PDA

View Full Version : Die Hard 2016: The Iberian LGM Refuge and R1b



Pages : 1 [2]

A.D.
03-16-2016, 09:13 PM
From Ireland to Greece and from the Baltic to the Mediterranean the religions/Pantheons are closely related. They seem not to be European Neolithic in origin (but certainly influenced by). Does this not indicate a common origin. If not Yamnaya who? They and there descendants seem to be the only people with that large sphere of influence. If that is not the case they must surely have a close relationship with other neighboring peoples.

Tomenable
03-18-2016, 06:10 PM
Carleton S. Coon wrote this about Bell Beakers - he suggested, that they sailed to Iberia from the East:


(7) THE COPPER AGE IN EUROPE NORTH OF THE MEDITERRANEAN
LANDS: DANUBIAN MOVEMENTS AND BELL BEAKERS

(...)

While Copper Age civilization was thus spreading westward along the
Danube and the lands to the north, a countermovement in the form of the
Bell Beaker invasion travelled eastward from the Rhine to the Danube,
and as far as Poland and Hungary. The remains of these Bell Beaker people
occupy single graves or groups of graves, rather than whole cemeteries;
they were apparently wandering traders, trafficking in metals, for their
gold spirals have been found in Danish graves of the corridor-tomb period.
They were thus in all likelihood rivals of the Battle-Axe people in their
search for amber.
It is not known how they went from Spain to central Europe. Sporadic
finds in France and northern Italy suggest the Rh6ne-Rhine and the
Brenner Pass routes as alternatives. 61 In neither case is the evidence very
satisfactory, and neither excludes the other. From the Rhine Valley as a center,
Bell Beaker expeditions moved eastward into Bohemia, Austria, Poland,
and Hungary; those who took part in these movements were eventually
absorbed into the local populations. The Bell Beaker people who
remained in the Rhinelands, however, came into intimate contact with the
Corded people, who had invaded from the east and northeast, and with the
corridor-tomb megalithic population to the north, whose domain extended
down into the Netherlands. These three, of which the Bell Beaker
element formed perhaps the dominant one, amalgamated to form an
Early Bronze Age cultural unit, the so-called Zoned Beaker people, who
invaded England and Scotland as the first important carriers of metal.
The Bell Beaker physical type is known to us from sixty or more skulls
from scattered burials in Germany, Austria, Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, and
Hungary. 62 Of these, about one-third are truly brachycephalic, while
the others are, almost without exception, mesocephals. In the Rhine
country around Worms, three-fourths or more of the Bell Beaker crania are
brachycephalic; in Austria, one finds an equally high ratio; but in Bohemia
and Poland the high brachycephaly becomes less frequent, and at
Tokol in Hungary, in a series of ten crania, four are mesocephalic and
six are dolichocephalic.
63
So high is the mesocephalic ratio, and except for Hungary, so infrequent
the truly long-headed crania associated with this type, that the
mesocephals are clearly one branch of the main type, and not the product
of local mixture with long heads. Morphologically, the mesocephals are
essentially Bell Beaker.
The series of skulls from the Rhineland, including nine adult males, is
the most suitable for comparison (see Appendix I, col. 21). It is identical
in the cranial index mean with that of Furst's forty-four male Bronze Age
skulls from Cyprus, which have already been studied, and which have
been called Dinaric. The Rhenish crania are a little larger in vault dimensions,
and particularly in height; but are almost identical facially. Morphologically,
the two groups are also similar, but the Bell Beaker group is
more extreme in many ways; the browridges are often heavy, the general
ruggedness frequently greater. The faces are characteristically narrow, the
orbits medium to high, the nasal skeleton high and aquiline; the occiput
frequently flat. The stature for six males reached the high mean of 177 cm.
The deviation of the Rhenish Bell Beaker skulls, such as it is, from the
Aegean and eastern Mediterranean Dinaric form, lies in a Borreby direction.
It is, therefore, more than likely that the invaders mixed with the
descendants of the earlier Neolithic brachycephals, whose territory
stretched along the North Sea coast from southern Sweden to Belgium.
On the whole, however, at the period represented by the Worms crania,
the eastern or Dinaric element was the more important.
The Spanish Bell Beaker problem now stands in a somewhat clearer light
than before. The Dinaric type, with which the Rhenish Bell beakers are
associated, is one which entered the western Mediterranean by sea from
the east, and eventually moved, by some route yet to be determined in
an accurate manner, to the north, and eventually to central Europe.
The paucity of brachycephals in Spain may be due to the paucity of remains
of this culture in general. It is still possible, one might add, that
certain North African elements became involved in the Bell Beaker racial
type, but such an accretion is unnecessary and hardly likely.
The Bell Beaker people were probably the first intrusive brachycephals.
to enter the Austrian Alps, and the mountains of northeastern Bohemia,
for the push of Lake Dwelling Alpines southeastward toward the Balkans
happened later in the Bronze Age. (...)
In their Rhineland center, the more numerous Bell Beaker people had
constant relationships with the inhabitants of Denmark, who were still
burying in corridor tombs. Furthermore, the Corded people, one branch
of whom invaded Jutland and introduced the single-grave type of burial,
also migrated to the Rhine Valley, and here amalgamated themselves
with the Bell Beaker people, who were already in process of mixing with
their Borreby type neighbors. The result of this triple fusion was a great
expansion, and a population overflow down the Rhine, in the direction
of Britain.

