GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-11 > 1289937338


From: Aaron Salles Torres <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dukes of Brabant - Neolithic J2
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:55:38 -0800 (PST)


Thank you for the corrections. I meant to say F, not F*. So J2 is excluded from this group, even though the haplogroup still could have been present among other Neolithic farmers... Some of the genealogists who have looked at this line of the Duke of Brabants have immediately interpreted YSearch MDPCK's J2 results as though they meant relatively recent Middle Eastern or Jewish ancestry, which goes against centuries of documented genealogical data. I have seen no records of Hans van Brant's ancestry being questioned during the 1600's - or ever, for that matter-, which means he was recognized by the Portuguese aristocracy as being a legitimate descendent of the von Brabant. This wasn't the case with families who tried to falsify their ancestry, and they needed the king to come in their defense with decrees and such prohibiting objections regarding their newly invented genealogy. The fact the Brant family was respected by their aristocratic contemporaries
could be seen as evidence of a solid paper trail.

J2 was still a strong force in the Brabant paper, correct? According to that study, "only males that provided genealogical data of the patrilineal line with at least one known ancestor living in the 18th century were selected for this study. According to the residence of the oldest known parental ancestor, each donor was assigned to one of the five‘ genealogical regions within Brabant based on contemporary administrative borders." Does the connection between J2 and the Neolithic agricultural wave still stand? If so, doesn't it make sense that the haplogroup would've reached Belgium during that expansion? In this case, some of the lines tested in Brabant would've been there long before the more recent Middle Eastern and Jewish migrations.

Does anyone have access to the actual J2 haplotypes tested in that study? It would be interesting to compare them to MDPCK.

More and more, I am convinced that MDPCK's case is solid and that the Dukes of Brabant could indeed have been J2. The evidence seems to warrant more testing for this sample.

Aaron Torres

From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dukes of Brabant - Neolithic J2
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:50:37 -0700
References: <><004801cb85a0$9dd40310$><AANLkTinN62kVXExhdOi=Ko7--N6wtRU+>


They measured and got F(xGHIJK)

So J2 is excluded, and I is excluded. IJK snps and IJ snps were not tested,
and F3 snps were not tested.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Sasson Margaliot" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dukes of Brabant - Neolithic J2


> Did they check for I or IJ ?
>
> Could these enough markers to exclude J2?
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Ken Nordtvedt
> <>wrote:
>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Aaron Salles Torres" <>
>>
>> Indeed, the Y DNA fragments that were recovered from the Neolithic
>> farmers
>> in the article cited above belong to paragroup F*, >
>>
>> The dna was F(x etc. ), not F*. They did not test for the quite
>> plausible
>> F3 haplogroup.
>>


This thread: