PDA

View Full Version : L51 into Europe West of the Steppe Via Corded Ware



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

jdean
02-04-2021, 11:13 PM
I came up some years ago when I started to brownse freely for the first time on genetic forums just for fun and out of curiosity. I think he was an irish man that posted very often on the Gioiello site IIRC. His name was Dartrage or something like that. He was very strong on the R1b L51 from the west theory.

He was band from here years ago and his opinions are worthless, clouded with prejudice and judgmentalism, he will twist any fact that threatens his view and gloats gleefully about anything he thinks (erroneously) supports it.

dsm
02-04-2021, 11:34 PM
Am putting forward this link to a doc about trade in 1500-1100 BCE as this is an interesting era. 1300 BCE was when the mighty battle at Tollense is said to have happened. Also this is the era that trade in the mediteranian began to collapse.

The trade aspects of Steppe nomad migrations, needs to be thought of as an important driver of movement and subsequent settling down. We already have the proven evidence that steppes nomads / Forest Zone dwellers as L23-L51 and as L23-Z2103/I2, arrived in central western Europe somewhere between 3,200 BCE and before 2,900 BCE.

SUMMARY:
The Bronze Age was the first epoch in which societies became irreversibly linked in their co-dependence on ores
and metallurgical skills that were unevenly distributed in geographical space. Access to these critical resources
was secured not only via long-distance physical trade routes, making use of landscape features such as river
networks, as well as built roads, but also by creating immaterial social networks, consisting of interpersonal
relations and diplomatic alliances, established and maintained through the exchange of extraordinary objects
(gifts). In this article, we reason about Bronze Age communication networks and apply the results of use-wear
analysis to create robust indicators of the rise and fall of political and commercial networks. In conclusion, we
discuss some of the historical forces behind the phenomena and processes observable in the archaeological
record of the Bronze Age in Europe and beyond.

"Connected Histories: the Dynamics of Bronze Age Interaction and Trade 1500–1100 BC"
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0079497X15000171

An interesting page from the above (think of P312 & *from* where & how they expanded - this chart may help in seeing a clearer picture & motivation ) ...
43051

And then there is this excellent Youtube that helps clarify the impact of Scandinavia on trade in the BA & LBA. This is a very helpful video in grasping how advanced Scandinavia was in art and trade at a time we all thought there was little going on there.

"The Nordic Bronze Age"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_OFqGuLc7s&fbclid=IwAR206j5svEzNkoqMGyllYfbTqkI8jpx78bp2bLIBQ oAiAgZ1WwdKUasDRxI

rms2
02-04-2021, 11:55 PM
For Black Sea/Mediterranean route to be a viable option, don’t we need some proof that the sea fearing technology and knowledge existed in the right place at the right time to facilitate such long distance sea travel?

I looked and the earliest evidence I found was

https://www.britannica.com/technology/ship/History-of-ships

A little too late and not the right place/culture.

What evidence is there that such a route was even feasible for Black Sea peoples to make such a trip?

I asked a similar question some posts back. I prefaced it by saying we know about Corded Ware and its big impact on Europe west of the steppe. Then I asked what culture that we know of advanced along the Mediterranean from the steppe at the right time.

None that I know of.

And why just southern France? Why not up the Adriatic, with L51 landings at Split or Venice? While we're pulling unlikely and fanciful stuff out of a hat, we might as well explore all the possibilities.

When P312 finally shows up in Vucedol remains, surely someone will bring L51 in via the eastern Adriatic coast.

rms2
02-05-2021, 12:05 AM
He was band from here years ago and his opinions are worthless, clouded with prejudice and judgmentalism, he will twist any fact that threatens his view and gloats gleefully about anything he thinks (erroneously) supports it.

I was around for the entire several-year-long evolution of that saga, which began with a Y-DNA haplogroup result he didn't like. Phew! It spanned more than one DNA discussion forum, too.

A rollicking good time was had by all.

Isn't he still holding forth with Gioiello over at Molgen?

Maybe those who are really into "civility" and straw men would like to go there. ;)

jdean
02-05-2021, 12:14 AM
I was around for the entire several-year-long evolution of that saga, which began with a Y-DNA haplogroup result he didn't like. Phew! It spanned more than one DNA discussion forum, too.

A rollicking good time was had by all.

Isn't he still holding forth with Gioiello over at Molgen?

Maybe those who are really into "civility" and straw men would like to go there. ;)

No definitely not, the only good thing about that dark corner of Molgen is they only have each other to talk to : )))))

rms2
02-05-2021, 12:15 AM
It is already settled, considering the already published data, and there's more data on the way from the Netherlands and Germany.

No one here is trying to disprove any alternative theories, I certainly am not. We're actually just pointing out that there are no plausible alternative theories.

There will always be missing links if you dig deep enough, but the big picture is already clear. We're just waiting to learn the details.

Excellent, very succinct post.

I could only give you a "Thanks", otherwise, I would have made it an "Amen".

The post of yours I quoted above was the third in a series of your posts for which "Amen" is the best response.

rms2
02-05-2021, 12:17 AM
No definitely not, the only good thing about that dark corner of Molgen is they only have each other to talk to : )))))

They need some new blood, and they're full of fanciful alternatives, with Italy and Ireland vying for the place of Eden in the story of humanity.

rms2
02-05-2021, 12:32 AM
You know, speaking of getting things wrong, a number of years ago, impressed with the writings of Marija Gimbutas as I was and still am, I thought Beaker was probably the product of the mixing of Yamnaya and Vucedol in the Carpathian basin, which was her idea.

I came around a few years ago to the idea that Beaker was derived from Single Grave Corded Ware, but at first I found it hard to believe, since at first every time there were DNA results from Corded Ware, the Y-DNA haplogroup was R1a. It took awhile before R1b-L51 began to pop up in Corded Ware (again, "L51" means it and all its subclades old enough to have been around).

So, why am I bringing this up?

Because I am wondering where Rich Rocca is. He was the first one I recall to advance the idea that Beaker was a Corded Ware development and that eventually L51 would show up in Corded Ware.

He was way out in front in being right.

dsm
02-05-2021, 12:59 AM
You know, speaking of getting things wrong, a number of years ago, impressed with the writings of Marija Gimbutas as I was and still am, I thought Beaker was probably the product of the mixing of Yamnaya and Vucedol in the Carpathian basin, which was her idea.

I came around a few years ago to the idea that Beaker was derived from Single Grave Corded Ware, but at first I found it hard to believe, since at first every time there were DNA results from Corded Ware, the Y-DNA haplogroup was R1a. It took awhile before R1b-L51 began to pop up in Corded Ware (again, "L51" means it and all its subclades old enough to have been around).

So, why am I bringing this up?

Because I am wondering where Rich Rocca is. He was the first one I recall to advance the idea that Beaker was a Corded Ware development and that eventually L51 would show up in Corded Ware.

He was way out in front in being right.

I too was going to mention Richard Rocca has having some great insights as to L51 appearing in SGC and BB. I still hang onto items he posted years back (such as the identification of an outlier U106 burial at Csepel Island) - that burial was what told me there was likely to be serious trade between the Yamnaya decendants in the Hungarian Plains and those peoples (L151 sub-clades) from the North & North West of central Europe.

I know we (you & I) have differing views on if P312 will show up in the Hungarian plains pre 2,900 BCE (I say not) but I agree 100% it is an open question.

MitchellSince1893
02-05-2021, 01:03 AM
For Black Sea/Mediterranean route to be a viable option, don’t we need some proof that the sea fearing technology and knowledge existed in the right place at the right time to facilitate such long distance sea travel?

I looked and the earliest evidence I found was

https://www.britannica.com/technology/ship/History-of-ships

A little too late and not the right place/culture.

What evidence is there that such a route was even feasible for Black Sea peoples to make such a trip?
Pre 3000 BC sites on Cyprus, Crete, and Sardinia indicate it was possible cross open seas for 1000s of years prior to 3000 BC.
So the ability was there to go from Mainland to nearby islands.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardium_pottery#/media/File%3ANeolithic_expansion.svg

But that is not necessarily the same as going from the Black Sea, thru the Bosporus and Dardanelles, across the Aegean, Ionian, Tyrrhenian, and Ligurian Seas to southern France. Is it impossible? No
But it would be a helluva lot easier to walk to Poland.

Silesian
02-05-2021, 01:32 AM
I have read David Anthony writings that Afanasievo (artifacts) are similar to the Repin Culture and so he surmises Afansievo's origin is Repin. Late Repin appears to become an element of early Yamnaya. I would not be surprised if L51>P310/L52 originated in the Repin area. For some reason it headed both east (Afanasievo) and west (parts of CWC) at high speed.

Very likely it's becoming rather obvious that these tight knit clans travelled, communicated,, with each other. No one expected R1b-V1636 to be an elite clan in Khvalynsk, and R1b-V1636 in North Caucasus to be a stratified with Yamnaya R1b-z2109. Then hitting like a ton of bricks, it shows up with R1b+L51 clans in SGC, what more surprises await the R1b clans, in those ancient Volga burial ground's L23, L51.......

MitchellSince1893
02-05-2021, 01:39 AM
If the appeal of the Mediterranean route is that it helps explain the seafaring ability of the later Bell Beaker folk, then why is it hard to believe that a people who originated along the Black Sea coast might not already have this skill when they take a N of Carpathian route.


After all, Caesar used ship building technology learned in far away Venice to construct a fleet along the English Channel.

Caesar gathered a larger force than on his previous expedition with five legions as opposed to two, plus two thousand cavalry, carried in ships which he designed, with experience of Venetic shipbuilding technology so as to be more suitable for a beach landing than those used in 55 BC, being broader and lower for easier beaching

There are a lot of settlements along the Black Sea, and Sea of Azov.
https://indo-european.info/indo-europeans-uralians/article267_files/image041.png

TigerMW
02-05-2021, 02:30 AM
Thanks to all for your feedback, particularly evidence based items, as far as an L51 via the Mediterranean theory.

Probably the most valuable item I picked up was RMS2's indication from Olalde of no Iberian ancestry outside of Iberia for Bell Beakers. I really didn't think he(they) had written something as absolute, but here it is,

These results support largely different origins for Beaker Complex-associated individuals, with no discernible Iberia-related ancestry outside Iberia.I'm saving this quote.

That only leaves a SE France doorway available for a Med pathway and that is like putting a camel through the eye of a needle, particularly given Mitchell's contention that seafaring couldn't have been great at 3000 BC and we haven't seen evidence of coast hopping colonies.

I would like to see more auDNA subgrouping and analysis of different parts of France, which may be very important later in the Bronze Age and in the Iron Age.

As has been well noted, it's probably moot point anyway. That's especially good news as I've been already out on the limb for some time.

there's more data on the way from the Netherlands and Germany

... but in the meantime, the affirmative CWC auDNA evidence per David is quite a contrast to the negative Iberian BBC evidence per Olalde.

I would still like to understand the sampling used in auDNA analysis and how time and geographic variances are mitigated or resolved. For my money, the Y phylogeny is much simpler and quite discrete. It just much more hit and miss based on finds and the precept of a MRCA to MRCA thin-line. There is not much room for gradients and clines.

The MRCA to MRCA lineage precept is still something to keep in mind. I think we are at the point where it is all about P310/L52 on down as far as the genesis of East Bell Beakers goes. There could be multiple waves of L51 into Central/West Europe, but only one led to the East Bell Beakers. For instance, DSM noted the P310 in SE Poland could easily be second wave from the Steppes that would have nothing to do with East Bell Beakers.

TigerMW
02-05-2021, 03:05 AM
delete - I was going off topic

dsm
02-05-2021, 03:32 AM
Thanks to all for your feedback, particularly evidence based items, as far as an L51 via the Mediterranean theory.

Probably the most valuable item I picked up was RMS2's indication from Olalde of no Iberian ancestry outside of Iberia for Bell Beakers. I really didn't think he(they) had written something as absolute, but here it is,
I'm saving this quote.

That only leaves a SE France doorway available for a Med pathway and that is like putting a camel through the eye of a needle, particularly given Mitchell's contention that seafaring couldn't have been great at 3000 BC and we haven't seen evidence of coast hopping colonies.

I would like to see more auDNA subgrouping and analysis of different parts of France, which may be very important later in the Bronze Age and in the Iron Age.

As has been well noted, it's probably moot point anyway. That's especially good news as I've been already out on the limb for some time.


... but in the meantime, the affirmative CWC auDNA evidence per David is quite a contrast to the negative Iberian BBC evidence per Olalde.

I would still like to understand the sampling used in auDNA analysis and how time and geographic variances are mitigated or resolved. For my money, the Y phylogeny is much simpler and quite discrete. It just much more hit and miss based on finds and the precept of a MRCA to MRCA thin-line. There is not much room for gradients and clines.

The MRCA to MRCA lineage precept is still something to keep in mind. I think we are at the point where it is all about P310/L52 on down as far as the genesis of East Bell Beakers goes. There could be multiple waves of L51 into Central/West Europe, but only one led to the East Bell Beakers. For instance, DSM noted the P310 in SE Poland could easily be second wave from the Steppes that would have nothing to do with East Bell Beakers.

Actually my point(s) were about R1b-L23-L51 reaching Poland / Baltic as a 1st wave ahead of both R1a Cordedware and before R1b-L23-Z2103/I2 reached the Hungarian plains. Perhaps between 3,200-3,000 BCE. And, thus 100-200 years before the Yamnaya arrived in the Hungarian plains.

What prompts this is the lack of R1b-L23-L51 among the ‘trail’ of ancient burials of R1b-L23-Z2103 + allies I2, as currently found on the route between Samara and Black sea and Hungarian plains. That trail only shows Z2103+I2. We can pretend to ignore this but it as it is.

Generalissimo
02-05-2021, 04:24 AM
Actually my point(s) were about R1b-L23-L51 reaching Poland / Baltic as a 1st wave ahead of both R1a Cordedware and before R1b-L23-Z2103/I2 reached the Hungarian plains. Perhaps between 3,200-3,000 BCE. And, thus 100-200 years before the Yamnaya arrived in the Hungarian plains.

What prompts this is the lack of R1b-L23-L51 among the ‘trail’ of ancient burials of R1b-L23-Z2103 + allies I2, as currently found on the route between Samara and Black sea and Hungarian plains. That trail only shows Z2103+I2. We can pretend to ignore this but it as it is.

There's no sign of L51 in the early CWC samples from near the Baltic. They're firmly M417.

dsm
02-05-2021, 04:29 AM
There's no sign of L51 in the early CWC samples from near the Baltic. They're firmly M417.

Thanks - a good point that may tell us, in time, that R1a made it to the Baltic ahead of R1b-L51.

dsm
02-05-2021, 07:19 AM
Here is an exercise in joining the dots (the ones some may see at the moment, plus some dots that are 'speculation') and where they might lead.

Dot 01 - Where is the oldest known ancient burial of R1b-L23 ?
Dot 02 - Is the above location a reasonable starting point for where L23 emerged ? - if not why not ? - else for today we should treat this location as the L23 starting point until some new substantive data contradicts this current oldest location
Dot 03 - If R1b-L23 is in area X, and we also find that *one* of its next child SNPs R1b-L23-Z2103 has its oldest known burial in the same area, then does this reinforce the origin point for R1b-L23 ?
Dot 04 - If R1b-L23-Z2103 has a brother clade (R1b-L23-L51) and we don't have a reliable oldest ancient burial for one, is it fair to assume L51 emerged close by Z2103 but we haven't located the exact spot yet !
Dot 05 - If at a location 2,300 kms away from Russian Samara (which is also close to what is called the Volga-Ural region), and this new location that is 2,300 kms away is in the Altai mountains of Mongolia (where as of today, the current oldest R1b-L23-L51-L52) is found, is it reasonable to assume that person migrated there from *nearby* the location where R1b-L23 emerged (Volga-Ural) especially if there are many more Z2103 burials at this location ? (NOTE: the peer reviewed paper published in 2020 on Afanasievo says 'they migrated to the Altai from Volga-Ural').
Dot 06 - Is it reasonable to assume that R1b-L23-L51-L52 did not emerge in Mongolia and migrate back to the Forest/Steppe zone such that all future L51 actually came from Afanasievo in Mongolia ? (this Question tests simple common sense)
Dot 07 - Is it reasonable to accept that this line of R1b-L23-L51-L52 was a 'dead-end' (one would hope this point is self evident)
Dot 08 - If at a future date (from today) a paper is published that shows a near identical R1b-L23-L51-L52 find from a similar date, and with matching autoDNA to the reported Afanasievo L52 but is 2,100 kms south from Samara being found in eastern Bulgaria. Do we think of it as for dots 05 & 06 & even 07 above ? (i.e. a dead-end or the source for SGC & B/B.)
Dot 09 - Is it possible that two matching finds close to 4,500 kms apart, are evidence of a significant dispersal at a *tight* point in time that caused these peoples to move away far and fast ? - or were they just sub-tribes who just wandered off in different directions to 'seek their fortune' ?
Dot 10 - If we also find R1b-L23-L51-L52 in Poland (or Switzerland) but as of today dated 100-300 years younger than the Afanasievo find (and possibly the east Bulgarian yet-to-be-published find) , does this mean the Poland/Switzerland finds *must be from one of these two* or is it evidence there may be a 3rd direction that the L51 parent group(s) headed off in from the original locations of Samara (and possibly Kazan) ?
Dot 11 - If R1b-L23-L51 turns up west of the area between the Volga-Kama Rivers junction (Samara is below this junction, Kazan is above) would this tip our view of who went where on its head ? (yes it would if proven - but unless a paper appears soon saying so, this 'dot' may remain moot and not to be connected to). PS: I admit to being provocative on this dot!.
Dot 12 - and more (add them as you wish)

Silesian
02-05-2021, 01:03 PM
Here is an exercise in joining the dots (the ones some may see at the moment, plus some dots that are 'speculation') and where they might lead.

Dot 01 - Where is the oldest known ancient burial of R1b-L23 ?
Dot 02 - Is the above location a reasonable starting point for where L23 emerged ? - if not why not ? - else for today we should treat this location as the L23 starting point until some new substantive data contradicts this current oldest location
Dot 03 - If R1b-L23 is in area X, and we also find that *one* of its next child SNPs R1b-L23-Z2103 has its oldest known burial in the same area, then does this reinforce the origin point for R1b-L23 ?
Dot 04 - If R1b-L23-Z2103 has a brother clade (R1b-L23-L51) and we don't have a reliable oldest ancient burial for one, is it fair to assume L51 emerged close by Z2103 but we haven't located the exact spot yet !
Dot 05 - If at a location 2,300 kms away from Russian Samara (which is also close to what is called the Volga-Ural region), and this new location that is 2,300 kms away is in the Altai mountains of Mongolia (where as of today, the current oldest R1b-L23-L51-L52) is found, is it reasonable to assume that person migrated there from *nearby* the location where R1b-L23 emerged (Volga-Ural) especially if there are many more Z2103 burials at this location ? (NOTE: the peer reviewed paper published in 2020 on Afanasievo says 'they migrated to the Altai from Volga-Ural').
Dot 06 - Is it reasonable to assume that R1b-L23-L51-L52 did not emerge in Mongolia and migrate back to the Forest/Steppe zone such that all future L51 actually came from Afanasievo in Mongolia ? (this Question tests simple common sense)
Dot 07 - Is it reasonable to accept that this line of R1b-L23-L51-L52 was a 'dead-end' (one would hope this point is self evident)
Dot 08 - If at a future date (from today) a paper is published that shows a near identical R1b-L23-L51-L52 find from a similar date, and with matching autoDNA to the reported Afanasievo L52 but is 2,100 kms south from Samara being found in eastern Bulgaria. Do we think of it as for dots 05 & 06 & even 07 above ? (i.e. a dead-end or the source for SGC & B/B.)
Dot 09 - Is it possible that two matching finds close to 4,500 kms apart, are evidence of a significant dispersal at a *tight* point in time that caused these peoples to move away far and fast ? - or were they just sub-tribes who just wandered off in different directions to 'seek their fortune' ?
Dot 10 - If we also find R1b-L23-L51-L52 in Poland (or Switzerland) but as of today dated 100-300 years younger than the Afanasievo find (and possibly the east Bulgarian yet-to-be-published find) , does this mean the Poland/Switzerland finds *must be from one of these two* or is it evidence there may be a 3rd direction that the L51 parent group(s) headed off in from the original locations of Samara (and possibly Kazan) ?
Dot 11 - If R1b-L23-L51 turns up west of the area between the Volga-Kama Rivers junction (Samara is below this junction, Kazan is above) would this tip our view of who went where on its head ? (yes it would if proven - but unless a paper appears soon saying so, this 'dot' may remain moot and not to be connected to). PS: I admit to being provocative on this dot!.
Dot 12 - and more (add them as you wish)
L51+ and V1636+Z2103+Mikhaylovka>>Lower Kvityana culture? Lower Mikhailovka culture had stone-lined cists, cromlechs, and stelae, pedestalled bowls, like so much of Bell Beaker.
Afanasievo > Repin>Dereivka had egg shaped style pottery.Dereivka sample I5884 R1b-z2103(2890-2696 calBCE)must be connected with R1b-L51 in this area>> M Mikhaylovka-Repin L23+/L51+ source of both Afanasievo and Bell Beakers. R1b-Z2109 was found in Vucedol, could there be L51 samples not yet released? Look at the BB Begleitkeramik. It's from the Carpathian Basin, not Corded Ware. It came via Vucedol offshoots, Zok-Mako and Somogyvar. Could a branch of L51 come up the Danube, and Yamnaya L51=L51 Bell Beaker-- It is also clear that if they lived in CW territory they must have been an out-group or an atypical specialist group.

Mikhaylovka II (3400-3000 BCE)[2] had connections to the east, as reflected by its Repin-style pottery.[2] Mikhaylovka II is divided into a lower (3400-3300 BCE) and an upper level (3300-3000 BCE).[2] Mikhaylovka II shows a shift from farming to cattle herding, typical for the Yamna horizon.[3]

rms2
02-05-2021, 01:12 PM
. . . I still hang onto items he posted years back (such as the identification of an outlier U106 burial at Csepel Island) . . .

Not to nit-pick, but that turned out to be a mistake. There was no U106+ Beaker individual at Csepel Island. Thus far the oldest U106 man is still RISE98 from Lille Beddinge in Sweden (2275-2032 BC).

We don't have any U106 in Beaker yet, but that's probably because we don't have Beaker DNA from Beaker's northern Province.

43058

Wing Genealogist
02-05-2021, 03:02 PM
I have created a new Google Docs spreadsheet documenting the R1b-L23-L151 (but likely ancestral to all L151 subclades) remains published to date. Please see the following thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?22907-New-Google-Docs-Spreadsheet-R1b-L23-to-L151-Ancient-DNA) for more details and discussion.

TigerMW
02-05-2021, 03:09 PM
Thus far the oldest U106 man is still RISE98 from Lille Beddinge in Sweden (2275-2032 BC).
We don't have any U106 in Beaker yet, but that's probably because we don't have Beaker DNA from Beaker's northern Province.
On the other side of the R1b-L151/L11 house, I speculate that P312 actually originated in CWC. It's old enough and my logic is that this P312 clan of CWC had to have enough people to almost* completely take over something (not sure what) and create the new hybrid culture that Heyd calls East Bell Beakers.

By the way, I still think there needs to be a renaming of this new hybrid culture to Corded Beakers, Corded Bell Beakers, AOC Beakers, AO Corded Ware, Bell Corded Ware or something to differentiate it from Iberian Bell Beakers. For heaven's sake, they weren't the same people and very likely spoke completely different types of languages, there were burial differences, etc. I see long time Atlantic focused researchers are repositioning the Iberian Bell Beakers as the Proto-Bell Beaker package with emphasis on "phenomenon". Everyone had archery, though. I get if this was a drinking thing and the Corded Ware people decided they liked beer (or whatever it was) too, so yes, it is a "phenomenon", but so is Budweiser. Calling a party a ritual doesn't mean much of West Europe were the same culture.

*Edit: inserted "almost" because it is not a good to use absolutes and nothing is pure except at outset

Silesian
02-05-2021, 04:10 PM
L51+ and V1636+Z2103+Mikhaylovka>>Lower Kvityana culture? Lower Mikhailovka culture had stone-lined cists, cromlechs, and stelae, pedestalled bowls, like so much of Bell Beaker.
Afanasievo > Repin>Dereivka had egg shaped style pottery.Dereivka sample I5884 R1b-z2103(2890-2696 calBCE)must be connected with R1b-L51 in this area>> M Mikhaylovka-Repin L23+/L51+ source of both Afanasievo and Bell Beakers. R1b-Z2109 was found in Vucedol, could there be L51 samples not yet released? Look at the BB Begleitkeramik. It's from the Carpathian Basin, not Corded Ware. It came via Vucedol offshoots, Zok-Mako and Somogyvar. Could a branch of L51 come up the Danube, and Yamnaya L51=L51 Bell Beaker-- It is also clear that if they lived in CW territory they must have been an out-group or an atypical specialist group.

Migration L51 -Vucedol Yersinia Pestis phylogeny distribution=

The younger Late Neolithic Y. pestis genomes from southern Germany are derived from the Baltic strains, and one of these is found in an individual associated with the Bell Beaker complex. Previous analyses have shown that Bell Beaker individuals from Germany also carry “steppe ancestry”


Our earliest indication of plague in Europe is found in Croatia and the Baltic, coinciding with the arrival of “steppe ancestry” [24, 25] in human populations. The Baltic Late Neolithic Y. pestis genomes (Gyvakarai1 and KunilaII) were reconstructed from individuals associated with the Corded Ware complex. Along with the Croatian Y. pestis genome (Vučedol complex), these are derived from a common ancestor shared with the Yamnaya-derived RK1001 and Afanasievo-derived RISE509.

“steppe ancestry”=Kurgan burials, versus "agri" non kurgan burials, aka--fairly deep‐cut flat graves, --forest steppe, non transfer grains.
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/comments/S0960-9822(17)31328-3

RK 1001 Rasshevatskiy Russia.

Silesian
02-05-2021, 04:50 PM
On the other side of the R1b-L151/L11 house, I speculate that P312 actually originated CWC. It's old enough and my logic is that this P312 clan of CWC had to have enough people to completely take over something (not sure what) and create the new hybrid culture that Heyd calls East Bell Beakers.............

