PDA

View Full Version : Corded Ware origin for P312?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

R.Rocca
05-28-2017, 01:05 PM
A Corded Ware origin for P312?

While the geographical origin of Bell Beaker pots and subtypes is still quite murky, several important developments for P312 have come about as a result of the recent Bell Beaker and Balkan papers. The most important is that Portuguese Bell Beaker people had no steppe nor L23 ancestry and could not have been responsible for the re-population of most of Western Europe. The Iberian Copper Age samples look like typical I2a and G2a which, when taken together with the northern Italian Remedello and Otzi samples, makes for a geographical continuum across the western Mediterranean.

These developments seem to point the area of focus back to the Danube. A direct Yamnaya to Bell Beaker East scenario is unlikely, given that only one of seven Hungarian Bell Beaker samples is P312 (one R-Z2103 and one R-M269) and appear no older than Bavarian Bell Beaker samples. The oft-proposed Moravian origin seems likely for Hungarian Bell Beaker. The other Hungarian Bell Beaker samples are typical of Copper Age populations (G2a, I2a) which is odd when one considers that this should have been the area of a complete L51 movement from east to west before a P312 west to east migration. If a direct Yamnaya to Bell Beaker origin is not likely, the next logical step would be to look for L51 and P312 in cultures influenced by Yamnaya. The many Baden Culture samples from previous studies have already ruled that culture out. If we combine the two Croatian Vucedol Culture (R-Z2103 and G2a) and two Hungarian Vucedol "Period" samples (I2a2a and unresolved R-M343), it becomes clear that this group is also too diverse to be the patrilocal L23 one would expect for P312's birthplace. While somewhat distant from the Danube, the I2a Bulgarian Yamnaya sample does not bode confidence in an L23 Danubian Yamnaya population holding its dominance there for a long period of time before incorporating local Copper Age haplogroups. This is a big problem, since the time gap between the Danubian Yamnaya (~2900 BC) and extremely rapid P312 expansion (~2500 BC) is significant. Where was P312 hiding for those 400 years? In my opinion, all of these data points make the western-most periphery of Corded Ware the front-runner for finding not only the earliest R-U106, but also the predecessor of R-P312 Bell Beakers. A peripheral Corded Ware "province" in the Low Countries, Alsace or Switzerland would certainly give enough time for the diverse groups we see by about 2400 BC to form.... since P312 > Z40481 > ZZ11 > U152 > L2 was already present from France to Hungary. Yes, Corded Ware has its own problems, primarily that Corded Ware samples to date are almost entirely R1a, but an albeit late Swedish Battle Axe Culture does belong to R-U106, but again, all we are looking for is a sub-group. So again, while not the only option, a Corded Ware subgroup could be the likeliest option for L51 > L11 groups.

rms2
05-28-2017, 02:19 PM
I've been thinking about that lately myself, but I am still holding out for the Gimbutas scenario, recalling that Heyd also derives BB from Yamnaya rather than Corded Ware.

I get your argument about the diversity of Hungarian BB so far, but I look on the Csepel BB Z2103 as actually a pretty good clue that BB was derived from Yamnaya. There we find a known eastern Yamnaya clade in Csepel Bell Beaker and, not far away, in the same time period, an R1b-L2 BB. What do they have in common? Both are R1b-L23, both have substantial steppe autosomal dna, and both belong to the Bell Beaker culture. What are the odds of two different sources of R1b-L23 in the same steppe culture that both Heyd and Gimbutas derive from Yamnaya?

I'm betting we just have not found the R1b-L51 in Yamnaya yet because we have not dug and tested in the right places, like the Pontic steppe, the Carpathian Basin, Mikhailovka, Kemi-Oba, etc.

Of those non-R1b BBs from Hungary, all but one have low steppe dna and look like fairly recent recruits/clients from among the local Neolithic farmers.

R1b-L51 coming from Corded Ware would please me to no end, so I have no objection to it, and I think what you are saying makes sense. We do have three R1bs in CW thus far. That could be a hint that more are coming. As Davidski mentioned over on his blog, patrilocality could very easily account for different y haplogroups prevailing among the different tribes of a single cultural horizon, so a set of CW tribes who were mostly R1b-L51, while other CW tribes were mostly R1a, would not greatly surprise me. But the same thing applies to Yamnaya, and I think we will see L51 Yamnaya (maybe even P312 Yamnaya), as well as R1a Yamnaya, just as we have seen I2a Yamnaya and Z2103 Yamnaya.

razyn
05-28-2017, 02:34 PM
I don't think the argument for starting P312 in western Europe is very strong. Corded Ware was broader than that anyway; but the specificity of Alsace/Low Countries/Switzerland seems to me to skew about 800 miles farther west than the slim genetic evidence is telling us. We listen to a lot of other voices, and that's good, but P312 is a genetic marker and some of the voices from linguistics, pottery, copper mining and other sources may not be singing in the same choir, all of the time (or between 2900 and 2400 BC).

rms2
05-28-2017, 02:42 PM
Another interesting thing possibly pointing to a Yamnaya origin is that the one non-R1b BB with substantial steppe autosomal dna, I2786, from Hungary, is I2a2a. That Yamnaya from Bulgaria is I2a2a1b1b. The other I2a BB from Hungary, I2741, one of the five non-Iberian non-R1bs with low steppe dna, is I2a1a1.

MitchellSince1893
05-28-2017, 03:23 PM
A peripheral Corded Ware "province" in the Low Countries, Alsace or Switzerland would certainly give enough time for the diverse groups we see by about 2400 BC to form.... since P312 > Z40481 > ZZ11 > U152 > L2 was already present from France to Hungary. Yes, Corded Ware has its own problems, primarily that Corded Ware samples to date are almost entirely R1a, but an albeit late Swedish Battle Axe Culture does belong to R-U106, but again, all we are looking for is a sub-group. So again, while not the only option, a Corded Ware subgroup could be the likeliest option for L51 > L11 groups.

My current thinking is L51 developed in the western periphery of Yamnaya (red circle on both maps) with U106, P312, DF27, U152 already born as well as some of their subclades. Once this group reached a survivable/sustainable/defenseable size, entered Corded Ware territory up the Dniester Valley on the northern slope of he Carpathians, with a sizable/mostly P312 portion entering Moravia, with some going down the Danube into Hungary and some up the Danube into Germany. Most U106 and some P312 kept going northwest towards the Baltic Sea, Jutland and on to Scandinavia.

One of the reasons for this thought is the present diversity of U152 subclades found on the eastern slopes the Carpathians in the red circle on bottom map (using data we do have in the absence ancient samples).

In that circle we find U152>L2, U152>PF6658, U152>Z56, 2 samples that are U152+ L2-,Z56-Z36-, but we presently find little to no U152>ZZ45. It's almost as if ZZ45 wasn't around until the group entered Moravia. Not a lot of U152 samples in the small circled area, but a lot of diversity within the samples we presently have in that area.

The two samples found in NE Romania that are negative for L2, Z56, and Z36 (largest subclade of ZZ45) are particularly of interest

16354

I wonder if DF27 and U106 notice a similar pattern of subclade diversity in this area.

jdean
05-28-2017, 03:26 PM
look on the Csepel BB Z2103 as actually a pretty good clue that BB was derived from Yamnaya.

We have a Hungarian BB who's Z2103 and very Yamnaya shifted ????

Why is this not being talked about more, or is it ?

Also why does the paper claim the only Eastern R1b BB that was proven to be P312- was the Netherlands U106 sample ?

MJost
05-28-2017, 06:01 PM
This paper has some interesting information that may assist in further understanding of CW Culture

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4880197/

Diet and Mobility in the Corded Ware of Central Europe Karl-Göran Sjögren, T. Douglas Price, and Kristian Kristiansen
Published online 2016 May 25.

Abstract
Isotopic investigations of two cemetery populations from the Corded Ware Culture in southern Germany reveal new information on the dating of these graves, human diet during this period, and individual mobility. Corded Ware Culture was present across much of temperate Europe ca. 2800–2200 cal. BC and is represented by distinctive artifacts and burial practices. Corded Ware was strongly influenced by the Yamnaya Culture that arose in the steppes of eastern Europe and western Eurasia after 3000 BC, as indicated by recent aDNA research. However, the development of CW on different chronological and spatial scales has to be evaluated. Examination of the CW burials from southern Germany supports an argument for substantial human mobility in this period. Several burials from gravefields and larger samples from two large cemeteries at Lauda-Königshofen "Wöllerspfad" and at Bergheinfeld “Hühnerberg” contributed the human remains for our study of bone and tooth enamel from the Corded Ware Culture. Our results suggest that Corded Ware groups in this region at least were subsisting on a mix of plant and animal foods and were highly mobile, especially the women. We interpret this as indicating a pattern of female exogamy, involving different groups with differing economic strategies.

(Also noted this study concluded that it is not possible to identify migrants from the steppe on the basis of Sr isotopes only.)

The above paper is part of another study
Re-theorising mobility and the formation of culture and language among the Corded Ware Culture in Europe
Kristian Kristiansen, et al

https://www.academia.edu/32293183/Re-theorising_mobility_and_the_formation_of_culture_a nd_language_among_the_Corded_Ware_Culture_in_Europ e

MJost-Watterson

rms2
05-28-2017, 06:05 PM
We have a Hungarian BB who's Z2103 and very Yamnaya shifted ????

Why is this not being talked about more, or is it ?

Also why does the paper claim the only Eastern R1b BB that was proven to be P312- was the Netherlands U106 sample ?

And the one non-R1b BB outside of Iberia with substantial steppe dna, also from Hungary, belongs to I2a2a, which has been found in Yamnaya. So, we have at least two BBs belonging to clades that have already been found in Yamnaya.

Honestly, I don't think that U106 was really Bell Beaker but was rather from a later culture inserted in a tumulus that was added after the Bell Beaker tumuli there. It was later in time than the P312 BB burials and was not buried BB fashion. If you read about it in the Supplementary Info, you'll see what I mean.

This is from page 17 of the Olalde et al Supplementary Info:



In the Early Bronze Age, between 1900 and 1700 BCE probably, at 20 m distance, a second burial mound (Tumulus I) was raised in which two skeletons have been interred, probably in the already existing barrow (skeletons 230 and 231). Both skeletons were buried in a manner typical for the Middle Bronze Age, stretched on their backs. Both are dated between 1880 and 1650 calBCE (3440±40 BP, GrA-17225 and 3450±BP, 449 GrA-17226).

Skeleton 230 is I4070, the U106 skeleton. 231 is a female.

The R1b-P312 Bell Beaker skeletons are older and were buried on their sides in a crouching posture, which was the BB fashion.

From pages 16-17:



In essence, this dates all skeletons buried in mound II to older than approximately 1900 BCE. The male individuals were all buried on their left side, facing south. The three females were buried on the right side, facing west or north. All individuals were laid down in a crouched position typical for Beaker burials.


Mound II, or Tumulus II, was the older mound where the P312 BBs were found. Mound or Tumulus I is the much younger mound in which the U106 was found on his back, non-BB style. II precedes I in this case.

jdean
05-28-2017, 08:17 PM
Another interesting thing possibly pointing to a Yamnaya origin is that the one non-R1b BB with substantial steppe autosomal dna, I2786, from Hungary, is I2a2a. That Yamnaya from Bulgaria is I2a2a1b1b. The other I2a BB from Hungary, I2741, one of the five non-Iberian non-R1bs with low steppe dna, is I2a1a1.

Found this (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265096668_Kohler_K_A_Harang_alaku_edenyek_nepe_Szi getszentmiklos-Felso-urge_Hegyi_dulo_lelohelyen_feltart_temetojenek_emb ertani_vizsgalati_eredmenyei_Anthropologiai_Kozlem enyek_52_2011_55-76) study on these Hungarian Bell Beakers, in Hungarian unfortunately : ) however it concerns skull morphology and could be very interesting.


The distribution of these two basic types can be clearly separated between men and women. While in males dolicho, hyperdolichocran, females have brachycran brain-skull dominated. In the case of the latter, there is a flat- Taurid, and the curved rectangular profile, most commonly of the short-headed human component of the alpine type

Bearing in mind Corded Ware had dolicho skulls this looks to pose another problem for those suggesting Bell Beaker folk got their Steppe ancestry via Corded Ware women.

16360

rms2
05-28-2017, 11:11 PM
Found this (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265096668_Kohler_K_A_Harang_alaku_edenyek_nepe_Szi getszentmiklos-Felso-urge_Hegyi_dulo_lelohelyen_feltart_temetojenek_emb ertani_vizsgalati_eredmenyei_Anthropologiai_Kozlem enyek_52_2011_55-76) study on these Hungarian Bell Beakers, in Hungarian unfortunately : ) however it concerns skull morphology and could be very interesting.



Bearing in mind Corded Ware had dolicho skulls this looks to pose another problem for those suggesting Bell Beaker folk got their Steppe ancestry via Corded Ware women.

16360

I believe the current thinking is that BB practiced cradle boarding, which artificially flattened the back of the skull.

R.Rocca
05-29-2017, 12:36 PM
Another interesting thing possibly pointing to a Yamnaya origin is that the one non-R1b BB with substantial steppe autosomal dna, I2786, from Hungary, is I2a2a. That Yamnaya from Bulgaria is I2a2a1b1b. The other I2a BB from Hungary, I2741, one of the five non-Iberian non-R1bs with low steppe dna, is I2a1a1.

Again, I just want to clarify that I am not at all proposing a non-Yamnaya origin... just a strong consideration for a Yamnaya > Corded Ware > Eastern Bell Beaker development rather than Yamnaya > Eastern Bell Beaker.

rms2
05-29-2017, 01:23 PM
Again, I just want to clarify that I am not at all proposing a non-Yamnaya origin... just a strong consideration for a Yamnaya > Corded Ware > Eastern Bell Beaker development rather than Yamnaya > Eastern Bell Beaker.

I agree with you completely. That is certainly a possibility. I just still think there are reasons to hold out for the Gimbutas scenario (not that she has always been right).

TigerMW
05-29-2017, 02:29 PM
Again, I just want to clarify that I am not at all proposing a non-Yamnaya origin... just a strong consideration for a Yamnaya > Corded Ware > Eastern Bell Beaker development rather than Yamnaya > Eastern Bell Beaker.
I think both alternatives are quite plausible. I still think U106 hold a key puzzle piece. If U106 is definitely Corded Ware then L151 and P312 are likely the same. If instead U106 was from Yamnaya on the Middle or Upper Danube then that seals the deal that the direct Yamnaya to Beaker connection was how L151 arrived in Central Europe.

We should probably say there are two variations of Yamnaya being direct source for P312. One would be the Danubian Yamnaya and the other would be Black Sea Yamnaya with the split of L151 going both sides of the Carpathians. The lack of L151 east of Carpathian Basin has caused me to demote the Black Sea Yamnaya as a direct source.

R.Rocca
05-29-2017, 02:43 PM
These data points have been made separately, but are pretty important when taken collectively:

Sample:...........................RISE563
Haplogroup:.....................P312+ U152+
Dating:............................2572-2512 calBCE (3955±35 BP, Poz-84553)... (recently produced C14 date from Olalde et al makes him the earliest known P312 sample to date)
Culture:...........................Bell Beaker East - Osterhofen-Altenmarkt Germany
Isotope Analysis:...............was a migrant based on this skeleton's use in a prior isotope study
Autosomal Composition:.....plots with Corded Ware samples and modern day eastern Ukrainians, Kargopol Russians and Mordovians

rms2
05-29-2017, 02:52 PM
We don't really know if L151 is lacking in Yamnaya in the Black Sea region. We only have one ancient y-dna result from Yamnaya anywhere near the Black Sea, and that is an I2a2a1b1b from Bulgaria. We don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe. We don't have any from Mikhailovka or Kemi Oba. And, of course, we don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from among the literally thousands of kurgans in the Carpathian Basin.

I also do not see why U106 couldn't be part of Corded Ware while P312 was part of Yamnaya. Why must they both be one or the other?

Thus far, U106 has not really shown up in Bell Beaker, despite the growing number of BB y-dna test results.

MitchellSince1893
05-29-2017, 04:16 PM
...I wonder if DF27 and U106 notice a similar pattern of subclade diversity in this area.

Not sure how useful this is but I did have a look at the FTDNA DF27 and U106 project maps.

DF27 in Ukraine, Moldova, and NE Romania
DF27>ZZ12: 4 samples
DF27>Z196: 7 samples

DF27 in Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, S. Poland and Slovakia (adds S. Poland and Slovakia to above)
DF27>ZZ12: 9 samples
DF27>Z196: 8 samples

U106 in Ukraine, Moldova, and NE Romania
U106>Z381: 12 samples
U106>Z18: 3 samples
U106>S18632: 1 sample

U106 in Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, S. Poland and Slovakia
U106>Z381: 30 samples
U106>Z18: 5 samples
U106>S18632: 4 samples

jdean
05-29-2017, 04:39 PM
I believe the current thinking is that BB practiced cradle boarding, which artificially flattened the back of the skull.

Yes I'm familiar with that explanation but reading about potential skull deformations caused in infancy I'm curious no BB's haven't been reported suffering from Plagiocephaly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiocephaly) or more extreme forms of brachycephaly (https://www.technologyinmotion.com/what-is-brachycephaly/)

However what I think is interesting is this paper seems to suggest the brachycran shape, whether by nature or nurture, could have entered the BB world via women (who were unlikely to be CW) around the area of Hungary and therefore providing a clue to to origins of Eastern BBs, or am I getting too excitable ?

rms2
05-29-2017, 05:33 PM
Yes I'm familiar with that explanation but reading about potential skull deformations caused in infancy I'm curious no BB's haven't been reported suffering from Plagiocephaly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiocephaly) or more extreme forms of brachycephaly (https://www.technologyinmotion.com/what-is-brachycephaly/)

However what I think is interesting is this paper seems to suggest the brachycran shape, whether by nature or nurture, could have entered the BB world via women (who were unlikely to be CW) around the area of Hungary and therefore providing a clue to to origins of Eastern BBs, or am I getting too excitable ?

I'm not sure the cradle boarding hypothesis is right. Honestly, I don't know the answer.

rms2
05-29-2017, 07:05 PM
These data points have been made separately, but are pretty important when taken collectively:

Sample:...........................RISE563
Haplogroup:.....................P312+ U152+
Dating:............................2572-2512 calBCE (3955±35 BP, Poz-84553)... (recently produced C14 date from Olalde et al makes him the earliest known P312 sample to date)
Culture:...........................Bell Beaker East - Osterhofen-Altenmarkt Germany
Isotope Analysis:...............was a migrant based on this skeleton's use in a prior isotope study
Autosomal Composition:.....plots with Corded Ware samples and modern day eastern Ukrainians, Kargopol Russians and Mordovians

You know, that is a fantastic result. Wish we had one that good for L21. B)

Wish they hadn't left the Amesbury Archer out of the Olalde et al paper.

TigerMW
05-29-2017, 09:06 PM
I also do not see why U106 couldn't be part of Corded Ware while P312 was part of Yamnaya. Why must they both be one or the other?
Of course it is possible, but the reason I 1) demote the probabilities of a P312 origin and U106 origin with the Black Sea Yamnaya and 2) rank down the idea of P312 and U106 originating on different sides (north vs south) of the Carpathians is the special pleadings (arguments of exception) that requires related to time and space.

We have P312>U152 RISE564 is in Bavaria about 2500 BC. YFull's estimates for P312's MRCA is 2400 BC so the genetic distance counting is in the right ball game, although I think P312's MRCA is more in line with U106's since it's genetic distance to U106 is so low.

It's over 1,200 miles to the Black Sea from Bavaria by either the north or south routes. Successful (sustained) migration/colonization efforts take more time than single scout heading off. I don't buy off on the special pleading of two lucky guys who could have been cousins, each becoming very successful in different cultures (Corded Wares and Danubian Yamnaya).

We are just narrowing the timeframe down more and more to when L151's MRCA would have to have been in the Black Sea Yamnaya. That's why I think the odds are being reduced of L151's MRCA being a Black Sea Yamnaya (Yamnaya proper).

Maybe I'm the only person who thinks genetic distances matter. There is corroboration on the STR side of things too. If you look at the early branching U106 and calculate modes that way rather than by biased modern populations, we are talking about a very low genetic distances STR-wise. In modern terms, these guys were of the same extended family. They could have easily been second cousins.

Wing Genealogist
05-29-2017, 09:36 PM
... I also do not see why U106 couldn't be part of Corded Ware while P312 was part of Yamnaya. Why must they both be one or the other? ...

Current estimates (both by YFull and by the preliminary work of Iain McDonald) give a slightly older date for U106 than for P312. Given this, it would be a bit odd (but certainly not impossible) for the older U106 to have an origin after the migration away from Yamnaya, but the younger P312 having an origin "back home".

Hopefully further ancient DNA testing will help clear up this picture.

rms2
05-29-2017, 10:03 PM
Of course it is possible, but the reason I 1) demote the probabilities of a P312 origin and U106 origin with the Black Sea Yamnaya and 2) rank down the idea of P312 and U106 originating on different sides (north vs south) of the Carpathians is the special pleadings (arguments of exception) that requires related to time and space.

We have P312>U152 RISE564 is in Bavaria about 2500 BC. YFull's estimates for P312's MRCA is 2400 BC so the genetic distance counting is in the right ball game, although I think P312's MRCA is more in line with U106's since it's genetic distance to U106 is so low.

It's over 1,200 miles to the Black Sea from Bavaria by either the north or south routes. Successful (sustained) migration/colonization efforts take more time than single scout heading off. I don't buy off on the special pleading of two lucky guys who could have been cousins, each becoming very successful in different cultures (Corded Wares and Danubian Yamnaya).

We are just narrowing the timeframe down more and more to when L151's MRCA would have to have been in the Black Sea Yamnaya. That's why I think the odds are being reduced of L151's MRCA being a Black Sea Yamnaya (Yamnaya proper).

Maybe I'm the only person who thinks genetic distances matter. There is corroboration on the STR side of things too. If you look at the early branching U106 and calculate modes that way rather than by biased modern populations, we are talking about a very low genetic distances STR-wise. In modern terms, these guys were of the same extended family. They could have easily been second cousins.

Special pleading is a form of argument in which one attempts to explain away things that might be unfavorable to his own position by advancing a tenuous, unlikely argument. Who has done that in this case?

First off, there are a couple of things unfavorable to your position. First, the absence of U106 in Bell Beaker despite the growing number of Bell Beaker samples, and its presence in a Nordic Battle Axe cemetery in Sweden contemporaneous with Bell Beaker. Another problem is the pretty obvious correlation of U106 with Germanic speakers and that of P312 with Italo-Celtic speakers. Those things don't make it look like U106 and P312 took the same route from the east.

Yamnaya began advancing up the Danube around 3000 BC, so L151 and its clades had plenty of time to get from the Danube delta on the Black Sea coast to Bavaria by 2500 BC. Corded Ware dates to about 2900 BC. Plenty of time for U106 to get where it wound up if it was part of Corded Ware.

If U106 and P312 were both part of the same culture coming out of the steppe, one wonders how P312 became so well represented in Bell Beaker and subsequently in Italo-Celtic-speaking areas, but U106 did not, instead showing up in Nordic Battle Axe in Sweden and in Germanic-speaking areas.

How did that happen?

YFull estimates U106's tmrca at about 2800 BC and P312's at about 2400 BC. Obviously the estimate for P312 is too low, but U106 and P312 are not so close that they could not have belonged to different cultural horizons in the same general Proto-Indo-European steppe milieu.

And there is no special pleading involved, no Rube Goldberg schemes or tenuous arguments to explain how the one became rife in Bell Beaker while the other did not, and how one came to be associated with Italo-Celtic while the other became associated with Germanic.

Maybe more testing of Bell Beaker will reveal U106 in it somewhere. Maybe more testing of Corded Ware will reveal both P312 and U106. I don't know.

But seeing the possibility that U106 came across the North European Plain with Corded Ware while P312 came up the Danube with Yamnaya-into-Bell Beaker requires no special pleading at all. It's pretty straightforward.

rms2
05-29-2017, 10:16 PM
Current estimates (both by YFull and by the preliminary work of Iain McDonald) give a slightly older date for U106 than for P312. Given this, it would be a bit odd (but certainly not impossible) for the older U106 to have an origin after the migration away from Yamnaya, but the younger P312 having an origin "back home".

Hopefully further ancient DNA testing will help clear up this picture.

The important thing is the difference in the ages of U106 and P312. They evidently did not spring from L151 so closely together in time as to render it impossible that they could have been involved in different movements out of the steppe and in different cultural horizons within the same general Proto-Indo-European steppe milieu. We're talking about pretty much the same people when we are talking about Corded Ware and Yamnaya. CW occupied the forest-steppe zone to the north of Yamnaya and went westward into Central Europe via the North European Plain. Yamnaya primarily came up the Danube Valley.

Corded Ware and Yamnaya were roughly contemporaneous, so it's not like U106 would have had to sit at home while the younger P312 clade was already on the road west.

Actually, I dislike getting involved in this argument, because I don't want to become wedded to one thing or another when it comes to U106 and P312. Pretty obviously, no one knows the answers. I do find it odd that U106 isn't showing up in Bell Beaker but P312 is all over it.

kinman
05-29-2017, 11:05 PM
I don't understand 2572-2512 calBCE (3955±35 BP). Why are these dates not 1950 years apart?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


These data points have been made separately, but are pretty important when taken collectively:

Sample:...........................RISE563
Haplogroup:.....................P312+ U152+
Dating:............................2572-2512 calBCE (3955±35 BP, Poz-84553)... (recently produced C14 date from Olalde et al makes him the earliest known P312 sample to date)
Culture:...........................Bell Beaker East - Osterhofen-Altenmarkt Germany
Isotope Analysis:...............was a migrant based on this skeleton's use in a prior isotope study
Autosomal Composition:.....plots with Corded Ware samples and modern day eastern Ukrainians, Kargopol Russians and Mordovians

alan
05-29-2017, 11:15 PM
A Corded Ware origin for P312?

While the geographical origin of Bell Beaker pots and subtypes is still quite murky, several important developments for P312 have come about as a result of the recent Bell Beaker and Balkan papers. The most important is that Portuguese Bell Beaker people had no steppe nor L23 ancestry and could not have been responsible for the re-population of most of Western Europe. The Iberian Copper Age samples look like typical I2a and G2a which, when taken together with the northern Italian Remedello and Otzi samples, makes for a geographical continuum across the western Mediterranean.

These developments seem to point the area of focus back to the Danube. A direct Yamnaya to Bell Beaker East scenario is unlikely, given that only one of seven Hungarian Bell Beaker samples is P312 (one R-Z2103 and one R-M269) and appear no older than Bavarian Bell Beaker samples. The oft-proposed Moravian origin seems likely for Hungarian Bell Beaker. The other Hungarian Bell Beaker samples are typical of Copper Age populations (G2a, I2a) which is odd when one considers that this should have been the area of a complete L51 movement from east to west before a P312 west to east migration. If a direct Yamnaya to Bell Beaker origin is not likely, the next logical step would be to look for L51 and P312 in cultures influenced by Yamnaya. The many Baden Culture samples from previous studies have already ruled that culture out. If we combine the two Croatian Vucedol Culture (R-Z2103 and G2a) and two Hungarian Vucedol "Period" samples (I2a2a and unresolved R-M343), it becomes clear that this group is also too diverse to be the patrilocal L23 one would expect for P312's birthplace. While somewhat distant from the Danube, the I2a Bulgarian Yamnaya sample does not bode confidence in an L23 Danubian Yamnaya population holding its dominance there for a long period of time before incorporating local Copper Age haplogroups. This is a big problem, since the time gap between the Danubian Yamnaya (~2900 BC) and extremely rapid P312 expansion (~2500 BC) is significant. Where was P312 hiding for those 400 years? In my opinion, all of these data points make the western-most periphery of Corded Ware the front-runner for finding not only the earliest R-U106, but also the predecessor of R-P312 Bell Beakers. A peripheral Corded Ware "province" in the Low Countries, Alsace or Switzerland would certainly give enough time for the diverse groups we see by about 2400 BC to form.... since P312 > Z40481 > ZZ11 > U152 > L2 was already present from France to Hungary. Yes, Corded Ware has its own problems, primarily that Corded Ware samples to date are almost entirely R1a, but an albeit late Swedish Battle Axe Culture does belong to R-U106, but again, all we are looking for is a sub-group. So again, while not the only option, a Corded Ware subgroup could be the likeliest option for L51 > L11 groups.

I agree. The fact that for 250 years before bell beaker using groups appeared in central Europe. CW and its variants covered so much of trans-Danube Europe from the Rhine/north Switzerland to the deep into eastern Europe is pretty hard to ignore.Combined with the fact Yamnaya proper ends where it does. There really is no universally acknowledged group with strong steppe links other than CW that fills the enormous gap between the Rhine and eastern Europe.

The sample is not big enough to be sure but what there is rules out a Med or south Alpine route west and makes an origin of L11 in Yamnaya on the Lower Danube/north Balkans look unlikely. The autosomal DNA of the P312 beaker users in central and NW Europe appears to point to a northern route west through north-central Europe (north of the Danube). That puts it in CW territory.

As I have said before, an origin within and a migratory path through CW territory doesnt mean they were CW people per se. It is also clear that if they lived in CW territory they must have been an out-group or an atypical specialist group.

The other thing is the P312 steppe gene heavy people simply had to be in a position to receive some influences from contract - no matter how brief and genetically insignificant - with south-west Europeans creeping towards central Europe from the south-west c. 2550BC give or take. That has always made it seem like special pleading to me to place them too far east. By far the most likely contact zone was the upper reaches of the Rhone, Rhine and Danube where the Iberian derived beaker user cultures and CW most closely approached each other.

We are talking about a male lineage - P312 - not an entire people. That lineage may not have been v old or numerous c. 2550BC when adopting some south-western ideas gave it a unique cultural identity. So, the cultural, physical and functional nature of them could have been unique to that 'clan' and atypical to the bulk of the pop the lived among.

rms2
05-29-2017, 11:22 PM
Look at the BB Begleitkeramik. It's from the Carpathian Basin, not Corded Ware. It came via Vucedol offshoots, Zok-Mako and Somogyvar. Thus P312 up the Danube, and Yamnaya 2.0 is Bell Beaker.

Let's see what the ancient y-dna says when the nut cutting is done.

16385

rms2
05-29-2017, 11:37 PM
And speaking of the Black Sea, where Mikhailovka had stone-lined cists, cromlechs, and stelae, like so much of Bell Beaker, look at this brazier, which looks like the pedestalled bowls of the Carpathian Basin.

16386 16387

alan
05-29-2017, 11:40 PM
Found this (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265096668_Kohler_K_A_Harang_alaku_edenyek_nepe_Szi getszentmiklos-Felso-urge_Hegyi_dulo_lelohelyen_feltart_temetojenek_emb ertani_vizsgalati_eredmenyei_Anthropologiai_Kozlem enyek_52_2011_55-76) study on these Hungarian Bell Beakers, in Hungarian unfortunately : ) however it concerns skull morphology and could be very interesting.



Bearing in mind Corded Ware had dolicho skulls this looks to pose another problem for those suggesting Bell Beaker folk got their Steppe ancestry via Corded Ware women.

16360

That agrees with a hunch I have long had that the distinctive central/NW European beaker skull type has come about from the female side either through marrying into a female population with genetic propensity to it or simply that the females introduced the cradle boarding tradition. Lets put it this way - look back a few steps and consider L23 as a whole. Do any of the other L23 ancient DNA samples come from people with those beaker type skulls? AFAIK they dont - including Z2103 Yamnaya guys. So it seems v unlikely that the beaker form of skull is an ancestral L23 trait. It seems in all likelihood to be a trait that P312 acquired not long before 2550BC when it appears in the archaeological record. Whether the skull shape is genetic or down to a cultural practice like cradleboarding is in a sense irrelevant. In both cases it would appear to have originated in P312 mixing with females that other L23 derived groups like Z2103 Yamnaya did not mix with in the same way. The answer may lie in comparing the mtDNA and autosomal DNA of Yamnaya Z2103 guys and beaker P312 guys and looking at the differences between in terms of what women these two L23-derived groups mixed with.

alan
05-30-2017, 12:17 AM
And speaking of the Black Sea, where Mikhailovka had stone-lined cists, cromlechs, and stelae, like so much of Bell Beaker, look at this brazier, which looks like the pedestalled bowls of the Carpathian Basin.

16386 16387

There is a possibility - strong IMO - that the P312 group was already plying the Danube route all the way from the Carpathians to the Rhine in pre-beaker times which would account for their cultural magpie tendencies. Someone was in control of metals that supplied the entire CW world in pre-beaker times and this appears to have been predominantly from the Carpathians. So the P312 lineage or its immediate ancestor could have been effectively controllers of a long trade route that passed through more than one culture in pre-beaker times. A lifestyle like that would clearly be easier on the hoof and a tendency to be eclectic in terms of brides would follow too. Such a lifestyle would also lend itself to cultural magpie behavour and women would be the main route for new pottery influences to flow.

jdean
05-30-2017, 12:18 AM
I agree. The fact that for 250 years before bell beaker using groups appeared in central Europe. CW and its variants covered so much of trans-Danube Europe from the Rhine/north Switzerland to the deep into eastern Europe is pretty hard to ignore.Combined with the fact Yamnaya proper ends where it does. There really is no universally acknowledged group with strong steppe links other than CW that fills the enormous gap between the Rhine and eastern Europe.

