PDA

View Full Version : R1b-M269 / L23 and the diffusion of early metallurgy



Tomenable
05-03-2016, 02:25 PM
In another thread (link) I've argued that R1b-L51 (or pre-L51 ancestral lineages of L23) was never present on the Steppe, but was responsible for spreading early metallurgy directly from the Middle East to Western Europe:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe

Here I present some evidence linking the rapid expansion of L23 lineages with the spread of metallurgy.

These are excerpts of "From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations" by Nissim Amzallag:

http://www.ajaonline.org/article/300

Rapid diffusion of metallurgy in the 4th millennium BC can be linked with expansion of R1b M269/L23:

http://s32.postimg.org/3zybzt5wl/metallurgy1.png

Metallurgy expanded north with Maykop culture, which contributed R1b-Z2103 to Yamnaya:

http://s32.postimg.org/b3c6fafj9/metallurgy2.png

Metallurgy expanded to Iberia across the Mediterranean region and later with Bell Beakers:

http://s32.postimg.org/3vx5xkhet/metallurgy3.png

And a map showing how R1b-L51 or maybe pre-L51 L23 (ancestral to ATP3 and Bell Beaker) migrated:

http://s32.postimg.org/ke2zqss9x/metallurgy4.png

Previously I've pointed out, that some of the most basal lineages of L51 can be found in Sardinia:

http://s32.postimg.org/xhctnmn2t/Sardinian_L51.png

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 03:39 PM
R1b-L23 initially dispersed as smiths & traders who travelled alone and married local women in each region, acquiring autosomal DNA of other groups. In most regions it was initially a peaceful dispersal.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 04:18 PM
This theory was discussed way before your time and Italian, Iberian and French Copper Age Y-DNA has already refuted it. Those results are all I2a + G2a and lack steppe autosomal DNA. There is no doubt that the shift from EEF to modern Western Europeans had to start off as pretty heavy in EHG to get to today's numbers. There are no amount of maps that can be drawn to get around that. That another early branch R1b shows up thousands of years before the Copper/Bronze Age transition doesn't change probability in the least.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 04:32 PM
Italian, Iberian and French Copper Age Y-DNA has already refuted it. Those results are all I2a + G2a and lack steppe autosomal DNA.

If you sampled Powhatan DNA from 1620, there would be no European admixture and most would be Q. But would it disprove the existence of Jamestown? Mixing takes time. E.g. KO1 from Hungary was pure WHG.

R1b expanded as lonely men (or small groups of men), who were smiths & traders, and married local women. So those R1b were becoming admixed by local women, but they were not admixing local I2a and G2a men.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 04:39 PM
If you sampled Powhatan DNA from 1620, there would be no European admixture and most would be Q. But would it disprove the existence of Jamestown? Mixing takes time. E.g. KO1 from Hungary was pure WHG.

R1b expanded as lonely men (or small groups of men), who were smiths & traders, and married local women. So those R1b were becoming admixed by local women, but they were not admixing local I2a and G2a men.

No kidding. Too bad there were no EHG women around either, so your point is irrelevant.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 04:41 PM
lack steppe autosomal DNA

ATP3 (suspected R1b) did not have the same autosomal DNA as other ATP samples:

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/analyses-of-copper-and-bronze-age-spanish-genomes/

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31558-Analysis-of-Chalcolithic-El-Portalon-samples-(Günther-at-al-2015)?p=466264&viewfull=1#post466264

Copper Age Iberia samples show evidence of two distinct origins of that population.

============

If you have a better autosomal DNA analysis of ATP samples, feel free to post it.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 04:47 PM
ATP3 (suspected R1b) did not have the same autosomal DNA as other ATP samples:

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/analyses-of-copper-and-bronze-age-spanish-genomes/

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31558-Analysis-of-Chalcolithic-El-Portalon-samples-(Günther-at-al-2015)?p=466264&viewfull=1#post466264

Copper Age Iberia samples show evidence of two distinct origins of that population.

============

If you have a better autosomal DNA analysis of ATP samples, feel free to post it.

ATP3 was low coverage, was he not? Even if he were a reliable sample, you need tons more EHG in a sample to get to modern Western Europeans.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 04:51 PM
Not only ATP3 but also ATP20 differed in terms of autosomal DNA from other ATPs.


Even if he were a reliable sample, you need tons more EHG in a sample to get to modern Western Europeans.

Carleton S. Coon explained, that Beakers mixed with CWC in Germany.

Later from Germany such admixed population back-migrated westward.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 04:53 PM
Not only ATP3 but also ATP20 differed in terms of autosomal DNA from other ATPs.

So they were heavily EHG?... like enough to breed with 100% EEF populations and turn them into modern Western Europeans?

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 04:55 PM
So they were heavily EHG?...

They weren't and neither are modern Iberians. Iberians are mostly EEF despite being mostly R1b.

===============

It was German Bell Beaker which acquired a lot of Steppe admixture, but not other Beaker groups.

Carleton S. Coon wrote:

"(...) 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 (...)"

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 05:03 PM
They weren't and neither are modern Iberians. Iberians are mostly EEF despite being mostly R1b.

All modern Iberians & Italians have more EHG than any Copper Age sample. You can't add a 0% EHG population to a hybrid WHG/EEF population and come up with anything more than 0% EHG. Unless you are trying to say that Copper Age Anatolia was extremely EHG heavy.

Agamemnon
05-03-2016, 05:07 PM
Odds are J (J2 in particular) had more to do with the diffusion of metallurgy than R1b-M269.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:08 PM
All modern Iberians & Italians have more EHG than any Copper Age sample

Celts, Romans, Germanic tribes, etc. - all those groups brought some EHG to Iberia.

And they came after the Copper Age and after the Early Bell Beaker period.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 05:12 PM
Celts, Romans, Germanic tribes, etc. - all those groups brought some EHG to Iberia.

And they came after the Copper Age and after the Early Bell Beaker period.

An early Bronze Age Iberian already plotted with modern Iberians. Can't remember the sample, but someone will likely chime in. And the Celts were the descendants of Bell Beaker, so how exactly did they get their very high EHG?

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:13 PM
Sweuro wrote:


The initial expansion was from Iberia into central-Europe, there they mixed with the steppe people, and there was a second expansion of BB from this area, with already steppe ancestry and R1b-P312.

I agree with this except for the R1b part. They had R1b already during the initial expansion.

In Central Europe they acquired Steppe autosomal ancestry mediated mostly via CW women.

In Central Europe there was Corded Ware with 75%+ of Steppe ancestry but R1a, not R1b.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:14 PM
And the Celts were the descendants of Bell Beaker, so how exactly did they get their very high EHG?

They were descendants of just one of many Beaker branches, not of all BB as a whole.

How they acquired EHG ancestry? - Carleton S. Coon (link) and Sweuro explained how:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7069-R1b-M269-L23-and-the-diffusion-of-early-metallurgy&p=154792&viewfull=1#post154792

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 05:25 PM
They were descendants of just one of many Beaker branches, not of all BB as a whole.

How they acquired EHG ancestry? - Carleton S. Coon (link) and Sweuro explained how:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7069-R1b-M269-L23-and-the-diffusion-of-early-metallurgy&p=154792&viewfull=1#post154792

So if P312 expanded from Iberia and came to dominate all the way up to the Rhine, how did that happen if you are saying that the P312 men overran the locals and only in Central Europe thid the men take on Corded Ware wives? Seems like you will also need to explain the extreme coincidence that L23 derived lineages expanded in the Steppe and in Beria at exactly the same time in two extreme ends of Europe.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:34 PM
explain the extreme coincidence that L23 derived lineages expanded in the Steppe and in Beria at exactly the same time in two extreme ends of Europe.

I think that I already did in my Opening Post. BTW, variance of L23 is greatest in the Middle East.


So if P312 expanded from Iberia and came to dominate all the way up to the Rhine

Well, those that initially expanded from Iberia were not necessarily already L21 or U152 or U106+.

They could be mostly L51*, L11*, P312* or U106*. More common lineages likely expanded later.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:45 PM
Odds are J (J2 in particular) had more to do with the diffusion of metallurgy than R1b-M269.

J (including J2) was already present among EEF in Europe and Western Anatolia.

The number of J samples from the Neolithic is not smaller than of E1b samples.

ADW_1981
05-03-2016, 05:46 PM
I think that I already did in my Opening Post. BTW, variance of L23 is greatest in the Middle East.



Well, those that initially expanded from Iberia were not necessarily already L21 or U152 or U106+.

They could be mostly L51*, L11*, P312* or U106*. More common lineages likely expanded later.

I found a good compilation by Maciamo - out of the 2309 Catalonian samples, a whopping 0% were L51. An Iberian refugium of L51+ (xL11) does not have much weight.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30910-New-big-paper-on-Catalan-Y-DNA

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 05:52 PM
Metallurgy did not expand via Catalonia, but rather Sardinia, Southern Iberia, Corsica, Southern France.

See the map in the Opening Post.

Agamemnon
05-03-2016, 06:16 PM
J (including J2) was already present among EEF in Europe and Western Anatolia.

The number of J samples from the Neolithic is not smaller than of E1b samples.

J has only been found in two Neolithic samples so far, one from Barcın; Turkey c. 8,200 yBP (I0708) and another from the Sopot culture in Hungary c. 7,000 yBP (ALE 14) both of which were J2. In fact, I0708 from Barcın was Z6048 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z6050/) which is a very specific branch under J2a-M410. So J2 was a minor Neolithic lineage at best. A more likely scenario taking CHG into account is that J2 foragers were still wandering throughout Anatolia when agriculture was taking root and that a few individuals were incorporated into the emerging farming communities, which is similar to what happened with I2a in Europe during the Neolithic. I2c and C1a-V20 were also found in the Barcın samples for instance, so this pattern of forager intrusion into farming communities might well count for other lineages.

E-V13 was found only once in a Neolithic context, in an Epicardial individual from the Avellaner cave in Spain c. 7,000 yBP, I actually spoke to one of the authors of the Avellaner study in 2014.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 07:18 PM
Metallurgy did not expand via Catalonia, but rather Sardinia, Southern Iberia, Corsica, Southern France.

See the map in the Opening Post.

Then why are all copper age skeletons lacking L23? And further, since the Copper Age went through Sardinia, why didn't there Y-DNA change, nor their autosomal DNA, nor their language?

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 07:39 PM
why didn't there Y-DNA change

Over 15% of modern Sardinian Y-DNA is actually M269+, and if including V88 then over 17%.


nor their autosomal DNA, nor their language?

We don't know if their language changed. It could change from one Non-IE to another Non-IE.

Autosomal DNA could change too. But if L23 was originally mostly EEF, why should it change?

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 07:50 PM
Over 15% of modern Sardinian Y-DNA is actually M269+, and if including V88 then over 17%.

Yes... and that's the least amount in all of Western Europe.... and genetic wave-of-advance does not work that way. Not sure why anyone would add V88 when we already know it's expansion into Europe occurred thousands of years earlier.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 07:55 PM
and that's the least amount in all of Western Europe....

So what?

If you assume that all Y-DNA expanded from areas where its modern frequency is highest, then this would mean that R1b could not expand from the Russian Steppe too, because it is very few in numbers there today.

How is my "out of Sardinia" inferior to your "out of Volga Region" then ???

In both regions L51 is few in numbers today. But Sardinia has some of very basal subclades of L51.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 07:59 PM
If we go solely by frequency, we would need to get back to "Paleolithic continuity in Iberia" theory.

That's not what I'm saying. In such case V88 originated in Chad, where some tribes have 90%+.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 08:02 PM
If anything, we should look at modern variance rather than frequency.

According to Myres et al., L23 has the highest variance in the Middle East.

So my idea that L23 mutation emerged in the Middle East is not improbable.

Agamemnon
05-03-2016, 08:07 PM
^^Why go by modern variance when we can go by ancient variance? In this case, the PC steppe has the most variance hands down, which strongly suggests that R1b-M269 emerged there.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 08:07 PM
If anything, we should look at modern variance rather than frequency.

According to Myres et al., L23 has the highest variance in the Middle East.

So my idea that L23 mutation emerged in the Middle East is not improbable.

Modern variance is useless and dances all over the place. A most recent paper had the highest modern L23 variance as Bulgaria. Needless to say, it is not very reliable. Someone years ago someone calculated the highest L21 variance as Nebraska USA!!!

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 08:15 PM
In this case, the PC steppe has the most variance hands down

Is it a joke? You know that we don't have any aDNA from the Middle East so far.

Nothingness never tends to be diverse.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 08:16 PM
A most recent paper had the highest modern L23 variance as Bulgaria.

The Balkans was one of pioneer areas in metallurgy indeed (apart from the Levant).

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 08:20 PM
Odds are J (J2 in particular) had more to do with the diffusion of metallurgy than R1b-M269.

I agree that odds are that J2 also had something to do with it, but alongside R1b-M269.

http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/J2-Y-DNA-Haplogroup-Map-J2-M172-Map-J2-Haplogrubu-Haritasi-v3.png

But the problem is that J2 is 28,000 years old (TMRCA) - so you need to specify which subclades are young and widespread enough to be involved in the spread of metallurgy, like R1b-M269/L23 are.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/J2/

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 08:33 PM
I agree that odds are that J2 also had something to do with it, but alongside R1b-M269.

http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/J2-Y-DNA-Haplogroup-Map-J2-M172-Map-J2-Haplogrubu-Haritasi-v3.png

But the problem is that J2 is 28,000 years old (TMRCA) - so you need to specify which subclades are young and widespread enough to be involved in the spread of metallurgy, like R1b-M269/L23 are.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/J2/

So it was alongside J2 and then the L23 men got DNA tested and separated themselves from J2 to re-populate the rest of Western Europe as Bell Beaker samples are all R1b and in areas like Ireland there is no J2?

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 08:45 PM
then the L23 men got DNA tested and separated themselves from J2

Nope. Actually L51 men got DNA tested and separated themselves from L23(xL51).

That's why Western Europeans today are all L51 and no Yamnaya L23(xL51).

Even in Germany which is in Central Europe L23(xL51) is just 0.62% (Myres 2010).

By comparison in Slovenia, Czech Rep., Poland L23(xL51) is ca. or over 5.0%.

=======================

BTW, guys L21, U152, DF27 and U106 also tested DNA and segregated themselves.

So that they formed nice geographical clusters, for example Ireland was vastly L21.

And Aryans, before moving to India, wiped out all of "impure" R1b from their ranks.

R.Rocca
05-03-2016, 08:55 PM
Nope. Actually L51 men got DNA tested and separated themselves from L23(xL51).

That's why Western Europeans today are all L51 and no Yamnaya L23(xL51).

Even in Germany which is in Central Europe L23(xL51) is just 0.62% (Myres 2010).

By comparison in Slovenia, Czech Rep., Poland L23(xL51) is ca. or over 5.0%.

=======================

BTW, guys L21, U152, DF27 and U106 also tested DNA and segregated themselves.

So that they formed nice geographical clusters, for example Ireland was vastly L21.

And Aryans, before moving to India, wiped out all of "impure" R1b from their ranks.

No, I was being sarcastic... how exactly did a mixed group of J2 and R-L51 men separate themselves during the Copper Age to become 100% R1b+? The answer: they were never together.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 09:04 PM
Just like all other mixed groups separated themselves.


The answer: they were never together.

So the PIE community also never existed in your opinion?

Because, you know, Lithuanians or Brahmins aren't R1b.

And how did L51 separate from the rest of L23?

Why is Western Europe entirely L51 ???

Western Yamna was 100% L51, Eastern Yamna 100% L23(xL51) ???

But how could it be the case, how did they separate?

Shouldn't subclades and haplogroups be evenly distributed?

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 09:07 PM
separate themselves during the Copper Age to become 100% R1b+?

Who was allegedly 100% R1b+ ??? Yamna ???

We are seeing only men buried in elite kurgans, not entire population. It's like checking only Viking graves from the Norman Kingdom of Sicily and then saying 100% of population were I1-M253, or something.

Agamemnon
05-03-2016, 09:07 PM
Is it a joke? You know that we don't have any aDNA from the Middle East so far.

Nothingness never tends to be diverse.

If we go by sheer diversity, we have RISE546, RISE524 (who were both M269*), I0443 (who was L23*), I0124 (who was intermediate between P297 and M478) and I0122 (Khvalynsk) alongside all the Z2103 samples in Yamnaya which clearly suggests that M269 emerged on the steppe. And we actually do have aDNA from the Near East (Bronze Age Armenia, Neolithic Turkey and Mesolithic-Epipaleolithic Georgia), what we don't have is good coverage of the region's genetic prehistory coupled with a general absence of data outside Anatolia and the Transcaucasus.

So yes, unless proof of the contrary shows up the steppe is R1b's diversity hotspot.



I agree that odds are that J2 also had something to do with it, but alongside R1b-M269.

http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/J2-Y-DNA-Haplogroup-Map-J2-M172-Map-J2-Haplogrubu-Haritasi-v3.png

But the problem is that J2 is 28,000 years old (TMRCA) - so you need to specify which subclades are young and widespread enough to be involved in the spread of metallurgy, like R1b-M269/L23 are.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/J2/

J2a is about as old as R1b, so I wouldn't worry about that if I were you. What I'd worry about is the lack of correlation between R1b-L23 and J2a since it really does a big disfavour to this theory of yours (and I'm not even mentioning ancient data here).

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 09:09 PM
One of Armenian Bronze Age R1b-s was P297*.

Agamemnon
05-03-2016, 09:14 PM
One of Armenian Bronze Age R1b-s was P297*.

Indeed, and that doesn't change a thing quite frankly.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 09:14 PM
In Bell Beaker we have only L11+, or even just P312+. In CWC we have a whole diverse bunch of R1a subclades.

We have M198*, L664, M417*, M417+, Z283+ (including Z284). Possibly some R1b M269(xL51) too.

This shows that CWC was a "wholesale" migration wave from the Steppe, with all lineages from very basal to more diverged moving at once. And all those guys had 75%+ Yamnaya/Steppe autosomal DNA (or Yamnaya-cousin autosomal DNA if you prefer).

German Beaker was not such a thing, as it had a shortage of Y-DNA diversity (only L11+) and less of Steppe admixture.

You need to explain why there was no L23(xL51) in Bell Beaker, and why there is none in modern Western Europe.

Populations descended from CWC (such as Slavs) actually have ca. 5% of R1b-L23(xL51). See: Myres 2010.

Which confirms that Corded Ware had some L23(xL51) from Yamna or Yamna-cousin population.

By contrast, there is absolute lack of Yamna-related L23(xL51) in BB and modern West Europe.

Eastern Europeans have 10x more of Yamna-related R1b (ca. 5.0%) than Germans (ca. 0.5%).

miiser
05-03-2016, 09:46 PM
Those results are all I2a + G2a and lack steppe autosomal DNA. There is no doubt that the shift from EEF to modern Western Europeans had to start off as pretty heavy in EHG to get to today's numbers.

This is not a sensible understanding of genetic group dynamics. When a new population mixes into a pre-existing gene pool, the percentage of the invader's genes within the population must be ~0 at t=0, by definition. The growth of admixture must be something like a linear slope, from a percentage of 0 at t=0 to a percentage X at time T. A population can't "start off as pretty heavy" anything. Individuals interbreed one by one. Entire cultural groups do not instantaneously interbreed. Today's numbers are the result of a continuous change in admixture from zero to X, and do not require a large percentage at t=0.

ADW_1981
05-03-2016, 09:59 PM
I agree that odds are that J2 also had something to do with it, but alongside R1b-M269.



Their distributions are quite distinct and unrelated.

Tomenable
05-03-2016, 10:23 PM
Their distributions are quite distinct and unrelated.

There is a lot of overlap even in Europe:

https://narinnamkn.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/haplogroup-j2.jpg
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-L23.gif

And even more so outside of Europe:

http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/J2-Y-DNA-Haplogroup-Map-J2-M172-Map-J2-Haplogrubu-Haritasi-v3.png
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b_World.png

Coldmountains
05-03-2016, 10:38 PM
To be honest it is more likely for me that R1b People Indo-Europeanized R1a People than the other way around. But i think the original PIE community was a mix of R1a and R1b but after bottlenecks/founder effects some late PIE tribes became R1b or R1a dominated.

ADW_1981
05-03-2016, 11:37 PM
Italy and Portugal both have a lot of P312 and J2. However, anywhere north of there, be it Britain, Germany, or France, J2 is abysmally low. They couldn't have spread together.

Agamemnon
05-04-2016, 01:14 AM
Italy and Portugal both have a lot of P312 and J2. However, anywhere north of there, be it Britain, Germany, or France, J2 is abysmally low. They couldn't have spread together.

Yeah, where did all the Lebanese L23 go? What about the Basque J2a? And let's not even talk about the Caucasus. Anyway, I think this is a perfect example of how using contemporary data to uncover the past fails in almost every single respect (as if all the surprises we've stumbled onto these last few years hadn't already made this painfully clear)

Gravetto-Danubian
05-04-2016, 01:20 AM
I have no horse in the R1b race, so my interest is out of "pure" interest & enthusiasm (;) )

One the one hand, we should not reduce the advent of Copper technology in western Europe to linear diffusionist radiation from the Near East, which requires it to have revolutionized life in central - western Europe in ways it appears not to have done (see Development of Metallurgy in Eurasia" by Piggot, Roberts & Thornton). Moreover, a Marxist framework is (? subconsciously) invoked : "master' R1b metalsmiths, "slave/ commoners" R1a, who then rebelled and overthrew their masters on the steppe after c. 2200 BC.

However, a model attempting to link BB with Yamnaya itself has problems, largely because the entire study of BB is unresolved (Dating issues), but also the existence of only very general similarities between Yamnaya & BB, at best/ those being a shift toward pastoralism, mobility and individualism which can be seen as widespread changes resulting from the "secondary products revolution"). Rather, the prevailing trend sees that the 'full Beaker package' to have developed somewhere in eastern France, western Germany- generally the west Alpine area - through a fusion of Iberian Beakers, some dagger types native to Nth Italy & Alpine Europe, and new 'eastern ideologies' of solitary burials, etc.

What is clear is that BB in east-central European countries like Bohemia, Hungary, Croatia, Poland is definitely seen to be intrusive from the west. So some kind of "reflux" is required, at least.

So the question is : how do we get P312 in Germany by 2600 BC (? as early as 2800 BC), so that it can reflux back, at least in part, back east ? Michal has several times offered an explanation, so I won't repeat his ideas in detail (but basically P312 was already present in Europe before the BB phase)

Exploring the alternative, Danube route, leaves us with this scenario:


9142

9143

The "Copper Age" Baden sample dates from c. 2800 BC. It shows no steppe admixture.
Collectively, from EBA Hungary we have several Y samples: 4 or so of which are I2a2, there is a J2, and the R1b-something from Vucedol (also dating to this period; but not fully sequenced, so we don't know what it really 'looked like").

If we take the Baden sample (from the Tisza valley of Hungary) as representative of Danube Europe (a problematic stance, being a mere 1 sample; but it is not too much of a stretch to envisage Hungary Baden being very similar to the Baden offshoots in Germany and Bohemia), it looks like it was still genetically Middle European Neolithic, and it had not yet admixed with its Yamanaya neighbours literally a stone's throw away in Hungary. The earliest evidence of EHG admixture in the Carpathian basin comes after 2000 BC, with the MBA. This presents us with a problem of getting an EHG -admixed population up the Danube to Germany by 2600 BC, albeit not an unsurmoutable one

[the culture map of central Europe is by Dr Tunde Horvath, Hungarian archaeologist]

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 04:15 AM
Italy and Portugal both have a lot of P312 and J2. However, anywhere north of there, be it Britain, Germany, or France, J2 is abysmally low. They couldn't have spread together.

Together or not, both "tribes" could be spreading metallurgy.

Unless you want to claim that since there is not much of J2 in France, it means that France never adopted metallurgy and is still stuck in the Stone Age to this day?

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 04:28 AM
Moreover, a Marxist framework is (? subconsciously) invoked : "master' R1b metalsmiths, "slave/ commoners" R1a, who then rebelled and overthrew their masters on the steppe after c. 2200 BC.

But there is even such a legend in the Aryan Veddas about the Asvins killing Dadhyak Atharvan because he didn't want to reveal to them the secrets of metallurgy. Then they cut of his head, replaced it with a horse's head - which started talking and revealed the knowledge to them. Believe it or not but such a burial of a decapitated man with attached horse's head has been found near Poltavka, and archaeologically (as well as chronologically) it corresponds to the replacement of R1b-dominated Poltavka culture by the R1a-dominated Potapovka culture.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 04:35 AM
That decapitated man has not yet been tested for Y-DNA, it would be nice to see if he was one of Poltavka "mainstream" or one of Poltavka "outliers" (but of course according to my theory "outliers" were actually the majority of Poltavka population, but "mainstream" - being smiths with "magical knowledge" - were overrepresented in kurgan graves; same in Yamnaya).

FredH
05-04-2016, 06:38 AM
Modern variance is useless and dances all over the place. A most recent paper had the highest modern L23 variance as Bulgaria. Needless to say, it is not very reliable. Someone years ago someone calculated the highest L21 variance as Nebraska USA!!!
In USA it 's not surprising since a state like Nebraska were a place of migration from all over Central Europe. In other hand, I think that maximum variance in an European State like Bulgaria is truly meaningfull with respect to their migration history and last archaeological discoveries. Apparently Varna on the Black Sea coast were a quite important metalurgy center, 5000 BC. This could coincide with the L51 expansion.
But after the very interesting Johannes Krause (from Max Planck institute) 's conference in 2015 on you tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk65TbJRN_A (52:37/1h13) the population flow came from Pontic Steppe (Yamna Culture) after 7000 years ago. His conclusions are drawn from admixture analysis.
L23 mutation is around 6000 years old. I am not sure it's not finaly compatible with a L23 journey by Anatolia giving L51 and another one by Caucase giving the HT35 Eastern Branches like the trade map given above.
http://s32.postimg.org/94kcs5aed/Johannes_Krause.jpg

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 07:40 AM
the population flow came from Pontic Steppe (Yamna Culture) after 7000 years ago. His conclusions are drawn from admixture analysis.

Yes, the population flow came from the Pontic Steppe, but L11 subclade was very likely not part of that movement.


L23 mutation is around 6000 years old.

According to YFull: formed 6400 years ago, TMRCA 6200 years ago.

And YFull rather tends to underestimate age than overestimate it.

FredH
05-04-2016, 08:58 AM
Yes, the population flow came from the Pontic Steppe, but L11 subclade was very likely not part of that movement.



According to YFull: formed 6400 years ago, TMRCA 6200 years ago.

And YFull rather tends to underestimate age than overestimate it.

