results that suggests Persian ancestry? Perhaps this is difficult to answer because the Persians were a mixed people?

Dear John Mathew,

Well regarding Persian ancestry I am still not sure because Persians were/are the most varied people in the world genetic database as u said correctly.

No one is still sure who are the actual ethnic and original “Persians”. Some say the Zoroastrians. Persia was a place where many cultures confluenced. So its difficult to predict and there are many hypothesis out there.

But yes the Zoroastrians and any community connected to Persia even vaguely have the occurence of R2 haplogroup in them. Almost 50% of the Parsis/Zoroastrians tested are said to be R2 as per one paper. And even Armenians (who are related to Persians as Armenia was a part of the Persian empire) have a high frequency of R2. Also the Ashkenazi Jews in and around Persia have good frequency of R2 haplogroup. So its like a mystery for this haplogroup. Its also rarely seen in India. So its origins are taken to be Persia.

In the Nasrani database we have 5 samples that are R2 which is significant but they do not match the other R2 samples found in other Indian communities. Few of our R2’s are closer to the Armenian and Ashkenzai Jewish R2 types in marker values. Others have no matches with any other community anywhere ! Thats because R2 is a scattered group.

But our R2 samples might have something to do with migrants “from” the Assyrian/Persian empire considering the notable frequency in our database, whose original ancestry/ethnicity cannot be guessed now.

And do not take for granted that all families “claiming” Pakalomattam or the famous priestly family heritage will be J2 Cohens ! Who knows how many of these claims are true and not made-up ? Only few of them might be genuinely so. Im just playing a positive critic here… Be informed !

We already see how easily history and claims can be altered as per the social need while the truth may be unquestioned. So take it with a pinch of salt.

But yes, many of the “Brahmin” claiming families will have a Cohen or Levite relation as seen in the project results. And in the database there are samples which also include native Indian/Dravidian ancestry. Even these families must be having “Brahminical” claims for sure. So how do we explain this then ?

So u see the big mess we are in ?

Dear Jackson

Thanks for your detailed replies.

I’ll just clarify my sources and understanding. It’s not to contradict anything. Correct me If I am wrong.

E3b, G, R1b and I:
These two links gave conflicting info (maybe due to difference in their sample size)
1. http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf and
2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/archaeogenetics/1547718128/

E3b is around 15% in Persians and Arabs.
R1b at 5%
I is present around 25% in Persians as per (1)
G is present at 12% in Persians as per (2)

I agree regarding the origins, i.e G is from Caucasses and E3b from North Africa. Apart from that, ‘I’ from Europe, R1b from Europe. However, the question is when did they come to Middle East/Persia? After 1st century? Upper Paleolithic? Islamic conquest of Persia? These are difficult questions for us.

Note that the historicity of Exodus is doubted even by Rabbis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wolpe#Historicity_of_the_Exodus

As for J2 Cohen, I think, there were 6 Nasrani matches in Ysearch. 4 of them where from the same family. So, effectively 3. But the samples from India on ysearch are very few, maybe around 100-200, and J2 at 25, and the samples from Kerala scanty; Only one sample-from the Nair project I guess.

But still, I agree that a 12 marker Cohen haplotype match is remarkable, considering that it is not yet found in the Middle East, and other Indian samples.

Is there any y-haplogroup testing done on Cochin Jews?

I tried matching some of the Nasrani sounding R1a1 samples found on ysearch. None of them gave any ‘0′ distance matches. And anyway, I’ve seen on some pages that this is said to be of Ashkenazi origin, not from the early centuries.

My doubt related to ‘red’ haplogroups is because of what they’ve mentioned on the results page:

“Haplogroups in red have been predicted by Family Tree DNA based on unambiguous results in the individual’s personal page. This has been placed on this GAP page for your ease and convenience. Please note that for any predicted results we see no reason for ordering a SNP test to confirm the Haplogroup”

So it sounded like they were not tested.

mtDNA R,M:

I understand your point regarding mtDNA. I felt from the haplogroup maps that mtDNA migrations across natural geographic boundaries are limited when compared to y-DNA.

Table 6 of this paper: http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Metspalu2004.pdf doesn’t give any major caste based differentiation on mtDNA. They used relatively larger no of samples, than others which claimed caste based linkages.

However there is a region based differentiation. Western states like Gujarat and Kashmir show more West Eurasian mixture, decreasing as we go south along the west coast of Maharashtra, Karnataka and finally Kerala. Interestingly, Rajasthan shows less West admixture due to the Thar natural barrier I guess. Similarly across the Chinese border you can see Eust Eurasian mixture.

The sample taken for Kerala was almost entirely from Cochin Jews. It showed little presence of any West Eurasian haplogroups (which were also probably locally inherited, considering the West Eurasian % on the Indian West coast)

I used the term ‘caste’ as this is what most genetic study papers on India concentrate on, apart from region. This had nothing to do with the Namboothiri origin myth.

Though the origin of the R is in the Middle East, looking at Figure 5 of the above study, I thought most of the subclades of R, apart from the one named by other letters and the East Eurasian R*, are found in the Indian Sub Continent.

By West Asian R* did you mean that R* may get resolved into HV, U or the like?

y-dna R2:

The Wikipedia page says,
“At least 90% of R2 individuals are located in the Indian sub-continent”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R2_(Y-DNA)#Distribution
http://www.ethnoancestry.com/index_files/index_data/Haplogroup_R2_Manoukian.pdf
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380230&rendertype=figure&id=FG4

Thanks
SV

Dear Jackson

Thanks for your detailed replies.

I’ll just clarify my sources and understanding. It’s not to contradict anything. Correct me If I am wrong.

E3b, G, R1b and I:
These two links gave conflicting info (maybe due to difference in their sample size)
1. (http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf) and
2. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/archaeogenetics/1547718128/)

E3b is around 15% in Persians and Arabs.
R1b at 5%
I is present around 25% in Persians as per (1)
G is present at 12% in Persians as per (2)

I agree regarding the origins, i.e G is from Caucasses and E3b from North Africa. Apart from that, ‘I’ from Europe, R1b from Europe. However, the question is when did they come to Middle East/Persia? After 1st century? Upper Paleolithic? Islamic conquest of Persia? These are difficult questions for us.

Note that the historicity of Exodus is doubted even by Rabbis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wolpe#Historicity_of_the_Exodus

As for J2 Cohen, I think, there were 6 Nasrani matches in Ysearch. 4 of them where from the same family. So, effectively 3. But the samples from India on ysearch are very few, maybe around 100-200, and J2 at 25, and the samples from Kerala scanty; Only one sample-from the Nair project I guess.

But still, I agree that a 12 marker Cohen haplotype match is remarkable, considering that it is not yet found in the Middle East, and other Indian samples.

Is there any y-haplogroup testing done on Cochin Jews?

I tried matching some of the Nasrani sounding R1a1 samples found on ysearch. None of them gave any ‘0′ distance matches. And anyway, I’ve seen on some pages that this is said to be of Ashkenazi origin, not from the early centuries. Well I might’ve missed something there.

My doubt related to ‘red’ haplogroups is because of what they’ve mentioned on the results page:

“Haplogroups in red have been predicted by Family Tree DNA based on unambiguous results in the individual’s personal page. This has been placed on this GAP page for your ease and convenience. Please note that for any predicted results we see no reason for ordering a SNP test to confirm the Haplogroup”

So it sounded like they were not tested.

mtDNA R,M:

I understand your point regarding mtDNA. I felt from the haplogroup maps that mtDNA migrations across natural geographic boundaries are limited when compared to y-DNA.

Table 6 of this paper: http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Metspalu2004.pdf doesn’t give any major caste based differentiation on mtDNA. They used relatively larger no of samples, than others which claimed caste based linkages.

However there is a region based differentiation. Western states like Gujarat and Kashmir show more West Eurasian mixture, decreasing as we go south along the west coast of Maharashtra, Karnataka and finally Kerala. Interestingly, Rajasthan shows less West admixture due to the Thar natural barrier I guess. Similarly across the Chinese border you can see Eust Eurasian mixture.

The sample taken for Kerala was almost entirely from Cochin Jews. It showed little presence of any West Eurasian haplogroups (which were also probably locally inherited, considering the West Eurasian % on the Indian West coast)

I used the term ‘caste’ as this is what most genetic study papers on India concentrate on, apart from region. This had nothing to do with the Namboothiri origin myth.

Though the origin of the R is in the Middle East, looking at Figure 5 of the above study, I thought most of the subclades of R, apart from the one named by other letters and the East Eurasian R*, are found in the Indian Sub Continent.

By West Asian R* did you mean that R* may get resolved into HV, U or the like?

y-dna R2:

The Wikipedia page says,
“At least 90% of R2 individuals are located in the Indian sub-continent”
(http://www.ethnoancestry.com/index_files/index_data/Haplogroup_R2_Manoukian.pdf)

Thanks
SV

Dear SV,

On R2 I said it has still to be determined what it’s exact origin is because it is a scattered haplogroup with no specific haplotypes. It is concentrated in and around Persia, Armenia and also in few communities in eastern parts of India. I dont know what link Nasranis might have to eastern Indian states and related migrations. Therefore the paper on ethnoancestry also says the same it does a pan-Indian “sub-continent” presence but not necessarily originated in India.

To see if our R2 samples are of Indian or foreign origin we look for matches as I said. Unfortunately due to the constricted data available for R2 it is not be determined. But it also does not match the existing Indian R2 samples. It is much closer to the Armenian and Ashkenazi Jewish R2. So we cannot conclude anything for now.

For R1a1 Nasranis R1a1 (most of them) are either perfect or close matches to the Ashkenzai Levite Modals (LMH). 3 of our R1a1 samples are exact LMH matches, so that says it. The others are varying in a couple of markers but closer, mutations cud be the reason. As long as the genetic distance is 3 or less the DNAs are related and having common origins. The lesser the distance the more clearer the conclusion. The Indian R1a1 and J2 samples are far from the Nasrani R1a1 and J2. The project admin himself has commented on this. I have also personally checked on ysearch and seen it.

