PDA

View Full Version : A mystery about P312's early history



alan
03-14-2020, 04:34 PM
Riddle me this. P312 so far is closely linked to bell beaker. It has three major subclades which are again all linked to geographical subsets of bell beaker. However, many people seem to prefer the idea that the TMRCA for P312 is quite a lot older than the yFull one of 2500BC. Some suggest 3000BC or even older. How can this be when P312 bell beaker doesnt seem to have existed before 2550BC at the earliest?

For all the P312 subclades to be associated with one culture - bell beaker - 500 years or more after their TMRCA - requires for them all to have stayed together in one 'tribe' for 5 centuries. So either Yfull is close to the truth of the TMRCA date or the early history of P312 is a lot different from its history of rapid expansion once it became associated with bell beaker. In the latter case it would mean a small group existed that were not expansive, perhaps barely reproducing themselves for centuries so that just before they finally were about to expand, they consisted of a still small group of descendants of a P312 ancestor 500 years earlier. In other words a still-together group of people whose TMRCA was a long long time earlier, consisting of a mix of U152, DF27, L21.

The alternative is that yfull is approximately right and their ancestor does date to around 2500BC.

Thoughts?

Wing Genealogist
03-14-2020, 05:07 PM
All clades start with a single individual who has the mutation (in this case P312). The earliest generations happen fairly slowly, and the growth is exponential. I don't have the expertise to say with any confidence how much time would elapse between the origin of the mutation and when it becomes large enough to spread out across areas.

GoldenHind
03-14-2020, 06:26 PM
It may be significant that that the other less numerous P312 subclades (DF19, L238, DF19, ZZ37 and a few other so far fairly rare ones) have not been found in Bell Beaker yet. There are a number of possibilities why this is the case: 1) they probably were rarer than the larger three even in the Bronze Age, so they may just not have been found yet, 2) they, or at least some of them, may have been concentrated in the northeast Beaker area which hasn't been sampled yet, or 3) they never became part of the Beaker culture. If the latter possibility is the case, it might well explain why these other subclades did not expand at the same rate as L21, DF27 and U152.

Andour
03-14-2020, 06:36 PM
Thoughts?

Thoughts, indeed.

2501 BC : Only a small P312 bridgehead around Oostwoud, Netherlands.
2499 BC : P312 is all over western and Central Europe.
Just joking, of course. But beyond the caricature, what strikes me is the extremely quick expansion of P312 as of 2500BC.
Suddenly, "out of nowhere", they are all over the place, from Ireland to Poland, from Scotland to Spain. Opening their way into territories which were far from empty at the time. The Megalithic people around Stonehenge were numerous and socially structured. The Corded Ware people in Central Europe, who had by then been growing and multiplying there for four centuries, can't have been peacelike doves either. Superseding such populations, and doing it in a few decades, must have taken not only warlike virtues, but also numbers. So... P312, a recently emerged haplogroup in a remote corner of CW territory? I, for one, very much doubt it.

Of course, they are indeed autosomally CW-like. But... different ceramics, different haplos, and, as far as I recall, slightly different burial practices. Plus, more significantly, no friendly feeling toward, nor peaceful mixing with, their steppe-derived CW neighbors. Plus, again, a centum language - when evidence points toward CW being (early) satem (as are all the subsequent cultures, all the way down to India).

If indeed, P312 dates from 2500 BC, it must have taken each male a vast number of wives, and a fairly active sex life, to produce enough sons to conquer so much so fast.

https://i.imgur.com/hkTPq9N.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/FZkF9B8.jpg

Of course, the screenshots above should not be considered too naively. They don't give exact dates, only date brackets. But still... it was a quick expansion, more like Migration Period raids than like the Neolithic Farmer spread.

alan
03-15-2020, 12:23 AM
It may be significant that that the other less numerous P312 subclades (DF19, L238, DF19, ZZ37 and a few other so far fairly rare ones) have not been found in Bell Beaker yet. There are a number of possibilities why this is the case: 1) they probably were rarer than the larger three even in the Bronze Age, so they may just not have been found yet, 2) they, or at least some of them, may have been concentrated in the northeast Beaker area which hasn't been sampled yet, or 3) they never became part of the Beaker culture. If the latter possibility is the case, it might well explain why these other subclades did not expand at the same rate as L21, DF27 and U152.

Think the last is extremely likely to be the answer.

alan
03-15-2020, 12:48 AM
Thoughts, indeed.

2501 BC : Only a small P312 bridgehead around Oostwoud, Netherlands.
2499 BC : P312 is all over western and Central Europe.
Just joking, of course. But beyond the caricature, what strikes me is the extremely quick expansion of P312 as of 2500BC.
Suddenly, "out of nowhere", they are all over the place, from Ireland to Poland, from Scotland to Spain. Opening their way into territories which were far from empty at the time. The Megalithic people around Stonehenge were numerous and socially structured. The Corded Ware people in Central Europe, who had by then been growing and multiplying there for four centuries, can't have been peacelike doves either. Superseding such populations, and doing it in a few decades, must have taken not only warlike virtues, but also numbers. So... P312, a recently emerged haplogroup in a remote corner of CW territory? I, for one, very much doubt it.

Of course, they are indeed autosomally CW-like. But... different ceramics, different haplos, and, as far as I recall, slightly different burial practices. Plus, more significantly, no friendly feeling toward, nor peaceful mixing with, their steppe-derived CW neighbors. Plus, again, a centum language - when evidence points toward CW being (early) satem (as are all the subsequent cultures, all the way down to India).

If indeed, P312 dates from 2500 BC, it must have taken each male a vast number of wives, and a fairly active sex life, to produce enough sons to conquer so much so fast.

https://i.imgur.com/hkTPq9N.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/FZkF9B8.jpg

Of course, the screenshots above should not be considered too naively. They don't give exact dates, only date brackets. But still... it was a quick expansion, more like Migration Period raids than like the Neolithic Farmer spread.

When you put it that way it is absurd to have the TMRCA of all P312 at 2500BC bur within a couple of generation its all over Europe in beaker burials, already in geographically distinct subclades. So, yes its lunancy to think P312 TMRCA was actually 2500BC. A TMRCA date a few centuries earlier makes a great deal more sense. Then you could have P312's descendants forming a powerful group who still had some sort of unity though divided mostly into a three major clans. For all three of the major divisions of the P312 lineage to be associated very closely with beaker does suggest that those descendants of P312 at the point of developing the link with beaker culture must have somehow remained very closely connected despite the real MRCA date surely being a few centuries earlier. Up to that point they must have remained a somehow unified group in terms of geography and identity. Personally I am looking to Corded Ware in parts of Poland and adjacent from c. 2900BC as possibly being where P312 lived before steppe beaker existed and this gave them time to form the three big clans prior to the development of the P312-beaker culture. The only alternitive is they were a single group who had previously had weak growth over a few centuries and so were a mixture of all three of the big P312 clades before expanding in the beaker phasa.

