PDA

View Full Version : Early R1b-Zarzian hunter gatherers in Iran?



alan
08-09-2013, 02:06 PM
I believe that the most likely position for P25* and upstream in the period 15000BC-9000BC when there was little else in R1b is likely in northern Iran where more of this has been observed than anywhere else. That corresponds with the Zarzian culture very well. The date match is rather uncanny. Factors like the LGM, deserification and apparent abandonment of north central Asia in the LGM and enormous flooding just after the LGM of south Russia and western north central Asia and the east Caucasus limit the options. Iran was the least effected zone by these post-LGM floods.

It is also well known that north-south and south-north movement was greatly hampered in the period 15000-12000BC especially. The younger dryas make also have delayed this. It seem unlikely that it moved north before this given the lack of P25* in the north and the barrier that existed to this which appears to have coincided with the first 3000 years of its existence. It is interesting that the opening up of opportunities for P25* lines to head north does date to the same period as P297. It is clear from the lack of any remains of the P297* until 5000BC that it had moved out of the early farming zone before 8000BC. So you could say that provides a nice pair of bookends pushing this hypothetical move into the period around 9000BC. This is exactly the date estimated for P297. I need to dig about a bit more for evidence of this sort of move although I already quoted an example of a move through the Caucasus into Russia a little north of the Caucasus in this timeframe.

The Zarzian is thought to descend from members of the Baradostian culture of the Zagross who surived the LGM by abandoning the uplands. My guess would be a move to the south Caspian. The Barodostian is similar to Aurignacian of Europe and similar Levantine cultures. It dates from about 35000BC to the LGM. IMO that sort of date and distribution is a very good match for the proposed split of F into the IJ line of the Levant and Anatolia and the K line. That almost takes us back to the origin of modern humans in the area. Perhaps the K and then P lines headed from the Iran sort of area. There original distribution was probably very much altered by the abandonment of much of north central Asia during the LGM followed by massive flooding in western north-central Asia which both may have pushed many lines south and east. Anyway,. it would seem a reasonable supposition that R* arose in the LGM among some of the groups. If the Zarzian is descended from earlier Baradostian Aurignoid groups in the Zagros who abandoned the uplands in the LGM that would suggest that may have been the cultural identity and location of R* and upstream of that. However, there were other Aurignoid groups in north central Asia before the LGM so I wouldnt push this.

So, it seems to me that Zarzian groups in northern Iran may have been the source of early R1b, best represented by P25*, and the most likely date of their offshoot north is around 9000BC when a move north probably finally had a combination of possibility and attractiveness. This is very close to the date of P297. This also makes sense because it is necessary to get this line out of the zone of early farming which appears from the complete lack of P297* anywhere to have passed this line by, the latter tottering on the edge of existence until the 5000-3500BC era.

alan
08-09-2013, 05:11 PM
Papers on the Zarzian

This one does waffle a lot about the Levant as its far better studied but it is not strongly suggesting an origin there.

humanities.journals.modares.ac.ir/?_action=showPDF...255...

There is one problem with my theory. The Zagros area was involved in the Neolithic fairly early. I notice on the web attemps to link it to J and also to nostratic. Speculative to say the least. However, it is more to the elements on the Caspian that I am looking to. Just chewing over an idea really.

This is an abstract for a new paper behind a paywall for similar cultures of the same date in the Caucasus. Would love to be able to read it.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618212003035

newtoboard
08-09-2013, 05:44 PM
Papers on the Zarzian

This one does waffle a lot about the Levant as its far better studied but it is not strongly suggesting an origin there.

humanities.journals.modares.ac.ir/?_action=showPDF...255...

There is one problem with my theory. The Zagros area was involved in the Neolithic fairly early. I notice on the web attemps to link it to J and also to nostratic. Speculative to say the least. However, it is more to the elements on the Caspian that I am looking to. Just chewing over an idea really.

This is an abstract for a new paper behind a paywall for similar cultures of the same date in the Caucasus. Would love to be able to read it.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618212003035

And linking it to R-P25* is speculative as well. But I agree with you on the Caspian being more important for R. The linking of it to J is likely based on the diversity of J around the Zagros and Taurus mountain ranges and its likely this wasn't a homogenous culture given it being distributed from Iraq to Central Asia. It also apparently seems to have contributed to the Hissar Culture.

Also I have never heard about the IJ* line of the Levant and Anatolia. We have no idea where IJ* originated or its ancient distribution but so far it has only been found in Iran.

RCO
08-10-2013, 02:26 AM
I think R1b and R1a were not natives and had not been around the Northern Iranian Alborz and the Southern Caspian shores in the Paleolithic and the Mesolithic Eras because they also had never been in the Eastern Caucasus Slopes where we can find the old and basal types of J1's. I think R1 (R1a and R1b) just crossed through the Northern Caspian shores via the steppes where no agriculture or civilization was established in the early Neolithic Age. If R1 (R1b and R1a) had crossed the Iranian Plateau they would had moved with (or at least) would had brought (pick or drag) also some of the Ancient Iranian haplogroups to Eastern and Western Europe, what obviously didn't happen in the same way that we can't find any concentration of R1 in the relic populations of the Caucasus, what possibly can mean that R1 types just crossed the relatively empty corridor of the Northern Steppe towards Europe coming from Central Asia (close to the common ancient origins of haplogroup P-Q) and the Iranian Plateau was the native cradle of haplogroup IJ where the most basal types had been found.

alan
08-10-2013, 05:47 PM
As far as I can see the major early splits in the populating of SW Asia and Europe split after F into lines leading to G, then the IJK split that leads to a split that leads to the Europe and SW Asia groups of I and J on the one hand and the second branch that leads ot R, Q and many eastern haplogroups. The impression I get is IJ is potentially old enough to be linked to either Aurigacian or Gravettian elements in the middle east but I is not old enough to have entered Europe until the Gravettain period. So, IJ was probably very old in SW Asia

its brother K branch led to R, Q, N and many far and SE Asia branches. So there feels like there was a bifurking of the IJK branch in terms of the K branch that leads to R, N, Q and many others having a more easterly feel and IJ having a more SW Asian and later a European feel. IJK is dated on Wiki to about 40000BC while IJ is placed about 35000BC and K is placed at about 45000BC by the same source. Any improved dates from better sources are very welcome. Especially given that source makes K OLDER than its IJK ancestor. A further upstream cousin H branch that leads to G and others is said to date to about 46000BC on wiki. Its most famous subclade G is dated far too imprecisely on wiki.

The broad picture of that seems to fit

1. An entry into Eurasia of CF a the beginning of human settlement 50000 years ago largely taking a southern route east bypassing much of SW Asia. This seems to be a very early wave that doesnt relate closely to the later brother branches.

2. Then a probable more stay-home brother SW Asian brother branch H about 46000BC splitting by 40000BC into the IJK branch on one hand and another branch that later led to G etc on the other.

3. Shortly after a split into the more stay-home IJ SW Asian branch one the one hand and the K branches that led to several including R ETC.

4. Then the K branch splitting into what seem to be branches that either stayed in SW Asia but in most cases headed eastwards. In terms of K, the K* branch of that looks likely to me to have been initially a stay-home branch in SW Asia
i
5. K's split into main MNOPS (also known as KxLT) into LT have a collective distrubtion that also points to a centre point for K in SW Asia maybe around Iran and fringing central Asia. I

6. MNOPS led to several branches including NO dated to 30-40000BC that led to N and O which must have headed east across north central Asia and P (which led to R and Q among others).