And as far as the Nasrani Cohen samples in our database go they are around 5-6 and from DISTINCT paternal families. I dont know who told u they are from the same family. If they are from the same paternal family they should all be perfect matches “to each other” and its logic ! Firstly u wouldnt get male members from a single family tested… u are wasting money coz they will give same results and thats understood ! Thats not the case here. Get your confusin resolved from the project admin please.

On the mtDNA, R* can again be resolved further as u said if tested further. And one of our R* is just a generation away by one step from mtDNA haplogroup H which is of west asian maternal lineage (also found in people from europe).

Finally, get in touch with the project admin Mr. Manakalathil. He will be the best person for first-hand info. Do not rely completely on wikipedia and websites or already done research. Research opens up new things almost daily ! So it updates itself.

Thanks

Perhaps one should ask *when* these Cohen markers were introduced into the Syrian Christian community. Its well documented that there have been multiple Jewish immigrations to the Malabar coast.

The most recent (afaik) was after the expulsion of Jews from Spain and they came to be known as the “white Jews” in Kerala.

From what I have “heard” these Jews ran out of suitable Jewish women to marry and took brides from the Syrian Christian communities (note plural) as they were deemed “closest”. The descendants were brought up as Syrian Christians.

Its very likely that some of the Cohen markers (especially since they are so close to American based Jews) entered then.

About the Indian markers in Syrian Christian males, I’ve explained that here: http://sharbtho.blogspot.com/2007/12/on-syrian-christians-nasrani-mappilas.html

As I try to point out there, one can expect heterogeneity amongst the Syrian Christians genetically. We’re too old and too mobile a community to retain genetic/cultural homogeneity.

Thanks,
veliath

To add to Deepak’s comment: another possibility is via our intercourse with Syriac Christians (not “Jewish Christians”) from West Asia.

I believe it is also documented that the Jewish Christians in the Eastern Roman Empire and the Persian Empire merged with the Gentile Syriac Christians, for various reasons. So I don’t think it would be surprising if the same J2/Cohen markers in our community were found in the general Syriac Christian communities — the Syriac Orthodox/Catholics, the CoE, the Chaldeans — in the Middle East. Has anyone looked into this?

Perhaps when members of those communities came to Kerala and intermarried with our ancestors (e.g., (1) there are families in Kollam who trace their ancestry the Persian/Syrian colonists of the Mar Sabor/Mar Aphroth era, (2) Mar Andrews’—Kallada Bawa—brother married into a Kerala family, and his descendants include Mor Gregorios of Parumala, and the early bishops of the Malabar Indep. Syriac Church of Thozhiyur, (3) Mar Yuhakim Coorilos came and his brother married into a Kerala family; ironically his descendant is a Protestant bishop — ironic because Mor Coorilos came to stop the spread of Protestant heterodoxy in Kerala, (4) someone on this board claimed his ancestor “Tolani” as a Syriac immigrant) they brought along their J2 DNA. That is — perhaps these J2 Cohens came to Kerala not as Jews but as bonafide Orthodox/Catholic Christians.

Dear Deepak,

You wrote ‘…From what I have “heard” these Jews ran out of suitable Jewish women to marry and took brides from the Syrian Christian communities (note plural) as they were deemed “closest”. The descendants were brought up as Syrian Christians..

If available, can you please give some more details?

I have recently been in couple of Syrian orthodox baptism and marriage and what I could see these Syrian/ west Asian traditions. Open your eyes and look at those people we can easily conclude that these west Asian people with Indian influence on them. then consider how we got our j2 r1a1 r2 in our dna samples. i even feel that we don’t even need a dna result to say these concepts. u need to know how complicated these traditions exist today and continue to go on and where we can find a spot to put these huge Hindu converts in it? and unknowingly westasian blood are distributing through marriages in different denominations and the generations are still go on. but i would say there can be few Hindu converts but they should be melt in these Syrian Christian populations. Debates going on beetween jacobites and orthodox that jacobites want their administration from west Asian bishops because they strongly believe that they are connected to west Asia. people who are just easy commenting something go and stand for an orthodox Syrian church and watch and participated a ceremony and u will see that it not a joke and u will feel the seriousness in it

Dear rp,
Their cravings for the spiritual leadership was always from the West Asia.They might have adopted the Hindu conversion story as blanket to defend the religious persecution .

Hi all,
I am a foundling in this DNA studies and I really dont want to browse net to understand how testing is done etc etc..
I have a question and dont call me stupid!

About this paternal DNA test, does it test only father’s father’s father’s and so on or does it include father’s mother’s father or mother. Similarly for the maternal DNA test. I hope u got my point. I find this very confusing. For all I know inheritance can be from any side of the family. My son looks like my hubby and daughter looks like my father (I look like my mother)..
If you guys Kezhakken/SV/George Mathew/jackson can answer me it will be nice.

Hi Annie,

The paternal dna only comes through the Y chromosome which is basically as you say only father’s, father’s father and so on into antiquity. Mothers is through mitochondrial DNA, and if my understanding is correct it will only be showing maternal DNA whether that be father’s mother or mother’s mother. Hope this help, and others can elaborate if they want. Here are some wiki links to look at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_mitochondrial_DNA_haplogroup

Dear Annie, I would say heritage can be comes to a Syrian Christian member from mother’s father or mother’s mother’ father family and none of them cannot be trace it clearly through DNA test except Y. DNA. if we get a sample from the male side from these families we can know their paternal heritage. What we looking is that if we believe St Thomas came to Malabar it most probably looking for Jewish Israelites in Malabar coast because there was an ancient trade exist in Malabar towards West Asian places and that is tell we have these jewish israelites presences. Our forefathers most probably Jewish, Israelites, Assyrians, Persians and then there can be a chance or some namboothris , nairs among our community. but we know that we all together and we all sharing these blood by having marriage in families. Again let me say probable chance that among Marthoma Christians are the decedents of St Thomas converted people who can be Jewish or Israelites encourage to do a paternal test so that we can know some one specifically showing Jewish ancestry but some samples did it. But that doesn’t mean that others are not sharing these heritage. I would say almost everybody is sharing these heritage but it may not stays in the paternal side and let me say my ydna says r2 which i dont yet found much info on that and my mother’s family ydna r1a1 have plenty of askennaze levites matches. Please wait for Jackson to give you a clear answer regarding Annie’s question

Dear Chacko
Thanks. I did go through the wiki pages.
.
Ctrl C and Ctrl V for those who wonder like me and dont want to ask.

“Most of your DNA is Autosomal and you get it from both parents coming down from all your ancestors.Y is passed soley from father to son.Mitochondrial is passed from mother to both sons and daughters, but only the daughters pass it on to their children.Genealogy DNA companies as a rule use Y & Mitochondrial only as it goes back in a straight line virtually unchanged. Y-DNA and mtDNA tests each only trace a single lineage (one’s father’s father’s father’s etc. lineage or one’s mother’s mother’s mother’s etc. lineage). They will advertise that you can find your “deep ancestral roots.” However it will only be in those 2 lines. Since you are a female you can only get your Mitochondrial done. If you have a brother he can get both. It will not give you your ancestors who were spouses of your direct Y & Mitochondrial ancestors. ”

ie if u are a girl make sure u have a daughter to pass on ur DNA!

Dear RP,
Thanks.
I didnt exactly understand what u meant by this ” Marthoma Christians are the decedents of St Thomas converted people who can be Jewish or Israelites encourage to do a paternal test so that we can know some one specifically showing Jewish ancestry but some samples did it.” Did u mean Marthoma denomination or Marthoma christians as in St Thomas christians.

Any way I am Orthodox with my paternal side being orthodox for the last 8 generations. My maternal side is a mixture of Orthodox and Marthoma. My maternal grandfather was Orthodox and maternal grandmother is marthoma. From what I have seen, there is lot of interdenominational marriage amongst christians of Tiruvalla side,be it Orthodox or Marthoma or CSI.

I guess, I will not learn anything much by testing my DNA as what I gathered from this site is that maternal DNA of those who has tested resulted in an Indian origin.

Dear Annie,

Inheritance and traits for that matter are contributed from both the father’s and mother’s side. If you are speaking of physical traits then yes.

Now coming to the ancestral studies… It is different from the previous one. Y-DNA is the Y-chromosome that is passed on exclusively from father to son to son and so forth un-interrupted for ages. So when a person (male only) tests for his y dna it says about his specific male lineage or paternal founder/ancestor.

Males also carry the mtDNA or mitochondrial DNA from the mother as the father contributes almost nil mtDNA. This is that particular tested person’s maternal lineage only. This mtDNA would be same only for him and his direct siblings. However the mtDNA of his father could be different as his father’s mother is from a different family/lineage. So mtDNA/maternal lineages in a given family could be different at different generations since (different) women ‘enter’ a family as in a patriarchal society. But this family’s Y-DNA remains the same throughout, detected in males of the family.

So when I say my mtDNA is X, it doesnt mean my maternal “ancestors” were from X haplogroup but just my mother’s mtDNA is X. But with Y-DNA haplogroup I can go back ages to my paternal ancestors and find who they were since it passes on uniterrupted. The case would be reverse in a matriarchal society.

Females carry only the mtDNA and no y dna. So a female’s paternal ancestry can be known from her brother’s or father’s test result only.

I also found an interesting comment from your post saying ” if u are a girl make sure u have a daughter to pass on ur DNA! “. Funny but scientifically wrong. A girl/female passes her DNA TO BOTH her male and female children. Thats basically why both men and women carry mtDNA (and X chromosome) which is from their mother. The father passes the Y-DNA or Y-chromosome to his son only.