Exciting, speculating about the early Baltic Corded Ware.
I know it's a rather insignificant point, but Eastern Bell Beakers are also, R1b-Z2103, Z2109 not many, but as far as I know they are still considered as Eastern Bell Beaker .
Same as Corded Ware SGC; not only one monolithic block made up of, R1a and L51+; rather proven Corded Ware, Single Grave Culture = R1b-V1636+.

rms2
02-05-2021, 05:03 PM
I'm pretty sure U106 originated in Corded Ware, as well, which is why the oldest known U106 man thus far was found in a Battle Axe culture cemetery in Sweden.

sheepslayer
02-05-2021, 05:11 PM
I'm pretty sure U106 originated in Corded Ware, as well, which is why the oldest known U106 man thus far was found in a Battle Axe culture cemetery in Sweden.

Call me Captain Obvious but I'm also willing to wager that battle axe culture was responsible for a large part of the initial spread of U106+ men, especially concerning the guys who would go on to form Z18

Silesian
02-05-2021, 07:10 PM
Call me Captain Obvious but I'm also willing to wager that battle axe culture was responsible for a large part of the initial spread of U106+ men, especially concerning the guys who would go on to form Z18

Would you care to predict the samples adjacent, the agro-semi pastoalist culture, buried in deep cut flat graves containing R-BY226207+but no L51/L52------could Volosovo culture perhaps be connected to Corded Ware barrows in SGC --L51?

dsm
02-05-2021, 08:02 PM
Not to nit-pick, but that turned out to be a mistake. There was no U106+ Beaker individual at Csepel Island. Thus far the oldest U106 man is still RISE98 from Lille Beddinge in Sweden (2275-2032 BC).

We don't have any U106 in Beaker yet, but that's probably because we don't have Beaker DNA from Beaker's northern Province.

43058

Yes you are right - that burial sits above U106 - thanks

dsm
02-05-2021, 08:07 PM
I have created a new Google Docs spreadsheet documenting the R1b-L23-L151 (but likely ancestral to all L151 subclades) remains published to date. Please see the following thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?22907-New-Google-Docs-Spreadsheet-R1b-L23-to-L151-Ancient-DNA) for more details and discussion.

A really excellent chart and one all should work through.

Until variant data is presented - these dates and locations are 'currently' important as to who might have been where.

sheepslayer
02-05-2021, 08:23 PM
Would you care to predict the samples adjacent, the agro-semi pastoalist culture, buried in deep cut flat graves containing R-BY226207+but no L51/L52------could Volosovo culture perhaps be connected to Corded Ware barrows in SGC --L51?

I'm afraid I don't know much about R1a or Z93. I only made claims about U106 because I've done a large amount of research on it, drawing graphs of its subclades

Silesian
02-05-2021, 08:30 PM
I'm afraid I don't know much about R1a or Z93. I only made claims about U106 because I've done a large amount of research on it, drawing graphs of its subclades

I take a personal interest in my maternal line. I'm trying to see the connection between early Corded Ware R-M417 and Corded Ware U106 besides a stone axe, like burial techniques. Common burial grounds etc....

rms2
02-05-2021, 08:55 PM
. . .

By the way, I still think there needs to be a renaming of this new hybrid culture to Corded Beakers, Corded Bell Beakers, AOC Beakers, AO Corded Ware, Bell Corded Ware or something to differentiate it from Iberian Bell Beakers. For heaven's sake, they weren't the same people and very likely spoke completely different types of languages, there were burial differences, etc. . . .

I agree with that completely. The problem is the early dominance of Spanish researchers Pedro Bosch Gimpera and Alberto del Castillo Yurrita in Beakerology. They came up with the Spanish Model of Beaker origins and did not really differentiate between early Iberian Bell Beaker and later Iberian Beaker (around and after 2500 BC), when Kurgan Bell Beaker began to intrude in Iberia.

The Dutch were closest to right, IMHO.

Too bad Bosch Gimpera and del Castillo Yurrita got on it first.

MitchellSince1893
02-05-2021, 09:58 PM
JMO but I would personally steer away from pottery types to classify the differences. I would stick with Steppe, Kurgan, Repin, Yamnaya, or whatever is best to describe these people...once we know without a doubt.

There’s a really good chance that the 1st P312 and U106 predate SGC and Corded Ware.

rms2
02-05-2021, 10:09 PM
JMO but I would personally steer away from pottery types to classify the differences. I would stick with Steppe, Kurgan, Repin, Yamnaya, or whatever is best to describe these people...once we know without a doubt.

There’s a really good chance that the 1st P312 and U106 predate SGC and Corded Ware.

I agree with that. Unfortunately, archaeologists named the major cultures we have to address long ago.

Martin Furholt's SGBR (Single Grave Burial Ritual) at least represents an attempt to get beyond pottery and get to the common elements of steppe-derived cultures.

This is from page 3 of his "Re-integrating Archaeology: A Contribution to aDNA Studies and the Migration Discourse on the 3rd Millennium BC in Europe":



Instead of seeing the 3rd millennium BC in Europe through the lens of monothetic, distinct archaeological cultures, each with their own specific set of burial ritual, the polythetic perspective reveals a wider complex of new elements of burial ritual transcending the borders of these entities. This is a complex of burials that highlights individual interments, gender differentiation, male warriors, and mostly strict rules of orientation of the dead (Fig. 1), as opposed to the mainly collective burials of the preceding periods and neighbouring regions.

Not everybody likes it, but it's worth considering.

Of course, Yamnaya lacked gender differentiation in the orientation of the corpse, so that's a weakness. SGBR is good for Corded Ware and Beaker, though.

alan
02-05-2021, 11:51 PM
Alan, do you think it is incredibly unlikely for the R1b-L51>P310>L151>P312 lineage to come into the East/NW Bell Beakers, but NOT through Corded Ware? Perhaps directly from Yamnaya or descendants coming up the Danube River valley?

I think its very unlikely. The genetics look far more like a group who went west only after passing from the steppes by a route north of the Carpathians. I think they simply had to have moved west via CW of some sort. The only possibilities I can see are a route along the north European Plain or alternatively a route following the northern slopes of the Carpathians then northern slopes of Alps. The latter upland fringes route would in theory make sense if they were looking for a more north-western metal source. However the Elbe and Rhine do link both those areas.

alan
02-06-2021, 12:05 AM
Before I say what I have to say in this post, let me first state that I had and have the utmost respect for Jean Manco, God rest her soul. She was a brilliant lady and a real blessing to genetic genealogy.

That said, her "Stelae People" idea was wrong. I think I understand how and why she came up with it. She was too impressed with the idea that Bell Beaker was a western, out-of-Iberia phenomenon. At the same time, however, she recognized the steppe pastoralist influences in Beaker. She also believed that R1b-M269 was ultimately of Indo-European, steppe origin.

Her way of reconciling the obvious contradictions in all that was by bringing Yamnaya or something very like Yamnaya round to early Iberia via the Mediterranean. Then Beaker, which she expected would be an R1b-M269-led mix of Yamnaya and Neolithic Iberians, advanced eastwards, where it met up in central Europe and blended with more Yamnaya migrants who had come up via the Danube valley.

Problem solved.

Her evidence was a supposed trail of stelae that led from the Pontic-Caspian steppe all the way across to western Europe, marking the trail of the "Stelae People".

Neat, and I looked into it, but to me the trail broke down because once one gets not too awfully far west, the stelae start to get weird and cease to look anything like the stelae on the steppe.

Take a look for yourself some time. As I recall, none of the "stelae" in central and western Europe is connected to a steppe-style, tumulus burial. It's just not convincing, and, besides that, Olalde et al put paid to it about four years ago.

Oh, and Jean strenuously objected to any sort of relationship between Corded Ware and Beaker, despite the numerous obvious similarities. The early wealth of R1a in CW reinforced this notion in her, and she passed away before R1b-L51 started to show up in CW in any numbers.

Got to be honest. I dreaded bringing up my preference of CW because Jean really really opposed it with a passion LOL. The crux of her mistake was that she took the radiocarbon evidence for early beaker dates in Iberia as gospel and really did fall into the pots are people trap.

Even if beaker pot was some kind of Iberian spin on a pot idea from central Europe (which Jean actually did think), there was no reason to see a migration in it. The model of the beaker could literally have come down a chain of CW women passing along the Grand Pressigny route from the Rhine to SW France and a very few women from SW France could have taken it into Iberia with no exchange of genes above noise level. I think that is what happened and why beaker in Iberia seems to predate steppe genes or P312. In that phase where beaker was in Iberia but no steppe genes c. 2750BC-2450BC, beaker pot really does just look like a trendy pot type in totally native Iberian contexts and in a society that had no hints of being of IE type or derived from central Europe.

alan
02-06-2021, 12:38 AM
I am not sure about U106 in battle axe originally. My own feeling is the one U106 in later Swedish battle axe suggested that there as a U106 area nearby. The location of that U106 burial is on a route between Denmark and Sweden. So, I have always tended to think it arrived from Denmark single grave. The east of Denmark facing Sweden has an oddball version of single grave too which might explain the strange grave

rms2
02-06-2021, 02:18 AM
I am not sure about U106 in battle axe originally. My own feeling is the one U106 in later Swedish battle axe suggested that there as a U106 area nearby. The location of that U106 burial is on a route between Denmark and Sweden. So, I have always tended to think it arrived from Denmark single grave. The east of Denmark facing Sweden has an oddball version of single grave too which might explain the strange grave

I know that Battle Axe was an offshoot of Corded Ware, but I am not sure what connection there was to Single Grave Corded Ware, if any.

rms2
02-06-2021, 02:31 AM
To me, Corded Ware and Beaker were strikingly similar:


Gender dimorphic, crouched-on-side burial (men buried lying on one side, women in the same locality buried lying on the opposite side)
Single graves in pits (yama)
Round burial mounds (kurgans)
Grave pits are often stone or wood-lined cists
Cromlechs (stone circles surrounding kurgans)
Sometimes wooden palisades surrounded the kurgan
Strikingly similar cord-decorated beakers deposited in graves
Weapons, including archery equipment and shafthole axes, deposited in graves
Horse and other animal bones deposited in graves


Beaker placed more emphasis on archery, but Corded Ware burials often included archery gear.

It is hard to look at this illustration and not think Beaker was merely a slightly later variety of Corded Ware. They must have shared pretty much identical religious ideas connected with death and the afterlife.

43084

Look at this Budzhak Yamnaya burial and note how similar it is to Corded Ware and Beaker.

43085

Generalissimo
02-06-2021, 04:36 AM
Mr. Quiles

There's no need to show this individual any respect. He doesn't deserve it.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/08/indo-european-crackpottery.html

Dewsloth
02-06-2021, 06:54 AM
I am not sure about U106 in battle axe originally. My own feeling is the one U106 in later Swedish battle axe suggested that there as a U106 area nearby. The location of that U106 burial is on a route between Denmark and Sweden. So, I have always tended to think it arrived from Denmark single grave. The east of Denmark facing Sweden has an oddball version of single grave too which might explain the strange grave

I think they (U106 and some P312) were long-time neighbors of Battle Axe concentrated more over on Jutland/South Baltic and the rest of what becomes Beaker's Northern Province as in RMS' map, below:


There was no U106+ Beaker individual at Csepel Island. Thus far the oldest U106 man is still RISE98 from Lille Beddinge in Sweden (2275-2032 BC).

We don't have any U106 in Beaker yet, but that's probably because we don't have Beaker DNA from Beaker's northern Province.

43058

Finn
02-06-2021, 07:22 AM
I think they (U106 and some P312) were long-time neighbors of Battle Axe concentrated more over on Jutland/South Baltic and the rest of what becomes Beaker's Northern Province as in RMS' map, below:

With regard to R1b U106 it is still an educated guess.

I would set my cards on a spread in which the Mittelelbe-Saale CW people caused 'the spreading event' towards NW Europe.

Why? Because this area was the epicenter of the Corded Ware that spread to NW Europe, more specific North Dutch, NW Germany, Jutland.

43087

This was into Bell Beaker times the network! The first R1b U106 in NW Europe was found in Lille Beddinge, the second one near Prague, Jimonice, the third in West-Friesland. Could all fit in this frame work.

And for the relationship North Dutch, Jutland, Lille Beddinge/ Sweden Corded Ware see:
https://studenttheses.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/52637

So this could be the framework of the R1b P312 and R1b U106 spread.
Of course: tentative. No prove yet. But IMO a good educated guess.

Silesian
02-06-2021, 01:08 PM
Budzhak Yamnaya burial and note how similar it is to Corded Ware and Beaker.

I wonder if it is at all necessary to use Corded Ware as a vector to link Afanasievo (L51 and to be found Yamnaya L51) with L51 Bell Beakers/

Budzhak Yamnaya>>>>> Bell Beaker?
Budzhak Yamnaya R1b-Z2103/L51>>Hungarian Eastern Bell Beaker R1b-Z2103/L51?
Or Budzhak Yamnaya L51+>mixed Corded Ware territory R1a>Hungarian Bell Beaker Beaker L51 from Single Grave Culture R1a-M417/L51/V1636?

!) Cord decorated vessel
2)precious metal spiral hair rings, like gold/silver...
3)Burial chambers are then covered with wooden beams, planks, or logs.
4)New weapon designs in copper: the single-edged shaft–hole axe, and the tanged metal dagger.

Re-establishment of metallurgy of gold and copper, following a long decline after 3500 BC, but with a different technology of smelting, working and casting in two-piece stone moulds, or ‘Caucasian metallurgy’ (Sherratt 2004).

https://indo-european.info/indo-europeans-uralians/VI_1_Early_Yamna_culture-.htm

Samborzec looks like an interesting place to compare.

ShpataEMadhe
02-06-2021, 01:32 PM
What evidence do we have to group z2103 with i2 people? Modern genetics suggest they had nothing in common

ShpataEMadhe
02-06-2021, 01:46 PM
An open question re L51-L52 path from Volga-Ural to Black Sea then somehow to central western Europe, is the yet to be explained claim of an ancient burial of R1b-L23-L51-L52 Claimed to exist in Eastern Bulgaria (but not yet published). It might be similar to the L52 Afanasievo burial. If so then it muddies the waters somewhat but would support the idea of L51 in the Balkans at an early date.

Also the above posted references (Silesian's post) to Z2109 AFAIAC are sub-clades of Z2103. I tend to stick to Z2103 to try to avoid the obvious confusion as to how Z2109 relates to Z2103. So a Z2109 burial can be called a Z2103 burial and is thus easier to connect to. If I write Z2103* then it means Z2103 and no sub-clades. Z2103 is essentially Z2103+ (which really means Z2103 plus any sub-clades) but writing Z2103 is simpler and clearer. As is writing L23-L51 (to mean all SNPs between L51 and L151 etc: ) - L51* can remain as the meaning of L51 and no sub-clades.

Which is the earliest L51 found in Balkans? L51 is very rare in Balkans

rms2
02-06-2021, 03:06 PM
. . .

I wonder if it is at all necessary to use Corded Ware as a vector to link Afanasievo (L51 and to be found Yamnaya L51) with L51 Bell Beakers/

Budzhak Yamnaya>>>>> Bell Beaker? . . .


If you mean Beaker may have been derived directly from Budzhak, there is no evidence of that. That's like deriving a grandson directly from his grandfather, without the mediation of the kid's father.

And Corded Ware is Beaker's daddy.

Svetlana Ivanova, in her paper, "Connections Between the Budzhak Culture and Central European Groups of the Corded Ware Culture", says that the Budzhak variety of Yamnaya came north from the Black Sea coast via the Dniester and Prut river valleys. She thinks they then turned west around the northern slopes of the Carpathians and into SE Poland via Małopolska.

This is from page 113 of Ivanova's paper that I mentioned above:



Probably, the Budzhak population migrated westwards to central Europe across Malopolska and northern slopes of the Carpathians. The evidence of such connections could be found in the presence of Yamnaya graves in the central European area (Fig. 15), as well as in the similarity of individual shapes of pottery and ornamental motifs (Fig. 11, 12, 18-20).

That's where, according to Ivanova, Budzhak encountered Corded Ware.

I think it's possible that's where Budzhak may not have merely encountered Corded Ware but may have been in on the actual formation of Corded Ware in what Linderholm called the "CWC-X Horizon" (3000-2900 BC).

This is from pages 2-3 of the Supplementary Information of the 2020 Linderholm et al paper, "Corded Ware cultural complexity uncovered using genomic and isotopic analysis from south-eastern Poland":




At the same time, the possibility that steppe communities dispersed into Małopolska regions was indicated - starting from the turn of the fourth and third millennium BCE. This phenomenon, called the "CWC-X horizon" [10, 13, 14], would precede the rather static formalisation of the CWC barrow ritual, i.e. the A horizon. Until recently, this was only a theoretical idea. Recently, this has been confirmed with the discovery of graves with skeletons coloured with ochre in burials at site 2 in Hubinek, dated to 3000-2900 BCE [15]: supplement; see also [16]. The barrow burials of the older phase of the CWC - both from Małopolska and from other regions of Europe - have not been the subject of archaeogenetic research so far.


As an afterthought, I'm going to throw in this map I made that I've posted before (sorry). I think it represents what probably happened.

43094

razyn
02-06-2021, 03:36 PM
This is from pages 2-3 of the Supplementary Information of the 2020 Linderholm et al paper, "Corded Ware cultural complexity uncovered using genomic and isotopic analysis from south-eastern Poland":


At the same time, the possibility that steppe communities dispersed into Małopolska regions was indicated - starting from the turn of the fourth and third millennium BCE. This phenomenon, called the "CWC-X horizon" [10, 13, 14], would precede the rather static formalisation of the CWC barrow ritual, i.e. the A horizon.


This reminds me of the slightly awkward choreography involved after a nice alphabetized YDNA haplotree had been constructed, starting (as one does) with the letter A. And then a member of the Perry family tested and was a good bit more "basal" than any of the A haplogroup they had, so far. Bonnie Schrack noticed that. Thomas Krahn was quoted in a magazine interview, "You don't want to tell a customer that his closest match in our database is a highland gorilla." After some new, backward dance steps -- and with additional testing in present-day Cameroon -- the YDNA haplotree includes A0 and A00.

Looks a bit as if the CWC-X horizon is the A00 of Corded Ware.

rms2
02-06-2021, 03:58 PM
This reminds me of the slightly awkward choreography involved after a nice alphabetized YDNA haplotree had been constructed, starting (as one does) with the letter A. And then a member of the Perry family tested and was a good bit more "basal" than any of the A haplogroup they had, so far. Bonnie Schrack noticed that. Thomas Krahn was quoted in a magazine interview, "You don't want to tell a customer that his closest match in our database is a highland gorilla." After some new, backward dance steps -- and with additional testing in present-day Cameroon -- the YDNA haplotree includes A0 and A00.

Looks a bit as if the CWC-X horizon is the A00 of Corded Ware.

Excellent analogy.

If one reads Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans (1989) and even Anthony's The Horse The Wheel And Language (2007), he will see that when they were published people didn't really have much of a clue about the origins of Corded Ware, whether or not it was even Indo-European or had any connection to the steppe at all. Gimbutas and a few others believed it was Indo-European and of steppe origin, but many other archaeologists disputed that, claiming Corded Ware was just an in situ further development of local TRB groups.

Ancient DNA quashed all that "local natives" stuff and showed that Corded Ware is of steppe origin and probably derived from Yamnaya.

I think we're getting close to really finding out at long last how Corded Ware was born.

Silesian
02-06-2021, 04:36 PM
If you mean Beaker may have been derived directly from Budzhak, there is no evidence of that. That's like deriving a grandson directly from his grandfather, without the mediation of the kid's father.

And Corded Ware is Beaker's daddy.

Svetlana Ivanova, in her paper, "Connections Between the Budzhak Culture and Central European Groups of the Corded Ware Culture", says that the Budzhak variety of Yamnaya came north from the Black Sea coast via the Dniester and Prut river valleys. She thinks they then turned west around the northern slopes of the Carpathians and into SE Poland via Małopolska.

This is from page 113 of Ivanova's paper that I mentioned above:



That's where, according to Ivanova, Budzhak encountered Corded Ware.

I think it's possible that's where Budzhak may not have merely encountered Corded Ware but may have been in on the actual formation of Corded Ware in what Linderholm called the "CWC-X Horizon" (3000-2900 BC).

This is from pages 2-3 of the Supplementary Information of the 2020 Linderholm et al paper, "Corded Ware cultural complexity uncovered using genomic and isotopic analysis from south-eastern Poland":




As an afterthought, I'm going to throw in this map I made that I've posted before (sorry). I think it represents what probably happened.

43094


Samborzec Beakers from Małopolska, Poland (Olalde et al, 2017)R1b1a1a2???

https://bellbeakerblogger.blogspot.com/2017/06/samborzec-beakers-from-maopolska-poland.html


I4251/RISE1122/grave no.
I4251/RISE1122/grave no. 7: 2837-2672 BCE (3990±60 BP, Ki-7926). Male inhumation burial (25-30 years) with northwest-southeast orientation, located on the left side. The grave goods consisted of two vessels (bowl and unornamented cup), a flint blade dagger and a flint scraper. [R1b1a1a2 + H1]


I4252/RISE1123/grave no. 1: 2463-2142 BCE (3820±50 BP, Ki-7921). Child inhumation burial (11-13 years; genetically male) with northeast-southwest orientation, located on the left side. There was a ceramic bowl and an undecorated cup. [R + U5a1a1]


I4253/RISE1124/grave no. 13: 2571-2208 BCE (3920±60 BP, Ki-7929). Male inhumation burial (25-30 years), with N-S orientation, located on the left side. The only element of equipment was a ceramic bowl, posed in the northern part of the grave." [R1b1a1a2 + U5a2c]



https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2020/04/corded-ware-cultural-and-genetic.html


The PCA revealed that despite geographical proximity there is a distinct genetic separation between CWC and BBC individuals from southern Poland. The genetic variation of CWC individuals from southern Poland overlaps with the majority of previously published CWC individuals from Germany while the eight published CWC individuals from the Polish lowland [10,11] more closely resemble BBC individuals (Fig. S21). This fact is not unexpected if we consider the CWC communities in Polish lowlands as representatives of north-western parts of the CWC world called as the Single-Grave culture (see supplementary information). The genetic variation of BBC individuals from south-eastern Poland overlaps with the broad variation of BBC individuals from Central Europe (Bohemia, Moravia, Germany, south-western Poland and Hungary) (Fig. S22) which corresponds well with archaeological data.

rms2
02-06-2021, 05:01 PM
Well, of course, Beaker is a later development from Single Grave Corded Ware and is bound to be somewhat different from contemporaneous individuals from late Corded Ware.

Beaker in SE Poland probably moved there from the west and did not represent recent descent from Polish Corded Ware.

So, Single Grave Corded Ware>>Beaker, followed by Beaker expansion into the rest of Europe, including Poland.

Before that, it was Yamnaya (probably Budzhak)>>Corded Ware>>Corded Ware expansion west>>Single Grave Corded Ware in N Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark.

Keep in mind the Corded Ware expansion west involved the acquisition of local Neolithic farmer women and their DNA, and the subsequent expansion of Beaker continued the same practice, so that Beaker had more Neolithic farmer DNA than Corded Ware had, simply because Corded Ware came first in time, and Beaker came after.

Sorry to keep editing this post, but one sees the same logical progression from Yamnaya to Corded Ware. Yamnaya is the steppe pastoralist standard, 100% Yamnaya (duh), but Corded Ware was derived from Yamnaya and represented the descendants of Yamnaya males (mostly) who had taken Neolithic farmer wives (or concubines, whatever). So Corded Ware folks generally had 60-80% Yamnaya DNA. With Beaker, since it came later, the proportion of Yamnaya DNA was further reduced to ~50% and often even less, depending on the amount of Neolithic farmer admixture.

etrusco
02-06-2021, 05:30 PM
FWIW here is a map taken from the presentation of the (bulgarian ?) guy who spoke about a R1b L 51 in western Yamanaya groups. To be taken obviously with a grain of salt. They would be important if they can be dated at the end of the 4th millennium.


43095

rms2
02-06-2021, 05:36 PM
FWIW here is a map taken from the presentation of the (bulgarian ?) guy who spoke about a R1b L 51 in western Yamanaya groups. To be taken obviously with a grain of salt. They would be important if they can be dated at the end of the 4th millennium.


43095

Was that the Bulgarian archaeologist (or geneticist?) Quiles posted the tv screenshot of?

Wish we knew more about what that Bulgarian had to say, i.e., if he knew what he was talking about.

etrusco
02-06-2021, 05:41 PM
Was that the Bulgarian archaeologist (or geneticist?) Quiles posted the tv screenshot of?

Wish we knew more about what that Bulgarian had to say, i.e., if he knew what he was talking about.

Yes he was that bulgarian. Let's wait and see. The only wise way in adna is follow the data wherever they take us.

rms2
02-06-2021, 05:45 PM
Yes he was that bulgarian. So with a grain of big big salt....

Could be good info. Wish we knew.

TigerMW
02-06-2021, 06:25 PM
Well, of course, Beaker is a later development from Single Grave Corded Ware and is bound to be somewhat different from contemporaneous individuals from late Corded Ware.

Beaker in SE Poland probably moved there from the west and did not represent recent descent from Polish Corded Ware.

So, Single Grave Corded Ware>>Beaker, followed by Beaker expansion into the rest of Europe, including Poland.

Before that, it was Yamnaya (probably Budzhak)>>Corded Ware>>Corded Ware expansion west>>Single Grave Corded Ware in N Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark.

Keep in mind the Corded Ware expansion west involved the acquisition of local Neolithic farmer women and their DNA, and the subsequent expansion of Beaker continued the same practice, so that Beaker had more Neolithic farmer DNA than Corded Ware had, simply because Corded Ware came first in time, and Beaker came after.

Sorry to keep editing this post, but one sees the same logical progression from Yamnaya to Corded Ware. Yamnaya is the steppe pastoralist standard, 100% Yamnaya (duh), but Corded Ware was derived from Yamnaya and represented the descendants of Yamnaya males (mostly) who had taken Neolithic farmer wives (or concubines, whatever). So Corded Ware folks generally had 60-80% Yamnaya DNA. With Beaker, since it came later, the proportion of Yamnaya DNA was further reduced to ~50% and often even less, depending on the amount of Neolithic farmer admixture.
The R1b project general audience had been updated on what SGC already but I need to update them on CWC-X. I am trying to decide about Budzhak. How strongly do you feel Budzhak was a key culture for R-L51? It looks reasonable. Are there any unique links with Afansievo or CWC-X?

rms2
02-06-2021, 06:35 PM
The R1b project general audience had been updated on what SGC already but I need to update them on CWC-X. I am trying to decide about Budzhak. How strongly do you feel Budzhak was a key culture for R-L51? It looks reasonable. Are there any unique links with Afansievo or CWC-X?

