Do You Tell Adopted Children?
I read with great interest Richard Sobel’s article on privacy, “Guidelines for Respecting Privacy in Jewish Genealogy (AVOTAYNU, Vol. XXIII, No. 1, Spring 2007). An additional situation about which I would appreciate some comment concerns informing adult individuals that they were adopted.
Consider a scenario in which an adult was adopted at birth. The parents lived in one state, but the child’s birth certificate with his/her adopted parents’ names on it was from a neighboring state (where the child was adopted). The parent, now deceased, told the child that he/she was not adopted, but had been born during a family vacation to that other state. When the individual asked other family members, including the family genealogist, if he/she were adopted, should they be told the truth or what their parents always said?
Several family members from the parents’ and the child’s generation know that this relative was adopted because the parents were not able to have children. They went to the other state to adopt the child. Family members suspect that this individual has always had a suspicion that he/she was adopted. Given the fact that there is no family resemblance, it also is pretty clear from an outsider’s perspective. Should the parents’ wishes be honored? If not, how should the family deal with the grief of “why didn’t you tell me all along” should that case arise?
When consulted, my rabbi offered the following opinion: “Honesty is always the best policy. Respecting the parents’ wishes is proper honoring of parents according to the Torah—BUT there is a limit to the honor that is expected. Dishonesty is one of those reasons that we can override the respect clause. So I would absolutely tell the relative and then certainly direct that person to good counseling for the grief issues. Of course, it used to be very typical that such secrets were kept and there were always, always consequences.”
Name Withheld Upon Request
Comments on People Who
Do Not Know Their Parentage
In his article reporting on a search for a missing mother, Randy Daitch wonders whether or not he missed a trick in his research (“The Sol Factor Story,” AVOTAYNU, Vol. XXIII, No. 2, Summer 2007). The answer is no, he did not. Mogen David Adom (MDA) didn’t find anything that Daitch had overlooked either. I’m sure of it. Simply put, the MDA safeguarded the mother’s identity, which is in accordance with good genealogical search practice. Where an adoption has occurred, the identity of the birth mother may well not be made public. Although 99.9999 percent of children born in wartime or post-war circumstances are much-wanted and much-treasured, several cogent reasons exist why a small number may well not have been viewed with delight.
Under some circumstances, a child may be abhorred. From Randy’s article, we know that the timing and place of his inquirer’s birth indicates desperate sorrow and probable ill-health. Many mothers in post-war displaced persons camps were malnourished and traumatized and had lived their recent years in fear. Many women made decisions they might not have in other circumstances in order to survive, even to keep warm, let alone to eat or live what might have passed for an ordinary life. Jewish girls were no exception. Some became the girlfriends or wives of Nazi Party members. Some did have children.
It is possible that this mother was too ill to be thought to be able to survive her privations, let alone care for a child. It could be that the survival was of the body, not the mind. It could be any one of a number of possibilities.
What is fact is that the child was given the chance for life, which he has lived as fully and as completely as was within his reach. Not all can say as much, even from the comfort of an average 2.4-person family.
Perhaps a true story told some 15 years ago illustrates the desperate possibility’s reality. In England, on a torrentially rainy summer day, a tourist boat idled in the middle of one of the Lake District’s more delightful lakes. As the weather was so bad, even for that rainy area, only two couples were aboard. It could have been a scene from Casablanca. One couple was Jewish, both genealogists. The other couple was a farmer and his wife. The farmer’s wife, hearing that the other couple were Jewish and genealogists, said she had a story to tell. She told of her arrival into England as part of a transport, not the Kindertransport, but a private group. She’d travelled as a wrapped package on a railway carriage luggage rack, having been diagnosed with scarlet fever on the day of departure. Wrapping her up and keeping her on a luggage rack was a strategy to safeguard the other children from infection. Her information as a small child was scant, little having been released or sent with her. What she learned later was from the Red Cross, that she was the daughter of a Jewish woman and a Nazi officer. The price of her safety, being sent to England, was her own mother’s certain death in an extermination camp. The Nazi officer was making good his loyalty to his Fuhrer. Had the mother said the child was not to go to England, then that child, the woman on the boat in the Lake District, would have been sent to certain death with her mother. The group of children were from an informal organization of kindly intentioned English ladies. The fact that a Nazi officer had placed an extra child on the transport was not questioned. Who questions the man with the gun?