Thus we get the basic human biology (of the sex chromosomes) of males been ‘XY’ (X from mother and Y from father) in composition while females been ‘XX’ (one X from mother and other X from father) !

mtDNA from the mother plays a very important role in determining many features of a child (male/female). In fact mtDNA (thus mother) has a lot to contribute to physical characters and traits of her children.

I hope I have been clear and not confused you more….. Any more queries are welcome.

Annie,

To exactly learn about your family’s heritage/ancestry you need to get your direct brother or father tested. The results will also apply to you and speak of your paternal ancestry as well.

Genetic studies have nothing to do with denominational barriers which are outwards. The results speak for the entire community as a whole. I hope atleast here people wont be biased and agree that all Thomasine Christians are (were) one community till 16 cent. AD. Down the line and within our genes and DNA we are all one!

Dear Jackson,
Thanks.
Just for the sake of argument, If I had only a son, i will pass my Mt DNA to him but he cannot pass it on to his offspring. But if I have a daughter too, she will pass it on to her children and hopefully that will be a daughter too. (So I can ensure at least ensure that my DNA has lived on for another century. )

I know that this is not the forum for this topic. Thanks to all for ur answers.

Dear Annie,
What i meant Marthoma Christians is that not Marthomites or Marthoma denomination and that is different. But what Marthoma means in general doesn’t matter which denomination it is, it means in suryani saint thomas( mar=saint, thoma=thomas) . More clearly it means the people who converted by St Thomas. We need to know all we all are Syrian Christian or suryani Christani that I think we all rooted someway to the west Asian land may be from palatine Israel Syria, Jewish Christians from Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq which St Thomas evangelize these places same as well as in India. But we may not original in these sense but mixed with few Indians like when Namboothirs, Nair Dravidians, locals converted compared to many immigrants in our Christian community
Again we used to be one before Portuguese arrived in 15th century and Portuguese let all the Syrian Christian converted to Catholics by force and destroyed lot of Syrian Christian ancient documents. Therefore we don’t have any proof regarding our history instead some oral information. After coon kurusu sathyam, our forefather came out from these Portuguese traditions and started to rebuilt the original Aramaic worship except some group and that is the roman catholic and Latin catholic denomination. Then different denominations originated i think Orthodox and Marthoma were right after coonon kurusu sathaym Therefore we are Syrian Christians that people just say first it was catholic. then orthodox or may be Jacobite , Marthoma , CSI , Evangelical, Reeth but nobody has any information what it was 1st century to 15 th century. These I write from my knowledge but Jackson , and few others are best in these to answer annie’s questions

Just Got this news from Jacob Admin

I am Jacob Admin of the Syrian Christan dna project on familytree dna. I welcome you to our group.
I just saw your results and was surprised to see E1b haplogroup which is not yet seen among keralites or Indians. It is clearly a middle eastern haplogroup ( found in southern Europe and Northern African mediteranean areas). This gives more evidence that there were quite a lot of middle eastern migrations to India in the past.

I just saw the E3b entry in our ftdna. I guess that adds more weight to the West Asian hypothesis. Well let’s even wait for more samples, Jackson

Dear SV and Varghese Paul,

The presence of E3b (E1b1b1) clearly resolves the confusion (if any) of West Asian (particularly Jewish) influence on the Nasrani community. E3b for that matter is the second largest haplogroup among Jews, typical of middle-easterners and mediterranean people. It is completely Semitic (southern levant in origin) beyond doubt.

Probably thats the first sample in India to be tested as E3b as the project admin says. And I wouldnt be surprised at all. Also a J1 or G2c among us wouldnt either be surprising. Let’s see….

Dear Varghese Paul,

Are you the E3b tested person with family name Kuttikadan ? Just curious as this is one of my relatives family name from Thrissur dist.

Nice to see such an informative site on St. Thomas Christians. I feel it is a novel leap in tracing the history of St. Thomas Christians through DNA mapping. My very apprehension is whether it is really possible. Human Genome project is only half a way, some are with the view that completion is not possible. Defenetly I beleive that some traits can be traced but not a for authenticated establishment of the history. I am sorry if my knowledge is meager. Need to know more………………

Hi Jackson

As a newcomer, I see from the postings that you have a sound understanding of the genograph.
As most enquiring minds do, I myself have a healthy sense of curiosity about my own ethnic origins in relation to (and despite) my (Knanaya) community’s claims.

I have the following data to share with you for your academic evaluations. The DNA analysis was done through National Geographic’s Genographic Project in March 2008:
Name: Cyril Abraham/House name: Thathamkulam/From: Neezhoor (Kaduthuruthy, Kottayam)
Y-chromosome DNA testing confirms that I belong to: Haplogroup J2 (M172)

The report further elucidates:
The M172 marker defines a major subset of haplogroup J, which arose from the M89 lineage. It is found today in North Africa, the Middle East, and southern Europe. In southern Italy it occurs at frequencies of 20 percent, and in southern Spain 10 percent of the population carries this marker. Both haplogroup J and its subgroup J2 are found at a combined frequency of around 30 percent in Jewish individuals.

And, as to my genetic journey, the report states:
Your ancestors left a physical footprint that matches their genetic journey. Artifacts from ancient towns such as Jericho, also known as Tell el-Sultan, a site close to present day Jerusalem, provide evidence of permanent human settlements to around 8500 BC. The sites also suggest the transition from hunter-gatherer to settled life occurred relatively suddenly. This is where your genetic trail, as we know today, ends.

Furthermore, the Project has provided a map showing the start of the genetic journey: from a point closer to the mid-eastern section of Africa with the title, “Eurasian Adam”, 31,000-79,000 years ago.

Feel free to quote my name and the data as given if it is helpful for your on evaluations and the ongoing discussions. Like I said in my initial posting, I’m open-minded, with an acute enquiring mind, and would not matter one way or the other whatever story my genetic markers may have to say. It is what it is! If you need more info, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Dear Rev. John G. Mathew,

The ‘Human Genome project’ is neither half-way nor under doubts of completion !! The HGP was completed fully with the final drafting out in 2003. You could even google search it for back reference. So we are well past the stage.

Dear Cyril Abraham,

You are the first Kna I’m hearing to belong to J2 haplogroup as u say. J2 is indeed a typically semitic marker/haplogroup. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY JEWISH. It depends on the marker values which gives the haplotype. Just haplogroup doesn’t say much. Has your J2 been further classified if you have taken further tests ? Like for example J2a, J2b, J2a1, J2b2, etc… ?

Dear Cyril Abraham,

And yes, what about your matches ? How many markers did u test for ? What are the DYS values (marker values) ? Please read the above post too.

Jackson

Hi Jackson

No, I have not undertaken additional tests (beyond the initial results).

The Short Tandem Repeats (STRs) for all twelve loci examined are listed as follows:
393/12, 19/16, 391/10, 439/12, 389-1/12, 389-2/18, 388/15, 390/24, 426/11, 385a/14, 385b/17, 392/11

I’m not sure if these are the values you are looking for.

Cyril

Cyril:

I dont know if u have already done the following, but I fed in your STR marker values on ‘ysearch’ (the most popular search site for genetic matches and genetically related people to u or any1 tested, based on STR marker values) and got around 101 matches though at a genetic distance of 2 and more. A genetic distance of 0 or 1 is worth considering, 2 and 3 is somewhat distantly related (depends on community and migration history too) and beyond that the unrelatedness increases and is irrelevant beyond 4.

Almost all of these matches at GD of 2 and 3 are Europeans. There is no middle-eastern or jewish person in the list matching ur results, not even an indication. Most of these are J2b or J2b2. So ur J2 type may be if further tested be classified as J2b, which only a test can say. Also, since u have no matches to existing middle-eastern or jewish people in the ysearch database (where the project results results are pooled), its probably not a Jewish J2 or atleast doesnt match existing and known jewish J2 samples, but could be of a different origin. If ur lineage is unique due to unique STR values, then u might not get any matches, as u havent got any now, so dont worry. Dont conclude it as european either, as 12 marker values are not sufficient to conclude such things, if results are ambiguous. But that J2 is generally speaking “’semitic” in origin is the only fact u can hold for now.

U might contact the Syrian Christian project admin at jacobmanakalathil@gmail.com and ask for his advice if u wish to further dig more details as to what ur J2 says. U might be advised to join the project and transfer the results to the project. Then u might have to take more marker tests which alone will clear the doubts. I cant say on this. You two need to work this out.

Hope that helped.

Jackson

Jackson:
Thank you. No, I hadn’t fed the STR values. Coming to think of it, the NG Genographic Project did hit some “snag” with my specimen – which was not unusual according to them – but it resulted in some processing delay.
I would probably get my specimen analyzed further.

It was quite informative and interesting to read the details you provided; most appreciate your kind efforts.

In history we can see that people in low ladder of the social structure was trying to imitate the higher section by accepting their culture and copying their customs.( Eg. Last centuries the Muslim land lords of Pakistan Punjab claimed rajputs ancestry and now they are claiming Arabic /sayyid ancestry. And in kerala now all the low cast Hindus are doing rituals like sradham etc ) christens of kerala also no exception now a days they are imitating a lot of hindu customs ,now all most all of the claiming namputhiri or savarna ancestry . it is not true( it’s pathetic that the followers of Jesus Christ born in a family of artisan claiming the high cast birth). Now every body now that the first century AD there were no namputhiri or nair or the present cast system that existed today . these stories are based on margam kali pattu ( another imitation of mohiniyattam and panamkali) that written much later ( the Malayalam and the vattazhuth used in that songs are not earlier than 16th or 17th century. We know that Malayalam and the present cast system come’s around 7-9th century AD, regarding the song if you sang that song in public there will be communal riot sure it is saying that nairs are cremating the dead like “mean chudunathu pole etc and some other words also highly objectionable . Regarding the Jews ancestry among some suriyanis and the haplogroup present in suriyanis. That is true that the kannayi thoma and the converted jews in first century may contributed that. And the middle east origin and haplogroup like M17,M172,M173 etc present in namputhiris and nairs also. My cousin (a namputhiri) his test result is like this R1ai M168>M89>M9>M45>M207>M173>M17 and one another cousin (a nair) also M17 but one of my friend nair is M172.

