Zalman Joffe of Kukliai - This person never existed.

Hatte Anne Blejer I'm sorry you find this all so confusing, Hatte. I think I have explained quite extensively in my previous posts the relationship of the so-called "Kukla lineages" to the Joffe rabbinical family, so rather than repeat myself, I suggest you re-read my previous posts about where the lines diverge etc. (Does your tree involve these ancestors? I'm wondering because your questions make me think you are not familiar with these lineages.)

Yes, Kukliai is an itsy-bitsy-teeny-weeny-justa-dot shtetlini. And yes, I'm well aware that Kukliai is the modern Lithuanian version of the name. The Yiddish, as I understand it, would have been "Kukle", pronounced "Kook-leh." Indeed, the Yiddish names of these towns was always so much better in my opinion...I much prefer Ladzjey, Yanishok, Shavel, Tavrig, etc. to their modern names!

Beider has been my homeboy for 3 decades and I own most of his books. Several things to notice. First, the "headline" surname he refers to is Kukli, one of the only variations that I don't think you'll find among descendants of the Kukla-Joffe branch. But that aside, the shtetls he mentions as sources of the surname include the one in this discussion thread and it is noteworthy that this village is in what was once considered Poland and much closer than the other Kukli villages to Prague, where the Joffe rabbinical ancestors of Zalman and his father hailed from.

As Beider himself clarifies, while "ski" and "er" are the more common topographic surnames, they are far from the only indicators. Let's take the example of the toponymic surnames of people from Kukle/Kukli, as listed by Beider himself: Kukli, Kukel, Kukla, Kuklya, Kukel and Kuklin. So clearly, the absence of the ski/er ending does not cast any doubt on the surname as a toponym.

The surname version "Kuklya" is associated by Beider with Rezekne (Rezhitsa) where many of the Kukla lineage identified with the Kukli village relevant to this thread moved in the 18th century. I find it an unbelievable coincidence to suggest this one family in Rezekne was actually made up of "Kuklas" from various tiny towns named Kukli from all over Lithuania. It is much more credible that the Kuklas in Rezekne who were part of the same family---as demonstrated via the genealogies---all came from the same Kukli/Kukle village. And how do we know the Kuklas in Rezekne in the Kukla-Joffe genealogy are all the same family? The DNA evidence kicks in here since there could not be so many autosomal DNA matches (literally hundreds) with similar segments/ cm counts as well as having interwoven genealogies if these living descendants had actually come from distinct, unrelated Kukla families.

Finally, returning to your YDNA question and the paper trails involved...and since the point of this thread had been to address the claim that Zalman did not exist...I will emphasize that it is precisely because hardly anybody (do you?) has complete paper trails to their 15th & 16th century ancestors---and thus relies on existing rabbinical trees etc.---that we undertook to do DNA testing of various men who appeared to have a solidly male descent from Zalman Joffe via various lineages. I would have loved to have also tested one of Zalman's brothers but I have yet to find a living male descendant to test. Same for his father's brothers etc. as I've detailed in posts previously.

I am sure many readers, perhaps including you and Mike Stangel are reaching a saturation on this topic and so if you remain unconvinced about what the genealogy and genetics are showing in this case---which is what I interpret your word "confusion" to actually mean---I guess for now we will have to agree to disagree.

I believe the evidence Debra Katz has provided is very compelling. In my opinion, the initial requests on the various Kukla profiles for evidence that these people existed has been strongly addressed and the onus should now shift to researchers to debunk any incorrect information with more credible evidence than what Debra and others have already provided here. Surely, there are plenty of other family trees on Geni of a similar scale that have received nowhere near the scrutiny this one has. Geni just revealed to me that Mike Stangel is my 50th cousin, 9 times removed, for example, and he is not in my Kukla-heavy family tree so let's go see what's down that rabbit-hole. (<:}

Any claims that Geoffrey Sea made that the profiles are fakes can surely be dismissed (or at least tabled) for lack of substantiation along with the compelling evidence Debra and others have provided to prove these individuals' existence. This evidence comes from numerous sources – Y-DNA testing of multiple individuals, autosomal DNA segment matching of dozens/hundreds of individuals, rabbinical family research, and, yes, family trees that were constructed from oral history, historical documents and meticulous genealogical research. These trees were not compiled from the work of one individual – as Geoffrey Sea claimed – but dozens, if not hundreds, of contributors across various genealogical databases. I can attest that in the past few weeks alone, I have added hundreds of Kukla family members to my own family tree, none of whom appear in any of Ian Levine's trees.

Like probably most people here, I do genealogy for fun AND I also take it very seriously. However, we all lose when we allow disrespect for other peoples' hard work and mean-spirited attacks on an individual's reputation to be acceptable.

Hatte Anne Blejer I have to agree completely with Private User that in this case the onus now needs to shift to those who feel skeptical to identify what about the profiles and/or their connection to other profiles seems less solid than the majority of pre-18th century profiles on Geni. You say there isn't either a paper trail or DNA evidence, which to you seems to be a fact but to me seems to have been provided in spades. That's why I wrote we must agree to disagree.

I hope I can be honest, Hatte, without it coming across as an attack---and you may not realize you do this--but your comments often assume you are the better-informed and more-experienced person, with the implication that your points therefore carry more weight. Your most recent comment "I suggest Debra contact Jeffrey Paull" is a perfect example. I have corresponded with Jeffrey Paull frequently over the years, I have read every paper he has published and cooperated with both him and Adam Cherson (another fellow focusing on tracking rabbinic genetic genealogy) on various issues. You couldn't have known that, of course, but if you had written something like "you may already be well aware of Jeffrey Paull's work, but if not, you might find it useful." That would have been more respectful.