Andour
03-15-2020, 08:55 AM
When you put it that way it is absurd to have the TMRCA of all P312 at 2500BC bur within a couple of generation its all over Europe in beaker burials, already in geographically distinct subclades. So, yes its lunancy to think P312 TMRCA was actually 2500BC. A TMRCA date a few centuries earlier makes a great deal more sense. Then you could have P312's descendants forming a powerful group who still had some sort of unity though divided mostly into a three major clans. For all three of the major divisions of the P312 lineage to be associated very closely with beaker does suggest that those descendants of P312 at the point of developing the link with beaker culture must have somehow remained very closely connected despite the real MRCA date surely being a few centuries earlier. Up to that point they must have remained a somehow unified group in terms of geography and identity. Personally I am looking to Corded Ware in parts of Poland and adjacent from c. 2900BC as possibly being where P312 lived before steppe beaker existed and this gave them time to form the three big clans prior to the development of the P312-beaker culture. The only alternitive is they were a single group who had previously had weak growth over a few centuries and so were a mixture of all three of the big P312 clades before expanding in the beaker phasa.

Yes... And not only that : I guess if you want to get the full picture, you have to factor in what became of P312's brother clade U106. They don't seem to show up among NDL Beakers, but they eventually emerge further east on the map. Were they part of the same migration - stragglers, somehow? Did they move in independently? I hope the coronavirus lets me live long enough to know where those people came from, and what route they followed.

(Anyway, thanks, Alan! We are all aware we have gone through all this before, but given the current shortage of new publications, and the ongoing obsession with the virus, it's the right time to revive this nagging question)

I know the Generalissimo has his own views on this question, based on more solid data than my amateurish intuitions. I hope he'll grant us two minutes of his time to tell us how he feels about it.

Generalissimo
03-15-2020, 12:05 PM
Well, I'm aware of at least one early CWC sample with P312. Hopefully it's published soon along with other useful data so that there's something to discuss finally.

There also might be some old P312 or at least L51 near the western edge of the Black Sea. That seems like an area with a lot of the relevant action. But we just have to wait.

Dewsloth
03-15-2020, 03:29 PM
Yes... And not only that : I guess if you want to get the full picture, you have to factor in what became of P312's brother clade U106. They don't seem to show up among NDL Beakers, but they eventually emerge further east on the map. Were they part of the same migration - stragglers, somehow? Did they move in independently? I hope the coronavirus lets me live long enough to know where those people came from, and what route they followed.

(Anyway, thanks, Alan! We are all aware we have gone through all this before, but given the current shortage of new publications, and the ongoing obsession with the virus, it's the right time to revive this nagging question)

I know the Generalissimo has his own views on this question, based on more solid data than my amateurish intuitions. I hope he'll grant us two minutes of his time to tell us how he feels about it.

Well, they haven't found any DF19 anywhere, either. So it's at least possible that if P312 is pre-beaker, the P312 subclades may have already split up; with DF19 and other smaller subclades like L238 staying closer to Uncle U106 (wherever they went off to).

GoldenHind
03-15-2020, 05:42 PM
Think the last is extremely likely to be the answer.

Personally I am inclined toward the second possibility- that the less numerous P312 subclades were concentrated in the northeastern Beaker settlements which haven't as yet been sampled. I also think it is likely that they did not participate to any large degree in the Beaker expansion to the west and south, as that appears to have been primarily (and perhaps exclusively?) composed of L21, U152 and DF27.

However I don't think any of the three can be ruled out at this point. Nor would I be surprised if all three possibilities were true to at least some extent.

rms2
03-15-2020, 06:50 PM
I've posted this map before, but it doesn't hurt to post it again and to recall that we don't have a single Beaker genome from Beaker's northern province, not one.

36818

Webb
03-15-2020, 08:03 PM
Here is an interesting read about Provence Beaker, or Beaker finds around the Rhne Provence’s.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200129943_The_Bell_Beaker_phenomenon_in_the_Southe ast_of_France_The_state_of_research_and_preliminar y_remarks_about_the_TGV-excavations_and_some_other_sites_of_the_Provence

rms2
03-15-2020, 08:10 PM
Here is an interesting read about Provence Beaker, or Beaker finds around the Rhne Provence’s.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200129943_The_Bell_Beaker_phenomenon_in_the_Southe ast_of_France_The_state_of_research_and_preliminar y_remarks_about_the_TGV-excavations_and_some_other_sites_of_the_Provence

A similar but updated version by Lemercier appears in Chapter 5 of the book, Background to Beakers (pp. 117-155), entitled, "The Beaker Transition in Mediterranean France". I have a hard copy, but I think the entire book is available online. Good article.

GoldenHind
03-16-2020, 12:41 AM
I've posted this map before, but it doesn't hurt to post it again and to recall that we don't have a single Beaker genome from Beaker's northern province, not one.

36818

Yes, that is exactly the area I was referring to. Until we get some Beaker aDNA from there, I don't think we can say that the less numerous P312 subclades were not part of the Beaker culture.

It would also explain why at least modern DF19, L238 and DF99 are oriented more to the north and east and less to the west and south of Europe.

alan
03-16-2020, 05:18 PM
Well, I'm aware of at least one early CWC sample with P312. Hopefully it's published soon along with other useful data so that there's something to discuss finally.

There also might be some old P312 or at least L51 near the western edge of the Black Sea. That seems like an area with a lot of the relevant action. But we just have to wait.

The fact the leaking info appears to haev P312 in early CW in Poland who surely push the MRCA back to at east 2800/2900BC as I think early CW by Polish standards is very early- very soon after 3000BC. Another rumour is early U106 somewhere in eastern Europe c. 2800BC so again that is also pushing the likely L151 and P312 date back in the direction of 3000BC. A date like that makes a hell of a lot of sense than the yfull implication of one guy in 2500BC having hundreds of sons and grandsons populate much Europe within a generation or two. Plus the patterning of major P312 subclades is very geographical in many places, it makes far more sense if P312 started growing its current descendants more like say 2900BC and had 400 years of grown before steppe bell beaker existed and by then had already divided into three large (and some smaller) tribes or clans by 2500BC (who nevertheless were still part of the same ethnos/linguistic group).

ADW_1981
03-16-2020, 05:43 PM
Whatever happened to that Iberian that was buried with 19 wives or something crazy? That was a number of years ago, but I don't recall ever seeing the results.

MitchellSince1893
03-16-2020, 06:31 PM
Polygamy can speed things along.

Ibn Saud (1875–1953), the founder and first king of Saudi Arabia,
had 45 sons of whom 36 survived to adulthood and had children of their own. He also had many daughters. He is thought to have had 22 wives

According to this site he had almost 100 children, and one of his sons, King Saud bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, had 115 children https://www.parhlo.com/these-9-saudi-kings-gave-birth-to-316-children-in-total-unbelievable/

So numbers can expand quickly in just a few generations.

I've often thought that Mr. U152>L2 must have had many wives because there are so many branches under L2.

Currently 31 L2 subclades on the FTDNA haplotree.

Pylsteen
03-16-2020, 08:12 PM
The fact the leaking info appears to haev P312 in early CW in Poland who surely push the MRCA back to at east 2800/2900BC as I think early CW by Polish standards is very early- very soon after 3000BC. Another rumour is early U106 somewhere in eastern Europe a few centuries before 3000BC so again that is also pushing the likely L151 and P312 date back to 3000BC and before. A date like that makes a hell of a lot of sense than the yfull implication of one guy in 2500BC having hundreds of sons and grandsons populate
much Europe within a generation or two.