Dear Johm mathew
In many history book it say as there was brahimns, and also says plenty of jewish merchant there at palayur and st thomas converted them a lot ..but i am not saying any statements they there was jews converted but it says in the book like that . and anywhere it does not say any jewish family as orgin instead a lot of syrian christian family history started out with brahimns converted. but it say there was plenty of jewish merchant and st thomas converted them a lot or may be i m thinkin still they became chrisitan and gone back to israel. sure lot of syrians landed and mix with some converts and it obviously evident in our community. if kanayas are syrians then i heard from them that they even have the blood of jesus means they say they are sort of jew/israelites. you know dont worry but i m mentioning some thoughts

DNA test was conducted on Parayi petta panthirukulam who are the famous twelve castes borne from Pariah woman in Kerala.

Mezhathol Agnihothri successors have L haplogroup, Pakanar successors have H haplogroup, Perumthachan and Naranath Bhranthan successors have R1a haplogroup, Akavoor Chevakar successors have 1b1b haplogroup and Vallon successors have J2 haplogroup. Study was conducted by Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Technology Trivandrum.

ravivarman thampi,

Many people on this forum are already beyond the attitude you have mentioned. There are also many who aren’t. However, your point has been made a no of times on this forum. It’s redundant now.

Hari Das,

I have major doubts regarding this.
- Are there any oral traditions for the castes to trace their ancestry to PPPK? I mean, how do they know the correct castes?
- It’s surprising that for each tribe, samples belong to only one haplogroup. Such homegenity is rarely possible. Or have you misquoted the study?
- All the tribes should have a single ancestor according to the fable. This is not consistent with the y-DNA results. Anyway as I said, the point regarding homgenity should apply here too.
- It’s difficult to say what this study implies. Does it show the distribution of Brahmins (since the fabled male ancestor is a Brahmin) or does it show the distribution for the castes.?
- “Akavoor Chevakar successors have 1b1b “. Did you mean R1b1? That would be most interesting since the haplogroup is rare in the Indian sub continent.
- Most importantly, do you have any references or links to the study?

Jackson,

I have some comments related to the hypothesis we have made so far.

Following is the current status of the Nasrani ftdna Database

y-DNA (N=48)
—————
H: 4 (8.3%)
J2:13 (27.1%)
L :12 (25.0%)
Q: 1 (2.1%)
R1a: 12 (25.0%)
R2 : 6 (12.5%)

There’s a doubtful G(Stivadoros is not a Nasrani sounding name at all)

mt-DNA (N=23)
————-
M: 23 (78.4%)
R: 4 (17.4%)
U: 1 (4.4%)

The E3b entry has turned out to be an H entry. It seems that the Ftdna site probably calculates haplogroup based on the haplotype proababilities first, and maybe defer actual tests later. Or, is it that haplogroup tests are not fully reliable? Just a doubt.

My hypothesis so far.
- At first look the y-DNA distribution is somewhat ‘Indian’
- The mtDNA distribution is clearly ‘Indian’

Why?

H is Indian. It is true that H is found in lesser proportions in central asia, and even in lesser amount in south eastern europe, but rarely in other places. It should also be noted that the H of Europe is present mostly in Roma, a group with Indian origins. Of course the origin of H could be Middle East/Central Asia, however when I say ‘Indian’ it means haplogroups arriving to India before the early centuries AD. I’ll say non-Vedic/Vedic or Indus valley/Pre Indus when we need to differntiate along those timelines. I’m also isolating North East India who have unique mongloid haplogroups apart from common haplogroups with the rest of us.

Now, H is also found across all castes, with a lesser proportion as we move north.

J2 is Indian, but not exclusively. Found across all castes, but mostly in South Indian upper castes, West Indians and Pakistan. Now what seems to be unique with Nasrani J2 is the Cohen marker, which is the only genetic evidence so far. I suspect that J2 could very well be an Indus valley marker as far as India is concerned

L is more Indian than J2, haplogroups like L3 being found outside India too, but India and Pakistan have the highest proportions of L. L is found across all castes, in proportions which only give vague conclusions.

Q is not exclusively Indian, and is scarce in the sub-continent, however, there seems to be no much caste based differentiation. So Q cannot be judged as indicative of Jewish or Brahmin ancestry.

R1a is a very widespread haplogroup streching from Scandinavia and Siberia across Iran/Central Asia till South India. A very controversial one, because of its possible and apparent links with the Aryan Invasion(Migration??) Theory associated with the Vedic civilization. From the studies of Sengupta, it is present in the highest amount in the North Indian Upper caste (45%), however, it is significant among south Indian upper castes (28%), and lower castes (24%). It could be quite possible that it was not exclusively brought to India by late migrations alone, but was also present with previous paleolitihic migrations. The presence of R1a need not be representative of Jewish or Brahmin ancestries. However, the R1a Levite connection is the counter evidence. But the Levite theory as I find it is muddled, not as clear as the J2 Cohen. If we didn’t suspect Levite ancestry, then R1a is quite Indian; Brahmin/not is a different question.

R2 has a slightly similar story as R1a, with the exception that most of R2 is in the subcontinent, and is almost absent in Europe. Again there seems to be some scanty haplotype evidence for the foreign origin of Nasrani-R2s.

- The combination (H,L,J2,Q,R1a,R2) is very much Indian and could be expected of a typical Indian sample, that is not to say that all of these haploroups are Indian but when you see all of them in a group, it is more possibly Indian than anything else. (Not considering J1 Muslims or O North East Indians)

- It could be said that more research needs to be done in analysing Indian samples, however, certain things are conclusive even from the present research, like you would hardly find an H in an English population or that you will hardly find an R1b or I in an Indian population.

- There should be some uniqueness for Nasrani population from the rest of the population, to have foriegn links , as far as haplogroups are concerned it doesn’t exist so far, but as far as haplotypes go it does, in the form of J2 Cohen. But I don’t see any other indian group with a large number of J2s to check whether it is exclusive to us. As you said earlier I’ll check with the project admin, but just speaking my mind.

- Partially, repeating the previous point, at least one unique haplogroup should exist if we have to confirm some foreign ancestry. The E3b seemed to be one, but it now seems to be a case of false analysis.

- I also want to make sure that we are not by any chance fleeced by FTDNA. These are captitalist companies; they might try to generate an artificial interest to get more tests done. FTDNA could be honest and fair, but just stating a possibility.

It could be the case where our samples are not enough. But unless we are too diverse, they speak something about our ancestry. IMO, If we are waiting for testing a foreign ancestry that could possibly be less than 2% or something, it’d be a good idea to get tests done for families known to have unique phenotypes.

Speaking of mtDNA, the combination (M,R,U) is very very Indian. My best guess is that we have little or no foreign ancestry on the maternal sides, otherwise we should see some unique middle eastern haplogroups here. I don’t think R will resolve to any of its descendants considering the high frequency of M (found in Indian and not in MidEast, true that M is there in China too, however, the subclades are unique to India)

I’m sure that you will have objections here. But just putting arguments forward.

Just think of this: How much is the probability that a haplogroup present in the Middle East, but not in the Indian Subcontinent, wouldn’t be present in an Indian population suspecting Middle Eastern ancestry.

One of my assumptions for the above hypothesis is that
- The genetics of Indan subcontinent would be largely determined by its natural boundaries (The himalayas, the Hindu Kush and the seas). (especially for the paleolitihic, before chariots were invented)

Just one more argument, according to DNAPrint genomics India is 60% European, 25% Asian(Mongoloid-A), 9% Native American(Mongoloid-B) and 6% Sub Saharan. They do the analysis per person based on ‘autosomal markers’ (I don’t really knwo what that is; however, it seems the proportion of ancestry per person can be found using this)

In my analysis this is somewhat consistent with the haplogroup proportions of India

mt-DNA
M: 60% (Mostly proto Mongoloid)
R+U: 25% (Mostly Caucooid))
East Eurasian haplogroups: 5% (proto Mongoloid-A/Mongoloid B)
West Eurasian haplogroups: 10% (Caucosoid)

y-DNA
F and its descendants except Q and O: 95% (Mostly Caucasoid)
Rest: Q, O and C 5% (proto Mongoloid-A/Mongoloid B))

Just to say that the vaguie consistencies b/n the results could be an indication of at least a vague consistency of the researches on Indian samples done so far.

If you have any links to new research papers related to my previous posts please give links.

Thanks

Well i am still thinking that we have that west asian influence clearly evident in many families. There were many immigration happened from West asia. I truely believe that those jewish population might have attracted st thomas in here and the king were welcoming and giving priveliges to the chirsitans.
In order to prove.. do we have jewish presence we need such a ydna result in the community and that is how it can confirm it. I see most of the syrian christian families believed that they have a history of st thomas are seems middleastern like or semitic like to me than we say we all are kerala converts. But in a way i would say they can be some brahimn converted but what i m trying to say is that now all are middleastern like. They can be some or more converts by st thomas or syrian missionaries converted em but most of em melted in the semitc populations . yes there can be still a lot of other ydna other than west asian dna can be found but if we look the person he could be more to the west asian side in our syrian christianity. if i could be completly brahimn or nair means i should be in that community and my mother should be nair/namboothri my wife should be nair/namboothir and my generations should maintain like that in order to be claim like that. but that is not happening in our syrian christian community. syrian christian culture and community is more to the suryani like and people eating habits. we can barely or few things compare things to the hindu sides. i used to think we are just like indian populations as hindus just converted to christianity by an apostole or missionary but now i m thinking it not quiet right but still an acceptable statement.The possible reason for all these is that there can be also a majority of chrisitan from anthioh came to malabar different perod of time and their presence being stronger and we had west asian contacts and bishops even if some denominations accepting it or not. Perhaps there nairs or namboothirs converted now enter in to a majority of middleasterners started to blend in . A nair conveted guy might have married a middleasten based women thus guess what what kind of child borned. Again things began to change now there is not much namboothris or nairs can be trace among the crowd unless i know that i was a brahimn and i married a brahimn converted woman and my genereations which is not . Therefore that is the reason people are now more influenced to middleastern because of these influecnes in our community although their dna facts are different . i dont know about kana but most of the members r middlestern like atleast some features is there may not because of they are truely pesian through their ydna or mtdna but these shapes and features and charasterics distributes among the syrianchrisitian community

Its quet true that lot of westasian immigrants had inculturation that many taken local or dravidian wives hence their generation mtdna can comes different . that does not mean their westasian influences is not on them , though these they did not mean to keep their orginality but they wanted to be like that. Or some west asian tried to maintiain their identity . and those families members might have selected to become bishops .Hence we the syrian christians have more dravidian influences than any thing. i dont think that there was nairs and namboothris at the first century because i believe the term namboothri is recent. but there can be some vedic brahimn converted or few such families converted , but that does not mean that syrian chrisitan identity is all about nairs and namboothris converted. this is pretty much the facts that i believe. if there was such a mass populations of brahimns converted it should have been reflected in many ways. looking deep in to the dna facts are confusing and it does not get you anywhere.