7. The P branch of K that ultimately led to R and others also looks like it ran eastwards generally from somewhere like Iran or the west end of north-central Asia. The current position of P* in south-central Asia cannot be considered a safe indicator of the position of the origin of P because of the southward expulsion of the north-central Asian population and also probably upland areas of Iran etc in the LGM. It may give a very broad idea of longitude though. i still suspect a position around Iran and maybe the west of north-central Asia as the starting point of P. The age given on wiki is far too broad to be meaningful

8. There seems a big gap in time between P and its branches Q and R. . I suspect the distributions and dates point to the impact of the LGM desertification on settlement in the western part of north central Asia. This seems likely to be the source of the splitting in Q and R. It makes sense to see a position for R* somewhere like Turkmenistan and adjacent. Then the worst of the ice age took hold with the area being evacuated, R2 or its immediate ancestor headed south due to and the ancestral lineage of R1 made a shorter move to the Caspian shores. This split might reflect nuances in the positions of different R* groups at the time when the LGM took a grip. R1 would seem to date to the end of the LGM when this were still pretty grim but better climate was just around the corner. So, it must have spent a fair part of the LGM in the state of an R* lineage probably in the south Caspian area, existing at the same time and in parallel to the R2 and other R*people who largely headed much further south (can anyone elaborate on the best route through the mountains for R2 from somewhere like Turkmenistan to India).

Given the abandonment of north central Asia to a large degree during the LGM cannot expect modern R* forms to reflect the positions held just before the LGM around 24000 to 18000BC The ancesors of R1 were just one R* lineage from perhaps 25000BC to 16500BC when R1 emerged. So, most of the LGM, perhaps it all, was spent in the R* form. In fact the coincidence is almost perfect. Any early R* people in north central Asia would have left fairly early in the existance of R and spent most of the LGM somewhere less hostile like the south Caspian or further south. R* probably has a distribution that partly reflects this abadonment of most of north central Asia and flight south, as of course does the R2 clade which seems to be an older sister branch of R1 that headed towards India during the LGM. R1* only appears at the end of the LGM and probably should partly reflect its position then although unlike R*, it at least soon after its period of coming into existance had a theoretical chance to expand north from a likely starting point in the south Caspian. This was caused by the end of the LGM.

However, this would have been hugely complicated by the sudden enormous expansion of the Caspian that happened c. 15000-10000BC and was especially dramtic in the first couple of millenium when it presented a massive water barrier of cascading seas stretching from Bulgaria to beyond the Aral Sea. It also seems to me that the R1* phase was very short compared to the R* phase and that R1a and b quickly followed R1*, possibly limiting the latters impact. which particularly would have e that might be a short phase before R1a and b emerged. So, it seems to me that late R1* and early R1a and b would have all potentially faced that massive water barrier.

It is possible that they could have just slipped north between their coming into existence, the warming up period and the massive flood but that seems to have been a narrow window of opportunity. Judging from R1*, 343 and P25* they may not have taken this brief chance to head north - which may not have been at all attractive anyway. One thing to bear in mind is the differences between the hunters on the north and south side of the Caspian. The latter were hunting sheep, goats, deer, the odd tortoise etc. The former were living in treeless steppe-tundra in houses built of mammoth tusks and hunting monsters like the latter. That would not have been an easy shift to make and I imagine pretty frightening. I know, I know, I would have preferred my y ancestor fighting mamoths etc rather than hunting goats and the heroic tortoise hunting lol. So, I personally now doubt any great wish to push north c. 16000BC for the eariest r1a and b groups.

The especially dramatic boundary to south-north movement caused by the cascading of the inland seas around 15000-13000BC would have made movement from somewhere like Iran, the Caucasus etc impossible without the most epic and insane journeys. The situation changed with the end of the Manych-Kerch spillway at some point around 12 of 13000BC. That date probably provides a bookmark for movement of R groups into Russia. That would slowly have dried out to a degree that it provided what might have been the only dryland route between north and south of the Portic Caspian Aral zonee. That would have allowed groups to pass up the shores of the Black and Caspian Seas on either side of the central Caucauses which were probably a ridiculously formidable barrier in that period which was topped of by the water barrier in the north Caucasus area up to 12/13000BC although I would doubt it became passible immediately and must have been a horrible swampy band for some time after so I personally would doubt this barrier was crossed for some centuries. There is also the climate to take into account and othe push-pull factors.

In terms of push, it is worth noting that the expansion of the Caspian had only a modest effect on Iran compared to the absolute turmoil and displacement it caused to the north, east and to a lesser degree in the eastern Caucasus. Anyone displaced from the latter had to head south or into the moutains to the west or perhaps into the narrow band between the Meych-Kerch spillway and the high Caucasus. So, I cannot see groups from the south Caspian Iran in particular moving much in this phase.

Another thing is that in terms of pull factors the hunters in the Iran and parts of the Caucasus area seem to have adapted to the hilly land for a long period hunting sheep, goats etc and I am not convinced they would have been hugely attracted by chilly marshy plains that were rapidly becoming innundated in south Russia and the west of central Asia even if they could have reached them.Finally, the early period of possible crossing including the Younger Dryas which not only made northern areas very cold again but would have made everywhere away from rivers, lakes and seas horribly arid.

That all makes me think that the most likely earliest period of intrusion of R groups from the south into Russia and adjacent may have been immediately after the Younger Dyas when conditions improved, the sea levels settled down and the environment of the western steppe area improved. I do however also think this happened in pre-farming times and that the P297 was out of the zone of early farming influence from the origin date of the SNP c 9000BC as there is basically no trace of the P297 between then and 5000-3500BC when M73 and M269 arise. That would effectively mean the movement happened c. 9000BC as the Younger Dryas ended.

newtoboard
08-10-2013, 06:20 PM
F split into G and HIJK not IJK so I think IJ is a bit more eastern than previously thought.

Not sure how you think H is SW Asian or am I misunderstanding your second point?

alan
08-10-2013, 09:00 PM
I am actually surprised how looking at the detail of the environment, seas, archaeology, variance dating and populations genetics really does suggest that R* may have originated just before the LGM among hunters in the countries immediately east of the Caspian and R1* may have originated at the end of the LGM among thoseof the former group who had legged it to the south Caspian. After that possibilities and push-pull factors may have been very limited for a northward movement until 9000BC but just at that time P297* moved north. It is possible to argue that it was even later but earlier seem unlikely to me unless modern patterns and extinctions of lineages has hugely distorted things. In terms of later periods, I dont think we can place P297 in Anatolia or anywhere south or west of that as they recieved farming too early to correpond to the non-existant imprint of P297 from 9000BC until the period 5000-3500BC when M73, M269 and L23 emerged after the big sleep. It also seem counter to the logic of the rest of the model using modern distribtions to place P297 in an area where its earliest subclade doesnt exist such as Iran. M73 dates to 5000BC which is pretty well the time farming spreads to northern and north plateau Iran as well as the north Caucasus. However, there is basically zero M73 in Iran and none except in Turkic groups in the north Caucasus. Also none in the south Caucasus. So, its very tempting to simply rule out those areas as the area where P297 was hiding in the 4000 years between that SNPs existance and that of M73. The process of elimination suggests to me that P297 is indeed the R1b clade that headed north from the south Caspian (where it ancestors had lived since the LGM) before the farming revolution effected the southern areas. This pretty well, assuming variance estimates are reasonable correct, had to have happened between the period of the P297 SNP c. 9000BC and the rise of M73 c. 5000BC. I would refine that further though because it really looks like P297 had flown the nest north before farming started to penetrate areas like north Iran plateau, the north Caucasus etc, areas which have practically no M73 anyway. So, I would further refine that move to almost having to have taken place some time between 9000 and 6000BC. I would further feel that its not due to an intrusion of farmers give the lack of any P297* which we should see in the period 9000-5000BC if it was doing well.