That would be much closer to McDonald's estimate of P312 (~3155 BC).

From my own calculations on Z56 which I am working on (purely based on the number of SNPs in BigY's), I get a median age of ~2495 BC for the - since this week split - Z56>BY3548,PF6571, extrapolating this gives me ~2665 BC for Z56, ~2750 BC for U152 and ~3090 BC for the P312 block.

Generalissimo
03-16-2020, 08:32 PM
The fact the leaking info appears to haev P312 in early CW in Poland who surely push the MRCA back to at east 2800/2900BC as I think early CW by Polish standards is very early- very soon after 3000BC. Another rumour is early U106 somewhere in eastern Europe a few centuries before 3000BC so again that is also pushing the likely L151 and P312 date back to 3000BC and before. A date like that makes a hell of a lot of sense than the yfull implication of one guy in 2500BC having hundreds of sons and grandsons populate
much Europe within a generation or two. Plus the patterning of major P312 subclades is very geographical in many places, it makes far more sense if P312 started growing its current descendants more like say 2900BC and had 400 years of grown before steppe bell beaker existed and by then had already divided into three large (and some smaller) tribes or clans by 2500BC (who nevertheless were still part of the same ethnos/linguistic group).

Not Poland. A neighboring country.

alan
03-16-2020, 08:45 PM
Yes, that is exactly the area I was referring to. Until we get some Beaker aDNA from there, I don't think we can say that the less numerous P312 subclades were not part of the Beaker culture.

It would also explain why at least modern DF19, L238 and DF99 are oriented more to the north and east and less to the west and south of Europe.

I wouldnt rule that out either. Nor even U106 turning up there. However, the primary issue in this thread is what IMO is the impossibility of the yfull TMRCAs of P312 and its early branching dating to 2500BC. That IMO is simply impossible. Even a date of say 2600BC is pretty well impossible to explain the spread of P312 a century or century and a half later. One man can have a lot of great grandsons in polygamy but not enough for them to have establish a sustained presence across most of Europe. It would be polygamy in a pretty simple society of clans. Not some head of a vast Medieval empire with a giant hareem. I think in the first century after even a very prolific clan chief in a simple beaker style clan society with no major chiefdom or state apparatus there would not be more than very low 100s of descendants within 100 years. Even that is stretching it bearing in mind the v high infant mortality rate plus the fact half their kids would be daughters. Personally I think c. 2500BC the steppe beaker genesis and expansion must have involved an existing group of several hundred men likely living at least 2 centuries since their MRCA.

They surely were already split into subclans of at least 100 men each, probably more long before the 2500BC-Beaker-P312 phenomenon.

It kind of goes without saying that if P312 is likely 2 or 3 centuries+ older than 2500BC/steppe beaker then U152, DF27 and the ancestor of L21 area also not much younger and had likely already formed into several generations deep subclans by 2500BC. I suspect that as in the Gaelic system, the P312 clan were about a century of MR P312 a unit of male relations out of 4th cousins (common GGG grandfather a century or more earlier) and that group. The process of breaking into branches probably commenced around 100 years after the initial P312 founder as groups became too distant from the current chief to have inheritance rights or interests. By about 200 years after Mr P312 I think we could have had a group of subclans each of similar size to what P312 in its entirely had been 100 years earlier. They probably were semi autonomous but still closely linked and conscious that they were part of the same deep descent P312 clan as clannish peoples tend to have major interest in genealogy and specialists who recited them. By about 200 years after P312 they could have been perhaps a 500-1000 men strong confederation of related subclans of 100 men or so, perhaps with an overall 'king' from the strongest clan. That is how I envisage (largely based on the much later Gaelic clan system) that the early history of P312 went up to 2500BC and the steppe beaker P312 phenomenon commencing.

The close association of at least all of the big three branches of P312 with steppe beaker culture implies that between Mr P312's birth and 2500BC, the whole of the descants of Mr P312 were still very closely tied geographically, culturally and linguistically to each other. It seems they remained together until 2500BC. To square this connection of all the big branches of P312 with the same culture with having enough numbers to fan out (even in low numbers of little clans and bands) across so much of Europe with beaker, they would have had to have existed and been growing for at least 200 years before 2500BC.

As to where, I have long suspected (and have often posted my reasoning for this) that the group grew and remained in the eastern part of the CW zone prior to not long before 2500BC. Poland and adjacent areas to the east seem likely to me to have harboured and given P312 a period to grow for at least a couple of centuries pre-2500BC. I kind of see steppe beaker as the westwards part of the same phenomenon of the developed phase of CW that drove Fatyanovo eastwards. Similar autosomal genetics I believe too.

I personally see P312 CW groups as forming the steppe beaker culture by crossing from the Polish rivers systems into the Elbe system in the period c. 2600-2550BC and forming the steppe beaker culture via contacts its developed there with west-central European cultures. They perhaps split with future L21 going to the Elbe mouth to the Rhine mouth with Ul52 going from the Elbe through the Moravian gate to the middle/upper Danube. Not a clue what DF27 did but I guess its most likely it took the same route as U152 before cutting into the head of the Rhone/Saone system. However, its possible all of P312 followed the suggested U152 route of middle Elbe-Upper Elbe-Moravian Gate-Middle Danube-Upper Danube with L21 and DF27 then going north and south respectively from a point where the sources of the Danube, Rhine and Rhone/Saone approach closest in SW Germany/north Switzerland.

alan
03-16-2020, 08:49 PM
Not Poland. A neighboring country.

I thought P312 in early CW Poland was the info leaking out. Do you mean some really early U106 wasnt Poland but somewhere close? If yes then that is in line with what ive heard.

alan
03-16-2020, 09:13 PM
That would be much closer to McDonald's estimate of P312 (~3155 BC).

From my own calculations on Z56 which I am working on (purely based on the number of SNPs in BigY's), I get a median age of ~2495 BC for the - since this week split - Z56>BY3548,PF6571, extrapolating this gives me ~2665 BC for Z56, ~2750 BC for U152 and ~3090 BC for the P312 block.

Yeah the more I think about it, any date for the common ancestor of all living P312 that is not well before 2500BC is preposterous when you think just how much of Europe was suddenly settled by P312 beaker within decades of that. Its simply - even if it was just a handful of related P312 clans of 100 or so men each - got to have been at least a couple of centuries older and realistically its surely a century or so even older than that. So, an origin date around 3000BC doesnt seem unlikely to me.

U106 seems most likely to me to have been a relatively 'stay home' clan that didnt move much west from the Poland kind of area until pretty late in the CW era thought it could have been crossing the Baltic to parts of Scandinavia earlier. The sample for battle axe in Sweden for example is tiny - just a couple of men I believe.

As for P312, the beaker burial rite is awful similar to battle axe Sweden in terms of body position, the compass orientation of the bodies and what sides the males and females were put on and what end their heads were at. It just seems too similar to be chance. That is why i've long suspected the P312 group in pre-beaker times could have been near the south Baltic and its rivers with contacts with Sweden across the Baltic influencing them at least by the developed stage of CW in Poland. It sounds weird but I think it makes sense. Even Fatyanovo has some resemblance to those rites.

