PDA

View Full Version : Oldest Steppe Bell Beakers: Saxony-Anhalt, Germany



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

alan
07-12-2018, 12:54 PM
A. Kazarnitsky « Onthe biological distinctness of the Pit Grave / Yamanaya people in the Northern Caspian : cranial evidence shows that the Kalmykia-Astrakhan region of the North-West Caspian Sea and Lower Volga were very different from other Yamnaya groups, Maykop and Armenia in being brachycephalic,broad faced/cheekbonesd, high headed With fairly prominent noses. A very beaker like sounding ‘Dinaric’ combo. I find this interesting as it tends to confirm the generally belief that there is no pre-beaker example of the beaker physical type in the rest of Eastern or Central Europe,the Caucasus, Armenia. Anatolia etc though the type later did spread there. As it stands, this NWCaspian area stands out as an early home of this type.

R.Rocca
07-12-2018, 04:04 PM
Horse riding- There is evidence of domestication of the horse in Spanish sites since the early chalcolithic age, but archaelogists that it was used for work (they were slaughtered at a later age), and it has not been proven that it was used for hunting or war. The oldest evidence (study of bones) of horse riding we have in Iberia is from la Bastida (Argar culture, Bronze Age, 1.750 BC).

As you know, horse domestication (usually for food) was very different than horse riding (mobility). I didn't mention anything about warfare.


Regarding "flat occiputs", I don't think is a distinctive sign of the steppe populations, because brachycephaly is typical of the Alps and the Pyrenees, but obviously, I can be wrong because I'm not an anthropologist.

A skull can be brachycephalic (round) and not have a flat occiput. What makes the Steppe Bell Beaker skulls different than those of the Copper Age is that they were both brachycephalic and had a flat occiput.


Regarding metallurgy, the oldest steppe bell beakers (2.500 BC) are not realted to bronze but to copper, and we have already seen that the techniques are clearly different (absence of annealing), therefore there was no transmision of metallurgical knowledge.

That's the point, the pre-2500 BC Iberian Bell Beaker were a Copper Age people, the post-2500 BC R-L51+ Steppe Bell Beaker were a Bronze Age people. The R-L51+ Steppe Bell Beaker likely introduced bronze metallurgy to Western Europe.

dsm
07-13-2018, 12:45 AM
Did some slow scanning of the interactive map looking for earliest R1b & R1a. Found the following earliest examples.
http://homeland.ku.dk/

Quite an interesting way to see them pop up at the dates shown ...


5500BC ...

R at Dnieper-Donets
==============
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I4112 / M
Find location: Dereivka
Country: Ukraine
Associated label in publication: Ukraine_Neolithic
Date: 5500-4800 BCE
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): U5a2a
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R
Reference: Mathieson et al. 2018
Colour group: Mixed
Comments: c. 50/50 between eastern and western hunter-gatherers. But an increase in western hunter-gatherer compared to the previous period in this region
Other references: null


5200BC ...

R1a at Samara 5200BC
====================
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I0433 / M
Find location: Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara
Country: Russia
Associated label in publication: Steppe_Eneolithic
Date: 5200-4000 BCE
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): U5a1i
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1a1
Reference: MathiesonNature2015
Colour group: Steppe (R1a)
Comments: The steppe ancestry profile is a mix between EHG and c. 20% Iranian/CHG which seems to begin with Khvalynsk and is carried with all the Yamnaya-related migrations (Narasimhan2018 sup info p. 144-148)
Other references: Narasimhan et al. 2018 (preprint supplementary information p. 142-148)


R1b at Samara 5200BC
====================
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I0122 / M
Find location: Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara
Country: Russia
Associated label in publication: Steppe_Eneolithic
Date: 5200-4000 BCE
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): H2a1
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1b1a (L754)
Reference: MathiesonNature2015
Colour group: Steppe (R1b)
Comments: The steppe ancestry profile is a mix between EHG and c. 20% Iranian/CHG which seems to begin with Khvalynsk and is carried with all the Yamnaya-related migrations (Narasimhan2018 sup info p. 144-148)
Other references: Narasimhan et al. 2018 (preprint supplementary information p. 142-148)


Q1a at Samara 5200BC
========================
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I0434 / M
Find location: Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara
Country: Russia
Associated label in publication: Steppe_Eneolithic
Date: 5200-4000 BCE
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): U4a2 or U4d
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): Q1a
Reference: MathiesonNature2015
Colour group: Steppe (autosomal)
Comments: The steppe ancestry profile is a mix between EHG (incl. Y-haplogroup Q1a) and c. 20% Iranian/CHG which seems to begin with Khvalynsk and is carried with all the Yamnaya-related migrations (Narasimhan2018 sup info p. 144-148)
Other references: Narasimhan et al. 2018 (preprint supplementary information p. 142-148)


R1b at (Russia just above mid Caucuses) 4991BC
==============================================
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): PG2001 / M
Find location: Progress 2
Country: Russia
Associated label in publication: Eneolithic steppe
Date: 4991-4178 BCE (C14)
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): I3a
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1b1
Reference: Wang et al. 2018
Colour group: Steppe (R1b)
Comments: null
Other references: null


R1a at (Ukraine - nth slopes Caucuses) 4045BC
=============================================
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I6561 / M
Find location: Alexandria
Country: Ukraine
Associated label in publication: Ukraine_Eneolithic
Date: 4045-3974 calBCE (5215±20BP, PSUAMS-2832)
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): H2a1a
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1a1a1 (M417)
Reference: Mathieson et al. 2018
Colour group: Steppe (R1a)
Comments: A mixture of western hunter-gatherer, Steppe, and Anatolian farmer ancestry, and first specimen carrying the R1a-M417 subclade, and the lactase persistence allele 13910*T
Other references: http://eurogenes.blogspot.dk/2018/03/was-ukraineeneolithic-i6561-proto-indo.html

rms2
07-13-2018, 03:40 PM
Broke down and ordered The Amesbury Archer and the Boscombe Bowmen, by Dr. Fitzpatrick of Wessex Archaeology.

I've wanted it for awhile, but it was always just a bit too expensive. Today the price is lower and shipping was free. Couldn't resist.

24596

jdean
07-13-2018, 04:23 PM
Broke down and ordered The Amesbury Archer and the Boscombe Bowmen, by Dr. Fitzpatrick of Wessex Archaeology.

I've wanted it for awhile, but it was always just a bit too expensive. Today the price is lower and shipping was free. Couldn't resist.

24596

Looking forward to extracts : )

rms2
07-13-2018, 04:55 PM
Looking forward to extracts : )

It's coming from the UK, so I'm not supposed to get it until sometime between 30 July and 15 August. Hope it arrives sooner than that, but I did opt for the free shipping.

jdean
07-13-2018, 05:28 PM
It's coming from the UK, so I'm not supposed to get it until sometime between 30 July and 15 August. Hope it arrives sooner than that, but I did opt for the free shipping.

We've unusually good weather at the mo because the wind's coming from the east so you never know you might get it sooner : )

etrusco
07-13-2018, 10:35 PM
Another book to order

http://www.academia.edu/36538377/Stratum_plus_N2_2018_Late_Prehistory_of_Eurasia_So cial_Models_and_Cult_Practices_contents.pdf

which has inside this study so important for this thread

A. I. Korolev, A. F. Kochkina, D. A. Stashenkov, A. A. Khokhlov, N. V. Roslyakova (
Samara, Russian Federation)
The Unique Burial of the Ekaterinovsky Cape Early Eneolithic Cemetery in the Middle Volga Region

dsm
07-13-2018, 10:58 PM
Another book to order

http://www.academia.edu/36538377/Stratum_plus_N2_2018_Late_Prehistory_of_Eurasia_So cial_Models_and_Cult_Practices_contents.pdf

which has inside this study so important for this thread

A. I. Korolev, A. F. Kochkina, D. A. Stashenkov, A. A. Khokhlov, N. V. Roslyakova (
Samara, Russian Federation)
The Unique Burial of the Ekaterinovsky Cape Early Eneolithic Cemetery in the Middle Volga Region

I can't tell if it is a dual language publication. But I agree it could be very pertinent.

D

razyn
07-13-2018, 11:20 PM
Another book to order

http://www.academia.edu/36538377/Stratum_plus_N2_2018_Late_Prehistory_of_Eurasia_So cial_Models_and_Cult_Practices_contents.pdf


I really like the makeup job on the largest of the three faces on that book's cover. Is that young woman from Siberia? Or central casting?

dsm
07-14-2018, 01:01 AM
I really like the makeup job on the largest of the three faces on that book's cover. Is that young woman from Siberia? Or central casting?

Was wondering the same thing - the 'icy' frosted lips did bother me a bit :(

glentane
07-14-2018, 02:56 PM
You know you have to ride horses a lot for it to show up in your bones.
One of the claims made in identifying the purported remains of James Hepburn, Earl Bothwell, in a 19th or early 20th century post-mortem examination, was that "these are the bones of a man who has spent most of his life in the saddle", and visibly distinguishable from the bones of deceased local Danes, whether noble or common. Which was certainly true of almost the entire male population of the Scottish/English Border at that time (pre-AD 1606). Bothwell was essentially an aggrandized Reiver clan chieftain, and spent a great deal of his early law-officer career chasing innumerable Elliots, Armstrongs and the like all over the country, usually in vain.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/bothwell-s-descendants-call-for-return-of-earl-s-remains-1-836916

rms2
07-14-2018, 05:49 PM
One of the claims made in identifying the purported remains of James Hepburn, Earl Bothwell, in a 19th or early 20th century post-mortem examination, was that "these are the bones of a man who has spent most of his life in the saddle", and visibly distinguishable from the bones of deceased local Danes, whether noble or common. Which was certainly true of almost the entire male population of the Scottish/English Border at that time (pre-AD 1606). Bothwell was essentially an aggrandized Reiver clan chieftain, and spent a great deal of his early law-officer career chasing innumerable Elliots, Armstrongs and the like all over the country, usually in vain.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/bothwell-s-descendants-call-for-return-of-earl-s-remains-1-836916

One of my third great grandmothers on my dad's side was an Armstrong.

glentane
07-15-2018, 08:57 PM
One of my third great grandmothers on my dad's side was an Armstrong.I did hear that some of them escaped to the New World. One even managed to get as far as the Moon, I believe.
Don't worry, you can come and visit, Bothwell's lang deid (although he is reputed to haunt Dragsholm Castle).

rms2
07-15-2018, 11:48 PM
It's funny that just today I discovered a new Armstrong match at Ancestry.

glentane
07-16-2018, 01:00 AM
Getting back to early steppe business, I got my mtDNA back recently. Checked Jean M's archived catalogue as you helpfully indicated elsewhere. No sign of it in Neolithic Isles, AFAICT.
But it did crop up early around the eternally-famous football stadium of Samara, at Khvalynsk II (4th millennium BC-ish), along with R1b1 of some sort. And later in East Lothian (i.e. 40 miles up the road) at Longniddry (a fine gaelicky-welsh placename) in the proper local bronze age, again with R1b1 (L21 this time).

Are pioneering Beaker blokes taking on local (farmer/former h/g) women out of necessity and preference as I'd always assumed, or could they be dragging at least some of them along from The Old Country ("Are we there yet? Are we there yet? I need to .." etc.)

I realise H2a1 mtDNA is all over the shop, even at this early date, and undifferentiated H2s could be concealing further types, but getting an early double top like that, at Ground Zero itself, makes my suspicious mind itch just a bit.
I remain to be corrected &c.
yrs. glentane

rms2
07-16-2018, 11:19 AM
MtDNA is so diverse in Kurgan Bell Beaker that I must confess I'm at loss to make much sense of it or to even want to try. The y-dna trail seems much clearer and is consistent with the whole idea that early Indo-European peoples were patriarchal, patrilineal, and patrilocal.

My mtDNA haplogroup, U5a2c3a, is found in a couple of Kurgan Bell Beaker samples, but U5a2c3, one step back upstream, has been found in a 10,000-year-old Mesolithic hunter-gatherer woman (BLA 20) from the Blätterhöhle Cave in Germany and in a Neolithic farmer woman half that age at Isbister in Orkney.

rms2
07-16-2018, 01:37 PM
Broke down and ordered The Amesbury Archer and the Boscombe Bowmen, by Dr. Fitzpatrick of Wessex Archaeology.

I've wanted it for awhile, but it was always just a bit too expensive. Today the price is lower and shipping was free. Couldn't resist.

24596

Just ordered another one: Background to Beakers, edited by Harry Fokkens and Franco Nicolis.

24658

I don't know if it's any good. Guess I'll find out.

This one must be coming from someplace nearby, because it's supposed to arrive at my door in two days from now.

If you try to order one from Amazon USA, you'll find it's temporarily out of stock. I snapped up the last copy, evidently.

razyn
07-16-2018, 02:16 PM
Just ordered another one: Background to Beakers, edited by Harry Fokkens and Franco Nicolis.

I don't know if it's any good. Guess I'll find out.


I think it was good in 2012, reporting on papers from a 2010 conference. Kind of like Gimbutas, Anthony, Mallory and other good stuff that isn't, and couldn't be, updated to agree more completely with the harder evidence from aDNA, that's lately become available (or in some areas, is still impatiently awaited).

I'm all in favor of background reading. I just hope it doesn't work too well at persuading current readers of hypotheses that have already been disproven. Celtic from the West conference reports spring to mind -- I bought a couple of those. And there's good stuff in them. But it was not for nothing that the recent Current Archaeology issue (reporting on Olalde et al, 2018) had a cover story titled "The Beaker Revolution." It's a revolution driven by aDNA; and outside the narrow walls of this forum, that new evidence is not as widely known (or agreed upon) as we might wish.

I'm not suggesting that adding this book to your library will suddenly make you agree with GASKA, et al.

rms2
07-16-2018, 02:30 PM
Unfortunately, there isn't anything I can find in book form that is completely up to date and reflective of the evidence of ancient dna, particularly of the groundbreaking data from Olalde et al.

I'm guessing Background to Beakers will contain some irritating old obsolete stuff based on adherence to the Spanish Model, but I wanted something more to read on Beakers, and there just isn't much out there in book form.

On the subject of Gimbutas, Mallory, and Anthony, I don't see how anyone can intelligently participate in these discussions or have much of a clue about what is going on without having read at least some of what they wrote.

Gimbutas gets a bad rap, mostly from people who haven't actually read what she wrote and are operating on hearsay, and mostly based on her "Neolithic hippies/egalitarian feminists" stuff. But it seems to me she was right about a lot way ahead of her time, a time in which the immobilists held sway in her field. Olalde et al have vindicated her when it comes to what she wrote about Bell Beaker not being of western origin. She knocked it out of the park on that one.

Dewsloth
07-16-2018, 03:31 PM
I'm not suggesting that adding this book to your library will suddenly make you agree with GASKA, et al.

That would require the Necronomicon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgvXtexdgAM

GoldenHind
07-16-2018, 05:26 PM
That would require the Necronomicon.



That won't easily be done. I'm afraid Abdul Alhazred is out of print and extremely difficult to find on the second hand market.

rms2
07-16-2018, 09:04 PM
That would require the Necronomicon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgvXtexdgAM

Great flick! I have Army of Darkness on dvd.

All Bruce would have had to do was watch The Day the Earth Stood Still to get the incantation right.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIaxSxEqKtA

jdean
07-17-2018, 04:35 PM
Great flick! I have Army of Darkness on dvd.

Am I the only person here who'd never heard of this film ?

Anyway we have it on our list to rent now : )

Dewsloth
07-17-2018, 06:55 PM
Am I the only person here who'd never heard of this film ?

Anyway we have it on our list to rent now : )

It is the sequel to Evil Dead II (which is a remake of Evil Dead with an actual budget:lol: ).
Watch EDII first ... or not: It's not like the movies are supposed to be taken seriously, just enjoyed.
Also the three seasons of the Starz TV series Ash vs. Evil Dead continues the story, sort of.

The scenes of Ash fighting his own hand in EDII are some of the best physical comedy in cinema. Bruce Campbell rules.

rms2
07-18-2018, 12:15 AM
Another great Bruce Campbell flick is Bubba Ho-Tep. It's brilliant.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akGeWx7NTM8

rms2
07-18-2018, 01:47 PM
Sorry for helping take this thread off topic over the past few posts, but it seems to be petering out anyway.

Sort of back on topic, I ordered David Reich's relatively new book, Who We Are and How We Got Here (https://www.amazon.com/Who-Are-How-Got-Here/dp/110187032X), which title seems to promise the answer to a question I've asked of other people about myself a number of times after drinking too much. Who am I, and how did I get here?

Anyway, it's somewhat on topic because of the following quote from the book, provided earlier in this thread by R. Rocca:



This preponderance of male ancestry coming from the steppe implies that male descendants of the Yamnaya with political or social power were more successful at competing for local mates than men from the local groups. The most striking example I know of is from Iberia in far southwestern Europe, where Yamnaya-derived ancestry arrived at the onset of the Bronze Age between forty-five hundred and four thousand years ago. Daniel Bradley's laboratory and my laboratory independently produced ancient DNA from individuals of this period.[28] We found that approximately 30 percent of the Iberian population was replaced along with the arrival of steppe ancestry. However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time. It is clear there were extraordinary hierarchies and imbalances in power at work in the expansions from the steppe.

jdean
07-18-2018, 01:57 PM
Another great Bruce Campbell flick is Bubba Ho-Tep. It's brilliant.

Looks like my cup of tea : )

R.Rocca
07-18-2018, 02:10 PM
Sorry for helping take this thread off topic over the past few posts, but it seems to be petering out anyway.

Sort of back on topic, I ordered David Reich's relatively new book, Who We Are and How We Got Here (https://www.amazon.com/Who-Are-How-Got-Here/dp/110187032X), which title seems to promise the answer to a question I've asked of other people about myself a number of times after drinking too much. Who am I, and how did I get here?

Anyway, it's somewhat on topic because of the following quote from the book, provided earlier in this thread by R. Rocca:

Just thinking out loud here: What role did the combination of horse riding and Yersinia pestis play in this imbalance? I'm assuming that if Yersinia pestis severely reduced and affected the Copper Age populations of Iberia evenly (men and women), the breakdown of groups of Copper Age men as protectors of farmlands would have allowed bands of horse-riders to move in. Also, the farmers would have lived in tighter living conditions that benefited the spread of Yersinia pestis, whereas the horse riders would have been able to survive further from more heavily populated village centers and due to their greater mobility. The reduced steppe ancestry points to a much smaller initial group of R1b men than in Central Europe, which could explain the acceptance of matrilineal Copper Age customs as well as the retention of Proto-Basque.

rms2
07-18-2018, 02:21 PM
It seems to me native Iberian men must have been disproportionately affected, since the overall replacement was 30%, but the y-dna replacement was around 90%.

I'm guessing that means there was some violence involved and that the eastern Bell Beaker newcomers did not bring many of their own women with them but rather retained the Iberian women to a large extent.

R.Rocca
07-18-2018, 04:03 PM
It seems to me native Iberian men must have been disproportionately affected, since the overall replacement was 30%, but the y-dna replacement was around 90%.

I'm guessing that means there was some violence involved and that the eastern Bell Beaker newcomers did not bring many of their own women with them but rather retained the Iberian women to a large extent.

I don't doubt that some violence occurred. If people argue it didn't, then they know nothing about human nature nor history. Also, I would imagine that in times of turmoil, a sickly native father would have encouraged a steppe type clan leader to take a daughter or two if it meant the difference between their living and dying. Again, just throwing out ideas and not talking in absolutes.

razyn
07-18-2018, 04:07 PM
I'm guessing that means there was some violence involved and that the eastern Bell Beaker newcomers did not bring many of their own women with them but rather retained the Iberian women to a large extent.

I already ran through a bunch of the alternate theories about this. In case R.Rocca or you missed it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=411778&viewfull=1#post411778

Since the population replacement (of males) in Iberia is in essence the massive surge of DF27 there, that specific digression from the topic of this thread is also part and parcel of another thread: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?827-Where-did-DF27-originate-and-when-and-how-did-it-expand

Whereas the Oldest Steppe Belle Beakers, as such, are a good bit more broadly relevant (to U152, L21, U106 and other steppe-admixed R1b guys, in other places than Iberia).

GASKA
07-18-2018, 04:57 PM
I don't doubt that some violence occurred. If people argue it didn't, then they know nothing about human nature nor history. Also, I would imagine that in times of turmoil, a sickly native father would have encouraged a steppe type clan leader to take a daughter or two if it meant the difference between their living and dying. Again, just throwing out ideas and not talking in absolutes.

It seems good to me, you have a theory that you try to defend, and I have another one that we try to demonstrate. A few years ago, what you propose would have caused a laugh in the International scientific community, and now, thanks to the advances in genetics, we must recognize that this oppinion doesn't have to be totally ruled out. We will see who is right, because in addition, the demonstration of that theory does not depend on you, but is in our hands. Next month I will try to personally ask Olalde for his oppinion about these issues, he will surely love to know that he has become the Icon of the Gimbuta's friends.

We have already seen that for some people, it's matter of life or death to disassociate Iberia from R1b, I can not understand their motives, but I am sure that they are not only scientific reasons. The best proof is the "kind" reception I received in this thread from some people who were trying to offend me (of course, I am not thinking about you).

Dozens of anglosaxon Hispanists have spent 200 years writing and giving opinions about our history, culture, religion, empire, customs, race etc.... and yet I don't know a single Spanish historian who has dedicated a minute to studying the anglosaxon culture. For centuries, we Spaniards felt so superior that we ignored the propaganda of our enemies who tried to discredit us. The result is the "black legend" (colonial cruelty, ultra-Catholic religious fanatism, racism....). It shows that they still don't appreciate us and that they don't want to know anything about us, I could say that the feeling is mutual, but I Have always thought that it would be interesting to share information and progress together.

Do you know any case of Yersinia pestis in the Iberian chalcolithic? It would be interesting to ask.

Un saludo, ya se ha terminado San Fermin, asi que nos vamos a trabajar.

etrusco
07-18-2018, 05:03 PM
From David Reich :
"However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time."

The more I read this passage the more I do not understand the "dramatic" implications drawn from this figure. It seems a perfect tautology: people with steppe ancestry obviously were carriers of Y-chromosome type of steppe origin. The real questions are another: how many Y dna lines of farmers ancestry survived? What time it took for Y R1b to become majority? These are the crucial questions.

GASKA
07-18-2018, 05:06 PM
I already ran through a bunch of the alternate theories about this. In case R.Rocca or you missed it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=411778&viewfull=1#post411778

Since the population replacement (of males) in Iberia is in essence the massive surge of DF27 there, that specific digression from the topic of this thread is also part and parcel of another thread: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?827-Where-did-DF27-originate-and-when-and-how-did-it-expand

Whereas the Oldest Steppe Belle Beakers, as such, are a good bit more broadly relevant (to U152, L21, U106 and other steppe-admixed R1b guys, in other places than Iberia).

When you speak about the Oldest

GASKA
07-18-2018, 05:11 PM
When you speak about the Oldest

steppe BBs, do you also speak about the oldest iberian steppe Bbs no? Richard is not talking about Df27, among other things because the oldest steppe Bbs were P312 and U152, so far Df27 has not appeared. This thread is much more fun and interesting than the other one.

R.Rocca
07-18-2018, 05:12 PM
It seems good to me, you have a theory that you try to defend, and I have another one that we try to demonstrate. A few years ago, what you propose would have caused a laugh in the International scientific community, and now, thanks to the advances in genetics, we must recognize that this oppinion doesn't have to be totally ruled out. We will see who is right, because in addition, the demonstration of that theory does not depend on you, but is in our hands. Next month I will try to personally ask Olalde for his oppinion about these issues, he will surely love to know that he has become the Icon of the Gimbuta's friends.

We have already seen that for some people, it's matter of life or death to disassociate Iberia from R1b, I can not understand their motives, but I am sure that they are not only scientific reasons. The best proof is the "kind" reception I received in this thread from some people who were trying to offend me (of course, I am not thinking about you).

Dozens of anglosaxon Hispanists have spent 200 years writing and giving opinions about our history, culture, religion, empire, customs, race etc.... and yet I don't know a single Spanish historian who has dedicated a minute to studying the anglosaxon culture. For centuries, we Spaniards felt so superior that we ignored the propaganda of our enemies who tried to discredit us. The result is the "black legend" (colonial cruelty, ultra-Catholic religious fanatism, racism....). It shows that they still don't appreciate us and that they don't want to know anything about us, I could say that the feeling is mutual, but I Have always thought that it would be interesting to share information and progress together.

Do you know any case of Yersinia pestis in the Iberian chalcolithic? It would be interesting to ask.

Un saludo, ya se ha terminado San Fermin, asi que nos vamos a trabajar.

One can certainly rewrite your sentence, but with the modification of just two words:

We have already seen that for some people, it's matter of life or death to associate Iberia with R1b, I can not understand their motives, but I am sure that they are not only scientific reasons.

Nive1526
07-18-2018, 05:14 PM
The real questions are another: how many Y dna lines of farmers ancestry survived? What time it took for Y R1b to become majority? These are the crucial questions.

And whether the violence hypothesis can be backed up with archaeological evidence of violence exceeding what is seen before and after the arrival of Bell Beakers. They surely did carry those swords for a reason, but 80 or 90% violent male population replacement should fill one or another grave with pre-BB males and evidence of slaughter.

GASKA
07-18-2018, 05:20 PM
From David Reich :
"However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time."

The more I read this passage the more I do not understand the "dramatic" implications drawn from this figure. It seems a perfect tautology: people with steppe ancestry obviously were carriers of Y-chromosome type of steppe origin. The real questions are another: how many Y dna lines of farmers ancestry survived? What time it took for Y R1b to become majority? These are the crucial questions.

Totally agree, also Reich refers fundamentally to the Iberian Bronze age (2.000-1.500 BC), where the overwhelming majority of P312 is undeniable.

Saluti

rms2
07-18-2018, 06:15 PM
One can certainly rewrite your sentence, but with the modification of just two words:

We have already seen that for some people, it's matter of life or death to associate Iberia with R1b, I can not understand their motives, but I am sure that they are not only scientific reasons.

I think you got that right. The ethno-nationalist passion and concomitant clouded reasoning is not coming from those who see the steppe as the ultimate source of the Kurgan Bell Beaker complex.

Witness the repeated use of the possessive pronoun "our": our hands, our history, culture, religion, empire, customs, race, etc. Then there's the collective, maligned, persecuted "we" and "us":



For centuries, we Spaniards felt so superior that we ignored the propaganda of our enemies who tried to discredit us. The result is the "black legend" (colonial cruelty, ultra-Catholic religious fanatism, racism....). It shows that they still don't appreciate us and that they don't want to know anything about us, I could say that the feeling is mutual, but I Have always thought that it would be interesting to share information and progress together.

Geez, Louise!

What is dispassionate or scientific about any of that?

rms2
07-18-2018, 06:27 PM
From David Reich :
"However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time."

The more I read this passage the more I do not understand the "dramatic" implications drawn from this figure. It seems a perfect tautology: people with steppe ancestry obviously were carriers of Y-chromosome type of steppe origin. The real questions are another: how many Y dna lines of farmers ancestry survived? What time it took for Y R1b to become majority? These are the crucial questions.

You put the word dramatic in quotes, as if you find Reich's use of it questionable. You do understand that 90% replacement is indeed a much more dramatic figure than 30%, right?

I mean, 90% replacement is just 10% short of total replacement.

If around 90% of the y-dna lines were replaced, that means around 10% of the native y-dna lines survived past the period of replacement to which Reich was referring.

One of the to my mind most dramatic things about the difference in those two figures, 30% and 90%, is that it indicates that the change was largely male mediated.

GASKA
07-18-2018, 06:52 PM
I think you got that right. The ethno-nationalist passion and concomitant clouded reasoning is not coming from those who see the steppe as the ultimate source of the Kurgan Bell Beaker complex.

Witness the repeated use of the possessive pronoun "our": our hands, our history, culture, religion, empire, customs, race, etc. Then there's the collective, maligned, persecuted "we" and "us":



Geez, Louise!

What is dispassionate or scientific about any of that?

Have you ever thought how boring this thread would be if you didn't have a Basque relative to discuss?

We are proud of our BBs ancestors (even if it finally turns out that hey have their origin in the steppes, what we don't share with the rest of BBs is your preference for beer, we have always preferred the Txacolí and the cider

When you talk about the American culture do you use the singular? Or is it a culture shared with your compatriots? I didn't have an Empire, my country and therefor all the Spaniards had it.

razyn
07-18-2018, 06:57 PM
[When you speak about the Oldest] steppe BBs, do you also speak about the oldest iberian steppe Bbs no?
When I spoke about it in that post, it was because that is the subject heading of this thread.


Richard is not talking about Df27
Richard Stevens was. Richard Rocca may not have been. But I (Richard Hulan) was replying to rms2, who referred to newcomer males who "retained the Iberian women." That only happened after they got to a place where there were some Iberian women to retain.

DF27 had not appeared in the aDNA record that we have so far, quite as soon as U152>L2 had. But that doesn't ipso facto make it younger, or mean that it "had not appeared." And anyway DF27 and U152 have the same paternal ancestry (ZZ11<Z40481<P312<P311<L51), none of which had appeared in Iberia until the guys with steppe paternal ancestry got there -- as far as we know, in about 2500 BC. And as far as we know, arriving there from the general vicinity of what is (only pretty recently) called Saxony-Anhalt. (That was the suggestion of the original post, not my suggestion; I'm just going along with it until something better turns up. But it has to be rational.)

GASKA
07-18-2018, 07:34 PM
When I spoke about it in that post, it was because that is the subject heading of this thread.

Richard Stevens was. Richard Rocca may not have been. But I (Richard Hulan) was replying to rms2, who referred to newcomer males who "retained the Iberian women." That only happened after they got to a place where there were some Iberian women to retain.

DF27 had not appeared in the aDNA record that we have so far, quite as soon as U152>L2 had. But that doesn't ipso facto make it younger, or mean that it "had not appeared." And anyway DF27 and U152 have the same paternal ancestry (ZZ11<Z40481<P312<P311<L51), none of which had appeared in Iberia until the guys with steppe paternal ancestry got there -- as far as we know, in about 2500 BC. And as far as we know, arriving there from the general vicinity of what is (only pretty recently) called Saxony-Anhalt. (That was the suggestion of the original post, not my suggestion; I'm just going along with it until something better turns up. But it has to be rational.)

We all agree, Df27 in Saxony (aprox 2.150 bc) and Df27 in the Cogotas culture (Spain, 2.000-1.500 bc). I have heard so many funny theories about the origin of P312 and Df27 that I would not be surprised if our origin is finally from the Caribbean.

