PDA

View Full Version : Where did L21 originate? and how/where the early branches expand?



R.Rocca
05-20-2013, 12:03 PM
As the best tested group in commercial (FTDNA) and full genome (1KG) testing, we should have a pretty good picture of the modern day subclades of L21 and their distribution. What does that breakdown tell us about the origin and/or expansion of L21?

[If one of the moderators can change the name of the title from L2 to L21, I would appreciate it. Thanks] [Moderator/Mikewww 5/20/2013: Done. I see it takes an L2 guy to start up a good L21 conversation sometimes. :)]

R.Rocca
05-20-2013, 02:18 PM
From the untrained eye of a non-L21 person, it looks like there are four generally mentioned geographical points of origination and/or expansion for L21. In alphabetical order, they are:

1. Brittany, France
2. Great Britain
3. Ireland
4. Lower Rhine-Meuse delta

Have any of these areas show a propensity for L21* ???

Dubhthach
05-20-2013, 03:05 PM
My money is on France, we basically see no L21+/DF13- in samples with native Irish surnames. If anything I believe the highest number of L21** (DF13-, DF63-) are found in samples with MDKA in France.

-Paul
(DF41+)

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 03:19 PM
My money is on France, we basically see no L21+/DF13- in samples with native Irish surnames. If anything I believe the highest number of L21** (DF13-, DF63-) are found in samples with MDKA in France....
For those who think it is probably France, including myself, I think we need to start getting down to a regional focus... Bretagne? Normandy, N-C France, i.e Paris, or down to SE France, etc.? France is a big country.

P.S. I'm not ruling out either side of the Rhine all the way north through the Low Countries... nor South/SE England.

R.Rocca
05-20-2013, 03:19 PM
My money is on France, we basically see no L21+/DF13- in samples with native Irish surnames. If anything I believe the highest number of L21** (DF13-, DF63-) are found in samples with MDKA in France.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I'm having a hard time finding any L21** of French ancestry. I am looking at the "Bb. L21* (DF13-, DF63-)" group in the FTDNA L21 project. Are there multiple L21 projects?

rms2
05-20-2013, 03:33 PM
I agree that France may be the point of origin for L21, but most of our current small number of DF13- DF63- have ancestry in England, mostly in the East, with the westernmost location being Almondbury, West Yorkshire (Berry, kit 37201). Blancett, kit 8814, has a French surname, but he cannot get his y line out of North America. Mattox, kit 25304, has a family tradition of French Huguenot ancestry and a possible name change from Matteaux (or something similar), but that has not been proven.

DF63 has some French and German representatives but also has a showing in eastern Scotland.

I have not had the chance to really confirm this, but it seems to me that once you get as far west as the West Midlands of England and beyond, you run out of DF13- and get into a solid block of DF13+. I do not know of a single Irish or Welsh individual who has tested DF13-, for example.

One of our perennial problems, however, is the lack of continentals, especially French, who have tested enough SNPs to help us out with this.

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 04:21 PM
Here are the confirmed L21+ DF13- DF63- and suspected (by 67 STR matching) folks. This is the true L21**. England and France and that's about it. Ireland and Scotland are conspicuously missing except for the Blanchett, which sounds more like a French origin surname than a Gaelic or Welsh name.

f25304 Maddox R1b-P312>L21** L21+ L459+ Z245+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13- uas France
fN80403 Bishop R1b-P312>L21** L21+ L459+ Z245+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- Z2542- X13-1313 England, London
f26883 Tupper R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas England, South East, West Sussex, Bury
f37201 Berry R1b-P312>L21** L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L69- L144- L195- 3c1g X13- uas England, Yorkshire and Humber, West Yorkshire, Almondbury Huddersfield
f236395 Bishop R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13-1313 England
f23955 Hale zzL21suspect X13-1313 England
f29568 Blanchett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 Ireland
f12733 Blancett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 UK
f365 Cook R1b-P312>L21>DF13 DF13+ Z2542+ DF49- L96- L144- X13- uas UK
f94428 Meadows R1b-P312>L21** L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13-1313 UK
f41108 Blancett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f8814 Blancett R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- L144- L195- X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f37707 Blanchet zzL21suspect X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f226438 Maddox zzL21suspect X13- uas zzzUnkOrigin
f224598 Meadows zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f176877 Wilson zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f44114 zzzUnk(Hale) zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f44113 zzzUnk(Hale) zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
fN49494 zzzUnk(Wildes) R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas zzzUnkOrigin

I have all the L21+ DF13- DF63+ guys, a longer list, posted over here.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?940-DF63-%28L21-gt-DF63%29

France, Germany, and Spain (Catalonia) show up in the DF63+ list.