Having read up on Fatyanovo recently, its a pretty complex genesis that may have involved 2 or more links to CW groups including Poland, the SE Baltic area and the Dnieper. However, the Middle Dnieper culture is currently dated (best recent attempts to date the two cultures) to 2500BC while Fatyanovo may have started by 2700BC or soon after. So the links to the middle Dnieper seem unlikely, Besides, I understand that the earliest middle Dnieper cultural traits are actually found in SE Poland anyway not on the Middle Dnieper. If so, then the suggestion that Fatyanovo is actually more related to impulses from the developed stage of CW Poland and the SE Baltic c. 2700BC or so seems strong. From what I understand in autosomal DNA terms both bell beaker and Fatyanovo being outpourings from CW Poland into new zones c. 2700-2600BC would make a lot of sense.

alan
03-16-2020, 09:51 PM
Whatever happened to that Iberian that was buried with 19 wives or something crazy? That was a number of years ago, but I don't recall ever seeing the results.

I think hogging all the women to a crazy degree is something that an individual just couldnt get away with in a simple clan society. Its not likely to make you popular with your fellow clan members and I can help thinking it would quickly get you dead. Another thing to remember is you might have had a guy having only a wife or two and the odd concubine at any given time but serial getting through lots because of the huge chance of dying in childbirth. A wealthy guy who lived for a considerably longer time than the average person (lets say 40 or 50) could have outlived a number of wives in sequence due to that. Certainly after 2500BC there is a situation where beaker groups in Germany and and the isles anyway seem to mainly marry only other beaker people. If so, you cant get away with abusing that sort of system as beaker wives were probably something that involved all sorts of alliances with other beaker clans and you would be liable to be bumped off I would think.

However, that is the beaker era. What about the pre-beaker phase of P312's history? Well marriage clearly couldnt have always had that beaker-style keeping it within the beaker clans system of marriage. We know that somewhere along the line P312 steppe males must have married heavily with GAC/northern TRB (or descendants) women or the beaker signal woudnt have been created. That simply cant have been created anywhere where GAC/northern TRB populations or their genetic descendants didnt exist. Genetic, chronological, archaeological and geographical considerations indicate to me that mix could only have happened if it involved GAC in Poland or close to its borders and a steppe group c. 3000-2600BC and that surely only matches a scenario of c. 3000-2700 within the Polish CW complex. That conclusion would make it essentially the same as the story of the what happened over the first few centuries of CW in Poland.

MitchellSince1893
03-16-2020, 11:55 PM
If ancient peoples preferred to stay in a biographic region they were used to/comfortable with, and if these regions haven't changed much since 3000 BC, then the path of P312/U106 and their immediate ancestors (L151, L51) and brother clades may be found in the light green continental region on this map. Originating somewhere in the Russian continental area near where L23 has been found in the Samara Bend region, moving through the Fatyanovo-Balanovo areas and on West in the Single Grave Culture areas. Not saying P312 originated in Russia, but rather this is the possible path back from where we've found ancient L23.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Europe_biogeography_countries_en.svg/1024px-Europe_biogeography_countries_en.svg.png

alan
03-17-2020, 01:09 AM
If ancient peoples preferred to stay in a biographic region there were used to/comfortable with, and if these regions haven't changed much since 3000 BC, then the path of P312/U106 and their immediate ancestors (L151, L51) and brother clades may be found in the light green continental region on this map. Originating somewhere in the Russian continental area near where L23 has been found in the Samara Bend region, moving through the Fatyanovo-Balanovo areas and on West in the Single Grave Culture areas. Not saying P312 originated in Russia, but rather this is the possible path back from where we've found ancient L23.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Europe_biogeography_countries_en.svg/1024px-Europe_biogeography_countries_en.svg.png

Well I think there is some broad truth in that though adaptations can happen. I think we can see in archaeology that actual Yamnaya stuck to steppe-like niches mostly along the Lower Danube when it expanded west and really didnt ever adjust to forest Europe. I think this is a major reason why Z2103 doesnt really get past the Lower Danube area in terms of Longitude west. It did later spread in places like Anatolia but there are steppe-like areas there too. I suspect the Yamnaya cultures pre-adaption to aridity may explain how Z2013 was able to adapt to very arid conditions in SE Europe, Antatolia and SW Asia after it was apparently displaced in that direction at some point.

CW clearly differed from Yamnaya in that it spread across the farming and forest zones easily. At the same time it avoided the steppes. That is of course despite early CW being so Yamnaya-like genetically.

My feeling now is Yamnaya was a very specific adaption to life on wheels by a particular tribe (Z2103) that only liked certain environmental niches and didnt adapt to European forest zone or farming zone and thus didnt make much impact on the vast bulk of Europe. I think they did eventually adapt to arid southern areas but never to the vast bulk of Europe Its only fairly strong candidates for descendant languages today IMO are Armenian and Albanian although I think they might have had had a role in Greek and lost-Balkan groups like the Dacians.

ADW_1981
03-17-2020, 01:41 AM
I think hogging all the women to a crazy degree is something that an individual just couldnt get away with in a simple clan society. Its not likely to make you popular with your fellow clan members and I can help thinking it would quickly get you dead. Another thing to remember is you might have had a guy having only a wife or two and the odd concubine at any given time but serial getting through lots because of the huge chance of dying in childbirth. A wealthy guy who lived for a considerably longer time than the average person (lets say 40 or 50) could have outlived a number of wives in sequence due to that. Certainly after 2500BC there is a situation where beaker groups in Germany and and the isles anyway seem to mainly marry only other beaker people. If so, you cant get away with abusing that sort of system as beaker wives were probably something that involved all sorts of alliances with other beaker clans and you would be liable to be bumped off I would think.

However, that is the beaker era. What about the pre-beaker phase of P312's history? Well marriage clearly couldnt have always had that beaker-style keeping it within the beaker clans system of marriage. We know that somewhere along the line P312 steppe males must have married heavily with GAC/northern TRB (or descendants) women or the beaker signal woudnt have been created. That simply cant have been created anywhere where GAC/northern TRB populations or their genetic descendants didnt exist. Genetic, chronological, archaeological and geographical considerations indicate to me that mix could only have happened if it involved GAC in Poland or close to its borders and a steppe group c. 3000-2600BC and that surely only matches a scenario of c. 3000-2700 within the Polish CW complex. That conclusion would make it essentially the same as the story of the what happened over the first few centuries of CW in Poland.

Yeah I'm hoping I didn't dream that up because I can't find it now when I search. It was something reported here, and possibly 4-5 years ago. It does seem unusual and could have been misrepresented by the media. I was just curious on the results since I thought it was a legitimate science article.

MitchellSince1893
03-17-2020, 03:06 AM
Well I think there is some broad truth in that though adaptations can happen...
If we carry this forward to post P312, then it appears L21 adapted to an Atlantic biographical region, U152 stayed mostly Continental with some Alpine later added; while DF27 seems to mostly transition to Atlantic and Mediterranean (with some still staying Continental). Going down the Rhone Valley would have facilitated this transition.

Outside of P312, U106 may have stayed mostly Continental.

alan
03-22-2020, 07:58 PM
The mystery remains though. For the big expansion across Europe that P312's main early branches did in a few generations from 2500BC, the TMRCA of all P312 has to have been at least 2 or 3 centuries earlier or the numbers would be simply impossibly low to do such a feat. Doubly so when you consider this was a society of clans with no major structures like states, empires etc, no urban or palace type centres and a preference for marrying other beaker people (albeit not locally). I think it can pretty safely be concluded their common ancestor lived nearer to 3000BC than 2500BC.