The sample is not big enough to be sure but what there is rules out a Med or south Alpine route west and makes an origin of L11 in Yamnaya on the Lower Danube/north Balkans look unlikely. The autosomal DNA of the P312 beaker users in central and NW Europe appears to point to a northern route west through north-central Europe (north of the Danube). That puts it in CW territory.

As I have said before, an origin within and a migratory path through CW territory doesnt mean they were CW people per se. It is also clear that if they lived in CW territory they must have been an out-group or an atypical specialist group.

The other thing is the P312 steppe gene heavy people simply had to be in a position to receive some influences from contract - no matter how brief and genetically insignificant - with south-west Europeans creeping towards central Europe from the south-west c. 2550BC give or take. That has always made it seem like special pleading to me to place them too far east. By far the most likely contact zone was the upper reaches of the Rhone, Rhine and Danube where the Iberian derived beaker user cultures and CW most closely approached each other.

We are talking about a male lineage - P312 - not an entire people. That lineage may not have been v old or numerous c. 2550BC when adopting some south-western ideas gave it a unique cultural identity. So, the cultural, physical and functional nature of them could have been unique to that 'clan' and atypical to the bulk of the pop the lived among.

I think it's well worth remembering Rich's observation (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10749-Corded-Ware-origin-for-P312&p=239561&viewfull=1#post239561), this is the most Yamnaya shifted sample in the study and also the dolicho male in the photo I posted. I don't think any CW were included in the Yamnaya_Samara to Anatolia_Neolithic comparison but I doubt any CW of a similar age would plot that close to Yamnaya.

16388

Wing Genealogist
05-30-2017, 12:19 AM
... Actually, I dislike getting involved in this argument, because I don't want to become wedded to one thing or another when it comes to U106 and P312. Pretty obviously, no one knows the answers. I do find it odd that U106 isn't showing up in Bell Beaker but P312 is all over it.

I agree with you on all counts.

rms2
05-30-2017, 12:20 AM
That seems unlikely to me, alan. It seems more likely that BB had the Begleitkeramik it did because it emerged from the Yamnaya mixing bowl in the Carpathian Basin.

alan
05-30-2017, 12:53 AM
Look at the BB Begleitkeramik. It's from the Carpathian Basin, not Corded Ware. It came via Vucedol offshoots, Zok-Mako and Somogyvar. Thus P312 up the Danube, and Yamnaya 2.0 is Bell Beaker.

Let's see what the ancient y-dna says when the nut cutting is done.

16385

its interesting that all the pottery that the P312 beaker people used seems to originate in other cultures. Its almost as though they had no pottery of their own. However, pottery is a female craft normally and this pattern is probably more a result of beaker people not having a CW style pattern of marrying locally. This makes perfect sense when we are talking about an expanding male lineage rather than an entire population.

rms2
05-30-2017, 01:01 AM
its interesting that all the pottery that the P312 beaker people used seems to originate in other cultures. Its almost as though they had no pottery of their own. However, pottery is a female craft normally and this pattern is probably more a result of beaker people not having a CW style pattern of marrying locally. This makes perfect sense when we are talking about an expanding male lineage rather than an entire population.

Even if it did stem from females, it shows where they picked up those females. BB had Carpathian Basin Begleitkeramik rather than CW ceramics. That points to the Yamnaya route up the Danube Valley.

If P312 came up the Danube Valley via Yamnaya into Bell Beaker, and U106 came around the north side of the Carpathians with Corded Ware, that would make perfect sense and explain a lot, like why U106 isn't showing up in Bell Beaker.

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 01:40 AM
On the Yfull page for R-L151 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

If we take all 245 of the L151 samples, the mean is 5112 ybp (3162 BC)

This is within 8 years of Ian McDonald's latest age estimates for P311 (L151 and P311 are in the same SNP block on Yfull). Also shown below are his his latest estimates for U106 and P312

P311 3170 BC
U106 3021 BC
P312 2911 BC

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10601-R1b-Specific-Thread-for-10-May-2017-Papers&p=235772&viewfull=1#post235772


As Richard R as stated, we know where P312 was around ~2550 BC (RISE563 on Danube in Bavaria, 20 miles from Austrian/German Border).

Assuming the dates above are close to the truth, it's the preceding 400 to 600 years that we are struggling to understand, keeping in mind that RISE563
Autosomal Composition:.....plots with Corded Ware samples and modern day eastern Ukrainians, Kargopol Russians and Mordovians

1. Is it that we got lucky and RISE563 was an early immigrant straight from the Pontic Steppe?

2. Or that RISE563 and his group had been in this area for a while and didn't mix much with the locals for ~500 years after leaving the Steppe?

3. Or RISE563 was part of a multi generational immigration from the Steppes...much like the Anglo Saxon immigration to Britain went on from the mid 400s AD to the early 600s AD. Meaning P312 had already settled in this part of Europe and RISE563 was just the latest immigrant to get off the boat to join his already established community.

4. Or some other option I didn't think of tonight.

I would lean towards option 3 (always choose the longest answer on a multiple choice test ;) )

A relevant quote from Kossinna's smile by Volker Heyd


Instead of favouring one episode of genetic transmission from Yamnaya to CWC, and
despite a handful of Yamnaya and/or Middle Dnieper/CWC graves along the steppe/forest steppe
border in Moldova and Ukraine having ‘mixed inventories’ of material culture
(Telegin 2005; Włodarczak 2014), it is more convincing in terms of the archaeological
realities to include interactions during previous centuries and to argue for a long-term and
incremental relationship between steppe and temperate European populations, particularly
as CWC is only partially contemporaneous with Yamnaya. Yet along the Rivers Prut,
Dnester, the two Bugs, and the San, it is the Globular Amphora Culture that for two or three
centuries exists in parallel with Yamnaya, with many mutual exchanges (Szmyt 2013). The
role of the Globular Amphora Culture in the transmission is not emphasized; their peoples
are not even mentioned in the aDNA papers. But throughout the fourth millennium BC,
we see evidence both north and south of the Carpathian arc for close interrelationships
between pre-Yamnaya societies of the steppe belt and ‘indigenous’ cultures or those whose
ancestors were already in contact with steppe societies (Frînculeasa et al. 2015). Likewise,
we find round barrows with individual burials in the Baalberge culture of eastern Germany
from c. 3700 BC and early horse bones/skulls at the same period (at the site of Alsleben)
and from the slightly later Salzmünde culture. Esperstedt, where the genotyped CWC
graves were found is, incidentally, in the same region. There are also horse bones at fourth millennium
BC sites in the Czech Republic and Hungary. The interaction between the
steppe and the south-east European ‘sown’ goes back as far as the fifth millennium BC, to
the graves of the Suvorovo-Novodanilovka tradition, and probably inspired the adoption
of steppe-related artifacts, such as stone horse-head scepters, and common burial practices
(Anthony & Ringe 2015; Heyd 2016).

Obviously P311, P312, U106 are too young to be the originators of these already established interactions between the above cultures (GAC ended around 2800 BC), but it may have been the vehicle for their arrival from the steppe to Central Europe.

Location of Globular Amphora
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8d/Map_Corded_Ware_culture-en.svg/800px-Map_Corded_Ware_culture-en.svg.png

I know the ancient dna doesn't yet support it but I would be inclined towards the Globular Amphora zone as the route that P311 (P312, U106, etc) took into Central Europe from the Yamnaya zone.

kinman
05-30-2017, 02:41 AM
Well,
I wouldn't say "obviously" too young to be the originators. Those dates are just the mean. My earlier date (3500 BC for U106 and P312) is still within the 95% confidence interval. And my date of 3100 BC for U152 (in NE Austria) gives the relatives of RISE563 plenty of time to go upriver to Bavaria. I have L2 arising about 2900 BC in southern Germany.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the Yfull page for R-L151 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

If we take all 245 of the L151 samples, the mean is 5112 ybp (3162 BC)

This is within 8 years of Ian McDonald's latest age estimates for P311 (L151 and P311 are in the same SNP block on Yfull). Also shown below are his his latest estimates for U106 and P312

P311 3170 BC
U106 3021 BC
P312 2911 BC

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10601-R1b-Specific-Thread-for-10-May-2017-Papers&p=235772&viewfull=1#post235772


As Richard R as stated, we know where P312 was around ~2550 BC (RISE563 on Danube in Bavaria, 20 miles from Austrian/German Border).

Assuming the dates above are close to the truth, it's the preceding 400 to 600 years that we are struggling to understand, keeping in mind that RISE563

1. Is it that we got lucky and RISE563 was an early immigrant straight from the Pontic Steppe?

2. Or that RISE563 and his group had been in this area for a while and didn't mix much with the locals for ~500 years after leaving the Steppe?

3. Or RISE563 was part of a multi generational immigration from the Steppes...much like the Anglo Saxon immigration to Britain went on from the mid 400s AD to the early 600s AD. Meaning P312 had already settled in this part of Europe and RISE563 was just the latest immigrant to get off the boat to join his already established community.

4. Or some other option I didn't think of tonight.

I would lean towards option 3 (always choose the longest answer on a multiple choice test ;) )

A relevant quote from Kossinna's smile by Volker Heyd



Obviously P311, P312, U106 are too young to be the originators of these already established interactions between the above cultures (GAC ended around 2800 BC), but it may have been the vehicle for their arrival from the steppe to Central Europe.

Location of Globular Amphora
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8d/Map_Corded_Ware_culture-en.svg/800px-Map_Corded_Ware_culture-en.svg.png

I know the ancient dna doesn't yet support it but I would be inclined towards the Globular Amphora zone as the route that P311 (P312, U106, etc) took into Central Europe from the Yamnaya zone.

MJost
05-30-2017, 02:46 AM
I agree with you completely. That is certainly a possibility. I just still think there are reasons to hold out for the Gimbutas scenario (not that she has always been right).

Another question. The R1b Yamna horse back herders required around 20 acres [8 hectares] (15 American football fields) a year for ~10 livestock grazing on grassland-based ecosystems. (or it takes 1.5 to 2 acres to feed a cow calf pair for 12 months), so with the fact that Deciduous forests once covered almost the whole of central and western Europe, I can see our R1b Herding ancestors most likely didn't spend a millennium in north of the Carpathian's. So had to be south of the same. Either route begs the question of when did the R1b L23 >>L11 men convert to metal traders after it appears P312 ended up in western Germany (see Gif Map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IE-migrations.gif This southern route via the eastern Black sea where L23 spawned and spilt into Z2103 & L51 with the former heading for Anatolia, We do know that the oldest branch of Indo-European, have been spoken in Anatolia since at least the 19th century BC.

As the L51 herders move westward along the river, eventually, 11 SNPs later spawned P312 and U106 (Ian McDonald calculated U106 SNP at 3075 BC). Here is where I believe P312 and U106 spawned and then split near Carnuntum in Lower Austria halfway between Vienna and Bratislava. This shortest (and possibly oldest) road avoids alpine areas and led from the Baltic coastline (nowadays Lithuania and Poland), through Biskupin and what is now Wrocław, passed the Moravian Gate, followed the river Morava, crossed the Danube near Carnuntum in the Noricum Province, headed southwest past Poetovio, Celeia, Emona, Nauportus, and reached Patavium and Aquileia at the Adriatic coast. One of the oldest directions of the last stage of the Amber Road to the south of the Danube, noted in the myth about the Argonauts, used the Sava and Kupa rivers, ending with a short continental road from Nauportus to Tarsatica (Trsat, Rijeka) on the coast of the Adriatic.

Amber processing began in the present day Latvia and Lithuania in the 4th millennium BC according to "Baltic Countries (Estonia Latvia Lithuania) Mineral Industry Handbook Volume 1 Strategic Information and Regulations" hand found on Google books.

Maybe Cousin U106 decided to that the amber route north from the Danube river and P312 continued up river to running into the south west corded ware culture and spread west from there. About 18 months ago I charted the Danube route of L51 found here (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNbGZndU9TZjVocHM/view?usp=sharing), the dates are now several hundred years old that shown on this chart.

Just a plausible route and where the sons of L11 may have went.

MJost - Watterson

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 03:14 AM
Well,
I wouldn't say "obviously" too young to be the originators. Those dates are just the mean. My earlier date (3500 BC for U106 and P312) is still within the 95% confidence interval. And my date of 3100 BC for U152 (in NE Austria) gives the relatives of RISE563 plenty of time to go upriver to Bavaria. I have L2 arising about 2900 BC in southern Germany.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will have to agree to disagree on dates. As I've stated previously I think Yfull can often get too young dates for some subclades when they include tiny branches, but even after eliminating that variable I don't see the dates getting as early as you suggest.

From a genetic perspective, P311 and subclades from the Steppe appear to have little to do with Globular Amphora area until around 2900 BC


Despite living in East Central Europe at about the same time as the nearby Yamnaya people of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, these GAC individuals show practically zero Yamnaya-related or steppe ancestry (note the almost total absence of the orange "Yamnaya" component in the Globular_Amphora results in the ADMIXTURE bar graph). Instead, they're very similar to Chalcolithic and Middle Neolithic Central and Western Europeans, with whom they overlap in the Principal Component Analysis (PCA)...During the tail end of the GAC period, East Central Europe was suddenly dominated by a new archaeological complex called the Corded Ware Culture (CWC). Although most CWC individuals sampled to date show minor GAC-related ancestry, they're overwhelmingly Yamnaya-like, which suggests that by and large the CWC population has its origins on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/globular-amphora-people-starkly.html

Tail end of the GAC period would have been ~2800 to 2900 BC. Based on the little evidence we have, there doesn't presently appear to be a strong steppe component in the GAC area prior to this. I'm just suggesting the Globular Amphora cultural network zone may have provided a path from Yamnaya to Central Europe (rather than the popular Danube route) .

alan
05-30-2017, 10:24 AM
Even if it did stem from females, it shows where they picked up those females. BB had Carpathian Basin Begleitkeramik rather than CW ceramics. That points to the Yamnaya route up the Danube Valley.

If P312 came up the Danube Valley via Yamnaya into Bell Beaker, and U106 came around the north side of the Carpathians with Corded Ware, that would make perfect sense and explain a lot, like why U106 isn't showing up in Bell Beaker.

True (although the Begleitkeramik does have non-Carpathian elements too) but the core of the mystery is that no pre-beaker culture surviving as late as 2550BC carrying P312 and what later became the typical beaker autosomal signal has been identified yet. Whatever the culture that transformed into the central European P312/steppe gene carrying group beaker people around 2550BC, it had to be around at that date for that to happen. It also had to be heavy in steppe genes. This is a v interesting sounding paper http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk/en/publications/pitgraves-yamnaya-and-kurgans-at-the-lower-danube-disentangling-late-4th-and-early-3rd-millennium-bc-burial-customs-equipment-and-chronology(c1537f85-8aa5-45b8-9e35-a5dfedea5a0b).html

That summary really highlights how poorly known the kurgans are and the potential that several waves may be identified.

kinman
05-30-2017, 11:19 AM
Of course, we can agree to disagree on the dates. Only time will tell how much older the dates will get as more samples are dated. Although the chances of finding graves of the earlier generations gets increasingly small as we go back in time. Meanwhile, I look forward to YFull altering its formula and coming up with dates that are at least somewhat older for this time period.

And I certainly agree that Globular Amphora could have provided a path for U106 and perhaps some of their relatives. However, I am going to stick with the Danube route for P312 and other relatives. There could easily have been a trickle of P312 going north and a trickle of U106 up the Danube, but with those trickles mostly dying out.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


We will have to agree to disagree on dates. As I've stated previously I think Yfull can often get too young dates for some subclades when they include tiny branches, but even after eliminating that variable I don't see the dates getting as early as you suggest.

From a genetic perspective, P311 and subclades from the Steppe appear to have little to do with Globular Amphora area until around 2900 BC

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/globular-amphora-people-starkly.html

Tail end of the GAC period would have been ~2800 to 2900 BC. Based on the little evidence we have, there doesn't presently appear to be a strong steppe component in the GAC area prior to this. I'm just suggesting the Globular Amphora cultural network zone may have provided a path from Yamnaya to Central Europe (rather than the popular Danube route) .

rafc
05-30-2017, 01:22 PM
The question of where P312 was hiding made me think of a peculiar detail in Anthony's book 'The horse, the wheel, the language'. On page 361-365 he describes how the wave of Yamnaya migrants that ended up in the Balkans and Hungary came from the Bug valley around 3100-3000 BC and bypassed the Usatovo inhabited areas around the Dniestr. The Usatovo culture stayed around untill about 2800 BC when the Lower Dniestr area was colonised by Yamnaya-people. Anthony speculates this was a 'back migration' from the Danube-Yamnaya.
This Lower Dniestr area coincides very well with what MitchellSince1893 proposes as a P312-homeland above. From there it's also feasible to see how they could have spread out westwards to form Eastern BB and from there to advance along the upper Danube, Rhine and Rhone to other later centres of BB.
So maybe the new Yamnaya boom around the Dniestr after 2800 BC is linked to the P312 boom. They could have come either from the west or the east (I think more likely from the east).

Isidro
05-30-2017, 01:31 PM
Older dates for branches of P312 is an option based on the latest findings like the P312-U152 dated circa 2,500 BC.
Not only this date is older than the estimate of it's inception, additionally, what are the odds of finding this mutation at this date and not guess rationally that P312 is at least 1,000 years older, or should adventure even older?.

R1b pre L23 is found all over Eurasia with the very limited samples we have, yes limited...

Mesolithic r1b in Ukraine is closely related in time and space with Cucuteni-Trypillian where also R1b pre l23 are found.

There is a possibility that indeed, L23 was born and grazed in the Steppes, came to Northern and Western Europe, via Corded Ware or a more southerly route from the East, or... R1b is Mesolithic in Europe, survived the last Ice Age in the South of Europe refugia ...many options here to guess an exact origin and then spread a star like expansions after being solidly established way prior to that in time, all this happening 4 to 5 thousand BC.



Of course, we can agree to disagree on the dates. Only time will tell how much older the dates will get as more samples are dated. Although the chances of finding graves of the earlier generations gets increasingly small as we go back in time. Meanwhile, I look forward to YFull altering its formula and coming up with dates that are at least somewhat older for this time period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Romilius
05-30-2017, 01:41 PM
Older dates for branches of P312 is an option based on the latest findings like the P312-U152 dated circa 2,500 BC.
Not only this date is older than the estimate of it's inception, additionally, what are the odds of finding this mutation at this date and not guess rationally that P312 is at least 1,000 years older, or should adventure even older?.

R1b pre L23 is found all over Eurasia with the very limited samples we have, yes limited...

Mesolithic r1b in Ukraine is closely related in time and space with Cucuteni-Trypillian where also R1b pre l23 are found.

There is a possibility that indeed, L23 was born and grazed in the Steppes, came to Northern and Western Europe, via Corded Ware or a more southerly route from the East, or... R1b is Mesolithic in Europe, survived the last Ice Age in the South of Europe refugia ...many options here to guess an exact origin and then spread a star like expansions after being solidly established way prior to that in time, all this happening 4 to 5 thousand BC.

I'm sorry, but where is the source about R1b pre L23 in Cucuteni-Trypillian? R1b in Ukraine is from Dereivka, in the Sredny-Stog area.
Cucuteni-Trypillian sites have G2a and E... not R1b.

Well... there aren't many options: L51 and Z2103 are descendants of the same L23 fellow. How can one be born in one edge of Europe and the other in the other easternmost edge nearly in the same time? Did a son of L23 parachute himself in Western Europe?

It seems now clear that R1b was in the belt between the Balkans and the Baltic in the Mesolithic... with some early clades cut off the main tribe and migrated to Western and Central-Western Europe (i.e. Blatterhohle, Els Trocs, ecc...).

R.Rocca
05-30-2017, 02:47 PM
Older dates for branches of P312 is an option based on the latest findings like the P312-U152 dated circa 2,500 BC.
Not only this date is older than the estimate of it's inception, additionally, what are the odds of finding this mutation at this date and not guess rationally that P312 is at least 1,000 years older, or should adventure even older?.

I'm not sure where you got 1000 years separating P312 and U152, but all of the calculated dates (not guesses) I've seen have been around 400 years. The mid-line between the RISE563 radiocarbon date is 2542 BC. If you add 400 years to 2542 BC, it gets you to 2942 BC. Yamnaya groups west of the Black Sea are dated to 2950 BC. I don't think anyone can objectively look at all of the data points we have and think this a mere coincidence.


There is a possibility that indeed, L23 was born and grazed in the Steppes, came to Northern and Western Europe, via Corded Ware or a more southerly route from the East, or... R1b is Mesolithic in Europe, survived the last Ice Age in the South of Europe refugia ...many options here to guess an exact origin and then spread a star like expansions after being solidly established way prior to that in time, all this happening 4 to 5 thousand BC.

Again, at this point in time, nobody can give equal probability to a southern European refuge for L23 without completely ignoring all of the ancient DNA before them, so let's not pretend it's on equal footing with a steppe origin.

kinman
05-30-2017, 04:18 PM
Hi Isidro,
I do estimate that P312 arose about 1000 years earlier ( 3500 BC). However, I estimate that it gave rise to U152 about 3100 BC, which agrees with the 400 year age difference which R. Rocca mentioned.

As for the two possibilities you mentioned where L23 was born, the first one (from the Steppes) seems to be supported by a lot more evidence. I disagree with many who believe it was on the Steppes of Ukraine. I think it arose in the steppes further east (in or near western Kazakhstan).

And I believe Haplogroup R1b itself arose even further east (like maybe Tajikistan) about 21,000 BC. Once R1b started migrating westward, it just kept going west into all of Europe (and many of their descendants would continue the westward trek from the eastern coast of North America to the Pacific. The motto of R1b might be: "Go West, Young Man, Go West."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Older dates for branches of P312 is an option based on the latest findings like the P312-U152 dated circa 2,500 BC.
Not only this date is older than the estimate of it's inception, additionally, what are the odds of finding this mutation at this date and not guess rationally that P312 is at least 1,000 years older, or should adventure even older?.

R1b pre L23 is found all over Eurasia with the very limited samples we have, yes limited...

Mesolithic r1b in Ukraine is closely related in time and space with Cucuteni-Trypillian where also R1b pre l23 are found.

There is a possibility that indeed, L23 was born and grazed in the Steppes, came to Northern and Western Europe, via Corded Ware or a more southerly route from the East, or... R1b is Mesolithic in Europe, survived the last Ice Age in the South of Europe refugia ...many options here to guess an exact origin and then spread a star like expansions after being solidly established way prior to that in time, all this happening 4 to 5 thousand BC.

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 05:29 PM
I'm not sure where you got 1000 years separating P312 and U152, but all of the calculated dates (not guesses) I've seen have been around 400 years. The mid-line between the RISE563 radiocarbon date is 2542 BC. If you add 400 years to 2542 BC, it gets you to 2942 BC. Yamnaya groups west of the Black Sea are dated to 2950 BC. I don't think anyone can objectively look at all of the data points we have and think this a mere coincidence....


The important thing is the difference in the ages of U106 and P312. They evidently did not spring from L151 so closely together in time as to render it impossible that they could have been involved in different movements out of the steppe and in different cultural horizons within the same general Proto-Indo-European steppe milieu.

I am going to push you all a little harder on this and ask that my logic on SNP Genetic Distances (GDs) be challenged.

There is a fallacy in the YFull presentation of ancient TMRCAs. The have to fudge the accumulation of SNPs in unequal subclades. My recommendation is don't get confused by the dates. Instead, look at the Genetic Distandces (GDs) which tells us about the relative aging between subclades. YFull and McDonald are counting from ground zero of modern DNA back 4000 years which give a lot of opportunity for abnormalities to accumulate. Just one pause or acceleration of SNPs in a large very subclade can mess things up. That's where the bias comes in given most Y lineages die out.

Here are the Yfull MRCAs. I've added the SNPs counted from the L151's MRCA down to these direct subclades' MRCAs.

L151 4800 ybp [GD= 0, delta yrs= 0]

S1200 4800 ybp [GD= 4/3, delta yrs= 0] (really S1194 is eldest in the block so this really pushes up agains the L151 MRCA)

U106 4800 ybp [GD= 1, delta yrs= 0]

P312 4400 ybp [GD= 2/1, delta yrs= -400] (Z1904 is not in a CombBed nor McDonald region so, strictly, should not be counted)

You can see the problem. If S1194 (S1200) is correct then clearly P312's -400 delta years is wrong and should be more like 100, or even less.

That's why we can't look at YFull's absolute dating in isolation. They are trying to figure out how to the spread the excess peanut butter across a number of branches in a very large (and biased!) phylogenetic tree.

400 years is NOT the mostly like age distance between P312's and U106's MRCAs. Looking at the GDs straight out, it is most likely less that 200 years, in fact I think less than 100 (given shorter yrs/generation).

We can use an intuitive sense from genealogy point of view. If you had a match in a YFull interpretation with only one qualified SNP difference you would not think there is a 400 years difference. There could be 400 years difference but the odds are against it.

This is why I am say to deny the low GDs is an argument by exception, special pleading. Why am I wrong?

Granted, real pauses in SNPs do exist. However, in any one case, the odds are against it and just as much a chance that there was an acceleration of SNPs. On the other hand, we hardly know what Pre-Germanic was or if there only one such dialect. similarly, the Y DNA and cultural artifacts don't track perfectly as we see from the early Southwestern Bell Beakers. In general, we can't dismiss out of hand that the molecular doesn't work. It does as shown in multiple studies.

We spend a lot of time trying to make the genes fit into the archaelogical and linguistic pictures. I trust genes more as the Y phylogenetic tree has rarely lied and this early branching has been tested to death in the modern populations with good samples, etc. The early branching IS a good artifact in and of itself. It's one the best, in fact, since we can use good DNA samples and lots of them.

...
Whether P312 was in Corded Ware or the Danubian Yamnaya, it wasn't too far from its brothers. Mark's scenario is quite plausible. I could easily see P312 coming out of Epi-Corded Ware as another alternative. Either way, something big was happening in Central Europe Bavaria across to Hungary and including Moravia. This is the East Bell Beaker zone.

By the way, let us not ignore S1194, the third brother. We don't have him in ancient DNA yet that I know of. In modern population we see the British Isles but a pretty heavy disposition towards Germany and Scandinavia. I think I saw one guy from Italy and one from Armenia. It appears credible to say S1194 may have traveled with U106.


As the L51 herders move westward along the river, eventually, 11 SNPs later spawned P312 and U106 (Ian McDonald calculated U106 SNP at 3075 BC). Here is where I believe P312 and U106 spawned and then split near Carnuntum in Lower Austria halfway between Vienna and Bratislava.

R.Rocca
05-30-2017, 06:17 PM
I am going to push you all a little harder on this and ask that my logic on SNP Genetic Distances (GDs) be challenged.

Quite honestly, this is neither the forum to challenge SNP dating techniques nor am I even remotely qualified to do so... not even close B)

I have seen that, for the most part, YFull's estimates deviate by about 200 years. So, Isidro's claim that P312 was 1000 years older than 2550 BC is unfounded and seems to be a personal preference of his. Your estimate in no way changes how far off his estimate is, and certainly does not point to a southern European refuge.

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 06:24 PM
Just to clarify a point which may be causing confusion. Rich didn't say there was 400 years between P312 and U106. He said 400 years between U152 and P312.

Obviously P312 can't be 4400 ybp if RISE563 is P312/U152 (2542 BC). On Williamson's Bigtree there are 3 and possibly 4 mutations between P312 and U152. And there is probably greater than a 99% chance that RISE563 wasn't the first man/generation to have the U152 mutation.

Using the Bigtree, the shortest number of transmission of mutation events possible between P312 and subclades would be:
>P312 had 6 sons. 1 with the Z40481, 1 with DF19, 1 with Z290/S461, 1 with L238, 1 with Y18209, and 1 with A9063 mutation
>>Z40481 had 1 son with Z38841 mutation
>>>Z38841 had 3 sons. 1 with ZZ11, 1 with DF99, and 1 with ZZ37 mutation.
>>>>ZZ11 had 2 sons. 1 with U152, and 1 with DF27 mutation.

So if every generation (30 years) got a new mutation that would be 120 years (30 years x 4 mutations) between P312 and U152. A more realistic scenario would be 1 mutation every 3 generations (90 years x 4 = 360 years).

Add 90 more years if you include Z1904/CTS12684/PF6548 mutation in the P312 block.

If RISE563 was the grandson of Mr. U152 (still an optimistic scenario), then P312 would have been around 2962 -3052 BC

R.Rocca
05-30-2017, 06:29 PM
Just to clarify a point which may causing confusion. Rich didn't say there was 400 years between P312 and U106. He said 400 years between U152 and P312.

Correct.

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 06:30 PM
Quite honestly, this is neither the forum to challenge SNP dating techniques nor am I even remotely qualified to do so... not even close B)

I have seen that, for the most part, YFull's estimates deviate by about 200 years. So, Isidro's claim that P312 was 1000 years older than 2550 BC is unfounded and seems to be a personal preference of his. Your estimate in no way changes how far off his estimate is, and certainly does not point to a southern European refuge.
Fair enough. My point is not YFull's absolute dating is wrong or right and how to improve it.

I'm just saying their absolute aging from today back 4000-5000 years is a different application than the very low genetic distances between the MRCAs for L151, P312, U106 as well as a handful of others.

The corollary point is that the every low genetic distances of the L151 family are telling us something about the expansion of its family, which is pertinent to this topic in the sense we have to account for L151*, U106 and S1194 when we talk about P312.

I'll re-iterate the summary conclusion I have, although not infallible. It has to be strongly considered when developing an answer to the the question - Was P312 in Corded Ware?

I really could flip coin as to where P312 was but my conclusion is the odds are quite high that the L151 family, including a layer or two down under DF27, U152 and U106 were of the same culture and homeland.

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 06:37 PM
Just to clarify a point which may causing confusion. Rich didn't say there was 400 years between P312 and U106. He said 400 years between U152 and P312....
It must be I'm cutting back on coffee this morning. :)

... but I disagree with 400 years between the MRCAs of P312 and U152 as well. It's the same issue.

The genetic distance between in this case is one, only one. There is only one qualified SNP in the U152 phylogenetic block. The GD=1. It is possible that only one SNP could occur over 400 years which but that is an exceptionally slow mutation rate of 1 SNP every 13 generations, actually possibly 15-17 generations given the shorter life spans.

It's just not likely when the average mutation rates are 1 every 3 generations (or less) for high coverage NGS testing.

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 07:00 PM
J.... Using the Bigtree, the shortest number of transmission of mutation events possible between P312 and subclades would be:
>P312 had 6 sons. 1 with the Z40481, 1 with DF19, 1 with Z290/S461, 1 with L238, 1 with Y18209, and 1 with A9063 mutation
>>Z40481 had 1 son with Z38841 mutation
>>>Z38841 had 3 sons. 1 with ZZ11, 1 with DF99, and 1 with ZZ37 mutation.
>>>>ZZ11 had 2 sons. 1 with U152, and 1 with DF27 mutation.

So if every generation (30 years) got a new mutation that would be 120 years between P312 and U152. A more realistic scenario would be 1 mutation every 3 generations (360 years).

Add 90 more years if you include Z1904/CTS12684/PF6548 mutation in the P312 block.

If RISE563 was the grandson of Mr. U152, then P312 would have been around 2962 - 3022 BC

Mitchell, you can't use the 1 every 3 generations mutation rate if you are counting non-qualified SNPs like ZZ11, ZZ37, Z38841 (which isn't even an SNP). If you want to start using mutations that aren't really SNPs and mutations that are in unstable regions you have ramp up your mutation rate. I don't think people have studied these types of mutations in estimating mutation rates. Perhaps you should use 1 every generation if you are counting those. We don't know the mutation rates are but it start becoming more like using STRs to estimate dates. There is a reason why YFull is not counting some of these.

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 07:09 PM
Yfull is counting ~144 years for every combBed region SNP. So one would have to count these mutations somewhere between 30 and 144 years. I just took the middle of this range.

If some subclades have these mutations and some don't then there has to be a transmission event involved to explain the difference.

As I said, 4 generations (120 years) is the closest distance between RISE563 and P312 (Unless ZZ11 and Z38841 were passed at same conception). But I seriously doubt it's that close...highly unlikely RISE563 was first U152, and doubtful it was exactly every generation for 4 generations in a row, for each mutation mentioned.

120 years between RISE563 and P312 would be around ~2662 BC. IMO too young of an age for P312.

R.Rocca
05-30-2017, 07:30 PM
R1b-L51 coming from Corded Ware would please me to no end, so I have no objection to it, and I think what you are saying makes sense. We do have three R1bs in CW thus far. That could be a hint that more are coming. As Davidski mentioned over on his blog, patrilocality could very easily account for different y haplogroups prevailing among the different tribes of a single cultural horizon, so a set of CW tribes who were mostly R1b-L51, while other CW tribes were mostly R1a, would not greatly surprise me. But the same thing applies to Yamnaya, and I think we will see L51 Yamnaya (maybe even P312 Yamnaya), as well as R1a Yamnaya, just as we have seen I2a Yamnaya and Z2103 Yamnaya.

rms2... which three Corded Ware samples? I only know of the one Swedish Battle Axe Culture sample, and that one is U106+.