L11/L151 is around 5000 years old, so the L11 mutations multiplied along with Bronze age expansion in Europe. If we linked L11 and Bronze Age, I admit it 's difficult to link Bronze works with a Steppe source. then It's hard to link L11 with the Steppe. The metal working took its source, apparently, through Anatolia from Mesopotamia.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 09:57 AM
Agamemnon - J2 probably cannot be associated with the spread of metallurgy - just like it cannot be associated with the spread of Indo-Europeans -, because (according to Davidski) not a single major subclade of J2 expanded by the end of the Neolithic and the beginning of the Metal Ages. Metallurgy originally spread shortly before the Proto-Indo-Europeans. R1b-L23 expanded also shortly before R1a-M417.

See: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/04/y-hg-j2-cannot-be-genetic-marker-of.html


For instance, an analysis of data from the deep sequencing of human Y-chromosomes as part of the 1000 Genomes Project suggests that not a single major subclade of J2 began expanding even roughly close to the LN/EBA. See here. (http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-invention-of-slavery/)

In the plot above three lineages jump out at you. E1b, R1a, and R1b. The first is associated with the Bantu expansion, that occurred over the last 4,000 years. The second two are likely associated with Indo-Europeans in both Asia and Europe, respectively. The timescale is on the order of 4 to 5,000 years in the past. The association between culture and genes, or the genetic lineages of males, is rather clear, in these cases. In other instances the growth was more gradual. For example, the lineages likely associated with the first Neolithic pulses, J and G.

In other words, we are left with R1b and R1a spreading both metallurgy (first) and Indo-European languages (later).

But R1a had a too northerly distribution to be associated with spreading metallurgy. And it is younger than R1b.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 10:20 AM
Let's also add that while the PIE did not invent metallurgy (and were not responsible for its initial diffusion), they most likely did acquire the knowledge of metallurgy from some Non-IE group before they started to diverge into branches (i.e. before the end of the PIE linguistic unity). That's probably why the majority of IE ethnic groups have the legend about "the Smith and the Devil" in one variant or another:

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/3/1/150645

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35358487


(...) And a folk tale called The Smith And The Devil, about a blacksmith selling his soul in a pact with the Devil in order to gain supernatural abilities, was estimated to go back 6,000 years ago (...)

L23 goes back 6,200 years ago (TMRCA according to YFull), linking it with the origins of metallurgy and of this folk tale.

This folk tale was later adopted by the PIE community, at the same time when it adopted metallurgy from R1b-L23.

Quote:


(...) In some cases, it may also be possible to evaluate inferences about ancestral tale corpora in relation to other sources of information about past societies, such as historical, archaeological, linguistic and genetic data. Our findings regarding the origins of ATU 330 ‘The Smith and the Devil’ are a case in point. The basic plot of this tale—which is stable throughout the Indo-European speaking world, from India to Scandinavia—concerns a blacksmith who strikes a deal with a malevolent supernatural being (e.g. the Devil, Death, a jinn, etc.). The smith exchanges his soul for the power to weld any materials together, which he then uses to stick the villain to an immovable object (e.g. a tree) to renege on his side of the bargain. The likely presence of this tale in the last common ancestor of Indo-European-speaking cultures resonates strongly with wider debates in Indo-European prehistory, since it implies the existence of metallurgy in Proto-Indo-European society. (...)

Unfortunately the authors don't say whether this tale about "the Smith & the Devil" exists also in Non-IE folklore traditions.

Agamemnon
05-04-2016, 02:29 PM
Agamemnon - J2 probably cannot be associated with the spread of metallurgy - just like it cannot be associated with the spread of Indo-Europeans -, because (according to Davidski) not a single major subclade of J2 expanded by the end of the Neolithic and the beginning of the Metal Ages. Metallurgy originally spread shortly before the Proto-Indo-Europeans. R1b-L23 expanded also shortly before R1a-M417.

See: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/04/y-hg-j2-cannot-be-genetic-marker-of.html



In other words, we are left with R1b and R1a spreading both metallurgy (first) and Indo-European languages (later).

But R1a had a too northerly distribution to be associated with spreading metallurgy. And it is younger than R1b.

There are several major branches of J2a, under M92 for instance, which seemingly expanded during the Chalcolithic era, so it's pretty clear you simply don't know what you're talking about here. I reiterate, odds are J2 had more to do with the emergence and spread of metallurgy than R1b.
Furthermore, your ability to abandon theories you were advocating in the blink of an eye is quite fascinating I must say.



Let's also add that while the PIE did not invent metallurgy (and were not responsible for its initial diffusion), they most likely did acquire the knowledge of metallurgy from some Non-IE group before they started to diverge into branches (i.e. before the end of the PIE linguistic unity). That's probably why the majority of IE ethnic groups have the legend about "the Smith and the Devil" in one variant or another:

PIE also has extensive agricultural terminology, are you about to suggest that the PIEs had EF/EEF ancestry? If so, by all means, do explain why we're not seeing any of this in the Yamna remains. In other words, you're taking contact-induced change way too far, and I could easily shatter this argument of yours on PIE's vocabulary relating to metallurgy.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 07:37 PM
Agamemnon,


There are several major branches of J2a, under M92 for instance, which seemingly expanded during the Chalcolithic era, so it's pretty clear you simply don't know what you're talking about here.

OK, if you say so. But how widespread are these branches?


I reiterate, odds are J2 had more to do with the emergence and spread of metallurgy than R1b. Furthermore, your ability to abandon theories you were advocating in the blink of an eye is quite fascinating I must say.

I adopted this theory about J2 also spreading metallurgy from you in the first place, so I'm not as strongly attached to it as to the R1b one.

My own theory is the one about R1b (mainly M269/L23) spreading copper metallurgy from the Middle East or/and from the Balkans.


PIE also has extensive agricultural terminology, are you about to suggest that the PIEs had EF/EEF ancestry? If so, by all means, do explain why we're not seeing any of this in the Yamna remains.

So by the time of moving to the Steppe those CHG people were still foragers in your opinion? Why in such case does this ancestry appear in substantial amount for the first time in Khvalynsk folks, who had the knowledge of agriculture (e.g. domesticated cattle and sheep-goat)?:

Excerpts from page 35 out of 46: http://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/10/10/016477.full.pdf

"The cemetery of Khvalynsk II, Saratov oblast, Russia, on the west bank of the Volga River,
6 km north of the village of Alekseevka. Khvalynsk I and II are two parts of the same cemetery,
excavated in 1977-79 (Khvalynsk I) and 1987-88 (Khvalynsk II).23 The two excavations
revealed 197 graves, about 10x larger than other cemeteries of this period in the Volga-Ural
steppes, dated by radiocarbon to 5200-4000 BCE (95.4% confidence). Bones of domesticated
cattle and sheep-goat, and horses of uncertain status, were included in 28 human graves and
in 10 sacrificial deposits."

The richest of the three graves from Khvalynsk also happened to be R1b, even though not yet L23:

"The 367 copper artifacts in the graves, mostly beads and rings, are
the oldest copper objects in the Volga-Ural steppes, and trace elements and manufacturing
methods in a few objects suggest trade with southeastern Europe. Together with high 15N in
the human bones from Khvalynsk, which might have caused a reservoir effect making 14C
dates too old, the circulation of so much copper, which increased in SE Europe after 4700
BCE, suggests that a date after 4700 BCE would be reasonable for many graves at
Khvalynsk. Copper was found in 13 adult male graves, 8 adult female graves, and 4 sub-adult
graves. The unusually large cemetery at Khvalynsk contained southern Europeoid and
northern Europeoid cranio-facial types, consistent with the possibility that people from the
northern and southern steppes mingled and were buried here."

80% of all copper objects were buried together with the R1b man (surely a "coincidence" - he wasn't a smith or a copper trader?):

"Y- 10122 / SVP35 (grave 12)

Male (confirmed genetically), age 20-30, positioned on his back with raised knees, with 293
copper artifacts, mostly beads, amounting to 80% of the copper objects in the combined
cemeteries of Khvalynsk I and II. Probably a high-status individual, his Y-chromosome
haplotype, R1b1, also characterized the high-status individuals buried under kurgans in later
Yamnaya graves in this region, so he could be regarded as a founder of an elite group of
patrilineally related families. His MtDNA haplotype H2a1 is unique in the Samara series."

And the other guy was one "commoners" (or "R1a outliers" who were in fact the majority - according to my theory):

"Y- 10433 / SVP46 (grave 1)

Male (confirmed genetically), age 30-35, positioned on his back with raised knees, with a
copper ring and a copper bead. His R1a1 haplotype shows that this haplotype was present in
the region, although it is not represented later in high-status Yamnaya graves. His U5a1i
MtDNA haplotype is part of a U5a1 group well documented in the Samara series."

After Khvalynsk we see the influx of even more CHG ancestry into the Steppe, and the influx of more R1b.

Do you think that the gradual increase of CHG ancestry had nothing to do with immigration of R1b ???

Do you think that people who brought that ancestry did not bring agriculture and copper with them ???

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 08:00 PM
We have 6 pages and no serious rebuttal of my hypothesis has been posted so far. It is just too good to be easily rebutted. :)

Chad Rohlfsen
05-04-2016, 08:19 PM
There is no evidence of L23 in Western Europe before 2600BCE. That's huge. R1 is likely from Afontovo Gora. WHG is like a mix of a West asian HG, GoyetQ, and Afontovo Gora. Look at the Amerindian affinity of WHG vs GoyetQ.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 08:29 PM
There is no evidence of L23 in Western Europe before 2600 BCE. That's huge.

Only if you think that ATP3 from Copper Age Iberia being R1b-M269+ is a false result.

ADW_1981
05-04-2016, 08:36 PM
Do you think that the gradual increase of CHG ancestry had nothing to do with immigration of R1b ???

Do you think that people who brought that ancestry did not bring agriculture and copper with them ???

Good summary, but do domesticated animals always indicate sedentary agriculturalists? Second, what evidence is there than these copper objects weren't the result of trade? After all, they would still be buried with elites. There is no indication here the chiefs were also metalworkers, they were just chiefs.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 08:53 PM
There is no indication here the chiefs were also metalworkers, they were just chiefs.

I think it is highly probable that chiefs = smiths or/and traders of metal objects.

That was the case in Bell Beaker culture for sure (where smiths were clan chiefs):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmHXBXG7Loo#t=6m20s


Second, what evidence is there than these copper objects weren't the result of trade?

They could be, and that R1b guy could actually be a trader of copper objects who settled in the Steppe to trade. I assume traders would come and settle (at least for some time), perhaps in many cases even staying for lifetime and marrying local women. He could come for example from the Balkans.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 09:00 PM
Good summary, but do domesticated animals always indicate sedentary agriculturalists?

Not always, but if there is vocabulary related to sedentary agriculture in PIE, then there probably were some farmers among them.

Chad Rohlfsen
05-04-2016, 09:09 PM
No L51 if you want to be specific. We have almost 40 males in Western Europe from the Mesolithic through the Chalcolothic. Where is the L51? There's none in Spain, Germany, Hungary, Poland, or Italy. Keep dreaming though. Watch the Greek and Anatolian UP show ANE in these other hunters, via R1 Afontovo Gora. Just wait.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 10:40 PM
Furnace smelting of copper was invented by semi-nomadic people (Caucasians and/or Anatolians).

This is according to Nissim Amzallag, "From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations" (screenshot):

http://s32.postimg.org/aa7laxhph/Earliest_furnace_smelting.png

This further strengthens my case that the spread of CHG admixture and R1b was related to this.

CHG stands for Caucasian admixture after all.

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 11:28 PM
In USA it 's not surprising since a state like Nebraska were a place of migration from all over Central Europe. In other hand, I think that maximum variance in an European State like Bulgaria is truly meaningfull with respect to their migration history and last archaeological discoveries. Apparently Varna on the Black Sea coast were a quite important metalurgy center

Indeed (see the English summary):

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6yhr033Fgu0J:cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.hdl_11089_5694/c/folia28_kadrow1.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=pl&client=opera

"E. Neustupný suggested using a term “Eneolithic” instead of the copper age and
replacing its distinctive raw material criterion (copper) by a complex of cultural, social
and economic elements. Importantly he recognized the emergence of the plough in
agronomy instead of burning techniques, the replacement of large settlements by smaller
ones, burying the dead in cemeteries on land outside the inhabited areas and the
strengthening role of the male (“patriarchy”) in societies of that time."

"A sequence of the Hamangia-Varna cultures, beginning from the 3rd development
phase of the former, is thought to be the oldest and most representative cultures of the
copper age/eneolithic. They are dated from 4900 to 4400 BC. The wealthiest in metal
product sites is an eponymic cemetery at Varna. All metal artifacts from the graves of
the Hamangia and Varna cultures may be qualified to a group of symbolic finds, which
had little in common with the notion of utilitarism. Similar functions were performed
by other artifacts made of different raw materials. Among others, long flint blades or
ornaments made of Spondylus shells and many others may be mentioned. It is thought
that in the cemeteries of the Hamangia-Varna cultures circle, with particular consideration
of the cemetery at Varna, there were traces of serious inner differentiation of
societies that were using it."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGIO9J2r1pU

Tomenable
05-04-2016, 11:50 PM
ATP3 (R1b-M269+ ?) from Iberia was among burials classified as "Pre-Bell Beaker" by archaeologists:

Read - "An unusual Pre-bell beaker copper age cave burial context from El Portalon de Cueva Mayor site (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos)":

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280640453_An_unusual_Pre-bell_beaker_copper_age_cave_burial_context_from_El _Portalon_de_Cueva_Mayor_site_Sierra_de_Atapuerca_ Burgos

https://www.academia.edu/16986146/Pre-Beaker_Copper_Age_burial_of_El_Portalón_de_Cueva_M ayor_Sierra_de_Atapuerca_Burgos_

Gravetto-Danubian
05-05-2016, 01:00 AM
Indeed (see the English summary):

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6yhr033Fgu0J:cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.hdl_11089_5694/c/folia28_kadrow1.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=pl&client=opera

"E. Neustupný suggested using a term “Eneolithic” instead of the copper age and
replacing its distinctive raw material criterion (copper) by a complex of cultural, social
and economic elements. Importantly he recognized the emergence of the plough in
agronomy instead of burning techniques, the replacement of large settlements by smaller
ones, burying the dead in cemeteries on land outside the inhabited areas and the
strengthening role of the male (“patriarchy”) in societies of that time."

"A sequence of the Hamangia-Varna cultures, beginning from the 3rd development
phase of the former, is thought to be the oldest and most representative cultures of the
copper age/eneolithic. They are dated from 4900 to 4400 BC. The wealthiest in metal
product sites is an eponymic cemetery at Varna. All metal artifacts from the graves of
the Hamangia and Varna cultures may be qualified to a group of symbolic finds, which
had little in common with the notion of utilitarism. Similar functions were performed
by other artifacts made of different raw materials. Among others, long flint blades or
ornaments made of Spondylus shells and many others may be mentioned. It is thought
that in the cemeteries of the Hamangia-Varna cultures circle, with particular consideration
of the cemetery at Varna, there were traces of serious inner differentiation of
societies that were using it."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGIO9J2r1pU

Until c. 4200 BC, the Copper Centres in northern Bulgaria & Serbia were paramount basically all in west Eurasia. So that Khvalynsk R1b chief probably obtained his imports from there, him probably trading back animals, furs and prestige items like horses. But with the demise of the Balkan Copper Age cultures, after a 400 year hiatus, the new metallurgical centre was in the North Caucasus (Majkop).
It'll be interesting to see what Copper Age genomes from Bulgaria look like, and last I heard they'd been ready for a while, so Im baffled by the delay in publication.
I guess a lot will hinge on these results ?

parasar
05-05-2016, 01:46 AM
To be honest it is more likely for me that R1b People Indo-Europeanized R1a People than the other way around. But i think the original PIE community was a mix of R1a and R1b but after bottlenecks/founder effects some late PIE tribes became R1b or R1a dominated.

Or Y-G could have Indo Europeanized R1a, R2 and R1b, we can never be sure.
What we do know is that perhaps >80% of R1a, R2, and R1b folk at present speak IE languages.

Agamemnon
05-05-2016, 02:33 AM
OK, if you say so. But how widespread are these branches?

Pretty widespread, several of M92's branches fit the bill for example, and M92 is a major M410 branch.



I adopted this theory about J2 also spreading metallurgy from you in the first place, so I'm not as strongly attached to it as to the R1b one.

My own theory is the one about R1b (mainly M269/L23) spreading copper metallurgy from the Middle East or/and from the Balkans.



Weren't you claiming there's some sort of correlation between J2 and L23 yesterday? Why the abrupt change all of a sudden? Anyway, at this pace you might as well notice that your theory about L23 spreading with metallurgy is even more inconsistent.



So by the time of moving to the Steppe those CHG people were still foragers in your opinion? Why in such case does this ancestry appear in substantial amount for the first time in Khvalynsk folks, who had the knowledge of agriculture (e.g. domesticated cattle and sheep-goat)?:

[...]

80% of all copper objects were buried together with the R1b man (surely a "coincidence" - he wasn't a smith or a copper trader?):

[...]

And the other guy was one "commoners" (or "R1a outliers" who were in fact the majority - according to my theory):

[...]

After Khvalynsk we see the influx of even more CHG ancestry into the Steppe, and the influx of more R1b.

Do you think that the gradual increase of CHG ancestry had nothing to do with immigration of R1b ???

Do you think that people who brought that ancestry did not bring agriculture and copper with them ???

Are you saying that the agricultural and pastoral package reached the Pontic-Caspian steppe... Through the Caucasus? Therefore that it was mediated via CHG admixture? That's what you're trying to say, right? In other words, you're using CHG as a substitute for EEF, which isn't completely unrealistic I might add as the Caucasus might well be a better contender (along with the SE Caspian) for the introduction of ovicaprids and cattle to the eastern parts of the Pontic-Caspian than the neighbouring Balkans. On the other hand, there's also the possibility (which you completely overlooked or downright ignored) that CHG type populations were on the Pontic-Caspian steppe prior to the arrival of ANE type populations, as suggested by I0211 (the J1 EHG from Karelia) I might add, so there's that.
Either way, thanks for proving my initial statement right, I guess we're making some progress after all.

Do I think that CHG had anything to do with the appearance of R1b on the steppe? Well, let's put it this way shall we: Unless you show me R1b in CHG samples, I'm just going to assume that J had more to do with CHG showing up on the steppe than R1b. That's not to say we won't be finding R1b in CHG type populations, CHG does seem to contain a fair amount of ANE-like ancestry after all.

Tomenable
05-05-2016, 03:29 AM
Weren't you claiming there's some sort of correlation between J2 and L23 yesterday?

Nope, I was claiming a correlation between various J and R1a several days ago.

But that was at best a very weak correlation (even though already present in EHG).

That J1 in EHG was a loner (as proved by paucity of J1 in the region later on).


Are you saying that the agricultural and pastoral package reached the Pontic-Caspian steppe... Through the Caucasus? Therefore that it was mediated via CHG admixture? That's what you're trying to say, right? In other words, you're using CHG as a substitute for EEF, which isn't completely unrealistic I might add as the Caucasus might well be a better contender (along with the SE Caspian) for the introduction of ovicaprids and cattle to the eastern parts of the Pontic-Caspian than the neighbouring Balkans.

It could be through the Balkans as well. We don't have Late Neolithic Balkan aDNA.

More importantly Eneolithization of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe was either through the Maykop culture or through the Varna culture perhaps (i.e. either through the Caucasus or through the Balkans).


On the other hand, there's also the possibility (which you completely overlooked or downright ignored) that CHG type populations were on the Pontic-Caspian steppe prior to the arrival of ANE type populations

So why doesn't CHG admixture show up in EHG? It shows up in noticeable amount for the first time in Khvalynsk. It seems that J1 from Karelia as well as R1b EHG from Samara were loners.

Just like Villabruna was likely a loner, rathern than Italy being full of R1b 14,000 ybp.

Tomenable
05-05-2016, 04:57 AM
Smith is the most common surname in Britain. Kowalski (= "Smithski") is the most common surname in Poland. The profession was hereditary. If one clan invented furnace metallurgy, they kept the secret to themselves for as long as possible.

And all early smiths around Western Eurasia were likely descended from those very first smiths.

Tomenable
05-05-2016, 05:07 AM
After ENF = 60% G2a does anyone still believe in rapid cultural transitions without migrating people involved? :) It is obvious that early diffusion of advanced metallurgy = a demographic event (migrations of hereditary smiths).

"Early Blacksmith Modal Haplotype" surely existed.

Baws
05-05-2016, 08:30 AM
Who was mentioning peaceful traders migrating around the old world and mixing with local women? Sounds like a fantasy novel to me. Bronze Age and allowing foreigners peacefully to migrate and mix to your land with your women?

There was lots of violence involved into this migrations.

R1b-s and R1a-s are definitely steppe in origin, patriarchally ANE descended that mixed with the local WHG-s to form the so called EHG-s autosomal.

So far so close, it seems that after the EHG R1b-s mixed with the Caucasus women that gave them the CHG component formed the PIE-s. And the rest is History, the horse the wheel, violence and conquest around the globe.

Tomenable
05-05-2016, 09:26 AM
African analogies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacksmiths_of_western_Africa#Mande_blacksmiths


The Mande blacksmiths hold important positions in society. Blacksmiths are often called upon by the chief for guidance in major decisions regarding the village. The power of the blacksmith is thought to be so great that they are also feared. Mande Blacksmiths control a force called nyama. This means that they control all energy and power in the village as well as the makeup and workings of the Mande society (Ross). The ability to control such a force is not given to just anyone. A single family in the village is designated to produce blacksmiths. The boys from that family are taught the daliluw, “the secret knowledge about the use and nature of nyama”(Ross).

“Nyama is the foundation that nourishes the institution of smithing, so that it may nourish society, is the simple axiom that knowledge can be power when properly articulated…. One must first possess it (nyama) in substantial amounts and then acquire the knowledge to manipulate and direct it to capitalize on its potential benefits. Acts that the difficult or dangerous—like hunting, or smelting, and forging iron—demand that a greater responsibility of energy and a higher degree of knowledge be possessed by the actor." (Perani, Smith 1998: 71)

They begin training at an early age, as an apprentice in order to master the techniques of blacksmithing by the time they reach adulthood and become a Mande Blacksmith.

The Bamana society is very similar to the Mande. Bamana society is also endogamous, so blacksmith families are the only Blacksmiths in the village and they hold a very high status, due to the extreme power and responsibility that they possess. Bamana Blacksmiths are also experts in divination, amulet making, as well as the practice of medicines due to their extensive knowledge of the Spirit of Ogun. Bamana Blacksmiths are responsible with the well being of the villagers and the safety of the village. This power like the Mande is driven by their control over nyama.

The Bamana training of young blacksmiths lasts about eight years. After completion of the apprenticeship the young blacksmith is ready to begin forging tools, weapons, and ritual masks and staffs, used for ceremonial purposes. “When used actively and sacrificed to, iron staffs continue to gain and radiate power, the power to protect, cure, fight, honor, lead, and repel” (Perani, Smith 1998: 71-72).

You will also notice that in Africa within the same tribe there are often genetic differences between farmers and blacksmiths:

"Ari Blacksmith" is in terms of autosomal DNA not the same as "Ari Cultivator" (probably also different clades of Y-DNA):

http://abload.de/img/jp2launcher_2015_10_0bgpv7.png

Tomenable
05-05-2016, 09:36 AM
More:

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


Blacksmiths emerged in western Africa around 1500 BC. They are feared in some societies for their skill in metalworking, which is considered a form of magic, but universally revered by for their technological pioneering. While common people fear the power of the blacksmith, they are highly admired and hold high social status. Because the trade is so specialized and dangerous, blacksmiths are often requisitioned by towns and villages where there are none (Ross). Other ironworking societies such as the Mande people of Mali and the Bamana exist in West Africa.

Someone should test Y-DNA haplogroups of different Western African blacksmiths.

It might turn out that most of them share a common ancestor who lived ca. 1500 BC.

Romilius
05-05-2016, 03:04 PM
More:

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



Someone should test Y-DNA haplogroups of different Western African blacksmiths.

It might turn out that most of them share a common ancestor who lived ca. 1500 BC.

Do you think they are R-V88?

Agamemnon
05-06-2016, 01:22 AM
Nope, I was claiming a correlation between various J and R1a several days ago.

Come on, don't be disingenuous, this (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7069-R1b-M269-L23-and-the-diffusion-of-early-metallurgy&p=154885&viewfull=1#post154885) is what you were claiming.



That J1 in EHG was a loner (as proved by paucity of J1 in the region later on).


This loner does suggest that CHG type populations were living on the Pontic-Caspian steppe at some point. Anyhow, a loner is better than no evidence in this first place, but again you seem quite keen to argue against the evidence.



It could be through the Balkans as well. We don't have Late Neolithic Balkan aDNA.

More importantly Eneolithization of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe was either through the Maykop culture or through the Varna culture perhaps (i.e. either through the Caucasus or through the Balkans).


You're mixing everything up here, whoever spoke of Maykop? We were talking about the introduction of the neolithic and pastoral package to the steppe, in which case the Caucasus does indeed seem more likely a contender than the neighbouring Balkans as far as the easternmost parts of the steppe are of concern. Even then, this theory is inherently flawed because the neolithicisation process east of the Dnieper is characterised by local hunting, fishing and foraging groups taking up agriculture and cattle-breeding, there's no clear migration trail from the Caucasus to the steppe during the Neolithic.


So why doesn't CHG admixture show up in EHG? It shows up in noticeable amount for the first time in Khvalynsk. It seems that J1 from Karelia as well as R1b EHG from Samara were loners.


Refer to the above. Moreover, I'm not claiming that J was widespread throughout Eastern Europe, just that CHG type populations carrying J lineages might've existed in the southernmost parts of the steppe north of the Caucasus, they even could've made it to Crimea. It just takes one individual in time to wander northwards and get incorporated into EHG type populations (or, more reasonably, one of the populations ancestral to the EHGs).


Just like Villabruna was likely a loner, rathern than Italy being full of R1b 14,000 ybp.

Fully agree with that.

sweuro
05-07-2016, 04:23 PM
Sweuro wrote:



I agree with this except for the R1b part. They had R1b already during the initial expansion.

In Central Europe they acquired Steppe autosomal ancestry mediated mostly via CW women.

In Central Europe there was Corded Ware with 75%+ of Steppe ancestry but R1a, not R1b.
So you still believe in the R1b Iberian origin theory ?

rms2
05-07-2016, 04:31 PM
Tomenable is wrong about Beaker acquiring steppe autosomal dna from Corded Ware women.

How did dolichocephalic, moderately gracile CW women mate with dolichocephalic, fully gracile Iberian men and produce robust, brachycephalic Bell Beaker men? Odd, don't you think?