I think we may be looking for an epipalaeolithic or Mesolithic cultural intrusion into south Russia from somewhere around the south Caspian and adjacent in the period 9000-6000BC. However it is not absolutely impossible that a little P25* could have died out in a population of hunters that was barely reproducing itself so I dont think we can totally could have enterred in that form and gave birth to P297 in situ. That could push the date back a little. There was at least the possibility for a clade like P25* that existed from perhaps 14000BC to cross into Russia via the Caucasus from maybe 12000BC. The relationship of such a movement to the younger dryas c. 11000BC to 9500BC is hard to work out. P25* might have just slipped in to the north as the route oppend up but before that cold snap. So, broadly I think we are looking at an intrusion into the north from the south Caspian or adjacent either in P25* form just before the Younger dyas c. 12-11000BC or some time after the YD which ended about the time P297 arose c. 9000BC.

The problem with ruling out the earlier window of opportunity on the grounds of a lack of P25* in the north is that this lack is also true of P297* everywhere. So its a potential problem for this attempt to bookend it and all sorts of scenarios could be imagined. It actually seems an unfortunate rule of thumb that the hunter gatherer period can often basically leave almost zero trail of their earlier generations. That seems to have happened to P297 and there is no reason to suppose it wouldnt have happened earlier.

That is where the doubt to this model, based to an extent on modern population studies as it is. That is where it could be badly out. So, these doubts are worth exploring a little. Rewinding a bit in time, it seems fair enough to say that R*was probably in central Asia and driven south to both places like India as R2. There is little doubt that the LGM's desertification effect in north central Asiao and its effect on R* and early R2 fits well. The real question is where it went to. South and west to the Caspian seems logical but can we rule out that central Asian R* didnt also move north into the also settled steppe tundra area on the north side of the sea. The Caspian was a lot smaller than today during the LGM. Is it possible that the whole sequence from R* to R1* to R1b/a happened in the north in the period 25000BC to 15000BC but they all died out. That would also of course require leaking out of R1* and early R1b and a subclades south for some reason that would need explained. I cannot see any evidence of the sort of north-south movements that would cause these early clades to spill south. During the period when R1 was coming into being at the end of the LGM the small Caspian would not have been a major barrier and easier to move around it. However, around the expected time for R1a and R1b's early days the main process effecting populations would be the relentless driving of the shores outwards, presumably pushing populations far to the north and east rather than south. Its also true that the channel that linked the Caspian and Black Sea appeared around the time of this flooding and warming phase. That again would create a barrier c. 15000BC to 12000BC give or take i.e. the same barrier would have prevented north-south movement as south-north. Again this only seems to have freed up by 12000BC. So, its unlikely that early R1b clades could have even theoretically moved south from an unlikely hypothetical northern location until 12000BC or later. Soon after that was the younger Dryas which I suppose would create a theoretical reason for moving south c. 11000-9500BC. By this period the Caspian was stablising near to its historical size range. However, that is close to the date of P297 and it would seem paradoxical to place a more northern looking clade in the south at that period while imagining P25*, a more southern clade, as being the northern donor. Even allowing for continual line death in the north that is pushing things to an illogically paradoxical conclusion.

One final observation may be conclusive in elimination the north-south option. That is that northern and north plateau Iran and most of the Caucasus were also very late to recieve farming, apparently between 5000BC and 6000BC. So, it is only fair to say that those areas were also subject to the same sort of conditions for lineage survival as the north side of the Caspian and the steppes until perhaps 5000BC. So, it probably unfair to think that farming has preserved early lineages in places like northern Iran or the Caucasus when farming was very late. So, on balance it seems easier to interpret the Iranian evidence, with its fairly high amount of early R1b clades compared to the steppes as a genuine reflection of where early R1b, R1 and almost certainly R1a probably arose.

alan
08-10-2013, 09:37 PM
F split into G and HIJK not IJK so I think IJ is a bit more eastern than previously thought.

Not sure how you think H is SW Asian or am I misunderstanding your second point?

Think I was getting out of my comfort zone going that far upstream. Was just trying to see how the Eurasian haplogroups connect back to the very beginnings. They seem to not have a clue about F. My impression from what is said about the paragroup is it lightly travelled all over making its origin really unknown.

WIKI STATES

This megahaplogroup contains mainly lineages that are not typically found in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting that its ancestral haplogroup CF may have been carried out of Africa very early in the modern human diaspora, and F-M89 may have appeared 48,000 (38,700-55,700) years ago, probably in Eurasia.[1]

According to the phylogeographic distribution of haplotypes observed among South Asian populations defined by social and linguistic criteria, the possibility arose of haplogroup F might have originated in or near India, and F-M89* might share a common demographic history with H-M69, C5, R2 and L1.[4] The presence of several subclusters of F-M89 and K that are largely restricted to the Indian subcontinent is consistent with the scenario that a coastal (southern route) of early human migration out of Africa carried ancestral Eurasian lineages first to the coast of the Indian subcontinent, or that some of them originated there.[5]

Other sources mention that this ancient haplogroup may have first appeared in North Africa, the Levant, or the Arabian Peninsula as much as 50,000 years ago (50,300±6500).[6] It is sometimes believed to represent a "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa. However, the location of this lineage's first expansion and rise to prevalence appears to have been in South Asia or somewhere close to it within the extended Middle East. All of Haplogroup F's descendant haplogroups also show a pattern of radiation from South Asia (haplogroups H, F* and K) or the Middle East (haplogroups G and IJ).

Several lineages derived from Haplogroup F-M89 appear to have migrated into Africa from a homeland in Southwest Asia sometime during prehistory. Y-chromosome haplogroups associated with this hypothetical "Back to Africa" migration include J, R1b, and T

I plumped for SW Asia simply based on the geography of the next downstream and the basic out of Africa flow aspect further upstream. However, I dont have a clue that far upsteam and was just trying to work through it in my head. Still, F is important as the ancestor of HIJK and G. It would be really interesting if our distant ancestors were part of an early out of Africa wave by a southern route that reached India before heading north. I hadnt ever thought about that far upstream. I had always really just assumed it was via the Levant into the middle east then central Asia then somehow west again into Europe. Might explain my love for Indian food :0)

newtoboard
08-10-2013, 09:59 PM
I am actually surprised how looking at the detail of the environment, seas, archaeology, variance dating and populations genetics really does suggest that R* may have originated just before the LGM among hunters in the countries immediately east of the Caspian and R1* may have originated at the end of the LGM among thoseof the former group who had legged it to the south Caspian. After that possibilities and push-pull factors may have been very limited for a northward movement until 9000BC but just at that time P297* moved north. It is possible to argue that it was even later but earlier seem unlikely to me unless modern patterns and extinctions of lineages has hugely distorted things. In terms of later periods, I dont think we can place P297 in Anatolia or anywhere south or west of that as they recieved farming too early to correpond to the non-existant imprint of P297 from 9000BC until the period 5000-3500BC when M73, M269 and L23 emerged after the big sleep. It also seem counter to the logic of the rest of the model using modern distribtions to place P297 in an area where its earliest subclade doesnt exist such as Iran. M73 dates to 5000BC which is pretty well the time farming spreads to northern and north plateau Iran as well as the north Caucasus. However, there is basically zero M73 in Iran and none except in Turkic groups in the north Caucasus. Also none in the south Caucasus. So, its very tempting to simply rule out those areas as the area where P297 was hiding in the 4000 years between that SNPs existance and that of M73. The process of elimination suggests to me that P297 is indeed the R1b clade that headed north from the south Caspian (where it ancestors had lived since the LGM) before the farming revolution effected the southern areas. This pretty well, assuming variance estimates are reasonable correct, had to have happened between the period of the P297 SNP c. 9000BC and the rise of M73 c. 5000BC. I would refine that further though because it really looks like P297 had flown the nest north before farming started to penetrate areas like north Iran plateau, the north Caucasus etc, areas which have practically no M73 anyway. So, I would further refine that move to almost having to have taken place some time between 9000 and 6000BC. I would further feel that its not due to an intrusion of farmers give the lack of any P297* which we should see in the period 9000-5000BC if it was doing well.