I'm making a somewhat educated guess based on Ivanova's 2013 paper plus what we have learned since, especially by way of Linderholm et al (2020). As far as I know, we don't have any DNA at all from Budzhak.

I do think Budzhak is a good candidate to be the Yamnaya subculture that came up the Prut and Dniester valleys into Małopolska and got in on the formation of Corded Ware, initiating the CWC-X Horizon. Some Budzhak burials bear a strong resemblance to Corded Ware burials, and Budzhak may have been descendants of Mikhailovka-Kemi Oba people, who had some of the same burial practices (stone-lined cists, crouched-on-side, etc.).

Budzhak was different from most of Yamnaya in that respect, although the male in the burial pictured on the map below was on his left side with his head to the east, which differs from the usual Corded Ware practice (males on their right sides with heads to the west).

43102

rms2
02-06-2021, 07:14 PM
Let me add that the whole thing doesn't rise or fall by Budzhak. It might have been some other flavor of Yamnaya that entered SE Poland and initiated the whole CWC-X Horizon thing.

Budzhak just seems to have been in the right place at the right time, and Ivanova does trace their movement north up the Prut and Dniester and into Małopolska. So, I'll blame her if that's wrong.

It is possible that Budzhak itself is too late, since Ivanova dates the early phase of it to about 2800 BC. If that's right, it's too late to have been involved in something that took place 3000-2900 BC. It could be that Budzhak simply provided an additional shot of steppe DNA into an already evolving Corded Ware in SE Poland, but I think ancient dates are pretty rubbery, with wide margins of error.

dsm
02-06-2021, 08:05 PM
************************************************** *********************************************

The Bulgarian claim re Z2103 & L51 - Said to be from the Ezero culture, in Southeastern Bulgaria.
The researcher is Svetoslav Stamov (Светослав Стамов). The dates are interesting regarding the Ezero Culture.

This link is to his TV presentation (in Bulgarian).

https://sedemosmi.tv/production/%d1%81%d1%82%d1%83%d0%b4%d0%b8%d0%be-%d1%85%d1%8a-%d1%81%d0%b2%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%81%d0%bb%d0%b0%d 0%b2-%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b0%d0%bc%d0%be%d0%b2-18-%d0%b0%d0%b2%d0%b3%d1%83%d1%81%d1%82-2020-%d0%b3/

This image shows Bulgaria in relation to other key Steppe Nomads locations etc:
43103


This is a screen grab (reversed) that shows the claimed list of DNA finds (see Z2103 and L51)
43104

Yes it can be taken with a grain of salt, but is worth being aware of. NOTE: R1a-Z93 burials are also supposed to be present.

Additional info (wiki) re Ezero Culture ...
"The Ezero culture, 3300—2700 BC, was a Bronze Age archaeological culture occupying most of present-day Bulgaria. It takes its name from the Tell-settlement of Ezero.

Ezero follows the copper age cultures of the area (Karanovo VI culture, Gumelniţa culture, Kodzadjemen culture and Varna culture), after a settlement hiatus in Northern Bulgaria. It bears some relationship to the earlier Cernavodă III culture to the north. Some settlements were fortified.

The Ezero culture is interpreted as part of a larger Balkan-Danubian early Bronze Age complex, a horizon reaching from Troy Id-IIc into Central Europe, encompassing the Baden of the Carpathian Basin and the Coţofeni culture of Romania. According to Hermann Parzinger, there are also typological connections to Poliochne IIa-b and Sitagroi IV."

Google map of Ezero (note proximity to Danube & to Black Sea)
43107

alan
02-06-2021, 08:38 PM
good thread. Ive got idea burnout but its interesting how so many of us are basically in agreement

TigerMW
02-06-2021, 10:37 PM
good thread. Ive got idea burnout but its interesting how so many of us are basically in agreement
Here is a question for your inspiration. How do we explain the R-M269 guy on the SW side of the Black Sea at ~4500 BC? Did he come from the northeast from the Steppes? Or had his lineage been there?

etrusco
02-06-2021, 10:42 PM
Here is a question for your inspiration. How do we explain the R-M269 guy on the SW side of the Black Sea at ~4500 BC? Did he come from the northeast from the Steppes? Or had his lineage been there?

We have a R1b M269 sample in Kvahlinsk at the same age IIRC. R1b M269 came from the east, possibly from the Skelya culture centered around eastern Ukraine. It would be interesting to know if its steppe ancestry is Progress shifted or more tied with the pontic HG.

rms2
02-06-2021, 10:53 PM
************************************************** *********************************************

The Bulgarian claim re Z2103 & L51 - Said to be from the Ezero culture, in Southeastern Bulgaria.
The researcher is Svetoslav Stamov (Светослав Стамов). The dates are interesting regrading the Ezero Culture.

This link is to his TV presentation (in Bulgarian).

https://sedemosmi.tv/production/%d1%81%d1%82%d1%83%d0%b4%d0%b8%d0%be-%d1%85%d1%8a-%d1%81%d0%b2%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%81%d0%bb%d0%b0%d 0%b2-%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b0%d0%bc%d0%be%d0%b2-18-%d0%b0%d0%b2%d0%b3%d1%83%d1%81%d1%82-2020-%d0%b3/

This image shows Bulgaria in relation to other key Steppe Nomads locations etc:
43103


This is a screen grab (reversed) that shows the claimed list of DNA finds (see Z2103 and L51)
43104

Yes it can be taken with a grain of salt, but is worth being aware of. NOTE: R1a-Z93 burials are also supposed to be present.

Additional info (wiki) re Ezero Culture ...
"The Ezero culture, 3300—2700 BC, was a Bronze Age archaeological culture occupying most of present-day Bulgaria. It takes its name from the Tell-settlement of Ezero.

Ezero follows the copper age cultures of the area (Karanovo VI culture, Gumelniţa culture, Kodzadjemen culture and Varna culture), after a settlement hiatus in Northern Bulgaria. It bears some relationship to the earlier Cernavodă III culture to the north. Some settlements were fortified.

The Ezero culture is interpreted as part of a larger Balkan-Danubian early Bronze Age complex, a horizon reaching from Troy Id-IIc into Central Europe, encompassing the Baden of the Carpathian Basin and the Coţofeni culture of Romania. According to Hermann Parzinger, there are also typological connections to Poliochne IIa-b and Sitagroi IV."

Google map of Ezero (note proximity to Danube & to Black Sea)
43107

But the map etrusco posted looks like the Carpathian Basin and surrounds, not Bulgaria. One can see the Danube delta on the right about midway down. Northernmost Bulgaria is at the bottom of the picture.

Don't think he means Ezero.

Looks like Yamnaya kurgans are intended.

TigerMW
02-06-2021, 10:55 PM
We have a R1b M269 sample in Kvahlinsk at the same age IIRC. R1b M269 came from the east, possibly from the Skelya culture centered around eastern Ukraine. It would be interesting to know if its steppe ancestry is Progress shifted or more tied with the pontic HG.
Are westward migrations at this time noted and described anywhere, like by Anthony or Gimbutas?

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:05 PM
Are westward migrations at this time noted and described anywhere, like by Anthony or Gimbutas?

It corresponds roughly to Gimbutas's Kurgan Wave I, which she dates to 4400-4300 BC (page 352, The Civilization of the Goddess). Anthony supplies about the same date (4200 BC) for the move of Suvorovo-Novodanilovka into the Lower Danube valley (pages 249-251, The Horse The Wheel And Language).

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:18 PM
I'm making a somewhat educated guess based on Ivanova's 2013 paper plus what we have learned since, especially by way of Linderholm et al (2020). As far as I know, we don't have any DNA at all from Budzhak.

I do think Budzhak is a good candidate to be the Yamnaya subculture that came up the Prut and Dniester valleys into Małopolska and got in on the formation of Corded Ware, initiating the CWC-X Horizon. Some Budzhak burials bear a strong resemblance to Corded Ware burials, and Budzhak may have been descendants of Mikhailovka-Kemi Oba people, who had some of the same burial practices (stone-lined cists, crouched-on-side, etc.).

Budzhak was different from most of Yamnaya in that respect, although the male in the burial pictured on the map below was on his left side with his head to the east, which differs from the usual Corded Ware practice (males on their right sides with heads to the west).

43102

This is a very interesting map. Seems we are looking for R1b-L23-L51-L52 'missing links' that could have reached Poland from a variety of starting points.

A picture does seem to be emerging. Also am guessing you no longer think that L51 will be found among the Kurgan burials in the Hungarian Plains other than as later arrivals (post 2,900 BCE).

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:26 PM
This is a very interesting map. Seems we are looking for R1b-L23-L51-L52 'missing links' that could have reached Poland from a variety of starting points.

A picture does seem to be emerging. Also am guessing you no longer think that L51 will be found among the Kurgan burials in the Hungarian Plains other than as later arrivals (post 2,900 BCE).

Honestly, I don't know, especially after seeing the map etrusco posted.

Right now, however, I am pretty convinced what happened was as follows: 1. Yamnaya up the Prut/Dniester valleys into SE Poland, followed by 2. the CWC-X Horizon and the formation of Corded Ware. 3. R1b-L51 (it and all its subclades old enough to have been around) then went northwest and was in on the birth of Single Grave Corded Ware. 4. Sometime around 2600 BC, Beaker was born as a variety of Single Grave Corded Ware and then pushed out into the rest of Europe.

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:31 PM
But the map etrusco posted looks like the Carpathian Basin and surrounds, not Bulgaria. One can see the Danube delta on the right about midway down. Northernmost Bulgaria is at the bottom of the picture.

Don't think he means Ezero.

Looks like Yamnaya kurgans are intended.

RMS, 'looks like' isn't a helpful comment. The map needed more qualification (where did it come from, we can assume the TV show but who is going to watch an hour of video to try to find out ?)
and as is, it is far to general as to who is really where. But here is some clarification in regard Ezero and that map.

43108

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:34 PM
Here's a photo attributed by Gimbutas to her Kurgan Wave I (4400-4300 BC) from a kurgan near Csongrad, Hungary.

It came from one of Gimbutas's books, but I forgot to make a note of which one. You'll have to pardon me, unless you aren't inclined to do so.

43109

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:36 PM
RMS, 'looks like' isn't a helpful comment. The map needed more qualification (where did it come from, we can assume the TV show but who is going to watch an hour of video to try to find out ?)
and as is, it is far to general as to who is really where. But here is some clarification in regard Ezero and that map.

43108

Take a look at the map. It's the Carpathian Basin and surrounds. Can't be Ezero up around the Tisza River. Besides, Ezero was a Neolithic farmer culture.

Hopefully that's helpful enough. Sorry I used the words "looks like", when I should have written, "Hell, that's the Carpathian Basin".

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:37 PM
What may make the Bulgarian data even more interesting is the 'claim' that the data has already been provided to the Reich Labs for inclusion in a soon to be published paper on 'South Eastern Europe'.

If there are indeed (as 'hinted' at) in the Etrusco map, more L51 in this region then the story gets new impetus and perhaps a bit more confusing. RMS2 might get his long awaited for L51 burials in the Carpathian Basin ;)

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:39 PM
Take a look at the map. It's the Carpathian Basin and surrounds. Can't be Ezero up around the Tisza River. Besides, Ezero was a Neolithic farmer culture.

Hopefully that's helpful enough. Sorry I used the words "looks like", when I should have written, "Hell, that's the Carpathian Basin".

Can I suggest you look even closer - This is why vague maps without good qualification are a crock.

PS I will add more detail to the map to try to help unclutter the confusion. Take me 10 mins.

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:48 PM
I hope this revision of the Etrusco map helps

43110

Cheers DSM
2nd attachment (changed its name)
43111

3rd revision - added where BLACK SEA is.
43112

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:50 PM
I hope this revision of the Etrusco map helps

43110

Cheers DSM

Can't open it. Sorry.

rms2
02-06-2021, 11:56 PM
Can I suggest you look even closer - This is why vague maps without good qualification are a crock.

PS I will add more detail to the map to try to help unclutter the confusion. Take me 10 mins.

I looked at it closely. By far - by far - most of it is out of the Ezero area and not in Bulgaria. Ezero was a tell site occupied by Neolithic farmer Karanovo people, with later ingression by steppe invaders.

Maybe the very southern end of that map concerns Ezero, but most of it does not, especially the part in the northwest up around the Tisza River, where R1b-L51 is listed along with R1b-Z2103.

dsm
02-06-2021, 11:59 PM
I looked at it closely. By far - by far - most of it is out of the Ezero area and not in Bulgaria. Ezero was a tell site occupied by Neolithic farmer Karanovo people, with later ingression by steppe invaders.

Maybe the very southern end of that map concerns Ezero, but most of it does not, especially the part in the northwest up around the Tisza River, where R1b-L51 is listed along with R1b-Z2103.

We must be looking at completely different maps ???

rms2
02-07-2021, 12:00 AM
I hope this revision of the Etrusco map helps

43110

Cheers DSM
2nd attachment (changed its name)
43111

The map includes the area south of the Carpathians (the Danube Delta) and part of the Carpathian Basin.

rms2
02-07-2021, 12:05 AM
We must be looking at completely different maps ???

We must be thinking two different things about Ezero.

dsm
02-07-2021, 12:07 AM
The map includes the area south of the Carpathians (the Danube Delta) and the Carpathian Basin.

At last we partially agree. But the Etrusco map (as vague as it is) covers Romania and Bulgaria. The Hungarian plains *are not* shown.
Do a step by step comparison with a real map.

rms2
02-07-2021, 12:32 AM
At last we partially agree. But the Etrusco map (as vague as it is) covers Romania and Bulgaria. The Hungarian plains *are not* shown.
Do a step by step comparison with a real map.

Most of it is clearly Romania, and Ezero was a Neolithic farmer culture.

If you spot the Olt River, pretty much down the middle of that map (where you have the red arrow pointing out the Danube), everything northwest of that is Carpathian Basin.

Not that much is south of the Danube, in Bulgaria.

rms2
02-07-2021, 12:45 AM
Did Stamov himself actually attribute the R1b-L51 and R1b-Z2103 on that map to the Ezero culture?

Of course, we're wasting posts quibbling about a map that is possibly a total fantasy.

rms2
02-07-2021, 01:19 AM
Correct me where I am wrong, but this is how I see that map.

43115

It's not the best sort of map as far as scale, proportions, and relative distance goes.

TigerMW
02-07-2021, 01:19 AM
Of course, we're wasting posts quibbling about a map that is possibly a total fantasy.
Yes, we need context. Is depiction a theory with evidence and what evidence?

rms2
02-07-2021, 01:29 AM
Looks like mostly the classic "Kurgans along the Danube and up the Tisza" thing, although the creators of the kurgans along the Tisza probably came down the Tisza from a pass through the Carpathians.

dsm
02-07-2021, 01:38 AM
RMS2 - It is not for me to teach geography nor to recommend anyone check their eyesight. I'll leave this to someone else to explain that Serbia (alongside Romainia) sits between Bulgaria and Hungary and Serbia is a long country.

But I agree, time to move on - at least this kind of detail tends to keep us honest.

Cheers DSM

rms2
02-07-2021, 01:44 AM
RMS2 - It is not for me to teach geography nor to recommend anyone check their eyesight. I'll leave this to someone else to explain that Serbia (alongside Romainia) sits between Bulgaria and Hungary and Serbia is a long country.

But I agree, time to move on - at least this kind of detail tends to keep us honest.

Cheers DSM

Look back at my edited map and see where Budapest is and whether or not that is correct. I think your answer is there. The part about teaching geography or checking one's eyesight was somewhat hasty, though, don't you think? Unless you were really sincere.

Here it is again:

43118

That's where Budapest is, just south of that big bend in the Danube.

One can also see it on this German map here:

43117

Generalissimo
02-07-2021, 01:47 AM
What may make the Bulgarian data even more interesting is the 'claim' that the data has already been provided to the Reich Labs for inclusion in a soon to be published paper on 'South Eastern Europe'.

If there are indeed (as 'hinted' at) in the Etrusco map, more L51 in this region then the story gets new impetus and perhaps a bit more confusing. RMS2 might get his long awaited for L51 burials in the Carpathian Basin ;)

The LN/CWC L51 samples from the Rhine and surrounds don't have anything to do with Hungarian Yamnaya. They're obviously CWC-related.

Upcoming samples from Hungarian Yamnaya are R-Z2103 and I-L699. So my predictions were correct.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/01/hungarian-yamnaya-predictions.html

I don't know if there's L51 in any Copper/Bronze Age samples from Bulgaria, but I doubt it. If that wasn't a typo in the Youtube clip, then that sample might be contaminated like the Afanasievo L51.

rms2
02-07-2021, 02:29 AM
The LN/CWC L51 samples from the Rhine and surrounds don't have anything to do with Hungarian Yamnaya. The obviously CWC-related.

Upcoming samples from Hungarian Yamnaya are R-Z2103 and I-L699. So my predictions were correct.

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/01/hungarian-yamnaya-predictions.html

I don't know if there's L51 in any Copper/Bronze Age samples from Bulgaria, but I doubt it. If that wasn't a typo in the Youtube clip, then that sample might be contaminated like the Afanasievo L51.

What makes you think that sample was contaminated? The "questionable" note referred not to Y-DNA but mtDNA. Do doubts about the mtDNA of a sample render the Y-DNA call invalid?

That was discussed here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?19944-R1b-L151-in-Afanasievo-Good-Y-DNA-Call-or-Not).

Silesian
02-07-2021, 02:44 AM
This is a very interesting map. Seems we are looking for R1b-L23-L51-L52 'missing links' that could have reached Poland from a variety of starting points.

A picture does seem to be emerging. Also am guessing you no longer think that L51 will be found among the Kurgan burials in the Hungarian Plains other than as later arrivals (post 2,900 BCE).

I have also noticed something very interesting emerging with R1b samples both released and non released data. There can be no doubt that R1b-L51 will be found in Yamnaya, it's only a matter of time .
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-63138-w

Fig. 1 is the relief map of Corded Ware and Bell Beaker burials.


the genetic variation of CWC individuals from southern Poland overlaps with the majority of the published CWC individuals from Germany while the eight published CWC individuals from Poland10,11 show a closer similarity to BBC representatives (Fig. S20) (c) the genetic variation of BBC individuals from southern Poland overlaps with the broad variation of BBC individuals from Central Europe (Czech Republic, Germany, Poland and Hungary)


It has been shown that Yamnaya pastoralists contributed Y chromosome R1a and R1b haplogroups to continental Europe almost entirely replacing the previously wide-spread G2a haplogroup1,2

dsm
02-07-2021, 02:45 AM
Look back at my edited map and see where Budapest is and whether or not that is correct. I think your answer is there. The part about teaching geography or checking one's eyesight was somewhat hasty, though, don't you think? Unless you were really sincere.

Here it is again:

43116

That's where Budapest is, just south of that big bend in the Danube.

One can also see it on this German map here:

43117

RMS2, I am off to get my glasses cleaned LoL - yes that messy map was way out of scale and indeed the top area is the Hungarian Plains.

Takes me back to my earlier comments about the uselessness of posting vague unqualified maps. We ended up wasting good posting time and space over this example.


GENERALISIMO:
I can't help but think you are right about questioning the Afansievo L52 & if it ever gets published, the claimed Bulgarian L52. I posted here in Anthrogenica last year several times, how those finds seemed totally out of place.

IIRC the Reich Labs entry for I6222 (IIRC) does have comments about the quality.I was assured by a few (here) that it was accepted as genuine. I see RMS2 reminds us the this referred to the mtDNA.

What particulary bothers me about both the Afanasievo L51-L52 & (if published as real) the Bulgarian L51-L52 - is that in each location they mention a number of Z2103 burials but just (in both places) only the one L51-L52. That alone 'rings warning bells' for me.

Generalissimo
02-07-2021, 03:01 AM
What makes you think that sample was contaminated? The "questionable" note referred not to Y-DNA but mtDNA. Do doubts about the mtDNA of a sample render the Y-DNA call invalid?

That was discussed here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?19944-R1b-L151-in-Afanasievo-Good-Y-DNA-Call-or-Not).

It has the contam suffix in the new Reich Lab anno file.

Keep in mind that contamination can be estimated with data from mtDNA or the X chromosome, but the contamination rate is then inferred for the rest of the genome from that.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 03:04 AM
RMS2, I am off to get my glasses cleaned LoL - yes that messy map was way out of scale and indeed the top area is the Hungarian Plains.

Takes me back to my earlier comments about the uselessness of posting vague unqualified maps. We ended up wasting good posting time and space over this example.


GENERALISIMO:
I can't help but think you are right about questioning the Afansievo L52 & if it ever gets published, the claimed Bulgarian L52. I posted here in Anthrogenica last year several times, how those finds seemed totally out of place.

IIRC the Reich Labs entry for I6222 (IIRC) does have comments about the quality.I was assured by a few (here) that it was accepted as genuine. I see RMS2 reminds us the this referred to the mtDNA.

Corded Ware R1b L52 in Southern Poland is considerably younger than Afanasievo. L52 and Afanasievo and or Yamnaya have to somehow have a connection, besides being derived from M269 and L23.

Anna Linderholm et al...


Overall, although non-significant the results suggested a trend where the four groups share more genetic drift with Russia_Afanasievo than with Yamnaya and Groups I, II and III share more genetic drift with Poland_CW than with Russian_Afanasievo (Table S14 & Fig. S20). This pattern was also mirrored by the f2-statistics.

Attention to minute details in genetic data like the phylogeny of Yersinia Pestis might help.

rms2
02-07-2021, 03:22 AM
I'd still like to know what the Bulgarian Stamov had to say and what he meant. The map that etrusco posted had R1b-L51 on it very clearly, twice. That wasn't a typo. Was that Stamov's map or someone else's interpretation of what he said?

I'm so tired of waiting for L51 news that I am grasping at weird screen grabs from generally unreliable web sites.

Where is that doggoned big SGC paper?

Silesian
02-07-2021, 03:36 AM
I'd still like to know what the Bulgarian Stamov had to say and what he meant. The map that etrusco posted had R1b-L51 on it very clearly, twice. That wasn't a typo. Was that Stamov's map or someone else's interpretation of what he said?

I'm so tired of waiting for L51 news that I am grasping at weird screen grabs from generally unreliable web sites.

Where is that doggoned big SGC paper?

Unless the SGC R1b-V1636 paper by Egfjord et al. was a mistake or contaminated data, it also by coincidence had 2 R1b-Yamnaya L51 in there diagram.

rms2
02-07-2021, 03:42 AM
Unless the SGC R1b-V1636 paper by Egfjord et al. was a mistake or contaminated data, it also by coincidence had 2 R1b-Yamnaya L51 in there diagram.

Oh, I believe the big SGC paper is coming. It's just a question of when. And will I live to see it?

Of course, since I believe in the immortality of the soul, if I do die, I can ask God about it in person and maybe even meet some old dead Single Grave Corded Ware guys and ask a few questions.

If they hit me with their hammer-axes, it won't matter, because I will already be dead.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 03:50 AM
Oh, I believe the big SGC paper is coming. It's just a question of when. And will I live to see it?

Of course, since I believe in the immortality of the soul, if I do die, I can ask God about it in person and maybe even meet some old dead Single Grave Corded Ware guys and ask a few questions.

If they hit me with their hammers, it won't matter, because I will already be dead.

Your (our)paternal ancestors were original thinkers, trend setters not followers. Try and think outside of the box. Like R1b speaking clans in South Eastern Poland, or Hungary or Bulgaria.

Generalissimo
02-07-2021, 03:54 AM
We have a R1b M269 sample in Kvahlinsk at the same age IIRC. R1b M269 came from the east, possibly from the Skelya culture centered around eastern Ukraine. It would be interesting to know if its steppe ancestry is Progress shifted or more tied with the pontic HG.

There's no M269 in any Khvalynsk samples.

rms2
02-07-2021, 03:59 AM
Your (our)paternal ancestors were original thinkers, trend setters not followers. Try and think outside of the box. Like R1b speaking clans in South Eastern Poland, or Hungary or Bulgaria.

Whatever I say is spoken in R1b, I think.

I thought outside the box back in 2006 when I got my first Y-37 results and everybody and his brother told me I was a Basque and a Cro-Magnon and absolutely Ur-native to western Europe. I caught a lot of flack for questioning that and suggesting that most of R1b got to western Europe with the Indo-Europeans. I was pretty much alone in my views for quite awhile.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 04:18 AM
There's no M269 in any Khvalynsk samples.

No but there is Q and R1a and R1b-V1636+. BTW thank you for pointing out the importance of Corded Ware :) until you mentioned the importance I would have never connected any dots.

rms2
02-07-2021, 04:28 AM
No but there is Q and R1a and R1b-V1636+. BTW thank you for pointing out the importance of Corded Ware :) until you mentioned the importance I would have never connected any dots.

Corded Ware is hugely important when it comes to the Indo-Europeanization of Europe west of the steppe. It is pretty plain that wasn't done by Yamnaya, not directly, anyway.

First I want to know more about the genomic make-up of Corded Ware, then I want to find out how Corded Ware came into being. What I currently believe about that is right, I think, but I'd like to see some real smoking-gun evidence, or at least the nearest thing to it that ancient DNA and archaeology can produce.

J Man
02-07-2021, 05:48 AM
No but there is Q and R1a and R1b-V1636+. BTW thank you for pointing out the importance of Corded Ware :) until you mentioned the importance I would have never connected any dots.

I think that there is a single J1 Khvalynsk sample as well so far.

Alain
02-07-2021, 07:06 AM
There's no M269 in any Khvalynsk samples.

But I mean it was found in Khvalynsk R1b but believe R1b1a L388 or another subclade, do you have any data or knowledge please? Would be nice

dsm
02-07-2021, 07:10 AM
Unless the SGC R1b-V1636 paper by Egfjord et al. was a mistake or contaminated data, it also by coincidence had 2 R1b-Yamnaya L51 in there diagram.

I noticed them too but was not sure why they showed there as Yamnaya along side so many Z2103. If as you say (seems right) then they show two L51 in SGC per their diagram. I will go back and look deeper in case I am getting this wrong. Thanks

Thanks

PS Is this a part of the diagram you are referring to ?