In addition, Beaker and Corded Ware had significant cultural differences and distributions, and both were patriarchal cultures. How did Iberian men acquire a patriarchal culture from women and then turn it into something as different from Corded Ware as Bell Beaker was?

Why did Marija Gimbutas, an archaeologist who actually took part in quite a few digs in eastern Europe, attribute Bell Beaker to the combination of Yamnaya and Vucedol and not to the combination of Iberians and Corded Ware?

If Bell Beaker and Corded Ware mixed so thoroughly, why are their genetic profiles not more similar?

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 04:42 PM
How did dolichocephalic, moderately gracile CW women mate with dolichocephalic, fully gracile Iberian men and produce robust, brachycephalic Bell Beaker men? Odd, don't you think?

I think that either Carleton S. Coon or John R. Baker discussed that.

It's not like dolichocephalic + dolichocephalic = even more dolichocephalic. It doesn't work like that.

And in general skull shapes are a difficult and not really well understood thing. Read for example about the process of brachycephalization in Central Europe. In the Early Middle Ages (e.g. around the 1100s) Germans and Slavs were mostly dolichocephalic. During the next 30 generations, average cranial index among Germans and Western Slavs increased by about 10 (i.e. they became much more round-headed). And that was apparently for no good reason, because there was no immigration of brachycephalic people to the region.

Scandinavians, on the other hand, preserved their dolichocephaly over that period of time.

Late Medieval / Early Modern brachycephalization was limited to Central and East-Central Europe.

rms2
05-07-2016, 04:59 PM
I don't want to begin a big argument on skull shapes, but since you are claiming, without any real support, that the steppe autosomal dna in Bell Beaker came from Corded Ware women, the burden of proving that is on you. Robust, brachycephalic populations do not usually spring from the combination of two gracile dolichocephalic populations.

Vucedol people inhabited the region of the Dinaric Alps. Brachycephaly was one of the attributes of what Coon and some of the other old anthropologists called the "Dinaric Race". As we know, Gimbutas derived Bell Beaker from the combination of Vucedol and Yamnaya.

You have yet to explain why Bell Beaker and Corded Ware were so different if Bell Beaker was a derivative of Corded Ware. And how did a group of Iberian men acquire a patriarchal steppe culture from women anyway?

And where are those Corded Ware women among the Bell Beaker results? Shouldn't we be finding numerous Bell Beaker women with 75% Yamnaya_Samara autosomal dna among Bell Beaker men with much lower levels of it?

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 05:22 PM
^ Corded type wasn't really gracile - East Nordic is the closest modern representation of Corded:

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/rg-eastnordic.htm

BTW - both Bell Beaker and Corded Ware cultures were not "homogeneous" in anthropological terms. Coon wrote that Iberian Beakers included two types of people. CWC was also not homogeneous.

Neither was Yamnaya culture homogeneous, it had a few types of people there:

"The Yamna population (...) was tall (175.5cm), dolichocephalic, with broad faces of medium height. Among them there were, however, more robust elements with high and wide faces (...), and also more gracile individuals with narrow and high faces, probably reflecting contacts with the East Mediterranean type (Kurts 1984: 90)."

So there were at least two anthropological types of people among the Yamnaya.

Perhaps reflecting EHG and CHG admixtures.

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 06:21 PM
So you still believe in the R1b Iberian origin theory ?

Nope, I believe in West Asian origin of R1b, but not in Russia.

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 06:35 PM
More on Corded Ware type (Battle Axe) anthropological type:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?44657-Corded-Type-(Battle-Axe-type)


CORDED TYPE (Battle-Axe type)

A tall, leptomorphic, dolichocephalic, long-faced and high-headed type originally affiliated with the western Eurasian steppes. The Corded type is characterized by a linear but muscular build; its browridges and muscular markings are medium to strong, the mandible is deep and the chin is marked, but narrow through the gonial angles. The nose is leptorrhine and often prominent. Its name derives from its association with the Corded Ware culture; it was the principal type of the Battle-Axe and Boat-Axe populations in the north. In connection with the Nordid types, Corded influence is of the essence, and individuals of Nordid derivation, especially East-Nordids and Trønders, often completely recapitulate the original Corded type. The ultimate origin of the Corded type is uncertain. It has been theorized that this type is at least partially associated with the propagation of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, which is found at significant frequencies along a northwestern-southeastern continuum running between the extremes of the Scandinavian Peninsula and the Subcontinent. Accordingly, tribes of predominantly Corded type have been credited with the propagation of Indo-European languages throughout western Eurasia.

Pre-CWC populations of Scandinavia:


In the Upper Paleolithic, parts of the Scandinavian Peninsula were inhabited by large-framed, robust Cro-Magnids, similar to the modern Dalo-Falid and "Brünn" varieties. As time passed, continual interbreeding with later (and perhaps earlier) arrivals contributed to a decrease in the number of "pure" populations of this type (yet relatively unaltered forms may be found e.g. in certain mountain isolates, and individuals nearly everywehere in Scandinavia do not seldom recapitulate fully Cro-Magnid features). The most important arrival, in this respect, was that of the Battle-Axe and Boat-Axe peoples, who carried with them the Corded type, a tall, high-headed, dolichocephalic leptosome of the eastern steppes, which was perhaps more closely related to members of the Mediterranid parafamily than to the aforementioned Cro-Magnids. This type was probably material to the formation of the Iron Age Nordid types in general, but in the central regions of the Scandinavian Peninsula (entering from the northeast) it played a particularly interesting role, as it combined with local Cro-Magnids to form the special form known as the Trønder type. This type has retained much of its Corded prevalence in the central Swedish and Norwegian provinces, becoming increasingly Cro-Magnid toward the sothwestern parts of Norway, a distribution indicative the historical dispersal of the Battle-Axe and Boat-Axe peoples in the peninsula. The Trønder population has thus evolved as a gradient type, internally variable yet mostly stabilized. The average Trønder is a Corded-Cro-Magnid intermediate, a Nordid approximation, combining traits from both formatives with varying amounts of Hallstatt Nordid and Borreby strains.

Apart from photos of modern people, there are also some actual reconstructions there:

A woman of Corded Ware culture:

http://s018.radikal.ru/i506/1208/9f/fb8aaaa49595.jpg

A CWC man from Ardu in Estonia (IIRC, Estonian CWC was autosomally a bit different?):

http://s019.radikal.ru/i625/1208/af/0ac38f7c9b35.jpg

Skeletons of CWC people (from Germany probably):

http://s43.radikal.ru/i099/1302/54/42e66180b0e9.jpg

http://i036.radikal.ru/1302/12/268063f22e9b.jpg

http://s017.radikal.ru/i438/1302/05/d4410c02e461.jpg

http://i650.photobucket.com/albums/uu227/roapazeinli/t024.jpg

CWC skull:

http://s019.radikal.ru/i608/1309/75/5bf3a0117e2f.jpg

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 06:45 PM
This is a German documentary about Corded Ware people from Eulau:

http://www.zdf.de/ZDFmediathek/beitrag/video/1118362/Tatort+Eulau#/beitrag/video/1118362/Tatort-Eulau

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 06:58 PM
Averege measuraments of the Corded type:

Head lenght: 205,75 mm
Head breadht: 148,75 mm
Minium Frontal: 105,5 mm
Byzigomatic: 135,75 mm
Total facial height: 129,75 mm
Upper facial height: 76,5 mm
Nasal height: 59,25 mm
Nasal breadht: 35 mm
Bigonial: 103 mm
Head Height: 155 mm

^ Found in that thread on "The Apricity".

Dr. House is given as example of Corded type (that's why he annoys R1b-s).

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 07:09 PM
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-IV9.htm


The Corded or Battle-Axe People

The latter part of the Neolithic period in most of north central Europe is marked by the appearance of an enigmatic group of people, who decorated their pottery, while still wet, with cord impressions, and who also placed in their graves perforated stone battle-axes suspiciously like those of the Fatjenovo culture in southern Russia, and others in the Caucasus. These axes, again, have copper parallels in Sumeria. The limits of the country overrun by the Corded people are the Vosges on the west, the Urals on the east, the Baltic on the north, and the Dinaric Alps on the south.49 Although these invaders were partly agricultural, their graves contain weapons rather than hoes, and, in a few cases, bones of horses, probably of a domestic variety.

Their rôle in the economic and political picture of Neolithic Europe remains still in doubt. Although they were equipped for warfare, they did not fight for the love of battle alone. The location of their burying grounds near the sources of natural wealth, such as amber, salt, and later of tin, shows that they were interested in easily traded commodities of small bulk but high value. They may have been Neolithic racketeers extorting their share from the drones, or overlords among peasants, or merely industrious and well-armed peddlers. Whatever their calling, whether peaceful or otherwise, they were destined to influence the later cultures of Europe in considerable degree.

The most typical aggregation of Corded skulls comes from Silesia and Bohemia, whence a series of twenty-nine males may be assembled.50 (See Appendix I, col. 12.) These belong to a very definite, very distinct physical type. The length of the vault is great, well over 190 mm. in most instances; its breadth is slight, yielding the low mean cranial index of 71; and the height is great, considerably exceeding the breadth. Combined with this exaggeratedly long, narrow, and high vault form is usually found a high, relatively steep forehead; stronger browridges and muscular markings than are usual with the Mediterranean types familiar to us in Egypt, Spain, and the Danube; while the face form includes compressed zygomata, low orbits, and a leptorrhine nose. The face heights are probably great, and the mandible is deep and strongly marked, although usually narrow. Unfortunately, in this series, these facial descriptions are much less certain than those of the vault, for few of the crania retain their facial segments. The long bones are heavier and more rugged than those of the smaller Mediterranean varieties, but the stature, ranging between 157 and 170 cm. in ten male examples, reaches the unimpressive mean of 164 cm. In other Corded series, as we shall see later, it is almost always tall.

The Corded crania are larger than any from Egypt, and are metrically very similar to the Elmenteita skulls from East Africa - the two groups could be combined without loss of homogeneity. In Mesopotamia, they may be favorably compared with the three dynastic skulls from Ur, although they are higher vaulted than the other early groups.

There has been much discussion over the origin of the Corded people, and many cradle-areas have been proposed. Childe, despite several objections which he himself raises, prefers to derive them from southern Russia, where the typical cultural elements of the Corded people are found mixed with other factors. The so-called boat-axe, the typical battle-axe form which they used, has relatives all the way to the Caucasus and beyond. And the horse, their use of which in the domestic form is not fully confirmed, since the grave examples might conceivably have been wild ones, was first tamed in Asia or in southern Russia.

On the basis of the physical evidence as well, it is likely that the Corded people came from somewhere north or east of the Black Sea. The fully Neolithic crania from southern Russia which we have just studied include such a type, also seen in the midst of Sergi's Kurgan aggregation. Until better evidence is produced from elsewhere, we are entitled to consider southern Russia the most likely way station from which thre Corded people moved westward.

There is one cautionary remark which must be made here, and that is: there is so far no justifiable reason for assuming that the Corded people were Nordics. Their cranial type, as we know it, does approach one or more of the forms which we know, in later times, to have been associated with blondism; but it also approaches those of the Iranian plateau and of Ur, which were probably brunette. Let us withhold judgment, therefore, upon Corded soft parts and pigmentation, and view these remains in the more scientific but less lively light of a skeletal type.

This Corded skeletal type is familiar also in Poland, where it is found in the graves of its associated culture; but that country also contains the more usual Danubian type, associated with a Neolithic agricultural economy, and a certain number of brachycephalic and other crania, which have northern affiliations, and which will therefore be dealt with later.51

In southern and western Germany remains of the Corded people are again found, and in comparative abundance. In Saxony and Thuringia they flourished especially, and apparently were more stable here than farther east. Out of ten crania which belong to the Saxo-Thuringian Corded culture,52 four of the seven which can be measured are mesocephalic, and only three dolichocephalic. In the eastern Corded group, the highest index was 75. The three dolichocephals seem to have belonged to the usual type.

The statures of two of them were both 168 cm. The rest of the crania, as far as one can tell, are normal Neolithic Mediterranean examples, which might have had either a Danubian or a North African derivation, or both. The Corded people in the west and south of Germany had settled down, and had combined with Neolithic farmers.

Before we leave this section, let us move still farther west to Baden, to the Early Neolithic cemetery of Altenburg.53 Here, in the center of one of the most brachycephalic regions of Europe today, were buried four male skeletons, the crania of which ranged from 65 to 71 in cranial indices, and two female skulls of 77. The long bones are small, the statures short; the skulls are delicate in appearance and purely Mediterraneran - but remarkable for the narrow vault form of the males. Six other Neolithic male crania, from Wörms, are similar.54 This evidence, while not complete, at least shows that the Corded people, in southern and southwestern Germany, were preceded by an agricultural population of the smaller Mediterranean variety, upon which they superimposed themselves.

Romilius
05-07-2016, 07:14 PM
@Tomenable

So, according to your view, a R1b élite passed their metallurgical skills to a R1a population of commoners... Then, I'm skeptical about this passage: if R1a were IE speakers...which language did R1b élite speak? In this case the élite language shift doesn't work?

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 07:16 PM
And here about Bell Beakers:

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-V7.htm


The Copper Age in Europe North of the Mediterranean Lands: Danubian Movements and Bell Beakers

While the earliest Metal Age culture was being carried westward through the Mediterranean by sea, other agencies conveyed it overland into central Europe. As before, the main highroad was the Danube Valley, but this time the center of earliest diffusion was not Bohemia, but Hungary. A series of crania from Bodrogkeresztür in that country56 are uniformly dolichocephalic, with the highest individual cranial index, out of more than fifty examples, only 76. This is too low for Danubians of the usual Neolithic type, and one suspects a movement from the northeast of peoples of Corded origin. The common presence of copper battle-axes, red ochre, tumulus burials, and other south Russian cultural traits in Copper Age sites in Hungary57 would tend to confirm this deduction. In the west Corded people brought the first metal to Switzerland, and in this case crania of definitely Corded type are involved.sup>58

The inhabitants of Yugoslavia during the Copper Age were, like those of Hungary, also uniformly dolichocephalic.59 Unfortunately, here also we have no further information of racial significance. As one approaches the mouth of the Danube, however, this dolichocephalic uniformity disappears. Four skulls from Russe in Bulgaria, include one male of Corded type, a mesocephalic male, and two brachycephalic females.60

From this evidence, such as it is, we may deduce that the people who brought copper into the Danube Valley at the close of the Neolithic period came from two centers, southern Russia and the Caucasus, and Anatolia, by way of Troy. The chief carriers were the Corded people or some others equally dolichocephalic, while brachycephals from Asia Minor were of little importance from the racial standpoint.

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 Rhône-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 Wörms, 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 Tököl 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. Morphologieally, 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; hut 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 Wörms 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. It is, therefore, possible that the present Dinaric populations of the Dinaric Alps and the Carpathians may be derived in part from this eastward irvasion. The small numbers and scattered burial habits of the Bell Beaker people on the more densely populated plains of Europe must have made them of much less ethnic importance there than in the mountains.

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.

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-V8.htm


The 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.65 The Corded element, however, was the tallest, and the Borreby element, about 170 cm., the shortest. On the whole, the heavy-boned, rugged quality of the Borreby type seems to have influenced the bodily build of the total group. The Beaker skulls as a whole are large, long, and high vaulted, whatever their shape. They form one of the rare groups in the world with a cranial length of 184 mm. and an index of over 80. This peculiarity they share with the few known brachycephalic crania of the Upper Palaeolithic. Again reminiscent of Upper Palaeolithic skulls is the ruggedness of muscular markings, the prominence of browridges and occipital lines, and the depth and breadth of the mandible.

In the Crania Britannica are engravings of seventy-three male crania of this group; by observing them morphologically it is possible to segregate them into their component elements. Twenty-four, or one-third of the whole, are planoccipital. This ratio is probably about the correct proportion of the original Bell Beaker element in the blend, with the Corded group one-fourth, and the rest Borreby. The planoccipital skulls are, as one would expect, the most brachycephalic; for over sixty per cent of all crania over the index point 83 possess some posterior flattening.

When seriated by index groups and occipital form, the planoccipital brachycephalic male crania (see Appendix 1, col. 22) approach metrically the series already discussed from Wörms, as well as that from Bronze Age Cyprus. The British planoccipitals are larger vaulted, in all three dimensions, than their continental and Near Eastern prototypes; they are also wider faced; but in total and upper face heights and in nasal dimensions, they are much the same. The curvoccipital brachycephalic crania (see Appendix I, col. 23) are much larger; and it is this element which contributes the combination of a truly long vault with a high index. They likewise have large faces, of great width, and of great mandibular size. One of the most striking differences between the two brachycephalic British sub-groups lies in the disproportion of face heights. Both have the same upper face height; but the total face height, from nasion to menton, is five mm. greater in the curvoccipital group. The lower jaw of the planoccipital skulls is more nearly of a normal Dinaric form, while that of the Borrebv element is nearly equal to Upper Palaeolithic standards.

The dolichocephalic crania (see Appendix 1, col. 24), forming the least numerous of the three elements, are of pure Corded type, and furnish an opportunity to study this form in greater numbers than elsewhere. The vault is very long, and extremely high, with a breadth-height ratio of 105, and extremely long faces, with deep, narrow mandibles. There can be no question that these most extreme variants from the fundamental Mediterranean stock came to England as part of the Zoned Beaker racial complex, and do not represent accretions of megalithic Long Barrow survivors, although both elements, in England as in Scandinavia, entered into the ultimate composition of the living population.

In Scotland the progress of events in the Early Bronze Age was quite different from that in England, and more complicated. The Beaker people who arrived on the eastern shore came in part directly from Holland, and in part from England. A few may have approached from the west, by way of Wales. At the time of the Beaker arrival, or not long after it, another group of people, named after the so-called Food Vessels which they placed in their tombs, seem to have arisen in the west, or to have arrived there from Ireland, where they were also prevalent during the Early Bronze Age. These Food Vessel people buried their dead in individual cists, as did the Beaker people, but often incinerated, for which reason their skeletal remains are relatively rare. The two groups-Beaker and Food Vessel - had close relationships and interchanged material possessions and ideas. In many Scottish cist graves, neither type of pottery is present, and it is not always possible to tell to which original complex the burial belongs.66

The short cist skeletons of Scotland have been lumped together regardless of original cultural affiliation, which in many cases may have been impossible to determine. By this means a series of seventy-seven crania has been assembled for study.67 (See Appendix I, col. 25.) In general, the Scottish Short Cist people resembled the Beaker invaders of England, but were by no means identical with them. The means of the cranial dimensions are in many cases smaller, and the larger elements in the blend seem to be less in evidence. Furthermore, the stature seems to have been shorter, with a mean of 165.0 cm.68 for seventeen males. The group as a whole is more purely Beaker in the continental sense, or Dinaric, than is that in England; metrically, the Scottish series resembles the non-Borreby brachycephalic element in the British Beaker population, and also approximates the skulls from the Rhineland. In several features, such as a lower vault, it comes closer to the Cypriote Bronze Age group than does any wholly Beaker series which we have studied.

The reasons for the difference between the Scottish and English series are not difficult to discover. The Borreby element is less prominent in Scotland, and the same is true of the Corded. In fact, three out of four dolichocephalic male crania from short cists seem to be of a Megalithic type, while only one has the characteristic vault form of the Battle-Axe people. Long heads are less frequent here than in England, and the original eastern Mediterranean brachycephalic type is in the majority. Logically, one would expect that the Food Vessel people belonged to this racial variety.

It is impossible, however, to determine with any certainty the physical type of the Food Vessel people in Scotland, for only four complete skeletons have been associated with this pottery form. Three, however, which are males, are all brachycephalic and of medium stature, and belong, in the totality of their features, to a small Beaker variety,69 as does the single female. Two other individuals, represented only by long bones, were, respectively, 166 and 173 cm. tall. Little is to be learned, unfortunately, from the members of this small group, except that they were no different from the Beaker people who occupied the same type of cist.

There is, however, one far better way to discover the physical affinities of the Food Vessel people, and that is by a study of the Bronze Age remains from Ireland. As far as we know from published evidence, the Beaker people never went to Ireland at all. 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 whole70 (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." 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. The latter seems the more likely, purely on racial grounds; furthermore, on the Scottish food vessels there are often cord impressions, on the Irish there are none. The direction, therefore, was probably from Ireland to Scotland and not vice versa.

Tomenable
05-07-2016, 07:35 PM
if R1a were IE speakers...which language did R1b élite speak?

Perhaps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasconic_languages

sweuro
05-07-2016, 08:40 PM
Nope, I believe in West Asian origin of R1b, but not in Russia.
ok, but this theory doesn't gel with autosomal dna, because if R1b was west-asian, how do we spaniards went from being Neolithic-like (with just 20% of North-Atlantic + Baltic , to the 50% in modern Spaniards) and on PCA we would plot between neolithic farmers and west-asian , but rather we pull towards North/Central Europe in comparison to neolithic-farmers :

http://s28.postimg.org/sfar01xf1/pca12.png

XooR
05-07-2016, 08:51 PM
http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/49Kuparadze-et-al.pdf

Ancient Collchis has some R1b early subclades, among Lazs there is two, yfull YF02895 is 6232 yo and yfull YF05208 is 5461 yo. If we have more data about ancient colchis people (Svans, Abkhazs, Megrels, Lazs) we might see the correlation.

Silesian
05-07-2016, 09:42 PM
In another thread (link) I've argued that R1b-L51 (or pre-L51 ancestral lineages of L23) was never present on the Steppe, but was responsible for spreading early metallurgy directly from the Middle East to Western Europe:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7057-The-genetic-history-of-Ice-Age-Europe

Here I present some evidence linking the rapid expansion of L23 lineages with the spread of metallurgy.

These are excerpts of "From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations" by Nissim Amzallag:

http://www.ajaonline.org/article/300

Rapid diffusion of metallurgy in the 4th millennium BC can be linked with expansion of R1b M269/L23:

http://s32.postimg.org/3zybzt5wl/metallurgy1.png

Metallurgy expanded north with Maykop culture, which contributed R1b-Z2103 to Yamnaya:

http://s32.postimg.org/b3c6fafj9/metallurgy2.png

Metallurgy expanded to Iberia across the Mediterranean region and later with Bell Beakers:

http://s32.postimg.org/3vx5xkhet/metallurgy3.png

And a map showing how R1b-L51 or maybe pre-L51 L23 (ancestral to ATP3 and Bell Beaker) migrated:

http://s32.postimg.org/ke2zqss9x/metallurgy4.png

Previously I've pointed out, that some of the most basal lineages of L51 can be found in Sardinia:

http://s32.postimg.org/xhctnmn2t/Sardinian_L51.png









:beerchug:
Check it out. Looks like your theory is backwards, LOL
Sardinian and Sintashta share, ancient Anatolian K8 admixture.What happened to Yamnaya's/Poltavka R1b-Z2103 ancient Anatolian admixture?

http://oi65.tinypic.com/29yii6g.jpg

http://oi66.tinypic.com/v8ob2f.jpg

http://oi63.tinypic.com/j5k1g6.jpg

Poltavka Culture>predates Sintashta.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA440&lpg=PA440&dq=poltavka+culture+mallory&source=bl&ots=wWp_14b38J&sig=NxDKrcuxX7aSQ1bRTreT13CWTDo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjFsMa49sjMAhVM9WMKHcQWBUUQ6AEILTAD#v=on epage&q=poltavka%20culture%20mallory&f=false

9196

Eurogenes K8
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JELnEcj_Q8_AKtFK_4z4UxBSn37QLnvrpe8yTbmN_Jo/edit#gid=20013436

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_uKagAzyBnSzfI1rIEclIx6kfIE-NYpiWY5Bs0XqyAg/edit#gid=1521430867

rms2
05-07-2016, 10:18 PM
According to Gimbutas, physically the TRB component predominated among Corded Ware people in Germany and what was Czechoslovakia.

Here is what she said about TRB people:



The physical type appears to be predominantly dolichocephalic, most commonly of the Atlantic type, with an occasional admixture of Cro-Magnon forms. The latter is considered to be continuous from the Late Mesolithic local population (Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, p. 138).

And Corded Ware:



Who were the Corded Pottery people? Do they represent an intrusion of a new Kurgan (i.e., Yamna) people from the east? Or does this period simply represent a later phase of the Globular Amphora complex, pushed to the north and northeast by the influx of the Yamna people? The latter seems likely. Both the Globular Amphora and Corded Pottery complexes contain components of the local TRB substratum and the Pontic steppe element. The TRB component is predominant in the physical type of the Corded Pottery population of Germany and Czechoslovakia, with the exception of some individuals who are considered to be of the steppe type. Analysis of skeletal material from Poland shows a steppe origin. Elsewhere the bulk of the population were indigenous remnants of Old Europeans (Gimbutas, The Civilization of the Goddess, p. 393).

I have not seen anything yet that indicates that Bell Beaker was derived from Corded Ware.

jeanL
05-08-2016, 04:55 AM
And where are those Corded Ware women among the Bell Beaker results? Shouldn't we be finding numerous Bell Beaker women with 75% Yamnaya_Samara autosomal dna among Bell Beaker men with much lower levels of it?

RISE563 -R1b-U152+ (Corded Ware looking)(Parent-1)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSFJva2RkakpTdm8/view?pref=2&pli=1


RISE564 Women Iberian looking(Parent-2)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQbmdQY0lsdmJYMXc/view?pref=2&pli=1


Here are the comments from Davinski about the Central German Beaker samples:

RISE559 - could be Iberian, North Italian or French
RISE560 - very Scandinavian/Baltic
RISE562 - looks British
RISE563 - very eastern, could pass for Corded Ware
RISE564 - looks Iberian or significantly EEF
RISE566 - looks British(Could be child of parent 1+2)
RISE567 - could pass for Corded Ware
RISE569 - shows a clear eastern vibe, but not quite in the Corded Ware range

So we have individuals that look Iberian(i.e High EEF low or no Steppe); we have individuals that look Corded Ware; and then we have individuals that look in between. How does that go against the Central Bell Beakers being a mixture of Iberian farmers and Corded Ware; when in the very sample you are seeing Beakers that look like both extremes and those that look like a mixture. The proof is just right there laid out in front of your eyes!