I think we may be looking for an epipalaeolithic or Mesolithic cultural intrusion into south Russia from somewhere around the south Caspian and adjacent in the period 9000-6000BC. However it is not absolutely impossible that a little P25* could have died out in a population of hunters that was barely reproducing itself so I dont think we can totally could have enterred in that form and gave birth to P297 in situ. That could push the date back a little. There was at least the possibility for a clade like P25* that existed from perhaps 14000BC to cross into Russia via the Caucasus from maybe 12000BC. The relationship of such a movement to the younger dryas c. 11000BC to 9500BC is hard to work out. P25* might have just slipped in to the north as the route oppend up but before that cold snap. So, broadly I think we are looking at an intrusion into the north from the south Caspian or adjacent either in P25* form just before the Younger dyas c. 12-11000BC or some time after the YD which ended about the time P297 arose c. 9000BC.

The problem with ruling out the earlier window of opportunity on the grounds of a lack of P25* in the north is that this lack is also true of P297* everywhere. So its a potential problem for this attempt to bookend it and all sorts of scenarios could be imagined. It actually seems an unfortunate rule of thumb that the hunter gatherer period can often basically leave almost zero trail of their earlier generations. That seems to have happened to P297 and there is no reason to suppose it wouldnt have happened earlier.

That is where the doubt to this model, based to an extent on modern population studies as it is. That is where it could be badly out. So, these doubts are worth exploring a little. Rewinding a bit in time, it seems fair enough to say that R*was probably in central Asia and driven south to both places like India as R2. There is little doubt that the LGM's desertification effect in north central Asiao and its effect on R* and early R2 fits well. The real question is where it went to. South and west to the Caspian seems logical but can we rule out that central Asian R* didnt also move north into the also settled steppe tundra area on the north side of the sea. The Caspian was a lot smaller than today during the LGM. Is it possible that the whole sequence from R* to R1* to R1b/a happened in the north in the period 25000BC to 15000BC but they all died out. That would also of course require leaking out of R1* and early R1b and a subclades south for some reason that would need explained. I cannot see any evidence of the sort of north-south movements that would cause these early clades to spill south. During the period when R1 was coming into being at the end of the LGM the small Caspian would not have been a major barrier and easier to move around it. However, around the expected time for R1a and R1b's early days the main process effecting populations would be the relentless driving of the shores outwards, presumably pushing populations far to the north and east rather than south. Its also true that the channel that linked the Caspian and Black Sea appeared around the time of this flooding and warming phase. That again would create a barrier c. 15000BC to 12000BC give or take i.e. the same barrier would have prevented north-south movement as south-north. Again this only seems to have freed up by 12000BC. So, its unlikely that early R1b clades could have even theoretically moved south from an unlikely hypothetical northern location until 12000BC or later. Soon after that was the younger Dryas which I suppose would create a theoretical reason for moving south c. 11000-9500BC. By this period the Caspian was stablising near to its historical size range. However, that is close to the date of P297 and it would seem paradoxical to place a more northern looking clade in the south at that period while imagining P25*, a more southern clade, as being the northern donor. Even allowing for continual line death in the north that is pushing things to an illogically paradoxical conclusion.

One final observation may be conclusive in elimination the north-south option. That is that northern and north plateau Iran and most of the Caucasus were also very late to recieve farming, apparently between 5000BC and 6000BC. So, it is only fair to say that those areas were also subject to the same sort of conditions for lineage survival as the north side of the Caspian and the steppes until perhaps 5000BC. So, it probably unfair to think that farming has preserved early lineages in places like northern Iran or the Caucasus when farming was very late. So, on balance it seems easier to interpret the Iranian evidence, with its fairly high amount of early R1b clades compared to the steppes as a genuine reflection of where early R1b, R1 and almost certainly R1a probably arose.

Glad to see we finally agree on something. :)

It actually looks the southern part of Iran received farming first (especially if Mehrgarh is dated to 7000 BC and considering the lack of typical North Iranian lineages in the South Asian and South Central Asian gene pool).

newtoboard
08-10-2013, 10:01 PM
Think I was getting out of my comfort zone going that far upstream. Was just trying to see how the Eurasian haplogroups connect back to the very beginnings. They seem to not have a clue about F. My impression from what is said about the paragroup is it lightly travelled all over making its origin really unknown.

WIKI STATES

This megahaplogroup contains mainly lineages that are not typically found in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting that its ancestral haplogroup CF may have been carried out of Africa very early in the modern human diaspora, and F-M89 may have appeared 48,000 (38,700-55,700) years ago, probably in Eurasia.[1]

According to the phylogeographic distribution of haplotypes observed among South Asian populations defined by social and linguistic criteria, the possibility arose of haplogroup F might have originated in or near India, and F-M89* might share a common demographic history with H-M69, C5, R2 and L1.[4] The presence of several subclusters of F-M89 and K that are largely restricted to the Indian subcontinent is consistent with the scenario that a coastal (southern route) of early human migration out of Africa carried ancestral Eurasian lineages first to the coast of the Indian subcontinent, or that some of them originated there.[5]

Other sources mention that this ancient haplogroup may have first appeared in North Africa, the Levant, or the Arabian Peninsula as much as 50,000 years ago (50,300±6500).[6] It is sometimes believed to represent a "second-wave" of expansion out of Africa. However, the location of this lineage's first expansion and rise to prevalence appears to have been in South Asia or somewhere close to it within the extended Middle East. All of Haplogroup F's descendant haplogroups also show a pattern of radiation from South Asia (haplogroups H, F* and K) or the Middle East (haplogroups G and IJ).

Several lineages derived from Haplogroup F-M89 appear to have migrated into Africa from a homeland in Southwest Asia sometime during prehistory. Y-chromosome haplogroups associated with this hypothetical "Back to Africa" migration include J, R1b, and T

I plumped for SW Asia simply based on the geography of the next downstream and the basic out of Africa flow aspect further upstream. However, I dont have a clue that far upsteam and was just trying to work through it in my head. Still, F is important as the ancestor of HIJK and G. It would be really interesting if our distant ancestors were part of an early out of Africa wave by a southern route that reached India before heading north. I hadnt ever thought about that far upstream. I had always really just assumed it was via the Levant into the middle east then central Asia then somehow west again into Europe. Might explain my love for Indian food :0)

I wonder if both HIJK and G both originated from F in South Central Asia. It seems likely K and then LT originates in Central Asia rather than the old theory of L migrating east. I do recall some theories on G originating near the Hindu Kush mountains.

alan
08-11-2013, 11:21 AM
lol. Had to happen sooner or later. I think we just got off on the wrong foot somewhere. I am not Eurocentric and never thought a northern origin that likely for a number of reasons but I think its best to consider all options. I just post in a thinking out loud way. Just putting ideas out there to see if they would stand up. I find it the best way to find out what works and doesnt because people are sure to tell you if they dont.

Its completely impossible for most mortals to understand all periods in all places so this hobby drags me and I suppose everyone to have to look into areas they are not familiar with the Palaeolithic to copper age of the circumCaspian area although I still need to work a bit on the Neolithic of the east side. So, this hobby is a learning process for me, including the archaeology. Its taken me months of my spare time to get to grips with the whol I now will be far better at questions about the Caspian area in pub quizes! There is just an incredible amount of data across Eurasia on archaeology, climate, the seas etc etc and it takes quite some time to read around it.