That leaves a long period (at least 3 centuries, probably more IMO) when P312 existed before steppe bell beaker existed. It certainly didnt come from Iberian chalcolithic or pre-2500BC Iberian beaker people. It clearly came from eastern Europe. Anyway this means something important IMO because if P312 and its main subclades were already centuries old by 2500BC, then how is it they 1. All entered the one culture. and 2. The main subclades were so strongly geographically patterned from the very start of beaker culture?

The only answer I can think of is that P312 was contained in a single zone/culture/network for several centuries from the TMRCA to 2500BC. They were presumably a single cultural group albeit divided into clans, including the big three ones. They must have been at a stage where the division into three clans was established but still had common identity and culture. There are plenty of parallels for this in history and anthropology whereby a group will still retain a shared identity and culture though divided into clans, even mutually hostile ones. I think that would fit quite well a group who had a common ancestor maybe 300 years before steppe bell beaker and had had enough time to be strongly divided into clans but not so much time they had lost the common bond. They were probably involved in marriage networks between the P312 clans across the period. Otherwise there would be really marked differences in autosomal DNA between beaker groups. We know anyway that in the beaker era they preferred to marry other beaker people even if they were non-local beaker wives.

Another thing also worth noting though is that there must have been a phase when P312 or perhaps even its L151 ancestor did marry out and gain all that GAC/northern TRB-like autosomal DNA. That must have been a kind of pioneer phase where a largely steppe male movement entered a zone that carried that substrate population. If you look at distribution maps of GAC and northern TRB and I suppose also CW groups that absorbed them before the beaker era then combine them, you essentially would get a map of the zone in which the classic beaker autosomal signal could have happened. Its quite a big area consisting of northern and north-central Europe from maybe the Rhine to the Poland and maybe the fringes of Ukraine etc. However, it does at least rule out a great deal of Europe including the entire south, Balkans, Danube and south-central Europe. Its also seems that there is no P312 in CW as yet which comfortably pre-dates beaker except in east-central Europe.

I think there are many indications that P312 and indeed all L151 did not take part in the main big first CW thrust west through central Europe to the Rhine c. 2900BC. It seems to have remained behind in east-central Europe. Not just ancient DNA but some aspects of burial traditions that beaker used also point towards the east-central and north-east fringes of the CW world IMO. Quite a number of groups in that zone had burial traditions that were not of the classic CW type and some of them seem to prefigure the beaker rite.

Another thing to note is the bell beaker signal cannot have come together further east than the GAC/northern TRB zone or there simply wouldnt have been the right substrate to create it. If you draw a line from NE poland at the Baltic to the middle reaches of the Dniester (or perhaps the Dnieper) the you can probably say the GAC/TRB input into bell beakers could not have occurred east of that line.

The only possibility of P312 absorbing that sort of autosomal DNA east of that line is if P312 was somehow captured within the Fatyanovo expansion into the Moscow type area and then mysteriously turned west again. That seems incredibly unlikely though not impossible given that Fatyanovo is thought to commence around 2700BC while beaker doesnt until at least 2550BC.

alan
03-22-2020, 08:06 PM
If we carry this forward to post P312, then it appears L21 adapted to an Atlantic biographical region, U152 stayed mostly Continental with some Alpine later added; while DF27 seems to mostly transition to Atlantic and Mediterranean (with some still staying Continental). Going down the Rhone Valley would have facilitated this transition.

Outside of P312, U106 may have stayed mostly Continental.

Certainly the absolutely key adaptation that L21 made was the ability to cross seas to Britain, Ireland and of course the many small islands off those islands, especially in Scotland. And of course the ability to keep up distribution of metals and other cultural spreads using the seas between Britain and Ireland and between them and the English channel for centuries. There is no delay between settling Britain and Ireland and indeed some of the larger islands off them so they seem to have been fully adapted to the rough northern seas from the get-go. That simply cannot have happened unless L21 was pre-adapted with considerable boating skills and tech before reaching the isles.

David Mc
03-22-2020, 08:57 PM
The only answer I can think of is that P312 was contained in a single zone/culture/network for several centuries from the TMRCA to 2500BC. They were presumably a single cultural group albeit divided into clans, including the big three ones. They must have been at a stage where the division into three clans was established but still had common identity and culture.

Ah yes, the houses of Bor, Haleth and Hador. Sorry. Couldn't resist. I like to think Tolkien would approve.

JoeyP37
03-22-2020, 10:25 PM
Hadorians are R1a, Beorians R1b, being related, while Haleth is God knows what. I2, maybe? Of the top five y-chromosome haplogroups in my 23andMe cousins, all of them are P312, save the L51, which was tested on an earlier chip, and many of them are also probably P312. The majority haplogroup of my relatives-and probably my ancestors-is L21, Atlantic Celtic. Ps. Tolkien was R1a, being Z92.

ADW_1981
03-23-2020, 03:02 AM
Hadorians are R1a, Beorians R1b, being related, while Haleth is God knows what. I2, maybe? Of the top five y-chromosome haplogroups in my 23andMe cousins, all of them are P312, save the L51, which was tested on an earlier chip, and many of them are also probably P312. The majority haplogroup of my relatives-and probably my ancestors-is L21, Atlantic Celtic. Ps. Tolkien was R1a, being Z92.

Not really surprising since he was an anglicized immigrant "German", although I didn't know his specific roots before that.

rms2
03-23-2020, 01:40 PM
Of course, God only knows to what y-dna haplogroup Tolkien really belonged. It would be interesting to find out.

I would also like to know to what haplogroup C.S. Lewis belonged. FTDNA's Lewis DNA Project isn't of much help. Lewis is a fairly common surname and is borne by men belonging to a diverse array of y-dna haplogroups.

ADW_1981
03-23-2020, 02:53 PM
Of course, God only knows to what y-dna haplogroup Tolkien really belonged. It would be interesting to find out.

I would also like to know to what haplogroup C.S. Lewis belonged. FTDNA's Lewis DNA Project isn't of much help. Lewis is a fairly common surname and is borne by men belonging to a diverse array of y-dna haplogroups.

This is probably what he's referring to. Seems pretty legitimate.

http://tolkniety.blogspot.com/2019/12/baltic-ancestry-of-prof-tolkien.html

rms2
03-25-2020, 02:53 AM
This is probably what he's referring to. Seems pretty legitimate.

http://tolkniety.blogspot.com/2019/12/baltic-ancestry-of-prof-tolkien.html

Oh, yeah, can't see any big reason to doubt it. I thought he was just kidding around.

Interesting. I think Tolkien would have enjoyed knowing all that.

rms2
03-25-2020, 03:09 AM
Here (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lewis-16623) is the entry for C. S. Lewis' most distant y-dna ancestor at WikiTree:



Joseph Lewis
Born before 11 Feb 1806 in Flintshire, Wales, United Kingdom
Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
Husband of Jane Ellis — married about 1825 in Hawarden, Flintshire, Walse[sic], United Kingdom


The entry says thus far no known descendants of Joseph Lewis have been dna tested.