FredH
05-08-2016, 07:35 AM
:

Poltavka Culture>predates Sintashta.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA440&lpg=PA440&dq=poltavka+culture+mallory&source=bl&ots=wWp_14b38J&sig=NxDKrcuxX7aSQ1bRTreT13CWTDo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjFsMa49sjMAhVM9WMKHcQWBUUQ6AEILTAD#v=on epage&q=poltavka%20culture%20mallory&f=false

9196


Poltavka culture (2700-2100 BC) from Pontic Steppe have no Anatolian component but the following culture as Sintashta (2100-1800 BC) have some , this is could be consistent with an R1b-L23 early first arrival by Anatoly before 2000 BC and then the growing exchange bewtween these area brought more autosomal admixture after 2000 BC. Anyway Bronze Age diffusion looks like a common feature of L23 people.

rms2
05-08-2016, 12:00 PM
RISE563 -R1b-U152+ (Corded Ware looking)(Parent-1)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSFJva2RkakpTdm8/view?pref=2&pli=1


RISE564 Women Iberian looking(Parent-2)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQbmdQY0lsdmJYMXc/view?pref=2&pli=1


Here are the comments from Davinski about the Central German Beaker samples:

RISE559 - could be Iberian, North Italian or French
RISE560 - very Scandinavian/Baltic
RISE562 - looks British
RISE563 - very eastern, could pass for Corded Ware
RISE564 - looks Iberian or significantly EEF
RISE566 - looks British(Could be child of parent 1+2)
RISE567 - could pass for Corded Ware
RISE569 - shows a clear eastern vibe, but not quite in the Corded Ware range

So we have individuals that look Iberian(i.e High EEF low or no Steppe); we have individuals that look Corded Ware; and then we have individuals that look in between. How does that go against the Central Bell Beakers being a mixture of Iberian farmers and Corded Ware; when in the very sample you are seeing Beakers that look like both extremes and those that look like a mixture. The proof is just right there laid out in front of your eyes!

You are citing Bell Beaker males as being "Corded Ware looking", when the claim is that steppe autosomal dna was mediated by Corded Ware females? Besides, what does "Corded Ware looking" mean? You are simply compiling a largely irrelevant list that looks like something but really amounts to nothing and does not address the argument.

Tomenable's argument is that CW was about 75% Yamnaya_Samara and that CW females are responsible for BB being about 50% Yamnaya_Samara. So where are the Bell Beaker females who are 75% Yamnaya_Samara and their Bell Beaker husbands, who should be about 0% anything steppe? Really he pulled that argument out of his . . . hat simply because it suits his purpose, not because there really is any substance to it.

Your argument makes no sense because it has no foundation. No one derives Bell Beaker from Corded Ware. The two were contemporary and differed considerably. In other words, one did not come from the other. There is absolutely NO evidence that the kurgan type of Bell Beaker was an Iberian adaptation of the Corded Ware culture.

The kurgan type of Bell Beaker appears to be the combination of Vucedol and Yamnaya.

rms2
05-08-2016, 12:03 PM
RISE563 -R1b-U152+ (Corded Ware looking)(Parent-1)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSFJva2RkakpTdm8/view?pref=2&pli=1


RISE564 Women Iberian looking(Parent-2)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQbmdQY0lsdmJYMXc/view?pref=2&pli=1


Here are the comments from Davinski about the Central German Beaker samples:

RISE559 - could be Iberian, North Italian or French
RISE560 - very Scandinavian/Baltic
RISE562 - looks British
RISE563 - very eastern, could pass for Corded Ware
RISE564 - looks Iberian or significantly EEF
RISE566 - looks British(Could be child of parent 1+2)
RISE567 - could pass for Corded Ware
RISE569 - shows a clear eastern vibe, but not quite in the Corded Ware range

So we have individuals that look Iberian(i.e High EEF low or no Steppe); we have individuals that look Corded Ware; and then we have individuals that look in between. How does that go against the Central Bell Beakers being a mixture of Iberian farmers and Corded Ware; when in the very sample you are seeing Beakers that look like both extremes and those that look like a mixture. The proof is just right there laid out in front of your eyes!

You are citing a Bell Beaker male as being "Corded Ware looking", when the claim is that steppe autosomal dna was mediated by Corded Ware females? Then you mention an Iberian-looking female? It looks like you are arguing that Bell Beaker steppe males took Iberian wives and not the other way around! Besides, what does "Corded Ware looking" mean? You are simply compiling a largely irrelevant list that looks like something but really amounts to nothing and does not address the argument.

Tomenable's argument is that CW was about 75% Yamnaya_Samara and that CW females are responsible for BB being about 50% Yamnaya_Samara. So where are the Bell Beaker females who are 75% Yamnaya_Samara and their Bell Beaker husbands, who should be about 0% anything steppe? Really he pulled that argument out of his . . . hat simply because it suits his purpose, not because there really is any substance to it.

Your argument makes no sense because it has no foundation. No one derives Bell Beaker from Corded Ware. The two were contemporary and differed considerably. In other words, one did not come from the other. There is absolutely NO evidence that the kurgan type of Bell Beaker was an Iberian adaptation of the Corded Ware culture.

The kurgan type of Bell Beaker appears to be the combination of Vucedol and Yamnaya.

Tomenable
05-08-2016, 12:12 PM
So where are the Bell Beaker females who are 75% Yamnaya_Samara and their Bell Beaker husbands, who should be about 0% anything steppe?

Do you remember KO1 man from Gamba et al. ??? He was culturally a farmer, but autosomally 100% WHG. However, he was only 1 among dozens of samples. It is hard to find "first generation farmers" like this one. Assuming that KO1 married an EEF women, their sons were I2a but autosomally 50% WHG and 50% EEF. If you want to find Beaker men with R1b but 0% Steppe autosomal, you need to look at early Beaker sites.

rms2
05-08-2016, 12:25 PM
Do you remember KO1 man from Gamba et al. ??? He was culturally a farmer, but autosomally 100% WHG. However, he was only 1 among dozens of samples. It is hard to find "first generation farmers" like this one. Assuming that KO1 married an EEF women, then their children were already ca. 50% WHG and ca. 50% EEF. If you want to find Beaker men with R1b but 0% Steppe autosomal, you need to look at early Beaker sites.

Those earliest Beaker sites won't produce any R1b.

Bell Beaker was not the product of Corded Ware + Iberians. It was the product of Vucedol + Yamnaya. You and jeanL are simply mounting an argument of convenience that sounds tenable to the uninformed because Bell Beaker has a lower level of Yamnaya_Samara than Corded Ware has. But it is a fatuous argument because it completely lacks any archaeological foundation, since Bell Beaker was not derived from Corded Ware.

Bell Beaker does not look as much like Yamnaya_Samara as Corded Ware does for a number of reasons:

1. Bell Beaker was the product of Vucedol and western Yamnaya (not Yamnaya_Samara), and not Globular Amphora and something else, as Corded Ware probably was.

2. Vucedol, according to Gimbutas, was the product of an earlier kurgan wave and Baden farmers, so it would have already carried considerable EEF and perhaps WHG.

3. Western Yamnaya had already lived in contact and mixed with Cucuteni farmers and so would have been shifted that way (EEF) by the time it moved up the Danube and into the Carpathian basin.

It's too bad these ancient dna papers are apparently not produced with any kind of overall organization or larger end in mind but are rather scatter shot. It would be nice to get genetic results from Yamnaya over its whole range and not just the east end of it.

ffoucart
05-08-2016, 01:47 PM
Poltavka culture (2700-2100 BC) from Pontic Steppe have no Anatolian component but the following culture as Sintashta (2100-1800 BC) have some , this is could be consistent with an R1b-L23 early first arrival by Anatoly before 2000 BC and then the growing exchange bewtween these area brought more autosomal admixture after 2000 BC. Anyway Bronze Age diffusion looks like a common feature of L23 people.

Except that different subclades of R1b existed already in the Steppes before. Moreover, Antalian EF were mostly G2, not R1b.

A move of R1b L23 from Anatolia to the Steppes is simply inconsistent with data.

FredH
05-08-2016, 02:56 PM
Except that different subclades of R1b existed already in the Steppes before. Moreover, Antalian EF were mostly G2, not R1b.

A move of R1b L23 from Anatolia to the Steppes is simply inconsistent with data.

According to Eupedia R1b frequency is more important in Anatolia than in Pontic Steppes and unfortunatly I don't see any ancient DNA for Bronze Age period in this area to simply decide if it 's consistent or not. Do you?

ffoucart
05-08-2016, 03:13 PM
According to Eupedia R1b frequency is more important in Anatolia than in Pontic Steppes and unfortunatly I don't see any ancient DNA for Bronze Age period in this area to simply decide if it 's consistent or not. Do you?

Not from the Bronze Age, but given there isn't any trace of migration from Anatolia to Western Europe during Bronze Age, this is irrelevant.

On the contrary, there are traces (archeological as genetical) of migration from the Steppes into Central and Western Europe around 5000 years ago, and more recent European samples which are R1b have also some Steppic admixture (even Basques or Sardinians).

Given the results on Anatolian Farmers who were very similar to EFF found throughout Europe, nearly all G2, we can easily say that the results are not favoring an Anatolian origin of R1b, and are overwhelming favoring a Steppic origin.

What happened in Anatolia is rather a migration of some sort, rich in J2, from the Caucasus (with some CHG), and later (?) of I.E. speakers (with the R1b signal).

Silesian
05-08-2016, 03:15 PM
Poltavka culture (2700-2100 BC) from Pontic Steppe have no Anatolian component but the following culture as Sintashta (2100-1800 BC) have some , this is could be consistent with an R1b-L23 early first arrival by Anatoly before 2000 BC and then the growing exchange bewtween these area brought more autosomal admixture after 2000 BC. Anyway Bronze Age diffusion looks like a common feature of L23 people.
You mean like Yamnaya sample I0443?:P
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/aDNA_02_11_30_2015.png
http://oi68.tinypic.com/2wqsqv6.jpg

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_uKagAzyBnSzfI1rIEclIx6kfIE-NYpiWY5Bs0XqyAg/edit#gid=1521430867
http://oi67.tinypic.com/2lkr1aa.jpg
http://oi67.tinypic.com/2woyrle.jpg
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2nbd5wk.jpg
http://oi63.tinypic.com/4sny1z.jpg

jeanL
05-08-2016, 03:17 PM
You are citing a Bell Beaker male as being "Corded Ware looking", when the claim is that steppe autosomal dna was mediated by Corded Ware females? Then you mention an Iberian-looking female? It looks like you are arguing that Bell Beaker steppe males took Iberian wives and not the other way around! Besides, what does "Corded Ware looking" mean? You are simply compiling a largely irrelevant list that looks like something but really amounts to nothing and does not address the argument.

Tomenable's argument is that CW was about 75% Yamnaya_Samara and that CW females are responsible for BB being about 50% Yamnaya_Samara. So where are the Bell Beaker females who are 75% Yamnaya_Samara and their Bell Beaker husbands, who should be about 0% anything steppe? Really he pulled that argument out of his . . . hat simply because it suits his purpose, not because there really is any substance to it.

Your argument makes no sense because it has no foundation. No one derives Bell Beaker from Corded Ware. The two were contemporary and differed considerably. In other words, one did not come from the other. There is absolutely NO evidence that the kurgan type of Bell Beaker was an Iberian adaptation of the Corded Ware culture.

The kurgan type of Bell Beaker appears to be the combination of Vucedol and Yamnaya.


You do realize that it doesn't necessarily need to be a female for the point that Bell Beakers acquired their Steppe admixture from mixing with neighboring Corded Ware females to be valid. The fact is that even in a small sample size you find individuals that are almost Corded Ware-like to the point the plot with Russians on a PCA and individuals that are completely Iberian-like to the point they plot with Iberians throws your whole Kurgan Beakers were made by mixing Vucedol and Yamnaya hypothesis off the balcony. Why? Because if Kurgan type of Bell Beaker was formed the way you claimed then why do we find the extreme cases amongst its people in terms of Steppe admixture? Also why do we find people who look like 50/50 mixture(i.e. British looking)?

My argument makes perfect sense to those with an unbiased view; namely because I am not deriving Bell Beaker from anything. Bell Beaker is from Iberia and it has always been. I'm saying that Central European Beakers acquired their Steppe admixture from local Corded Ware admixture. What is so outlandish about assuming that two populations that lived side by side mixed with each other?

jeanL
05-08-2016, 03:24 PM
1. Bell Beaker was the product of Vucedol and western Yamnaya (not Yamnaya_Samara), and not Globular Amphora and something else, as Corded Ware probably was.

You can repeat these statement ad nauseam; it doesn't change the fact that it holds no weight in the current genetic sample were some Central European Beakers look straight Corded Ware and some look straight up Iberian and some look mixed between the two.


2. Vucedol, according to Gimbutas, was the product of an earlier kurgan wave and Baden farmers, so it would have already carried considerable EEF and perhaps WHG.

You mean Vucedol that can be represented by Copper Age Hungarian sample with Zero Steppe admixture. Or perhaps Bronze Age Hungarians with way lower Steppe Admixture than both Corded Ware or Central Bell Beakers!



It's too bad these ancient dna papers are apparently not produced with any kind of overall organization or larger end in mind but are rather scatter shot. It would be nice to get genetic results from Yamnaya over its whole range and not just the east end of it.

Ohhh you mean an Agenda! Yeah it is too bad those who produced papers are even more biased to try to find data to prove a point. But hey they are at least starting to ignore inconvenient data(i.e. Vestonice42; ATP3; etc); so hopefully soon we shall get there. Let's sample early Iberian Beakers and then when the R1b-DF27 folks come out we'll call it a day or contamination(Whichever one suits you better).;)

FredH
05-08-2016, 03:37 PM
You mean like Yamnaya sample I0443?:P
exactly!B) L23 arrived first looking for ore and then with population and exchange growing along with admixture. This is a possibility. The population size parameter is barely unknown and crucial thow.

FredH
05-08-2016, 04:05 PM
Not from the Bronze Age, but given there isn't any trace of migration from Anatolia to Western Europe during Bronze Age, this is irrelevant.

On the contrary, there are traces (archeological as genetical) of migration from the Steppes into Central and Western Europe around 5000 years ago, and more recent European samples which are R1b have also some Steppic admixture (even Basques or Sardinians).

Given the results on Anatolian Farmers who were very similar to EFF found throughout Europe, nearly all G2, we can easily say that the results are not favoring an Anatolian origin of R1b, and are overwhelming favoring a Steppic origin.

What happened in Anatolia is rather a migration of some sort, rich in J2, from the Caucasus (with some CHG), and later (?) of I.E. speakers (with the R1b signal).

It depends on where the Bronze age craddle is located, If it 's Mesopotamia, it very likely that the Bronze age culture went through Anatolia and then the Pontic Steppe and Europe, first encountered first served as Agriculture expansion did few thousands years before. This culture must be bore by a migration current. a R1b type population looks a good candidate at this time.

ffoucart
05-08-2016, 04:45 PM
exactly!B) L23 arrived first looking for ore and then with population and exchange growing along with admixture. This is a possibility. The population size parameter is barely unknown and crucial thow.

And the fact that L23 and above can be found in samples from the Steppe well before Bronze Age doesn't bother you?

Moreover, arsenical bronze seems to be older in Northern Caucasus (around 3800 BC). So the migration would be the other way (from North Caucasus and Steppes to Anatolia and Middle East).

Silesian
05-08-2016, 05:14 PM
It depends on where the Bronze age craddle is located, If it 's Mesopotamia, it very likely that the Bronze age culture went through Anatolia and then the Pontic Steppe and Europe, first encountered first served as Agriculture expansion did few thousands years before. This culture must be bore by a migration current. a R1b type population looks a good candidate at this time.

:beerchug: R1b multi-generational party! The Near Eastern R1b[according to your theory]joining Steppe.:)
Check this out. 2000 years in same location all within 5km, Hunter Gatherer R1b-M73,Yamnaya- Lopatino, Poltavka. What are the chances the R1b copper workers are all are buried within 5km and 2000+/-yrs of the oldest R1b-Steppe sample?
http://oi67.tinypic.com/2ykddt3.jpg



http://oi63.tinypic.com/302uusl.jpg

FredH
05-08-2016, 06:34 PM
And the fact that L23 and above can be found in samples from the Steppe well before Bronze Age doesn't bother you?

Moreover, arsenical bronze seems to be older in Northern Caucasus (around 3800 BC). So the migration would be the other way (from North Caucasus and Steppes to Anatolia and Middle East).

The only sample identified as L23 is I0443 at Lopatino (Pontic Steppe) is around 5000 years old. It 's right Bronze age in this area. Then I am not bothering that much. :angel:

FredH
05-08-2016, 06:50 PM
:beerchug: R1b multi-generational party! The Near Eastern R1b[according to your theory]joining Steppe.:)
Check this out. 2000 years in same location all within 5km, Hunter Gatherer R1b-M73,Yamnaya- Lopatino, Poltavka. What are the chances the R1b copper workers are all are buried within 5km and 2000+/-yrs of the oldest R1b-Steppe sample?
http://oi67.tinypic.com/2ykddt3.jpg



http://oi63.tinypic.com/302uusl.jpg

:beerchug:I agree that there is a nice suit of R1b DNA in this area but then how could we explain the Bronze age expansion? The coïncidence between R1b-L23 Expansion toward Europe and the Bronze age trail in Europe is curious. The Bronze technology came from Mesopotamia westward to Europe.Some Uruk people from Sumer migrated toward Pontic Steppe around 3000 BC. Sumerian were particulary advanced , we have written source from them at Bronze age!

Silesian
05-08-2016, 07:43 PM
:beerchug:I agree that there is a nice suit of R1b DNA in this area but then how could we explain the Bronze age expansion? The coïncidence between R1b-L23 Expansion toward Europe and the Bronze age trail in Europe is curious. The Bronze technology came from Mesopotamia westward to Europe.Some Uruk people from Sumer migrated toward Pontic Steppe around 3000 BC. Sumerian were particulary advanced , we have written source from them at Bronze age!


These blue eyed statues (pictured below) are of Sumerians from the early/mid 3rd millennium BC. "...they [the Sumerians] certainly belong to the same racial division of mankind as the nations of Europe, they are scions of the Caucasian stock" - Arthur Keith (quoted in Ur Excavations, 192
http://humansarefree.com/2014/04/the-origin-of-blue-eyes-ancient-gods.html
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iOG5jOynKKk/U1JdHBtM2kI/AAAAAAAAMcg/oNSs7XhXpG4/s1600/blue+eyes+Sumerian+statues+05.jpg
Maybe the latest paper with all those Ice age samples is correct in pointing towards Italy and Northern Caucasus for genes with blue eyes. Perhaps the Sumerians were derived from a Caucasian stock.

ffoucart
05-08-2016, 07:51 PM
The Bronze technology came from Mesopotamia westward to Europe.Some Uruk people from Sumer migrated toward Pontic Steppe around 3000 BC. Sumerian were particulary advanced , we have written source from them at Bronze age!

What proof?

Yes Sumer was a big city with a lead on many things. But does it means that they developped Bronze metallurgy? No.

We simply don't know exactly where bronze metallurgy appeared, other than incidentally.

But the facts remain clear: R1b was in the Pontic Steppe for thousands of years before Bronze Age.

We also know that the Steppic admixture found in R1b samples are not South Asian admixed. The steppic component can be reduced to EHG + CHG.

The South Asian drift found in South European has another cause, linked with the diffusion of J2.

Tomenable
05-08-2016, 07:52 PM
http://humansarefree.com/2014/04/the-origin-of-blue-eyes-ancient-gods.html
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iOG5jOynKKk/U1JdHBtM2kI/AAAAAAAAMcg/oNSs7XhXpG4/s1600/blue+eyes+Sumerian+statues+05.jpg
Maybe the latest paper with all those Ice age samples is correct in pointing towards Italy and Northern Caucasus for genes with blue eyes. Perhaps the Sumerians were derived from a Caucasian stock.

^ Blue eyes were found among WHG, SHG, EHG but also among those CHG from Georgia.

They were rather common (more so than light skin - WHG were dark-skinned for example).

But Early European/Anatolian Farmers were brown-eyed (despite their lighter skin than WHG).

Silesian
05-08-2016, 08:40 PM
^ Blue eyes were found among WHG, SHG, EHG but also among those CHG from Georgia.

They were rather common (more so than light skin - WHG were dark-skinned for example).

But Early European/Anatolian Farmers were brown-eyed (despite their lighter skin than WHG).
Yes that's right. Like I said, I think you have it backwards.
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/phenotype-snps-from-prehistoric-europe/
According to Genetiker also R1b Hunter Gatherer had HERC2-[ blue eyes]genes. What are the chances the two oldest R1b samples 14k+/- and 7.5K+/- had HERC2-gene for blue eyes?
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/phenotype-snps-from-prehistoric-europe/

OCA2/HERC2, rs12913832, blue eyes

Corded Ware LN I0049 AA
Corded Ware LN I0103 GA
Corded Ware LN I0104 AG
Esperstedt MN I0172 GA
Halberstadt LBA I0099 GG
Karelia HG I0061AA
Karsdorf LN I0550 AA
LBK EN I0022 GG
LBK EN I0025 GA
LBK EN I0026 AA
LBK EN I0046 GG
LBK EN I0048 GA
LBK EN I0054 AA
LBK EN I0056 GG
LBK EN I0100 GG
LBK EN I0659 GG
Motala HG I0011 GG
Motala HG I0012 GG
Motala HG I0013 GG
Motala HG I0014 GG
Motala HG I0015 GG
Motala HG I0016 GG
Motala HG I0017 GG
Samara HG I0124 GG
Spain EN I0410 AA
Yamnaya I0231 AA
Yamnaya I0357 AA
Yamnaya I0370 AA
Yamnaya I0429 AA
Yamnaya I0438 AA
Yamnaya I0443 GA
Yamnaya I0444 AA
[/I]

http://oi63.tinypic.com/jhagpd.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/11/55/22/1155229e85b3266ddef6f6435c2868b8.jpg
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/391883605048397162/

ADW_1981
05-08-2016, 08:54 PM
http://humansarefree.com/2014/04/the-origin-of-blue-eyes-ancient-gods.html
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iOG5jOynKKk/U1JdHBtM2kI/AAAAAAAAMcg/oNSs7XhXpG4/s1600/blue+eyes+Sumerian+statues+05.jpg
Maybe the latest paper with all those Ice age samples is correct in pointing towards Italy and Northern Caucasus for genes with blue eyes. Perhaps the Sumerians were derived from a Caucasian stock.

It's called Adobe Photoshop. I bet they didn't have blue eyes.

FredH
05-08-2016, 09:26 PM
The problem is to fit these two images. The Eupedia R1b migration trail doesn't fit the Bronze age expansion traitional view.
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Metallurgical_diffusion.png

In Mesopotamia, the Mesopotamian Bronze Age began around 6000 BP... R1b-L23 mutation age.

May I draw your attention ;)
"6000BP to 5000 BP. ,during the Early Bronze Age the Kura-Araxes culture of the Caucasus spread throughout the greater part of the Caucasus, Eastern Anatolia, northern parts of Iran, Middle East and even Europe.... "
source BULLETIN OF THE GEORGIAN NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, vol. 6, no. 2, 2012
Uruk Migrants in the Caucasus
Konstantine Pitskhelauri
http://dienekes.blogspot.fr/2013/05/uruk-migrants-in-caucasus.html
pdf http://science.org.ge/old/moambe/6-2/153-161%20Pitskhelauri.pdf

Tomenable
05-08-2016, 09:47 PM
It's called Adobe Photoshop. I bet they didn't have blue eyes.

Why not ???

Satsurblia man, with J1 haplogroup, dated to 13,380-13,130 ybp, had the blue eye gene:

http://s32.postimg.org/mo8ysn5dx/Satsurblia.png

Location of Satsurblia:

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/ppreviews-plos-725668748/1770971/preview.jpg

Tomenable
05-08-2016, 09:57 PM
Of course Satsurblia man was AG, so his eyes were either dark or mixed (light-dark).

But some percent of people from his tribe/community surely had light (blue) eyes.

ADW_1981
05-08-2016, 10:01 PM
Of course Satsurblia man was AG, so his eyes were either dark or mixed (light-dark).

But some percent of people from his tribe/community surely had light (blue) eyes.

The first farmers all had brown eyes. What makes the Sumerians different? I guess we need aDNA.

Tomenable
05-08-2016, 10:04 PM
The first farmers all had brown eyes.

You mean those Western Anatolian farmers? They were not autosomally the same as Satsurblia/Kotias.


What makes the Sumerians different?

There are 2000 kilometers between Anatolian samples and Sumeria. What should make them identical?

Silesian
05-08-2016, 10:22 PM
It's called Adobe Photoshop. I bet they didn't have blue eyes.
Others have also written about their language.
http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/~asahala/asahala_sumerian_and_pie.pdf
I guess in the end we need some samples to prove one way or another.

Silesian
05-08-2016, 10:37 PM
The problem is to fit these two images. The Eupedia R1b migration trail doesn't fit the Bronze age expansion traitional view.
Here are some positions of R and R1b, I quickly made up, using known published data.
As you can see they plot quite differently from your proposed map.

Els Trocs Spain-R1b
9201

Villabruna-R1b
9202

Armenian-R1b
9203

Kvhalynsk Russia-R1b
9204


Samara, Russia-R1b, close up surrounded by Yamnaya and Poltavka R1b-Z2103 kurgans.
9205



http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#4/49.58/59.94

FredH
05-09-2016, 05:57 AM
Here are some positions of R and R1b, I quickly made up, using known published data.
As you can see they plot quite differently from your proposed map.



Samara, Russia-R1b, close up surrounded by Yamnaya and Poltavka R1b-Z2103 kurgans.
9205



http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#4/49.58/59.94

The problem is that we lack very much genetic data from Anatolia, actual Turkey, and Mesopotamia, actual Irak. There are plenty of Bronze Age Hittite sites in Anatolia that had been analysed by archeologists but no DNA without speaking Irak. The Hittites were probably R1b, IE speaking, used cuneiform writing, they looked at least the cultural descent of the Sumerians. Pharaoh Tutankhamun, Akhenaten and Amenhotep III were R1b of suspected Hittite origin. Which subclades? only ancient DNA could tell.

here the map of the settlements of Bronze Age Anatolia, based on Hittite records
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Hatti.JPG

FredH
05-09-2016, 07:53 AM
It's called Adobe Photoshop. I bet they didn't have blue eyes.
4 to 5000 years old Sumerian Photoshop, may be they had already special lenses. B)
http://www.linternaute.com/histoire/magazine/dossier/06/irak/images/une2.jpg
Statue of Ebih-Il, nu-banda
from the Département des Antiquités orientales : Mésopotamie Louvres Paris.
Statue is around 4500 years old from Mari in Syria . The blue eyes are made of Lapis Lazuli , Analysis determined that the blue stones came from Afghanistan, thousand km away. From the cuneiform inscription in his back, the statue was a gift supposed to represent the benefactor.
http://www.louvre.fr/oeuvre-notices/statue-d-ebih-il-nu-banda

Silesian
05-09-2016, 09:38 AM
The problem is that we lack very much genetic data from Anatolia, actual Turkey, and Mesopotamia, actual Irak. There are plenty of Bronze Age Hittite sites in Anatolia that had been analysed by archeologists but no DNA without speaking Irak. The Hittites were probably R1b, IE speaking, used cuneiform writing, they looked at least the cultural descent of the Sumerians. Pharaoh Tutankhamun, Akhenaten and Amenhotep III were R1b of suspected Hittite origin. Which subclades? only ancient DNA could tell.
We have known KV-55 and Tutankhamun blood type since 1969, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v224/n5217/abs/224325a0.html
For whatever reason this particular lineage KV-55[Akhenaten] and son Tutankhamun ydna was never officially released.
Ignea had speculated https://www.igenea.com/en/tutankhamun however results were not released
[2010 - http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=185393].
However specific genes like those found in http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v224/n5217/abs/224325a0.html the king Tut and father like the genes for blue eyes could have come from a more Northerly position. Blood type A2omn rh-iIs not very common among Egyptians. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v224/n5217/abs/224325a0.html
A2 and rh- genes together can be found in more Northerly regions. Anatolia have high A. Armenians have some of highest A if you include Caucasus and Europe. However A2 is found high amongst Saami. Rh-once thought to have ancient ancestry within European regions http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/63_Blood_Types/Blood_TypesEn_files/image008.gif. like the genes for blue eyes are not common outside these regions. So it could be we have a case of genes flowing south.

ffoucart
05-09-2016, 10:52 AM
I am still waiting to any confirmation of the haplogroup of the said Pharaohs. To my knowledge, R1b is purely speculative.