Remember that in Iberia, they can still appear (3.000-2.500 BC) and that this possibility does not exist anywhere outside Western Europe. As I suppose you are not an expert in the Iberian chalcolithic, I hope you don't mind that we continue discovering sites and increasing our knowledge.

MitchellSince1893
07-19-2018, 04:13 AM
I0806 (Oldest known DF27) compared to present day populations via K36 tool. See here https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10813-Tool-for-K36-your-similarities-rates-on-maps

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/9f/7a/a0/9f7aa0da4ae553c1c630ecdfa9810573.png

And RISE563 (Oldest known U152) for comparison

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16956&d=1497673991

jdean
07-19-2018, 07:35 AM
When I spoke about it in that post, it was because that is the subject heading of this thread.


Richard Stevens was. Richard Rocca may not have been. But I (Richard Hulan) was replying to rms2, who referred to newcomer males who "retained the Iberian women." That only happened after they got to a place where there were some Iberian women to retain.

DF27 had not appeared in the aDNA record that we have so far, quite as soon as U152>L2 had. But that doesn't ipso facto make it younger, or mean that it "had not appeared." And anyway DF27 and U152 have the same paternal ancestry (ZZ11<Z40481<P312<P311<L51), none of which had appeared in Iberia until the guys with steppe paternal ancestry got there -- as far as we know, in about 2500 BC. And as far as we know, arriving there from the general vicinity of what is (only pretty recently) called Saxony-Anhalt. (That was the suggestion of the original post, not my suggestion; I'm just going along with it until something better turns up. But it has to be rational.)

Other issue with DF27, which I don't think gets mentioned, when it comes to aDNA is it's probably nigh on impossible to detect by itself, it's hard enough to test for in fresh DNA samples let alone age ripened ones.

rms2
07-19-2018, 11:41 AM
Have you ever thought how boring this thread would be if you didn't have a Basque relative to discuss?

That much is true. ;)



We are proud of our BBs ancestors (even if it finally turns out that hey have their origin in the steppes, what we don't share with the rest of BBs is your preference for beer, we have always preferred the Txacolí and the cider

I think you should realize no one here is badmouthing people from Iberia. I just don't think your y-dna haplogroup has been there as long as you evidently believe. IMHO, it arrived from the east with Kurgan Bell Beaker people.

That was long enough ago (over 4,000 years).



When you talk about the American culture do you use the singular? Or is it a culture shared with your compatriots? I didn't have an Empire, my country and therefor all the Spaniards had it.

I'm not arguing that my y-dna haplogroup is native to America. I'm not even arguing that it was native to Britain or Ireland, where most of my ancestors came from.

I don't have an ethno-nationalist axe to grind.

rms2
07-19-2018, 11:56 AM
We all agree, Df27 in Saxony (aprox 2.150 bc) and Df27 in the Cogotas culture (Spain, 2.000-1.500 bc). I have heard so many funny theories about the origin of P312 and Df27 that I would not be surprised if our origin is finally from the Caribbean.

The date range for I0806 is 2431-2150 BC, so the midpoint is about 2291 BC or ~2300 BC.



Remember that in Iberia, they can still appear (3.000-2.500 BC) and that this possibility does not exist anywhere outside Western Europe. As I suppose you are not an expert in the Iberian chalcolithic, I hope you don't mind that we continue discovering sites and increasing our knowledge.

What makes you think DF27 older than 2500 BC can only be found in western Europe? Seems to me that is the place in Europe it is least likely to appear.

It is pretty obvious from what Reich said in his recent book that neither he nor Bradley found any R1b-M269 at all in Iberia from before the Early Bronze Age, and we know that Olalde et al didn't either.

ADW_1981
07-19-2018, 01:08 PM
Am I the only person here who'd never heard of this film ?

Anyway we have it on our list to rent now : )

Enjoyed it as a kid, but watched it again recently as an adult and I didn't find it nearly as funny. Not really my type of humour.

rms2
07-19-2018, 01:37 PM
BTW, one of the books I ordered from Amazon, Background to Beakers, arrived late yesterday. I really haven't done more than glance through it yet.

Chapter 3, Exploring Agency Behind the Beaker Phenomenon: The Navigator's Tale, by Robert Van De Noort, should be of interest to razyn, because it apparently deals with Bell Beaker maritime travel and sewn-plank boats. I may hurry up and read that one first, just to be able to share what it has to say sooner.

My copy of Reich's book is supposed to get here today. B)

razyn
07-19-2018, 03:09 PM
The Navigator's Tale[/I], by Robert Van De Noort, should be of interest to razyn, because it apparently deals with Bell Beaker maritime travel and sewn-plank boats.

I had access to that via Jean Manco, and read it when it came out. Also swapped emails with Van de Noort, at the time.

I didn't read the rest of the book, though.

ADW_1981
07-19-2018, 04:02 PM
BTW, one of the books I ordered from Amazon, Background to Beakers, arrived late yesterday. I really haven't done more than glance through it yet.

Chapter 3, Exploring Agency Behind the Beaker Phenomenon: The Navigator's Tale, by Robert Van De Noort, should be of interest to razyn, because it apparently deals with Bell Beaker maritime travel and sewn-plank boats. I may hurry up and read that one first, just to be able to share what it has to say sooner.

My copy of Reich's book is supposed to get here today. B)

Do you recall if we have any YDNA from the maritime beaker populations?

rms2
07-19-2018, 06:13 PM
I had access to that via Jean Manco, and read it when it came out. Also swapped emails with Van de Noort, at the time.

I didn't read the rest of the book, though.

I thought that maybe I remembered that you had. Anyway, I have read it now and found it a very enjoyable article, if somewhat imaginative and speculative, since the oldest of the sewn-plank boats we have dates to the end of the Beaker period (1980 BC).

Van De Noort is an engaging writer.

This is from page 73 of the book:



Alongside the person who sought to acquire the exotic objects and esoteric knowledge, the majority of the crew of a sewn-plank boat consisted of some 16 to 20 paddlers, most probably young men who were physically fit, but who did not necessarily possess any advanced knowledge of seafaring. We can safely assume that the person who sought to acquire the objects and knowledge, with or without the marriage partner [Van de Noort talks earlier of traveling to acquire a mate], was an aspiring member of the elite who undertook the journey as a prerequisite for taking on a role as a leader . . .

Alongside the aspirant leader and the paddlers, the crew of the sewn-plank boat must have also included a navigator. This was somebody who had advanced skills in environmental navigation, and used his knowledge of coastlines, currents and swell, animal behavior including that of seabirds, fish and sea mammals, and the subtle differences in the colour of the sea, in steering the boat to its destination. The navigator may have been skilled in reading the stars; even a very basic understanding of astronomy, such as the ability to identify the North Star or Pole Star, was invaluable in directing a boat at sea in the desired direction of travel. Alongside skills in environmental navigation, the navigator was also the most likely person to understand the networks of exchange, and to know the geographical locations of the communities that needed to be visited during the long-distance journeys. He may also have been able to speak foreign languages, or alternatively the lingua franca that was used between navigators (Needham 2009, 19).

rms2
07-19-2018, 06:16 PM
Do you recall if we have any YDNA from the maritime beaker populations?

I'd have to look back at Olalde et al and check, but I believe the earliest Iberian BB people had only maritime-type beakers and lacked beakers with corded decoration.

However, later BB people possessed maritime beakers in addition to other types of beakers.

alan
07-19-2018, 06:17 PM
It’s an interesting thing that sewn plank boats did not have a very long era of use but leather covered wicker framed currach type boats lasted right into modern times. They are extremely seaworthy and very good in tough seas. They can be built from single tower to maybe high teens. That makes me wonder what causes the phase of sewn plank boats in the early Bronze Age? In many ways they are not as good as currachs. The only obvious advantage I can see is the body of sewn plank boats are less likely to be pierced from outside by sharp rocks etc. Maybe they allowed more weight?

GASKA
07-19-2018, 08:17 PM
I0806 (Oldest known DF27) compared to present day populations via K36 tool. See here https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10813-Tool-for-K36-your-similarities-rates-on-maps

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/9f/7a/a0/9f7aa0da4ae553c1c630ecdfa9810573.png

And RISE563 (Oldest known U152) for comparison

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16956&d=1497673991

Eurogenes K36- IO806-Df27 from Quedlinburg

Basque-4,85
Central Euro-1,69
East central Euro-16,01
Eastern Europe- 7,57
French-9.96
Iberian-22,70
North Atlantic-9,40
North Caucasian-6,59
North sea- 21,24

It's curious that in some cases references to current populations are not valid (for example to justify the Franco-Cantabrian origin of P312), and yet in other cases these references are considered as evidence of the origin of Df27. If we continue like this, we will never reach a moderately intelligent agreement. The only thing that shows Eurogenes K36 is that the current inhabitants of Iberia are the most similar to I0806.

By the way the mitochondrial haplogroup of I0806 is tipically Iberian.

GASKA
07-19-2018, 08:35 PM
You put the word dramatic in quotes, as if you find Reich's use of it questionable. You do understand that 90% replacement is indeed a much more dramatic figure than 30%, right?

I mean, 90% replacement is just 10% short of total replacement.

If around 90% of the y-dna lines were replaced, that means around 10% of the native y-dna lines survived past the period of replacement to which Reich was referring.

One of the to my mind most dramatic things about the difference in those two figures, 30% and 90%, is that it indicates that the change was largely male mediated.

What etrusco was saying is that the important thing is not the 90% amount, because we all agree that a "dramatic" substitution occurred. What is really important is to Know exactly when that substitution occurred. In the case of the British isles, it's clear that only 10% of the neolithic male lineages (I2) survived.

The case of Iberia is different, 50% of the male lineages (BBs burials) are I2a and G2, and other 50% R1b P312 (2.300-2.000 BC). That substitution of 90% occurred safely during the Bronze Age (2.000-1.000 BC) in a long process that lasted a thousand years and continued through the Iron Age and the celtic invasions. You can never prove that there was a violent conquest or Yersinia pestis which caused that R1b was so overwhelmingly in Iberia.

When we see the dates of Reich we will leave doubts.

rms2
07-19-2018, 08:36 PM
. . .

By the way the mitochondrial haplogroup of I0806 is tipically Iberian.

Well, it was H1. I'm guessing that never was limited to Iberia or was specifically Iberian. Kurgan Bell Beaker had a pretty diverse mtDNA profile.

rms2
07-19-2018, 08:54 PM
It seems to me native Iberian men must have been disproportionately affected, since the overall replacement was 30%, but the y-dna replacement was around 90%.

I'm guessing that means there was some violence involved and that the eastern Bell Beaker newcomers did not bring many of their own women with them but rather retained the Iberian women to a large extent.

Looks like David Reich agrees with me. I just got my copy of Who We Are and How We Got Here. Here's a little bit longer excerpt from pages 239-240:




The descendants of the Yamnaya or their close relatives spread their y chromosomes into Europe and India, and the demographic impact of this expansion was profound, as the Y-chromosome types they carried were absent in Europe and India before the Bronze Age but are predominant in both places today.25

This Yamnaya expansion also cannot have been entirely friendly, as is clear from the fact that the proportion of Y chromosomes of steppe origin in both western Europe26 and India27 today is much larger than the proportion of steppe ancestry in the rest of the genome. This preponderance of male ancestry coming from the steppe implies that male descendants of the Yamnaya with political or social power were more successful at competing for local mates than men from the local groups. The most striking example I know of is from Iberia in far southwestern Europe, where Yamnaya-derived ancestry arrived at the onset of the Bronze Age between forty-five hundred and four thousand years ago. Daniel Bradley's laboratory and my laboratory independently produced ancient DNA from individuals of this period.28 We found that approximately 30 percent of the Iberian population was replaced along with the arrival of steppe ancestry. However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time. It is clear there were extraordinary hierarchies and imbalances in power at work in the expansions from the steppe.

razyn
07-19-2018, 10:38 PM
It’s an interesting thing that sewn plank boats did not have a very long era of use but leather covered wicker framed currach type boats lasted right into modern times. They are extremely seaworthy and very good in tough seas. They can be built from single tower to maybe high teens. That makes me wonder what causes the phase of sewn plank boats in the early Bronze Age? In many ways they are not as good as currachs. The only obvious advantage I can see is the body of sewn plank boats are less likely to be pierced from outside by sharp rocks etc. Maybe they allowed more weight?

Currachs are advantageous for island people whose island is short on trees, but has thick-skinned animals. Otherwise, wooden boats make more sense, are stronger, last longer, can hold far more, float if they have holes in them, are hydrodynamically shaped, and a bunch of ceteras. The ones that were for carrying tin or its ores just about had to be wooden, or the holes would have been punched from inside. Likewise for transporting cattle and horses across the English Channel, or any other big stretch of water.

I think a distinction needs to be made between "maritime beakers" (an old definition of a sort of pottery) and maritime Beakers (people from the steppe, bearing a cultural complex, who had to be "maritime" or they would never have reached the Isles to begin with).

rms2
07-19-2018, 11:35 PM
Here is something interesting Reich has to say on pages 237-239 of Who We Are and How We Got Here relative to the viewpoint of Marija Gimbutas (right before the excerpt I posted above).



The archaeologist Marija Gimbutas has argued that Yamnaya society was unprecedentedly sex-biased and stratified. The Yamnaya left behind great mounds, about 80 percent of which had male skeletons at the center, often with evidence of violent injuries and buried amid fearsome metal daggers and axes.22 Gimbutas argued that the arrival of the Yamnaya in Europe heralded a shift in the power relationships between the sexes. It coincided with the decline of "Old Europe," which according to Gimbutas was a society with little evidence of violence, and in which females played a central social role as is apparent in the ubiquitous Venus figurines. In her reconstruction, "Old Europe" was replaced by a male-centered society, evident not only in archaeology but also in male-centered Greek, Norse, and Hindu mythologies of the Indo-European cultures plausibly spread by the Yamnaya.23

Any attempt to paint a vivid picture of what a human culture was like before the period of written texts needs to be viewed with caution. Nevertheless, ancient DNA data have provided evidence that the Yamnaya were indeed a society in which power was concentrated among a small number of elite males. The Y chromosomes that the Yamnaya carried were nearly all of a few types, which shows that a limited number of males must have been extraordinarily successful in spreading their genes. In contrast, in their mitochondrial DNA, the Yamnaya had more diverse sequences.24


BTW, if you decide to order Reich's book, it is a really nice hardback.

rms2
07-20-2018, 04:27 PM
If you haven't read Reich's book, Who We Are and How We Got Here, I recommend you do. I haven't finished it yet, and I must confess I have been jumping around in it, reading stuff that catches my interest (like everything on Bell Beaker and the Indo-Europeans), including the chapters on the Genomics of Inequality and the Genomics of Race and Identity near the end of the book.

Anyway, one thing I wonder about is how confidently Reich speaks of y chromosomes of steppe origin in places in Europe, like Iberia, where you know he is not talking about R1a but about R1b-M269 and probably more specifically about R1b-L11 and maybe even R1b-P312. He is usually pretty careful, yet he never expresses any apparent doubt about the origin of these "Y chromosomes of steppe origin". He never indicates that he merely thinks they are of steppe origin but that they could be of a different origin. Reich never specifically names the haplogroups of these "Y chromosomes of steppe origin", but what he means is pretty obvious.

So, does he know something we don't?

Reich mentions that as of August of 2017, his lab alone had generated genome-wide data on over 3,000 ancient dna samples. He lists the current total number of ancient dna samples as 3,748 (Figure 2, page xvi), but says that, thus far, in total, only 711 ancient dna samples have been published.

From page xvi (in the book's introduction):



We are now producing data so fast that the time lag between data production and publication is longer than the time it takes to double the data in the field.


Recall too that Reich and his colleagues are involved in the ongoing Carpathian Basin Project (http://www.ri.btk.mta.hu/archaeogenetika/kutatas_en.html).

So, does Reich know about R1b-L51 (and/or subclades) results in Yamnaya that we don't?

rms2
07-20-2018, 11:13 PM
Guess this thread is fizzling out. Well, it was nice while it lasted.

rms2
07-20-2018, 11:52 PM
Not sure anyone will respond, but Reich mentions the notion that Bell Beaker as an idea but not as a people spread east from Iberia. I'm not sure that even the idea spread from Iberia, because how much of the Bell Beaker package really originated in Iberia?

On the one hand Reich says steppe dna and Y chromosomes of steppe origin spread throughout Europe from the east, but on the other he sees Bell Beaker spreading initially out of Iberia as a kind of religion.

I suspect there is an error involved in this that is tied to the Spanish Model and to probably erroneous 14C dates.

glentane
07-21-2018, 12:11 AM
The only obvious advantage I can see is the body of sewn plank boats are less likely to be pierced from outside by sharp rocks etc. Maybe they allowed more weight?
I was banging on about this a while back. The plank boats mostly appear to have been ferries of some sort. Which is why they get found, same as log dugouts of any age. Favourable conditions of preservation on mudbanks, inland freshwater marshy places, lochans, where they get left and forgotten about when the operators go missing for one reason or another.
Curraghs are brilliant for open-water load-carrying; cattle, pigs, and even Morris Minors, in fact any sharp-hoofed animal. But easily broken to buggery on sandbanks and mudflats when loaded.

The plank boat thing has a great deal to do with incipient long distance highways, not just airy-fairy "trade routes", I suspect.

Point-to-point, by well-known paths, and any old thing, weighing god knows how much, could turn up requiring repeated passage, and not be easily refused if one wanted to maintain the (profitable in many ways) reputation of one's route ("one" being the chiefs or overseers of a territory) as a predictable, safe (possibly "policed") conduit for goods, including livestock, or armies, or private persons.

My model would start by examining the historical practices of, for instance, droving cattle, the social conventions and strictures which modified the normally full-on brigandage and bloodfeud endemic among the groups they passed through, in the long trail to market.

Skin boats, though fast, epically seaworthy, and easily made by skilled wrights are just too fragile, and tricky, for non-mariners to be expected to behave properly on.

razyn
07-21-2018, 12:42 AM
It’s an interesting thing that sewn plank boats did not have a very long era of use but leather covered wicker framed currach type boats lasted right into modern times.

It would be an interesting thing if it were true. Sewn plank boats have also lasted into the present day, a very long era of use in more northern parts of Europe. I've previously posted links to the website of a Russian guy, Mika (Misha) Naimark, who currently builds reproductions of the local historic types for museums (in Norway, and countries around the Baltic generally). He learned the craft skills from traditional builders in that broader area. http://www.sewboat.narod.ru/boat/index.htm

jdean
07-21-2018, 11:29 AM
It would be an interesting thing if it were true. Sewn plank boats have also lasted into the present day, a very long era of use in more northern parts of Europe. I've previously posted links to the website of a Russian guy, Mika (Misha) Naimark, who currently builds reproductions of the local historic types for museums (in Norway, and countries around the Baltic generally). He learned the craft skills from traditional builders in that broader area. http://www.sewboat.narod.ru/boat/index.htm

According to Oliver Rackham (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Rackham) planking reached it's zenith with the Romans and has never been equaled, he was talking about ship building though.

Romilius
07-21-2018, 11:58 AM
Looks like David Reich agrees with me. I just got my copy of Who We Are and How We Got Here. Here's a little bit longer excerpt from pages 239-240:

Very interesting... thanks for sharing.

I see that there is a note (n. 28) about the discoveries of the two laboratories, of Bradley and of Reich... did Reich refer to already published data, or not?

dsm
07-21-2018, 12:02 PM
Guess this thread is fizzling out. Well, it was nice while it lasted.

Your prior two posts sure added a spark. But, Perhaps we can hope that the poster of the endless wheel spinning posts will fizzle out.

Speaking for myself I learn next to nothing useful from the wheel-spinning source but have learned so much from your responses plus the other intelligent thinkers who have made so many informative thoughtful posts.

It is painful to see kiddy mentality trying to ‘argue’ with wiser people who share ideas and knowledge rather than seek to throw tantrums if you disagree with them.

Once again, thank you for the quality of your posts and the helpful knowledge and ideas they deliver.

D

rms2
07-21-2018, 12:09 PM
Very interesting... thanks for sharing.

I see that there is a note (n. 28) about the discoveries of the two laboratories, of Bradley and of Reich... did Reich refer to already published data, or not?

Here's what that note says, on page 314 of the book, in the notes to Chapter 10, "The Genomics of Inequality":



28. Martiniano et al., "West Iberia"; unpublished results from David Reich's laboratory.


So, the note refers both to the published results from Martiniano et al and to unpublished results from Reich's own lab.

etrusco
07-21-2018, 09:43 PM
Not sure anyone will respond, but Reich mentions the notion that Bell Beaker as an idea but not as a people spread east from Iberia. I'm not sure that even the idea spread from Iberia, because how much of the Bell Beaker package really originated in Iberia?

On the one hand Reich says steppe dna and Y chromosomes of steppe origin spread throughout Europe from the east, but on the other he sees Bell Beaker spreading initially out of Iberia as a kind of religion.

I suspect there is an error involved in this that is tied to the Spanish Model and to probably erroneous 14C dates.


What Reich says is what I'm telling and pointing out since my first posts. The movement of people is from east ( the exact point of origin we do not know it depends on where we will find the crucial R1b L-51; it could be the steppe it could be Romania or western Ukraine we'll see) but most of the cultural package of BBC and post BBC is deeply connected with the farmers world. Happy that Reich is aware of it too.

rms2
07-21-2018, 09:47 PM
What Reich says is what I'm telling and pointing out since my first posts. The movement of people is from east ( the exact point of origin we do not know it depends on where we will find the crucial R1b L-51; it could be the steppe it could be Romania or western Ukraine we'll see) but most of the cultural package of BBC and post BBC is deeply connected with the farmers world. Happy that Reich is aware of it too.

Honestly, I think that is a mistake, the legacy of the old Spanish Model. I don't see much about Bell Beaker that could have come out of Iberia. Even the pots look like they are derived from older steppe proto-types.

But it seems like the long established orthodoxy says, "Bell Beaker originated in Iberia", so everyone must bow to that, even when the preponderance of the evidence says otherwise.

glentane
07-22-2018, 12:10 AM
It would be an interesting thing if it were true. Sewn plank boats have also lasted into the present day,
...
http://www.sewboat.narod.ru/boat/index.htmI think my internet is playing up a bit, I'm getting a blank page for that link.

But it's quite true. Saami boats were the best exemplars of the sewn-plank technique. Fantastically seaworthy too, for fishing off the Lofoten islands for instance. Which is no joke, even for skilled North Atlantic sailors.
Here's a Skolt Saami lad toiling away in Russia somewhere
24796

razyn
07-22-2018, 12:21 AM
I think my internet is playing up a bit, I'm getting a blank page for that link.

Might try this one, for the Russian language version of his website (and that has many more photos). The first link works for me, with Firefox. Often the issue is browser incompatibility. Anyway, it's not a dead link -- although some of the picture links imbedded in it are defunct, and may now redirect to some sort of porn site. Naimark's own site is OK. http://www.sewboat.narod.ru/boat/koi8.htm

alan
07-23-2018, 12:29 AM
I was referring to NW Atlantic Europe re curraghs. There are classical references from 6th century BC Ora Maritima and later to currach type boats in the isles, NW France and Iberia and it appear to me that the sail ( only take up much later by germanics) probably spread much earlier up the Atlantic coast - the idea likely coming from Phoenicians in the late Bronze Age. The golden broighter Iron Age model boat from Ireland is generally considered have the shape of a currach and it inludes a sail mast as well as oars. The sailed currach seems likely to have been the type of boat that ran the Atlantic trade networks after 900BC. The archaeological evidence for sewn plank boats in the Isles seems to all fall between 2000 and 1000BC with the evidence of skin boats and sails post dating it. The later were not flimsy. The leather covered a wicker boat. Wicker is incredible strong and also absorbed shock v well. In fact I’d trust wicker to withstand blunt force or pressure more than planks. People transported cattle etc in them so they were v robust on the inside. Their only downside is sharp stuff piercing the skin hull from the outside such as sharp reefs etc. They could be built to very large sizes too. So I stand by what I posted earlier. The sewn plank boats in the North Atlantic related to a particular period and probably function. They are essebtially post-beaker and there could be a link between their emergence and the old beaker networks giving way the early Bronze Age.

razyn
07-23-2018, 01:46 AM
So I stand by what I posted earlier.

Spoken like a true archaeologist. And I speak as a folklorist. Your Phoenician sailors were working in a tradition that included sewn plank boats with sails (as recovered in several very dry locations, including the area of the great pyramids and some ports on the Red Sea) in the mid-3rd millennium BC. The wood came from Lebanon, but the Egyptians were building seaworthy plank boats with it.

If the Isles people learned of sails from them (Phoenicians), why did they neglect to learn of sewn plank boats? But they didn't. Everybody west of the Caspian Sea knew about them; they just didn't all have suitable trees (aspen was popular in Finland), and some had to make do with wicker and hides. (At least, by 2000 years later than the Bronze Age migration of Bell Beaker folk, they did.) Some places had to use reeds. Some used hollowed logs. Some used birch bark. Whatever floats your boat.

GASKA
07-23-2018, 11:33 AM
Honestly, I think that is a mistake, the legacy of the old Spanish Model. I don't see much about Bell Beaker that could have come out of Iberia. Even the pots look like they are derived from older steppe proto-types.

But it seems like the long established orthodoxy says, "Bell Beaker originated in Iberia", so everyone must bow to that, even when the preponderance of the evidence says otherwise.

An erroneus opinion often repeated can become true for those people who don't know the reality of the III millenium BC in Europe. In fact even the most recalcitrant "enemies" of the Iberian origin of the BB culture have had to admit that the C14 are incontestable. I guess this doen'st mean much to you, because you repeatedly try to deny it. This can have effects on your parishioners, that is, people who think like you, but in the rest, the only thing that causes is surprise because the inability to accept the evidence.

Have you read the study of Joao Cardoso (2.014) that I sent? Don't you agree with him? Why? Do you know any other study of European archaeologists that contradict their conclusions? Would you mind sharing it with us?

Regarding Reich, we are all waiting for his data, to check their dates and the sites or burials analyzed. Obviously he knows something that we don't know, because those data apparently only need to be known by a few people. I hope that the publication serves to clear up some doubts.

rms2
07-23-2018, 01:30 PM
An erroneus opinion often repeated can become true for those people who don't know the reality of the III millenium BC in Europe. In fact even the most recalcitrant "enemies" of the Iberian origin of the BB culture have had to admit that the C14 are incontestable. I guess this doen'st mean much to you, because you repeatedly try to deny it. This can have effects on your parishioners, that is, people who think like you, but in the rest, the only thing that causes is surprise because the inability to accept the evidence.

You take this stuff very personally, but please understand that I am not the "enemy" of the Iberian origin of Bell Beaker. I just don't think it's true. I don't dislike the Iberian peninsula or its people or have any anti-Iberian animus inspiring me. It's just that, from what I have read, the idea that Bell Beaker originated in Iberia doesn't make sense to me.

I don't think the moon is made of cream cheese either, but I don't hate the moon (never been there) and I love cream cheese (especially on bagels).

There are numerous problems with the idea that Bell Beaker originated in Iberia. We've discussed some of them already, and I would be pleased to continue the discussion. I am intrigued, for one thing, with what Reich mentioned about several archaeologists telling him that Bell Beaker could be seen as a kind of ancient religion.



Have you read the study of Joao Cardoso (2.014) that I sent? Don't you agree with him? Why? Do you know any other study of European archaeologists that contradict their conclusions? Would you mind sharing it with us?

No, I don't recall reading that one. If it's in English, would you mind posting the link again?



Regarding Reich, we are all waiting for his data, to check their dates and the sites or burials analyzed. Obviously he knows something that we don't know, because those data apparently only need to be known by a few people. I hope that the publication serves to clear up some doubts.

Reich is pretty careful in his choice of words. It's doubtful the data will do much to contradict what he wrote in his book about a 30% overall genomic replacement in Iberia and a y-dna replacement of around 90%.

The fact that Dan Bradley's lab produced the same results independently says a lot.

I am glad to see you posting, GASKA. It dawned on me not too long ago that your posts are keeping this thread alive.

rms2
07-23-2018, 01:49 PM
GASKA -

You may be interested in this thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?11766-Poll-Bell-Beaker-Models), since it seems more appropriate for a discussion of Bell Beaker origins than this one. It began last summer, so it no doubt contains material that is outdated now, but most of it should be pretty current.

Some few people really seriously dislike that thread and its poll question (to the point of apparent personal offense, for some strange reason), even though I was pretty careful in formulating it and the first post, quoting and citing sources for the summaries of the Bell Beaker models. In other words, I didn't make anything up myself.

alan
07-23-2018, 03:13 PM
Spoken like a true archaeologist. And I speak as a folklorist. Your Phoenician sailors were working in a tradition that included sewn plank boats with sails (as recovered in several very dry locations, including the area of the great pyramids and some ports on the Red Sea) in the mid-3rd millennium BC. The wood came from Lebanon, but the Egyptians were building seaworthy plank boats with it.

If the Isles people learned of sails from them (Phoenicians), why did they neglect to learn of sewn plank boats? But they didn't. Everybody west of the Caspian Sea knew about them; they just didn't all have suitable trees (aspen was popular in Finland), and some had to make do with wicker and hides. (At least, by 2000 years later than the Bronze Age migration of Bell Beaker folk, they did.) Some places had to use reeds. Some used hollowed logs. Some used birch bark. Whatever floats your boat.

Dont disagree with what you said. The sewn plank idea is ancient in the Med. and it is possible it also made its way north from there too. I dont known when but logically you would think it also came up the Atlantic coast with perhaps the maritime beaker phase when Iberian derived beaker crept up the Atlantic coast of France being the logical date. However, until earlier boats are found then it will still be a maybe. My main point though its there is a marked shift between the archaeological evidence of sewn plank boats between 2000 and 1000BC then what appear to be almost exclusively references to wicker and skin made boats on the Atlantic from the 6th century BC until we come to Caesae and the Venetti's wooden boats which are yet another type of vessel. While skin boats intuitively sound like a backwards step from sewn plank, this is not true in terms of open sea performance and - this is my big hunch on this - their lightness may have been very compatible with the spread of the sail that probably was an idea that went up the Atlantic c 900BC and inspired by Phoenicians in SW Iberia. A light boat that was very good in open sea and had a sail added to it may have been the result of all of that. However, it may have been very much an Atlantic Bronze Age thing confined to the isles and the English channel. The way Nordic boats developed seems rather different and derived from wood (v plentiful in that area) and took up the sail very much later. I dont known why this was but I suspect the NW Atlantic and the isles presented a particular preference for seaworthiness in rough sea and sail use due to the wide crossing needed to be taken. They probably traded off the solidity and strurdiness of the sewn plank for the advantages of the currach type boat.