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 08:31 PM
Yfull is counting ~144 years for every combBed region SNP.

We can't count by one yardstick and report by another so let's look at the Adamov CombBED yardstick that YFull uses and go with one SNP every 144 yrs.
ZZ11, Z1904 and Z38841 are all eliminated.

Below are the subclades of L151 that have lived until today along with their true SNP CombBED region GDs up to 3 to the L151 MRCA. All of the below should be about 432 years after L151 or less. I argue for a shorter timeframe because of lower years per generation back in the Bronze Age.

S1194 is GD=1 to the L151 MRCA

U106 GD=1
U106>Z381 GD=2

P312 GD=1

P312>U152 GD=2
P312>U152>L2 GD=3
P312>U152>Z36 GD=3
P312>U152>Z192 GD=3
P312>U152>BY3851 GD=3

P312>DF27 GD=2
P312>DF27>BY3332 GD=3
P312>DF27>L881 GD=3
P312>DF27>BY11969 GD=3
P312>DF27>FGC46562 GD=3
P312>DF27>PH2047 GD=3
P312>DF27>FGC17112 GD=3
P312>DF27>Z2573 GD=3
P312>DF27>BY2285 GD=3
P312>DF27>Z2552 GD=3
P312>DF27>Z2571 GD=3
P312>DF27>Y16019 GD=3
P312>DF27>FGC20747 GD=3

P312>DF99 GD=2

P312>DF19 GD=3

To me this, this is incredible, particularly DF27. DF27 may be the star of the show yet. The number of early branches from the L151 family that survived 4000-5000 years is astounding. This was not just luck. I don't know what the key to their success was but they had something going.



... 120 years between RISE563 and P312 would be around ~2662 BC. IMO too young of an age for P312.

I agree, which is why I tell people not to look at YFull's absolute age estimate for P312. It is closer to U106 than they say. In any case, the whole scale could be slid back. I don't know, but I think the close relations of the L151 family and its expansion should be accounted for.

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 10:20 PM
We can't count by one yardstick and report by another so let's look at the Adamov CombBED yardstick that YFull uses and go with one SNP every 144 yrs.
ZZ11, Z1904 and Z38841 are all eliminated...
Yes eliminated by the rules of that method. But if the goal is to be as accurate as possible, they still must be accounted for in the real world . They are in fact mutations that some P312 branches have and some don't. I'm not an expert but I'm assuming conception is the only event that accounts for these mutations regardless of whether they are in the combBed region.

A branch of P312 has the Z40481 mutation, 5 other branches don't. If P312 didn't have the Z40481 mutation then isn't that by definition a GD of 1?
A conception happened by P312 or one of his descendants that caused the Z40481 mutation.

Later Z404081 has a descendant with the ZZ11 and Z38841 mutations while two other Z404081 descendants don't. Isn't that another genetic distance that has to accounted for in the real world between U152/DF27 and P312. I just don't see a way around it if the goal is to be as accurate as possible.

Thus placing a minimum of GD of 3 between P312 and U152 and DF27 (GD of 4 of if ZZ11 and Z38841 happened sequentially).

Whether they are in the combBed region or not, they did happen and IMO should be accounted for in order to get a more accurate estimate, At a minimum add 30 years for each of these types of mutations.

Therefore I would say:

If P312 GD=1
P312>U152 GD=4+ (depending on whether ZZ11 and Z38841 happened simultaneously or sequentially)
P312>U152>L2 GD=5+
P312>U152>Z36 GD=6+ (ZZ45 happened between U152 and Z36)
P312>U152>Z192 GD=6-7+ (Z193 and PF6658 happened between U152 and Z192)
P312>U152>BY3851 GD=7-8+ (Z193 and PF6658 and Z40483 happened between U152 and BY3851

P312>DF27 GD=4+ (depending on whether ZZ11 and Z38841 happened simultaneously or sequentially)


I tell people not to look at YFull's absolute age estimate for P312. It is closer to U106 than they say. We are in agreement on this. I currently think P312 is within 100 to 150 years of U106's age.

My intent here is not to be argumentative with you. I understand the combBed dating method, but I'm thinking it would be prudent to include these non CombBed mutations in the equation when they are known...even if it's just adding 30-90 years per non combBed mutation where one branch has it and another doesn't.

rms2
05-30-2017, 10:39 PM
rms2... which three Corded Ware samples? I only know of the one Swedish Battle Axe Culture sample, and that one is U106+.

RISE431 R1b1a-L754

RISE436 R1b1-L1349

RISE1 R1b1-L1345

The first two are in the spreadsheet of the recent Mathieson et al SE Europe paper. I understand RISE1 has been disputed, but those are the three.

16414

I wasn't counting the Swedish U106 from Lilla Beddinge as CW. If you include him, that makes four.

Wing Genealogist
05-30-2017, 10:44 PM
While it is certainly correct that a mutation such as Z40481, ZZ11 & Z38841 did occur at some time, the CombBED yardstick doesn't care about that.

Your argument is like saying numbers like pi and e need to be added to the yardstick, because they do exist. While these numbers (and mutations) do actually exist, they don't figure in the calculation methods.

Studies have shown where, on average a CombBED region SNP occurs about every 144 years. This does not say that other mutations didn't also occur, but these other mutations simply don't help with estimating the ages.

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2017, 11:13 PM
I give up

TigerMW
05-30-2017, 11:32 PM
... But if the goal is to be as accurate as possible, they still must be accounted for in the real world . ..
You can't keep the same mutation rate if you start counting more and more different variants in more and more regions.

You have to repull all of the data, all up and down the tree and across the haplogroups, and then recalculate the mutation rate. You might have a mutation rate of 1 per every generation given a new definition of what variants can be considered. There might be (probably are) these kinds of not-quite SNPs all over the tree. Please recognize that we've looked at these non-qualified variants in the early branching with magnifying lenses. We have not done that all up and down tree.

Maybe the mutation rate would be one SNP every 40 years. We can't assume the old rates still apply to our new broader definitions of variants to include. They almost certainly don't.

We know that Y chromosome has up towards 700 STRs and a couple of dozen those may change every father-son transmission. Forget the aging and think genetic distance. A GD=2 STRs at 67 STRs is not that he same thing as a GD=5 at 400 STRs. GD=2 at 67 is diversity of 3% while GD=5 at 400 is only 1.25%, so 5 of 400 is much better. The STRs from 68 to 400 are real, just like Pi. We could add the extra STRs and we should, but we have to use a new divisor, 400, not 67. Similarly the mutation rate must be recalculated.

To backup a second, that doesn't mean these non-qualified variants are not useful for the discerning tree branches. It's just that aren't useful for genetic distance comparisons with other branches across tree unless the whole tree is defined that way. This is what Adamov paper is about, defining a constant for measurement in terms of type/volatility and region.

Where's the icon for beating the donkey with your guitar? :deadhorse: I get it, but I'll stick with contention that the L151 family expanded very rapidly and very successfully at its onset. Since we aren't finding L151 along either the East European routes northeast along the Carpathians (where we see R1a) or hooking south along the Lower Danube (where we see Z2103), it does cause reason to think L151 didn't take off until Central Europe. I guess the counter is that the testing along the Lower Danube is non-existent so L51 to L151 could have been a bigger player there, or there is a special subset of Corded Ware that was L23/L51 dominated.

Why didn't R1a guys take-off in Central Europe movements west with P312? Why didn't Z2103 guys take-off in Central Europe movements west with P312? The L151 launchpad was not a mixed group, Y DNA wise. There were some northern trekkers from L151 who mixed in with others, but northwest and southwestward heading P312ers did not mix with their steppes cousins.

[EDIT: Okay, Razyn. You get the last post in but so I can let my dead horse rest. Just consider I didn't make up the worlds of mathematics and statistics. They are the study of the natural order of things. Call them laws or rules or what have you doesn't negate the natural order - logos.]

[EDIT 2: Mutations of whatever kind are fine for branch discernment but genetic distance comparisons require a common and stable yardstick. David V confirmed over on the SNP mutation rate/new paper thread, "FGC Elite has 23 Mbp coverage yielding a SNP every 53 years". If we are get into counting some of these odd SNPs we have to be think in the range of 53 yrs per SNP, not 144.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10785-What-mutation-rates-should-we-consider-for-Y-SNPs&p=241022&viewfull=1#post241022
Back on the more philosophical side. It is not about math, nor anthropology nor any specific discipline. It is about the study of reality as a whole, the universe, and it does have its natural order. 2+2 always is 4 as 3+1. The biological structure of humans and our cultural practices are a reality too. It's all part of the universe and there is natural order - logos. I'm speaking to the Greeks.]

razyn
05-30-2017, 11:53 PM
It's still just an article of faith that there is a mutation rate.

On the other hand, it's observed reality that there are branching events, after which the persons on branches that have separated do not reunite. They become genetically more distant. Ignoring that increased distance because one has Rules is unscientific.


[EDIT: Okay, Razyn. You get the last post in but so I can let my dead horse rest. Just consider I didn't make up the worlds of mathematics and statistics. They are the study of the natural order of things. Call them laws or rules or what have you doesn't negate the natural order - logos.]

EDIT: Okay, Mikewww. Both of our deceased horses need a rest, badly. Mine has specific reference to concession of Adamov et al's Rule of counting mutations in the ComBed region, but ignoring mutations in several other classes that don't meet their criteria. Yet those other mutations do create observable branching of the tree -- with concomitant separation of the migratory routes and later histories of those YDNA lineages that do, or don't, respectively, bear them.

The science I am interested in pursuing (we used to call it Cultural Anthropology, back in an era when Physical Anthropology was something else) is unwilling to concede this turf to Adamov et al. They are welcome to make their calculations based on mathematically and statistically consistent principles. And I am content to retain fundamental dissatisfaction with their conclusions, based on observed branching in Alex Williamson's Big Tree that I cannot observe in (the corresponding segments of) YFull's. What is the YFull date of ZZ11? That sort of thing.

I realize that the Big Tree is not the whole tree, but this thread is about the origin of P312, and the Big Tree does cover P312.

R.Rocca
05-31-2017, 12:16 AM
RISE431 R1b1a-L754

RISE436 R1b1-L1349

RISE1 R1b1-L1345

The first two are in the spreadsheet of the recent Mathieson et al SE Europe paper. I understand RISE1 has been disputed, but those are the three.

16414

I wasn't counting the Swedish U106 from Lilla Beddinge as CW. If you include him, that makes four.

Both RISE431 and RISE436 are (more) likely to be R1a than R1b. From the BAM file, I checked these in the past and found these calls:

R1a Equivalents:
RISE431 = 13590915 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 14613372 REF->ALT (C->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS3004', 'M669'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16563407 REF->ALT (G->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5936', 'M698', 'PF6192'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 17883019 REF->ALT (AGGGGGG->AGGGGG); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18158155 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS8710', 'M737'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18920886 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F2901', 'M742', 'PF6204'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 23050018 REF->ALT (C->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F3398', 'PF7532'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 22803327 REF->ALT (G->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS10847', 'M791', 'PF6221'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 15686890 REF->ALT (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS4509', 'M687'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive

R1b Equivalents:
RISE431 = 22889018 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L754', 'PF6269', 'YSC0000022'] <<< POSITIVE
RISE436 = 23403749 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS11985', 'PF6523'] <<< NEGATIVE
RISE436 = 22722580 ALT->REF (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L1349', 'PF6268', 'YSC0000231'] <<< POSITIVE

parasar
05-31-2017, 12:32 AM
Both RISE431 and RISE436 are (more) likely to be R1a than R1b. From the BAM file, I checked these in the past and found these calls:

R1a Equivalents:
RISE431 = 13590915 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 14613372 REF->ALT (C->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS3004', 'M669'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16563407 REF->ALT (G->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5936', 'M698', 'PF6192'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 17883019 REF->ALT (AGGGGGG->AGGGGG); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18158155 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS8710', 'M737'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18920886 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F2901', 'M742', 'PF6204'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 23050018 REF->ALT (C->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F3398', 'PF7532'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 22803327 REF->ALT (G->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS10847', 'M791', 'PF6221'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 15686890 REF->ALT (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS4509', 'M687'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive

R1b Equivalents:
RISE431 = 22889018 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L754', 'PF6269', 'YSC0000022'] <<< POSITIVE
RISE436 = 23403749 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS11985', 'PF6523'] <<< NEGATIVE
RISE436 = 22722580 ALT->REF (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L1349', 'PF6268', 'YSC0000231'] <<< POSITIVE

Also from Allentoft:
RISE1 baCw R1b (Genetiker puts this as R)
RISE431 baCw R1a
RISE436 baCw R1 (Genetiker puts this as R1a)

Allentoft and Genetiker
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HuNPykGuq2PbHkUOL5dCiwrveIy-OGO2qOklwfsayW8/edit#gid=2120948378

TigerMW
05-31-2017, 12:36 AM
The good news is L151/L11 is getting more play rather than leaving things at the M269 or M343 level. This new paper has L151/L11 at 4800 to 5900 ybp. If you go back to 3900 BC we are deep in the Pontic Steppes, I think. What was the earliest Corded Wares reach Bavaria? Any chance that L51, L151 & P312 were just the lead party and anyone (L51*) left behind in East Europe got run over?

Of course, somehow P312 had a religious conversion from the Bell Beaker practices. That's a little hard to figure out.

"Humany Y-chromosome variation in the genome sequencing era", by Jobling and Smith.
http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nrg.2017.36.html

Male-mediated expansions.
Several Y‑chromosome resequencing studies have concurred in finding bursts of expansion within specific lineages within the past few thousand years
...
the expansion in western Europe of lineages within haplogroup R1b‑L11 ~4.8–5.9 kya, which was possibly associated with technological advances in the Bronze Age
...
The Bronze Age Yamnaya culture has been linked by genome-wide aDNA evidence to a massive migration from the Eurasian Steppe, which may have replaced much of the previous European population. The expansion of haplogroup R1b‑L11 is also evident in a European-focused population sequencing study, which found additional recent European expansions involving the haplogroups I1‑M253 and R1a‑M17.

The bad news for men is you better keep your Y chromosomes flowing in the blood.

[ EDIT: I started on thread on the SNP mutation rates as identified in this study. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10785-What-mutation-rates-should-we-consider-for-Y-SNPs ]

rms2
05-31-2017, 10:53 AM
Both RISE431 and RISE436 are (more) likely to be R1a than R1b. From the BAM file, I checked these in the past and found these calls:

R1a Equivalents:
RISE431 = 13590915 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 14613372 REF->ALT (C->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS3004', 'M669'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 16563407 REF->ALT (G->T); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5936', 'M698', 'PF6192'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 17883019 REF->ALT (AGGGGGG->AGGGGG); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35) <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18158155 REF->ALT (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS8710', 'M737'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 18920886 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F2901', 'M742', 'PF6204'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 23050018 REF->ALT (C->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['F3398', 'PF7532'] <<< Positive
RISE431 = 22803327 REF->ALT (G->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS10847', 'M791', 'PF6221'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 15686890 REF->ALT (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS4509', 'M687'] <<< Positive
RISE436 = 16414608 REF->ALT (A->G); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS5648', 'M695'] <<< Positive

R1b Equivalents:
RISE431 = 22889018 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L754', 'PF6269', 'YSC0000022'] <<< POSITIVE
RISE436 = 23403749 ALT->REF (G->A); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['CTS11985', 'PF6523'] <<< NEGATIVE
RISE436 = 22722580 ALT->REF (T->C); # of mutations in tree = 1 (weighted = 35); ['L1349', 'PF6268', 'YSC0000231'] <<< POSITIVE

Too bad. I was just going by the Mathieson et al spreadsheet.

dp
05-31-2017, 04:54 PM
The big answer is BP = before present. BCE = before common era. So to any BCE add the current (C.E.) year to get into BP.
The small answer is that radiological dates are not exactly calender dates.
dp :-)

I don't understand 2572-2512 calBCE (3955±35 BP). Why are these dates not 1950 years apart?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

R.Rocca
05-31-2017, 07:52 PM
We all know that the oldest Portuguese and Spanish samples tested by Olalde lack R-L23 and have no steppe ancestry. They are...

I4229 I2a1a1 BB_Portugal_Mou 2289–2135 calBCE (3775±25 BP, PSUAMS-1750)

I0826 I2a2 BB_Spain_Cer 2833–2480 calBCE (4051±28 BP, MAMS-25940)

But interestingly, the oldest Hungarian sample tested belongs to haplogroup G2a2a1a2a1...

I3528 G2a2a1a2a1 BB_Hungary_HUN 2559–2301 calBCE (3931±31 BP, DeA-11507)

This is interesting because the second oldest BB sample from Germany also belongs to G2a2a1a2a1...
E09538 G2a2a1a2a1a BB_Central_Europe BB_Germany_BAV Yes 2471–2300 calBCE (3909±29 BP, MAMS-29074)

Both of these G2a2a1a2a1 samples have some steppe ancestry, but on the lower end for Central European BB. This is also the haplogroup that Otzi the Iceman belongs to, so it might hint at cross Alpine interactions (or not). The presence of I2a1a1-M26 (aka the "Sardinian" marker) in another Hungarian Bell Beaker sample and other Copper Age samples from Portugal, Spain and Hungary may also be telling us something.

We can assume that the father of the oldest French Bell Beaker sample (female, 2832–2476 calBCE) was also not L23 because she lacks steppe ancestry, and her two contemporaries (2750-2725 BC) from Dolmen La Pierre Fritte a little further west were both I2a1. Also, two samples from the Remedello cemetery in Northern Italy date to the Bell Beaker period and both are I2a1.

These Y-chromosomes really cross off a lot of areas where P312 could have expanded from prior to 2500 BC and seem to collapse to areas right on the Danube and Rhine.

TigerMW
05-31-2017, 09:21 PM
... These Y-chromosomes really cross off a lot of areas where P312 could have expanded from prior to 2500 BC and seem to collapse to areas right on the Danube and Rhine.
That's East Bell Beaker territory. I wish I could see a realistic cultural mechanism for P312 males to pickup Bell Beaker practices. Do we have any other prospects besides integration with Vucedol?
Are Corded Wares and Bell Beaker practices really that different? I guess they are.

I see that in the "C" phase of Vucedol these two regions were reached.
Transdanubian (Pannonian Hungarian type)
East Austrian-Czech type

Do we know any more about the formation of the East Bell Beakers and what their inputs were?

rms2
06-01-2017, 12:38 AM
I think the key zone is the Carpathian Basin, and Bell Beaker is Yamnaya 2.0, not Yamnaya>Corded Ware>Bell Beaker. Yamnaya moved up the Danube into a zone loaded with LBK-descended Neolithic farmers mixed with earlier incursions of steppe peoples. That mix gave birth to eastern Bell Beaker, which explains why Bell Beaker has more EEF and HG than Corded Ware.

Corded Ware becomes involved later, but it is not the ancestor of Bell Beaker. Bell Beaker is a product of the Carpathian Basin mixing bowl.

That is where L51, and maybe P312, will be found.

Isidro
06-01-2017, 01:26 PM
We all know that the oldest Portuguese and Spanish samples tested by Olalde lack R-L23 and have no steppe ancestry. They are...

All two of them?. Wow how scientific is using this as a yard stick for all Y-Chromosomes of males in Portugal or Spain of the time , even the ones that could be a few miles from those could turn out diverse.

Both of these G2a2a1a2a1 samples have some steppe ancestry, but on the lower end for Central European BB. This is also the haplogroup that Otzi the Iceman belongs to, so it might hint at cross Alpine interactions (or not). The presence of I2a1a1-M26 (aka the "Sardinian" marker) in another Hungarian Bell Beaker sample and other Copper Age samples from Portugal, Spain and Hungary may also be telling us something.

Yes, it's telling us that the Bell Beaker in general was not a migration in large scale anywhere except in the British Isles with attributed displacement replacement of whatever "ment" is the fade headline of the season.

We can assume that the father of the oldest French Bell Beaker sample (female, 2832–2476 calBCE) was also not L23 because she lacks steppe ancestry, and her two contemporaries (2750-2725 BC) from Dolmen La Pierre Fritte a little further west were both I2a1. Also, two samples from the Remedello cemetery in Northern Italy date to the Bell Beaker period and both are I2a1.

Assume what you wish, that doesn't make it so, L23 is just a landmark on the journey, it's real but it has no culture "attached" exclusively to steppe, I mean after all the R1b(xL23) found in Western Europe is like trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, it just doesn't gel.

These Y-chromosomes really cross off a lot of areas where P312 could have expanded from prior to 2500 BC and seem to collapse to areas right on the Danube and Rhine

What is this a conquer the world table game?.

We have seen a tip of the tip of the iceberg of ancient DNA so far, scientists are promising tons by the thousands coming very soon, so what is the hurry on closing doors?.


.

I don't know the outcome will be but but whatever it is is not going to be changed by whatever you say, actually just looking at the Eurogenes K13 oracles of those Eastern Bell Beakers that went to England and Ireland, where they have 25% EEF +in addition to a large chunk of WHG and out of the 20 top Oracle locations not even a small fraction is attributed to Southern Europe (including Iberia). What a cracked pot sense of neutrality.

TigerMW
06-01-2017, 01:44 PM
I think the key zone is the Carpathian Basin, and Bell Beaker is Yamnaya 2.0, not Yamnaya>Corded Ware>Bell Beaker. Yamnaya moved up the Danube into a zone loaded with LBK-descended Neolithic farmers mixed with earlier incursions of steppe peoples. That mix gave birth to eastern Bell Beaker, which explains why Bell Beaker has more EEF and HG than Corded Ware.

Corded Ware becomes involved later, but it is not the ancestor of Bell Beaker. Bell Beaker is a product of the Carpathian Basin mixing bowl.

That is where L51, and maybe P312, will be found.

We have P312>U152 in the Budapest ancient DNA so P312 was definitely there in the Carpathian Basin during Heyd's third quarter of the 3rd millenium BC. Its not the first appearance of P312 but we may never find ancient DNA of the first appearance of P312.

I know we have Z2103 over in the steppes in Yamnaya graves and we also have L23+ Z2103- (am I right on that? not just Z2103 unknown). Do we have L23+ Z2103- in ancient DNA anywhere along the lower to middle Danube or in the Balkans? If so, that would be tad bit more evidence. Two out of three L23 brothers along the Danube. We have no L23 to the north of the Carpathians, right? until Swedish Boat Axe and is U106?

The remnants of the Neolithic farmers would have been the Baden Culture. Is there evidence that the East Bell Beakers have any traits from Baden?

As a side commentary, if this Yamnaya L151 combined with Baden to create Vucedol and the East Bell Beakers, by the time they were the East Bell Beakers they must have crushed the prior male lineages. The thin thread L51 lineage became a powerhouse. Anything that would account for this metallurgy wise? use of archery? or something else? Heyd thinks archery was a big thing in the Belll Beakers that apparently wasn't such a big thing in Yamnaya? Is this from maritime exchange with early west/southwest Beakers?

R.Rocca
06-01-2017, 02:53 PM
I don't know the outcome will be but but whatever it is is not going to be changed by whatever you say, actually just looking at the Eurogenes K13 oracles of those Eastern Bell Beakers that went to England and Ireland, where they have 25% EEF +in addition to a large chunk of WHG and out of the 20 top Oracle locations not even a small fraction is attributed to Southern Europe (including Iberia). What a cracked pot sense of neutrality.

More samples are always welcome, but the trend is overwhelming. If you want to complain about sampling bias, then don't pretend that it is just two male Iberian Bell Beaker samples, but also include the dozens of Iberian Copper Age samples that lack L23 (where it should be overwhelming) and lack steppe ancestry.

R.Rocca
06-01-2017, 02:58 PM
The remnants of the Neolithic farmers would have been the Baden Culture. Is there evidence that the East Bell Beakers have any traits from Baden?

On the admixture of Bell Beaker, this overlooked gem from the Olalde study...


For Beaker Complex in Iberia, populations outside Iberia are strongly rejected as sources and only Iberian populations (Iberia_MN, Iberia_Chalcolithic_MIR) show a good fit.The other Chalcolithic Iberian population, Iberia_Chalcolithic_ALA, fails as a source likely because it harbours more hunter-gatherer ancestry (Extended Data Fig. 2) than do other Iberian populations. In contrast, for Beaker Complex individuals outside Iberia, models using Iberian populations as a source for their Neolithic ancestry are rejected. We obtain a good fit for Globular_Amphora_LN and TRB_Sweden_MN, two populations with a hunter-gatherer component close to KO1 on the cline defined by LaBrańa1-KO1 (Extended Data Fig. 2; Table S5), and beyond Loschbour on the cline defined by LaBrańa1-Loschbour (Table S6). Other central European populations such as Germany_MN or Hungary_LCA are rejected, but their fit can be improved by adding KO1 as a third source (Table S8), suggesting that the true admixing population likely had more hunter-gatherer ancestry than either Germany_MN or Hungary_LCA.

So we have a rejection of German and Hungarian Neolithics as the input into non-Iberian Bell Beaker and instead have a better fit for more northern/eastern populations in GAC and TRB. I would reject their inclusion of the Hungarian KO1 as a third population since it is three thousand years older (5780-5640 calBCE) than the population we are looking for.

Romilius
06-01-2017, 05:24 PM
A question... how do you all explain the lack of CHG admixture in Martiniano's samples from Portugal? He states that the Portuguese samples had got steppe admixture... but I thought that steppe admixture came only with CHG component... it could be useful to see in which percentage that steppe admixture exists in those Portuguese samples.

TigerMW
06-01-2017, 05:31 PM
On the admixture of Bell Beaker, this overlooked gem from the Olalde study...



So we have a rejection of German and Hungarian Neolithics as the input into non-Iberian Bell Beaker and instead have a better fit for more northern/eastern populations in GAC and TRB. I would reject their inclusion of the Hungarian KO1 as a third population since it is thousands of years older (5780-5640 calBCE) than the population we are looking for.

And the GAC and TRB male samples have no R1b, right? Are they G?

MitchellSince1893
06-01-2017, 06:27 PM
...input into non-Iberian Bell Beaker and instead have a better fit for more northern/eastern populations in GAC and TRB.
Which may provide a hint of their route from Yamnaya into Central Europe.

Radboud
06-01-2017, 06:38 PM
And the GAC and TRB male samples have no R1b, right? Are they G?

Every single GAC sample belongs to the I2 haplogroup up to date.

TRB samples have G2 and I2.

MitchellSince1893
06-01-2017, 07:11 PM
For reference

FIGURE 10-13 Culture groups c. 3500-3000 BC. New formations in central Europe influenced by North Pontic culture

KEY
Light shade - Kurganized territories in Central Europe
Dark shade - Pit Grave in the Don-Volga basin and North Pontic Kurgan groups

—— - Limits of Kurgan territories north of the Black Sea and the Volga basin
——> - Kurgan Wave #2 influences from the North Pontic area
----- - Numbers mark the substratum culture groups;
1. Cucuteni;
2. TRB;
3. Michelsberg
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasCivilizationOfTheGoddess/BC3500GimbutasMKurganFig10-13.gif
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasMKurgansToEuropeEn.htm

rms2
06-01-2017, 10:24 PM
For reference

FIGURE 10-13 Culture groups c. 3500-3000 BC. New formations in central Europe influenced by North Pontic culture

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasCivilizationOfTheGoddess/BC3500GimbutasMKurganFig10-13.gif
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasMKurgansToEuropeEn.htm

Nice map, but it comes from Anatole Klyosov's web site, in which he claims Yamnaya and R1b were Tengri-worshiping Turkic peoples. He claims R1a was the IE y haplogroup (naturally). It's quite an elaborate scheme.

ADW_1981
06-01-2017, 10:31 PM
Do we have Globular Amphora YDNA? Hard to keep track sometimes. If so, do we also have their admixture results?

EDIT: I see their admixture, scratch that. Almost entirely WHG + EEF

rms2
06-01-2017, 10:36 PM
We have P312>U152 in the Budapest ancient DNA so P312 was definitely there in the Carpathian Basin during Heyd's third quarter of the 3rd millenium BC. Its not the first appearance of P312 but we may never find ancient DNA of the first appearance of P312.

I know we have Z2103 over in the steppes in Yamnaya graves and we also have L23+ Z2103- (am I right on that? not just Z2103 unknown). Do we have L23+ Z2103- in ancient DNA anywhere along the lower to middle Danube or in the Balkans? If so, that would be tad bit more evidence. Two out of three L23 brothers along the Danube. We have no L23 to the north of the Carpathians, right? until Swedish Boat Axe and is U106?

. . .

I0443, a Yamnaya skeleton from Lopatino II on the Sok River in Russia, 3300-2700 BC, is L23+ Z2105-, but we don't have any that I know of from the places you mentioned, not yet.

rms2
06-01-2017, 10:44 PM
Do we have Globular Amphora YDNA? Hard to keep track sometimes. If so, do we also have their admixture results?

Yes, eight of them. All but two are I2. Those two are reported as BT and CT, but the notes show they are related to some of the others and probably I2 themselves.

rms2
06-01-2017, 10:56 PM
. . .



So we have a rejection of German and Hungarian Neolithics as the input into non-Iberian Bell Beaker and instead have a better fit for more northern/eastern populations in GAC and TRB . . .

If that turns out to be an accurate reflection in autosomal dna of the source of the Neolithic ancestry in Bell Beaker, then Bell Beaker could still be derived directly from Yamnaya without any Corded Ware middlemen, but Yamnaya that went around the north side of the Carpathians instead of up the Danube Valley.

The problem with Corded Ware is that it has been almost monolithically R1a thus far. Until you shot them down in flames, I thought we had a glimmer of R1b in those three samples I listed earlier, but even those turned out to probably be R1a. All we are left with is a single U106 in Nordic Battle Axe in Sweden, and that's not much, because U106 isn't showing up in anything anyone can confidently assert is Bell Beaker.

ADW_1981
06-01-2017, 11:00 PM
Yes, eight of them. All but two are I2. Those two are reported as BT and CT, but the notes show they are related to some of the others and probably I2 themselves.

That seems to make sense as does their Admixture. The lack of Ukraine_Mesolithic (red) among GAC in the Mathieson preprint is quite telling, yet it is present in the R1b (xP297) Latvians. Only the earliest R1b seems to be strongly linked with WHG as well as the usual suspect I2. I suspect by the time the M269 mutation arose, those men were mostly EHG with some WHG, possibly acquiring the CHG shortly there after from the northern Caucasus.

We really need to see if those R1b Dereivka samples are derived for additional SNPs in the raw data. I'm not entirely sold on the CW link, as I think some of these western movements may not be coupled with the presence of CHG, but most definitely are with EHG. Only time will tell. I also recall some Corded Ware samples completely lacking CHG from a few years ago, but I don't have the source.

TigerMW
06-01-2017, 11:04 PM
Every single GAC sample belongs to the I2 haplogroup up to date.

TRB samples have G2 and I2.
What was the timeframe that Corded Ware overlaid GAC and TRB? The chronology is that happened before the East Bell Beakers came about, correct?

This could account for the additional dilution of steppe at DNA. The front of the wave, the westward edge, had more generations of mixing with natives as they reached into Germany and Austria.

The question still really is who formed the East Bell Beakers?

It could have just been the Danubian Yamnaya just coming in and squashing Western Corded Ware which already some GAC and TRB at DNA?

In any case the missing link is not just L51+ L151- but also culturally what made for the L151/P312 conversion to Beaker? The East Bell Beakers had some huge advantage and it was more than standard Yamnaya practices. I may be reading too much Heyd and his sources. All I can figure out was archery but maybe there was a religious inspiration that resulted in organizational superiorities over the West Beakers, the natives and even the CW and Danubian cousins and predecessors.

Remember that both R1a and Z2103 were cut off from Northwest, Southwest and South-Central Europe. Meanwhile P312's L21, DF27 and U152 reached very high frequencies.

rms2
06-01-2017, 11:18 PM
From page 249 of Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans:



As the most superficial glance at a map will indicate, the Corded Ware horizon occupies essentially the same general territory as the preceding TRB culture . . . it is impossible to consider Corded Ware origins without taking into account the preceding TRB culture.

From page 250:



Like the Corded Ware horizon, the Globular Amphora cultures emerged out of a TRB substrate. However, Gimbutas argues that upon this base was superimposed a ruling stratum from the Pontic region. The evidence, she argues, is to be found in the complete congruency of the burial rites of the two areas - stone cists, cromlechs, stelae, ritual burial of animals including horses, and the practice of suttee, executing the wife and possibly other members of the family on the death of the husband. To this we could add the occasional use of ochre and kurgans in the eastern region of the Globular Amphora culture.

alan
06-02-2017, 10:31 AM
That seems unlikely to me, alan. It seems more likely that BB had the Begleitkeramik it did because it emerged from the Yamnaya mixing bowl in the Carpathian Basin.

No doubt that most of the Beglerkeramik does show a general flow from east to west /north-west. Although exactly what it means is clear. It probably shows the network and women moving within the beaker social network. Of course against this we have to set the bell beaker itself (or at least the early/maritime type) and perhaps some other craft and jewelry trends moving the other way. Pottery is always a bad idea to infer male movement from though.