(8) THE BRONZE AGE IN BRITAIN

The consideration of the Bell Beaker problem leads naturally to that of
the Bronze Age in the British Isles, where the Beaker people found their
most important and most lasting home. Coming down the Rhine and out
into the North Sea, they invaded the whole eastern coast of England and
of Scotland, and also the shore of the Channel.
The Beaker invasion of Britain was not a simple affair. Not only did the
newcomers land in many places, but they brought with them somewhat
different traditions. Although most of them brought zoned beakers and
battle axes, in consequence of their blending with the Corded people in
the Rhinelands, others, with the older type of bell beakers and with stone
wrist-guards of Spanish inspiration, seem to have entered unaffected by
Corded influence.
Like their predecessors the Long Barrow people, the new invaders who
went to England chose open lands for settlement, and eschewed the forest
of the Midlands, and the Weald of Surrey, Sussex, and Kent. Yorkshire
with its moors was a favorite spot, while other centers were Wiltshire and
Gloucestershire in the south, and Derbyshire and Staffordshire in between.
64 On the whole, the Beaker people chose the same regions which
had attracted the builders of the long barrows, except that the concentration
in Yorkshire was an innovation. The Beaker people did not exterminate
the Long Barrow people, who continued for a while to build
their characteristic earth-covered vaults, in some of which Beaker pots
have actually been found. The remains of the newcomers, however, are
always buried singly under round barrows, of a type which the Corded
people contributed to the Zoned Beaker complex.
In comparison with the Continent, Great Britain contains a great plenty
of Beaker skeletal material. The invasions which reached this island
brought the wholesale migration of a large population. Over two hundred
and sixty crania from England alone have been preserved and studied.
Out of a series of one hundred and fifty exhaustively analyzed by Morant,
the brachycephals exceed the pure long heads in the ratio of three to one,
while the intermediate forms are about equal in number to the latter.
This segregation would indicate that the blending between the Corded
racial element and its round-headed companions was incomplete at the
time of invasion, as well as afterward. In all the regions from which a
considerable number of skulls have been taken, the proportion between
round heads and long heads is constant, and this would indicate that the
survivors of the Long Barrow people were not buried in the tombs of the
invaders.
The Bronze Age people of England, as represented by this Beaker
series, were clearly heterogeneous. The three ancestral elements which met
in the Rhinelands may be distinguished easily. All three were tall, and
the mean stature of the whole group was about 174 cm.

He suggests, that Beaker Folks came to Spain from the East, but by boats, via the Mediterranean Sea?

And later on, they started spreading from Iberia towards Central Europe, then from there to Britain?

