Bell Beakers, Gimbutas and R1b

[Kopfjäger]

That ancient man was probably I2a, honestly, but I would not go so far as to claim that is what he was.

I think that is the most likely, considering ATP3 is accompanied by other I2 and even H2 - scions of pre-IE Iberia. The authors have a reason for not assigning a haplogroup to ATP3, reads which, as you say, are dubious at best.

[bicicleur]

I think that is the most likely, considering ATP3 is accompanied by other I2 and even H2 - scions of pre-IE Iberia. The authors have a reason for not assigning a haplogroup to ATP3, reads which, as you say, are dubious at best.

what do you know about H2 ?

[Kopfjäger]

what do you know about H2 ?

I know that it has been largely supplanted by R1b.

[alan]

Alan you are aware that these individuals are not from any of the regions that are considered part of the modern day Basque region? They are from a close location but not from the Basque Country.

Thank you. My geography isnt great. Its in Burgos which is due south of Santander in Cantabria? So inland and on the south side of the Cordillera and a little west of the Ebro valley and Navarre. Still, the point stands that the really major copper age re-beaker sites tend to be in the south and west. More importantly than my dodgy geographical grip is the date. This guy is pre-copper age in normal Iberian terminology. Although stray copper artifacts are known in Iberia, France and several other places in the Neolithic, the copper age is not usually considered to start until the Villa Nova de Sao Pedro/Zambujal sort of phase when copper working clearly took off. That is usually places as commencing in the 3100-2900BC period a couple of centuries before beaker. So, my main doubt is based on this guy probably being 400 years or so too soon to link him to a pre-beaker copper age influx. If he was a few centuries younger or if the date was the same but he had been found in Italy I would probably have thought there is a possibility that he could have been derived from a Suvorovo M269 guy who mixing with local Balkans copper age people before the latter spread west with the spread of proper copper working. The date just seems wrong.

So the fallback IMO is the guy is an oddity from the Balkans who was moving well ahead of the pack by several centuries - strongly suggestive of a dead end. It cannot be ruled out that a certain amount of exploring for metals way ahead of the pack and unsuccessful could have happened before someone found the best ore sources and the best spots. The location looks easily reachable by either the Ebro valley or from Biscay although it should be noted that there is no evidence of an established copper age in France until several centuries after this guy lived. The nearest areas of developed copper working when this guy lived were Italy and the Alps. It would seem a hell of a triumph against probability if someone so much in the vanguard would be found in a tiny sample.

OR

Some M269xL23 guy got caught up in Cardial (either in the Levant or the west Balkans) rather like appears to have been the case with the V88 Iberian farmer.

I havent really considered the archaeological context other than date. I should read it again to see if there are any hints.

[alan]

the sample is low coverage indeed, but having false positives and false negatives are common in reading of anciant DNA
so you are right to reserve some doubts
but watching these Y-calls, M269 remains the most likely outcome

or no conclusion remains the most likely outcome.

[Heber]

or no conclusion remains the most likely outcome.

The Y calls are showing that that M269 is the most likely outcome from Genitiker and Ted Kendall's analysis.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the people who are bucking the trend and pushing the boundaries of this hobby. Many of the Allentoft SNPs were identified by 3rd parties.
This is only one of the few ancient genomes tested in the west , admittedly in poor condition but there are fifty more and probably one hundred more to be processed, hopefully soon. I look forward to further developments.
Some commentators tend to see the theory of PIE as incompatible with R1b-M269 expanding in the West or the Celtic branch of IE forming near the Atlantic. This is a conceptual hang up that I just don’t understand, as if there were some inherent reason that Indo-European had to become Bell Beaker or Celtic first before it could expand to the west.
The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case. The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

[alan]

The Y calls are showing that that M269 is the most likely outcome from Geniker and Ted Kendall's analysis.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the people who are bucking the trend and pushing the boundaries of this hobby.
This is only one genome , admittedly in poor condition but there are fifty more and probably one hundred more to be processed, hopefully soon. I look forward to further developments.
Some commentators tend to see the theory of PIE as incompatible with R1b expanding in the Atlantic or the Celtic branch of IE forming near the Atlantic. This is a conceptual hang up that I just don’t understand, as if there were some inherent reason that Indo-European had to become Bell Beaker or Celtic first before it could expand to the west.
The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case. The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

I think there are valid reasons for doubting a far south-western origin of Celtic on many grounds - archaeological, linguistic etc. However, I am not an adherent to the Urnfield-Hallstatt-La Tene model as it cannot work along either.

Actually, I have a kind of middle ground view that is neither Atlanticist or central Europe only. I dont believe Celtic had developed as a separate language in the beaker period or certainly not until the very late beaker period. I think it developed in stages mainly after 2000BC. The longest and most sustained triangle of contacts from 2400-800BC is isles-Armonica-central Europe with lesser known but connected cultures in northern France, Belgium and south Holland. The contacts penetrated by the rivers flowing north including the Loire, Seine, and Rhine. The contacts are virtually continuous for 1700 years and looks like a linguistic zone to me. You could call it a north-west model albeit it penetrates into west-central Europe.

Atlantic Iberia sort of joins this party relatively late and briefly for 300 years c. 1300-1000BC before becoming disconnected again and becoming linked to other directions like the Med. and east Iberia inland. If Celtic spread by the Atlantic it looks like it went north to south. So, the emphasis on Iberia seems very unfounded. It is a late addition and a relatively brief one in the much longer Atlantic system to the north. I dont think its any coincidence then that Atlantic Iberia looks a patchily Celticised area with Italo-Celtic dialects like Lusitanian and related dialects surviving into the early historic period. I think that is because its connectivity to the Celtic speakers in the north Atlantic was a relatively brief phase before its contacts focused elsewhere.

As for the question of the possible M269 guy, I just believe it is too crucial an issue to accept a bit of evidence that could change the entire model if it is in doubt. With a lot more samples to come we will know sooner or later but there is too much doubt to start rethinking the model based on this sample. Its by no means impossible but does jar with most of the other evidence to date so its kind of a big claim that needs a reasonably high bar of certainty. For the record I am somewhat dubious about some of the attempts to pinpoint some of the poor read yDNA from eastern and central Europe too and dont really put much store by them either.

[GoldenHind]

The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case. The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

I would be very interested in learning what data you think shows P312 subclades DF19, DF99 and L238 expanded in the Atlantic zone.

[rms2]

the sample is low coverage indeed, but having false positives and false negatives are common in reading of anciant DNA
so you are right to reserve some doubts
but watching these Y-calls, M269 remains the most likely outcome

It's a mess, honestly, appearing to be positive for a number of different y haplogroups. So, what makes you think you can pick one and say it is "more likely" than any of the others in such a mish-mash? It's as likely to belong to any of them . . . or to none of them, as a matter of fact.

That is why the paper's authors did not assign ATP3 a y haplogroup, not even going as far as a simple R, let alone R1b or R1b-M269.

I don't see why that is hard to understand. I don't know about you, bicicleur, but some folks are so desperate for a really old Iberian M269 they can almost taste it. This isn't it though. They are going to have to wait for something a lot less ambiguous than this one.

[Agamemnon]

Some commentators tend to see the theory of PIE as incompatible with R1b-M269 expanding in the West or the Celtic branch of IE forming near the Atlantic. This is a conceptual hang up that I just don’t understand, as if there were some inherent reason that Indo-European had to become Bell Beaker or Celtic first before it could expand to the west. The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case.

^^ That's just an appeal to authority, really. The "Celtic from the West" type of scenario you're putting forth here doesn't make sense, as it contradicts what we know about Common Celtic. Moreover, no one is saying that Indo-European had to "become" Celtic before it could expand westwards.


The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

It seems to me you're putting too much faith in contemporary data while conveniently failing to address the fact that all the BB samples we've analysed were P312.

[rms2]

The Y calls are showing that that M269 is the most likely outcome from Genitiker and Ted Kendall's analysis.

The fact is that it is a mess that is low coverage and positive for a number of apparently mutually contradictory y haplogroups. That means none of them is "more likely" than any of the others. In fact, it strikes me as ridiculous to speak of likelihood with results like that.

Don't let the wish be father to the thought. ATP3 appears to be useless on the y-dna front, which is why the authors of the paper did not assign it a y haplogroup, not even a simple R, let alone R1b or R1b-M269.



We owe a debt of gratitude to the people who are bucking the trend and pushing the boundaries of this hobby. Many of the Allentoft SNPs were identified by 3rd parties.

A different set of circumstances, with results that were possible to determine. This one is a hash.



This is only one of the few ancient genomes tested in the west , admittedly in poor condition but there are fifty more and probably one hundred more to be processed, hopefully soon. I look forward to further developments.

Let's wait for results that are far less ambiguous and dodgy than ATP3, since they're coming.

Calling this one R1b-M269 smacks of desperation and grasping at straws, similar to what happened with Els Trocs (only at least Els Trocs was a decent result).



Some commentators tend to see the theory of PIE as incompatible with R1b-M269 expanding in the West or the Celtic branch of IE forming near the Atlantic. This is a conceptual hang up that I just don’t understand, as if there were some inherent reason that Indo-European had to become Bell Beaker or Celtic first before it could expand to the west.

What evidence is there that there is anything Indo-European about El Portalon?



The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case.

They have?



The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

Yes, R1b is most frequent in the West, but that is really not such a big deal when it comes to figuring out where it originated. You keep saying "P312 expanded in the Atlantic zone", but I still cannot figure out what you mean by that. Grew in population? Or originated?

So most of the P312 subclades got really populous in western Europe. We know that. That does not mean they originated there or expanded from the Atlantic zone. I think P312 probably originated in eastern Europe, migrated to western Europe, and prospered there.

The kinds of things you are saying could be extrapolated to North America, I would imagine. P312 appears to have expanded between Hudson Bay and Honduras. (I went with those two for the alliteration mainly.)

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Shifting the focus from BB networks and the like I would like to highlight something more global. .
We are probably all familiar with the findings based on Bayesian modelling of C14 dates of a relative "collapse" of neolithic populations in Europe- at least central and parts of the west (although this wasn't exactly synchronous, of exact same magnitude or causes) thanks to the works of Shennan et al.

Even more specifically we have Dorian Fuller's proposal from Britain ( http://www.academia.edu/2422785/Did_Neolithic_farming_fail_The_case_for_a_Bronze_A ge_agricultural_revolution_in_the_British_Isles) that after 3000 BC till as late as 1500 BC, there was lower population and near absence of agriculture, and economy was dominated by dispersed pastoral groups.
In this scenario it is easy to envisage certain M269 clades becoming dominant through drift and also linked to certain selective factors- such as lactase persistence (which appears to be the buzz phrase these days).

So M269 perhaps gained a foothold during the BB phase, and even earlier as it might now appear, but it's meteoric rise might have only begun been sometime in the aforementioned period.

[lgmayka]

ZZ12 & ZZ11 appear to be stable, as in there is zero NGS' that make an end run around these two mutations by reversing the occurrence.
I don't know what you mean. ZZ11_1 is definitely negative in YF02497, who is actually R-Z49* . Thus, we have already found one back-mutation.
---
Sample: #YF02497 (R-L2)
ChrY position: 22286799 (+strand)
Reads: 396
Position data: 396C
Weight for C: 1.0
Probability of error: 0.0 (0<->1)
Sample allele: C
Reference (hg19) allele: C
---

[ArmandoR1b]

The Y calls are showing that that M269 is the most likely outcome from Genitiker and Ted Kendall's analysis.
We owe a debt of gratitude to the people who are bucking the trend and pushing the boundaries of this hobby. Many of the Allentoft SNPs were identified by 3rd parties.
This is only one of the few ancient genomes tested in the west , admittedly in poor condition but there are fifty more and probably one hundred more to be processed, hopefully soon. I look forward to further developments.
Some commentators tend to see the theory of PIE as incompatible with R1b-M269 expanding in the West or the Celtic branch of IE forming near the Atlantic. This is a conceptual hang up that I just don’t understand, as if there were some inherent reason that Indo-European had to become Bell Beaker or Celtic first before it could expand to the west.
The greatest scholars in Celtic archaeology and linguistics and the most recent publications have shown that this is not the case. The data also shows that R1b has its highest frequency in the west and the branches of the Phylogenetic tree from P312 appear to have expanded in the Atlantic zone.

There wasn't a call for M269 so the specimen shouldn't be called M269. It has a call for PF6518 and that is the only M269 phylogenetically equivalent SNP it got a call for and nothing downstream either.

[MJost]

I don't know what you mean. ZZ11_1 is definitely negative in YF02497, who is actually R-Z49* . Thus, we have already found one back-mutation.
---
Sample: #YF02497 (R-L2)
ChrY position: 22286799 (+strand)
Reads: 396
Position data: 396C
Weight for C: 1.0
Probability of error: 0.0 (0<->1)
Sample allele: C
Reference (hg19) allele: C
---

Ok, mostly stable. Bound to happen. New branching.

MJost

[Megalophias]

El Portalon cave is located near a pass between the Douro and Ebro basins, maybe the kind of place traders and travellers might wash up?


It's a mess, honestly, appearing to be positive for a number of different y haplogroups. So, what makes you think you can pick one and say it is "more likely" than any of the others in such a mish-mash? It's as likely to belong to any of them . . . or to none of them, as a matter of fact.

We can say R1b-M269 is more likely than the others because the others have contradictory calls - in most cases lots of contradictory calls.

E1b1b1a1-L547+, but E1b1b1a-PF2108-, E1b1b-PF1689-, E1b1-P180-, E-PF1561- (besides it is F+)
I2a2a1b2a2-something-Y16447+ (not old enough anyway according to Y-Full), but I-CTS1006-, IJ-F1450, IJ-Y1943-
J2a1b-S18476+, but J2a-M410-, J2-PF4926-, J-PF4562-, and the 2 IJ-
O3a2c1c1-F1835+, but NO-F415-, NO-M2335-
Q1b-Y1109+, but Q1b-Y1254- (to be fair this might not be equivalent)
Q1a2b2a2-Y1618+, but Q1a2-Y750-
R2(a?)-Y3545+, but R2(a?)-Y3385-, Y3402-, FGC22606-, Y4689-, FGC12636-
R1b1a2-PF6518+, R1b1a-Y97+ (albeit this one is likely spurious), R1-M748+, K-PF5501+, GHIJK-M3773 , F-Y1811+, F-PF2756+.

If it is actually R1b-M269 then it has 6 contradictory calls scattered randomly through a very large number of called SNPs (and these could even be genuine private SNPs for all we know), and a neat unbroken sequence of positive SNPs.
If it was another one then there are more contradictory calls, including negative SNPs upstream in their own lineages, and the R ones just happen to form an unbroken sequence.
So M269 *is* more likely than any of the others, due to that crazy little thing called math.

It could still be just a fluke, or more plausibly contamination (though from what Ted Kandell was saying the R1 SNP sounds genuine). I wouldn't take it as solid proof of early Iberian M269. But I certainly wouldn't bet against finding more either.

[alan]

El Portalon cave is located near a pass between the Douro and Ebro basins, maybe the kind of place traders and travellers might wash up?



We can say R1b-M269 is more likely than the others because the others have contradictory calls - in most cases lots of contradictory calls.

E1b1b1a1-L547+, but E1b1b1a-PF2108-, E1b1b-PF1689-, E1b1-P180-, E-PF1561- (besides it is F+)
I2a2a1b2a2-something-Y16447+ (not old enough anyway according to Y-Full), but I-CTS1006-, IJ-F1450, IJ-Y1943-
J2a1b-S18476+, but J2a-M410-, J2-PF4926-, J-PF4562-, and the 2 IJ-
O3a2c1c1-F1835+, but NO-F415-, NO-M2335-
Q1b-Y1109+, but Q1b-Y1254- (to be fair this might not be equivalent)
Q1a2b2a2-Y1618+, but Q1a2-Y750-
R2(a?)-Y3545+, but R2(a?)-Y3385-, Y3402-, FGC22606-, Y4689-, FGC12636-
R1b1a2-PF6518+, R1b1a-Y97+ (albeit this one is likely spurious), R1-M748+, K-PF5501+, GHIJK-M3773 , F-Y1811+, F-PF2756+.

If it is actually R1b-M269 then it has 6 contradictory calls scattered randomly through a very large number of called SNPs (and these could even be genuine private SNPs for all we know), and a neat unbroken sequence of positive SNPs.
If it was another one then there are more contradictory calls, including negative SNPs upstream in their own lineages, and the R ones just happen to form an unbroken sequence.
So M269 *is* more likely than any of the others, due to that crazy little thing called math.

It could still be just a fluke, or more plausibly contamination (though from what Ted Kandell was saying the R1 SNP sounds genuine). I wouldn't take it as solid proof of early Iberian M269. But I certainly wouldn't bet against finding more either.

One thing this and several of the poorly resolved Y chromosomes in other studies far to the east remind us of is that ancient yDNA still is a lot trickier to get in good condition. A lot of very poorly resolved or uncertain yDNA among the gems still looks likely. I dont know what the rate of well resolved yDNA to failures or resolution of limited use is but it is still fairly high from what I can see.

[bicicleur]

or no conclusion remains the most likely outcome.

yes, ok

I'm sure we'll be able to judge better in a few years when more DNA from the same period/area will become available and we'll be able to put this in perspective.
But there is something else that can be told about this individual with the Y-calls at hand today : he is very unlikely to be haplogroup I or G.

[bicicleur]

There wasn't a call for M269 so the specimen shouldn't be called M269. It has a call for PF6518 and that is the only M269 phylogenetically equivalent SNP it got a call for and nothing downstream either.

well in that case I guess you'll have to relabel the haplogroups for virtualy all anciant DNA identified
but maybe it is better to label this e.g. pré-M269 indeed

[bicicleur]

Alan you are aware that these individuals are not from any of the regions that are considered part of the modern day Basque region? They are from a close location but not from the Basque Country.

it's near Burgos where Tom Dumoulin won the time trial in the Vuelta yesterday
(sorry for the small detour)
;)

[vettor]

it's near Burgos where Tom Dumoulin won the time trial in the Vuelta yesterday
(sorry for the small detour)
;)

Burgos was the capital of the castilians and leonese .............if it was basque, it was never mentioned as basque in ancient texts that I can recall

[Heber]

Burgos was the capital of the castilians and leonese .............if it was basque, it was never mentioned as basque in ancient texts that I can recall

I have lived in most countries of Europe. At one stage in the early 90s I was living in Paris and working in Madrid.
I made the long 1500 km drive between the two capitals many times sometimes stopping off for the fiesta San Fermin in Pamplona. One thing that always struck me driving through the Basque country was the sheer lush green beauty of the countryside. I can see why settlers were attracted to the place. And then you hit Burgos with its beautiful cathedral, pass through town and spot the silhouette of the Osbourne bull on the hillside and you enter the fiery stark and arid caldron of the Meseta.

http://www.spainthenandnow.com/spanish-travel/the-meseta/default_25.aspx

[alan]

yes, ok

I'm sure we'll be able to judge better in a few years when more DNA from the same period/area will become available and we'll be able to put this in perspective.
But there is something else that can be told about this individual with the Y-calls at hand today : he is very unlikely to be haplogroup I or G.

While it would be interesting if he was M269, this would tell us a lot less than if he was resolved in terms of whether he was L23 etc. M269 SNP probably dates as far back as 12000BC so rather like V88 El Trocs, something as old as that could have somehow got incorporated as a rare M269xL23 guy way way back somewhere far to the east and come with the Neolithic. If we knew he was L23 or Z2103 that would change things as it would probably be too young to have come through that method. Resolution to only M269 would leave its origin options open and unknowable. If he was M269* then it seems like he was not part of the surviving Eurasian M269xL23 group because they are distinctly eastern and resolve to a common ancestor in the copper age. http://www.r1b.org/imgs/M269_without_L23.png

By the way, its hard to look at that map and, allowing for modest displacement over the last 5000 years or so, not feel there is some link to copper.

[alan]

I have lived in most countries of Europe. At one stage in the early 90s I was living in Paris and working in Madrid.
I made the long 1500 km drive between the two capitals many times sometimes stopping off for the fiesta San Fermin in Pamplona. One thing that always struck me driving through the Basque country was the sheer lush green beauty of the countryside. I can see why settlers were attracted to the place. And then you hit Burgos with its beautiful cathedral, pass through town and spot the silhouette of the Osbourne bull on the hillside and you enter the fiery stark and arid caldron of the Meseta.

http://www.spainthenandnow.com/spanish-travel/the-meseta/default_25.aspx

Northern Spain is a beautiful area. I did a few weeks doing the entire northern seaboard from Galicia to the Basque country. Funny thing is that although its 'Green Spain', much of it seems to have generally been less developed in prehistory than other parts of Iberia despite it appearing on the surface as being a nicer area to live than the much more arid and hot conditions in much of the peninsula. I imagine it was far more pastoralist than much of Iberia - cows need a lot of water! I never did the Camino though because I really wanted to go along the coast and it runs inland.

[Heber]

^^

It seems to me you're putting too much faith in contemporary data while conveniently failing to address the fact that all the BB samples we've analysed were P312.

I have no problem that the BB samples analysed were P312. However I believe BB expanded in the west with mtDNA H as described by Brandt. It probably traveled back and forth several time. These were highly mobile people. As we have little aDNA testing in the west I will wait until we have more genomes published from Reich's collection before speculating on ancient P312 in the west. What I am interested in is where P312 expanded and the data shows that this is in Atlantic Europe as described by Hallast.

[rms2]

. . .
So M269 *is* more likely than any of the others, due to that crazy little thing called math.

You were doing fine until you got snarky. Everything you pointed out indicates ATP3 is kind of a mess and not to be trusted, which you yourself admit below.

Honestly, it seems pointless to speak of likelihood with such murky, contradictory results. What is really likely is that ATP3 cannot be assigned to a y haplogroup because it's a mess, which is apparently why the paper's authors couldn't bring themselves to do so.



It could still be just a fluke, or more plausibly contamination (though from what Ted Kandell was saying the R1 SNP sounds genuine). I wouldn't take it as solid proof of early Iberian M269. But I certainly wouldn't bet against finding more either.

More implies that we have one already to which we can add. We don't, not with anything even approaching certainty.

Even if ATP3 is PF6518 under R1b, and I think there is good reason to doubt that, it doesn't make him M269+, and it certainly does not make him L23+ or L51+.

[rms2]

I have no problem that the BB samples analysed were P312. However I believe BB expanded in the west with mtDNA H as described by Brandt. It probably traveled back and forth several time. These were highly mobile people. As we have little aDNA testing in the west I will wait until we have more genomes published from Reich's collection before speculating on ancient P312 in the west. What I am interested in is where P312 expanded and the data shows that this is in Atlantic Europe as described by Hallast.

Expanded means "got bigger". Is that what you mean by it? If so, I think almost everyone would agree that P312 got bigger, i.e., increased in population, in Western Europe. That is not really a matter of controversy and is no big deal.

The real question is where P312 came from.

[Romilius]

Expanded means "got bigger". Is that what you mean by it? If so, I think almost everyone would agree that P312 got bigger, i.e., increased in population, in Western Europe. That is not really a matter of controversy and is no big deal.

The real question is where P312 came from.

I think that the knowledge of where the highest diversity of P312 is can be the answer to many doubts.

[rms2]

I think that the knowledge of where the highest diversity of P312 is can be the answer to many doubts.

STR diversity can be inflated when a region receives members of the same y haplogroup from multiple sources. I think North America is a good example. It probably has a fair amount of P312 STR diversity.

Still, STR diversity is one piece of the puzzle.

Ultimately, I think ancient y-dna will be the biggest puzzle piece.

[ArmandoR1b]

well in that case I guess you'll have to relabel the haplogroups for virtualy all anciant DNA identified
but maybe it is better to label this e.g. pré-M269 indeed

I don't think a relabeling of all ancient groups is necessary. There just needs to be a way to identify the results of low coverage specimens as incomplete and the placement within a large group of phylogenetically equivalent SNPs as being uncertain. I don't know what can be used, maybe using an asterisk before and after the SNP as opposed to the asterisks after the SNP used to be signify a supposed dead end on a branch. I don't know if that has been used before though. I think that people are going to continue to publish results of low coverage specimens so I think similar situations will arise in the future and therefore is something to take seriously.

[R.Rocca]

Not sure that anyone has mentioned this, but did anyone notice the El Portalon archer's bracers on figure S2? I tried briefly to look for anything on pre- or non-Bell Beaker bracers and could not find anything, outside of a mention that Sangmeister thought the oldest samples were from Iberia. Anyone have any information on them?

[ADW_1981]

I think that the knowledge of where the highest diversity of P312 is can be the answer to many doubts.

It appears to be Germany.

[Romilius]

It appears to be Germany.

Thanks for information. I suspect that, in future, with more samples, we will see the highest diversity in Eastern Europe.

[R.Rocca]

Even if ATP3 is PF6518 under R1b, and I think there is good reason to doubt that, it doesn't make him M269+, and it certainly does not make him L23+ or L51+.

In his study of 1,200 Sardinian males, Francalacci (2013) found PF6518 only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. In another anonymous sequence of 966 British males, PF6518 was found only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. Magoon (2013) in 1,292 males from across the globe found PF6518 in M269+ males and in a lone haplogroup C sample. That's 3,458 males tested and PF6518 safely an M269 equivalent, with some rare appearances in other haplogroups. We have seen enough genomes to know that, if you test enough, you will likely find most SNPs exist in more than one branch.

So yes, we are talking about a very low quality sample, and yes, the data is not publishable, but it is still likelier to be R1b+ than anything else, so I see no reason to not discuss hypothetical scenarios in the event that future pre-Beaker Iberians are found to be M269 equivalents.

[Kopfjäger]

So yes, we are talking about a very low quality sample, and yes, the data is not publishable, but it is still likelier to be R1b+ than anything else...

Ok, so if it's R1b, then it's R1b, case closed. Is there any reason at this point why we are not confirming it is R1b?

[R.Rocca]

Ok, so if it's R1b, then it's R1b, case closed. Is there any reason at this point why we are not confirming it is R1b?

Not sure how many times it needs to be repeated...it can't be confirmed, not with the data we have. All we can do is say that it is "likelier" to be R1b than anything else. This isn't a court of law and we are not peer reviewing a paper that is going out for print. None of this should stop anyone from discussing a scenario of how a "possible" M269 might have gotten to Iberia in the Copper Age.

[rms2]

In his study of 1,200 Sardinian males, Francalacci (2013) found PF6518 only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. In another anonymous sequence of 966 British males, PF6518 was found only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. Magoon (2013) in 1,292 males from across the globe found PF6518 in M269+ males and in a lone haplogroup C sample. That's 3,458 males tested and PF6518 safely an M269 equivalent, with some rare appearances in other haplogroups. We have seen enough genomes to know that, if you test enough, you will likely find most SNPs exist in more than one branch.

That's great, but were any of Francalacci's samples or those British samples or Magoon's samples over 5,000 years old?

PF6518 might not actually be phylogenetically equivalent to M269. It might actually be upstream of it, and 5,000+ years ago there may have been men running around who were PF6518+ and M269-.



So yes, we are talking about a very low quality sample, and yes, the data is not publishable, but it is still likelier to be R1b+ than anything else, so I see no reason to not discuss hypothetical scenarios in the event that future pre-Beaker Iberians are found to be M269 equivalents.

It seems to me ATP3 is a dubious sample that is derived for a number of mutually contradictory y haplogroups but puts on the best of its otherwise pathetic show for R1b-M269-Maybe, since it isn't actually M269+ but is PF6518+, a SNP that appears in a number of other y haplogroups.

I don't see any reason not to discuss anything anyone wants to discuss, but ATP3 doesn't inspire much confidence.

[R.Rocca]

That's great, but were any of Francalacci's samples or those British samples or Magoon's samples over 5,000 years old?

PF6518 might not actually be phylogenetically equivalent to M269. It might actually be upstream of it, and 5,000+ years ago there may have been men running around who were PF6518+ and M269-.

It seems to me ATP3 is a dubious sample that is derived for a number of mutually contradictory y haplogroups but puts on the best of its otherwise pathetic show for R1b-M269-Maybe, since it isn't actually M269+ but is PF6518+, a SNP that appears in a number of other y haplogroups.

I don't see any reason not to discuss anything anyone wants to discuss, but ATP3 doesn't inspire much confidence.

People should be allowed to discuss "possible" scenarios "if" it is an M269 equivalent without having to walk on eggshells or putting a legal disclaimer about it "possibly" not being a valid R1b sample.

[Kopfjäger]

Not sure how many times it needs to be repeated...it can't be confirmed, not with the data we have. All we can do is say that it is "likelier" to be R1b than anything else. This isn't a court of law and we are not peer reviewing a paper that is going out for print. None of this should stop anyone from discussing a scenario of how a "possible" M269 might have gotten to Iberia in the Copper Age.

So, we're pretty much back to stage 1: waiting for confirmed aDNA samples from Iberia. And I am not advocating censure of discussion, but I will opine that this result has done nothing to change the commonly accepted view of Western European M269+ being derived from the Steppe.