What is arguably the best approach is to look at the aspects of beaker culture that are very much male. Archery is v hard to interpret as it was pretty well the main practical weapon across a lot of Europe. Even steppe peoples used it - something that is not often discussed. Its interesting that CW peoples didnt seem to be big on archery though. The fact archery is such a big deal among beaker peoples may be a hint at which steppe subgroup they derive from, as of course is horse riding. I dont think archery is an introduction from Iberia. Yes the barbed and tanged arrowheads could be a western influence but not all beaker peoples favoured them.

Little known fact - Ireland has far more hollow based arrowheads than B and Tanged in the beaker period. Ireland also has a far higher amount of polypod pots than Britain. Those trends are counterintuitive given Britain is closer to the areas where hollow based arrowheads and polypod pots were made on the continent. So that is pretty strange. Presumably some kind of cultural founder effect.

I must dig in a bit to look at steppe groups and variations in weaponry among them. Clearly CW came from a group who were especially into stone battle axes while beaker came from groups who favoured archery and daggers. That might be a clue as to the nuance that separates the origins of CW and beaker people.

Another thing that we really need to get to the bottom of is the origin of the beaker types single inhumation - especially the central European type. It hints more of an origin on the westernmost fringes of Yamnaya/their overspill into the Danube area rather than classic Yamnaya lying on the back. Some groups like Usatovo have a tradition of copper daggers albeit of the rivetted type if memory serves me right. Long flint daggers were also a trait of some steppe groups. I definately remember seeing some steppe burials with lots of arrowheads too. I really need to read into this a bit deeper to see which steppe or steppe-derived groups prefigure beaker traits like crouched burials, archery, daggers and horse riding.

Finn
06-02-2017, 03:34 PM
For reference

FIGURE 10-13 Culture groups c. 3500-3000 BC. New formations in central Europe influenced by North Pontic culture

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasCivilizationOfTheGoddess/BC3500GimbutasMKurganFig10-13.gif
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasMKurgansToEuropeEn.htm

This is with thanks to Maciamo Hay, the K36 result for a Funnelbeaker or TRB.

Funnelbeaker (Gökhem7, mtDNA H, c. 3000 BCE Sweden)

Eurogenes K36

0.00% Amerindian
0.00% Arabian
0.00% Armenian
28.21% Basque
0.00% Central_African
0.00% Central_Euro
0.00% East_African
0.00% East_Asian
15.66% East_Balkan
0.00% East_Central_Asian
0.00% East_Central_Euro
0.00% East_Med
0.00% Eastern_Euro
0.00% Fennoscandian
0.00% French
24.60% Iberian
0.00% Indo-Chinese
0.01% Italian
0.00% Malayan
0.00% Near_Eastern
0.00% North_African
0.00% North_Atlantic
0.00% North_Caucasian
0.00% North_Sea
0.00% Northeast_African
0.00% Oceanian
3.60% Omotic
0.00% Pygmy
0.00% Siberian
0.00% South_Asian
0.00% South_Central_Asian
0.00% South_Chinese
0.00% Volga-Ural
0.00% West_African
0.00% West_Caucasian
27.92% West_Med



Besides the ENF coming from the Mediterranean covered by West_Med (27,92%) and Iberian (24,60%) also an "East-Balkan" (15,66%) component connected with the movement shown in the picture (from Mitch) above!?

R.Rocca
06-03-2017, 01:27 PM
No doubt that most of the Beglerkeramik does show a general flow from east to west /north-west. Although exactly what it means is clear. It probably shows the network and women moving within the beaker social network. Of course against this we have to set the bell beaker itself (or at least the early/maritime type) and perhaps some other craft and jewelry trends moving the other way. Pottery is always a bad idea to infer male movement from though.

This is quite an interesting sequence I've been looking at... Globular Amphorae Culture > Moravian Corded Ware > Moravian Bell Beaker

The settlement at Olomouc-Slavonín and possibly other sites show a mix of Corded Ware pottery with "Begleitkeramik" pottery without the decorated Bell Beaker pottery as can be seen here: https://www.academia.edu/1223032/The_Northeast_Frontier_of_Bell_Beakers

The only radiocarbon Corded Ware Culture dates I could find for Olomouc-Slavonín are as follows:
2840 BC ± 60
2610 BC ± 70
2550 BC ± 50

Source: https://www.academia.edu/26079634/_Nagyr%C3%A9v_Jugs_and_Their_Archaeological_Contex t

Also from the Czebreszuk paper...


It is important to mention the special character of some
Corded Ware cemeteries in central Moravia. Their assemblages
and body positioning are keeping the traditions of the Corded
Ware burial rite, however, their orientation is up to the Bell
Beaker fashion (north-south, south-north) . Another puzzle is
also the lack of clearly Beaker burial contexts.

To your point Alan, we also need to account for how archery became so important to R-L51+ men. In Moravia at least, there is a evidence of Moravian Bell Beaker arrow-making techniques being the same as that of the Moravian Corded Ware...


Evolution of the Moravian Bell Beaker culture is reflected
in its lithic assemblages. During earlier phases (I and I/
II), arrowheads dominate (Kopacz, Přichystal, Šebela 2009,
Plates XXV: 4, 5; XXVI: 3; XXXIV: 5). They are usually
manufactured from imported lithics (Jurassic silicites from
the Cracow-Częstochowa Upland, silicites from glacial sediments)
as well as from local raw materials (cf. Kopacz,
Přichystal, Šebela 2009, 109, 128). Characteristic elements
of the lithic industry include flat invasive retouch applied
to arrowheads and a flake reduction technique which already
appears during the final stage of the Moravian Corded
Ware culture.

Here is a map of Moravia and the expansions of Bell Beaker from/to surrounding areas...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Moravian_BB_Expansion.png

TigerMW
06-04-2017, 01:48 AM
To your point Alan, we also need to account for how archery became so important to R-L51+ men. In Moravia at least, there is a evidence of Moravian Bell Beaker arrow-making techniques being the same as that of the Moravian Corded Ware.

I posted the five points that Harrison and Heyd considered important to the completion of the total Beaker package (circa 2500 BC) on the Gimbutas thread.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3474-Bell-Beakers-Gimbutas-and-R1b&p=234016&viewfull=1#post234016

"3. The third is the warrior self-consciousness. H. Case (2004, 29) noted this when he suggested that the bow and arrow was deliberately chosen as a status object for men....
creates a deliberate contrast to earlier styles of combat, which used hafted axes and daggers, for close hand-to-hand fighting. Archery allows the warrior to fight at a distance, even from horseback, and he can choose to kill from thirty metres, or be concealed from view. This is antithetical to a code of honour based on individual combat where rivals face each other two metres apart."

I'll look for H.Case's research on this, but the point is not necessarily archery in and of itself, but the military tactic of using archery versus hand to hand combat with axes or daggers. The ethos part of this is important. The fact that this was even possibly a military tactic implies more advanced military strategy. There is a difference between disorganized attacks/one on one fighting versus military tactics, as the Romans taught us. It's one thing to be old-fashioned honorable, but its another to be alive and the victor.

rms2
06-04-2017, 02:21 AM
It would have been a tremendous advantage if the Bell Beaker people were able to fire their bows from horseback, especially against foes on foot. A group of mounted archers can circle opponents on foot, feather them with arrows, then gallop away beyond the range of their opponents' own missile weapons; wash-rinse-repeat, until the enemy is bled dry.

Romilius
06-04-2017, 07:17 AM
I posted the five points that Harrison and Heyd considered important to the completion of the total Beaker package (circa 2500 BC) on the Gimbutas thread.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3474-Bell-Beakers-Gimbutas-and-R1b&p=234016&viewfull=1#post234016

"3. The third is the warrior self-consciousness. H. Case (2004, 29) noted this when he suggested that the bow and arrow was deliberately chosen as a status object for men....
creates a deliberate contrast to earlier styles of combat, which used hafted axes and daggers, for close hand-to-hand fighting. Archery allows the warrior to fight at a distance, even from horseback, and he can choose to kill from thirty metres, or be concealed from view. This is antithetical to a code of honour based on individual combat where rivals face each other two metres apart."

I'll look for H.Case's research on this, but the point is not necessarily archery in and of itself, but the military tactic of using archery versus hand to hand combat with axes or daggers. The ethos part of this is important. The fact that this was even possibly a military tactic implies more advanced military strategy. There is a difference between disorganized attacks/one on one fighting versus military tactics, as the Romans taught us. It's one thing to be old-fashioned honorable, but its another to be alive and the victor.

Hmmm... I'm skeptical about all this: we know about a code of honour only since early bronze age (s. Mycenaeans, with obvious source in Homer). But, if we analyze well Homeric poems, we will see that archery is an important part of Mycenaean princely weaponry. The false idea of bad archer/good swordman is derived from the description of Paris, but late Italian academical studies have shown that the negative view is only focused on the person, not the kind of weapon: Paris is THE negative hero in the poem, not because it was equipped with a bow (in fact, he was equipped with all kind of weapon), but because he was a degenerated prince who killed the holy hospitality by kidnapping his host's wife. Archery is the best activity for Persians and the sign of the King was the bow, because it is tied with hunting, an activity exclusively mantained by and for nobility because of its similarity with war action. The archer equipment is required for warriors, because they had to be skilled both in short and long distance combat. Remember that bow is also the weapon with which Ulisses freed his island... and in a proof of ability in which only princes could apply.

Also, the same antithetic relationship could be applied also on cavalry and spear: the horse leads the knight to be at a "security distance" from his opponent... and the spear let him hit from greater distance even more... But horse and spear are the best equipment for Germanic nobles. I think that we haven't got a system based on 1-to-1 combat vs long distance combat... because, if so, we would have had swords and not daggers or battle axes. We (and also many experts in weaponry) have to realize that also technology and actual dangers led peoples to develop different weapons, not the idea of honourable fighting.

rms2
06-04-2017, 11:52 AM
In later Indo-European mythology, there were a number of gods and goddesses who used bows and arrows and other missile weapons. Perhaps the Bell Beaker people had a similar deity, like the Celtic gods Cernunnos and Nodens, connected with the hunt. It wouldn't be considered dishonorable to resort to a weapon used by the gods themselves.

Romilius
06-04-2017, 12:06 PM
And, yes, let's remember also the role of bow in the capture of Troy: only with Philoctetes' bow it was possible to defeat Troy. The bow was given by the most illustrious hero, Heracles, to Philoctetes' grandfather as sign of respect for hospitality. Obviously, the hero Heracles is equipped with a bow, which is his weapon along with a cudgel... and his archery teacher was the famous Eurytus from Thessaly (and remember that Thessalians were seen as the most barbarian-like among Greeks... so the most fierce and warlike). But it is not finished: the bow of Eurytos was the bow that passed to Ulixes. Eurytos himself was the nephew of Apollo, the archer god and the sun god, son of the father Zeus and the female titan Leto, mistress of smithing. I read a lot of Bell Beaker traits in all these things...

Romilius
06-04-2017, 12:08 PM
In later Indo-European mythology, there were a number of gods and goddesses who used bows and arrows and other missile weapons. Perhaps the Bell Beaker people had a similar deity, like the Celtic gods Cernunnos and Nodens, connected with the hunt. It wouldn't be considered dishonorable to resort to a weapon used by the gods themselves.

It is also an Indo-Aryan thing: many deities were archers in the Vedas... and also the great hero Arjuna was also an archer in the Mahabharata.

rms2
06-04-2017, 12:20 PM
Honestly, I think the idea of the bow as dishonorable is a product of the Middle Ages, when elite noblemen found their status as armored knights threatened by peasants armed with the longbow or the crossbow. What good was it to spend all that money to be encased in plate armor when a mere commoner could knock you off from long distance? Oh, I say! How unsportsmanlike!

Romilius
06-04-2017, 03:04 PM
Honestly, I think the idea of the bow as dishonorable is a product of the Middle Ages, when elite noblemen found their status as armored knights threatened by peasants armed with the longbow or the crossbow. What good was it to spend all that money to be encased in plate armor when a mere commoner could knock you off from long distance? Oh, I say! How unsportsmanlike!

Good point. That's what I think! In fact, the nobility after the X century created the myth of the sword. The origins of the European landed or feudal nobility have roots in Germanic nobles, who were (not always) knights equipped with the framea, a long but not heavy spear.

In many cities of Northern Italy, for example, because of their freedom from great feudal lords (they were free municipalities - it boosted the creation of family names before other European and Italian lands), the crucial part of the army were crossbowmen. In my city of origin, for example, infantry was much more important than other: a particular infantry was very famous... the sickle infantry (yes, they were armed with light sickles). Many local urban nobles (the patricians, who were born thanks to political offices) were officers of infantry. Only few feudal lords, who renounced to their rights, were welcome as cavalry.

So, if we want to be very honest, we better say that the spear is the noblest weapon. And, for proto-hystoric times, the bow and the cudlidge (also heavy, with metal or stone parts), weapons of deities and heroes. If I remember well, a cudlidge (probably like those of Vedic descriptions) was found in a Yamna kurgan, along with a sample R1b-Z2103.

TigerMW
06-04-2017, 03:12 PM
...Archery is the best activity for Persians and the sign of the King was the bow, because it is tied with hunting, an activity exclusively mantained by and for nobility because of its similarity with war action. The archer equipment is required for warriors, because they had to be skilled both in short and long distance combat. Remember that bow is also the weapon with which Ulisses freed his island... and in a proof of ability in which only princes could apply.

Regardless of the moral codes between hand to hand fighting and whatever, use of archery as a military tactic could be huge advantage, as we have seen for a long time.
Perhaps its first great use as a military tactic was by the East Bell Beakers, or maybe Bell Beakers in general. In any case, there is a difference in the way archery is honored in East Bell Beaker burials versus Corded Ware. For some reason, archery was very important.
As I noted earlier, R1b-P312 pretty much cut-off its potential Yamnaya derived cousins, Z2103, L23* and R1a, as P312 dominated from Central Europe to point northwest, west and southwest as well as directly south into half of the Italian Peninsula.

Romilius
06-04-2017, 03:18 PM
Regardless of the moral codes between hand to hand fighting and whatever, use of archery as a military tactic could be huge advantage, as we have seen for a long time.
Perhaps its first great use as a military tactic was by the East Bell Beakers, or maybe Bell Beakers in general. In any case, there is a difference in the way archery is honored in East Bell Beaker burials versus Corded Ware. For some reason, archery was very important.
As I noted earlier, R1b-P312 pretty much cut-off its potential Yamnaya derived cousins, Z2103, L23* and R1a, as P312 dominated from Central Europe to point northwest, west and southwest as well as directly south into half of the Italian Peninsula.

It is an advantage only with skilled archers: to train a swordman is easier than training an archer. That's why, for example, in my area of origin in Italy free municipalities passed from bowmen to crossbowmen: it was easier and faster to train a crossbowman.

Given that, I can't even imagine the difficulty for a Bell Beaker boy to learn how to use the bow with those flint arrowheads and to fight with that and a dagger. It must have been a training for the entire life.

TigerMW
06-04-2017, 04:03 PM
It is an advantage only with skilled archers: to train a swordman is easier than training an archer. That's why, for example, in my area of origin in Italy free municipalities passed from bowmen to crossbowmen: it was easier and faster to train a crossbowman.

Given that, I can't even imagine the difficulty for a Bell Beaker boy to learn how to use the bow with those flint arrowheads and to fight with that and a dagger. It must have been a training for the entire life.
That's the point. IE has foundation words-concepts for warrior, army and king. This was not just a hobby or for hunting although that was a use too. Kids can do a lot besides just the chores. Have you seen kids competitive football/soccer, baseball, etc.?

Romilius
06-04-2017, 05:42 PM
That's the point. IE has foundation words-concepts for warrior, army and king. This was not just a hobby or for hunting although that was a use too. Kids can do a lot besides just the chores. Have you seen kids competitive football/soccer, baseball, etc.?

Well, yes. But I dare also to state that we put too much emphasis on archery in Bell Beaker: I'd say that arrows+bow+dagger+spear/javelin (see that strange arrowhead in Alsatian remains from the last paper by Olalde) is a panoply tied to warriors. To be a BB warrior, a person must master the art of archery and 1-vs-1 fight. In Yamna, as I recall, but I can easily make mistakes, we have dagger similar to those of BB and also arrowheads. I don't know if also Yamnayans offer hints about the role of archery in their culture... perhaps you all know more than me about the argument.

rms2
06-04-2017, 06:13 PM
The horse was pretty obviously the most significant advantage Bell Beaker and the other steppe-derived peoples had. If the Bell Beaker people figured out how to use the bow effectively from the back of a horse, that would have given them a tremendous advantage.

TigerMW
06-05-2017, 01:17 PM
Well, yes. But I dare also to state that we put too much emphasis on archery in Bell Beaker: I'd say that arrows+bow+dagger+spear/javelin (see that strange arrowhead in Alsatian remains from the last paper by Olalde) is a panoply tied to warriors. To be a BB warrior, a person must master the art of archery and 1-vs-1 fight. In Yamna, as I recall, but I can easily make mistakes, we have dagger similar to those of BB and also arrowheads. I don't know if also Yamnayans offer hints about the role of archery in their culture... perhaps you all know more than me about the argument.
I am not sure archery is the one and only answer to the advantage the East Bell Beakers had over both Corded Wares and Danubian Yamnaya or their derived (if they existed along side) to have cut R1a males and Z2103 males from making much of an impact on Western Europe during the post 2500 BC Beaker period.

Of course the East Bell Beakers apparently won out over the West Bell Beakers and Neolithic peoples too. Why they won out over the West Bell Beakers I'm not sure. The East Bell Beakers may have been better organized or more aggressive with a Yamnaya-ization. I guess that is a good question.

What did the East Bell Beakers have over the West Bell Beakers? Is there something the males picked up from Corded Wares or from the Danubian Yamnaya. Maybe that is another way to couch the question of did P312 come from Corded Ware? Which is more likely from a male related cultural practices or physical standpoint? Were the East Bell Beaker males and their behaviors more like Corded Ware males or Danubian Yamnaya males? I'm not saying they would be exactly alike. They weren't, but if you had to pick one over the other, would either Corded Ware or Danubian Yamnaya (which I guess could include Vucedol as derived) have left more traits for the East Bell Beakers?

TigerMW
06-05-2017, 02:22 PM
Which is more likely from a male related cultural practices or physical standpoint? Were the East Bell Beaker males and their behaviors more like Corded Ware males or Danubian Yamnaya males? I'm not saying they would be exactly alike. They weren't, but if you had to pick one over the other, would either Corded Ware or Danubian Yamnaya (which I guess could include Vucedol as derived) have left more traits for the East Bell Beakers?
I think just unwittingly gave the answer. Vucedol is derived from Danubian Yamnaya and we know that Marija Gimbutas thinks Bell Beaker came out of Vucedol. What are the details of that? Does that or should that exclude early Southwest Bell Beakers?

Barring L51+ L151- and L151+ aDNA finds east of the Carpathian Basin, I think I have to lean towards a Danubian route for L51 which means L151 and P312. It is possible for L51 to go both north and south of the Carpathians from the Steppes but I have my doubts on L151.

MitchellSince1893
06-05-2017, 03:19 PM
A simple exercise: If all you had available to you were present day distribution maps of P312 subclades, some ancient dna samples, and knowledge that these ancient ancestors tended to move from East to West, you might ask:

"What would be a good starting point/core area for growth based on present day distribution? (not necessarily the same as origin but a core area for later expansion)"

Taking some basic EUPEDIA maps (used here only for example purposes) you might come up with something like this.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/09/60/96/0960969cd8faa1b57538036146715df5.png

DF27 and L21 are pretty straight forward, but U152 is a little more complicated.

The lower right panel showing all 3.

Ironically the location of the oldest known P312 sample (RISE563) is in the middle of where those 3 circles overlap.

Before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, this is simply an exercise of curiosity on my part..more detailed maps may give different results. So treat it as such. :) Plus lots of movement of peoples has happened since ~2500 BC.

vettor
06-05-2017, 06:38 PM
I think just unwittingly gave the answer. Vucedol is derived from Danubian Yamnaya and we know that Marija Gimbutas thinks Bell Beaker came out of Vucedol. What are the details of that? Does that or should that exclude early Southwest Bell Beakers?

Barring L51+ L151- and L151+ aDNA finds east of the Carpathian Basin, I think I have to lean towards a Danubian route for L51 which means L151 and P312. It is possible for L51 to go both north and south of the Carpathians from the Steppes but I have my doubts on L151.

IIRC, vucedol was stated to represent proto-illyrian culture ............has there been a change in this thinking?

TigerMW
06-05-2017, 08:39 PM
IIRC, vucedol was stated to represent proto-illyrian culture ............has there been a change in this thinking?
I don't have the Gimbutas book, "The Civilization of the Goddess: the world of Old Europe", but it looks like if you get to about page 390 you'll read what she thinks about it. Here is sub-title of one section.


The Bell Beaker Folk - Descendants of the Amalgamated Yamna and Vucedol Culture in the Middle Danube Basin

It looks like from about 3000 BC to about 2700-2600 BC she thinks Yamnaya incursions in to the Vucedol initiated what would be the Bell Beakers. I'm not sure if this only pertains to the East Bell Beakers, but this would be about the right timeframe for a predecessor to the East Bell Beakers of about 2500 BC when a Central to West European wave began - the fusion-fission.

R.Rocca
06-05-2017, 09:05 PM
When looking for R-L51 in "Early Begleitkeramik" instead of simply "Early Bell Beaker", it really makes for much more focused reading. Probably the most interesting things I've been reading about during the past week are the developments within the Kraków-Sandomierz Corded Ware group of the Małopolska Upland, southern Poland.

1. After an initial phase where single graves were oriented in the typical Corded Ware west-east axis, the Kraków-Sandomierz CW group switches to placing their dead in a north-south axis starting ca. 2700 BC. This is the same orientation of the Moravian Corded Ware Group from Olomouc-Slavonín and the Bell Beaker East group.

2. Also from its inception phase, the Kraków-Sandomierz CW group places a premium on archery equipment in male graves including arrow heads, flint tips and other flake producing tools. This archery toolkit is typical of the Bell Beaker package, but is not common for Corded Ware. Corded Ware grave 1(2) from Żuków shows the importance of archery and includes an S-shaped beaker with zone ornamentation...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Zukow_CWC_Grave.png


3. Around the time when graves switched to the north-south axis, pottery is influenced by Globular Amphora Culutre/Zlota and also TRB. From the Olalde paper, genetic contributions from GAC and TRB are the best Late Neolithic fits for Bell Beaker samples from outside of Iberia.

The similarities between Moravia and the Małopolska Upland continues into the Bell Beaker period. As mentioned in my prior post, just like the Moravian Olomouc-Slavonín BB group lacked decorated pottery, it is missing from the Samborzec Bell Beaker burials as well. Of the three Samborzec males tested by Olalde et al 2017, one low resolution sample belongs to haplogroup R while the other two belong to at least R-M269. Perhaps the raw data will reveal better haplogroup resolution. The I4251 sample has an early date of 2837–2672 calBCE (3990±60 BP, Ki-7926). The date is disputed however. The Samborzec Begleitkeramic sample (Grave III) was not tested, but it is by far the most interesting. The burial contains a male in the typical N-S orientation, but lying on his back with knees bent outward. This position is found in some other Corded Ware graves and earlier Pit Graves. One of the Corded Ware samples is the very sample from Żuków that produced the grave goods above! Also in Samborzec Grave III was a copper tanged dagger which also looks a lot like a Yamnaya dagger. He also checks just about every Eastern Bell Beaker checkbox...bow-shaped pendant made of boar tusk, four holed wrist guard, flint arrowhead, and the archers toolkit (flint, bone and antler tools) and a polypod bowl. Again, of importance is the lack of decorated beakers. Here is an image of the grave goods and his position...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Samborzec_BB_Grave_III.png

Only four Corded Ware samples from Poland have been tested thus far (that I know of)... one is R1a, one is G, one is likely I/J and the fourth is the low quality Corded Ware R1b1a-L1345 sample from Oblaczkowo, Poland that is dated to 2865-2578 BC. This sample could of course belong to L51 just as well as it could to Z2103. Either way, it will be interesting to see if a Corded Ware paper comes out with as much information as the recent Bell Beaker one. If so, I hope they include samples from Moldovian and southern Poland, as it may throw some surprises our way.

ADW_1981
06-05-2017, 09:30 PM
Wasn't there another R1b Hungarian genome that was supposed to undergo deeper analysis? It wasn't the Vucedol one, but another later sample I believe. I haven't heard anything on that one. I'm also assuming the R1b-Z2103 is the same Vucedol one reported in the paper a couple years back.

Gravetto-Danubian
06-05-2017, 09:51 PM
When looking for R-L51 in "Early Begleitkeramik" instead of simply "Early Bell Beaker", it really makes for much more focused reading. Probably the most interesting things I've been reading about during the past week are the developments within the Kraków-Sandomierz Corded Ware group of the Małopolska Upland, southern Poland.

1. After an initial phase where single graves were oriented in the typical Corded Ware west-east axis, the Kraków-Sandomierz CW group switches to placing their dead in a north-south axis starting ca. 2700 BC. This is the same orientation of the Moravian Corded Ware Group from Olomouc-Slavonín and the Bell Beaker East group.

2. Also from its inception phase, the Kraków-Sandomierz CW group places a premium on archery equipment in male graves including arrow heads, flint tips and other flake producing tools. This archery toolkit is typical of the Bell Beaker package, but is not common for Corded Ware. Corded Ware grave 1(2) from Żuków shows the importance of archery and includes an S-shaped beaker with zone ornamentation...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Zukow_CWC_Grave.png


3. Around the time when graves switched to the north-south axis, pottery is influenced by Globular Amphora Culutre/Zlota and also TRB. From the Olalde paper, genetic contributions from GAC and TRB are the best Late Neolithic fits for Bell Beaker samples from outside of Iberia.

The similarities between Moravia and the Małopolska Upland continues into the Bell Beaker period. As mentioned in my prior post, just like the Moravian Olomouc-Slavonín BB group lacked decorated pottery, it is missing from the Samborzec Bell Beaker burials as well. Of the three Samborzec males tested by Olalde et al 2017, one low resolution sample belongs to haplogroup R while the other two belong to at least R-M269. Perhaps the raw data will reveal better haplogroup resolution. The I4251 sample has an early date of 2837–2672 calBCE (3990±60 BP, Ki-7926). The date is disputed however. The Samborzec Begleitkeramic sample (Grave III) was not tested, but it is by far the most interesting. The burial contains a male in the typical N-S orientation, but lying on his back with knees bent outward. This position is found in some other Corded Ware graves and earlier Pit Graves. One of the Corded Ware samples is the very sample from Żuków that produced the grave goods above! Also in Samborzec Grave III was a copper tanged dagger which also looks a lot like a Yamnaya dagger. He also checks just about every Eastern Bell Beaker checkbox...bow-shaped pendant made of boar tusk, four holed wrist guard, flint arrowhead, and the archers toolkit (flint, bone and antler tools) and a polypod bowl. Again, of importance is the lack of decorated beakers. Here is an image of the grave goods and his position...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Samborzec_BB_Grave_III.png

Only four Corded Ware samples from Poland have been tested thus far (that I know of)... one is R1a, one is G, one is likely I/J and the fourth is the low quality Corded Ware R1b1a-L1345 sample from Oblaczkowo, Poland that is dated to 2865-2578 BC. This sample could of course belong to L51 just as well as it could to Z2103. Either way, it will be interesting to see if a Corded Ware paper comes out with as much information as the recent Bell Beaker one. If so, I hope they include samples from Moldovian and southern Poland, as it may throw some surprises our way.

The KS group definitely comes from the middle to late phase of the Corded Ware period, stray C14 dates aside; although the distinctiveness of southern Poland CWC has probably been known to Eastern European readers for over 10 years (indeed I have pointed to it several times). In fact, the K-S group also shows typological parallels with Srubnaya culture

R.Rocca
06-05-2017, 10:26 PM
The KS group definitely comes from the middle to late phase of the Corded Ware period, stray C14 dates aside; although the distinctiveness of southern Poland CWC has probably been known to Eastern European readers for over 10 years (indeed I have pointed to it several times). In fact, the K-S group also shows typological parallels with Srubnaya culture

Yes G-D, I have re-read some of your "pre-beaker zone" posts in the past few days as well. My mind only registers things when I deem them important I guess :D

In them you mention the gold items in pre-beaker Corded Ware and Eastern Bell Beaker, which I have also been looking at.

Gravetto-Danubian
06-05-2017, 11:10 PM
I think just unwittingly gave the answer. Vucedol is derived from Danubian Yamnaya and we know that Marija Gimbutas thinks Bell Beaker came out of Vucedol. What are the details of that? Does that or should that exclude early Southwest Bell Beakers?

Barring L51+ L151- and L151+ aDNA finds east of the Carpathian Basin, I think I have to lean towards a Danubian route for L51 which means L151 and P312. It is possible for L51 to go both north and south of the Carpathians from the Steppes but I have my doubts on L151.

I wouldn't say Vucedol is "derived from Yamnaya", such a position is chronologically untenable, according to up to date literature. The Vucedol culture emerges c. 3000 BC, from the preceding Kostolac base, but was infused with some pre-Yamnaya steppe individuals, or perhaps even directly from the Caucasus (Majkop)- looking at the shaft -hole axes.
The Yamnaya horizon also emerged c. 3000 BC (in it's classic form) - and it is a totally different cultural group occupying different ecological zones.

Nor do I think the position that BB, in turn, derives from Vucedol, is at all clear. The heriarchical settlements, incl. forts and shaft-holes axes which characterised Vucedol don't speak of any close analogies to BB. Rather, as Vettor pointed out, Vucedol is ancestral to a raft of Bronze Age west Balkan groups which might be considered 'proto-Illyrian', at least in part.
I suspect that central European BB might be a 3 way fusion rather than a more neat 2-way fusion, but at least for now the lack of any L51 in the Vucedol region has made this avenue less likely.

rms2
06-05-2017, 11:38 PM
Gimbutas said Vucedol was a combination of Baden farmers and pre-Yamnaya steppe migrants. What she said of Bell Beaker is that it was the product of the amalgam of Vucedol and Yamnaya. She further clarified that by explaining that it was the Vucedol offshoots Samogyvar (aka Somogyvar) and Zok-Mako that gave rise to Bell Beaker.

If you look at these pedestalled bowls from the Carpathian Basin and a much older brazier from Mikhailovka, you'll no doubt see the pretty obvious similarities.

16687 16688

kinman
06-05-2017, 11:42 PM
These early burials in south and central Poland are certainly interesting. Both the Oblaczkowo burial (R1b) and the K-S switch of orientation (to north-south) are dated about 2700 B.C. It would not surprised me at all if this is due to some U152 spreading north from its birthplace in northeastern Austria (east of Vienna?).
If so, it would show that U152 definitely arose well before 4400 years ago (the age given by YFull). Of course, this should be obvious, since YFull has U152's subclades, sub-subclades, and many of its sub-sub-subclades as also forming 4400 years ago. This alone should prompt YFull to change its formula for these groups. I guess if the Oblaczkowo R1b man does turn out to be U152, that would make it even more obvious that it formed centuries before 4400 years ago (more like 4900 years ago, or perhaps even my prediction of 5100 years ago).


The KS group definitely comes from the middle to late phase of the Corded Ware period, stray C14 dates aside; although the distinctiveness of southern Poland CWC has probably been known to Eastern European readers for over 10 years (indeed I have pointed to it several times). In fact, the K-S group also shows typological parallels with Srubnaya culture

rms2
06-05-2017, 11:52 PM
I think we may be looking at R1b-L151 or maybe, at the most, R1b-P312. I would be thrilled if we could find either of those, or even just L51, in Polish Corded Ware.

kinman
06-06-2017, 12:07 AM
I would be thrilled too. However, if one of P312's subclades were to be found there, it would most likely be U152. That would be icing on the cake for me.


I think we may be looking at R1b-L151 or maybe, at the most, R1b-P312. I would be thrilled if we could find either of those, or even just L51, in Polish Corded Ware.

Gravetto-Danubian
06-06-2017, 12:37 AM
Focussed studies on specific sites & microregions will bring light to lingering details.
For example, a study by Gerling, Heyd et al from the site at Sárrétudvari-Orhalom (https://www.academia.edu/7825958/Claudia_Gerling_Volker_Heyd_Alistair_Pike_Eszter_B %C3%A1nffy_J%C3%A1nos_Dani_Kitti_K%C3%B6hler_Gabri ella_Kulcs%C3%A1r_Elke_Kaiser_Wolfram_Schier_Ident ifying_kurgan_graves_in_Eastern_Hungary_A_burial_m ound_in_the_light_of_strontium_and_oxygen_isotope_ analysis) has several chronologic layers.

It begins with Grave 12, a young man with non-Yamnaya burial style, but the earliest occupant of the burial mound, and dated to c. 3300 BC (ie pre-Yamnaya, or incipient Yamnaya). He had a local isotopic signature.

A second individual (mature male; grave 10) dating to 3000 BC, with E-W orientation, burial with some Ochre, horse & cattle bones. He too, had local signatures.

Then come some later burials from a second mound from the classic Yamnaya period (2800 BC) with more constituents of the Yamnaya panopoly and clear non-local ('eastern') isotopic affinities.

Nevertheless, despite the local signature of the 2 in the earliest mound, its character s overall novel to the region.

If they extract aDNA from these individuals, it would be very helpful. It could be some north Balkan individuals drifted east, made contact with the steppe, which was then followed by a reflux west.