You put it yourself: there is no correlation between diffusion of R1b and thin bronze.

razyn
05-09-2016, 12:55 PM
I am still waiting to any confirmation of the haplogroup of the said Pharaohs. To my knowledge, R1b is purely speculative.


As I recall, the speculation on the old DNA-Forums began with on-screen YDNA results glimpsed in a Discovery Channel program. Disregarding the advertisement propaganda, this page has what IGENEA claims was glimpsable: https://www.igenea.com/en/tutankhamun

ffoucart
05-09-2016, 01:29 PM
As I recall, the speculation on the old DNA-Forums began with on-screen YDNA results glimpsed in a Discovery Channel program. Disregarding the advertisement propaganda, this page has what IGENEA claims was glimpsable: https://www.igenea.com/en/tutankhamun

That's what I recall too.

FredH
05-09-2016, 05:34 PM
According to Igenea Haplotype of Tutankhamun:
DYS# 393 390 19 391 385a 385b 439 389-1
Allele 13 24 14 11 11 14 10 13

DYS# 392 389-2 458 437 448 GATA H4 456 438
Allele 13 30 16 14 19 10 15 12

with Haplogroup predictor Tool : http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/hapest5a/hapest5.htm
Result for Tutankhamun 100% R1b. Somebody could predict his Subclade L23?:)
I note also several FTDNA testers R1b HT35 (not U106 or P312) from Iraq... sounds interesting.
I enter his haplotype in Ysearch, his haplotype looks closed to L51 people (R1b1a2a1)... to investigate further but It's not a surprise if we know that Tutankhamon had possible Hittite origins.

Agamemnon
05-09-2016, 05:37 PM
Perhaps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasconic_languages

Here we go again...

Tomenable
05-09-2016, 05:40 PM
^ Re: FredH,

If Tutankhamun was M269/L23+ (not V88+), this only strengthens my case against L23 being IE.

M269+ was also found in ancient DNA from Canarian Aboriginals (who were Berber-related folks).

Tomenable
05-09-2016, 06:42 PM
Map from Cunliffe 2010:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7732&d=1462809840

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/c4/23/5d/c4235dcfde9e67c747a7da3e5cfbb0ba.jpg

Rhenish Beakers apparently migrated also to Scandinavia:

http://thewaythetruthandthelife.net/index/2_background/2-5_societal/0-000-043-000-bc-to_2-011-ad_2-5-1_peopling-europe/0-000-043-000-bc-to_2-011-ad_2-5-1-11/BellBeakerGroups.jpg

FredH
05-09-2016, 07:07 PM
^ Re: FredH,

If Tutankhamun was M269/L23+ (not V88+), this only strengthens my case against L23 being IE.

M269+ was also found in ancient DNA from Canarian Aboriginals (who were Berber-related folks).

Except if Tutankhamun father line was Hittite, Hittite language was of IE anatolian type apparently.

Tomenable
05-09-2016, 07:22 PM
Except if Tutankhamun father line was Hittite, Hittite language was of IE anatolian type apparently.

I guess you read Maciamo's article about Tutankhamun? He made a mistake.

Tutankhamun was from the 18th Dynasty which was of native Egyptian origin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighteenth_Dynasty_of_Egypt#Early_Dynasty_XVIII

Ahmose I, founder of the 18th Dynasty, was the one who expelled foreigners:

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

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

So there is no evidence that Tutankhamun was of Indo-European descent.

Unless Ahmose was like Somerled "the most Celtic of Celts" with R1a-Z284.

Tomenable
05-09-2016, 07:30 PM
But if I am not mistaken we are talking about the Hyksos, not the Hittites.

And the Hyksos were, IIRC, Semitic-speakers (according to the majority of scholars).

So even if Tutankhamun was of Hyksos descent, it makes his R1b Semitic.

Agamemnon
05-09-2016, 08:07 PM
The Hyksos spoke a NW Semitic language, probably Proto-Canaanite or even something similar to Amorite. And no, Tutankhamun definitely wasn't of Hyksos descent, he was a member of the Thutmosid royal line (AKA 18th dynasty) and was therefore a legitimate descendant of Ahmose I, son of Seqenenre Tao (a 17th dynasty pharaoh killed by the Hyksos), who chased the Hyksos out of Egypt and established the 18th dynasty.

Here's a map depicting the situation in Egypt during the 17th and 16th centuries BCE which led to the emergence of the 17th dynasty:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Egypt_Hyksos_Period.png/502px-Egypt_Hyksos_Period.png

FredH
05-10-2016, 06:23 AM
I guess you read Maciamo's article about Tutankhamun? He made a mistake.

Tutankhamun was from the 18th Dynasty which was of native Egyptian origin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighteenth_Dynasty_of_Egypt#Early_Dynasty_XVIII


So there is no evidence that Tutankhamun was of Indo-European descent.
.
I didn't get this info from Maciamo. You can see on quite well documented internet sites that historians pointed to cuneiform documents during Akhenatem & Amenhotep III reign in the Hittite archive that mention an Egyptian Queen asking the Hittite king (Source: Deeds of Suppiluliuma) for a son to marry. This show at least the tight links between the Hittite kings and Egyptian Pharaons at that time. Akhenatem & Amenhotep III were direct ancestors of Tutankhamun. This is consistent with the genetical fact that Tutankhamun has a typical 100% R1b European Haplotype.
The Egyptian Queen mentioned is not well identified apparently, it could be Dakhamunzu after wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakhamunzu
The only way to fix up the clue is to make genetic studies of Hittite remains from Anatolia or Turkey.

Romilius
05-10-2016, 03:23 PM
But if I am not mistaken we are talking about the Hyksos, not the Hittites.

And the Hyksos were, IIRC, Semitic-speakers (according to the majority of scholars).

So even if Tutankhamun was of Hyksos descent, it makes his R1b Semitic.

It seems that you like to catch the wind... when it comes to tie R1b to an ancient population (obviously, all population but IE). So, let me understand: a semitic population, with a patrilocal and patrilinear culture (somewhat like IE) have a great number of Y-DNA so far (E, J, G, T, R1b)... Just like Corded Ware, in which we have R1a, R1b, I or J and G... but, of course, it doesn't matter: CW is IE, and it is a dogma.

Romilius
05-10-2016, 03:35 PM
Here we go again...

The Basques again! Vintage is vintage... how dare you to put fashion in doubt!B)

I don't recall Tomenable's ideas... if R1b élite was Vasconic... then why R1b people, descendants of the élite, are speaking IE languages? This makes me thinking about this... PIE peoples must have been really Flintstones-like people to be easily dominated by a small élite of foreigners (and, I suppose, they also passed to R1a commoners their warlike culture and other things useful only to a nationalistic révanchisme). And PIE people are the marvellous and faboulous superior people of Dumézilian memory... what a fraud!

Agamemnon
05-10-2016, 04:03 PM
The Basques again! Vintage is vintage... how dare you to put fashion in doubt!B)

I don't recall Tomenable's ideas... if R1b élite was Vasconic... then why R1b people, descendants of the élite, are speaking IE languages? This makes me thinking about this... PIE peoples must have been really Flintstones-like people to be easily dominated by a small élite of foreigners (and, I suppose, they also passed to R1a commoners their warlike culture and other things useful only to a nationalistic révanchisme). And PIE people are the marvellous and faboulous superior people of Dumézilian memory... what a fraud!

Well, Dumézil never really claimed that the PIEs were superior or marvellous in any way, shape or form... But that's above the point I guess :)

Tomenable
05-10-2016, 06:09 PM
Romilius:

Do you speak Gothic, Langobardic, or this Flintstones-like... how it's callled... Romance? :biggrin1:

Langobardic, Gothic, etc. are extinct languages today:

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

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

Tomenable
05-10-2016, 06:24 PM
Just like Corded Ware, in which we have R1a, R1b, I or J and G.

That single sample of "presumed R1b" from Corded Ware is of just as bad quality as ATP3.

So if you deny that Iberian ATP3 was R1b, you should also reject the presence of R1b in CWC. On the other hand, I wrote that I indeed expect to find a minority of R1b-Z2103 (Yamna-derived) among CWC.

I/J and G obviously represented the EEF Neolithic population absorbed/conquered by CWC.

Romilius
05-11-2016, 05:02 AM
That single sample of "presumed R1b" from Corded Ware is of just as bad quality as ATP3.

So if you deny that Iberian ATP3 was R1b, you should also reject the presence of R1b in CWC. On the other hand, I wrote that I indeed expect to find a minority of R1b-Z2103 (Yamna-derived) among CWC.

I/J and G obviously represented the EEF Neolithic population absorbed/conquered by CWC.

The only, small difference is that academics wrote that oblaczkowo sample was R1b (so, not so controversial), but they didn't about ATP3...

Tomenable
05-11-2016, 05:23 AM
Oblaczkowo from which RISE1 comes, is located ca. 5 kilometers from my hometown. :)

But unless RISE1 had the same subclade as me* :), I would say that he was probably R1a.

One sample from Esperstedt was also - wrongly - described as R1b, but it was R1a-M198.

*I don't know yet what is my subclade (or RISE1's for that matter), I need to buy SNP Pack.

===========

Do you have STR markers from that Oblaczkowo sample (RISE1)?

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 05:37 AM
According to Igenea Haplotype of Tutankhamun:
DYS# 393 390 19 391 385a 385b 439 389-1
Allele 13 24 14 11 11 14 10 13

DYS# 392 389-2 458 437 448 GATA H4 456 438
Allele 13 30 16 14 19 10 15 12

with Haplogroup predictor Tool : http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/hapest5a/hapest5.htm
Result for Tutankhamun 100% R1b. Somebody could predict his Subclade L23?:)
I note also several FTDNA testers R1b HT35 (not U106 or P312) from Iraq... sounds interesting.
I enter his haplotype in Ysearch, his haplotype looks closed to L51 people (R1b1a2a1)... to investigate further but It's not a surprise if we know that Tutankhamon had possible Hittite origins.

Except that Igenea didn't test Tutankhamun, and that Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published.
http://www.livescience.com/15388-discovery-channel-tutankhamen-dna.html

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 05:43 AM
Except that Igenea didn't test Tutankhamun, and that Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published.
http://www.livescience.com/15388-discovery-channel-tutankhamen-dna.html

So given the reaction of the team who worked on Tutankhamun's DNA, it is very unlikely that he was R1b.

FredH
05-11-2016, 06:09 AM
Except that Igenea didn't test Tutankhamun, and that Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published.
http://www.livescience.com/15388-discovery-channel-tutankhamen-dna.html

"Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published" this is the best proof that Igenea is right. Because if Igenea were wrong since 2010, the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, responsible for the project would have been in hurry to deny officialy the Igenea assertion. Did they deny the fact that Tuthankhamon is 100% R1b? May be the subject is too sensitive to officialy publish an European haplotype for a Pharaoh. The European scientific team involved in the project might be not very confortable with respect to this discovery, this might explain their silence. As a French you should understand this type of problem better than anyone else.
Based on Ysearch, Tutankhamun haplotype looks R1b-L23.

Tomenable
05-11-2016, 07:46 AM
It seems that first Y-DNA and mtDNA samples from Iberian Beaker Folks are already in the lab:

Some links (written in Catalan):

http://www.cerdanyola.cat/webapps/web/continguts_portal/menu_principal/informacio/Comunicats_Premsa/comunicats/Actuals/Actuals/Resultats_Estudi_Jaciment_Carrer_Paris/Resultats_Estudi_Jaciment_Carrer_Paris.html

http://calaix.gencat.cat/bitstream/handle/10687/91663/2006_14.pdf?sequence=1

www.raco.cat/index.php/CotaZero/article/download/67362/112953

^ Use Google Translate. Here Google translation from the first link:


The analysis of samples of human remains from the site of the street culture bell Paris reveals that sex, mitochondrial DNA, the Y chromosome (in the male individuals), family relations, external physical features population affinities with other contemporary groups.

The site of the culture bell Paris street is part of a larger project that will allow rebuild that culture. It is an international project in which participating institutions like Harvard Broad Institute of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History and the Institute of Evolutionary Biology (CSIC-UPF). The main objective of the project is to find out if this culture corresponds to a movement of people and ideas, ie if the various cultural elements that identify as bell spread through networks or other commercial or van be provided directly to groups of people with a specific genetic differentiable movement of indigenous peoples. To determine this we compare the samples found in different fields of culture bell and compared with samples of Neolithic populations above in each of the geographic areas considered. Presently genomic information of 67 individuals from the culture bell, which include samples from Portugal, England, France, Italy, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary and Spain, among which is the Hypogeum the street of Paris.

The genetic study of human remains from the site analyzed Cerdanyola has yielded positive results in 11 samples and it has been determined sex, AND mitochondrial chromosome Y (in the male individuals), family relations, the physical characteristics and external population affinities with other contemporary groups. Two of the samples correspond to first-degree relatives of females (two sisters, mother and daughter ...). It has also been told, for example, that women do not tolerate lactose and another had brown eyes.

Judging from what Carleton S. Coon wrote about Iberia in the Early Beaker period, R1b should be there, but together with Megalithic Y-DNA (such as for example I2a, G2a, E1b, etc.). So Beaker Folks lived together with Megalithic Folks in that area. And very likely, Beaker Folks were in minority, while populations of the earlier Megalithic stock were still numerically superior to them at that time. Thus I expect that R1b will be in minority among samples from Iberian early BB period. However, as Beaker Folks expanded out of Iberia to France & Germany (this theory - expansion out of Iberia - is supported by Coon) they generally did not take Megalithic Folks with them. That's when & where R1b became the majority.

See pages 148-172, 184-189, 200, 254, 371, 396, 399, 504, 530, 535-541. Also Plates 6 and 36:

https://ia800300.us.archive.org/20/items/racesofeurope031695mbp/racesofeurope031695mbp.pdf

https://archive.org/details/racesofeurope031695mbp

These are pages of the book, not of the PDF file (and 148 book page = 164 / 875 PDF page).

==========================

So it seems, that currently there are around 11 samples of Y-DNA from Iberian Beakers in the lab.

These 11 BB samples are from Cerdanyola, ca. 10 km from the city of Barcelona.

If among these 11 there is at least 1 R1b-L23, I will consider it as a confirmation of my hypothesis.

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 08:44 AM
"Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published" this is the best proof that Igenea is right. Because if Igenea were wrong since 2010, the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, responsible for the project would have been in hurry to deny officialy the Igenea assertion. Did they deny the fact that Tuthankhamon is 100% R1b? May be the subject is too sensitive to officialy publish an European haplotype for a Pharaoh. The European scientific team involved in the project might be not very confortable with respect to this discovery, this might explain their silence. As a French you should understand this type of problem better than anyone else.
Based on Ysearch, Tutankhamun haplotype looks R1b-L23.

Is it joke?

Since when silence is a proof?

Silesian
05-11-2016, 09:22 AM
Is it joke? Since when silence is a proof?

"Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published"
Who decides, to have the tests done? Who decides to release/control scientific information? Why not retest him, with latest snp information we have? We could compare him with the Ancient Ethiopian Mota sample. Why keep silent on the matter?
Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture throughout the African continent

Weren't the results of Ramesses III: anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study fully released?

[I]Revisiting the harem conspiracy and death of Ramesses III: anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study


Ramesses III belonged to haplogroup E1b1a
DYS 19 = 19
DYS 385a,b = 20
DYS 389I = 13
DYS 389II = 33
DYS 390 = 21
DYS 391 = 8
DYS 392 = 17
DYS 393 = 8
DYS 437 = 14
DYS 438 = 10
DYS 448 = 20
DYS 456 = 13
Y-GATA-H4 = 13

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 09:27 AM
Who decides, to have the tests done? Who decides to release/control scientific information? Why not retest him, with latest snp information we have? We could compare him with the Ancient Ethiopian Mota sample. Why keep silent on the matter?
Ancient Ethiopian genome reveals extensive Eurasian admixture throughout the African continent

Perhaps because the results were unclear, or DNA too damaged, or there was a contamination.

Moreover, please remember the difficult political situation in Egypt (and the lack of money). Testing new samples or re-testing could be quite difficult at the moment.

Silesian
05-11-2016, 09:38 AM
Perhaps because the results were unclear, or DNA too damaged, or there was a contamination.

Moreover, please remember the difficult political situation in Egypt (and the lack of money). Testing new samples or re-testing could be quite difficult at the moment.
The genetic samples could still be in the lab. They could be retest king Tut or KV-55. As a potential tourist attraction for everyone, why not retest?
Look how much one 14,000 R1b year old sample from Villabruna Italy has changed current thinking.

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 09:50 AM
The genetic samples could still be in the lab. They could be retest king Tut or KV-55. As a potential tourist attraction for everyone, why not retest?
Look how much one 14,000 R1b year old sample from Villabruna Italy has changed current thinking.

I'm agree, but the fact remains: officially, no R1b has been found in Ancient Egypt at the moment.

And frankly, if I understand the difficulties in India about haplogroups, I don't see why finding R1b in Ancient Egypt would be a problem (or political issue).
I even think that it would be good news, as more studies would be done, more tourists would go in Egypt and more money for Egyptians.

FredH
05-11-2016, 11:19 AM
Perhaps because the results were unclear, or DNA too damaged, or there was a contamination.

Moreover, please remember the difficult political situation in Egypt (and the lack of money). Testing new samples or re-testing could be quite difficult at the moment.

unclear or DNA too damaged? do you shed some doubts on the analysis of the Scientist of Tübingen University as Tuthenkhamun were the Akhenaten 's son? I cannot believe this a second. :biggrin1:

Also, I am pretty sure that as scientist the University of Tübingen took all necessary precautions to be fully able to repeat the analysis anytime if asked.

FredH
05-11-2016, 12:11 PM
It seems that first Y-DNA and mtDNA samples from Iberian Beaker Folks are already in the lab:




So it seems, that currently there are around 11 samples of Y-DNA from Iberian Beakers in the lab.

These 11 BB samples are from Cerdanyola, ca. 10 km from the city of Barcelona.

If among these 11 there is at least 1 R1b-L23, I will consider it as a confirmation of my hypothesis.

R1b-L23 in Spain could come from Near East Bronze age people looking for tin. There are not many tin mines in this part of the world, with no tin, no bronze.
The Bronze Age in the ancient Near East began in the 4th millennium BC. Some scientists have noticed a trade between Near East and Spain and Portugal at Bronze age. I try to find the ref.

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 12:36 PM
unclear or DNA too damaged? do you shed some doubts on the analysis of the Scientist of Tübingen University as Tuthenkhamun were the Akhenaten 's son? I cannot believe this a second. :biggrin1:

Also, I am pretty sure that as scientist the University of Tübingen took all necessary precautions to be fully able to repeat the analysis anytime if asked.

DNA was in all likehood fragmented, and it was an old research (in 2005, well before 2010, and the publication of Neanderthal genome with a new methodology).

I don't know it wasn't updated, but fact is we don't know his Y haplogroup.

All I know is that people who have done the analysis do not back Igenea (and some seem to have said "R1b? impossible!".

You can always try to guess, but with no result, it will remain pure guesswork.

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 12:42 PM
R1b-L23 in Spain could come from Near East Bronze age people looking for tin. There are not many tin mines in this part of the world, with no tin, no bronze.
The Bronze Age in the ancient Near East began in the 4th millennium BC. Some scientists have noticed a trade between Near East and Spain and Portugal at Bronze age. I try to find the ref.

False! Tin is needed for tin Bronze, not for Bronze. Arsenical Bronze was also used, and one of the first sword in Bronze was made of arsenical Bronze (Maykop culture, probably around 3800 BC).

It is not that simple!

Moreover, trade (especially sea trade) is not equal to migration. Of some low level genes flux, yes (except with slave trade).

Therefore, your point is inconclusive.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-11-2016, 12:43 PM
R1b-L23 in Spain could come from Near East Bronze age people looking for tin. There are not many tin mines in this part of the world, with no tin, no bronze.
The Bronze Age in the ancient Near East began in the 4th millennium BC. Some scientists have noticed a trade between Near East and Spain and Portugal at Bronze age. I try to find the ref.

There was no trade in the early Bronze Age, at least not real trade. Gits, metal, ores, etc, was exchanged between individuals with access to such commodities, for alliances, kinship, etc. So the question is - is it possible for such a number of people - which dominated Bronze Age western Europe, to have arrived en masse by boat during the BA . Does such evidence exist ?

FredH
05-11-2016, 01:19 PM
DNA was in all likehood fragmented, and it was an old research (in 2005, well before 2010, and the

You can always try to guess, but with no result, it will remain pure guesswork.

then Tomorow, another day is your best guess. :amen:

FredH
05-11-2016, 01:45 PM
There was no trade in the early Bronze Age, at least not real trade. Gits, metal, ores, etc, was exchanged between individuals with access to such commodities, for alliances, kinship, etc. So the question is - is it possible for such a number of people - which dominated Bronze Age western Europe, to have arrived en masse by boat during the BA . Does such evidence exist ?

The problem is population size in Bronze Age. What is the population size in Spain at that time? few men arrived has no chance to change anything if the population size is few millions of constantly interacting people , things are different if it's few thousands spread over the territory in less than hundred people settlements. In brief genetic impact of few traders could depend on the population size and structure they met at Bronze Age.

ADW_1981
05-11-2016, 02:06 PM
Except that Igenea didn't test Tutankhamun, and that Tutankhamun Y DNA has not been published.
http://www.livescience.com/15388-discovery-channel-tutankhamen-dna.html

Ramses III always gets reported as *confirmed* E1b1a even though the haplotype isn't very close to any existing one we have in any publicly available databases. Strange isn't it? Why not a controversy here?

R1b1b2 for Tut is quite likely IMHO, and the less feedback we get from the people who actually ran the study, the more I am convinced. (Probably R1b-L584 branch)

ADW_1981
05-11-2016, 02:12 PM
So given the reaction of the team who worked on Tutankhamun's DNA, it is very unlikely that he was R1b.

They stated that it was unlikely that, to paraphrase -western men descend from him-. This goes without saying. Even without considering very specific SNPs like P312, most lineages die out. So naturally, it's quite impossible for west Europeans to be directly related, the common ancestor is back 6200 ybp or so.

Tomenable
05-11-2016, 02:31 PM
Tutankhamun lived less than 3400 ybp (born ~1350 BC), by that time most of Western Europe had long been R1b-dominated. Expansion of Beaker Folks was a thousand years before Tutankhamun's birth. So even for this simple chronological reason, Tutankhamun couldn't be ancestral to Europeans with R1b.

ffoucart
05-11-2016, 02:43 PM
The problem is population size in Bronze Age. What is the population size in Spain at that time? few men arrived has no chance to change anything if the population size is few millions of constantly interacting people , things are different if it's few thousands spread over the territory in less than hundred people settlements. In brief genetic impact of few traders could depend on the population size and structure they met at Bronze Age.

Do you realize that we speak of a copper age population? Not some thousands of hunter-gatherers.

FredH
05-11-2016, 03:54 PM
Do you realize that we speak of a copper age population? Not some thousands of hunter-gatherers.

You are missing completly my point.
I point out the fact that the genetic impact of incomming population is linked to the local population density. Otherwise if you have some figures for Spain at Bronze Age or may be an interesting ref. on the subject? just tells me. :beerchug: takes time, I am not in hurry.

Silesian
05-11-2016, 09:34 PM
R1b-L23 in Spain could come from Near East Bronze age people looking for tin. There are not many tin mines in this part of the world, with no tin, no bronze.
The Bronze Age in the ancient Near East began in the 4th millennium BC. Some scientists have noticed a trade between Near East and Spain and Portugal at Bronze age. I try to find the ref.
Exactly what group or location carried R1b-L23 ? Is there a study you can quote?

FredH
05-12-2016, 05:19 AM
Exactly what group or location carried R1b-L23 ? Is there a study you can quote?

I just saw very quickly few days ago in a library a recent Archaelogy Symposium proceedings on Near East Bronze Age, there was an article of a Portuguese scientist mentioning a link between Spain & Portugal and Near East during Bronze age period. This caught my attention but I had no time to keep reading the article accurately and to keep the ref. I thought I will find more on internet anyway but it 's not the case. I will go back on that because I find the subject interesting, may be I got the words wrongly.

ffoucart
05-12-2016, 05:54 AM
You are missing completly my point.
I point out the fact that the genetic impact of incomming population is linked to the local population density. Otherwise if you have some figures for Spain at Bronze Age or may be an interesting ref. on the subject? just tells me. :beerchug: takes time, I am not in hurry.
No, as I think it is clear to everyone that density increase with and from Neolithic. Bronze is an improvement from copper, but in day to day life, most tools were still in stone or copper. Density was not a key element in Iberia.

Anyway, there are some papers on the subject, and I will try to post some links.

But all in all, this is getting ridiculous: we have some results from European before and after the migration from the Steppes. The Steppic component is pretty obvious in all post 3000/2500 BC samples. In Northern Europe as in Southern Europe, but no Near Easter migration. So what's the point to arguing about a theory without any element in its favor?

Gravetto-Danubian
05-12-2016, 06:11 AM
Freddie

It's hard if not impossible to come up with absolute population figure, but I've discussed trends and relative data here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6773-The-Copper-bronze-Age-transition-in-Iberia-Genetic-amp-demographic-implicaitons)

FredH
05-12-2016, 10:13 AM
Exactly what group or location carried R1b-L23 ? Is there a study you can quote?