[R.Rocca]

So, we're pretty much back to stage 1: waiting for confirmed aDNA samples from Iberia. And I am not advocating censure of discussion, but I will opine that this result has done nothing to change the commonly accepted view of Western European M269+ being derived from the Steppe.

I for one didn't say it did, but it doesn't mean it can't be discussed. Also, there are plenty of people out there that are M269(xL23), mostly Balkan and southern Italian, that would find an open discussion pretty interesting.

[ADW_1981]

Thanks for information. I suspect that, in future, with more samples, we will see the highest diversity in Eastern Europe.

Perhaps. There are some early branchings, for example L238, DF99, and some others that are not found, to the best of my knowledge in SW Europe (although I see a couple hits in Italy which makes sense). Many of the core P312+ branches like L21, U152, and DF27 are found throughout Germany in addition to the rare ones I also mentioned.

The challenge is eastern Europe isn't as well sampled, but even someplace like Poland which is, has a mixed bag of branches that tends to be from various migrations, even including Jewish diaspora for example. I have seen a dataset from Hungary within the last 2 years that pegged R1b at about 30% but no SNPs were tested, just STR. It doesn't appear Slavic migrations brought much R1b to the best of my knowledge and doesn't even correlate well with the Yamnaya type of R1b either. Hopfeully that Vucedol sample yields some more clues. The later one would be nice as well.

[rms2]

People should be allowed to discuss "possible" scenarios "if" it is an M269 equivalent without having to walk on eggshells or putting a legal disclaimer about it "possibly" not being a valid R1b sample.

Oh, I realize we are probably going to have to regard ATP3 as R1b-M269 for purposes of discussion, even if it really is no such thing.

If R1b-M269 really was in Iberia circa 3500 BC, I hope a clean and unambiguous exemplar turns up very soon, because this one just muddies the waters more than anything else.

I know some people are convinced ATP3 is R1b-M269, but I have real reservations about it.

And if the discussion is truly free and open, then no one should mind being reminded of the dubious quality of ATP3.

[MitchellSince1893]

EDIT: Disregard, got PF6513 and PF6518 mixed up. Thought I had found an ancient example that was M269- and PF6518+


I0124, Lebyazhinka IV on the Sok River [SVP44], 5640-5555 BC ‘Samara hunter-gatherer’
Haak ei al. 2015: M343+, L278+ M269-, M478-

Re-assignment: (M343eq: M343/PF6242+, PF6248+, L278+, L1349/PF6268/YSC231+) > (L754eq: n/a) > (P297eq: PF6513+) > (M478eq: Y13872+, M478-, Y13866-) (M269eq: L150.1/PF6274.1/S351.1-, M269/PF6517-)
Modern samples have at least 49 phylogenetically equivalent markers in the M478 level. The presence of positive and negative markers in the M478 node can reflect an intermediate stage of its formation.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4664-Request-Y-DNA-haplogroup-results-from-Allentoft-2015&p=91529&viewfull=1#post91529

[Heber]

Not sure that anyone has mentioned this, but did anyone notice the El Portalon archer's bracers on figure S2? I tried briefly to look for anything on pre- or non-Bell Beaker bracers and could not find anything, outside of a mention that Sangmeister thought the oldest samples were from Iberia. Anyone have any information on them?

There is an interesting paper (chapter 4) in The Bell Beaker Transition in Europe, Bell Beaker Stone Wrist Guards as Symbolic Male Ornament.
"The majority of stone wrist guards in Europe belong to the late Enolithic and Early Bronze Age. Most were recovered from Bell Beaker cemeteries. E. Sangmeister divided them into an earlier type - wide, arched with four holes - and a later form usually narrow, flat with only two holes." These appear to be the two hole variety.

[vettor]

So, we're pretty much back to stage 1: waiting for confirmed aDNA samples from Iberia. And I am not advocating censure of discussion, but I will opine that this result has done nothing to change the commonly accepted view of Western European M269+ being derived from the Steppe.

maciano from eupedia on genitkers admixture for ATP3 states:

ATP3 (3516–3362 BCE) stands out from other samples thanks to its high Northern Middle Eastern ancestry (31.97%) against 0% for ATP20, 11% for ATP17 and between 0% and 8% for other samples. What Genetiker calls Northern Middle Eastern is what we typically referred on this forum as Caucaso-Gedrosian admixture - the same as in the "Armenian-like admixture" in Yamna samples.

With its 32% of Caucaso-Gedrosian, 14% of Northern European ancestry, 6% of European Hunter-Gatherer and 3.8% of Veddoid, it does indeed look as if ATP3 has about half of Steppe ancestry, which explains why he could be R1b-M269. What is amazing is that ATP3 reached Iberia at the very beginning of the Yamna period !

In conclusion, it seems pretty clear from the autosomal analysis that ATP3 is descended from an early Steppe migrant to Western Europe. The ATP3 individual himself appears to have almost exactly 50% of Steppe ancestry and 50% of Iberian ancestry. It is not impossible that a horse rider would have crossed Europe from the Pontic Steppe to Iberia in a single generation, but morelikely that a small group (or extended family) of Steppe people with chariots travelled all the way there. The maternal north-east European lineage indicates that females also took part in the migration. Even though such events must have been relatively rare and were probably not representative of a large-scale PIE migration.

This however would explain how early subclades of R1b-M269 (S116* and DF27) ended up in southern France and Iberia, bypassing the rest of Europe. The bulk of R1b people would only have arrived from the Balkans to Central Europe c. 2800-2500 BCE, and a second wave of R1b-S116 (probably L21) moved into Western Europe from 2500 to 2000 BCE. A third wave (U152) expanded from Central Europe during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods.

this seems reasonable to me, but with more south-caucasus than steppe

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Interesting, vettor. Does anyone know if David has acquired the genomes of ATP3 and the others yet? Finding a probable R-M269 in pre-beaker Iberia is intriguing and I am finding it hard to be patient waiting on further analysis of this sample.

[rms2]

maciano from eupedia on genitkers admixture for ATP3 states:

ATP3 (3516–3362 BCE) stands out from other samples thanks to its high Northern Middle Eastern ancestry (31.97%) against 0% for ATP20, 11% for ATP17 and between 0% and 8% for other samples. What Genetiker calls Northern Middle Eastern is what we typically referred on this forum as Caucaso-Gedrosian admixture - the same as in the "Armenian-like admixture" in Yamna samples.

With its 32% of Caucaso-Gedrosian, 14% of Northern European ancestry, 6% of European Hunter-Gatherer and 3.8% of Veddoid, it does indeed look as if ATP3 has about half of Steppe ancestry, which explains why he could be R1b-M269. What is amazing is that ATP3 reached Iberia at the very beginning of the Yamna period !

In conclusion, it seems pretty clear from the autosomal analysis that ATP3 is descended from an early Steppe migrant to Western Europe. The ATP3 individual himself appears to have almost exactly 50% of Steppe ancestry and 50% of Iberian ancestry. It is not impossible that a horse rider would have crossed Europe from the Pontic Steppe to Iberia in a single generation, but morelikely that a small group (or extended family) of Steppe people with chariots travelled all the way there. The maternal north-east European lineage indicates that females also took part in the migration. Even though such events must have been relatively rare and were probably not representative of a large-scale PIE migration.

This however would explain how early subclades of R1b-M269 (S116* and DF27) ended up in southern France and Iberia, bypassing the rest of Europe. The bulk of R1b people would only have arrived from the Balkans to Central Europe c. 2800-2500 BCE, and a second wave of R1b-S116 (probably L21) moved into Western Europe from 2500 to 2000 BCE. A third wave (U152) expanded from Central Europe during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods.

this seems reasonable to me, but with more south-caucasus than steppe

Now that is interesting and could begin to make sense out of what is otherwise perplexing. Maybe ATP3 really is R1b-PF6518. We can't know for sure, but the possibility of steppe ancestry makes it look more likely.

I look forward to seeing what David has to say about this.

[R.Rocca]

Now that is interesting and could begin to make sense out of what is otherwise perplexing. Maybe ATP3 really is R1b-PF6518. We can't know for sure, but the possibility of steppe ancestry makes it look more likely.

I look forward to seeing what David has to say about this.

I have asked him and Chad to run some best fit scenarios using Copper Age samples from Iberia, Germany and Hungary against Bell Beaker, Yamnaya, and Samara HG. He is still getting access to the data.

[ADW_1981]

If "Steppe" ancestry is based on the Yamnaya result we need to be careful here as Yamnaya is a mix of EHG + Teal (Kush Neolithic). Basque can also be modeled as part Yamnaya but the affinity is due to shared hunter gatherer origins rather than any true west asian like ancestry. The oldest Dodecad runs show Basque with very similar results to the ones in the paper for these Iberian farmers - 0% or < 1% West Asian.

[Piquerobi]

Is he this guy? If so, then he does not plot like Neolithic Europeans, who generally usually plot with Sardinians, or even further West of Sardinians. He plotted with modern Tuscans, i.e, he is pushed towards the East (taking the position of Sardinians as a proxy for Neolithic Iberians), even if somewhat Southern than, say, BR2 from that Hungarian study.

http://i59.tinypic.com/x2vs4i.jpg

Other maps to show what I meant:
http://i57.tinypic.com/2cdibte.png
http://i62.tinypic.com/xeehl1.jpg

[vettor]

Is he this guy? If so, then he does not plot like Neolithic Europeans, who generally usually plot with Sardinians, or even further West of Sardinians. He plotted with modern Tuscans, i.e, he is pushed towards the East (taking the position of Sardinians as a proxy for Neolithic Iberians), even if somewhat Southern than, say, BR2 from that Hungarian study.

http://i59.tinypic.com/x2vs4i.jpg

Other maps to show what I meant:
http://i57.tinypic.com/2cdibte.png
http://i62.tinypic.com/xeehl1.jpg

I do not understand your red arrow

[Piquerobi]

I do not understand your red arrow

The red arrow means the eastward push of Neolithic Europeans as a result of IE input. They moved from near Sardinians to where they are now. First they moved to about where the Sardinians are, when Neolithic migrants arrived. After that, they moved eastwards with the arrival of IE speaking tribes. If the Portalon plots with modern Tuscans, then he already had that IE input.

[R.Rocca]

Is he this guy? If so, then he does not plot like Neolithic Europeans, who generally usually plot with Sardinians, or even further West of Sardinians. He plotted with modern Tuscans, i.e, he is pushed towards the East (taking the position of Sardinians as a proxy for Neolithic Iberians), even if somewhat Southern than, say, BR2 from that Hungarian study.


Can't be the same since the ATP3 sample is 1,500 years older.

[R.Rocca]

So David has confirmed that the ATP3-Maybe (my new nickname for him) does not plot with other Neolithic or Copper Age farmers and instead plots with modern NE Spaniards and secondarily with Basques. If this shift eastward is due to steppe components, then could we be seeing the first signs of Jean Manco's "Stelae People"?

[sweuro]

maciano from eupedia on genitkers admixture for ATP3 states:

ATP3 (3516–3362 BCE) stands out from other samples thanks to its high Northern Middle Eastern ancestry (31.97%) against 0% for ATP20, 11% for ATP17 and between 0% and 8% for other samples. What Genetiker calls Northern Middle Eastern is what we typically referred on this forum as Caucaso-Gedrosian admixture - the same as in the "Armenian-like admixture" in Yamna samples.

With its 32% of Caucaso-Gedrosian, 14% of Northern European ancestry, 6% of European Hunter-Gatherer and 3.8% of Veddoid, it does indeed look as if ATP3 has about half of Steppe ancestry, which explains why he could be R1b-M269. What is amazing is that ATP3 reached Iberia at the very beginning of the Yamna period !

In conclusion, it seems pretty clear from the autosomal analysis that ATP3 is descended from an early Steppe migrant to Western Europe. The ATP3 individual himself appears to have almost exactly 50% of Steppe ancestry and 50% of Iberian ancestry. It is not impossible that a horse rider would have crossed Europe from the Pontic Steppe to Iberia in a single generation, but morelikely that a small group (or extended family) of Steppe people with chariots travelled all the way there. The maternal north-east European lineage indicates that females also took part in the migration. Even though such events must have been relatively rare and were probably not representative of a large-scale PIE migration.

This however would explain how early subclades of R1b-M269 (S116* and DF27) ended up in southern France and Iberia, bypassing the rest of Europe. The bulk of R1b people would only have arrived from the Balkans to Central Europe c. 2800-2500 BCE, and a second wave of R1b-S116 (probably L21) moved into Western Europe from 2500 to 2000 BCE. A third wave (U152) expanded from Central Europe during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods.

this seems reasonable to me, but with more south-caucasus than steppe
ATP3 plots with spaniards,

Edit : Didn't see Rocca's post.

[Heber]

So David has confirmed that the ATP3-Maybe (my new nickname for him) does not plot with other Neolithic or Copper Age farmers and instead plots with modern NE Spaniards and secondarily with Basques. If this shift eastward is due to steppe components, then could we be seeing the first signs of Jean Manco's "Stelae People"?

I was expecting us to find R1b-P312 in Iberia. The fact that we have found an ancient DNA sample that it is further up the tree almost as far as M269 is extraordinary and is an indication that Iberia and the Atlantic probably played a major part is the expansion of the Bell Beakers and Celtic. I look forward to further genomes to support this theory. The contribution of citizen scientists to this process has been great to watch and validates community based crowd sourcing and analysis.
I suspect ATP3 could have come to Iberia with the late cardial wave or similar route along with mtDNA H and returned to the steppes via the Stelae People route. Someone mentioned making the journey by horse or chariot in a generation. I believe these people could have made the journey in a season.

[rms2]

The distance from Kiev to Madrid is about 1,760 miles, as the crow flies. A good horse can travel that in about 44 days, definitely over the course of a single summer. So a rider from the steppe could make it to El Portalon in a single summer season without too much trouble or hurry.

[lgmayka]

In his study of 1,200 Sardinian males, Francalacci (2013) found PF6518 only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. In another anonymous sequence of 966 British males, PF6518 was found only in M269+ males and lacking in all non-M269 males. Magoon (2013) in 1,292 males from across the globe found PF6518 in M269+ males and in a lone haplogroup C sample. That's 3,458 males tested and PF6518 safely an M269 equivalent, with some rare appearances in other haplogroups.
Amazing how YFull has no difficulty encountering examples that so many vaunted academics can't find even with their strongest reading glasses. It only shows, once again, how utterly unrepresentative academic datasets are. "Sardinians and British, guys? Gosh, we've covered everyone. Oh Magoo, you've done it again!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3UKJq_lxcM)
---
− PF6518 R-M269
− PF6518 N-Y4374
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
− PF6518 G-FGC5672
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
− PF6518 J-CTS130
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
− PF6518 E-CTS1622
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
− PF6518 C-V20*
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
− PF6518 C1a1a1
This position for SNP is not in the YTree
---

[newtoboard]

maciano from eupedia on genitkers admixture for ATP3 states:

ATP3 (3516–3362 BCE) stands out from other samples thanks to its high Northern Middle Eastern ancestry (31.97%) against 0% for ATP20, 11% for ATP17 and between 0% and 8% for other samples. What Genetiker calls Northern Middle Eastern is what we typically referred on this forum as Caucaso-Gedrosian admixture - the same as in the "Armenian-like admixture" in Yamna samples.

With its 32% of Caucaso-Gedrosian, 14% of Northern European ancestry, 6% of European Hunter-Gatherer and 3.8% of Veddoid, it does indeed look as if ATP3 has about half of Steppe ancestry, which explains why he could be R1b-M269. What is amazing is that ATP3 reached Iberia at the very beginning of the Yamna period !

In conclusion, it seems pretty clear from the autosomal analysis that ATP3 is descended from an early Steppe migrant to Western Europe. The ATP3 individual himself appears to have almost exactly 50% of Steppe ancestry and 50% of Iberian ancestry. It is not impossible that a horse rider would have crossed Europe from the Pontic Steppe to Iberia in a single generation, but morelikely that a small group (or extended family) of Steppe people with chariots travelled all the way there. The maternal north-east European lineage indicates that females also took part in the migration. Even though such events must have been relatively rare and were probably not representative of a large-scale PIE migration.

This however would explain how early subclades of R1b-M269 (S116* and DF27) ended up in southern France and Iberia, bypassing the rest of Europe. The bulk of R1b people would only have arrived from the Balkans to Central Europe c. 2800-2500 BCE, and a second wave of R1b-S116 (probably L21) moved into Western Europe from 2500 to 2000 BCE. A third wave (U152) expanded from Central Europe during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods.

this seems reasonable to me, but with more south-caucasus than steppe



I was expecting us to find R1b-P312 in Iberia. The fact that we have found an ancient DNA sample that it is further up the tree almost as far as M269 is extraordinary and is an indication that Iberia and the Atlantic probably played a major part is the expansion of the Bell Beakers and Celtic. I look forward to further genomes to support this theory. The contribution of citizen scientists to this process has been great to watch and validates community based crowd sourcing and analysis.
I suspect ATP3 could have come to Iberia with the late cardial wave or similar route along with mtDNA H and returned to the steppes via the Stelae People route. Someone mentioned making the journey by horse or chariot in a generation. I believe these people could have made the journey in a season.

Pretty incredible that these R1b steppe dudes were using chariots around 3500 BC when chariots were invented on the east side of the Urals in Asia by Sintashta R1a guys around 2200 BC. Simply amazing.

[rms2]

Some folks err when they mean wagons and say chariots. You're right, of course, but substitute wagons for chariots.

[vettor]

Pretty incredible that these R1b steppe dudes were using chariots around 3500 BC when chariots were invented on the east side of the Urals in Asia by Sintashta R1a guys around 2200 BC. Simply amazing.

They where proto-type chariots ..................maybe they had a patent on them!

[rms2]

They where proto-type chariots ..................maybe they had a patent on them!

Four-wheel-drive chariots, aka wagons.

[miiser]

Four-wheel-drive chariots, aka wagons.

Agree with your point, although, to be technically correct, wouldn't that be four legged drive, four wheeled bearing?

[rms2]

Agree with your point, although, to be technically correct, wouldn't that be four legged drive, four wheeled bearing?

Sure, as opposed to the two wheeled bearing chariot.

[vettor]

LOL, ..........wagons and chariots..............most likely he was on foot in a small group of mixed haplotypes

[Gravetto-Danubian]

maciano from eupedia on genitkers admixture for ATP3 states:

ATP3 (3516–3362 BCE) stands out from other samples thanks to its high Northern Middle Eastern ancestry (31.97%) against 0% for ATP20, 11% for ATP17 and between 0% and 8% for other samples. What Genetiker calls Northern Middle Eastern is what we typically referred on this forum as Caucaso-Gedrosian admixture - the same as in the "Armenian-like admixture" in Yamna samples.

With its 32% of Caucaso-Gedrosian, 14% of Northern European ancestry, 6% of European Hunter-Gatherer and 3.8% of Veddoid, it does indeed look as if ATP3 has about half of Steppe ancestry, which explains why he could be R1b-M269. What is amazing is that ATP3 reached Iberia at the very beginning of the Yamna period !

In conclusion, it seems pretty clear from the autosomal analysis that ATP3 is descended from an early Steppe migrant to Western Europe. The ATP3 individual himself appears to have almost exactly 50% of Steppe ancestry and 50% of Iberian ancestry. It is not impossible that a horse rider would have crossed Europe from the Pontic Steppe to Iberia in a single generation, but morelikely that a small group (or extended family) of Steppe people with chariots travelled all the way there. The maternal north-east European lineage indicates that females also took part in the migration. Even though such events must have been relatively rare and were probably not representative of a large-scale PIE migration.

This however would explain how early subclades of R1b-M269 (S116* and DF27) ended up in southern France and Iberia, bypassing the rest of Europe. The bulk of R1b people would only have arrived from the Balkans to Central Europe c. 2800-2500 BCE, and a second wave of R1b-S116 (probably L21) moved into Western Europe from 2500 to 2000 BCE. A third wave (U152) expanded from Central Europe during the Hallstatt and La Tène periods.

this seems reasonable to me, but with more south-caucasus than steppe

An interesting interpretation of the evidence. 32% Geodrosia and 14% North european doesn't sit with a steppe ancestry, does it ?
I think we'll find that these guys are more eastern Agro-farmers - those same "Teal people" who colonised the steppe to form Yamnaya from EHG...

And Yamnaya only began in 3200 BC.

[rms2]

LOL, ..........wagons and chariots..............most likely he was on foot in a small group of mixed haplotypes

But if he was R1b-PF6518 (a big if, IMHO), then it is likely his ancestor came from the steppe and could have been on horseback or driving a wagon.

[rms2]

An interesting interpretation of the evidence. 32% Geodrosia and 14% North european doesn't sit with a steppe ancestry.
I think we'll find that these guys are more eastern Agro-farmers - those same "Teal people" who colonised the steppe to form Yamnaya from EHG...

And Yamnaya only began in 3200 BC.

I must confess that these autosomal mixtures are sometimes Greek to me, but that combination does not seem to fit what I have seen of Neolithic farmers of Near Eastern derivation, and apparently ATP3 is shifted well east of them.

And if he is R1b-PF6518 (cough!), then a steppe origin for the y-dna progenitor of his who first went to Iberia seems likely.

A Yamnaya origin is unnecessary. According to Gimbutas, Yamnaya was preceded into Europe west of Russia and Ukraine by two earlier waves of "kurgans", one beginning about 4200 BC, if I recall correctly.

[Dubhthach]

All this talk of Chariots reminds me that the word Car in English is borrowing of proto-Celtic *karros via Latin from Gaulish. The Irish cognate is "Carr", funnily enough some people in Ireland who don't understand original of word car in English go on that "Carr" is a makey uppy word in Irish, even though it's documented back to before 1000AD and is obviously derived from proto-Celtic *karros ;)

[vettor]

But if he was R1b-PF6518 (a big if, IMHO), then it is likely his ancestor came from the steppe and could have been on horseback or driving a wagon.

Again, does it matter if he went on foot, with horse or with wagon and also, if it took him 1 year or even 5 years..........the query is he arrived in spain from ????.
And in my opinion it would have been with a small mixed group with many different markers. I cannot foresee a man travelling in those ancient times from the "steppe" to Iberia, alone.

[rms2]

Again, does it matter if he went on foot, with horse or with wagon and also, if it took him 1 year or even 5 years..........the query is he arrived in spain from ????.
And in my opinion it would have been with a small mixed group with many different markers. I cannot foresee a man travelling in those ancient times from the "steppe" to Iberia, alone.

Yes, it matters. Traveling on horseback or by horse or ox-drawn wagon is faster than traveling on foot, and such travel is accepted as part of the Indo-European package.

Alone or in a group, ATP3's y-dna immigrant ancestor was one man.

[vettor]

Yes, it matters. Traveling on horseback or by horse or ox-drawn wagon is faster than traveling on foot, and such travel is accepted as part of the Indo-European package.

Alone or in a group, ATP3's y-dna immigrant ancestor was one man.

How does it matter,?............. did he even know where he was heading to?, did he have some appointment?

Explain this issue on why you want this "steppe" person to travel from steppe to Iberia in a few months ( or the time you require ) instead of 5 years ( as an example )

[rms2]

How does it matter,?............. did he even know where he was heading to?, did he have some appointment?

Explain this issue on why you want this "steppe" person to travel from steppe to Iberia in a few months ( or the time you require ) instead of 5 years ( as an example )

Ease of travel. A trip that is possible to make in a relatively short time is more likely than a trip that takes years. It might have taken years, but it need not have taken that long. The point is that the steppe is not so far from Iberia that a rider could not travel from one place to the other in a single summer (good weather) season.

How matters because Indo-Europeans were a horse and wagon people. It's hard to imagine an Indo-European or "kurgan" heading to Iberia on foot with a bunch of Neolithic sodbusters.

[vettor]

Ease of travel. A trip that is possible to make in a relatively short time is more likely than a trip that takes years. It might have taken years, but it need not have taken that long. The point is that the steppe is not so far from Iberia that a rider could not travel from one place to the other in a single summer (good weather) season.

How matters because Indo-Europeans were a horse and wagon people. It's hard to imagine an Indo-European or "kurgan" heading to Iberia on foot with a bunch of Neolithic sodbusters.

But you are assuming he knew the road to Iberia and with this knowledge he managed it inside a few months. This is a huge assumption.

IMO,.............. he took years - I care little for mode of travel - he was not alone when travelling

[rms2]

But you are assuming he knew the road to Iberia and with this knowledge he managed it inside a few months. This is a huge assumption.

IMO,.............. he took years - I care little for mode of travel - he was not alone when travelling

I'm not actually assuming anything except that a hypothetical rider could make it from the steppe to Iberia in one summer, whether he knows the way or not.

Heck, we don't even really know for sure that ATP3 is any kind of R1b at all. We also don't know when or how his y-dna ancestor got to Iberia.

[alan]

Ease of travel. A trip that is possible to make in a relatively short time is more likely than a trip that takes years. It might have taken years, but it need not have taken that long. The point is that the steppe is not so far from Iberia that a rider could not travel from one place to the other in a single summer (good weather) season.

How matters because Indo-Europeans were a horse and wagon people. It's hard to imagine an Indo-European or "kurgan" heading to Iberia on foot with a bunch of Neolithic sodbusters.

He may have abandoned eastern Europe because the food was so tasty in Spain. Tapas trump milk products. France may have the high end food reputation but certainly today Spain has the best everyday food in Europe by miles IMO. I notice the chalcolithic people in Spain seem to have had an amazingly varied diet compared to many area.

[vettor]

I'm not actually assuming anything except that a hypothetical rider could make it from the steppe to Iberia in one summer, whether he knows the way or not.

Heck, we don't even really know for sure that ATP3 is any kind of R1b at all. We also don't know when or how his y-dna ancestor got to Iberia.

did'nt David Anthony state the horse was domesticated ~3500BC..........this ATP3 must have been one of the first or never had a horse

[rms2]

did'nt David Anthony state the horse was domesticated ~3500BC..........this ATP3 must have been one of the first or never had a horse

Geez. I said a hypothetical rider could make it from the steppe to Iberia in one summer. I did not say ATP3 did it. If anyone connected to him did it, it would have been his y-dna ancestor.

The earliest bit wear evidence of horseback riding dates to about 3500 BC, but horseback riding itself could be older than that. All these dates are pretty rubbery. Everyone should keep that in mind.

Besides I wasn't saying anyone in particular actually made the trip on, you know, 01 August 3552 BC. I was merely saying that by horse the steppe and Iberia aren't really all that terribly far from one another.

[Heber]

How does it matter,?............. did he even know where he was heading to?, did he have some appointment?


With some of the biggest copper mines in Europe in the direction of the setting sun and the metal rich west being a key success factor to copper and bronze age people, they would probably remember how to find their way there using Stelae of other markers.
In any event they were not the first visitors. The Cardial wave bearing mtDNA H had migrated to Iberia using boats long before they made the journey. Pre Beaker people also left a trail of copper daggers so the path was well traveled.

5870

5871

[TigerMW]

I was expecting us to find R1b-P312 in Iberia. The fact that we have found an ancient DNA sample that it is further up the tree almost as far as M269 is extraordinary and is an indication that Iberia and the Atlantic probably played a major part is the expansion of the Bell Beakers and Celtic. I look forward to further genomes to support this theory. The contribution of citizen scientists to this process has been great to watch and validates community based crowd sourcing and analysis.
I suspect ATP3 could have come to Iberia with the late cardial wave or similar route along with mtDNA H and returned to the steppes via the Stelae People route. Someone mentioned making the journey by horse or chariot in a generation. I believe these people could have made the journey in a season.

I believe this has already been brought up, but phylogenetic equivalent blocks in extant (surviving) paternal lines do not apply the same way to ancient DNA.

YFull's tree and estimation techniques do help us a great deal here by giving us ranges even if they are not perfect.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

The M269 phylogenetic equivalent block is so large we get a large range. The formed date is 13300 ybp and the TMRCA (of extant/modern people) is 6400 ybp.

Look at the V88 block. It's formed date is 16700 ybp and the TMRCA is 7300 ybp.

We don't know how old PF6518 is. A PF6518 guy could easily have mixed in with V88 group types back some where far to the east (or west I guess) long before Celts and IE and horses and what have you.

I think the L23, L51 and P311 ancient DNA finds will be more important.

[alan]

With some of the biggest copper mines in Europe in the direction of the setting sun and the metal rich west being a key success factor to copper and bronze age people, they would probably remember how to find their way there using Stelae of other markers.
In any event they were not the first visitors. The Cardial wave bearing mtDNA H had migrated to Iberia using boats long before they made the journey. Pre Beaker people also left a trail of copper daggers so the path was well traveled.

5870

5871

but the dagger trail west only reached Iberia about 300 years after this guy lived. It had only reached Italy and the Alps in his lifetime. However I do agree that this trail - basically also the trail of the spread of copper working from the Balkans westwards c. 4000-3300BC is the most likely way any ANE or any eastern yDNA could have reached the west in pre-Yamnaya times. As their were early steppe elements in the Balkans in small numbers from 4200BC it is possible that any trail west by Balkans people included some lineages from these steppe groups. After all an alliance between people with copper working skills with people with skills of mobility on horses could be a useful blend.