It takes me a long time to even convince myself of anything but I think at least now I have convinced myself to my own satisfaction of the early part of the R and R1 and early R1b story at least broadly speaking. It was important for me to work out the likely starting points. Without that its impossible to then look at the options for P297. The next thing for me then is to look at the archaeology of south-north movements at the end of the Palaeolithic, Mesolithic etc. The bookends for that period are most likely about 95000BC to 6000BC in the period when P297 arose but before farming became a big factor. I need now to look at the possible indications of input into more northern areas in that span, probably spreading from somewhere between the SE shores of the Caspian and the Caucasus although as the rock carvings in Azerbaijan show, marine travel was an option from the upper Palaeolithic.

I am so impressed by those carvings and the way they bring to life the late Palaeolithic hunters around the south Caspian area. I realise that they are perhaps not litterally those of our ancestors but I imagine that groups could easily move all around the south Caspian shoreline in that period, sometimes forced to do so by sea level changes etc so I think they were probably similar peoples which indeed is what the archaeology suggests. I am a bit dissapointed by the lack of a good single collection of images on the web. I hear they just opened up a museum devoted to the rock carvings which are an Unesco site. If it is every confirmed that R roots are in south Caspian hunters I think I will get some prints of them framed!


Glad to see we finally agree on something. :)

It actually looks the southern part of Iran received farming first (especially if Mehrgarh is dated to 7000 BC and considering the lack of typical North Iranian lineages in the South Asian and South Central Asian gene pool).

alan
08-11-2013, 11:57 AM
In terms of the title of the thread I am not 100% sure if Zarzian is the best term for those hunters or at least it should be noted that there were a number of epipalaeolithic groups of broadly similar type in both north Iran and the Caucasus that could have been linked to the early R1 story. The action of the sea would have moved them around the south Caspian shores, so they seem likely to be closely related, which indeed is what the epipalaeolithic archaeology suggests. it will probably never be possible to recover the detail of the movements given that the shores of the Caspian Sea of the LGM are now under the middle of the sea and the land between those shores and the maximum, which presents the shorelines of the LGM to 12000BC would mainly be buried under marine depostits now on dryland. So, as I have explained before, this makes the settlement traces of shoreline life of the whole period from 20-odd thousand BC to 12000BC close to impossible to recover except where maybe erosion on shores or unusually deep development works penetrate though the post-LGM marine deposits. The best chance of understanding of these groups is probably to be found on the high inland terraces left by the maximum of the Caspian Sea dating to around 12000BC. The below map probably gives a good impression of where the peoples living on the shores of the south Caspian c. 15000-12000BC would have been located and also where the best probability of remains surviving area.

http://paleogeo.org/Flood_big_en.jpg

Broadly speaking most of the shores of that period that look relevant appear to be in norIran and the Caucasus. There is also the fascinating possibility of groups being divided by the barriers. I wonder about the north Caucasus area sort of cut off between the mountsins of the Caucasus and the the spillway to the north. Not exactly totally trapped though as they could still come around the steep shore of the east Caucasus southward. Then there is another possibility that the link between the Aral and Caspian sea could have isolated a group on its north side. This though would have been in the era where R1* gave rise to early R1b (P25) and R1a clades so it is possible that the different patterning between the two could date to this sort of period when groups were kind of pushed apart by the expanded seas and in some cases isolated from each other. Michal has mentioned a theory about a spread of R1b up the east side of the Caspian but I wonder if this is not as likely a scenario for R1a given its probably later links with the Caspian-Urals area.
I dont know the details of these terrace but I know they are known in north Iran and the Caucasus, including around the rock carvings in Azerbaijan.

alan
08-11-2013, 01:58 PM
I have been reading Hunters in Transition, which I suspect is Michal's core source for his idea of a move up the east side of the Caspian to the Urals. Its a magnificent book which I havent read in years. Although rather old now its still the best overview of the period in English for that area and at least a base to work on. I actually think Michal may well be onto something with his idea.

Having convinced myself of a south Caspian location for R1 and earliest R1b and a, there are basically only two obvious land routes into the north side of the sea - either up the eastern or western shores. One problem with the western route at the end of Palaeolithic anyway is that the cultures of that period in the Ukraine steppes are connected from an early date with those around the west of the Black Sea and later also to those of the Baltic and seem extremely unlikely to be R related. I would expect the Ukraine steppe area to have had a hunter-gather population that shared a lot in common with SE and Baltic Europe. That seems hugely unlikely to be R related.

There is also the issue that the main clade in the north, P297, has its earliest subclade with a fairly easterly distribution and I suspect an origin close to the Urals. So, Michal really may be onto something. The attraction of the eastern side of the Caspian went from very little beyond immediate shore-side settlement to something more attractive in the wetter phase in the Mesolithic period. According to Zvelebil the cultures of the end of the palaeolithic on the east side of the Caspian at the west end of north central Asia look derived from south Caspian ones around Iran.

I notice when I google Yangelskaya culture that its already been talked about a lot on the web-almost all the hits are hobbiest DNA sites, although more in relation to R1a than R1b. No reason it couldnt be both of course. The modern clades in the area all date to much later so we cannot be sure. I hadnt really considered this in detail before as my researches were basically moving from west to east and hadnt quite reached the east Caspian. I suppose my question is why link it with R1a rather than R1b? After all the oldest P297 clade M73 could nicely fit that sort of model. While R1a could have been involved, there are not clades as old as M73 or with such a nice potential fit in distribution. Funny enough I have wondered about L23xL51 also having some peaks around the Urals in pre-Russian populations. That is much more speculative however, and a lot later in time than M73 is.

M73 doesnt get the attemtion it deserves IMO. Its lack in SE or east central Europe and SW Asia strongly suggests a location near the Ural area. If it had been further west during the early steppe waves it would have been well represented in the Balkans and east-central Europe. Its distribution to the west basically stops at the Ukrainians of east Moldova and its strenght in the Urals area and east is noticeable. I would say its lack in the Balkans shows it was west of the Dneiper-Don areas and towards the Urals in the period c. 4500-4000BC.

As the oldest P297 clade that needs to be taken as a serious indicator of an origin of the M73 SNP close to the Urals. The P297* part of the trail is lost completely and suggests a location in non-farming area up to c. 9000-5000BC give or take a millenium. The non-farming area of that time includes northern Iran and adjacent areas as well as the steppes. Northern Iran is the hotspot of P25* and M73* has a hotpsot around the Urals. So, P297* looks like it could have been involved in south Caspian hunters who moved north in the period between the latter two SNPs c. 9000-5000BC. You could argue that M73 could represent the late period of those hunters with arrival of farming influences in that area in the second half of that period.

That would seem the most simple explanation for the pattern without getting too much into complex special pleading. So, having finally made my mind up on a south Caspian refuge in the LGM, I can really see Michals point. He might well be right. My reading had not made it quite far enough to the east to see that clearly but it does make a lot of sense. The exact position of R* elements, R1* and early R1b on the south Caspian shores doesnt really matter IMO as they likely were all connected along the shoreline from the SE Caucasus to NE Iran in the period 25000-10000BC.