Scotland shows up too with DF63+ with the good sized MacFarland family which flows over into Ulster, but the rest of Ireland is conspicuously missing.

I think the STR diversity of L21 overall is still higher in England than it is in Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

All of this makes me inclined to rule out the British Isles except for England - specifically England (and not Great Britain.)

seferhabahir
05-20-2013, 04:40 PM
Why does the Geno 2.0 project continue to be the only entity that tends to align with my thinking (West Asia)? Are these Spencer Wells' estimations or somebody else's? Are we just that out of it? Surely someone there has put thought into it? I know I'm completely biased, but why would Nat Geo be? Also, why would modern day distribution parallel the origin and expansion of P312, L21, and DF13 (and also now I guess I can include Z251) given the overemphasis of British Isles testers? I may not agree with the Geno 2.0 ages, but aren't all these SNPs 3,500-5,000 years old? What if they all occurred close together?

Here's the summary from the Geno 2.0 L21 page (it's been the same since they started):

Branch: L21
Age: 5,500 – 12,000 Years Ago
Location of Origin: West Asia

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 04:45 PM
Why does the Geno 2.0 project continue to be the only entity that tends to align with my thinking (West Asia)? Are these Spencer Wells' estimations or somebody else's? Are we just that out of it? Surely someone there has put thought into it? I know I'm completely biased, but why would Nat Geo be? Also, why would modern day distribution parallel the origin and expansion of P312, L21, and DF13 (and also now I guess I can include Z251) given the overemphasis of British Isles testers? I may not agree with the Geno 2.0 ages, but aren't all these SNPs 3,500-4,000 old? What if they all occurred close together?

Here's the summary from the Geno 2.0 L21 page (it's been the same since they started):

Branch: L21
Age: 5,500 – 12,000 Years Ago
Location of Origin: West Asia

I would not say that West Asia is impossible, it just seems unlikely for L21. What you are seeing on the Geno 2.0 web site is, I think, just a default answer for R1b. When they don't have specific information on a subclade, they seem to just default to higher levels up in the tree. We had a discussion on this and L47 over on the U106 yahoo group. I think that most of us felt that this is what was happening....

I guess, I don't trust National Genographic's narratives on their web site. They seem vague and in such a case like this, sloppy. I've been censured on forums for saying they (Wells, et al) are vague, BTW. Keep in mind, their web site is not a scientific paper. I don't know what it is, other than a vehicle to talk to and interact with the consumer/donor public. Please don't respond to concerns about National Genographic other than in a general category as I don't want to sidetrack us on this thread. I'll join in the parade in another category if you want converse on that. Sorry about the sidetracking.

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 05:00 PM
I'm having a hard time finding any L21** of French ancestry. I am looking at the "Bb. L21* (DF13-, DF63-)" group in the FTDNA L21 project. Are there multiple L21 projects?

There aren't many L21** folks out there. The one that claims French ancestry is kit # 25304. I see they are citing dates in the 1700s so I suppose it is reasonable their genaological records could be good.

You can see them in the Maddox project as family #38.

26256 samuel Maddox bc 1775 -1850 France R1b1a2
11492 JAMES Maddox b.c. 1750 FRANCE_Wm Unknown Origin R1b1a2
25304 JAMES Maddox b.c. 1715 FRANCE_James France R1b1a2a1a1b4
56388 CHARLES Maddox b.c. 1785 USA Unknown Origin R1b1a2

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/madoxETC_dna/default.aspx?section=yresults

R.Rocca
05-20-2013, 05:12 PM
I would not say that West Asia is impossible, it just seems unlikely for L21. What you are seeing on the Geno 2.0 web site is, I think, just a default answer for R1b. When they don't have specific information on a subclade, they seem to just default to higher levels up in the tree. We had a discussion on this and L47 over on the U106 yahoo group. I think that most of us felt that this is what was happening....

I guess, I don't trust National Genographic's narratives on their web site. They seem vague and in such a case like this, sloppy. I've been censured on forums for saying they (Wells, et al) are vague, BTW. Keep in mind, their web site is not a scientific paper. I don't know what it is, other than a vehicle to talk to and interact with the consumer/donor public. Please don't respond to concerns about National Genographic other than in a general category as I don't want to sidetrack us on this thread. I'll join in the parade in another category if you want converse on that. Sorry about the sidetracking.