Dear SV (applies to All) ,

“My hypothesis so far.
- At first look the y-DNA distribution is somewhat ‘Indian’
- The mtDNA distribution is clearly ‘Indian’” — Your comments

Kindly DO NOT make such hypothesis. All that you “intepreted” are flatly and totally wrong and misleading to a lay reder. Both the ydna and mtdna distributions are NOT Indian. Few among these samples ‘may be’. And genetically speaking there is nothing called ‘exclusive Indian’. Read more…

Examples of wrong interpretations/understanding from your side:

1. “The combination (H,L,J2,Q,R1a,R2) is very much Indian and could be expected of a typical Indian sample, that is not to say that all of these haploroups are Indian but when you see all of them in a group, it is more possibly Indian than anything else.”

Wrong. Genealogy/Community genetics for origins are NOT studied or understood this way by grouping haplogroups or just looking at haplogroups. They look at HAPLOTYPES and MATCHES and MUTATIONS at individual markers which is typical of certain population groups. Then the sample under study is cross-compared to the ‘existing database’ to suggest origins. This origin suggestion may not be perfect in rare cases, based on community history, data and facts with “substantiated traditions”.

2. Your derivations on the origins of various hgps. like H, J2, R2, R1a/R1a1, Q and L (those seen in our database as of now) are again wrong. H is NOT Indian ‘in origin’. It is yes, ‘by presence’ largely found in the ‘Indian sub-continent’ and also across the Middle-east, Central Asia, North Asia, etc. Its origins are still UNKNOWN because of its extremely rare presence (less than 2% of the world population). So hrly any data is available. You can be sure on this.

About the J2 in our database again u are completely wrong in saying its origins and contributions to our community. R2 is again present across Central Asia, Middle-east, Caucasian (specially Armenia), Iran (quite common), India. Its origin is like R1a’s.

Now as for the R1a1 samples in our database specifically. I have told a thousand times on this forum before, they are NOT the typical or even closely Indian-type of R1a. And most of them are the Eastern European related R1a (which is R1a1). Most among these are the R1a1 Ashkenazi Levite EXACT matches (with same mutations). So as u stated, its not a “hypothesis”. Its a fact found and publicly seen and can be verified by anybody (Help ? Ysearch.com). The non-levite R1a1 matches are close to the other non-jewish east europeans and NOT the Indian-type R1a/R1a1.

Q is Central Asian/ East Russian in origin. Q1a3 (found in our database) is particularly not of Asian origin nor Mongoloid. Thus a migrant foreign contribution. Please read up more.

L is NOT exclusively Indian. Whatever paper or website said this is either outdated or least factual by research standards and data today. L’s origins are debated just like H. It is also found in India but is said to have been introduced in India like H from Middle-east or Iran. The Middle-eastern origins of L (L1 and L3) are substantiated because of its higher presence in Lebanese, Druze, Iraqis, Iran, Yemenite Jews, Afghanistan, Pakistan more than in India. Sengupta et al. is an old paper I too have read and genetics has come far beyond that stage with better standards. National Geographic’s haplogroup migration data describes this that both H and L are an early yet foreign migratory group into India (though not all H’s and L’s). L3 is particularly middle-eastern. L1 is also found in the middle-east. So saying its Dravidian is not food for rationale or 21st century scientific logic. Or it could be its presence among the Dravidian groups is because they too are one of the earliest migrant groups from the middle-east into India, thus carrying these haplogroups, mixed with the Australoids and still other earlier groups. We arent going that back in history for studying our community origins which are relatively recent.

3. “Speaking of mtDNA, the combination (M,R,U) is very very Indian. My best guess is that we have little or no foreign ancestry on the maternal sides, otherwise we should see some unique middle eastern haplogroups here.”

Again wrong. What are u studying combinations for ??? New technique to me. M* haplogroups is a very wide haplogroup seen across Central Asia, Middle-east, East Europe, Russia and the Indian-sub-continent. The East Asian (Mongloid-type M groups split out long back during migrations and are unique to them). So ours are not the Mongloid type nor are they found yet in our database. I cant even understand how u concluded they are “Indian” when science doesnt say so.

R* type mtdna is Near-Eastern in origin and contribution (Near East spans area from West Asia to North India). One of our R samples is a step mutation away from HV* type mtdna which is again not at all Asian or Indian. Others are well different too. They need to be further classified which the individual test takers need to be doing.

And yes. U haplogroup ! U say its Indian ??!! This is probably one of the most surprising result in our database. It is not any U. It is U1a and U1a is not found at all in the Indian sub-continent, except for in the Chitpavan Brahmin community who also have recent foreign contributions to their gene pool. U1a is typically called “Una” by scientists and a marker of West Asians and/or Caucasians. Read up the different U type mtdnas and u will learn more. Its U7 and probably U5 thats more Indian (seen in upper-castes in India).

4. “Just think of this: How much is the probability that a haplogroup present in the Middle East, but not in the Indian Subcontinent, wouldn’t be present in an Indian population suspecting Middle Eastern ancestry.” (Your comment)

If ur asking this based on mtdna result then yes. Its Highly probable. If u have understood the passing down of mtdna, then u must also know that mtdnas have chance of been “virtually lost or missing” from a community. So suppose, initially while founding, the members of a community had say HV* type mtdna but this community mixed heavily (meaning take local wives in this context) with the locals among whom they had settled, then over a period of time the initially present mtdnas would be gradually getting less frequent and ultimately non-existent over a period of time based on amount of local mixing. mtdna has this characteristic of been lost thats why. Ydna does not , because it passes uninterrupted from father to son for almost a wide timespan unless najor mutations take place and haplogroups change which is rarest possibility in fact. Yes there may be a mismatch in a marker or two value even between father and son if both tested (but not in haplogroup). This is due to mutation simply.

Well, I do not understand why is something so very typical “middle-eastern” as regards to ydna except for ydna haplogroups like the J (J1 and J2) and E. And yes, the project is just at a member count of 50 or so. So no conclusions yet as stated there too. Only trends. And something also found in India as elsewhere doesnt make it a property of India exclusively. And genetically speaking “India” is a contribution from outside gene pool sources over varying timelines. “Indians” fall under the Caucasoid race. Then individual communities may have different contributions as the case may be. There are just three sub-divisions of the human race – Caucasoid, Afroid, Mongoloid, scientifically. Then sub-racial scientific theories like Caucasoids further categorized as Mediterranean, Semitic/Armenoid, Baltic, etc… Again these sub-races fall under either of the 3 main race branches. This is science. Now whatever “Caucasian” means to people today is recent invention by political idiots for supremacy theory who link Caucasian=White. Intellectual Garbage. No further comments on this.

As for the E been classified as H. That happens after the haplogroup is confirmed by SNP testing when doubtful. However, this E which is now H (Kuttikadan) is not a typical H haplotype. It just carries the mutation for a H haplogroup. But the marker values it carries is unique (unique haplotype), so it has a very different origin or lineage. As I said H itself is rare, so its debatable for now. That again disproves H haplogoup has a single origin limited to a specific region. I have confirmed this with the H haplogroup project admin (this is a different project by ftdna itself).

To All,

I have elaborately described all of this in various posts on this forum itself as to what the Nasrani database possibly imply from results available so far. Please find and read them up before bringing newer hypothesis. And please, this is too exhausting to repeat the same thing again and again for individual hypothesizers. And further clarifications, contact the project Admin who might be more informed than me.

Thanks

Dear Jackson,

the idea of kerala syriac-christians is okay,as many thought of it before.but we should also see that the chithpavan brahmins for sure and the kokanastha brahmins
also are of west asian orgin.