I am going to have a dig about to see if more recent research backs up Zvelebil's ideas of a late Palaeolithic to Neolithic migration up the east side of the Caspian. I tend to avoid Anthony's opinions on things like this until I read other papers first and only look at him after I have done that so I can make my own mind up. I just think Anthony often makes stuff seem more clearcut than they are to create a flowing narrative. His book doesnt have a current rival book on the same subject unlike in 20 odd years back when we had the Mallory-Renfrew books out at the same time. That makes his book appear like the IE bible which I dont think is healthy given that Russians and Ukranians have some really good experts with different spins on this but lost mainly by a language barrier. Mallory also avoided the overdone narrative style of Anthony which I think tends to drive Anthony towards brushing over of doubt a lot more than Mallory ever did.

newtoboard
08-11-2013, 02:20 PM
In terms of the title of the thread I am not 100% sure if Zarzian is the best term for those hunters or at least it should be noted that there were a number of epipalaeolithic groups of broadly similar type in both north Iran and the Caucasus that could have been linked to the early R1 story. The action of the sea would have moved them around the south Caspian shores, so they seem likely to be closely related, which indeed is what the epipalaeolithic archaeology suggests. it will probably never be possible to recover the detail of the movements given that the shores of the Caspian Sea of the LGM are now under the middle of the sea and the land between those shores and the maximum, which presents the shorelines of the LGM to 12000BC would mainly be buried under marine depostits now on dryland. So, as I have explained before, this makes the settlement traces of shoreline life of the whole period from 20-odd thousand BC to 12000BC close to impossible to recover except where maybe erosion on shores or unusually deep development works penetrate though the post-LGM marine deposits. The best chance of understanding of these groups is probably to be found on the high inland terraces left by the maximum of the Caspian Sea dating to around 12000BC. The below map probably gives a good impression of where the peoples living on the shores of the south Caspian c. 15000-12000BC would have been located and also where the best probability of remains surviving area.

http://paleogeo.org/Flood_big_en.jpg

Broadly speaking most of the shores of that period that look relevant appear to be in norIran and the Caucasus. There is also the fascinating possibility of groups being divided by the barriers. I wonder about the north Caucasus area sort of cut off between the mountsins of the Caucasus and the the spillway to the north. Not exactly totally trapped though as they could still come around the steep shore of the east Caucasus southward. Then there is another possibility that the link between the Aral and Caspian sea could have isolated a group on its north side. This though would have been in the era where R1* gave rise to early R1b (P25) and R1a clades so it is possible that the different patterning between the two could date to this sort of period when groups were kind of pushed apart by the expanded seas and in some cases isolated from each other. Michal has mentioned a theory about a spread of R1b up the east side of the Caspian but I wonder if this is not as likely a scenario for R1a given its probably later links with the Caspian-Urals area.
I dont know the details of these terrace but I know they are known in north Iran and the Caucasus, including around the rock carvings in Azerbaijan.

I would be curious to hear his ideas on R1a's spread. He seems to rule out a western route so I can't think of any other route for R1a.

Jean M
08-11-2013, 05:20 PM
I have been reading Hunters in Transition, which I suspect is Michal's core source for his idea of a move up the east side of the Caspian to the Urals.

It is certainly what I cite for the cultural link between the two regions. I also point to the same material found in connection with the famed petroglyphs of boats at Gobustan on the coast of the Caspian. I had already deduced that the people concerned most likely crossed the Caspian by boat, simply because the terrain makes that the most attractive option, and that such crossings in the Mesolithic made the best sense of the R1b/R1a pattern we see. I still have my notes from 2009, which I circulated to a couple of people for comment before I plunged into public with the idea. Makes me feel quite nostalgic. :)

newtoboard
08-11-2013, 05:41 PM
It is certainly what I cite for the cultural link between the two regions. I also point to the same material found in connection with the famed petroglyphs of boats at Gobustan on the coast of the Caspian. I had already deduced that the people concerned most likely crossed the Caspian by boat, simply because the terrain makes that the most attractive option, and that such crossings in the Mesolithic made the best sense of the R1b/R1a pattern we see. I still have my notes from 2009, which I circulated to a couple of people for comment before I plunged into public with the idea. Makes me feel quite nostalgic. :)

Do you see both R1a/R1b traveling together or did one make the journey north first?

Is there any support for movements across the Caspian in the east-west direction (might explain R1b-L23 in Central Asia being close to Caucasian R1b and the presence of Y-DNA L1c in the Caucasus.)?

Michał
08-11-2013, 06:12 PM
I would be curious to hear his ideas on R1a's spread. He seems to rule out a western route so I can't think of any other route for R1a.
I would indeed exclude the Western route, but only if this is dated to the early Neolithic period. Some earlier R1a migrations through Anatolia are still possible (though not very likely, IMO).

At the moment, I suspect that a very small group of R1a* people has arrived to Eastern Europe from Central Asia, and this would need to have happened very early (i.e. before 10-8 ky BC). However, we simply have not enough confirmed cases of R1a*, R1a1* and R1a1a* to say something more in this regard. I know that Underhill’s data suggest a relatively high frequency of those rare R1a species in West Asia (including Iran, Turkey and even Egypt), but he also reported a surprisingly high level of R1a1* in Scandinavia (Sweden and Norway), yet upon some closer investigation all three R1a1* cases from Sweden turned out to be very dubious, to say the least. Most importantly, we haven’t found a single FTDNA customer from West Asia (or Scandinavia) who would be R1a(xM417), so I need to remain sceptical as to the West Asian origin of R1a (at least until some cases confirmed with both SNPs and STRs are reported).

Jean M
08-11-2013, 06:13 PM
Do you see both R1a/R1b traveling together or did one make the journey north first?

Here's an old image of mine. It is out-of-date in details of R1b subclades, but you get the idea. I am guessing that R1* made seasonal crossings from a winter refuge in the southern Caspian to summer hunting on the steppe over many generations. Eventually the mutations would occur that created R1b and R1a. It would be just chance which side of the Caspian their descendants happened to decide to settle all year round.

I must stress that this is speculative. We need ancient DNA.

Click to enlarge:

608

Michał
08-11-2013, 06:32 PM
Here's an old image of mine. It is out-of-date in details of R1b subclades, but you get the idea.
Your scenario is actually much closer to what Alan has recently suggested, but I will wait for your book before making any specific comments. :)

Jean M
08-11-2013, 08:07 PM
I will wait for your book before making any specific comments. :)

Won't be long now! By the way, the speculative map of R1b that I posted above is not in the book. I am only posting it now to illustrate the cross-Caspian idea.

Jean M
08-11-2013, 08:17 PM
Your scenario is actually much closer to what Alan has recently suggested

No - Alan's scenario is similar to mine. :) The date on that map is 2011. The date of the notes in which I laid out the deductions for the Southern Caspian refuge was 2009. Alan's post plumping for the same is dated August 2013.


[[[Mikewww/Moderator on 08/11/2013: I'm not going to try to compare scenarios between originators, but I'll just ask that we not worry about authorship on this thread since that draws it off topic. I recognize that all copyrights, etc. should be respected, though.]]]

alan
08-11-2013, 08:45 PM
its amazing when you google the name of the culture all you get in English Zvelebil, DNA hobbiests and lots of Russian stuff for several pages. The lack of more recent stuff on this culture on the web is frustrating.

Anyway, if Yangelskaya and related phenomenon is related to a south Caspian movement north around 8000BC or that sort of timeframe then regardless of whether it is R1a or R1b related it does seem to be indirect confirmation of the south Caspian position of R groups prior to that. The sort of area we are talking about in the south Caspian is probably represented by the remains of epipalaeolithic groups in northernmost Iran from 10000BC or slightly earlier. I notice there is a general feel in the comments on some papers that its not clear if it is the same as Zarzian and may not be. The latteR might make sense as the Zarzian is especially linked to the Zagros which is a bad fit for R1b due to the rather early stage of farming there - several millenia earlier than in northern Iran's Caspian shores and northern plateau.