We really need aDNA samples from early Iberian Bell Beaker culture.

Tomenable
03-18-2016, 06:21 PM
And this is what Coon wrote about Bronze Age people in Ireland:

He associated them with Bell Beaker physical type and he was right as we know today from aDNA.

He wrote, that they could come from either Iberia or Central Europe:


The thirty odd known Irish skeletons
of the Bronze Age, taken from short cists, were associated with food vessels
in most cases, or at least when there is known to have been any pottery.
The series as a whole 70 (see Appendix I, col. 26) is tall and slender
boned; the skulls, almost exclusively brachycephalic, are often thin walled;
the bony relief is rarely as prominent as in the British specimens. Metrically,
the Irish crania are narrower headed and narrower faced than the
Scottish, and are almost identical with the Adlersburg group in Germany,
and quite close to the series from Cyprus. Their most notable difference
from the British group, which confirms their similarity to the skulls from
Cyprus, is in their narrow facial breadth. In this and in many other ways,
the Scottish skulls are intermediate between the English and the Irish.

The Irish Bronze Age people who were buried in association with food
vessels were, therefore, members of the racial type which was originally
linked with the Beaker complex, without the associated Borreby and
Corded elements. Childe finds possible prototypes of the food vessels both
in Germany and in Spain.71 Without doubt, in any case, there were movements
from northern Spain and the western end of the Pyrenees during
the Bronze Age, which brought halberds to Ireland, and thence to Scotland,
along with other cultural innovations. These movements were quite
late, but so, in all probability, was the spread of the Food Vessel people,
who often incinerated.
It is necessary to choose between two routes of invasion for the Food
Vessel people, for they were obviously not indigenous. The first, from
Germany and Holland, would be somehow separate from the Beaker invasions,
but yet would bring the most basic Beaker physical element. The
second is from Spain, where the Beaker people were probably only one of
a number of related brachycephalic groups. (...)

Food vessels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_Vessel

Tomenable
03-18-2016, 09:08 PM
I've just found this map (which potentially explains both links to Yamna, and arrival by boats suggested by Coon):

https://pl.pinterest.com/pin/295267319296329269/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kemi_Oba_culture

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/d1/b3/18/d1b318e1baa43c586c481396fbe6c01a.jpg

But that migration did not have much impact on population of Sardinia (contrary to what the map might suggest).

ffoucart
03-18-2016, 10:29 PM
Sailed to Iberia from the East? Not heard of this theory for years.

I think the Danubian route is a far easiest and logical route from the steppes.

Tomenable
03-19-2016, 01:23 AM
I think the Danubian route is a far easiest and logical route from the steppes.

But chronologically Bell Beaker culture first appears in Iberia and advances to the north-east.

How do you imagine people advancing in opposite direction to their material culture ??? There are some suggestions that Bell Beaker culture was represented by 2 distinct groups of people, one advancing from Iberia (and Non-IE) and the other one "intrusive" IE from the Steppe. IIRC, rms2 in one of his posts wrote about this and provided some anthropological evidence supporting this idea, but I can't find it now.

Anyway, it seems that Coon didn't notice that supposed "duality" of Bell Beaker population(s).

=========

Source of quotes from Coon: https://ia800300.us.archive.org/20/items/racesofeurope031695mbp/racesofeurope031695mbp.pdf

Romilius
03-19-2016, 03:43 PM
It's weird the choice of boat... for a steppic tribe that sees sea of... grassland. It reminds me of the establishment of the Vandal kingdom in North Africa...

Surely, we need tested samples from Spain and Portugal... I'm waiting for the promised paper by Reich about the Beaker phenomenon. I expected it to be published in february or in march, following a sort of tradition after that great and revolutional paper of 2015. Well... I was wrong...

rms2
03-19-2016, 05:19 PM
But chronologically Bell Beaker culture first appears in Iberia and advances to the north-east.