Certainly it is very striking that between the 6th century BC (there are few if any records older than that so it should just be seen as a terminus ante quem date) and Caesar's description of the wooden Venetti boats the reference to native boats on the sea in Atlantic Europe seem to be to curraghs and not sewn plank. So, I suspect what we would think of as a natural progression from skin to sewn plank to non-sewn wooden vessels is not what happened. As for what boats the beaker people used, I havent a clue as there is no historical or archaeological evidence for that part of Europe in the beaker era. IF the sewn plank boats are truly a new thing in NW Europe c. just after 2000BC then then all we can work on is inference from other things like changes in trade networks and contact patterns.

The period the skin boat emerged did see a shake up in the old network and a decline in the importance of Ireland for copper and perhaps tin from SW England. It also saw the start of the triangle of contacts from Wessex, Armorica and Unetice. In genetic terms we see U106 appear. So, one could argue that c. 2000BC there was a bit of a reorientation of the network. Still, I cant see landlocked Unetice having been influential on sailing - kind of like the Swiss Navy! What could have been a factor is an increase and improvement in woodworking via better bronze tools. On the other hand the maritime part of that triangle of contact was basically the isles and Armorica so, there is a case for saying that the sewn plank boat must have already been in those areas. Its hard to see how a contact triangle between central Europe, the isles and Armorica could have introduced new boat types that were not already in existence in the isles and/or Armorica and if the technology was already there then the most likely explanation is it crept up the Atlantic coast in the beaker era. Of course its also impossible to rule out parallel invention in the Med. in the mid 3rd millennium and in NW Europe 500 years later but....I tend to think that is unlikely.

Given the origins of the steppe P312 beaker people, its not very likely that maritime technology was their thing (horse riding boatmen being rare - just look at the dothraki in Game of Thrones needing the Targaryen fleet :0)) and its far more likely that this was acquired by a P312 group (L21 being prime suspect) who spent a generation or two at a maritime/ mouth of a huge sea estuary type location and acquired the knowledge from pre-existing people there. In fact that is almost certain the key to the L21 story: a smaller clade on land but masters of the NW seas.

GASKA
07-23-2018, 03:56 PM
You take this stuff very personally, but please understand that I am not the "enemy" of the Iberian origin of Bell Beaker. I just don't think it's true. I don't dislike the Iberian peninsula or its people or have any anti-Iberian animus inspiring me. It's just that, from what I have read, the idea that Bell Beaker originated in Iberia doesn't make sense to me.

I don't think the moon is made of cream cheese either, but I don't hate the moon (never been there) and I love cream cheese (especially on bagels).

There are numerous problems with the idea that Bell Beaker originated in Iberia. We've discussed some of them already, and I would be pleased to continue the discussion. I am intrigued, for one thing, with what Reich mentioned about several archaeologists telling him that Bell Beaker could be seen as a kind of ancient religion.



No, I don't recall reading that one. If it's in English, would you mind posting the link again?



Reich is pretty careful in his choice of words. It's doubtful the data will do much to contradict what he wrote in his book about a 30% overall genomic replacement in Iberia and a y-dna replacement of around 90%.

The fact that Dan Bradley's lab produced the same results independently says a lot.

I am glad to see you posting, GASKA. It dawned on me not too long ago that your posts are keeping this thread alive.

The interpretation made by Spanish archaelogists of some of the last discovered BBs burials is very simple. They don't speak as much about religion as about offerings to the dead. The BBs bowls contain the remains of banquets held "in situ" in honor of the deceased. It's exciting to find single, double, triple burials with small children or relatives of the dead, each individual is associated with their offerings (daggers, halberds, awls, necklace beads), the bowls contain beer, mead, fat, fish, beef. It's evident that the pain for the dead of the loved ones is as old as the history of humanity. It's also evident the pride to the belonging to a certain clan (probably family), because some burials are not contemporaneus and bodies of different ages are buried together (grandparents, parents, children and women).

The famous buttons of bone or ivory (V perforated), do not seem offerings but remains of the woolen dresses worn by women, because sometimes they are arrenged in a straight line (wool or linen disappeared, but the buttons continue there). In any case buttons are not considered luxury items, because bone is one of the materials most used by man since the Paleolithic. The same happens with copper awls, always associated with women who evidenced the work of weaving and sewing clothes. Men have their own objects, in some (few) cases related to metallurgy, and in the rest, related to their trade and social rank (hunter-warrior- Wristguards, tanged copper daggers, halberds, axes.....)

Regarding ceramics, there is a variety of types (maritime, corded, not decorated, geometric, Ciempozuelos), in some cases coexisted, and in others not, some ceramics are better worked and finished than others, and there is no special pattern, except that in Spain, many Bb burials are associated with the famous "Triada Ciempozuelos", that is to say glass, casserole, bowl, which is always accompanied by Palmela type copper spearheads, silex arrows, daggers etc...They were therefore small family clans (30-80 people), that settled on the bank of the rivers, rich lands suitable for agriculture and livestock breeding.

Regarding an ancient religion, it's suspected in a solar cult (small idols and ceramics decorated with solar circles, orientation is some burials..), but these cults seem proven in Europe since the neolithic. The intention to preserve the bodies and not to remove the burials is evident, but the burials are not visible as in the Neolithic, but are usually hidden (artificial and natural caves, pits, in some cases mounds).

Now I'm going on vacation, and my only genetic concern will be waiting for the results you have mentioned and talking with some Spanish geneticists about the subject that concern us. I will consult the thread that you have recommended me.

Un saludo.

alan
07-23-2018, 09:32 PM
The interpretation made by Spanish archaelogists of some of the last discovered BBs burials is very simple. They don't speak as much about religion as about offerings to the dead. The BBs bowls contain the remains of banquets held "in situ" in honor of the deceased. It's exciting to find single, double, triple burials with small children or relatives of the dead, each individual is associated with their offerings (daggers, halberds, awls, necklace beads), the bowls contain beer, mead, fat, fish, beef. It's evident that the pain for the dead of the loved ones is as old as the history of humanity. It's also evident the pride to the belonging to a certain clan (probably family), because some burials are not contemporaneus and bodies of different ages are buried together (grandparents, parents, children and women).

The famous buttons of bone or ivory (V perforated), do not seem offerings but remains of the woolen dresses worn by women, because sometimes they are arrenged in a straight line (wool or linen disappeared, but the buttons continue there). In any case buttons are not considered luxury items, because bone is one of the materials most used by man since the Paleolithic. The same happens with copper awls, always associated with women who evidenced the work of weaving and sewing clothes. Men have their own objects, in some (few) cases related to metallurgy, and in the rest, related to their trade and social rank (hunter-warrior- Wristguards, tanged copper daggers, halberds, axes.....)

Regarding ceramics, there is a variety of types (maritime, corded, not decorated, geometric, Ciempozuelos), in some cases coexisted, and in others not, some ceramics are better worked and finished than others, and there is no special pattern, except that in Spain, many Bb burials are associated with the famous "Triada Ciempozuelos", that is to say glass, casserole, bowl, which is always accompanied by Palmela type copper spearheads, silex arrows, daggers etc...They were therefore small family clans (30-80 people), that settled on the bank of the rivers, rich lands suitable for agriculture and livestock breeding.

Regarding an ancient religion, it's suspected in a solar cult (small idols and ceramics decorated with solar circles, orientation is some burials..), but these cults seem proven in Europe since the neolithic. The intention to preserve the bodies and not to remove the burials is evident, but the burials are not visible as in the Neolithic, but are usually hidden (artificial and natural caves, pits, in some cases mounds).

Now I'm going on vacation, and my only genetic concern will be waiting for the results you have mentioned and talking with some Spanish geneticists about the subject that concern us. I will consult the thread that you have recommended me.

Un saludo.

Maybe you can help me on something. Its been really annoying me that there is an interesting paper on Spanish beaker burials that talked about 'individualised' body positions of the (I think later) beaker burials in Spain. It actually considered it to be a kind of version of the Corded Ware tradition although I dont think they meant that to be taken too literally. I cant recall if it was in English or Spanish but it was a fairly new paper a couple of years back when I think I got access to it through Jean Manco's digital library which she gave some of us access to. I just cannot for the life of me remember enough about it to even find a reference to it by googling. It was a very interesting paper.

alan
07-23-2018, 09:47 PM
I thought this study (which focuses mostly on France) is very good at demonstrating the archaeological echo of the 'two different beaker peoples' conclusion of the ancient DNA. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304925443_Behind_the_warriors_Bell_Beakers_and_ide ntities_in_Atlantic_Europe_third_millennium_BC

GASKA
07-23-2018, 11:05 PM
Maybe you can help me on something. Its been really annoying me that there is an interesting paper on Spanish beaker burials that talked about 'individualised' body positions of the (I think later) beaker burials in Spain. It actually considered it to be a kind of version of the Corded Ware tradition although I dont think they meant that to be taken too literally. I cant recall if it was in English or Spanish but it was a fairly new paper a couple of years back when I think I got access to it through Jean Manco's digital library which she gave some of us access to. I just cannot for the life of me remember enough about it to even find a reference to it by googling. It was a very interesting paper.

The truth is that I have never paid much attention to the orientation of the bodies in the BBs burials, but I can search and I hope to find what you are looking for.

In the large chalcolithic villages, the burials with BB ceramic and Pre BB ceramic are contemporaneus (2.750-2.650 BC), it seem that the local elites, adopt the Portuguese models (maritime BB), that were introduced in the rest of Iberia through the Guadiana and Tagus rivers and through the maritime trade with the Mediterranean coast (Spain and later France and Sicily). Those first BBs burials are never individual (that only begin to be discovered from 2.500-2.450 BC).

We have to bear in mind that we are talking about a long period of time (2.750-2.000 BC), 750 years, many models and customs were developed throughout Europe and many of these models were exported from one place to another.

Regarding corded ware tradition, there is a few burials with this type of ceramic. These models seem to come from Brittany, and thay have been found in Castile, Galicia and Basque country (North of Spain) but I have no news that the Dna of these burials has been analyzed. In any case, I will look for the orientation of these bodies, just in case it coincides with what you are saying. You are right, they are late burials (2.350-2.150 BC).

I think there are more than "two different beaker peoples", because there are many different models of BB ceramics that in some cases are exclusive of certain territories. I don't know if when you speak of two different beaker peoples, you mean the distinction between those who are R1b and those who are not, if so, I believe that at least in Spain (also in Hungary and Germany), the men buried with BB package belong indistinctly to different haplogroups (R1b and I2a, even G2a), they lived in the same settlements and the grave goods were similar. Genetic distinction in burials are not appreciated.The richest families were buried with Ciempozuelos ceramics, some of whose have more than 7.500 incisions, making it easy to guess the skill of the artisans and the amount of hours they should devote to its preparation.

GASKA
07-23-2018, 11:43 PM
I thought this study (which focuses mostly on France) is very good at demonstrating the archaeological echo of the 'two different beaker peoples' conclusion of the ancient DNA. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304925443_Behind_the_warriors_Bell_Beakers_and_ide ntities_in_Atlantic_Europe_third_millennium_BC

Regarding the Bb burial of la Sima (Miño de Medinaceli, Soria), Spanish archaelogist say- "The lineal decorative pattern have their best parallels in Brittany, and ultimately in the corded ware complex, in the contest of long exchange systems, through BB and accompanying objects moved"

Two men were found buried (2.350 BC) in a neolithic collective burial reused in the chalcolitic- 18 vessels (maritime and geometric style), 10 glasses, 2 bowls and 6 casseroles (I don't know if you use this word, but it's the one that appeared in the google translator), 2 stone wrist guards, a fragment of another wristguard, 3 arrowheads of silex, 2 awls, 1 flat ax, 2 Palmela type copper spearheads and 3 tanged daggers (all copper),3 bone buttons V perforated

Bodies- "An individual was in a flexed position on his left side, with the head facing south (towards the outside of the tomb)" "the ceramic vessel was located at the feet of the deceased"

rms2
07-24-2018, 12:49 AM
. . .
I don't know if when you speak of two different beaker peoples, you mean the distinction between those who are R1b and those who are not, if so, I believe that at least in Spain (also in Hungary and Germany), the men buried with BB package belong indistinctly to different haplogroups (R1b and I2a, even G2a), they lived in the same settlements and the grave goods were similar . . .

Not indistinctly. There are distinctions in terms of time, physical anthropology, burial rite, and in terms of genome. The earliest Iberian Bell Beaker people are indistinguishable from the Neolithic farmers who preceded them. They had no R1b-M269 or steppe dna. Physically they were like their Neolithic predecessors: for the most part short in stature, long headed, and with gracile skeletons. By far most of their burials were in collective tombs. They weren't buried with the classical Beaker warrior kit.

But the Bell Beaker situation in Iberia, as in the rest of Europe, did not remain static. About 2500 BC, a new type of Bell Beaker people began to appear, who differed from the earlier Iberian Bell Beaker people physically, in their burial rite, and in their genomes. The men were mainly R1b-M269 and they carried steppe dna. They were tall for the period, round headed, and had robust skeletons. They buried their most important dead, especially the men, in single graves in pits under round burial mounds, sometimes with a warrior's kit of weapons.

Of the non-Iberian Olalde et al Bell Beaker samples, only six were non-R1b, and all of them, save one, lacked steppe dna. So don't pretend non-Iberian Bell Beaker was some sort of diverse society in terms of y-dna. It wasn't. It was incredibly monolithic.

From Olalde et al, pages 1-2:



The Y-chromosome composition of Beaker-complex-associated males was dominated by R1b-M269 (Supplementary Table 4), which is a lineage associated with the arrival of steppe migrants in central Europe after 3000 bc2,3. Outside Iberia, this lineage was present in 84 out of 90 analysed males. For individuals for whom we determined the R1b-M269 subtype (n = 60), we found that all but two had the derived allele for the R1b-S116/P312 polymorphism, which defines the dominant subtype in western Europe today14. By contrast, Beaker-complex-associated individuals from the Iberian Peninsula carried a higher proportion of Y haplogroups known to be common across Europe during the earlier Neolithic period2,4,15,16, such as I (n = 5) and G2 (n = 1); R1b-M269 was found in four individuals with a genome-wide signal of steppe-related ancestry, and of these, the two with higher coverage could be classified as R1b-S116/P312. The widespread presence of the R1b-S116/P312 polymorphism in ancient individuals from central and western Europe suggests that people associated with the Beaker complex may have had an important role in the dissemination of this lineage throughout most of its present-day distribution.


From Olalde et al, page 5:



In Iberia, the majority of Beaker-complex-associated individuals lacked steppe affinities and were genetically most similar to preceding Iberian populations. In central Europe, steppe-related ancestry was widespread and we can exclude a substantial contribution from Iberian Beaker-complex associated individuals. However, the presence of steppe-related ancestry in some Iberian individuals demonstrates that gene flow into Iberia was not uncommon during this period.

GASKA
07-24-2018, 10:03 AM
Not indistinctly. There are distinctions in terms of time, physical anthropology, burial rite, and in terms of genome. The earliest Iberian Bell Beaker people are indistinguishable from the Neolithic farmers who preceded them. They had no R1b-M269 or steppe dna. Physically they were like their Neolithic predecessors: for the most part short in stature, long headed, and with gracile skeletons. By far most of their burials were in collective tombs. They weren't buried with the classical Beaker warrior kit.

But the Bell Beaker situation in Iberia, as in the rest of Europe, did not remain static. About 2500 BC, a new type of Bell Beaker people began to appear, who differed from the earlier Iberian Bell Beaker people physically, in their burial rite, and in their genomes. The men were mainly R1b-M269 and they carried steppe dna. They were tall for the period, round headed, and had robust skeletons. They buried their most important dead, especially the men, in single graves in pits under round burial mounds, sometimes with a warrior's kit of weapons.

Of the non-Iberian Olalde et al Bell Beaker samples, only six were non-R1b, and all of them, save one, lacked steppe dna. So don't pretend non-Iberian Bell Beaker was some sort of diverse society in terms of y-dna. It wasn't. It was incredibly monolithic.

From Olalde et al, pages 1-2:



From Olalde et al, page 5:

Archaelogically speaking, I think there is one only BB culture in Europe (2.800-2.000 BC), with the different regional variations that occurred over such a long period of time. Antoher thing is the genetic difference of the men and women who developed that culture. The customs never remained unchanged, even the orientation of the bodies and the models of tombs varied. The history of chalcolithic in France, Spain or the British isles was very different.

I have started looking for the papers alan mentioned, and my first surprise is that the studies I know about orientation of the bodies, speak of a total variety of customs (N-S, W-O, O-W etc..). I am trying to arrange the burials chronologically to see if the patterns of burials varied at a certain time or if they were always so diverse.

Currently we only have the Olalde Paper, which is exhaustive in the British isles and very poor in Spain, France and Portugal. In the isles he studied 44 chalcolithic sites, with more the 300 skeletons and the result can confuse many people, because 32 men were R1b-P312 and only two I2a. However if you study the age of the deposits, you will notice that 20 men belong to the Bronze Age (2.080-1.110 BC), 10 men to the late chalcolithic (2.200-2.100 BC) and only 6 to the full chalcolithic (2.380-2.200 BC), and all of them theoretically are considered BBs. I am not surprised that Olalde and Reich talk about a dramatic replacement of the population, because they are talking about a period of 1.300 years of the pre-history of the British islands. We already talked about I 2416, which has the lowest amount of steppe ancestry of all the skeletons studied, and it's the second oldest of all (2.335 BC). He was almost certainly an iberian migrant and the type of burial has nothing to do with the type of the steppes. Many of the burials are not associated with BB ceramics and are poor archaelogically speaking (there are hardly any copper objects and other distintive elements of the Bb package. Interestingly, the steppe related ancestry increases in the British isles during the Bronze Age (1700-1000 BC), when it is supposed to decrease by mixing with British women.

However in Spain only 5 BB burials were analyzed (2.500-2.000 BC), the others (2), were very old collective deposits (3.000-2.700 BC), that's why I always said that we should be more cautious and expect more results in Iberia.

rms2
07-24-2018, 01:03 PM
I count 17 Bell Beaker results from Iberia in Olalde et al: 2 from Portugal, and 15 from Spain. Of those, 4 were R1b-M269, and those four had steppe dna.

Then there are the three additional Iberian Bell Beaker results not in Olalde et al I mentioned before from Lipson et al (2017) from the Basque country, all three of them pretty old, one of them among the earliest of early Bell Beaker results, and none of them had steppe dna:

I1976 2571-2347 calBCE Y-DNA: I2 mtDNA: H3

I2473 2916-2714 calBCE Y-DNA: I2a2a mtDNA: H3

I2467 2481-2212 calBCE Y-DNA: I2a2a mtDNA: X2b

Remember too that Olalde et al included Iberian Neolithic samples from before the Bell Beaker period. They too lacked R1b-M269 and steppe dna.

Also recall those unpublished Iberian samples cited by Reich in his recent book and those he mentions from Dan Bradley's lab, all of which support what he wrote about a 30% overall population replacement in Iberia along with a y-dna replacement of around 90%.

In Britain, the same sort of pattern emerged, with Neolithic farmers who were genomically a lot like Iberian Neolithic farmers, lacking both R1b-M269 and steppe dna, followed by invasive Kurgan Bell Beaker people whose men were R1b-M269 and who carried steppe dna.

I doubt a million more samples from either or both places would alter the picture.

And the picture from both Iberia and Britain is like this:

Before around 2500 BC: No R1b-M269, no steppe dna.

After around 2500 BC: Both R1b-M269 and steppe dna.

rms2
07-24-2018, 01:28 PM
It seems to me the basic outline of what occurred is beyond dispute. Before the middle of the third millennium BC, Neolithic farmers, many of whom genomically like Iberian Neolithic farmers, prevailed over much of western Europe. Around 2500 BC, people began to arrive from the east who carried steppe dna and whose men were mostly R1b-M269 (and most of them R1b-P312). To varying degrees, they replaced the people who lived in western Europe before them.

To our seemingly everlasting confusion, they used pots that when held upside down look like bells. They included those bell-shaped pots in the graves of their dead, and those pots seem to be oldest in Iberia. That is what led to confusion, because the invaders themselves did not come from Iberia, and their culture included many items and practices that likewise did not come from Iberia.

The real issue for us is sorting out the exact genesis of these eastern Bell Beaker people and how it is their culture came to be associated with a place far to the southwest of their own homeland.

R.Rocca
07-24-2018, 01:41 PM
Archaelogically speaking, I think there is one only BB culture in Europe (2.800-2.000 BC), with the different regional variations that occurred over such a long period of time. Antoher thing is the genetic difference of the men and women who developed that culture. The customs never remained unchanged, even the orientation of the bodies and the models of tombs varied. The history of chalcolithic in France, Spain or the British isles was very different.

The archaeologists disagree with you. The changes are so great that Edward Sangmeister proposed the "Rückstromtheorie" (Reflux Theory) to explain the differences. Other subject matter experts (e.g. Harrison & Heyd, Lemercier etc.) also see this reflux as an important differentiator.

GASKA
07-24-2018, 01:48 PM
I count 17 Bell Beaker results from Iberia in Olalde et al: 2 from Portugal, and 15 from Spain. Of those, 4 were R1b-M269, and those four had steppe dna.

Then there are the three additional Iberian Bell Beaker results not in Olalde et al I mentioned before from Lipson et al (2017) from the Basque country, all three of them pretty old, one of them among the earliest of early Bell Beaker results, and none of them had steppe dna:

I1976 2571-2347 calBCE Y-DNA: I2 mtDNA: H3

I2473 2916-2714 calBCE Y-DNA: I2a2a mtDNA: H3

I2467 2481-2212 calBCE Y-DNA: I2a2a mtDNA: X2b

Remember too that Olalde et al included Iberian Neolithic samples from before the Bell Beaker period. They too lacked R1b-M269 and steppe dna.

Also recall those unpublished Iberian samples cited by Reich in his recent book and those he mentions from Dan Bradley's lab, all of which support what he wrote about a 30% overall population replacement in Iberia along with a y-dna replacement of around 90%.

In Britain, the same sort of pattern emerged, with Neolithic farmers who were genomically a lot like Iberian Neolithic farmers, lacking both R1b-M269 and steppe dna, followed by invasive Kurgan Bell Beaker people whose men were R1b-M269 and who carried steppe dna.

I doubt a million more samples from either or both places would alter the picture.

And the picture from both Iberia and Britain is like this:

Before around 2500 BC: No R1b-M269, no steppe dna.

After around 2500 BC: Both R1b-M269 and steppe dna.

In Spain and Portugal, there are many burials studied in what we call ancient chalcolithic-

Dolmen de la Mina (Sedano, Burgos)- (3.900-3.600 BC)- 1 I2a2a, 1 H2.
Cova da Moura (3.635-3.210 BC)- 1 I2a1b. Cabeco de Arruda (3.500-3.000 BC)- 1 I2a1b 1 G2a2a1. Dolmen de Ansiao (3.500-3.000 BC)- 1 I2a1a1a
El Portalón (Atapuerca, Burgos)- (3.516-3.332 BC)- 1H2, 5 I2a2a, Famous ATP3 R1b M269 ???
Cueva de las Yurdinas (Peñacerrada, Alava)- (3.350-2.750 BC)- 1 I2a2a2a
El Mirador (Atapuerca, Burgos) (2.900-2.679 BC)- 3 I2a2a, 1 I2a1a, 2 I, 1 G2a2b.
Alto de la Huesera (Laguardia, Alava) (3.092-2.918 BC)- 1 G2a2a
Camino del Molino (Caravaca, Murcia) Olalde et al 2.018- (2.920-2.670 BC)- 2 I, 1 CF ????
Dolmen del Sotillo (Laguardia, Alava) (2.916-2.714 BC)- 2 I2a2a, 1 I2a
Cerdañola del Vallés (Barcelona)- Olalde et al, 2.018- (2.833-2.480 BC)- 1 I2a2a 1 G2a, 2 R1b V88

All are Pre BBs sites. It is obvius that I2a predominates (with the only doubt of ATP3), nobody will deny this data.

Regarding BB burials (2.500-2.000 BC), there are only 17 men analyzed, 5 R1b (we included I6622, camino de las Yeseras (2.800-1.750 BC)- P1-R1b M269), 7 I2a, 1 G2a and 5 failed (CT etc.., that according to you are P312 because all of them have steppe ancestry)- If we count the failed cases- R1b (60%), I2a (35%) G2a (5%). If we don't count them R1b (42%), I2a (50,6%) G2a (8%).

I have been trying for a long time to explain that barely have analyzed burials between (3.000-2.500 BC), that are precisely the key dates to explain the emergence of P312 in Western Europe. When we have abundant samples of those years, we can give you the reason or take it away, meanwhile you should understand that I am skeptical, becuase I know the abundance of burials and the scarce data that we currently have.

GASKA
07-24-2018, 02:00 PM
We have NO data of any of the more than 70 largest chalcolithic villages in Andalucia (los Millares, Marroquies Bajos etc...) Extremadura (las Pijotillas, San Blas.....), south of Portugal, and Castile. We also don't have data from Galicia, Asturias, Cantabria, Aragón and Valencia, that is, we don't know the ancient genetic profile of more than 70% of the territory of the Iberian peninsula. How we are going to consider the Olalde's results as definitive? It would be reckless to do it, and also, totally anti-scientific.

rms2
07-24-2018, 02:03 PM
Please quit bringing up the bogus claim that ATP3 was R1b-M269. Anglesqueville already posted the results from ATP3's BAM file (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=416033&viewfull=1#post416033), and the complete absence of M269 in subsequent Iberian samples from before the mid-third millennium BC further shows how unlikely such a result is.

Recall what Reich wrote on page 240 of his recent book, Who We Are and How We Got Here, based on the current set of published samples and on the unpublished samples from his own lab and that of Dan Bradley:



We found that approximately 30 percent of the Iberian population was replaced along with the arrival of steppe ancestry. However, the replacement of Y chromosomes was much more dramatic: in our data around 90 percent of males who carry Yamnaya ancestry have a Y-chromosome type of steppe origin that was absent in Iberia prior to that time. It is clear there were extraordinary hierarchies and imbalances in power at work in the expansions from the steppe.


Notice the part I put in bold red?

". . . that was absent in Iberia prior to that time".

P312 did not originate in Iberia, GASKA.

It came there from the east around 2500 BC in men who carried steppe autosomal dna.

rms2
07-24-2018, 02:33 PM
The archaeologists disagree with you. The changes are so great that Edward Sangmeister proposed the "Rückstromtheorie" (Reflux Theory) to explain the differences. Other subject matter experts (e.g. Harrison & Heyd, Lemercier etc.) also see this reflux as an important differentiator.

It sounds like Reich also believes in Sangmeister's Reflux Theory.

From pages 114-115 of Who We Are and How We Got Here:



Beginning about forty-seven hundred years ago, a couple of centuries after the Corded Ware culture swept into central Europe, there was an equally dramatic expansion of the Bell Beaker culture, probably from the region of present-day Iberia . . . It is possible to learn about the movement of people and objects by studying the ratios of isotopes of elements like strontium, lead, and oxygen that are characteristic of materials in different parts of the world. By studying the isotopic composition of teeth, archaeologists have shown that some people of the Bell Beaker culture moved hundreds of kilometers from their places of birth.36

. . . A major open question for understanding the spread of the Bell Beaker culture has always been whether it was propelled by the movement of people or the spread of ideas . . .

So, in contrast to what happened with the spread of the Corded Ware culture from the east, the initial spread of the Bell Beaker culture across Europe was mediated by the movement of ideas, not by migration.

Once the Bell Beaker culture reached central Europe through the dispersal of ideas, though, it spread further through migration.

GASKA
07-24-2018, 04:32 PM
The archaeologists disagree with you. The changes are so great that Edward Sangmeister proposed the "Rückstromtheorie" (Reflux Theory) to explain the differences. Other subject matter experts (e.g. Harrison & Heyd, Lemercier etc.) also see this reflux as an important differentiator.

SOME archaelogists disagree with me, others agree. BB ceramic is so called, because of the inverted bell shape that the first models had, and we all agree that the variations are so great, that in many cases, it's difficult to recognize the resemblance. This is normal, 800 years of history and thousands of different people who made those vessels. The forms were changing, also the techniques, the clay used and the decoration models.

Nevertheless, the Ciempozuelos style (2.500-1.800 BC) only exists in Spain, hundred of vessels has been studied and only 37 different decoration models (700 years) have been found. Somehow techniques passed from parents to children, and it's certain that there was NO Central european influence. By this I mean, that the typical models of Iberia (maritime, geometric and Ciempozuelos) will always be our, and therefore different from those typical of the rest of Europe.

My conclusion is very simple, if R1b-P312 came from the steppes ?? and entered Iberia after 2.300 BC, didn't bring a single cultural or technological innovation, and there were no violent conquests either. Nor do I believe that the population decreased because of the plague, but because of the climatic event that caused a terrible drought in southern Europe.

R.Rocca
07-24-2018, 07:51 PM
It sounds like Reich also believes in Sangmeister's Reflux Theory.

From pages 114-115 of Who We Are and How We Got Here:

Without a doubt the genetic data aligns with overwhelming consensus among archaeologists.

rms2
07-25-2018, 11:05 AM
Without a doubt the genetic data aligns with overwhelming consensus among archaeologists.

My problem with it is seeing what it is about Bell Beaker that originated in Iberia and spread east initially as ideas.

Even the pots have pretty obvious antecedents in the east.

rms2
07-25-2018, 11:35 AM
. . .

My conclusion is very simple, if R1b-P312 came from the steppes ?? and entered Iberia after 2.300 BC, didn't bring a single cultural or technological innovation, and there were no violent conquests either. Nor do I believe that the population decreased because of the plague, but because of the climatic event that caused a terrible drought in southern Europe.

As Reich makes clear in the quote I provided a couple of posts back, the ancient genomic evidence is that P312 was not present in Iberia before the arrival of steppe dna from the east c. 2500 BC.

Evidently Sangmeister saw a lot in eastern Bell Beaker that was not present in early Iberian Bell Beaker and could not be attributed to early Iberian Bell Beaker, hence his Rückstrom (literally backstream) or Reflux Model, in which BB moves east out of Iberia, picks up a bunch of innovations in central Europe, and then moves back west.

And Harrison and Heyd mention a BB "proto-package" in early Portugal that was not the complete, classical BB package. Classical BB would only come to exist with the help of many central European innovations that had their ultimate source in Yamnaya, not least of which were R1b-P312 and steppe dna.

Here are some east central European innovations in Bell Beaker that are absent from early Iberian Bell Beaker:

1. Single graves in pits under round burial mounds

2. Dependence on the horse, evidence of horseback riding, and the central role of the horse in religious ritual

3. Cord decoration on beakers

4. Boars tusk pendants

5. Archer's wrist guards

6. Tanged daggers

7. Use of white bone paste on beakers

I'm pretty sure I've left some things out.