There are also comments about the lack of sites on the south Caspian area before the epipalaeolithic. However, this is surely a product of the sea level changes masking older remains - leaving the LGM shores under the present sea and the post-LGM shores under innundation deposits now on dryland. These deposits can be many metres deep and unless eroded in some way they would mask the archaeology of the period 15000-12000BC very effectively.

During the LGM the shrunken Caspian must have had a much smaller ciruit of shore and its northern shore was significantly further south for today's. So, IMO back in that period the only thing stopping people from wandering to the northern shores would have been the worse climate. Again though, this area is lost under the waters and probably under massive depth of underwater silt. So, I think, bar a miracle we will not find remains dating to the LGM around the Caspian shores and it will also be very hard to find remains of the warming phase 15000-12000BC due to the deposits made by the temporary expansion of the sea that would have covered most of them. All we can really hope to find are the high terrace deposits of c. 12000BC and periods after than when the shore progressively shrank again. Maybe where erosion by rivers, quarries, landslides etc has happend their might be an exception. So, in general I think we need to focuss on the very late or epi palaeolitic of the south Caspian shores as the possible remains of fairly early R1b/a ancestors. The data seems a little poor though for these late hunting groups of the south Caspian c. 12000BC-9000bc.

I would also like to understand a little more how close the relationship was between the late hunters in the north Iran Caspian area and the east Caucasus. Its hard to say how close they would be. In theory around the small LGM Caspian you would think the plains around the south-west shore of the shrunken Caspian would link into similar narrower ones then exposed on the south shore. You would think they would have been closely in touch. However, the east Caucasus did experience drastic flooding in the 15000-12000BC area that must have had a huge impact, much more than the southern shore. Basically it would have driven them either south towards Iran or into the mountains, an area that had other late palaeolithic groups. My feeling is that shore dwellers would stick to the shore if possible and move either with it or along it. If I had to guess I would think they may have moved to the south shores where flooding was less drastic. Alternarively the new waters of the Manych-Kerch spillways south shore might have been an attraction.

Problem yet again is that the shores there between the LGM and 12000BC or so also were subsequenly flooded either temporaily or permanently in the case of the LGM western Caspian shores. So, again, it is probably only from 12000BC or after that we have much of a chance of finding the sites of south-western Caspian shore dwellers. It is also interesting that there is evidence of the increase of fishing and appearance of depictions of boats by 8 or 9000BC around parts of the Caspian area.

Certainly it seems to me that the remains of the R1*phase c. 16500BC and the millenia or so after are well beyond likely detection. I would extend that to any remains of hypothetical early R1b peoples up to 12000BC and maybe later. So, we will probably never find the remains of very early R1b or the earlier P25* groups. We might find those of later P25* groups of c. 12-9000BC though.

alan
08-11-2013, 09:54 PM
Your scenario is actually much closer to what Alan has recently suggested, but I will wait for your book before making any specific comments. :)

I did already point out that the web was full of discussion about this when I googled the culture name. Its been discussed a lot over the years. The posts were probably mostly by Jean although I didnt open any of them up as I was looking for recent published archaeological papers in English. There were none.

newtoboard
08-11-2013, 10:04 PM
Normally someone is happy when someone else does quite a bit of research over a period of months and comes to a similar conclusion on something. Especially if they are a professional in one of the relevant subjects related to this. If you had just left that post from Newtoboard untill I saw it I would have corrected him myself and that would have been happy days all round instead of leaving a bad taste in the mouth. In fact I DID point out that when I googled the culture name that lots of hobbiest posts on this came up - hardly something I would point out if I was trying to claim originality. So, there was no need to post that. I would have dissabused him of crediting me.


I think you meant to write Michal instead of me?

alan
08-11-2013, 10:10 PM
I think you meant to write Michal instead of me?

Sorry newtoboard.

newtoboard
08-11-2013, 10:32 PM
Sorry newtoboard. I am a bit riled by Jean's post.

No problem.

alan
08-11-2013, 10:52 PM
No - Alan's scenario is similar to mine. :) The date on that map is 2011. The date of the notes in which I laid out the deductions for the Southern Caspian refuge was 2009. Alan's post plumping for the same is dated August 2013.

Jean

I know I am years behind on this. I have only really got into the steppe details, Caspian, Iran, Caucasus etc over 2013 to a degree which would satisfy myself that I can conclude. I pretty well ignored the subject because I wasnt a believer in steppe R1b until recently so I have had a lot of catching up to do on that this year. When people posted detailed stuff on this it was pretty well Greek to me. I might have been guilty in the past of having opinions before I had done the research when it comes to the circumpontic-Caspian area and have only really put that right by reading 100s of onlne papers and books over the last 6 months and it is still not completed. As you know, I have to work stuff out for myself and I dont honestly think a person can do that without doing a hell of a lot of research for themselves rather than summaries from others. I have not researched or written a book on the subject and I am still on a learning curve in terms of the eastern part of the possible story.

[[[ Mikewww/Moderator on 08/11/2013: Well, I'm definitely guilty of having opinions before having done thorough research, but let us not gauge one on another on our research or timing, but rather let's try to focus on on the topic and its points. I'm not sure where the right place for worrying about credit is, but let it be elsewhere. ]]]

Jean M
08-12-2013, 09:52 AM
@ Alan

I understand perfectly what you are doing. It is what I suggest my students do i.e. set aside the obvious secondary sources on their chosen research topic until the primary sources have been assessed, so that they are not overly influenced by the standard works on the topic and come to it with a fresh eye. Once they have their own ideas, they can then include the standard source(s) and discuss whether they agree or disagree. This avoids two intellectual traps
1) Being over-deferential towards authority.
2) Striving deliberately to differ from authority in the desire to make a mark.

Bear in mind though that your readers here do not necessarily know what you are doing. I do. You don't need to explain to me. But others may be somewhat confused as you arrive triumphantly at conclusion A, a month or so before my book comes out with conclusion A. Have I copied you? No folks. It takes a long time to get from writing to print. :)

Michał
08-12-2013, 11:57 AM
@ Jean and Alan

I feel a bit guilty of causing so much confusion, so Jean and Alan please accept my apology. I have a lot of respect to both of you and don’t want you to accuse each other of anything because of my awkward comment. :)

alan
08-12-2013, 02:02 PM
@ Alan

I understand perfectly what you are doing. It is what I suggest my students do i.e. set aside the obvious secondary sources on their chosen research topic until the primary sources have been assessed, so that they are not overly influenced by the standard works on the topic and come to it with a fresh eye. Once they have their own ideas, they can then include the standard source(s) and discuss whether they agree or disagree. This avoids two intellectual traps
1) Being over-deferential towards authority.
2) Striving deliberately to differ from authority in the desire to make a mark.