43124

If it is this diag, then there may be a mistaken understanding of the diagram. This diag was AFAICT showing the R1b tree = what was found in SGC Denmark was named - the above diag was showing the SNPs they found but also the entire R1b tree. If there is a separate story can you point to it thanks. Else there are no Z2103 found that I know of in SGC Denmark (but I may be talking about a different topic).

ADDED: The only R1b as SGC in Denmark are the named entries to the left of Z2103. All the entries to the right are 'Modern R1a & R1b' as per bottom left of the diag.

etrusco
02-07-2021, 10:09 AM
There's no M269 in any Khvalynsk samples.


that is the text from the much talked about conference. Obviously it turned out R1b P312 was an hoax. I based the R1b M 269 call on a Richard Rocca's post that mentioned this as the oldest R1b M269 so far. But so far so good that sample was not R1b M269!

RRocca wrote this: If I'm not mistaken, the 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC (~4250 BC) would still make it the earliest M269 found anywhere, no? That would still be huge.

Translation of Alexey Butin's original

"Hello. Today the XIV Samara Archaeological Conference was held. The following reports were heard.
Khokhlov A.A. Preliminary results of anthropological and genetic studies of materials of the Volga-Ural period of the Neolithic-Early Bronze Age by an international group of scientists.
In his report Khokhlov A.A. introduced into the scientific revolution yet unpublished data of the Eneolithic burial ground Ekatirinovsky cape, which combines both Mariupol and Hvalyn features, and belongs to 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC. All samples analyzed were of the uraloid anthropological type, the chromosome of all samples belonged to the haplogroup R1b1a2 (R - P 312 / S 116), and the haplogroup R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2. Mito to haplogroups U2, U4, U5. In the Khvalynsk repositories (1 half IV. BC) anthropological material is more diverse. In addition to the uraloid substrate, the European broad-faced and southern European variants are recorded. R1a1, O1a1, I2a2 are added to the mito T2a1b, H2a1 by the haplogroups."

Generalissimo
02-07-2021, 10:14 AM
that is the text from the much talked about conference. Obviously it turned out R1b P312 was an hoax. I based the R1b M 269 call on a Richard Rocca's post that mentioned this as the oldest R1b M269 so far. But so far so good that sample was not R1b M269!

RRocca wrote this: If I'm not mistaken, the 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC (~4250 BC) would still make it the earliest M269 found anywhere, no? That would still be huge.

Translation of Alexey Butin's original

"Hello. Today the XIV Samara Archaeological Conference was held. The following reports were heard.
Khokhlov A.A. Preliminary results of anthropological and genetic studies of materials of the Volga-Ural period of the Neolithic-Early Bronze Age by an international group of scientists.
In his report Khokhlov A.A. introduced into the scientific revolution yet unpublished data of the Eneolithic burial ground Ekatirinovsky cape, which combines both Mariupol and Hvalyn features, and belongs to 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC. All samples analyzed were of the uraloid anthropological type, the chromosome of all samples belonged to the haplogroup R1b1a2 (R - P 312 / S 116), and the haplogroup R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2. Mito to haplogroups U2, U4, U5. In the Khvalynsk repositories (1 half IV. BC) anthropological material is more diverse. In addition to the uraloid substrate, the European broad-faced and southern European variants are recorded. R1a1, O1a1, I2a2 are added to the mito T2a1b, H2a1 by the haplogroups."

No wonder this hasn't been published yet.

davit
02-07-2021, 01:15 PM
that is the text from the much talked about conference. Obviously it turned out R1b P312 was an hoax. I based the R1b M 269 call on a Richard Rocca's post that mentioned this as the oldest R1b M269 so far. But so far so good that sample was not R1b M269!

RRocca wrote this: If I'm not mistaken, the 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC (~4250 BC) would still make it the earliest M269 found anywhere, no? That would still be huge.

Translation of Alexey Butin's original

"Hello. Today the XIV Samara Archaeological Conference was held. The following reports were heard.
Khokhlov A.A. Preliminary results of anthropological and genetic studies of materials of the Volga-Ural period of the Neolithic-Early Bronze Age by an international group of scientists.
In his report Khokhlov A.A. introduced into the scientific revolution yet unpublished data of the Eneolithic burial ground Ekatirinovsky cape, which combines both Mariupol and Hvalyn features, and belongs to 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC. All samples analyzed were of the uraloid anthropological type, the chromosome of all samples belonged to the haplogroup R1b1a2 (R - P 312 / S 116), and the haplogroup R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2. Mito to haplogroups U2, U4, U5. In the Khvalynsk repositories (1 half IV. BC) anthropological material is more diverse. In addition to the uraloid substrate, the European broad-faced and southern European variants are recorded. R1a1, O1a1, I2a2 are added to the mito T2a1b, H2a1 by the haplogroups."

O1a1? WTF?

Silesian
02-07-2021, 01:20 PM
But I mean it was found in Khvalynsk R1b but believe R1b1a L388 or another subclade, do you have any data or knowledge please? Would be nice

There are flat burials and Kurgan burials. Deep flat cut graves =Fatyanovo Z93. Kurgans with KMS75 rich in CHG are being used to compare Baltic Corded Ware- why?. One must ask why Poltavka I0432-- z2124 is in Kurgan, when R1a in khvalynsk CHG and Fatyanovo EEF are not. SGC with V 1636 and CHG = barrows not flat graves.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 01:25 PM
Corded Ware is hugely important when it comes to the Indo-Europeanization of Europe west of the steppe. It is pretty plain that wasn't done by Yamnaya, not directly, anyway.

First I want to know more about the genomic make-up of Corded Ware, then I want to find out how Corded Ware came into being. What I currently believe about that is right, I think, but I'd like to see some real smoking-gun evidence, or at least the nearest thing to it that ancient DNA and archaeology can produce.

We.are both after the set of answers. BTW did you notice the height description with Eastern Bell Beakers, rich.in CHG.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 02:01 PM
I think that there is a single J1 Khvalynsk sample as well so far.
Ancient CHG?

J Man
02-07-2021, 02:06 PM
Ancient CHG?

Likely linked to the CHG like ancestry part of the Khvalynsk folks yeah.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 02:20 PM
Likely linked to the CHG like ancestry part of the Khvalynsk folks yeah.

Source of rh-?

rms2
02-07-2021, 03:38 PM
that is the text from the much talked about conference. Obviously it turned out R1b P312 was an hoax. I based the R1b M 269 call on a Richard Rocca's post that mentioned this as the oldest R1b M269 so far. But so far so good that sample was not R1b M269!

RRocca wrote this: If I'm not mistaken, the 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC (~4250 BC) would still make it the earliest M269 found anywhere, no? That would still be huge.

Translation of Alexey Butin's original

"Hello. Today the XIV Samara Archaeological Conference was held. The following reports were heard.
Khokhlov A.A. Preliminary results of anthropological and genetic studies of materials of the Volga-Ural period of the Neolithic-Early Bronze Age by an international group of scientists.
In his report Khokhlov A.A. introduced into the scientific revolution yet unpublished data of the Eneolithic burial ground Ekatirinovsky cape, which combines both Mariupol and Hvalyn features, and belongs to 4th quarter of the 5th millennium BC. All samples analyzed were of the uraloid anthropological type, the chromosome of all samples belonged to the haplogroup R1b1a2 (R - P 312 / S 116), and the haplogroup R1b1a1a2a1a1c2b2b1a2. Mito to haplogroups U2, U4, U5. In the Khvalynsk repositories (1 half IV. BC) anthropological material is more diverse. In addition to the uraloid substrate, the European broad-faced and southern European variants are recorded. R1a1, O1a1, I2a2 are added to the mito T2a1b, H2a1 by the haplogroups."

I remember all that very well. I contacted Khokhlov by email, with the help of my wife, who is Russian. He told me there was R1b-M269 but no P312 thus far. He wouldn't go any further, because I suspect he was trying to stuff the cat back in the bag that he let out at that conference.

Could what he was talking about have some connection to the rumored paper on Volosovo recently mentioned over at Eurogenes Blog?

Doesn't sound like it, since Butin mentioned Mariupol and Khvalynsk, and Ekaterinovsky Cape (https://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica/article/view/46.24) is an Eneolithic burial site of the Samara culture, but who knows? Things get mixed up in the telling and retelling.

rms2
02-07-2021, 04:19 PM
I remember all that very well. I contacted Khokhlov by email, with the help of my wife, who is Russian. He told me there was R1b-M269 but no P312 thus far. He wouldn't go any further, because I suspect he was trying to stuff the cat back in the bag that he let out at that conference.

Could what he was talking about have some connection to the rumored paper on Volosovo recently mentioned over at Eurogenes Blog?

Doesn't sound like it, since Butin mentioned Mariupol and Khvalynsk, and Ekaterinovsky Cape (https://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica/article/view/46.24) is an Eneolithic burial site of the Samara culture, but who knows? Things get mixed up in the telling and retelling.

You know, I take that back, a little anyway. Khokhlov didn't mention M269, he merely said "R1b". I don't suppose it would hurt to show you the text of the actual email:



Dear Richard.

В могильнике Ekaterinovsky Cape точно есть R1b, но я не вижу субклад - P312 (S116).
Здесь нужно быть осторожным.

Respectfully,
Aleksandr.

Суббота, 7 июля 2018, 23:47 +04:00

Translation:



Dear Richard.

The Ekaterinovsky Cape burial ground definitely contains R1b, but I do not see a subclade - P312 (S116).
You have to be careful here.

Respectfully,
Aleksandr.

Saturday 7 July 2018 11:47 pm +04:00

TigerMW
02-07-2021, 07:06 PM
...
What particulary bothers me about both the Afanasievo L51-L52 & (if published as real) the Bulgarian L51-L52 - is that in each location they mention a number of Z2103 burials but just (in both places) only the one L51-L52. That alone 'rings warning bells' for me.All,
I think the R1b-L51>P310* call is real.
I reviewed this with several people in October, 2020.

SHT001 (in the original paper)
Afanasievo culture
3112-2918 calBCE
Shatar Chuluu site - Erdenetsogt, MONGOLIA

After some discussion and multiple reviews, Ted Kandell and his analyst help reported this (YFull forum Oct 24,2020):

R1b-L51 haplogroup level:
L51+, 2 derived reads 1240K capture array sequencing, 1 derived read separate shotgun sequencing
Y410-, 1 ancestral read 1240K (R-L51 equiv)

R1b-L51>P310/L52 haplogroup level:
P310+, 1 derived read shotgun
P311+, 3 derived reads 1240K, 3 derived reads shotgun (R-P310 equiv)
CTS7650+, 1 derived read shotgun (R-P310 equiv)


Y410- would be aDNA damage. ... Therefore, he is certainly R-L52.
He also has only one novel SNP with more than 2 reads, 4 derived reads at chrY:14644742 C to T.
He's right at the root of R-L52.

Ted is Ted so I won't say any more. So I also checked with FTDNA and they already reviewed this sample.


Multiple positive calls at P310 branch.
Positive calls for:
P310
P311
YSC0000082 (not on the YFull tree)
CTS7650 (unreliable in ancient samples)
They also had the L51 derived upstream as Ted did and the Y410-. They also said Y410 would be unreliable in ancient samples so they discounted it.

I can't find my notes but my memory is that FTDNA had downstream L151 ancestral and L11/S127 ancestral. That would make this guy a true R1b-P310/L52*. I don't trust that coverage is normalized in Ted's comments on novel variants but this guy is at ~3000 BC and R-P310's MRCA is probably about ~3300-3100 BC so I find it plausible the Afansievo sample is a very early R-P310/L52 person.

These guys could travel!

This is why I say much of the future analysis needed will really be downstream of L51 on types of R1b-P310 people. P310's MRCA was probably directly in the Pontic-Caspian Steppes, probably not even the western fringes of the steppes. The big Y DNA winner of the whole CWC>SGCCWC>E.BBC descendancy group was R1b-L151 so only the P310>L151 lineage matters to huge population impact in West and Central Europe.

Wing Genealogist
02-07-2021, 07:37 PM
While the R1b calls for SHT001 are real, I believe the question revolves around whether this DNA sample may have been contaminated by someone who had handled the remains at some time. I really don't know the answer, but IMHO it would be informative to see whether SHT001 has positive reads for a number SNPs which have occurred sometime AFTER roughly 2900 BCE. We may expect isolated reads for a couple of "new" SNPs, but if there are more than a small number, it would indicate the sample is contaminated by a much more recent individual.

Silesian
02-07-2021, 07:49 PM
You know, I take that back, a little anyway. Khokhlov didn't mention M269, he merely said "R1b". I don't suppose it would hurt to show you the text of the actual email:



Translation:

Back to L51 in Poland and it's interesting types of unique pottery.
Any input much appreciated-
-Pitcher pottery and Polypod Cups ?
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/3536/3051
Handled Pitcher pottery in
Makó-Kosihy-Caka group in Hungary and Slovakia and in the Zlota group in southeast Poland.
Polypod Cups

Kostolac group in Slovakia and in northwest Hungary during the Final Neolithic. It then spread throughout the several cultures in eastern Europe (Vucedol, Rivnac, Cham, Corded Ware)

rms2
02-07-2021, 08:40 PM
All,
I think the R1b-L51>P310* call is real.
I reviewed this with several people in October, 2020.

SHT001 (in the original paper)
Afanasievo culture
3112-2918 calBCE
Shatar Chuluu site - Erdenetsogt, MONGOLIA

After some discussion and multiple reviews, Ted Kandell and his analyst help reported this (YFull forum Oct 24,2020):

R1b-L51 haplogroup level:
L51+, 2 derived reads 1240K capture array sequencing, 1 derived read separate shotgun sequencing
Y410-, 1 ancestral read 1240K (R-L51 equiv)

R1b-L51>P310/L52 haplogroup level:
P310+, 1 derived read shotgun
P311+, 3 derived reads 1240K, 3 derived reads shotgun (R-P310 equiv)
CTS7650+, 1 derived read shotgun (R-P310 equiv)



Ted is Ted so I won't say any more. So I also checked with FTDNA and they already reviewed this sample.


They also had the L51 derived upstream as Ted did and the Y410-. They also said Y410 would be unreliable in ancient samples so they discounted it.

I can't find my notes but my memory is that FTDNA had downstream L151 ancestral and L11/S127 ancestral. That would make this guy a true R1b-P310/L52*. I don't trust that coverage is normalized in Ted's comments on novel variants but this guy is at ~3000 BC and R-P310's MRCA is probably about ~3300-3100 BC so I find it plausible the Afansievo sample is a very early R-P310/L52 person.

These guys could travel!

This is why I say much of the future analysis needed will really be downstream of L51 on types of R1b-P310 people. P310's MRCA was probably directly in the Pontic-Caspian Steppes, probably not even the western fringes of the steppes. The big Y DNA winner of the whole CWC>SGCCWC>E.BBC descendancy group was R1b-L151 so only the P310>L151 lineage matters to huge population impact in West and Central Europe.

Sounds good to me, and we hashed that out here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?19944-R1b-L151-in-Afanasievo-Good-Y-DNA-Call-or-Not) starting back in March of last year. It seemed to me, looking at the results, that the problem was with that sample's mtDNA but that the Y-DNA call was good.

However, Generalissimo is more knowledgeable than I am, and he seems to think the whole genome is contaminated. But Ted Kandell also knows more than I do, and apparently, as you say, he thinks it's a good Y-DNA result.

So, I'll hang onto it, but with the knowledge that it's kind of iffy.

Meanwhile, we wait for the really pristine, sure-fire results.

rms2
02-07-2021, 09:46 PM
Back to L51 in Poland and it's interesting types of unique pottery.
Any input much appreciated-
-Pitcher pottery and Polypod Cups ?
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/3536/3051
Handled Pitcher pottery in
Polypod Cups

I tried to find something with some good mention of the types of pottery you're talking about, but I couldn't, not with Y-DNA results connected to it, anyway.

The similarity of pottery in the Carpathian basin amongst the various steppe-derived cultures there is interesting, though.

43132

dsm
02-07-2021, 10:03 PM
Sounds good to me, and we hashed that out here (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?19944-R1b-L151-in-Afanasievo-Good-Y-DNA-Call-or-Not) starting back in March of last year. It seemed to me, looking at the results, that the problem was with that sample's mtDNA but that the Y-DNA call was good.

However, Generalissimo is more knowledgeable than I am, and he seems to think the whole genome is contaminated. But Ted Kandell also knows more than I do, and apparently, as you say, he thinks it's a good Y-DNA result.

So, I'll hang onto it, but with the knowledge that it's kind of iffy.

Meanwhile, we wait for the really pristine, sure-fire results.


What crosses my mind re the findings of isolated L52 where it 'may' seem out of place, is that the DNA of the archeologists handling the ancient samples should be identified. At least that info would allow us another perspective on the find.

rms2
02-07-2021, 10:17 PM
What crosses my mind re the findings of isolated L52 where it 'may' seem out of place, is that the DNA of the archeologists handling the ancient samples should be identified. At least that info would allow us another perspective on the find.

I think that is standard procedure, and none of them would be just L52* and nothing more.

TigerMW
02-07-2021, 11:05 PM
... But Ted Kandell also knows more than I do, and apparently, as you say, he thinks it's a good Y-DNA result..
It’s not just Ted, but Michael Sager too. He’s curated over 50,000 BAM interpretations.
I also have another “expert” opinion but can’t use his name.
Of course experts can be wrong. It would surprising to find the R-P310 interpretations on this sample are wrong just like it would be surprising to find R-P310 in Afansievo.
However, the dot connections all lead back to the steppes.

Dieu
02-07-2021, 11:09 PM
It’s not just Ted, but Michael Sager too. He’s curated over 50,000 BAM interpretations.
I also have another “expert” opinion but can’t use his name.
Of course experts can be wrong. It would surprising to find the R-P310 interpretations on this sample are wrong just like it would be surprising to find R-P310 in Afansievo.
However, the dot connections all lead back to the steppes.

Repin and (or) Sredny stog seems the easy answers

TigerMW
02-08-2021, 12:11 AM
I think that is standard procedure, and none of them would be just L52* and nothing more.
There aren’t many true R-P310* people running around. That is partially why I think the L151- L11- is important.

As an aside, I don’t know if they do this but probably only women in the lab should handle Y DNA testing.

rms2
02-08-2021, 12:21 AM
There aren’t many true R-P310* people running around. That is partially why I think the L151- L11- is important.

As an aside, I don’t know if they do this but probably only women in the lab should handle Y DNA testing.

Yeah, I think it would be pretty obvious if a modern man's Y-DNA contaminated an ancient sample. The result would really pop out strongly and be derived for all sorts of downstream SNPs that weren't in existence in, say, the 3rd or 4th millennium BC.

A modern guy's Y-DNA wouldn't show up as L52 and nothing more.

TigerMW
02-08-2021, 01:30 AM
Yeah, I think it would be pretty obvious if a modern man's Y-DNA contaminated an ancient sample. The result would really pop out strongly and be derived for all sorts of downstream SNPs that weren't in existence in, say, the 3rd or 4th millennium BC.

A modern guy's Y-DNA wouldn't show up as L52 and nothing more.
I don’t have specifics but know FTDNA’s phylogenetic analysis is to look at upstream and all downstream variants.

The multiple P311+ reads are strong so it is very unlikely he is not R-P310/L52.

His L52 itself is actually a no call. For all we know he would have broken the R-P310 phylogenetic block and L52 is the youngest of the SNPs in the old block. That is another cautionary note on modern people phylogenetic blocks and TMRCA estimates.

dsm
02-08-2021, 04:17 AM
I think that is standard procedure, and none of them would be just L52* and nothing more.

That is obvious, the issue is if the worker has an L151 line and where does a lone R1b-L23-L51-L52 set of SNPs really came from. In good circumstances one would expect clean work and clean results.

But ?

Generalissimo
02-08-2021, 04:44 AM
Yeah, I think it would be pretty obvious if a modern man's Y-DNA contaminated an ancient sample. The result would really pop out strongly and be derived for all sorts of downstream SNPs that weren't in existence in, say, the 3rd or 4th millennium BC.

A modern guy's Y-DNA wouldn't show up as L52 and nothing more.

That sample isn't totally contaminated though. It just has a relatively high but still minor contamination.

rms2
02-08-2021, 12:51 PM
That is obvious, the issue is if the worker has an L151 line and where does a lone R1b-L23-L51-L52 set of SNPs really came from. In good circumstances one would expect clean work and clean results.

But ?

I'm no geneticist, but if you get a modern man's Y-DNA in a sample, it wouldn't produce L52 and nothing further along. You'd get calls downstream of that because he isn't a man of the fourth millennium BC; he's a modern man.

TigerMW
02-09-2021, 04:45 AM
So, does anyone want to venture a guess on the genesis of Corded Ware?

I have no clue, except to say it must have developed from one or more of the steppe Eneolithic groups that contributed to the development of Yamnaya.

Corded Ware is barely younger* than Yamnaya so I think some of this relies upon archaeological definitions of one culture versus another. Actually, they are both horizons so their sub-entities, the cultures, may have different degrees of affinity with Corded Ware versus Yamnaya.

Regardless, something significant drove rapid movements of people. It might be one domineering force among the brothers (including all of R1) or it might be a shortage of resources (i.e. rainfall, etc.) or a grab for new critical resources (copper, i.e.). Maybe the culprit was a black death or pestilence (maybe even just hitting the livestock - anthrax). I'd run from that too.

(Edit: I meant younger not older, but I actually was trying to point out they started nearly at the same time).

TigerMW
02-09-2021, 04:54 AM
I've been looking for potential causes for a massive westward expansion of Yamnaya>CWC, etc.. However, I still come back to the same sticky issue, the narrowness of L51>P310. Eurogenes was right on target in posing this question back in Sept of 2019.


and, most crucially, if R1b-L51, which includes R1b-P312, and is nowadays by far the most important Y-haplogroup in Western Europe, arrived there from the Pontic-Caspian steppe, then why hasn't it yet appeared in any of the ancient DNA from this part of Eastern Europe or surrounds, except of course in samples that are too young to be relevant?
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/09/is-yamnaya-overrated.html
I added the emboldening/italicization.

I think the answer is just that the initial generations of R1b-L51 lineage did not do so well in terms of long-term reproduction/survival.

R1b-L51>PF7589 was spun off and still survives so it was successful, but it was really the only part of L51, other than P310>L151, that was successful to any degree.

P310 and L151 are extremely important. L51 initially, was a bit of sliver. L51, itself, was not necessarily initially massive or was terminated other than for PF7589 and P310.

Yes, I agree that Yamnaya is overrated. True, it is probably a key part of the Indo-European language and European as well as Indian and Persian, etc. cultural formation. In those senses, the Yamnaya can not be overrated.

However, in terms of the peopling of Europe, especially on the male side, R1b-L151, especially, P312, is the dog not the tail. Since the L51 to P310 lineage is a bit of sliver we can't necessarily expect to find this needle in the haystack. This is why I look for P310's descendants and the "most important Y-haplogroup in Western Europe", which is R1b-L151. P312, U106 and S1194 are all of the same ancestor and only an SNP count or two away from L151. They are of the same tribe or even clan, originally (in my opinion). If SGC is where we find them, so be it.

The challenge towards understanding the reasons for the thin sliver of R1b-L51>P310 heading west into or as a part of Corded Ware is most difficult. The P310 to L151 clan may have been along for the ride or had special missions such as scouting/exploration, trading, propecting/mining and metallurgy. They may have had little to do with the genesis of Corded Ware, but were just instruments of the movement. I guess it could be the other way around too, that they were the leaders of the movement initially and folks like R1a, etc. became the main body or settlers.

(Edit: For some reason I thought RMS2s question "venture a guess on the genesis of Corded Ware?" was recent but I see now it is from last year so it is not too current. Sorry. I was doing searches on Corded Ware posts).

etrusco
02-09-2021, 10:14 AM
food for tought.
Both CWC and BBC share the bigendered crouched burial custom:

The transition of the Tiszapolgar culture and following Bodrogkeresztur (and Laznany group of eastern Slovakia) cultures from 4,500 BCE with distinctly individual male (right side) and female (left side) crouched burials (Boric 2015) and the associated appearance of sun discs, boars tusks, copper chisels and knives.

Silesian
02-09-2021, 11:18 AM
Still trying to dance around the fact of how R1a-M417 in Europe Baltic scores the coveted overrated Yamnaya component?While Polish L51 and downstream SGC R1b clans score the overated Yamnaya and or component . At the same time the Persian- Indian-Yamnaya component. Not even a vague attempt at an explanation?

davit
02-09-2021, 11:39 AM
Still trying to dance around the fact of how R1a-M417 in Europe Baltic scores the coveted overrated Yamnaya component?While Polish L51 and downstream SGC R1b clans score the overated Yamnaya and or component . At the same time the Persian- Indian-Yamnaya component. Not even a vague attempt at an explanation?

A model getting a decent fit when using Yamnaya to model the steppe ancestry Corded Ware doesn't necessarily mean that steppe ancestry is directly from Yamnaya. It could be that both Yamnaya and Corded Ware descend from a common population.

Generalissimo
02-09-2021, 11:59 AM
Still trying to dance around the fact of how R1a-M417 in Europe Baltic scores the coveted overrated Yamnaya component?While Polish L51 and downstream SGC R1b clans score the overated Yamnaya and or component . At the same time the Persian- Indian-Yamnaya component. Not even a vague attempt at an explanation?

The Baltic, Polish and Danish CWC samples all score the same components.

It's just that the very early Baltic CWC has much less farmer ancestry, so it's practically like Yamnaya. The southeast Polish CWC has a little more farmer ancestry.

The North Central Polish CWC, late Baltic CWC and Danish CWC (SGC) all have more farmer ancestry.

None of these groups has any real Persian or Indian ancestry. So learn the basics or get another hobby.

Alain
02-09-2021, 12:31 PM
food for tought.
Both CWC and BBC share the bigendered crouched burial custom:

The transition of the Tiszapolgar culture and following Bodrogkeresztur (and Laznany group of eastern Slovakia) cultures from 4,500 BCE with distinctly individual male (right side) and female (left side) crouched burials (Boric 2015) and the associated appearance of sun discs, boars tusks, copper chisels and knives.

This burial rite is identical to the Eastern European CWC looking to the east. Were the individuals of the Tiszapolgar culture (4500- 4000 B.C) correctly dated? Or do the individuals come except at a later time?

Silesian
02-09-2021, 01:08 PM
The Baltic, Polish and Danish CWC samples all score the same components.