As it happened, the woman had led a good and solid life. Yes, she’d wondered who she was, but had married, had children, was due to have grandchildren, and in that way, gave her own lost mother a future.
It is possible that her own children might seek out their past. It is quite certain that DNA would be their only route. Millions of children do not have birth certificates, known parentage or certain histories. It isn’t wholly what is one’s past that determines one’s future, but how a person manages his or her own life within its limits of probability and possibilities that most often determines how that life will be lived.
Daitch’s enquirer has now reached an age at which he can see the future, through grandchildren, perhaps. The story may well reflect that while he doesn’t know his natural mother’s origins, or those of his father, he does know who he is and may well thank the Good Lord for such bounty. Alternatively, he may wish to stir the waters by having his DNA placed in databases from which it might be possible to determine with which people his DNA best aligns. He may also put his findings, if he goes down that route, into an envelope for his youngest grandchild to follow up when that grandchild reaches 50 years of age. In that way, while he may not know all the answers, the safeguarding of those close to the origin of the inquiry is guaranteed, with the search recommencing well after the original subject is long deceased.
Judith Joseph
Birmingham, England
Tuesday Is for Weddings
In his article “The Story of Alter Blatt,” (AVOTAYNU, Vol. XXIII, No. 2, Summer 2007) Harry Boonin concludes with the observation that the observant do not normally select Tuesdays for weddings.
On the contrary. In the Creation narrative, the phrase “it was good” appears twice on the third day, so that day is considered particularly auspicious for weddings. I don’t know how old that custom is, but Encyclopedia Judaica cites it without sources.
Israel Pickholtz
Gush Etzion, Israel
[Susan Edel of Petah Tikva, Israel, also has written to say the same thing—Ed.]
Discusses Levite and Sephardic Origins of WIRTH Group
Hats off to Herb Huebscher and Elise Friedman for their trail-blazing DNA study of the families within the WIRTH group. This fascinating study undoubtedly will serve as a guide for future DNA genealogical research. I would like to address two aspects of the conclusions. One concerns the possible Levite status of the entire WIRTH group; the second discusses whether or not the families are of Sephardic descent.
Regarding the Levite or Israelite status of the family: All members of this group must be either Levites or Israelites. Because such status only passes down from father to son (although one’s status as a Jew comes from the mother), some cannot be Levite and some Israelite if they all descend from a common male.
Virtually all Jews today descend from families that were religiously observant only a handful of generations ago. At that time, every Jew in any community knew who were the Cohanim, the Levites and the Israelites since this status was important when being called up to say the blessings before and after Torah readings. The lineage could not be faked, nor would any reason exist to do so. No benefit derives from the status aside from having the first aliyah (for Cohanim) or second aliyah (for Levites). Even if a man moved to a distant town and wanted to fake his status, he risked discovery from someone passing through and would lose his reputation and good name, something that meant more then than it does today.
In modern times, many families became secular and did not pass down knowledge of this status from father to son. Their descendants simply don’t know their status–even though they still retain it.
How does this apply in the WIRTH case? The way to determine the status is to find other male descendants of the earliest-known male ancestor, trace these lines and talk to members of these branches or obtain photographs of the gravestones of the common male ancestors’ descendants. Especially among those who died before World War II, Cohanim or Leviim status was known and typically recorded on gravestones. A pitcher was a common symbol for a Levite. In addition, some branches likely will have remained observant and know whether they are Cohanim, Levites or Israelites.
If some WIRTH families truly know that they are Israelites while others know that they are Levites—and they really all do descend from a common male ancestor, the only way this could occur is as a result of what is called an “unrecorded paternity,” that is, one of the male ancestors in the family was not the biological son of his father. Such could come about in one of the following ways:
- A woman remarried and her children were recorded as belonging to her new husband
- Through adoption as we know it today
- Through an unknown and unrecorded liaison
Halachically (according to Jewish law), unless people witness a physical relationship between a married woman and a man to whom she is not married, the children are considered to belong to the lawful husband.
Regarding possible Sephardic origins, Huebscher and Friedman postulate that the entire WIRTH group was once Sephardic because the Rosa family in Puerto Rico, originally from Spain, shares the group’s DNA pattern. The authors assume that the family lived in the Iberian Peninsula before Jews were forced either to convert or leave the peninsula. (1492 for Spain, and 1498 for Portugal) In Portugal, Jews had to convert; they were not allowed to leave.