The article is from : A. Augusto Tavares 1992, „Les campagnes militaires de l’Assyrie vers la méditerranée. Reflets sur la
péninsule ibérique?“, in: Dominique Charpin (Hg.), La circulation des biens, des personnes et des
idées dans le Proche-Orient ancien (RAI 38), Paris, 291–296.

The author is from University of Lisbon. The article details more the Phenician influence at the end of 2nd millenium BC on Spain & Portugal but he doesn't reject an earlier influence from Near East which is discussed in another article. He gave the example of small balls made of Glass found in Portugal, 4000 years old as a proof of contact between Near East and Portugal at that time. I am not an expert but apparently glass products could come only from Mesopotamia at that time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_glass_trade

Silesian
05-12-2016, 12:44 PM
The article is from : A. Augusto Tavares 1992, „Les campagnes militaires de l’Assyrie vers la méditerranée. Reflets sur la
péninsule ibérique?“, in: Dominique Charpin (Hg.), La circulation des biens, des personnes et des
idées dans le Proche-Orient ancien (RAI 38), Paris, 291–296.

The author is from University of Lisbon. The article details more the Phenician influence at the end of 2nd millenium BC on Spain & Portugal but he doesn't reject an earlier influence from Near East which is discussed in another article. He gave the example of small balls made of Glass found in Portugal, 4000 years old as a proof of contact between Near East and Portugal at that time. I am not an expert but apparently glass products could come only from Mesopotamia at that time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_glass_trade
Keep in mind the time between L23* and R1b Z2103 is only 200 years. They are grouped very close.
Yamnaya-I0370 is quite inclusive to a specific region-R1b-z2109 is more associated among modern day Pathans and Bashkir.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-basal-subclades/about/background
I don't think any glass has been found in any Yamnaya or Poltavka burials. No R1b L-584 has been found so far in Yamnaya or Poltavka cultures. More than three years ago I tried to explain the R1b-L584 group.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?112-L277-and-L584&p=1743#post1743
Now we know at base of L584 current tree[Armen1] is Armenian. I don't think they were known for glass either.
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/R1b1a2_ht35_project_tree_27_03_09_2016.pdf K2015-GS000035452-Armen1 (Armenians, Vardenis )

Further there is no R1b-Z2109 in any of the Phoenician trading colonies. While there is solid evidence that R1b-z2103 was in Ancient Greek colonies. Like Phokaia and Smyrna.
R1b-M269 (22.6% and 27.8%)
http://edugeography.com/image.php?pic=/images/phoenicia/phoenicia-03.jpg

http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-69

FredH
05-13-2016, 06:46 AM
Keep in mind the time between L23* and R1b Z2103 is only 200 years. They are grouped very close.


Concerning this point , after YFull estimation L23 , Z2103, Z2106 Z2109 are all born in 4000 BC 100 years apart, so It's very closed indeed. Such a burst of mutations implies also a significant burst of demography @ 4000 BC. Such a significant burst of demography should be seen through archaelogical facts at the same age. After you, is there a place in Steppe Pontic that could correspond to this criteria? Or somewhere else, what 's about the Uruk culture, 6000 years old culture in Mesopotamia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruk_period
Population of Uruk city was growing up to an unprecendented huge size of 80 000 residents @2900BC. This could have been a place where the mutations number exploded 6000 years ago. At least this event could be seen with the genetic trees.
I read also: "Around 3600 BCE, during the Middle Uruk period, Uruk trade networks started to expand to other parts of Mesopotamia, and as far as North Caucasus". the R1b-M269 remains found in Yamnaya are all dated around 3000 BC. This is quite consistent.

Tomenable
05-13-2016, 08:21 AM
4 to 5000 years old Sumerian Photoshop, may be they had already special lenses. B)
http://www.linternaute.com/histoire/magazine/dossier/06/irak/images/une2.jpg
Statue of Ebih-Il, nu-banda
from the Département des Antiquités orientales : Mésopotamie Louvres Paris.
Statue is around 4500 years old from Mari in Syria . The blue eyes are made of Lapis Lazuli , Analysis determined that the blue stones came from Afghanistan, thousand km away. From the cuneiform inscription in his back, the statue was a gift supposed to represent the benefactor.
http://www.louvre.fr/oeuvre-notices/statue-d-ebih-il-nu-banda

In 2008 (but also many times later) the age of blue eye mutation was estimated as 6,000-10,000 years:

http://www.livescience.com/9578-common-ancestor-blue-eyes.html

Today we already know that those age estimates were totally off, the mutation is at least twice as old.

Derived allele leading to blue eyes (OCA2/HERC2, rs12913832) was present for example in:

- Villabruna hunter-gatherer from Italy, dated to ca. 14,180-13,780 years ago
- Grotte du Bichon hunter-gatherer from Switzerland, dated to 13,770-13,560 ybp
- Satsurblia hunter-gatherer from Gerogia, dated to 13,380-13,130 years ago

Not only did blue eyes exist 14,000 ybp, but they were geographically widespread 13,000 ybp - implying that the mutation must be at least a few thousand years older than this, since it couldn't spread immediately to locations so distant from each other.

------

Check this documentary about modern slavery in the Islamic State:

Fragment 8:55 - 9:05 of the video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO1r0s2mw1k#t=8m55s

Yazidi girl with brown eyes = 300 dollars; with blue eyes = more...

------

https://www.johndenugent.com/images/mesopotamia-blue-eyes.jpg


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

Assyrian art (in German): http://ia600503.us.archive.org/10/items/assyrischekunst00webe/assyrischekunst00webe.pdf

Silesian
05-13-2016, 10:06 AM
Concerning this point , after YFull estimation L23 , Z2103, Z2106 Z2109 are all born in 4000 BC 100 years apart, so It's very closed indeed. Such a burst of mutations implies also a significant burst of demography @ 4000 BC. Such a significant burst of demography should be seen through archaelogical facts at the same age. After you, is there a place in Steppe Pontic that could correspond to this criteria? Or somewhere else, what 's about the Uruk culture, 6000 years old culture in Mesopotamia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruk_period
Population of Uruk city was growing up to an unprecendented huge size of 80 000 residents @2900BC. This could have been a place where the mutations number exploded 6000 years ago. At least this event could be seen with the genetic trees.
I read also: "Around 3600 BCE, during the Middle Uruk period, Uruk trade networks started to expand to other parts of Mesopotamia, and as far as North Caucasus". the R1b-M269 remains found in Yamnaya are all dated around 3000 BC. This is quite consistent.
Good question. We have to take whole package.Not only copper metal working but ceramic/pottery and typical motif for period.
You have to ask why Yamnaya would adopt a totally new pottery, and drop all animal motif style from Uruk period.Especially when Maikop in same time frame +/- retained or adopted the new ideas from Uruk.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA287&lpg=PA287&dq=maikop+pottery+lion&source=bl&ots=2Z8_oQKGOy&sig=0ltIt0Tuy7AFZok-7WhSuNk6yAk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwinn8uu49bMAhUi8IMKHYc0Bd0Q6AEIHDAA#v=on epage&q=maikop%20pottery%20lion&f=false

http://www.peopleofar.com/wp-content/uploads/Yamnaya-culture-artifacts.jpg

Do you remember a few posts back, where R1b-M73 hunter gatherer and R1b-Z2103+ are tightly buried together in the same region? Perhaps showing continuity for 1000 years +?

Now compare fig 1 in Elshan culture in following paper on pottery styles.
http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/documenta/pdf38/38_21.pdf

An alternative interpretation of the
Chekalino IV dates of 8990±100 BP
(Le–4871) and 8680±120 BP (Gin–
7085) can be suggested; they date the
Mesolithic layer. On the other hand,
the dates of Iliinskaya 8510± 60 BP
(Le–5839) and, Lebyazhinka IV
8470±140 BP (Gin–7088) should be
corrected because of the ‘reservoir’
effect.

Uruk 4000 B.C. style motif. Is it possible Yamnaya did not know about lions, and that is why the symbol of power is missing from 4000B.C. time frame?
http://www.oooorg.org/search/?for=Uruk
http://www.oooorg.org/_upload/temp/214.jpg

Gravetto-Danubian
05-13-2016, 11:13 AM
Good question. We have to take whole package.Not only copper metal working but ceramic/pottery and typical motif for period.
You have to ask why Yamnaya would adopt a totally new pottery, and drop all animal motif style from Uruk period.Especially when Maikop in same time frame +/- retained or adopted the new ideas from Uruk.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA287&lpg=PA287&dq=maikop+pottery+lion&source=bl&ots=2Z8_oQKGOy&sig=0ltIt0Tuy7AFZok-7WhSuNk6yAk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwinn8uu49bMAhUi8IMKHYc0Bd0Q6AEIHDAA#v=on epage&q=maikop%20pottery%20lion&f=false

http://www.peopleofar.com/wp-content/uploads/Yamnaya-culture-artifacts.jpg

Do you remember a few posts back, where R1b-M73 hunter gatherer and R1b-Z2103+ are tightly buried together in the same region? Perhaps showing continuity for 1000 years +?

[/url]


Uruk 4000 B.C. style motif. Is it possible Yamnaya did not know about lions, and that is why the symbol of power is missing from 4000B.C. time frame?
http://www.oooorg.org/search/?for=Uruk


I agree that I do not see Yamnaya, or even Majkop, as anything (directly) derived from the Uruk expansion, but rather an area which benefitted from it.
From purely archaeology perspective, many theories have arise for the origins of Majkop, ranging from central Germany to south Caucasus, Uruk and central Asia. But Majkop looks like none of any of them, nor anything which preceded it locally. The old axiom, "only aDNA will tell" rings again.

In turn, I can definitely envisage that parts of the Yamnaya culture which developed some few hundred years after the earliest Majkop probably derived from some colonization from Majkop to the Don- Volga steppe, possibly as far as the Urals in search for ores. in that respect, there is a definite population change in Samara between the Mesolithic M73 and Khvalnysk, as well as between Khvalysnk period & Yamnaya, albeit emanating from within the same meso-region.

FredH
05-13-2016, 06:56 PM
I agree that I do not see Yamnaya, or even Majkop, as anything (directly) derived from the Uruk expansion, but rather an area which benefitted from it.
From purely archaeology perspective, many theories have arise for the origins of Majkop, ranging from central Germany to south Caucasus, Uruk and central Asia. But Majkop looks like none of any of them, nor anything which preceded it locally. The old axiom, "only aDNA will tell" rings again.

In turn, I can definitely envisage that parts of the Yamnaya culture which developed some few hundred years after the earliest Majkop probably derived from some colonization from Majkop to the Don- Volga steppe, possibly as far as the Urals in search for ores. in that respect, there is a definite population change in Samara between the Mesolithic M73 and Khvalnysk, as well as between Khvalysnk period & Yamnaya, albeit emanating from within the same meso-region.
there is an ancient DNA RISE397 in south Armenia at Kapan R1b-L23>Z2106 3000 years old. Does he come from the North or the South? Maykop culture sit North of Caucasian Mountains. After an interesting Wikipedia article about "Leyla Tepe Culture" South of the Caucasian barrier, it's looks like that this culture make the bridge between Mesopotamian Uruk Culture and North of Caucase Maykop Culture via migration from Mesopotamia always during the 3rd Millenia BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture
It 's written: "The appearance of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers in the Caucasus marked the appearance of the first local Caucasian metallurgy. This is attributed to migrants from Uruk, arriving around 4500 BCE.[6]
ref 6 Tufan Isaakoglu Akhundov, AT THE BEGINNING OF CAUCASIAN METALLURGY (http://http://www.academia.edu/9535165/Problems_of_Early_Metal_Age_Archaeology_of_Caucasu s_and_Anatolia._Proceedings_of_International_Confe rence). Problems of Early Metal Age Archaeology of Caucasus and Anatolia. Proceedings of International Conference. Tbilisi, 2014


Concerning the fact that Yamnaya culture didn't keep the same type of animal representation, apparently, Lion figure style lost his sense for these object users. May be the owners of these products adapted themself gradualy to the new steppe environment and culture few centuries after Maykop culture.

Silesian
05-13-2016, 08:18 PM
there is an ancient DNA RISE397 in south Armenia at Kapan R1b-L23>Z2106 3000 years old. Does he come from the North or the South? Maykop culture sit North of Caucasian Mountains. After an interesting Wikipedia article about "Leyla Tepe Culture" South of the Caucasian barrier, it's looks like that this culture make the bridge between Mesopotamian Uruk Culture and North of Caucase Maykop Culture via migration from Mesopotamia always during the 3rd Millenia BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture
It 's written: "The appearance of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers in the Caucasus marked the appearance of the first local Caucasian metallurgy. This is attributed to migrants from Uruk, arriving around 4500 BCE.[6]
ref 6 Tufan Isaakoglu Akhundov, AT THE BEGINNING OF CAUCASIAN METALLURGY (http://http://www.academia.edu/9535165/Problems_of_Early_Metal_Age_Archaeology_of_Caucasu s_and_Anatolia._Proceedings_of_International_Confe rence). Problems of Early Metal Age Archaeology of Caucasus and Anatolia. Proceedings of International Conference. Tbilisi, 2014


Concerning the fact that Yamnaya culture didn't keep the same type of animal representation, apparently, Lion figure style lost his sense for these object users. May be the owners of these products adapted themself gradualy to the new steppe environment and culture few centuries after Maykop culture.

There is really not much you can do to try and make a connection below Maikop autosomally.
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2i7mvme.jpg
You are boxed in between West Asian and R1a Hunter Gatherer component to the far North.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=917906623
R1b-Z2106* is also in Tabassarans. Besides Yamnaya-Stalingrad Quarry.
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/aDNA_02_11_30_2015.pdf
http://oi63.tinypic.com/qzjaxj.jpg

Who also have one of the highest readings of ANE, in the region, from Tabassarans to Maikop region.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/X-8eCF1RfQA7Vds0goBmXYlB94ZmiBJRm9pSjeBS630=w380-h206-no

Silesian
05-13-2016, 08:46 PM
There is one more point of interest. Beside skills in copper/ pottery; there is also fermentation skill.



The earliest evidence of domesticated grapes has been found at Gadachrili Gora, near the village of Imiri, Marneuli Municipality, in southeastern Republic of Georgia; carbon-dating points to the date of about 6000 BC.[3][4][5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitis_vinifera


Etymology

Borrowed into Proto-Kartvelian from Proto-Indo-European[1][2][3][4][5][6] *we/oi(H)nyo-, via — according to some — Proto-Armenian[7][8][9][10] *ɣʷeinyo-, the ancestor of Old Armenian գինի ‎(gini).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Kartvelian/%C9%A3wino-

razyn
05-13-2016, 09:07 PM
There is one more point of interest. Beside skills in copper/ pottery; there is also fermentation skill.
As I was saying, a couple of years ago. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2711-Does-the-connection-of-M269-with-copper-skills-go-right-back-to-its-invention&p=44053&viewfull=1#post44053

In a way, I was just yanking Gioiello's chain; he wouldn't want his beloved Tuscan founders of all that is good in Europe to have been immigrant Georgian viticulturists, so I suggested it. But that doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-14-2016, 12:03 AM
there is an ancient DNA RISE397 in south Armenia at Kapan R1b-L23>Z2106 3000 years old. Does he come from the North or the South? Maykop culture sit North of Caucasian Mountains. After an interesting Wikipedia article about "Leyla Tepe Culture" South of the Caucasian barrier, it's looks like that this culture make the bridge between Mesopotamian Uruk Culture and North of Caucase Maykop Culture via migration from Mesopotamia always during the 3rd Millenia BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture
It 's written: "The appearance of Leilatepe tradition’s carriers in the Caucasus marked the appearance of the first local Caucasian metallurgy. This is attributed to migrants from Uruk, arriving around 4500 BCE.[6]
ref 6 Tufan Isaakoglu Akhundov, AT THE BEGINNING OF CAUCASIAN METALLURGY (http://http://www.academia.edu/9535165/Problems_of_Early_Metal_Age_Archaeology_of_Caucasu s_and_Anatolia._Proceedings_of_International_Confe rence). Problems of Early Metal Age Archaeology of Caucasus and Anatolia. Proceedings of International Conference. Tbilisi, 2014


Concerning the fact that Yamnaya culture didn't keep the same type of animal representation, apparently, Lion figure style lost his sense for these object users. May be the owners of these products adapted themself gradualy to the new steppe environment and culture few centuries after Maykop culture.

Yes I think K-A aDNA will be very interesting.
But still, kura-Arax and Majkop look like different identities, despite some similarities

ffoucart
05-14-2016, 01:59 AM
Concerning this point , after YFull estimation L23 , Z2103, Z2106 Z2109 are all born in 4000 BC 100 years apart, so It's very closed indeed. Such a burst of mutations implies also a significant burst of demography @ 4000 BC. Such a significant burst of demography should be seen through archaelogical facts at the same age. After you, is there a place in Steppe Pontic that could correspond to this criteria? Or somewhere else, what 's about the Uruk culture, 6000 years old culture in Mesopotamia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruk_period
Population of Uruk city was growing up to an unprecendented huge size of 80 000 residents @2900BC. This could have been a place where the mutations number exploded 6000 years ago. At least this event could be seen with the genetic trees.
I read also: "Around 3600 BCE, during the Middle Uruk period, Uruk trade networks started to expand to other parts of Mesopotamia, and as far as North Caucasus". the R1b-M269 remains found in Yamnaya are all dated around 3000 BC. This is quite consistent.

You mean "this is quite inconsistent"?

Because, R1b subclades (above M269) were already present in the Ponthic Steppes before 3000 BC (look at the Khvalynsk samples), and 3000 BC is the period of expansion of Yamna admixture into Central and Western Europe.

In fact, you are making a mistake in linking emergence of haplogroup to population burst.

And please, don't use wikipedia as a source.

Xuipa
05-14-2016, 02:17 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCsl52biXHA

he still has it wrong, but he is closer than most so called experts in this freakin game.

FredH
05-14-2016, 09:23 AM
You mean "this is quite inconsistent"?

Because, R1b subclades (above M269) were already present in the Ponthic Steppes before 3000 BC (look at the Khvalynsk samples), and 3000 BC is the period of expansion of Yamna admixture into Central and Western Europe.

In fact, you are making a mistake in linking emergence of haplogroup to population burst.

And please, don't use wikipedia as a source.
Where did you find R1b-M269 before 3000 BC in Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara ? could you be more pecise?
by the way, I am not using Wikipedia as Source but as Tool.

ffoucart
05-14-2016, 09:32 AM
Where did you find R1b-M269 before 3000 BC in Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara ? could you be more pecise?
by the way, I am not using Wikipedia as Source but as Tool.

I said "above M269".

M269 appeared between Khvalynsk and Yamna (probably in those populations). Please remind that Khvalynsk dominant class was overwhelming R1b1.

Moreover the statement in the Ice Age Europe article about modern subclades as originated from the Steppe is a clue of what they already have (unpublished).

FredH
05-14-2016, 12:45 PM
I said "above M269".

M269 appeared between Khvalynsk and Yamna (probably in those populations). Please remind that Khvalynsk dominant class was overwhelming R1b1.

Moreover the statement in the Ice Age Europe article about modern subclades as originated from the Steppe is a clue of what they already have (unpublished).

above? you meant upstream M269, I suppose. R1b1 mutation is 20 000 years old! You are few light years out of subject. We are talking of much later mutations (L23, L51,..) and Bronze age migrations.

ffoucart
05-14-2016, 01:47 PM
above? you meant upstream M269, I suppose. R1b1 mutation is 20 000 years old! You are few light years out of subject. We are talking of much later mutations (L23, L51,..) and Bronze age migrations.

We have not downstram analysis for Khvalynsk, but what are the chances to have Yamna with Z2103, without having also L23 in the same population?

I can understand your fascination with Uruk, but there are obvious fact for a R1b continuity in the Steppes, and an expansion from there (not only because Uruk and Yamna are contemporary).

Gravetto-Danubian
05-14-2016, 03:03 PM
We have not downstram analysis for Khvalynsk, but what are the chances to have Yamna with Z2103, without having also L23 in the same population?

I can understand your fascination with Uruk, but there are obvious fact for a R1b continuity in the Steppes, and an expansion from there (not only because Uruk and Yamna are contemporary).

We do have analysis and he is an extinct branch of M269; with a different autosomal profile compared to later Yamnaya.
I haven't been saying "discontinuity" on the Volga - Caspian part of steppe out of my imagination ! ;)
But as I said, it doesn't mean the newcomers came from too far away...


Where did you find R1b-M269 before 3000 BC in Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara ? could you be more pecise?
by the way, I am not using Wikipedia as Source but as Tool.


True, but the question is what make more sense: R1b came from the steppe, and we just haven't happened to yet find the M269, or M269 came from much further south, and there were repeated migrations of R1b onto the steppe. ?
I think most people will favour the first, and argue the second is not parsiminous (although of course not impossible, given we know there were several migration waves into central Europe, so imaginably an unstable place like the steppe had even more).

Silesian
05-14-2016, 04:49 PM
The two sites with significant copper.


I0122, Khvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [5200-4000 BCE] copper.

Khvalynsk
Eneolithic in the Volga steppes: Saratovo,Russia (n=3)
Three individuals are among 39 excavated in 1987-88 at the Eneolithic cemetery of KhvalynskII, Saratov oblast, Russia, on the west bank of the Volga River, 6 km north of the village of Alekseevka. KhvalynskI and II are two parts of the same cemetery, excavated in 1977-79 (Khvalynsk I) and
1987-88 (Khvalynsk II).23The two excavations revealed 197 graves, about 10x larger than other cemeteries of this period in the Volga-
Ural steppes, dated by radiocarbon to 5200-4000 BCE (95.4% confidence). Bones of domesticated cattle and sheep-goat, and horses of uncertain status, were included in 28 human graves and in 10 sacrificial deposits. The 367 copper artifacts in the graves, mostly beads and rings, are the oldest copper objects in the Volga-Ural steppes, and trace elements and manufacturing methods in a few objects suggest trade with southeastern Europe. Together with high 15N in the human bones from Khvalynsk, which might have caused a reservoir effect making 14C dates too old, the circulation of so much copper, which increased in SE Europe after 4700 BCE, suggests that a date after 4700 BCE would be reasonable for many graves at Khvalynsk. Copper was found in 13 adult male graves, 8 adult female graves, and 4 sub-adult graves. The unusually large cemetery at Khvalynsk contained southern Europeoid and northern Europeoid cranio-facial types, consistent with the possibility that people from the northern and southern steppes mingled and were buried here...............10122
/
SVP35 (grave 12)Male(confirmed genetically), age 20-30, positioned on his back with raised knees, with 293
copper artifacts, mostly beads, amounting to 80% of the copper objects in the combined cemeteries of Khvalynsk I and II. Probably a high-
status individual, his Y-chromosome haplotype, R1b1, also characterized the high-status individuals buried under kurgans in later Yamnaya graves
in this region, so he could be regarded as a founder of an elite group of patrilineally related families. His MtDNA haplotype H2a1 is unique in the Samara series.

6727
http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/



1-2000 yrs+/- later

Yamnaya R1b-Z2103>Z2109>KMS75[found among modern day Bashkir's]Kutuluk kurgan cemetery I, located 60 km east of the city of Samara, contained:
SVP58/I0444 (central grave 1, kurgan 4, 3335-2881 calBCE, male burial, copper.
6726
The remains are of male aged 25-35 years (Fig. S3.2), estimated height 176 cm, with no obvious injury or disease, and buried with the largest metal object found in a Yamnaya grave
anywhere 26. The object was a blunt mace 48 cm long, 767 g in weight, cast/annealed and made of pure copper, like most Yamnaya metal objects.

http://oi68.tinypic.com/2cxf7zs.jpg

http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/10/10/016477.abstract?%3Fcollection=
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/151116/ncomms9912/full/ncomms9912.html
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433

FredH
05-14-2016, 05:38 PM
the question is what make more sense: R1b came from the steppe, and we just haven't happened to yet find the M269, or M269 came from much further south, and there were repeated migrations of R1b onto the steppe. ?
I think most people will favour the first, and argue the second is not parsiminous (although of course not impossible, given we know there were several migration waves into central Europe, so imaginably an unstable place like the steppe had even more).

May be we could look more closely at the Mt-Haplogroups. I0444 Kutuluk I, Kutuluk River, Samara 3000 BC is I3a and few (RISE555) are N1a. Where these Mt-Haplogroups came from? apparently N1a was exclusively found among Near Eastern Neolithic farmers.
I3a is a subclade of N1a. At least some women came from the fertile crescent. The scenario is well explained here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I_mtDNA.shtml). I am reading; "With the expansion of agriculture from the Fertile Crescent, N1a1a (and N1a3) migrated to Anatolia, then to Europe. During that time, N1a1b expanded directly from the Fertile Crescent to the Caucasus and northern Iran, where it developed N1a1b1 (found in Iran today) and N1a1b2 (haplogroup I). In this scenario, R1b cattle herders from eastern Anatolia would have absorbed mtDNA I by intermarriages with Caucasian women on the way to the Pontic Steppe. This would have happened with other mtDNA lineages too (see maternal lineages corresponding to haplogroup R1b). Whatever the exact route and timing, haplogroup I was almost certainly found in the northwest Caucasus when the Maykop culture appeared around 3700 BCE, and would consequently have become part of the Proto-Indo-European tribes before the great migrations to Europe and Central Asia." I don't know if it 's right, I think Maciamo wrote that but it's look fairly plausible. It should be interesting to look closely at the FTDNA R1b-L23 people of Near East.

I am not fascinating by Uruk culture. It's just a good candidate for a scenario with respect to the burst of mutation that coincide with the emergence of Cities-State.

Generalissimo
05-15-2016, 12:40 AM
Yamnaya is just Khvalynsk with more CHG.

The reason Yamnaya has more CHG is because for males status and wealth was linked to the land inherited from their paternal ancestors. If the high status males left the lands of their ancestors, who were buried in kurgans alll around them, they'd lose their power. They only began to move out into Central Europe and Central Asia when aridity increased on the Eastern European steppe.

So for the most part, females were imported from other areas, probably the more populous ones, and this just happened to be the north Caucasus area in this region. The fact that the single Khvalynsk R1b is not directly ancestoral to Yamnaya R1b doesn't mean anything because it's just one sample. The fact that there's not a single J, G or H in the high statuts Bronze Age steppe graves shows very clearly that males stood their ground, and it was the southern females who migrated north.

DMXX
05-15-2016, 12:58 AM
If I recall the craniometric data from the Eneolithic PC steppe correctly, both "robust Europid" and "Mediterranean" remains were found, but there was segregation in their propensity based on gender (men tended to be the former, women the latter). Of course, this serves as corroborating support for the model our fine General has been proposing for a while.