\”chitpavan brahmin demonstrates younger maternal component and substantial paternal gene flow from west asia, thus giving credence to their recent irano-scythian ancestry from mediterranean or turkey, which correlated well with european-looking features of this caste. this also explains their untraceable ethno-history before 1000 years, brahminization event and later amalgamation by maratha….. for y-chromosomal polymorphisms, the frequency distribution of 10 y-haplogroups: h, r1a1, r1a, r2, l, j2, c, k2, p* and f* was determined. r1a had very high frequency (32%) in chitpavan-brahmin from “konkan” as compared to <=5% in other castes. indianspecific r2 and l accounts for 29.4% dhangar and 17% chitpavan-brahmin chromosomes respectively……mitochondrial dna diversity in 77 individuals as one haplotype each was shared within maratha and chitpavan brahmin respectively. m lineages had frequency of 67% in chitpavan-brahmin. the other south-asian specific diverse sub-clusters of r and u were also frequent in chitpavan-brahmin (84%). neolithic migration and very recent western influence was seen more (14-15%) in chitpavan-brahmin and desasth-brahmin than the other two castes (maratha and dhangar)…….. haplotype diversities were highest (1.000 ± 0.017) in dhangar and desasth-brahmin while haplotypes were shared within maratha and chitpavan-brahmin. the studied groups did not share haplotypes among them…..”

the researchers give following conclusion

“chitpavan-brahmin and desasth-brahmin constitutes just 10% of entire populace (~80 million) of western india. their different marriage rules, varied customs, different local dialects (southern branch of indo-aryan language) illustrated distinct origins. our extensive comparative analyses support their different ethno-histories. the y-chromosomes of marathi speaking desasth-brahmin carried r1a1 lineage in high frequency, which reflected their considerable affinity with central asian giving credence to their “scythic” descent (admixture, pc plot, amova analysis). their intermediate mtdna diversity comprise of low frequency west-eurasian clades and significant paleolithic gene pool (m) indicating south-asian ancestry, which provide evidence of their tribal origin due to upward social mobility of females as shown by study of baig et al. (2004). these brahmin subjects presented highest number of biparental alleles, heterozygosity and genetic affinity with central asians. these analyses provide evidence of “scytho-dravidian” genesis of desasthbrahmin. they are the ancient upper-caste comprising of 50 sub-divisions or “gotra” because the considerable time-depth as inferred from tau value, helped them to consolidate their predominance in different administrative jobs besides traditional priesthood.

conversely, non-recombining uniparental contributions in chitpavan-brahmin mediterranean or east european type as shown by 20% (hv, u3) mtdna lineages and highly frequent (r1a and l) y-haplogroups. the admixture and pc analyses reflected genetic association of chitpavan-brahmin with iranian, ashkenazi-jews (turkey), greeks (east europe) and to some extent with central asian turkish populations elucidating their distinct nordic, “scytho-iranian” ancestry. the caucasian link of chitpavanbrahmin has also been inferred from biparental microsatellites variations. the observed genomic analyses asserted the ethnographical fact that chitpavan-brahmin share ancestry with conspicuously european-looking pagan or alpine group, who under religious pressure had migrated from anatolian turkey or east europe to gujarat coast probably via sea-vessel. besides, their documented history is untraceable beyond 1000 years, further indicating that they were not part of the original vedic migrations (early indo-european) on the west coast. therefore, the present genome analyses provide conclusive evidence of their recent migration, genesis, and expansion after they migrated from “sopara” (india’s western trade zone) to geographically isolated konkan-region, where they adopted “konkani” language, and cultivated cash crop. their considerable genetic affinity with maratha caste further corroborated the prevalent norm that few of the dynamic and intelligent chitpavans were “brahmanized” for performing religious rituals in king shivaji’s court. we observed 15% similar hvs -1 sequence motif (m4 lineage) between chitpavan-brahmin and bene-israeli (or indian jews), probably suggesting similar indigenous paleolithic contribution. compared to desasth-brahmin, kokanasth-brahmin showed lowest biparental diversity, younger age of population based upon tau value, larger genetic affinity with west asians plus east europeans suggesting their recent descent, in absence of bottleneck effect. however, recent marriages between desasth-brahmin boy and chitpavan girl have contributed towards their genetic affinity”

other research in genetics of chitpavan brahmins state as follows

“the origins on the maternal side (mt-dna) are equally surprising. unlike most other indians whose maternal origins can be almost exclusively traced to the single macro-haplogroup m (mt-dna), studies (kivisild et al. 2003, gaikwad et al. 2005) indicate that the chitpavan gene-pool shows the presence of various other central asian and european mt-dna haplogroups, in particular, the u (mt-dna), h (mt-dna), hv (mt-dna), x (mt-dna), r* (mt-dna), and n1 (mt-dna) haplgroups. on the paternal side (y-dna), r1a (y-dna) is the most frequently found haplogroup. incidentally, this haplogroup is also commonly found amongst north indians (sahoo et al. 2006), central asians, and east europeans. the rate of r1a is also high among south indian castes such as pallars, kallars, yadavas and sourashtrians as well as among tribals such as badagas. the origin of r1a or haplogroup m17 is debatable as either southern central asia or south asia or western caucasus or eastern europe. oxford university geneticist stephen oppenheimer has come to the conclusion through his genetic findings that “south asia is logically the ultimate origin of m17 and his ancestors”, and that “one estimate for the age of this line in india is as much as 36,000 years old” (see haplogroup r1a (y-dna) ). the presence of a deep common ancestry between these regions remains a puzzle to this day. haplogroup j2 (y-dna) is another frequently found haplogroup considered to be of middle-eastern origins and found in a lot of higher-caste indians. there is also a significant presence of haplogroups r2 (y-dna), l (y-dna), and h1 (y-dna) which are believed to be of indian origin and dominantly found in western and south indians (sahoo et al. 2006). based on the current evidence therefore, it does seem then that the aforementioned racial characteristics can be most likely traced to their maternal side.”

so even the namboothiri caste have come from maharastra and gujrat.the name nambootiri were given to them by perumal kings by 9 century denoting that they came by nayambu=boat/row boat and thiri-which is an official suffix for thirumeni or extreme lordship.

as a small community with just the senior male marrying they never intermingled with other brahmin or priestly communities to keep the wealth given to them.which have eventually destroyed them.

also the iyengar/iyer brahmin community has south asian and south east asian dna,does that make them low caste.certainly not.as when the brahmin caste were made up many were initiated and given priestly class.see,world was not made as or in the caste structure as we see today.the chera dynasty were vellars/vellalars meaning people/lord of the spear.they were an ancient khsatriya class in kerala.buut as namboothiri came in and they brought the present nairs from ahichatra-an ancient town near rampur in u.p.they made up the royal and ruling class of kerala.they plundered buddhism and brought in brahmincal hinduism,with advent of shankaracharya thus was in the pinnacle form.

so let us see as an aryan dynasty people mixed up with dravidian people.

dear all,

Well what all might say,its hard to swallow that syriac christians of kerala are jewish.firstly if so like the knanaya people the jewish would have certainly kept the link alive with them in most ways.the syriac liturgy was introduced much later by the 3-4 century manicheans in the form of the chaldean rite.we should understand the whole st.thomas christians were under the chaldean bishop based in thrissur who was under persian-baghdad patriarch.its was only by the arrival of the portugese and then the alleged synod of diamper.the church broke later to be one under rome as latin catholics.the other under the syrian patriarch of antioch.so it is wrong to say just as st.thomas christians followed syriac liturgy they are jews is just absurd.latin rite is spread all over the world that just doesnot mean all over they are all ancient latin people from europe.or are the roman catholics more roman across the world.the case of tamil iyers speaking the language and others.they all came jusy a few centuries back.we should take into the account that the official langauage of travancore kings and court was tamil till about 1900\’s.the language malayalam eventhough formed its existence by 825 ad,it devoloped into a full language only by the 12-14 th century after the nampoothiri brahmins brought the bunts and the subcaste matrilineal nairs from ahichatra-near modern rampur,u.p. to help them as landlords and rulers/chieftains in present day south canara/kerala.do they speak hindi or garwali or any north indian language.
the ancient rulers of kerala-or chera vamsham were vellars/vellalars along with the present day ezhavas,the term chokon denoted for them comes from the term soldier.the famed unniarcha,aarromal chekavar,chanthu chekavar are all from this community.do they speak ancient tamil or else anything.

why this is elaborated is that they were all buddhists,all major temples in kerala are said to be earlier buddhist temple except guruvayoor.ancient kerala till about 9th century shaivite revival and the great shankaracharya \’s clout on kerala soil.all buddhist temples were called palli,as you know they were all learned very high thrissur,malapuram,alapuzha were all seats of high learning by buddhist centers.they were a peacefull community and they openly agreed theological interventions.the ancient great brahmin prime minister kautilya is said to be from kollam in kerala.

the about the jews accepting jesus as their saviour messiah in a far off land from jerusalem in india after being persecuted by the jews who saw him alive is a bit hard to digest.the converted jews came as groups from west asia many times eventhough we just keep record of the knanaya\’s.

later by 4-5 century,9 century,11-12 century also many came along with various bishops and patriarch\’s.there is also a version that says the arrival of mar sabrisho and mar piruz to kollam in kerala was to establish the first full church of kerala at thevallakara as all others were temples and half hindu.as this was marked as the beginiing of the kolla varsha or the malayalam calendar.

the ancient church in kerala was more of an extented ancient indian hindu religion.the term hindu is/was more of a country denoting term untill the britishers came and ruled india.
their is some proof to say that the ancient church as it was called \”issaniya sampradaya \” as it had more of the brahmin converts than any others.it was as such till about 12 century.only after the portugese arrival by 15th century did we have the present so called european church equivalent.

the family names like pakalomattom means p akal om mattom -people who had authority of surya and om and mattom,that is worship,religion,god and markets/courts.

kalli,kallinkal comes from the ancient kalli worship,shankarapuri comes from family who had authority over shiva temples.the if we look into the migration of the pakalomattom and other families to south,they came to the places that had or were part of the 64 brahmin gramams blessed by sage parashurama.be it aluva,angamaly,kudamaloor and of course ettumanoor which is very near to kuruvilangad,a place where most st.thomas christians fine their lineage.till about the 1930\’s many pakalomattom families had priviledges in temples to do thaila purification as thailashanthi\’s,it was a good omen to make them do that by many royal and namboothiri familes across kerala like in royal families of panadlam,thiruvalla,anaparmapal-alapuzha,thripunithura.all this would have been only possible due to brahmin orgin or no one places them on par with kings/brahmins.pakalomattom family were fully veggetarians in many places were they had temple links till about a century back.still some among the pakalomattom are still vegetarian and follows strict nampoothiri customs,ways of life on par with strong christian faith.its a topic not to be discussed on net.