It's just that the very early Baltic CWC has much less farmer ancestry, so it's practically like Yamnaya. The southeast Polish CWC has a little more farmer ancestry.

The North Central Polish CWC, late Baltic CWC and Danish CWC (SGC) all have more farmer ancestry.

None of these groups has any real Persian or Indian ancestry. So learn the basics or get another hobby.

Bro, Persian or Indian ancestry do have Yamnaya component, no*? There is a connection with Eastern Europe and Vedic, no?And I thought Gyvakarai1 was the Only R1a-M417 with a hammer-headed pin in Yamnaya like Baltic samples-- like the ones found in YamnayaR1b-V1636 PG2001 territory, Fatyanovo, etc.. or perhaps I might be mistaken? Gyvakarai1 R1a-M417 is also on the same branch-strain of Yersinia Pestis as Gen72,no?
If true how did Gyvakarai1 acquire a hammer headed pin and Yersinia Pestis and Yamnaya component, via female exogamy? Or it originates from the same time and region as the R1b-L52 found in Corded Ware Poland-yet did not expand with Bell Beaker and Yamnaya component in Western Europe?
* Please be so kind as to compare barrow/Kurgan--samples with no signs of trauma as Gen72(as far as I know) I0432-2124? I7670 , I6294 and I7670, I1020,I0575 with Bell Beaker I2787.

rms2
02-09-2021, 01:13 PM
Corded Ware is barely older than Yamnaya so I think some of this relies upon archaeological definitions of one culture versus another. Actually, they are both horizons so their sub-entities, the cultures, may have different degrees of affinity with Corded Ware versus Yamnaya.

Regardless, something significant drove rapid movements of people. It might be one domineering force among the brothers (including all of R1) or it might be a shortage of resources (i.e. rainfall, etc.) or a grab for new critical resources (copper, i.e.). Maybe the culprit was a black death or pestilence (maybe even just hitting the livestock - anthrax). I'd run from that too.

Corded Ware is actually younger than Yamnaya (maybe that is what you meant).

You quoted one of my older posts in this thread for your response above. Now I think I actually do have an idea how Corded Ware formed, which I have mentioned a few times already: 1) Yamnaya moved north from the steppe up the Dniester/Prut valleys and into the NW Ukraine/SE Poland/E Slovakia area; 2) there it dominated and to a limited extent blended with local peoples to form incipient Corded Ware during the CWC-X Horizon (3000-2900 BC); and 3) from that region Corded Ware expanded.

At least, that's what I think right now. I could be wrong.

I'll just be glad and excited to see those SGC ancient DNA results, if we ever do.

rms2
02-09-2021, 01:20 PM
food for tought.
Both CWC and BBC share the bigendered crouched burial custom:

The transition of the Tiszapolgar culture and following Bodrogkeresztur (and Laznany group of eastern Slovakia) cultures from 4,500 BCE with distinctly individual male (right side) and female (left side) crouched burials (Boric 2015) and the associated appearance of sun discs, boars tusks, copper chisels and knives.

Gender dimorphism in burials under actual small kurgans was also practiced at Nalchik in the northern Caucasus in the last half of the 4th millennium BC. Mallory and Anthony both mention that in their books.

rms2
02-09-2021, 02:36 PM
Regarding the "Yamnaya is overrated" thing, I agree, if by that one means that it wasn't actually Yamnaya itself that accomplished the Indo-Europeanization of Europe west of the steppe or of South Asia. Yamnaya-derived successor cultures did that in both places.

But what is Yamnaya? (I asked that rhetorical question earlier in this thread, umpteen posts ago.)

It seems to me "Yamnaya" is a catch-all term for the mish-mash of steppe pastoralist peoples about 3300-2600 BC. There was a "Yamnaya package" that kind of generally describes what was going on, but there was a lot of variety. The amazing thing is it seems these people all pretty much swam in essentially the same pool of autosomal DNA but had a few different Y-DNA haplogroups represented among them. Probably each separate tribe, clan, or individual Yamnaya subculture was dominated by its own particular Y-DNA line, but Yamnaya as a whole was not. There weren't that many different Y-DNA haplogroups in Yamnaya, but there were certainly more than just one.

When Corded Ware and its offshoot Bell Beaker show up with "Yamnaya DNA", I think they come by it honestly: it really is Yamnaya DNA they have, probably because there was no one else on the steppe but the catch-all Yamnaya horizon to supply it.

So, some kind of Yamnaya went into the creation of Corded Ware; it didn't come into being via some mysterious "other" non-Yamnaya people who just appeared out of thin air. Because, as I understand it, and correct me if I am wrong, the Yamnaya cultural horizon was it, all there really was, for steppe pastoralist peoples on the steppe at that time. What other source for Corded Ware could there be that had that same kind of autosomal DNA and the same sorts of cultural traits?

Yamnaya should be called in Russian the вся култура, i.e., the "Everything Culture" for the steppe during the period roughly 3300-2600, although perhaps not so much during its later period.

The "Yamnaya Package" from Harrison and Heyd (2007):

43166

TigerMW
02-09-2021, 03:24 PM
Corded Ware is actually younger than Yamnaya (maybe that is what you meant).
Absolutely. I'll edit in the original post. I meant to say "Corded Ware is barely younger than Yamnaya". They are almost brothers. This could be something to consider. Perhaps L51 sat somewhere along the north edge of Yamnaya but as noted, that depends on the definitions.
We do need more L51 ancient DNA back in the east. We have that one result in the Yamnaya territories but there is disagreement on it so it would be very nice to have more.

etrusco
02-09-2021, 03:33 PM
Absolutely. I'll edit in the original post. I meant to say "Corded Ware is barely younger than Yamnaya". They are almost brothers. This could be something to consider. Perhaps L51 sat somewhere along the north edge of Yamnaya but as noted, that depends on the definitions.
We do need more L51 ancient DNA back in the east. We have that one result in the Yamnaya territories but there is disagreement on it so it would be very nice to have more.

barely..... I would say not. Distance between Yamnaya and CWC is like the distance between us and the Mayflower's trip.....

Silesian
02-09-2021, 05:04 PM
An rough idea of the area covered by Corded Ware R1a-M417 and L51+ in relation to Yamnaya and Bell Beaker.

https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/yamnaya-corded-ware-bell-beakers.jpg?x56347

rms2
02-09-2021, 05:05 PM
Speaking of Yamnaya and what it is (or was), this is from Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans, page 211:



The final Eneolithic culture of the Pontic-Caspian region, and the last cultural entity which may putatively be assigned a Proto-Indo-European date, is the Yamnaya (Pit-grave) culture. The major floruit of this culture, substantiated by more than seventy radiocarbon dates, is about 3600-2200 BC. Its territory embraced the entire Pontic-Caspian from the Bug and Dniester rivers on the west across to the Ural and Emba rivers on the east. Such a territory, stretching 3,000 kilometres across, is so vast that many archaeologists accept the terminology of Nikolai Merpert and refer to a Yamnaya cultural-historical area rather than to a single culture.

The immediate origins of the Yamnaya culture are complicated and still very much disputed, although there is general agreement that both the Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk cultures were the primary foundations for the Yamnaya groups of their respective regions. While these certainly underlie some of the local Yamnaya variants, it should be noted, however, that Merpert envisages nine different regional variants in this vast continuum.


Merpert's nine regional Yamnaya variants mentioned above, from the map on page 211, are as follows:

1. Southwest

2. Northwest

3. Lower Dnieper

4. Crimean

5. Azov

6. North Donets

7. Don

8. Volga-Ural

9. North Caucasian

Those are just regional variants of Yamnaya. Within them were various Yamnaya subcultures.

TigerMW
02-09-2021, 05:50 PM
barely..... I would say not. Distance between Yamnaya and CWC is like the distance between us and the Mayflower's trip.....

Rather than go into semantics and when "barely" is barely or something else. This is what I see is commonly accepted.

Yamnaya 3300–2600 BC
Corded Ware 3100- 2350 BC

overlap 3100-2600 BC

The overlap is more than the lead time Yamnaya has. Of course, all of these dates are subject to opinion and variation and definitions of what is Yamnaya is.

As far as semantics and comparisons with the Mayflower, let's have a little fun.

I'm in 2021. The Mayflower trip was 1620 so that's 400 years. The Mayflower has 400 years lead time over us.
The overlap of Mayflower with my lifetime is 0%.

The Yamnaya has 200 years lead time on Corded Ware (depending on definitions, etc.) That 200 years was against a backdrop of a 700 year life of a cultural horizon of something going on 5000 years ago (5000, nor 400). 200 years is not a lot of time for something 5000 years ago.

The overlap of CW with Yamnaya is about 70% (500 divided by 700 yrs). That's in comparison to us and an overlap with the Mayflower of 0%.

I'm not sure the Mayflower is a great comparison.

I suppose you are talking about physical distance while I was talking about timeframes. I'm still not seeing the comparison, though. CW and Yamnaya are shown to be adjacent, again depending on definitions.

BTW, I have an ancestors who were pilgrims. The one I can identify didn't come over on the Mayflower but soon after. The descendants of these people were at Lexington and Concord. One was my ancestor who died in a British prison ship. I have found out that more soldiers died on this ships than in battle during the Revolutionary War.

TigerMW
02-09-2021, 05:53 PM
An rough idea of the area covered by Corded Ware R1a-M417 and L51+ in relation to Yamnaya and Bell Beaker.

https://indo-european.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/yamnaya-corded-ware-bell-beakers.jpg?x56347

For all we can say about the author, this is a nice chart. I like showing of the burials and the pots.

rms2
02-09-2021, 05:55 PM
For all we can say about the author, this is a nice chart. I like showing of the burials and the pots.

As I recall, Furholt had a very similar map in his paper on the SGBR cultural horizon.

rms2
02-09-2021, 06:02 PM
As I recall, Furholt had a very similar map in his paper on the SGBR cultural horizon.

Here it is:

43168

Interesting that Furholt shows the different orientations within the Corded Ware culture. Some males have the classic CW posture (crouched on right side, head to the west). Others have their heads to the north, while still others are supine on their backs.

rms2
02-09-2021, 06:52 PM
Looking back for something, I noticed that Mallory says Yamnaya began about 3600 BC, and Anthony says 3400 BC.

Corded Ware dates to about 2900 BC, maybe 3000 BC.

Ancient dates surely have pretty wide margins though. We know Yamnaya is a few centuries older than Corded Ware, but just how many is an open question.

Silesian
02-09-2021, 07:00 PM
For all we can say about the author, this is a nice chart. I like showing of the burials and the pots.

Is it safe to say the Afanasievo R1b-L51 is connected with Yamnaya R1b-KMS75? And Yamnaya R1b-KMS75 have been using the same burial ground area for over 1000 years? 3300-2925+/- --------- 2121-1942 [I0429 Yamnaya 3339-2917 calBCE Russia Lopatino I, Sok River, Samara Haak et al. 2015 I0438 Yamnaya 3021-2635 calBCE Russia Luzkhi I, Samara River, Samara Haak et al. 2015 I0439 Yamnaya 3305-2925 calBCE Russia Lopatino I, Sok River, Samara Haak et al. 2015............ Grachevka I, kurgan 1, grave 1 (I7670): Date of 2121-1942 calBCE
page 8 map R1b-KMS75 burial grounds.
file:///C:/Users/thinkpad/Downloads/SchultingRichards2016Samara.pdf

rms2
02-09-2021, 07:09 PM
As I recall, Furholt had a very similar map in his paper on the SGBR cultural horizon.

Well, this is embarrassing. I knew I saw that same map in Furholt's paper, but I stopped too soon when I came across Figure 2 on page 5. The actual very same map is Figure 3 on the next page.

Here it is:

43170

alan
02-10-2021, 02:07 AM
Honestly, I don't know, especially after seeing the map etrusco posted.

Right now, however, I am pretty convinced what happened was as follows: 1. Yamnaya up the Prut/Dniester valleys into SE Poland, followed by 2. the CWC-X Horizon and the formation of Corded Ware. 3. R1b-L51 (it and all its subclades old enough to have been around) then went northwest and was in on the birth of Single Grave Corded Ware. 4. Sometime around 2600 BC, Beaker was born as a variety of Single Grave Corded Ware and then pushed out into the rest of Europe.

totally agree. It does look very likely.

alan
02-10-2021, 02:19 AM
Absolutely. I'll edit in the original post. I meant to say "Corded Ware is barely younger than Yamnaya". They are almost brothers. This could be something to consider. Perhaps L51 sat somewhere along the north edge of Yamnaya but as noted, that depends on the definitions.
We do need more L51 ancient DNA back in the east. We have that one result in the Yamnaya territories but there is disagreement on it so it would be very nice to have more.

The start of CW is several centuries later than Yamnaya. However it is noticeable that the start of the CW is very similar to the start of Yamnaya to the west of the steppes. Both just after 3000BC. So those two phenomenon ran chronologically in parallel. It suggests that Yamnaya had a big migration event into old Europe around the same time that CW began further to the north.

alan
02-10-2021, 02:32 AM
Regarding the "Yamnaya is overrated" thing, I agree, if by that one means that it wasn't actually Yamnaya itself that accomplished the Indo-Europeanization of Europe west of the steppe or of South Asia. Yamnaya-derived successor cultures did that in both places.

But what is Yamnaya? (I asked that rhetorical question earlier in this thread, umpteen posts ago.)

It seems to me "Yamnaya" is a catch-all term for the mish-mash of steppe pastoralist peoples about 3300-2600 BC. There was a "Yamnaya package" that kind of generally describes what was going on, but there was a lot of variety. The amazing thing is it seems these people all pretty much swam in essentially the same pool of autosomal DNA but had a few different Y-DNA haplogroups represented among them. Probably each separate tribe, clan, or individual Yamnaya subculture was dominated by its own particular Y-DNA line, but Yamnaya as a whole was not. There weren't that many different Y-DNA haplogroups in Yamnaya, but there were certainly more than just one.

When Corded Ware and its offshoot Bell Beaker show up with "Yamnaya DNA", I think they come by it honestly: it really is Yamnaya DNA they have, probably because there was no one else on the steppe but the catch-all Yamnaya horizon to supply it.

So, some kind of Yamnaya went into the creation of Corded Ware; it didn't come into being via some mysterious "other" non-Yamnaya people who just appeared out of thin air. Because, as I understand it, and correct me if I am wrong, the Yamnaya cultural horizon was it, all there really was, for steppe pastoralist peoples on the steppe at that time. What other source for Corded Ware could there be that had that same kind of autosomal DNA and the same sorts of cultural traits?

Yamnaya should be called in Russian the вся култура, i.e., the "Everything Culture" for the steppe during the period roughly 3300-2600, although perhaps not so much during its later period.

The "Yamnaya Package" from Harrison and Heyd (2007):

43166

I looked pretty hard into the sequence in burials in that Yampil and nearby zones on the Dniester route and NW Ukraine in general and, although its not an open-shut thing, I think western Ukraine forest steppe Yamnaya looks the most likely candidate to have become part of the ethnogensis of CW - including L51. I am less convinced that dry steppe yamnaya nearer the Black Sea shores contained L51 or R1a or surely it would have appeared in kurgans around the Danube, west shore of Black Sea etc. I tend to think that the dry steppe was Z2103 while forest steppe upstream featured the L51 and R1a. Presumably with slightly differently adapted subsistence strategies as the fora and fauna is not the same close the Black Sea as it is in the middle reaches of the Ukraine rivers. Living in the forest steppe probably would have helped the adapting to non-steppe conditions too if they lived close to the interface. In contrast its often pointed out that the Danube Yamnaya (presumably Z2103 dominated) groups stayed only in particular steppe-like niches for 500 years and didnt adapt during the period of that culture - though presumably their descendants did in the post-Yamnaya cultures of that region after 2500BC and merged with locals. But I suspect that in 3000-2500BC L51 and R1a being adaptive while Z2103 apparently not doing so created the basic division we still see today.

alan
02-10-2021, 02:38 AM
Certainly it looks like CW and its derivatives were responsible for the bulk of known IE languages. The only exceptions seem to be Greek, Armenian, some of the dead Balkans languages and maybe Tocharian. As well as the Antatolian ones.

VladimirTaraskin
02-10-2021, 05:54 AM
I looked pretty hard into the sequence in burials in that Yampil and nearby zones on the Dniester route and NW Ukraine in general and, although its not an open-shut thing, I think western Ukraine forest steppe Yamnaya looks the most likely candidate to have become part of the ethnogensis of CW - including L51.

This area is of course important, obviously it is there that future CWCs have acquired an admixture of EEF. However, this area has been inhabited since the Neolithic by EEF (Trypillia) and EEF/WHG (GAC) populations. But it is just as obvious that in this area the pre-CWC population appeared shortly before 3000 BC. Firstly, because the Fatyanovo study says that the EEF admixture was acquired in the period from 3100 to 2900 BC, and secondly, because there is practically no EEF in the early samples of CWC R1a-CTS4385. Thus, the area where the early CWC R1a-CTS4385 came from and where R1a-Z645 were located before 3100 BC was outside of Tripoli and the GAC. This area is east of the Dnieper.

etrusco
02-10-2021, 09:01 AM
This area is of course important, obviously it is there that future CWCs have acquired an admixture of EEF. However, this area has been inhabited since the Neolithic by EEF (Trypillia) and EEF/WHG (GAC) populations. But it is just as obvious that in this area the pre-CWC population appeared shortly before 3000 BC. Firstly, because the Fatyanovo study says that the EEF impurity was acquired in the period from 3100 to 2900 BC, and secondly, because there is practically no EEF in the early samples of CWC R1a-CTS4385. Thus, the area where the early CWC R1a-CTS4385 came from and where R1a-Z645 were located before 3100 BC was outside of Tripoli and the GAC. This area is east of the Dnieper.

A few notes:
I'm not a native English speaker so maybe I cannot get the subtility of a term but why you call the EEF "admixture" impurity?

You are right that Yamnaya is made up of an eastern shift regarding autosomal. It is all about the rise in Progress like ancestry and the watering down of both EEF and Euro HG on the pontic steppe. As per the introgression of Yline I would rather be cautious. After all isn't true that they found an R1a Z93 type in eastern Romania ( Galvanesti IIRC). It is not from Gac or TC but Usatovo tough.

It seems to me that there is a recurrent flip flop regarding Yamanaya. On one side they say that it is overrated ( I guess because it has no R1a...at least so far) so it cannot be ancestral to CWC. On the other side when the issue is about the EEF factor ( the impurity) than people ( the very same people often) generally point out that early CW IS LIKE YAMNAYA ( it has the least impurity possible!) so implicitly admitting that CW is likely from Yamanaya.
At least there is a good point in being on genetic forums. You learn the virtue of patience......

rms2
02-10-2021, 01:00 PM
In English the word "impurity" carries a negative connotation that it does not always carry in Russian as примесь, so you'll have to cut Vladimir some slack. In this case примесь really would be better translated as admixture.

BTW, I'm no expert at Russian, nor do I regard myself as anywhere near fluent, but I lived there for a short while, and I am exposed to the language every day in my own house.

I think what is meant by Yamnaya being overrated is that it wasn't Yamnaya that accomplished the Indo-Europeanization of either Europe west of the steppe or South Asia. Yamnaya-derived successor cultures like Corded Ware in Europe did that.

But Yamnaya is super important, because it got the IE ball rolling, and the steppe DNA and steppe pastoralist cultural traits in cultures like Corded Ware came ultimately from Yamnaya.

VladimirTaraskin
02-10-2021, 01:22 PM
In English the word "impurity" carries a negative connotation that it does not always carry in Russian as примесь, so you'll have to cut Vladimir some slack. In this case примесь really would be better translated as admixture.

BTW, I'm no expert at Russian, nor do I regard myself as anywhere near fluent, but I lived there for a short while, and I am exposed to the language every day in my own house.



Thank you, otherwise I wouldn't understand what etrusco is talking about

MitchellSince1893
02-10-2021, 01:38 PM
I’m being facetious, but to avoid the “Yamnaya”, baggage; we could simply say, “people who buried their dead in a pit with a mound on top, who lived North of the Black Sea circa 3000 BC”

Silesian
02-10-2021, 02:52 PM
A few notes:
I'm not a native English speaker so maybe I cannot get the subtility of a term but why you call the EEF "admixture" impurity?

You are right that Yamnaya is made up of an eastern shift regarding autosomal. It is all about the rise in Progress like ancestry and the watering down of both EEF and Euro HG on the pontic steppe. As per the introgression of Yline I would rather be cautious. After all isn't true that they found an R1a Z93 type in eastern Romania ( Galvanesti IIRC). It is not from Gac or TC but Usatovo tough.

It seems to me that there is a recurrent flip flop regarding Yamanaya. On one side they say that it is overrated ( I guess because it has no R1a...at least so far) so it cannot be ancestral to CWC. On the other side when the issue is about the EEF factor ( the impurity) than people ( the very same people often) generally point out that early CW IS LIKE YAMNAYA ( it has the least impurity possible!) so implicitly admitting that CW is likely from Yamanaya.
At least there is a good point in being on genetic forums. You learn the virtue of patience......

Here is a comment on a blog by a fan of Seima-Turbino culture, about Yamnaya and Catacombe. I could also bring up a post about skull measurments and pigmentation, but you get the drift.

When you are center of attention everyone wants a piece of the action, no harm by talking about mis translated impurity . BTW I don't think there were I1 in Volosovo, no?..
@Davidski. By the way, in this work, figure object 4, the first time I see that Peplinski mound related to Seima-Turbino. In all works before Peplinski mound was related to Chirkovo culture. This place is epic Abashevo culture, just the mound is the burial place of Abashevo. It should be understood that the Volga region by 2000 was already densely populated. There were remnants of Ymnaiy culture (Poltava culture) subclades R1b-Z2103 and Abashevo (Srubnaiy culture) subclades R1a-Z2124, and remnants of Fatyanovo culture and Balanovo culture (R1a-?) and Volosovo culture subclades I, likely I1, and still mass cultures, culture Lola with North Caucasian tribes, Pozdnyakovskaya culture, the remnants of Repino culture, the remnants of culture pit-comb ceramics (R1b-M73 and still perhaps that the). Only a very strong aggressive and well-armed community could break through this shield. In fact, all these cultures were replaced by the culture of Chirkovo, which later became the culture of mesh ceramics, and their fist, apparently, was Seima-Turbino.


If only we knew what happened there and what prompted them to go to the forest from Ukraine. The most plausible is the overpopulation and pressure from the south of Yamnaya Z2103. In the West, apparently, there was still a strong GAC, in the north, the swamps around the Pripyat River are generally impassable. Only the east remained. Apparently, this whole group of Z93 went to the east. Fatyanovo to the northeast, others directly to the east. The most warlike group of them were Volsk-Lbishchevo. Like a battering ram, it crushed the catacomb tribes in its path.

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 03:43 PM
The Baltic, Polish and Danish CWC samples all score the same components.

It's just that the very early Baltic CWC has much less farmer ancestry, so it's practically like Yamnaya. The southeast Polish CWC has a little more farmer ancestry.

The North Central Polish CWC, late Baltic CWC and Danish CWC (SGC) all have more farmer ancestry.

None of these groups has any real Persian or Indian ancestry. So learn the basics or get another hobby.

It's interesting the early Baltic CWC had less farmer ancestry. I guess that just proves the point the incoming males took wives from wherever they could get them. I think it is a simple as that. Any other thoughts?

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 04:00 PM
It seems to me "Yamnaya" is a catch-all term for the mish-mash of steppe pastoralist peoples about 3300-2600 BC. There was a "Yamnaya package" that kind of generally describes what was going on, but there was a lot of variety. The amazing thing is it seems these people all pretty much swam in essentially the same pool of autosomal DNA but had a few different Y-DNA haplogroups represented among them. Probably each separate tribe, clan, or individual Yamnaya subculture was dominated by its own particular Y-DNA line, but Yamnaya as a whole was not. There weren't that many different Y-DNA haplogroups in Yamnaya, but there were certainly more than just one.
This about as rational an explanation as I've heard of something that was more of an horizon of cultures than a singular culture-group.

This brings to mind the situation on the ground there. Maybe we should take a page from Corded Ware and back up a step. The CW (or soon to be) men took wives from Neolithic groups to create hybrid families/cultures.

Why would that not be a similar situation back home in the steppes? Perhaps men from one tribe raided women from others over a period of enough time to create an autosomal DNA pattern that was common across the horizon (Yamnaya). The Yamnaya were actually nomadic. This beckons me to recheck the Native American tribes of the Great Plains. I know tribes warred with each other that there was raiding of horses. I am not sure how much raiding of women there was but it may have been a big part of it.


When Corded Ware and its offshoot Bell Beaker show up with "Yamnaya DNA", I think they come by it honestly: it really is Yamnaya DNA they have, probably because there was no one else on the steppe but the catch-all Yamnaya horizon to supply it.
Perhaps Corded Ware is really Yamnaya Corded War, then East/North Bell Beaker should be Yamnaya Corded Beaker.

I don't know, but I have asked several researchers to consider renaming the East and North Bell Beakers something different. Even if they just add one label in front of Bell Beakers, like "Continental" Bell Beakers, that would be better than the current state. There needs to be one specific and differentiating label attached to this cultural horizon, which is probably a hybrid of Corded Ware and something else.

VladimirTaraskin
02-10-2021, 04:13 PM
Here is a comment on a blog by a fan of Seima-Turbino culture, about Yamnaya and Catacombe. I could also bring up a post about skull measurments and pigmentation, but you get the drift.

When you are center of attention everyone wants a piece of the action, no harm by talking about mis translated impurity . BTW I don't think there were I1 in Volosovo, no?..

It's sad, but that's life. Unfortunately, a large part of the change of archaeological cultures did not occur peacefully. Whether this is good or bad, it is difficult for us to judge from the present tense. But the fact is that if this had not happened in the past, the present would have been different. Better or worse is also unknown. To understand how the current situation has developed, it is hardly worth avoiding such unpleasant moments in the past. On the other hand, you don't need to project on yourself what happened to a particular Y-DNA haplogroup in the past. It is even more strange to try to prove the autochthonous nature of a certain Y-DNA haplogroup in a certain territory. One way or another, a chain of different events led to the current state of affairs. Finding out these events is of scientific or cognitive interest, but not making claims to another haplogroup for the past.