Flintshire is in northern Wales. Wales as a whole is about 50% R1b-L21, but not too far west of Flintshire is Abergele in Conwy, which has an unusually high frequency of E-V13 for Britain. Of course, I don't think there is any reason to believe that frequency of E-V13 extends beyond Abergele; it's kind of a local anomaly.

So, anyway, while L21 is a pretty good bet, Lewis' y-dna haplogroup could have been anything. Unfortunately, as far as I know, he did not have any sons. Not sure about his brother Warren or any of their male Lewis relatives.

rms2
03-25-2020, 03:38 AM
Apparently C. S. Lewis had three Lewis uncles, his father's brothers. I don't know whether or not any of them has any living y-dna descendants, but I hope they all do.

Maybe one of those descendants will pop up with y-dna test results sometime.

Lewis Tree (https://www.geni.com/family-tree/canvas/6000000010556087217)

Kopfjger
03-25-2020, 04:34 AM
Here (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lewis-16623) is the entry for C. S. Lewis' most distant y-dna ancestor at WikiTree:



The entry says thus far no known descendants of Joseph Lewis have been dna tested.

Flintshire is in northern Wales. Wales as a whole is about 50% R1b-L21, but not too far west of Flintshire is Abergele in Conwy, which has an unusually high frequency of E-V13 for Britain. Of course, I don't think there is any reason to believe that frequency of E-V13 extends beyond Abergele; it's kind of a local anomaly.

So, anyway, while L21 is a pretty good bet, Lewis' y-dna haplogroup could have been anything. Unfortunately, as far as I know, he did not have any sons. Not sure about his brother Warren or any of their male Lewis relatives.

Very interesting that Lewis's antecedents were from Wales... He is one of my favorite authors, much like Tolkien.

rms2
03-25-2020, 03:10 PM
There must be some kind of C. S. Lewis fan club somewhere that has knowledge of living relatives of the famous author.

I wonder . . .

razyn
03-25-2020, 08:26 PM
There must be some kind of C. S. Lewis fan club somewhere that has knowledge of living relatives of the famous author.

I wonder . . .

Some decades ago there was a Mythopoeic Society, based somewhere in darkest California. My brother used to hang out with some of its founders, but wasn't active in it himself AFAIK. They would do stuff like dressing as orcs and kidnapping a friend in the night, to celebrate his birthday in a park that was supposedly closed. Fun bunch, I guess. Anyway if that society still exists, its fanzine (or whatever it has now) would probably know, Lewis was one of the guys whose oeuvre they more or less reenacted.

rms2
03-26-2020, 02:21 AM
Apparently they are still active and can be found here (http://www.mythsoc.org/about.htm).

Thanks!

MitchellSince1893
04-08-2020, 10:30 PM
On Eurogenes Davidski mentioned


Apparently there are some unpublished instances of early L51 and P312 in LNBA (pre-Bell Beaker) samples from Bohemia, Romania and Ukraine. But they're all associated with steppe or steppe-derived populations
Ask your contacts about P312 in Czech CWC
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4123559132014627431&postID=210490950092318815&isPopup=true

Pre Bell Beaker steppe-derived sounds like Corded Ware based on comments and geography above. I believe the oldest P312 currently published is still RISE563, in Bavaria near the Danube, not too far from the Austrian and Czech borders in a Bell-Beaker grave setting approx 2542 BC. Which is early in the Bell Beaker period.

If P312 is also found in an earlier Corded Ware setting in neigbhoring Bohemia, that may be the missing puzzle piece we've been trying to connect. Time will tell.

MitchellSince1893
04-09-2020, 01:54 AM
Just looking at a basic article on CWC at encyclopedia.com


The earliest-known carbon-14 dates for Corded Ware come from Kujavia and Małopolska in central and southern Poland. These include a grave at Krusza Zamkowa in Kujavia and a barrow at Średnia in Małopolska dating to the transition from the fourth to the third millennium b.c. Carbon-14 dating of the remaining central European regions shows that Corded Ware appeared after 2880 b.c. Around that time, in 2725 b.c., the first pile settlements (dwellings built on pilings at the edge of lakes) appeared in the Alpine foothills. Such sites have yielded materials characteristic of Corded Ware. The latest dates, about the middle of the third millennium b.c., are from the Russian Plain.

The most likely hypothesis, then, is that Corded Ware first appeared (on the transition between the fourth and third millennia b.c.) in the central part of its domain and spread from east to west. In 2725 b.c. it reached its southwestern edge. About 2500 b.c., Corded Ware spread in another direction, to the northeast, and it is eventually found on the upper Volga.

So the L51 to P312 path may be from Russia/Belarus/Ukraine to Central/South Poland then to Czechia and on to Germany.

razyn
04-09-2020, 03:59 AM
So the L51 to P312 path may be from Russia/Belarus/Ukraine to Central/South Poland then to Czechia and on to Germany.
And nothing yet says where along that route P312, U106, or the major subclades of either were born.

MitchellSince1893
04-09-2020, 05:10 AM
And nothing yet says where along that route P312, U106, or the major subclades of either were born.
Haven't made a map in a while...making a map is a nice distraction from the daily depressing corona virus figures/stories...

Based on the above locations, I'm going to guess it's somewhere near here. I could be wrong (full disclosure, I previously thought it was near Moldova/near Black Sea...back when a Yamnaya direct connection was popular).
We will never know for sure. All we can go by is the oldest discovered P312 as a possible indicator.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fc/12/2b/fc122b444fc573e2c41ded27a2efc3d0.png

razyn
04-09-2020, 05:38 PM
As a public service, I go back and find these older map threads. I'm citing a modified version rather than your original (post #854, if you want to see the progression), and including the comment by dsm that L151 "could turn out quite easily to be further east." L151 in Afanasievo, for instance, is substantially farther east. Not that I'm suggesting that is its birthplace; just another place to which L151 is confirmed to have expanded, early.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16234-Bell-Beaker-Archaeology-and-Ancient-DNA&p=598360&viewfull=1#post598360

MitchellSince1893
04-09-2020, 07:12 PM
As a public service, I go back and find these older map threads. I'm citing a modified version rather than your original (post #854, if you want to see the progression), and including the comment by dsm that L151 "could turn out quite easily to be further east." L151 in Afanasievo, for instance, is substantially farther east. Not that I'm suggesting that is its birthplace; just another place to which L151 is confirmed to have expanded, early.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16234-Bell-Beaker-Archaeology-and-Ancient-DNA&p=598360&viewfull=1#post598360
Yes Generalismo’s Single Grave Culture idea obviously influenced that map. I wasn’t convinced it was a point of origin, but rather as as a point of rapid expansion. SGC/North German Plain area appears to be a common area for many L51 subclades allowing them to spread into Scandinavia, down the Rhine, Rhne, and Danube.
P312 could have originated further east near my above map, before ending up in the Single Grave Culture. According to the encyclopedia.com. East/Central Poland supposedly has the oldest CWC sites. If P312 and/or L51 started there, it could have later spread to SGC where it then had rapid growth. Allowing L21 to quickly jump over to the Isles, U106 to Battle Axe in southern Sweden etc.

