PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on U106 - another beaker founder effect based on marine monopoly like L21?



alan
09-03-2016, 05:11 PM
It would be interesting if the current pattern of no L11 in central European corded ware continues while U106 was present in the battle axe variant in northern Europe and the Nordic Bronze Age afterwards. I know people have put ifs and buts into the U106 battle axe guy due to a relatively late date and some peculiarities in the burial BUT lets just say for now that this pattern is confirmed.

If so then what could be in northern European battle axe CW variant that isnt in the core central European CW from Poland to the Rhine? I considered a Globular Amphora substrate but that really doesnt work - it didnt make it to Scandinavia and if anything its impact should be bigger on east-central European CW not the http://journal.topoi.org/index.php/etopoi/article/viewFile/182/212

I personally think its still an open question as to whether U106 was in corded ware at all. The other option is that U106 was a small beaker line that hit the big time in a kind of founder effect in one isolated area in northern Europe and nowhere else. If that happened it would be a parallel with the way L21 probably crossed the English Channel and found what was virgin territory for metallurgists with no competition - hence a huge founder effect. The most obvious parallel to that would be if U106 found a virgin maritime territory with no rivals in coastal north Germany or even coastal Poland and Scandinavia. I seriously dount that could have happened in central Europe in general because we know that P312 lines dominated that area in beaker times.

The key to such a model for U106 is similar to L21 - it couldnt have happened until a group linked to U106 (beaker or not) had acquired or could access decent maritime transport. Once the latter had been achieved by a group, it might have unlimited domination over an area only or most easily accessed by sea. That seems to be what happened with L21 IMO. I suspect the same may have happened with U106.

Certainly ancient DNA to date would support the model of U106 being an eastern version of L21 - i.e. a beaker lineage which acquired maritime skills that inland groups like U152 could do nothing to challenge. In Europe east of the Rhine, this could only really work in a Scandinavian (or v close) context where maritime power is really vital - arguably the only place other than the isles where maritime transport is so crucial. The ancient DNA does appear to show the appearance of U106 in the beaker period in Scandinavia and its importance thereafter. The beaker culture and the beaker period is more of wooly in and adjacent to Scandinavia as there is a complex blending with battle axe cultural traits.

Anyway, I want to further flesh out a model of L21 in the north-west and U106 in Scandinavia and 'Germanic Europe' as parallel north European founder effects by beaker groups who acquired or developed maritime technology/skills that their inland bros didnt. All we know is the isles by definition require decent maritime skills for a continental group to move into. The plank-sewn boats in Britain dont survive until the immediate post-beaker era but it probably provides a hint that boat improvement may have been worked on for some time before and likely originated in a skin boat tradition. The Scandinavian boat tradition seems to have a different origin stemming from log boats that seems to gradually develop from the Neolithic to the early historic era.

So we are not talking about a pan-beaker boat type. IMO in all probability the beaker groups who crossed the northern seas likely acquired boats seaworthy enough to cross those choppy seas from people who were already there - probably traders who were responsible for the pre-beaker high status object trade in the Neolithic which is well attested and which clearly involved maritime skills. A central European group with steppe genetics doesnt just suddenly become a skilled sailing group and its unthinkable that they wouldnt have sought to team up with experienced mariners who had been plying rough northern seas to trade status goods since the time of the first farmers there. Nevertheless the beaker period and the coming of regular copper use made trading a bit more important than it had been in the Neolithic - no other way of getting copper (and later Bronze) and there is a paper that sees the beaker period as one of an upsurge in investment in maritime technology.

After a founding phase by L21 groups crossing the English channel and my hypothetical U106 one on the coasts further east, first-in advantage and genetic founder effect, there is no reason to think those two groups rule of the searoutes would ever be wrestled off them. Indeed these two groups dominated their respective areas of the Northern seas until they met each other in the migration period.

NB- The details or frequency or even modern variance of current distribution on U106 in 'Germanic' Europe is not important to this model. We know there have been huge upheavals over the last 4000 years and ancient DNA trumps all of that

GoldenHind
09-03-2016, 09:29 PM
I believe one of the highest concentrations of U106 in Scandinavia today is in northern Jutland. I don't believe there has been much immigration there in the modern area- it's a pretty rural area. This is the location of the Beaker settlement in Denmark. That is hardly conclusive evidence, but it is suggestive. I don't think a presence of U106 in some Beakers can be ruled out until we get some samples of Beaker aDNA from Denmark, or stronger evidence of U106 in a Corded Ware context than the one example. If U106 did arrive in Scandinavia with the Beakers, the question is where it got there from. One possibility is a maritime route along the west coast of Jutland from the mouth of the Rhine, another would be along the east coast pf Jutland from the south Baltic coast.

Incidentally I'm not certain all subclades of U106 have strong presence in Scandinavia. The last I looked, U198 was pretty rare there.

alan
09-04-2016, 06:20 PM
I believe one of the highest concentrations of U106 in Scandinavia today is in northern Jutland. I don't believe there has been much immigration there in the modern area- it's a pretty rural area. This is the location of the Beaker settlement in Denmark. That is hardly conclusive evidence, but it is suggestive. I don't think a presence of U106 in some Beakers can be ruled out until we get some samples of Beaker aDNA from Denmark, or stronger evidence of U106 in a Corded Ware context than the one example. If U106 did arrive in Scandinavia with the Beakers, the question is where it got there from. One possibility is a maritime route along the west coast of Jutland from the mouth of the Rhine, another would be along the east coast pf Jutland from the south Baltic coast.