[rms2]

. . .

We don't know how old PF6518 is. A PF6518 guy could easily have mixed in with V88 group types back someone where far to the east (or west I guess) long before Celts and IE and horses and what have you.

I think the L23, L51 and P311 ancient DNA finds will be more important

Uriah served in King David's Israelite army, and he was a Hittite. I know that was over two thousand years after ATP3 lived, but I am using it as an example of how people got around in those days. Let's assume for a minute that, as an IE-speaking Hittite from Anatolia, Uriah was R1b-Z2103. What would the Anthrogenica chatter be if his bones were found in Israel and y-dna successfully extracted from them?

So, I agree with you.

Another point is that the other major P297+ clade, M73, is found in close proximity to M269 in far eastern Europe and western Asia, not in Iberia or elsewhere in western Europe. The other major division of R1, R1a, is found there, as well, as are Q, N, and O. Where all the kinfolk are clustered together, look for grandpa's old log cabin . . . and home. ;)

[alan]

I believe this has already been brought up, but phylogenetic equivalent blocks in extant (surviving) paternal lines do not apply the same way to ancient DNA.

YFull's tree and estimation techniques do help us a great deal here by giving us ranges even if they are not perfect.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

The M269 phylogenetic equivalent block is so large we get a large range. The formed date is 13300 ybp and the TMRCA (of extant/modern people) is 6400 ybp.

Look at the V88 block. It's formed date is 16700 ybp and the TMRCA is 7300 ybp.

We don't know how old PF6518 is. A PF6518 guy could easily have mixed in with V88 group types back someone where far to the east (or west I guess) long before Celts and IE and horses and what have you.

I think the L23, L51 and P311 ancient DNA finds will be more important

When you present the MRCA of living people rather than the date of the SNP it does indicate of course that any living M269 people cannot have arrived at their current locations before that date except those who lived at the origin point. V88 probably is just about old enough to have come with Cardial. M269 though having a MRCA of only 4400BC by definition means it cannot have spread west with Cardial. That date is slightly earlier than the first wave of steppe people in the Balkans so it is possible that everyone of the M269xL23 clade could descend from such a person. In fact, it is curious that the MRCA date seems to date to the same time as that event which could suggest a link.

When do you make the MRCA of L23 and also the MRCA of Z2013?

[ArmandoR1b]

I believe this has already been brought up, but phylogenetic equivalent blocks in extant (surviving) paternal lines do not apply the same way to ancient DNA.

YFull's tree and estimation techniques do help us a great deal here by giving us ranges even if they are not perfect.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1b/

The M269 phylogenetic equivalent block is so large we get a large range. The formed date is 13300 ybp and the TMRCA (of extant/modern people) is 6400 ybp.

Look at the V88 block. It's formed date is 16700 ybp and the TMRCA is 7300 ybp.

We don't know how PF6518 is. A PF6518 guy could easily have mixed in with V88 group type back someone where far to the east (or west I guess) long before Celts and IE and horses and what have you.

I think the L23, L51 and P311 ancient DNA finds will be more important

Yes, I had brought up that range of dates before. Thank you for bringing it up again because it is very important to the discussion. I agree a PF6518 guy could have mixed with a V88 group and the L23, L51 and P311 ancient DNA finds will be more important.

[TigerMW]

When you present the MRCA of living people rather than the date of the SNP it does indicate of course that any living M269 people cannot have arrived at their current locations before that date except those who lived at the origin point. V88 probably is just about old enough to have come with Cardial. M269 though having a MRCA of only 4400BC by definition means it cannot have spread west with Cardial. ....
I think you get the idea but I'll make a technical correction. It's not that "M269 .. having an MRCA of only 4400 BC by definition means it cannot have spread west with Cardial", it's that the lineages of M269 that populated Europe and survived until today could not have spread/expanded west with Cardial because of their TMRCA. There may have been some extinct types of M269 or of PF6518 (is all we know) that came with Cardial or with the V88 guys from Africa.

Someone should challenge Genetiker on his blog about this. He has a fatal logical flaw in his assertion. Phylogenetic equivalent blocks apply only to a population. Lineages probably spun off and died off all along the long list of equivalants. You can NOT equate PF6518 to the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) of a surviving lineage. Practically speaking, it's L23 with its Z2103 and L51 lineages that are most important. We already have a stake in the ground with Z2103 far to the east in Yamna territory.

I don't think finding a PF6518 remain in Iberia is much more clarifying than finding a V88 remain there because we can't say a PF6518 is closely related to the L23 MRCA.

[alan]

I think you get the idea but I'll make a technical correction. It's not that "M269 .. having an MRCA of only 4400 BC by definition means it cannot have spread west with Cardial", it's that the lineages of M269 that populated Europe and survived until today could not have spread/expanded west with Cardial because of their TMRCA. There may have been some extinct types of M269 or of PF6518 (is all we know) that came with Cardial or with the V88 guys from Africa.

Totally agree - that is exactly what I meant and maybe didnt express clearly

Someone should challenge Genetiker on his blog about this. He has a fatal logical flaw in his assertion. Phylogenetic equivalent blocks apply only to a population. Lineages probably spun off and died off all along the long list of equivalants. You can NOT equate PF6518 to the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) of a surviving lineage. Practically speaking, it's L23 with its Z2103 and L51 lineages that are most important. We already have a stake in the ground with Z2103 far to the east in Yamna territory.

I don't think finding a PF6518 remain in Iberia is much more clarifying than finding a V88 remain there because we can't say a PF6518 is closely related to the L23 MRCA.

Yeah I basically mean that even if this guy was M269, the lack of knowledge of his downtream SNPs below M269 makes him impossible to interpret. It would have been a lot more telling if we had a definite read on whether he was L23 or not. Without that a stray M269 dead end line could have arrived from the east any time through most of the post-Glacial era. So this, even if it wasnt shrouded in doubt, tells us very little.

[alan]

I think you get the idea but I'll make a technical correction. It's not that "M269 .. having an MRCA of only 4400 BC by definition means it cannot have spread west with Cardial", it's that the lineages of M269 that populated Europe and survived until today could not have spread/expanded west with Cardial because of their TMRCA. There may have been some extinct types of M269 or of PF6518 (is all we know) that came with Cardial or with the V88 guys from Africa.

Someone should challenge Genetiker on his blog about this. He has a fatal logical flaw in his assertion. Phylogenetic equivalent blocks apply only to a population. Lineages probably spun off and died off all along the long list of equivalants. You can NOT equate PF6518 to the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) of a surviving lineage. Practically speaking, it's L23 with its Z2103 and L51 lineages that are most important. We already have a stake in the ground with Z2103 far to the east in Yamna territory.

I don't think finding a PF6518 remain in Iberia is much more clarifying than finding a V88 remain there because we can't say a PF6518 is closely related to the L23 MRCA.

what would the current MRCA for L23 be?

[Gravetto-Danubian]

but the dagger trail west only reached Iberia about 300 years after this guy lived. It had only reached Italy and the Alps in his lifetime. However I do agree that this trail - basically also the trail of the spread of copper working from the Balkans westwards c. 4000-3300BC is the most likely way any ANE or any eastern yDNA could have reached the west in pre-Yamnaya times. As their were early steppe elements in the Balkans in small numbers from 4200BC it is possible that any trail west by Balkans people included some lineages from these steppe groups. After all an alliance between people with copper working skills with people with skills of mobility on horses could be a useful blend.

Alan, early steppe elements in the Balkans? We know about Suvorovo beyond the Danube delta, which are seen to be an early steppic offshoot, but actually inside and beyond (northwest of) the Balkans remains more intangible. Is there anything else you're thinking about ?

I guess its easy to see exchanges between the Carpathian basin and the circum-Pontic region already present before Yamnaya , especially given that mobility and secondary products had already increased. And i dont think we need to appeal for some rogue horse-rider wondering off into the sunset. A romantic as it seems, there is no solid evidence for horseriding at this stage. At best, people in Botai far to the east were still experimenting with taming these beasts.

In fact, there is a chance that some R1b groups arrived to the west at the tail end of the Neolithic via the Balkans, along with other rarer groups like E-v13 (although different origins). Newer M269 groups probably arrived later still from the steppe.

Finally, there is always the possibility for a 'disjoint scenario': ie the arrival of M269 and ANE had different trajectories. The former earlier, more southern, the latter later, via north-central Europe / CWC.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

what would the current MRCA for L23 be?

According to YFull, L23 "formed" 6400 yBP, and 'expanded' (TMRCA) 6200. They have Z2103 begining to expand immediately thereafter, with L51 a little later (5800 yBP= 2800 BC ~ initial BB period).

Also note the less known "brother" of L23: PF7563; which formed same-ish time and is found in Southern Europeans (some Balkan groups like Bulgarians; Sardinians), Turks; certain Semitic groups. It's correlation with indo europeans appears unlikely.

[razyn]

According to YFull, L23 "formed" 6400 yBP, and 'expanded' (TMRCA) 6200. They have Z2103 begining to expand immediately thereafter, with L51 a little later (5800 yBP= 2800 BC ~ initial BB period).
5800 ybp is indeed what they say, but that's actually 3800 BC, and therefore I guess not initial BB. To that the extent that any of these dates are right.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

5800 ybp is indeed what they say, but that's actually 3800 BC, and therefore I guess not initial BB. To that the extent that any of these dates are right.

Ha ha true. Shameful ; I don't know what 5 - 2 =

That opens even more perplexity

Actually, 3800 BC could be no fluke.
Indeed, this is when the Majkop and Kura-Araxes cultures emerge. Many have pointed to their role of metallurgical suppliers to Mesopotamia -even some colonisation from the latter, whilst most recently a role of Central Asia has been highlighted . In turn, the caucasus later spurred on what we think of as Yamnaya and Afansievo, IMO.

Whatever the case, direct movements from the copper age Caucasus region to europe must be considered.

[Heber]

Actually, 3800 BC could be no fluke.
Indeed, this is when the Majkop and Kura-Araxes cultures emerge. Many have pointed to their role of metallurgical suppliers to Mesopotamia -even some colonisation from the latter, whilst most recently a role of Central Asia has been highlighted . In turn, the caucasus later spurred on what we think of as Yamnaya and Afansievo, IMO.
dol, in Northern Bulgaria
Whatever the case, direct movements from the copper age Caucasus region to europe must be considered.

I have always believed that Maikop is key to our understanding of linking the Steppes to the Atlantic.
For Cunliffe it was so significant he choose to put the Golden Bull of Maikop on the cover of Europe Between the Oceans.
This bull culture is later seen in Bronze Age Iberia and even later Iron Age Ireland (Tain Bo Culaigh)

5904

"The gold bull which formed part of the frame of a canopy in the Maikop buriel, is a brilliantly observed model coming from daily familiarity with the animals."

5909

""A silver bowl from the mid-third millennium BC burial at Maikop, Kuban in south Russia. The craftsman depicts the two animals vital to the well being of the community, long horned cattle (seen on the side) and wild horses (on the opposite side) probably the Equus przwalski."

5907

"The compelling evidence for the western movement of some steppes communities comes from burials. At Plachidol in northern Bulgaria, a pit-grave 5m deep has been set beneath a massive barrow 7m high and 55m in diameter....
Other burials of a similar kind are found in Hungary, in the flood plain of the Tisza and Koros rivers. Dating evidence for the movement is imprecise but the Plachidol burial dates to around 3000 BC"
"The earliest anthropomorphic stelae date to the 4th millennium BC, and are associated with the early Bronze Age Yamna Horizon, in particular with the Kemi Oba culture of the Crimea and adjacent steppe region."

5908
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/kemi-oba/

"The simple, early type of anthropomorphic stelae are also found in the Alpine region of Italy, southern France and Portugal. Examples have also been found in Bulgaria at Plachidol, Vezevero, and Durankulak."

Maikop is also central to John Koch theory of Indo European from the East, Celtic from the West, so much so that the warrior stelae of Kemi Oba which he links to the warrior stelae of Tartessos figures on the cover of his paper.

5905

https://www.academia.edu/8299894/Indo-European_from_the_east_and_Celtic_from_the_west_re conciling_models_for_languages_in_later_prehistory

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-from-the-west/

This timing is also right for the Pre Beaker Copper Dagger trail to be set across the Mediterranean to Iberia Los Millares (3200 BC) in time to meet up with the emerging Bell Beaker from the Tagus estuary (2800 BC).

[alan]

Alan, early steppe elements in the Balkans? We know about Suvorovo beyond the Danube delta, which are seen to be an early steppic offshoot, but actually inside and beyond (northwest of) the Balkans remains more intangible. Is there anything else you're thinking about ?

I guess its easy to see exchanges between the Carpathian basin and the circum-Pontic region already present before Yamnaya , especially given that mobility and secondary products had already increased. And i dont think we need to appeal for some rogue horse-rider wondering off into the sunset. A romantic as it seems, there is no solid evidence for horseriding at this stage. At best, people in Botai far to the east were still experimenting with taming these beasts.

In fact, there is a chance that some R1b groups arrived to the west at the tail end of the Neolithic via the Balkans, along with other rarer groups like E-v13 (although different origins). Newer M269 groups probably arrived later still from the steppe.

Finally, there is always the possibility for a 'disjoint scenario': ie the arrival of M269 and ANE had different trajectories. The former earlier, more southern, the latter later, via north-central Europe / CWC.

The Suvorovo groups are small but as with Yamnaya they are found as far west as Hungary. See Anthony's map. As with Yamnaya again, there is no clear trail of that culture any further west. So, Suvorovo and Yamnaya have exactly the same complications in that we have to think of individuals or people within a new culture extending the steppe genes further west. The only major difference is Suvorovo was far far smaller in numbers. However the principle is still the same. The only trail west we see that fits between the arrival of Suvorovo in Hungary etc c. 4200BC is the spread of copper west through the Alps and Italy 4000-3500BC. Now that spread doesnt have anything particularly steppic looking about it. However, because of the likely spread of the copper being from the Balkans and the presence of small Suvorovo groups in the Balkans at this time, it is not impossible that some steppe lineage have been incorporated.

Admittedly this has not looked a likely scenario based on early copper age yDNA in non-steppe Europe so far - Remedello, Ice Man, Trielles etc. However it does provide a potential scenario albeit a very tenuous one when you consider the Iberian copper age proper doesnt even start for 400 years after this guy lived and copper industries had not even reached France at this stage.

In general its very hard to archaeologically explain a M269 guy in Iberia c. 3500BC without a lot of special pleading and going for a negative evidence lone rider type scenario. This tends to strengthen my doubts about this being a real result.

[alan]

I have always believed that Maikop is key to our understanding of linking the Steppes to the Atlantic.
For Cunliffe it was so significant he choose to put the Golden Bull of Maikop on the cover of Europe Between the Oceans.
This bull culture is later seen in Bronze Age Iberia and even later Iron Age Ireland (Tain Bo Culaigh)

5904

"The gold bull which formed part of the frame of a canopy in the Maikop buriel, is a brilliantly observed model coming from daily familiarity with the animals."

5909

""A silver bowl from the mid-third millennium BC burial at Maikop, Kuban in south Russia. The craftsman depicts the two animals vital to the well being of the community, long horned cattle (seen on the side) and wild horses (on the opposite side) probably the Equus przwalski."

5907

"The compelling evidence for the western movement of some steppes communities comes from burials. At Plachidol in northern Bulgaria, a pit-grave 5m deep has been set beneath a massive barrow 7m high and 55m in diameter....
Other burials of a similar kind are found in Hungary, in the flood plain of the Tisza and Koros rivers. Dating evidence for the movement is imprecise but the Plachidol burial dates to around 3000 BC"
"The earliest anthropomorphic stelae date to the 4th millennium BC, and are associated with the early Bronze Age Yamna Horizon, in particular with the Kemi Oba culture of the Crimea and adjacent steppe region."

5908
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/kemi-oba/

"The simple, early type of anthropomorphic stelae are also found in the Alpine region of Italy, southern France and Portugal. Examples have also been found in Bulgaria at Plachidol, Vezevero, and Durankulak."

Maikop is also central to John Koch theory of Indo European from the East, Celtic from the West, so much so that the warrior stelae of Kemi Oba which he links to the warrior stelae of Tartessos figures on the cover of his paper.

5905

https://www.academia.edu/8299894/Indo-European_from_the_east_and_Celtic_from_the_west_re conciling_models_for_languages_in_later_prehistory

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-from-the-west/

This timing is also right for the Pre Beaker Copper Dagger trail to be set across the Mediterranean to Iberia Los Millares (3200 BC) in time to meet up with the emerging Bell Beaker from the Tagus estuary (2800 BC).

Got to say I was big into the Maykop and circumpontic metallurgical thing at one time but the more I read into it the more the model was far too simplistic and the changes in metal type are far more complex than a Balkans followed by a circumpontic metal tradition. It seems there was a lot more pragmatism - for example Yamnaya used models derived from Maykop arsenical bronze traditions but made them in pure copper while some clearly non-steppe/non-Maykop metal objects were made in Arsenical copper. According to some, the copper dagger originates in the metal rich Bodrogkeresztúr c. 4000-3500BC - a culture who are overwhelmingly related to the preceding Tiszapolgar culture with some additional influences. Although by this date the Suvorovo ochre graves had appeared, this culture seems basically a native non-steppe one (albeit I have a suspicion that the idea of long daggers as a weapon could derive from those flint ones of the Suvorovo group).

[alan]

I have always believed that Maikop is key to our understanding of linking the Steppes to the Atlantic.
For Cunliffe it was so significant he choose to put the Golden Bull of Maikop on the cover of Europe Between the Oceans.
This bull culture is later seen in Bronze Age Iberia and even later Iron Age Ireland (Tain Bo Culaigh)

5904

"The gold bull which formed part of the frame of a canopy in the Maikop buriel, is a brilliantly observed model coming from daily familiarity with the animals."

5909

""A silver bowl from the mid-third millennium BC burial at Maikop, Kuban in south Russia. The craftsman depicts the two animals vital to the well being of the community, long horned cattle (seen on the side) and wild horses (on the opposite side) probably the Equus przwalski."

5907

"The compelling evidence for the western movement of some steppes communities comes from burials. At Plachidol in northern Bulgaria, a pit-grave 5m deep has been set beneath a massive barrow 7m high and 55m in diameter....
Other burials of a similar kind are found in Hungary, in the flood plain of the Tisza and Koros rivers. Dating evidence for the movement is imprecise but the Plachidol burial dates to around 3000 BC"
"The earliest anthropomorphic stelae date to the 4th millennium BC, and are associated with the early Bronze Age Yamna Horizon, in particular with the Kemi Oba culture of the Crimea and adjacent steppe region."

5908
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/kemi-oba/

"The simple, early type of anthropomorphic stelae are also found in the Alpine region of Italy, southern France and Portugal. Examples have also been found in Bulgaria at Plachidol, Vezevero, and Durankulak."

Maikop is also central to John Koch theory of Indo European from the East, Celtic from the West, so much so that the warrior stelae of Kemi Oba which he links to the warrior stelae of Tartessos figures on the cover of his paper.

5905

https://www.academia.edu/8299894/Indo-European_from_the_east_and_Celtic_from_the_west_re conciling_models_for_languages_in_later_prehistory

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-from-the-west/

This timing is also right for the Pre Beaker Copper Dagger trail to be set across the Mediterranean to Iberia Los Millares (3200 BC) in time to meet up with the emerging Bell Beaker from the Tagus estuary (2800 BC).

Problem is this guy is several centuries older. Copper had not even reached France, let alone Iberia in 3500BC. It had only just reached north Italy around this time. So that compounds the doubt about this guy being M269 and somehow having made it from eastern Europe.

Another thing to note is that to have any link to a steppe group, he would have to ultimately be descended from the Suvorovo ocher grave small first wave into the Balkans and Danube. That took place c. 4200BC. There is serious doubt as to whether the MRCA of living M269xL23 or Z2103 is old enough for this guy to have left any descendants.

[R.Rocca]

Problem is this guy is several centuries older. Copper had not even reached France, let alone Iberia in 3500BC. It had only just reached north Italy around this time. So that compounds the doubt about this guy being M269 and somehow having made it from eastern Europe.

Another thing to note is that to have any link to a steppe group, he would have to ultimately be descended from the Suvorovo ocher grave small first wave into the Balkans and Danube. That took place c. 4200BC. There is serious doubt as to whether the MRCA of living M269xL23 or Z2103 is old enough for this guy to have left any descendants.

The other thing to consider is the sequence of haplogroups we've seen so far in Iberia. In El Trocs, we see a V88 equivalent guy along with I2a1 in the Early Neolithic, and then I2a1 and I2a2 in the Middle Neolithic. Then in El Portalon, you see this R1b-"maybe" guy as the oldest sample by hundreds of years, only to see I2a2 and H2 in later samples. The haplogroup sequence we are looking for is the exact opposite of what we are seeing in these Iberian samples...we need samples from a point in time where R1b is being the replacer, not the replacee. Also, we would expect that the male ancestor or Western European R1b would have been in an almost entirely R-L23 community, and not part of an alphabet soup of haplogroups, especially ones that are so rare (V88, H2) or minor (I2a1, I2a2) in modern day Iberians. Also, IMO, there is no way to detach the spread of L23 in Western Europe at the same time it was spreading in Yamnaya to the East unless one believes in extreme coincidences.

Of course, the caution is that we are looking at very few samples and in other locations, the situation could be quite different.

[rms2]

The ancient y-dna in Iberia that I want to see, besides Beaker, is SJAPL (http://eaa.elte.hu/FERNANDEZ.pdf). There you have a pretty high level of lactase persistence in a burial dated to about 3300-3000 BC. Who the heck were those people?

[sweuro]

Northern Spain and Basques today have a high level of lactose tolerance, at least much higher than rest of South Europe.

[Heber]

High lactose tolerance was one of the findings of the Irish DNA Atlas project linking Brittany to Ireland.
This is also confirmed by the Karakachoff study Fine-scale human genetic structure in Western France.

"When looking for genomic regions informative about Breton origin, we found two prominent associated regions that include the lactase region and the HLA complex. For both the lactase and the HLA regions, there is a low differentiation between Bretons and Irish, and this is also found at the genome-wide level. "

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n6/full/ejhg2014175a.html

[alan]

The other thing to consider is the sequence of haplogroups we've seen so far in Iberia. In El Trocs, we see a V88 equivalent guy along with I2a1 in the Early Neolithic, and then I2a1 and I2a2 in the Middle Neolithic. Then in El Portalon, you see this R1b-"maybe" guy as the oldest sample by hundreds of years, only to see I2a2 and H2 in later samples. The haplogroup sequence we are looking for is the exact opposite of what we are seeing in these Iberian samples...we need samples from a point in time where R1b is being the replacer, not the replacee. Also, we would expect that the male ancestor or Western European R1b would have been in an almost entirely R-L23 community, and not part of an alphabet soup of haplogroups, especially ones that are so rare (V88, H2) or minor (I2a1, I2a2) in modern day Iberians. Also, IMO, there is no way to detach the spread of L23 in Western Europe at the same time it was spreading in Yamnaya to the East unless one believes in extreme coincidences.

Of course, the caution is that we are looking at very few samples and in other locations, the situation could be quite different.

I agree although I would possibly say steppe rather than necessarily Yamnaya as we do have a small but apparently influential (probably mostly on Balkans natives) Ochre grave/Suvorovo group. They could have brought any R1 lines that existed at the point of their break off from the steppes c. 4200BC. I dont think the genetic impact of this group was much and probably tiny at autosomal level and indeed they may pre-date the addition of the teal element into the steppes. The best archaeological signal for the addition of this teal element into Yamnaya or its ancestors is the contact with the Caucasus along the Don c. 4000-3300BC. These Survovo guys would have broken off before this contact or when it was minimal and therefore may have been significantly different in autosomal genetics - no/less teal/Caucasus but more ENF.

but they once even a small amount of steppe y lineages are added to the Balkans mix, it is theoretically possible that any movements from the Balkans could thereafter include a few of those Suvorovo male lines. The movement of copper working and mining knowledge west along the Alps and into Italy is probably evidence that can be tentatively interpreted as Balkans inputs westwards c. 4000-3500BC but as far as I can see this didnt reach Iberia until 300 or more years after this supposed M269 guy.

[alan]

High lactose tolerance was one of the findings of the Irish DNA Atlas project linking Brittany to Ireland.
This is also confirmed by the Karakachoff study Fine-scale human genetic structure in Western France.

"When looking for genomic regions informative about Breton origin, we found two prominent associated regions that include the lactase region and the HLA complex. For both the lactase and the HLA regions, there is a low differentiation between Bretons and Irish, and this is also found at the genome-wide level. "

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n6/full/ejhg2014175a.html

I must admit I dont think this trait is all that ancient or an indicator of direct contact. Its looks far more of a selection process in areas where pastoralism has predominated throughout much of history and prehistory. I wouldnt read anything much about prehistory into its frequencies today.

[alan]

The other thing to consider is the sequence of haplogroups we've seen so far in Iberia. In El Trocs, we see a V88 equivalent guy along with I2a1 in the Early Neolithic, and then I2a1 and I2a2 in the Middle Neolithic. Then in El Portalon, you see this R1b-"maybe" guy as the oldest sample by hundreds of years, only to see I2a2 and H2 in later samples. The haplogroup sequence we are looking for is the exact opposite of what we are seeing in these Iberian samples...we need samples from a point in time where R1b is being the replacer, not the replacee. Also, we would expect that the male ancestor or Western European R1b would have been in an almost entirely R-L23 community, and not part of an alphabet soup of haplogroups, especially ones that are so rare (V88, H2) or minor (I2a1, I2a2) in modern day Iberians. Also, IMO, there is no way to detach the spread of L23 in Western Europe at the same time it was spreading in Yamnaya to the East unless one believes in extreme coincidences.

Of course, the caution is that we are looking at very few samples and in other locations, the situation could be quite different.

I agree. L23 is the key. M269 in an ancient sample with no further information tells us little the SNP was around 15000 years ago somewhere and with some eastern looking links like pressure microblades and pointed pot spreading some distance west in the Mesolithic it cannot be ruled out some M269* guys could have been peppered around - there is even the outlier pointed based pot of Rocoudor in SW France not too far Iberia. L23 is far younger so its vastly narrows down options and almost by definition has to be a post-first farmers spread broadly in what was the European copper age.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Got to say I was big into the Maykop and circumpontic metallurgical thing at one time but the more I read into it the more the model was far too simplistic and the changes in metal type are far more complex than a Balkans followed by a circumpontic metal tradition. It seems there was a lot more pragmatism - for example Yamnaya used models derived from Maykop arsenical bronze traditions but made them in pure copper while some clearly non-steppe/non-Maykop metal objects were made in Arsenical copper. According to some, the copper dagger originates in the metal rich Bodrogkeresztúr c. 4000-3500BC - a culture who are overwhelmingly related to the preceding Tiszapolgar culture with some additional influences. Although by this date the Suvorovo ochre graves had appeared, this culture seems basically a native non-steppe one (albeit I have a suspicion that the idea of long daggers as a weapon could derive from those flint ones of the Suvorovo group).

Sure, Majkop metal wasn't the be -all and end -all. But the events are clear:

4500-4000 BC: decline of Balkan Copper centres
3800- rise of Majkop, K-A; following pre-Ubaid colonisation of Sth Caucasian Piedmont.
3300/3200: Yamnaya, Usatavo, Cernavoda.
3000: kurgans further west; ie Hungary.

Prior to 3200 BC, the Don-Volga steppe was a backwater, with a sparse population and still using bone implements. If we are looking for a "spark", you can't go past the Caucasus- with it's much denser population and technological superiority.

I'm sure it was more complex than a domino of events, but the Yamnaya-centred steppe was a mere link in the chain, and it's Repin / SS precursors were not the origin of what we're seeing IMO. And they certainly don't explain Afansievo which is as earlier, if not earlier than Yamnaya (and I don't buy a Repin migration to the Altai).

[Generalissimo]

I'm sure it was more complex than a domino of events, but the Yamnaya-centred steppe was a mere link in the chain, and it's Repin / SS precursors were not the origin of what we're seeing IMO. And they certainly don't explain Afansievo which is as earlier, if not earlier than Yamnaya (and I don't buy a Repin migration to the Altai).

But something has to explain Afanasievo, because it's basically identical to Yamnaya and not native to the Altai.

Also, the fact that Afanasievo is so similar to Yamnaya means there are problems in attributing the Caucasus-like admixture on the steppe to the Bronze Age Caucasus, because it suggests that the ancestors of Afanasievo were homogeneous and Yamnaya-like before they headed east.

[Silesian]

The ancient y-dna in Iberia that I want to see, besides Beaker, is SJAPL (http://eaa.elte.hu/FERNANDEZ.pdf). There you have a pretty high level of lactase persistence in a burial dated to about 3300-3000 BC. Who the heck were those people?