Silesian
02-10-2021, 04:22 PM
It's sad, but that's life. Unfortunately, a large part of the change of archaeological cultures did not occur peacefully. Whether this is good or bad, it is difficult for us to judge from the present tense. But the fact is that if this had not happened in the past, the present would have been different. Better or worse is also unknown. To understand how the current situation has developed, it is hardly worth avoiding such unpleasant moments in the past. On the other hand, you don't need to project on yourself what happened to a particular Y-DNA haplogroup in the past. It is even more strange to try to prove the autochthonous nature of a certain Y-DNA haplogroup in a certain territory. One way or another, a chain of different events led to the current state of affairs. Finding out these events is of scientific or cognitive interest, but not making claims to another haplogroup for the past.

Vlad, if you only knew. I'm surprised you did not pick it up. I gave General a view samples to post on this thread, so we can compare Volga Z2109+ and Baltic M417 And Fatyanovo 93 with L51 in Poland and L51 in Afanasievo. When more samples come in I'll let you in on something.

VladimirTaraskin
02-10-2021, 04:42 PM
Vlad, if you only knew. I'm surprised you did not pick it up. I gave General a view samples to post on this thread, so we can compare Volga Z2109+ and Baltic M417 And Fatyanovo 93 with L51 in Poland and L51 in Afanasievo. When more samples come in I'll let you in on something.


I'm comfortable with the past. What was not to be changed. As for the Russian steppe zone itself, if I am not mistaken, Davidsky said that it follows from as yet unpublished works that the Y-DNA lines there changed every 500-1000 years. This is a scientific fact. I do not think that this should be treated with an emotional assessment.

Silesian
02-10-2021, 05:06 PM
I'm comfortable with the past. What was not to be changed. As for the Russian steppe zone itself, if I am not mistaken, Davidsky said that it follows from as yet unpublished works that the Y-DNA lines there changed every 500-1000 years. This is a scientific fact. I do not think that this should be treated with an emotional assessment.

I'm comfortable with the past also. Wait and be patient for more samples, SS- Yamnaya, 30+/- Volga , etc..... this might get very interesting for Tomatoes. In the mean time we can compare samples already in his data base, like the ones I pointed out, from, Early Baltic, SE Poland Corded Ware-L51, Afanasievo, Poltavka, Potrovoka, Sintashta, Bell Beaker Eastern branch Csepel Island etc.....

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 05:31 PM
It seems to me "Yamnaya" is a catch-all term for the mish-mash of steppe pastoralist peoples about 3300-2600 BC. There was a "Yamnaya package" that kind of generally describes what was going on, but there was a lot of variety. The amazing thing is it seems these people all pretty much swam in essentially the same pool of autosomal DNA but had a few different Y-DNA haplogroups represented among them

Here it is.

I can now cite 20 published Yamnaya individuals with whole-genome data from the Pontic-Caspian steppes.
...
The single fact that stands out now is the surprising homogeneity of Yamnaya genomes across the sampled regions. Almost all sampled Yamnaya individuals in the Pontic-Caspian steppes exhibit very similar genetic ancestries, derived primarily from older Eneolithic steppe populations with the additional admixture of 5-15% ancestry from Danubian farmers (Wang et al. 2018).
"Anthony 2021 Migration nomads from the east IEMA SUNY Buffalo", David Anthony (2020)
https://www.academia.edu/44892216/Anthony_2021_Migration_nomads_from_the_east_IEMA_S UNY_Buffalo

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 05:39 PM
Davidsky said that it follows from as yet unpublished works that the Y-DNA lines there changed every 500-1000 years.

I'll be interested to see if researchers can show this is change-over of the general male population or of the elite only. I'll also be interested if this turns out to be changes in place geographically but not culturally. In other words, cultures can move too. In that case, it might be better described as migrations rather than change-overs.


Almost all sampled Yamnaya males were members of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b1a. Older Eneolithic cemeteries had yielded a more diverse set of patrilines (R1b, R1a, Q1a, J, Ia2a). Later Corded Ware populations, although derived from Yamnaya ancestry, were largely Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, which had been present in the steppes during the Eneolithic and could have remained present but been excluded from kurgans through the Yamnaya era, re-emerging as a dominant male lineage in in the Corded Ware population. This shifting of male lineages within a broadly related set of steppe-derived populations could indicate a succession of restricted male-defined clans gaining access to political power and to memorialization under prominent burial mounds while excluding other males from such positions. The regionally suppressed patrilines such as those that inherited the R1a haplotype would in this case have become almost invisible archaeologically in the steppes because of their exclusion from Yamnaya kurgan graves, but then emerged as migrants in central Europe. Social and political competition between patrilines could have encouraged migration to new regions. But if burial under a kurgan was restricted in this way, then aDNA is sampling only the dominant elite, not the whole population.

"Anthony 2021 Migration nomads from the east IEMA SUNY Buffalo", David Anthony (2020)
https://www.academia.edu/44892216/Anthony_2021_Migration_nomads_from_the_east_IEMA_S UNY_Buffalo

I'll go back to my old line. Just like R1b-M269 down to right before M269>L23, R1b-L51 down to R1b-L51>P310 and even down to R1b-L51>P310>L151, was not necessarily extremely successful. It's only at R1b-L151 that we can say a tremendous impact began for West and Central Europe.

rms2
02-10-2021, 06:03 PM
I remember in reading that recent paper from Anthony thinking that he must have written it before the recent spate of R1b-L51 (what I mean by R1b-L51) results in Corded Ware.

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 07:34 PM
Here is an example of why I proposed the L51 Mediterranean route and asked for ways to disprove it. This is a from a very recent magazine article. I emboldened a phrase.


The arrival of the Bell Beakers about 4,000 years ago replaced the Neolithic farmers. These new arrivals are similar to the later Celts and modern Irish populations and they originated in the Pontic Steppes and Caucasus between the Black and Caspian Sea. They migrated west and blended with the Bell Beaker culture from Iberia before expanding along the Atlantic Facade and the Isles.
Womans Way magazine, Gerard Corcoran

This is a great guy and huge help to genetic genealogy. He never said how the Bell Beakers made it west but chose to emphasize an Iberian connection.

This all goes hand in hand with "Celtic from the West" and John Koch... and the Irish legends.
He could be talking about the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is post the East/North Bell Beakers, although it certainly sounds like he is referring to Bell Beakers.

rms2
02-10-2021, 07:46 PM
Here is an example of why I proposed the L51 Mediterranean route and asked for ways to disprove it. This is a from a very recent magazine article. I emboldened a phrase.

Womans Way magazine, Gerard Corcoran

This is a great guy and huge help to genetic genealogy. He never said how the Bell Beakers made it west but chose to emphasize an Iberian connection.

This all goes hand in hand with "Celtic from the West" and John Koch... and the Irish legends.
He could be talking about the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is post the East/North Bell Beakers, although it certainly sounds like he is referring to Bell Beakers.

As I recall, Gerard has the screen name "Heber" here.

He does seem to be fond of the whole Celtic-from-the-west thing. Of course, it would be better if he explained his position on that.

It seems to me Olalde et al shot that down in flames, since it is pretty obvious Beaker did not go to Iberia first and then expand along the Atlantic façade from there.

British Beaker is autosomally closest to Dutch Beaker and to Corded Ware. Its dominant Y-DNA haplogroup is R1b-L21, which has not shown up in Iberian Beaker, even among the post-2500 BC Iberian Beaker men with steppe DNA.

If Beaker had gone to Iberia first, blended with the people there, and then expanded along the Atlantic façade, then some Neolithic Iberian autosomal DNA ought to be showing up in British and Irish Beaker, but it's not.

rms2
02-10-2021, 08:09 PM
. . . They migrated west and blended with the Bell Beaker culture from Iberia before expanding along the Atlantic Facade and the Isles.

The word culture in that sentence just caught my eye. Gerard may not actually be saying the steppe-derived people who became Beaker went to Iberia first and expanded from there or that they blended with Iberian people before expanding. He may simply be saying that the steppe-derived people who became Beaker picked up the Beaker culture on their way west and that Beaker culture was Iberian in origin.

That's essentially what Reich said in his book, i.e., that Bell Beaker ideas expanded east out of Iberia, and steppe-derived people picked those ideas up in Central Europe and adopted them.

I don't totally agree with that either, but it is different from the idea of steppe-derived people actually going to Iberia first, blending with the native people there, and expanding from Iberia afterwards.

Webb
02-10-2021, 08:09 PM
As I recall, Gerard has the screen name "Heber" here.

He does seem to be fond of the whole Celtic-from-the-west thing. Of course, it would be better if he explained his position on that.

It seems to me Olalde et al shot that down in flames, since it is pretty obvious Beaker did not go to Iberia first and then expand along the Atlantic façade from there.

British Beaker is autosomally closest to Dutch Beaker and to Corded Ware. Its dominant Y-DNA haplogroup is R1b-L21, which has not shown up in Iberian Beaker, even among the post-2500 BC Iberian Beaker men with steppe DNA.

If Beaker had gone to Iberia first, blended with the people there, and then expanded along the Atlantic façade, then some Neolithic Iberan autosomal DNA ought to be showing up in British and Irish Beaker, but it's not.

That would be my first observation. There is enough DF27 in Iberia in ancient samples that it should have been found in the British Isles, anciently as well if it was a migration of P312 out of Iberia, and it has not been found. Secondly the lack of other P312 subclades in Iberian ancient samples. There were more than enough samples from Iberia in Olalde's work that it was a clear transition from I to P312 with the onset of the Bronze Age, and the samples that were able to be called below P312 were DF27. If P312 was a reflux out of Iberia, then I would think we would have seen more variety in the ancient samples as well as modern distribution.

Dewsloth
02-10-2021, 08:52 PM
That would be my first observation. There is enough DF27 in Iberia in ancient samples that it should have been found in the British Isles, anciently as well if it was a migration of P312 out of Iberia, and it has not been found. Secondly the lack of other P312 subclades in Iberian ancient samples. There were more than enough samples from Iberia in Olalde's work that it was a clear transition from I to P312 with the onset of the Bronze Age, and the samples that were able to be called below P312 were DF27. If P312 was a reflux out of Iberia, then I would think we would have seen more variety in the ancient samples as well as modern distribution.

Yeah, I think we can safely rule that one out for now; although if someone finds an L238 Iberian Beaker I reserve the right to reconsider.

JoeyP37
02-10-2021, 09:17 PM
Here is an example of why I proposed the L51 Mediterranean route and asked for ways to disprove it. This is a from a very recent magazine article. I emboldened a phrase.

Womans Way magazine, Gerard Corcoran

This is a great guy and huge help to genetic genealogy. He never said how the Bell Beakers made it west but chose to emphasize an Iberian connection.

This all goes hand in hand with "Celtic from the West" and John Koch... and the Irish legends.
He could be talking about the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is post the East/North Bell Beakers, although it certainly sounds like he is referring to Bell Beakers.

I don't want to sound misogynistic, but Womans Way is not a peer-reviewed journal.

rms2
02-10-2021, 09:29 PM
I don't want to sound misogynistic, but Womans Way is not a peer-reviewed journal.

Lol. I actually got a big grin from that one. :biggrin1:

rms2
02-10-2021, 10:01 PM
This is post #928. That's a big number, which probably indicates that this thread will soon crash due to its own weight, but I have enjoyed it.

I'll be glad when some fresh papers on this topic start to appear, and we can discuss - and celebrate - the results.

Dieu
02-10-2021, 10:08 PM
I remember in reading that recent paper from Anthony thinking that he must have written it before the recent spate of R1b-L51 (what I mean by R1b-L51) results in Corded Ware.

Just say L52 or L151 then.

rms2
02-10-2021, 10:13 PM
Just say L52 or L151 then.

Nope. If I did that I would be leaving out L51 and everything downstream of L151. I mean to include L51 and everything downstream of it old enough to have been present in Corded Ware.

I could just say L51 if explaining myself once, as I did in the very first post of this thread, was enough.

Dieu
02-10-2021, 10:54 PM
This about as rational an explanation as I've heard of something that was more of an horizon of cultures than a singular culture-group.

This brings to mind the situation on the ground there. Maybe we should take a page from Corded Ware and back up a step. The CW (or soon to be) men took wives from Neolithic groups to create hybrid families/cultures.

Why would that not be a similar situation back home in the steppes? Perhaps men from one tribe raided women from others over a period of enough time to create an autosomal DNA pattern that was common across the horizon (Yamnaya). The Yamnaya were actually nomadic. This beckons me to recheck the Native American tribes of the Great Plains. I know tribes warred with each other that there was raiding of horses. I am not sure how much raiding of women there was but it may have been a big part of it.


Perhaps Corded Ware is really Yamnaya Corded War, then East/North Bell Beaker should be Yamnaya Corded Beaker.

I don't know, but I have asked several researchers to consider renaming the East and North Bell Beakers something different. Even if they just add one label in front of Bell Beakers, like "Continental" Bell Beakers, that would be better than the current state. There needs to be one specific and differentiating label attached to this cultural horizon, which is probably a hybrid of Corded Ware and something else.

In new caledonia, I knew a tribal chef that was meeting with another tribal chief for a woman theft that happened 150 years earlier even before the colonisation of the island and it still wasn't settled yet

TigerMW
02-10-2021, 11:01 PM
...That's essentially what Reich said in his book, i.e., that Bell Beaker ideas expanded east out of Iberia, and steppe-derived people picked those ideas up in Central Europe and adopted them.

I don't totally agree with that either...
At this point, I don't agree much at all with the theory of steppe-derived people picking up the Iberian culture in a majority or near-majority way.

As you pointed out, the archery wrist guards probably don't even come from Iberia. Probably, the languages were different. Religiously, the burials, which were different, are much more important to the culture.

Maybe the drinking was a big deal. Maybe that's the "idea" that was phenomenal. In total, though, I just don't see the large impact.

I'll ask like this - culturally, who were the East/North Bell Beaker cultures most like?
1) the Early Iberian Bell Beaker cultures or
2) the Corded Ware cultures?

alan
02-11-2021, 12:35 PM
This area is of course important, obviously it is there that future CWCs have acquired an admixture of EEF. However, this area has been inhabited since the Neolithic by EEF (Trypillia) and EEF/WHG (GAC) populations. But it is just as obvious that in this area the pre-CWC population appeared shortly before 3000 BC. Firstly, because the Fatyanovo study says that the EEF admixture was acquired in the period from 3100 to 2900 BC, and secondly, because there is practically no EEF in the early samples of CWC R1a-CTS4385. Thus, the area where the early CWC R1a-CTS4385 came from and where R1a-Z645 were located before 3100 BC was outside of Tripoli and the GAC. This area is east of the Dnieper.

My understanding (though it may not be cutting edge) is that the GAC settlement in the area between the Carpathians and the Bug in Ukraine appeared about 2900BC and only extended to the Dnieper around a couple of centuries or more later. Its possible that the earliest proto CW people headed north up the Dniester 2 or 3 generations before the GAC culture entered the Dniester system and didnt mix with CW.

Its then difficult to see how they could have reached the Baltic via Poland without encountering GAC. Though it is possible to not admix with other cultures you pass through. That seems to have been what later happened with beaker people in Britain even though they must have been surrounded by local Neolithic farmers when they first arrived.

alan
02-11-2021, 12:44 PM
Here is an example of why I proposed the L51 Mediterranean route and asked for ways to disprove it. This is a from a very recent magazine article. I emboldened a phrase.

Womans Way magazine, Gerard Corcoran

This is a great guy and huge help to genetic genealogy. He never said how the Bell Beakers made it west but chose to emphasize an Iberian connection.

This all goes hand in hand with "Celtic from the West" and John Koch... and the Irish legends.
He could be talking about the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is post the East/North Bell Beakers, although it certainly sounds like he is referring to Bell Beakers.

Good guy but too tied to the idea of a grain of truth in the early Irish myths which were in reality mostly constructed by monks 3500 years after the beaker era using classical and bibilical sources. Those myths have been essentially analysis to death by Irish scholars and all the reliable ones conclude they are next to worthless in terms of population history. The only bits that seem to come from native Irish tradition and not christian era/classical stuff are the references to the Fir Bolg, Fir Domnainn and Fir Galleon which probably do have links to some memory of Belgi and Dumnonni/Damnonni etc. The rest is easily shown to be derived from copying biblical and classic sources.

alan
02-11-2021, 12:58 PM
Thank you, otherwise I wouldn't understand what etrusco is talking about

yeah when talking about genetics 'impure' sounds a bit like something from Third Reich like 'racial hygiene' in English. But of course that is not what was intended.

VladimirTaraskin
02-11-2021, 02:19 PM
My understanding (though it may not be cutting edge) is that the GAC settlement in the area between the Carpathians and the Bug in Ukraine appeared about 2900BC and only extended to the Dnieper around a couple of centuries or more later. Its possible that the earliest proto CW people headed north up the Dniester 2 or 3 generations before the GAC culture entered the Dniester system and didnt mix with CW.

Its then difficult to see how they could have reached the Baltic via Poland without encountering GAC. Though it is possible to not admix with other cultures you pass through. That seems to have been what later happened with beaker people in Britain even though they must have been surrounded by local Neolithic farmers when they first arrived.

But before the GAC, there was Trypillia and TRB, too, with EEF. And getting to the Baltic Sea without meeting the GAC is very easy if you go not from western, but from eastern Ukraine.

rms2
02-11-2021, 02:37 PM
At this point, I don't agree much at all with the theory of steppe-derived people picking up the Iberian culture in a majority or near-majority way.

As you pointed out, the archery wrist guards probably don't even come from Iberia. Probably, the languages were different. Religiously, the burials, which were different, are much more important to the culture.

Maybe the drinking was a big deal. Maybe that's the "idea" that was phenomenal. In total, though, I just don't see the large impact.

I'll ask like this - culturally, who were the East/North Bell Beaker cultures most like?
1) the Early Iberian Bell Beaker cultures or
2) the Corded Ware cultures?

The following is from page 203 of Harrison and Heyd (2007), "The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland)":



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).

Personally, I think the Dutch were right about the Maritime Beaker, i.e., that it evolved from the AOO or AOC beaker that was used by Single Grave Corded Ware. Archery was already in use in Corded Ware. Archery gear sometimes appears in Corded Ware burials.

Maybe the decorated textiles and the V-perforated buttons can be attributed to early Iberia. Otherwise, it seems to me very little of Beaker can be ascribed to Iberia.

TigerMW
02-11-2021, 08:27 PM
The following is from page 203 of Harrison and Heyd (2007), "The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC: the example of ‘Le Petit-Chasseur I + III’ (Sion, Valais, Switzerland)":



Personally, I think the Dutch were right about the Maritime Beaker, i.e., that it evolved from the AOO or AOC beaker that was used by Single Grave Corded Ware. Archery was already in use in Corded Ware. Archery gear sometimes appears in Corded Ware burials.

Maybe the decorated textiles and the V-perforated buttons can be attributed to early Iberia. Otherwise, it seems to me very little of Beaker can be ascribed to Iberia.

So really it is Harrison and Heyd way back in 2007 who said Iberia had "something that we can call the 'proto-Package'[Bell Beakers]".

If they Dutch Model is right, which includes a the development sequence of the pottery, the Iberian "Proto-package" is truly blown out of the water. It's just a separate group with some similarities in pottery and archery.

That would mean the whole "interaction zone" or "reflux" area was just a Corded Ware exchange of ideas/practices and probably people ... from CW-x to CW to CW-SGC and finally CW-BBC and Unetice.

rms2
02-11-2021, 08:54 PM
Yeah, honestly, I do not see much that is Beaker about so-called early Iberian Beaker.

I think Beakerology got confused because two Spanish archaeologists dominated the field early, and because there were no genomic data, it looked to them like later Iberian Beaker (after 2500 BC) was just a further development of the "proto-package" stuff.

We now know Iberian Beaker post-2500 BC was mostly R1b-P312 (or DF27), had steppe DNA, and was a whole different game from the earlier stuff.

Prior to roughly 2500 BC, there was no steppe DNA or R1b-P312 in early Iberian Beaker, and there was no real Beaker package, i.e., no single grave, kurgan-style burials, etc., in Iberia either.

TigerMW
02-12-2021, 01:52 PM
...We now know Iberian Beaker post-2500 BC was mostly R1b-P312 (or DF27), had steppe DNA, and was a whole different game from the earlier stuff.

Prior to roughly 2500 BC, there was no steppe DNA or R1b-P312 in early Iberian Beaker, and there was no real Beaker package, i.e., no single grave, kurgan-style burials, etc., in Iberia either.
Exactly, Iberian Beaker people prior to 2500BC were not the same as those after.

This is why I think it is important to understand the data set used for the the autosomal DNA analysis that indicates the CWC>SGR>East BBC cline. There hopefully has been validation that the CWC and SGR samples are either from the right time frames or that the population from the right timeframe (before or close to East BBC) stayed the same down through the times of the CWC, SGR samples.

I believe the cline is real. There is too much corroborating evidence. However, there are people out there who could use assurance to be convinced.

TigerMW
02-12-2021, 02:14 PM
I would like to see more auDNA subgrouping and analysis of different parts of France, which may be very important later in the Bronze Age and in the Iron Age.

There is now a formal response from scientists who don't like Kris Kristiansen's narrative. Much of the discussion is semantic related and a matter of "to what degree?"


examining details relating to a >90 per cent shift in the genetic ancestry of populations who inhabited Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Britain (c. 2450–1600 bc). While this outcome was certainly influenced by movements of communities carrying novel ancestries into Britain from continental Europe, it was unlikely to have been a simple, rapid process, potentially taking up to 16 generations, during which time there is evidence for the synchronous persistence of groups largely descended from the Neolithic populations. Insofar as genetic relationships can be assumed to have had social meaning, identification of genetic relatives in cemeteries suggests paternal relationships were important, but there is substantial variability in how genetic ties were referenced and little evidence for strict patrilocality or female exogamy.

The authors choose to focus on Britain. They should be looking at Continental Europe harder and Iberia too in order to get a broader understanding of what was going on about 2800-2300 BC. They don't like Kristiansen's and Anthony's choice of words but they are narrowing their focus in their criticism.

The reason I asked for more auDNA evidence from regions of France is exactly what Booth is bringing up.

A caveat is that it is currently difficult to distinguish between ancestry from Neolithic populations of Britain and more western areas of continental Europe where we have little relevant archaeogenetic data but which represent archaeologically plausible sources of population movements, such as present-day northern France (Olalde et al. 2018; Parker Pearson et al. 2019b). If people from western areas of northern Europe harboured more ancestry from local Neolithic populations than we see in the Oostwoud Beaker burials, it is possible that migrations into Britain from these regions could account for some of the Neolithic ancestry we see in samples from C-EBA Britain. However, the limited amounts of archaeogenetic data we have from Bronze Age burials from present-day France indicates that these populations had similar levels of steppe-related ancestry to sampled populations of C-EBA Britain (Brunel et al. 2020; Olalde et al. 2018; Rivollat et al. 2020)

"Tales from the Supplementary Information: Ancestry Change in Chalcolithic–Early Bronze Age Britain Was Gradual with Varied Kinship Organization", Booth, et. al. (11Feb2015)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-archaeological-journal/article/tales-from-the-supplementary-information-ancestry-change-in-chalcolithicearly-bronze-age-britain-was-gradual-with-varied-kinship-organization/5B71BE0F34927E0A7199A6A568DAB3BC?fbclid=IwAR3BeCMw RB08Z6EpJgesgkDqn8cZ2JZF-LgZRIzkha6cSQHDNpxSMxHu-Oo#

Booth, et. al. don't provide answers, just questions. We need strong responses of logic and more data to "settle" the science.

J Man
02-12-2021, 03:27 PM
There is now a formal response from scientists who don't like Kris Kristiansen's narrative. Much of the discussion is semantic related and a matter of "to what degree?"



The authors choose to focus on Britain. They should be looking at Continental Europe harder and Iberia too in order to get a broader understanding of what was going on about 2800-2300 BC. They don't like Kristiansen's and Anthony's choice of words but they are narrowing their focus in their criticism.

The reason I asked for more auDNA evidence from regions of France is exactly what Booth is bringing up.


"Tales from the Supplementary Information: Ancestry Change in Chalcolithic–Early Bronze Age Britain Was Gradual with Varied Kinship Organization", Booth, et. al. (11Feb2015)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-archaeological-journal/article/tales-from-the-supplementary-information-ancestry-change-in-chalcolithicearly-bronze-age-britain-was-gradual-with-varied-kinship-organization/5B71BE0F34927E0A7199A6A568DAB3BC?fbclid=IwAR3BeCMw RB08Z6EpJgesgkDqn8cZ2JZF-LgZRIzkha6cSQHDNpxSMxHu-Oo#

Booth, et. al. don't provide answers, just questions. We need strong responses of logic and more data to "settle" the science.

The authors of this paper say that they intended to look at the finer details to get a better picture of what was possibly happening at individual sites. They are trying to look at what was happening at a more local level insead of the broad scale of previous papers about this topic. They chose Britain since the population turnover there was very large. Wouldn't looking at sites from France and Iberia contradict the point of their paper? The social process of the population turnover in Britain may not have been exactly the same as what happened in parts of Continental Europe. I do agree however that future studies like this in Continental Europe would also be very informative.

Silesian
02-12-2021, 03:48 PM
Remember the Generals exciting predictions post, for those interested in the following subjects, like L51+, no hints if Derievka, Sredny Stogg is going to be L51? Exciting times.


- the search for the Proto-Indo-European homeland will shift west to the North Pontic steppe

- on the other hand, the search for the Proto-Uralic homeland will move deep into Siberia

- the key role of the Single Grave (westernmost Corded Ware) culture in the population history of Western Europe will finally get some attention

- following on from the above, Y-haplogroup R1b-L51 will be revealed as a Single Grave marker

- the idea that the Pontic-Caspian steppe was colonized by migrants from Mesopotamia during the Bronze Age will be forgotten, and, ironically, we'll instead learn that there was a significant influx of steppe ancestry into ancient Mesopotamia

- Old Kingdom Egyptians will come out less Sub-Saharan African than present-day Egyptians.

TigerMW
02-12-2021, 04:06 PM
The authors of this paper say that they intended to look at the finer details to get a better picture of what was possibly happening at individual sites. They are trying to look at what was happening at a more local level insead of the broad scale of previous papers about this topic. They chose Britain since the population turnover there was very large. Wouldn't looking at sites from France and Iberia contradict the point of their paper? The social process of the population turnover in Britain may not have been exactly the same as what happened in parts of Continental Europe. I do agree however that future studies like this in Continental Europe would also be very informative.
You have to understand who is who when studying population changes. Who are the newcomers, how many and from where? which could include multiple types and sources. The authors say as much.