16689

kinman
06-06-2017, 01:27 AM
This paper makes a number of references to calBC dates. But I am not sure exactly how these differ from traditional BC dates. Normally you can add 1950 years to the BC date to get BP (before present) dates. However, the calBC dates I am not so sure about.


Focussed studies on specific sites & microregions will bring light to lingering details.
For example, a study by Gerling, Heyd et al from the site at Sárrétudvari-Orhalom (https://www.academia.edu/7825958/Claudia_Gerling_Volker_Heyd_Alistair_Pike_Eszter_B %C3%A1nffy_J%C3%A1nos_Dani_Kitti_K%C3%B6hler_Gabri ella_Kulcs%C3%A1r_Elke_Kaiser_Wolfram_Schier_Ident ifying_kurgan_graves_in_Eastern_Hungary_A_burial_m ound_in_the_light_of_strontium_and_oxygen_isotope_ analysis) has several chronologic layers.

It begins with Grave 12, a young man with non-Yamnaya burial style, but the earliest occupant of the burial mound, and dated to c. 3300 BC (ie pre-Yamnaya, or incipient Yamnaya). He had a local isotopic signature.

A second individual (mature male; grave 10) dating to 3000 BC, with E-W orientation, burial with some Ochre, horse & cattle bones. He too, had local signatures.

Then come some later burials from a second mound from the classic Yamnaya period (2800 BC) with more constituents of the Yamnaya panopoly and clear non-local ('eastern') isotopic affinities.

Nevertheless, despite the local signature of the 2 in the earliest mound, its character s overall novel to the region.

If they extract aDNA from these individuals, it would be very helpful. It could be some north Balkan individuals drifted east, made contact with the steppe, which was then followed by a reflux west.

16689

Gravetto-Danubian
06-06-2017, 01:38 AM
This paper makes a number of references to calBC dates. But I am not sure exactly how these differ from traditional BC dates. Normally you can add 1950 years to the BC date to get BP (before present) dates. However, the calBC dates I am not so sure about.

Calibration of C14 data takes into account variations in atmospheric C14 levels, so they be properly calibrates it to normal calendar years (ie your "traditional BC").
Its what modern works usually reference. UnCal BC is essentially useless and rarely quoted these days.

kinman
06-06-2017, 01:49 AM
So can you still add 1950 years to a calBC date to get BP dates?


Calibration of C14 data takes into account variations in atmospheric C14 levels, so they be properly calibrates it to normal calendar years (ie your "traditional BC").
Its what modern works usually reference. UnCal BC is essentially useless and rarely quoted these days.

Ryukendo
06-06-2017, 06:51 AM
It would have been a tremendous advantage if the Bell Beaker people were able to fire their bows from horseback, especially against foes on foot. A group of mounted archers can circle opponents on foot, feather them with arrows, then gallop away beyond the range of their opponents' own missile weapons; wash-rinse-repeat, until the enemy is bled dry.

Mounted archery appears only after the chariot does, pretty late in history; its not likely to have played a role here.

rms2
06-06-2017, 08:07 AM
Mounted archery appears only after the chariot does, pretty late in history; its not likely to have played a role here.

I don't think we know. We were talking about what might have given Bell Beaker an advantage, and I suggested mounted archery as a possibility. Amerindians were able to use bows from horseback without stirrups and without having gone through a chariot phase. Perhaps BB managed to become capable mounted archers themselves.

rms2
06-06-2017, 08:16 AM
I would be thrilled too. However, if one of P312's subclades were to be found there, it would most likely be U152. That would be icing on the cake for me.

Maybe, but pretty obviously U152 was not the only Bell Beaker subclade, and the title of this thread is "Corded Ware origin for P312?". I got the impression the focus was on how P312 might have entered Bell Beaker from Corded Ware, not on how one particular clade did. If what we are talking about is CW as the source of U152, then where did the rest of P312 come from? Are we to back up to before CW to look for the source of P312?

Has U152 been found in Polish Bell Beaker?

You mentioned that you think U152 arose in Eastern Austria around 3100 BC, but that would put it there before Corded Ware or Yamnaya. Are you saying U152 isn't Indo-European, or that it stemmed from one of the earlier kurgan waves?

Ryukendo
06-06-2017, 09:43 AM
I don't think we know. We were talking about what might have given Bell Beaker an advantage, and I suggested mounted archery as a possibility. Amerindians were able to use bows from horseback without stirrups and without having gone through a chariot phase. Perhaps BB managed to become capable mounted archers themselves.

The Comanches did use stirrups...

rms2
06-06-2017, 10:52 AM
The Comanches did use stirrups...

Not all Amerindians were Comanches.

There were Plains Indians who shot their bows from horseback and did not have either stirrups or short recurved bows.

I don't know whether or not Bell Beaker people were mounted archers, but they put great emphasis on the bow and on horses. Hard to imagine they would not have tried to combine the two. I'm betting they did, became pretty good at it, and that gave them a big advantage.

TigerMW
06-06-2017, 01:07 PM
Mounted archery appears only after the chariot does, pretty late in history; its not likely to have played a role here.

I don't think we know. We were talking about what might have given Bell Beaker an advantage, and I suggested mounted archery as a possibility. Amerindians were able to use bows from horseback without stirrups and without having gone through a chariot phase. Perhaps BB managed to become capable mounted archers themselves.
This suggestion of mounted archery comes from Heyd in regards to the Harrison and Heyd studies of the East Bell Beakers so they apparently think mounted archers were around with at least some sects of the Bell Beakers.

MitchellSince1893
06-07-2017, 06:39 PM
...This is the same orientation of the Moravian Corded Ware Group from Olomouc-Slavonín and the Bell Beaker East group...The similarities between Moravia and the Małopolska Upland continues into the Bell Beaker period.

Present day Moravia does appear to be an area of interest for what later became Eastern Bell Beaker.

Found this old post of yours. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4770-Bell-Beaker-and-U152&p=92300&viewfull=1#post92300


...Several years ago, I proposed on this and other forums that U152, and more specifically L2 was an important player in the Eastern Bell Beaker province, best know for its Begleitkeramik, or accompanying ware. This Bell Beaker province of course included Bavaria as well as Moravia and Bohemia. It also had a very large impact on Italian Bell Beakers. One of the things that stood out to me was that two papers (Magoon & Larmusea) had both singled out the star-like pattern of L2, meaning that this lineage produced a lot of successful lineages very rapidly. Now, the number of L2 subclades are even more impressive...with an outstanding 18 (not a typo) subclades known, and almost all of them have indistinguishable STR signatures from the rest of U152 or P312 for that matter. I would be shocked if further testing did not produce more than a fair share of L2+ results. The linguistic implication for U152 being found so early north of the Alps, but having its modern frequency peak on the southern side of the Alps, is that these were Italo-Celtic speakers. Hopefully we'll get many more samples in the future to see how my theory plays out.



I know Gravetto-Danubian has spoken on this before too


...In his ""Families, Prestige Goods, Warriors & Complex Societies: Beaker Groups of the 3rd Millennium cal BC Along the Upper & Middle Danube", Heyd...suggests (IMO) that the BB East group might have arrived to central Europe via southern Poland & eastern Moravia, northern Hungary perhaps also playing a role, also highlighting that the easternmost tip of Austria. This suggests a trail of Proto-East-Beaker traits. He doesn't really mention Vucedol. Lastly, he highlights that BB "begins" in Danube Germany , Moravia etc c. 2500 BC."
Recalling Durman's article on Vucedol, it begins by 3000 BC (in Croatia), but it's similarity to BB develops later, after 2500 BC, with the interlinked Mako culture, occurring due to the arrival of BB Csepel from further up then Danube...It thus seems to me at least, that BB East pastoralists arrived to central Europe directly from Late classic Yamnaya, after CWC had already expanded there from Poland. Whilst we can see steppe-(early Croatian) Vucedol links (3000BC) and later secondary BB-(classic) Vucedol (2500BC) links, it doesn't seem that Vucedol is a the genesis of BB East, but some group of far western Yamnayans directly, consisting of some 25 -50 households and their heads, just before Yamnaya itself disappears from Hungary and the Balkans.

R.Rocca
06-08-2017, 03:09 AM
Present day Moravia does appear to be an area of interest for what later became Eastern Bell Beaker.

Found this old post of yours. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4770-Bell-Beaker-and-U152&p=92300&viewfull=1#post92300

I know Gravetto-Danubian has spoken on this before too

I agree with Gravetto-Danubian as I don't think Vučedol is what we are looking for for the reasons I outlined at the beginning of this post. Vučedol's replacement to the north, the Kosihy-Čaka/Makó Culture is an option, but still has some glaring cultural differences with almost all of Bell Beaker East (e.g. cremation).

The prime position of Corded Ware as the major contributor to Bell Beaker East is also strongly proposed by two of the better regarded papers of the past decade. The first was Jocelyne Desider's study on the dental traits from Czech Republic, Hungary, Switzerland, France and Spain. In it, she concludes...



1. Migration of groups of Bell Beaker individuals from the Iberian Peninsula toward the east, while the
eastern domain is still occupied by the Corded Ware culture.
2. Part of the Corded Ware on the edge of the phenomenon was individualized and adopted by
borrowing some of the southern Bell Beaker traditions. Diffusion of this new society - the Beakers -
continued toward the east. At the same time, certain eastern elements were diffused toward the west.

She also makes the point that...


The Hungarian Bell Beaker occupation - the Csepel-Bell-Beaker - is the only one in the eastern domain
outside the zone of the Corded Ware substrate....Hungarian Bell Beakers seem much closer to their contemporaneous western groups.


And we have seen that Hungarian Bell Beakers are the only ones from the Eastern group that have produced some non-R1b results thus far.

The other was the study on common ware pottery (aka Begleitkeramik) by Marie Besse. For the eastern domain, she concludes the following:


Thus, many external influences may have acted in this region. Nevertheless, the stock from the
regional Corded Ware Culture substrate seems to dominate, as the types which are most frequently
encountered originate from the substrate of the regional Corded Ware.

Besse's map of BB collective graves versus BB single graves also shows quite strikingly how the latter was almost entirely in Corded Ware territory.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/BB_Collective_Graves.png

MitchellSince1893
06-08-2017, 05:04 AM
I think your earlier post (partially quoted below) about the arrow making techniques of the Moravian Corded Ware Culture and Moravian Bell Beaker Culture being the same could be of great significance...possibly at the "smoking gun" level; as I image this to often be a "father teaching son" type of activity.


...we also need to account for how archery became so important to R-L51+ men. In Moravia at least, there is a evidence of Moravian Bell Beaker arrow-making techniques being the same as that of the Moravian Corded Ware...

Evolution of the Moravian Bell Beaker culture is reflected
in its lithic assemblages. During earlier phases (I and I/
II), arrowheads dominate (Kopacz, Přichystal, Šebela 2009,
Plates XXV: 4, 5; XXVI: 3; XXXIV: 5). They are usually
manufactured from imported lithics (Jurassic silicites from
the Cracow-Częstochowa Upland, silicites from glacial sediments)
as well as from local raw materials (cf. Kopacz,
Přichystal, Šebela 2009, 109, 128). Characteristic elements
of the lithic industry include flat invasive retouch applied
to arrowheads and a flake reduction technique which already
appears during the final stage of the Moravian Corded
Ware culture.http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10749-Corded-Ware-origin-for-P312&p=242380&viewfull=1#post242380

rms2
06-08-2017, 11:26 AM
I agree with Gravetto-Danubian as I don't think Vučedol is what we are looking for for the reasons I outlined at the beginning of this post. Vučedol's replacement to the north, the Kosihy-Čaka/Makó Culture is an option, but still has some glaring cultural differences with almost all of Bell Beaker East (e.g. cremation).

The prime position of Corded Ware as the major contributor to Bell Beaker East is also strongly proposed by two of the better regarded papers of the past decade. The first was Jocelyne Desider's study on the dental traits from Czech Republic, Hungary, Switzerland, France and Spain. In it, she concludes...



1. Migration of groups of Bell Beaker individuals from the Iberian Peninsula toward the east, while the eastern domain is still occupied by the Corded Ware culture.
2. Part of the Corded Ware on the edge of the phenomenon was individualized and adopted by borrowing some of the southern Bell Beaker traditions. Diffusion of this new society - the Beakers - continued toward the east. At the same time, certain eastern elements were diffused toward the west.

She also makes the point that...


The Hungarian Bell Beaker occupation - the Csepel-Bell-Beaker - is the only one in the eastern domain outside the zone of the Corded Ware substrate....Hungarian Bell Beakers seem much closer to their contemporaneous western groups.


And we have seen that Hungarian Bell Beakers are the only ones from the Eastern group that have produced some non-R1b results thus far.

The other was the study on common ware pottery (aka Begleitkeramik) by Marie Besse. For the eastern domain, she concludes the following:


Thus, many external influences may have acted in this region. Nevertheless, the stock from the regional Corded Ware Culture substrate seems to dominate, as the types which are most frequently encountered originate from the substrate of the regional Corded Ware.

Besse's map of BB collective graves versus BB single graves also shows quite strikingly how the latter was almost entirely in Corded Ware territory.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/BB_Collective_Graves.png

Really excellent and eye-opening post.

Makes me wonder what this upcoming paper might reveal.

Phillip Stockhammer, Corina Knipper, Alissa Mittnik, Ken Massy, Fabian Wittenborn, Stephanie Metz, Steffen Kraus, Ernst Pernicka, Johannes Krause, The Bell Beaker Complex in the Lech Valley: a Bioarchaeological Perspective.



While the integration of archaeological and scientific – especially genetic – evidence has enabled a better understanding of the Corded Ware Complex in the last years, similar data for the Bell Beaker Complex has not been published yet. However, in the last years we have conducted an interdisciplinary bioarchaeological research program on 85 Corded Ware, Bell Beaker and Early Bronze Age burials in the Lech Valley south of Augsburg, which is now a key region to understand the social transformations during the 3rd millennium BC. We will present the archaeological evidence of the Bell Beaker Complex in the Lech valley and integrate the data in an archaeological-diachronic perspective as well as with regard to the broad range of scientific analyses (ancient mitochondrial, Y and nuclear DNA, stable isotope ratios of strontium, oxygen carbon and nitrogen, radiocarbon dating, lead isotope analyses, etc.). The isotope data demonstrate a striking pattern of patrilocality and female exogamy during the Bell Beaker Complex and the Early Bronze Age where more than half of the females were non-local, while there were only rare occurrences among the male and subadult individuals. The DNA analysis enables us to understand family relations within the burial sites as well as the transformation of the genomic patterns from the Corded Ware to the Bell Beaker Complex and further on to the Early Bronze Age. In the end, we are able to present a new narrative for the genesis as well as the end of the Bell Beaker Complex at least for the Lech Valley south of Augsburg.

Lech Valley south of Augsburg:

16743

rms2
06-08-2017, 11:52 AM
Based on Besse's map of Bell Beaker collective versus single graves, as posted by Rich above, it looks like the Lech Valley south of Augsburg is a pretty good place to look (if my red circle is not too far off).

16744

rms2
06-09-2017, 11:13 AM
You know, Besse's map is pretty amazing. Look especially at the places with the big triangles representing at least ten single grave burials. I do wonder why she left Britain and Ireland out.

Looking at that map, it's not hard to see why the results from Olalde et al came out the way they did. Of course, I have been saying for a long time that I found the differences between the earliest Iberian BB of the collective Neolithic tombs and the later kurgan BB puzzling, as if they were two different sets of people. Now we know they really were two different sets of people.

16754

R.Rocca
06-09-2017, 11:39 AM
In the Olalde paper, they had a graphic with Yamnaya_Samara + Anatolia_Neolithic + WHG to show steppe related ancestry. However, in Olalde's thesis, he has a similar graphic with Corded_Ware_Germany + Central_MN....

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Corded_Ware_Affinity.png

MitchellSince1893
06-09-2017, 02:44 PM
In the Olalde paper, they had a graphic with Yamnaya_Samara + Anatolia_Neolithic + WHG to show steppe related ancestry. However, in Olalde's thesis, he has a similar graphic with Corded_Ware_Germany + Central_MN....

I took the data from Table S4 and put it in a spreadsheet to create a bar graph
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/58/1f/be/581fbeaeb041b7f00bc55720db6c14e4.png

The difference between Bell Beaker in Iberia and some BB in France, and Bell Beaker in British Isles and the rest of Europe really stands out as it relates to Anatolian vs Yamanya admixture. However BB_Hungary_Szi1 is an exception to this trend.

Interesting the most Anatolian samples (top row), the least Yamanya sample (among samples that had at least some Yamanya) and most Yamanya sample (bottom row) are all from Hungary. Hungary_LCA, BB_Hungary_Bud1, BB_Hungary_Szi3

Hungary_LCA 14 samples 3800-3000 calBCE (Oldest 3910-3650 calBCE, youngest 3337-3024 calBCE) Balatonlelle, Vörs, Vámosgyörk, Abony, Budakalász, Alsonemedi
BB_Hungary_Bud1 2470–2060 calBCE Budapest-Békásmegyer
BB_Hungary_Szi3 2458–2202 calBCE Szigetszentmiklós,Felső Ürge-hegyi dűlő
BB_Hungary_Szi1 2458–2154 calBCE Szigetszentmiklós,Felső Ürge-hegyi dűlő

R.Rocca
06-09-2017, 09:33 PM
One of the big differences between Corded Ware and the Begleitkeramik Bell Beaker is skull shape. Since the flattening of the back of the skull (occiput) is so frequent in Bell Beaker, it has lead many (including me) to consider these two very different populations. However, this may be due to cradle boarding, and like pottery, may have been a female initiated cultural element into Bell Beaker.

There are however similarities in skeletal material between Corded Ware and Bell Beaker. Here is a paper comparing non-metric traits from Corded Ware and Bell Beaker in Bohemia...

Biological variability of postcranial non-metric traits of Eneolithic populations in the area of Bohemia
"The osteological material belonging to the populations of the Corded Ware culture and the Bell Beaker culture in the area of Bohemia has been surveyed with respect to non-metric trait occurrence. The origin of both of these culture bearers is still a discussed issue. There is a hypothesis saying that bearers of both Late Eneolithic cultures might represent actually one population and the difference of cultural patterns were due only to life-style changes, not to large-area migration. With respect to the frequency of 94 postcranial non-metric traits both samples have been compared to each other on a basis of measure of divergence and mean measure of divergence. The samples of Late Eneolithic populations showed significant difference only in frequencies of two non-metric traits and along with the values of mean measure of divergence they seem to show rather homogeneity."

rms2
06-09-2017, 10:38 PM
. . .

The difference between Bell Beaker in Iberia and some BB in France, and Bell Beaker in British Isles and the rest of Europe really stands out as it relates to Anatolian vs Yamanya admixture. However BB_Hungary_Szi1 is an exception to this trend . . .


BB_Hungary_Szi1 is I2741 (page 80 of the Olalde et al Supplementary Info):



I2741 Szi BB_Hungary_Szi1

I2741 belongs to y haplogroup I2a1a1 and is mentioned among the other non-R1b Bell Beaker samples with low (or no) steppe dna here on page 66 of the paper itself:



Overall, Y-chromosome haplogroups are highly correlated with steppe ancestry proportions in the nuclear genome . . .

Six individuals outside Iberia without R1b Y-chromosomes were excavated in Hungary (n=4), Germany (n=1) and England (n=1). Interestingly, most of these individuals presented low amounts of steppe ancestry in the nuclear genome as compared to other individuals from the same regions (Figure S1).

Only one of those non-R1b BBs had normal steppe dna for a BB: I2786, who was I2a2a, and is also known as BB_Hungary_Szi2.

The rest were all low in steppe dna:

1. E09538 Y-DNA: G2a 2471–2300 calBCE Unterer Talweg 58-62 (Augsburg, Germany) Low steppe dna
2. I1767 Y-DNA: I2a 2200–1970 calBCE Windmill Fields, Ingleby Barwick (Stockton-on-Tees, County Durham, England) Moderately low steppe dna
3. I2364 Y-DNA: H2 2470–2060 calBCE Budapest-Békásmegyer, Királyok útja (former Vöröshadsereg útja) (Hungary) Very low steppe dna
4. I2741 Y-DNA: I2a 2458–2154 calBCE Szigetszentmiklós, Felső Ürge-hegyi dűlő (Hungary) Very low steppe dna
5. I3528 Y-DNA: G2a 2559–2301 calBCE Budakalász, Csajerszke (M0 Site 12) (Hungary) Moderately low steppe dna

rms2
06-10-2017, 01:43 AM
So, gentlemen (and ladies), what should we expect? A CW site with R1b-P312 rather than R1a?

Was R1b-P312 in the westward vanguard of Corded Ware, with R1a following after?

David Mc
06-10-2017, 02:31 AM
So, gentlemen (and ladies), what should we expect? A CW site with R1b-P312 rather than R1a?

Was R1b-P312 in the westward vanguard of Corded Ware, with R1a following after?

It really is starting to look that way, isn't it? Westward or southern-most...

MitchellSince1893
06-10-2017, 03:02 AM
So, gentlemen (and ladies), what should we expect? A CW site with R1b-P312 rather than R1a?

Was R1b-P312 in the westward vanguard of Corded Ware, with R1a following after?

I currently believe R1b-L11/P311 traveled from north of Black Sea coast through the "GAC GAP" on the north slope of the Carpathians which was located in the Corded Ware area. Maybe the collapse of GAC made it a tempting target for R1b L11 and explains the GAC-like admixture of Eastern Bell Beaker noted in the Olade paper.

I would tend to think P312 was a peripheral player on the SW edge of Corded Ware Culture (S. Poland and Moravia)...that is, not originally part of Corded Ware, but picking up aspects of it as they moved deeper into Corded Ware territory. JMO.

Some quick thoughts:
1. 1st generations: L11/P310/P311 Yamnaya moving NW into collapsing GAC territory.
2. Next few generation: Yamnaya with GAC admixture as they continue to move from NW Ukraine into southern Poland. Maybe U106 and P312 go their separate ways after this?
3. Followed by: Yamnaya with GAC and Corded Ware admixture/adopting aspects of Corded Ware Culture e.g. arrow head technologies
4. Finally: Yamnaya/GAC/Corded Ware admixture/materials adopting aspects of Eastern Bell Beaker as they enter Moravia...or maybe they are the original Eastern Bell Beaker folk?

R.Rocca
06-10-2017, 12:04 PM
So, gentlemen (and ladies), what should we expect? A CW site with R1b-P312 rather than R1a?

Was R1b-P312 in the westward vanguard of Corded Ware, with R1a following after?

If so, they were more likely to have lived in a Corded Ware area that was more receptive to ideas outside of its cultural sphere.. like Moravia instead of more closed groups like Bavaria (Heyd, see below). This of course could have been facilitated by exogamy.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Heyd_BB_CWC_Relationships.png

alan
06-10-2017, 12:05 PM
Some very interesting thoughts. Great thread. The south Polish CW with the change from E-W to N-S orientation and the archery traditions is facisnating and if the date of 2700BC was solid then this would be very important indeed. Its not the first time I have noticed some CW type groups have N-S orientation. I read that battle axe groups on the south shore of the Baltic (north Poland I think) had N-S orientation too. So that all suggests to me that the N-S orientation arose somewhere around Poland. The suggestion of a GAC influence is v interesting. Clearly GAC has nothing to do with L11 or with major steppe input but there could have been some contract. Indeed its hard to see how some contact could have been avoided when you look at the distribution of GAC

The crucial thing is that it can be shown for sure that the N-S orientated CW/battle axe groups pre-date the rise of beaker in central Europe i.e. we need to rule out that they arent just CW groups influenced by beaker groups.

alan
06-10-2017, 12:11 PM
The Wiki corded ware entry states something I think needs further discussion:

Burial occurred in flat graves or below small tumuli in a flexed position; on the continent males lay on their right side, females on the left, with the faces of both oriented to the south. However, in Sweden and also parts of northern Poland the graves were oriented north-south, men lay on their left side and women on the right side - both facing east.

The latter is the the beaker burial orientation tradition but in a CW type group.

So if those south Polish N-S orientated CW people are pre-beaker then we can also add the north Polish+Swedish CW related groups too to the list of CW people using beaker N-S orientation. In the North-Poland/Swedish CW group they not only appear to use beaker N-S orientation but also the beaker gender rules.

alan
06-10-2017, 12:20 PM
The Wiki corded ware entry states something I think needs further discussion:

Burial occurred in flat graves or below small tumuli in a flexed position; on the continent males lay on their right side, females on the left, with the faces of both oriented to the south. However, in Sweden and also parts of northern Poland the graves were oriented north-south, men lay on their left side and women on the right side - both facing east.

The latter is the the beaker burial orientation tradition but in a CW type group.

So if those south Polish N-S orientated CW people are pre-beaker then we can also add the north Polish+Swedish CW related groups too to the list of CW people using beaker N-S orientation. In the North-Poland/Swedish CW group they not only appear to use beaker N-S orientation but also the beaker gender rules.

Note too that the one of the Swedish battle axe people is a proven U106. So there may be a common L11 element involved in spreading a N-S orientation in CW related groups from south Poland to the Baltic in what appears to be a longitudinal band that does slightly put on in mind of the zone that the GAC and CW overlap.

rms2
06-10-2017, 12:29 PM
One thing I noticed in skimming through Olalde's doctoral dissertation is that he remarked on the differences between Bell Beaker and Corded Ware mtDNA. The link to his dissertation is not working this morning or I would go back, check on that again, and quote him, but, if that's right, he pretty much does away with the idea that R1b-P312 acquired its steppe dna by marrying CW women.

Evidently the exogamy was more a matter of R1b-P312 Corded Ware men taking wives from among the GAC and TRB people and of a Corded Ware group becoming Bell Beaker, rather than Bell Beaker men taking Corded Ware wives.

The original (anti-R1b) argument was that R1b-P312 non-kurgan Bell Beaker expanded out of Iberia, encountered Corded Ware in Central Europe, and married Corded Ware women. Through them, the story continued, Bell Beaker acquired its steppe dna and its kurgan culture.

Olalde et al have pretty much eliminated that idea.

rms2
06-10-2017, 12:31 PM
Note too that the one of the Swedish battle axe people is a proven U106. So there may be a common L11 element involved in spreading a N-S orientation in CW related groups from south Poland to the Baltic in what appears to be a longitudinal band that does slightly put on in mind of the zone that the GAC and CW overlap.

Right, which would also explain U106's absence from southern and western Bell Beaker (including, apparently, British and Irish Bell Beaker), if U106 was mostly on the Baltic end of that band.

alan
06-10-2017, 12:39 PM
Note too that the one of the Swedish battle axe people is a proven U106. So there may be a common L11 element involved in spreading a N-S orientation in CW related groups from south Poland to the Baltic in what appears to be a longitudinal band that does slightly put on in mind of the zone that the GAC and CW overlap.

I am not sure about the accuracy of the wiki quote but it does appear the male-left, female-right sides the burial lies on is true for Scandi battle axe. That is the same as the beaker tradition and differs from classic German CW which is the opposite

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiEk_KgpLPUAhVmBMAKHRXrDkMQFgguMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fportal.research.lu.se%2Fportal%2F files%2F4275794%2F7767204.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGJdIhLfkYx2xvc3e2epLl5v9vDqw

rms2
06-10-2017, 12:48 PM
. . .

The rest were all low in steppe dna:
. . .

5. I3528 Y-DNA: G2a 2559–2301 calBCE Budakalász, Csajerszke (M0 Site 12) (Hungary) Moderately low steppe dna

For what it's worth, I just remembered Gimbutas mentioning Budakalász as a GAC site. Since Bell Beaker burials also appear there later, and we have this low-steppe dna BB buried there, evidently it's a site where mixing occurred.

alan
06-10-2017, 01:14 PM
I am not sure about the accuracy of the wiki quote but it does appear the male-left, female-right sides the burial lies on is true for Scandi battle axe. That is the same as the beaker tradition and differs from classic German CW which is the opposite

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiEk_KgpLPUAhVmBMAKHRXrDkMQFgguMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fportal.research.lu.se%2Fportal%2F files%2F4275794%2F7767204.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGJdIhLfkYx2xvc3e2epLl5v9vDqw

And this states that the north-south body orientation (opposite of classic German type CW) is the norm in both Middle Dnieper and Fatyanovo. Add that to what I have read about north Polish/Swedish battle axe burials and also the south Polish CW group and you can see there is definitely a band of N-S and/or males on left, females on right burials within the overall CW complex. It also appears this coincides to a significant degree with the area where CW overlapped late GAC. Makes you wonder.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/corded-ware-east-west

Gravetto-Danubian
06-10-2017, 01:49 PM
With regard to burial rite, the N-S , gendered burial was earlier seen around the Danube (eg Tiszapolgar & Varna, Copper Age). It spread north toward the Baltic with the GAC, which I now tend to regard as migrants to north-central Poland from Hungary. It explains why GAC was so solidly I2a2, yet we know there was R1b in nearby Baltic & steppe in the adjacent east, and Blatterhohle to its west.

As GAC then expanded through northern & eastern Europe from Kuyavia, steppe groups were moving northwest into Poland, both expanding through what was still mostly "TRB territory". This explains the TRB & GAC cultural & genetic substrate in steppe-Beaker group as they moved west across the north European plain..

I think the contacts with the Balkans would have generated the proto-Unetice influences, and perhaps -reintroduction of I2a2 in central Europe.

alan
06-10-2017, 01:50 PM
That whole SE corner of Poland-Slovakia-Ukraine-Hungary intereface area really looks interesting. Could L11 or part of it have followed the Dniester around the northern edge of the Carpathians to SE Poland/Slovakia. Recent discussions are making me favour that kind of route following the northern fringe of the Carpathians rather than either the Danube of the Dnieper.

rms2
06-10-2017, 02:23 PM
The facts adduced in this thread, by Rich Rocca and others, pointing to a Corded Ware origin for central European Bell Beaker and R1b-P312 (and perhaps R1b-U106) are compelling. A few things give me pause, among them the lack, thus far, of any R1b in Corded Ware. I also still have in mind the remarks of both Marija Gimbutas and David Anthony, which seem to point to an up-the-Danube/Yamnaya origin for Bell Beaker.

Here's Anthony on the subject, from pages 305-6 of his book, The Horse The Wheel and Language:



After a pause of only a century or two, about 3100-3000 BCE, a large migration stream erupted from within the western Yamnaya region and flowed up the Danube valley and into the Carpathian Basin during the Early Bronze Age. Literally thousands of kurgans can be assigned to this event, which could reasonably have incubated the ancestral dialects for several western Indo-European language branches, including Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic. After this movement slowed or stopped, about 2800-2600 BCE, late Yamnaya people came face to face with people who made Corded Ware tumulus cemeteries in the east Carpathian foothills, a historic meeting through which dialects ancestral to northern Indo-European languages (Germanic, Slavic, Baltic) began to spread among eastern Corded Ware groups.

And there's this from page 367:



The many thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in eastern Hungary suggest a more continuous occupation of the landscape by a larger population of immigrants, one that could have acquired power and prestige partly just through its numerical weight. This regional group could have spawned both pre-Italic and pre-Celtic. Bell Beaker sites of the Csepel type around Budapest, west of the Yamnaya settlement region, are dated about 2800-2600 BCE. They could have been a bridge between Yamnaya on their east and Austria/Southern Germany to their west, through which Yamnaya dialects spread from Hungary into Austria and Bavaria, where they later developed into Proto-Celtic. Pre-Italic could have developed among the dialects that remained in Hungary, ultimately spreading into Italy through the Urnfield and Villanovan cultures. Eric Hamp and others have revived the argument that Italic and Celtic shared a common parent, so a single migration stream could have contained dialects that later were ancestral to both.

Of course, neither Gimbutas nor Anthony is infallible, but what are we to make of all those Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin? Do they all contain the skeletons of men who were R1b-Z2103 and I2a-L699?

What of Anthony's linguistic speculations concerning the ancestor of Italo-Celtic coming up the Danube with Yamnaya, and the ancestors of Germanic, Slavic, and Baltic emerging from eastern Corded Ware?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing against a Corded Ware origin for R1b-P312 and Central European Bell Beaker; I'm nearly convinced. I'm just wondering about these things and about the lack of R1b in Corded Ware thus far. Of course, we also suffer from a lack of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya thus far, but we have not sampled the right kind of Yamnaya yet. We don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe or the Carpathian Basin.

Romilius
06-10-2017, 02:24 PM
If so, they were more likely to have lived in a Corded Ware area that was more receptive to ideas outside of its cultural sphere.. like Moravia instead of more closed groups like Bavaria (Heyd, see below). This of course could have been facilitated by exogamy.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Heyd_BB_CWC_Relationships.png

I'm not a specialist... but doesn't the Bell Beaker vessel seem a wider and more decorated version of a Corded Ware one?

alan
06-10-2017, 02:36 PM
With regard to burial rite, the N-S , gendered burial was earlier seen around the Danube (eg Tiszapolgar & Varna, Copper Age). It spread north toward the Baltic with the GAC, which I now tend to regard as migrants to north-central Poland from Hungary. It explains why GAC was so solidly I2a2, yet we know there was R1b in nearby Baltic & steppe in the adjacent east, and Blatterhohle to its west.