There are two alternate explanations. First, a non-Jewish Spaniard, an ancestor of the Rosa family, went to Eastern Europe and sired a son (or sons) from whom all WIRTH families descend. Second, an Ashkenazic Jew, an ancestor of the WIRTH families, went to Spain before the Inquisition period and sired a son from whom the Rosa family descends.
Under any circumstances, the Huebscher and Friedman article is fascinating. It demonstrates how exciting DNA research is becoming for the genealogist. To be sure, it answers certain questions and shows us whether we should or should not pursue certain research strategies. But it also presents us with new and intriguing questions, which, before the ability to use DNA research for genealogical purposes, we could not even imagine.
Harold Rhode
Potomac, Maryland
[We asked Bennett Greenspan, president of FamilyTree DNA for his thoughts on the subject. Here is his response. “Rhode is 100 percent right about the status of Levite or Yisrael. I think that a remarriage might make the most sense where the children from one marriage were Levites, while from the other marriage they were not, and the message got confused as time moved forward. About whether or not the WIRTH families originally were Sephardic we find that 98 percent of the participants are Ashkenazic. Two percent are possibly Sephardic. The WIRTH signature has not been found in the as-yet-unpublished results of Drs. Michael Hammer’s and Doron Behar’s combined Middle Eastern database. Therefore, if the group was from Spain, why hasn’t the signature been found to date in any Sephardic population that is downstream from the expulsion of the Jews of Iberia?
In science we use the concept of Ockhams’s Razor, the most important portion of the concept being “All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one,” or, alternately, “We should not assert that what we do not have some proof for.” In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities (although this is not always the same as simplicity). I think that the idea that Rosa was really ROSE or some other Ashkenazic name and that the name was changed is the simplest solution to this question. Is it right? We don’t know, but it seems the most logical.”—Ed.]
Locating Hard-to-Find
Library Holdings in Europe
Edward David Luft’s excellent article “How to Locate a Hard-to-Find Library Holding,” AVOTAYNU Vol XXIII, no. 2, Summer 2007, can be supplemented with additional resources in the United Kingdom and Europe. Most will arrange interlibrary loan.
Among these are the Copac Academic and National Library catalogue <www.copac.ac.uk> which gives free access to the merged online catalogues of major university and national libraries in the UK and Ireland, including the British Library. Included are substantial holdings in Hebrew, Yiddish, Russian and other foreign languages.
Copac includes details of materials held in libraries throughout the UK. This includes a wide range of major university libraries, Trinity College Dublin Library in Ireland as well as specialist collections such as the National Art Library (Victoria and Albert Museum), Aberdeen, Birmingham (currently unavailable), Bradford REES Collection, Bristol, British Library, British Library Map catalogue, British Library Register of Preservation Surrogates, Cambridge, Cardiff, Durham, Edinburgh, Essex REES Collection, Exeter Arabic & Special Collections, Glasgow, Imperial College London, King’s College London (KCL), Lampeter Special Collections, Leeds, Liverpool, London School of Economics (LSE), Manchester (currently unavailable), National Library of Scotland, National Library of Wales / Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru, Newcastle, Nottingham, Oxford, Reading Special Collections, Register of Preservation Surrogates (British Library), Royal College of Surgeons of England, St. Andrews Special Collections, School of Advanced Study (SAS), School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), Science Museum Library, Scott Polar Research Institute REES Collection (SPRI Cambridge), Sheffield (currently unavailable), Southampton, Trinity College Dublin, UCL (University College London), University of London (ULRLS), V&A National Art Library, Warwick and Wellcome Library. For additional library details see <www/copac.ac.uk/libraries>. Major Hebraica and Judaica collections are not always included in the Copac databases.
To access the British Library Public Catalogue (BLPC), go to <www.blpc.bl.uk>. Substantial map holdings also are listed. Some older British Library Hebrew manuscripts and books are not in the online catalogues because they are on a card index.
The Leopold Muller Memorial Library at the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, Yarnton Manor <www.ochjs.ac.uk/library/basis.html> has an online catalog searchable in Hebrew, Yiddish and Roman characters. Online collections include yizkor books, Foyle-Montefiore, Montefiore archive, Kressel archive and the Hugo Gryn archive. Recent additions to the collection include: the Library of Rabbi Dr Louis Jacobs, the Loewe Collection and the Coppenhagen Library.