I wouldn't be so sure there were no violent conquests either. Reich mentions the fact that there was around 90% y-dna replacement to go along with the arrival and spread of steppe dna. That could not have been easy on the native Iberian males of that time, as Reich says, on pages 239-240 of Who We Are and How We Got Here:



This Yamnaya expansion also cannot have been entirely friendly, as is clear from the fact that the proportion of Y chromosomes of steppe origin in both western Europe26 and India27 today is much larger than the proportion of steppe ancestry in the rest of the genome.

rms2
07-25-2018, 11:45 AM
Harrison and Heyd mention advanced archery skills and reliance on the bow and arrow as part of the early Portuguese BB "proto-package", but I'm not sure even that can be attributed to Iberia when it comes to Kurgan Bell Beaker.

This is from James Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans, page 122:



With regard to Proto-Indo-European weaponry, the most unequivocal reconstructions concern the bow, bowstring and arrow, all of which support the existence of archery within the Proto-Indo-European community. A thrusting weapon such as a dagger is usually postulated on the basis of the cognates Sanskrit asis 'sword' and Latin ensis 'sword'.

xenus
07-25-2018, 12:12 PM
@rms2

That's a good summary of the current evidence as well as the most parsimonious explanation of the available data. I don't think you're ever going to win over someone like GASKA who has very strong feelings and what seem like identity issues with the topic at hand. No matter how civil you can't debate feelings and just end up beating a dead horse in my experience.

rms2
07-25-2018, 12:54 PM
@rms2

That's a good summary of the current evidence as well as the most parsimonious explanation of the available data. I don't think you're ever going to win over someone like GASKA who has very strong feelings and what seem like identity issues with the topic at hand. No matter how civil you can't debate feelings and just end up beating a dead horse in my experience.

I don't mind batting things back and forth with GASKA. It actually helps me to become more and more familiar with the material so that I know it well.

This is something that really interests me, so it's hard for me to get too much of talking about Bell Beaker, Yamnaya, Corded Ware, etc., etc.

If GASKA stopped posting in it, this thread would probably fizzle out, and that wouldn't be a good thing.

GASKA
07-25-2018, 05:48 PM
As Reich makes clear in the quote I provided a couple of posts back, the ancient genomic evidence is that P312 was not present in Iberia before the arrival of steppe dna from the east c. 2500 BC.

Evidently Sangmeister saw a lot in eastern Bell Beaker that was not present in early Iberian Bell Beaker and could not be attributed to early Iberian Bell Beaker, hence his Rückstrom (literally backstream) or Reflux Model, in which BB moves east out of Iberia, picks up a bunch of innovations in central Europe, and then moves back west.

And Harrison and Heyd mention a BB "proto-package" in early Portugal that was not the complete, classical BB package. Classical BB would only come to exist with the help of many central European innovations that had their ultimate source in Yamnaya, not least of which were R1b-P312 and steppe dna.

Here are some east central European innovations in Bell Beaker that are absent from early Iberian Bell Beaker:

1. Single graves in pits under round burial mounds

2. Dependence on the horse, evidence of horseback riding, and the central role of the horse in religious ritual

3. Cord decoration on beakers

4. Boars tusk pendants

5. Archer's wrist guards

6. Tanged daggers

7. Use of white bone paste on beakers

I'm pretty sure I've left some things out.

I wouldn't be so sure there were no violent conquests either. Reich mentions the fact that there was around 90% y-dna replacement to go along with the arrival and spread of steppe dna. That could not have been easy on the native Iberian males of that time, as Reich says, on pages 239-240 of Who We Are and How We Got Here:

I agree with you in points 1 (mounds), 2 (horses), 3 (cord decoration) and 4 (boar's tusk pendants), because none of the four has been archeologically demonstrated in Iberia before 2.500 BC.

Wrist guards and tanged copper daggers are known in Iberia before 3.000 BC.

White bone paste is one of the typical characteristics of the Ciempozuelos style. https://fy.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofbyld:Vaso_Campaniforme_Ciempozuelos.jpg

GASKA
07-25-2018, 05:53 PM
I don't mind batting things back and forth with GASKA. It actually helps me to become more and more familiar with the material so that I know it well.

This is something that really interests me, so it's hard for me to get too much of talking about Bell Beaker, Yamnaya, Corded Ware, etc., etc.

If GASKA stopped posting in it, this thread would probably fizzle out, and that wouldn't be a good thing.

Thank you, if we finally become friends, I will have no choice but to invite you to visit the Pyrenees, you will surely forget the steppes.

Un saludo

rms2
07-25-2018, 06:55 PM
I agree with you in points 1 (mounds), 2 (horses), 3 (cord decoration) and 4 (boar's tusk pendants), because none of the four has been archeologically demonstrated in Iberia before 2.500 BC.

Wrist guards and tanged copper daggers are known in Iberia before 3.000 BC.

We've been through that before.

Regarding archer's wrist guards, the following excerpts are from Harrison and Heyd, The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland), the first from page 170, the second from page 187:



Interestingly (and important for understanding the role different regions play in the formation of the various Beaker ‘packages’) the wristguards are not found at Sion, and are not depicted on the stelae. We suspect they are a later addition to the Beaker ‘package’, originating from the Carpathian basin. They are not part of the earliest western Beaker ‘package’.




There are no wrist-guards found with early Beaker graves in northern Italy, southern France, or the early maritime beaker contexts in Iberia (see chapter 9.3). Only in the Bell Beaker East Group do they occur in a few early graves (Heyd 2001). Otherwise, we see many of them from the middle Bell Beaker period onwards, spreading widely in the EBA to Italy, France and Spain.

Here is mention of the tanged dagger:

Ibid, page 203:



Our present knowledge shows that Portugal does not have the classical ‘Bell Beaker Package’ that was so well described by C. Burgess and S. Shennan (1976), but the region does have something that we can call the ‘proto-Package’, which displays the essential early elements that belong to it, such as the Maritime Beaker, copper knives and awls, advanced archery skills and reliance on the bow and arrow, a knowledge of decorated textiles (discussed in Harrison 1977, 45–47), and perhaps also V perforated buttons of the tortuga type. Missing specifically are the boars’ tusk pendants shaped like bows, the stone wrist-guard (always a rare item in Portugal), and the type of tanged dagger that becomes identified with Beaker grave groups later on (Brandherm/Ruiz-Gálvez in press). Therefore, it is useful to speak of a ‘proto-Package’, in which core elements are linked together in Portugal from the earliest moment, and to which, at a later date, are added the wrist-guard, tanged dagger, Palmela points, and spiral gold ornaments.



White bone paste is one of the typical characteristics of the Ciempozuelos style. https://fy.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofbyld:Vaso_Campaniforme_Ciempozuelos.jpg

Apparently white bone paste was used earlier in the Carpathian basin and on TRB pottery.

From Jean Manco's Ancestral Journeys, page 161:



Bell Beaker ware from 3rd-millennium BC Spain was decorated with white paste of crushed bone. This technique was used earlier in the Carpathian basin and on Funnel Beaker ware (see pp. 100-01).16

etrusco
07-25-2018, 08:04 PM
We've been through that before.

Regarding archer's wrist guards, the following excerpts are from Harrison and Heyd, The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland), the first from page 170, the second from page 187:





Here is mention of the tanged dagger:

Ibid, page 203:





Apparently white bone paste was used earlier in the Carpathian basin and on TRB pottery.

From Jean Manco's Ancestral Journeys, page 161:


In the PIE homeland on the middle Volga we should find clear signs of archery activity given that this kind of stuff is present in the "protovocabulary". Otherwise ( as in agricultural vocabulary) it will be another self-inflicted wound.........besides Funnel beaker, carpathian basin .......not really in the surroundings of the eastern steppe.........

rms2
07-25-2018, 09:11 PM
In the PIE homeland on the middle Volga we should find clear signs of archery activity given that this kind of stuff is present in the "protovocabulary". Otherwise ( as in agricultural vocabulary) it will be another self-inflicted wound.........besides Funnel beaker, carpathian basin .......not really in the surroundings of the eastern steppe.........

Well, I already posted what Mallory said about bows, arrows, and bowstrings in Proto-Indo-European, i.e., that of all PIE weapons, the most unequivocal constructions concern them. There are arrowheads and other archery related artifacts in Yamnaya burials.

I'm not sure what you mean by "another self-inflicted wound" and the reference to agricultural vocabulary.

If the white bone paste used on some bell beakers in Spain in the mid-third millennium BC had antecedents in the Carpathian basin and in TRB pottery, that is an indication that it wasn't a technique of Iberian origin but was brought there as part of the Beaker package from the east. So it can't be claimed as a part of early Iberian Bell Beaker.

rms2
07-25-2018, 09:37 PM
Here's an artist's rendition of a cist burial from the Budzhak Yamnaya subculture from Alkaliya on the northwest Black Sea coast in Ukraine showing the arrowheads and other archery gear. I suspect Budzhak might be the mysterious pre-Beaker culture.

24848

Budzhak beakers looked a lot like Bell Beaker beakers.

24849

alan
07-28-2018, 10:06 PM
Regarding the Bb burial of la Sima (Miño de Medinaceli, Soria), Spanish archaelogist say- "The lineal decorative pattern have their best parallels in Brittany, and ultimately in the corded ware complex, in the contest of long exchange systems, through BB and accompanying objects moved"

Two men were found buried (2.350 BC) in a neolithic collective burial reused in the chalcolitic- 18 vessels (maritime and geometric style), 10 glasses, 2 bowls and 6 casseroles (I don't know if you use this word, but it's the one that appeared in the google translator), 2 stone wrist guards, a fragment of another wristguard, 3 arrowheads of silex, 2 awls, 1 flat ax, 2 Palmela type copper spearheads and 3 tanged daggers (all copper),3 bone buttons V perforated

Bodies- "An individual was in a flexed position on his left side, with the head facing south (towards the outside of the tomb)" "the ceramic vessel was located at the feet of the deceased"

There is no doubt that the classic body orientation of central European bell beaker did enter Iberia eventually. I have read a few papers that show examples of textbook central European BB burial traditions, often inserted into older collective tombs but clearly individual in treatment. These seem to be post-2500BC though and are clearly a different tradition to what went on before. They are most certainly migrants and IMO mark the arrival of the P312 beaker folk in Iberia.

Personally looking at the archaeology, its pretty clear that for a generation or two the beaker people of southern France, the Rhone, SW Switzerland and NW Italy were of the Iberian type. I would also add western France to this too. So, I do think there was an out-of-Iberia beaker migration. However, I think it was brief. AFAIK there are no beaker dates accepted today that much pre-date 2500BC in southern France, SW Switzerland/NW Italy. So, the evidence for a long existence, if any, of these Iberian derived colonists in those areas of SW Eurioe prior to the appearance of the other type of beaker period in central Europe just doesnt exist. I wouldnt hinge too much on a few decades when it comes to radiocarbon dating.

Personally I see very little in central European beaker culture that had to come from an older Iberian beaker culture. Things like daggers and archery for example were well known all across Europe and need not have come from one to the other. It would be crazy to see something as generic as daggers or arrows as something that came from the Iberian 'proto package' to the full package. Indeed the type of daggers and arrows used by the Iberian (and derived) beaker groups were different from those used by the P312 beaker groups in central Europe. To be more specific that hollow based arrowhead used by the P312 central European beaker groups was a type that was popularising (in parallel with a rise in the importance of archery) in the east of Europe c. 2700-2500BC but was not used in the west at that period. Daggers were long of importance as a weapon and symbol of power across Europe so, again, it would be crazy to see that as something that came from proto-beaker package Iberia to full package central Europe. Again the type of tanged knife used by central Europeans was not derived from the Iberian type. We already know burial tradition, body orientation rules etc do not derive from the Iberian beaker group. I would go as far as to say that there is essentially nothing that looks to have derived from the Iberian beaker groups in the P312 central European beaker groups.

However, if there is one possible thing it may be pottery influence. This can spread with movement of wives. Indeed, there is already evidence of far flung movement of pottery ideas. The early Iberian beaker pot seems to most likely have come from a north-central European template via the Grand Pressigny route c. 2750BC. Then, often overlooked, there is the clear evidence of the corded type decoration appearing on beakers in north and east Iberia at quite an early stage - I believe the 2600sBC. The nearest groups using corded decoraction at this time were the furthest west CW groups around Switzerland and the Rhine. So, there was a clearly a light flow of women and their pottery skills between central Europe and Iberia going on c. 2750 BC-2550BC. This in unlikely to have been entirely one way so it seems completely possible that some aspects of early Iberian beaker pottery ideas headed the other direction towards the Rhine. The possibility of this was surely magnified after Iberia type beaker groups appear to have moved east into SE France and adjacent shortly before 2500BC

alan
07-28-2018, 10:23 PM
Here's an artist's rendition of a cist burial from the Budzhak Yamnaya subculture from Alkaliya on the northwest Black Sea coast in Ukraine showing the arrowheads and other archery gear. I suspect Budzhak might be the mysterious pre-Beaker culture.

24848

Budzhak beakers looked a lot like Bell Beaker beakers.

24849

Budzhak is definitely in the right period and zone. Although I never felt I could pinpoint one culture, a bit of burying myself in reading up definitely convinced me that the vast bulk of features of classic central European beaker fit very well in with what was going on in the area between the Carpathians and the Dnieper c. 2700-2600BC after classic yamnaya (and indeed CW) with its east-west orientation etc starts being replaced by new traits such as north-south orientation, archery, hollow based arrowheads etc. So, bell beaker is very much reflective of the period it arose in rather than what was going on 3 of 4 hundred years earlier. But the key thing to note is its very much of its time in terms of the area between the Carpathians and Dnieper NOT of areas further west. Central European beaker culturally looks like the spreader of a second wave from east to west c. 250 years after CW had done that. And that is pretty well what the ancient DNA is showing too with the replacement of R1a with P312 and a bit of a shift in autosomal DNA too.

GASKA
07-29-2018, 12:32 PM
There is no doubt that the classic body orientation of central European bell beaker did enter Iberia eventually. I have read a few papers that show examples of textbook central European BB burial traditions, often inserted into older collective tombs but clearly individual in treatment. These seem to be post-2500BC though and are clearly a different tradition to what went on before. They are most certainly migrants and IMO mark the arrival of the P312 beaker folk in Iberia.

Personally looking at the archaeology, its pretty clear that for a generation or two the beaker people of southern France, the Rhone, SW Switzerland and NW Italy were of the Iberian type. I would also add western France to this too. So, I do think there was an out-of-Iberia beaker migration. However, I think it was brief. AFAIK there are no beaker dates accepted today that much pre-date 2500BC in southern France, SW Switzerland/NW Italy. So, the evidence for a long existence, if any, of these Iberian derived colonists in those areas of SW Eurioe prior to the appearance of the other type of beaker period in central Europe just doesnt exist. I wouldnt hinge too much on a few decades when it comes to radiocarbon dating.

Personally I see very little in central European beaker culture that had to come from an older Iberian beaker culture. Things like daggers and archery for example were well known all across Europe and need not have come from one to the other. It would be crazy to see something as generic as daggers or arrows as something that came from the Iberian 'proto package' to the full package. Indeed the type of daggers and arrows used by the Iberian (and derived) beaker groups were different from those used by the P312 beaker groups in central Europe. To be more specific that hollow based arrowhead used by the P312 central European beaker groups was a type that was popularising (in parallel with a rise in the importance of archery) in the east of Europe c. 2700-2500BC but was not used in the west at that period. Daggers were long of importance as a weapon and symbol of power across Europe so, again, it would be crazy to see that as something that came from proto-beaker package Iberia to full package central Europe. Again the type of tanged knife used by central Europeans was not derived from the Iberian type. We already know burial tradition, body orientation rules etc do not derive from the Iberian beaker group. I would go as far as to say that there is essentially nothing that looks to have derived from the Iberian beaker groups in the P312 central European beaker groups.

However, if there is one possible thing it may be pottery influence. This can spread with movement of wives. Indeed, there is already evidence of far flung movement of pottery ideas. The early Iberian beaker pot seems to most likely have come from a north-central European template via the Grand Pressigny route c. 2750BC. Then, often overlooked, there is the clear evidence of the corded type decoration appearing on beakers in north and east Iberia at quite an early stage - I believe the 2600sBC. The nearest groups using corded decoraction at this time were the furthest west CW groups around Switzerland and the Rhine. So, there was a clearly a light flow of women and their pottery skills between central Europe and Iberia going on c. 2750 BC-2550BC. This in unlikely to have been entirely one way so it seems completely possible that some aspects of early Iberian beaker pottery ideas headed the other direction towards the Rhine. The possibility of this was surely magnified after Iberia type beaker groups appear to have moved east into SE France and adjacent shortly before 2500BC

Your interpretation from the archaelogical point of view is interesting, I am looking for the paper you mentioned, but for now, I have only found partial studies on certain Spanish regions. I will try to sort all the data chronologically just in case, we could have a clue about possible Central European influences, but at the moment everything is quite chaotic.

We see that the copper objects were symbolic, and that the discovery of metallurgy didn't produce great transformations in the chalcolithic societies. It is not a metal strong enough to make swords, nor to manufacture plowshares, or other types of tools. Daggers, axes, halberds and spearheads were used simbolically in Iberia.

The violence was mainly based on ash wood arches, and stone arrows that unfortunately evolved to become more letal. Look at the arrow types related to violence
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272377697_Indicios_de_violencia_en_yacimientos_de_ la_region_de_Madrid_en_el_marco_del_Calcolitico_pe ninsular

jdean
07-29-2018, 05:01 PM
Looking for information specific to BB metallurgy I found two papers, the first concerning Iberia and the second Eastern BB.

The Iberian paper is quite old though and could be out of date but both papers appear to come to the same conclusion that the two flavours of BB obtained their respective metal smithing skills from older cultures in the area, however Iberian BB copper contained arsenic whilst there was apparently no particular trend with Eastern BB


With the recognition of only four metals we can gain a clearer appreciation of the technology of copper working around the Tagus estuary. The main technical innovation was the appearance of tin bronze alloys of Atlantic and Argaric traditions. But prior to this, no major technological discontinuity between the VNSP and Beaker cultures can be identified on the basis of the more than 400 SAM analyses. We can see the same 2°/o arsenical alloy in use in VNSP times to manufacture awls, flat axes and chisels as in the Beaker period for the production of Palmela Points.


the earlier discussed difference of Bell Beaker metal used in the western and eastern areas of this study does not reflect a Bell Beaker specific metallurgy. Copper of similar compositions has been treated in various regions and by other archaeological groups.

A Reconsideration Of The Iberian Background To Beaker Metallurgy (https://ugp.rug.nl/Palaeohistoria/article/viewFile/24796/22244)

Bell Beaker Metallurgy and the emergence of Fahlore-copper use in central europe (https://www.iansa.eu/papers/IANSA-2010-01-02-merkl.pdf)

jdean
07-29-2018, 06:29 PM
The formulation of the ‘Out of Iberia’ argument is not dissimilar in its emphasis on an earlier regional tradition. In this case the inspiration for the Bell Beaker is argued to the small and earlier Copoz beakers that have impressed decoration and which are found widely around the Tagus estuary in Portugal. The radiocarbon dates from Iberia and also a small number of stratigraphic sequences demonstrate that Maritime Bell Beakers which have zones of opposed ‘herring bone style’ decoration had emerged by the 27th century BC (e.g. Kunst 2001). Although doubts have been expressed about the reliability of some of the radiocarbon dates from Iberia (Lanting 2008), it has also been widely doubted whether the small number of Maritime beakers from the Low Countries could have inspired the very numerous examples elsewhere in western Europe (e.g. Salanova 2004b). The very existence of a phase when the Maritime beaker was the most common type in the Low Countries has also been challenged (e.g. Drenth & Hogestijn 2007) and the emerging consensus is that the Bell Beaker first appeared in Iberia.

However, this was not necessarily the time that the Bell Beaker Set appeared. Current chronologies suggest that for perhaps a century Bell Beakers were only made in Iberia and it is uncertain whether the other components of the Bell Beaker Set were also current at this time. The warrior equipment may have been added to an Iberian Bell Beaker ‘proto-package’ when it was adopted in temperate Europe, with the martial symbolism perhaps deriving ultimately from Yamnaya groups to the east (Harrison & Heyd 2007

The Arrival Of The Bell Beaker Set In Britain And Ireland_Andrew Fitzpatrick (https://www.academia.edu/24957136/THE_ARRIVAL_OF_THE_BELL_BEAKER_SET_IN_BRITAIN_AND_ IRELAND?auto=download)

MitchellSince1893
07-29-2018, 07:12 PM
...

Personally looking at the archaeology, its pretty clear that for a generation or two the beaker people of southern France, the Rhone, SW Switzerland and NW Italy were of the Iberian type. I would also add western France to this too. So, I do think there was an out-of-Iberia beaker migration. However, I think it was brief. AFAIK there are no beaker dates accepted today that much pre-date 2500BC in southern France, SW Switzerland/NW Italy. So, the evidence for a long existence, if any, of these Iberian derived colonists in those areas of SW Eurioe prior to the appearance of the other type of beaker period in central Europe just doesnt exist. I wouldnt hinge too much on a few decades when it comes to radiocarbon dating.

Personally I see very little in central European beaker culture that had to come from an older Iberian beaker culture. Things like daggers and archery for example were well known all across Europe and need not have come from one to the other. It would be crazy to see something as generic as daggers or arrows as something that came from the Iberian 'proto package' to the full package. Indeed the type of daggers and arrows used by the Iberian (and derived) beaker groups were different from those used by the P312 beaker groups in central Europe. To be more specific that hollow based arrowhead used by the P312 central European beaker groups was a type that was popularising (in parallel with a rise in the importance of archery) in the east of Europe c. 2700-2500BC but was not used in the west at that period. Daggers were long of importance as a weapon and symbol of power across Europe so, again, it would be crazy to see that as something that came from proto-beaker package Iberia to full package central Europe. Again the type of tanged knife used by central Europeans was not derived from the Iberian type. We already know burial tradition, body orientation rules etc do not derive from the Iberian beaker group. I would go as far as to say that there is essentially nothing that looks to have derived from the Iberian beaker groups in the P312 central European beaker groups.

However, if there is one possible thing it may be pottery influence. This can spread with movement of wives. Indeed, there is already evidence of far flung movement of pottery ideas. The early Iberian beaker pot seems to most likely have come from a north-central European template via the Grand Pressigny route c. 2750BC. Then, often overlooked, there is the clear evidence of the corded type decoration appearing on beakers in north and east Iberia at quite an early stage - I believe the 2600sBC. The nearest groups using corded decoraction at this time were the furthest west CW groups around Switzerland and the Rhine. So, there was a clearly a light flow of women and their pottery skills between central Europe and Iberia going on c. 2750 BC-2550BC. This in unlikely to have been entirely one way so it seems completely possible that some aspects of early Iberian beaker pottery ideas headed the other direction towards the Rhine. The possibility of this was surely magnified after Iberia type beaker groups appear to have moved east into SE France and adjacent shortly before 2500BC

When you look at this map you can see the area where single and community BB graves overlap, which is where you also see a little island of eastern Bell Beaker.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d0/45/ba/d045ba67d9d80146c6c37e84906d67bd.png

GASKA
07-29-2018, 07:20 PM
Looking for information specific to BB metallurgy I found two papers, the first concerning Iberia and the second Eastern BB.

The Iberian paper is quite old though and could be out of date but both papers appear to come to the same conclusion that the two flavours of BB obtained their respective metal smithing skills from older cultures in the area, however Iberian BB copper contained arsenic whilst there was apparently no particular trend with Eastern BB





A Reconsideration Of The Iberian Background To Beaker Metallurgy (https://ugp.rug.nl/Palaeohistoria/article/viewFile/24796/22244)

Bell Beaker Metallurgy and the emergence of Fahlore-copper use in central europe (https://www.iansa.eu/papers/IANSA-2010-01-02-merkl.pdf)

The metallurgy issue is one of the most intriguing of European prehistory, because is absolutely proven that Iberian metallurgy was different from Balkan metallurgy. the tests carried out on copper objects related to the Bb culture in Hungary and Spain show that the annealing technique was NOT used in Iberia, which means that emigration from Iberia to Central Europe must be ruled out (or at least, discard it in relation to metallurgy). This migration couldn't take place in the opposite direction either, because until the Bronze Age metallurgies continue to be different. Then we can only think that emigrants in one way (or another) adapted to local customs, and that metallurgy was only known to a privileged few.

On the contrary, I think that there could have been an ideology transmission from Central Europe which is shown in the tombs of warriors discovered in Northern Spain (possibly Post 2.350 BC).

At least, genetics has served to demonstrate that Basques and Spaniards are not genetically different from the rest of Europe. One hundred years ago, we Basques had to speak Euzkera, be Roman-Catholics, and have at least 8 Basques surnames (that is, all our great grandparents had to be Basques). Obviusly, anyone who does not have those surnames (English, Spaniards, Swedish, Russian or Italian), was considered inferior. Only individuals like Sabino Arana or Adolf Hitler can think that some human beings are superior to others taking into account their hemotipology or craniometry

rms2
07-29-2018, 07:59 PM
. . . Only individuals like Sabino Arana or Adolf Hitler can think that some human beings are superior to others taking into account their hemotipology or craniometry

Can we leave off with that kind of stuff? No one here thinks anyone is superior to anyone.

We are all just interested in the truth.

For me, genetic genealogy is just fun, and nothing more. When I first found out I was R1b, back in the spring of 2006, I was excited by what I read, because I thought I might have Spanish ancestry. That turned out to be wrong, but I didn't have any Hitlerian visions in my head, and I still don't.

Hitler himself was E1b1b anyway.

rms2
07-29-2018, 08:14 PM
You know, honestly, when some s.o.b. brings up Hitler, insinuating that anyone who believes R1b-M269 originated on the steppe is some kind of Nazi, it really pisses me off.

alan
07-29-2018, 09:07 PM
The Arrival Of The Bell Beaker Set In Britain And Ireland_Andrew Fitzpatrick (https://www.academia.edu/24957136/THE_ARRIVAL_OF_THE_BELL_BEAKER_SET_IN_BRITAIN_AND_ IRELAND?auto=download)

The very earliest few decades of beakers to the isles probably included the Boscombe Bowmen, the Amesbury Archer and the people at the Ross Island mine in Ireland. All probably around 2400BC (not 2500BC as you tend to see in old books - that was a crude ballpark). Its interesting that the companion to Amesbury Archer (who it appears was a close relation) was L21, as was one of the bodies in the body jumble at the Boscombe Bowmen site. So, in all probability this is telling us that L21 was perhaps the main lineage operating the beaker network in the south of Britain and south of Ireland c. 2400BC at the start of the beaker period in the isles (and perhaps the whole of the isles). The interesting thing about all of those is the complex mixture of central European and Atlantic aspects. They clearly came from a zone or interacted across a zone where both central European and Atlantic features could be absorbed. As P312 and steppe genes are linked to the L21 and in general P312 carrying beaker people there is no doubt that the male lines are of eastern origin.

However, the westernmost P312 beaker people c. 2500-2400BC around the Rhine would appear to have been capable of absorbing western material culture traits - for example on the Rhine they dropped the ancestral preference for hollow based arrowheads seen in P312 people in central Europe for the western barbed and tanged arrowheads preferred both by the non- P312 beaker groups (and also other pre-beaker groups in south-west Europe). They also intermittently absorbed maritime beaker from the west to add to their other beaker types and perhaps some other portable material culture traits. However, that this was a fairly superficial type borrowing and interaction is shown by the fact that they did not absorb the burial traditions of south-western Europe during this interaction. So, there was definitely a zone around the Rhine in which P312 groups of central European origin from further east could absorb south-western type beaker traits with almost no genetic impact. I think a combination of observing archaeological traits and the ancient DNA clearly show this ability to arrive, absorb exotic traits from further west but remain genetically not impacted on at detectable levels is proven in the Rhine/Low Countries area.

That being so, then we should not be surprised if there were similar P312 groups even further west (i.e west of the Rhine in northern France) who absorbed even more south-west European cultural traits without much genetic impact. My own opinion is that the Holland to Britain model is too simplified. There are traits in some of the early beaker burials in Britain that suggest even deeper level of contact (which as we have seen does not mean genetic mixing) with Atlantic Europe. For example some larger than single burial sized pits with re-openable burial chambers of wooden construction that were resigned for at least some re-use. They actually put me in mind of earth and wood version of Irish Wedge Tombs. The latter - if you take no notice of much later re-use in later periods such as the Bronze and Iron Age - also seem a new type that arrives in Ireland c. 2400BC fully 600 years after the last megalithic tombs had been built there. Contrary to what some sketchy interpretation suggest in some offerings, it is a new thing and there is no continuity with the earlier use of Megalith burial in Neolithic Ireland. Another thing to note is that, again if you are careful to only include the initial beaker phase of use, it appears that wedge tombs typically did not have more than a few burials inserted and look almost like the tomb of a nuclear family to me. The problem is though that they do at their simplest look like stone boxes and because of that most are badly disturbed, looted and re-used in later times. One rare case where it had been untouched for over 4000 years was one in Co. Tyrone where it had been buried by peat and the area abandoned. It had become invisible and so was frozen in time in the late beaker era. It contained just the burials of what (from memory) was apparently one guy, his wife and a couple of children and not the Neolithic jumble of disarticulated bones of 100s of bodies.

Anyway I think some groups of P312 beaker groups - probably including at least part of L21 - were further west than the Rhine by 2400BC - perhaps around Normandy and the Seine and probing further west seasonally due to an interest in metals which would inevitably have drawn them towards NW France's rocky coast. However, in that area they may (depending on the timing) have had competition given that Atlantic France has a strong beaker element that looks like it is derived from the non-P312 Iberian beaker groups. Indeed, it may be that brought about a halt to their expansion in that direction for a time and they had to settle for being a cog in the trade from the south-west rather than taking over the area and any raw metal sources. Its hard to be definitive as NW French beaker seem a mess of disturbance and poor dating but it seems likely to me that the migrations of two different types of beaker people bumped into each other around Normandy and the Seine c. 2500-2400BC. They might have had to both halt there and limit themselves to some mutual trading rather than physically expanding. And who knows? The P312 group might then have concluded that the best bet in expanding then lay crossing the English Channel. It makes sense to me and kind of fits the evidence of a P312 group derived from those slightly earlier P312 beaker folk in Germany etc were able to absorb a fair amount of western beaker cultural ideas but remain pretty well genetically unmixed with them. It may even be that there was an untested 'buffer' group that lay between the P312 group in say NE France that went to the isles and the Iberian group who at that time held Brittany. A buffer group (or an intermediate link in a contact chain if you like) which lay in between those two groups could have prevented much actual direct contact and genetic mixing between the P312 (L21) group that went to the isles and the Iberian-derived beaker group in Atlantic France. What we do know is the L21 group who went to Britain and have been DNA tested are unlikely to have been that buffer group as they do not have the expected Iberian type admixture and remained almost identical to the Dutch beaker people. The only reason why I suspect the L21 isles group were a little further west of classic Dutch is mostly archaeological. It seems to me the earliest isles beaker settlers had just a fraction more access to influences and trade from the Atlantic side than the Dutch albeit without this involving detectable gene-flow from the Atlantic.

alan
07-29-2018, 09:20 PM
Can we leave off with that kind of stuff? No one here thinks anyone is superior to anyone.