Alternatively, P312 men could have had a very mobile lifestyle which constantly transversed a large geographic area (trading network?) stretching from the Rhine to Eastern Europe, making any attempt to pinpoint and origin extremely difficult.

But if P312 originated in CWC and oldest CWC is in Central/Southern Poland, and P312 is found in CWC in neighboring Bohemia, then that’s as logical guess for a P312 origin as any.

As can be seen from the evolution of my maps, I tend to go with the latest thinking on the subject e.g Yamnaya to SGC to Poland/Czech area. As more data comes in I tend to update my thinking accordingly. Others posters prefer a more consistent approach but I’m not too concerned if I end up having an evolving/changing point of view.

ADW_1981
04-09-2020, 07:50 PM
Haven't made a map in a while...making a map is a nice distraction from the daily depressing corona virus figures/stories...

Based on the above locations, I'm going to guess it's somewhere near here. I could be wrong (full disclosure, I previously thought it was near Moldova/near Black Sea...back when a Yamnaya direct connection was popular).
We will never know for sure. All we can go by is the oldest discovered P312 as a possible indicator.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fc/12/2b/fc122b444fc573e2c41ded27a2efc3d0.png

That's about where I'm thinking it was too. U106 probably isn't too far off. (IMHO)

Osiris
04-09-2020, 07:52 PM
I've always wondered if someone tried to model population structures back then. If you have a multi-level society where the upper class have an average of 6 surviving children, middle class an average of 4 and lower class an average of 2 with some minor mobility. Or whatever would be a realistic situation. How fast would that erase the lower classes to the benefit of the upper classes.

MitchellSince1893
04-10-2020, 09:58 PM
FrankN said on Eurogenes blog said
"
the onset of that [CW] transition may have started even earlier in Switzerland compared to the Middle-Elbe-Saale Region"

A trail up the Danube towards Switzerland is rather unlikely. CW appeared comparatively late in Moravia / Upper Austria, apparently out of Bohemia, and archeologically rather formed a hybrid with pre-existing post-Baden cultures than completely replacing them.

The standard assumption so far was that CW reached Switzerland from the Saale via the Main Triangle (Bergrheinfeld RISE446) and the Tauber Valley (modern A71 and A80 motorways). At least the Main Triangle CWC seems to have been a spin-off of the Saale CWC.
That assumption was already implicitly put into question by Furholt 2014 "Upending a totality.." His multifactoral analysis demonstrated a lack of cultural linkage between Swiss and Saale CWC Groups. Instead, Swiss CWC had most in common with Single Grave from the Elbe-Weser triangle, followed by Dutch CWC (unfortunately, Furholt didn't include Rhein-Main CWC in his analysis, which should have been the place were both streams converged).
Now, intriguingly, Furholt also uncovered strong cultural contacts between Baltic (Lithuanian) CWC, and the Mecklenburg - Schleswig-Holstein - Elbe-Weser - Netherlands Single Grave cluster - a communication line that was obviously seaborne, and in all likelyhood fuelled by amber trade.

Furholt 2014 furthermore cautiously (in Figure 1) revised his older statement, whereby the oldest CWC appeared in S. Poland. Instead, he now seems to align with other research that sees the earliest evidence of CWC elements - still as hybrid with pre-existing groups - in the Bay Coast Culture along the E. Prussian and Lithuanian coast shortly after 3,000 BC. Acc. to him, the first "original" culture, yet lacking the characteristic pottery but already following the typical burial rite and championning battle axes, was Jutland Single Grave, the onset of which he dates to 2,900 BC.

So, Dave: "Airplanes weren't invented until 1903 ..", but boats were obviously already known during the Neolithic, and apparently used by CWC/SGC. Possibly
for expansion up the Rhine (and possibly also for getting from the Steppe to the Baltic Sea). Let's see what dates the Swiss study will yield..

April 9, 2020 at 9:54 AM

If the oldest CWC is now thought to be in East Prussia/Lithuania rather than Central/Southern Poland, then it obviously impacts the map I drew based on oldest CWC being in Central/Southern Poland.

MitchellSince1893
04-11-2020, 03:10 AM
Going back and reviewing Furholt 2014 "Upending a totality"
https://www.academia.edu/5878366/Upending_a_Totality_Re-evaluating_Corded_Ware_Variability_in_Late_Neolith ic_Europe._Proceedings_of_the_Prehistoric_Society_ FirstView_Article_January_2014_pp_1_-_20._DOI_10.1017_ppr.2013.20_Published_online_28_J anuary_2014

Table 1 has the following chronology for the "Corded Ware phenomenon". If it is accurate then eyeballing the chart:
~2950 BC Bay Coast Culture in Lithuania/East Prussia
~2900 BC Zlota Culture in Southeast Poland
~2900 BC Corded Ware in North Central Poland
~2825 BC Single Grave Culture in Jutland
~2800 BC Battle Axe Culture in Southern Sweden
~2800-2750 BC Corded Ware in Central Germany
~2775 BC Corded Ware in Bohemia
~2775 BC Corded Ware in Southern Germany
~2750 BC Single Grave Culture in Netherlands
~2725 BC Single Grave Culture in Switzerland
~2700 BC Younger Neolithic with Corded Ware in Danish Isles and NE Germany

Using 15 regional CWC studies, Furholt analyzes the similarities of these Corded Ware groups to each other as it pertains to:
-9 different types of Beaker pottery forms
-11 other types of pottery (e.g. bowles, plates, cups, mugs, amphora)
-3 different axe types
-Blades
-Daggers
-Disc
-Amber
-Copper

Based on these similarities he created a network analysis with line thickness between CWC groups representing similarities i.e. the thicker the line the more similar the two groups were.

What can be seen in the map on Fig 7 is that:
The ~2950 BC CWC group in Lithuania/East Prussia has thick line connections to the North Central Poland (Kujawia site), Southern Poland (Sandomierz and Lubacow sites), and the Netherlands.
The ~2900 BC CWC group in North Central Poland (Kujawia site) has moderately thick line to Bohemia
The ~2900 BC CWC group in Southeast Poland (Lubaczow) has a moderately thick line connection to the Central Germany Group (Saale).
The ~2900 BC CWC group in Southeast Poland (Sandomierz) has a moderately thick line connection to the Elb Wesser Group in Northern Germany.
The similarly aged Central Germany (Saale) and Bohemia sites have a thick line connection to each other; and to the later Moravia Group.

If these chronologies and connections are accurate and P312 came into existence circa 3000 BC, then the P312 in Corded Ware Bohemia may have come from the Lithuania/East Prussia CWC group (aka Bay Coast Culture) via the North Central Poland Group (Kujawia). As indicated by the Green Lines.