A caveat is that it is currently difficult to distinguish between ancestry from Neolithic populations of Britain and more western areas of continental Europe where we have little relevant archaeogenetic data but which represent archaeologically plausible sources of population movements....

TigerMW
02-12-2021, 04:11 PM
Remember the Generals exciting predictions post, for those interested in the following subjects, like L51+, no hints if Derievka, Sredny Stogg is going to be L51? Exciting times.
I don't know what Eurogenes knows but this could all make Thomas Booth, et. al. look foolish. I'm not a scientist but I certainly would check around for alternative views and new data before pulling the publishing triger.

You can always puts something on hold while checking out the new data that Eurogenes speaks of. Certainly, if I was criticizing Olalde, Anthony, Kristiansen, etc. I would at least send them a preprint and call them to see if I made any obvious errors in my work and/or to gain insight on counter-arguments.

Scientists can be foolish, though. They are far from infallible, as we all are.

razyn
02-12-2021, 04:47 PM
Speaking of Yamnaya and what it is (or was), this is from Mallory's In Search of the Indo-Europeans [1989], page 211:


[Nikolay Yakovlevich] Merpert's nine regional Yamnaya variants mentioned above, from the map on page 211, are as follows:
1. Southwest

2. Northwest

3. Lower Dnieper

4. Crimean

5. Azov

6. North Donets

7. Don

8. Volga-Ural

9. North Caucasian

Those are just regional variants of Yamnaya. Within them were various Yamnaya subcultures.

The referenced map is from a 1974 publication, itself based on Merpert's 1968 (Dr. habil.) dissertation. A couple of years ago, I cited (among a number of other things) a considerably updated version of it, from a 2015 publication by Claudia Gerling. That's the next-to-last paragraph in this post:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16234-Bell-Beaker-Archaeology-and-Ancient-DNA&p=544606&viewfull=1#post544606. Apart from the fact that Gerling's updated map contains some details from archaeological research less than 50 years old, I'm guardedly confident of the relevance of my parenthetical remark there:
note that only the southwest variety is shown taking a westward route that involves the Danube, or Hungary.

That is, all the rest of Yamnaya (eight more varieties, including all that were anywhere on the Dnieper, Don, Volga or Ural watersheds) might have found some other route more convenient, if they found it necessary to travel, or migrate, to central (and eventually western) Europe.

Silesian
02-12-2021, 04:48 PM
Here is an golden-oldie from a couple years back by MitchellSince1893, any ideas, now that we know Afanasievo is also L51+ and high in Repin type EHG ancestry?


Just to throw the "Goldilocks zone back in the mix (not too south not too north; not too Z2103, not too R1a; not too corded ware, not too Balkan Farmer) from a previous thread https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13871-Oldest-Steppe-Bell-Beakers-Saxony-Anhalt-Germany&p=372289&viewfull=1#post372289


Where the 500 mile radius of the center of point of voting overlays the "Goldilocks Zone" The map projection type distorts the circle into a radius

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/85/15/5c/85155c269af1668b04510c0bed178474.png

J Man
02-12-2021, 05:05 PM
I don't know what Eurogenes knows but this could all make Thomas Booth, et. al. look foolish. I'm not a scientist but I certainly would check around for alternative views and new data before pulling the publishing triger.

You can always puts something on hold while checking out the new data that Eurogenes speaks of. Certainly, if I was criticizing Olalde, Anthony, Kristiansen, etc. I would at least send them a preprint and call them to see if I made any obvious errors in my work and/or to gain insight on counter-arguments.

Scientists can be foolish, though. They are far from infallible, as we all are.

How can what David from Eurogenes knows make Thomas Booth look foolish? Is that in reference to this latest paper about EBA Britain?

Silesian
02-12-2021, 06:48 PM
I'm comfortable with the past. What was not to be changed. As for the Russian steppe zone itself, if I am not mistaken, Davidsky said that it follows from as yet unpublished works that the . This is a scientific fact. I do not think that this should be treated with an emotional assessment.

Bro, I think my line is Uralic, I'm more closer language ydna N men than Z2109+ Related, who knew?
CTS-1450* Is Mordovian :) small world.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-CTS1450/

alan
02-12-2021, 07:16 PM
But before the GAC, there was Trypillia and TRB, too, with EEF. And getting to the Baltic Sea without meeting the GAC is very easy if you go not from western, but from eastern Ukraine.

Yeah I understand your point. Its a fair point that GAC is very hard to avoid using a route from the Dniester. Then again, material culture aspects of CW culture look like they wouldnt exist without GAC contact. Furholt has suggested though that most of what we think of as A horizon CW culture dates to a period after the migrations and is due to interaction. Its possible that CW was created by people coming from Ukraine by two different route (Dniester to Poland in the west and Dnieper to the east Baltic to the east) and then converging around the south Baltic. Perhaps L51 took the western route and R1a took the eastern route. Certain Furholt saw the A horizon as a 2nd generation convergence through interaction between dispersed CW groups.

rms2
02-12-2021, 07:25 PM
The referenced map is from a 1974 publication, itself based on Merpert's 1968 (Dr. habil.) dissertation. A couple of years ago, I cited (among a number of other things) a considerably updated version of it, from a 2015 publication by Claudia Gerling. That's the next-to-last paragraph in this post:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?16234-Bell-Beaker-Archaeology-and-Ancient-DNA&p=544606&viewfull=1#post544606. Apart from the fact that Gerling's updated map contains some details from archaeological research less than 50 years old, I'm guardedly confident of the relevance of my parenthetical remark there:

That is, all the rest of Yamnaya (eight more varieties, including all that were anywhere on the Volga or the Dnieper watersheds) might have found some other route more convenient, if they found it necessary to travel, or migrate, to central (and eventually western) Europe.

I couldn't see Gerling's map. Am I correct that you think Yamnaya or whatever steppe people were in on the formation of Corded Ware came west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat rather than the Dniester/Prut valleys?

I'm open to nearly anything, but it seems to me the Dniester valley leads right to the doorstep of SE Poland and Małopolska, and it's in that region where CWC-X horizon burials have been found that are indicative of the transition from Yamnaya to Corded Ware.

Pripyat/Belarus is heavily forested. I think it was heavily forested back in the 4th/3rd millennia, as well. I could be wrong, but that doesn't strike me as a convenient or natural route west for a people who relied on ox-drawn wagons, on horses, and on their herds of livestock.

As for the comment about SW Yamnaya taking the Danube valley/Hungary route west, I would say that some of them did, but we know that others, like Budzhak, for one, went up the Dniester and Prut valleys into NW Ukraine/E Slovakia/SE Poland.

alan
02-12-2021, 07:29 PM
There is now a formal response from scientists who don't like Kris Kristiansen's narrative. Much of the discussion is semantic related and a matter of "to what degree?"



The authors choose to focus on Britain. They should be looking at Continental Europe harder and Iberia too in order to get a broader understanding of what was going on about 2800-2300 BC. They don't like Kristiansen's and Anthony's choice of words but they are narrowing their focus in their criticism.

The reason I asked for more auDNA evidence from regions of France is exactly what Booth is bringing up.


"Tales from the Supplementary Information: Ancestry Change in Chalcolithic–Early Bronze Age Britain Was Gradual with Varied Kinship Organization", Booth, et. al. (11Feb2015)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-archaeological-journal/article/tales-from-the-supplementary-information-ancestry-change-in-chalcolithicearly-bronze-age-britain-was-gradual-with-varied-kinship-organization/5B71BE0F34927E0A7199A6A568DAB3BC?fbclid=IwAR3BeCMw RB08Z6EpJgesgkDqn8cZ2JZF-LgZRIzkha6cSQHDNpxSMxHu-Oo#

Booth, et. al. don't provide answers, just questions. We need strong responses of logic and more data to "settle" the science.

That paper is excellent and it makes the same points about apparent rapidity of genetic turnover that I and some others have been saying for a few years. The real process probably took 500+ years - maybe 20 generations or so - with initial periods of parallel living with little mixing followed by an era where they came together, albeit the Neolithic farmer input was very much the minority one. This was always apparent in the cultural material which clearly showed that the beaker people absorbed some ideas from the natives. Quite subtle things like genetic or dietary advantage or anything that can give you a significant edge is surviving offspring will make a huge impact across 20 generations.

alan
02-12-2021, 07:35 PM
I couldn't see Gerling's map. Am I correct that you think Yamnaya or whatever steppe people were in on the formation of Corded Ware came west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat rather than the Dniester/Prut valleys?

I'm open to nearly anything, but it seems to me the Dniester valley leads right to the doorstep of SE Poland and Małopolska, and it's in that region where CWC-X horizon burials have been found that are indicative of the transition from Yamnaya to Corded Ware.

Pripyat/Belarus is heavily forested. I think it was heavily forested back in the 4th/3rd millennia, as well. I could be wrong, but that doesn't strike me as a convenient or natural route west for a people who relied on ox-drawn wagons, on horses, and on their herds of livestock.

As for the comment about SW Yamnaya taking the Danube valley/Hungary rote west, I would say that some of them did, but we know that others, like Budzhak, for one, went up the Dniester and Prut valleys into NW Ukraine/E Slovakia/SE Poland.

Is there a way from Ukraine to the Neman/Neris river system that passes from Belarus to the Baltic through Lithuania?

rms2
02-12-2021, 07:38 PM
Is there a way from Ukraine to the Neman/Neris river system that passes from Belarus to the Baltic through Lithuania?

I'm sure one could follow the river valleys, but that's forest country with some marshy ground. Fine for hunter-gatherers on foot, but not ideal for people with wagons and livestock or young males on horseback.

alan
02-12-2021, 07:38 PM
BTW BBC 2 tonight has a hugely interesting show about the finding of the location in Wales of a former stone circle which was apparently robbed of its stones and transferred into England and set up as the main Neolithic phase of stonehenge.

alan
02-12-2021, 07:40 PM
I couldn't see Gerling's map. Am I correct that you think Yamnaya or whatever steppe people were in on the formation of Corded Ware came west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat rather than the Dniester/Prut valleys?

I'm open to nearly anything, but it seems to me the Dniester valley leads right to the doorstep of SE Poland and Małopolska, and it's in that region where CWC-X horizon burials have been found that are indicative of the transition from Yamnaya to Corded Ware.

Pripyat/Belarus is heavily forested. I think it was heavily forested back in the 4th/3rd millennia, as well. I could be wrong, but that doesn't strike me as a convenient or natural route west for a people who relied on ox-drawn wagons, on horses, and on their herds of livestock.

As for the comment about SW Yamnaya taking the Danube valley/Hungary route west, I would say that some of them did, but we know that others, like Budzhak, for one, went up the Dniester and Prut valleys into NW Ukraine/E Slovakia/SE Poland.

The Pripat route only makes any sense at all if it was done by boat. It is navigable for a lot of its length by boat.

rms2
02-12-2021, 07:52 PM
The Pripat route only makes any sense at all if it was done by boat. It is navigable for a lot of its length by boat.

Yeah, I don't see it, but who knows?

I'm thinking mostly young males on horseback, but with some other folks with ox-drawn wagons and herds of livestock. To me the Dniester/Prut valleys up into Małopolska makes the most sense for the genesis of Corded Ware.

We're pretty sure Budzhak took exactly that route. The only possible problem with Budzhak as the source is that Ivanova gives a date of 2800 BC for their early phase. If that date is right, it's too late for CWC-X (3000-2900 BC). But I wonder what that date for Budzhak is based on and if it's right.

rms2
02-12-2021, 07:58 PM
BTW BBC 2 tonight has a hugely interesting show about the finding of the location in Wales of a former stone circle which was apparently robbed of its stones and transferred into England and set up as the main Neolithic phase of stonehenge.

I haven't read that Booth paper, but one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of people really like the idea that they are the descendants of the builders of Stone Henge.

Olalde et al robbed them of that.

They might be motivated to get it back.

etrusco
02-12-2021, 08:09 PM
I haven't read that Booth paper, but one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of people really like the idea that they are the descendants of the builders of Stone Henge.

Olalde et al robbed them of that.

They might be motivated to get it back.

modern english have IIRC have around 40/45 EEF. It still may remain the greatest contributor ( or at least on par with the steppe) of their genome wide ancestry. The imbalance on paternal Y line is quite obvious of course but speaking in general the genome wide ancestry is a better indicator of your cultural identity. In general. Even tough the blood ties are emotionally and morally important. Stonhenge was not destroyed. The cult there likely went on for centuries if not millennia both practised by surviving locals AND by R1b L 21 folks too. It has been a part of british culture ever since. And still is.

rms2
02-12-2021, 08:14 PM
modern english have IIRC have around 40/45 EEF. It still may remain the greatest contributor ( or at least on par with the steppe) of their genome wide ancestry. The imbalance on paternal Y line is quite obvious of course but speaking in general the genome wide ancestry is a better indicator of your cultural identity. In general. Even tough the blood ties are emotionally and morally important

Yeah, except a lot of genomic water has flowed under the British bridge since c. 2400 BC, when the Beaker folk first started arriving.

One has to look at the ancient before-and-after picture developed by Olalde et al, which showed massive population replacement.

Since that time Neolithic farmer ancestry has rebounded thanks to continental sources. In other words, there was a wipeout of the Neolithic British at the hands of the Beaker people followed in subsequent periods by an inflow from the Continent of people with higher levels of Neolithic farmer ancestry.

This (https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43712587) should help sort things out, if it is ever published.

etrusco
02-12-2021, 08:16 PM
Yeah, except a lot of genomic water has flowed under the British bridge since c. 2400 BC, when the Beaker folk first started arriving.

One has to look at the ancient before-and-after picture developed by Olalde et al, which showed massive population replacement.

Since that time Neolithic farmer ancestry has rebounded thanks to continental sources. In other words, there was a wipeout of the Neolithic British at the hands of the Beaker people followed by an inflow from the Continent of people with higher levels of Neolithic ancestry.

Ok sometimes you simply are not able to understand. Seems that you write always the same post all over again. regards.

rms2
02-12-2021, 08:26 PM
Ok sometimes you simply are not able to understand. Seems that you write always the same post all over again. regards.

It seems to me you don't understand.

If I wrote the same thing over again, it's probably because the Olalde et al paper has not been revised. It still says what it said when it was published.

I'm not going to change that and agree that because the modern British have 40-45% EEF that means Olalde was wrong and plenty of British Neolithic farmers survived, not when I know from history that plenty of people from the Continent have moved to Britain in ages subsequent to the Bronze Age.

rms2
02-12-2021, 08:40 PM
Some folks have a real soft spot for the old Neolithic farmer population.

TigerMW
02-12-2021, 08:54 PM
I haven't read that Booth paper, but one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of people really like the idea that they are the descendants of the builders of Stone Henge.

Olalde et al robbed them of that.

They might be motivated to get it back.

I notice that in the new Thomas Booth paper down in the acknowledgements. "TB is grateful to the attendees of the 2019 Bronze Age Forum in Durham, as well as Barry Cunliffe for convincing him that this paper was worth writing."

Cunliffe is one of the authors of the Olalde "The Beaker Phenomenon and the Genomic Transformation of Northwest Europe" paper. It must be Cunliffe has reservations he didn't get into the original paper. Cunliffe did work with John Koch on "Celtic from the West". The Celtic speaking came later anyway but there is an inclination to hold on to the importance of the Atlantic facade.


Some folks have a real soft spot for the old Neolithic farmer population.
I'll have to back and look at my Cunliffe "Europe between Oceans" book. There is a certain beauty and peace to farming. My grandparents on both sides were farmers, although they loved to hunt too. ... um wasn't the first murder by a farmer of a stockherder?

A lot of the Booth paper is war of semantics. He describes the problems with "sudden" change.

etrusco
02-12-2021, 08:59 PM
It seems to me you don't understand.

If I wrote the same thing over again, it's probably because the Olalde et al paper has not been revised. It still says what it said when it was published.

I'm not going to change that and agree that because the modern British have 40-45% EEF that means Olalde was wrong and plenty of British Neolithic farmers survived, not when I know from history that plenty of people from the Continent have moved to Britain in ages subsequent to the Bronze Age.

Overall the BBC that landed in britain were more or less a copy and paste of Beaker_the Netherlands. Dutch Beaker were something like 60% Yamnaya and the rest TRBC . They were so very similar to moder day britons only the latter have a tad more farmer. Britain did not move much from Beaker time. Only that the BBC R1b L21 were wiped out by the R1b U106 AS at least in the eastern part of the country. Not much water under the bridge. But anyway the sense of my post was another. I'm done with this conversation. No need to reply.

rms2
02-12-2021, 09:05 PM
I've read a couple of Cunliffe's books, including Europe Between the Oceans and The Ancient Celts. He is a learned man but a bit of an anti-migrationist/immobilist at heart, he of the Longue Durée.

Cunliffe was used against me by a number of knuckleheads back in 2006 when I first suggested that most of R1b in Europe might be Indo-European in origin and not Basque or Cro-Magnon.

The ancient DNA revolution of the last eight or nine years has probably come as a tremendous shock to Cunliffe. He may not like what we have learned all that much.

Ruderico
02-12-2021, 09:21 PM
Overall the BBC that landed in britain were more or less a copy and paste of Beaker_the Netherlands. Dutch Beaker were something like 60% Yamnaya and the rest TRBC . They were so very similar to moder day britons only the latter have a tad more farmer. Britain did not move much from Beaker time.

I would say this may be mostly true for Ireland, but not as much for Britain. You can see an eastern-shift even in some IA British samples (link (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?21528-How-I-run-clustering-in-Past4-and-Excel&p=741472&viewfull=1#post741472)) and even more so in the IA French ones that likely wasn't native to Atlantic Europe. Of course this is not even considering Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian (Viking) migrations.

razyn
02-12-2021, 09:42 PM
I couldn't see Gerling's map. Am I correct that you think Yamnaya or whatever steppe people were in on the formation of Corded Ware came west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat rather than the Dniester/Prut valleys?

I thought that in early 2019 when I wrote the linked post. I'm not really wedded to the Pripyat idea; but I do (still) think the Dnieper is and always was more important in the story than other, smaller watersheds a little closer to the Carpathians, with more routes and passes over them (that weren't used for the L51 migration, if Generalissimo's PCA magic is right).


I'm open to nearly anything, but it seems to me the Dniester valley leads right to the doorstep of SE Poland and Małopolska, and it's in that region where CWC-X horizon burials have been found that are indicative of the transition from Yamnaya to Corded Ware.

Pripyat/Belarus is heavily forested. I think it was heavily forested back in the 4th/3rd millennia, as well. I could be wrong, but that doesn't strike me as a convenient or natural route west for a people who relied on ox-drawn wagons, on horses, and on their herds of livestock.

As for the comment about SW Yamnaya taking the Danube valley/Hungary route west, I would say that some of them did, but we know that others, like Budzhak, for one, went up the Dniester and Prut valleys into NW Ukraine/E Slovakia/SE Poland.

I guess I'm saying, Z2103 was probably dominant in the SW Yamnaya, which in turn was not dominant (maybe not even a factor at all) in the somewhat later peopling of central and western Europe by R1b-L51 subclades. Not all of whom were cowboys. I have previously said that massive herds of cattle or other domesticated grazers probably came west via ridge routes, that crossed rivers where they were fordable -- and had long since been beaten by migratory grazers such as red deer, without much help or hindrance from human beings.

Also the rivers and swamps may become the easiest of highways when they are frozen; and that does happen. (Though not as often as it used to.)

I can paste in screen grabs of the maps, the one in color will be Gerling's. Both are under copyright, but the publications have been cited, so I guess it's fair use. If not, somebody will take them down.

4325043251

MitchellSince1893
02-12-2021, 09:49 PM
I would say this may be mostly true for Ireland, but not as much for Britain. You can see an eastern-shift even in some IA British samples (link (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?21528-How-I-run-clustering-in-Past4-and-Excel&p=741472&viewfull=1#post741472)) and even more so in the IA French ones that likely wasn't native to Atlantic Europe. Of course this is not even considering Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian (Viking) migrations.

Based on maps of Viking and Norman settlements/ownership, it appears Donegal may be one of the most untouched areas of Ireland since the Bronze age...but I will be the first to admit I'm not familiar with all the pre-Viking incursions into Ireland.

alan
02-12-2021, 09:51 PM
I haven't read that Booth paper, but one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of people really like the idea that they are the descendants of the builders of Stone Henge.

Olalde et al robbed them of that.

They might be motivated to get it back.

Its a good paper. It doesnt dispute that even by the early Bronze Age, the rebound of British farmer DNA was a very very modest one. Its by no means trying to reverse the big picture. It just points out stuff like there was a period for 2-3 centuries after the arrival where little mixing happened and the picture was one of very classic NW beaker people plus a minority with a lot of farming ancestry which showed that groups of largely farming ancestry did survive nearby though mixing was rare. It then notes that both the pure beaker and the minority with a lot of farming ancestry disappear from the ancient DNA records in the early bronze age when the picture is a population that was pretty uniformly people whose ancestry was overwhelmingly beaker but with a little extra farmer ancestry. Overall the farmer bounce back was still very modest indeed. Its a very nuanced paper and explains its reasoning very well and also the issues in the archaeological record. For example the native isles farmers who the beaker people met c. 2400BC were almost universally using cremation burial and even the recoverable ones were likely a minority with most cremations likely simply being scattered on surfaces or in streams etc. So its not easy to find or compare or obtain DNA from anyone in the beaker era who wasnt using classic beaker era inhumation. Its a good paper and I think you will be pleasantly surprised. Its in no way trying to change the basic big picture of enormous genetic replacement of the farmers.

Ruderico
02-12-2021, 09:53 PM
Based on maps of Viking and Norman settlements/ownership, it appears Donegal may be one of the most untouched area of Ireland since the Bronze age...but I will be the first to admit I'm not familiar with all the pre-Viking incursions into Ireland.

I don't either, but people move and marry around a lot over the millennia/centuries, so I guess everything homogenized to a certain degree even in the most remote areas of Ireland

alan
02-12-2021, 10:01 PM
Based on maps of Viking and Norman settlements/ownership, it appears Donegal may be one of the most untouched area of Ireland since the Bronze age...but I will be the first to admit I'm not familiar with all the pre-Viking incursions into Ireland.

There was a significant chunk of Ireland where Normans or Vikings really made no permanent lasting settlements. The vast bulk of Ulster except the coastal parts of Antrim and Down had zero. Ulster plus part of northern Connaught was called 'the great Irishry' in the 1500s I think because it was the largest unbroken block of land beyond Norman or English settlement or control. The great Irishry was about a quarter of Ireland. Much of the western seaboard was native except small enclave towns where Norman or Viking input would have been extremely minor. The biggest impact the normans had outside the Pale was really the Norman families who went native and turned into Gaelic clans and were very mixed with the natives. Some of those families really proliferated but I suspect their autosomal DNA fairly rapidly became vastly more native Irish than Norman due to centuries of marrying native Irish Gaels.

rms2
02-12-2021, 10:03 PM
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue - well, maybe I am a little - but what is the evidence of Yamnaya or other steppe pastoralists coming west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat and becoming involved in the formation of Corded Ware?

We now know there was R1b-L51 (you know what I mean) in Corded Ware. We also know about the idea of the CWC-X horizon and the formation of Corded Ware around 3000-2900 BC. CWC-X horizon burials, at least according to Linderholm, have been found in Hubinek in Małopolska in SE Poland. Those burials, which are considered to mark the transition from Yamnaya to incipient Corded Ware, are an indication that Małopolska may have been a central location in the genesis of Corded Ware. We also have R1b-L51 Corded Ware in that same area, although several centuries later.

We also know that if one follows the Dniester valley northwards from the steppe, he ends up in NW Ukraine not far from the border of Małopolska.

There is good evidence that the Budzhak variety of Yamnaya moved north up the Dniester and Prut valleys from the NW Black Sea coast and into Małopolska. Now maybe Budzhak wasn't the variety of Yamnaya that started the whole Corded Ware ball rolling, but it certainly shows that steppe people knew how to use the Dniester/Prut track into Małopolska. If Budzhak was just a couple of centuries older than the 2800 BC that Ivanova gives as its early phase, it very well could have been in on the creation of Corded Ware.

But it doesn't really matter whether it was Budzhak or not. There are CWC-X horizon burials in Małopolska, evidently marking the very beginning of Corded Ware.

What do we have north of there, on the Dnieper/Pripyat route, that is comparable?

MitchellSince1893
02-12-2021, 10:09 PM
I don't either, but people move and marry around a lot over the millennia/centuries, so I guess everything homogenized to a certain degree even in the most remote areas of Ireland

Doing some more digging on this tangent. Plot from the Irish DNA Atlas study.

Interesting that South Scotland (SSC), is closer to Irish than N. Irish pop (NICS).
https://media.irishpost.co.uk/uploads/2018/01/dd-977x1024.png

rms2
02-13-2021, 12:32 AM
Do you all recall the critique, by recently-departed Russian archaeologist Leo Klejn, of Haak et al's "Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe" (2015)?

Here (https://www.academia.edu/35551662/Discussion_Are_the_Origins_of_Indo_European_Langua ges_Explained_by_the_Migration_of_the_Yamnaya_Cult ure_to_the_West) is the link, if you haven't read it or have forgotten.

One of Klejn's chief objections is based on his belief in Gray and Atkinson and their glottochronology, which makes Indo-European far too old, so you might be tempted to dismiss Klejn out of hand, but his critique is still worth reading.

He also comes to the ridiculous conclusion that the people who became Yamnaya and Corded Ware came out of the Mesolithic Scandinavian Northland, but he still had a few valuable things say.



Quite recently we have witnessed the success of a group of geneticists from Stanford University and elsewhere (Poznik et al., 2016). They succeeded in revealing varieties of Y-chromosome connected with demographic expansions in the Bronze Age. Such expansion can give rise to migration. Among the variants connected with this expansion is R1b, and this haplogroup is typical for the Yamnaya culture. But what bad luck! This haplogroup connected with expansion is indicated by the clade L11, while the Yamnaya burials are associated with a different clade, Z2103, that is not marked by expansion. It is now time to think about how else the remarkable results reached by both teams of experienced and bright geneticists may be interpreted.

Klejn focuses on the cultural differences in what he classes as Yamnaya and some of the traits of the steppe pastoralist people who went west. He doesn't consider Yamnaya the source of western steppe DNA or of the "Yamnaya DNA" in Corded Ware.