We are all just interested in the truth.

For me, genetic genealogy is just fun, and nothing more. When I first found out I was R1b, back in the spring of 2006, I was excited by what I read, because I thought I might have Spanish ancestry. That turned out to be wrong, but I didn't have any Hitlerian visions in my head, and I still don't.

Hitler himself was E1b1b anyway.

I actually think that the findings of ancient DNA over the last 3 or 4 years or so has completely destroyed the neo-nazi hobby of quoting pre-WWII racial physical anthropology studies. If you want a laugh just read all the absolute gibberish that must have occupied 100s of thousands of hours of lowbrow thinker's time on Stormfront etc. Almost all their notions have been proven to be nonsense or laughably exaggerated. We know know that a lot of the fair hair and blue eye genes probably arose in north-east or north-east-central Europe among farmers there like Globular Amphorae (perhaps partly from some hunters before them) and were probably absorbed by IE groups like CW and proto-beaker (in modest numbers - they remained predominantly dark haired/eyed) and moved west by them. Its pretty clear only some sort of (probably sexual) selective process slowly took those traits up to modern levels. It really isnt how they imagined it as uber-aryan Thor-like CW steppe groups. I think they probably think sword and sourcery books and heavy metal album covers are real

Saetro
07-29-2018, 09:40 PM
I think they probably think sword and sourcery books and heavy metal album covers are real

"Sourcery" may be a typo, but it is a great name for what this topic is about.

As for the rest, at a time when some people think that dinosaurs were alive not so long ago, a belief in folk tales may be somewhat more credible.
And as for what these people looked like, there was someone recently on these forums who, in a slightly inept way, was trying to remind us that it was Persian and Indian ancient texts that talked of "Aryan" and they did not mean blonde or blue-eyed.

GASKA
07-29-2018, 10:11 PM
I actually think that the findings of ancient DNA over the last 3 or 4 years or so has completely destroyed the neo-nazi hobby of quoting pre-WWII racial physical anthropology studies. If you want a laugh just read all the absolute gibberish that must have occupied 100s of thousands of hours of lowbrow thinker's time on Stormfront etc. Almost all their notions have been proven to be nonsense or laughably exaggerated. We know know that a lot of the fair hair and blue eye genes probably arose in north-east or north-east-central Europe among farmers there like Globular Amphorae (perhaps partly from some hunters before them) and were probably absorbed by IE groups like CW and proto-beaker (in modest numbers - they remained predominantly dark haired/eyed) and moved west by them. Its pretty clear only some sort of (probably sexual) selective process slowly took those traits up to modern levels. It really isnt how they imagined it as uber-aryan Thor-like CW steppe groups. I think they probably think sword and sourcery books and heavy metal album covers are real

https://phys.org/news/2014-01-spanish-hunter-gatherer-blue-eyes-dark.html

You are right, blue eyes, don't seem to be linked to any Y haplogroup in particular. This Iberian hunter gatherer was C1a.

I have blue eyes, like my paternal grandfather, two of my children and 20% of the Basques (25% Spaniards). The percentages are higher in Northern Europe with what everyone assumes to have originated there. Among the Basques was not a sign of racial purity, when I was a child, the priests told us that Basques with blue eyes were descendants of vikings, and that we were not as pure as the mountaineers. If Father Zumalacarregui had known something about genetics, his eyes would come out of their sockets.

GASKA
07-29-2018, 10:28 PM
You know, honestly, when some s.o.b. brings up Hitler, insinuating that anyone who believes R1b-M269 originated on the steppe is some kind of Nazi, it really pisses me off.

I think Hitler was E1b, and obviusly the BAsques are not nazis because they think that the origin of P312 is in the Franco-Cantabrian region, nor are you because you think M269 originates in the steppes.

Moreover, I think that people who use that arguments are because they have many prejudices and complex. Why do you think that in many countries in Europe it's very difficult to talk about genetics?. For example, in Spain if you defend haplogroup R1b (absolute majority in the male population), inmediately a politician appears saying that we are racist because we despise the inheritance of jews and moors.

I don't know what happened in the U. States but I imagine that there will be even more complicated. So calm, on this subject I think just like you.

rms2
07-29-2018, 11:23 PM
You were the one who brought up Hitler a couple of posts back, and it has happened quite a few times in the past that the inference was made that anyone who thought R1b-M269 and especially R1b-P312 had a steppe origin was some sort of fascist.

It gets old.

peternorth
07-30-2018, 07:28 AM
You know, honestly, when some s.o.b. brings up Hitler, insinuating that anyone who believes R1b-M269 originated on the steppe is some kind of Nazi, it really pisses me off.



Well said.

Mis
07-30-2018, 08:08 AM
Wife went on vacation.
Now I feel like a real man from the steppe.

jdean
07-30-2018, 09:14 AM
The metallurgy issue is one of the most intriguing of European prehistory, because is absolutely proven that Iberian metallurgy was different from Balkan metallurgy. the tests carried out on copper objects related to the Bb culture in Hungary and Spain show that the annealing technique was NOT used in Iberia, which means that emigration from Iberia to Central Europe must be ruled out (or at least, discard it in relation to metallurgy). This migration couldn't take place in the opposite direction either, because until the Bronze Age metallurgies continue to be different. Then we can only think that emigrants in one way (or another) adapted to local customs, and that metallurgy was only known to a privileged few.

Mulling over your answer it occurs to me that it doesn't really cut the mustard, Eastern Bell Beaker folk moved to Britain in the late Copper age and were clearly very families with both mining and smelting.

Ruderico
07-30-2018, 06:12 PM
The thing I don't get about some of the supporters of the Iberian origin for the BBs is the emotional connection, I see this a lot amongst other Iberians (mostly Spanish, although to be fair I don't see as many Portuguese people posting, so the my sample is biased).
If deep down there is an autochthonous bias, it really shouldn't be in favour of the non-steppe Iberian BBs. Checking some simple models for the Portuguese, for example, we get:


Portuguese - scaled Global 25/nMonte

Barcin_N 54.2
Yamnaya_Samara 29.8
WHG 10.8
Iberomaurusian 5.3
Levant_N 0.0
Yoruba 0.0


Portuguese - Davidski's qpAdm

Caucasus_HG 0.0
Lengyel_LN 59.3
Nganasan 2.0
Onge 1.0
Steppe_EBA 30.6
Western_HG 3.8
Yoruba 3.3

Obviously the Eastern BBs who arrived in Iberia weren't full steppe, but rather around 40-50%, so basically around half of modern Iberian ancestry from 2500BCE-ish is traced back not to the non-steppe Iberian BBs, but to Central Euro BBs. If they/we had to have a bias towards the majority of our ancestors, shouldn't it be towards the "foreigners"? Or at least 50/50


Personally I don't really care where the package came from, it's not like I'm them, nor I had anything to do with it anyway


Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not saying Iberians who support the Iberian hypothesis have an emotional bias.
I'm just questioning whether those who do are actually placing it on the right folks

rms2
07-30-2018, 07:44 PM
The thing I don't get about some of the supporters of the Iberian origin for the BBs is the emotional connection, I see this a lot amongst other Iberians (mostly Spanish, although to be fair I don't see as many Portuguese people posting, so the my sample is biased).
If deep down there is an autochthonous bias, it really shouldn't be in favour of the non-steppe Iberian BBs. Checking some simple models for the Portuguese, for example, we get:


Portuguese - scaled Global 25/nMonte

Barcin_N 54.2
Yamnaya_Samara 29.8
WHG 10.8
Iberomaurusian 5.3
Levant_N 0.0
Yoruba 0.0


Portuguese - Davidski's qpAdm

Caucasus_HG 0.0
Lengyel_LN 59.3
Nganasan 2.0
Onge 1.0
Steppe_EBA 30.6
Western_HG 3.8
Yoruba 3.3

Obviously the Eastern BBs who arrived in Iberia weren't full steppe, but rather around 40-50%, so basically around half of modern Iberian ancestry from 2500BCE-ish is traced back not to the non-steppe Iberian BBs, but to Central Euro BBs. If they/we had to have a bias towards the majority of our ancestors, shouldn't it be towards the "foreigners"? Or at least 50/50


Personally I don't really care where the package came from, it's not like I'm them, nor I had anything to do with it anyway


Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not saying Iberians who support the Iberian hypothesis have an emotional bias.
I'm just questioning whether those who do are actually placing it on the right folks

I don't get it either. It seems to me Iberianists argue against their own y-dna ancestors in favor of ancestors who passed dna to them only along female-mediated lines.

All of us western Europeans have Neolithic farmer and WHG ancestry. That's fine. Let's not deny it.

But those of us who are R1b-M269 are descended patrilineally from Yamnaya ancestors. We shouldn't deny them either.

etrusco
07-30-2018, 08:02 PM
rms2

All of us western Europeans have Neolithic farmer and WHG ancestry. That's fine. Let's not deny it.


Yes and never forget that 80/90% of steppe people cultural package ( I think to have posted enough about that!) came from their western neighbors so farmer "substantial" ancestry is even bigger.
Remember that steppe/farmers interactions started more or less 5000 BC and that for a good 1800 years cultural, religious and spiritual influence was mainly one sided. Fine that we are free to concentrate in the time span of the third millennium. Fine but not scientifically correct if we want to understand the PIE problem.

rms2
07-30-2018, 08:38 PM
rms2

All of us western Europeans have Neolithic farmer and WHG ancestry. That's fine. Let's not deny it.


Yes and never forget that 80/90% of steppe people cultural package ( I think to have posted enough about that!) came from their western neighbors so farmer "substantial" ancestry is even bigger.
Remember that steppe/farmers interactions started more or less 5000 BC and that for a good 1800 years cultural, religious and spiritual influence was mainly one sided. Fine that we are free to concentrate in the time span of the third millennium. Fine but not scientifically correct if we want to understand the PIE problem.

Don't understand that.

"80/90% of steppe people cultural package ( I think to have posted enough about that!) came from their western neighbors so farmer "substantial" ancestry is even bigger"?

Huh?

Steppe people got 80-90% of their culture from their western neighbors?

Don't think so.

Ruderico
07-30-2018, 10:44 PM
I don't get it either. It seems to me Iberianists argue against their own y-dna ancestors in favor of ancestors who passed dna to them only along female-mediated lines.

All of us western Europeans have Neolithic farmer and WHG ancestry. That's fine. Let's not deny it.

But those of us who are R1b-M269 are descended patrilineally from Yamnaya ancestors. We shouldn't deny them either.

To be honest I personally don't care too much about patrilinear or matrilinear ancestors, they are just one small part of our ancestry - one that might be totally disconnected or irrelevant to our identity as a people. I don't even know my own haplogroups (although my 23andme kit is on the way), but whatever they are I won't care more or less about the Bell Beakers or any other ancient group. I'm cust curious and a history/antropology afficionado who wants to know what happened, particularly with some groups I - for some reason - "like" the most, and these are not even necessarily ancestral to me (eg: Indo-Iranians and Indo-Aryans)

rms2
07-30-2018, 11:42 PM
To be honest I personally don't care too much about patrilinear or matrilinear ancestors, they are just one small part of our ancestry - one that might be totally disconnected or irrelevant to our identity as a people. I don't even know my own haplogroups (although my 23andme kit is on the way), but whatever they are I won't care more or less about the Bell Beakers or any other ancient group. I'm cust curious and a history/antropology afficionado who wants to know what happened, particularly with some groups I - for some reason - "like" the most, and these are not even necessarily ancestral to me (eg: Indo-Iranians and Indo-Aryans)

That's where we are different. I do care about my father line. My y chromosome was passed to me by my father, and he got it from his father, and so on. It connects me to my dad, his dad, his dad, and his dad, and so on, back through the dim reaches of time, without any intervening females. It is a sure inheritance, without random recombination like autosomal dna, which can be completely changed within a few generations.

Thus the y-dna signifies something far greater than mere biology. It is not itself spiritual, but it represents a spiritual heritage, the unbroken connection to one's fathers. That is what makes y-dna of paramount importance, at least to me.

I know I've said all that before, but I still feel the same way.

rms2
07-31-2018, 12:12 AM
I wish Reich and some of his compadres would develop a keen interest in R1b-P312 and its history.

MitchellSince1893
07-31-2018, 12:16 AM
The thing I don't get about some of the supporters of the Iberian origin for the BBs is the emotional connection, I see this a lot amongst other Iberians (mostly Spanish, although to be fair I don't see as many Portuguese people posting, so the my sample is biased).
If deep down there is an autochthonous bias, it really shouldn't be in favour of the non-steppe Iberian BBs. Checking some simple models for the Portuguese, for example, we get:


Portuguese - scaled Global 25/nMonte

Barcin_N 54.2
Yamnaya_Samara 29.8
WHG 10.8
Iberomaurusian 5.3
Levant_N 0.0
Yoruba 0.0


Portuguese - Davidski's qpAdm

Caucasus_HG 0.0
Lengyel_LN 59.3
Nganasan 2.0
Onge 1.0
Steppe_EBA 30.6
Western_HG 3.8
Yoruba 3.3...

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not saying Iberians who support the Iberian hypothesis have an emotional bias.
I'm just questioning whether those who do are actually placing it on the right folks

I honestly wonder if this view is part of the curriculum of the Spanish Public schools. i.e. taught widespread from an early age and never questioned. (not specifically Bell Beaker but Western Europeans descending from Cro-Magnons and other natives to Western Europe...nothing is taught to the contrary of this view?).

Not trying to be cute, or condensing. Honestly trying to figure out why this view is so prevalent in Spain.

dsm
07-31-2018, 01:03 AM
When you look at this map you can see the area where single and community BB graves overlap, which is where you also see a little island of eastern Bell Beaker.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d0/45/ba/d045ba67d9d80146c6c37e84906d67bd.png

That map is interesting. What caught my eye was the circled EBB area in the Sth Alps. It is shown as a 'hot-spot' for some U106 & S1194 (CTS4528) people as outlined in the N.Myres et al (2011) study. Admittedly that study called S1194 as L11* back then but they are essentially the same since CTS4528/DF100 began to show up.

Not sure what that circle actually tells us in relation to a hot-spot there for S1194, but it was attention getting.

D

MitchellSince1893
07-31-2018, 04:15 AM
That map is interesting. What caught my eye was the circled EBB area in the Sth Alps. It is shown as a 'hot-spot' for some U106 & S1194 (CTS4528) people as outlined in the N.Myres et al (2011) study. Admittedly that study called S1194 as L11* back then but they are essentially the same since CTS4528/DF100 began to show up.

Not sure what that circle actually tells us in relation to a hot-spot there for S1194, but it was attention getting.

D

The circle was added by me to draw attention to it (I also made the vertical lines red for the eastern BB so they would stand out). I'd seen that map before but never noticed that little Eastern BB Island.

Here is the original map. It's easy to miss the Eastern BB outpost in what looks like the Rhône-Alpes region of France.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/90/2d/ab/902dabae967baa199a4388eada251f72--prehistory-ware.jpg

msmarjoribanks
07-31-2018, 05:12 AM
So I just finished the Reich book, which I enjoyed. Any recommendations for the next book related to this topic I should read? I've read the Olalde paper and also I recently moved and am going through my books, so high up on the list (because I find I own them) are:

Mallory, In Search of the Indo Europeans
Pereltsvaig and Lewis, The Indo European Controversy
Barry Cunliffe, Europe Between the Oceans
David Anthony, The Horse, The Wheel, and Language

Also, as someone who has been peeking in for about 6 months now, but does not understand why the Bell Beaker thing is controversial (why people are clearly so attached to different theories, here and in the Indo European thread), can someone outline the controversies? I have a guess, but why guess when many of you have been involved in the debates!

For the record, my dad's Y is R-L21 (but DF63), which I assume is steppe-based, and would love to know when it came to the British Isles, and his and my mtDNA is Kb2, which is also supposed to have expanded with the steppe people, probably (not found so far among early farmers or WHG).

razyn
07-31-2018, 05:44 AM
Thus the y-dna signifies something far greater than mere biology. It is not itself spiritual, but it represents a spiritual heritage, the unbroken connection to one's fathers. That is what makes y-dna of paramount importance, at least to me.

I know I've said all that before, but I still feel the same way.

I find it partly comforting, and partly mind-boggling, to reflect that every father in line before me was a guy who (like me) had at least one son who grew to maturity and had a son, who did likewise. And by "every father" I don't mean six, eight, a dozen -- whatever number of generations it may be, since some male ancestor came to America from a more-or-less precisely known locale in western Europe.

I also don't mean all of the forefathers who lived in Iberia, or Saxony-Anhalt, or some other place where some fraction of my R1b-DF27 haplogroup project members currently prefer to hang their respective, genetic hats. I mean, back to "genetic Adam." For 150,000 years, or whatever it turns out to have been.

Every. Single. One.

Pylsteen
07-31-2018, 06:41 AM
I find it partly comforting, and partly mind-boggling, to reflect that every father in line before me was a guy who (like me) had at least one son who grew to maturity and had a son, who did likewise. And by "every father" I don't mean six, eight, a dozen -- whatever number of generations it may be, since some male ancestor came to America from a more-or-less precisely known locale in western Europe.


I guess "just" 150 generations since 2500 BC, all these men could fit together in a lecture hall. How I'd love to know their faces and personalities.

Finn
07-31-2018, 07:46 AM
double posting

Finn
07-31-2018, 07:50 AM
I did some Global 25 nMonte Runner comparison. My parents and my samples shows affinity with the British and Central European Beakers but not with the Dutch! I wonder why....


The Beakers of the Netherlands are out ruled by the Beakers of Central Europe and Britain:
1 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn 2.2235 34.17 (Britain) 65.83 (Central) 0 (Dutch)
2 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn_dad 1.9892 25.83 (Britain)74.17 (Central) 0 (Dutch)
3 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn_mom 2.1124 16.67 (Britain) 83.33 (Central) 0 (Dutch)

Ruderico
07-31-2018, 09:50 AM
That's where we are different. I do care about my father line. My y chromosome was passed to me by my father, and he got it from his father, and so on. It connects me to my dad, his dad, his dad, and his dad, and so on, back through the dim reaches of time, without any intervening females. It is a sure inheritance, without random recombination like autosomal dna, which can be completely changed within a few generations.

Thus the y-dna signifies something far greater than mere biology. It is not itself spiritual, but it represents a spiritual heritage, the unbroken connection to one's fathers. That is what makes y-dna of paramount importance, at least to me.

I know I've said all that before, but I still feel the same way.

Sure, I'm not going to argue against you as it's obviously something very personal, but since we only know about chromosomes very recently in human history, I tend to disregard Y-DNA a bit and instead look at the big picture on one's ancestry, particularly since tribe-based communities are dead around these parts for a long time and are effectively meaningless - we have a relatively small number of family names aswell, it seems everyone is a "something"-es or Silva/Santos around here.

It might also be because I'm a lot closer to my mother than my father - with whom at times I have a rather cold relation - besides looking a lot more similar to that side of the family (except for the big head) and having a closer emotional connection to them, despite being much more in touch with paternal relatives. I guess that's in part the result of my father and his relatives being rather humourless, cold, and pragmatic (kind of like the German stereotype)..it made me feel some difficulty connecting to them, as opposed to my mother's side who is much warmer and vivacious eventhough I see them much less often because of distance


Anyway, I digress, sorry for that





I did some Global 25 nMonte Runner comparison. My parents and my samples shows affinity with the British and Central European Beakers but not with the Dutch! I wonder why....


The Beakers of the Netherlands are out ruled by the Beakers of Central Europe and Britain:
1 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn 2.2235 34.17 (Britain) 65.83 (Central) 0 (Dutch)
2 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn_dad 1.9892 25.83 (Britain)74.17 (Central) 0 (Dutch)
3 Beaker_Britain +Beaker_Central_Europe +Beaker_The_Netherlands Custom_-_AGUser_finn_mom 2.1124 16.67 (Britain) 83.33 (Central) 0 (Dutch)

That's nice, could you do the same for Iberians?

rms2
07-31-2018, 11:44 AM
So I just finished the Reich book, which I enjoyed. Any recommendations for the next book related to this topic I should read? I've read the Olalde paper and also I recently moved and am going through my books, so high up on the list (because I find I own them) are:

Mallory, In Search of the Indo Europeans
Pereltsvaig and Lewis, The Indo European Controversy
Barry Cunliffe, Europe Between the Oceans
David Anthony, The Horse, The Wheel, and Language

Also, as someone who has been peeking in for about 6 months now, but does not understand why the Bell Beaker thing is controversial (why people are clearly so attached to different theories, here and in the Indo European thread), can someone outline the controversies? I have a guess, but why guess when many of you have been involved in the debates!

For the record, my dad's Y is R-L21 (but DF63), which I assume is steppe-based, and would love to know when it came to the British Isles, and his and my mtDNA is Kb2, which is also supposed to have expanded with the steppe people, probably (not found so far among early farmers or WHG).

Of the books you listed, I would begin with Anthony's The Horse The Wheel and Language, then go with Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans, and then Asya Pereltsvaig's The Indo-European Controversy. Cunliffe is a good writer, and I have a couple of his books, including Europe Between the Oceans, but I'm not a big fan because I found him something of an immobilist. He was the one everyone relied on back when they were giving me hell over the FC LGM Refuge and Cunliffe's Longue Duree, which was used to argue that R1b had basically always been where it is now.

The Beaker controversy is essentially the R1b origin controversy. As recently as five or six years ago, but especially ten years ago, the consensus of opinion was that R1b had spent the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) in a Franco-Cantabrian Refuge, emerging from there to repopulate Europe as the ice sheets retreated. As early as 2006 some of us argued against that. I was one of them, arguing that R1b represented the western branch of the Indo-Europeans. As the ancient dna evidence began to come in, it became apparent early on that R1b was missing in action in Europe west of the Dniester before the Copper Age/Early Bronze Age. Instead, it appeared in Yamnaya and in Bell Beaker in Germany (at first). Soon the FC LGM Refuge for R1b became an obsolete idea.

The die hard defenders of the FC LGM Refuge turned to the Spanish Model of Bell Beaker origins to argue that, even though R1b as a whole did not spend the LGM in the FC refuge, certainly R1b-P312 was born in Iberia and spread east and north from there. The Spanish Model, which is and was the default theory for the origin of Bell Beaker, argues that the Bell Beaker culture began in Iberia and spread by migration from there. The belief that the Maritime beaker is the basic Bell Beaker pot, and that the others are refinements of that original proto-type, is the basis for the Spanish Model, since it has been associated with contexts in Portugal and Spain with the earliest radiocarbon dates.

Some of us have been arguing against the Spanish Model for awhile, including the French archaeologist Christian Jeunesse, whose paper, The dogma of the Iberian origin of the Bell Beaker: attempting its deconstruction (https://www.academia.edu/11325848/The_dogma_of_the_Iberian_origin_of_the_Bell_Beaker _attempting_its_deconstruction), should be required reading for anyone interested in Bell Beaker. For several years now, I and a few others have been pointing out the pretty obvious differences between early Iberian Bell Beaker and the Kurgan type of Bell Beaker, arguing that the two were so different as to be evidence that the Bell Beaker phenomenon was the product of two very different kinds of people.

An important though often ignored figure in the Bell Beaker controversy was the famous archaeologist Marija Gimbutas, who argued as late as the 1990's that Bell Beaker was of steppe origin and derived from Yamnaya. Gimbutas specifically denied that Bell Beaker was of western European origin, which made her a maverick and well ahead of her time (as she was in other ways).

Then in 2017 the preprint of Olalde et al's The Beaker Phenomenon and the Genomic Transformation of Northwest Europe came along and vindicated Gimbutas, Jeunesse, and the rest of us who agreed with them. It didn't exactly completely abandon the Spanish Model, but it did turn Iberia into the source of Bell Beaker cultural ideas rather than people, and made east central Europe the source of the people who spread the Bell Beaker Complex, greatly modified and enhanced with steppe-derived burial rites, equipment, and especially horses.

Olalde et al made it clear that there was no R1b-M269 or steppe dna in western Europe before the arrival of the Kurgan or Steppe kind of Bell Beaker people around 2500 BC (around 2400 BC in Britain and 2300 BC in Ireland).

There is more to the story than that, but you've read of most of it in Reich's book, so you don't need me to recount it all.

dsm
07-31-2018, 11:58 AM
Sure, I'm not going to argue against you as it's obviously something very personal, but since we only know about chromosomes very recently in human history, I tend to disregard Y-DNA a bit and instead look at the big picture on one's ancestry, particularly since tribe-based communities are dead around these parts for a long time and are effectively meaningless - we have a relatively small number of family names aswell, it seems everyone is a "something"-es or Silva/Santos around here.

It might also be because I'm a lot closer to my mother than my father - with whom at times I have a rather cold relation - besides looking a lot more similar to that side of the family (except for the big head) and having a closer emotional connection to them, despite being much more in touch with paternal relatives. I guess that's in part the result of my father and his relatives being rather humourless, cold, and pragmatic (kind of like the German stereotype)..it made me feel some difficulty connecting to them, as opposed to my mother's side who is much warmer and vivacious eventhough I see them much less often because of distance


Anyway, I digress, sorry for that






That's nice, could you do the same for Iberians?

I have to admit an affinity with rms2 on this. The image of father to father & mother to mother is far more compelling to my interest than the confused dilution of auto DNA that I do accept is part of who I am, but what part?. No one can say beyond 5-6 gens. What I can see is two ladders into the ether representing the Y DNA line & mtDNA lines. I really can and do contemplate them, how they evolved, how they ventured, survived & how I am their success.

Must admit though that my interest declines markedly beyond 3,000 BC. Will leave that contemplating to some future gen who may have 3D image reconstructions of the humanity thst begat us back 10,000s years. That can be their dreaming or reconstructed reality.

In a future post I,d like to broach the topic of what music my ancestors liked and may have carried with them. 2 nights back attended a concert of the Sydney Brandenburg orchestra playing authentic music from a journey by someone over the silk road into Nth China, around the 1100s. Will be there myself in Oct this year. Especially want to see Kashgar in the Tarim Basin and our R1b Uyghur relations who are still there. :)

D

Finn
07-31-2018, 12:34 PM
@ruderico

Fine, this is the one with added Iberia and Hungary
Finn
Fit 2.2 32.5 (Brit) 65.3 (Central) 0.8 (Hun) 3.3 (Iberia) 0 (NL)
Finn-Dad
Fit 1.95 20.8 (Brit) 72.5 (Central) 0 (Hun) 6.7 (Iberia) 0 (NL)
Finn-Mom
Fit 2.11 18.3 (Brit) 74.2 (Central) 4.2 (Hun) 1.7 (Iberia) 1.7 (NL)

With Iberia without Hungary
Finn
Fit 2.2 30.8 (Brit) 65.8 (Central) 3.3 (Iberia) 0 (NL)
Finn Dad
Fit 1.96 21.7 (Brit) 73.3 (Central) 5 (Iberia) 0 (NL)
Finn Mom
Fit 2.12 15.8 (Brit) 81.7 (Central) 1.7 (Iberia) 0.83 (NL)

rms2
07-31-2018, 01:04 PM
I have to admit an affinity with rms2 on this. The image of father to father & mother to mother is far more compelling to my interest than the confused dilution of auto DNA that I do accept is part of who I am, but what part?. No one can say beyond 5-6 gens. What I can see is two ladders into the ether representing the Y DNA line & mtDNA lines. I really can and do contemplate them, how they evolved, how they ventured, survived & how I am their success . . .

My y-dna line is of paramount importance to me, but what I see as the chief value of whole genome testing is its ability to help explore prehistory. David Reich's account of the ancient dna discoveries of the past ten years or so in his book, Who We Are and How We Got Here, is just fascinating (and very well written). It's one of the best books I've read in years.

Testing of whole ancient genomes allows us to learn things about our patrilineal heritage that would be impossible with just y-dna testing alone.

Webb
07-31-2018, 01:43 PM
I agree with rms2. My YDna line is more important to me than my MtDna or my overall dna make up. I am very proud of my surname, and my patrilineal dna line. My cousins and I all have spider web tattoos, and mine has my surname in Old English font in the middle. I am most interested in DF27 in relation to Celtic migrations. I mentioned in a different post, that until the advent of DNA, I assumed having a surname that is one of the oldest English occupational names, and my particular surname retains the oldest variation of the name, I was most likely Anglo-Saxon. However, I have always felt a strong pull to Celtic culture. So I am very pleased that I turned out to be DF27. As time goes on we are catching up with U152 as far as project member numbers go. I think we will eventually be the second largest P312 clade. I think we all have had our eyes opened and have rethought history because of DNA. The group that makes up the many different subclades of P312 is a bit of a passion to me.

MitchellSince1893
07-31-2018, 01:49 PM
.,.we are catching up with U152 as far as project member numbers go. I think we will eventually be the second largest P312 clade. I think we all have had our eyes opened and have rethought history because of DNA. The group that makes up the many different subclades of P312 is a bit of a passion to me.
You already passed us.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10837-FTDNA-U152-Project-Closing-in-on-2000-members&p=436018&viewfull=1#post436018

What will be interesting for me watch now is if combined DF27/U152 closes the gap with L21.

ADW_1981
07-31-2018, 02:13 PM
You already passed us.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10837-FTDNA-U152-Project-Closing-in-on-2000-members&p=436018&viewfull=1#post436018

What will be interesting for me watch now is if combined DF27/U152 closes the gap with L21.

I think we do pass you when you consider all of untested Iberia and the New World. DF27 is the largest group of them all.

Webb
07-31-2018, 02:14 PM
You already passed us.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10837-FTDNA-U152-Project-Closing-in-on-2000-members&p=436018&viewfull=1#post436018

What will be interesting for me watch now is if combined DF27/U152 closes the gap with L21.

Thanks. Somehow I missed this. I think I was on vacation. I suspect, though, there is still quite a bit of L21 to be yet discovered in continental Europe. Though, there does seem to be more French kits coming in, which is a good thing, and sorely needed. The rate of FTDNA project members to Alex's Big Tree is still underrepresented by U152 it seems. DF27 seems to be close to a 50% ratio where as U152 is closer to 25% ratio.