Same exact wording for U152, so I don't think it carries much weight. Can't say I blame them for their vagueness though as they are probably obligated to go by what scientific studies say (i.e. Myres, Balaresque) which, as we know, is at the very high "R1b" level.

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 06:11 PM
...
I think the STR diversity of L21 overall is still higher in England than it is in Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

To get the counts up I used 37 or greater length haplotypes to calculate variance by country.

1.01 France (n=78)
1.01 Germany (n=50)
0.99 Ireland (n=1503)
0.97 England (n=505)
0.93 Wales (n=134)
0.86 Scotland (n=729)
0.90 Spain & Portugal (n=42)

I wouldn't make too much of any differentiation, though, because of the vagaries of STR variance by geography.

I thought I'd do a little cross-checking on Ireland and the potential effects of Ulster.

0.88 Scotland & Ulster (n=1113)
0.96 Ireland exc. Ulster (n=429)
0.90 Ulster stand-alone (n=384)

Ulster, though it, itself does not have high diversity, seems to pull whatever you attach to it up.

R.Rocca
05-20-2013, 07:55 PM
Has anyone ever tried to put L21 in a Bell Beaker context, especially Irish Bell Beakers?

As per Case's (1995), Irish Beakers in their European Context...

1. Irish BB pottery shows affinities to Atlantic, British and Central European pottery. (not much help)
2. Irish BB burial practice is that of the Atlantic collective tombs and cist, pit and barrow burials are rare. (pointing more towards France)
3. Irish BB stone wrist guards are of the two-hole variety characteristic of Western France. (pointing more towards France)

Do the last two points push the probable L21 origin (or its P312* predecessor if one considers an Isles origin for L21) closer to the Bell Beaker Breton group than that of the Rhine? Do we see a dolichocephalic/brachycephalic divide in Ireland or in Ireland versus Britain?

Mikewww
05-20-2013, 10:56 PM
Has anyone ever tried to put L21 in a Bell Beaker context, especially Irish Bell Beakers?

As per Case's (1995), Irish Beakers in their European Context...

1. Irish BB pottery shows affinities to Atlantic, British and Central European pottery. (not much help)
2. Irish BB burial practice is that of the Atlantic collective tombs and cist, pit and barrow burials are rare. (pointing more towards France)
3. Irish BB stone wrist guards are of the two-hole variety characteristic of Western France. (pointing more towards France)

Do the last two points push the probable L21 origin (or its P312* predecessor if one considers an Isles origin for L21) closer to the Bell Beaker Breton group than that of the Rhine? Do we see a dolichocephalic/brachycephalic divide in Ireland or in Ireland versus Britain?

Hopefully Alan can answer those questions, or Richard S. I see some old posts that Richard made about the W/MR Beaker folks.

Some don't necessarily like my perspective on this but I think the wave advance theory seems to apply to L21 across Britain and over to Ireland from a southeast to west/northwest set of clines. What I mean is that the earlier branching of DF13's big subclades seems to be more likely found in England. DF49* and DF23* seem to be the picture of that, remnant cousins of the very large and young M222 subclade, which is as Irish and Scottish as you get.

That doesn't mean the first L21 people in England were Brythonic speaking, though. I would suspect they were Q-Celtic if not Italo-Celtic or some predecessor (that's my appeasement for the faithful Gaels.)

If the early branching of DF13 subclades means anything along with the presence of L21*, then cultures like Wessex are good places to look.

Wessex seems to be connected to the Lower Rhine/Low Countries.


The Wessex culture is the predominant prehistoric culture of central and southern Britain during the early Bronze Age, originally defined by the British archaeologist Stuart Piggott in 1938. It should not be confused with the later Saxon kingdom of Wessex.

The culture is related to the Hilversum culture of the southern Netherlands, Belgium and northern France, and linked to the northern France armorican tumuli, prototyped with the Middle Rhine group of Beaker culture and commonly subdivided in the consecutive phases Wessex I (2000-1650 BC) and Wessex II (1650-1400).