You might have an interest in this also.
http://en.academic.ru/pictures/enwiki/67/Clines.png
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/259720

It appears that above study/diagram predicated the assumption/placement of certain markers.

he study was based on the assumption that Basques were modern representatives of Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers’ gene pool, and Near Eastern peoples were a proxy population for Neolithic farmers. Subsequently, they used admixture analysis to estimate the likely components of the contemporary European gene pool contributed by the two parental populations whose members hybridized at a certain moment in the past. The study suggested that the greatest Near Eastern admixture occurs in the Balkans (~80%) and Southern Italy (~60%), whilst it is least in peoples of the British Isles (estimating only a 20% contribution). The authors concluded that the Neolithic shift to agriculture entailed major population dispersal from the Near East.[15]

How did Bannu and Sindh end up sharing some of these same unique markers attributed to a Palaeolithic Western European Basque population?
http://www.ayubmed.edu.pk/JAMC/PAST/20-4/Khattak.pdf

[Gravetto-Danubian]

But something has to explain Afanasievo, because it's basically identical to Yamnaya and not native to the Altai.

Also, the fact that Afanasievo is so similar to Yamnaya means there are problems in attributing the Caucasus-like admixture on the steppe to the Bronze Age Caucasus, because it suggests that the ancestors of Afanasievo were homogeneous and Yamnaya-like before they headed east.

Do we have immediately pre-Afansievo genomes from Altai?

Whatever the case, Afansievo being Yamnaya like isn't a problem at all. All it needs is an EHG -like substrate and the same Caucasus/ Teal admixture that engaged in Yamnaya to have affected Afansievo, even if this population came 'pre-admixed" from further west - Kazakh area

In fact, this might also explain why CWC looks Yamnaya like: same/ similar EHG substrate (from the borders of Poland to Siberia) -> synchronous Teal admixture from common source eg Caucasus or the Altai ?region.

The other thing often forgotten was that Yamnaya (3200 -2600 BC) was a period of in-migration to the steppe, even if the range of the steppe sphere now extended to Hungary and northern Balkans. The milder, wetter climate must be responsible for this. Out migration from it appears contradictory to the evidence at hand.

Anyhow, I'm not suggesting that this is! what happened, but it's well within the realm of possibility.

[Net Down G5L]

Alan, early steppe elements in the Balkans? We know about Suvorovo beyond the Danube delta, which are seen to be an early steppic offshoot, but actually inside and beyond (northwest of) the Balkans remains more intangible. Is there anything else you're thinking about ?

I guess its easy to see exchanges between the Carpathian basin and the circum-Pontic region already present before Yamnaya , especially given that mobility and secondary products had already increased. And i dont think we need to appeal for some rogue horse-rider wondering off into the sunset. A romantic as it seems, there is no solid evidence for horseriding at this stage. At best, people in Botai far to the east were still experimenting with taming these beasts.

In fact, there is a chance that some R1b groups arrived to the west at the tail end of the Neolithic via the Balkans, along with other rarer groups like E-v13 (although different origins). Newer M269 groups probably arrived later still from the steppe.

Finally, there is always the possibility for a 'disjoint scenario': ie the arrival of M269 and ANE had different trajectories. The former earlier, more southern, the latter later, via north-central Europe / CWC.

A thought on migrations....
I mostly 'look for' migrations as the largescale movement of a culture such as Yamnaya - leaving a clear trail.

Today's news made me think again. Today there are 3.5 to 4 million people very recently displaced from Syria by conflict. You can 'see' a trail of people into Turkey across the Me iterranean sea, into Greece, Bulgaria, Austria, Germany, France etc.
However, these people are not overwhelming the existing population or introducing a total change in culture to these countries - but they may add a new richness to the culture.

In prehistoric times we probably had a number of similar 'displaced populations' that may only be visible by minor additions to the heritage of a culture...or by ancient DNA.

For every Yannaya or Corded Ware type migration there may be displaced populations widely spread across neighbouring regions. As noted above by others, the Balkans may be an important area in which/from which to understand these 'displacements'.

[Net Down G5L]

The other thing to consider is the sequence of haplogroups we've seen so far in Iberia. In El Trocs, we see a V88 equivalent guy along with I2a1 in the Early Neolithic, and then I2a1 and I2a2 in the Middle Neolithic. Then in El Portalon, you see this R1b-"maybe" guy as the oldest sample by hundreds of years, only to see I2a2 and H2 in later samples. The haplogroup sequence we are looking for is the exact opposite of what we are seeing in these Iberian samples...we need samples from a point in time where R1b is being the replacer, not the replacee. Also, we would expect that the male ancestor or Western European R1b would have been in an almost entirely R-L23 community, and not part of an alphabet soup of haplogroups, especially ones that are so rare (V88, H2) or minor (I2a1, I2a2) in modern day Iberians. Also, IMO, there is no way to detach the spread of L23 in Western Europe at the same time it was spreading in Yamnaya to the East unless one believes in extreme coincidences.

Of course, the caution is that we are looking at very few samples and in other locations, the situation could be quite different.

I have been looking in more depth at dolmens, passage graves, R1b and I2a2 on the Atlantic fringe.
I am more and more convinced by the archaeology and radio-carbon date evidence that there was an initial 'dolmen phase' in Iberia>France>Isles>Denmark>Sweden. I link this to R1b V88 and possibly early M269. (Through my archaeology/radiocarbon dating and (superficial) aDNA analysis I have raised my probability of an R1b/dolmen link from a 2% long shot to 50% or more chance).
IMO this was quickly followed by a 'passage grave phase' that was in conflict with, and replaced , the dolmen people (or at least 'pushed them' into Scandinavia). I have the passage grave people as I2a2 dominated and the replacers.

This model explains the early R1b and supports 'Gimbutas (like) Indo-European origins' for L51>L11>P312/U106.

As a caution, I really would like to see comprehensive autosomal comparisons between our Iberian probable V88, our R1b "maybee" guy and a range of other ancient/modern samples - including Beaker. I know the Y Full dates quoted above do not support M269>L23 making it to Iberia in the Neolithic but as some on this forum think YFull plus 20% is nearer the truth we do need to rule out the possibility by DNA analysis - not just using date projections. It is a low probability that L23 made it to the Isles / Scandinavia via Iberia in the Neolithic, but it should be easy to disprove by the autosomal analysis?

[alan]

But something has to explain Afanasievo, because it's basically identical to Yamnaya and not native to the Altai.

Also, the fact that Afanasievo is so similar to Yamnaya means there are problems in attributing the Caucasus-like admixture on the steppe to the Bronze Age Caucasus, because it suggests that the ancestors of Afanasievo were homogeneous and Yamnaya-like before they headed east.

I dont follow you on that. At one time it was a problem because Afansievo looked older than Yamanaya but the dates have been reevaluated a couple of times since then and now they are no older than Yamnaya. As for Caucasus DNA in Yamanaya and Afansievo it appears very likely that Repin on the middle Don received Maykop genes from intermediary cultures on the Lower Don who were directly in contact with Maykop and this was crucial in the both the cultural and genetic rise of Yamnaya. This may also be true to a lesser extent on the Volga. Afanasievo is probably just a break off that happened around the time when late Repin was morphing into Yamnaya.

There may of course been other steppe cultures who absorbed Maykop or even pre-Maykop Caucasus genes as I recall reading about the influence of Maykop on Azov and also Crimea and nearby. The pre-Maykop farmers of the north Caucasus also were in contact with steppe groups for some time before Maykop arose. Some of the steppe metalwork made of Balkans metals which were carried about by the Stredny Stog groups have been found in the pre-Maykop Neolithic north Caucasus so there was contact over a long period from perhaps 5000BC. However, I think Maykop accelerated this.

[alan]

I have been looking in more depth at dolmens, passage graves, R1b and I2a2 on the Atlantic fringe.
I am more and more convinced by the archaeology and radio-carbon date evidence that there was an initial 'dolmen phase' in Iberia>France>Isles>Denmark>Sweden. I link this to R1b V88 and possibly early M269. (Through my archaeology/radiocarbon dating and (superficial) aDNA analysis I have raised my probability of an R1b/dolmen link from a 2% long shot to 50% or more chance).
IMO this was quickly followed by a 'passage grave phase' that was in conflict with, and replaced , the dolmen people (or at least 'pushed them' into Scandinavia). I have the passage grave people as I2a2 dominated and the replacers.

This model explains the early R1b and supports 'Gimbutas (like) Indo-European origins' for L51>L11>P312/U106.

As a caution, I really would like to see comprehensive autosomal comparisons between our Iberian probable V88, our R1b "maybee" guy and a range of other ancient/modern samples - including Beaker. I know the Y Full dates quoted above do not support M269>L23 making it to Iberia in the Neolithic but as some on this forum think YFull plus 20% is nearer the truth we do need to rule out the possibility by DNA analysis - not just using date projections. It is a low probability that L23 made it to the Isles / Scandinavia via Iberia in the Neolithic, but it should be easy to disprove by the autosomal analysis?

David says the maybe M269 Spanish sample is in too bad shape to run through the most useful autosomal programs. He is going to try on another more recent sample from the same site which is in much better shape.

[rms2]

David says the maybe M269 Spanish sample is in too bad shape to run through the most useful autosomal programs. He is going to try on another more recent sample from the same site which is in much better shape.

I think ATP3's PF6518+ result is about as good as the condition of his autosomal dna. :\

[TigerMW]

You may be thinking of Myres, who had only 4% R1b-M269 in Armenians - however this was with a sample size of only 26. Two thorough recent studies of Armenians exist - one with n=1170 has 27.5% R1b-M269, the other with n=413 has 29%. The latter distinguished the subclades: 1.2% R1b-M269*(xL23) and 27.8% R1b-L23*(xM412), presumably all Z2103. So yeah, lots.
I think the high Z2103/Z2105 in Armenia is correct. They don't call the STRs the Armenian Haplotype for nothing.

If you look at the STRs (Armenian Ht) that Lucotte, et. al. used that we abscond as a proxy for L23xL51/probable Z2103/Z2105 they are different than we see in the fairly rare M269xL23. Given that, I think the Lucotte study is the best we have for a Z2103/Z2105 proxy frequency.

Southern Italy, Greece and Armenia are the hot spots, with Calabria (to my surprise) being the winner.

I picked a point in Eastern Turkey, Erzurum, and looked at distances:

Erzurum to Samara (and our ancient DNA Z2103 folks) is about 2,200 km
Erzurum to Thessaloniki is about 1,800 km
Erzurum to Calabria (with a ferry) is about 2,600 km
Erzurum to Andorra in the Pyrenees is over 4,100 km

Hungary has a decent showing but does not compare with the Southern Italy, Greece and Old Armenia.

Perhaps Humanist can shed some light on this.

I could see a little Cardial Wares in the locations above but YFull has formed & TMRCA for L23 as 6400-6200 ybp and Z2103 both as 6200 ybp so L23 and Z2103 had to spread later than the early Neolithic.

It's a long way from Andorra to Samara or Samara to Andorra. Boat, horse or whatever - I think you have to look at places in between as the start of an expansion... of course, that is assuming L23 was in the Western Bell Beaker region early on. Maybe it wasn't. It's kind of hard to see how that would work.

[R.Rocca]

I think the high Z2103/Z2105 in Armenia is correct. They don't call the STRs the Armenian Haplotype for nothing.

If you look at the STRs (Armenian Ht) that Lucotte, et. al. used that we abscond as a proxy for L23xL51/probable Z2103/Z2105 they are different than we see in the fairly rare M269xL23. Given that, I think the Lucotte study is the best we have for a Z2103/Z2105 proxy frequency.

Are you sure? Unless I'm missing something, the only difference I see in the STRs Lucette used is that DYS390=25 is the modal for M269(xL23). Even then, half of the M269(xL23) samples have the Z2103/Z2105 modal DYS390=24. Either way, Lucotte's paper is a mess with some glaring errors.



Southern Italy, Greece and Armenia are the hot spots, with Calabria (to my surprise) being the winner.

Again, more reason to think Lucotte's data includes M269(xL23), since there is a known M269(xL23) hotspot (comparatively) in Calabria from FTDNA testing. Rather than racking our brains with what may or may not be Z2103/Z2105 in Lucotte's paper, we know from Trofimova 2015 that Z2105 is 36.2% in Burzyan Bashkirs and 21.2% in Udmurts.



I picked a point in Eastern Turkey, Erzurum, and looked at distances:

Erzurum to Samara (and our ancient DNA Z2103 folks) is about 2,200 km
Erzurum to Thessaloniki is about 1,800 km
Erzurum to Calabria (with a ferry) is about 2,600 km
Erzurum to Andorra in the Pyrenees is over 4,100 km

Hungary has a decent showing but does not compare with the Southern Italy, Greece and Old Armenia.

Perhaps Humanist can shed some light on this.

I could see a little Cardial Wares in the locations above but YFull has formed & TMRCA for L23 as 6400-6200 ybp and Z2103 both as 6200 ybp so L23 and Z2103 had to spread later than the early Neolithic.

It's a long way from Andorra to Samara or Samara to Andorra. Boat, horse or whatever - I think you have to look at places in between as the start of an expansion... of course, that is assuming L23 was in the Western Bell Beaker region early on. Maybe it wasn't. It's kind of hard to see how that would work.

Maybe I missed it, or maybe you are making a different point about ATP3, but I'm not sure why one would have to estimate the distance from Erzurum to Androrra, since Z2103/Z2105 never reached Iberia and it would have taken a different migration path than L51??? If the Bashkir's have the highest frequency, then the distance should be from Samara to Burzyan and Udmurtia, which are relatively close. My point is that we need to take modern frequency into account at some point, and considering it totally irrelevant when discussing 3000 or 2500 BC is a mistake, especially thinking that DF27 had a minor presence in Iberian Bell Beaker, only to see its frequency explode over the past 1000-1500 years.

[Humanist]

Hungary has a decent showing but does not compare with the Southern Italy, Greece and Old Armenia.

Perhaps Humanist can shed some light on this.

Mike, I created the below map a little while back. The great majority of the frequencies here presumably represent Z2103 men. This is especially true for the men in the northern parts of the region, such as the N Syrian Alawites, Armenians, NW Iranians, and Assyrians. We are looking at a great stretch of territory, from the Mediterranean Coast of SE Turkey/Syria to the shores of the Caspian with an average of 20+% of Z2103.

http://i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g326/dok101/dok101091/Map_Middle_East_R1b_size.jpg

[TigerMW]

Are you sure? Unless I'm missing something, the only difference I see in the STRs Lucette used is that DYS390=25 is the modal for M269(xL23). Even then, half of the M269(xL23) samples have the Z2103/Z2105 modal DYS390=24.... .
No, I'm not at all sure. I had looked at M269+ L23- before but it has been a couple of years. I have to agree with you I don't see much differentiation on the M269+ non U106 non P312 project screens.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new?iframe=ycolorized

Peter, Joe and Sergey are the folks who would have the best feel.

It is fascinating to see the origin countries listed.

I think understanding Southern Italy, Greece and Turkey are critical to go with SE Europe in general.

[TigerMW]

... Maybe I missed it, or maybe you are making a different point about ATP3, but I'm not sure why one would have to estimate the distance from Erzurum to Androrra, since Z2103/Z2105 never reached Iberia and it would have taken a different migration path than L51??? If the Bashkir's have the highest frequency, then the distance should be from Samara to Burzyan and Udmurtia, which are relatively close.

I'm just saying that L51 brothers L23* and Z2103/Z2105 don't have much to do with Western Europe early on that I can see. They are all from the L23 Most Recent Common Ancestor so we know at one point their ancestry was in one place. If the time constraints are close that gives us something to hone in on.

I guess this ends up back at another point that has been argued earlier. How relevant and how close in time was the branch splitting between Z2103/Z2105, L51 and any L23* out there?

L23 formed and MRCA dates are 6400-6200 ybp
Z2103 formed and MRCA dates are 6200-6200 ybp
L51 formed and MRCA dates are 6200-5800 ybp

I think L23*, Z2103 and L51 are very relevant in relation to each other. I guess it comes down to L51's lineage making a sprint to the Pyrenees over a handful of generations or two and when P311 popped out.


... My point is that we need to take modern frequency into account at some point, and considering it totally irrelevant when discussing 3000 or 2500 BC is a mistake, especially thinking that DF27 had a minor presence in Iberian Bell Beaker, only to see its frequency explode over the past 1000-1500 years.
Modern frequency should be taken into account, particularly as it relates to other cross-validating genes and derived languages, cultures and such....
but I think high modern frequencies have little to do with an ancient origin point. The Wave of Advance theory is most applicable to fast growing populations so an allele riding the wave fits nicely.

Is there some reason you use the past 1000-1500 years expansion timeframe as a reference point? Perhaps it was the last 2500-3000 years that the greatest expansion took place. If we look at the diversity of the early branching in everything from L21 to L2 to DF27, it appeared the bushiness to the P311 tree started in the Bronze Age. The rest (of the expansion) is just history, so to speak.

[rms2]

. . . My point is that we need to take modern frequency into account at some point, and considering it totally irrelevant when discussing 3000 or 2500 BC is a mistake, especially thinking that DF27 had a minor presence in Iberian Bell Beaker, only to see its frequency explode over the past 1000-1500 years.

I wouldn't say that DF27 had a minor presence in Iberian Bell Beaker. My guess (and I could be wrong) is that the very earliest Iberian Bell Beaker was not R1b of any kind. I think that for the reasons I've mentioned before, which make the earliest Iberian Beaker so different from fully developed Beaker. I think later Iberian and French Beaker probably had plenty of R1b-DF27 in it.

Just my opinion, and the ancient y-dna may prove me wrong (assuming they test some of the very earliest Iberian Beaker).

[R.Rocca]

Modern frequency should be taken into account, particularly if relates to other cross-validating genes and derived languages, cultures and such....
but I think modern frequency has very little to do with an ancient origin point. The Wave of Advance theory is most applicable to fast growing populations so an allele riding the wave fits nicely.

I didn't mention anything about origin point, just that modern day frequency doesn't mean that they won't correlate in some areas circa 2800 or 2500 BC. That Z2103 was found in high numbers in the modern steppe and ancient DNA was just an example.


Is there some reason you use the 1000-1500 years expansion timeframe as a reference point?

Specifically, because of some folks keep insinuating that DF27 likely expanded into Iberia much later than it did anywhere else.

[alan]

I'm just saying that L51 brothers L23* and Z2103/Z2105 don't have much to do with Western Europe early on that I can see. They are all from the L23 Most Recent Common Ancestor so we know at one point their ancestry was in one place. If the time time constraints are close that gives us something to hone in on.

I guess this ends up back at another point that has been argued earlier. How relevant and how close in time was the branch splitting between Z2103/Z2105, L51 and any L23* out there?

L23 formed and MRCA dates are 6400-6200 ybp
Z2103 formed and MRCA dates are 6200-6200 ybp
L51 formed and MRCA dates are 6200-5800 ybp

I think L23*, Z2103 and L51 are very relevant in relation to each other. I guess it comes down to L51's lineage making a sprint to the Pyrenees over a handful of generations or two and when P311 popped out.


Modern frequency should be taken into account, particularly as it relates to other cross-validating genes and derived languages, cultures and such....
but I think high modern frequencies have little to do with an ancient origin point. The Wave of Advance theory is most applicable to fast growing populations so an allele riding the wave fits nicely.

Is there some reason you use the past 1000-1500 years expansion timeframe as a reference point? Perhaps it was the last 2500-3000 years that the greatest expansion took place. If we look at the diversity of the early branching in everything from L21 to L2 to DF27, it appeared the bushiness to the P311 tree started in the Bronze Age. The rest (of the expansion) is just history, so to speak.

What is curious is that allowing for error then the two branches of L23 seems to have MRCA around the same age c. 4200BC give or take a century or so. Even if the absolute dating is wrong the similarity remains. So there seems to be some early phase of take off of L23 before the next later explosion of L11 with a major hiatus in between on the L51 line. I dont know enough about Z2013 to ascertain as to whether Z2103 had a bit of down time.

If we knew for sure that c. 4200BC give or take is the real date then we could put this into some sort of context that might make sense for demographic expansion followed by hiatus. The steppe picture around 4200BC is one of an aridity crisis in both Old Europe and the steppe and movement of early ochre grave/suvorovo groups into east-central Europe.

On the other hand this coincides with the beginning of the end for the zenith of Stedny Stog groups and their long lasting network across the steppes. Maybe a time of new opportunity for others? Repin is one group who emerge from the ashes soon after c. 4000BC and Repin leads to Yamnaya which is very associated with Z2103. So there seems a very high chance if Z2103 has a MRCA around the century or so running up to 4000BC that it is linked to Repin.

[razyn]

Specifically, because of some folks keep insinuating that DF27 likely expanded into Iberia much later than it did anywhere else.

insinuate: to suggest or hint (something bad or reprehensible) in an indirect and unpleasant way

I'd prefer a less loaded term such as "suggesting;" or maybe "deducing" (just to load it the other way). And "later than into many places to the north and east" would be more accurate than much later than anywhere else.

I'm just looking at several dozen subclades of DF27 -- as far as we can yet tell, basal DF27 -- that have no readily apparent genetic or historic ties back toward some hypothetical ancestry in Iberia, Atlantic Europe, or even Western Europe. Geographically, they may be anyplace between Armenia and whatever ocean stopped them; phylogenetically, they are below DF27 (and, most of them, ZZ12). To me, it makes more sense to view that as a dispersal of the basic stock from someplace east of the Rhine -- with different subclades present (or occasionally dominant), depending on the age of the mutation and the direction taken from that more eastern homeland.

DF27 does have some diversity in the far west, including but not limited to Iberia. And some of its subclades that are found there have reached impressively high percentages in the total male population. But a currently numerous subclade with a formed date of 600 AD is certainly not telling us much about the Bronze Age; wherever it formed -- or its much more distant ancestors lived -- its own proliferation has to be more recent than its birth. Some subclades found in Iberia or western France clearly are much older than 1500 years; but one has to add in all the grandkids to get the big numbers that make DF27 turn all dark on your maps, and that's recent proliferation.

[ADW_1981]

DF27 and L238 are mutually exclusive no? A mild, but reasonable deduction should be Germany because the latter has a nearly complete Scandinavian presence. A region which has historically had little immigration until recent years. I'm all for people moving around, but other P312(xDF27) seem to have a similar Germanic, or at least continental Celtic distribution.

[TigerMW]

Is there some reason you use the 1000-1500 years expansion timeframe as a reference point?

Specifically, because of some folks keep insinuating that DF27 likely expanded into Iberia much later than it did anywhere else.
Early and late are relative terms but I can readily accept that DF27 was along both sides of the Pyrenees, particularly the north side, not long after the DF27 Most Recent Common Ancestor. I don't know if that is in time for early western Beakers in the Iberian Peninsula, though.

Similarly, I don't have any problem seeing L21 hit Ireland quite early. The DF13 subclade is marked by only a two SNP block and it is thick, thick, thick in Ireland. Brother DF63 seems to be a little more easterly but there is a good chance DF13, some of its early branches, DF63 and some other early L21 branching actually occurred in Northwest or North France or even along the Rhine. The puzzler is the L21 pocket in Bologna, Italy.

Likewise, if one can accept Wave of Advance theory, it's easy to see DF27's early branches occurring in route to the Atlantic and the Iberian Peninsula. The L51 group's march westward could be one long leap, but securing logistics, communications and military outposts and alliances along the way, ensuring sustainability; I think would take several generations rather than be an end run. I guess the waterways can alter that line of thought, but logistics and support should not be underestimated for sustainability. Look at Jamestown/Roanoke.

I am speculating so I don't have a hard line on any of this.:)

[TigerMW]

I quoted this from the "Genome of late... " thread because we are getting pretty R1b specific.
....
I'll save you some trouble - Hallast et al have an L238 clade from Norway and Denmark and a DF99 sample from Italy (but no DF19). Busby was published in 2011, none of those three clades are even on the ISOGG 2010 tree. It has P312(xU152, L21) but of course that includes DF27. Rocca et al have DF19 and L238 but that was just SNP/clade discovery based on 1000 Genomes data without geographical data (unless there is another paper I don't know about).

The most relevant paper would be Valverde et al 2015, who have an extensive Spanish sample and smaller French, Irish, and Portuguese samples. Of P312+ Iberian men (n=712) there were 77% DF27, 7% U152, 4% L21, no DF19 or L238, and 12% P312*(xDF27, U152, L21, L238, DF19) - which might include some DF99, it wasn't tested. Irish P312+ men (n=109) had 1% DF27, 3% U152, 72% L21, no DF19 or L238, and 24% P312*. Bretons (n=117) had 21% DF27, 5% U152, 65% L21, 1% L238, no DF19, and 8% P312*.

Without knowing what the P312* is we can't tell the frequency and diversity of minor clades (well you can look at the STRs if you like, I'm not).

Besides the Berton L238 above all three clades are found in Britain, but obviously they could be Norman, Roman, etc. After thousands of years you can probably find examples of pretty much anything pretty much anywhere if you look closely enough.
These numbers caught my attention from Valverde:
Iberian: 12% P312*
Irish: 24% P312*
Bretons: 8% P312*

We can't really say there is any reason to think early branching P312 is particularly diverse in the Iberian Peninsula as was once thought.

It surprised to me see DF27's P312 proportion was higher in Iberia
than L21's proportion of P312 in Ireland.

This all seems to fit a Wave of Advance west as DF27 and L21 hit green fields on the way to the Atlantic. Is it fair to think of the Atlantic fringe and Atlantic Bronze Age as hinterlands or frontier territory?

[R.Rocca]

insinuate: to suggest or hint (something bad or reprehensible) in an indirect and unpleasant way

I'd prefer a less loaded term such as "suggesting;" or maybe "deducing" (just to load it the other way). And "later than into many places to the north and east" would be more accurate than much later than anywhere else.

I'm just looking at several dozen subclades of DF27 -- as far as we can yet tell, basal DF27 -- that have no readily apparent genetic or historic ties back toward some hypothetical ancestry in Iberia, Atlantic Europe, or even Western Europe. Geographically, they may be anyplace between Armenia and whatever ocean stopped them; phylogenetically, they are below DF27 (and, most of them, ZZ12). To me, it makes more sense to view that as a dispersal of the basic stock from someplace east of the Rhine -- with different subclades present (or occasionally dominant), depending on the age of the mutation and the direction taken from that more eastern homeland.

DF27 does have some diversity in the far west, including but not limited to Iberia. And some of its subclades that are found there have reached impressively high percentages in the total male population. But a currently numerous subclade with a formed date of 600 AD is certainly not telling us much about the Bronze Age; wherever it formed -- or its much more distant ancestors lived -- its own proliferation has to be more recent than its birth. Some subclades found in Iberia or western France clearly are much older than 1500 years; but one has to add in all the grandkids to get the big numbers that make DF27 turn all dark on your maps, and that's recent proliferation.

I didn't say that DF27 was born in Iberia, although it is still a possibility as nothing in the data we have today contradicts it. Certainly finding young clades within older clades is just that, a recent proliferation proliferation, but even proliferation is much more likely when you have chiefs arising in areas that were 80% DF27 from as far back as at least 2500 BC.

[Joe B]

Are you sure? Unless I'm missing something, the only difference I see in the STRs Lucette used is that DYS390=25 is the modal for M269(xL23). Even then, half of the M269(xL23) samples have the Z2103/Z2105 modal DYS390=24. Either way, Lucotte's paper is a mess with some glaring errors.

Again, more reason to think Lucotte's data includes M269(xL23), since there is a known M269(xL23) hotspot (comparatively) in Calabria from FTDNA testing. Rather than racking our brains with what may or may not be Z2103/Z2105 in Lucotte's paper, we know from Trofimova 2015 that Z2105 is 36.2% in Burzyan Bashkirs and 21.2% in Udmurts.

Maybe I missed it, or maybe you are making a different point about ATP3, but I'm not sure why one would have to estimate the distance from Erzurum to Androrra, since Z2103/Z2105 never reached Iberia and it would have taken a different migration path than L51??? If the Bashkir's have the highest frequency, then the distance should be from Samara to Burzyan and Udmurtia, which are relatively close. My point is that we need to take modern frequency into account at some point, and considering it totally irrelevant when discussing 3000 or 2500 BC is a mistake, especially thinking that DF27 had a minor presence in Iberian Bell Beaker, only to see its frequency explode over the past 1000-1500 years.
No, I'm not at all sure. I had looked at M269+ L23- before but it has been a couple of years. I have to agree with you I don't see much differentiation on the M269+ non U106 non P312 project screens.
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new?iframe=ycolorized

Peter, Joe and Sergey are the folks who would have the best feel.

It is fascinating to see the origin countries listed.

I think understanding Southern Italy, Greece and Turkey are critical to go with SE Europe in general.Don't forget byrgian. Not only because he is a co-administator of the ht35 Project, his DYS393=13 is also a good example of one of the problems with the Lucotte paper. R1b-CTS9219 > BY611/A1777/Y10789+ is a branch found in the Balkans with DYS393=13 that the paper missed with it's 100% focus on DYS393=12. R1b>M269>L23>Z2103>Z2106>Z2109>CTS7822>CTS9219>BY611/A1777/Y10789+ brygian worked hard on this one.