Finn
07-31-2018, 02:17 PM
That's where we are different. I do care about my father line. My y chromosome was passed to me by my father, and he got it from his father, and so on. It connects me to my dad, his dad, his dad, and his dad, and so on, back through the dim reaches of time, without any intervening females. It is a sure inheritance, without random recombination like autosomal dna, which can be completely changed within a few generations.

Thus the y-dna signifies something far greater than mere biology. It is not itself spiritual, but it represents a spiritual heritage, the unbroken connection to one's fathers. That is what makes y-dna of paramount importance, at least to me.

I know I've said all that before, but I still feel the same way.

I see myself as a mosaic of all my ancestors. The most recent are the biggest parts, they formed me the most, but further away it becomes smaller and smaller and more vague. When they don't represent a kind passed down story any longer the light goes more and more out.... I guess I'm narrative oriented in stead of spiritual.

But must say that the sum of mu ancestry, may be you can call it a 'genetic cline', set me on track of the early middle ages. The phase when in my region the genetic cards (the last time) really was shaken. What was their story? That's partly in knowledge hey those ancestors shaped me (kind of blue print period!) but that's also abstract, no connected names, no recognizable ancestoral persons....(in some sense they were but whe can't point it).

I don't see why Y-DNA is something spiritual or transcendental it's what people make of it....it's nothing outside of ourselves....(although be my guest Rms2!)

Of course I'm connected with my paternal line too... simply because of the surname tradition. No doubt. And simply personal because I had a special relationship with my paternal grandfather.

So a deep kind of affinity, without to much hocus pocus ;)

rms2
07-31-2018, 02:33 PM
. . .

So a deep kind of affinity, without to much hocus pocus ;)

I feel a deep affinity for my y-dna line, with the realization that most of my ancestors dropped out of my autosomal mosaic long ago, while the y chromosome keeps marching along.

It's a mistake to regard that as "hocus pocus", but I realize some people look at things differently than others.

Dewsloth
07-31-2018, 03:18 PM
I agree with rms2. My YDna line is more important to me than my MtDna or my overall dna make up. I am very proud of my surname, and my patrilineal dna line. My cousins and I all have spider web tattoos, and mine has my surname in Old English font in the middle. I am most interested in DF27 in relation to Celtic migrations. I mentioned in a different post, that until the advent of DNA, I assumed having a surname that is one of the oldest English occupational names, and my particular surname retains the oldest variation of the name, I was most likely Anglo-Saxon. However, I have always felt a strong pull to Celtic culture. So I am very pleased that I turned out to be DF27. As time goes on we are catching up with U152 as far as project member numbers go. I think we will eventually be the second largest P312 clade. I think we all have had our eyes opened and have rethought history because of DNA. The group that makes up the many different subclades of P312 is a bit of a passion to me.


I think we do pass you when you consider all of untested Iberia and the New World. DF27 is the largest group of them all.

DF19 at FTDNA barely has enough (355) for a decent family reunion; and at Big Tree maybe enough to charter a flight :lol:
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=183

All I have is a pile of mysteries:

My mtDNA is a mystery, because it looks primarily N. Euro, but comes from the Levant 150 years ago, and my mother really doesn't have any more N. Euro of any stripe than a random Chr. Lebanese person to give a hint. It must have been there for many centuries.

Autosomally, I'm an informational mess :lol: Fortunately both of my parents have also been tested.
My mom looks autosomally like she just stepped off a plane from Beirut, even though she's the 3rd generation to be born in the US.

My dad is autosomally also an informational mess of midpoints, although at least it's mostly NW Europe. His father's family has been in Germany for at least 400 years and his mother's side mostly arrived in N. America from Great Britain about 400 years ago (I know who a lot of these people are, now, but as to whose genes survive :noidea: ). Autosomally Dad could be French, or Flemish, or Swiss, or British, or one of those unhelpful "Utahn" blends. Certainly he has (along with his Ashkenazi ancestors) both "Celtic" and "Germanic" ancestry, but it's impossible to tweeze out what content comes from what parent -- my guess is probably a good dose of both from each parent.

But our Y-line (bringing it back on topic, here) -- that at least is a straight line connection. Too bad it's a clade of P312 that nobody can seem to locate before ~300AD.
All the circumstantial evidence points to their wives participating in the Bell Beaker Multi-level marketing complex, but so far it seems that DF19s reaching the vaunted copper dagger level are scarce, or they lived in an as-yet untested region.
Past that point, who knows? Family Y-line paper history begins in a little town above Wiesbaden in 1635; the town was supposed to have been founded 300 years earlier by people from Thuringen.
So there's just a little 3,000 year gap to fill. :shrug:

razyn
07-31-2018, 03:19 PM
I think apart from the mystical union stuff -- which people tend not to feel very strongly if dear old dad was absent or a jerk -- there is the trend toward learning one's (male-specific) trade or craft from one's patrilineal kin (father, uncles, brothers, grandpa). Wheelwrights may be mostly guys whose fathers were wheelwrights, and made them work in the shop. Warriors were the sons of warriors, and so on, and on.

Here's an illustration by Leif Parsons that accompanied a DNA article by Anne Tergesen, "Finding a Few Hundred Cousins," in The Wall Street Journal for Monday, Dec. 10, 2012. I was reminded of it by several posts on this thread, including (but not limited to) my own. Obviously, a bunch of us think about this linear aspect of our YDNA.

24921

Ruderico
07-31-2018, 04:15 PM
I see myself as a mosaic of all my ancestors. The most recent are the biggest parts, they formed me the most, but further away it becomes smaller and smaller and more vague.

That's kind of how I feel aswell, I find it hard to feel a strong connection to someone I never met even if they were my ancestors. The man on my avatar is my maternal grandfather, but I unfortunetly never actually met him. The main reason I use his photo as an avatar is because we kind of look alike (my photo is in my profile, in case anyone's curious to see if I resemble him or not). Supposedly he was a bit of a bully and not a very kind person, but whatever



Btw rms2, if you were in my shoes you would possibly be thrilled to know that my girfriend and I decided to move from Lisbon (where we were both born) not only to my father's village, but to the same house my paternal grandfather bought and built nearly 70 years ago - although it's heavily renovated, of course. Hopefully we'll move late 2019

MikeWhalen
07-31-2018, 05:00 PM
I too am a ydna kind of guy, for all the reasons others have said
I also am a bit of a MTdna guys for similar reasons

both are some sort of real, zero bs 'goal posts' regarding my personal heritage & DNA and I've always enjoyed the ebb and flo the 2 family systems social impact as well as genetic (moms branch is Newfoundland Devon-shire English with strong dollops of Irish/Scottish...Dads side was Orange lodge Irish (& Irish Scots) protestant bush farmers/loggers

it probably helps that I find Y & MT dna alot easier to understand and follow
on a small hunting note, I have found many more real relatives via my mtdna than my y dna, but its my y dna where I have the dratted brick wall...figures and how frustrating

I have always been challenged to fully understand and follow what seems to be much finickier and elusive rules/usefulness of any of the autosomal stuff...to the point where I simply gave up cause none of it made much sense or relevance to me...ya, I know the value of all the autosomal testing and how it helps with the big picture, but as some have said, given it peters out around 10 gen, I love how the y and mt just go on forever to back to Africa

anyway, its all good, and its all valid, but I just like y dna studies better, lol, or perhaps I just understand it better :)

Mike

btw, rms, lovely synopsis a few posts ago (#1642) about the background of the 'iberian' fuss... clear and short with your teachers penchant for giving some footnotes if we want to check it out ourselves-thx chum

alexfritz
07-31-2018, 05:08 PM
i like all features of my genome, no SNP left behind! and i like all of my ancestors as well, no ancestor left behind! its in my blood and it cant get treated with tablets;

the Y lineage just got me very interested in regional/local history an interest i havent had as such before, thats a plus solely on the Y side;

Pylsteen
07-31-2018, 05:15 PM
I feel a deep affinity for my y-dna line, with the realization that most of my ancestors dropped out of my autosomal mosaic long ago, while the y chromosome keeps marching along.



I think it's a bit sad that many ancestors tried to survive and procreate but have now been dropped out of the DNA of most of their descendants. Still, they are historically important, since without them, one would not exist. We cannot call them "genetic ancestors", but I think they can easily be called "biological ancestors" or "birth ancestors" or maybe "shadow ancestors".

jdean
07-31-2018, 05:23 PM
I also am a bit of a MTdna guys for similar reasons

I live in hope when it comes to MtDNA but I'm not counting my chickens.

I traced my MtDNA ancestor back to a small Welsh village not very far from where I live and also have an exact match whose MtDNA ancestor also comes from this area.

Trouble is this lady was born in Cardiff with the surname Jones and I can't find out who her father was, needless to say hunting for a Jones in Cardiff is like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

then there's my MtDNA ancestor, should be easy, small village back in the late 18th C. but the place was absolutely heaving with Morgans !!

But that's Welsh genealogy for you : )

Webb
07-31-2018, 05:37 PM
I live in hope when it comes to MtDNA but I'm not counting my chickens.

I traced my MtDNA ancestor back to a small Welsh village not very far from where I live and also have an exact match whose MtDNA ancestor also comes from this area.

Trouble is this lady was born in Cardiff with the surname Jones and I can't find out who her father was, needless to say hunting for a Jones in Cardiff is like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

then there's my MtDNA ancestor, should be easy, small village back in the late 18th C. but the place was absolutely heaving with Morgans !!

But that's Welsh genealogy for you : )

Looking for a Jones in the U.S. is like looking for a needle in a haystack!!!! Do you know how many Jones’ there are in Kentucky alone? Near impossible.

GoldenHind
07-31-2018, 05:38 PM
I agree with rms2. My YDna line is more important to me than my MtDna or my overall dna make up. I am very proud of my surname, and my patrilineal dna line. My cousins and I all have spider web tattoos, and mine has my surname in Old English font in the middle. I am most interested in DF27 in relation to Celtic migrations. I mentioned in a different post, that until the advent of DNA, I assumed having a surname that is one of the oldest English occupational names, and my particular surname retains the oldest variation of the name, I was most likely Anglo-Saxon. However, I have always felt a strong pull to Celtic culture. So I am very pleased that I turned out to be DF27. As time goes on we are catching up with U152 as far as project member numbers go. I think we will eventually be the second largest P312 clade. I think we all have had our eyes opened and have rethought history because of DNA. The group that makes up the many different subclades of P312 is a bit of a passion to me.


You already passed us.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10837-FTDNA-U152-Project-Closing-in-on-2000-members&p=436018&viewfull=1#post436018

What will be interesting for me watch now is if combined DF27/U152 closes the gap with L21.

In looking at the relative sizes of the three largest P312 subclades, one has to keep in mind the enormous over weighting of samples in the FTDNA database from the British Isles and Ireland, where L21 reaches its greatest concentration. It would be an interesting exercise to compare the numbers of the three on the continent alone, assuming this would be somehow possible.

rms2
07-31-2018, 05:50 PM
i like all features of my genome, no SNP left behind! and i like all of my ancestors as well, no ancestor left behind! its in my blood and it cant get treated with tablets;

the Y lineage just got me very interested in regional/local history an interest i havent had as such before, thats a plus solely on the Y side;



I think it's a bit sad that many ancestors tried to survive and procreate but have now been dropped out of the DNA of most of their descendants. Still, they are historically important, since without them, one would not exist. We cannot call them "genetic ancestors", but I think they can easily be called "biological ancestors" or "birth ancestors" or maybe "shadow ancestors".

I care about all my ancestors, too. I'm interested in all of them. It's just that the y-dna line is Number One for me. I'm a man: I identify with my dad and the experiences and challenges I have had growing up as a male that connect me to all my male ancestors but especially to the uninterrupted male line.

Regarding the genetically lost "shadow ancestors" mentioned by Pylsteen above: I agree that we wouldn't exist without them and that they are therefore important. The point I was making in mentioning them was about the transient, fleeting, and ephemeral nature of autosomal dna, at least when it comes to one's own personal heritage. Unless one has some of his ancestors (parents, grandparents) and relatives tested, it's impossible to know from whom we inherited what. Autosomal dna seems to have more value for overall populations and their connections to ancient peoples than it does for individual genealogy, especially the farther back one goes.

Meanwhile y-dna is fairly simple and straightforward, a sure inheritance from our fathers.

I realize that some guys aren't happy with their y-dna results for one reason or another (e.g., dad was no good, maybe he abandoned them, or they didn't get the exciting haplogroup they were hoping for), and that affects how much emphasis a man places on his y-dna line or a woman places on her father's y-dna line.

So, to each his own.

MitchellSince1893
07-31-2018, 05:54 PM
Thanks. Somehow I missed this. I think I was on vacation. I suspect, though, there is still quite a bit of L21 to be yet discovered in continental Europe. Though, there does seem to be more French kits coming in, which is a good thing, and sorely needed. The rate of FTDNA project members to Alex's Big Tree is still underrepresented by U152 it seems. DF27 seems to be close to a 50% ratio where as U152 is closer to 25% ratio.

Because U152 has been around so much longer, many of the original members of the FTDNA U152 project aren't involved for whatever reason (deceased, forgot about it, lost interest, no longer use the email registered at FTDNA etc). As most DF27 members are more recent, they are much more apt to be interested in ordering a BigY test.

jdean
07-31-2018, 06:01 PM
Looking for a Jones in the U.S. is like looking for a needle in a haystack!!!! Do you know how many Jones’ there are in Kentucky alone? Near impossible.

Probably not as many as live in Wales and Kentucky is 5 times bigger : )

Back in 1881 there were just under 175,000 and most of Wales is sparsely populated.

alexfritz
07-31-2018, 06:46 PM
I care about all my ancestors, too. I'm interested in all of them. It's just that the y-dna line is Number One for me. I'm a man: I identify with my dad and the experiences and challenges I have had growing up as a male that connect me to all my male ancestors but especially to the uninterrupted male line.

Regarding the genetically lost "shadow ancestors" mentioned by Pylsteen above: I agree that we wouldn't exist without them and that they are therefore important. The point I was making in mentioning them was about the transient, fleeting, and ephemeral nature of autosomal dna, at least when it comes to one's own personal heritage. Unless one has some of his ancestors (parents, grandparents) and relatives tested, it's impossible to know from whom we inherited what. Autosomal dna seems to have more value for overall populations and their connections to ancient peoples than it does for individual genealogy, especially the farther back one goes.

Meanwhile y-dna is fairly simple and straightforward, a sure inheritance from our fathers.

I realize that some guys aren't happy with their y-dna results for one reason or another (e.g., dad was no good, maybe he abandoned them, or they didn't get the exciting haplogroup they were hoping for), and that affects how much emphasis a man places on his y-dna line or a woman places on her father's y-dna line.

So, to each his own.

i guess there are people out there that attach it to an emotional/personal backround in good or bad terms personally myself always viewed it in same way as the blood-group aka just a neutral fact (no emotions attached), psyched nonetheless as it is a direct continuity{paternal;

but truth be told you can call yourself lucky as you are from a Y line that received a lot of attention and in depth publications modern and past pops so a lot of context and insight, and thats my only downer concerning my Y line that it hasnt; henceforth hence my interest is crippled by that piss poor publication so far, yeah i know the database of FTDNA but im talking in depth academic publications modern pops and aDNA for a proper context aka the royal R1b treatment _til than 'my own' is the continuity of ötzi's blood &co, psyched above all with that;

Webb
07-31-2018, 08:01 PM
Probably not as many as live in Wales and Kentucky is 5 times bigger : )

Back in 1881 there were just under 175,000 and most of Wales is sparsely populated.

My dad’s parents were first cousins so my dad is half a Jones.

jdean
07-31-2018, 10:42 PM
My dad’s parents were first cousins so my dad is half a Jones.

I'm a little short on Jones for a Taff, I've two going back 6 generations and one of those needs more evidence to be sure.

It concerns my maternal grandmother's paternal family and the evidence I used is a story she often told me.

In her version her paternal grandfather and his brothers went to America but were beset by tragedy and returned, subsequently the family was called 'Harris America' which my mother also remembers. Unfortunately I can't find any travel or census documents to help me out but have found American Welsh newspaper reports about a Henry Harris of Ebbw Vale who could be my Nan's paternal great grandfather and if so his mother was a Mary Jones of Llansamlet, Glamorgan.

MitchellSince1893
07-31-2018, 11:38 PM
Because U152 has been around so much longer, many of the original members of the FTDNA U152 project aren't involved for whatever reason (deceased, forgot about it, lost interest, no longer use the email registered at FTDNA etc). As most DF27 members are more recent, they are much more apt to be interested in ordering a BigY test.

Just to elaborate on the how DF27 and U152 have had different project growth histories. It took U152 9 years to get to 2000 members (2008 to July 2017). Plenty of time for many members to lose contact with the project for various reasons.

By contrast, DF27 reached the 2000 mark in ~4 years (2013 to September 2017).

Since 1 Jan of this year

U152 has grown 7.1% (2136 to 2289 members).
DF27 has grown 15% (2040 to 2346 members).
ZZ11 (Combined U152 & DF27) has grown by 11%
L21 has grown 8% (6348 to 6857)

Gap between ZZ11 and L21: 2172 on 1 Jan 2018 to 2222 on 31 July

So while ZZ11 has a faster growth rate, L21 is still adding more total members. In the not too distant future I would expect the gap to begin to narrow.

alan
07-31-2018, 11:39 PM
For the purpose of genetics I take most interest in yDNA as its just such a handy tracking device. As an Old World person I kind of knew my ancestry and origins anyway and had done a multi line approach to paper genealogy (the hobby wont be a long lasting one if you just follow the direct male line!). I probably am a bit unusual as the small community I was born and raised in was where my mum is from and she is from a family that have been there continuously for at least 500 years. My dad moved there and is from a hotchpotch background in terms of where they lived etc and has a less strong identity. So growing up it was my mothers side which provided the very deep local heritage, lots of relatives within 10 minutes walk, all sorts of complex interelationships of cousins of various degrees and the link to the main thing the community was about - fishing. So I kind of consider my maternal grandad's extremely long line of fishermen who lived where I also grew up to be the line I relate to most and consider my closest heritage. My dads line is not without interest but it traveled around a lot and was not linked to any particular work etc and has a less clear identity than the other side.

Eterne
08-01-2018, 07:38 AM
(double post)

Eterne
08-01-2018, 07:42 AM
I think there's kind of a gap between the people who are a bit more personal genomics focuses, against where I kind of tend to come at this whole thing from a population centered sort of view.

There's that strong feeling of personal connection with clonal dna (mtdna or y-dna) as it does match a personal ancestor, in ways that your autosome as a whole can't (because it recombines and is as unique as you are).

At the same time, that the y is free from the forces of recombination mean that it can "walk" far from where it originates, and so it's not very informative, in the very long term, about the populations that an individual's ancestors were mostly evolving in.

Take R1 for instance - it probably originates from P in East-Central Eurasia, which hops over into North-Central Eurasians (like Mal'ta boy) as R, then hops over to admixed WHG-ANE populations like EHG and the Southeast European HG, then again into other different populations with at least a dash of Near Eastern ancestry (all the way down to the Sahara), and finally back into Native American and South Asian populations (sort of looping back to East Eurasia in an autosomal sense).

(And today, most of those ancestral groups to P / R1 are often extinct or at reduced frequency even where they originated, in favour of N or C or O or G1, because this churn is happening everywhere with every group).

That's a kind of extreme example (R probably is an extreme as a migratory haplogroup), but does kind of highlight how with y-dna you can get this story that weaves across humanity, with a personal connection. While at the same time, it doesn't tell you much about the very long term population history of your ancestors and a few lucky males who get their hands on the right technology or circumstances at the right time, can wipe over another deep story of how different human groups evolving as different populations and facing different evolutionary challenges through history.

Though all this said, in terms of personal connections and genealogy, when it comes to using the autosome for this, more will become possible with this the more technology advances, and sample banks get larger (as you can match long segments even where the y or mt has fallen out due to probability).

rms2
08-01-2018, 12:51 PM
I think there's kind of a gap between the people who are a bit more personal genomics focuses, against where I kind of tend to come at this whole thing from a population centered sort of view.

There's that strong feeling of personal connection with clonal dna (mtdna or y-dna) as it does match a personal ancestor, in ways that your autosome as a whole can't (because it recombines and is as unique as you are).

I think one sees this at Anthrogenica. Some folks are here for the science; others are here to find out about their particular ancestors.

The primary interest for me is my own heritage. The science I see as mainly a means to that end; it's interesting, yes, but I'm just not that motivated by genetics as an end in itself. I realize how important it is for medical research, etc., but I'm talking about a hobbyist's approach, because that's what I am: a hobbyist, and the hobby is genetic genealogy.



At the same time, that the y is free from the forces of recombination mean that it can "walk" far from where it originates, and so it's not very informative, in the very long term, about the populations that an individual's ancestors were mostly evolving in.

Wherever it walked, it did so on the legs of one of your straight-line paternal ancestors, and what we discover about it becomes part of one's own history and agnatic heritage.

There's a cool factor there that is personally satisfying.



. . .

Though all this said, in terms of personal connections and genealogy, when it comes to using the autosome for this, more will become possible with this the more technology advances, and sample banks get larger (as you can match long segments even where the y or mt has fallen out due to probability).

Let's hope so.

I agree with what you posted and gave you a "thanks" for it. This response was intended as my simple commentary, not as a rebuttal.

rms2
08-01-2018, 01:04 PM
. . . So I kind of consider my maternal grandad's extremely long line of fishermen who lived where I also grew up to be the line I relate to most and consider my closest heritage. My dads line is not without interest but it traveled around a lot and was not linked to any particular work etc and has a less clear identity than the other side.

My dad was in the Navy, so we moved every couple of years. As a consequence, I didn't see all that much of any of my relatives outside my immediate family, but the ones I did see were mostly on my mother's side. They were great people, and I loved all of them.

But I admired my dad best of all, and I carry his last name, so it was with him I mainly identified. In addition to that, when it comes to genealogy, my mother's family tree was already pretty well plotted out by the time I was old enough to care. There wasn't a whole lot of mystery there or much for me to do. My y-dna line, on the other hand, got back only as far as my third great grandfather, born in West Virginia (part of Virginia at that time) in 1804, which didn't and doesn't seem all that long ago to me. There I saw a field of endeavor in which I might actually accomplish something.

rms2
08-01-2018, 01:16 PM
. . .

but truth be told you can call yourself lucky as you are from a Y line that received a lot of attention and in depth publications modern and past pops so a lot of context and insight, and thats my only downer concerning my Y line that it hasnt; henceforth hence my interest is crippled by that piss poor publication so far, yeah i know the database of FTDNA but im talking in depth academic publications modern pops and aDNA for a proper context aka the royal R1b treatment _til than 'my own' is the continuity of ötzi's blood &co, psyched above all with that;

You feel that way, and I understand, but to me I see interest in all y-dna haplogroups eclipsed by the craze for autosomal dna. I understand the value of ancient autosomal dna for what it can tell us about entire populations and their movements, but it seems to have pushed y-dna to the margin, which for me is distressing. Y-dna is like a sideshow now.

It is frustrating to see a huge study like Olalde et al turn up a startling result like the near-monolithic dominance of R1b-P312 in Kurgan Bell Beaker and yet stimulate no apparent follow up to find out where R1b-P312 came from and how it got into Kurgan Bell Beaker.

But Reich and company have a lot more ancient genomes than they have been able to talk about in print, so maybe they know more than they're saying.

And switching to the topic of our cousin R1a, is no one curious about the genesis of Corded Ware? Where did it come from?

I'd trade the genomes of a million Natufians for some answers to those questions (not that there ever were that many Natufians).

Webb
08-01-2018, 01:31 PM
You feel that way, and I understand, but to me I see interest in all y-dna haplogroups eclipsed by the craze for autosomal dna. I understand the value of ancient autosomal dna for what it can tell us about entire populations and their movements, but it seems to have pushed y-dna to the margin, which for me is distressing. Y-dna is like a sideshow now.

It is frustrating to see a huge study like Olalde et al turn up a startling result like the near-monolithic dominance of R1b-P312 in Kurgan Bell Beaker and yet stimulate no apparent follow up to find out where R1b-P312 came from and how it got into Kurgan Bell Beaker.

But Reich and company have a lot more ancient genomes than they have been able to talk about in print, so maybe they know more than they're saying.

And switching to the topic of our cousin R1a, is no one curious about the genesis of Corded Ware? Where did it come from?

I'd trade the genomes of a million Natufians for some answers to those questions (not that there ever were that many Natufians).

Something to keep in mind. We are all not at the same stage of discovery. If you are L21 with ancestry from the British Isles, you could, with probably 99.9% accuracy say you are of Celtic stock. Case closed, at that point maybe you are ready to move on, say further back in time. Focus on early Bell Beakers or Steppe origins of P312. Some of us DF27/ U152 guys of British ancestry, are still stuck at how did we get here. I know Mitchell favors the Belgae link, mine could be anywhere from early Celtic stock to Flemish weavers. I am not really ready to move on much until DF27 gets resolved. Once that happens then maybe I will be ready to take on the earlier mysteries. Don't get me wrong, I read all of the threads. I just don't add much because my knowledge base earlier than Celtic history is limited. But, I am a very common sense type of thinking person. Many years ago when everyone was on the Out of Iberia kick, common sense dictated that DF27 can't have much of a different history than its siblings. R1b can't have much of a different history than R1a, R can't have much of a different history than Q, and so forth.

Webb
08-01-2018, 01:39 PM
Something else I want to add. Everyone can quote me later saying, you know that Webb guy is brilliant. But if Africa is the birthplace of humanity, then Asia/Western Asia is the birthplace of humanities grandchildren.

rms2
08-01-2018, 01:50 PM
Something to keep in mind. We are all not at the same stage of discovery. If you are L21 with ancestry from the British Isles, you could, with probably 99.9% accuracy say you are of Celtic stock. Case closed, at that point maybe you are ready to move on, say further back in time. Focus on early Bell Beakers or Steppe origins of P312. Some of us DF27/ U152 guys of British ancestry, are still stuck at how did we get here. I know Mitchell favors the Belgae link, mine could be anywhere from early Celtic stock to Flemish weavers. I am not really ready to move on much until DF27 gets resolved. Once that happens then maybe I will be ready to take on the earlier mysteries. Don't get me wrong, I read all of the threads. I just don't add much because my knowledge base earlier than Celtic history is limited. But, I am a very common sense type of thinking person. Many years ago when everyone was on the Out of Iberia kick, common sense dictated that DF27 can't have much of a different history than its siblings. R1b can't have much of a different history than R1a, R can't have much of a different history than Q, and so forth.

You may get your wish (hopefully) with this new British study (https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43712587) and the one coming soon on ancient Iberia, both from Reich and company.

Of course, evidently DF27 is not an easy SNP to ferret out, even in modern men. That could pose a problem.

To me the origin of R1b-P312 is part of a long-running argument I would like to see settled once and for all.

Webb
08-01-2018, 02:02 PM
You may get your wish (hopefully) with this new British study (https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43712587) and the one coming soon on ancient Iberia, both from Reich and company.

Of course, evidently DF27 is not an easy SNP to ferret out, even in modern men. That could pose a problem.

To me the origin of R1b-P312 is part of a long-running argument I would like to see settled once and for all.

I agree. I think the U152 samples found in Csepel Island is huge.

rms2
08-01-2018, 02:08 PM
I agree. I think the U152 samples found in Csepel Island is huge.

For me the R1b-L11xP312,U106 in Proto-Nagyrev there is even more important. That's like finding L11 in Vucedol, since Proto-Nagyrev is the transition from Late Vucedol to Nagyrev.

alexfritz
08-01-2018, 03:24 PM
You feel that way, and I understand, but to me I see interest in all y-dna haplogroups eclipsed by the craze for autosomal dna. I understand the value of ancient autosomal dna for what it can tell us about entire populations and their movements, but it seems to have pushed y-dna to the margin, which for me is distressing. Y-dna is like a sideshow now.

It is frustrating to see a huge study like Olalde et al turn up a startling result like the near-monolithic dominance of R1b-P312 in Kurgan Bell Beaker and yet stimulate no apparent follow up to find out where R1b-P312 came from and how it got into Kurgan Bell Beaker.

But Reich and company have a lot more ancient genomes than they have been able to talk about in print, so maybe they know more than they're saying.

And switching to the topic of our cousin R1a, is no one curious about the genesis of Corded Ware? Where did it come from?