University College, London (UCL) <www.ucl.ac.uk/ hebrewjewish/aboutus/ourlibrary.php> has a remarkable wealth of Hebrew, Yiddish and Judaica, featuring a number of special collections, now combined in the Arnold Mishcon Jewish Studies Reading Room. These collections include the Mocatta Library, Gaster Papers, the Lucien Wolf collection and many other items. The main catalogue is searchable at <library.ucl.ac.uk/F?RN=759648446>.
A number of neighboring libraries with significant Hebrew and Judaica collections supplement the resources of the UCL Library. These are the Library of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) <lib.soas.ac.uk> ; Dr Williams’s Library, the Institute of Archaeology and, primarily for research students, the Warburg Institute Library and the British Library’s Oriental Books and Manuscript Department. Jewish Music Institute print holdings are included in SOAS Library catalogue. The catalog section of Ancient Near East/Semitics/Judaic <www.soas.ac.uk/ library/index.cfm?navid=305> includes Hebrew, Israeli and Yiddish studies, while the A.N. Stencl collection includes over 2,000 items of 19th- and 20th-century Yiddish books and journals. The London School of Jewish Studies (LSJS) Library is home to more than 70,000 volumes of Judaica and Hebraica. The catalog is listed in part by the SOAS Library.
WorldCat <firstsearch.oclc.org/route=UK;FSIP> provides access to more than 45 million bibliographic records from hundreds of libraries, including holdings information from libraries in 45 countries. Also of interest is University College, London, School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES) <www.ssees.ac.uk/libarch.htm>.
The major French library for Hebrew and Jewish interests is Centre de Documentation Juive Contemporaine (CDJC): Jewish Contemporary Documentation Centre, Research and Documentation. <www.memorial-cdjc.org> and <www.memorial-cdjc.org/index_en.htm>.
Saul Issroff
London, England
Pittsburgh Jewish Newspapers Online
In April 2007, Pittsburgh became the first U.S. city whose major English-language Jewish newspapers are posted online, available for searching and browsing. Eventually the site will host the Jewish Criterion (1895–1962), the American Jewish Outlook (1934–1962) and the Jewish Chronicle (1962–present). The project serves as both an online reference source and as a digitized historical documentation of the Pittsburgh Jewish community and its outlying areas. Current coverage online extends from 1902–1959.
Especially valuable to genealogists with Pittsburgh-area roots or research, the site is relatively easy to navigate. Simply go to the Carnegie Mellon University website at <www.cmu.edu/index.shtml> and enter “Pittsburgh Criterion” in the search field. Click on the first search result. It will bring up the Pittsburgh Jewish Newspaper Project. Enter name, surname, individual or institution in the “Search the Collection” field and prepare to be pleased with the resulting genealogical gems.
My search was for a musicology and scholarly research project about a relative, composer Nikolai Lopatnikoff. A professor of music at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, today Carnegie Mellon University, his compositions were conducted by the leading conductors of his time. The newspaper website yielded 19 hits. For example (from November 14, 1958):
Weren’t last weekend’s Pittsburgh Symphony concerts superb . . .we’re all glowing with civic pride over our eminent concertmaster Samuel Thaviu and the internationally recognized composer Nikolai Lopatnikoff, neither of whom is native to our city, but both of whom we now proudly proclaim as Pittsburghers.
What did I learn from the Pittsburgh Criterion and the press project? Dates of premiers and performances; names of other famous performers who played during Lopatnikoff concerts, including Arthur Rubenstein, Isaac Stern, Alexander Zakin, Zino Francescatti and Gregor Pistigorsky, and the names of two of Lopatnikoff’s students, one of whom I was able to track down through the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle today via an obituary. From her I obtained invaluable personal information about my relative.
Gary Fitelburg
Calabasas, California
Plan To Identify Jewish
UK Fire Service Persons
Martin Sugarman (archivist, Association of Jewish Ex-Servicemen and Women AJEX Jewish Military Museum) and Stephanie Maltman (Firemen Remembered Memorial Association) are compiling an honor list of all Jewish men and women who served in the UK Fire Service, especially during World War II, but also before and since. We are aware that many individuals will have had relatives who served and have personal details about them, including photographs. Anyone with such information, whether just names or details, too, please contact Martin Sugarman at martin.sugarman@westking.ac.uk
Martin Sugarman
AJEX Museum, Shield House
Harmony Way, off Victoria Rd
Hendon NW4 2BZ United Kingdom