As GAC then expanded through northern & eastern Europe from Kuyavia, steppe groups were moving northwest into Poland, both expanding through what was still mostly "TRB territory". This explains the TRB & GAC cultural & genetic substrate in steppe-Beaker group as they moved west across the north European plain..

I think the contacts with the Balkans would have generated the proto-Unetice influences, and perhaps -reintroduction of I2a2 in central Europe.

Sounds a plausible melting pot c. 3000-2800BC but if central European bell beaker emerged only c. 2550BC at the earliest then there had to be an intermediary culture that those traits and P312 was located in c. 2800-2550BC. In that sort of zone, other than GAC and the funnel beaker substrate there is really only CW and related cultures in that timeslot.

Also it is interesting that Middle Dnieper and Fatyanovo (some think the latter is derived from the former) had the N-S orientation. I suppose the Dnieper area was at the boundary between steppe groups and farmers for a long time so its not surprising if an orientation preference had leaked across the river from the farming world.

rms2
06-10-2017, 02:42 PM
I'm not a specialist... but doesn't the Bell Beaker vessel seem a wider and more decorated version of a Corded Ware one?

Honestly, I've always thought CW pots and BB pots look a lot alike, but I have mostly kept my mouth shut because I am not even close to any kind of ancient pottery expert. I am becoming more and more ancient each passing year, however.

MitchellSince1893
06-10-2017, 03:34 PM
If so, they were more likely to have lived in a Corded Ware area that was more receptive to ideas outside of its cultural sphere.. like Moravia instead of more closed groups like Bavaria (Heyd, see below). This of course could have been facilitated by exogamy.

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Heyd_BB_CWC_Relationships.png

For geographic reference.https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/70/7c/0c/707c0c7cf529d897a00f3066a28ed1ce.png

rms2
06-10-2017, 03:38 PM
So, we need some ancient y-dna from Corded Ware groups that switched to the N-S burial orientation, placed an emphasis on archery, and perhaps also had the Begleitkeramik that shows up in Bell Beaker.

Maybe they are the pre-Beaker folk we've all been looking for.

MitchellSince1893
06-10-2017, 04:07 PM
The facts adduced in this thread, by Rich Rocca and others, pointing to a Corded Ware origin for central European Bell Beaker and R1b-P312 (and perhaps R1b-U106) are compelling. A few things give me pause, among them the lack, thus far, of any R1b in Corded Ware. I also still have in mind the remarks of both Marija Gimbutas and David Anthony, which seem to point to an up-the-Danube/Yamnaya origin for Bell Beaker.

Here's Anthony on the subject, from pages 305-6 of his book, The Horse The Wheel and Language:



And there's this from page 367:



Of course, neither Gimbutas nor Anthony is infallible, but what are we to make of all those Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin? Do they all contain the skeletons of men who were R1b-Z2103 and I2a-L699?

What of Anthony's linguistic speculations concerning the ancestor of Italo-Celtic coming up the Danube with Yamnaya, and the ancestors of Germanic, Slavic, and Baltic emerging from eastern Corded Ware?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing against a Corded Ware origin for R1b-P312 and Central European Bell Beaker; I'm nearly convinced. I'm just wondering about these things and about the lack of R1b in Corded Ware thus far. Of course, we also suffer from a lack of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya thus far, but we have not sampled the right kind of Yamnaya yet. We don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe or the Carpathian Basin.

A thought is P312 and subclades formed in/near present day Ukraine. Is it possible not everyone went the same way? Could U106 and some P312 subclades (a few levels down from P312) taken the northern route, while other P312 subclades went up the Danube with Z2103? For example on U152 I could see L2, Z56, and other subclades possibly taking a northern route, while other U152 subclades may have gone up the Danube.

I haven't investigated the likelihood of this idea, just throwing it out there to see if it's even a possibility.

rms2
06-10-2017, 04:18 PM
A thought is P312 and subclades formed in/near present day Ukraine. Is it possible not everyone went the same way? Could U106 and some P312 subclades (a few levels down from P312) taken the northern route, while other P312 subclades went up the Danube with Z2103? For example on U152 I could see L2, Z56, and other subclades possibly taking a northern route, while other U152 subclades may have gone up the Danube.

I haven't investigated the likelihood of this idea, just throwing it out there to see if it's even a possibility.

That's a possibility, but I tend to think maybe we are in either/or territory here. Either R1b-P312 (and maybe R1b-U106) was in the part of Corded Ware that became Bell Beaker (if that's what happened) or Gimbutas was right and Yamnaya mixed with Vucedol-descended groups in the Carpathian Basin and spawned Bell Beaker.

I suppose things could be extra complex and what you are proposing could be right.

Rich has just about got me convinced of the Corded Ware thing. It's annoying that we don't have any R1b-L51 in either Corded Ware or Yamnaya yet, but Bell Beaker is just lousy with it.

One would think these geneticists would be all over those kurgans in the Carpathian Basin. When are we going to get some y-dna results from them?

razyn
06-10-2017, 05:21 PM
One would think these geneticists would be all over those kurgans in the Carpathian Basin. When are we going to get some y-dna results from them?
I don't think geneticists in Cambridge (Mass.) and Copenhagen have many options about whose remains they get all over. That's up to the archaeologists (and governments) in many countries, in which the latter have stored the said remains). Some of these countries are not the best of friends. Sourcing of samples, to fill gaps we perceive, gets very tricky.

rms2
06-10-2017, 05:43 PM
Well, there is the Genomic Carpathian Prehistory Project (http://www.ri.btk.mta.hu/archaeogenetika/kutatas_en.html) to look forward to.



Genomic exploration of cultural transformations over 4,000 years of the Carpathian Basin's prehistory

The research project Genomic Carpathian Prehistory focuses on population transformations in the Carpathian Basin between 6000-2000 BC (from the Early Neolithic to the end of the Early Bronze Age), sampling individuals with cultural assignment from almost every archaeological cultures within the mentioned time interval. The project team intends to study population structure and mixture events, and reconstruct deep population history over 4,000 years of the Carpathian Basin's prehistory. For this purpose, we use next generation DNA sequencing methods (NGS) on human genome scale, with target enrichment (capture) approaches, developed by the team of Prof. Dr David Reich's laboratory (Harvard Medical School).

Hungarian colleagues involved in the project: Eszter Bánffy, János Jakucs, Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, Balázs G. Mende, Kitti Köhler, Krisztián Oross, Tibor Marton, Anett Osztás, Gabriella Kulcsár, Viktória Kiss, Mária Bondár (IA RCH HAS)

International partner institutes in the project:

Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston (Prof. Dr David Reich)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena (Dr Wolfgang Haak)
Institute for Prehistory and Archaeological Science and Hightech Research Center, University of Basel, Basel
Center of Natural and Cultural History of Teeth, Danube Private University, Krems (Prof. Dr Kurt W. Alt)
Roman-Germanic Commission, German Archaeological Institute, Frankfurt (Prof. Dr Eszter Bánffy)

alan
06-10-2017, 06:19 PM
The facts adduced in this thread, by Rich Rocca and others, pointing to a Corded Ware origin for central European Bell Beaker and R1b-P312 (and perhaps R1b-U106) are compelling. A few things give me pause, among them the lack, thus far, of any R1b in Corded Ware. I also still have in mind the remarks of both Marija Gimbutas and David Anthony, which seem to point to an up-the-Danube/Yamnaya origin for Bell Beaker.

Here's Anthony on the subject, from pages 305-6 of his book, The Horse The Wheel and Language:



And there's this from page 367:



Of course, neither Gimbutas nor Anthony are infallible, but what are we to make of all those Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin? Do they all contain the skeletons of men who were R1b-Z2103 and I2a-L699?

What of Anthony's linguistic speculations concerning the ancestor of Italo-Celtic coming up the Danube with Yamnaya, and the ancestors of Germanic, Slavic, and Baltic emerging from eastern Corded Ware?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing against a Corded Ware origin for R1b-P312 and Central European Bell Beaker; I'm nearly convinced. I'm just wondering about these things and about the lack of R1b in Corded Ware thus far. Of course, we also suffer from a lack of R1b-L51 in Yamnaya thus far, but we have not sampled the right kind of Yamnaya yet. We don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe or the Carpathian Basin.

I have never been comfortable ruling out a CW origin (perhaps atypical) for L11 given that no pre-beaker steppe/steppe derived culture (proven or agreed pretty well universally) existed anywhere north of the Danube between the steppe and the Atlantic other than Corded Ware/battle axe. With GAC now ruled out as a steppe culture/R1b carrier, that still remains the case.

So that really makes CW north of the Carpathians or Yamnaya along the Danube the only obvious possibilities. I tend to think its best to go with the ancient DNA evidence even if the sample is v poor. I totally accept that there could be Yamnaya kurgans with a more bell-beaker type signal in the huge nos unsampled. My feeling now is L11 may have neither gone by the Danube or straight up the Dnieper but may have sort of gone west via the Dniester just around the north-east edge of the Carpathians towards that south Poland/Slovakia/Hungary interface sort of area.

I still fancy the notion that the CW world in pre-beaker times needed someone to move the predominantly Carpathian copper about. So there might have been specialist outgroups in the Corded Ware world who did that. Could that have been L11? If so, it stands to reason that this commenced near the Carpathians where the ore sources were and perhaps used the Danube plus the north flowing rivers. Slovakia/south Poland is unique in that you are at the north Carpathians but you can quickly access the Danube (and therefore the Rhine) but also the north flowing Vistula, Oder and Elbe. Its a great location as a core base for supply the CW world with Carpathian ore.

Does anyone have any info or papers on the exact location of the copper sources n the Carpathians that were used for metalwork c. 2900-2500BC? I know the source shifted from the older mines to ones somewhere else in the Carpathians after the fall of old Europe but I cannot recall where and am a bit too busy to look into it at present.

alan
06-10-2017, 06:42 PM
That's a possibility, but I tend to think maybe we are in either/or territory here. Either R1b-P312 (and maybe R1b-U106) was in the part of Corded Ware that became Bell Beaker (if that's what happened) or Gimbutas was right and Yamnaya mixed with Vucedol-descended groups in the Carpathian Basin and spawned Bell Beaker.

I suppose things could be extra complex and what you are proposing could be right.

Rich has just about got me convinced of the Corded Ware thing. It's annoying that we don't have any R1b-L51 in either Corded Ware or Yamnaya yet, but Bell Beaker is just lousy with it.

One would think these geneticists would be all over those kurgans in the Carpathian Basin. When are we going to get some y-dna results from them?

The fact that there are now 2 samples which, although a bit late to be totally confident, do indicate U106 at opposite ends of the CW world of N Europe tends to make me think that L11 must have been very close to the CW core, close enough for U106 to have been encorporated into CW as a minority lineage. Its generally thought (unless this is now doubted) that CW arose c. 2900BC or so around the SE Poland/NW Ukraine border area. So that could be a hint that L11 was not too far away from there. They say the Swedish U106 guy was not a typical battle axe burial and that would perhaps fit my notion that L11 was within but perhaps not of the CW zone, perhaps a specialist trade focused outgroup.

To expand on this, I dont think P312 guys just suddenly became vastly networking wanderers c. 2550BC because a couple of them married women from southern France and got some new fancy pots and trinkets. That is extremely unlikely. Its more likely IMO that L11 was already doing that role and already had at least part of that network set up but had not yet developed a distinctive material identity that made them very visible. If you look at some of the steppe groups in lower Danube etc, they often had no pottery of their own in their graves, it all being from (presumably along with wives) from local cultures they had settled among or near to. Sort of Magpies in terms of pottery. If P312 lines were like that then adopting beaker from other groups to the south-west would just be a continuation of this behavour. Having little or no pottery tradition of your own would be a classic indicator or a highly mobile existence, pottery being far less practical than wood, wicker, skin and leather for that kind of lifestyle.

alan
06-10-2017, 06:45 PM
For geographic reference.https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/70/7c/0c/707c0c7cf529d897a00f3066a28ed1ce.png

From memory is Mako not an exceptionally metal rich group?

alan
06-10-2017, 07:06 PM
So, we need some ancient y-dna from Corded Ware groups that switched to the N-S burial orientation, placed an emphasis on archery, and perhaps also had the Begleitkeramik that shows up in Bell Beaker.

Maybe they are the pre-Beaker folk we've all been looking for.

That sounds a plan to me. Also any hints of horse riding, graves with metal smithing gear.

I was reading something interesting. The big trend (I understand spreading from the Balkans Black Sea coast area) as the Neolithic went on (and up to the fall of Old Europe) seems to have been a north-south body orientation but with the females on their left and the males on their right. That is the opposite of bell beaker orientation. The choice of sides by gender is more like CW but the N-S orientation is more like BB. So its clearly complex. I also read that the N-S orientation was the norm in Middle Dneiper (CW-like) as well as in Fatyanovo and Baltic battle axe culture. This is all very different from the classic German-centred CW east-west axis of the body with the males on their right side and the female son their left. It is strange that the CW groups with the beaker-like body orientation preferences seem to be from areas where CW overlapped with GAC. I understand the autosomal DNA suggests the beaker steppe component was mixed with a farmer component most like a TRB-GAC mix. If beaker P312 came from CW then it would seem that it had to come from where CW-GAC+TRB+a steppe culture ether Yamnaya or sharing an ancestor with Yamnaya overlapped. That does sound like that area where the north Carpathians and steppe bordered each other where west Ukraine meets SE Poland, Slovakia etc. It does not sound like something that could have happened in the Lower-middle Danube south of the Carpathians.

Jean M
06-10-2017, 10:57 PM
I'm not a specialist... but doesn't the Bell Beaker vessel seem a wider and more decorated version of a Corded Ware one?

Yes that is right. In fact the similarity is even more marked if you compare Corded Ware of the early, simple type (as seen in the Moravian example on the left) with the AOC (all over corded) type of Bell Beaker (not shown). It is that similarity that convinced a lot of archaeologists that BB sprang from CW. This would seem quite logical to those who did not realise that both cultures sprang from a common ancestor. Decorating pots with cord had been common on the steppe from the earliest pottery there.

MitchellSince1893
06-11-2017, 12:31 AM
Does anyone have access to this article?
Upending a ‘Totality’: Re-evaluating Corded Ware Variability in Late Neolithic Europe
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/proceedings-of-the-prehistoric-society/article/upending-a-totality-reevaluating-corded-ware-variability-in-late-neolithic-europe/44BA8546F6A1B4A4F705F47E65209805
I registered, but then I needed $25 to access it.


It has this map which caught my eye...came across it as I was trying to find a map which shows the distribution of N-S burials in this time and area.

7 Network analysis based on the quantitative occurrence of Corded Ware pottery forms, pottery ornamentation styles, tools, weapons and ornaments as stated ...
https://static.cambridge.org/resource/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20160921041218329-0961:S0079497X13000200:S0079497X13000200_fig7t.jpe g?pub-status=live

Gravetto-Danubian
06-11-2017, 01:26 AM
Does anyone have access to this article?
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/proceedings-of-the-prehistoric-society/article/upending-a-totality-reevaluating-corded-ware-variability-in-late-neolithic-europe/44BA8546F6A1B4A4F705F47E65209805
I registered, but then I needed $25 to access it.


It has this map which caught my eye...came across it as I was trying to find a map which show the distribution of N-S burials in this time and area.

https://static.cambridge.org/resource/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20160921041218329-0961:S0079497X13000200:S0079497X13000200_fig7t.jpe g?pub-status=live

It can be found here https://www.academia.edu/5878366/Upending_a_Totality_Re-evaluating_Corded_Ware_Variability_in_Late_Neolith ic_Europe._Proceedings_of_the_Prehistoric_Society_ FirstView_Article_January_2014_pp_1_-_20._DOI_10.1017_ppr.2013.20_Published_online_28_J anuary_2014

It discusses all the aspects of burial , ceramics etc

R.Rocca
06-11-2017, 11:25 AM
The facts adduced in this thread, by Rich Rocca and others, pointing to a Corded Ware origin for central European Bell Beaker and R1b-P312 (and perhaps R1b-U106) are compelling. A few things give me pause, among them the lack, thus far, of any R1b in Corded Ware. I also still have in mind the remarks of both Marija Gimbutas and David Anthony, which seem to point to an up-the-Danube/Yamnaya origin for Bell Beaker.

I don't think this conflicts with the possibility of a Corded Ware origin for P312. Below is a map of Central European cemeteries containing Pit-Grave elements. Certainly these areas could have harbored P312 and/or U106 and/or R1a...

http://www.r1b.org/imgs/Pit_Grave_Elements_Central_Europe.png

The source is from a very good paper on the Budzhak Culutre, which could have been an R1a Yamnaya related culture where the Sub-Carpathian Corded Ware Culture could have derived from...
https://repozytorium.amu.edu.pl/bitstream/10593/13220/1/BPS-18-5_S_Ivanova%20CONNECTIONS%20BEWTEEN%20THE%20BUDZHA K%20CULTURE%20AND%20CENTRAL%20EUROPEAN%20GROUPS%20 OF%20THE%20CORDED%20WARE%20CULTURE%20PP_86-120.pdf

Jean M
06-11-2017, 11:59 AM
A Corded Ware origin for P312?

I haven't wanted to interfere in this thread. You all know my views. I have repeated them far too often. It does no harm to consider alternatives. Something interesting might come out of it.

But I feel that I should just point out that the YFull estimated age of P312 (formed 4800 y.a.) makes it a shade older than either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware. Several people here consider the YFull dates to be under-estimates. The last estimate I have for P312 from Michal M. is 5600 (5100-6100) ya. I don't know if that is up-to-date. If so, it seems unlikely that P312 cropped up in Corded Ware. It is more likely to be Yamnaya in origin. Then we have a long period before its huge expansion with Bell Beaker East.


only one of seven Hungarian Bell Beaker samples is P312

One is better than the zero in Corded Ware so far. ;) Bear in mind that P312 first occurred in one man. There is no particular reason to suppose a vast pool of it hiding away in some mysterious location. It just had to survive and get into the front of the wave of the expanding BB East, outbreeding the rival BB clan of I2a2a.

Jean M
06-11-2017, 12:16 PM
For the record, Y-DNA of Bell Beaker in Hungary:

I3528 / GEN85 / Grave276: G2a2a1a2a1
I4178 / GEN_58, Grave 552: R1b1a1a2 [M269]
I2364 / GEN_10a, Grave 219/B: H2
I2365 / GEN_11a, Grave45: R1b1a1a2a1a2b1 [U152 > L2]
I2786 / GEN_56, Grave 133: I2a2a
I2741 / GEN_20, Grave 49: I2a1a1
I2787 / GEN_59, Grave 688: R1b1a1a2a2 [CTS1078 / Z2103]

rms2
06-11-2017, 12:16 PM
Whatever the ultimate origin of R1b-P312, it seems that Kurgan Bell Beaker (KBB, to differentiate it from early Iberian Bell Beaker) was born someplace in the contact zone in east-central Europe from the Baltic to the Carpathian Basin where all those different steppe-derived groups interacted. Probably the key zone is from southern Poland to the Carpathian Basin. So many different elements are represented in Bell Beaker, it's hard to point to one specific culture and identify it as the single parent.

rms2
06-11-2017, 12:19 PM
For the record, Y-DNA of Bell Beaker in Hungary:

I3528 / GEN85 / Grave276: G2a2a1a2a1
I4178 / GEN_58, Grave 552: R1b1a1a2 [M269]
I2364 / GEN_10a, Grave 219/B: H2
I2365 / GEN_11a, Grave45: R1b1a1a2a1a2b1 [U152 > L2]
I2786 / GEN_56, Grave 133: I2a2a
I2741 / GEN_20, Grave 49: I2a1a1
I2787 / GEN_59, Grave 688: R1b1a1a2a2 [CTS1078 / Z2103]

And of those, only the R1bs and I2786 (I2a2a) had significant steppe autosomal dna. The other non-R1bs appear to be the products of fairly recent recruitment from among the native Old European Neolithic farmer population.

alan
06-11-2017, 02:48 PM
Whatever the ultimate origin of R1b-P312, it seems that Kurgan Bell Beaker (KBB, to differentiate it from early Iberian Bell Beaker) was born someplace in the contact zone in east-central Europe from the Baltic to the Carpathian Basin where all those different steppe-derived groups interacted. Probably the key zone is from southern Poland to the Carpathian Basin. So many different elements are represented in Bell Beaker, it's hard to point to one specific culture and identify it as the single parent.

Unfortunately the cultural complexity of that zone makes the best brains hurt. I read a paper which just discussed Hungary (or was it Slovakia?) 3000-2500BC and it was hideously complex. There are an incredible amount of cultures in that zone and time period.

My gut feeling is P312 around 3000-2550BC was located not far from the CW-Yamnaya interface. L11/P312 could have been a Yamnaya lineage but one that was within the CW world performing a trade function that greater mobility, horse riding etc made it perfect for. Someone was distribution Carpathian copper through the CW world from 2800-2550BC before beaker appeared. IMO probably the same L11/P312 lineage. Now what would 250 years (up to 10 generations) of running a pre-beaker trade network 90% in the CW world do to your autosomal signal?

alan
06-11-2017, 03:10 PM
And of those, only the R1bs and I2786 (I2a2a) had significant steppe autosomal dna. The other non-R1bs appear to be the products of fairly recent recruitment from among the native Old European Neolithic farmer population.

Note the contrast

1. the incorporation of a high amount of other male lineages into Hungarian bell beaker and also Yamnaya outside the Russian steppe

2. Russian Yamanaya and central European bell beaker (and CW?) which both are very strongly associated with specific R1 lineages.

It also seems to me that the areas with tradition 2. which seemed rather more exclusive in terms of male lineages also kept higher amounts of steppe autosomal DNA. It can be argued I think that those following tradition 2. had preserved the original Russian Yamnaya ways but those following tradition 1 had become far more inclusive of other male lineages.

As to why there are lots of complex potential reasons. However one less obvious one I think worth raising is that some steppe areas (near the Dnieper for example) were far far more used to interaction with the farming world (over several millennia) and there is even very convincing cranial evidence of 'farmer' types being strong in the part of Sredny Stog closest to the Dnieper - and indeed this was especially among the males! There are of course other cultures along the lower Dnieper and Crimea areas who seem to have had a lot of farmer contact and again there is cranial evidence for this.

So some steppe groups near the interface with the farmers had been absorbing farmer genes, apparently including males for maybe 2000 years before the big Yamnaya wave out of the steppes. Makes me think Stedny Stog and their Suvorovo 1st wave offshoot way have been packed with non-R1b men and a quite different autosomal signal to Yamnaya.

alan
06-11-2017, 03:20 PM
Unfortunately the cultural complexity of that zone makes the best brains hurt. I read a paper which just discussed Hungary (or was it Slovakia?) 3000-2500BC and it was hideously complex. There are an incredible amount of cultures in that zone and time period.

My gut feeling is P312 around 3000-2550BC was located not far from the CW-Yamnaya interface. L11/P312 could have been a Yamnaya lineage but one that was within the CW world performing a trade function that greater mobility, horse riding etc made it perfect for. Someone was distribution Carpathian copper through the CW world from 2800-2550BC before beaker appeared. IMO probably the same L11/P312 lineage. Now what would 250 years (up to 10 generations) of running a pre-beaker trade network 90% in the CW world do to your autosomal signal?

I should add that the idea that the P312 lineage could have been serving (but not necessarily originating in) the CW world c.2800-2550BC could explain why on balance it seems that P312 is at least as old as 2800 and perhaps 2 or 3 centuries older The branching of L11 and P312 (after a huge pre-L11 period of doing zilch) seems to indicate that the change in fortunes had started at least 2-3 centuries before beaker pot was adopted in central Europe.

MitchellSince1893
06-11-2017, 03:30 PM
...Something interesting might come out of it. One positive is a few of us, like myself, know a lot more about ancient Central/Eastern European cultures than we did a few weeks ago...which was next to nothing in my case.

Don't want to jinx it, but so far this thread is a great example of the synergy of anthrogenica: An online brain storming session if you will, with several members helping to educate the others on various aspects/points of views.

I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread.

rms2
06-11-2017, 03:36 PM
Note the contrast

1. the incorporation of a high amount of other male lineages into Hungarian bell beaker and also Yamnaya outside the Russian steppe

2. Russian Yamanaya and central European bell beaker (and CW?) which both are very strongly associated with specific R1 lineages.

It also seems to me that the areas with tradition 2. which seemed rather more exclusive in terms of male lineages also kept higher amounts of steppe autosomal DNA. It can be argued I think that those following tradition 2. had preserved the original Russian Yamnaya ways but those following tradition 1 had become far more inclusive of other male lineages.

As to why there are lots of complex potential reasons. However one less obvious one I think worth raising is that some steppe areas (near the Dnieper for example) were far far more used to interaction with the farming world (over several millennia) and there is even very convincing cranial evidence of 'farmer' types being strong in the part of Sredny Stog closest to the Dnieper - and indeed this was especially among the males! There are of course other cultures along the lower Dnieper and Crimea areas who seem to have had a lot of farmer contact and again there is cranial evidence for this.

So some steppe groups near the interface with the farmers had been absorbing farmer genes, apparently including males for maybe 2000 years before the big Yamnaya wave out of the steppes. Makes me think Stedny Stog and their Suvorovo 1st wave offshoot way have been packed with non-R1b men and a quite different autosomal signal to Yamnaya.

Thus far the Sredny Stog men from Dereivka were all R1b and (one) R1a.

This is from Mathieson et al:

16786

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1opz8pHASkZynRDUP105sq9L0hBWvg8tgG4MX4yoJs0I/edit#gid=0

alan
06-11-2017, 03:41 PM
I haven't wanted to interfere in this thread. You all know my views. I have repeated them far too often. It does no harm to consider alternatives. Something interesting might come out of it.

But I feel that I should just point out that the YFull estimated age of P312 (formed 4800 y.a.) makes it a shade older than either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware. Several people here consider the YFull dates to be under-estimates. The last estimate I have for P312 from Michal M. is 5600 (5100-6100) ya. I don't know if that is up-to-date. If so, it seems unlikely that P312 cropped up in Corded Ware. It is more likely to be Yamnaya in origin. Then we have a long period before its huge expansion with Bell Beaker East.



One is better than the zero in Corded Ware so far. ;) Bear in mind that P312 first occurred in one man. There is no particular reason to suppose a vast pool of it hiding away in some mysterious location. It just had to survive and get into the front of the wave of the expanding BB East, outbreeding the rival BB clan of I2a2a.

Jean, do you have any info on the changing ore sources in the Balko-Carpathians across the period 4000-2600BC. I do recall reading a shift to the north-west from the old sources favoured by Varna etc but I am not sure of the details and cannot remember the source. I do recall reading that most CW ore came from the Carpathians with perhaps a second minor source in central Germany. Also recall a paper saying central European beaker metalworking techniques were the same as bell beaker in the same area later.

rms2
06-11-2017, 03:50 PM
I should add that the idea that the P312 lineage could have been serving (but not necessarily originating in) the CW world c.2800-2550BC could explain why on balance it seems that P312 is at least as old as 2800 and perhaps 2 or 3 centuries older The branching of L11 and P312 (after a huge pre-L11 period of doing zilch) seems to indicate that the change in fortunes had started at least 2-3 centuries before beaker pot was adopted in central Europe.

Over at YFull's tree there are 12 separate SNPs at the L151/L11 level (if I counted correctly). That seems a fair bottleneck. For P312 there are only two listed (ISOGG lists eight for L151 and one for P312).

Of course, that is nothing compared to the massive number at M269.

MitchellSince1893
06-11-2017, 03:57 PM
...The source is from a very good paper on the Budzhak Culutre, which could have been an R1a Yamnaya related culture where the Sub-Carpathian Corded Ware Culture could have derived from...
https://repozytorium.amu.edu.pl/bitstream/10593/13220/1/BPS-18-5_S_Ivanova%20CONNECTIONS%20BEWTEEN%20THE%20BUDZHA K%20CULTURE%20AND%20CENTRAL%20EUROPEAN%20GROUPS%20 OF%20THE%20CORDED%20WARE%20CULTURE%20PP_86-120.pdf

From what I've read so far for me the Budzhak Culture is a nice fit for various aspects discussed in this thread.

Some interesting quotes

The information obtained as a*result of many years of excavations of barrows
of the North-Western Pontic Region allow defining the Budzhak culture not only
as a*unique structural entity within the Yamnaya cultural-historical area, but also
as a*mobile community opened to “cultural dialogue” and capable of long-distance
migrations. Indications of that include imports, imitations, derivatives in the material
complex, as well as the population’s westward movement to the Balkan – Carpathian
Region. Merpert was the first to define the territory from which the westward migration
occurred: the area between the Bug and the Danube rivers [Merpert 1982: 329],
i.e., the area populated by the Budzhak tribes.


The main kinds of vessels are pots (Fig. 5:1, 2), “Budzhak jars” (Fig. 5:3, 5),
amphorae (Fig. 6:1-3, 7), amphora-like vessels (Fig. 5:4, 6), beakers and beaker-like
vessels (Fig. 5:7, 8), bowls (Fig. 5:10, 11), cups (Fig. 5:9)...To a*large extent, it is the
pottery that allows identifying the directions of the Budzhak tribes’ relations and contacts.
Some of the vessels have parallels in terms of their shapes and styles in various cultures
of the late Eneolithic – Early Bronze Age in south-eastern and central Europe (Fig. 9:10).
At the early stage (2800–2600 BC) we are able to reconstruct the relations in two main directions: eastbound
(with tribes of the Yamnaya cultural-historical area) and westbound (with cultures of the Carpathian
– Balkan Region). In the late Eneolithic and the early Bronze Age, the same categories
of pottery – amphorae, beakers and askoses – occurred both in the Balkan
– Danube Region and the Budzhak culture.


Work tools from graves of Budzhak culture:...Congaz 11/5, arrow... Hlinaia 1/1,
arrow blades, 18 – Chervonyi Yar I 1/6, tools for straightening arrow shafts, , 19,20 – Olăneşti 6/2,
tools for straightening arrow shafts,


Judging by the finds, contacts with the Corded Ware cultures had been already
established in the first half of the 3rd mill. BC (Fig. 11). The early-stage pottery
includes two beakers (Butor 9/3, Trapovka 6/20), which, most probably, may be
referred to Horizon A3 (Fig. 13:2, 3). The same common European horizon may include
a*beaker from Myrne 1/124 (Fig. 13:1). According to Włodarczak and Kośko,
most of the amphorae, found in the Budzhak culture area, were connected to the
early stage (2800–2600 BC) (Fig. 14). Some items with a*spherical body also have
their parallels with Horizon A*(Fig. 14:2, 3, 14), others – with later groups of the
Corded Ware, the Bohemia-Moravia and the middle German cultures (Fig. 14:1,
6, 12). Of particular interest are so-called “oval” amphorae with relief décor on the
handles and the body in the form of rolls with incisions (Fig. 14:5, 15, 19).
This kind of amphorae was not common, but it still occurs in southern areas of
the Corded Ware culture and its origin is believed to be connected to the Carpathian
Basin culture circle. Włodarczak explains the emergence of innovations in the
southern areas of the Corded Ware culture (genesis of the barrow ritual, proliferation
of individual graves and some other elements of the material culture, in particular,
“oval” amphorae, as compared with the spherical “Thuringia” amphorae)
by the absorption of new ideas from the Carpathian basin and the Northern Balkans
District.


And that's only 1 3rd the way through the the paper

alan
06-11-2017, 04:08 PM
From what I've read so far for me the Budzhak Culture is a nice fit for various aspects discussed in this thread.

Some interesting quotes









And that's only 1 3rd the way through the the paper

I was just reading a paper on that culture yesterday.https://repozytorium.amu.edu.pl/bitstream/10593/13220/1/BPS-18-5_S_Ivanova%20CONNECTIONS%20BEWTEEN%20THE%20BUDZHA K%20CULTURE%20AND%20CENTRAL%20EUROPEAN%20GROUPS%20 OF%20THE%20CORDED%20WARE%20CULTURE%20PP_86-120.pdf

Jean M
06-11-2017, 04:16 PM
Jean, do you have any info on the changing ore sources in the Balko-Carpathians across the period 4000-2600BC. I do recall reading a shift to the north-west from the old sources favoured by Varna etc but I am not sure of the details and cannot remember the source. I do recall reading that most CW ore came from the Carpathians with perhaps a second minor source in central Germany. Also recall a paper saying central European beaker metalworking techniques were the same as bell beaker in the same area later.

Oh golly Alan. You know my memory is not my strong suit. Have a ferret in the Library.

MitchellSince1893
06-11-2017, 04:58 PM
Additional quotes

Probably, the Budzhak population migrated westwards to central Europe across Malopolska and northern slopes of the Carpathians.
Malopolska is known as "Lesser Poland" in English...located in southeastern Poland.


The evidence of such connections could be found in the presence of Yamnaya graves in the central
European area (Fig. 15), as well as in the similarity of individual shapes of potteryand ornamental motifs (Fig. 11, 12, 18-20).

This is figure 2016788

Red circle added to show Malopolska/Lesser Poland


Machnik believes that the Globular Amphora population had served as kind
of a*barrier that blocked the proliferation and migration of other cultures and that
contacts between them became possible only after the decay of the Globular Amphora
culture in the second half of the 3rd mill. BC [Machnik 1979: 60]. However,
the analysis of the pottery complex and the dates of some complexes indicate rather
early connections between the Budzhak culture and the Corded Ware culture,...