Bear in mind though that your readers here do not necessarily know what you are doing. I do. You don't need to explain to me. But others may be somewhat confused as you arrive triumphantly at conclusion A, a month or so before my book comes out with conclusion A. Have I copied you? No folks. It takes a long time to get from writing to print. :)

It would be impossible for you to copy me seeing the web is full of your work and you have had your text done for a long time and your ideas on that particular culture etc go back several years. I dont think too many people care about my warbling on the web anyway compared to the interest there will be in your book and I am anonymous anyway so I am not bothered about any sort of recognition. Although you could be the next Dr Who and have travelled in a tardis from 2010 to the future and copied my post from yesterday before nipping back to 2010 :0)

alan
08-12-2013, 02:11 PM
@ Jean and Alan

I feel a bit guilty of causing so much confusion, so Jean and Alan please accept my apology. I have a lot of respect to both of you and don’t want you to accuse each other of anything because of my awkward comment. :)

Ach storm in a tea cup. I have bad insomnia and was just grumpy and took it as an implication of copying ideas at the time. Its not my style to agree with almost anyone's ideas without satisfying myself I have done enough primary research to make a final call. Its just taking a long time to read about all periods everywhere in western and central Eurasia! I am targeting finishing my reading before 2050.

alan
08-12-2013, 09:23 PM
I was thinking there. It really is impossible on DNA evidence to recover the period between p297 and M73 c. 9000-5 or 6000bc. I usually make a presumption that non-existence of P297* is a sign of non-farming locations which I think is reasonable. However that trick doesnt help with hypothetical movement from the south Caspian area to the steppe as neither area really got dragged into farming much before the age of M73. All we can infer is that P297 probably began in the south where the ancestral forms p25* are located c. 9000BC and it was probably on the other side of the Caspian by 5-6000BC when M73 which is virtually absent in Iran was born. So, the move could have taken place anytime between 9000 and 6000BC based on DNA alone. I would probaby narrow that to 9000BC-6000BC as farming influences started to arrive soon after in the southern area and there is a lack of P297* anywhere so I think its unlikely that such a clade got caught up in farming. You could also argue that its pretty unlikely that the first P297* person had an M73 son. Possible but seems unlikely to me. The only other clue is the take off of M73 itself, apparenty not in Iran and most likely on current evidence near the Urals although displacement cannot be ruled out by any means. So, lets say around 6000BC better times suddenly occurred for P297 and that unless present distribution is an illusions this occurred somewhere at the east end of the European steppes/Urals. I doubt it is an illusion though. The Balkans, which recieved several waves from the western steppes c. 4200BC to after 3000BC lacks M73.

Another tangential clue is the even longer period between P297 and M269 with no remaining clades of the period in between. What made M269 even slower to take off, maybe by 1000 years or more? Did its P297 remain somewhere less advantagious for longer? I dont think one genetic evidence alone it can yet be ruled out that P297 occurred on the south Caspian but its two lineages that led to M73 and M269 need not have moved at the same time or direction. However, the same logic of having to see the pre-M269 as in a non-farming area applies. So, again I would be wary of seeing M269's ancestors much after 6000BC as remaining behind in the south somewhere. So, the pre-M269 line would also appear to have existed the south not much later than 6000BC. It also has the bookend of an age usually estimated to 4000BC or a little before although its distribution is less distinct. In theory it is possible that P297 lines could have moved from the south early simultanteously around both sides of the Caspian or across it although I havent see an real evidence of something like that in the archaeological record (I still need to understand the epipalaeolitic of the whole southern half of the Caspian better). Its simpler to look at it as a single movement of P297* lines some time between 9000 and 6000BC.

A couple of climatic push factors spring to mind in that period. There was the begining of the pre-boreal and boreal phases where it got less cold and arid across Eastern Eurasia which might have made the north more attractive. One other effect of this period was the dramtic spread of woodland in varous phases although how that affected the circum-Caspian region I have no idea unless I read into it. The usual effect of this was a dramtic change in the frontiers of where animals lived. Whether this was a good or bad thing kind of depends on what you were used to. You could move north with your old quarry or adapt to the new environment. Again, I really am not sure about this but I have read something to the effect that the south Caspian was wooded and perhaps that was the sort of environment the hunters were used to. If that sort of environment spread north, so might the hunters. Does anyone have any knowledge on this? I dont have the time to look into it myself right now. I understand the south Capian hunters fished, hunted mainly goat, sheep, deer etc but this shifted with time. I think the Gobustan rock carvings show the sequence of change in that area. Although the possibility of boat travel at this time is proven by those carvings etc, there is also the possibility of simply following the coast or maybe a mix of the two coast hugging. The variations of the Caspian are baffling but I would imagine there might have been a temporary low in the younger dryas when it got arid and cold and then a slight rise again after, that and any of the other variations could easily hide the remains of a shoreline treck. Such a spread of a south Caspian type environment north might have been a pre-farming push factor. Perhaps the further warming made the south Caspian less attractive - a push factor. Was the north Caspian area relatively attractive spot for people used to south Caspian conditions as forrest spread? Then there is the role of the Caspian Sea and its changes. Anyway, I need some environmental info before that thought can be taken further.

This is modern times but look just how beautiful the woods of north Iran are:

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

RCO
08-13-2013, 09:35 PM
YHRD
Rasht, Iran [Gilaki]
http://www.yhrd.org/YP000517

SMGF has also collected some haplotypes from that region. I have matches from Astane and Rasht in my J-M365 cluster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astaneh-ye_Ashrafiyeh

Just as a curiosity the climate and vegetation in Northern Portugal and in Southern Brazil are more or less similar to the Caspian Hyrcanian mixed forests, so we are a type of "green and wooded" type of J1.

alan
08-19-2013, 06:42 PM
http://archaeology.org.az/pdf/AASIA&E%20presentation7.pdf

I came across this on the net. Towards the end it gives some nice maps showing the changes in environment from the LGM through to post-glacial times. It gives some indication of the waxing and waning of the type of environment that south Caspian peoples would have been adapted to. There is also a graph showing neatly the complexity of the Caspian Sea across this period.

It shows that the environment that south Caspian peoples were used to did indeed change with the invasion of forrests and that this sort of environment did extend north up much of the west of north-central Asia. That is possible a push and pull scenario for people with hunting-gathering-fishing preferences. The Younger Dryas created a shock that resulted in partial return of unattractive environments in north central Asia for such a group. Finally something close to modern conditions returned. It is noticeable that a patch of similar environment survived in the north Caspian during the Younger Dryas when conditions in north central Asia deteriorated.

If one wanted to be environmentally deterministic we could suppose the adapted environment for R* and R1* is that shown on the LGM perod map running from the south Caucasus through Iran and towards India. This environment then after the LGM was altered in the Caucasus and northern Iran by the invasion of trees etc but spread up the west side of north central Asia. Then the Younger Dryas returned the latter back into the LGM type desert conditions which would surely have been yet another major displacement event. The options for people who had spread north at that stage was either to head south again or remain in the small band just north of the Younger Dryas desert, an area which interestingly does include the area of the NE corner of the Caspian which included a similar land environment and a sea shore as that of the south Caspian in the LGM . That strikes me as a potential splitting even in the R1 family but how it might have split is unclear. This is close to the time when P297 split from other R1b lines. It could possibly have been a geographical one too.

alan
08-19-2013, 10:34 PM
The map showing the Khvalynian phases around the Caspian also has to be mentally combined with the ecological map. In the LGM the Atelian Caspian was very much smaller, especially in a northerly direction and any seasonal movement around it would have been restricted to areas now under the southern two-thirds of the sea. That sort of period is probably pre-R1* if Karafet's dating is correct. It seems that early R1* and R1b lived in the post-LGM warming period where north central Asia became more attractive and similar to the south Caspian. However, they also faced the full effect of the early Khvalynian which included the Uzboy spillway to the east which, short of using boats, would have involved a very large journey east to bypass and it seems much of the land to the north of the spillway remained desert. The water barrier seems to have disappeared by the middle Khvalynian C. 15500-13000bc but it seems the desert area between the north Caspian and Aral Sea remained and a lot of the lowlands of the west of north-central Asia remained underwater. It seems to me that although not impossible, there would have been a lot of issues in expanding north in this era and it may not have happened. The desertification that returned to north central Asia again in the Younger Dryas would in all probability have forced the majority who had expanded north back south again. So, these maps add a little more detail to the consideration that permanent R1b expansion into the north Caspian area seems unlikely to pre-date 10000BC. That tallies fairly well with the apparent fact that R1b seems to largely be P297 derived in the north while P297 negative clades seem to be a southern phenomenon. I suppose around 9000BC, according to these maps, there was a period when the middle of the east Caspian shores would not have been in a similar ecozone as the south.