FYI, the lineage at issue in this thread is one that Paull has thus far not explored at all. And I might add that Paull's studies are usually based on finding descendants of persons who lived much more recently than the profiles in question AND often draw their conclusions based on 37 marker Y-DNA results, which is not a bad thing, but much less solid and "proof-worthy" than higher level genetic testing...this is because, as I believe you know, people who match at 37 markers can still be VERY distantly related...i.e. the common ancestor could have lived centuries before the time of the identified common ancestor rabbi being researched.

Hatte Anne Blejer Thanks for your kind words...and as to your last remark, ditto!

Mike Stangel Rather than reiterate the genetic evidence I've elaborated on above, let me ask this question....Rabbi Arye Leib Jaffe Ginz has 10 children. Other than his son Abraham---Zalman's father--what is the evidence for the existence of any of his other children?

One of the better documented would be his son Rabbi Moshe Schlesinger Jaffe Margaliot...but even his existence is predicated on a 20th century family tree (Eger) and citations that actually contradict some of the "facts" for Moshe...and then Ancestry trees. And his sons are often supported solely by the "Scrolls of the Jaffe Family" from 1996! Why is that documenty so valid and the trees of the greater "Kukla family" (so to speak) are not? Other siblings have zero documentation and a several have NO descendants listed so there isn't even a connection to more modern personages that could be documented. Further, several of his children died in Vishay, Lithuania, the very same town that Abraham moved to.

My point is simply this...why is Abraham (and by extension his son Zalman) being singled out as requiring a higher level of proof than Abraham's brothers or even his father? (Not to mention that none of Abraham's other children are being called into question...why not?)

Don't get me wrong...I'm not doubting these other profiles. And I would love to find a book or other document outside of genealogical trees that lists Abraham and his offspring. I'm just saying that I think the autosomal and YDNA evidence, showing the that multiple independent genealogists share a strong genetic link as well as the lead up to the Joffe ancestry in their families, is as strong if not stronger than the majority of GENI profiles from this time period.

So while anyone is free "not to buy" the connection, I cannot see any grounds for the particular questioning of or possible removal of Zalman's profile---not to mention therefore the profiles of all his children and their children etc. which would be definition have to "go" as well.

I say this because I believe that removal was the end goal of those who started this thread. If it is not, then we can simply as genealogists agree that some of us feel there is enough evidence to include these profiles in our family tree and others do not. We all have that choice with every profile.

I'm tagging Private User --and no, we are not Katz relatives!---as he is a certified, highly experienced long-term genealogist who is following this thread---in case he wants to express a different opinion.

Sorry I have missed much of this discussion. Excuse me.....how does one have genetic evidence on an individual who never existed? There is no documentation that an individual named Zalman Joffe ever lived ......nothing. Nada. However, there is MUCH evidence that the name was fabricated by Ian Levine to fill a hole in his personal family tree. Mr. Levine has admitted in print that he first called this person Z. Kukla. Then he changed the name to Zalman Jaffe for no apparent reason other than to create a fictional link to the Jaffe family. The original Z. Kukla was also fictional. The entire group of people that Levine created to populate Kukliai, Lithuania is fictional. Let me be clear -- none of these people including Zalman Jaffe, his fictional wife, or his fictional parents ever lived. It is pure imagination. ALL of these profiles must be removed. It is the Land of Honalei.

We cannot have a discussion of the "DNA" of fictional people. The entire discussion by Debra Katz is diversonary. You can't bring a fictional character into reality by analyzing their DNA.

This conversation must be based on rational grounds. Step 1: Prove the individual lived. The only way to do that is with documentation of the name -- a state record, a transit record, a published source. Anything else is fantasy.

Only after proving that an individual lived can we discuss their POTENTIAL lineage.

The entire DNA discussion should be taken as evidence that there was no Zalman Jaffe, that no documentation of his name or existence can be produced, and that a tiny group of individuals is attempting to create a group of fictional people for undisclosed motives (and I'm being polite). This profile must be removed. This has gone on way too long.

Ms. Katz -- Since you spent so many hours analyzing the DNA of Zalman Joffe, what evidence do you have that such a person ever existed? Please limit your response to documents that verify there was ever such a person by that name in Kukliai, Lithuania.

Geoffrey Sea it would greatly help this discussion if you could point us to the evidence that the name of Zalman Joffe was fabricated by Ian Levine, and especially where Mr. Levine "has admitted in print that he first called this person Z. Kukla."
This doesn't take away that those that believe Zalman Joffe was a real person still have to come up with any evidence or even pointers to his existance (that he is mentioned in other family trees isn't any evidence).

As a newcomer to this discussion I'd like to thank everyone for resolving this issue for the rest of us. For the sake of other newcomers here is the upshot: Abraham Ben-Yehudah-Leib Jaffe is not the son of Rabbi Aryeh Leib Jaffe Ginz and is the son of: Rabbi Aryeh Leib Jaffe Ginz The question regarding the ydna haplogroup of Rabbi Mordechai Jaffe, Ba׳al "Halevushim" is unripe for decision due to insufficient evidence. There are still several ydna haplogroups in contention. Anyone interested in working on the ydna lineage question is welcomed to join: https://www.geni.com/projects/Rabbinical-Lineages-yDNA-and-Haplogro...