Yet another part of the picture of the Budzhak culture’s western and eastern connections and its possible status as a*transfer medium of different cultural traditions are vessels of the Globular Amphora and the Corded Ware.

alan
06-11-2017, 05:07 PM
Oh golly Alan. You know my memory is not my strong suit. Have a ferret in the Library.

LOL - me too. My baby boy is keeping me very under-slept and in a permanent state of confusion.

alan
06-11-2017, 05:28 PM
Additional quotes

Malopolska is known as "Lesser Poland" in English...located in southeastern Poland.



This is figure 2016788

Red circle added to show Malopolska/Lesser Poland

I have stood on the Poland-Slovakia border at the peak of the Tatras (part of north Carpathians) near the Polish mountain resort of Zakopane. Stunning area of wooded mountains like what you see in Dracula films :0)

MitchellSince1893
06-11-2017, 05:47 PM
From memory is Mako not an exceptionally metal rich group?

Referencing metals, I'm sure you already saw this in the Budzhak paper

Researchers note the arrival of metal to the North-Western Pontic Region from
the Ezero metallurgical source [Kamenski 1990]. The proliferation of silver objects
in south-eastern Europe was linked with the Yamnaya tribe migration to the
area [Jovanovich 1994]. However, the sources of silver were probably located in the
Transylvania. Possibly, Transylvanian copper and poly-metal ores were used, given
that we know of natural bronze deposits in the area [Duffy 2010]. The finds of
Budzhak pottery in Romanian Moldova and Dobrogea [Simion 1991] confirm the
fact that the westward proliferation of the Yamnaya cultural-historical entity should
be primarily connected with the migration of the Budzhak population.

Jean M
06-11-2017, 06:26 PM
LOL - me too. My baby boy is keeping me very under-slept and in a permanent state of confusion.

I've had a thought. You may have in mind Matthias B. Merkl, Bell Beaker metallurgy and the emergence of Fahlore-copper use in Central Europe, Interdisciplinaria archaeologica: Natural Sciences in Archaeology, vol. 1, nos.1-2 (2010), pp. 19-27. I have popped a copy into the Bell Beaker folder in the Vault.

However it was Evgenij Nikolayevich Chernykh, Metallurgical Provinces of Eurasia in the Early Metal Age: Problems of Interrelation, ISIJ International, Vol. 54 (2014), No. 5, pp. 1002–1009, who laid down the basics.

Essentially the Balkan copper was pretty pure. That was used in what Chernykh calls the Carpatho-Balkan metallurgical province (CBMP).


Final centuries of the fifth and early fourth mill. BCE was the time of disintegration and disappearance of the earliest metallurgical province in Eurasia. One very paradoxical fact: the inheritance of lively CBMP was scarcely clear reflected in the production of following and more late metallurgical systems.

The Fahlore coppers had impurities, such as arsenic. They were used in what Chernykh calls the Circumpontic metallurgical province i.e. surrounding Black Sea. Anthony talks about this too. He sees Yamnaya as inheriting this type of metallurgy from Maikop.

Now for Merkl:


.. it is obvious that metal objects of the Eastern Bell Beaker group do not consist of one specific type of copper. All types of copper that have been used for Bell Beaker objects are also employed in other periods... Not only did they use fahlore-copper, they also used pure, almost pure and arsenic-copper (low) which is typical of earlier periods. Whilst copper types with low levels of impurities were used during all parts of the Chalcolithic, those with higher impurity levels have been used frequently until after c. 2800 BC. ....

However, the significance of southern and central German.. is reflected by central German Corded Ware copper as well. In this case we suppose a local copper type in the 3rd millennium BC. These artefacts are chiefly made of lead- and bismuth-rich arsenical fahlorecoppers (i.e. arsenic-copper [high], arsenic-lead-copper and arsenic-copper with impurities). Since these are also found in other areas it was probably distributed. In spite of this, it is not possible to identify a specific type of copper used only by metal workers or for artefacts of the Eastern Bell Beaker group, because all types of “Bell Beaker copper” were also used for other artefacts found in other regions and in non-Bell-Beaker contexts.

MitchellSince1893
06-12-2017, 01:42 AM
...Malopolska is known as "Lesser Poland" in English...located in southeastern Poland.

Thought I would cross post this from another thread where R.Rocca and Mikewww were discussing Malopolska
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10565-The-Beaker-Phenomenon-And-The-Genomic-Transformation-Of-Northwest-Europe-Olalde&p=234203&viewfull=1#post234203

Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
Anyone else as intrigued by this sample as I am???...

Sample ID: I4251
Date: 2837–2672 calBC
Haplogroup: R1b1a1a2 (M269 equivalent, but a low quality sample that likely has many missing reads below M269)
Location: Samborzec, Vistula valley (western Małopolska; SE Poland)
Culture: Equipment was typical for the Eastern group of the Beaker complex
Comment: Anthropologically, the skeletons from Samborzec show very characteristic morphological traits distinguishing them from other Neolithic and Early Bronze groups from SE Poland. The skulls are classified as short or very short. Their main characteristic is the shape of the back part, namely the distinct flattening of the upper part of the occipital bone and of an area of the parietal bone. Such a morphology suggests that this population was genetically foreign to the territory of Małopolska. We obtained genome-wide ancient DNA data from three individuals.


Mikewww: Certainly this is quite interesting, the combination of this age in the first quarter of the 3rd millenium BC to go with M269. Below is about all I know about the Malopolska Corded Ware. It looks like Malopolska is the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, the Krakow area. This is due north of the Carpathian Basin with the mountainous Slovakia in between, but we see Moravia and the Czech Rep. are due west.


Małopolska Corded Ware. Małopolska Corded Ware in southern Poland is known mainly from cemeteries, where at most a few dozen individuals were buried (the largest number of graves in one place totaled sixty-four at Z˙erniki Górne). These were single-burial graves, mostly flat. Barrows were also numerous, but they did not form unified cemeteries. Instead, they often followed one after another along the crest of a rise in the terrain. The individual was placed on a north-south axis, opposite the east-west arrangement found in the other Corded Ware regions. A characteristic of the Małopolska Corded Ware culture is the so-called catacomb tombs, consisting of a vertical shaft dug in the loess subsoil, at the bottom of which was a chamber where the body was placed. Usually the grave goods consisted of one or two vessels, heart-shaped arrowheads, flakes, and stone objects, such as battle-axes. The few settlements found exhibited impermanent dwellings. The thesis that the Małopolska Corded Ware culture had a pastoral character is widely accepted, not only on a theoretical basis but also on the basis of physical evidence.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/humaniti...ware-east-west

Gravetto-Danubian
06-12-2017, 02:45 AM
Jean, do you have any info on the changing ore sources in the Balko-Carpathians across the period 4000-2600BC. I do recall reading a shift to the north-west from the old sources favoured by Varna etc but I am not sure of the details and cannot remember the source. I do recall reading that most CW ore came from the Carpathians with perhaps a second minor source in central Germany. Also recall a paper saying central European beaker metalworking techniques were the same as bell beaker in the same area later.

This is an interesting question, definitely showing some trends which correlate with the overall demographic & cultural picture.

During the 'heyday' of the north Balkan Ores, we can only see the occasional import of copper axes and adzes north of the Carpathian range, perhaps directed at individual benefactors as gifts. There is little local processing.
After 42/4000 BC , the monopoly of the Bulgarian and Serbian metal centres ended, most likely because environmental change, woodland depletion, exhaustion of Ores; and this end of Copper production correlates with the sociocultural collapse.

For a couple of centuries, the areas just to its north -Hungary - continued Copper production of the CBMP tradition (eg the Tiszapolgar culture), before it too ended, such that subsequent cultures of the Carpathian basin (eg Boleraz- Baden) are 'metal poor'.
By this time, the central European Alpine metallurgical zone came into its own, perhaps again as Hungarian monopoly ended, or production was 'exported out'. From this Alpine zone, it spread to the western Europe - IMO Italian, Sth French & Iberian production began due to Alpine metallurgists (correlating with rise of WHG and I2a from EN to MN/ Copper Age Iberia).
This Alpine Copper Zone is also important for the BB East group. As mentioned in the Merkl article above, it might have continued during the BB period as it was ? commandeered by arriving steppe groups.


Turning East, collapse of the Carpatho-Balkan centres is offset by the rise of Majkop centres c. 3800 BC. Here, the balance of native development, Balkan influences and NW Iranian influences are still being debated. After a a couple of hundred years, the Caucasian metallurgical centres' influences spilled over onto the steppe (Yamnaya), west Balkans (Vucedol) and East Balkans (Ezero).

The CWC - at least its eastern parts- seemed to have had its own metallurgical centred focussed around the Eastern Carpathians.

alan
06-12-2017, 09:39 AM
This is an interesting question, definitely showing some trends which correlate with the overall demographic & cultural picture.

During the 'heyday' of the north Balkan Ores, we can only see the occasional import of copper axes and adzes north of the Carpathian range, perhaps directed at individual benefactors as gifts. There is little local processing.
After 42/4000 BC , the monopoly of the Bulgarian and Serbian metal centres ended, most likely because environmental change, woodland depletion, exhaustion of Ores; and this end of Copper production correlates with the sociocultural collapse.

For a couple of centuries, the areas just to its north -Hungary - continued Copper production of the CBMP tradition (eg the Tiszapolgar culture), before it too ended, such that subsequent cultures of the Carpathian basin (eg Boleraz- Baden) are 'metal poor'.
By this time, the central European Alpine metallurgical zone came into its own, perhaps again as Hungarian monopoly ended, or production was 'exported out'. From this Alpine zone, it spread to the western Europe - IMO Italian, Sth French & Iberian production began due to Alpine metallurgists (correlating with rise of WHG and I2a from EN to MN/ Copper Age Iberia).
This Alpine Copper Zone is also important for the BB East group. As mentioned in the Merkl article above, it might have continued during the BB period as it was ? commandeered by arriving steppe groups.


Turning East, collapse of the Carpatho-Balkan centres is offset by the rise of Majkop centres c. 3800 BC. Here, the balance of native development, Balkan influences and NW Iranian influences are still being debated. After a a couple of hundred years, the Caucasian metallurgical centres' influences spilled over onto the steppe (Yamnaya), west Balkans (Vucedol) and East Balkans (Ezero).

The CWC - at least its eastern parts- seemed to have had its own metallurgical centred focussed around the Eastern Carpathians.

I read the same in an old paper (pre-end of cold war) which quoted Chernynk. He cited evidence that the CW groups in the NW Ukraine/SE Poland area used local Carpathian ores. He mentioned a likely source (I think it was in Ukraine near the Polish border) but thought there were probably similar sources also used in the same general area.

Its all a terribly complex picture in that melting pot zone though. I rather fancy L11 or at least P312 took a route out of western Ukraine like the Dniester or Bug or some nearby route into that area along the northern Carpathians where south Poland, Slovakia etc meet, only reaching the Danube around Bratslava. A route around the fringes of the north Carpathians that only accesses the Danube around Bratislava would neatly explain why L51/L11/P312 etc seem to suddenly pick up in this area while the Danube further downstream east and the Balkans looks very much in the Z2103 territory

alan
06-12-2017, 10:16 AM
I known this is v unscientific but I thought the Poles around the Carpathians looked different from the poles further north. In most of Poland the young men have that kind of youthful boyish small faces, slim tallish builds, hair mostly from mid brown to dirty ash blond and very straight. It really struck me at the Carpathians that the the people were markedly different - with many men very strong broad chested compact build, more masculine sharper features, ruddier pink completions, I think the hair wasnt quite as mega-straight as most Polish. I even noticed redheads had appeared - they seem far rarer in a lot of Poland. Far less spoke English - German is the 2nd language. I got in a right pickle in a restaurant because noone n it had a word of English and the menu was in Polish or German.I tried French but noone had that either. Oh and they were really into very smokey barbecues LOL

Jean M
06-12-2017, 12:22 PM
The Fahlore coppers had impurities, such as arsenic. They were used in what Chernykh calls the Circumpontic metallurgical province i.e. surrounding Black Sea. Anthony talks about this too. He sees Yamnaya as inheriting this type of metallurgy from Maikop.

I should mention here that I need to correct AJ re arsenical copper. I had followed the crowd on this, but my ideas were turned upside down by reading Betancourt, P. P. 2006. The Chrysokamino Metallurgy Workshop and its Territory. Hesperia supplement 36. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Two very important points are made:

1. Arsenic did not make for a harder metal.
2. It is doubtful whether metal-workers even identified arsenic in the Copper Age.

16796

16795

MitchellSince1893
06-12-2017, 12:58 PM
... I even noticed redheads had appeared - they seem far rarer in a lot of Poland...
Speaking of red heads, metals, and north-south burials (Fatyanovo).

While it doesn't support my idea of a starting point near the Black Sea in the Ukraine, it is an interesting coincidence...although the yellow circles aren't exactly in the same area.
16798

Shadogowah
06-12-2017, 02:05 PM
Speaking of red heads, metals, and north-south burials (Fatyanovo).

While it doesn't support my idea of a starting point near the Black Sea in the Ukraine, it is an interesting coincidence...although the yellow circles aren't exactly in the same area.
16798

It seems to be Western European trait and here they say there are more "hidden" redheads among the Spaniards and Portuguese but they are "camouflaged" by higher levels of eumelanin due to the contribution of other genes.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/origins_of_red_hair.shtml

What is immediately apparent to genetic genealogists is that the map of red hair correlates with the frequency of haplogroup R1b in northern and western Europe. It doesn't really correlate with the percentage of R1b in southern Europe, for the simple reason that red hair is more visible among people carrying various other genes involved in light skin and hair pigmentation. Mediterranean people have considerably darker pigmentations (higher eumelanin), especially as far as hair is considered, giving the red hair alleles little opportunity to express themselves. The reddish tinge is always concealed by black hair, and rarely visible in dark brown hair. Rufosity being recessive, it can easily stay hidden if the alleles are too dispersed in the gene pool, and that the chances of both parents carrying an allele becomes too low. Furthermore, natural selection also progressively pruned red hair from the Mediterranean populations, because the higher amount of sunlight and strong UV rays in the region was more likely to cause potentially fatal melanoma in fair-skinned redheads.

lgmayka
06-12-2017, 02:21 PM
It really struck me at the Carpathians that the the people were markedly different - with many men very strong broad chested compact build, more masculine sharper features, ruddier pink completions, I think the hair wasnt quite as mega-straight as most Polish. I even noticed redheads had appeared - they seem far rarer in a lot of Poland. Far less spoke English - German is the 2nd language.
Speaking as someone whose ancestry is entirely from southeastern Poland (the Subcarpathian and Lesser Poland voivodeships):

- Two of my brothers have red hair.

- Many of our family members have ended up with pink/red complexions. A doctor (general practitioner, not a dermatologist) actually opined that my mother had bacterial rosacea, and gave her medicine for it. The medicine did nothing, of course, because her complexion was simply naturally pink/red--as mine now is also.

Jessie
06-12-2017, 02:50 PM
It seems to be Western European trait and here they say there are more "hidden" redheads among the Spaniards and Portuguese but they are "camouflaged" by higher levels of eumelanin due to the contribution of other genes.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/origins_of_red_hair.shtml

What is immediately apparent to genetic genealogists is that the map of red hair correlates with the frequency of haplogroup R1b in northern and western Europe. It doesn't really correlate with the percentage of R1b in southern Europe, for the simple reason that red hair is more visible among people carrying various other genes involved in light skin and hair pigmentation. Mediterranean people have considerably darker pigmentations (higher eumelanin), especially as far as hair is considered, giving the red hair alleles little opportunity to express themselves. The reddish tinge is always concealed by black hair, and rarely visible in dark brown hair. Rufosity being recessive, it can easily stay hidden if the alleles are too dispersed in the gene pool, and that the chances of both parents carrying an allele becomes too low. Furthermore, natural selection also progressively pruned red hair from the Mediterranean populations, because the higher amount of sunlight and strong UV rays in the region was more likely to cause potentially fatal melanoma in fair-skinned redheads.


If enough people carry one red hair allele in the population more people will have red hair. It doesn't really have anything to do with if a population has higher eumelanin but the amount of carriers in the population. If a population doesn't have much red hair there aren't enough carriers of the gene. Basically if someone gets a red hair gene from both parents there is a high chance they will have red hair even if both parents are dark haired.

Red hair is most probably selected against in countries with higher amounts of sunlight because it has a correlation with skin cancer. Even carrying one red haired allele causes people to have a more pale and freckled skin so not really desirable in warmer countries.

https://www.livescience.com/26633-redhead-dna-gene.html

alan
06-12-2017, 03:27 PM
I read the same in an old paper (pre-end of cold war) which quoted Chernynk. He cited evidence that the CW groups in the NW Ukraine/SE Poland area used local Carpathian ores. He mentioned a likely source (I think it was in Ukraine near the Polish border) but thought there were probably similar sources also used in the same general area.

Its all a terribly complex picture in that melting pot zone though. I rather fancy L11 or at least P312 took a route out of western Ukraine like the Dniester or Bug or some nearby route into that area along the northern Carpathians where south Poland, Slovakia etc meet, only reaching the Danube around Bratslava. A route around the fringes of the north Carpathians that only accesses the Danube around Bratislava would neatly explain why L51/L11/P312 etc seem to suddenly pick up in this area while the Danube further downstream east and the Balkans looks very much in the Z2103 territory

Its just a great pity that the archaeology of the northern curve of the Carpathians through west Ukraine, Moldova, south Poland, Slovakia, Moravia, eastern Hungary etc in the period 3000-2500BC is a fiendishly complex moving patchwork of complex cultures and influences. P312 really was inconsiderate :0)

TigerMW
06-12-2017, 03:42 PM
...
But I feel that I should just point out that the YFull estimated age of P312 (formed 4800 y.a.) makes it a shade older than either Bell Beaker or Corded Ware. Several people here consider the YFull dates to be under-estimates. The last estimate I have for P312 from Michal M. is 5600 (5100-6100) ya. I don't know if that is up-to-date. If so, it seems unlikely that P312 cropped up in Corded Ware. It is more likely to be Yamnaya in origin. Then we have a long period before its huge expansion with Bell Beaker East.

One is better than the zero in Corded Ware so far. ;) Bear in mind that P312 first occurred in one man. There is no particular reason to suppose a vast pool of it hiding away in some mysterious location. It just had to survive and get into the front of the wave of the expanding BB East, outbreeding the rival BB clan of I2a2a.

I advise caution in considering a there might be a "long period" between the P312 MRCA (or birth for that matter) and its "huge expansion". The evidence of the expansion genetically is the large number of early branches that have survived into modern times. The genetic distance between those early branches of P312 and the P312 MRCA (or birth) is not large, indicating potentially a short period of time from L151 to P312 and U106 and many of their very successful early branches.

This does not contradict a Black Sea area Yamnaya origination. The L151 band of brothers may have started near the Black Sea and then headed west with prolific success before finding a great home in Central Europe. They just may have been restless because their scouts in Central Europe had seen and promised great things.

Kopfjäger
06-12-2017, 04:09 PM
Its just a great pity that the archaeology of the northern curve of the Carpathians through west Ukraine, Moldova, south Poland, Slovakia, Moravia, eastern Hungary etc in the period 3000-2500BC is a fiendishly complex moving patchwork of complex cultures and influences. P312 really was inconsiderate :0)

What if Yamnaya in the Carpathian Basin is Z2103?

rms2
06-12-2017, 04:34 PM
What if Yamnaya in the Carpathian Basin is Z2103?

He was talking mostly about the northern curve of the Carpathians outside the basin.

We won't know what the Yamnaya y-dna inside the basin is until we get some results from there. We don't have any yet.

If all the males in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin are Z2103, one wonders why Z2103 kind of fizzled when it came to expanding into central and western Europe (no offense to our Z2103 brothers intended).

alan
06-12-2017, 04:40 PM
I note that the Malopolska beakers are considered an offshoot of the Moravian beakers who migrated through the Moravian gate.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=57OVD144tUIC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=bell+beakers+moravia&source=bl&ots=GL-exnS4oK&sig=1Al9Txzn-LkwgB1c-eaGMJeTnN0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiky_Kn0bjUAhXmKsAKHfjVArMQ6AEINjAD#v=on epage&q=bell%20beakers%20moravia&f=false

alan
06-12-2017, 05:03 PM
A position in the northern Curve of the Carpathians may seem not expected of steppe people but most pf the accessible prehistoric copper ore seems to be in uplands and/or rocky areas. Even the Yamnaya mine at Kargaly was in the south Urals. So it is pretty certain that a group closely linked to metalworking would have adapted their subsistence strategy to allow for living at least seasonally in upland locations. I suspect mining was integrated into summer upland transhumance as they would seem like the sort of thing that would combine well.

rms2
06-12-2017, 05:04 PM
I note that the Malopolska beakers are considered an offshoot of the Moravian beakers who migrated through the Moravian gate.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=57OVD144tUIC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=bell+beakers+moravia&source=bl&ots=GL-exnS4oK&sig=1Al9Txzn-LkwgB1c-eaGMJeTnN0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiky_Kn0bjUAhXmKsAKHfjVArMQ6AEINjAD#v=on epage&q=bell%20beakers%20moravia&f=false

Interesting how Czebreszuk and Szmyt use the term filiation to describe the relationship between Corded Ware and Bell Beaker which succeeded it in the western part of the Polish Lowlands.

16801

TigerMW
06-12-2017, 06:27 PM
...
We won't know what the Yamnaya y-dna inside the basin is until we get some results from there. We don't have any yet.

If all the males in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin are Z2103, one wonders why Z2103 kind of fizzled when it came to expanding into central and western Europe (no offense to our Z2103 brothers intended).
Good point. Some how, some way, P312 cut off Yamnaya derived R1a and Z2103 cousins and did not allow them to expand northwest, west and southwest, or immediately south (N. Italy). It's amazing the Yamnaya derived cultures that were mostly R1a and Z2103 didn't do better at expanding west. Similarly, we see P312 appears to have cut-off U106 in the Bronze Age until later, the Iron Age.

alan
06-12-2017, 09:35 PM
Good point. Some how, some way, P312 cut off Yamnaya derived R1a and Z2103 cousins and did not allow them to expand northwest, west and southwest, or immediately south (N. Italy). It's amazing the Yamnaya derived cultures that were mostly R1a and Z2103 didn't do better at expanding west. Similarly, we see P312 appears to have cut-off U106 in the Bronze Age until later, the Iron Age.

This is the mystery. To stop someone spreading further, you have to already be there. It does indeed appear that the halting of Z2103 and constraining of most of it to SE/Lower Danube Europe is already apparent in the ancient DNA of the 3rd millennium BC.

However, in order to block Z2103 from expanding P312 would have to be at the right spot at the right time. Z2103 does seem likely to have used the Danube and to have been associated with Yamnaya kurgans. ASAIK they probably had reached their max extent by 2800BC (although I am willing to be corrected). Problem is then P312 has not been found any earlier than the Bell Beaker east group which prob dates no earlier than 2550BC.

What I think is far more likely, and seems to agree with what Anthony says of Yamanaya along the Danube, is that Yamanaya just didnt adapt to non-steppe-like environments and remained confined and unable to expand beyond such environs. I think that probably explains the distribution of Yamnaya kurgans and Z2013.

This of course contrasts with CW whose secret to success and distribution surely must be linked to steppe elements adapting to non-steppe environments and a new subsistence and settlement strategy that was not mobile pastoralism on wheels. Of course by 2750BC if not a little earlier that CW horizon stretched across most of Europe north of the Danube and would indeed have formed a barrier to further expansion by other groups (perhaps Z2103 included) anyway. That CW group however do not seem to have featured a lot of L11 and were likely mostly R1a but they may have checked any chance of expansion of Z2103 after 2800B-2550BC before the beaker people showed up.

TigerMW
06-12-2017, 09:45 PM
This is the mystery. To stop someone spreading further, you have to already be there.
Probably so, but it may be a little more nuanced. For example, the earliest settlers could have been swamped by a much more aggressive or populous group, leaving little trace of the first folks in. Many of the earliest European settlements in North America did not last long.


It does indeed appear that the halting of Z2103 and constraining of most of it to SE/Lower Danube Europe is already apparent in the ancient DNA of the 3rd millennium BC.

However, in order to block Z2103 from expanding P312 would have to be at the right spot at the right time. Z2103 does seem likely to have used the Danube and to have been associated with Yamnaya kurgans. ASAIK they probably had reached their max extent by 2800BC (although I am willing to be corrected). Problem is then P312 has not been found any earlier than the Bell Beaker east group which prob dates no earlier than 2550BC.

What I think is far more likely, and seems to agree with what Anthony says of Yamanaya along the Danube, is that Yamanaya just didnt adapt to non-steppe-like environments and remained confined and unable to expand beyond such environs. I think that probably explains the distribution of Yamnaya kurgans and Z2013.

This of course contrasts with CW whose secret to success and distribution surely must be linked to steppe elements adapting to non-steppe environments and a new subsistence and settlement strategy that was not mobile pastoralism on wheels. Of course by 2750BC if not a little earlier that CW horizon stretched across most of Europe north of the Danube and would indeed have formed a barrier to further expansion by other groups (perhaps Z2103 included) anyway. That CW group however do not seem to have featured a lot of L11 and were likely mostly R1a but they may have checked any chance of expansion of Z2103 after 2800B-2550BC before the beaker people showed up.

I don't see anything the metallurgy differences between East Bell Beakers and Corded Ware. Merkl can not differentiate them.

https://www.iansa.eu/papers/IANSA-2010-01-02-merkl.pdf

It really does puzzle me that Corded Ware did not seem to absorb France. I guess its the old fission-fusion/east meets west stuff with the East Bell Beakers on top, but why? how?

rms2
06-12-2017, 10:30 PM
It's also possible that Yamnaya in the Carpathian Basin was not mostly Z2103. Maybe it was P312.

I like this thread and discussing the Corded Ware/P312 idea, but with Yamnaya we have R1b-L23 already, which is what we have in Bell Beaker. We don't have any of that in Corded Ware yet.

Admittedly, most of the R1b-L23 in Yamnaya has been Z2103, but L51, as I have emphasized so many times before, is Z2103's brother clade under L23. It wouldn't be a real shocker for L51 (in the form of its subclades that were present) to turn up in Yamnaya.

After all, we've seen at least three known varieties of P312 in Bell Beaker thus far: DF27, L21, and U152. Why should the R1b-L23 in Yamnaya be a complete and utter monolith?

And remember, we have a Csepel Bell Beaker man now who was Z2103. Someone will say, "See! It's Z2103 in Hungary!" I say, right, see. See the U152 Bell Beaker man there in Hungary, as well, and see that Z2103 as evidence of a shot of Yamnaya into Bell Beaker. Maybe the P312 in Bell Beaker is also evidence of an even bigger shot of Yamnaya in Bell Beaker, and we just don't know it because the right Yamnaya skeletons haven't been tested yet.

ADW_1981
06-13-2017, 01:12 AM
Speaking as someone whose ancestry is entirely from southeastern Poland (the Subcarpathian and Lesser Poland voivodeships):

- Two of my brothers have red hair.

- Many of our family members have ended up with pink/red complexions. A doctor (general practitioner, not a dermatologist) actually opined that my mother had bacterial rosacea, and gave her medicine for it. The medicine did nothing, of course, because her complexion was simply naturally pink/red--as mine now is also.

Tons of Poles in Canada and you would definitely be the minority. Just saying from visual experience.

Joe B
06-13-2017, 01:19 AM
He was talking mostly about the northern curve of the Carpathians outside the basin.

We won't know what the Yamnaya y-dna inside the basin is until we get some results from there. We don't have any yet.

If all the males in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin are Z2103, one wonders why Z2103 kind of fizzled when it came to expanding into central and western Europe (no offense to our Z2103 brothers intended).

Maybe another way to look at it is perhaps the R1b-Z2103 tribes went a different direction with a different agenda. It's mostly the clades emanating from the Z2109 node that are European for lack of a better description. Another question to ask is why did Z2103 have such a wide geographic dispersion while P312 seems to be limited geographically? The L51 - Z2103 question has got to be more than serendipity. Climate, culture and the horse.

Kopfjäger
06-13-2017, 03:07 AM
He was talking mostly about the northern curve of the Carpathians outside the basin.

We won't know what the Yamnaya y-dna inside the basin is until we get some results from there. We don't have any yet.

If all the males in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin are Z2103, one wonders why Z2103 kind of fizzled when it came to expanding into central and western Europe (no offense to our Z2103 brothers intended).

That's true. We just never know, but hopefully soon enough.

Kopfjäger
06-13-2017, 03:11 AM
This is the mystery. To stop someone spreading further, you have to already be there.

Maybe L51 was already in the Carpathian Basin before Z2103 and Yamnaya proper got there. I know we need more DNA from kurgans in the area, like Rich said, but Yamnaya has been pretty monolithic (Z2103+, with an outlier here and there) thus far.

This isn't to say that L51 isn't IE-speaking. It most certainly was, but it maybe it left the steppe earlier.

ffoucart
06-13-2017, 05:31 AM
but Yamnaya has been pretty monolithic (Z2103+, with an outlier here and there) thus far.

Not so much. Some were I2a:

Yamnaya_Bulgaria Bul4 I2a2a1b1b
Yamnaya_Kalmykia RISE552.SG I2a2a1b1b2

It's probably more than outlier there and there. It's more like substructure.

And Patterson has warned us to not "overidentify clonal DNA with culture". Given that the warning was about exactly identifying Yamna to Z2103 and CW to R1a, and given who gave it, I think we should consider it.

rms2
06-13-2017, 08:18 AM
Maybe another way to look at it is perhaps the R1b-Z2103 tribes went a different direction with a different agenda. It's mostly the clades emanating from the Z2109 node that are European for lack of a better description. Another question to ask is why did Z2103 have such a wide geographic dispersion while P312 seems to be limited geographically? The L51 - Z2103 question has got to be more than serendipity. Climate, culture and the horse.

The horse? The Bell Beaker culture was a horse riding culture, very much so. In fact, if you recall, one of the Beaker men from Germany showed osteological evidence of horseback riding. One has to spend a lot of time on horseback for it to show up in his thigh bones.

Besides, P312 is widespread, and in large numbers. Z2103 is only very sparsely represented in central and western Europe. It is widespread across the Eurasian steppe in part because widespread is the only way one can live on the steppe. There's nothing there. I've been there and seen it.

Romilius
06-13-2017, 08:32 AM
I noticed that in the second update of the History of South-eastern Europe paper, two Corded Ware samples are still regarded as R1b: RISE436 and RISE431.

P.s.: only to amuse... did you notice the grave goods of the R1b1 individual I2430? That person looked like he was very aggressive! A stone axe and a copper wedge!
P.p.s.: I read that I2430 came from a Copper Age tell... isn't it a sort of kurgan?

rms2
06-13-2017, 08:35 AM
Imagine Bell Beaker research limited to just a handful of U152 samples. People would be saying all of Bell Beaker was U152, and the rest of P312 were Neolithic farmers or something.

Some of us would point out the fact that U152 is pretty close to L21, DF27, and the rest of P312, but who would listen?

Thus far, we have very few Yamnaya y-dna test results, and all but one of them are from the east, from the Caspian steppe and the Volga-Ural steppe. We have NO Yamnaya y-dna from the Carpathian Basin yet. None. We have one Yamnaya from SE Bulgaria, and that one was I2a2a1b1b.

We also have no Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe. There are obviously some big holes in our knowledge, and that part of Yamnaya that appears to be monolithic is monolithically R1b-L23. Z2103 isn't all there is to R1b-L23, just as there isn't just one clade in R1b-P312.

Joe B
06-13-2017, 09:04 AM
The horse? The Bell Beaker culture was a horse riding culture, very much so. In fact, if you recall, one of the Beaker men from Germany showed osteological evidence of horseback riding. One has to spend a lot of time on horseback for it to show up in his thigh bones.

Besides, P312 is widespread, and in large numbers. Z2103 is only very sparsely represented in central and western Europe. It is widespread across the Eurasian steppe in part because widespread is the only way one can live on the steppe. There's nothing there. I've been there and seen it.
Z2103's wasn't limited to the steppe. Asia Minor, the Caucuses, Mesopotamia, Persia are some of the other areas where it's possible to find Z3103 (xZ2109) numbers. It's doubtful that these were unpopulated backwaters in the day. Hopefully that osteological evidence wasn't from a donkey.

Shadogowah
06-13-2017, 09:13 AM
If enough people carry one red hair allele in the population more people will have red hair. It doesn't really have anything to do with if a population has higher eumelanin but the amount of carriers in the population. If a population doesn't have much red hair there aren't enough carriers of the gene. Basically if someone gets a red hair gene from both parents there is a high chance they will have red hair even if both parents are dark haired.

Red hair is most probably selected against in countries with higher amounts of sunlight because it has a correlation with skin cancer. Even carrying one red haired allele causes people to have a more pale and freckled skin so not really desirable in warmer countries.

https://www.livescience.com/26633-redhead-dna-gene.html

I think you have several misconceptions about the topic. I cannot type an extensive reply but I can just give you a few statements. Read and think about them.