How do you imagine people advancing in opposite direction to their material culture ??? There are some suggestions that Bell Beaker culture was represented by 2 distinct groups of people, one advancing from Iberia (and Non-IE) and the other one "intrusive" IE from the Steppe. IIRC, rms2 in one of his posts wrote about this and provided some anthropological evidence supporting this idea, but I can't find it now.

Sorry to have to repeat myself, but here it is again briefly.

The earliest Iberian Bell Beaker people were short in stature and had long skulls (they were dolichocephalic) and gracile skeletons. They were buried in collective Neolithic tombs without the classic Bell Beaker warrior kit. They lived in or near fairly large, well established settlements. The later Bell Beaker people, however, especially those in eastern and central Europe, the British Isles and Ireland, were tall for the period and had round heads (they were brachycephalic) and robust skeletons. They buried their important dead in single graves under a round tumulus and with a warrior's kit of weapons and other goods. Their settlements are difficult to find, apparently because they were leading a highly mobile pastoralist lifestyle.



Anyway, it seems that Coon didn't notice that supposed "duality" of Bell Beaker population(s).

=========

Source of quotes from Coon: https://ia800300.us.archive.org/20/items/racesofeurope031695mbp/racesofeurope031695mbp.pdf

Yes, he did.

Carleton S. Coon, The Races of Europe, p. 150:



Where Bell Beaker burials are found in central Europe, the skeletons are almost always of the same tall brachycephalic
type which we have already studied in the eastern Mediterranean and Italy. In Spain, however, they are frequently of the Megalithic race.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 07:40 PM
Yes, he did.

Carleton S. Coon, The Races of Europe, p. 150

Thanks, I must have missed that.

But then he adds that brachycephalic Beakers also existed in Spain, alongside Megalithic type:


The basis for the belief that the Bell Beaker people of Spain were Dinarics
rests largely upon three cranial fragments from the type site of this culture
at Ciempozuelos, near Madrid, and upon one complete mesocephalic
skull from Cerro de Tomillo some forty miles away.46

The measurements of the three fragments are uncertain, and their
allocation to a definite type impossible.46

However, all three fragments appear to be brachycephalic, and one to have a high vault.
One has strong, another weak, browridges. One seems to have a slight lambdoid
flattening. In the only fragment which possesses facial bones, the orbits
are high and the nose narrow. The Cerro de Tomillo skull is not, however,
a pure dolichocephal, and does resemble, in a partial sense, the Dinaric
brachycephalic variety which was common in the Mediterranean at that time.

Although there seems to be little doubt in the minds of the archaeologists
that the Bell Beaker culture developed in Spain, and although eastern
Mediterranean brachycephals came there at about the same time, the
manner in which the physical type and the culture became identified with
each other is still obscure. (...)

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 07:47 PM
C. S. Coon described the main phenotype of Bell Beaker folks as Dinaric (which is brachycephalic).

And it seems, that modern Basques have exactly the same Atlanto-Dinaric, brachycephalic phenotype:

https://periklisdeligiannis.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/on-the-physical-anthropology-of-the-ancient-celts/


the Atlantic variety of Dinaric (represented today mostly by the Pre-Indoeuropean Basques)

This begs the question again - why don't they speak an IE language ??? They are not Megalithic types.

Shaikorth
03-20-2016, 07:53 PM
C. S. Coon described the main phenotype of Bell Beaker folks as Dinaric (which is brachycephalic).

And it seems, that modern Basques have exactly the same Atlanto-Dinaric, brachycephalic phenotype:

https://periklisdeligiannis.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/on-the-physical-anthropology-of-the-ancient-celts/



This begs the question again - why don't they speak an IE language ??? They are not Megalithic types.

They are not like the Bell Beakers we have so far either, in a genetic sense.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:06 PM
Yes, autosomally they are actually a lot more WHG and EEF, if I recall correctly.

So how did they become so R1b-heavy, even though autosomal change didn't follow.

Gravetto-Danubian
03-20-2016, 08:08 PM
C. S. Coon described the main phenotype of Bell Beaker folks as Dinaric (which is brachycephalic).