Another key marker missing was DYS426. The STR combination of DYS393=12 and DYS426=11 is a very good indicator of R1b-PF7562 or the old M269+, L150+, L23- branch.

They did use DYS392 and the couple of haplotypes with DYS392=14 are likely R1b-L277 but could also be R1b-PF7562.

The Lucotte paper was a good try but lacked the insight we now have for "ht35" haplotpes. The good thing is that Peter H. was involved with the Lucotte paper and is administrator of the ht35 project. That won't be a problem if there is a next time.

The R1b-M269 (P312- U106-) haplogroup project is geographically and ethnically diverse.
Albania
Algeria
Armenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
England
Ethiopia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Hungary
India
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kosovo
Latvia
Lebanon
Libya
Lithuania
Macedonia
Mexico
Morocco
Netherlands
Northern Ireland
Norway
Pakistan
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Romania
Russian Federation
Saudi Arabia
Scotland
Serbia
Slovakia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
United States (Native American)
Wales
Yemen
We have people working on a lot of different areas now. Ancient remains, improving the haplogroup resolution of Armenian haplotypes and tracing Jewish L584 and L277 lines from the 11th century just to name a few.

The Volga area and everywhere north of the Caspian is not studied well enough to give good frequency data. smal or Arsen know about the studies in that area better than I would. The Bashkir group is proving to be interesting. Just the other day Arsen found us a R1b-Z2103>L584 which means that there may be more Z2103 branch diversity with the Bashkirs and other groups south of the Urals than previously thought.http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1586-From-R-L23-L150-to-R-PF7580-amp-L584&p=108202&viewfull=1#post108202

My general sense is that the R1b-Z2103 branches spread out in a completely different manner that the R1b-L51 branches. R1b-Z2103>L277 and L584 branches flourished in the mountains of Anatolia and then on to the Balkans where the CTS7822 branchs seem to be more frequent. The Z2103 haplogroup resides around the Black and Caspian Seas so it wouldn't be unreasonble to think that they were part of a group that had some sea fairing skills useful for the eastern Mediterranean.

It wouldn't be surprising if L51 rapidly moved west with a combination of river and overland travel. Perhaps in a similar way one would make their way from the northeast United States to the California in 1849. It was a raft via the Ohio, Mississippi and Missouri rivers to Kansas City and then 3,200 kms overland via the California trail to the west coast using an ox and wagon. An ox and wagon was likely what was used several thousand years ago in europe for the L51 and then the U106 and P312 migrations west. The 4.2 kiloyear event or some other climate event was the likely impetus for these migrations out of the steppe.

[razyn]

even proliferation is much more likely when you have chiefs arising in areas that were 80% DF27 from as far back as at least 2500 BC.
Do you know of some such area, testing DF27+ that high in 2500 BC aDNA? I sure as heck don't.

[R.Rocca]

Do you know of some such area, testing DF27+ that high in 2500 BC aDNA? I sure as heck don't.

Stay tuned.

[vettor]

Early and late are relative terms but I can readily accept that DF27 was along both sides of the Pyrenees, particularly the north side, not long after the DF27 Most Recent Common Ancestor. I don't know if that is in time for early western Beakers in the Iberian Peninsula, though.

Similarly, I don't have any problem seeing L21 hit Ireland quite early. The DF13 subclade is marked by only a two SNP block and it is thick, thick, thick in Ireland. Brother DF63 seems to be a little more easterly but there is a good chance DF13, some of its early branches, DF63 and some other early L21 branching actually occurred in Northwest or North France or even along the Rhine. The puzzler is the L21 pocket in Bologna, Italy.

Likewise, if one can accept Wave of Advance theory, it's easy to see DF27's early branches occurring in route to the Atlantic and the Iberian Peninsula. The L51 group's march westward could be one long leap, but securing logistics, communications and military outposts and alliances along the way, ensuring sustainability; I think would take several generations rather than be an end run. I guess the waterways can alter that line of thought, but logistics and support should not be underestimated for sustainability. Look at Jamestown/Roanoke.

I am speculating so I don't have a hard line on any of this.:)


The L21 pocket in Bologna could be the celtic Boii tribe which this tribe is also in bohemia

[Heber]

I quoted this from the "Genome of late... " thread because we are getting pretty R1b specific.
These numbers caught my attention from Valverde:
Iberian: 12% P312*
Irish: 24% P312*
Bretons: 8% P312*

We can't really say there is any reason to think early branching P312 is particularly diverse in the Iberian Peninsula as was once thought.

It surprised to me see DF27's P312 proportion was higher in Iberia
than L21's proportion of P312 in Ireland.

This all seems to fit a Wave of Advance west as DF27 and L21 hit green fields on the way to the Atlantic. Is it fair to think of the Atlantic fringe and Atlantic Bronze Age as hinterlands or frontier territory?

You can see the hotspots of P312 in the table below.
IMHO P312 expanded in Atlantic Europe, L21 in the Isles NW France, U152 in France / Alpine, DF27 in Iberia / SW France.

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/atlantic-dna/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/isles-dna/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/france-dna/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/iberian-dna/

5923

[TigerMW]

Stay tuned.
Now you have our attention! Well, you always did but now we are anxious.

I've read of the rumblings from other R1b1a2 citizen-scientists authors that more data has been made public and work is being done to analyze it. Very good!

Your group has done more for R1b-M269 understanding than anybody! I hope some of the full time academics are inspired to pick up and keep advancing the ball too.

[TigerMW]

You can see the hotspots of P312 in the table below.
IMHO P312 expanded in Atlantic Europe, L21 in the Isles NW France, U152 in France / Alpine, DF27 in Iberia / SW France.
...
Right, I agree. I don't think there is much doubt that P312 of all types have expanded greatly in Western Europe.

Where do you think these types of P312 originated though, or at least originally expanded from?

Perhaps the Hawaiian Island chain is a good illustration. The earth's mantle is slowly drifting, causing the "string" of islands.

Kuaui is a beautiful island, called the Garden Isle as it known for its lush vegetation and waterfalls. It is towards the western side of the chain. Hawaii, in contrast is on the eastern side. It has large portions of dry volcanic rock. It has current volcanic activity and is still growing. Of course, it is known as the Big Island but Hawaii is much younger than Kuaui despite dwarfing Kuaui in size.

Modern frequency as little to do with origin points. It's still important data but just another piece of the puzzle, particularly in fast growing populations. Human population growth has accelerated with all of the agricultural, distribution/marketing and medical advancements.

[Heber]

Right, I agree. I don't think there is much doubt that P312 of all types have expanded greatly in Western Europe.

Where do you think these types of P312 originated though, or at least originally expanded from?

Perhaps the Hawaiian Island chain is a good illustration. The earth's mantle is slowly drifting, causing the "string" of islands.

Kuaui is a beautiful island, called the Garden Isle as it known for its lush vegetation and waterfalls. It is towards the western side of the chain. Hawaii, in contrast is on the eastern side. It has large portions of dry volcanic rock. It has current volcanic activity and is still growing. Of course, it is known as the Big Island but Hawaii is much younger than Kuaui despite dwarfing Kuaui in size.

Modern frequency as little to do with origin points. It's still important data but just another piece of the puzzle, particularly in fast growing populations. Human population growth has accelerated with all of the agricultural, distribution/marketing and medical advancements.

Mike,

It is not just the frequency of individuals (which is overwhelming) but the sheer number of branches in the Phylogenetic Tree which have developed.
As the main branches are close or equal to the TMRCA of P312, 4600 and they are dominant in the Atlantic zone that is where we should look.
If as Ted Kendall clearly demonstrated R1b (at a higher level than P312) was found in Neolithic Iberia I reserve my opinion until further aDNA is published. What is interesting is I understand that Bell Beaker objects eg polished stone wristguards were found in the grave of ATP3 so something is not quiet clear here.

[rms2]

Mike,

It is not just the frequency of individuals (which is overwhelming) but the sheer number of branches in the Phylogenetic Tree which have developed.
As the main branches are close or equal to the TMRCA of P312, 4600 and they are dominant in the Atlantic zone that is where we should look.

If that is the case, and the Atlantic zone "is where we should look" (for what? The origin of P312?), it is really odd that no ancient P312 of any kind has yet turned up in the Atlantic zone, aside from two relatively late (Iron Age) samples from southeastern England (really in the North Sea zone).

[Heber]

The recent studies Allentoft, Haak have not tested in Western Europe and it is only recently that ancient DNA testing techniques have improved to test samples in warmer climates.

[rms2]

The recent studies have not tested in Western Europe and it is only recently that ancient DNA testing techniques have improved to test samples in warmer climates.

Well, that's not really true. What about the y-dna results from La Braña, Avellaner and La Mina in Spain and Treilles and the Dolmen of La Pierre Fritte in France?

[rms2]

I'm betting that Gimbutas, although not right about everything, was right when it comes to Beaker and, by inference, P312. The Beaker that counts for most of us is a product of the mixing of Yamnaya and Vučedol, and Vučedol itself may have already been the product of the mixing of an earlier kurgan wave and Neolithic farmers.

I'm betting P312 will be found on Yamnaya's route west and possibly among the remains in kurgans from one of the earlier steppe incursions, like the skeleton of the man in the photo below near Csongrad, Hungary, dated to Gimbutas' Kurgan Wave 1 (4400-4200 BC).

5924

I think it is a major mistake to think that just because no R1b-L51 has yet been found in eastern Yamnaya that therefore all Yamnaya was almost exclusively R1b-Z2103. A similar mistake was made when Corded Ware, some Scythians, and the Tarim mummies all turned out to be R1a, so everyone just assumed Yamnaya and everything else early IE would be R1a.

[lgmayka]

As the main branches are close or equal to the TMRCA of P312, 4600 and they are dominant in the Atlantic zone that is where we should look.
This is circular logic. You have defined "main" branches to be those common among frequent DNA testers (i.e., Western Europeans). You are then pleased to find that they are "dominant in the Atlantic zone" (i.e., among Western Europeans).

Please understand that in determining the origin of a clade, every subclade and indeed every singleton is arguably of equal weight. In fact, I generally weight the singletons and rare subclades more heavily, because they did not enjoy a rapid expansion (which usually implies a migration into new territory). Singletons and small subclades are more likely to be the remnants that stayed behind.

We desperately need Big Y testing of P312** examples from across all of Europe, including central, eastern, and southeastern regions.

[kinman]

I certainly agree with your observations, except I would have some doubts about the Csongrad skeleton in Hungary. 6200 years ago seems to be a bit early for R-L51 and R-Z2103 to have advanced quite that far west. At least from the following timeline I put forth in the "horse domestication" thread (or are my dates too recent?):

"R-L51 and relatives had presumably been part of the Samara Culture, which then evolved into the Khvalynsk Culture. If they moved west towards Ukraine about 6000-6200 years ago, I assume this would make them part of Kurgan Wave 1. The earliest part of the Yamna Culture (Sredny Stog II) would have begun about this time. It was probably in southern Ukraine that R-L51 gave rise to R-L11 (L151). Kurgan Wave 2 (about 5500 years ago) would have taken them (and their relatives) into the lower Danube River area (present-day Romania and Bulgaria). Of course, they took their Yamna Culture, Indo-European language, and horses with them. Remains of their chestnut-colored (definitely domesticated) horses have been found in Romania (dated at about 5000 years ago). It was perhaps in the area of Hungary that R-L11 gave rise to R-P312 about 5200 years ago."

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


I'm betting that Gimbutas, although not right about everything, was right when it comes to Beaker and, by inference, P312. The Beaker that counts for most of us is a product of the mixing of Yamnaya and Vučedol, and Vučedol itself may have already been the product of the mixing of an earlier kurgan wave and Neolithic farmers.

I'm betting P312 will be found on Yamnaya's route west and possibly among the remains in kurgans from one of the earlier steppe incursions, like the skeleton of the man in the photo below near Csongrad, Hungary, dated to Gimbutas' Kurgan Wave 1 (4400-4200 BC).

5924

I think it is a major mistake to think that just because no R1b-L51 has yet been found in eastern Yamnaya that therefore all Yamnaya was almost exclusively R1b-Z2103. A similar mistake was made when Corded Ware, some Scythians, and the Tarim mummies all turned out to be R1a, so everyone just assumed Yamnaya and everything else early IE would be R1a.

[rms2]

I certainly agree with your observations, except I would have some doubts about the Csongrad skeleton in Hungary. 6200 years ago seems to be a bit early for R-L51 and R-Z2103 to have advanced quite that far west. At least from the following timeline I put forth in the "horse domestication" thread (or are my dates too recent?):

"R-L51 and relatives had presumably been part of the Samara Culture, which then evolved into the Khvalynsk Culture. If they moved west towards Ukraine about 6000-6200 years ago, I assume this would make them part of Kurgan Wave 1. The earliest part of the Yamna Culture (Sredny Stog II) would have begun about this time. It was probably in southern Ukraine that R-L51 gave rise to R-L11 (L151). Kurgan Wave 2 (about 5500 years ago) would have taken them (and their relatives) into the lower Danube River area (present-day Romania and Bulgaria). Of course, they took their Yamna Culture, Indo-European language, and horses with them. Remains of their chestnut-colored (definitely domesticated) horses have been found in Romania (dated at about 5000 years ago). It was perhaps in the area of Hungary that R-L11 gave rise to R-P312 about 5200 years ago."

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

I'm not sure why what you wrote excludes the possibility that any of the steppe pastoralists of Kurgan Wave 1 could have been R1b-L51 or even R1b-P312. Yamnaya was Gimbutas' Kurgan Wave 3.

[kinman]

I did say that R-L51 and their relatives (such as R-Z2103) were probably part of Kurgan Wave 1. However, I also said that R-P312 arose about 5200 years ago, and if that is even close to being accurate, R-P312 couldn't have been a part of either Wave 1 or Wave 2 (which occurred hundreds of years before the first R-P312 man was born). Right? Or are my dates too recent?
--------------Ken


I'm not sure why what you wrote excludes the possibility that any of the steppe pastoralists of Kurgan Wave 1 could have been R1b-L51 or even R1b-P312. Yamnaya was Gimbutas' Kurgan Wave 3.

[R.Rocca]

I'm not sure why what you wrote excludes the possibility that any of the steppe pastoralists of Kurgan Wave 1 could have been R1b-L51 or even R1b-P312. Yamnaya was Gimbutas' Kurgan Wave 3.

I don't think anything excludes it, but I find the differences in dates difficult to reconcile. A Kurgan Wave I with L51 and/or P312 would mean that roughly 1,500 years would have passed between the first entry of L51 into the Balkans and the oft-quoted 2900 BC date for the heavy push of Yamnaya into the Hungarian plain. That's just too much time for a purely R1b+L23+ group to remain separate for my liking. Unless of course, we see the Yamnaya of 2900 BC being Z2103/Z2105 and/or R1a and "pushers" of an older L51 into the upper Danube and further west. Certainly possible.

I will caution about reading too much into the earlier burials. The Copper Age Remedello Culture males were buried in flex positions with archery equipment, copper daggers, red ochre, drinking cups and were mesocephalic. Gimbutas considered them "Kurgan" people as well and that seems to have been a big red herring...

http://www.artearti.net/assets/channel_images/3764/otzi4.jpg

[alan]

I don't think anything excludes it, but I find the differences in dates difficult to reconcile. A Kurgan Wave I with L51 and/or P312 would mean that roughly 1,500 years would have passed between the first entry of L51 into the Balkans and the oft-quoted 2900 BC date for the heavy push of Yamnaya into the Hungarian plain. That's just too much time for a purely R1b+L23+ group to remain separate for my liking. Unless of course, we see the Yamnaya of 2900 BC being Z2103/Z2105 and/or R1a and "pushers" of an older L51 into the upper Danube and further west. Certainly possible.

I will caution about reading too much into the earlier burials. The Copper Age Remedello Culture males were buried in flex positions with archery equipment, copper daggers, red ochre, drinking cups and were mesocephalic. Gimbutas considered them "Kurgan" people as well and that seems to have been a big red herring...

http://www.artearti.net/assets/channel_images/3764/otzi4.jpg

although the first wave/Suvorovo/Ocher burials were very very small in number. Their genetic impact may have been small, especially autosomal, but it is generally accepted that after their move into the Balkans there does seem to have been influence on pre-Yamanaya cultures in the Balkans etc. There COULD have been among the native Balkans lines some L23 derived clans in that pre-Yamnaya mix with only minor amounts of autosomal DNA. Another thing to consider about these Suvorovo guys is they are probably Srendy Stog derived people from around the Dnieper and there is good evidence of a lot farmer input into the westernmost Sredny Stog groups. Cranial studies showed many had skull types associated with farmers - in particular the males. The Sredy Stog groups further east had the more usual proto-Europoid or steppe type crania.

So, the first wave may have already been heavily mixed with the farmers even before they moved west of the Dnieper and of course as a small group would have mixed heavily again with farmers in the Balkans. So there could very easily be groups carrying male lines that had once been on the steppe but carrying very little steppe autosomal DNA after perhaps 800 years living in the Balkans before Yamnaya came on the scene. IMO they may have had far less of this Teal and a lot more EEF as well as EHG.

[GoldenHind]

I did say that R-L51 and their relatives (such as R-Z2103) were probably part of Kurgan Wave 1. However, I also said that R-P312 arose about 5200 years ago, and if that is even close to being accurate, R-P312 couldn't have been a part of either Wave 1 or Wave 2 (which occurred hundreds of years before the first R-P312 man was born). Right? Or are my dates too recent?
--------------Ken

Although I have no idea of its accuracy, Yfull is currently assigning a formation date for P312 at 4900 YBP, with a TMRCA at 4600 YBP.

[Heber]

Originally Posted by Richard A. Rocca View Post
Not sure that anyone has mentioned this, but did anyone notice the El Portalon archer's bracers on figure S2? I tried briefly to look for anything on pre- or non-Bell Beaker bracers and could not find anything, outside of a mention that Sangmeister thought the oldest samples were from Iberia. Anyone have any information on them?

.......

There is an interesting paper (chapter 4) in The Bell Beaker Transition in Europe, Bell Beaker Stone Wrist Guards as Symbolic Male Ornament.
"The majority of stone wrist guards in Europe belong to the late Enolithic and Early Bronze Age. Most were recovered from Bell Beaker cemeteries. E. Sangmeister divided them into an earlier type - wide, arched with four holes - and a later form usually narrow, flat with only two holes." These appear to be the two hole variety.

I am probably missing something here and there is probably a simple explanation, but can someone explain why we have Bell beaker wrist guards in El Portalon which is a Pre Bell beaker site.

http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2015/09/02/1509851112.DCSupplemental/pnas.1509851112.sapp.pdf
(Page 41)

5930

[TigerMW]

Mike,

It is not just the frequency of individuals (which is overwhelming) but the sheer number of branches in the Phylogenetic Tree which have developed.
As the main branches are close or equal to the TMRCA of P312, 4600 and they are dominant in the Atlantic zone that is where we should look.
I agree entirely that diversity in early branching is important, although I think ancient DNA is better evidence as long as it involves the right subclades.


If as Ted Kendall clearly demonstrated R1b (at a higher level than P312) was found in Neolithic Iberia I reserve my opinion until further aDNA is published. What is interesting is I understand that Bell Beaker objects eg polished stone wristguards were found in the grave of ATP3 so something is not quiet clear here.
What is it that Ted Kendall is demonstrating? Which higher levels or earlier branching have been demonstrated to be in Neolithic Iberia?

Earlier branching is of little importance if the distance in time and branching is huge. Obviously the location of genetic Adam does not have much to do with this. Haplogroup R1b is quite old. Even R1b1a2 (we call it M269 but it should be called R1b1a2) is quite old.

What's more important is the direct lineages of people found in Neolithic Iberia and their brothers and close cousins.. This is where L51, P311, P312 and U106 come in to play.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

What if we entertain the remote possibility that M269 had indeed entered Europe as a minor Late Neolithic group - like E-V13 - but expanded considerably afterward. Admittedly shaky and scant evidence does suggest that a couple of different R1b groups existed. And although the two thus far discovered R1b were not ancestral to modern western Europeans, the possibility of its immediate ancestor remains open to anywhere between north-western France and Russia.

The abstract for a paper released a little while ago "Mittnik et al., Ancient DNA reveals patterns of residential continuity and mobility at the onset of the Central European Bronze Age, Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution (SMBE) 2015 abstract" did mtDNA and isotopic analysis and found continuity from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age in the Lech valley, Bavaria, with patrilocality but high rates of female exogamy.

From good old archaeological evidence, Iberia in the pre-Beaker period is characterised by, on the whole, high rates of settlement, with nothing of the Neolithic collapse seen in the Balkans (c. 42000 BC) and central Europe.


As a final point, we should recall the abstract release for Kumptepe in Late Neolithic Turkey possibly already had the 'Teal component' c. 4700 BC ( Genome wide data from Neolithic Anatolia bring new insights to the spread of farming, EEBST 2015 talk, August 6, Middle East Technical University, Ankara).

So there is the remote possibility that the expansion of R1b and the arrival of an eastern autosomal impact have independent trajectories, admittedly built on snippets of possibilities, and not currently parsimonous.

[rms2]

Please delete this post.

[rms2]

. . .
If as Ted Kendall clearly demonstrated R1b (at a higher level than P312) was found in Neolithic Iberia I reserve my opinion until further aDNA is published . . .

Ted Kendall did not demonstrate, clearly or otherwise, that R1b was found in Neolithic Iberia, if by that you are referring to ATP3. He merely showed that R1b-PF6518 was the most likely of ATP3's confusing array of possible y haplogroups. It remains, however, impossible to say that ATP3 really was any kind of R1b.

[rms2]

I think YFull has the TMRCA of P312 at about 6200 ybp. All such dates are pretty flexible and come with margins of error either side of them.

I see that a couple of posts back Goldenhind said that YFull has P312's TMRCA at 4600 ybp. I was going from memory, so I have to defer to what he wrote. Not sure where I got 6200 ybp from - probably from the TMRCA of L23.

I would still urge caution when using such dates. They're pretty flexible and inexact, IMHO.

[rms2]

What if we entertain the remote possibility that M269 had indeed entered Europe as a minor Late Neolithic group - like E-V13 - but expanded considerably afterward . . .

As you know, the R1b in Europe is overwhelmingly L23>L51. Does it seem even remotely possible, if I follow what you are saying, that L23 expanded from both the western and eastern ends of the European peninsula at about the same time?

L51 and Z2103 are brother clades under L23. The latter has been found in eastern Yamnaya, and the former, at a later date, in German Bell Beaker. Thus you have L23 found in two cultural horizons commonly regarded as vehicles of the spread of Indo-European languages to the west.

And, not surprisingly, western Europe is both overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and a place where y haplogroup R1b-L51 prevails.

Both L51 and Indo-European got to western Europe somehow and became very successful there. I think they rode in together and any stray dead-end M269 that may turn up (like ATP3, if in fact he really was R1b-PF6518, which I still doubt) is a distraction.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

As you know, the R1b in Europe is overwhelmingly L23>L51. Does it seem even remotely possible, if I follow what you are saying, that L23 expanded from both the western and eastern ends of the European peninsula at about the same time?

L51 and Z2103 are brother clades under L23. The latter has been found in eastern Yamnaya, and the former, at a later date, in German Bell Beaker. Thus you have L23 found in two cultural horizons commonly regarded as vehicles of the spread of Indo-European languages to the west.

And, not surprisingly, western Europe is both overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and a place where y haplogroup R1b-L51 prevails.

Both L51 and Indo-European got to western Europe somehow and became very successful there. I think they rode in together and any stray dead-end M269 that may turn up (like ATP3, if in fact he really was R1b-PF6518, which I still doubt) is a distraction.

No indeed, L23 itself did not expand from both east and western Europe, and the rapid succession of SNPs suggests that its descendents also did so soon afterwards. My point was that the ultimate place of origin for L51 remains to be determined. Did L51 arrive formed from the east, or did it develop from L23 in situ ?

The finding of these older R1b clades might not be directly relevant for the genealogy of modern western Europeans, but they're certainly relevant for an overall reconstruction of Eurasian events. There might have been several sources and waves of Rb, and the early ones minor. All these suggest a complex history of R1b.

And this does not in itself exclude the possibility that ANE, and such, wasn't also brought in by women.

[kinman]

I personally believe that YFull is underestimating the ages from R-L23 down to R-P312. My estimates are about 300-400 years older.
As I posted in the "Horse domestication" thread, I estimate the origin of R-L23 at 6800 years ago (YFull says 6400), and I estimate the origin of R-L51 at 6600 years ago (YFull says 6200). I estimated the origin of R-L11 (L151) at about 6000 years ago (YFull says 5800), and then I have R-P312 originating at 5200 years ago (YFull says 4900).
---------------Ken
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Although I have no idea of its accuracy, Yfull is currently assigning a formation date for P312 at 4900 YBP, with a TMRCA at 4600 YBP.

[alan]

As you know, the R1b in Europe is overwhelmingly L23>L51. Does it seem even remotely possible, if I follow what you are saying, that L23 expanded from both the western and eastern ends of the European peninsula at about the same time?

L51 and Z2103 are brother clades under L23. The latter has been found in eastern Yamnaya, and the former, at a later date, in German Bell Beaker. Thus you have L23 found in two cultural horizons commonly regarded as vehicles of the spread of Indo-European languages to the west.

And, not surprisingly, western Europe is both overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and a place where y haplogroup R1b-L51 prevails.

Both L51 and Indo-European got to western Europe somehow and became very successful there. I think they rode in together and any stray dead-end M269 that may turn up (like ATP3, if in fact he really was R1b-PF6518, which I still doubt) is a distraction.

one huge blank in ancient DNA is Ukraine. We have no Yamnaya west of the Don. We have no samples from Sredny Stog. We have no samples from the big variety of cultures that lay along the Dnieper from the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age. We also know that today's DNA in south Ukraine especially is probably largely derived from historical period intrusions so modern DNA is next to useless. Obviously the country is not in good shape at the moment so it wouldnt be surprising if ancient DNA is slow to come from that country but its absolutely crucial to understanding the IE question and where non-Z2013 L23 may have been back 5-6000 years ago. We are missing a big big piece of the jigsaw and so its not at all surprising to me that a lot is still unclear.

[Megalophias]

Keep in mind that Y-Full's (or anyone's) coalescence dates, even if their model is completely accurate, have a confidence interval for a reason. The method is based on the probability of a given number of random events occurring and has an inherent uncertainty. It is not just some fudge factor of "well we think it is 4600 BC but we could be wrong", it means that *most of the time* the central TMRCA date will *not* be the true date, and in one out of twenty TMRCAs you look at the true date will fall entirely outside the predicted range. That is *if* they are doing everything right; it's entirely possible they have the wrong mutation rate or that there is rate variation going on, so the true uncertainty is even greater. The date is more likely to be toward the middle of the range, but it is only a probability; a considerable proportion of dates will be off toward the ends.

Y-Full's formed date for L23 (i.e. the TMRCA of M269) is 7300-5500 bp, and its TMRCA is 6900-5600 bp; likewise the formed date of P312 (TMRCA of L11) is 5400-4400 bp and its TMRCA is 5000-4300 bp. So being a few centuries off from the central date in any direction means nothing, even if you take their formula as gospel.

[TigerMW]

Ted Kendall did not demonstrate, clearly or otherwise, that R1b was found in Neolithic Iberia, if by that you are referring to ATP3. He merely showed that R1b-PF6518 was the most likely of ATP3's confusing array of possible y haplogroups. It remains, however, impossible to say that ATP3 really was any kind of R1b.
Okay. I just didn't recognize the name and realize we were just talking about Genetiker. <in error - ignore>

I did post my comment on his blog. I don't really see a response. I'm not sure if anyone cares. It is what it is.

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/y-snp-calls-from-copper-and-bronze-age-spain/


. . .
If as Ted Kendall clearly demonstrated R1b (at a higher level than P312) was found in Neolithic Iberia I reserve my opinion until further aDNA is published . . .
The point is that this Neolithic person who may have been R1b and even R1b1a2, may have very little do with P312. He may be on a totally different branch, a dead-end where as P312's ancestor may have come from somewhere else. We don't know.

[kinman]

Thanks,
I guess I should have said that I have little confidence in their "mean values" (upon which their confidence intervals are based). If their formula is yielding dates that are too recent for individual kits, then their mean value and the confidence interval will also be too recent. I suspect something like that could be happening for haplogroups R-P312 through R-L23 in particular.
We already have a known R-P312 man up in Germany (well north of the Danube) who is 4200-4300 years old. I would not be surprised if they found R-P312 men down in Austria or Hungary that are older than 5200 years (perhaps even 5500 years old, which would actually be outside of YFull's present confidence interval of 5400-4400; what an embarrassment that would be). In any case, I believe that their "mean value" and confidence interval is off for one reason or another.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Keep in mind that Y-Full's (or anyone's) coalescence dates, even if their model is completely accurate, have a confidence interval for a reason. The method is based on the probability of a given number of random events occurring and has an inherent uncertainty. It is not just some fudge factor of "well we think it is 4600 BC but we could be wrong", it means that *most of the time* the central TMRCA date will *not* be the true date, and in one out of twenty TMRCAs you look at the true date will fall entirely outside the predicted range. That is *if* they are doing everything right; it's entirely possible they have the wrong mutation rate or that there is rate variation going on, so the true uncertainty is even greater. The date is more likely to be toward the middle of the range, but it is only a probability; a considerable proportion of dates will be off toward the ends.