The Hilversum culture is a prehistoric material culture found in middle Bronze Age in the region of the southern Netherlands and northern Belgium. It has been associated with the Wessex culture from the same period in southern England, and is one of the material cultures of this part of northwestern continental Europe which has been proposed to have had a "Nordwestblock" language which was indo-european, but neither Germanic nor Celtic. is closely associated with the construction and use of the later phases of Stonehenge.

rms2
05-21-2013, 12:18 AM
Isn't the thinking that Irish Beaker is derived from British Beaker and that by the time it got to Ireland there were some changes in the package?

Webb
05-21-2013, 01:33 AM
Here's my question. Obviously, whether the intent was to settle or not. L21 is so concentrated in the isles, that settling is what they did. Was it mass migration, or have they been there so long, that time was on there side as far as reproduction? Anyway, if they are there because of BB movements, why does L21's presence in the isles seem different than DF27 BB movements? Were they speaking insular Celtic when they arrived? Is it possible L21 is not part of the BB movement and were there even earlier?

rms2
05-21-2013, 08:05 AM
Don't think so. When would you have L21 arrive in the Isles? During the Neolithic? The Mesolithic? It doesn't look likely that even L11 was that far north and west by the Neolithic. Remember too that L21 isn't all that old and is, after all, part of P312, its rapid expansion and rapid succession of subclades.

Dubhthach
05-21-2013, 08:18 AM
I do wonder if Bell Beaker is abit early for L21, make sense with regards to P312. In case of Ireland "Bell Beaker" culture package is specifically found in period 2500BC to 1700BC. How old do we predict L21 to be? In general I've heard dates of 3700-4000 years which would put it at 2000BC-1700BC, right at end of Bell Beaker period.

The Atlantic Bronze Age of 1300BC-700BC appears to show a disconnect so much so that you hear people talking about a distinctive "Late Bronze Age", my own feeling is that Celtic language usage in the Atlantic peripheral arrives around this time.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/Atlantic_Bronze_Age.gif

rms2
05-21-2013, 11:02 AM
I've always heard 4k-5k years for the estimated age of L21, with sizable margins of error on both sides of that range. That would put it about the right age to have arisen in a P312 Beaker context.

I think part of what makes Beaker so attractive as a vehicle for the arrival of L21 in the Isles is that there is nothing else out there that seems to make any sense. The Neolithic Period is probably too early, and the Mesolithic is way too early. The Iron Age is too late. What else is there besides Beaker that might explain not only the arrival of L21 in the Isles but its obvious success there?

If one accepts that Q-Celtic is the older form, then he sees a kind of linguistic match, as well. Assuming for a moment that the Beaker Folk brought an early form of Celtic to the Isles, then it appears they pushed through to Ireland in the west, where the language retained its Q-Celtic character. Behind it, in Britain, subsequent influences from the Continent brought in the P-Celtic innovations.

MJost
05-22-2013, 04:17 AM
I've always heard 4k-5k years for the estimated age of L21, with sizable margins of error on both sides of that range. That would put it about the right age to have arisen in a P312 Beaker context.

I loaded the latest L21 haplotypes and used Bird's stable markers and ran the TRMCA.

30 YPG N=1805 R-L21 111 Marker 111(48) Bird's q

3,866.1 +-809.4 YBP < Most probabable range
CI@99.73% +-1,303.9 (for CI Max of 5,170 ybp)



If one accepts that Q-Celtic is the older form, then he sees a kind of linguistic match, as well. Assuming for a moment that the Beaker Folk brought an early form of Celtic to the Isles, then it appears they pushed through to Ireland in the west, where the language retained its Q-Celtic character. Behind it, in Britain, subsequent influences from the Continent brought in the P-Celtic innovations.

I would think that theory is plausable. Wasn't the 1st milliumn BC and Pre-Roman Ireland mostly only settled in the south southeast part of the island Intially or possibility along the eastern coast northward up river ways?

MJost

Dubhthach
05-22-2013, 09:01 AM
I loaded the latest L21 haplotypes and used Bird's stable markers and ran the TRMCA.

30 YPG N=1805 R-L21 111 Marker 111(48) Bird's q

3,866.1 +-809.4 YBP < Most probabable range
CI@99.73% +-1,303.9 (for CI Max of 5,170 ybp)



I would think that theory is plausable. Wasn't the 1st milliumn BC and Pre-Roman Ireland mostly only settled in the south southeast part of the island Intially or possibility along the eastern coast northward up river ways?

MJost

Ireland has had human inhabitation in all parts since the meolithic, the earliest human inhabitation dates from about 8000BC.