And it seems, that modern Basques have exactly the same Atlanto-Dinaric, brachycephalic phenotype:

https://periklisdeligiannis.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/on-the-physical-anthropology-of-the-ancient-celts/



This begs the question again - why don't they speak an IE language ??? They are not Megalithic types.

Probably because the study of historical sociolinguistics is more complex than tracking skull shapes
(Or indeed singular Y haploid lineages)
;)

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:17 PM
Probably because the study of historical sociolinguistics is more complex than tracking skull shapes

Those anthropologists tracking skull shapes were right about most things. Anthropometry can be used just like DNA to unravel migrations - skull shape is largely heritable (even though some of the German Nazis claimed that it can be altered by sleeping on wrong pillow in childhood, which is how they tried to explain prevalence of brachycephaly in Germany when compared to dolichocephalic Scandinavia).

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:24 PM
Probably because the study of historical sociolinguistics is more complex

What do you mean ???

That Basques are descended from IE who were "magically De-Indo-Europeanized" through purely cultural transmission of Non-IE language?

Or something else ???

What if all of Bell Beaker R1b-P312 initially spoke "Basque-like" language, but were later magically Indo-Europeanized in Central Europe?

Gravetto-Danubian
03-20-2016, 08:26 PM
What do you mean ???

That Basques are descended from IE who were "magically De-Indo-Europeanized" through purely cultural transmission of Non-IE language?

Or something else ???

What if all of Bell Beaker R1b-P312 initially spoke "Basque-like" language, but were later magically Indo-Europeanized in Central Europe?

Yes, people/ entire groups can change language (it's called language shift) and it happened many times without major migrations . Here, it would seem the Basques switched, but magic was not required. I think RMS has explained his hypothesis 37 times.

Shaikorth
03-20-2016, 08:32 PM
Those anthropologists tracking skull shapes were right about most things. Anthropometry can be used just like DNA to unravel migrations - skull shape is largely heritable (even though some of the German Nazis claimed that it can be altered by sleeping on wrong pillow in childhood, which is how they tried to explain prevalence of brachycephaly in Germany when compared to dolichocephalic Scandinavia).

The brachycephalic beakers and dolicocephalic corded ware types have turned out to be lot more similar to each other than either is to EEF/caucasus dolicocephalics and so on. Kostenki skull was classified as "veddoid" (his reconstructions look the part too) but genetically he's nothing like a southern Indian. Occasionally the craniometrics correlate with genetics but often don't.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:34 PM
Coon on page 156 wrote:


The Bell Beaker people who remained in the Rhinelands, however, came into intimate contact with the Corded [Ware] people, who had invaded from the east and northeast, and with the corridor-tomb megalithic population to the north, whose domain extended down into the Netherlands. These three, of which the Bell Beaker element formed perhaps the dominant one, amalgamated to form an Early Bronze Age cultural unit, the so-called Zoned Beaker people, who invaded England and Scotland as the first important carriers of metal.

That could be where Bell Beaker speakers of "Basque-like" language became Indo-Europeanized by Corded Ware folks.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:36 PM
The brachycephalic beakers and dolicocephalic corded ware types have turned out to be lot more similar to each other

They were partly from the same meta-population, but were different in many ways.

They were different in Y-DNA, in pigmentation as well.

And Bell Beaker folks were after all much more WHG and EEF admixed than CWC.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:38 PM
Here, it would seem the basques switched, but magic was not required

Or some part of BB folks switched language to IE after encountering CWC in Central Europe, but BB in Iberia remained Non-IE.


But yes, people/ entire groups can change language (it's called language shift) and it happened many times without major migrations . Here, it would seem the basques switched, but magic was not required

No I wasn't slow on the uptake. It was a provocative question and you provided exactly such answer as I expected to provoke. ;)

Shaikorth
03-20-2016, 08:41 PM
They were partly from the same meta-population, but were different in many ways.

They were different in Y-DNA, in pigmentation as well.

And Bell Beaker folks were after all much more WHG and EEF admixed than CWC.

But those farmers and and WHG's weren't brachycephalic enough to explain that difference.