Silesian
05-15-2016, 01:17 AM
The region in and around Samara bend took on the full force from East and West. Attacked from both sides.
http://www.brego-weard.com/lib/MAA_491.pdf page 6/7

The original Volga Bulgar state was destroyed during devastating
campaigns by two enemies who were at the same time bitterly hostile to
each other: the Russian principalities, and the Mongol Khanate of the
Golden Horde (generally referred to as the Tatars). Each feared that
the Volga Bulgars would become allies of the other. Thus the Tatar khans
burned Bulgar city in 1360, 1362 and 1407, while equally damaging
Russian campaigns were waged in 1370, 1374, 1376 and 1409. The final
collapse of the Volga Bulgars came in 1431, the year that also saw the
emergence of the new town of Kazan

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 02:01 AM
Yamnaya is just Khvalynsk with more CHG.

The reason Yamnaya has more CHG is because for males status and wealth was linked to the land inherited from their paternal ancestors. If the high status males left the lands of their ancestors, who were buried in kurgans alll around them, they'd lose their power. They only began to move out into Central Europe and Central Asia when aridity increased on the Eastern European steppe.

So for the most part, females were imported from other areas, probably the more populous ones, and this just happened to be the north Caucasus area in this region. The fact that the single Khvalynsk R1b is not directly ancestoral to Yamnaya R1b doesn't mean anything because it's just one sample. The fact that there's not a single J, G or H in the high statuts Bronze Age steppe graves shows very clearly that males stood their ground, and it was the southern females who migrated north.

Well, no it doesn't actually, especially if we're going to start inventing our own ethnographic narratives and turn a blind eye to several strands of evidence.


It's been inferred for decades from traditional anthropology and archaeology that there was constant population flux within the steppe, all the more magnified by the now well described ecological instability on the steppe which came in cycles of several hundred-years. Between the Mesolithic & Catacomb, there were probably 4 or 5 more or less complete population turnovers in a region like Samara, but as I point out, "replacing" groups probably arrived from adjacent steppe or forest-steppe (more likely), or in the case of Yamnaya Samara- were an incoming dominant clan from 'down the road'.
To be specific, the late Neolithic Mariupol horizon, which includes the "Samara culture" represents a movement from the forest steppe representing a replacement of original Rakushechny Yar groups, which itself was in turn replaced by Khvalynsk. These are sharp changes, and not 'gradual evolution by acquiring CHG wives".


Nor is there any continuity of Khvalnysk chiefs after 4000 BC, because the source of their prestige was the Balkan copper centres, as noted in the R1b xM269 male's burials, for which they traded raw materials & animals (incl horses). The Balkan Copper World collapse likely created a power vacuum on the steppe, and indeed there is a 3 to 400 year hiatus with no kurgan / rich burials. Moreover, the Khvalynsk men were economically still Stone Age fisher-hunter-foragers. The newly arriving Yamanaya men - probably from the Kuban DOn region, or some late Repin varian from the west, would have easily outcompeted any remnants (what with their new, specialist cattle-herding economy and Arsenical Copper of Caucasian derivation). So, the Samara Yamnaya are not just Khvalnysk + more CHG wives.

Its the details which are important, unless we are in the business of creating myths instead of real population prehistory.

Generalissimo
05-15-2016, 02:07 AM
Well, no it doesn't actually, especially if we're going to start inventing our own ethnographic narratives and turn a blind eye to several strands of evidence.


It's been inferred for decades from traditional anthropology and archaeology that there was constant population flux within the steppe, all the more magnified by the now well described ecological instability on the steppe which came incycle of several hundred-years. Between the Mesolithic & Catacomb, there were probably 4 or 5 more or less complete population turnovers in a region like Samara, but as I point our, this groups could have arrived from adjacent steppe or forest-steppe (more likely) regions. For example, the late Neolithic Mariupol horizon, which includes the "Samara culture" represents a movement from the forest steppe representing a replacement of original Rakushechny Yar groups, which itself was in turn replaced by Khvalynsk. These are sharp changes, and not 'gradual evolution by acquiring CHG wives".


Nor is there any continuity of Khvalnysk chiefs after 4000 BC, because the source of their prestige was the Balkan copper centres, noted in the R1b xM269 male's burials. The Balkan Copper World collapse and likely created a power vaccuum on the steppe, and indeed there is a 3 to 400 year hiatus with no kurgan / rich burials. Moreover, the Khvalynsk men were economically still Stone Age fisher-hunter-foragers. The newly arriving Yamanaya men - probably from the Kuban DOn region, or some late Repin varian from the west, would have easily outcompeted any remnants (what with their new, specialist cattle-herding economy and Arsenical Copper of Caucasian derivation). So, the Samara Yamnaya are not just Khvalnysk + more CHG wives. This is nonsense.

Its the details which are important, unless we are in the business of creating myths instead of real population prehistory.

Detailas are indeed important. The detail about high female mobility during the Bronze Age in Europe is the one detail that can't be ignored here.


The results indicate both local genetic continuity spanning the cultural transition, and, following the onset of the Early Bronze Age, a major influx of mtDNA types previously not found in this region. Integrating stable isotope data with the genetic data reveals a picture of a patrilocal society with remarkable mobility in women.

High female mobility in Bronze Age Europe (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/high-female-mobility-in-bronze-age.html)

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 02:19 AM
Detailas are indeed important. The detail about high female mobility during the Bronze Age in Europe is the one detail that can't be ignored here.



High female mobility in Bronze Age Europe (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/high-female-mobility-in-bronze-age.html)

Why are we referencing Denmark, from 1400 BC ? We have isotopic and aDNA clues from our very region & time frame. Natalia Shishlina "The Steppe and the Caucasus During the Bronze Age: Mutual Relationships and Mutual Enrichments"


The sedentary Majkop population that lived in a narrow piedmont strip of the North Caucasus subsisted on dry farming and animal husbandry (cattle, sheep and goats) (Trifonov 2002). Small Majkop settlements with an occupation layer of up to 40 cm were located in river valleys. River pastures and steppe watershed grasslands were used for grazing animals, i.e. horses and pigs, near settlements. Most likely, high mountainous areas were not exploited (Trifonov 2002). Various sub-sectors of sedentary livestock-raising could develop in several landscape areas, such as pig- and sheep-raising, or a mixed type of pastoralism where cattle, sheep and goats were reared (Munchaev 1975). A dry and warm climate and mild winters with only a small amount of snow supported this type of economy. Though the Majkop population of the North Caucasus is considered to be sedentary, we may suppose that the steppe environment contributed to their efforts to colonize the still vacant steppe areas.[U] Majkop groups appeared in the Steppe starting from the Early Majkop culture, i.e. 3600-3500 calBC ''

In fact, Majkop weren't sedentary - a residual error from early scholarship. They were mobile pastoralists, as now elucidated.
Sure, there was also individual female mobility, but that doesn;t explain everything

Btw: new mtDNA lineages can arrive with men & women.

Generalissimo
05-15-2016, 04:47 AM
Why are we referencing Denmark, from 1400 BC ?

Steppe groups migrated to North-Central Europe en masse, and took their customs with them.


We have isotopic and aDNA clues from our very region & time frame. Natalia Shishlina "The Steppe and the Caucasus During the Bronze Age: Mutual Relationships and Mutual Enrichments".

This paper actually gives an exmple of female migration from the south to the north.


Btw: new mtDNA lineages can arrive with men & women.

They arrived with women on the Samara steppe.

Yamnaya does not derive from Maikop, and the Maikop population did not contribute R1 lineages to steppe groups. The sudden influx of southern admixture on the steppe was mediated by female migration.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 05:14 AM
Steppe groups migrated to North-Central Europe en masse, and took their customs with them.

I question the relevance you are trying to imply by referencing a paper which discusses something 2000 years later; whence the "migrated steppe folk " had already intermixed, and adopted often new customs, as is evident. Anyhow, read around the fact that exogamy is a near universal human phenomenon, so there is no need to claim a steppe exclusivity.



This paper actually gives an exmple of female migration from the south to the north.
Try again..




They arrived with women on the Samara steppe.

Yamnaya does not derive from Maikop, and the Maikop population did not contribute R1 lineages to steppe groups. The sudden influx of southern admixture on the steppe was mediated by female migration.

That is certainly a possibility. But without Majkop genomes I'm not sure how we can exclude a contribution from more than just Majkop women ?

Anyhow, my main point isn't that Yannaya necessarily derives from Majkop (as it must have been more complex than that, and we lack data for most of the steppe), but rather (specifically) the Yamnaya groups of Samara basin represent local discontinuity, and derive from immigrant groups further west/ southwest of the steppe instead of preceding Khvalynsk groups.

Generalissimo
05-15-2016, 07:04 AM
But rather (specifically) the Yamnaya groups of Samara basin represent local discontinuity, and derive from immigrant groups further west/ southwest of the steppe instead of preceding Khvalynsk groups.

I thought about it, and I say no.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 07:25 AM
I thought about it, and I say no.

Congratulations
When can we expect your excavation publication detailing the missing 300 years in the Khvalysnk sequence ?


I look forward to continuing this debate in a few months

:beerchug:

ffoucart
05-15-2016, 08:05 AM
We do have analysis and he is an extinct branch of M269; with a different autosomal profile compared to later Yamnaya.
I haven't been saying "discontinuity" on the Volga - Caspian part of steppe out of my imagination ! ;)
But as I said, it doesn't mean the newcomers came from too far away...

My bad! That's what I thought, but couldn't find the reference (I was using my IPhone to post, not a easy way to post links or find reference).

I wrote "continuity" not between Khvalynsk and Yamna but between the Steppic subgroups and the Yamna (as Yamna look like a coalescence of difference more ancient regional cultures, all in the Steppes, and more or less related).

In that prospect, specific continuity to one culture to another is not important, as the main subject is general continuity (here social domination by men presenting related haplogroups, with similar autosomal signature: EHG + CHG)., and I am not forgetting that the search is more about how modern R1b subclades came into Central and Western Europe.





True, but the question is what make more sense: R1b came from the steppe, and we just haven't happened to yet find the M269, or M269 came from much further south, and there were repeated migrations of R1b onto the steppe. ?
I think most people will favour the first, and argue the second is not parsiminous (although of course not impossible, given we know there were several migration waves into central Europe, so imaginably an unstable place like the steppe had even more).


I don't think that comparing Central Europe and the Steppe is sustainable, as I don't think is that easy to migrate into the Steppe without any steppic background. Most of the migrations in or from the Steppes were from people originated from the Steppes (even the Turks were originally from the Eurasian Steppes). I'm not saying there were not some migration and admixture, but on a limited scale.

ffoucart
05-15-2016, 08:40 AM
May be we could look more closely at the Mt-Haplogroups. I0444 Kutuluk I, Kutuluk River, Samara 3000 BC is I3a and few (RISE555) are N1a. Where these Mt-Haplogroups came from? apparently N1a was exclusively found among Near Eastern Neolithic farmers.
I3a is a subclade of N1a. At least some women came from the fertile crescent. The scenario is well explained here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I_mtDNA.shtml). I am reading; "With the expansion of agriculture from the Fertile Crescent, N1a1a (and N1a3) migrated to Anatolia, then to Europe. During that time, N1a1b expanded directly from the Fertile Crescent to the Caucasus and northern Iran, where it developed N1a1b1 (found in Iran today) and N1a1b2 (haplogroup I). In this scenario, R1b cattle herders from eastern Anatolia would have absorbed mtDNA I by intermarriages with Caucasian women on the way to the Pontic Steppe. This would have happened with other mtDNA lineages too (see maternal lineages corresponding to haplogroup R1b). Whatever the exact route and timing, haplogroup I was almost certainly found in the northwest Caucasus when the Maykop culture appeared around 3700 BCE, and would consequently have become part of the Proto-Indo-European tribes before the great migrations to Europe and Central Asia." I don't know if it 's right, I think Maciamo wrote that but it's look fairly plausible. It should be interesting to look closely at the FTDNA R1b-L23 people of Near East.

I am not fascinating by Uruk culture. It's just a good candidate for a scenario with respect to the burst of mutation that coincide with the emergence of Cities-State.

Massiamo is not always reliable, I'm afraid.

One point you are still don't take into account: Yamna are basically EHG + CHG (as Khavlynsk, but with more CHG). But without EFF (or Anatolian Farmers). CW did have some EFF, but because of admixing with European farmers.

Even if there were migrants from Southern Caucasus or Mesopotamia (why not?), their numbers would be extremely low.

FredH
05-15-2016, 08:46 AM
Based on YFull estimation, L23 (6400 years bp) gave birth to L51 mutation in 6200 ybp and Z2103 same time of 6200 ybp. Then I wonder how come we have no L51 in all ancient DNA samples from Pontic Steppe but only in Western Europe since the both mutations Z2103 & L51 appeared the same time?? If L51 born along with Z2103 came from Pontic Steppe, we should find them in Pontic Steppe along with Z2103. This seems not the case. Here the picture showing where we found the two groups of mutations with the estimated Yfull time of appearance.
http://s32.postimg.org/ikb0kucqd/R1b_Ancient_DNA_tree3.png
One group Z2103 is found only in Pontic Steppe, the other only in W. Europe, this doesn't say anything about their bithplace but at least we can say that the migration trails between W. European L51 & Yamnaya Z2103 diverged before the apparition of their mutations @6200 ybp otherwise among Yamnaya samples we should find at least few L51 mutations, there is none. In this case What was the Route of L51 european?Anatolia ? and so where was located the original 6400 years bp L23 mutation? The problem is rather unsettled unless we find a L51 mutation in an ancient DNA in Pontic Steppe and vice versa, Z2103 in W. Europe. It's interesting to note that the Mt DNA doesnt tell the same story, we have for example I3a Mt Haplogroup both in W. Europe and in Pontic Steppe Yamnaya ancient DNA , this is strange but at least it could explain why the autosomal results are also commun.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 09:44 AM
I don't think that comparing Central Europe and the Steppe is sustainable, as I don't think is that easy to migrate into the Steppe without any steppic background. Most of the migrations in or from the Steppes were from people originated from the Steppes (even the Turks were originally from the Eurasian Steppes). I'm not saying there were not some migration and admixture, but on a limited scale.

Why do you think that people can't move into the steppe, but people from the steppe can move everywhere - northern European plains, Baltic forests, Balkan mountains & south Asian savannah ?
In fact, the steppe appears to have been colonized from the densely settled forest-steppe and southern forest zone north during the Mesolithic; and steppe-forest steppe, farmer - pastoralist interactions continued to be characteristic. Maybe some groups also moved onto the steppe during or just before the Yamnaya period, because they certainly were not moving out of it (contrary to what is often claimed) ..

Let's think about it for a second. Harsh climactic conditions forced people off the steppe repeatedly, to almost wholescale desertion. It happened in the Mesolithic, it happened in the LBA Belozerka period, it happened after the major Scythian phase, and i happened in the 5th century AD. It also happened, but only half so, in the Catacomb period (mid Bronze Age). Each time, it was re-settled, after a variable hiatus period, from various different directions, depending on specific event. Moreover, some parts of the steppe were colonized from the south, - central Asia- during the Iron Age.

Isn't it rather obvious that the steppe was a population sink, not source. ?


Based on YFull estimation, L23 aged of mutation 6400 years bp gave birth to L51 mutation in 6200 ybp and Z2103 same time of 6200 ybp. How come we have no L51 in all ancient DNA samples from Pontic Steppe but only in Europe since the both mutations Z2103 & L51 appeared the same time. If L51 born along with Z2103 came from Pontic Steppe, we should find them in Pontic Steppe along with Z2103. This seems not the case. Here the picture showing where we found the two groups of mutations with the estimated Yfull time of appearance.
http://s32.postimg.org/ikb0kucqd/R1b_Ancient_DNA_tree3.png
One group Z2103 is found in Pontic Steppe, the other in Europe, this doesn't say anything about their bithplace but at least we can say that the migration trails between European L51 & Yamnaya Z2103 diverged before the apparition of their mutations @6200 ybp otherwise among Yamnaya samples we should find at least few L51 mutations, there is none. In this case What was the Route of L51 european?Anatolia ? and so where was located the original 6400 years bp L23 mutation? The problem is rather unsettled unless we find a L51 mutation in an ancient DNA in Pontic Steppe.

Some would say that YFull has underestimated ages by 20%, which would mean that M269 began to split more like 7500 y BP.
Moreover there is a sub-branch under M269 but parallel to L23 - PF7562- which appears only in southern Europe, to date.
Im not sure what the significance of that is ?

Tomenable
05-15-2016, 10:38 AM
(even the Turks were originally from the Eurasian Steppes).

Proto-Turks were originally from Siberia, not the Steppes. They moved southward to the Steppes later. The Dinglings mentioned in Chinese texts, who lived along the Lena River (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lena_River), were Early Turks:

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


They are assumed to have been an early Turkic-speaking people (...) They originally lived on the bank of the Lena River in the area west of Lake Baikal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Baikal), gradually moving southward to Mongolia and northern China.

Descendants of the Dinglings were these guys:

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

Tomenable
05-15-2016, 10:52 AM
BTW - you will have a hard time finding one, single, "Proto-Turkic haplogroup":

Check my recent posts #5 and #6 in this thread:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6852-Finno-Ugric-and-Turkic-Y-DNA-frequencies&p=149553&viewfull=1#post149553

They were probably a mixture of many haplogroups since their ethnogenesis.

aarnisotka
05-15-2016, 11:19 AM
Proto-Turks were originally from Siberia, not the Steppes. They moved southward to the Steppes later. The Dinglings mentioned in Chinese texts, who lived along the Lena River (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lena_River), were Early Turks:

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





Descendants of the Dinglings were these guys:

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

As far as I know the general idea is that the people of Egiin Gol-Xiongnu complex were the Proto-Turks, ie all modern Turkic languages all descent from that area. If you like to claim that one root of the Proto-Turks comes from these Dinglings futher north, fine. But you can not call them Proto-Turks.

aarnisotka
05-15-2016, 12:37 PM
According to physical anthropology medival Turks (1000-1300AD) from Central Mongolia cluster very tightly with Egiin Gol. Curiously enough modern Mongolians cluster with Central Asians instead.

http://oi64.tinypic.com/ebddo7.jpg

Egiin Gol, Xiongnu sample from Northern Mongolia is also similar with Bronze Age Chandman from Western Mongolia. Egiin Gol itself though is dissimilar with other Xiongnu period samples further south. But the interesting thing to note is that this shows physical continuation in Mongolia from the Bronze Age, all through Xiongnu times, ending in with those medival Turks.

Here is another interesting plot in which the Chandmann-Egiin Gol-Turk bunch is compared to some other older specimens. As you can see C-bunch is once again a outlier. The early Iron Age Siberian, the Iron Age Tuvan and the Iranian Pazyryk sample from Southern Siberia cluster in close proximity along with Mongolian and Yakut samples.

http://oi66.tinypic.com/e6258g.jpg

http://etd.lib.umt.edu/theses/available/etd-10262012-092813/unrestricted/Schmidt_umt_0136D_10199.pdf

rms2
05-15-2016, 12:42 PM
Based on YFull estimation, L23 (6400 years bp) gave birth to L51 mutation in 6200 ybp and Z2103 same time of 6200 ybp. Then I wonder how come we have no L51 in all ancient DNA samples from Pontic Steppe but only in Western Europe since the both mutations Z2103 & L51 appeared the same time?? If L51 born along with Z2103 came from Pontic Steppe, we should find them in Pontic Steppe along with Z2103. This seems not the case. Here the picture showing where we found the two groups of mutations with the estimated Yfull time of appearance.
http://s32.postimg.org/ikb0kucqd/R1b_Ancient_DNA_tree3.png
One group Z2103 is found only in Pontic Steppe, the other only in W. Europe, this doesn't say anything about their bithplace but at least we can say that the migration trails between W. European L51 & Yamnaya Z2103 diverged before the apparition of their mutations @6200 ybp otherwise among Yamnaya samples we should find at least few L51 mutations, there is none. In this case What was the Route of L51 european?Anatolia ? and so where was located the original 6400 years bp L23 mutation? The problem is rather unsettled unless we find a L51 mutation in an ancient DNA in Pontic Steppe and vice versa, Z2103 in W. Europe. It's interesting to note that the Mt DNA doesnt tell the same story, we have for example I3a Mt Haplogroup both in W. Europe and in Pontic Steppe Yamnaya ancient DNA , this is strange but at least it could explain why the autosomal results are also commun.

We don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from west of the Don River, so we don't have any Yamnaya y-dna from the Pontic Steppe. From the Caspian Steppe, yes, but from the Pontic Steppe, no.

It was western Yamnaya that moved around the south end of the Carpathians, up the Danube Valley, and into the Carpathian basin. It was this movement, along with the movement of Corded Ware into the North European Plain, that was primarily responsible for the advance of Indo-European languages and culture into central and western Europe. If Gimbutas is right (and I think she will be proven right), then Bell Beaker was the consequence of the fusion of Yamnaya and Vucedol in the Carpathian basin, and it was Bell Beaker that carried kurgan culture and Indo-European languages into western Europe.

We already have loads of L51 in ancient Bell Beaker.

The Eurasian steppe is pretty vast, and Yamnaya is a cultural horizon rather than a cultural monolith. Yamnaya was apparently not an R1 monolith either. It had some R1a and also more than one kind of R1b-L23. As you pointed out, L51 and its brother clade under L23, Z2103, arose at about the same time, so it isn't likely that they were born at opposite ends of the European continent. IMHO, both arose on the Eurasian steppe.

My prediction is that L51 will be found in western Yamnaya or perhaps in Vucedol, which, according to Gimbutas, was the product of the mix of an earlier kurgan wave out of the steppe and Baden farmers.

One really cannot say there is no L51 in Yamnaya when the only Yamnaya remains yet tested have all come from the eastern end of its range.

Tomenable
05-15-2016, 03:45 PM
So it turns out that autosomally German BB can be modelled as 65% CWC +35% other groups:

Bell_Beaker_Germany:

"Corded_Ware_Germany" 65.05
"Germany_MN" 30.35
"Hungary_HG" 2.6
"Motala_HG" 1
"Esan_Nigeria" 0.6
"Atayal" 0.4
distance%=0.3689

This is from the "Comments" section:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/05/d-statsnmonte-open-thread-2.html?m=1

FredH
05-15-2016, 05:03 PM
It was western Yamnaya that moved around the south end of the Carpathians, up the Danube Valley, and into the Carpathian basin.

So we can imagine that L23 is born 6400 years ago somewhere in Pontic Steppe then the Western Yamnaya were moving west to give birth few centuries later to L51 in Europe and Z2103,Z2106 etc in Pontic Steppe. They shared some few MT-Haplogroup N1a1 & I3a from these period. Why not?

Or the other scenario, L23 is born in Near East 6400 ybp giving birth by 6200bp to a line that went in Europe this is L51 , and Z2103 in Near East moving to Pontic Steppe before 3000 BC. They shared both some few Mt-Haplogroup N1a1 & I3a from Near East.


For the 1st scenario where are the archaelogical proofs in Pontic Steppe of a growing demography in 4000 BC giving some such rapid succesions of mutations?
For the 2nd secnario, the Uruk demography expansion is a straight away answer around 4000 BC in these areas.
Also N1a1 mt-haplogroup is found only in Near-East @ Neolitihic.

Analysis of Ancient DNA in these areas and the FTDNA R1b-M269 people of Near East could give us some usefull info. Wait & See.

rms2
05-15-2016, 08:15 PM
So we can imagine that L23 is born 6400 years ago somewhere in Pontic Steppe then the Western Yamnaya were moving west to give birth few centuries later to L51 in Europe and Z2103,Z2106 etc in Pontic Steppe. They shared some few MT-Haplogroup N1a1 & I3a from these period. Why not?

Or the other scenario, L23 is born in Near East 6400 ybp giving birth by 6200bp to a line that went in Europe this is L51 , and Z2103 in Near East moving to Pontic Steppe before 3000 BC. They shared both some few Mt-Haplogroup N1a1 & I3a from Near East.


For the 1st scenario where are the archaelogical proofs in Pontic Steppe of a growing demography in 4000 BC giving some such rapid succesions of mutations? . . .

It is pretty well known that there were several waves of expansion westward out of the steppe, beginning about 4400 BC and culminating in the Yamnaya expansion about 3000 BC.

Look at the evidence.

1. L51 and Z2103 are brother clades under L23 and born at about the same time.

2. Z2103 has been found in eastern Yamnaya, but thus far we have no y-dna from western Yamnaya.

3. It was western Yamnaya that moved up the Danube Valley into the Carpathian basin.

4. Western Europe became overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and predominantly R1b-L51 somehow.

5. According to Marija Gimbutas, a renowned archaeologist who worked on many of the digs involving kurgan cultures, Bell Beaker was the product of the fusion of Yamnaya and Vucedol, and Vucedol was the product of the mix of an earlier wave of steppe migrants and Baden farmers.

6. Plenty of R1b-L51 (including its subclades, like P312 and the P312 subclades U152 and L21) has been found in Bell Beaker.

7. According to Gimbutas and a number of other scholars, Bell Beaker is largely responsible for the spread of Indo-European speech to western Europe.

8. L51 shows a growth spurt and a proliferation of subclades in the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, the right timing to be the product of the steppe expansion into Europe but not the right timing for some sort of Near Eastern expansion into Europe.

We have no y-dna yet from Yamnaya on the Pontic steppe or in the Carpathian basin. We have one Vucedol period skeleton from Hungary that thus far is known to be R1b-M343 but is supposed to be undergoing more extensive testing in Reich's lab.

To me the presence of L51 in eastern, kurgan-type Bell Beaker is a strong indication that Gimbutas was right and L51, like its brother, Z2103, came from the steppe with Yamnaya. But no one has looked at the y-dna of the actual people who carried Indo-European and R1b-L51 up the Danube into Europe west of the Dniester.

I don't buy the Uruk idea or the goofy notion that Bell Beaker was somehow derived from Corded Ware.

I think L51 (under which heading I include its subclades, as well) will be found in western Yamnaya. Time will tell.

Tomenable
05-15-2016, 10:24 PM
It is pretty well known that there were several waves of expansion westward out of the steppe, beginning about 4400 BC and culminating in the Yamnaya expansion about 3000 BC.

TMRCA of Western European branch of R1b - L151 - is only ca. 2900 BC according to YFull, though:

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

Shouldn't it be several centuries older to be represented among Yamna people in large numbers ??? Because you claim that a "massive migration" occured, not a small group of a few men riding from Ukraine to Iberia.

But if you say that Yamna expansion was in 4400-3000 BC, then L151 is too young to be part of it.