Y-Full's formed date for L23 (i.e. the TMRCA of M269) is 7300-5500 bp, and its TMRCA is 6900-5600 bp; likewise the formed date of P312 (TMRCA of L11) is 5400-4400 bp and its TMRCA is 5000-4300 bp. So being a few centuries off from the central date in any direction means nothing, even if you take their formula as gospel.

[ArmandoR1b]

Okay. I just didn't recognize the name and realize we were just talking about Genetiker.

The spelling is Ted Kandell. It is this person - https://www.linkedin.com/pub/ted-kandell/5/b99/a3b He analyzed the ATP3 file and posted the results somewhere else which Heber reposted to http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1646-Genome-of-a-late-Neolithic-Iberian-farmer&p=107963&viewfull=1#post107963

Genetiker is a completely different person than Ted Kandell.


The point is that this Neolithic person who may have been R1b and even R1b1a2, may have very little do with P312. He may be on a totally different branch, a dead-end where as P312's ancestor may have come from somewhere else. We don't know.
Right, we don't even know which of the M269 equivalent SNPs that ATP3 was negative or positive for since there weren't any reads for any of them other than PF6518.

[rms2]

I don't think anything excludes it, but I find the differences in dates difficult to reconcile. A Kurgan Wave I with L51 and/or P312 would mean that roughly 1,500 years would have passed between the first entry of L51 into the Balkans and the oft-quoted 2900 BC date for the heavy push of Yamnaya into the Hungarian plain. That's just too much time for a purely R1b+L23+ group to remain separate for my liking. Unless of course, we see the Yamnaya of 2900 BC being Z2103/Z2105 and/or R1a and "pushers" of an older L51 into the upper Danube and further west. Certainly possible.

I will caution about reading too much into the earlier burials. The Copper Age Remedello Culture males were buried in flex positions with archery equipment, copper daggers, red ochre, drinking cups and were mesocephalic. Gimbutas considered them "Kurgan" people as well and that seems to have been a big red herring...

http://www.artearti.net/assets/channel_images/3764/otzi4.jpg

I wouldn't dismiss Gimbutas' classification of Remedello as "kurgan" as a red herring just because of the genomic results of those three Remedello males. It could be that Remedello represents a people who had adopted a steppe-influenced lifestyle and armaments, and steppe burial practices, without much of an infusion of actual steppe people and their genes. Their culture could have evolved as the result of its people having spent time as the clients of some more directly kurgan group from farther east.

[R.Rocca]

I wouldn't dismiss Gimbutas' classification of Remedello as "kurgan" as a red herring just because of the genomic results of those three Remedello males. It could be that Remedello represents a people who had adopted a steppe-influenced lifestyle and armaments, and steppe burial practices, without much of an infusion of actual steppe people and their genes. Their culture could have evolved as the result of its people having spent time as the clients of some more directly kurgan group from farther east.

Within the context of finding Bell Beaker's ancestors and R1b, it is a red herring.

[rms2]

Within the context of finding Bell Beaker's ancestors and R1b, it is a red herring.

Maybe not, if the earliest Iberian Beaker turns out to have been I2.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

I wouldn't dismiss Gimbutas' classification of Remedello as "kurgan" as a red herring just because of the genomic results of those three Remedello males. It could be that Remedello represents a people who had adopted a steppe-influenced lifestyle and armaments, and steppe burial practices, without much of an infusion of actual steppe people and their genes. Their culture could have evolved as the result of its people having spent time as the clients of some more directly kurgan group from farther east.

Have we considersd parallel development and a very general cultural influence? Because it can be easy to be led astray by overzealous looking for signs of kurgan influence. Many of these developments probably occurred generally in non-Levantine northwest eurasia without requiring one central origin. ?

[R.Rocca]

Maybe not, if the earliest Iberian Beaker turns out to have been I2.

If the earliest Iberian Beaker turns out to be just as old as any other, and turns out to be R1b+, then it is a red herring. Either way, my original point still remains, just because Gimbutas labeled a culture "Kurgan", doesn't make it R1b.

[rms2]

Have we considersd parallel development and a very general cultural influence? Because it can be easy to be led astray by overzealous looking for signs of kurgan influence. Many of these developments probably occurred generally in non-Levantine northwest eurasia without requiring one central origin. ?

I don't know enough about the specifics of Remedello itself to say, but it seems more likely to me that single grave burials with weapons and the body in the flexed position diffused from kurgan peoples in eastern Europe than that they just arose nearly simultaneously throughout northwest Eurasia. I am not saying that kurgan genes diffused with its cultural practices in every case, however. It is apparent thus far in what little we know of Remedello that they did not.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

I don't know enough about the specifics of Remedello itself to say, but it seems more likely to me that single grave burials with weapons and the body in the flexed position diffused from kurgan peoples in eastern Europe than that they just arose nearly simultaneously throughout northwest Eurasia. I am not saying that kurgan genes diffused with its cultural practices in every case, however. It is apparent thus far in what little we know of Remedello that they did not.

Remedello is not my forte either :)
I take your point though

[rms2]

If the earliest Iberian Beaker turns out to be just as old as any other, and turns out to be R1b+, then it is a red herring. Either way, my original point still remains, just because Gimbutas labeled a culture "Kurgan", doesn't make it R1b.

I didn't see you make that point. You seemed to me to be saying that Gimbutas was wrong about Remedello because it wasn't a kurgan culture. I think the original kurgans (again using Gimbutas' term) were R1b, but there were "spin-off" kurgans who were not, and Gimbutas was making her classifications based on archaeology and cultural practices, not genetics. So, she may have been right about Remedello regardless of its y-dna profile.

We'll see if the very earliest Iberian Beaker (if it is in fact the earliest Beaker anywhere) is R1b if anyone ever actually tests the earliest Iberian Beaker and doesn't just give us Iberian Beaker results from c. 2500 BC on.

[rms2]

I didn't see you make that point. You seemed to me to be saying that Gimbutas was wrong about Remedello because it wasn't a kurgan culture. I think the original kurgans (again using Gimbutas' term) were R1b, but there were "spin-off" kurgans who were not, and Gimbutas was making her classifications based on archaeology and cultural practices, not genetics. So, she may have been right about Remedello regardless of its y-dna profile.

We'll see if the very earliest Iberian Beaker (if it is in fact the earliest Beaker anywhere) is R1b if anyone ever actually tests the earliest Iberian Beaker and doesn't just give us Iberian Beaker results from c. 2500 BC on.

I do think it possible that some steppe IE people got to Iberia very early and created the Bell Beaker culture there; it's just the differences between the very earliest Iberian Beaker people and the later Beaker people and their cultural and burial practices that make me think we are talking about two completely different sets of people, with different y-dna profiles. In the former case you have people who are physically like Near Eastern-derived Neolithic farmers and who seem to be burying their dead in the old collective tombs without the characteristic warrior kit. In the latter case you have a different, larger, more robust physical type burying its dead in single graves, often under a tumulus, with the body in a flexed position and accompanied by a distinctive warrior kit.

[R.Rocca]

I didn't see you make that point. You seemed to me to be saying that Gimbutas was wrong about Remedello because it wasn't a kurgan culture. I think the original kurgans (again using Gimbutas' term) were R1b, but there were "spin-off" kurgans who were not, and Gimbutas was making her classifications based on archaeology and cultural practices, not genetics. So, she may have been right about Remedello regardless of its y-dna profile.

We'll see if the very earliest Iberian Beaker (if it is in fact the earliest Beaker anywhere) is R1b if anyone ever actually tests the earliest Iberian Beaker and doesn't just give us Iberian Beaker results from c. 2500 BC on.

You said the 4000 BC guy might be R1b...I didn't disagree, just cautioned against the Gimbutas classification, plain and simple. No need going around in circles over something that I mentioned as a "caution" and not a "fact".

[vettor]

I wouldn't dismiss Gimbutas' classification of Remedello as "kurgan" as a red herring just because of the genomic results of those three Remedello males. It could be that Remedello represents a people who had adopted a steppe-influenced lifestyle and armaments, and steppe burial practices, without much of an infusion of actual steppe people and their genes. Their culture could have evolved as the result of its people having spent time as the clients of some more directly kurgan group from farther east.

keep in mind , if Remedello is "kurgan", then migration went through NorthernItaly and not southern Germany...............old north-italian burial system was , males where cremated, women and children buried ( some with horses and eye amulets ).........Remedello is modern Brescia area in eastern Lombardy

[rms2]

You said the 4000 BC guy might be R1b...I didn't disagree, just cautioned against the Gimbutas classification, plain and simple. No need going around in circles over something that I mentioned as a "caution" and not a "fact".

Okay. Honestly, I just misunderstood the point you were making. I thought it was mostly about Gimbutas being wrong and Remedello not being kurgan.

[rms2]

keep in mind , if Remedello is "kurgan", then migration went through NorthernItaly and not southern Germany...............old north-italian burial system was , males where cremated, women and children buried ( some with horses and eye amulets ).........Remedello is modern Brescia area in eastern Lombardy

If people went one way, they couldn't go the other, as well?

Maybe I have too much respect for Gimbutas, but I think she might have been right in regarding Remedello as kurgan. They may have been kurgan copycats and not R1b originals, but if they walked the walk (or rode the ride, in this case), then maybe they were kurgans. Of course, if being an R1b and having steppe autosomal dna are essential to being a kurgan, then the Remedello men we know about thus far don't qualify.

You know, what I have read of Gimbutas' works is only snippets here and there on the internet and in articles about her. So, I decided to bite the bullet and order at least one of her books. From what I have heard, the one to read is Civilization of the Goddess, so I went ahead and ordered it from Amazon. The estimated delivery date is 25 September - 13 October, which seems a pretty wide window, but my experiences with Amazon have been good thus far, so I'm thinking the book will come closer to 25 September than 13 October.

Oh, I ordered a used hardback. I like hardback books, and I have had good results buying used books. They're quite a bit cheaper than new ones, for starters.

[R.Rocca]

If people went one way, they couldn't go the other, as well?

Maybe I have too much respect for Gimbutas, but I think she might have been right in regarding Remedello as kurgan. They may have been kurgan copycats and not R1b originals, but if they walked the walk (or rode the ride, in this case), then maybe they were kurgans. Of course, if being an R1b and having steppe autosomal dna are essential to being a kurgan, then the Remedello men we know about thus far don't qualify.

You know, what I have read of Gimbutas' works is only snippets here and there on the internet and in articles about her. So, I decided to bite the bullet and order at least one of her books. From what I have heard, the one to read is Civilization of the Goddess, so I went ahead and ordered it from Amazon. The estimated delivery date is 25 September - 13 October, which seems a pretty wide window, but my experiences with Amazon have been good thus far, so I'm thinking the book will come closer to 25 September than 13 October.

Yeah, it's a pretty good read and you will enjoy it. For all of the things she missed on, Gimbutas seems to have been directionally correct on the archaeological big picture.

[Romilius]

I do think it possible that some steppe IE people got to Iberia very early and created the Bell Beaker culture there; it's just the differences between the very earliest Iberian Beaker people and the later Beaker people and their cultural and burial practices that make me think we are talking about two completely different sets of people, with different y-dna profiles. In the former case you have people who are physically like Near Eastern-derived Neolithic farmers and who seem to be burying their dead in the old collective tombs without the characteristic warrior kit. In the latter case you have a different, larger, more robust physical type burying its dead in single graves, often under a tumulus, with the body in a flexed position and accompanied by a distinctive warrior kit.

I read - but I could easily make a mistake - that also pottery was different between those supposed earlier Iberian BB and the supposed later eastern BB.

[Lirio100]

Gimbutas fell a little too much in love with her theory; a few years later a book was published, edited by Lucy Goodison and Christine Morris, Ancient Goddesses Each chapter is written by a female archaeologist or historian, re-examining the evidence Gimbutas used for her theory. I'd recommend trying to find that one too.

[rms2]

Gimbutas fell a little too much in love with her theory; a few years later a book was published, edited by Lucy Goodison and Christine Morris, Ancient Goddesses Each chapter is written by a female archaeologist or historian, re-examining the evidence Gimbutas used for her theory. I'd recommend trying to find that one too.

I'm less interested in the whole goddess schtick than I am in what she had to say about the early Indo-Europeans. I think she was right to a degree about the farmers of Neolithic Old Europe but overdid it, in keeping with the Zeitgeist, which was feminist, anti-war, and anti-male.

[alan]

reading up a lot on beaker recently makes me realise just how much work there is to be done and how many of the advances are fairly recent and were only possible because of the huge scale excavations caused by modern road building and compulsory employment of archaeologist by the developers during the economic boom in the 2nd half of the 90s to around 5 years ago when big projects somewhat tailed off due to economic austerity. That and advances in the use of white coat techniques to help analysis and interpretation. it really takes vast amounts of work to understand a pan-European and very fast moving phenomenon like this and its piecemeal because each country is doing it at different paces. Amazingly it seems many areas have no comprehensive sourcing of the raw materials of beaker metal artifacts for example.

[alan]

I'm less interested in the whole goddess schtick than I am in what she had to say about the early Indo-Europeans. I think she was right to a degree about the farmers of Neolithic Old Europe but overdid it, in keeping with the Zeitgeist, which was feminist, anti-war, and anti-male.

She certainly was wrong on a lot about the Neolithic people - its seems they were almost certainly patrilocal, patriarchal etc, quite tooled up weapon wise (especially archery), many instances of trauma on skeletons suggestive of warfare etc. Indeed some of the most spectacular evidence of warfare comes from causewayed enclosures where at least some are peppered in a way suggestive of mass archer attack. The main difference I can see with the early Neolithic people is in the more core areas they lived village life with less hierachy (although almost certainly some) and a focus on home for life, burial etc. Later outside the core areas this model started to break down in the middle Neolithic with areas without villages or grand houses and instead collective impressive burial-ritual monuments served as permanent fixtures in a shifting settlement landscape. I think those middle Neolithic people to some extent were already shifting towards something different before steppe intrusions.

Certainly Gimbutas exagerrated differences. By the time Yamnaya arrived, Neolithic societies in Europe were apparently nothing like the classic early Neolithic village model anyway.

[alan]

I got to be honest, it is not at all clear to me that the beaker people had any military advantage over the locals when they entered western Europe. You are basically talking about one group of archery skilled people versus the same. I suspect with two groups with long archery traditions that other weapons like knives and axes were very much secondary. Noone had some huge advantage. Copper knives or axes arent much advantage if you have to get through a hail of arrows from archers with thousands of years of archery tradition behind them to use them. It sounds like of like there would be a stalemate.

I think it is a lot more subtle than weaponry technology. I suspect the Neolithic localised social structure may have been the disadvantage if the beaker people had a nested clientship system which allowed them to draw on forces and protection from far and wide. Horses may have been a factor in making that system practical. The other thing is of course, any group who are tied to the land and their fields can have their crops burned and cattle stolen and are at a disadvantage to groups who can live far more mobile lifestyles. Mobile groups are capable of wearing down far more advanced peoples by their simple advantage of being able to strike at any time and being able to avoid retaliation. If you live in a settled community you dont have these advantages.

[rms2]

Horseback riding was a tremendous military advantage, IMHO. Mounted infantry, which is basically what the Beaker people and other early Indo-Europeans were, can ride in, strike hard and by surprise, and get pretty far away pretty quickly, out of the range of pursuers on foot.

I think the fact that Beaker men were larger than the average Near Eastern-derived Neolithic farmer was an advantage if things went downhill and hand-to-hand fighting occurred.

[rms2]

She certainly was wrong on a lot about the Neolithic people - its seems they were almost certainly patrilocal, patriarchal etc, quite tooled up weapon wise (especially archery), many instances of trauma on skeletons suggestive of warfare etc. Indeed some of the most spectacular evidence of warfare comes from causewayed enclosures where at least some are peppered in a way suggestive of mass archer attack. The main difference I can see with the early Neolithic people is in the more core areas they lived village life with less hierachy (although almost certainly some) and a focus on home for life, burial etc. Later outside the core areas this model started to break down in the middle Neolithic with areas without villages or grand houses and instead collective impressive burial-ritual monuments served as permanent fixtures in a shifting settlement landscape. I think those middle Neolithic people to some extent were already shifting towards something different before steppe intrusions.

Certainly Gimbutas exagerrated differences. By the time Yamnaya arrived, Neolithic societies in Europe were apparently nothing like the classic early Neolithic village model anyway.

I don't think she was totally wrong. She just got carried away with the whole hippy feminist, peace-loving, matriarchal, earth-goddess-worshiping, idyllic farmers scenario.

I grew up in the 1960s and 1970s, and I remember the Zeitgeist then, which was pervasive and influenced a lot of what was being thought, written, and said. (I know Civilization of the Goddess was not published until 1991, but Gimbutas was active throughout the period.)

This corny old song from back then reminds me both of the general mood and of what Gimbutas wrote about the kurgans versus the Neolithic sodbusters.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTBx-hHf4BE

[Lirio100]

I'm less interested in the whole goddess schtick than I am in what she had to say about the early Indo-Europeans. I think she was right to a degree about the farmers of Neolithic Old Europe but overdid it, in keeping with the Zeitgeist, which was feminist, anti-war, and anti-male.

Oh my yes. That's how I came across both books, I used to know some neopagan women. Popular culture under a full head of steam rarely reads widely or critically.

[TigerMW]

Horseback riding was a tremendous military advantage, IMHO. Mounted infantry, which is basically what the Beaker people and other early Indo-Europeans were, can ride in, strike hard and by surprise, and get pretty far away pretty quickly, out of the range of pursuers on foot.

I think the fact that Beaker men were larger than the average Near Eastern-derived Neolithic farmer was an advantage if things went downhill and hand-to-hand fighting occurred.
I agree that horse riding might have been a huge advantage if the Beaker and other Bronze Age people had that and the Neolithic peoples did not.

It does not take much study of American history to understand the importance of the cavalry. It was the key to many battles. It was only the forays (i.e. General Patton) into mechanized vehicles that the tanks replaced the cavalry as the critical lightening-like strike force in a battle.

The other factor I think we may underestimate is the command control structure of a strong modern military. If the command and control structure can be broken, the battle is essentially over. If we go back to the culture of the Indo-Europeans, we see there was a code of conduct related to discipline and the king. The next big cultural advancement beyond discipline was the Roman advantage of battle engineering and intelligence. They engineered the battlefield. The Gauls didn't have the teamwork and discipline of action to compete with the Romans. This is very clear. The consequence is that Romance languages are so pervasive and a pathway was made for a new religion.

[alan]

I agree that horse riding might have been a huge advantage if the Beaker and other Bronze Age people had that and the Neolithic peoples did not.

It does not take much study of American history to understand the importance of the cavalry. It was the key to many battles. It was only the forays (i.e. General Patton) into mechanized vehicles that the tanks replaced the cavalry as the critical lightening-like strike force in a battle.

The other factor I think we may underestimate is the command control structure of a strong modern military. If the command and control structure can be broken, the battle is essentially over. If we go back to the culture of the Indo-Europeans, we see there was a code of conduct related to discipline and the king. The next big cultural advancement beyond discipline was the Roman advantage of battle engineering and intelligence. They engineered the battlefield. The Gauls didn't have the teamwork and discipline of action to compete with the Romans. This is very clear. The consequence is that Romance languages are so pervasive and a pathway was made for a new religion.

You can even see this in Medieval and Elizabethan Ireland. It is incredibly hard for a settled people to deal with a semi-mobile people for whom cattle was more important, who were used to mobility because of a tradition of transhumance, who didnt invest much in houses anyway due to endemic warefare and who had a very flexible land tenure system. The Normans had a system of castles, villages and a different type of land tenure. They had certain advantages militarily on paper. However in practice, the Irish clans could just appear with no warning and burn down their villages. When the punitive retaliation forces came looking for the Irish they would just literally dismantle their houses, herd their cattle and families and melt away into the rough or high land where the Norman heavy horses became a disadvantage. Very soon the supply train meant they had to return home (that was a great limiting factor). The cycle started all over again and there was a 400 year stalemate. The native Irish knew not to fight the Normans in set piece battles on lowlands but they also knew they could wear them down slowly. The cost was that the native Irish had to cede the best land where the Normans had a clear advantage and to some extent revert to a more basic way of living but once they had done that there was a stalemate which wore the Normans down. If you read the Irish annals you can see the Irish clans close to the pale practiced this constant almost yearly torching and raiding of the Norman areas by hit and run and melting away from the pursuing Normans. The Irish often would destroy their own fortification so the Normans couldnt use them as bases or garrison them.

[Romilius]

Perhaps, we should pay attention to Franco Cardini, an Italian author who is an auctoritas in his field and studied the origins of Medieval knight: in his book Alle origini della cavalleria medievale he writes that horse riding wasn't an advantage in battle before the discover of stirrups. It was easier to unseat a mounted soldier when you know that he is posed on an animal. Also, the first recorded document about the art of riding was written by Kikkuli, a Hurrian speaker. A lot of Indoeuropean people, like Celts or Germanic warriors, went to battle on horse, but, when ready to fight, they dismounted and fought as infantry. The real advantage of horse without stirrups was only to bind the animal to a chariot.

[alan]

Perhaps, we should pay attention to Franco Cardini, an Italian author who is an auctoritas in his field and studied the origins of Medieval knight: in his book Alle origini della cavalleria medievale he writes that horse riding wasn't an advantage in battle before the discover of stirrups. It was easier to unseat a mounted soldier when you know that he is posed on an animal. Also, the first recorded document about the art of riding was written by Kikkuli, a Hurrian speaker. A lot of Indoeuropean people, like Celts or Germanic warriors, went to battle on horse, but, when ready to fight, they dismounted and fought as infantry. The real advantage of horse without stirrups was only to bind the animal to a chariot.

I agree. The key was not any major fighting advantage in sitting on a horse in early time. The advantage came from its use to travel TO battle, not in the conduct of battle mounted.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

I agree. The key was not any major fighting advantage in sitting on a horse in early time. The advantage came from its use to travel TO battle, not in the conduct of battle mounted.

I've said earlier, the horse wasn't even ridden in any significant degree until the Early Iron Age, and certainly, the stirrup later still (c. 4th cc. AD) revolutionised warfare further. Thus whatever brought the shifts seen in EBA Europe, it wasn't; the horse. In fact, its already rather clear that the 'eastern' groups moving in c. 3000BC were egalitarian pastoralists moving in to fill niches and empty lands in central Europe and north Balkans after the relative demise of late Neolithic groups (the latter due to soil degradation, climate shift, endemic local warfare, or what have you).

[Megalophias]

It was easier to unseat a mounted soldier when you know that he is posed on an animal. Also, the first recorded document about the art of riding was written by Kikkuli, a Hurrian speaker.
It was about training chariot horses, and was written in Hittite, but on the instructions of a Hurrian using Mitanni Aryan technical terms.

[kinman]

Why do you say that they were egalitarian? And were the niches in Europe so empty that they were just waiting to be filled (rather than fought for)? That is not the impression I get from their graves.
---------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I've said earlier, the horse wasn't even ridden in any significant degree until the Early Iron Age, and certainly, the stirrup later still (c. 4th cc. AD) revolutionised warfare further. Thus whatever brought the shifts seen in EBA Europe, it wasn't; the horse. In fact, its already rather clear that the 'eastern' groups moving in c. 3000BC were egalitarian pastoralists moving in to fill niches and empty lands in central Europe and north Balkans after the relative demise of late Neolithic groups (the latter due to soil degradation, climate shift, endemic local warfare, or what have you).

[R.Rocca]

I've said earlier, the horse wasn't even ridden in any significant degree until the Early Iron Age, and certainly, the stirrup later still (c. 4th cc. AD) revolutionised warfare further. Thus whatever brought the shifts seen in EBA Europe, it wasn't; the horse. In fact, its already rather clear that the 'eastern' groups moving in c. 3000BC were egalitarian pastoralists moving in to fill niches and empty lands in central Europe and north Balkans after the relative demise of late Neolithic groups (the latter due to soil degradation, climate shift, endemic local warfare, or what have you).

Egalitarian?...now I've heard everything.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Kinman

How closely have you looked at their graves ? :)
By egalitarian, I mean relatively speaking, and was not implying a total absence of social structure.
I think the common perception by the general, Anglophone public is that espoused by David Anthony - which finds little empirical support when placed under close scrutiny. Certainly, archaeologists from eastern Europe nowdays see yamnaya as more or less egalitarian (Kaiser, Ivanova, Mazura, Rassamakin). I quote: "The dispersed population of this region occupied short-lived settlements...communities comprised of only several households...Apart from the position of the body and some minor differences in the costruction of the mound, burial customs were uniform. The burial site comprised a few small mounds and the graves contained only a a limitied number of siple artefacts. Thus the mortuary evidence supprts the evidence of small dispersed and rather egalitarian communitites, also conveyed by the habitation sites. This lifestuyle, which stands in clear contrast to the larger populations in the north Caucasus limited the possibilities of recruiting larger working parties...The modest material culture and restricted long-distance contacts of the steppe inhabitants were coupled with an unsophisticated and conservative technological situation" . This needs to be coupled to the absence of any real evidence for horse-riding, and it becomes clear that the entire Anthony model collapses.

The simple, low density situation in yamnaya groups stands in marked contrast with the well populated Majkop region with large, and impressively furnished kurgan graves (in terms of wealth, construction size and metallurgical technique), or indeed Tripolye communities, or those Usatavo-Cernavoda groups in the East Balkans. .

Now, about late Neolithic Europe, perhaps you're unaware about the late Neolithic collapse ? In the Balkans, kurgan graves occupy specific niches . Its as plain as day, the north Bulgarian plain and eastern hungary - which had steppe like environments. (See eg Volker Heyd's papers on Academia.edu). Similarly, vast areas of east-central Europe were virtually uninhabited in the Terminal late Neolithic - see Stephan Shennan. So yes, there was plenty of "empty land".

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Egalitarian?...now I've heard everything.

Rich, just read the follow up comment (above).
The evidence is rather clear
Relatively egalitarian, albeit patrilocal and clan oriented.

Finally, I am not stating that the ancestor L51 didn't come from Yamnaya - he could very well have done so; or he could have ultimately come from Majkop, or the northwest Black Se region specifically. Anything is possible. I'm merely clarifying the proper social context (I hope).

[Romilius]

About the egalitarian question:

the last archaic civilization in the Old Europe (so, much more similar to first IE tribes) were Germanic tribes that invaded the Roman Empire in Late antiquity: their social structure was based on freemen. Perhaps Gravetto-Danubian referred to those people: freemen and nobles weren't so different, the former bore arms and weapons, the latter (and the King among them) were chosen when a war happened. So, virtually, every freeman could become a noble, when invested of leadership in war. And we don't forget that Slavic tribes were somewhat anarchical-structured.

For me, our Yamnaya graves tell us a thing: the corpses buried belonged to the freemen and nobles of that civilization, not to slaves or half-free people.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

About the egalitarian question:

the last archaic civilization in the Old Europe (so, much more similar to first IE tribes) were Germanic tribes that invaded the Roman Empire in Late antiquity: their social structure was based on freemen. Perhaps Gravetto-Danubian referred to those people: freemen and nobles weren't so different, the former bore arms and weapons, the latter (and the King among them) were chosen when a war happened. So, virtually, every freeman could become a noble, when invested of leadership in war. And we don't forget that Slavic tribes were somewhat anarchical-structured.

For me, our Yamnaya graves tell us a thing: the corpses buried belonged to the freemen and nobles of that civilization, not to slaves or half-free people.

Possibly, but we should not anachronise from the 'germanic society' back 3500 years . The kurgans of Yamnaya groups were those of the head of the family, which otherwise consisted of an extended family group with intermittent but important and ritualised connections to other family groups more or less far away. Compared to one another, they were equal. No one kurgan was more impressive than the next. This is different to Majkop; with far greater differentiation in wealth, and far more wealth in toto. So if we are looking for elites- its a Majkop; and not in Yamnaya or their Sredni Stog/ Repin predecessors.

But as I said earlier, im not suggesting that this means L23 came from Majkop. It could have come from anywhere around the Black Sea region

[rms2]

Perhaps, we should pay attention to Franco Cardini, an Italian author who is an auctoritas in his field and studied the origins of Medieval knight: in his book Alle origini della cavalleria medievale he writes that horse riding wasn't an advantage in battle before the discover of stirrups. It was easier to unseat a mounted soldier when you know that he is posed on an animal. Also, the first recorded document about the art of riding was written by Kikkuli, a Hurrian speaker. A lot of Indoeuropean people, like Celts or Germanic warriors, went to battle on horse, but, when ready to fight, they dismounted and fought as infantry. The real advantage of horse without stirrups was only to bind the animal to a chariot.