Tomenable
03-20-2016, 08:42 PM
But those farmers and and WHG's weren't brachycephalic enough to explain that difference.

Coon writes that Beaker skull type originated from Eastern Mediterranean areas, and that they sailed to Iberia.

So yes - they came by boats from the East, but whether they originally spoke Indo-European language is uncertain.

Not sure why are people assuming that any Post-Neolithic immigration to Europe from the East = Indo-Europeans. IMO they could originally speak some Basque-related language, and became Indo-Europeanized in Central Europe by Corded folks (R1a + R1b-U106 + I1).

"Basque-like" language could come to Iberia from East Mediterranean regions, or even from Crimea or South Ukraine.

Shaikorth
03-20-2016, 09:14 PM
Coon writes that Beaker skull type originated from Eastern Mediterranean areas, and that they sailed to Iberia.

So yes - they came by boats from the East, but whether they originally spoke Indo-European language is uncertain.

Not sure why are people assuming that any Post-Neolithic immigration to Europe from the East = Indo-Europeans. IMO they could originally speak some Basque-related language, and became Indo-Europeanized in Central Europe by Corded folks (R1a + R1b-U106 + I1).

"Basque-like" language could come to Iberia from East Mediterranean regions, or even from Crimea or South Ukraine.

The point is that the neolithic farmers were more dolicocephalic than bell beakers, and so were the cordeds, but genetically the beakers can be modeled as the mixture of the two so skull shape doesn't really correlate with the genetic makeup we're seeing here.

Romilius
03-21-2016, 04:39 PM
After Yamna R1b discovery, it seems that many let's-go-with-R1a-others-are-language-shifters have gone mad... EliasAlucard in disguise?

rms2
03-21-2016, 05:11 PM
Or some part of BB folks switched language to IE after encountering CWC in Central Europe, but BB in Iberia remained Non-IE.


How did that happen? And why is it that thus far Yamnaya is by far mostly R1b-L23 like Bell Beaker and not R1a like Corded Ware? As I have mentioned numerous times before, Gimbutas regarded Bell Beaker as the amalgam of Yamnaya and Vucedol in the Carpathian basin, not as the amalgam of wandering Basques and Corded Ware.

The Basques are likely to have acquired a y-dna profile that resembles that of their neighbors over time via admixture and a matrilocal marriage tradition. Some scholars claim to see a relationship between the Basque language, Euskara, and Nuragic, otherwise known as Paleo-Sardinian. I-M26 reaches its maximum frequency anywhere (~ 40%) on the island of Sardinia. The Basques still carry I-M26 at about 10%. IMHO, I-M26 was the original dominant y haplogroup among the Basques, who have become mostly R1b-DF27 over time through mixing with their Indo-European neighbors.

alan
03-21-2016, 05:15 PM
I dont dispute that a large WHG group expanded from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge right across most of Europe and including into the isles eventually. However it is incredibly unlikely it has anything to do with R1b and certainly not the forms that predominate today in Europe. They have left a legacy but its autosomal.

Romilius
03-21-2016, 05:52 PM
How did that happen? And why is it that thus far Yamnaya is by far mostly R1b-L23 like Bell Beaker and not R1a like Corded Ware? As I have mentioned numerous times before, Gimbutas regarded Bell Beaker as the amalgam of Yamnaya and Vucedol in the Carpathian basin, not as the amalgam of wandering Basques and Corded Ware.

The Basques are likely to have acquired a y-dna profile that resembles that of their neighbors over time via admixture and a matrilocal marriage tradition. Some scholars claim to see a relationship between the Basque language, Euskara, and Nuragic, otherwise known as Paleo-Sardinian. I-M26 reaches its maximum frequency anywhere (~ 40%) on the island of Sardinia. The Basques still carry I-M26 at about 10%. IMHO, I-M26 was the original dominant y haplogroup among the Basques, who have become mostly R1b-DF27 over time through mixing with their Indo-European neighbors.