Also, there is a huge gap of nearly a thousand years between formation and TMRCA of L151. It suggests that L151 either underwent a bottleneck (as I1 did) a millennium after its initial expansion, or that it only barely "vegetated", as a marginal and small in numbers lineage, for the first thousand years of its existence.

If L151 underwent a bottleneck around year 2900 BC - why did that happen, and in which area? If L151 did not go through a bottleneck, then why was it such a marginal / small lineage from 3800 to 2900 BC?

Gravetto-Danubian
05-15-2016, 10:45 PM
Yes it'll be interesting to evaluate Gimbutas' hypothesis when we get a more complete sample set

But one problem I see (to reiterate) is the lack of EHG admixture in Baden (or Remedello, or those central German TRB mound graves)
Although future aDNA might change this, it is hard at present to see BB deriving from a Yamnaya/ Balkan fusion; for EHG arrives much too late; and has too low EHG % (based on the BA proxy from c. 2000 BC), and formal stats dont support BB deriving from a Balkan-Yamnaya mix

moreover, not many (?any) scholars in the last 4 decades favour BB origins to the Balkans. Although BB origins remains a controversial topic, the prevailing consensus would place it somewhere in central-western Europe, doesn't it ?

It seems like it's a case of BB from west, R1b from east ? (Relatively speaking)

FredH
05-16-2016, 09:08 AM
It is pretty well known that there were several waves of expansion westward out of the steppe, beginning about 4400 BC and culminating in the Yamnaya expansion about 3000 BC.

Look at the evidence.


1. L51 and Z2103 are brother clades under L23 and born at about the same time.

2. Z2103 has been found in eastern Yamnaya, but thus far we have no y-dna from western Yamnaya.

3. It was western Yamnaya that moved up the Danube Valley into the Carpathian basin.

4. Western Europe became overwhelmingly Indo-European speaking and predominantly R1b-L51 somehow.

5. According to Marija Gimbutas, a renowned archaeologist who worked on many of the digs involving kurgan cultures, Bell Beaker was the product of the fusion of Yamnaya and Vucedol, and Vucedol was the product of the mix of an earlier wave of steppe migrants and Baden farmers.

6. Plenty of R1b-L51 (including its subclades, like P312 and the P312 subclades U152 and L21) has been found in Bell Beaker.

7. According to Gimbutas and a number of other scholars, Bell Beaker is largely responsible for the spread of Indo-European speech to western Europe.

8. L51 shows a growth spurt and a proliferation of subclades in the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, the right timing to be the product of the steppe expansion into Europe but not the right timing for some sort of Near Eastern expansion into Europe.


The problem is not at all the proliferation of mutations downstream of L51 in Europe after 3000 BC, the Problem is the proliferation of mutations in 4000 BC: downstream of L23 like L51 formed in 6200 bp, Z2103 formed 6200bp, Z2106 formed 6100bp etc. etc...

It's a genetic fact that the number of mutation is related to the size of the population then if we observe a growth of mutation at a given period this must be related to a growth of population at the same period.

Then my question still remains unanswered:
where are the archaelogical proofs in Pontic Steppe (East or West) of a growing demography in 4000 BC giving some such rapid succesions of mutations?

I made a rapid tour on haplogroup G & E & J tree to check if there were also mutations in this period of time, I found not as much as in R1b.
The problem with the passed archeology, it's difficult to differantiate culture migration from people migration. Only genetic can do it.

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 09:47 AM
Why do you think that people can't move into the steppe, but people from the steppe can move everywhere - northern European plains, Baltic forests, Balkan mountains & south Asian savannah ?
Because the Steppes are a specific biotope, not easy to adapt.


Let's think about it for a second. Harsh climactic conditions forced people off the steppe repeatedly, to almost wholescale desertion. It happened in the Mesolithic, it happened in the LBA Belozerka period, it happened after the major Scythian phase, and i happened in the 5th century AD. It also happened, but only half so, in the Catacomb period (mid Bronze Age). Each time, it was re-settled, after a variable hiatus period, from various different directions, depending on specific event. Moreover, some parts of the steppe were colonized from the south, - central Asia- during the Iron Age.

Isn't it rather obvious that the steppe was a population sink, not source. ?

Both ideas are not contradictory, as durable colonization was the fact of nomadic or semi-nomadic people.

I don't buy a desertification of the steppes except during the most harsh climatic events. Absence of artefacts is not absence of population.




Some would say that YFull has underestimated ages by 20%, which would mean that M269 began to split more like 7500 y BP.


Completely agree.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-16-2016, 09:54 AM
Because the Steppes are a specific biotope, not easy to adapt.

Well, so are other biotopes. All require specific adaptations.




I don't buy a desertification of the steppes except during the most harsh climatic events. Absence of artefacts is not absence of population.



Yes it is. Even monkeys leave artifacts. That "absence of evidence...." arguement is nonsense when it comes to archaeology. Sure, material culture could become simpler, less "visible", etc. But absence is absence.

You need to support your arguements with citable and observable fact, not just a pet theory built on general ideas one has heard at some point in the past.

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 09:56 AM
It's a genetic fact that the number of mutation is related to the size of the population then if we observe a growth of mutation at a given period this must be related to a growth of population at the same period.


Not exactly. This is theorical, so not a fact. I don't think we have enough data from the past to know it for sure.

Moreover, in the prospect of Y mutations, you must take into account how the Y chromosome is diffused in the population. Therefore, a expansion of a specific Y subclade is not necessarely correlated to an overall population expansion. Only domination of a specific clan.

But all in all, why do you think there was no increase of population in the Steppes around 5500 years ago?

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 10:08 AM
Yes it is. Even monkeys leave artifacts. That "absence of evidence...." arguement is nonsense when it comes to archaeology. Sure, material culture could become simpler, less "visible", etc. But absence is absence.


I beg your pardon? Give us some artefacts from monkeys, please.

The Eurasian steppe is so wide that you just couldn't say we find all archeological artifacts there.

Archeology relies on sites, and research done. Not all sites have been found, and not all known sites have been worked on.

Yes, sometimes, material culture became simplier, and we can't find anything. But can we deduce that nobody lived there?

Try to find stone tools from East Asia, good luck!

But, as we have no real disagrement here, I don't see the point to discuss it further. The thread is about R1b diffusion, not the history of the Eurasian Steppe.

Gravetto-Danubian
05-16-2016, 10:12 AM
Not exactly. This is theorical, so not a fact. I don't think we have enough data from the past to know it for sure.

Moreover, in the prospect of Y mutations, you must take into account how the Y chromosome is diffused in the population. Therefore, a expansion of a specific Y subclade is not necessarely correlated to an overall population expansion. Only domination of a specific clan.



I was not referring to genetics- based inferences on population growth, nor did i state there was no growth 5500 years ago (confused me with Fred ?) Here , I agree its very theory based

What i was saying is that when we see a population drop in an area by traditional means (ie settlements, burials found; and accurately dated by typology or scientific methods), then it can't be simply argued away by invoking a lame cliche. In fact, it cannot be argued away at all. Its hard, observable fact you can hold in your hand. Im not saying there aren't any doubts, as there indeed are in any field of evidence. But there are very clear patterns already of the demographic status through most of Europe from the Mesolithic era to now. At any 250 year block, we have a fair idea which regions of Europe were densely populated, and which were not. There are ample publications on it, and this needs to be married with genetic conclusions from aDNA, etc.




But all in all, why do you think there was no increase of population in the Steppes around 5500 years ago?

Specifically for 5500 y BP, ie 3500 BC ? Yes i do think there was an increase.
It seems the steppe population on the steppe grew steadily from ~ 3500 BC to 2500 BC , but (for this region) that's all we can say, as it has not had the formal modelling afforded to other areas, like Copper Age Iberia, any period in Germany, or the Cucuteni Trioplje culture. All we can say is, yes, the population appears to have grown in that period, but there was a change and contraction after 2500 BC, going toward the Catacomb phase. Here, it appears the optimum ended and a new arid phase began on the steppe.

But how does this compare & fit in with other regions ?
That's for a another time.

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 10:35 AM
I was not referring to genetics- based inferences on population growth, nor did i state there was no growth 5500 years ago (confused me with Fred ?) Here , I agree its very theory based

Yes, it was an answer to FredH's post, not yours (as stated in the quote). But you're welcome. As I said, we don't have real disagreement. ;-)

rms2
05-16-2016, 11:17 AM
TMRCA of Western European branch of R1b - L151 - is only ca. 2900 BC according to YFull, though:

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

Shouldn't it be several centuries older to be represented among Yamna people in large numbers ??? Because you claim that a "massive migration" occured, not a small group of a few men riding from Ukraine to Iberia . . .

I did not actually use the words "massive migration", so you don't need quotation marks around them. I said there were several waves of expansion westward out of the steppe beginning in about 4400 BC and culminating in the Yamnaya expansion around 3000 BC. As it turns out, however, the Yamnaya expansion of the third millennium BC was pretty big, judging by the number of kurgans in the Carpathian basin. There are literally thousands of them.

L151 is downstream of L51. We were talking about L51, but a TMRCA of 2900 BC for L151 would put its birth squarely in the period of Yamnaya expansion westward.



But if you say that Yamna expansion was in 4400-3000 BC, then L151 is too young to be part of it.

That's not what I said. I said there were several waves of expansion westward out of the steppe beginning about 4400 BC. Yamnaya was the last and largest wave. It began about 3000 BC, but it did not end abruptly on New Year's Day, 2999 BC. It continued throughout much of the first half of the third millennium BC.

Have you read any of the books by Anthony, Mallory or Gimbutas?

rms2
05-16-2016, 11:29 AM
The problem is not at all the proliferation of mutations downstream of L51 in Europe after 3000 BC, the Problem is the proliferation of mutations in 4000 BC: downstream of L23 like L51 formed in 6200 bp, Z2103 formed 6200bp, Z2106 formed 6100bp etc. etc...

I explained to you that steppe peoples were on the move during that period, expanding westward into Europe in several waves. The Yamnaya wave of the third millennium BC was simply the last and largest of them.

The proliferation of L51 subclades during the third millennium BC fits the period of Yamnaya expansion into Europe west of the Dniester, but it does not fit any Near Eastern expansion into Europe and neither does the 5th millennium BC, when both L51 and Z2103 were fathered by R1b-L23 men (or maybe the same man).

Have you read any of the books by Anthony, Mallory or Gimbutas?

FredH
05-16-2016, 12:11 PM
I explained to you that steppe peoples were on the move during that period, expanding westward into Europe in several waves. The Yamnaya wave of the third millennium BC was simply the last and largest of them.

The proliferation of L51 subclades during the third millennium BC fits the period of Yamnaya expansion into Europe west of the Dniester, but it does not fit any Near Eastern expansion into Europe and neither does the 5th millennium BC, when both L51 and Z2103 were fathered by R1b-L23 men (or maybe the same man).

Have you read any of the books by Anthony, Mallory or Gimbutas?

the 6200 years L23 subclades fit well the Uruk cities state expansion in 4000 ybp.
I propose this interesting reading about a genetic study on Near East people:
Al-Zahery N, Pala M, Battaglia V, et al. (2011). "In search of the genetic footprints of Sumerians: a survey of Y-chromosome and mtDNA variation in the Marsh Arabs of Iraq". BMC Evolutionary Biology 11: 288
Here (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3215667/)
They studied people of Mesopotamian Marshes.
I quote: "The ancient inhabitants of the marsh areas were Sumerians, who were the first to develop an urban civilization some 5,000 years ago. Although footprints of their great civilization are still evident in prominent archaeological sites lying on the edges of the marshes, such as the ancient Sumerian cities of Lagash, Ur, Uruk, Eridu and Larsa, the origin of Sumerians is still a matter of debate"
They made genetic analysis of people living there and guess what? L23 haplogroup is one of the most popular haplogroup in the Iraq group even with a small ratio of L51 but only R1b-L23 (no R1b-L51/M412 nor R1a) is found , of course at much lower level than Middle Eastern J haplogroup but still at a significant level in Arab Marshes supposed to be of Sumerian descent. The repartition by haplogroup in the Iraquis & Arab Marshes Here (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3215667/figure/F2/)
In the Article Table the Near-Eastern haplogroup J1-Page8 mutation has the biggest frequency 72.7% of Marshes population. The estimated age of the Mutation by the authors is 4000 ybp, that could correspond to the Semitic Babilonian period of Mesopotamia after 2000 BC.
In other hand the only mutation which corrolates with the raise of the Uruk cities-state is .... the 6200 years old mutation L23, that 's a rather funy coincidence.
I understand this is not proof at all, this is just concordant results.
After Inquiry, the ancient human remains found on sumerian archeological sites are all in Chicago, London, Osaka, Warsaw...
"There is also a dental
collection of about 500 individuals from many sites from eastern Syria and
northern Iraq housed in the Department of Historical Anthropology at Warsaw
University (cf. Soltysiak 2003[2006])" here (http://www.antropologia.uw.edu.pl/SHA/sha-04-07.pdf)

marcelkolar
05-16-2016, 12:36 PM
'Bell Beaker' as an archeologically defined culture cannot have developed outside of Iberia -- the tenets of Gimbutas' farmer-herder amalgamation hypothesis are insupportable in the case of Bell Beaker. The idiosyncratic incision decoration of Bell Beaker pottery already existed in the 4th millenium BC in Skhirat, northern Morocco, even employing sub-beaker shapes in a few cases long before any contact with Corded Ware. The characteristic wristguards that constitute an integral part of the Beaker package also entered the North African context too early to be explained by an introduction from the east, suggesting that there existed something like a pan-Iberoatlantic-Mediterranean technological-cultural complex.

The first true maritime Bell Beakers in Zambujal seem to be a minority off-shoot of the preceding Chalcolithic megalithism of the Alentejo culture, with a distinct shift towards a cosmopolitan approach that unifies various elements present in Western Europe-North Africa in a single complex. The latter appears to become even more pronounced during the westward migration of BB -- indeed, it seems one of the reasons the Bell Beaker phenomenon is so elusive is that it had a homogenizing effect on the pre-existing populations which makes it rather difficult to resolve the question of genetic origin from aDNA alone. We need DNA from southern Portugal and the first true contact zones in south-western Germany where we find Corded Ware and Bell Beaker archeology in still stark contrast to each other. Kromsdorf and other eastern Beaker sites are already somewhat 'watered-down' compared to the Western sites.

There's more than enough time between the early Iberian Beakers and the German Beakers for a significant shift towards steppe-like DNA. Even a complete turnover in the paternal haplotype would be possible within a span of 300-400 years. The debate should focus on what happened to the Beaker package once it left the south-western fringe of Europe -- deriving Bell Beaker directly from Vucedol-Yamnaya is impossible since none of the elements of early BB exist in Eastern Europe. Anyway, it's not obvious that Bell Beaker was instrumental to the spread of Indo-European languages -- there's nothing in its material culture that hints at a particular linguistic affiliation IMHO.

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 02:08 PM
In the Article's Table The only mutation which corrolates with the raise of the Uruk cities-state is .... the 6200 years old mutation L23, that 's a rather funy coincidence.


from the article "Haplogroup R1 is present at a significantly lower frequency in the Marsh Arabs than in the Iraqi sample (2.8% vs 19.4%; P < 0.001), and is present only as R1-L23. Conversely the Iraqis are distributed in all the three R1 sub-groups (R1-L23, R1-M17 and R1-M412) found in this survey at frequencies of 9.1%, 8.4% and 1.9%, respectively."

Can I remind you that Mesopotamia is known to have suffered of several IE invasions, and that some of the Iraquis are still IE speakers today (Kurds)?

FredH
05-16-2016, 02:59 PM
from the article "Haplogroup R1 is present at a significantly lower frequency in the Marsh Arabs than in the Iraqi sample (2.8% vs 19.4%; P < 0.001), and is present only as R1-L23. Conversely the Iraqis are distributed in all the three R1 sub-groups (R1-L23, R1-M17 and R1-M412) found in this survey at frequencies of 9.1%, 8.4% and 1.9%, respectively."

Can I remind you that Mesopotamia is known to have suffered of several IE invasions, and that some of the Iraquis are still IE speakers today (Kurds)?

I believe the scentists have selected this area in Iraq called "Arab Marsch" for their studies of the Sumerian for good reasons. We cannot discard their analysis so easily. I think. They explained why they use this area. These people are very apart from the others Iraquis, all of that is explained in the article. They concluded these people of Arab Marsh could not come from Asia but are more middle eastern with the mutation J2-Page8 4000 years old. Note that they left no comment on the little unique presence of R1b-L23 6000 years old mutation in the Arab Marsh, except that 4000 years old corresponds to the Semitic Babylonian Mesopotamia. 6000 years old corresponds to Uruk period as you can check.
Again , all of that doesn't prove anything, this is just concordant facts.

ADW_1981
05-16-2016, 03:02 PM
I believe the scentists have selected this area in Iraq called "Arab Marsch" for their studies of the Sumerian for good reasons. We cannot discard their analysis so easily. I think. They explained why they use this area. These people are very apart from the others Iraquis, all of that is explained in the article. They concluded these people of Arab Marsh could not come from Asia but are more middle eastern with the mutation J2-Page8 4000 years old. Note that they said nothing on the little unique presence of R1b-L23 6000 years old mutation in the Arab Marsh, except that 4000 years old corresponds to the Semitic Babylonian Mesopotamia. 6000 years old corresponds to Uruk period as you can check.

R1b-L23 could be 6000 years old, but it doesn't mean it has been in southern Iraq that long. There is a very big difference. A better approximation would be to find the TMRCA of all studied Iraq R1b men within L23 for example. We should be getting Sumerian aDNA soon. My hunch is on J1/J2/G/E1b, but we shall see.

FredH
05-16-2016, 03:27 PM
R1b-L23 could be 6000 years old, but it doesn't mean it has been in southern Iraq that long. There is a very big difference. A better approximation would be to find the TMRCA of all studied Iraq R1b men within L23 for example. We should be getting Sumerian aDNA soon. My hunch is on J1/J2/G/E1b, but we shall see.

Sumerian aDNA, what age?
TMRCA of all studied Iraq R1b men within L23, I think so too.

ffoucart
05-16-2016, 04:44 PM
Sumerian aDNA, what age?
TMRCA of all studied Iraq R1b men within L23, I think so too.

The % in Arab Marsh is low (around 6%) far lower than in the Iraqis (around 19%). And nearly all are L23. It looks more like a founder effect, than a diffusion from there. If the Arab Marsh are representative of the Uruk population, it is not very consistent with a diffusion of R1b L23 from Uruk. Quite the contrary.

FredH
05-16-2016, 06:41 PM
The % in Arab Marsh is low (around 6%) far lower than in the Iraqis (around 19%). And nearly all are L23. It looks more like a founder effect, than a diffusion from there. If the Arab Marsh are representative of the Uruk population, it is not very consistent with a diffusion of R1b L23 from Uruk. Quite the contrary.

They didn't check the subclades of L23 except L51/M412, may be they are Z2103 or L23* but certainly not L51. The sample size is still not big. But it's a rather curious result. The authors made any comments.
In 2000 BC the Semitic Assyrian replaced the Uruk people.

FredH
05-17-2016, 08:03 AM
Not exactly. This is theorical, so not a fact. I don't think we have enough data from the past to know it for sure.

Moreover, in the prospect of Y mutations, you must take into account how the Y chromosome is diffused in the population. Therefore, a expansion of a specific Y subclade is not necessarely correlated to an overall population expansion. Only domination of a specific clan.

But all in all, why do you think there was no increase of population in the Steppes around 5500 years ago?

It's both an observed fact and easily explained. for Y gene with an overall mutation rate R ,It's obvious that the number of Mutation in a male population of size N is simply N x R proportional to the size of the male population N. More you have men more the Y gene mutations number is big. Then any kind of selection process reduce more or less the gene pool but at least when you have a burst of Mutation at a particular time , this is the signature of a population growing at that time.
Otherwise , I don't know if there were an increase or not of population around 6000 bp in the Steppe. It's why I am asking.

Tomenable
06-23-2016, 12:44 AM
Sample I1635 (2619-2465 BC) from Kura-Araxes culture is R1b:

https://twitter.com/iosif_lazaridis/status/744192603424456704

This culture is definitely linked with the diffusion of metallurgy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

ffoucart
06-23-2016, 01:12 AM
Sample I1635 (2619-2465 BC) from Kura-Araxes culture is R1b:

https://twitter.com/iosif_lazaridis/status/744192603424456704

This culture is definitely linked with the diffusion of metallurgy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

yes, but M415 not L23.

Tomenable
06-23-2016, 01:25 AM
yes, but M415 not L23.

Some very rare (?) branch, it seems?:

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-i1635/

parasar
06-23-2016, 03:10 AM
Some very rare (?) branch, it seems?:

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-i1635/

Surprised to see this highlighted
R1a-M459-SRY10831/PF6234/PAGE65.1/SRY1532.1/SRY10831.1
Or is it SRY10831.2?

Tomenable
06-23-2016, 04:52 PM
^ IIRC, this is some unstable/unreliable SNP.

Tomenable
06-23-2016, 09:15 PM
This Kura-Araxes R1b may be L389*, which exists in Armenia also today, but at low frequency.

Kristiina
06-24-2016, 02:44 PM
Tomenable, I checked the autosomal makeup of this Kura Araxes R1b and he is less EHG (only 12%) than Chalcolithic Armenians and MLBA Armenians and carries some extra WHG. According to Genetiker, he is as dark eyed, dark haired and dark skinned as Natufians. Then I checked on Wikipedia that "An archaeological site in Serbia contains the oldest securely dated evidence of copper making at high temperature, from 7,500 years ago. The find in June 2010 extends the known record of copper smelting by about 800 years, and suggests that copper smelting may have been invented in separate parts of Asia and Europe at that time rather than spreading from a single source. In Serbia, a copper axe was found at Prokuplje, which indicates that humans were using metals in Europe by 7,500 years ago (~5,500 BCE), many years earlier than previously believed"; and "Though not conventionally considered part of the Chalcolithic or "Copper Age", the Vinča culture (Balkans) provides the earliest known example of copper metallurgy."

If we go by your theory that R1b spread with metallurgy, we could indeed argue that Eastern Mediterranean/Italy was the original area of R1b as evidenced by Villabruna (14000 BC) and Els Trocs (5000 BC) and Lánycsók Vučedol (2800 BC), and R1b spread from the Balkans to the Near East. If I am not mistaken, now we have in Caucasus/ Yamnaya:
Kura Araxes (Armenia_EBA): I1635 R1b1-M415(xM269) or R1b1a-CTS4244(xV88, P297)
Armenia MBA R1b-P297(x269)
Yamnaya Temrta RISE546 R1b-269(xL23)
Yamnaya Samara, Yamnaya Kalmykia R1b-L23

In my other post I was speculating along the lines of the Wikipedia article on Kura Axes if this R1b guy spoke Urartuan/Hurrian or Kartvelian language but now I also wonder if he could have spoken the Armenian language. If I am not mistaken, Armenians are still today autosomally very much Neolithic Anatolia.

Here are the Eurogenes ANE West_Eurasia_K8 results of the Samara Hunter gatherer, pre R1b-M73:
WHG 52%, ANE 37%, South Eurasian 5%, Near Eastern 0%, East Eurasian 4%
Very high amount of WHG and no Near Eastern. However, CHG was not known when this analysis was made.

parasar
06-24-2016, 03:27 PM
^ IIRC, this is some unstable/unreliable SNP.

It indeed has mutated at least twice, but appears very stable.

Per YFull
− SRY10831 • PF6234 • PAGE65.1 • SRY1532.1 • SRY10831.1 R-M459
− SRY10831 • PF6234 • PAGE65.1 • SRY1532.1 • SRY10831.1 BT

Silesian
08-16-2016, 09:53 PM
Rapid diffusion of metallurgy in the 4th millennium BC can be linked with expansion of R1b M269/L23:

Metallurgy expanded to Iberia across the Mediterranean region and later with Bell Beakers:


And a map showing how R1b-L51 or maybe pre-L51 L23 (ancestral to ATP3 and Bell Beaker) migrated:

http://s32.postimg.org/ke2zqss9x/metallurgy4.png




You might not have known this when you posted your theory of L23 and by extension z2103+ copper smelting. However Arkaim [the settlement at the very top of the diagram you posted was a R1a-93/94 fortified settlement producing copper. Sintashta had war-chariots and special weapons[no composite bow]. Several Sintashta settlements were built over Poltavka-R1b-Z2103.




http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Dj_O_Z7Jij4/VeTPge_HF0I/AAAAAAAABnw/c1xAps9HoqQ/w1200-h630-p-nu/arkaim.jpg




A rough idea how R1a-93 dispersed to the South-West of Sintashta settlements.
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1a-Z93-Asia.png

A modern day pocket of R1a-93 that is roughly located near the Sintashta fortified settlements. Note significant R1b pockets are also found. This becomes evident

http://oi68.tinypic.com/2wrq1iv.jpg



Burzyyanskiy Disctrict


http://oi63.tinypic.com/2s5xlhy.jpg

http://ftp.anrb.ru/molgen/Lobov_AS.PDF

Tomenable
05-14-2017, 06:24 PM
Bump.

I was right about R1b all over Mesolithic and Post-Mesolithic Balkans!

Including Varna culture!

Gravetto-Danubian
05-14-2017, 06:43 PM
Bump.

I was right about R1b all over Mesolithic and Post-Mesolithic Balkans!

Including Varna culture!


Well done. We had a whole thread on it too
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8107-Where-did-R1-come-from-(2016)-The-UP-of-north-central-Eurasia/page4

Tomenable
05-14-2017, 06:50 PM
My idea that Balkan HG ancestry (and their R1b) survived the initial onslaught of Anatolian farmers is also confirmed. Many people found it unlikely due to the degree of population replacement in Early Neolithic Central Europe.

rms2
05-14-2017, 09:47 PM
Er, ah, if this (from the original post in this thread) was your idea, I don't think the SE Europe paper proves you right at all:


In another thread (link) I've argued that R1b-L51 (or pre-L51 ancestral lineages of L23) was never present on the Steppe, but was responsible for spreading early metallurgy directly from the Middle East to Western Europe . . .

From what I gather, it looks like R1b spent the LGM in a SE European refuge that probably included Ukraine, and evidently lammed out of the Balkans at the end of the Mesolithic/start of the Neolithic and moved into Ukraine.

Looks like L23 arose on the steppe, which explains its correlation with steppe autosomal dna and its abundant presence thus far in both Yamnaya and Bell Beaker.

Ethereal
08-18-2017, 11:19 PM
Perhaps this could explain the almost ubiquitous levels of Ashkenazi R1b being M269, as Ashkenazis seem to have close to 0 admixture from intermarriage on the paternal side.