A less direct route would be from Lithuania/East Prussia to Southern Poland (Lubaczow) to the Central Germany Group (Saale) to Bohemia. As indicated by the Blue Lines.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d6/84/b5/d684b54622ed7de36ca8d57c62486c42.png

alan
04-11-2020, 08:18 PM
Going back and reviewing Furholt 2014 "Upending a totality"
https://www.academia.edu/5878366/Upending_a_Totality_Re-evaluating_Corded_Ware_Variability_in_Late_Neolith ic_Europe._Proceedings_of_the_Prehistoric_Society_ FirstView_Article_January_2014_pp_1_-_20._DOI_10.1017_ppr.2013.20_Published_online_28_J anuary_2014

Table 1 has the following chronology for the "Corded Ware phenomenon". If it is accurate then eyeballing the chart:
~2950 BC Bay Coast Culture in Lithuania/East Prussia
~2900 BC Zlota Culture in Southeast Poland
~2900 BC Corded Ware in North Central Poland
~2825 BC Single Grave Culture in Jutland
~2800 BC Battle Axe Culture in Southern Sweden
~2800-2750 BC Corded Ware in Central Germany
~2775 BC Corded Ware in Bohemia
~2775 BC Corded Ware in Southern Germany
~2750 BC Single Grave Culture in Netherlands
~2725 BC Single Grave Culture in Switzerland
~2700 BC Younger Neolithic with Corded Ware in Danish Isles and NE Germany

Using 15 regional CWC studies, Furholt analyzes the similarities of these Corded Ware groups to each other as it pertains to:
-9 different types of Beaker pottery forms
-11 other types of pottery (e.g. bowles, plates, cups, mugs, amphora)
-3 different axe types
-Blades
-Daggers
-Disc
-Amber
-Copper

Based on these similarities he created a network analysis with line thickness between CWC groups representing similarities i.e. the thicker the line the more similar the two groups were.

What can be seen in the map on Fig 7 is that:
The ~2950 BC CWC group in Lithuania/East Prussia has thick line connections to the North Central Poland (Kujawia site), Southern Poland (Sandomierz and Lubacow sites), and the Netherlands.
The ~2900 BC CWC group in North Central Poland (Kujawia site) has moderately thick line to Bohemia
The ~2900 BC CWC group in Southeast Poland (Lubaczow) has a moderately thick line connection to the Central Germany Group (Saale).
The ~2900 BC CWC group in Southeast Poland (Sandomierz) has a moderately thick line connection to the Elb Wesser Group in Northern Germany.
The similarly aged Central Germany (Saale) and Bohemia sites have a thick line connection to each other; and to the later Moravia Group.

If these chronologies and connections are accurate and P312 came into existence circa 3000 BC, then the P312 in Corded Ware Bohemia may have come from the Lithuania/East Prussia CWC group (aka Bay Coast Culture) via the North Central Poland Group (Kujawia). As indicated by the Green Lines.

A less direct route would be from Lithuania/East Prussia to Southern Poland (Lubaczow) to the Central Germany Group (Saale) to Bohemia. As indicated by the Blue Lines.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d6/84/b5/d684b54622ed7de36ca8d57c62486c42.png

I've also tried to reason through this in the past. I generally couldnt make sense of it if you look at it as migratory. One of the key things though is that this paper is describing post-dispersal convergence by 2nd generation contact networks among CW people. So, it is not going to be a map of migrations. Its a confusing map and it has problems because some of the groups are much younger than others according to radiocarbon dating so its confusing to plot them all on a single map and its also noticeable that there is a lack of correlation in burial details between some of the closest linked areas.

I found it very hard to come up with anything concrete from the map. The thing that stands out for me isnt so much the strongest connection but the way Kujawia is like the spider at the centre of the web, suggesting the early importance of this area in the CW story. I tend to think that does have significance. Another I think may have significance is the links between the east Baltic and Sadomierz. The map doesnt extend to include Fatyanovo and Middle Dnieper which is a pity. But I read a recent paper on Fatyanovo and it indicated that there were two directions of CW input into it - one from the Middle Dnieper and, interestingly, one from the north Poland/east Baltic area. But middle Dnieper RC dates are too young to have been an origin of Fatyanovo and on balance the south/east Baltic CW link makes more sense. If L151 is found in Fatyanovo in addition to early Czech CW then it suggests it was present in the Poland/east Baltic area or very nearby.

MitchellSince1893
04-11-2020, 08:50 PM
Beyond P312, the Bay Coast Culture in Lithuania/East Prussia and Kujawia, Poland, are in good locations as it pertains to other L151 subclades. As others have pointed out, there appears to be an affinity to the Baltic Coast/North German Plain for the other L151 subclades. For many of these subclades we are limited to present day distributions, but U106 expert, Iain McDonald mentioned a few years ago that he thought U106 originated somewhere between Prague and the Baltic Coast.

razyn
04-11-2020, 10:33 PM
The map doesn't extend to include Fatyanovo and Middle Dnieper which is a pity. But I read a recent paper on Fatyanovo and it indicated that there were two directions of CW input into it - one from the Middle Dnieper and, interestingly, one from the north Poland/east Baltic area. But middle Dnieper RC dates are too young to have been an origin of Fatyanovo and on balance the south/east Baltic CW link makes more sense. If L151 is found in Fatyanovo in addition to early Czech CW then it suggests it was present in the Poland/east Baltic area or very nearby.
To the east by southeast of Kujawia, and northeast of Lubaczw, that spidery watershed draining eastward (and off the edge of this map) is the Pripyat Fork of Big Dnieper, as we might say in the USA. If you strap on snowshoes in January, you can probably walk down it to Sredny Stog before it melts and you need a boat. But people did have boats.

Here's a map showing more of the riverine linkages between the Baltic and the steppe. https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2573-New-DNA-Papers-General-Discussion-Thread&p=505410&viewfull=1#post505410

Andour
04-11-2020, 11:15 PM
But people did have boats.

I wouldn't be surprised if boats turned out to be a key to the riddle in the end.

A few weeks (months?) ago, on some other thread, I posted something very similar to what's below. It didn't seem to raise anyone's interest at the time. I'll post it again now. I am struck by the high level of Combed Ware in NDL BBs. Signicantly higher then in CW on average. The explanation I got (via PM) was that those figures must be some sort of stand-in for a local population with high levels of WHG, eg something Welzin-like. Trouble is, the fits are much better with Combed Ware than with any other group. Could there be a clue hiding there?

https://i.imgur.com/f6ZaX30.png

MitchellSince1893
04-12-2020, 12:39 AM
...The thing that stands out for me isnt so much the strongest connection but the way Kujawia is like the spider at the centre of the web, suggesting the early importance of this area in the CW story. I tend to think that does have significance. Another I think may have significance is the links between the east Baltic and Sadomierz. The map doesn't extend to include Fatyanovo and Middle Dnieper which is a pity. But I read a recent paper on Fatyanovo and it indicated that there were two directions of CW input into it - one from the Middle Dnieper and, interestingly, one from the north Poland/east Baltic area. But middle Dnieper RC dates are too young to have been an origin of Fatyanovo and on balance the south/east Baltic CW link makes more sense. If L151 is found in Fatyanovo in addition to early Czech CW then it suggests it was present in the Poland/east Baltic area or very nearby.


To the east by southeast of Kujawia, and northeast of Lubaczw, that spidery watershed draining eastward (and off the edge of this map) is the Pripyat Fork of Big Dnieper, as we might say in the USA. If you strap on snowshoes in January, you can probably walk down it to Sredny Stog before it melts and you need a boat. But people did have boats.

Here's a map showing more of the riverine linkages between the Baltic and the steppe. https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2573-New-DNA-Papers-General-Discussion-Thread&p=505410&viewfull=1#post505410

Taking your thoughts into account, you might end up with something like this
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c7/d6/12/c7d61275f1a9c6a0dc2fa845237ca4c8.png