That's the point, and I will put my hand on fire that if it popped out a R1a in Paleolithic Spain, then nobody would dare to put in doubt the R1a=IE dogma. But, unsurprisingly, when it comes to tie R1b to a culture different from Basque... then... God knows!

ffoucart
03-21-2016, 06:05 PM
Coon writes that Beaker skull type originated from Eastern Mediterranean areas, and that they sailed to Iberia.

So yes - they came by boats from the East, but whether they originally spoke Indo-European language is uncertain.

Not sure why are people assuming that any Post-Neolithic immigration to Europe from the East = Indo-Europeans. IMO they could originally speak some Basque-related language, and became Indo-Europeanized in Central Europe by Corded folks (R1a + R1b-U106 + I1).

"Basque-like" language could come to Iberia from East Mediterranean regions, or even from Crimea or South Ukraine.
There is no proof of a migration of the Proto-Basques into the Iberian Peninsula, and the grammar of the Proto Basque language is highly debated. The more recent authors exclude a link to Caucasian languages.

In fact, Proto Basque was probably already in the influence of I.E. languages.

Frankly, the "boat theory" is against odds (for Basques or BB anyway).

I think you're making a confusion between culture and artifacts. As an example: it is not because you can find Roman or Greek artifacts in northern Gaul that Gauls were Greeks or Romans.

The BB phenomenon is a very complex one, and could recover different cultures.

kevingnet
03-07-2017, 03:54 AM
You seem confused. Ancient people are not descended from modern people. It is the other way around.


The DF21 ancient samples are not like the modern Germans. They are like modern Irish. They were descended from Bell Beaker people who arrived in Britain and Ireland from the Continent, probably down the Rhine. At the time Germany did not exist. The ancestors of the modern Germans were not living along the Rhine. The etymology of the river-name Rhine is Celtic. The Bell Beaker samples in modern Germany are mainly ancestral to the samples from Rathlin Island. They were Celts. Celts lived in that whole area before the expansion of the Germani out of Scandinavia.
The Neolithic Irish woman was not from Sardinia. The modern Sardinians just happen to have retained more Neolithic DNA than any other people in Europe. This is because of two factors. Hunter-gatherers visited Sardinia occasionally, but did not settle there. It was settled by Neolithic farmers. Secondly the Indo-Europeans had less impact on this small island people than on most of the rest of Europe.
Hinxton 4 was not Irish. The individual is more similar to modern Irish people than modern English because modern Irish are more Celtic than modern English, who have much more Anglo-Saxon input. Before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons, the Romano-British were much more similar to the Irish.


I don't mean to butt in, since I'm an amateur at best at this thing. But I couldn't help to notice that in these posts people appear to have some sort of agenda trying to prove their point and often they omit what appears to be important data. I've seen several of your posts and you seem pretty knowledgeable for the most part.

"Celts lived in that whole area before the expansion of the Germani out of Scandinavia." While this is true, it's also well known that in the current geographical area of Germany, there are several important groups of which the one you mention is only one of them. I think that people sort of cherry pick whatever fits their view often. The fact of the matter is, when it comes to genetics, human migrations and such things, there are many factors to consider, other than just dna, and I gather that much is understood by most. However, I don't believe there is a single point of origin of just about nothing, perhaps only from central east Africa, and probably due to lack of data. Most of the current and I have to assume ancient as well, human populations are a mixture of two or more groups. Even if it can be ascertained through Y or mtDNA origin, it's only part of the story, since the genetic composition of all humans is a mixture of the genes from the lineage, however the genetic contributions from the lineages are very diluted comparing to the recent autosomal DNA that one inherits from our progenitors.

In the case of this thread, it had been my understanding that it had been established that Irish shared genetic material with Iberians. I don't know exactly what has changed since last year. Perhaps, I don't really comprehend well enough what's being discussed on this thread, this is very likely. My presumption is that there appear to be a group that argues that the origin of the Irish people came from the Celts. I think this cannot be denied, however Celt is now understood as a culture. So, perhaps even if those Celts were a population that came from that region in Germany, depends on how far back you go, we would find that their ancestors might be the same as those for Iberians. Regardless, the current genetic findings as far as I know has been that the Irish do share genetic material with Basques, and Basques also share quite a bit of DNA with other Iberians. Also, of note is that the Iberians were not a single people, even in antiquity. This is what I'm seeing being neglected in this thread. There were several important waves of migrations into the peninsula from Greece, Phoenicia, north Africa, Europe, etc...