- The color of the hair is defined by several genes and not just one and ultimately rely on the concentration of pheomelanin and eumelanin. It is assumed that it is mainly ruled by two genes but there are MORE involved.
- You can carry both recessive alleles for readhead ( regulates pheomelanin) but also carry OTHER genes that make your hair dark because they are associated to a higher production of eumelanin in skin and hair.
- Statistic of readheads are made in base of WHAT YOU SEE and not analyzing DNA.
- For two dark haired parents to have a red hair child (and I mean that you can SEE he/she is a readhead). Each parents must carry the red hair allele and both pass them to the child (so it has two) AND carry light hair recessive alleles and also pass them to the child.
- Lots of southerneuropeans have BLACK hair, thus high concentration of eumelanin that will mask the red hair.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_hair_color

The genetics of hair colors are not yet firmly established. According to one theory, at least two gene pairs control human hair color.


Hair color is the pigmentation of hair follicles due to two types of melanin: eumelanin and pheomelanin. Generally, if more eumelanin is present, the color of the hair is darker; if less eumelanin is present, the hair is lighter. The darker a person's natural hair color is, the more individual hair follicles they have on their scalp. Levels of melanin can vary over time causing a person's hair color to change, and it is possible to have hair follicles of more than one color on the same person. Particular hair colors are associated with ethnic groups. Gray or white hair is associated with age.

One phenotype (brown/blonde) has a dominant brown allele and a recessive blond allele. A person with a brown allele will have brown hair; a person with no brown alleles will be blond. This explains why two brown-haired parents can produce a blond-haired child. However, this can only be possible if both parent are heterozygous in hair color- meaning that both of them have one dominant brown hair allele and one recessive allele for blond hair, but as dominant traits mask recessive ones the parents both have brown hair. The possibility of which trait may appear in an offspring can be determined with a Punnett square.

The other gene pair is a non-red/red pair, where the non-red allele (which suppresses production of pheomelanin) is dominant and the allele for red hair is recessive. A person with two copies of the red-haired allele will have red hair. <-- BUT YOU WON'T SEE IT if the hair is dark

The two-gene model does not account for all possible shades of brown, blond, or red (for example, platinum blond versus dark blond/light brown), nor does it explain why hair color sometimes darkens as a person ages. Several gene pairs control the light versus dark hair color in a cumulative effect. A person's genotype for a multifactorial trait can interact with the environment to produce varying phenotypes (see quantitative trait locus).

rms2
06-13-2017, 10:51 AM
Z2103's wasn't limited to the steppe. Asia Minor, the Caucuses, Mesopotamia, Persia are some of the other areas where it's possible to find Z3103 (xZ2109) numbers. It's doubtful that these were unpopulated backwaters in the day.

I know it wasn't and I was aware of all that. In becoming defensive because I mentioned the obvious fact that Z2103 is relatively sparse in central and western Europe, you missed the point.

There are literally thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin. If all the male skeletons in them were Z2103, one naturally wonders what happened and why Z2103 did not expand more robustly into central and western Europe.

I think the reason is because not all the male skeletons in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin were Z2103. Probably some or even many of them were, but I think it likely some of them belonged to Z2103's brother clade under L23, L51.

All those places you named are eastern, like the Z2103 Yamnaya finds thus far. We have no Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe or the Carpathian Basin. Maybe when we do get it, it will all be Z2103. But let's wait and see.



Hopefully that osteological evidence wasn't from a donkey.

That was a petty remark. Sorry you became defensive because I wondered aloud why Z2103 isn't more frequent in central and western Europe, if all those Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin contain male skeletons are Z2103.

I'm not too bad at being a smart ass myself, but I will refrain from using one or more of the obvious synonyms for donkey to respond in kind. ;)

rms2
06-13-2017, 11:01 AM
I think you have several misconceptions about the topic

. . .

I'm at work now and don't have all my notes with me, but as I recall genetic testing of red hair variants shows that there is a cline from southern Europe to northern Europe, with red hair variants increasing as one moves north.

Naturally the more carriers of red hair variants there are in a population, the more red hair will show up in that population, since it is a recessive trait. That is why red hair, while not unknown in southern Europe, is relatively scarce there.

Here are a set of maps of the frequency of carriers (not actual redheads) of three of the most common red hair variants. The set comes from 23andMe.

16816

alan
06-13-2017, 11:01 AM
Probably so, but it may be a little more nuanced. For example, the earliest settlers could have been swamped by a much more aggressive or populous group, leaving little trace of the first folks in. Many of the earliest European settlements in North America did not last long.



I don't see anything the metallurgy differences between East Bell Beakers and Corded Ware. Merkl can not differentiate them.

https://www.iansa.eu/papers/IANSA-2010-01-02-merkl.pdf

It really does puzzle me that Corded Ware did not seem to absorb France. I guess its the old fission-fusion/east meets west stuff with the East Bell Beakers on top, but why? how?

I agree the France thing is a mystery. It had reached its eastern borders by at least 2750BC but then just halted in the face of assorted final Neolithic/early Copper Age cultures. I imagine the large CW people waving stone battle axes were pretty scary and I doubt they voluntarily just stopped there.France by the times Romans started writing was considered the best farming land north of the Alps, far better than east of the Rhine.. I can only think that either there were environmental reasons that meant the CW people didnt want the land (seems unlikely to me) or the natives just didnt allow the CW people through. Maybe France had a far denser population.Its certainly something that needs explained.

alan
06-13-2017, 11:19 AM
It's also possible that Yamnaya in the Carpathian Basin was not mostly Z2103. Maybe it was P312.

I like this thread and discussing the Corded Ware/P312 idea, but with Yamnaya we have R1b-L23 already, which is what we have in Bell Beaker. We don't have any of that in Corded Ware yet.

Admittedly, most of the R1b-L23 in Yamnaya has been Z2103, but L51, as I have emphasized so many times before, is Z2103's brother clade under L23. It wouldn't be a real shocker for L51 (in the form of its subclades that were present) to turn up in Yamnaya.

After all, we've seen at least three known varieties of P312 in Bell Beaker thus far: DF27, L21, and U152. Why should the R1b-L23 in Yamnaya be a complete and utter monolith?

And remember, we have a Csepel Bell Beaker man now who was Z2103. Someone will say, "See! It's Z2103 in Hungary!" I say, right, see. See the U152 Bell Beaker man there in Hungary, as well, and see that Z2103 as evidence of a shot of Yamnaya into Bell Beaker. Maybe the P312 in Bell Beaker is also evidence of an even bigger shot of Yamnaya in Bell Beaker, and we just don't know it because the right Yamnaya skeletons haven't been tested yet.

that is v true - and I am totally sitting on the fence re whether it was in Yamnaya or some sort of originally tiny outgroup lineage in CW. Really when we are talking about just a small pretty new P312 clan around 3000BC it could easily be anywhere and invisible.

Y full says formation around 2800BC and TMRCA 2400BC. Other says quite a bit older. What just struck me now - I dont do a lot of looking at these trees - is the 400 year gap between P312 and the TMRCA. Does that mean that while P312 could date to 2800BC or a few centuries earlier, they actually all descend from a guy 400 years later? I assume it does. So even if P312 is older, say 3000BC or so, the actual expansion from a common ancestor still would date to around 2600BC. That would make sense as it at least coincides with the archaeological signal of the massive beaker expansion in central and northern Europe. Until I noticed this difference between formation date and TMRCA I thought there was a lack of an archaeological signal for the expansion of P312 but I was looking at the formation date not the TMRCA. The TMRCA date of P312 - if you push it back a century or two or three as most want to do with yfull dates - does fit the archaeological signal of a massive beaker expansion - even if the formation date doesnt.

If that is right and there was a 400 period when P312 was just a bare survival line then it would be extremely hard to stumble on very early P312 guys in ancient DNA.

alan
06-13-2017, 11:23 AM
Imagine Bell Beaker research limited to just a handful of U152 samples. People would be saying all of Bell Beaker was U152, and the rest of P312 were Neolithic farmers or something.

Some of us would point out the fact that U152 is pretty close to L21, DF27, and the rest of P312, but who would listen?

Thus far, we have very few Yamnaya y-dna test results, and all but one of them are from the east, from the Caspian steppe and the Volga-Ural steppe. We have NO Yamnaya y-dna from the Carpathian Basin yet. None. We have one Yamnaya from SE Bulgaria, and that one was I2a2a1b1b.

We also have no Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe. There are obviously some big holes in our knowledge, and that part of Yamnaya that appears to be monolithic is monolithically R1b-L23. Z2103 isn't all there is to R1b-L23, just as there isn't just one clade in R1b-P312.

Very true. There is still a very good chance P312 or L11 as a whole is from Yamnaya as the sampling is incredibly light. Pretty well the only alternative is CW though so it is a useful exercise to chew over that option.

alan
06-13-2017, 11:36 AM
that is v true - and I am totally sitting on the fence re whether it was in Yamnaya or some sort of originally tiny outgroup lineage in CW. Really when we are talking about just a small pretty new P312 clan around 3000BC it could easily be anywhere and invisible.

Y full says formation around 2800BC and TMRCA 2400BC. Other says quite a bit older. What just struck me now - I dont do a lot of looking at these trees - is the 400 year gap between P312 and the TMRCA. Does that mean that while P312 could date to 2800BC or a few centuries earlier, they actually all descend from a guy 400 years later? I assume it does. So even if P312 is older, say 3000BC or so, the actual expansion from a common ancestor still would date to around 2600BC. That would make sense as it at least coincides with the archaeological signal of the massive beaker expansion in central and northern Europe. Until I noticed this difference between formation date and TMRCA I thought there was a lack of an archaeological signal for the expansion of P312 but I was looking at the formation date not the TMRCA. The TMRCA date of P312 - if you push it back a century or two or three as most want to do with yfull dates - does fit the archaeological signal of a massive beaker expansion - even if the formation date doesnt.

If that is right and there was a 400 period when P312 was just a bare survival line then it would be extremely hard to stumble on very early P312 guys in ancient DNA.

If my understanding is right and the MRCA being 400 years younger than the P312 SNP is right then how did they come to that conclusion. Are there 400 years of SNPs between P312 and the final common ancestor of all living P312?

rms2
06-13-2017, 11:37 AM
that is v true - and I am totally sitting on the fence re whether it was in Yamnaya or some sort of originally tiny outgroup lineage in CW. Really when we are talking about just a small pretty new P312 clan around 3000BC it could easily be anywhere and invisible.

Y full says formation around 2800BC and TMRCA 2400BC. Other says quite a bit older. What just struck me now - I dont do a lot of looking at these trees - is the 400 year gap between P312 and the TMRCA. Does that mean that while P312 could date to 2800BC or a few centuries earlier, they actually all descend from a guy 400 years later? I assume it does. So even if P312 is older, say 3000BC or so, the actual expansion from a common ancestor still would date to around 2600BC. That would make sense as it at least coincides with the archaeological signal of the massive beaker expansion in central and northern Europe. Until I noticed this difference between formation date and TMRCA I thought there was a lack of an archaeological signal for the expansion of P312 but I was looking at the formation date not the TMRCA. The TMRCA date of P312 - if you push it back a century or two or three as most want to do with yfull dates - does fit the archaeological signal of a massive beaker expansion - even if the formation date doesnt.

If that is right and there was a 400 period when P312 was just a bare survival line then it would be extremely hard to stumble on very early P312 guys in ancient DNA.

I am no geneticist or expert at SNP counting, but one thing I noticed is that there isn't a big stack of SNPs at the P312 level indicating a bottleneck or a long time with the SNP engine idling before the major subclades were born. YFull shows just two SNPs at the P312 level. ISOGG shows just one.

At the L151 level, on the other hand, YFull shows 12 SNPs. There are five at L51. There are just three at L23, but we all know there was some kind of massive bottleneck at M269, where there are over a hundred SNPs.

rms2
06-13-2017, 11:47 AM
that is v true - and I am totally sitting on the fence re whether it was in Yamnaya or some sort of originally tiny outgroup lineage in CW. Really when we are talking about just a small pretty new P312 clan around 3000BC it could easily be anywhere and invisible . . .

That's where I am, as well. Part of me thinks BB came directly out of Yamnaya, and part of me finds Rich Rocca's arguments as presented in this thread very compelling.

We just don't have any R1b-L23 in CW yet, while we do have it in Yamnaya.

alan
06-13-2017, 12:11 PM
A bit off-topic but could the difference among CW groups and its derivatives (Fatyanovo, Abashevo etc) be that some absorbed the GAC and other didnt?

ffoucart
06-13-2017, 12:13 PM
I agree the France thing is a mystery. It had reached its eastern borders by at least 2750BC but then just halted in the face of assorted final Neolithic/early Copper Age cultures. I imagine the large CW people waving stone battle axes were pretty scary and I doubt they voluntarily just stopped there.France by the times Romans started writing was considered the best farming land north of the Alps, far better than east of the Rhine.. I can only think that either there were environmental reasons that meant the CW people didnt want the land (seems unlikely to me) or the natives just didnt allow the CW people through. Maybe France had a far denser population.Its certainly something that needs explained.

The S-O-M (Seine Oise Marne) Neolithic complex is not well-known, and not many people are working on it. But several authors have underlined a influence from CW, and some have suggested that SOM were part of the CWC in its final stage.

rms2
06-13-2017, 12:15 PM
A bit off-topic but could the difference among CW groups and its derivatives (Fatyanovo, Abashevo etc) be that some absorbed the GAC and other didnt?

And if Bell Beaker was originally a CW group that took wives from GAC, that would explain the dilution of its steppe dna relative to other CW groups.

Michał
06-13-2017, 01:20 PM
I agree the France thing is a mystery. It had reached its eastern borders by at least 2750BC but then just halted in the face of assorted final Neolithic/early Copper Age cultures.
Maybe it was close to the Rhine river (SW Germany and/or Switzerland) where the expanding CW people met the Iberia-derived non-steppe Bell Beaker folk for the first time, and this was also when the initial transformation from CW to BB took place, so this is why we don't see any CWC settlements/cemeteries farther west. Unfortunately, we don't have any graves for the CWC groups in Switzerland, so we might be unable to determine whether they were R1a or R1b.

If the above scenario is right, we would still need that initial steppe-admixed BB grouping to migrate farther east or north-east (or actually to migrate back, if these were mostly the former CW people with some new BB-related features) towards Austria and Moravia, to get the Carpathian-Danubian Begleitkeramik and complete the transformation (before eventually expanding in all directions).

Shadogowah
06-13-2017, 01:22 PM
I'm at work now and don't have all my notes with me, but as I recall genetic testing of red hair variants shows that there is a cline from southern Europe to northern Europe, with red hair variants increasing as one moves north.

Naturally the more carriers of red hair variants there are in a population, the more red hair will show up in that population, since it is a recessive trait. That is why red hair, while not unknown in southern Europe, is relatively scarce there.

Here are a set of maps of the frequency of carriers (not actual redheads) of three of the most common red hair variants. The set comes from 23andMe.

16816

I can't see the attachment.

MitchellSince1893
06-13-2017, 01:27 PM
... I dont do a lot of looking at these trees - is the 400 year gap between P312 and the TMRCA. Does that mean that while P312 could date to 2800BC or a few centuries earlier, they actually all descend from a guy 400 years later?...

From YFull FAQ

Subclade "formed" age: The TMRCA (time to most recent common ancestor) of a subclade is used as the "formed" age of each branch of the subclade. Stated otherwise, the formed age of a branch is the same as the TMRCA of the "parent" subclade of that branch.

Determination of TMRCA for a subclade: The general rule is that the TMRCA of a subclade is equal to the average age (after rounding) shown in the yellow bar of the YTree "info" pop-up table for the subclade. In the situations where the general rule is not followed YFull will add an explanatory note at the bottom of the pop-up table. Rounding rules: An age of less than 500 ybp is rounded to the nearest "25" (e.g., 267 becomes 275); an age of 500 to 1999 is rounded to the nearest "50" (e.g., 1267 becomes 1250); and an age of 2000 or more is rounded to the nearest "100" (e.g., 2267 becomes 2300).

So the formed age for P312 is the same as TMRCA calculation of R-L151

For details on how they determine TMRCA
https://www.yfull.com/faq/what-yfulls-age-estimation-methodology/

I don't want to open this can of worms again, but to state what we do know so far on dates:
P312>U152 RISE563 was born around 4500 ybp /2550 BC (at death his sample dated 2572 to 2512 BC). To account for all the mutation events in the Bigtree at ytree.net, U152 (and DF27) has to be at least 3 generations below P312.

By this alone we know Yfull's TRMCA for P312 has to be earlier than the currently stated 4400 ybp.

Yfull is incorporating data from recently released ancient dna samples into their next version so hopefully we will see some date revisions to align with the ancient samples.

rms2
06-13-2017, 01:31 PM
I can't see the attachment.

I'm not on my home computer. This one sometimes does not work as it should. I'll try again.

16817

Shadogowah
06-13-2017, 01:55 PM
I'm not on my home computer. This one sometimes does not work as it should. I'll try again.

16817

Eupedia states there are eight mutations associated to the readhead trait but those maps only take three of them into account, it seems.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/dna_traits_list.shtml#rufosity

rms2
06-13-2017, 01:59 PM
. . .

So the formed age for P312 is the same as TMRCA calculation of R-L151 . . .


So, really, the formed age of P312 should be thought of as sometime between the tmrca of L151 and P312's own tmrca. It could have formed anytime in that interval, but we don't know exactly when.

Sorry if I just opened the can of worms you were talking about. That wasn't my intention.

rms2
06-13-2017, 02:01 PM
Eupedia states there are eight mutations associated to the readhead trait but those maps only take three of them into account, it seems.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/dna_traits_list.shtml#rufosity

That's right, but those are three of the most common. There are many many red hair variants, but many of them are pretty rare.

I think if you look further, you will find that red hair variants are far less common in southern Europe than they are in northern Europe.

MitchellSince1893
06-13-2017, 02:13 PM
So, really, the formed age of P312 should be thought of as sometime between the tmrca of L151 and P312's own tmrca. It could have formed anytime in that interval, but we don't know exactly when.

Sorry if I just opened the can of worms you were talking about. That wasn't my intention.

IMO, the absolute latest for P312 date range (very optimistic timing) is 2700 BC, but I would say there is less than a 10% chance it's this young.

Kopfjäger
06-13-2017, 05:29 PM
I noticed that in the second update of the History of South-eastern Europe paper, two Corded Ware samples are still regarded as R1b: RISE436 and RISE431.

P.s.: only to amuse... did you notice the grave goods of the R1b1 individual I2430? That person looked like he was very aggressive! A stone axe and a copper wedge!
P.p.s.: I read that I2430 came from a Copper Age tell... isn't it a sort of kurgan?

Are those samples confirmed R1b? I remember Rich Rocca saying something earlier about some of these samples being more likely R1a than R1b.

Kopfjäger
06-13-2017, 05:34 PM
That's right, but those are three of the most common. There are many many red hair variants, but many of them are pretty rare.

I think if you look further, you will find that red hair variants are far less common in southern Europe than they are in northern Europe.

I don't wanna derail this thread, but I was born with red hair, yet I do not inherit the MC1R or whatever is associated with it.

Joe B
06-13-2017, 05:54 PM
I know it wasn't and I was aware of all that. In becoming defensive because I mentioned the obvious fact that Z2103 is relatively sparse in central and western Europe, you missed the point.

There are literally thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin. If all the male skeletons in them were Z2103, one naturally wonders what happened and why Z2103 did not expand more robustly into central and western Europe.

I think the reason is because not all the male skeletons in those thousands of Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin were Z2103. Probably some or even many of them were, but I think it likely some of them belonged to Z2103's brother clade under L23, L51.

All those places you named are eastern, like the Z2103 Yamnaya finds thus far. We have no Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic steppe or the Carpathian Basin. Maybe when we do get it, it will all be Z2103. But let's wait and see.



That was a petty remark. Sorry you became defensive because I wondered aloud why Z2103 isn't more frequent in central and western Europe, if all those Yamnaya kurgans in the Carpathian Basin contain male skeletons are Z2103.

I'm not too bad at being a smart ass myself, but I will refrain from using one or more of the obvious synonyms for donkey to respond in kind. ;)

The simple point I was trying to make between Z2103 and L51 is that there wasn't a competition for central and Western Europe. Whoever is thinking all those Carpathian kurgans are Z2103 will probably be sorely disappointed. It's my opinion that these two brother clades went in completely different directions. Probably from somewhere on the Eurasian steppe. Likely this was caused by a climatic event. The cultures that L51 to the west and Z2103 to Southwest Asia encountered were completely different with different outcomes for procreation. One can visualize that the domesticated horse is the superior vehicle each had.
The smart ass donkey comment had more to do with the lack of horse related archaeological evidence to go with the osteological evidence. Perhaps I naively expect that the North American experience of cultural disturbance when the domesticated horses was introduced would be similar in ancient Europe.
As you know, I'm capable of being a smart ass too. Guess this is a good case of it takes one to know one. :)
On a side note, I live in a valley where the horse business is number one by dollar volume. The osteological evidence of who seriously rides a horse and who doesn't is all around. That look comes early during the growing years.

TigerMW
06-13-2017, 07:48 PM
So the formed age for the R-P312 haplogroup is the same as TMRCA calculation of R-L151
We should consider that the earliest estimated "formed" of the R1b-P312 can be no earlier than the age of the L151 MRCA. The branch itself began to form uniquely with one son of the L151 MRCA but P312 may not have been in him, but could have occurred in one of his descendants.


I don't want to open this can of worms again
I know people don't like the L151 MRCA family puzzle pieces but I don't think they can be dismissed out of hand because of culturally related hypotheses. I'm purposely aggregating these post replies into one so as to lessen the annoyance.


P312>U152 RISE563 was born around 4500 ybp /2550 BC (at death his sample dated 2572 to 2512 BC). To account for all the mutation events in the Bigtree at ytree.net, U152 (and DF27) has to be at least 3 generations below P312.
By this alone we know Yfull's TRMCA for P312 has to be earlier than the currently stated 4400 ybp.

Absolutely. The TMRCA of a subclade, ie. P312, must older than any and all of its descendant subclades TMRCAs.

... and I agree that P312's TMRCA has to be at least as old as RISE563, which looks to be 4400 ybp. Due to problems with YFull's inability (and no one else has figured it out yet) to adjust for uneven subclade branch lengths I've always suggested that YFull's TMRCA for P312 should be very close in age to the U106 TMRCA of 4800 ybp.


I am no geneticist or expert at SNP counting, but one thing I noticed is that there isn't a big stack of SNPs at the P312 level indicating a bottleneck or a long time with the SNP engine idling before the major subclades were born. YFull shows just two SNPs at the P312 level. ISOGG shows just one.
Absolutely, this what I've been pointing to as the close genetic distance between the L151 MRCA and P312 and U106 MRCAs.



At the L151 level, on the other hand, YFull shows 12 SNPs. There are five at L51. There are just three at L23, but we all know there was some kind of massive bottleneck at M269, where there are over a hundred SNPs.
Yes, the difference in relationship between any M269+ individual and any R1b M269- individual is vast. You would have to go back to the ages of the P297 MRCA, about 13300 ybp, to find any confidence of a cultural relationship between an M269+ and an R1b M269- person. This is why P297* and V88 finds don't mean much to the origin and expansion of L23.


So, really, the formed age of P312 should be thought of as sometime between the tmrca of L151 and P312's own tmrca. It could have formed anytime in that interval, but we don't know exactly when.
I don't like the word "formed" for this because of the confusion, but the branch that became R1b-P312 started (formed if you will) with the first pre-P312 or P312+ son of the L151 MRCA. On the other hand the SNP P312 may not have occurred with the first son for the branch that was forming as R1b-P312.

In many respects, the important dates are the TMRCA dates, not the "formed" dates. The MRCA dates represent successful subclades and a set of close descendant TMRCAs suggests a successful population expansion.


Admittedly, most of the R1b-L23 in Yamnaya has been Z2103, but L51, as I have emphasized so many times before, is Z2103's brother clade under L23. It wouldn't be a real shocker for L51 (in the form of its subclades that were present) to turn up in Yamnaya.
Okay, to come around full circle to the points I've made about the L151 MRCA's family. It clearly would not be shocker for L51 to turn up in Yamnaya because brothers Z2103 and L23* have already.

Likewise, it would be even less of a shocker for U106 to show up in the same specific culture as P312 and the L151 MRCA. The genetic distances are very close. This is a puzzle piece that has to be accounted for or attempted to be argued away by reason of exception that there was pause in SNP occurrences between the L151 MRCA and P312.

The L151 family's early decendants' culture is unknown but the colors and interlocking sections of the puzzle pieces says they are of the same culture.

Coldmountains
06-13-2017, 08:53 PM
A bit off-topic but could the difference among CW groups and its derivatives (Fatyanovo, Abashevo etc) be that some absorbed the GAC and other didnt?

Fatyanovo-Balanovo showed mixed Corded Ware/GAC traits. Not sure about Abashevo but i guess it had some GAC traits because it was in some way linked/derived from Fatyanovo-Balanovo. Also Sintashta/Andronovo showed already EEF admixture which could be GAC derived. It seems that Fatyanovo-> Abashevo -> Sintashta/Andronovo were ultimately derived from the Middle Dnjepr culture which was in the contact between GAC and steppe herders. But the lack of EEF among some Baltic Corded Ware people (later Estonian Corded Ware already showed it) means that the earliest Corded Ware expansions, where not necessarily driven by hybridization with GAC or that mixing with GAC/CT people was at first limited to some clans in the contact zone, which later rapidly expanded into all directions because they adopted new steppe-farmer hybrid technolgies. It is also interesting that my rare mtdna H28 was found at first among GAC people in Poland but now H28 is rather typical for the Baltic region, North Europe and is also found in Britain. It seems that Corded Ware and likely also Bell Beakers spread GAC mtdna all over Europe

jeanL
06-13-2017, 10:26 PM
Yes, the difference in relationship between any M269+ individual and any R1b M269- individual is vast. You would have to go back to the ages of the P297 MRCA, about 13300 ybp, to find any confidence of a cultural relationship between an M269+ and an R1b M269- person. This is why P297* and V88 finds don't mean much to the origin and expansion of L23.

We know that the Blatterhole farmer/hunter R1b had both derived and ancestral SNPs in the R1b-M269 line; therefore he was a lot closer to the R1b-M269 than Samara HG; Samara eNeolithic; and even the Baltic HGs. Also; he was modeled as being ~39% WHG and 61% Farmer.

jeanL
06-13-2017, 10:43 PM
I'm referring to Bla16; here is the appropriate quote from the Supplementary info: (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQMlpkck9QVjIwLUE/view)


This Blatterhole_MN individual was derived for six SNPs within the P clade (L781, L741, P226, P237, P239, M45), one SNP characteristic for haplogroup R (P227), one for R1 (P238), and the sole representing SNP for R1b (M343). Subclade R1b1 was defined by L278. R1b1a1a2 showed both derived and ancestral alleles of characteristic SNPs. Thus, he could only be assigned to haplogroup R1b1.

16834

We will have to wait until the release the BAM files to see how many ancestral and derived SNPs he had in the R1b-M269 line. We know that by 3300 BC R1b-L23* and R1b-Z2103 were already in Yamnaya. This fellow has an age range of 3958 BC- 3344 BC; also apparently his Hunter Gatherer/farmer admixture is modeled as occurring 15+-5.8 generations ago; therefore if using 25 years/generation then his admixture date is 4478 BC-3574 BC; if using 30 years/generation then 4582 BC-3620 BC.

Gravetto-Danubian
06-13-2017, 11:00 PM
I'm referring to Bla16; here is the appropriate quote from the Supplementary info: (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQMlpkck9QVjIwLUE/view)



16834

We will have to wait until the release the BAM files to see how many ancestral and derived SNPs he had in the R1b-M269 line. We know that by 3300 BC R1b-L23* and R1b-Z2103 were already in Yamnaya. This fellow has an age range of 3958 BC- 3344 BC; also apparently his Hunter Gatherer/farmer admixture is modeled as occurring 15+-5.8 generations ago; therefore if using 25 years/generation then his admixture date is 4478 BC-3574 BC; if using 30 years/generation then 4582 BC-3620 BC.

Although only listed as "R1b" there was a Romanian (Transylvania) Eneolithic individual also with high WHG :EEF .
Would be interesting to analyse him too.

I think there might have been several M269 lineages, of which only 2 really began to expand in the late Copper age – L51 & Z2103. Perhaps they were all around Romania & the western steppe; and prospered from development/adaptation of the Kurgan package

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6wTyrhNIuWM/WSc8Tti_WqI/AAAAAAAAFqA/JlTXFMfDt5Ai5PwD0m4hLcgLdjfOWVYBQCLcB/s1600/Gonzalez-Fortes_Table_1.png

rms2
06-13-2017, 11:39 PM
The simple point I was trying to make between Z2103 and L51 is that there wasn't a competition for central and Western Europe. Whoever is thinking all those Carpathian kurgans are Z2103 will probably be sorely disappointed. It's my opinion that these two brother clades went in completely different directions. Probably from somewhere on the Eurasian steppe. Likely this was caused by a climatic event. The cultures that L51 to the west and Z2103 to Southwest Asia encountered were completely different with different outcomes for procreation. One can visualize that the domesticated horse is the superior vehicle each had.
The smart ass donkey comment had more to do with the lack of horse related archaeological evidence to go with the osteological evidence. Perhaps I naively expect that the North American experience of cultural disturbance when the domesticated horses was introduced would be similar in ancient Europe.
As you know, I'm capable of being a smart ass too. Guess this is a good case of it takes one to know one. :)
On a side note, I live in a valley where the horse business is number one by dollar volume. The osteological evidence of who seriously rides a horse and who doesn't is all around. That look comes early during the growing years.

There is plenty of archaeological evidence for horse domestication and horse riding in Bell Beaker, so I am not sure what you are getting at.

From The Civilization of the Goddess, page 391:



Horse bones in a series of sites provide a clue to the mobility of the Bell Beaker people. Analysis of animal bones from the sites at Budapest (Csepel Hollandiut and Csepel-Haros) have shown that the horse was the foremost species of the domestic fauna, constituting more than 60 percent of the total animal bones. This suggests a large-scale domestication of the horse in the Carpathian basin. Bell Beaker migrations were carried out on horseback from central Europe as far as Spain (where horse bones have also been found in Bell Beaker contexts). The horse also played a significant role in religion, as can be seen from the remains of the horse sacrifice where skulls are found in cremation graves . . .

rms2
06-13-2017, 11:46 PM
. . .

Likewise, it would be even less of a shocker for U106 to show up in the same specific culture as P312 and the L151 MRCA. The genetic distances are very close . . .

I think where I disagree with you with regard to P312 and U106 is how long that cultural unity persisted and to what extent. They might have begun in the same steppe milieu but something happened along the way to divert U106 into the Germanic trajectory and away from the Italo-Celtic trajectory.

Maybe U106 was in Bell Beaker, but it hasn't made much of a showing in it thus far. As I said before, there is more I2a and G2a than U106 in Bell Beaker, and that is even if that doubtful, intrusive-looking, rather late Dutch U106 burial is credited as Bell Beaker.

alan
06-13-2017, 11:46 PM
It is curious that the start of Central European bell beaker coincides with the onset of an exceptionally dry period.

rms2
06-14-2017, 12:10 AM
I'm referring to Bla16; here is the appropriate quote from the Supplementary info: (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQMlpkck9QVjIwLUE/view)



This Blatterhole_MN individual was derived for six SNPs within the P clade (L781, L741, P226, P237, P239, M45), one SNP characteristic for haplogroup R (P227), one for R1 (P238), and the sole representing SNP for R1b (M343). Subclade R1b1 was defined by L278. R1b1a1a2 showed both derived and ancestral alleles of characteristic SNPs. Thus, he could only be assigned to haplogroup R1b1.

. . .

Am I missing something? If he could only be assigned to R1b1-L278, then aren't L754, L388 and P297 some big holes to fill before we get to how many derived and ancestral alleles he had at the M269 level?

Evidently, Blätterhöhle wasn't even derived for L754, L388 and P297, let alone M269. Lipson et al would have called him R1b1a if he was derived for L754 at least, would they not?

Silesian
06-14-2017, 12:49 AM
Not really familiar with this branch of R1b [P312?]learn something new everyday :).Looks like it has not made much of an impact in Yamnaya kurgans perhaps because of it's relatively younger age; if any[0%?]I'm sure that will change, with more samples.
Local European distribution pattern[p312] compared to Z2106/08/09/10 is rather lackluster. The Yamnaya/Sarmatian line sure covers a tremendous amount of area;perhaps due do its age and or use of Ox wagon and or horse, include to date- Yamnaya kurgans/Sarmatian sample/Gujarati/Punjabi India,Dagestan,Iraq and now Greece.
R-P312P312/S116/PF6547 * Z1904/CTS12684/PF6548formed 4800 ybp, TMRCA 4400 ybp/R-Z2108Z2109/CTS1843 * Z2108formed 6100 ybp, TMRCA 6100 ybp
https://yfull.com/tree/R-P312/
https://yfull.com/tree/R-Z2108/
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/R1b-M269xP312xU106_tree_38_05_30_2017.png

rms2
06-14-2017, 12:55 AM
No one has actually cracked open any kurgans on the Pontic steppe or in the Carpathian Basin yet to try and get some Yamnaya y-dna from them. Everything thus far has been pretty eastern, with the exception of one from SE Bulgaria that was I2a2a1b1b.