If you read what I wrote when I commented on the advantages of the horse, you no doubt would have noticed that I mentioned that the Beaker people and other early Indo-Europeans fought as mounted infantry, not as cavalry. They probably only rarely actually fought from the back of a horse, since they did not have stirrups to provide a steady platform for fighting.

Just the same, horseback riding was a tremendous advantage. Riders can travel great distances at speed, surprise the enemy, dismount to conduct a raid on foot, and then remount to make their getaway, easily outpacing pursuers who are on foot. It is a lot easier to drive stolen livestock away while mounted than while on foot, as well.

[rms2]

I've said earlier, the horse wasn't even ridden in any significant degree until the Early Iron Age, and certainly, the stirrup later still (c. 4th cc. AD) revolutionised warfare further. Thus whatever brought the shifts seen in EBA Europe, it wasn't; the horse . . .

It is apparent steppe pastoralists were riding horses well before the Iron Age. That gave them a tremendous advantage, IMHO, and very well could have contributed significantly to their success and the success of R1b-L23 in Europe.

[Romilius]

If you read what I wrote when I commented on the advantages of the horse, you no doubt would have noticed that I mentioned that the Beaker people and other early Indo-Europeans fought as mounted infantry, not as cavalry. They probably only rarely actually fought from the back of a horse, since they did not have stirrups to provide a steady platform for fighting.

Just the same, horseback riding was a tremendous advantage. Riders can travel great distances at speed, surprise the enemy, dismount to conduct a raid on foot, and then remount to make their getaway, easily outpacing pursuers who are on foot. It is a lot easier to drive stolen livestock away while mounted than while on foot, as well.

I'm sorry, I didn't notice that you meant the same.

[Romilius]

Possibly, but we should not anachronise from the 'germanic society' back 3500 years . The kurgans of Yamnaya groups were those of the head of the family, which otherwise consisted of an extended family group with intermittent but important and ritualised connections to other family groups more or less far away. Compared to one another, they were equal. No one kurgan was more impressive than the next. This is different to Majkop; with far greater differentiation in wealth, and far more wealth in toto. So if we are looking for elites- its a Majkop; and not in Yamnaya or their Sredni Stog/ Repin predecessors.

But as I said earlier, im not suggesting that this means L23 came from Majkop. It could have come from anywhere around the Black Sea region

Not anachronised at all: it is well known that Germanic tribes were somewhat not fully developed. Caesar wrote that Celts were much more civilized than their germanic neighbours. And some tribes were at tribe stage of social structure also in medieval times, when Charlemagne conquered the Saxons.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

It is apparent steppe pastoralists were riding horses well before the Iron Age. That gave them a tremendous advantage, IMHO, and very well could have contributed significantly to their success and the success of R1b-L23 in Europe.

Yes they used them for chariots c. 1800 BC and after .
Can you inform me what evidence we have for 'Obviously apparent" evidence we have for horses being ridden to any significant strategic benefit at 4000 BC ?

[kinman]

As I have discussed in the "Horse domestication" thread, horses were probably domesticated about 4500 B.C. (6500 year ago) in or near western Kazakhstan (Volga-Ural Rivers area). Not surprisingly, during Kurgan Wave 1 (4400-4000 B.C.), the R1b men would spread "relatively" quickly as far west as southern Ukraine. And mobility wasn't the only advantage. Having a stable supply of mare's milk and horse meat during the harsh winters would have reduced mortality as well. Their population would have increased rapidly compared to the very low population numbers during the thousands of years previous.
During this initial Kurgan Wave, horses would have not only have been ridden, but used to haul their belongings (clothing, blankets, food, etc.). Sort of the way the Plains Indians of America often moved from place to place. At this early stage, the R1b men may have still ridden their horses bareback, so there unfortunately would be no "bitting" wear on their horses teeth for us to find as evidence. Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. What we really need is more genetic evidence for horse domestication.
And as others have already noted, being on horseback would have helped the R1b men if they needed to raid settlements along the way. A small party on horseback could launch repeated attacks, getting quickly away on horseback, and reducing the numbers of male inhabitants by attrition. Therefore, domesticated horses would have been a huge advantage in many ways (including mobility, fighting, and food supply).
------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yes they used them for chariots c. 1800 BC and after .
Can you inform me what evidence we have for 'Obviously apparent" evidence we have for horses being ridden to any significant strategic benefit at 4000 BC ?

[rms2]

Yes they used them for chariots c. 1800 BC and after .
Can you inform me what evidence we have for 'Obviously apparent" evidence we have for horses being ridden to any significant strategic benefit at 4000 BC ?

Can you show me where I used the words "Obviously apparent" that you seem to be quoting from me? I used the word "apparent", not "obviously apparent".

The research Anthony and his wife Dorcas Brown did on ancient signs of bit wear indicates that steppe people were riding horses pretty early. The strategic advantages of horseback riding are easy enough to infer.

You said horses weren't ridden to much advantage prior to the Iron Age. I did not say anything specifically about 4000 BC. I said it is apparent that steppe people were riding long before the Iron Age. That is true, and it did give them a tremendous tactical advantage, which I already described.

[George]

Yes they used them for chariots c. 1800 BC and after .
Can you inform me what evidence we have for 'Obviously apparent" evidence we have for horses being ridden to any significant strategic benefit at 4000 BC ?

We're obviously not talking about significant warfare here, something way beyond the capacity of the little raiding bands of early pastoralists. As Mykhajlo Videiko wrote in his 2011 apercu of 40 years of study on the Trypilian culture (the article is in Ukrainian, in the "archaeology" segment of the 2011 material at trypillja.com -there is also a very comprehensive chapter on Trypilian armament in volume 1 of the Trypilian Dictionary there) : "Maydanets [a proto-city of ca. 3,500BCE] had an army more potent than the combined forces of all the tribes of the Sredny Stog unity." Of course raiding could be more effective in dislocated Central Europe.

[rms2]

We're obviously not talking about significant warfare here, something way beyond the capacity of the little raiding bands of early pastoralists. As Mykhajlo Videiko wrote in his 2011 apercu of 40 years of study on the Trypilian culture (the article is in Ukrainian, in the "archaeology" segment of the 2011 material at trypillja.com -there is also a very comprehensive chapter on Trypilian armament in volume 1 of the Trypilian Dictionary there) : "Maydanets [a proto-city of ca. 3,500BCE] had an army more potent than the combined forces of all the tribes of the Sredny Stog unity." Of course raiding could be more effective in dislocated Central Europe.

Of course, I wasn't talking about anything even remotely like organized warfare conducted by regular armies. I was merely talking about the tactical advantages horses gave to raiding bands of mounted pastoralists, which mainly enabled them to be better cattle rustlers and women stealers.

[kinman]

Hi George,
I agree. Even though Sredny Stog had become increasingly Kurganized by 3500 B.C. (Sredny Stog II/Early Yamnaya), there wouldn't have been enough R1b men to take on the Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture at that time. Perhaps that is why they stayed closer to the Black Sea, and Kurgan Wave II did an end-run south of the Cucuteni-Trypillians, and then up the Danube River.
Of course, when the big European drought hit about 3200 B.C., the Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture (heavily dependent on farming) quickly weakened, while the R1b Kurgans (Haplogroup R-L51 and relatives) increased in numbers. When the big drought hit, Kurgans were at the right place, at the right time, and not dependent on farming. Invading central Europe might still have been a big challenge and took hundreds of years, but 3200 B.C. was apparently a key moment in the history of Europe. It was also about 3200 B.C. (5200 years ago) that I date the origin of Haplogroup R-P312, probably in the area of Hungary or Romania.
--------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



We're obviously not talking about significant warfare here, something way beyond the capacity of the little raiding bands of early pastoralists. As Mykhajlo Videiko wrote in his 2011 apercu of 40 years of study on the Trypilian culture (the article is in Ukrainian, in the "archaeology" segment of the 2011 material at trypillja.com -there is also a very comprehensive chapter on Trypilian armament in volume 1 of the Trypilian Dictionary there) : "Maydanets [a proto-city of ca. 3,500BCE] had an army more potent than the combined forces of all the tribes of the Sredny Stog unity." Of course raiding could be more effective in dislocated Central Europe.

[George]

Yes. I basically agree. Classical Trypilia was done around then (c.3200 BCE). Economic collapse etc.. The only groups which survived (while morphing) were Usatovo and the northern Sofievka. The latter rather interesting too, since its economy was very close to the later CWC of the Middle Dnipro (so close in fact that researchers feel Sofievka simply readjusted again when the new impulse came.)

BTW as to the formation of Yamna, there is an interesting article here: https://www.academia.edu/6529541/MS30_04_Rassamakin_email (my apologies if you already know this). R. does not raise genetic issues, but he is a very competent archaeologist. He has very interesting perspectives (not just his) on Repin. But he doesn't say much about Transdanubia or the trans-Volga area.

[alan]

It is possible that Yuri Rassamakin is partly right and that there is a horizon aspect to Yamnaya rather than an expansion from one small area. We wont know until we have a geographically wider sample tested for ancient DNA. So far all the tested Yamnaya fall between the Don and Urals which represents just 2 of the 9 or so Yamnaya variants some authors have suggested. So L51 could be part of the horizon west of the Don. In some ways the presence of R1a in corded ware and its autosomal genetics linking it to Yamnaya does seem to support Yuri's horizon model - problem is we are missing any samples between the Don and the Dniester. If Z2103 and R1a are linked autosomally and apparently linguistically then L51 could easily turn up yet. Considering there is a Yamnaya autosomal aspect to L51 derived beaker people then it almost looks certain to me.

[David Mc]

Perhaps, we should pay attention to Franco Cardini, an Italian author who is an auctoritas in his field and studied the origins of Medieval knight: in his book Alle origini della cavalleria medievale he writes that horse riding wasn't an advantage in battle before the discover of stirrups. It was easier to unseat a mounted soldier when you know that he is posed on an animal. Also, the first recorded document about the art of riding was written by Kikkuli, a Hurrian speaker. A lot of Indoeuropean people, like Celts or Germanic warriors, went to battle on horse, but, when ready to fight, they dismounted and fought as infantry. The real advantage of horse without stirrups was only to bind the animal to a chariot.

Cardini is wrong. With or without stirrups, the horse provided a significant advantage on the battlefield. A number of cultures fought from horseback without the use of stirrups including Roman cavalry up until the time that they inherited the stirrup from their eastern enemies, the Irish (who eschewed stirrups well into renaissance times) and more recently the Indian tribes of the Great Plains.

The advent of the stirrup allowed cavalry to shift from a light force to a heavy one-- a force that could now use larger lances to devastating effect.

[rms2]

It is possible that Yuri Rassamakin is partly right and that there is a horizon aspect to Yamnaya rather than an expansion from one small area. We wont know until we have a geographically wider sample tested for ancient DNA. So far all the tested Yamnaya fall between the Don and Urals which represents just 2 of the 9 or so Yamnaya variants some authors have suggested. So L51 could be part of the horizon west of the Don. In some ways the presence of R1a in corded ware and its autosomal genetics linking it to Yamnaya does seem to support Yuri's horizon model - problem is we are missing any samples between the Don and the Dniester. If Z2103 and R1a are linked autosomally and apparently linguistically then L51 could easily turn up yet. Considering there is a Yamnaya autosomal aspect to L51 derived beaker people then it almost looks certain to me.

That's what I have been saying for quite some time, except that I focused on Yamnaya's route west, south of the Carpathians and up the Danube. I wish Reich and all the rest would test some of the remains in those thousands of kurgans in Hungary.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

As I have discussed in the "Horse domestication" thread, horses were probably domesticated about 4500 B.C. (6500 year ago) in or near western Kazakhstan (Volga-Ural Rivers area). Not surprisingly, during Kurgan Wave 1 (4400-4000 B.C.), the R1b men would spread "relatively" quickly as far west as southern Ukraine. And mobility wasn't the only advantage. Having a stable supply of mare's milk and horse meat during the harsh winters would have reduced mortality as well. Their population would have increased rapidly compared to the very low population numbers during the thousands of years previous.
During this initial Kurgan Wave, horses would have not only have been ridden, but used to haul their belongings (clothing, blankets, food, etc.). Sort of the way the Plains Indians of America often moved from place to place. At this early stage, the R1b men may have still ridden their horses bareback, so there unfortunately would be no "bitting" wear on their horses teeth for us to find as evidence. Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. What we really need is more genetic evidence for horse domestication.
And as others have already noted, being on horseback would have helped the R1b men if they needed to raid settlements along the way. A small party on horseback could launch repeated attacks, getting quickly away on horseback, and reducing the numbers of male inhabitants by attrition. Therefore, domesticated horses would have been a huge advantage in many ways (including mobility, fighting, and food supply).
------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Cardini is wrong. With or without stirrups, the horse provided a significant advantage on the battlefield. A number of cultures fought from horseback without the use of stirrups including Roman cavalry up until the time that they inherited the stirrup from their eastern enemies, the Irish (who eschewed stirrups well into renaissance times) and more recently the Indian tribes of the Great Plains.

The advent of the stirrup allowed cavalry to shift from a light force to a heavy one-- a force that could now use larger lances to devastating effect.




“ The research Anthony and his wife Dorcas Brown did on ancient signs of bit wear indicates that steppe people were riding horses pretty early.”

quite possible, but these were controversial interpretations, and not universally acccepted. And what was happening in kazakhstan cannot be generalised to all the steppe, where the faunal assemblages don't show anything like Botai, apart from Dereivka, which was anyhow misdated! Instead they're dominated by cattle

And maybe some steppe groups were experimenting, maybe a handful of people could ride horses, but they hardly a formidable force, and certainly not the primary mechanism/ reason as to why there was a movement of people from beyond the Vistula/ Bug/ Dniester region further west. And if we're going to make bold claims of thousands of horselords invading half of Eurasia, you'd better have at least some convincing evidence. All the evidence we do have from copper age europe- archery, battle axes, wrist guards, doesn't support horseback warfare. The "absence of evidence does not meant evidence for absence" adage is a flaccid arguement, and the general trend is clear ; the horse was hunted, then domesticated for food then traction , then used to pull chariots then ridden singly for horseback combat.

Whatever the case, the fact remains that the main reason d’etre for new pastoralist groups in central Europe was economic, environmental and simply pragmatic – which is obvious if one is familiar with the settlement and palynological data from 4000 – 2000 BC Europe. Vast tracks of land in Central Europe were empty. One didn't need a blitzkrieg, all they needed was feet.!

Moreover, I am not stating the Yamanaya folk classless Marxists and hippies. Im sure they engaged in war, and had to fight for their land at times. Certainly, this might have been the case in southwestern europe where there were relatively greater population densities.
But let’s paint realistic scenarios supported by evidence ..

[kinman]

Hi all,
I'm not sure what thread is best for this question, so I'll just try here. Looking at YFull's "info" information boxes, I noticed that they seem to always estimate clade age by multiplying (the corrected number of SNPs) X 144.41 and then adding 60. Is that number 144.41 based on the assumption that there is a constant molecular clock that works across the board? If so, why would mutation rates be so uniform. I can sort of see this formula working fairly well for older broad groupings with lots of clades (if varying mutation rates tend to cancel each other out). However, at the younger small branches with only two or three members, I'm more reluctant to have much faith in the numbers that formula spits out for them (even with a wide confidence interval).
-----------Ken

[Gravetto-Danubian]

It is possible that Yuri Rassamakin is partly right and that there is a horizon aspect to Yamnaya rather than an expansion from one small area. We wont know until we have a geographically wider sample tested for ancient DNA. So far all the tested Yamnaya fall between the Don and Urals which represents just 2 of the 9 or so Yamnaya variants some authors have suggested. So L51 could be part of the horizon west of the Don. In some ways the presence of R1a in corded ware and its autosomal genetics linking it to Yamnaya does seem to support Yuri's horizon model - problem is we are missing any samples between the Don and the Dniester. If Z2103 and R1a are linked autosomally and apparently linguistically then L51 could easily turn up yet. Considering there is a Yamnaya autosomal aspect to L51 derived beaker people then it almost looks certain to me.

Yes
The Yamnaya period (c.3000-2500 Bc) was one of greater density of finds on the steppe compared to earlier (Repin, S/S) and later periods (Catacomb). This means people were moving onto the steppe, not emigrating out from it. These people weren't conquering anything and anyone other than the steppe itself.

So, yes, let's see what future aDNA shows . Let's see where the R1a of CWC came from, let's see where the L23 in Western Europe came from for surety.

[kinman]

You ask for sources, but if I quoted Anthony and Brown (much less Gimbutas) sounds like you would just automatically dismiss it. I am still trying to figure out how you back your contention that the Kurgans were egalitarian and that there were vast empty lands for them to fill. I've looked at Shennan et al., 2013, since you suggested his work, and I am not surprised to see a considerable dip in the population around 3200 B.C. (due to the great drought). But for Shennan to call it a "collapse" seems an exaggeration (looks more like a stock market correction, not a great depression). And they didn't even study the lower Danube. I don't see how graphs like the following show a "collapse":

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/fig_tab/ncomms3486_F2.html

I have seen nothing to convince me that the Lower Danube Valley suffered a population "collapse". The Cucuteni-Trypillian farming culture to the east could be called a collapse, but if anything, many of them would have fled west to the Danube and actually increased the population there. It probably took 800 years for the Kurgans (L51 and descendants) to fight their way from the lower Danube to its headwaters near the Black Forest. If there were so many empty niches to fill, it wouldn't have taken near that long. And I am still baffled by your claim that they were egalitarian. Even so-called "classless" Marxists could be brutal and far from egalitarian. Perhaps your scenarios aren't quite as realistic as you might imagine. Let the debates continue and see where future evidence takes us.
-------------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sounds like your opinion. No hard evidence. No reference to credible publications ?

"the R1b men may have still ridden their horses bareback"

so maybe they were experimenting, maybe a handful of people could ride them , but hardly a formidable force, and certainly not the primary mechanism/ reason as to why there was a movement of people from beyond the Vistula/ Bug/ Dniester region further west.

"Kurgan wave 1 "??

Flashback from Gumbutas' outdated story.

" Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence"

very poetic, but an utterly weak arguement. If youre going to make bold claims of thousands of horselords invading half of Eurasia, you'd better have at least some evidence.



Same. No evidence, no hard data. just foot stomping " because I said so".



quite possible, but these were controversial interpretations, and not universally acccepted. And what was happening in kazakhstan cannot be generalised to all the steppe.

Whatever the case, the fact remains that the main reason d’etre for new pastoralist groups in central Europe was economic, environmental and simply pragmatic – which is obvious if one is familiar with the settlement and palynological data from 4000 – 2000 BC Europe.
Moreover, I am not stating the yamnaaya folk classless Marxists andhippies. Im sure they engaged in war, and had to fight for their land at times. But let’s paint realistic scenarios supported by evidence ..

[Gravetto-Danubian]

You ask for sources, but if I quoted Anthony and Brown (much less Gimbutas) sounds like you would just automatically dismiss it. I am still trying to figure out how you back your contention that the Kurgans were egalitarian and that there were vast empty lands for them to fill. I've looked at Shennan et al., 2013, since you suggested his work, and I am not surprised to see a considerable dip in the population around 3200 B.C. (due to the great drought). But for Shennan to call it a "collapse" seems an exaggeration (looks more like a stock market correction, not a great depression). And they didn't even study the lower Danube. I don't see how graphs like the following show a "collapse":

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131001/ncomms3486/fig_tab/ncomms3486_F2.html

I have seen nothing to convince me that the Lower Danube Valley suffered a population "collapse". The Cucuteni-Trypillian farming culture to the east could be called a collapse, but if anything, many of them would have fled west to the Danube and actually increased the population there. It probably took 800 years for the Kurgans (L51 and descendants) to fight their way from the lower Danube to its headwaters near the Black Forest. If there were so many empty niches to fill, it wouldn't have taken near that long. And I am still baffled by your claim that they were egalitarian. Even so-called "classless" Marxists could be brutal and far from egalitarian. Perhaps your scenarios aren't quite as realistic as you might imagine. Let the debates continue and see where future evidence takes us.
-------------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well; the fact is the lower Danube did suffer "Collapse". That is the Old Balkan cultures in Bulgaria c. 4200. Cucuteni Tripolye was in Moldavia and western Forest steppe Ukraine. According to the opinon of archaeologists from Europe (mazura, Rassamakin) it was they who in no small part populated the steppe. Perhaps they also moved north to Corded Ware, and indeed the earliest true Corded Ware design appears in C-T, not Sredni Stog as originally thought. In fact, it is possible that CT even moved west- as you point out. The appearance of Yamnaya in north Bulgaria is 3000 BC. I cannot account for the large hiatus of hundreds of years, but its there alright despite the years of research. So whatever halted their advance, it wasn;t masses of people. When they do move in it was specific areas; the north Bulgarian plain and Hungary east of the Tisza - steppe like areas. So, yes, its "niches".

But main main point was the region of east-central Europe . ie north of the Danube - Carpathians. This was even less densely populated.

Finally, it is not me who is dismissing the evidence for significant horse-riding, but Robert Drews, Anatolya Kazhanov. In fact, I think even Kuzmina doesn't uphold the reconstruction as put by Anthony/ Brown. In fact, add an entire corpus of scholars - Ivanova/ Mazura/ Rassamakin/ Frachetti/ Nikolova.

But, again, the basic picture Im painting is that the westward movements were primarily pragmatic, opportunistic and adaptable. And there is no evidence that the deux et machina was horse-back combat, driving a wedge through Europe.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

We're obviously not talking about significant warfare here, something way beyond the capacity of the little raiding bands of early pastoralists. As Mykhajlo Videiko wrote in his 2011 apercu of 40 years of study on the Trypilian culture (the article is in Ukrainian, in the "archaeology" segment of the 2011 material at trypillja.com -there is also a very comprehensive chapter on Trypilian armament in volume 1 of the Trypilian Dictionary there) : "Maydanets [a proto-city of ca. 3,500BCE] had an army more potent than the combined forces of all the tribes of the Sredny Stog unity." Of course raiding could be more effective in dislocated Central Europe.

Of course George . The concensus in ukraine is that CT colonised the steppe, not that steppists invaded CT. The final break up of CT was a diasporan type movement in multiple directions to North (Corded ware) and South (Yamnaya).
But I fully admit we need to see aDNA
(And I'm not ukrainian or anything to have a slanted view).

[Romilius]

Cardini is wrong. With or without stirrups, the horse provided a significant advantage on the battlefield. A number of cultures fought from horseback without the use of stirrups including Roman cavalry up until the time that they inherited the stirrup from their eastern enemies, the Irish (who eschewed stirrups well into renaissance times) and more recently the Indian tribes of the Great Plains.

The advent of the stirrup allowed cavalry to shift from a light force to a heavy one-- a force that could now use larger lances to devastating effect.

You are right, in fact cavalry is most useful when it charges. But only with stirrups you can charge and have a strike effect.

Without stirrups, cavalry is only a light force able to do rapid attacks, but not effectively dangerous. So, it is again infantry that must do the hard work.

So, Cardini wanted to say that if you want to make cavalry the main force of an army, you must attend the discover of stirrups.

The advantage in ancient times, and particularly in the mediterranean, was unexistent: the heavy infantry of oplites was the main force in an army, and cavalry couldn't do anything against a wall of bronze.

[David Mc]

You are right, in fact cavalry is most useful when it charges. But only with stirrups you can charge and have a strike effect.

Without stirrups, cavalry is only a light force able to do rapid attacks, but not effectively dangerous. So, it is again infantry that must do the hard work.

So, Cardini wanted to say that if you want to make cavalry the main force of an army, you must attend the discover of stirrups.

The advantage in ancient times, and particularly in the mediterranean, was unexistent: the heavy infantry of oplites was the main force in an army, and cavalry couldn't do anything against a wall of bronze.

Yes, heavy cavalry is more effective than light. If heavy and light cavalry were to clash, the light cavalry would be cut to shreds. And yes, light cavalry is less effective than heavy against a disciplined and heavily armored infantry... less effective, not ineffective. But we are talking about an era before phalanxes marched across the Mediterranean-- we are talking about warbands and inter-tribal conflict. In that context twenty light horse can be incredibly effective against footmen.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Yes, heavy cavalry is more effective than light. If heavy and light cavalry were to clash, the light cavalry would be cut to shreds. And yes, light cavalry is less effective than heavy against a disciplined and heavily armored infantry... less effective, not ineffective. But we are talking about an era before phalanxes marched across the Mediterranean-- we are talking about warbands and inter-tribal conflict. In that context twenty light horse can be incredibly effective against footmen.

Well your personal anecdote is interesting but Robert Drews - arguably the leading authority on Bronze Age Military archaeology and history -would certainly disagree with you. As would Anatoly Khazanov– the worlds leading authority on nomads and pastoralists; indeed also Evgeny Chernykh- whos the authority on steppe metallurgy and coined the concepts such as "circum-Pontic metallurgical province"...

Moreover, there has been a study of weapons found in late yamnaya and Catacomb. 82.3 % of weapons in Yamnaya were dart-heads (!!) In the Catacomb period, bow/ arrows, axes and mace's appear. The bulk of any fighting force was infantry, and charioteers came toward the tail end of Catacomb (well after 2000 BC). So clearly warfare on the steppe entailed menial weaponry with menial manpower, all in all suggestive of local skirmishes and not massive drag nach westlich.


This discussion is now redundant .

[rms2]

. . .

But, again, the basic picture Im painting is that the westward movements were primarily pragmatic, opportunistic and adaptable. And there is no evidence that the deux et machina was horse-back combat, driving a wedge through Europe.

Wish I had more time this morning, but please try to address things that people actually said. No one said anything about driving wedges through Europe, etc. All that was said was that horseback riding provided a tremendous tactical advantage. No need to list the reasons why yet again, so I won't.

I'll have more to say later.

[R.Rocca]

I guess the Romans and Etruscans must have had cavalry just for "show" then, because they did not use stirrups and would have been a detriment in battle.
I guess the Etruscan on horse in the stela below lost this encounter to the Gaul on foot?
I guess the folks arguing against a military advantage of a horse rider without stirrups has never ridden on a horse or seen one charging at full speed, or heck, even been close enough to see how powerful they are.

http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/9/images/figure18.jpg

[TigerMW]

... not massive drag nach westlich....
As a moderator I ask that we stay away from use of modern era politically charged or generally inflammatory descriptions or analogies. This is a warning.

[George]

Of course George . The concensus in ukraine is that CT colonised the steppe, not that steppists invaded CT. The final break up of CT was a diasporan type movement in multiple directions to North (Corded ware) and South (Yamnaya).
But I fully admit we need to see aDNA
(And I'm not ukrainian or anything to have a slanted view).

There is indeed a consensus that the steppe did not "invade" the northernmost agricultural areas, and was heavily influenced by them. The issue of "colonisation of the steppes by CT" is still very much open. As is the issue of the eventual fate of CT. Or even how much of it (if any) remained after the formation of Usatovo and Sofiivka. But that would be a topic for another thread.

[kinman]

Very interesting,
The absence of Yamnaya until ca. 3000 B.C. in northern Bulgaria might seem puzzling. However, it can be easily explained by the concentration of farmers along the lowermost Danube. The farmers that survived the great drought would have fled to Danube in large numbers, at least large numbers compared to the population of the R1b Kurgans at that time. Therefore, the Kurgans filled the empty niches in Romania and continued to increase their own population, between 3200 and 3000 B.C. Then they would have the manpower to expand into the Danube Valley and cross into northern Bulgaria.
So I would say that the lower Danube River Valley itself could have increased in population as the drought emptied much of Romania. The R1b Kurgans then opportunistically moved into much of Romania. But once their own population had increased enough, they could begin fighting their way across and up the Danube. The remains of chestnut-colored (clearly domesticated) horses have been found in Romania dated at about 3000 B.C., and I suspect such horses and their R1b owners were there at least 200 years earlier. And just because they were "pragmatic, opportunistic and adaptable" does not mean they were egalitarian and not up for a good fight once their numbers were sufficient to fight their way up the Danube. It would have been foolish of them not to have used the advantages their horses would have given them in battles (small raids or sometimes even more substantial battles).
--------------Ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well; the fact is the lower Danube did suffer "Collapse". That is the Old Balkan cultures in Bulgaria c. 4200. Cucuteni Tripolye was in Moldavia and western Forest steppe Ukraine. According to the opinon of archaeologists from Europe (mazura, Rassamakin) it was they who in no small part populated the steppe. Perhaps they also moved north to Corded Ware, and indeed the earliest true Corded Ware design appears in C-T, not Sredni Stog as originally thought. In fact, it is possible that CT even moved west- as you point out. The appearance of Yamnaya in north Bulgaria is 3000 BC. I cannot account for the large hiatus of hundreds of years, but its there alright despite the years of research. So whatever halted their advance, it wasn;t masses of people. When they do move in it was specific areas; the north Bulgarian plain and Hungary east of the Tisza - steppe like areas. So, yes, its "niches".

But main main point was the region of east-central Europe . ie north of the Danube - Carpathians. This was even less densely populated.