I'd trade the genomes of a million Natufians for some answers to those questions (not that there ever were that many Natufians).

fully agree with that and thats exactly what i meant with the publications;
a recent example is that consensus on the subclade i belong to is that it is (year 2018) 'anyones guess' _no clue myself but sketched out my own opinion just a few days ago right here #3
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14845-M458-Vistula-Veneti&p=444360#post444360
... and thats how exciting and interesting it is at the moment{until they publish new material and hopefully a bit more specified;

to be honest with you i wouldnt trade in any aDNA genomes for anything else as they proofed extremely valuable in reconstructing the actual past, just five years ago if there would be a discussion about the past the anti-migrationists would have had the entire academic weight on their side aka 'hunter-gatherers adopting agriculture' 'steppe migrations a hoax' etc. etc. but today we know better;

am for sure very interested in corded-ware though as was discussed on a nother thread i dont think furholt is that far off aka socio economic change ~3400bc>intra-regional networks>fusion of/into the a-horizon etc. the only thing he sparsed out is that the socio-economic change went about by steppe pastorolist groups which we only know thanks to genome wide aDNA; and just for show the area im from is in fact core corded-ware (no BBs) so it is for sure cool that people from the same hg tree pos ancestral clad{but very doubtful my derived clade roamed around here millenias ago, last summer they discovered four burials in a field between here and edelfingen and a month ago further burials in oberbalbach
https://www.fnweb.de/fraenkische-nachrichten_artikel,-lauda-koenigshofen-auf-den-spuren-vergangener-kulturen-_arid,1268209.html
and word on the street has it that the people of 'the hockergräber' have been sent to a lab, ill wait and see what happens though i got a hunch theyll for sure be akin to nearby RISE446 R1a1a1(?FGC2550+?);

i guess we do all have personal reasons for checking into our own DNA, now i would never go as far as to claim i like ötzi more than my own father([B]even if he would have been an R1b;)) but i guess its just how we all grew up here in germany(also austria) ötzi is a bit of a rock-star every kid knows ötzi the iceman and back in school there were all sorts of jokes about backward bavarians being ötzi and jokes on whether he was from germnay austria or italy and to be now actually part of these jokes aka the continuity is just awesome and i dont think im wrong in aserting its the same with you and the bell beakers/celts just the fascinations we grew up with; but i also view the farmers as a whole package aka the ancestry, craniometrics, the known genotyped derived phenotype _a stable ref is a good ref in my opinion and im not going to deny that as someone with south european ancestry i am thrilled that it turned out south europe inherited a lot of that whole package;

rms2
08-01-2018, 03:35 PM
I'd like to see the whole y-dna haplogroup R skeleton fleshed out and his sons, grandsons, etc., traced. Where did R arise, then R1 and each of his scions, and how did they all get where they eventually wound up? And what about R2 and his story?

etrusco
08-01-2018, 03:41 PM
fully agree with that and thats exactly what i meant with the publications;
a recent example is that consensus on the subclade i belong to is that it is (year 2018) 'anyones guess' _no clue myself but sketched out my own opinion just a few days ago right here #3
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14845-M458-Vistula-Veneti&p=444360#post444360
... and thats how exciting and interesting it is at the moment{until they publish new material and hopefully a bit more specified;

to be honest with you i wouldnt trade in any aDNA genomes for anything else as they proofed extremely valuable in reconstructing the actual past, just five years ago if there would be a discussion about the past the anti-migrationists would have had the entire academic weight on their side aka 'hunter-gatherers adopting agriculture' 'steppe migrations a hoax' etc. etc. but today we know better;

am for sure very interested in corded-ware though as was discussed on a nother thread i dont think furholt is that far off aka socio economic change ~3400bc>intra-regional networks>fusion of/into the a-horizon etc. the only thing he sparsed out is that the socio-economic change went about by steppe pastorolist groups which we only know thanks to genome wide aDNA; and just for show the area im from is in fact core corded-ware (no BBs) so it is for sure cool that people from the same hg tree pos ancestral clad{but very doubtful my derived clade roamed around here millenias ago, last summer they discovered four burials in a field between here and edelfingen and a month ago further burials in oberbalbach
https://www.fnweb.de/fraenkische-nachrichten_artikel,-lauda-koenigshofen-auf-den-spuren-vergangener-kulturen-_arid,1268209.html
and word on the street has it that the people of 'the hockergräber' have been sent to a lab, ill wait and see what happens though i got a hunch theyll for sure be akin to nearby RISE446 R1a1a1(?FGC2550+?);

i guess we do all have personal reasons for checking into our own DNA, now i would never go as far as to claim i like ötzi more than my own father([B]even if he would have been an R1b;)) but i guess its just how we all grew up here in germany(also austria) ötzi is a bit of a rock-star every kid knows ötzi the iceman and back in school there were all sorts of jokes about backward bavarians being ötzi and jokes on whether he was from germnay austria or italy and to be now actually part of these jokes aka the continuity is just awesome and i dont think im wrong in aserting its the same with you and the bell beakers/celts just the fascinations we grew up with; but i also view the farmers as a whole package aka the ancestry, craniometrics, the known genotype derived phenotype _as a stable ref is a good ref in my opinion and im not going to deny that as soemone with south european ancestry i am not thrilled that it tuned out south europe inherited a lot of that whole package;

as for the origin of Otzi ( his body even tough by a matter of few meters) was found in Italy. It seems likely he was from italian territory ( IIRC the Bressanone region which is in Italy even tough is largely germanic speaking ). This is reinforced by the fact that he had a remedellian-like package as the axe for example.

Of course the term Italy back then had zero meaning.

MitchellSince1893
08-01-2018, 03:56 PM
...I know Mitchell favors the Belgae link, mine could be anywhere from early Celtic stock to Flemish weavers.

To clarify, I favor multiple Iron Age arrivals (Hallstatt, La Tene, Belgae etc) as a major source for U152 in the Isles.

Dewsloth
08-01-2018, 04:23 PM
Something to keep in mind. We are all not at the same stage of discovery. If you are L21 with ancestry from the British Isles, you could, with probably 99.9% accuracy say you are of Celtic stock. Case closed, at that point maybe you are ready to move on, say further back in time. Focus on early Bell Beakers or Steppe origins of P312. Some of us DF27/ U152 guys of British ancestry, are still stuck at how did we get here. I know Mitchell favors the Belgae link, mine could be anywhere from early Celtic stock to Flemish weavers. I am not really ready to move on much until DF27 gets resolved. Once that happens then maybe I will be ready to take on the earlier mysteries. Don't get me wrong, I read all of the threads. I just don't add much because my knowledge base earlier than Celtic history is limited. But, I am a very common sense type of thinking person. Many years ago when everyone was on the Out of Iberia kick, common sense dictated that DF27 can't have much of a different history than its siblings. R1b can't have much of a different history than R1a, R can't have much of a different history than Q, and so forth.

Do tell. ;)

Since the history of DF19 is a black box until Roman York (sample size of one); for me it's all tied together from its Daddy P312 (early or pre-Beaker?) to the Migration Period or later.
Where DF27 and U152 have a joint history for extra generations, and also with (to a lesser extent) DF99, DF19 and L238 could have been fellow travellers with them and/or L21 or off doing their own thing. Maybe(???) they were even visiting their Uncle U106?

I know Mr. Rocca suspects DF19 to be clustered near the Netherlands at some point in time, but it sure would be nice to have some actual finds. Maybe my ancestors had a strong affinity for cremation and acidic soils?

alexfritz
08-01-2018, 04:58 PM
as for the origin of Otzi ( his body even tough by a matter of few meters) was found in Italy. It seems likely he was from italian territory ( IIRC the Bressanone region which is in Italy even tough is largely germanic speaking ). This is reinforced by the fact that he had a remedellian-like package as the axe for example.

Of course the term Italy back then had zero meaning.

well that much i know myself, but i did say those were jokes{not actual academic discussions;
i think the settlement that is most associated with ötzi himself is latsch in south tyrol
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225716687_The_Late_Neolithic_settlement_of_Latsch_ Vinschgau_northern_Italy_Subsistence_of_a_settleme nt_contemporary_with_the_Alpine_Iceman_and_located _in_his_valley_of_origin
and if i saw it correclty than there is a future paper about that settlemet or other sttlements within ötzi radius on the way aka more aDNA samples will be insightful as to how much is I2a and how much G2a as that hg shift(?local euro takeover) within the farmers by constant anatolian/WHG ancestry has yet to be explained;

for remedello in a bell beaker thread another chapter form the book you posted highlights the superseding by beakers of remdello, it says the petroglyph it coincides with the burials (?post destruction) in sion/aosta;
http://www.rockartscandinavia.com/images/articles/a12umberto.pdf
i suspect that their phase date however is off as that would still be remedelloII period;

rms2
08-01-2018, 05:12 PM
Going back to y-dna versus autosomal dna for a minute, and because this thread has kind of turned into a sort of generic chat environment, just today I got a new match at Ancestry who I am hoping can provide y-dna information on a line that comes to me via more than one female, but one that evidently bequeathed sufficient autosomal dna to me to garner a boat load of matches at Ancestry for me and membership in the biggest and strongest of my dna circles there.

To make a long story short, this man and I share descent from Leonard Stutts, the grandson of the immigrant, Ulrich Stutz, who was born in 1688 in Zürich, Switzerland. I have already gotten Ancestry matches with female Stutts/Stutzes, but this is the first male match who still bears that surname. I wrote and asked him if he has had his y-dna tested and if so to please tell me what haplogroup he belongs to. I also told him about the option of running his Ancestry raw data in Morley's Tool (https://ytree.morleydna.com/extractFromAutosomal) for squeezing y-dna info out of Ancestry data.

I'll probably never hear from the guy, but I am excited about the possibility of finding out about another y-dna haplogroup in my ancestral mosaic. Who knows, maybe I will hear from him, since I provided an option for finding out that is free of charge.

Webb
08-01-2018, 05:15 PM
I'd like to see the whole y-dna haplogroup R skeleton fleshed out and his sons, grandsons, etc., traced. Where did R arise, then R1 and each of his scions, and how did they all get where they eventually wound up? And what about R2 and his story?

My gut tells me R was born very close to where Q was born. These are hunter gatherers, after all. They would have followed the food source, large grazing animals. The majority of Q went east and the majority of R went west. After that is where things start to get complicated.

rms2
08-01-2018, 05:21 PM
My gut tells me R was born very close to where Q was born. These are hunter gatherers, after all. They would have followed the food source, large grazing animals. The majority of Q went east and the majority of R went west. After that is where things start to get complicated.

They are both sons of P, so wherever dad was hanging out (in Asia someplace) is where it started.

24930

Phylo when I was young,

I used to call your name.

When no one else would come,

Phylo you always came . . . ;)

Webb
08-01-2018, 06:15 PM
This is the route that most intrigues me (markups including the blue dot location of Kromsdorf is obviously mine):

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

This stands out from Ivanova:



I don't know that these movements need to be related to the Budzhak Culture though, as there are some serious red flags. The main link that the Budzhak Culture has to Corded Ware is their similar amphorae. Corded Ware's amphorae is counter to Bell Beaker's handled jugs (a.k.a Nagyrev Jugs) in the same way that the Corded Ware axe is counter to the Bell Beaker copper dagger. It's the reason why the Ivanova paper is entirely dedicated to Corded Ware links to Budzhak. If we take the close ties between Budzahak and Corded Ware as genetic, then we are right back to the big "R1a" problem. Also, the dating of Budzhak is a little sketchy since it was radiocarbon tested by a the Kiev lab whose dates have been discredited by academia.

In order to get around two big problems (R1a in Corded Ware, Z2103 along the Danube), I think the best scenario moves R-L51 tribes via Transyvania and into the Middle and Upper Tisza River area during Horvath's Pit Grave Period IV (2900/2800–2500/2400 cal BC). A small Yamnaya breakout group could have made a mad dash for the area of Saxony-Anhalt by ~2700-2600 BC. The Z2103 movement would have been along the Danube during the Early Pit Grave Period III (3300/3100–2900/2600 cal BC) which would explain the appearance in Vucedol. Due to their hillfort settlements, it looks like the Z2103 that helped form Vucedol (and associated Somogyvár-Vinkovci) took to a more sedentary lifestyle.

This is post #18.

Webb
08-01-2018, 06:16 PM
FWIW, Sashen-Anhalt does fit well with my rough estimate of the geographic midpoints for the minor L11 subclades and Iain McDonald's estimate that U106 originated between Prague and the Baltic

-DF100/S1200 (Armenia, Scandinavia, Hungary, Germany) comes out in western Ukraine near the Polish border. If you remove Armenia then it's near near the Oder River (mid point on the German/Polish border...half way between the Baltic and Prague)

-L238 (Scandinavia, Germany, Poland, Austria) comes out near the Oder River (mid point on the German/Polish border) very close to DF100 pt above

-A8039/S1194(Germany, Scandinavia, Armenia) comes out in NW Ukraine. If you remove Armenia it comes out on the German Baltic coast.

These sites that Rich identified in Sachen-Anhalt (Egeln Nord, Hettstedt, Alberstedt, Wetzendory) are about 125 miles west of these minor subclade midpoints.


https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4710-R1b-U106-in-Swedish-Battle-Axe-Culture-(a-Corded-Ware-subgroup)&p=364987#post364987

As rms2 mentioned this is the same area as the Yamnaya Budzhak culture.

This is post #9.

Webb
08-01-2018, 06:20 PM
Mitchell brings up a good point in post #9 about L238. Is it possible that instead of traversing across mainland Europe our Beakers went North from Saxony-Anhalt, accessing the North Sea from the east side of now Denmark, made a counter clockwise spin around Denmark bringing them back to the Rhine Delta? This area is one of the few places where we have all of P312's children accounted for in modern populations.

Ravai
08-01-2018, 07:20 PM
Hello, (offtopic) I attached two images, one is my genetic tree under haplogroup R-U152> L2> BY3485 and another a map of Europe with the following legend:

- Star: Each of the ancestors and their last known place.
- Bow / arrow: Places where the tribe of the Bigrantes were.
- Churches: Cultures of La Tène and Hallstatt

We can see that at a moment R-BY3478 the branches are separated, some stay in the north of Italy and others go to the British Isles. This makes me think that there were one or several Celtic tribes that traveled from Switzerland-Upper Bavaria to the British Isles and the best known is that of the Brigantes. There is also R-U152 in Galicia, Spain and there was founded Brigantium and according to the legend from A Coruña the brigantes sailed to Ireland and then to Great Britain.

I think R-BY3485 was part of this Celtic tribe. What do you think?

Thank you

Greetings and excuse the offtopic

24934
24935

msmarjoribanks
08-01-2018, 07:28 PM
i like all features of my genome, no SNP left behind! and i like all of my ancestors as well, no ancestor left behind! its in my blood and it cant get treated with tablets;

the Y lineage just got me very interested in regional/local history an interest i havent had as such before, thats a plus solely on the Y side;

I'm the same way.

I love mtDNA and YDNA (although I have to use that of other family members), because it allows for a connect way, way back before anything we can connect to autosomally. But -- maybe because I'm female -- it's not specifically my father's line or my mother's mtDNA line. I've made more connections on my father's mtDNA than my own (which hits a big brick wall) or than his YDNA (which seems to be irritatingly obscure despite being L21). I have preliminary tests for the line of my Swedish ancestor who immigrated here in 1888, and for a relative with my mother's birth surname, and I'm trying to find one for my paternal grandmother's surname (which is probably one of the lines I am most interested in).

So far everyone I have YDNA from are R-M269.

But apart from the ancient stuff, I like being able to know the stories and find out what I can about what the people were like and how what they did influenced later patterns I see, and so I really like the genealogical time too.

razyn
08-01-2018, 08:09 PM
Mitchell brings up a good point in post #9 about L238. Is it possible that instead of traversing across mainland Europe our Beakers went North from Saxony-Anhalt, accessing the North Sea from the east side of now Denmark, made a counter clockwise spin around Denmark bringing them back to the Rhine Delta? This area is one of the few places where we have all of P312's children accounted for in modern populations.

I was suggesting something like this seven years ago, only I think that was on DNA-Forums (when there was such a thing). Anyway, a refinement of that argument has been posted here. I also suggested that with technology available in the Bronze Age it would have been easier to drag boats across Jutland than to sail "around Denmark," which involves some heavy seas, fast currents, and rocks one might logically prefer to avoid, if possible. And it was possible. I don't know that it was done, but modern political borders certainly weren't a factor. https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6225-Jutland-Bell-Beaker-L21&p=133750&viewfull=1#post133750

Webb
08-01-2018, 10:11 PM
I was suggesting something like this seven years ago, only I think that was on DNA-Forums (when there was such a thing). Anyway, a refinement of that argument has been posted here. I also suggested that with technology available in the Bronze Age it would have been easier to drag boats across Jutland than to sail "around Denmark," which involves some heavy seas, fast currents, and rocks one might logically prefer to avoid, if possible. And it was possible. I don't know that it was done, but modern political borders certainly weren't a factor. https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6225-Jutland-Bell-Beaker-L21&p=133750&viewfull=1#post133750

Yes. While most of us were concentrating on Western Europe, you were looking much further east. What if our beakers stayed close to the coast? I’m picturing an ancient form of to go a Viking in my head.

dsm
08-01-2018, 10:57 PM
This is post #9.

Some notes re these
Re S1194. And DF100, they are the same (L11 => S1194 => CTS4528/DF100/S1200)

And, to the best of my knowledge, among the 100s of S1194 people, only 2 are identified as Armenian. But, the jury is way out on if those 2 Armenians come from back migrations/settlement - I.e. Christians settling in with Armenians after the fall of Constantinople. We know that both Anglo-Danish warriors who fled England after the Norman invasion, And Rhos (Scandinavian) warriors were the core of the Varangian guard in the Byzatinine empire, up to the fall of Consttantinople.

So much to discover :)

Jessie
08-02-2018, 02:11 AM
I think Hitler was E1b, and obviusly the BAsques are not nazis because they think that the origin of P312 is in the Franco-Cantabrian region, nor are you because you think M269 originates in the steppes.

Moreover, I think that people who use that arguments are because they have many prejudices and complex. Why do you think that in many countries in Europe it's very difficult to talk about genetics?. For example, in Spain if you defend haplogroup R1b (absolute majority in the male population), inmediately a politician appears saying that we are racist because we despise the inheritance of jews and moors.

I don't know what happened in the U. States but I imagine that there will be even more complicated. So calm, on this subject I think just like you.

I think most people just want the truth and anyone looking into this topic over the last decade has been through many origin theories so has been around the block. It's obvious to me R1b-M269 originated in the Steppes. Autosomal dna also backs this up and also ancient dna.

dsm
08-02-2018, 03:07 AM
This is a left-field topic but one that to me is intertwined with a) The Yamnaya migrations, b) The movement of PIE (that seems to support the Yamnya migrations), and the issue of music.

- People
- Language
- Music

What we so often talk about is the People & PIE movement but how well can we identify how music and instruments also migrated.

The Celts appear to have a unique attraction to and identification with lively music some will equate liveliness and jigging with 'Celtic Music' - We might even conclude that much country and western music arrived in the USA along with Irish & Scottish immigrants who settled in the newer territories (Appalachian Mnts & then the South & mid-west ) - the 'fiddle' being an important carrier of the melodies and tunes that became so popular at Hootenany events and the 'country' in the emerging nation.

So where did that particular music originate. It seems a core of it may well have travelled with the Yamnaya and that it spread to many parts of the east as well as west.

In its broadest sense music has to be as important as language. So the question is "Is Celtic Music derived from music the Steppes people liked/played and would have carried with them " ?

One person who has sought to investigate 'Celtic Music' is Lorena McKennitt - she is Canadian but was always musical & fascinated with the patterns of music that she believed connected Celtic Europe with the regions around the Silk Road(s) and in-between. Just how real this connection is, is open to debate. But speaking for myself, am quite taken at the similar rhythms and sounds that she likes to reproduce as connecting middle-east to Celtic music. Her music players on her albums use authentic instruments that can be traced to Celtic Europe and to the Silk road countries.

A whole new type of DNA - music !

D

MitchellSince1893
08-02-2018, 03:27 AM
FWIW, Sashen-Anhalt does fit well with my rough estimate of the geographic midpoints for the minor L11 subclades and Iain McDonald's estimate that U106 originated between Prague and the Baltic

-DF100/S1200 (Armenia, Scandinavia, Hungary, Germany) comes out in western Ukraine near the Polish border. If you remove Armenia then it's near near the Oder River (mid point on the German/Polish border...half way between the Baltic and Prague)

...


I just ran that exercise again for DF100.
Using the non British Isles samples from this source
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/DF100-CTS4528-L11-P310-L151-P311?iframe=yresults

I plotted the specific locations where available. If it was a generic country location such the 5 Germanys, 2 Denmarks, 2 Netherlands, 1 Italy, 1 Sweden, 1 Switzerland etc. I gave them a weight of 5, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1 respectively and plotted them

As it was questionable I didn't plot Armenia this time. Here is the result.

http://www.geomidpoint.com/?ml=51.97674&mn=10.54913&l=51.165691|48.673728|50.095636|50.658239|53.42854 4|44.838124|41.87194|46.818188|59.583459|52.132633 |58.190558|56.26392|60.128161&n=10.451526|9.517734|8.776084|13.231355|14.552812| 11.619787|12.56738|8.227512|11.1629|5.291266|11.77 8423|9.501785|18.643501&a=Germany|73278+Schlierbach,+Germany|Offenbach,+Ge rmany|Z%C3%B6blitz,+09517+Marienberg,+Germany|Szcz ecin,+Poland|Ferrara,+Province+of+Ferrara,+Italy|I taly|Switzerland|Askim,+Norway|Netherlands|Myckleb y,+472+93+Stillings%C3%B6n,+Sweden|Denmark|Sweden&d=5|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|2|1|2|1&cl=51.91667&cn=11.96738&z=4&x=1&c=0&p=1&r=0&w=1



The center point for the R-P311->S1194->CTS4528+DF100+ samples from the above FTDNA project is currently
N 51.97674, E 10.54913 near Lengde, Germany. This is 37 miles to the west of the Bleckendorf, Saxony-Anhalt site and 77 miles NNW of the Kromsdorf, Saxony-Anhalt site mentioned in post 1 of this thread.

DF100 is interesting. Excluding the Isles, except for the Netherlands it's not common in Western Europe. Nor is it common East of Germany. it's like it sprung to life somewhere in Germany and spread North into Scandinavia, South into Switzerland and Italy, and West into the Low Countries. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of DF100 in Britain is from the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons...and maybe some more during the Danelaw era.

dsm
08-02-2018, 04:19 AM
I just ran that exercise again for DF100.
Using the non British Isles samples from this source
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/DF100-CTS4528-L11-P310-L151-P311?iframe=yresults

I plotted the specific locations where available. If it was a generic country location such the 5 Germanys, 2 Denmarks, 2 Netherlands, 1 Italy, 1 Sweden, 1 Switzerland etc. I gave them a weight of 5, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1 respectively and plotted them

As it was questionable I didn't plot Armenia this time. Here is the result.

http://www.geomidpoint.com/?ml=51.97674&mn=10.54913&l=51.165691|48.673728|50.095636|50.658239|53.42854 4|44.838124|41.87194|46.818188|59.583459|52.132633 |58.190558|56.26392|60.128161&n=10.451526|9.517734|8.776084|13.231355|14.552812| 11.619787|12.56738|8.227512|11.1629|5.291266|11.77 8423|9.501785|18.643501&a=Germany|73278+Schlierbach,+Germany|Offenbach,+Ge rmany|Z%C3%B6blitz,+09517+Marienberg,+Germany|Szcz ecin,+Poland|Ferrara,+Province+of+Ferrara,+Italy|I taly|Switzerland|Askim,+Norway|Netherlands|Myckleb y,+472+93+Stillings%C3%B6n,+Sweden|Denmark|Sweden&d=5|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|2|1|2|1&cl=51.91667&cn=11.96738&z=4&x=1&c=0&p=1&r=0&w=1



The center point for the R-P311->S1194->CTS4528+DF100+ samples from the above FTDNA project is currently
N 51.97674, E 10.54913 near Lengde, Germany. This is 37 miles to the west of the Bleckendorf, Saxony-Anhalt site and 77 miles NNW of the Kromsdorf, Saxony-Anhalt site mentioned in post 1 of this thread.

DF100 is interesting. Excluding the Isles, except for the Netherlands it's not common in Western Europe. Nor is it common East of Germany. it's like it sprung to life somewhere in Germany and spread North into Scandinavia, South into Switzerland and Italy, and West into the Low Countries. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of DF100 in Britain is from the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons...and maybe some more during the Danelaw era.

I would have to agree 100%. :)

In England, DF100 S1194 plus CTS4528 plus S1200 - tends to only show up in the Scottish border regions, the Welsh border regions and the Cornish border regions. There are a few showing up around York which was the heart of the Danish occupation prior to King Canute,s takeover and him shifting the capital to Winchester in the Sth West Counties area.

We dont show up in any numbers in the East side of England ( so called Anglo-Saxon) region). Nor in the Celtic areas (incl Cornwall, Wales or Ireland (apart from some in Ulster). So, we mostly show up in-between those 2 areas of influence of Celts and Anglo-Saxons.

Also we dont show up in any numbers to speak of, in the Jutland peninsula. But we do show in East Denmark and the close by Sth Baltic areas.
I believe our place of origin likely to be in Bohemia and out of the Unetice culture. Moving to the Sth Baltic as Unetice wound down.

Your analysis is thus very interesting.

D

dsm
08-02-2018, 06:47 AM
I was suggesting something like this seven years ago, only I think that was on DNA-Forums (when there was such a thing). Anyway, a refinement of that argument has been posted here. I also suggested that with technology available in the Bronze Age it would have been easier to drag boats across Jutland than to sail "around Denmark," which involves some heavy seas, fast currents, and rocks one might logically prefer to avoid, if possible. And it was possible. I don't know that it was done, but modern political borders certainly weren't a factor. https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6225-Jutland-Bell-Beaker-L21&p=133750&viewfull=1#post133750

Sail or row the boats up the river Schlei then drag them over to the peninsula to Husum. I.E. (Schleswig to Husum) At Schleswig you are halfway across already.

Or

Travel on the river that is today the Kiel canal. Through Rendsburg. That canal was one of the big prizes that motivated Bismark to invade Denmark and seize the Dutchy Holstien which he did in 1864. Mind you, most Holstieners wanted it to be seized by Bismark at the time

Or (added comment)

The Eider River system between Rendsburg & Tonning. This river links into the Kiel system at Rendsburg.

At different times in history, the land level of Jutland rose and fell as a result of tectonic plate bounce stemming from the rapid LGM decline in full swing 16K years ago. The whole area is still swampy. On a recent trip to Western Norway I discussed this issue with local historians. As an example look at the 1st link below in regard to the 'Dunkirk Transgressions' - periods of land rise and fall. This is known in the region by people who live there.

As a child living in Selsey in England (was in England at boarding school there) we were told about a village that had supposedly disappeared into the sea off Selsey Bill. One story (clearly a folk tale) was how in heavy swells the lost village church just off Selsey Bill, would ring under water. That part of the English coast has been dropping in recent times. But at Rye between Hastings and Dover, it has been rising. At Rye, the ocean in Roman times went some kms inland on a broad front (look up 'Small Hythe' on a map - the Romans could sail to it - It was once a ship building town).

The Netherlands is famous for its shifting landmass which in known history has gone up and down. But, These 'bounces' do take 100s even 1000s of years.

The Angles from Schleswig in Jutland who went to Britain in the 400AD-600AD period are said to have evacuated en-masse from Schleswig after an inundation around the Schlei river.

The Frisians did the same (many going to Britain) after the Frisian Islands went underwater in 300AD-650AD period. I believe we can add the west Saxons from Holstien and the Jutes from Nth Jutland to tribes who fled to Britain. History says they were invited by the Celts to help defend Britain from the invading Irish and Scots (Google Hengist and Horsa) but the stories are a bit tangled as to why they all went over to Anglia (Angles) & Hampshire (west Saxons) & Kent (Jutes & Saxons) Note though that Anglia was the area denuded of the Icenii tribe after the Bouddica revolt against the Romans - they were all but wiped out in that part of Britain. The area was empty. but, if we look at the Dunkirk transgressions we have a factual basis for a large tribal movement vs the politically motivated 'stories' of paid allies & betrayal of the Romanised Celts.

Dunkirk Transgressions (esp note Transgression II) ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk_transgression

And the Frisii ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisii

And a NASA link ...

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/glacial-rebound-the-not-so-solid-earth

And finally, what has this to do with Oldest Steppe Bell Beakers: Saxony-Anhalt, Germany ? - well for my S1194 line, I believe we could well have started out from there or just a bit further in Bohemia..

Finn
08-02-2018, 10:01 AM
sail or row the boats up the river Schlei then drag them over to the peninsula to Husm. I.E. (Schleswig to Husum) At Schleswig you are halfway across already.

Or

Travel on the river that is today the Kiel canal. Through Rendsburg. That canal was one of the big prizes that motivated Bismark to invade Denmark and sieze the Dutchy Holstien which he did in 1864. Mind you, most Holstieners wanted it to be siezed by Bismark at the time :)

At different times in history, the land level of Jutland rose and fell as a result of tectonic plate bounce stemming from the rapid LGM decline in full swing 16K years ago. The whole area is still swampy. On a recent trip to Western Norway I discussed this issue with local historians. As an example look at the 1st link below in regard to the 'Dunkirk Transgressions' - periods of land rise and fall. This is known in the region by people who live there.

As a child living in Selsey in England (was in England at boarding school there) we were told about a village that had supposedly disappeared into the sea off Selsey Bill. One story (clearly a folk tale) was how in heavy swells the lost village church just off Selsey Bill, would ring under water :)

The Netherlands is famous for its shifting landmass which in known history has gone up and down. But, These 'bounces' do take 100s even 1000s of years.

The Angles from Schleswig in Jutland who went to Britain in the 450AD-600AD period are said to have evacuated en-masse from Schleswig after an inundation around the Schlei river.

The Frisians did the same (many going to Britain) after the Frisian Islands went underwater in 300AD-650AD period. I believe we can add the west Saxons from Holstien to the tribes who fled to Britain. History says they were invited by the Celts to help defend Britain from the invading Irish and Scots (Google Hengist and Horsa) but the stories are a bit tangled as to why they all went over to Anglia (the area denuded of the Icenii tribe after the Bouddica revolt against the Romans). but, if we look at tge Dunkirk transgressions we have a factual basis vs the politically motivated 'stories'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk_transgression

And a NASA link ...

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/glacial-rebound-the-not-so-solid-earth

D

Very interesting! One Add. Were the Old Frisii went to is still uncertain. Especially in the most western part (= nowadays province of Friesland and especially Westergo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westergoa)). was almost or some say totally abandoned in the 4th century. In the Roman time in the most North Eastern parts of the Netherlands there were incoming Chauci (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauci). This became more intense during the migration period. And amalgam of North Sea tribes went to North Dutch. I guess this is the real reason why Anglo-Saxons and North Dutch/Frisians resemble....

R.Rocca
08-02-2018, 01:46 PM
A very interesting result from Di Cristofaro et al (2018) which was published today.

Prehistoric migrations through the Mediterranean basin shaped Corsican Y-chromosome diversity
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200641#sec013

Two datasets from Tuscany show samples that are L23(xL51,xZ2105):

Tuscany - Pisa
44.2% (50 of 113 samples)

Tuscany - Siena
4.6% (4 of 86 samples)

Since neither L51 nor Z2105 are alone on their respective branches, it could be that they represent an early split of either. The other option is a third brother branch below L23.

etrusco
08-02-2018, 02:10 PM
Mitochondrial genomes reveal an east to west cline of steppe ancestry in Corded Ware populations
Anna Juras, Maciej Chyleński, Edvard Ehler, Helena Malmström, Danuta Żurkiewicz, Piotr Włodarczak, Stanisław Wilk, Jaroslav Peška, Pavel Fojtík, Miroslav Králík, Jerzy Libera, Jolanta Bagińska, Krzysztof Tunia, Viktor I. Klochko, Miroslawa Dabert, Mattias Jakobsson & Aleksander Kośko
Scientific Reportsvolume 8, Article number: 11603 (2018) | Download Citation

Abstract

From around 4,000 to 2,000 BC the forest-steppe north-western Pontic region was occupied by people who shared a nomadic lifestyle, pastoral economy and barrow burial rituals. It has been shown that these groups, especially those associated with the Yamnaya culture, played an important role in shaping the gene pool of Bronze Age Europeans, which extends into present-day patterns of genetic variation in Europe. Although the genetic impact of these migrations from the forest-steppe Pontic region into central Europe have previously been addressed in several studies, the contribution of mitochondrial lineages to the people associated with the Corded Ware culture in the eastern part of the North European Plain remains contentious. In this study, we present mitochondrial genomes from 23 Late Eneolithic and Bronze Age individuals, including representatives of the north-western Pontic region and the Corded Ware culture from the eastern part of the North European Plain. We identified, for the first time in ancient populations, the rare mitochondrial haplogroup X4 in two Bronze Age Catacomb culture-associated individuals. Genetic similarity analyses show close maternal genetic affinities between populations associated with both eastern and Baltic Corded Ware culture, and the Yamnaya horizon, in contrast to larger genetic differentiation between populations associated with western Corded Ware culture and the Yamnaya horizon. This indicates that females with steppe ancestry contributed to the formation of populations associated with the eastern Corded Ware culture while more local people, likely of Neolithic farmer ancestry, contributed to the formation of populations associated with western Corded Ware culture


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiSzZOZxc7cAhUL0xoKHbCgCHMQFjAAegQICRAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Farticles%2Fs4159 8-018-29914-5&usg=AOvVaw2Raw_AZxYPnC5MFX4QCiic

ADW_1981
08-02-2018, 02:43 PM
I'd like to see the whole y-dna haplogroup R skeleton fleshed out and his sons, grandsons, etc., traced. Where did R arise, then R1 and each of his scions, and how did they all get where they eventually wound up? And what about R2 and his story?