I should mention that while I quoted @Jean M, I meant my post to be more generic.

My position is that, yeah, sometimes it may be tempting to feel some kind of pride about my ancestry in some ways, but the fact remains is that I cannot know for certain a lot of things. It seems more likely that there were many admixtures for most if not all of the populations. So, to say, ah... this group came from this place or from these peoples, it's highly dubious. In my case for example, I'm 21% native American, so I can't say I'm European because I'm mixed. I believe similarly, this is the case of other populations. For instance, over time as populations become more homogenized they tend to develop an identity and therefore claim to be this or that. For example, French or Italian identify with those populations, however they are for the most part made up of the same proportions of ancient inhabitants from several distant in time and place areas of Europe and even further. So while the Irish have been living in that location perhaps even for several millennia, they also share similar genetic proportions with other Europeans, therefore you cannot say, Irish came from Celt Germany. It's not that it isn't true, the problem is that we're cherry picking a particular time and place and that's only a very limited way to look at the whole picture.

kevingnet
03-07-2017, 05:10 AM
Of course... but the real question is why does a person put in doubt the connection between R1b and IE on the basis of Corded Ware DNA, when a more ancient and IE-connected culture - i.e. Yamna - is indeed R1b... perhaps something flees away from my ability of understanding.

I realize that sometimes we have people who stopped 15 years ago: R1b is in Europe for 10000 years, and, of course, it is vasconic... as if nothing except vasconic existed in Europe 10000 years ago.

"as if nothing except vasconic existed in Europe 10000 years ago."
Well... according to latest findings, that would appear to have been the case. The inhabitants of the peninsula were for the most part homogeneous and there had been no other populations found during that time. However, they may not necessarily have been Vasconic. It is believed via linguistic studies that the or *a* precursor to modern Basque was Iberian. These inhabitants were called West European Hunter Gatherers.

Also, you may want to rephrase your last paragraph, I don't really comprehend the totality of it. Specifically the part "we have people who stopped 15 years ago" and then what followed.

Romilius
03-07-2017, 06:30 AM
"as if nothing except vasconic existed in Europe 10000 years ago."
Well... according to latest findings, that would appear to have been the case. The inhabitants of the peninsula were for the most part homogeneous and there had been no other populations found during that time. However, they may not necessarily have been Vasconic. It is believed via linguistic studies that the or *a* precursor to modern Basque was Iberian. These inhabitants were called West European Hunter Gatherers.

Also, you may want to rephrase your last paragraph, I don't really comprehend the totality of it. Specifically the part "we have people who stopped 15 years ago" and then what followed.

I'm sorry... homogeneous? Surely they were autosomally similar, but the uniparental markers were pretty diverse, suggesting more than one wave of migration or more than one tribe. Basque can be younger than expected, we just need more evidence to state conclusions. And the idea of a Paleolithic Europe only vasconic-speaking is nearly impossible, statistically impossible.

kevingnet
03-08-2017, 02:56 AM
I'm sorry... homogeneous? Surely they were autosomally similar, but the uniparental markers were pretty diverse, suggesting more than one wave of migration or more than one tribe. Basque can be younger than expected, we just need more evidence to state conclusions. And the idea of a Paleolithic Europe only vasconic-speaking is nearly impossible, statistically impossible.

We're both right and wrong depending on which time we're talking about. Perhaps I overreached. I meant to say that the Iberian population at some point were more or less homogeneous, at least more so than now, in the sense that they were hunter and gatherer. Most likely, even HG was some kind of mixture of something or another. However, the ancient dna samples that have been found in the region are thought to be that. Not to imply that at later times there were many other peoples that filled the peninsula, that is already understood amply.