In the period form about 200BC there is distinct difference on archaelogical finds between the northern half of Ireland (line from Galway to Dublin) and southern half.

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/irelandlpria.jpg

Obviously roman finds are concentrated in East, not surprising as this is the side of Ireland facing "Roman Britain" across the Irish Sea.

What's worth pointing out is that Ireland underwent a dark age for period after 800BC, archaelogical finds drop significantly likewise the levels of tree pollen in Bog core samples shoot up (along with grass pollen) with drop in crop pollen. Around 200BC we see an increase in finds connected to La Tene material culture, followed by another drop off until basically the 2nd century AD.

From what I recall the bog core samples show climatic shock due to change in rainfall etc.

-Paul
(DF41+)

Mikewww
05-22-2013, 01:22 PM
... What's worth pointing out is that Ireland underwent a dark age for period after 800BC, archaelogical finds drop significantly likewise the levels of tree pollen in Bog core samples shoot up (along with grass pollen) with drop in crop pollen. Around 200BC we see an increase in finds connected to La Tene material culture, followed by another drop off until basically the 2nd century AD.

From what I recall the bog core samples show climatic shock due to change in rainfall etc.

Do we have any estimates of the population of Ireland after the shock began, after it ended and then after the La Tene increases? Perhaps the majority of the the DNA in Ireland has not been there since the Early Bronze Age.

This begs of a more general issue. I think that population busts have gone on fairly regularly until recent times. That makes continuity types of theories more difficult. New people, immigrants, could have a greater impact during the bust cycles. This can be applied to Beaker folks too. Who's to say that the Beakers who originally hit Ireland left the majority of the Y DNA we now find? That Y DNA in Ireland today could well still have had Beaker ancestry, but from Britain or even from the continent through Britain or Bretagne to Ireland. I have the same concerns about Iberia, per another conversation that I had with Richard R. The constant and multiple migrations pressures over the millenia may have had more genetic impact than large initial cultural changes/expansions. Well.... that probably belongs in another category on this forum.:\

Dubhthach
05-22-2013, 01:38 PM
Do we have any estimates of the population of Ireland after the shock began, after it ended and then after the La Tene increases? Perhaps the majority of the the DNA in Ireland has not been there since the Early Bronze Age.

This begs of a more general issue. I think that population busts have gone on fairly regularly until recent times. That makes continuity types of theories more difficult. New people, immigrants, could have a greater impact during the bust cycles.

Well not necessarily to have migration for population recovery. I'll give you example from Ireland. During the wars of 1641-53 it's probable that up to half the Irish population was killed. William Petty for example put the death toll at over 600,000. Let the descendants of these survivors would eventually grow to a population of about 8.5million by 1845. The population having nearly double in the 50 years leading up to the Great Famine alone.

Some of the estimates of population at the end of the Bronze Age are on the order of 100-200,000.

Dubhthach
05-22-2013, 01:43 PM
With regards to Bronze Age I see following paper from 1995, haven't read through it fully but others may find it interesting:

http://www.nuigalway.ie/archaeology/oldsite/documents/jw_celts.pdf

-Paul
(DF41+)

MJost
05-22-2013, 01:53 PM
Ireland has had human inhabitation in all parts since the meolithic, the earliest human inhabitation dates from about 8000BC.

In the period form about 200BC there is distinct difference on archaelogical finds between the northern half of Ireland (line from Galway to Dublin) and southern half.

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/irelandlpria.jpg

Obviously roman finds are concentrated in East, not surprising as this is the side of Ireland facing "Roman Britain" across the Irish Sea.

What's worth pointing out is that Ireland underwent a dark age for period after 800BC, archaelogical finds drop significantly likewise the levels of tree pollen in Bog core samples shoot up (along with grass pollen) with drop in crop pollen. Around 200BC we see an increase in finds connected to La Tene material culture, followed by another drop off until basically the 2nd century AD.

From what I recall the bog core samples show climatic shock due to change in rainfall etc.

-Paul
(DF41+)

The local Ireland ecomony was, what, now documented as far back as The Céide Fields in Mayo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%A9ide_Fields

"Their main economy was cattle rearing but among them were also craftspeople and builders in both wood and stone"

I assume a lot of bartering internally and from remote locations such as the coasts and inter isles.

MJost

MJost
05-22-2013, 02:23 PM
Do we have any estimates of the population of Ireland after the shock began, after it ended and then after the La Tene increases? Perhaps the majority of the the DNA in Ireland has not been there since the Early Bronze Age.