I've wondered if R2 may be related to that west Siberian hunter-gatherer input in India. It peaks in that area and isn't found in high % elsewhere, similar to the R2 distribution. That haplogroup could be some descendant of a Mal'ta like person.

etrusco
08-02-2018, 02:48 PM
A very interesting result from Di Cristofaro et al (2018) which was published today.

Prehistoric migrations through the Mediterranean basin shaped Corsican Y-chromosome diversity
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200641#sec013

Two datasets from Tuscany show samples that are L23(xL51,xZ2105):

Tuscany - Pisa
44.2% (50 of 113 samples)

Tuscany - Siena
4.6% (4 of 86 samples)

Since neither L51 nor Z2105 are alone on their respective branches, it could be that they represent an early split of either. The other option is a third brother branch below L23.

Which time are those samples?

ADW_1981
08-02-2018, 02:53 PM
I just ran that exercise again for DF100.
Using the non British Isles samples from this source
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/DF100-CTS4528-L11-P310-L151-P311?iframe=yresults

I plotted the specific locations where available. If it was a generic country location such the 5 Germanys, 2 Denmarks, 2 Netherlands, 1 Italy, 1 Sweden, 1 Switzerland etc. I gave them a weight of 5, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1 respectively and plotted them

As it was questionable I didn't plot Armenia this time. Here is the result.

http://www.geomidpoint.com/?ml=51.97674&mn=10.54913&l=51.165691|48.673728|50.095636|50.658239|53.42854 4|44.838124|41.87194|46.818188|59.583459|52.132633 |58.190558|56.26392|60.128161&n=10.451526|9.517734|8.776084|13.231355|14.552812| 11.619787|12.56738|8.227512|11.1629|5.291266|11.77 8423|9.501785|18.643501&a=Germany|73278+Schlierbach,+Germany|Offenbach,+Ge rmany|Z%C3%B6blitz,+09517+Marienberg,+Germany|Szcz ecin,+Poland|Ferrara,+Province+of+Ferrara,+Italy|I taly|Switzerland|Askim,+Norway|Netherlands|Myckleb y,+472+93+Stillings%C3%B6n,+Sweden|Denmark|Sweden&d=5|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|2|1|2|1&cl=51.91667&cn=11.96738&z=4&x=1&c=0&p=1&r=0&w=1



The center point for the R-P311->S1194->CTS4528+DF100+ samples from the above FTDNA project is currently
N 51.97674, E 10.54913 near Lengde, Germany. This is 37 miles to the west of the Bleckendorf, Saxony-Anhalt site and 77 miles NNW of the Kromsdorf, Saxony-Anhalt site mentioned in post 1 of this thread.

DF100 is interesting. Excluding the Isles, except for the Netherlands it's not common in Western Europe. Nor is it common East of Germany. it's like it sprung to life somewhere in Germany and spread North into Scandinavia, South into Switzerland and Italy, and West into the Low Countries. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of DF100 in Britain is from the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons...and maybe some more during the Danelaw era.

Based on the fact that the Beaker Netherlands results did not yield any known SNPs below P312+ (probably some rare or dead branch), I am also arriving at a north European origin of both U106 and P312 when combined with other datasets like the north European distribution of L11+ (xP312/U106) and some early branches below P312+ like DF99 and L238 who are heavily northern as well. All the dates seem to coincide around 2500 BC or thereabouts. It's all a matter of finding that missing link that came before 2500 BC, where did he live?

rms2
08-02-2018, 03:00 PM
A very interesting result from Di Cristofaro et al (2018) which was published today.

Prehistoric migrations through the Mediterranean basin shaped Corsican Y-chromosome diversity
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200641#sec013

Two datasets from Tuscany show samples that are L23(xL51,xZ2105):

Tuscany - Pisa
44.2% (50 of 113 samples)

Tuscany - Siena
4.6% (4 of 86 samples)

Since neither L51 nor Z2105 are alone on their respective branches, it could be that they represent an early split of either. The other option is a third brother branch below L23.

No ancient y-dna, right?

rms2
08-02-2018, 03:05 PM
Based on the fact that the Beaker Netherlands results did not yield any known SNPs below P312+ (probably some rare or dead branch), I am also arriving at a north European origin of both U106 and P312 when combined with other datasets like the north European distribution of L11+ (xP312/U106) and some early branches below P312+ like DF99 and L238 who are heavily northern as well. All the dates seem to coincide around 2500 BC or thereabouts. It's all a matter of finding that missing link that came before 2500 BC, where did he live?

I would be very wary of conclusions about 3rd millennium BC origins based on 3rd millennium AD distributions.

ADW_1981
08-02-2018, 03:56 PM
I would be very wary of conclusions about 3rd millennium BC origins based on 3rd millennium AD distributions.

It's a possibility, and is supported with the SNP results of the Beaker_Netherlands, and L238+ results who are almost completely nordic in origin.

rms2
08-02-2018, 04:07 PM
It's a possibility, and is supported with the SNP results of the Beaker_Netherlands, and L238+ results who are almost completely nordic in origin.

It seems to me the evidence (e.g., steppe dna) indicates that Beaker_Netherlands hadn't been there long, and L238+ results are modern.

Of course, a lot depends on what you mean by northern Europe.

I think steppe derived people were moving fast and far in the 3rd millennium BC. I wouldn't bet against a steppe origin for P312 and U106.

R.Rocca
08-02-2018, 04:26 PM
No ancient y-dna, right?

Nothing to do with ancient DNA, but it could be useful in the re-branching of the tree below L23.

rms2
08-02-2018, 04:37 PM
Nothing to do with ancient DNA, but it could be useful in the re-branching of the tree below L23.

That's what I thought. Just wanted to make sure I was right, because I really only skimmed through that paper.

alan
08-02-2018, 10:29 PM
I've wondered if R2 may be related to that west Siberian hunter-gatherer input in India. It peaks in that area and isn't found in high % elsewhere, similar to the R2 distribution. That haplogroup could be some descendant of a Mal'ta like person.

that makes sense and I have thought that likely since the Mal'ta discovery. Only question is when did it enter India? Around the same time as Mal'ta boy - fleeing the LGM OR did it linger further north in refugia in the inner Asian mountains and only cross to India much later?

alan
08-02-2018, 10:39 PM
I agree. I think the U152 samples found in Csepel Island is huge.

I cant even remember that. Too much data so its beginning to leak out my head

rms2
08-02-2018, 10:57 PM
that makes sense and I have thought that likely since the Mal'ta discovery. Only question is when did it enter India? Around the same time as Mal'ta boy - fleeing the LGM OR did it linger further north in refugia in the inner Asian mountains and only cross to India much later?

I have not kept up with the latest stuff on R2, but in India you basically have ANI (Ancestral North Indian) and ASI (Ancestral South Indian), the first a euphemism for ancestry that came in from the Eurasian steppe in the 2nd millennium BC.

It seems to me if R2 came in earlier with a Mal'ta Boy type population, its bearers would carry a lot of ANE or at least some ANE. Instead R2 is most frequent in SE India, whose population I assume is more ASI than ANI.

I don't know the answer, because, like I said, I'm not up to speed on R2.

rms2
08-03-2018, 12:33 AM
Going back to y-dna versus autosomal dna for a minute, and because this thread has kind of turned into a sort of generic chat environment, just today I got a new match at Ancestry who I am hoping can provide y-dna information on a line that comes to me via more than one female, but one that evidently bequeathed sufficient autosomal dna to me to garner a boat load of matches at Ancestry for me and membership in the biggest and strongest of my dna circles there.

To make a long story short, this man and I share descent from Leonard Stutts, the grandson of the immigrant, Ulrich Stutz, who was born in 1688 in Zürich, Switzerland. I have already gotten Ancestry matches with female Stutts/Stutzes, but this is the first male match who still bears that surname. I wrote and asked him if he has had his y-dna tested and if so to please tell me what haplogroup he belongs to. I also told him about the option of running his Ancestry raw data in Morley's Tool (https://ytree.morleydna.com/extractFromAutosomal) for squeezing y-dna info out of Ancestry data.

I'll probably never hear from the guy, but I am excited about the possibility of finding out about another y-dna haplogroup in my ancestral mosaic. Who knows, maybe I will hear from him, since I provided an option for finding out that is free of charge.

Sorry to do a follow-up off-topic post, but I heard from my Stutts/Stutz cousin. Turns out he did the Geno 2.0 thing some years ago and got a result of I-M170. That's as far as things went back then, so he could be almost any kind of y-dna I downstream of that.

He told me he is interested in ordering a test from FTDNA to get more information. I told him now is a good time because FTDNA has its big summer sale going on.

So, what do you know? I actually heard from him.

Nice guy.

Webb
08-03-2018, 12:57 AM
Sorry to do a follow-up off-topic post, but I heard from my Stutts/Stutz cousin. Turns out he did the Geno 2.0 thing some years ago and got a result of I-M170. That's as far as things went back then, so he could be almost any kind of y-dna I downstream of that.

He told me he is interested in ordering a test from FTDNA to get more information. I told him now is a good time because FTDNA has its big summer sale going on.

So, what do you know? I actually heard from him.

Nice guy.

I have a Y111 step 7 match that I emailed today to try and persuade him to upgrade to the BigY. Last name is Shields from Ireland. I have numerous 67 marker matches with the last name Wilder. I would like to get Shields and at least one Wilder to do the BigY, as I haven’t trusted STR matches to determine relatedness in many years. My 37, 67, 111 market matches have such close to WAMH values that we appear to be closer than we really are.

etrusco
08-06-2018, 04:30 PM
An interesting article on the possible origin of R1b L-51. Strongly connected to this discussion:

https://indo-european.eu/2018/08/on-the-origin-of-haplogroup-r1b-l51-in-late-repin-early-yamna-settlers/

Nibelung
08-06-2018, 04:49 PM
An interesting article on the possible origin of R1b L-51. Strongly connected to this discussion:

https://indo-european.eu/2018/08/on-the-origin-of-haplogroup-r1b-l51-in-late-repin-early-yamna-settlers/

It's Shulaveri-Shomu!

rms2
08-06-2018, 07:03 PM
Is there any truth to the claim that I0443 is Y410+?



Yamna sample I0443, R1b-L23 (Y410+, L51-), ca. 3300-2700 BCE from Lopatino II, points to an intermediate subclade between L23 and L51, precisely in one of the supposed late Repin sites (based on kurgan burials with late Repin cultural traits) in the Samara region.


YFull has Y410 on the same phylogenetic level as L51. If I0443 really is Y410+ but L51-, that would be major news.

I seem to remember something like that two or three years back that we got excited about but which didn't pan out.

Anyway, does anyone know? Is I0443 really Y410+, and, if so, is that a reliable SNP?

I see on my YFull page that I am derived for Y410/E207 (with the bright green plus sign of more than one read), which is reported as "level R-L51", but it's a SNP given a rating of just one star out of five by YFull.

Still, if I0443 is derived for it, that could be something, however small.

jdean
08-06-2018, 07:21 PM
Is there any truth to the claim that I0443 is Y410+?



YFull has Y410 on the same phylogenetic level as L51. If I0443 really is Y410+ but L51-, that would be major news.

I seem to remember something like that two or three years back that we got excited about but which didn't pan out.

Anyway, does anyone know? Is I0443 really Y410+, and, if so, is that a reliable SNP?

I see on my YFull page that I am derived for Y410/E207, which is reported as "level R-L51", but it's a SNP given a rating of just one star out of five by YFull.

Still, if I0443 is derived for it, that could be something, however small.

Richard Rocca wasn't terribly impressed with it.

The genetic history of Ice Age Europe_post 804 (http://archive.is/o/1VOJG/www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe&p=160096&viewfull=1%23post160096)

rms2
08-06-2018, 07:26 PM
Richard Rocca wasn't terribly impressed with it.

The genetic history of Ice Age Europe_post 804 (http://archive.is/o/1VOJG/www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe&p=160096&viewfull=1%23post160096)

That's what I was remembering. I knew something about it sounded familiar.

Given the context, it might still be a clue, but it can't be counted on.

Too bad.

jdean
08-07-2018, 12:43 PM
That's what I was remembering. I knew something about it sounded familiar.

Given the context, it might still be a clue, but it can't be counted on.

Too bad.

C'est la vie

rms2
08-08-2018, 12:08 AM
C'est la vie

Yeah, and after that short-lived bit of excitement, we'll all go back to sleep. Seems like the interest in Beaker discussions has waned for now.

Saetro
08-08-2018, 02:34 AM
Yeah, and after that short-lived bit of excitement, we'll all go back to sleep. Seems like the interest in Beaker discussions has waned for now.

Well, to comment on your uniparental favouritism - for me, mtDNA rocks.
My YDNA haplogroup deep history is interesting but no recent matches so little real interest.
Whereas mtDNA connected me with a group of people who solved a geographical puzzle.

But I am also interested in my line of poets, my line of musicians; less so my lines connected with nobility, and more so my lines connected within an eagle's flight of a particular hill in Cornwall.
That region around the hill connects to my mtDNA, which most likely arrived with the Bell Beaker folk.
And the question of where they came from - maybe via Saxony-Anhalt? Or somewhere around there?

rms2
08-08-2018, 11:38 AM
Well, to comment on your uniparental favouritism - for me, mtDNA rocks . . .

Good for you, but mtDNA generally rocks me to sleep.

etrusco
08-08-2018, 02:26 PM
An article on western yamnaya, a potential source for eastern bell beaker:

https://indo-european.eu/2018/08/the-yampil-barrow-complex-and-the-yamna-connection-with-forest-steppe-cultures/

razyn
08-08-2018, 06:51 PM
An article on western yamnaya, a potential source for eastern bell beaker:

These "articles" (blog posts) you have linked lately are interesting, and relevant to the thread topic. They seem to be pretty much the solo work of Carlos Quiles -- who has posted here, but seldom, and I think not lately. (Possibly because he now runs his own forum, in four western European languages.) Personally, I like the broad-brush approach he takes, and his numerous, sequential, large-area maps. He has been accused here on Anthrogenica of mental instability, by a frequent poster who is about equally manic and opinionated. For all I know, one of them might be right, more often than the other; but I have no strong reason to think the more correct one is the more "stable" one. Whatever. A lot of good work and creative approaches have come from people who are off their meds, high on something, drunk, bearers of OCD or bipolar disorder. Good work is good work. Incivility can get you kicked off the forum, but wild or improbable ideas as such shouldn't. They may force us to rethink things, help rms2 stay awake, etc.

Romilius
08-08-2018, 08:38 PM
Among other people missing is Genetiker: last activity was on the 31st of March... then nothing else. I'm worried: too many months passed and no sign of activity by him.

rms2
08-09-2018, 12:10 PM
Among other people missing is Genetiker: last activity was on the 31st of March... then nothing else. I'm worried: too many months passed and no sign of activity by him.

Yes, and he never finished posting his y-dna SNP calls for Olalde et al (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2018/02/19/y-snp-calls-for-bell-beaker-genomes/) and for Mathieson et al's SE Europe paper (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2018/02/21/y-snp-calls-from-ancient-southeastern-europe/). He started those back in February.

rms2
08-10-2018, 02:52 AM
Just a guess.

25144

Generalissimo
08-10-2018, 04:06 AM
These "articles" (blog posts) you have linked lately are interesting, and relevant to the thread topic. They seem to be pretty much the solo work of Carlos Quiles -- who has posted here, but seldom, and I think not lately. (Possibly because he now runs his own forum, in four western European languages.) Personally, I like the broad-brush approach he takes, and his numerous, sequential, large-area maps. He has been accused here on Anthrogenica of mental instability, by a frequent poster who is about equally manic and opinionated. For all I know, one of them might be right, more often than the other; but I have no strong reason to think the more correct one is the more "stable" one. Whatever. A lot of good work and creative approaches have come from people who are off their meds, high on something, drunk, bearers of OCD or bipolar disorder. Good work is good work. Incivility can get you kicked off the forum, but wild or improbable ideas as such shouldn't. They may force us to rethink things, help rms2 stay awake, etc.

Carlos doesn't produce good work. He pretends that he knows about genetics and statistics, but he obviously doesn't and often just makes things up as he goes along.

This is easy to demonstrate and I will do so if he keeps annoying me. And it'll be so straightforward and clear that even you will understand it.

Asrafael.
08-10-2018, 04:10 AM
Carlos has a thing for wild, inchoate, and utterly insensible theories.

His R1b-V88 of MegaChad = proto-Afroasiatics theory is but one of several.

dsm
08-10-2018, 07:56 AM
Among other people missing is Genetiker: last activity was on the 31st of March... then nothing else. I'm worried: too many months passed and no sign of activity by him.

Sadly, he went into my waste bin when he failed to explain his analysis that claimed S1194 for one Olalde find. In fact he hasn't been heard of since we questioned him on that particular analysis, on his own blog ( we asked in the nicest possible way).

D

Eterne
08-10-2018, 08:24 AM
Quiles seems pretty divisive because of his frequent thinly veiled digs at R1a bearers, as biased against his models.

That said, I do think his related theory of a split between Indo-Uralic into R1a proto-Corded Ware, proto-Uralic and R1b proto-Corded Ware, proto-Indo-European, from an Indo-Uralic proto language, is probably wrong. And this is almost solely where he seems to depart from repeating orthodox steppe urheimat theory; everything else seems pretty unremarkable standard steppe urheimat stuff (and so hard to call "mentally ill" in any way tbh).

I am skeptical of the seemingly ersatz language tree that he has constructed to support his hypothesis (of course, it will fit beautifully with your theories, if you have constructed it simultaneously to do so...!). Particularly, I do not think that anyone has the impression that Indo-European languages and Uralic are only a little bit more diverged from each other than the internal divisions within IE, which seems to be what is implied by his tree and how he maps it to archaeological cultures.

It seems more likely that the earliest proto-Corded Ware were proto-Indo-European speaking (late pIE even).

However, to go on a bit of a tangent, probably then it does seem likely to me that at least some people in the later developed Corded Ware horizon adopted Uralic languages quite early.

We know that 1) present day Uralic speakers look structurally as like the could be descended from Corded Ware as other East Europeans on their same geography, 2) Indo-European and Uralic are supposed to share structural similarities and evidence of contact at the earliest stages of formation of IE (and in my mind one of the more signficiant problems for the steppe hypothesis if this were not true) and 3) Uralic remains in contact with proto-Indo-Iranian languages.

We also know from adna that the low level East Eurasian ancestry that present-day Uralic speakers have also was in no way atypical for likely Iron Age Indo-European speakers of Western Steppe and Central Asia - the sole difference being those IE speakers were replaced by Turko-Mongolic peoples and languages. We know from adna that the N1c haplogroups that might have been considered to come from an East Eurasian elite migration were probably cosmopolitan across North Eurasia from ANE->Northeast Eurasian groups. So there is no need for any of the postulated proto-Uralic migration from an heavily autosomally East Eurasian elite (an idea with was certainly about in the blog sphere from the late '00s to early '10s). And likely the only elite male biased East Eurasian migrations across Eurasia are the early historical ones we know about, of Turkic and Mongolic peoples (linked to O and C y-haplogroups), who were at a stage of culture and technology that allowed them to do so, and which clearly happened.

(I think this, on proto-Uralic, is all similar to what has been articulated before, and possibly better, by some comments by Ryukendo.)

So while I think Quiles is wrong on his "hard" division of Corded Ware=Uralic=R1a and Yamnaya=Indo-European=R1b, probably is true that some Corded Ware went from Indo-European->Uralic very early and probably some back again from Uralic->IE later.

dsm
08-10-2018, 08:56 AM
Thought I'd add my comments re David Reich's book 'Who we are and how we got here' am still early into the book but can say that the detail he goes into just in the 1St part when he talks about matching Neaderthaler DNA to AMH (anotomically modern humans) is quite deep but despite its depth lets us know just how precise his and his collegues research was and is.

What is starting to come through very well is the professionalism of him and his peers. He admits to starting out convinced that Neanderthalers had not bred with AMH and how this was the orthodox view held by leading researchers, but again and again the data said otherwise. Then at a conference he met another researcher who was struggling with particular DNA traces that weren't showing in Africans and clearly were older than the o-o-A events. He was able to confirm that AMH who were not of African origin, had 1.7 to 2.1 trace DNA that proved to be Neanderthaler. Repeat Africans don't have it.

They were able to eventually extract good Neanderthaler DNA from a Croatian cave find. They were able to work out that this person was about 8 generations decended from a Neanderthaler. Quite a stunning achievement.

More later when am further through it.

D

Generalissimo
08-10-2018, 09:31 AM
Quiles seems pretty divisive because of his frequent thinly veiled digs at R1a bearers, as biased against his models.

That said, I do think his related theory of a split between Indo-Uralic into R1a proto-Corded Ware, proto-Uralic and R1b proto-Corded Ware, proto-Indo-European, from an Indo-Uralic proto language, is probably wrong. And this is almost solely where he seems to depart from repeating orthodox steppe urheimat theory; everything else seems pretty unremarkable standard steppe urheimat stuff (and so hard to call "mentally ill" in any way tbh).

No, it's not.

Have you seen his attempt at "statistics"? He claimed that the Yamnaya-like Baltic Corded Ware sample in Jones et al. was a statistical artifact. And when more samples of this type were presented in Mittnik et al., he claimed that this actually confirmed his argument.

This is not something a mentally stable person would claim. A mentally stable person would be very embarrassed, and would not only admit that they don't know what a statistical artifact really is, but would also apologize to their readers.

Apart from that I've had e-mail exchanges with this guy, and in my opinion he's crazy.

P.S. How about his excuses that he can't run any genetic analyses because his computer is busy? Haha.

razyn
08-10-2018, 03:27 PM
This is easy to demonstrate and I will do so if he keeps annoying me. And it'll be so straightforward and clear that even you will understand it.

Well, meow to you too. I've aimed for simplicity and clarity, since I got past my dissertation committee 40 years ago and no longer had to do the "academic abstraction" tapdance (unless I really wanted to). Straightforward and clear would be good. Not very nice, but easier to skim through.

rms2
08-10-2018, 09:49 PM
I'm not a big fan of Carlos Quiles. I'm not sure who he reminds me of, but he reminds me of someone (or more than one person) from a ways back. I don't want to be too critical, but his ideas seem to be tenuous (not to mention tedious), extensive, and require too many twists and turns. And I don't think R1a was Uralic.

I am not so patiently waiting for R1b-L51 (and probably R1b-P312) in Yamnaya, and R1a, too.

vettor
08-10-2018, 11:45 PM
I'm not a big fan of Carlos Quiles. I'm not sure who he reminds me of, but he reminds me of someone (or more than one person) from a ways back. I don't want to be too critical, but his ideas seem to be tenuous (not to mention tedious), extensive, and require too many twists and turns. And I don't think R1a was Uralic.

I am not so patiently waiting for R1b-L51 (and probably R1b-P312) in Yamnaya, and R1a, too.

he is equal to all the others.....all use selective sampling to justify their claims

rms2
08-11-2018, 12:46 AM
he is equal to all the others.....all use selective sampling to justify their claims

I don't think that's true. But then again, I don't know who "all the others" are.

jdean
08-11-2018, 01:05 AM
I don't think that's true. But then again, I don't know who "all the others" are.

I'd say that's definitely not true, you don't have to look very far back through the various threads on this forum to see people in general engagement that such and such rumoured results probably aren’t going to pan out and dismissal of SNP analysis that don't meet required standards even if they would support cherished theories.

But of course there are exceptions : )

rms2
08-11-2018, 01:11 AM
I'd say that's definitely not true, you don't have to look very far back through the various threads on this forum to see people in general engagement that such and such rumoured results probably aren’t going to pan out and dismissal of SNP analysis that don't meet required standards even if they would support cherished theories.

But of course there are exceptions : )

I know I don't engage in "selective sampling". I just take what comes. If I tried selective sampling, the people here would eat me alive.

The selective samplers, it seems to me, are the folks with an ethnic or nationalist axe to grind.

etrusco
08-11-2018, 08:54 PM
S. V. Ivanova, A. G. Nikitin, D. V. Kiosak
https://www.academia.edu/37141707/С._В._Иванова_А._Г._Никитин_Д._В._Киосак_МАЯТНИКОВ ЫЕ_МИГРАЦИИ_В_ЦИРКУМПОНТИЙСКОЙ_СТЕПИ_и_ЦЕНТРАЛЬНОЙ _ЕВРОПЕ_В_ЭПОХУ_ПАЛЕОМЕТАЛЛА_и_ПРОБЛЕМА_ГЕНЕЗИСА_Я МНОЙ_КУЛЬТУРЫ_Археологія_і_давня_історія_України_2 018_вип._1_26_с._101-146


Pendulum migrations in the Circum-Pontic Steppe and Central europe during the Paleometal epoch and the problem of genesis of the yamna Culture

This article is dedicated to the problem of the origin and spread of the Yamna cultural-historical community (YCHC) in the context of the hypothesis recently expressed by geneticists about the massive migration of population groups genetically related to YCHC and carrying the genetic determinants of the Iranian Neo-lithic agrarians and hunters and fishers of the North Caucasus from the Ponto- Caspian steppe to central and northern Europe at the beginning of the Bronze Age. Based on an in-depth archeological and genetic analysis, we propose that the genetic «invasion» of the Iranian-Caucasian genetic element into Europe at the beginning of the Bronze Age, recently proposed by paleogenetisits on the basis of a large-scale study of ancient DNA, was not the result of a large-scale mi-gration of representatives of YCHC from the Ponto-Caspian steppes to central and northern Europe, but the result of global population and cultural changes in Eurasia at the end of the Atlantic climatic optimum. We further suggest that before the steppe genetics ap-peared in Europe at the beginning of the Bronze Age, central European genetic determinants appeared in the steppe in the Eneolithic, and that the movement of the steppe genetic element to Europe was at least in part the second phase of the «pendular» migration of European expatriates, returning to the historical zone of habitation. We also come to the conclusion that the very concept of distinguishing YCHC as a monolithic entity is inappropriate, and that the groups of nomadic tribes of the Ponto-Caspian steppe most likely existed as discrete communities, although united by a common ideology and a genetic relationship that included both the Iranian-Caucasian (throughout the entire range), and European / Anatolian agricultural (locally) genetic elements.

rms2
08-11-2018, 09:40 PM
I understand some Russian, but my Russian is not up to reading papers like that one. I don't feel like processing that whole thing through Google Translate.

From what I could guess from the maps, they seem to be saying some Old European farmers went to the steppe, which we knew already. But we have ancient dna from those farmers, and none of them was R1b-M269 or R1a-M417, and none of them had steppe dna.

Whoop-dee-doo. But I haven't read the paper, because it's in Russian.

razyn
08-11-2018, 10:19 PM
That's very interesting. But really a slow read, for me. Maybe a rainy day activity. Anyway, skipping to the end, I notice that one of the authors (Nikitin) teaches in the USA (the other two are in Ukraine), and there are email addresses for all three. The references include current ones based on aDNA with which we tend to be familiar (Allentoft, Haak, Olalde), and a large number, mostly from archaeology and ethnology, with which I assume most of us chatting on Anthrogenica aren't. The references get repeated -- the second time (starting part way down p. 142), the ones titled in Cyrillic alphabets are transliterated, but not translated.

Figures 5 and 6, from Videiko (2000), seem highly relevant to this thread. I have no immediate reason to believe or disbelieve it, but anyway the watercourses involved are among those more northern/eastern routes (alternatives to the Danube) that we've discussed. The paper overall seems weighted toward events farther in the past than the Bronze Age, and mtDNA more than YDNA. But that's a very hasty impression, maybe inaccurate after one actually reads it.

In edit: I think Fig. 6 is the current authors' superimposition and colorization of several archaeological cultures they discuss, on the base map (Fig. 5) from Videiko's 2003 article about the Trypillia (aka Cucuteni-Tripolye) culture and its neighbors.

The cited papers by Nikitin are based on mitochondrial DNA. However, the latest ancient YDNA papers were for the most part not yet available when he wrote them, and I believe D. Reich is a listed co-author of his latest effort. So perhaps better info about the Y chromosome's prehistory in the subject region will be coming soon.

Generalissimo
08-12-2018, 03:33 AM
Indo-European crackpottery (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/08/indo-european-crackpottery.html)

rms2
08-12-2018, 02:52 PM
Whenever I read a long-winded, tenuous solution to some aspect of the Indo-European question, I am reminded of a Rube Goldberg device.

I don't read too many of them, I must confess, because I can't make it through most of them while still awake. But when I do, I am often astonished by the number of their octopus-like tentacles and the number of precarious things that had to happen first before the next unlikely scenario could unfold. Wow!

I don't read over-long posts here at Anthrogenica either unless the author is someone I know from past experience probably has something worthwhile to say, and there are only a few such people. One of them, Jean Manco, passed away back in March (God rest her soul), so that's one less. And even Jean concocted something of a Rube Goldberg contraption with her Stelae People idea. But at least that was a noble shot at a tough knot (the Beaker mystery).

I like this one.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmOxqhEuBUM

Conestoga
08-19-2018, 11:45 PM
PF6404 Looking for origination date and location. It seems like L11 or L51. It's not on my list for either, but it's close. Help please?
:)

Joe B
08-20-2018, 03:17 AM
PF6404 Looking for origination date and location. It seems like L11 or L51. It's not on my list for either, but it's close. Help please?
:)PF6404 is just one of several SNPs at the R1b-L23 level. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L23/
Where R1b-L23 originated is one of the great questions often discussed on this forum.