Ignore the goofy Gray and Atkinson glottochronology and Scandinavian Mesolithic stuff and notice what he writes about Yamnaya and the steppe people who went west. Anyone care to take that up?

Note: I fixed the link above. The earlier one, like Klejn himself, has expired, but the new one should work.

rms2
02-13-2021, 02:22 AM
BTW, L11 is coincident with L151. So, read Klejn as saying, "This haplogroup connected with expansion is indicated by the clade L151".

TigerMW
02-13-2021, 04:42 AM
BTW, L11 is coincident with L151. So, read Klejn as saying, "This haplogroup connected with expansion is indicated by the clade L151".
I agree. This is the needle in the haystack problem and what I'm saying about understanding the L51 types, not just as a general subclade.

Klejn goes on
In common with many other archaeologists, I doubt that the discoveries in question reflect a direct migration from the Yamnaya to the Corded Ware cultures.
He also lists different times for the start of Corded Ware. This is what I was trying to communicate earlier. I don't know, but I'm not sure we can say Corded Ware is a straight derivative of Yamnaya. It may be partially derived from Yamnaya along with other things. Of course that is obvious but with the period of overlap and potential exchange we might have to consider populations on the northern edges of the Yamnaya more than we know about today. Perhaps even L51 is from the north and not Yamnaya proper, whatever that is.

In the response from Haak, Reich, etc. they say
Klejn mischaracterizes our article.I think they'd say the same thing about Thomas Booth's criticisms. It more about the use of words and how "sudden" populations turned over in Britain. Was it 500 years or 300 years? I don't know and I don't remember Olalde being that specific although Booth is claiming the 16 generations or more.

I almost get the feeling Booth is more concerned about Kristiansen's and Anthony's word choices although he seems to point hardest at some news article by a Colin Barras.

Thomas Booth wrote,
This model has been extrapolated to the point of caricature in popular outlets which have evoked images of marauding horsemen pillaging their way across Europe and the Channel.(Barras 2019) If they are really criticizing Barras more than Haak, Olalde, etc. then this is a strawman debate strategy.

I didn't really get that picture from Olalde and have not read the Barras article, but it may not be an actual scientific paper and more of a distraction than anything.

The semantics is the political part of the whole discussion. Haak uses the word "massive". Kristiansen describes some forms of "war bands" and raiding. Apparently, this Barras goes off the deep end with it. Booth, urged by Cunliffe, wants this softened and the population turnover stretched. That's rational that the turnover in Britain was not immediate anyway, not that Olalde ever said it was. (I need to reread his word choices).

In fact, for Britain, Olalde indicated the turnover was heavily invested autosomally which by itself indicates the British takeover included a lot of women from the continent, not just R1b-L151 men. It was not the same as the Corded Ware situation that Kristiansen described on the continent in the first generations.
Spain is different yet.

rms2
02-13-2021, 02:10 PM
I agree. This is the needle in the haystack problem and what I'm saying about understanding the L51 types, not just as a general subclade.

I don't have a problem with trying to understand the different L51 types, but when I started this thread what I wanted to talk about was how the most numerous non-Z2103 branch of R1b-L23 got where it is, and how it was involved in Corded Ware. L51 was intended as a moniker for the entire branch, and I really was concerned that the thread not break down into discussions of this or that downstream clade rather than of the branch as a whole.

In other words, I wanted to talk about the whole team, not about the individual players.



Klejn goes on
He also lists different times for the start of Corded Ware. This is what I was trying to communicate earlier. I don't know, but I'm not sure we can say Corded Ware is a straight derivative of Yamnaya. It may be partially derived from Yamnaya along with other things. Of course that is obvious but with the period of overlap and potential exchange we might have to consider populations on the northern edges of the Yamnaya more than we know about today. Perhaps even L51 is from the north and not Yamnaya proper, whatever that is.

. . .


That seems to me to come down to a question of exactly what Yamnaya is, which I have mentioned a couple of times before. Mallory says Yamnaya began about 3600 BC; Anthony says 3400 BC; others have it beginning around 3300 BC. Okay, so c. 3600-3300 BC. Split the difference and make Yamnaya begin about 3450 BC.

So, from around 3450 BC Yamnaya was the big catch-all steppe pastoralist cultural horizon: a collection of peoples who had a lot of similar practices but many local differences. They all seem to have been kinfolk, since they all were very much like each other in their autosomal profiles, yet there wasn't one single Y-DNA haplogroup that dominated the entire cultural horizon, from the Bug all the way out east to the Ural and beyond.

If that is what Yamnaya was, then it was pretty much the only steppe pastoralist game in town when Corded Ware came into being beginning about 3000-2900 BC. What else was there that could have supplied the Yamnaya/steppe DNA and the steppe pastoralist traits that went into the making of Corded Ware?

Klejn mentioned that there are steppe pastoralist kurgans in the Danube basin and elsewhere west of the steppe that predate Yamnaya and differ in some details from what he regards as classical Yamnaya. That is true, and it's the reason Gimbutas spoke of earlier waves of Kurgan invaders. But they're too early for Corded Ware, and they're too far south.

Klejn, it seems to me, also restricts Yamnaya to the peoples who buried their dead only in a single, limited, prescribed way. Thus his "Yamnaya" is much smaller than the vast steppe pastoralist historical-cultural horizon I have in mind, and which I have read about. Klejn populates the steppe with various other pastoralist cultures that he considers were not part of Yamnaya yet were contemporaneous with Yamnaya. I, following Mallory, Anthony and others, see those as varieties of Yamnaya, at least once Yamnaya came into being.

I have not read the Booth paper yet. In the last few days I have downloaded several papers I intend to read, but I have not read them yet. I know farmers are nice, and we all have a lot of Neolithic farmer DNA, but reading about their possible extended survival in Britain just isn't something that motivates me all that much.

razyn
02-13-2021, 03:22 PM
I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that it is I with whom you aren't trying to argue here...


Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue - well, maybe I am a little - but what is the evidence of Yamnaya or other steppe pastoralists coming west via the Dnieper valley and the Pripyat and becoming involved in the formation of Corded Ware?

[I'm skipping over the Dniester/Prut/Budzhak stuff...]

What do we have north of there, on the Dnieper/Pripyat route, that is comparable?

Well not much, but maybe a little. Clearly, one could say that my speculation is no more useful than yours; but to some extent we're all still speculating. So here are the links to mine, sometimes triggered by someone else's (which I have also cited).

This wasn't my post, but a little later I cited the work in which it had appeared, without showing the actual map. Mitchell's post shows it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13779-R1b-L11-Where-from&p=366073&viewfull=1#post366073]

Less than a year ago, but not on this thread, Mitchell also credited (or blamed) me for some Pripyat-route speculation, here: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660048&viewfull=1#post660048

I followed up on that, after I noticed it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660250&viewfull=1#post660250

Anglesqueville subsequently posted a helpful link to a large Baltic-Pontic Studies publication, from which Mitchell and I had been extracting bits of Klochko's work: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660357&viewfull=1#post660357

Less than a month after that post, you started this thread, posted several times, and (in just under ten hours) decided nobody was interested. So within a couple of days, I helpfully added my little bit, to what is currently closing in on its first thousand posts. This is the only place I really got into my rationale for ridge routes, in general -- of which the Sokal ridge is one example, perhaps relevant to a possible Pripyat route for what this thread more broadly is discussing. There are other examples, some even found on the previously mentioned Klochko modifications of an old Gimbutas map: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20310-L51-into-Europe-West-of-the-Steppe-Via-Corded-Ware&p=667181&viewfull=1#post667181

TigerMW
02-13-2021, 04:08 PM
I have not read the Booth paper yet. In the last few days I have downloaded several papers I intend to read, but I have not read them yet. I know farmers are nice, and we all have a lot of Neolithic farmer DNA, but reading about their possible extended survival in Britain just isn't something that motivates me all that much.
I'm going to try to make a list of criticisms Booth has and then look for the wording in Olalde's paper. Again, I think what Olalde, et. al., will reply is similar to what they did with Klejn - that's not what we really said (you've "mischaracterized").

The criticisms about wording or use of adjectives ends up being just a political correctness discussion and perhaps protecting one's prior positions. To me that's all a fluff discussion. There is possibly a big setup in this. The Kristiansen type characterizations could even used in modern education/politics in America, potentially pointing back to Europe as the birth place of XXXXX (you fill in your own description of something bad). It can also be used on the other political side by crazies which only is self-destructive.

There are some concerns Booth has that I have too. We need more samples and analysis of the Neolithic autosomal DNA from the Jutland all the way down through France. Perhaps there are regional differences that would be telling. We also need more representation of the right timeframe, not necessarily autosomal DNA 400-500 years after the changes as it relates to source areas.

TigerMW
02-13-2021, 04:21 PM
Klejn, it seems to me, also restricts Yamnaya to the peoples who buried their dead only in a single, limited, prescribed way. Thus his "Yamnaya" is much smaller than the vast steppe pastoralist historical-cultural horizon I have in mind, and which I have read about. Klejn populates the steppe with various other pastoralist cultures that he considers were not part of Yamnaya yet were contemporaneous with Yamnaya. I, following Mallory, Anthony and others, see those as varieties of Yamnaya, at least once Yamnaya came into being.

If Yamnaya means "pit grave" and not all steppe pastoralists used them then maybe Yamnaya is a bad label for the overall horizon. In that case we should just call the people "Eurasian steppe pastoralists". They may never happen as Yamnaya has been used as a term for too long. However, I do see more references to "steppe DNA" rather than "Yamnaya DNA". That's probably the safer way to label it.

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 05:57 PM
If Yamnaya means "pit grave" and not all steppe pastoralists used them then maybe Yamnaya is a bad label for the overall horizon. In that case we should just call the people "Eurasian steppe pastoralists". They may never happen as Yamnaya has been used as a term for too long. However, I do see more references to "steppe DNA" rather than "Yamnaya DNA". That's probably the safer way to label it.

“Steppe Pastoralists“

expatriates: a person who lives outside their native country. Often shortened to “expats”

Steppe-patriates or Steppatriates: a person living outside their native Steppe

Shortened to “Steppats”

rms2
02-13-2021, 06:51 PM
I'm going to try to make a list of criticisms Booth has and then look for the wording in Olalde's paper. Again, I think what Olalde, et. al., will reply is similar to what they did with Klejn - that's not what we really said (you've "mischaracterized").

The criticisms about wording or use of adjectives ends up being just a political correctness discussion and perhaps protecting one's prior positions. To me that's all a fluff discussion. There is possibly a big setup in this. The Kristiansen type characterizations could even used in modern education/politics in America, potentially pointing back to Europe as the birth place of XXXXX (you fill in your own description of something bad). It can also be used on the other political side by crazies which only is self-destructive.

There are some concerns Booth has that I have too. We need more samples and analysis of the Neolithic autosomal DNA from the Jutland all the way down through France. Perhaps there are regional differences that would be telling. We also need more representation of the right timeframe, not necessarily autosomal DNA 400-500 years after the changes as it relates to source areas.

You know, I just finished reading most of the Booth paper. I haven't made it all the way through because very near the end I was overcome by boredom. I was very near the end of it, though. Unless the tenor changed in the last few paragraphs, I got the impression that it was a paper attacking the straw man of a rapid, near-total, often violent wipeout of the Neolithic farmer population of Britain by crazed Beaker bullies from the Continent. I'm wondering who claimed that Beaker people violently wiped out the Neolithic farmers of Britain in the space of a few years or even a couple of generations. Certainly Olalde et al did not. Maybe, Barras, whoever he or she is, did.

The paper also seems to be sticking up for 21st century sensibilities about the importance of women, as if to say, "Olalde et al give the impression that Beaker men were male chauvinists; we don't like that, so it must not be true!" Maybe I'm not being fair to Booth on that score.

Booth's paper doesn't deny the >90% replacement of British Neolithic farmers by people with steppe DNA; it simply argues that it took awhile. Okay. As I recall that's what Olalde et al said, too.

rms2
02-13-2021, 06:55 PM
If Yamnaya means "pit grave" and not all steppe pastoralists used them then maybe Yamnaya is a bad label for the overall horizon. In that case we should just call the people "Eurasian steppe pastoralists". They may never happen as Yamnaya has been used as a term for too long. However, I do see more references to "steppe DNA" rather than "Yamnaya DNA". That's probably the safer way to label it.

No, pretty much all of them used pits. It was the shape of the pit that differed, usually between rectangular and oval, and sometimes the pits were lined with wood or stone, etc.

rms2
02-13-2021, 07:13 PM
I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that it is I with whom you aren't trying to argue here...



Well not much, but maybe a little. Clearly, one could say that my speculation is no more useful than yours; but to some extent we're all still speculating. So here are the links to mine, sometimes triggered by someone else's (which I have also cited).

This wasn't my post, but a little later I cited the work in which it had appeared, without showing the actual map. Mitchell's post shows it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?13779-R1b-L11-Where-from&p=366073&viewfull=1#post366073]

Less than a year ago, but not on this thread, Mitchell also credited (or blamed) me for some Pripyat-route speculation, here: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660048&viewfull=1#post660048

I followed up on that, after I noticed it: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660250&viewfull=1#post660250

Anglesqueville subsequently posted a helpful link to a large Baltic-Pontic Studies publication, from which Mitchell and I had been extracting bits of Klochko's work: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20109-Corded-Ware-cultural-complexity-uncovered-using-genomic-and-isotopic-analysis-from-so&p=660357&viewfull=1#post660357

Less than a month after that post, you started this thread, posted several times, and (in just under ten hours) decided nobody was interested. So within a couple of days, I helpfully added my little bit, to what is currently closing in on its first thousand posts. This is the only place I really got into my rationale for ridge routes, in general -- of which the Sokal ridge is one example, perhaps relevant to a possible Pripyat route for what this thread more broadly is discussing. There are other examples, some even found on the previously mentioned Klochko modifications of an old Gimbutas map: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20310-L51-into-Europe-West-of-the-Steppe-Via-Corded-Ware&p=667181&viewfull=1#post667181

That's a lot to respond to, requiring one to toggle back and forth between here and several other places.

Real quickly, I would say that the Dnieper/Pripyat route is a possibility, but to me it doesn't seem nearly as likely in the story of the formation of Corded Ware as the Dniester valley-to-Małopolska route. I've already said why. No need to repeat all that.

The Middle Dnieper culture represents a west-to-east movement of Corded Ware itself. In other words, it came once CW was already in existence and did not predate the formation of CW itself. If it did, it would be possible to derive CW from the Middle Dnieper culture, but that's not the case. It was the other way around, so Middle Dnieper is no help in solving the issue of how CW got started.

The tooth isotopes of those L51 CW guys in SE Poland show they could have come from another part of Poland or from Belarus/Pripyat. That's not much help. I know I mentioned them, too, but I did so with the caveat that they date to centuries after the CWC-X horizon. Where exactly (or approximately) they were born and raised won't tell us anything about how or where CW got started.

Here I will kind of repeat myself. If the CWC-X horizon is as important a thing to the creation of Corded Ware as Linderholm seems to think, then those CWC-X Horizon burials in Hubinek, Małopolska, Poland, dating to 3000-2900 BC, are extremely important. I really hope there's some ancient DNA coming soon from them, and I really hope the Y-DNA is R1b-L51 of some kind.

jdean
02-13-2021, 07:14 PM
You know, I just finished reading most of the Booth paper. I haven't made it all the way through because very near the end I was overcome by boredom. I was very near the end of it, though. Unless the tenor changed in the last few paragraphs, I got the impression that it was a paper attacking the straw man of a rapid, near-total, often violent wipeout of the Neolithic farmer population of Britain by crazed Beaker bullies from the Continent. I'm wondering who claimed that Beaker people violently wiped out the Neolithic farmers of Britain in the space of a few years or even a couple of generations. Certainly Olalde et al did not. Maybe, Barras, whoever he or she is, did.

The paper also seems to be sticking up for 21st century sensibilities about the importance of women, as if to say, "Olalde et al give the impression that Beaker men were male chauvinists; we don't like that, so it must not be true!" Maybe I'm not being fair to Booth on that score.

Booth's paper doesn't deny the >90% replacement of British Neolithic farmers by people with steppe DNA; it simply argues that it took awhile. Okay. As I recall that's what Olalde et al said, too.

The recent paper from the Reich stable mentioned the possibility Neolithic Britain was already struggling before the Bell Beaker folk turned up and this has been mentioned before WRT to the whole of Europe, particularly the Northern reaches.

I wonder why people who struggle with the idea of none peaceful changeover don't look into that more ?

rms2
02-13-2021, 07:25 PM
Hey, sorry for sounding stupid, especially if this was already explained, but what exactly is a "ridge route"?

I've always thought of ridges as elevated obstacles rather than as convenient highways for migrants, especially migrants on horseback, with ox-drawn wagons, and herds of livestock.

So, how does one use a ridge route? Or does it mean use of valleys between ridges?

CillKenny
02-13-2021, 07:30 PM
I am reading the Booth et al paper too. You keep seeing the same construct - the data suggest strongly x however y is also possible.

jdean
02-13-2021, 07:33 PM
Hey, sorry for sounding stupid, especially if this was already explained, but what exactly is a "ridge route"?

I've always thought of ridges as elevated obstacles rather than as convenient highways for migrants, especially migrants on horseback, with ox-drawn wagons, and herds of livestock.

So, how does one use a ridge route? Or does it mean use of valleys between ridges?

Don't know if this is relevant or helpful but one of the oldest roads in Britain is called The Ridgeway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ridgeway)

rms2
02-13-2021, 07:41 PM
The recent paper from the Reich stable mentioned the possibility Neolithic Britain was already struggling before the Bell Beaker folk turned up and this has been mentioned before WRT to the whole of Europe, particularly the Northern reaches.

I wonder why people who struggle with the idea of none peaceful changeover don't look into that more ?

You know, I agree with Booth overall that population replacement in Britain beginning with the arrival of Beaker took a lot of time and was never 100% (it wasn't too far off that figure though).

Just the same, it wouldn't surprise me if mass graves from that period started showing up in Britain, if they haven't already, like the ones in Poland and elsewhere on the Continent that Kristiansen talked about, full of Neolithic farmer folk with blunt force trauma to their heads as if they were made to kneel and were then hammered with stone axes.

Like this -

43271

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 07:47 PM
Just a point of clarification/understanding so that we are all on the same sheet of music.

Does a Yamnaya grave imply a Kurgan aka mound on top of the grave? As opposed to a flat pit grave which was used in other Pontic Caspian steppe cultures like Sredny Stog.


In its three largest cemeteries, Alexandria (39 individuals), Igren (17) and Dereivka (14), evidence of inhumation in flat graves (ground level pits) has been found.[5] This parallels the practise of the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture, and is in contrast with the later Yamna culture, which practiced tumuli burials, according to the Kurgan hypothesis.From wiki

I understand that pit graves (whether Kurgan/mound on top or flat/ground level on top) were dominate throughout the Pontic Steppe during 4th millennium BC...there is some evidence of sporadic cremation too.

But is it correct to say all pit graves in this area are Yamnaya graves or is the Yamnaya description limited to just Kurgan graves?

rms2
02-13-2021, 07:58 PM
Just a point of clarification/understanding so that we are all on the same sheet of music.

Does a Yamnaya grave imply a Kurgan aka mound on top of the grave? As opposed to a flat pit grave which was used in other Pontic Caspian steppe cultures like Sredny Stog.

From wiki

I understand that pit graves (whether Kurgan/mound on top or flat/ground level on top) were dominate throughout the Pontic Steppe during 4th millennium BC...there is some evidence of sporadic cremation too.

But is it correct to say all pit graves in this area are Yamnaya graves or is the Yamnaya description limited to just Kurgan graves?

As I understand it flat graves can be a variety of Yamnaya grave, just as in Corded Ware there were some flat graves.

There is some controversy over whether flat graves were always flat or whether they were originally covered by a low mound that has either worn away or was removed via subsequent agricultural activity.

razyn
02-13-2021, 08:01 PM
Hey, sorry for sounding stupid, especially if this was already explained, but what exactly is a "ridge route"?

I've always thought of ridges as elevated obstacles rather than as convenient highways for migrants, especially migrants on horseback, with ox-drawn wagons, and herds of livestock.

So, how does one use a ridge route? Or does it mean use of valleys between ridges?

"Ridge" is just shorter, and more common in spoken English, than "interfluvial zone." River valleys, down to and including tiny creek valleys such as the one in which I live, are by nature full of trees, underbrush, swamps, slippery rocks, and just about any other discouragement a cow might dream of. They do have water to drink. But to name a few, the original Natchez Trace (aka the Devil's Backbone), the Buffalo Trace north of the Ohio, long sections of Chisholm's Trail, and other such routes in frontier parts of America were mostly along "ridges," or the higher ground between watersheds -- where large, non-domesticated herbivores had beaten them. They weren't encumbered by trees, because wild goats and deer had eaten the seedlings and saplings; also large herds of large critters had pounded their main paths to a condition inhospitable to seed germination. I don't know that from Eneolithic Eurasia, but that environment was also part of the same planet on which I do know it.

I don't think anybody drove an ox-drawn wagon from Pinsk to Gdansk, if that really bothers you.

rms2
02-13-2021, 08:14 PM
. . .

I don't think anybody drove an ox-drawn wagon from Pinsk to Gdansk, if that really bothers you.

I don't either.

It seems to me there should be some kind of substantial archaeological evidence that suggests a proposed route west for steppe peoples, without a lot of topographical impediments militating against it.

To each his own, but I don't see Yamnaya (or whatever steppe pastoralist people) slogging through heavy forest and swamp with ox-drawn wagons, on horseback, and with herds of livestock.

We'll just have to disagree. If kurgan burials start showing up on the way between Pinsk and Gdansk, that would be something. If they turned out to contain R1b-L51 skeletons, I would celebrate.

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 08:26 PM
As I understand it flat graves can be a variety of Yamnaya grave, just as in Corded Ware there were some flat graves.

There is some controversy over whether flat graves were always flat or whether they were originally covered by a low mound that has either worn away or was removed via subsequent agricultural activity.
In that case, a north of the Carpathian route by a flat grave practicing Yamnaya group; that gave birth to a flat grave practicing Corded Ware culture would make sense.

Continuing that thought: If a Kurgan practicing Yamnaya group that took Danube route to the Carpathian basin were the ancestors of Corded Ware via entry in Moravia from the south, as some recent papers have proposed; then why didn’t their Corded Ware descendants continue the Kurgan tradition in Moravia and southern Poland?

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 08:37 PM
My next question would be, what do we know about pre 3000 BC, flat grave practicing Yamnaya groups in the Pontic Steppe?

I’ve mentioned Sredny Stog but that is a pre Yamnaya culture that ended around 3500 BC right?

rms2
02-13-2021, 08:57 PM
Maybe the flat grave was an innovation in those places?

Here's something interesting about Małopolska Corded Ware from page 471 of Czebreszuk's "Corded Ware From East to West" (in Bogucki and Crabtree, editors, Ancient Europe):



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

43276

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 09:46 PM
I have previously posted this a year or so ago but here it is again
https://archeo.amu.edu.pl/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/121535/BPS18.pdf

The study of the complex of metallurgical goods from the region between the rivers of the Vistula and Dnieper shows that from the end of the 4th mill . BC a metallurgical centre had emerged in the Pre-Carpathian and Volhynia Regions, based on local deposits of copper [Klochko et al . 2000; Kloczko et. al 2003] . The centre was founded by metallurgists of the late Tripolye culture and migrants from Central Europe

From the early 3rd mill . BC, that centre became the main producer of metal goods (the “willow leaf” metal complex) for the Corded Ware cultures between the rivers of the Vistula and Dnieper (Fig . 22) .
.
Associated figure 22
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/27/30/72/27307283999a9bf31de96ba0fe8d7532.jpg

it is postulated that the oldest of these metallurgical goods originated in Kiev/Kyiv Ukraine

Jewellery from the “Kyiv Hoard” stand out among the finds due to their oval-shaped leaves, a distinct decor (convex lines on the leaf plate), as
well as a specially diligent production; most probably they are the oldest.


Artemenko considered the “Kyiv Hoard” to be the evidence of connections between the Middle Dnieper tribes and the Corded Ware tribes that had populated the Volhynia and
the Western Podolia

So we know there was a trade route from Kiev on the Dnieper to the Vistula in southeastern Poland/northwestern Ukraine circa 3000 BC

Quote from wiki about the Middle Dnieper culture "is a formative early expression of the Corded Ware culture,[1] ca. 3200—2300 BC, of northern Ukraine and Belarus"

It has been argued that the area where the Middle Dnieper culture is situated would have provided a better migration route for steppe tribes along the Pripyat tributary of the Dnieper and perhaps provided the cultural bridge between Yamnaya and Corded Ware cultures.

rms2
02-13-2021, 10:19 PM
Of course, Kiev was a Tripolye (Trypillia) site at that time. In fact, the Tripolye or Trypillia name of that culture comes from the name of the village of Trypillia not far from Kiev.

Kiev itself is on the Dnieper.

MitchellSince1893
02-13-2021, 10:39 PM
Of course, Kiev was a Tripolye (Trypillia) site at that time. In fact, the Tripolye or Trypillia name of that culture comes from the name of the village of Trypillia not far from Kiev.

Kiev itself is on the Dnieper.
You know who else was on Dnieper?
The Sredny Stog culture (Ukrainian: Середньостогівська культура) is a pre-Kurgan archaeological culture from the 5th millennium BC. It is named after the Russian term for the Dnieper river islet of today's Seredny Stih, Ukraine, where it was first located.

rms2
02-13-2021, 10:49 PM
Yes, the Dnieper is a major river that runs southward from the forested region near modern-day Smolensk through the steppe and out into the Black Sea.

Similarly, the Dniester runs southward from NW Ukraine right near the border of Małopolska and empties into the Black Sea.

Anthony lists Late Sredni Stog as one of the five cultures of the steppe Eneolithic that went into the formation of Yamnaya (page 267 of The Horse The Wheel and Language).

Sorry to edit this post again, but on page 274 Anthony says that sometimes small mounds were raised over Late Sredni Stog graves "but in many cases they were flat".

Interesting!

rms2
02-13-2021, 11:01 PM
Of course, the graves with small mounds might represent the original condition of the graves that are regarded as "flat" now.

Hard to tell. That's a problem with so-called flat graves. Mounds, especially small ones, can be worn flat with enough time.