Finally, it is not me who is dismissing the evidence for significant horse-riding, but Robert Drews, Anatolya Kazhanov. In fact, I think even Kuzmina doesn't uphold the reconstruction as put by Anthony/ Brown. In fact, add an entire corpus of scholars - Ivanova/ Mazura/ Rassamakin/ Frachetti/ Nikolova.

But, again, the basic picture Im painting is that the westward movements were primarily pragmatic, opportunistic and adaptable. And there is no evidence that the deux et machina was horse-back combat, driving a wedge through Europe.

[David Mc]

Well your personal anecdote is interesting but Robert Drews - arguably the leading authority on Bronze Age Military archaeology and history -would certainly disagree with you. As would Anatoly Khazanov– the worlds leading authority on nomads and pastoralists; indeed also Evgeny Chernykh- whos the authority on steppe metallurgy and coined the concepts such as "circum-Pontic metallurgical province"...

Moreover, there has been a study of weapons found in late yamnaya and Catacomb. 82.3 % of weapons in Yamnaya were dart-heads (!!) In the Catacomb period, bow/ arrows, axes and mace's appear. The bulk of any fighting force was infantry, and charioteers came toward the tail end of Catacomb (well after 2000 BC). So clearly warfare on the steppe entailed menial weaponry with menial manpower, all in all suggestive of local skirmishes and not massive drag nach westlich.

I think we are all agreed that it is small scale warfare. That was precisely the point I made above.


Well your personal anecdote is interesting but Robert Drews - arguably the leading authority on Bronze Age Military archaeology and history -would certainly disagree with you. As would Anatoly Khazanov– the worlds leading authority on nomads and pastoralists; indeed also Evgeny Chernykh- whos the authority on steppe metallurgy and coined the concepts such as "circum-Pontic metallurgical province"...

I offered up no personal anecdotes so I'm not sure what you mean, and you've offered no evidence against my primary point that light horse have a significant advantage over footmen apart from tossing in some names without relevant quotes to back up your point. What I did offer was historical examples that demonstrate the usefulness of light cavalry (sans stirrups) against footmen. Alan went further and noted that this kind of fighting force can be more effective than heavy on certain terrain and in certain conditions. Sometimes historical reality trumps academics who may or may not have addressed the question under discussion.

[R.Rocca]

I think we are all agreed that it is small scale warfare. That was precisely the point I made above.

I offered up no personal anecdotes so I'm not sure what you mean, and you've offered no evidence against my primary point that light horse have a significant advantage over footmen apart from tossing in some names without relevant quotes to back up your point. What I did offer was historical examples that demonstrate the usefulness of light cavalry (sans stirrups) against footmen. Alan went further and noted that this kind of fighting force can be more effective than heavy on certain terrain and in certain conditions. Sometimes historical reality trumps academics who may or may not have addressed the question under discussion.

To add... if a modern day "expert" says that a stirrup-less horse rider offers no combat advantage to someone on foot, then their "expert" label needs to be rescinded. It goes against historical reference, common sense and fails even the simplest of eyeball tests.

[MitchellSince1893]

To add... if a modern day "expert" says that a stirrup-less horse rider offers no combat advantage to someone on foot, then their "expert" label needs to be rescinded. It goes against historical reference, common sense and fails even the simplest of eyeball tests.
General Custer would agree ;)

[alan]

The expert is wrong. Read this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobelar

[George]

To add... if a modern day "expert" says that a stirrup-less horse rider offers no combat advantage to someone on foot, then their "expert" label needs to be rescinded. It goes against historical reference, common sense and fails even the simplest of eyeball tests.

Wouldn't try it in late 12th century Sherwood Forest though, even with stirrups :beerchug:

[alan]

This is the definitive piece on the Irish Medieval Hoblar light unarmoured horse skirmishers

http://archive.is/5fcdr#selection-259.0-317.497

[alan]

Basically it seems that tough ponies with very little armour and even very little accouterments were very useful on rough terrain, hills, damp land etc for tracking, patrolling, guarding, rapid response, scouting and lightening raids/torching settlements. In a sense they were mounted infantry rather than cavalry. However, the Anglo-Normans who settled in Ireland were very impressed by the local light horseriders on their tough, fast ponies and first tried to import large numbers of Irish light horse hobelars to fight the Scots on their terrain which was similar to Ireland (and on which the heavy armoured horse was useless across huge areas of the country). They then copied and adapted them as the Medieval English hobelar and then later turned them into mounted archers. They had no armour, stirips etc so their main ability was their speed, ability to do lightning raids and hunt down people in the roughest terrain etc. I think such simple fast, tough any-terrain mounted infantry for want of a better word would have been ideal in the vaguely protection racket sort of clientship systems of early IE societies too. They were not meant to fight in lines like Medieval Knights but more to be able to do lightening raids,retaliation etc at times of their choosing.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

To all,

In any case - i'll provide yet more specialists.


"It was only at the end of the Bronze Age that a sporadic development
in the steppe cultures occurred in which horseback
riding was mastered–and this was probably by shepherds. It is
during this time that finds of bone and rod-shaped cheekpieces
with various modifications are noted, as well as being illustrated
in numerous rock drawings (Bokovenko 1979; 1986). It
was only at the beginning of the first millennium BC–in connection
with significant progress in horsebreeding and the
development of a more reliable type of bronze bridle–that for
the first time an early Scythian-type nomadic society depicted
a horse rider in the form of a centaur"
Kurgans, Ritual Sites, and Settlements: Eurasian Bronze and Iron Age. BAR 2000, p 304-310.

So, it is not for me to disprove David Mc's, or Richards hypotheses. Contrary to some, I do not claim "I know better than scholars", and am not under the illusion that showing random anachronistic picture of horses from Medieval Ireland and pre-Roman Etrusca has remote (at best) relevance to 3000 BC Europe. Rather, I form conclusions based on the consensus of the humble experts, that is how scholarship is supposed to work. I guess next we can see youtube links to kids riding horses unsaddled et voila – here are your Indo Europeans !

Jokes aside, my aim is not to prove or disprove that horses were ridden or not. Rather, this is not what was the main cause for migrations to the west .. What was the settlement situation in Europe:


:The results of recent work by Mili sauskas and Kruk (1986b) suggest, on the contrary, that in the Little Poland region the TRB phase was followed by a period of major population decline ca. 3100 BC, which, they suggest, was the result of environmental degradation arising from the extensive nature of TRB agricultural practices. In the subsequent Baden and then Corded Ware phases, lasting until the later third millennium, population remained low but was extremely dispersed, hence the large part of the landscape over which Corded Ware burial evidence is found. Further confirmation of the dispersed nature of settlement is given by Neustupny's analysis of the large Corded Ware cemetery of Vikletice in Bohemia . S T Shennan (Settlement and Social Change in Central Europe, 3500–1500 BC


Much of central Europe was near-empty land. Neighbours from nearby (Ukraine, Russia) simply moved in - maybe because they were better adapted to exploit the ? now fallow land, with different, more pastoral economy- most probably on foot. Horses are a side issue. And no one is stating that they were necessarily welcomed by the remaining Late Neolithic central groups, or they were peace loving hippies, or the fact that they weren't all that culturally advanced they could put up a good biff. Indeed, by the Late Bronze Age, R1b groups probably were riding horses, winning battles, and turfing out people, but that was later.

People are further casting aside the evidence from Yamnaya itself. c. 3000 BC appears to have been a period of settling into the steppe, not moving out from it. Lets keep in mind we are yet to pin-point where Corded Ware –R1a expanded from, and where central-western European L51 expanded from. We can't lump everything together (at least yet) ! Indeed, the expansion of CWC-R1a, and BB R1b might have had different (slightly but significant) places of origin.

[David Mc]

So, it is not for me to disprove David Mc's, or Richards "I know better than scholars" perspective, equipped with pictures from Medieval Ireland and pre-Roman Etrusca whos relevance to 3000 BC Europe is remote at best.

You seem to be missing the main-- in fact the only-- point I have been making. Posts were written suggesting that light horse had no advantage over infantry. Richard, Alan, I, and others have explained why that is a load of bollocks. We have provided historical examples that prove our point. No scholarship has been offered to refute that (and simply saying "scholars disagree" without proffering quotes isn't a valid form of argument). I'm actually astounded that you aren't conceding a point that is abundantly clear to anyone who has studied military history. Or even met a horse. The horse itself is a powerful weapon even before you add man-made arms to the equation. Any scholar who did try to argue against this point would be an embarrassment to the academy.

If you're wanting an argument about when mounted warfare began, fair enough. Bring on the scholars and I'll listen. Try to use those scholars (who aren't talking about the effectiveness of cavalry against infantry) into the aforementioned argument, and you're just bringing a knife to a gunfight... "jokes aside."

[Gravetto-Danubian]

You seem to be missing the main-- in fact the only-- point I have been making. Posts were written suggesting that light horse had no advantage over infantry. Richard, Alan, I, and others have explained why that is a load of bollocks. We have provided historical examples that prove our point. No scholarship has been offered to refute that (and simply saying "scholars disagree" without proffering quotes isn't a valid form of argument). I'm actually astounded that you aren't conceding a point that is abundantly clear to anyone who has studied military history. Or even met a horse. The horse itself is a powerful weapon even before you add man-made arms to the equation. Any scholar who did try to argue against this point would be an embarrassment to the academy.

If you're wanting an argument about when mounted warfare began, fair enough. Bring on the scholars and I'll listen. Try to use those scholars (who aren't talking about the effectiveness of cavalry against infantry) into the aforementioned argument, and you're just bringing a knife to a gunfight... "jokes aside."

Fair enough, maybe I sidetracked. In fact - I have no doubt that light infantry would have been an advantage and of strategic importance. No disagreement.

But I doubt "light infantry' existed c. 3000 BC. Certainly, the paper I quoted yesterday appears to be a fairly darn detailed analysis of warfare in the Late Yamnaya period, and it doesn't appear that units of "light infantry" at all existed. At best, men would have been still trying to hold on for dear life at the back of a horse.



Because in both the Tripolye and the Yamnaya cultures horses were commonly raised as
food animals, it may well be that it was in one of those cultures that the sport of riding
originated...Surely in places where horses were so ubiquitous
at least a few young men had learned to ride at least a few horses..Nevertheless, such riding as there was could not have been of much consequence. Ute
Luise Dietz, who has recently completed a catalog of almost seven hundred bits found on
the Pontic-Caspian steppe and dating from the tenth to the seventh centuries BC,
concluded that here as elsewhere true riding did not begin until the first millennium BC...

Undoubtedly, from the late third millennium onward it must have been possible to
see, now and then, a demonstration of athletic riding in the steppe, just as one could have
seen it in the Near East. But the massive change in the material record between the
second millennium and the first makes it quite clear that in the steppe, as elsewhere,
serious riding began after the Bronze Age ended. Until that happened, the importance of
horses on the steppe was to a small extent based on their utility as pack or draft animals,
and to a great extent on their provision of mare’s milk and horsemeat.
R Drews. Early Riders. The Beginnings of Mounted Warfare in Asia and Europe.

Anyhow, sorry for straying off topic.

[rms2]

Well, once again I am writing in the morning and have little time. I'll have to pull out my copy of Anthony's book, because I know his conclusions are far different from those offered by the people cited by Gravetto-Danubian. Anthony and his wife Dorcas Brown studied bit wear for signs of early horseback riding and concluded it dated to at least 3500 BC, as I recall (I could be off somewhat, since I am working from memory). It's likely that it goes back farther than that, since dating bits merely provides a lower bound to when horseback riding probably began and not an upper bound.

Remember, we aren't talking about organized cavalry units, especially heavy cavalry. We're talking about bands of young men riding bareback to a location, dismounting, raiding on foot, and then remounting and galloping away lickety split. Hard to imagine that such tactics weren't a considerable advantage.

And we know that Yamnaya mounted a genuine folk migration into Europe beyond Russia and Ukraine beginning in the late 4th millennium BC. Wish I had more time. I could mention some of the evidence that the Beaker men were mounted warriors, as well.

[lgmayka]

Rather, I form conclusions based on the consensus of the humble experts, that is how scholarship is supposed to work.
No, it isn't. Experts are rarely humble, and scholarship is based not on "consensus" but on a continual interplay between the posing of questions and the presentation of evidence.

[alan]

The basic point of why I posted about the Medieval Irish Hobelar type horsemen is that in its basic form they would leave virtually no archaeological trace - a guy on a horse with a blanket/rug rather than a saddle, no stirrups etc. Weapons were basically the same as those used on land because other than throwing spears overarm they dismounted to fight.

[David Mc]

Well said, Alan. The same could be said of the Plains tribes or the Numidian cavalry during the Punic Wars, who rode bareback and controlled their horses with a rope around their necks. If it wasn't for the descriptions we have of the latter in ancient writings, there would be no archaeological proof that Numidian cavalry even existed.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

No, it isn't. Experts are rarely humble, and scholarship is based not on "consensus" but on a continual interplay between the posing of questions and the presentation of evidence.

Indeed it is. So I look forward to this interplay bringing forth peer reviewed publications showing the definitive evidence for the light cavalry units. And all the above references were written recently with the most up to date evidence. To summarily dismiss the opinion of specialists and insist that the pontifications of amateurs are instead correct appears rather arrogant.


Anthony's book...
Yes yes we've all read Anthony's book. The only difference is that some have gone beyond Anthony's book and have bothered to consider the interpretation of the same evidence- and more- by other scholars too; and not accepting a single author's work as gospel.


The basic point of why I posted about the Medieval Irish Hobelar type horsemen is that in its basic form they would leave virtually no archaeological trace - a guy on a horse with a blanket/rug rather than a saddle, no stirrups etc. Weapons were basically the same as those used on land because other than throwing spears overarm they dismounted to fight.

The evidence from Irish Hoblars, or units of Roman light cavalry is anachronistic. Because they represent ‘reversions’ to unsaddled, un-spurred riding, as active deliberate choices for specific purposes. It was relatively easy for an Irish hoblar to learn to ride without the entire gamut of accoutrements because of collective learned memory, teaching through generations, etc.

The difference c. 4000 – 3000 BC is that there was no collective memory. Man was learning for the first time. Taming to ride a beast- even if (recently) domesticated for its secondary products – would have taken generations. And scholars from central Asia and Russia all reach the same conclusion. Effective riding for military purposes was mastered much later. And as I have indicated, this is not to exclude that some groups of men from the steppe weren’t experimenting and riding, but a horse led conquest is beyond reason, and anyhow wasn’t a priori required. One can march onto more or less sparsely populated lands with a goat, for all that matters.

I have little problem in accepting that the horse might have been ridden (albeit cumbersomely) for conflicts. But my point is even without the horse, groups would have drifted west. This was not a prerequisite, and this fantisizing preoccupation with horses leads to missing the overall "big" picture as to what was happening in Eurasia c. 4000 BC to cause these movements.

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

[rms2]

. . .


Yes yes we've all read Anthony's book. The only difference is that some have gone beyond Anthony's book and have bothered to consider the interpretation of the same evidence- and more- by other scholars too; and not accepting a single author's work as gospel . . .

Some of us find it compelling. You seem to prefer a couple of other authors who suit you better but whose work, at least in the instances of it you cited, seems to be contrary to the evidence, at least the evidence amassed by Anthony and his wife.

I did not see a quote from your favorites that directly questioned Anthony's work or called it into doubt. I understand your interest in downplaying the advantages of the early Indo-Europeans. I just don't find your arguments convincing despite your insistence that you alone are relying on scholarship.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Some of us find it compelling. You seem to prefer a couple of other authors who suit you better but whose work, at least in the instances of it you cited, seems to be contrary to the evidence, at least the evidence amassed by Anthony and his wife.

I did not see a quote from your favorites that directly questioned Anthony's work or called it into doubt. I understand your interest in downplaying the advantages of the early Indo-Europeans. I just don't find your arguments convincing despite your insistence that you alone are relying on scholarship.

It is all good that you find Anthony's book compelling. I initially did too before I read other works . And it's more than "a couple of scholars" who disagree with Anthony's reasoning. I could list them all but it wouldn't make a difference because your clearly biased by your self-created vision of an ancestral past. And you appear to think that it's only you who is aware of Anthony's book, and the aforementioned authors are somehow stupid and not widely read.

[rms2]

It is all good that you find Anthony's book compelling. I initially did too before I read other works . And it's more than "a couple of scholars" who disagree with Anthony's reasoning. I could list them all but it wouldn't make a difference because your clearly biased by your self-created vision of an ancestral past. And you appear to think that it's only you who is aware of Anthony's book, and the aforementioned authors are somehow stupid and not widely read.

You're stepping over the line in asserting that I am hopelessly biased while implying that you yourself are merely a disinterested advocate for scholarly research.

If your arguments were convincing, that would be one thing, but they're not. You seem to rely too heavily on authority. I simply cited Anthony's research as support for the antiquity of horseback riding on the steppe and among the early Indo-Europeans. Otherwise, I posted what are my own ideas about why horseback riding was an advantage.

[Gray Fox]

{Moderator}

Ad hominem/Personal attacks will not be tolerated. Reminder to keep it civil.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Here is Elena Kuzmina. have you heard of her ?


It would have been possible for herders to ride horses using a
leather bridle without a leather bit, but it would have been impossible
for warrior riders to maintain control of their horses
without a bit. The nomadic lifestyle of the early horse breeders,
moreover, is refuted by the existence of settlement sites
with evidence of pig husbandry
The Eurasian Steppes: The Transition from Early Urbanism to Nomadism.

or Phillip Kohl


But this process involved two distinct steps: the first was associated with the introduction of heavy oxen-driven wheeled carts and wagons; and the second, which may have occurred during the 2nd half of the IIIrd millennium BC, was associated with the riding of horses and their harnessing to lighter vehicles, developments which greatly enhanced the mobility of the pastoralists occupying the steppes from the trans-Ural region in the east to the Danube basin in the west.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATIONS: CROSSING THE PASTORAL/AGRICULTURAL BRIDGE


You actually have the gall to suggest that I merely supply "a couple" of sources. There are several, and I could go on.
All you can provide is "David Anthony". No. They're all wrong, and you're right.

Do you want 10 more ?

And I told you, I'm I2a1b. My vision of the past is the last few hundred years to which any real ancestry can ever go back to. I have nothing against R1b, and Im not about the business of claiming 'native rights'. This is not about geneaology, but accurate reconstruction of population prehistory.

[rms2]

Here is Elena Kuzmina. have you heard of her ?

Nothing she wrote militates against anything I wrote or that Anthony has written. Bit wear on ancient horse teeth indicates that steppe people were using bits pretty early, and I did not claim that all steppe pastoralists were nomads in the classical sense.


You actually have the gall to suggest that I merely supply "a couple" of sources. There are several, and I could go on.
All you can provide is "David Anthony".

You haven't really provided anything that really refutes Anthony or that is convincing in that direction. It doesn't take much "gall" to see that or to say it.



And I told you, I'm I2a1b. My vision of the past is the last few hundred years to which any real ancestry can ever go back to. I have nothing against R1b, and Im not about the business of claiming 'native rights'. This is not about geneaology, but accurate reconstruction of population prehistory.

You were the one who opened up that can of worms by accusing me of bias based on my "self-created vision of an ancestral past". If you don't want your own motives questioned, don't do it to someone else.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Nothing she wrote militates against anything I wrote or that Anthony has written. Bit wear on ancient horse teeth indicates that steppe people were using bits pretty early, and I did not claim that all steppe pastoralists were nomads in the classical sense.


You haven't really provided anything that really refutes Anthony or that is convincing in that direction. It doesn't take much "gall" to see that or to say it.



You were the one who opened up that can of worms by accusing me of bias based on my "self-created vision of an ancestral past". If you don't want your own motives questioned, don't do it to someone else.

Ok . Well I very much look forward to your publication of empirical evidence refuting scores of scholars who are of the opinion that horseback warfare was not yet developed in M4, and unlikely to have made any significant / global impact. Any idea when it's due ?

Oh and the 'bit ware' that Anthony "discovered" could be a tragic case of horses not flossing before bedtime. :) Plus were there any comments of the post- cranial (cervical vertebrae ) ware otherwise characteristic of ridden horses ?

[David Mc]

The evidence from Irish Hoblars, or units of Roman light cavalry is anachronistic. Because they represent ‘reversions’ to unsaddled, un-spurred riding, as active deliberate choices for specific purposes. It was relatively easy for an Irish hoblar to learn to ride without the entire gamut of accoutrements because of collective learned memory, teaching through generations, etc.


This is incorrect. Roman cavalry only adopted the stirrup sometime around the fourth century. They did quite well prior to the stirrup, as did the Germanic and Gallic horse warriors who would later form the bulk of their auxiliary forces. I've already mentioned to Numidian cavalry who gave Hannibal one of his most significant edges during the Punic War-- and they didn't even use bits (contrary to Kuzmina's contentions). We could also mention Alexander's companions who managed to bring havoc to even heavy infantry, all without stirrups. And we could go on and on.

As to the Irish, it isn't a matter of reversion. They never took to the stirrup. We've mentioned the hobelars, but the mounted nobility also rejected the foreign stirrup. You can see this illustrated in woodcuts and other illustrations from as late as Elizabethan times. The English described it as the "Irish riding style."

I say all of this to point out the apparent anachronism isn't a weakness in our argument; it's a strength. The continuity is remarkable. Whatever someone ensconced in an ivory tower might think, men who lived and died by the sword continued to favour this mode of fighting for millennia, which speaks volumes louder than your or my pontifications as to whether one can or cannot effectively fight from horseback.

And that brings me back to my final point. You write:


Man was learning for the first time. Taming to ride a beast- even if (recently) domesticated for its secondary products – would have taken generations.


This brings me back to the Plains Indians. The domesticated horse was introduced to the Americas by the Spanish in the 16th century. Over the course of decades and in some instances as much as a century, horseback riding spread north into the American Plains/Canadian Prairies. By the 1800's the Plains tribes were described by the white settlers as "the finest horsemen in the world. Riding bareback, they could perform astounding martial feats with lance, club or bow and arrow, even sliding down the side of their horses to shoot from underneath the horse's neck at full gallop, effectively turning their horse into a living shield.

At this point we've moved beyond mere supposition to a historically observable example of how quickly whole cultures can take to the horse and use them to dominate the battlefield.

Was this the case with the first Indo-European interlopers? I don't know, but neither do the experts. If history is any guide, I would bet on it, though. People are far more resourceful than we imagine, especially when it comes to war, for good or ill.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Ok fair Enough, although we are mostly talking about the need for bridle bits.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Well, thanks to all for a lively debate (genuinely).
So to clarify all your perspectives, can you summarize how your vision differs that from the scholars I have read ? Is it basically, despite the absence of clear evidence for horse riding (apart from the controversial evidence of tooth studies by Brown/ Anthony),

a) you wish admit the real possibility that horses could have been ridden in M4 ? If so, then Ive never doubted that and agree that people were beginning to start to ride horses
b) you wish to propose that horses conferred some kind of advantage ? Again no doubt, certainly they weren't a disadvantage.
c) did they transform warfare in M4-M3, and were they the main reason for the putative expansion of Yamnaya groups west ? Here the answer is more a no than yes. I appreciated you guys have spent time researching this topic, but one can only fall back to the opinions of the 'experts' who argue decisively that their main uses were traction, food and milk. Any riding was tentative, and rather awkward. And in the overall demography / settlement picture, there were other larger factors at play.

[David Mc]

I would argue that they likely were riding horses, and that if they were, they were also likely adept. The leap from possessing a horse to riding it is a small one. Clearly, I do see this as giving a significant military advantage, but that doesn't need to have been the primary reason for their success. The horse would allow them to manage larger herds, which would sustain a larger population. Horses would give them greater mobility. This, in turn, would open up new trade routes and provide them with greater access to new lands along with a significant degree of economic pull. It could be any or all of these.

I believe this is the most likely scenario, but I'm open to opposing views.

[jdean]

I'm not really convinced it would have taken that long for people to become more than proficient at riding horses, young men in particular have a habit of pushing boundaries to impress.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAxAep9dQHE

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Yes skylarking, tricks and speed is what the earliest horse riding would have involved. This is a different matter to proficient use in a dedicated military setting, as already spelt out


In the fourth and earlier third millennium daredevils in the
Eurasian steppe may have occasionally shown off by trying to stay aboard an
unconstrained horse, but successful riding was not yet possible. In the latter half of the
third millennium BC success was finally achieved, and the kind of riding we see
thereafter is what I have termed “athletic” or “recreational.” An important innovation
may have been the strapping of a girth around the horse: the rider could grasp the girth
with one hand, and could also insert his feet or knees between the girth and the horse’s
belly. Where the vogue for athletic riding began is obviously unknown, but we may guess
it was in a region where horses were commonly raised as food animals: Eastern Europe, the steppe...

Finally, it is pertinent that the evolution of horsemanship from display and recreation
to war was accomplished with the chariot. This evolution took place over about three
hundred years. Can we believe that ca. 2000 BC, when the chariot was in its infancy, the
steppe dwellers were already riding their horses to war, shooting arrows at each other
from horseback; and that it took three hundred years before it occurred to Near Easterners
that the same sort of warfare could be conducted from the platforms of chariots? There is
good reason to think that horsemanship north of the Caucasus ca. 2000 BC was not
appreciably better than horsemanship in the Near East at that time, and that in the steppe
and in Europe, just as in Greece and the Near East, riding continued to be a challenge all
through the second millennium".
R Drews. Early riders ..


The weight of scholarly opinion is inescapable . We must have some reason and self - moderation of our own opinions .

[Gravetto-Danubian]

he claims that have been made for early riding depend not on the material evidence
itself, which is ambiguous at best, but on the interpretation of the material evidence, and
on the model of horseback riding by North American natives soon after the horse was
brought to the western hemisphere in the sixteenth century. The model is problematic, in
part because the first domesticated horses of the neolithic steppe were barely separated
from their wild past, whereas the North American horses—whether domesticated or feral
their relationship with horses is concerned, the Plains Indians differed from came from a
stock that had been ridden for two thousand years. So far as the neolithic inhabitants of
the Pontic-Caspian steppe in two very important ways: the Plains Indians had learned
from the Spanish conquistadores that horses are meant to be ridden, and except in dire
emergency the Plains Indians did not eat their horses. The readiness with which the
Native Americans took to riding is therefore a questionable model for what may or may
not have happened in neolithic Eurasia. The earliest direct and unambiguous evidence for
riding—figurines and pictures of men on horseback—comes from the Near East and from
the late third millennium BC, and we shall look closely at it in Chapter 3. Here we must
be satisfied with a negative conclusion: the material record has not shown that people on
the Eurasian steppe were riding horses in the fifth, fourth and third millennia.

Of course, this entire horse debate might be peripheral. h
How certain are we as to where L23 came from ?

[rms2]

Yes skylarking, tricks and speed is what the earliest horse riding would have involved. This is a different matter to proficient use in a dedicated military setting, as already spelt out



In the fourth and earlier third millennium daredevils in the
Eurasian steppe may have occasionally shown off by trying to stay aboard an
unconstrained horse, but successful riding was not yet possible. In the latter half of the
third millennium BC success was finally achieved, and the kind of riding we see
thereafter is what I have termed “athletic” or “recreational.” An important innovation
may have been the strapping of a girth around the horse: the rider could grasp the girth
with one hand, and could also insert his feet or knees between the girth and the horse’s
belly. Where the vogue for athletic riding began is obviously unknown, but we may guess
it was in a region where horses were commonly raised as food animals: Eastern Europe, the steppe...

Finally, it is pertinent that the evolution of horsemanship from display and recreation
to war was accomplished with the chariot. This evolution took place over about three
hundred years. Can we believe that ca. 2000 BC, when the chariot was in its infancy, the
steppe dwellers were already riding their horses to war, shooting arrows at each other
from horseback; and that it took three hundred years before it occurred to Near Easterners
that the same sort of warfare could be conducted from the platforms of chariots? There is
good reason to think that horsemanship north of the Caucasus ca. 2000 BC was not
appreciably better than horsemanship in the Near East at that time, and that in the steppe
and in Europe, just as in Greece and the Near East, riding continued to be a challenge all
through the second millennium".
R Drews. Early riders ..


The weight of scholarly opinion is inescapable . We must have some reason and self - moderation of our own opinions .

How is that quote "[t]he weight of scholarly opinion"? Plus it just doesn't make sense. "[S]uccessful riding was not yet possible . . . [i]n the fourth and earlier third millennium"? Really? You believe that, even after all the evidence David Mc has presented about bareback riding and in the face of Anthony's bit wear research?

I rode horses bareback when I was a teenager. I did have the advantage of a modern halter and bit, but it was still bareback: no saddle, no stirrups. It wasn't that difficult, not with a good horse.

And no one said anything about "shooting arrows at each other from horseback". We specifically mentioned mounted infantry, i.e., the use of horses to travel to and from the scene of a raid or a conflict.

Scholarly opinion has to make some sense to carry any weight, otherwise citing it is merely an appeal to orthodox authority. If we were all in constant awe of scholarly opinion, then anti-migrationism would be set in stone, and we would all still be talking about R1b in the Iberian Ice Age Refuge.