brahmin or royal standards for st.thomas christians.anyway not of semitic orgin which was a taboo for brahmins.also the customs of st.thomas christians were same as those of namboothiris in almost all ways till about a century ago.or else st.thomas nazranis will have to be a ruling class for the brahmins to adopt it in ancient times.which might not be possible as they as vedic purohits are very strict.

there is also a version that says mahabali was an christian emperor.
the harvest festival -onam and mahabali chakravarthy was a title not a name for ancient kings of malabar.the all people are one and equal in all ways in god and world-can be a kingdom of god concept after christ\’s resurrection by the early christian church.if thats so why did holy roman emperors been so rude and power hungry.did the 1 st century to about 6-7 century have christian kings in malabar who encouraged jewish migration for the love and respect for jerusalem.the ancient brahminism was a sole religion that had been along with the buddhism in kerala,karnataka and konkan.the term hinduism and other castes and formations came much late.mahabali was basically based in konkan he was stepped down by the vamana-the vaishanava invaders from north india to present day kerala.so the was the whole western india once christian or st.thomas christian.only gods knows.

okay thats about the st.thomas conversions in palayur there were many others in nirnam,kokkamangalam-paravur,nilacakal,kollam.they can never be jewish as no jewish colonies existed there. some historians have the view that st.thomas selectively converted local ruling familes which were mostly brahmin as they were very highly learned in vedas and ancient scriptures,more theologically inclined and they also waited earnestly for a messiah-the prajapathy as said in the vedas. the sacred thread ceremony can also be compared to circumcision as both make children new born or dwija.the anthropologists have the view that they were a same tribe that broke about 5000 yrs back in iraq-iran .the abraham\’s children went west into west egypt and israel became jews while the other children went into turkmenistan-afghanistan to be brahmins..king dushyanta\’s and shakuntalas son became emperor bharath who ruled from uzbekistan-persia-afghan to the deccan and indian ocean which made migration into south india much easier.

as the research into the tomb of jesus in kashmir takes new light.many antropologist-historians by proof say abraham and sarah is indeed brahma and sarasvati.maybe true or false,god knows.there is also a view that siva linga is/was a black stone venerated by west asians 500o yrs back and also also denotes the single pole cross jesus was crucified.so are the saivites true folowers of christ.a matter of debate and prayers.

many indian brahmins have west asian dna which may prove the aryan invasion theory true.especially western indian brahmins like the chitpavan and kokanastha brahmins.

chitpavan brahmin demonstrates younger maternal component and substantial paternal gene flow from west asia, thus giving credence to their recent irano-scythian ancestry from mediterranean or turkey, which correlated well with european-looking features of this caste. this also explains their untraceable ethno-history before 1000 years, brahminization event and later amalgamation by maratha….. for y-chromosomal polymorphisms, the frequency distribution of 10 y-haplogroups: h, r1a1, r1a, r2, l, j2, c, k2, p* and f* was determined. r1a had very high frequency (32%) in chitpavan-brahmin from “konkan” as compared to <=5% in other castes. indianspecific r2 and l accounts for 29.4% dhangar and 17% chitpavan-brahmin chromosomes respectively……mitochondrial dna diversity in 77 individuals as one haplotype each was shared within maratha and chitpavan brahmin respectively. m lineages had frequency of 67% in chitpavan-brahmin. the other south-asian specific diverse sub-clusters of r and u were also frequent in chitpavan-brahmin (84%). neolithic migration and very recent western influence was seen more (14-15%) in chitpavan-brahmin and desasth-brahmin than the other two castes (maratha and dhangar)…….. haplotype diversities were highest (1.000 ± 0.017) in dhangar and desasth-brahmin while haplotypes were shared within maratha and chitpavan-brahmin. the studied groups did not share haplotypes among them…..”

all,after all even the darwins theory of evolution says man first walked the face of earth or evovled in east africa.very close to west asia.so if we go on analysing the dna all people of afro-asia at least may have a single parent.

after all we cannot assume gauthama buddha’s brothers family who ruled nepal never had buddhist links.but as of now they are a kshatriya clan.that is how things change over a period of 500-1000yrs.we have 2000 yrs of tracing.
lets us be practical in all ways.

before we stop something much interesting to many on the dna hunt.

let us see another important point.during prime minister margaret thatchers rule suddenly britsh royal family’s-present,the house of windsor-orginal name house of saxe-coburg and gotha-name changed due to anti german sentiment during world war by king george v in 1917.

united press international
october 10, 1986
moslems in buckingham palace

mixed in with queen elizabeth’s blue blood is the blood of the moslem prophet mohammed, according to burke’s peerage, the geneological guide to royalty. the relation came out when harold b. brooks-baker, publishing director of burke’s, wrote prime minister margaret thatcher to ask for better security for the royal family. ”the royal family’s direct descent from the prophet mohammed cannot be relied upon to protect the royal family forever from moslem terrorists,” he said. probably realizing the connection would be a surprise to many, he added, ”it is little known by the british people that the blood of mohammed flows in the veins of the queen. however, all moslem religious leaders are proud of this fact.”

brooks-baker said the british royal family is descended from mohammed through the arab kings of seville, who once ruled spain. by marriage, their blood passed to the european kings of portugal and castille, and through them to england’s 15th century king edward iv. ‘

thats what we told we can be cohens and brahmins now st.thomas nazranis.
godbless you all.

Dear Jackson and all,

Let me take this time to thank all of you for a great debate like this.The dna does not prove anything as of such in the present way.but more into dna classification.as of now none of st.thomas christians that have cohen or j2 are not jewish.sorry,live with it.latest findings.

The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH)
Haplogroup J is a subdivision of F and is part of a grouping that includes haplogroups G, H, I, J and is prominent in the Caucasian Mountains, in the Balkans (hg G), amongst Middle East Peoples (hg J), some Indians (hg H), a portion of the Scandinavians, Germans, Bosnians, and Sardinians (hg I).
About 40% of Jews are haplogroup J.
The CMH is a subgroup of haplogroup J.
Even though J accounts only for 40% of the Jews as a whole it reaches more than 80% amongst the Cohanim.

The Jewish population is divided into Cohens, Levites, and ordinary Israelites who amongst the Jews are mostly from Judah and Benjamin.
<>

The Cohens are descended from Aaron the brother of Moses. They are the Priestly Caste. They were originally part of Levi but today they are perhaps more numerous than the Levites are. They also have an entirely different genetic structure from the Levites.

There are “Ashkenazic” (European) Jews and “Sephardic” (Mediterranean and Eastern) Jews.

Haplogroup J consists of an ancestral form (J*) and two subgroups J1 and J2.
<>

<>
<>

The CMH is a subgroup of haplogroup J.
Although you can have the CMH in either J1 or J2, it is the genetic signature in J1 that is considered the Jewish priestly signature.

<>
48% of Ashkenazi Cohanim and 58% of Sephardic Cohanim have the J1 Cohen Modal Haplotype (Skorecki et al. 1997).

To sum up, about 40% of the the Jews are hg J (both J1 and J2) whereas for Cohanim the figure is ca. 80% out of which about half (ca. 40%) have the CMH whereas for Jews who are not Cohens only ca. 3% have the CMH. Most Cohens who are J1 are also CMH wheas most non-Cohen J1 Jews are not.
Does CMH Define the Cohens?
No.
About half the Cohens do not have CMH and CMH is also found in other peoples.

CMH Amongst Non-Jews
Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin
“Are today’s Jewish priests descended from the old ones?”
HOMO: Journal of Comparative Human Biology – Zeitschrift fuer
vergleichende Biologie des Menschen
51:2-3 (Urban & Fischer Verlag, 2000): 156-162.
Zoossmann explains that:

* The Cohen modal haplotype is the most common haplotype among
Southern Italians*1, Central Italians*2, Hungarians*3, and Iraqi
Kurds*4, and is also found among many Armenians*5 and South African Lembas*6. .

cf. J.E. Elkins
<> An Updated World-Wide Characterization of the Cohen Modal Haplotype. J.E. Ekins et al.

Is the CMH the result of a one-time only mutation (UEP, Unique Event Polymorphism) as conventionally explained?

The CMH CANNOT BE the result of a single event but can only be explained as a recurring phenomenon effecting a change that after taking place is passed on by hereditry. It mainly takes place within haplogroup J but in 3% of the cases has also been recorded outside of it.
To explain how this could be so we must clarify the difference between haplogroup and haplotype.
Haplogroups are determined by SNP (pronounced “snip”) while haplotypes are defined by STP.
<>.

In principle STPs have a faster rate of change than SNPs which are considered more stable. Different STPs may therefore be found on the one SNP. Different STPs define Haplotypes whereas differences in the SNP define the Haplogroup. Haplotypes should therefore be considered the same as subdivisions of Haplogroups. The problem is that the same Haplotype is found frequently in more than one Haplogroup. Haplotypes are transmitted by hereditry but they are an example of a typical REP (Repeat Event Polymorphism) that can occur more than once and in more than one context. They are an example of Identical Genetic Change that occurs in more than one place in more than one subject amd then are inherited and can be used to trace ancestry. Since the same changes however occur in other bodies their applicability is limited. If we knew what influences the occurence of the changes we could use the hereditry aspects. If for instance we were aware that groups within a certain area at a certain time were liable to have undergone the said changes when we later find these changes in other places we could assume that their ancestors had formerly sojourned in the affected regions at the time in question. This however would not be enough to determine hereditry though it could lead in that direction.
The CMH is a haplotype that occurs in J1, J2, and elsewhere:

<>
An Updated World-Wide Characterization of the Cohen Modal Haplotype.
J.E. Ekins et al.

Placing the occurrence of CMH outside of J to the side for the moment and concentrating on its occurrence only in J1 and J2 Giacomi made a proposal that superficially could explain the occurrence of CMH in both J1 and J2.