This begs of a more general issue. I think that population busts have gone on fairly regularly until recent times. That makes continuity types of theories more difficult. New people, immigrants, could have a greater impact during the bust cycles. This can be applied to Beaker folks too. Who's to say that the Beakers who originally hit Ireland left the majority of the Y DNA we now find? That Y DNA in Ireland today could well still have had Beaker ancestry, but from Britain or even from the continent through Britain or Bretagne to Ireland. I have the same concerns about Iberia, per another conversation that I had with Richard R. The constant and multiple migrations pressures over the millenia may have had more genetic impact than large initial cultural changes/expansions. Well.... that probably belongs in another category on this forum.:\

As the link suggests, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_field
Most families only could maintain at or less than 2k meters square (>1mile). This seems excessive but I am sure possible with the correct number of people and tools. And as per my previous link posted, states

"For a while, these people prospered, but some changes (de-forestation) led to the development of raised bogs and the transformation of the arable land into barren and unusable land. It is speculated[by whom?] that the removal of the tree canopy helped cause this change."

Changes like this could have made possible a continues population reduction. I havent yet, but will read Paul's link to 'Ireland in the Bronze Age' Paper.

MJost

jdean
05-22-2013, 02:25 PM
What's worth pointing out is that Ireland underwent a dark age for period after 800BC, archaelogical finds drop significantly likewise the levels of tree pollen in Bog core samples shoot up (along with grass pollen) with drop in crop pollen. Around 200BC we see an increase in finds connected to La Tene material culture, followed by another drop off until basically the 2nd century AD.

(DF41+)

Any idea if Britain was effected by this ?

The climates today are very similar ie. wet and mild

Dubhthach
05-22-2013, 05:38 PM
Any idea if Britain was effected by this ?

The climates today are very similar ie. wet and mild

At the end of Bronze age there was a decline there as well, though I don't know much about Britain's history:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12989605

As for weather, well Ireland is the wettest country in Europe, and the west of Ireland gets about twice the rainfall as the east coast! London seems continental during summer time in comparison!

jdean
05-22-2013, 06:01 PM
As for weather, well Ireland is the wettest country in Europe, and the west of Ireland gets about twice the rainfall as the east coast! London seems continental during summer time in comparison!

It's wetter here than London as well : ) but it's the west wind that brings it in.

alan
05-22-2013, 06:33 PM
Here are the confirmed L21+ DF13- DF63- and suspected (by 67 STR matching) folks. This is the true L21**. England and France and that's about it. Ireland and Scotland are conspicuously missing except for the Blanchett, which sounds more like a French origin surname than a Gaelic or Welsh name.

f25304 Maddox R1b-P312>L21** L21+ L459+ Z245+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13- uas France
fN80403 Bishop R1b-P312>L21** L21+ L459+ Z245+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- Z2542- X13-1313 England, London
f26883 Tupper R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas England, South East, West Sussex, Bury
f37201 Berry R1b-P312>L21** L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L69- L144- L195- 3c1g X13- uas England, Yorkshire and Humber, West Yorkshire, Almondbury Huddersfield
f236395 Bishop R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13-1313 England
f23955 Hale zzL21suspect X13-1313 England
f29568 Blanchett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 Ireland
f12733 Blancett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 UK
f365 Cook R1b-P312>L21>DF13 DF13+ Z2542+ DF49- L96- L144- X13- uas UK
f94428 Meadows R1b-P312>L21** L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13-1313 UK
f41108 Blancett R1b-P312>L21 L21+ X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f8814 Blancett R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- L144- L195- X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f37707 Blanchet zzL21suspect X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f226438 Maddox zzL21suspect X13- uas zzzUnkOrigin
f224598 Meadows zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f176877 Wilson zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f44114 zzzUnk(Hale) zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
f44113 zzzUnk(Hale) zzL21suspect X13-1313 zzzUnkOrigin
fN49494 zzzUnk(Wildes) R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas zzzUnkOrigin

I have all the L21+ DF13- DF63+ guys, a longer list, posted over here.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?940-DF63-%28L21-gt-DF63%29

France, Germany, and Spain (Catalonia) show up in the DF63+ list.

Scotland shows up too with DF63+ with the good sized MacFarland family which flows over into Ulster, but the rest of Ireland is conspicuously missing.