Incidentally I'm not certain all subclades of U106 have strong presence in Scandinavia. The last I looked, U198 was pretty rare there.

My feeling is in low population marginal areas for agriculture and where the very high death rate profession of fishing and otherwise using the seas is also important, a lot of bottlenecks, line extinctions etc would have happened and modern patterns and variance may be very misleading.

I suppose my main point is that L11 clades seemed to have an inherent propensity for one branch or subbranch to predominate in an given geographical zone. These geographical patterns go right to the most upstream branching off L11 and P312. clearly tells us something about L11 and P312 in its earliest days. We have ancient DNA evidence that indicates that already 4000 years ago, give or take a century or so, the patterning of L11 and P312 subdivisions we see today was already taking shape to some degree. The sample is tiny but its the very tinyness of the sample which makes it striking that the what we have found so far fits today's various L11 and P312 major distribution patterns.

So at least it appears that all L11 major initial branchings share this trait of having formed geographical patters by 2000BC or before that have survived into the modern world. This tends to suggest to me that the all L11 was subject to the same cultural-social patterns not just P312 which in turn makes me think U106 may have been a beaker lineage.There fact U106 seems to have remained confined to around the north Germanic area and didnt spread west of the Rhine or into the isles until Roman times and after is not much different from the fact U152 likely made very little impact on much of the isles or than L21 is rare deep in cental Europe. They are all similar phenomenon of strong geographical clines in L11 clades that even a tiny sample of ancient DNA seems to have picked up that this started to form over 4000 years ago. The fact that U106 seems to have undergone a major expansion with Germanic since 400BC is entirely compatible with U106 having been a beaker clade largely confined to north-east Europe 2000 years earlier.

alan
09-04-2016, 06:34 PM
However, the Danish beaker culture,concentrated in north Jutland, is thought to be closest linked to the Dutch beakers.

Heber
09-04-2016, 08:24 PM
So at least it appears that all L11 major initial branchings share this trait of having formed geographical patters by 2000BC or before that have survived into the modern world. This tends to suggest to me that the all L11 was subject to the same cultural-social patterns not just P312 which in turn makes me think U106 may have been a beaker lineage.There fact U106 seems to have remained confined to around the north Germanic area and didnt spread west of the Rhine or into the isles until Roman times and after is not much different from the fact U152 likely made very little impact on much of the isles or than L21 is rare deep in cental Europe.

The principal message in Cassidy et al was "CONTINUITY", repeated over 20 times so I will not be surprised to see P312 expanding in the Atlantic Zone and U106 east of the Rhine.
L21 arrived in Ireland before 2000BC and Ireland today has the highest frequency of L21.
I am not sure about U106 being mainly linked to Bell Beaker.
The very latest papers including Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages has made it clear that Bell Beaker expanded from the West from an Atlantic base.

alan
09-04-2016, 11:54 PM
The principal message in Cassidy et al was "CONTINUITY", repeated over 20 times so I will not be surprised to see P312 expanding in the Atlantic Zone and U106 east of the Rhine.
L21 arrived in Ireland before 2000BC and Ireland today has the highest frequency of L21.
I am not sure about U106 being mainly linked to Bell Beaker.
The very latest papers including Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages has made it clear that Bell Beaker expanded from the West from an Atlantic base.

I think the distinction between beaker pot maker and beaker people isnt widely understood. The beaker pot itself may have first been made in Iberia c. 2800BC but these were people with Neolithic type crania who buried in Neolithic type collective tombs and were probably descendants of local Neolithic farmers with a small additional component from copper workers who spread from the Balkans to Iberia across the period 3500-3000BC. They invented beaker pots in Iberia around 2800BC but IMO they were the same people as the early copper age pre-beaker Iberians c. 3100-2800BC. The latter were essentially typical middle Neolithic farmers genetically speaking and this has already been shown in ancient DNA for immediate pre-beaker copper age people in Iberia, southern France and Italy.

In contrast beaker package was formed in central Europe c. 2500BC. They were probably horse riding central Europeans who had had contact with the genetically middle Neolithic farmer-like inventors of the beaker pot coming form the south-west c. 2500BC in central Europe, intermarried with them, formed trade alliances then usurped them. These central European beaker people seem to be a different people from the Iberian inventors of the beaker pot and the fact they came to share the pot type is probably due to contact and intermarriage (pottery is a female craft so its a terrible tracker for y DNA).

When they get round to testing the beaker pot users in Iberia c. 2800-2500BC they will find no R1b (other than stuff in or close to the V88 Neolithic branch) and no steppe genes. They will find them to be essentially copper using middle Neolithic farmers similar to those found in immediate pre-beaker times in Italy, southern France and Iberia. I am going to predict that in fact it will only be in the latest beaker period of Iberia not much before c. 2000BC that P312, steppes genes etc will appear in Iberia.

I believe they will find they are essentially the same early copper age people as are found in southern Europe c. 3500-3000BC and will lack the steppe component of R1b. They will appear like all the other southern Europeans of that period - essentially middle Neolithic people just as the I dont believe the beaker-R1b-steppe link occurred until c. 2500BC in central Europe.