<>

Giacomi says that the CMH gave rise to J1. If this were so it would explain perhaps how CMH could be found in both J1 and J2. The explanation could be explained as saying that originally there was J2. CMH emerged as a haplotype in J2. From the CMH variety of J2 emerged J1. Originally all J1 would have had CMH but something happened, J1 changed and produced varieties mostly without CMH. Nevertheless CMH remained as a sub-group in J1 and also as a sub-group in J2 from which it had originally emerged. This scenario is a bit far-fetched and even Giacomi probably would not agree with it. It is however the only way the presence of CMH in both J1 and J2 can be explained while preserving the principle of it being the result of a one-time only event. The problem however is that CMH is considered YOUNGER than both J2 and J1 and therefore could not have fathered “J1″.

From: Dienekes Pontikos
The CMH can arise on a J1 and a J2 background independently. In addition to the CMH, there are numerous other haplotypes shared by both J1 and J2, and there is no reason to believe that the CMH in particular was the ancestral haplotype of haplogroup J. Actually, it was almost certainly not, because the CMH has a long DYS388-16, and ancestral J almost certainly had a short DYS388.
What Does the CMH Really Tell Us?
Question: We have seen from the above that CMH does occur at a much higher frequency amongst Cohans than amongst others. You have shown that CMH is also found in non-Jewish people. You have also shown that not all bearers of CMH are necessarily related to each other in anyway.
What is then is significance of CMH concerning Jews or people who think they may be Jewish?

Answer: CMH is more likely to appear in hg J (especially J1?) than in other haplogroups. Once CMH appears it is transmitted by hereditry. Since Cohens are the most likely to have CMH when CMH is found amongst Jews there is a higher than average chance that the Jew is a Cohen.

Assuming that our figures are correct if ca. 6% of Jews are Cohens and half of them are CMH then ca.3% of the Jews are CMH Cohens. We also understand that 3% of Jews who are not Cohens are CMH. If therefore we come across a Jew with CMH there is a probability factor of one out of two that he is a Cohan against a chance of 3 out of 100 when we do not know if he is CMH or not. In other words, half the Jews with CMH are Cohens and a Jew with CMH is ca.17 times more likely to be a Cohen than a Jew without CMH.
We can go further than this. Half the Cohens have CMH. Jews who are Cohens are aware of the fact because they have a family tradition that they are Cohens. There are however numerous reasons why this tradition would not always have been kept. We can exprect to find Jews who are Cohens and not aware of it. The number of Jews who are not Cohens (as far as they know) with CMH equals the numbers of Cohens who have it. It could be that many of these non-Cohen CMH Jews actually had a Cohan ancestor. Within Jews we can assume that CMH is particular to Cohens or almost so. Since twice as many Cohens as “Israelite-Jews” are hg J and half of these are CMH we are justified in regarding the CMH in Cohens as emerging amongst the Cohanim some time after the designation of their forefather Aaron the first Cohen! This explains why about half the Cohens are not CMH.

CMH is a haplotype that emerges spontaneously and after emerging remains to be transmitted by hereditry. This means that all Cohens who have CMH could be related to each other but CMH in non-Jewish peoples in most cases could be an independent phenomenon.
When CMH is found amongst non-Jews it does not indicate that the person has Jewish ancestry. If however additional evidence is available the presence of CMH may have some supportive value.

By analogy if ca. 14% of Irishmen have red hair versus only ca.7% for the non-Irish inhabitants of Glasgow, Scotland, and 10%(?) of Glasgow is Irish when we find a red-haired person in Glasgow there is (all other factors being the same) one chance in five (instead of one chance in ten) that the person is an Irishmen. This does not mean that all red-haired people are related to the Irish since not all red-hairs are kinfolk to each other even though red-hair is often an inherited trait.
Conclusion:
We see from the above that DNA changes take place spontaneously and repeatedly under certain conditions.
DNA haplogroups therefore have only LIMITED APPLICABILITY in determining common ancestry. They do however have some pertinence since once the DNA changes take place they are transmitted by hereditry. DNA may be able to tell us which groups of people were in the same areas at the same time and subject to the same influences even though they were not necessarily related to each other. More study on these matters is required.
The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH) demonstrates the use of DNA by possibly helping us to trace who is a Cohen within the Jewish Community. On the other hand the CMH also exemplfies the limitations of DNA studies when we find it appearing independently amongst other peoples and with no ancestral connection to Israel.

LET US BE PROUD IN WHAT WE ARE NOW IN LORDS NAME.

ok let me tell my small ideas that i felt.
brahimn orgin what you are saying can be true and it acceptable
but it the matter to know many were used to say we are of ton of brahimn or nair converted which is wrong.
yes my friend the he still maintain a close frendship with jews who left isreal , from those jews he is giving us sureity that there were many jewis converted and they were the first christians.
yes st thomas also converted some brahimns families there is noting wrong to accept it
it is hard to believe there was an established hindusim caste system in deep forest area todays kerala in bcs
there was many trade ship came murisis for israelites roman phonicians arabs etc.
there is no proof of knanaya thommen to say recently named knanayas are the exact decendents
instead there is immgrations happend bar yeshu, mar sabor iso and mar proth, knanaya tommen, jewish immigraiton etc
many experts giving surety that there where no such special communiites exist in the past
one mentioning kanayas of cocubine communities of syrians prbably of knanay thommen group or later immigrant that accendently had contact with some fair skinned lower cast women
and these generations revangeous to the nasrani community and kept their syrain blood pure as much they can over centuries
many sryian or jews much later mixed with local and indianised
this elder a close friend of mine in california and confidently speaking of ancient nasrais that all were one long time ago. shemayil ninnum achen vannu means bishops often came from syria and conduch holy qurbana. they often reached malabar through arab ships and they also brought famlies
he is very well aware of his past with armeanian immigrations
know that syric transilated to malayalam only in recent centuries before all were in full syric and they were converts but most were members had connection to syrc language and orgin
and all experts /histrorian accepting that some of the vedic brahimns converted and there can be converts but later on many westasian immgrants joined and mixed with these chrstians and hence many of them has clear jewish westasian orgin though their yside still others are influenced to west asian and syric through these influences in these syrian christrian community

Dr. Saj Pakalomattom,

“LET US BE PROUD IN WHAT WE ARE NOW IN LORDS NAME.”

And what are we according to you ? Syrian Christians ? Agreed ! So…. from Syria ? Not exactly. Then what ? Brahmins ? Namboothiris ? Nairs ? etc etc ? Not entirely, not even close. I am not an adherant of “brahmin stories” nor of “jewish stories” or any puritarian claims. We are a multi-ethnic community and this is a historical and now a scientific fact !! Accept it or reject it, your choice. Because none of them as puritarian claims, cater to my logic or senses. So I’m over it. And I dont think I have to be “proud”, unless I contribute something towards the community’s betterment. Being “proud” about one’s ‘ancestry’ is something not fitting for the 21st century society. That era is gone. Nor do I say be ashamed of anything. Just lets not overdo it. Now the debate…….

CMH (Cohen Modal Haplotype) is NOT the same as actual Cohen haplotype. Lets get this clear first.

I did say earlier, what I had to comment has been commented in great detail. They are unfortunately scattered on various other threads becoz of questions being posed there and this thread being relatively new. Please read up. No repitition, no corrections on what I had been commenting on NSC wrt the DNA project outcome for almost a year now. Some of the earlier bloggers here might be well aware of what I was talking and still am.

Finally, I see you are “Pakalomattom”. Probably thats a reason for your strong objection to known facts and proposition of some other “hypothesized facts” supplied by “Namboothiri stories”. Im not against these stories. They are simply good to hear and makes my head swell for a minute and thats all it does for me. And I simply dont understand ur descriptions by quoting from various papers. Fortunately they support what the project also says as of now. Sorry for my lack of understanding.

And since you are from the Pakalomattom family, your best option to get “your facts” aligned with facts now known in research circles, is to contact the DNA project administrator Mr. Jacob Manakalathil who also is of Pakalomattom heritage and has undoubtedly proved to be a J2a4h Cohen (for heaven’s sake, NOT CMH). His email id is up on this page. Go ahead and propose your theories to him and let us all then know if that convinces you at all.

For additional information, this “fact” (which is not convincing to u) that (a percentage of) Nasranis have got the actual J2 Cohens among them and NOT just the so-called CMH (which is just a 12-marker modal as u elaborately described) has been verified, tested and confirmed by the existing Jewish (Cohen) researchers and related project persons and Family Tree DNA institute. This is not a hypothesis any longer nor awaits anymore confirmation. It is well known now to the above described people. So its not something coming as stories from someone or from some books. So people dont need to sound frustrated.

Go ahead, hear it yourself. And if all this sounds rubbish to you still, we have got many other topics on NSC to discuss and debate. Leave the genetics part to the persons concerned. You have the democratic liberty to dismiss it as nonsense. Many Thanks and Good Luck with your quest.

Jackson

(@ All, P.S.: KIndly read the various threads and comments on NSC related to any particular topic, esp. this topic of DNA and stuff, to see if the answers to your questions are already out there. It isnt very pleasant to repeat the same thing discussed and stated many times, and waste everyone’s time and NSC’s space, here. Then, if still not convincing, contacts are provided for verification. If nothing convinces, then there is no point of debate. Thanks.)

Dr. Saj,

And yes…. Blue blood in England and Mohammed’s contribution, Tomb of Jesus (stupidest *story* of all), Abraham and Sarah being Brahma and Saraswati, Mahabali and Onam, Nairs coming from Uttar Pradesh, Gautam Buddha’s life history, etc. etc. are neither topics of my interest nor sound sensible to be discussed here or funny to be laughed at.

And about Chitpavan Brahmins (also called Kokanastha Brahmins)….. we arent discussing about them either. I know very well about that community, their genetic profile, customs, traditions and have close friends from that community. Lets not bother them anyway.

Im out of such debates.

Thanks again.

Actually haplogroup R is believed to have originated in India according to newer genetic studies. So is R1a, if anything ancient Indians migrated to Europe.