I think the STR diversity of L21 overall is still higher in England than it is in Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

All of this makes me inclined to rule out the British Isles except for England - specifically England (and not Great Britain.)

Could DF63 simply be an additional SNP that happened perhaps in France in an important L21** man after the migration of L21** to England? That would make the L21XDF13 status more important than whether or not it is DF63 positive or negative.

alan
05-22-2013, 07:14 PM
Has anyone ever tried to put L21 in a Bell Beaker context, especially Irish Bell Beakers?

As per Case's (1995), Irish Beakers in their European Context...

1. Irish BB pottery shows affinities to Atlantic, British and Central European pottery. (not much help)
2. Irish BB burial practice is that of the Atlantic collective tombs and cist, pit and barrow burials are rare. (pointing more towards France)
3. Irish BB stone wrist guards are of the two-hole variety characteristic of Western France. (pointing more towards France)

Do the last two points push the probable L21 origin (or its P312* predecessor if one considers an Isles origin for L21) closer to the Bell Beaker Breton group than that of the Rhine? Do we see a dolichocephalic/brachycephalic divide in Ireland or in Ireland versus Britain?

The indicators of Irish beaker origins are confusing. It has a range of influences apparently running from Atlantic France through to the British-Rhenish area. The only archaeologist I recall tackling this head on in recent times was indeed Humprey Case and he concluded (very tentatively) Atlantic France. I do know that Irish beaker has very little early Maritime beaker or the later Iberian types so I dont think the origin was from as far south as that. Indeed Irish R1b is so predominanty L21 (when later surnames are removed) that that in itself points to Atlantic and northern France as well as Britain. So it does kind of match even though its all a bit uncertain.

I do not believe that the Late Bronze Age 'Atlantic Bronze Age' is a very good match for L21 except in its northern half. The southenr half of the Atlantic Bronze Age is Porgugal/western Iberia and L21 is rare (DF27 appears to predominate). So the Atlantic Bronze Age is actually divided into an L21 north and DF27 south and is disunited in terms of P312 clades. It seems clear to me that the clade pattern was established earlier than this, perhaps in the beaker period.

alan
05-22-2013, 08:00 PM
Hopefully Alan can answer those questions, or Richard S. I see some old posts that Richard made about the W/MR Beaker folks.

Some don't necessarily like my perspective on this but I think the wave advance theory seems to apply to L21 across Britain and over to Ireland from a southeast to west/northwest set of clines. What I mean is that the earlier branching of DF13's big subclades seems to be more likely found in England. DF49* and DF23* seem to be the picture of that, remnant cousins of the very large and young M222 subclade, which is as Irish and Scottish as you get.

That doesn't mean the first L21 people in England were Brythonic speaking, though. I would suspect they were Q-Celtic if not Italo-Celtic or some predecessor (that's my appeasement for the faithful Gaels.)

If the early branching of DF13 subclades means anything along with the presence of L21*, then cultures like Wessex are good places to look.

Wessex seems to be connected to the Lower Rhine/Low Countries.

There is no doubt that Ireland and Britain (and to a lesser extent northern France) were intimately connected in the beaker metalwork. Ireland's early Ross Island mine supplied arsenic rich Bronze to Ireland as well as Britain and to a lesser degree France. I get the strong impression that Ireland was heavily involved in the ore and production end while middlemen in England got rich in redistribution. I think they were likely part of the same early beaker network but different aspects of it. Certainly the earliest metal aspect strongly links Ireland and Britain as do aspects of the beakers themselves and other material. The distribution of gold lunalae also echoes this 'network'. This 'network' would seem a good fit for L21. Ross Island and Irish beaker in general is not terribly early and dates from c. 2400BC. I think there are slightly earlier British dates. There is some information on the pottery in the Ross Island monograph and I think where it had any connections it was with British-Rhenish and I didnt see any maritime type pots. This article by an amateur is actually rather good in terms of discussing the early phase of Irish-British beakers. Remember too that a few centuries later tin bronze was probably invented in the same basic zone.

http://armchairprehistory.com/2010/05/08/stonehenge-avebury-ross-island-and-the-perils-of-the-cornish-coast/

The map does have a resemblance to the L21 world or at least its epicentre.


The difference in grave tradition between Ireland and Britain should not be overegged. Ireland has always been peculiar in terms of burials. The oldest cremations by far in Europe come from Ireland (early Mesolithic) and this remained strong in the Neolithic (despite a short period where inhumation was also present) and ultimately cremation prevailed. Again out of steppe with most of Europe. Ireland kept this habit of going against the grain and preferring cremation right up until Christianity and any periods of inhumation fashions always were mixed with cremation which ultimately prevailed. The issue of the other Irish beaker period burial tradition is also unclear. Wedge Tombs only appeared after megalithic tombs of other types had ceased. Indeed, they actually do look rather like slightly above ground cists. Often they appear in rocky areas and perhaps this tradition developed because excavated cists were impractical or very difficult. They do not seem to be collective in the Neolithic sense and contain just a few burials, sometimes much later re-use. I doubt that they truly represent continuity of or re-introduction of meglalithic collective traditions. They were sometimes re-used in much later times but that does not reflect the time of builders or their beliefs.

alan
05-22-2013, 08:44 PM
The relationship of P312 and U106 on both the continent and the isles really does give a feel that the Celts were P312 dominated and were overlaid by U106 in England and what was Belgic Gaul where Germanic languages arrived, creating what looks like a zone where the subclades still preserved strongly to the west were diluted by clades including U106. This seems to have created a dilution of clades like L21 in the mixed zone while at the same time this mixed zone grinds to a very sudden halt as seen by the dramatic fall of U106. So in effect we are seeing a fairly unmixed 'pre-Germanic' group to the west of a mixed zone where Germanic has overlaid Celtic/Latin speakers who remained a substantial substrate. One thing is clear, this is further evidence that U106 is extremly strongly associated with Germanic speaking. This all fits rather well with the default identification of L21 (and others) as NW Celtic and U106 as Germanic.

Mikewww
05-22-2013, 09:02 PM
EDIT: Moved my P312/U106 response to the R1b consensus thread in R1b General.

R.Rocca
05-24-2013, 01:44 PM
The difference in grave tradition between Ireland and Britain should not be overegged. Ireland has always been peculiar in terms of burials...

I have no problem with that, but we must then afford that same wiggle room in funerary and two-holed wrist guard traditions to Iberian BB, which quite often get classified as non-R1b by posters.

rms2
05-24-2013, 03:04 PM
Here is what Coon had to say about the physical type of the Irish Beaker Folk:



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.

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

Of course, Coon seems to make of these Irish "food vessel people" a group separate and distinct from the Beaker Folk proper.

Mikewww
05-24-2013, 03:26 PM
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.


... Of course, Coon seems to make of these Irish "food vessel people" a group separate and distinct from the Beaker Folk proper.

Thanks, Richard.

I see he cited that they "incinerated." Does this indicate that particular group was Urnfielders?

R.Rocca
05-24-2013, 07:41 PM
Thanks, Richard.

I see he cited that they "incinerated." Does this indicate that particular group was Urnfielders?

I would imagine not, since Urnfield is only attributed to cultures that placed the cremated remains in an urn and then placed the urn in a field with other urns. This tradition only appears in Central Europe many hundreds of years after Bell Beaker.

Gray Fox
05-24-2013, 08:03 PM
"The second is from Spain, where the Beaker people were probably only one of a number of related brachycephalic groups."

I thought this group was considered dolichocephalic?

Dubhthach
05-24-2013, 08:16 PM
Urnfield is a Late Bronze Age material culture, and chronicologically the preceeding material culture to Hallstat in Central Europe. To the West of it during the Late Bronze Age you had the "Atlantic Bronze Age" material culture.

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/4650/urnfieldexpansions.png

Wikipedia has the following map:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Cultures%2C_1200_BC.PNG


A simplified map of the central European cultures, ca 1200 BC. The pink area is the Lusatian culture, the central blue area is the Knoviz culture, the red area is the central urnfield culture, and the orange area is the northern urnfield culture. The brown area is the Danubian culture, the blue area is the Terramare culture and the green area is the West European Bronze Age. The yellow area is the Nordic Bronze Age.

alan
05-29-2013, 01:38 AM
There is a lot of new information on the northern France-British links in the early to late Bronze age and its emerging that this goes beyond just shared Atlantic metalwork and includes pottery, house types etc. Its hard to not think L21 lineages were involved in this complex of cross channel similarities. Interestingly once you hit flanders some more eastern influences also appear suggesting there was a cultural overlap zone in what would later be the Belgic zone.


http://www.academia.edu/1163590/Bourgeois_and_Talon_2009._From_Picardy_to_Flanders _Transmanche_connections_in_the_Bronze_Age