PDA

View Full Version : M269 in Italy



alan
06-06-2013, 11:08 PM
The recent study of Italy posted by Dienekes http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/genetic-structure-and-different.html seems (unless I am misunderstanding) a steady south-north cline in what I take to be M269XL11 (which I suppose is an undefined mix of M269*, L23* and L51*) from a about 10% in the south to 5% in the north. Given that that is very different from the L51* distribution (and a significant amount of this must be L51* in the north) this is presumably largely a reflection of the L23* cline. I of course use L23* as shorthand.

TigerMW
06-07-2013, 08:39 PM
Italy is an important place. It is a crossroads in the Mediterranean. It's also right in the middle of the Cardial Wares Neolithic Advance, as a staging point.

However, Italy is huge north to south. I think it is important to dissect it as it has different prehistories and geographies.

One area that has to be treated uniquely for sure is North Italy, but to emphasize the point, I like to call it what the Romans called it, Cisalpine Gaul - "Gaul this side of the Alps." Wikipedia says,
"Cisalpine Gaul, also called Gallia Citerior or Gallia Togata, was a Roman province until 41 BC, when it was merged into Roman Italy. It was that part of Gallia, the land of the Gauls, which lay south and east of the Alps, as opposed to Gallia Transalpina. Its inhabitants were primarily Celtic since the expulsion of the Etruscans.
The province was bounded on the north and west by the Alps, in the south as far as Placentia by the river Po, and then by the Apennines and the river Rubicon, and in the east by the Adriatic Sea" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisalpine_Gaul

I suspect that Italians would also consider Peninsular Italy to be somewhat zonal as well. I would have to think Puglia, Calabria, Sicily and Sardinia have some uniquenesses from the central part of the peninsula. Of course, there must be quite a difference between Genoa and Trieste too. I've got family and friends from Trieste. I think there is some Slavic genetic influence in that region.

I suppose, since the Neolithic advances are so significant, we should start with a picture of the Cardial Wares advance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cardial_map.png

"The earliest date in Italy comes from Coppa Nevigata on the Adriatic coast of southern Italy, perhaps as early as 6000 cal B.C. Also during Su Carroppu civilization in Sardinia, already in its early stages (low strata into Su Coloru cave, c. 6000 BC) early examples of cardial pottery appear."

I've seen estimates for M269 of anywhere from 4000 to 8000 years old (Mike Hammer, FTDNA conference). I think Vince Vizachero use to use this as well informally.

I've chided folks on this, but I can see why one would make sure to use the 8000 (6000 BC) as an upper range just to make sure that leaves room for the Cardial Wares in Italy. Marko Helinila calculates the age of M269 as 5700 years ago (3700 BC) and Anatole Kylosov calculates 7000 years ago (5000 BC), but probably the upper range of 6000 BC is quite fair.

What's the story of the ancient Latin League? Where are the Latin tribes thought to have come from prior to Latium?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_peoples_of_Italy
Can we connect them back to Remedello? or ?

What about the Etruscans? Wikipedia says
"J. P. Mallory compares the Etruscans to other remnant non Indo-European central Mediterranean populations, such as the Basques of the Iberian Peninsula and southern France, who absorbed the art styles and alphabet of their Greek neighbors."

Is there good reason to think the Etruscans come from Anatolia or is that disproven?

razyn
06-07-2013, 09:58 PM
The principal reason for thinking of Basques as a remnant is their non-Indo-European language, and that appears to be somewhat disconnected from their Y-DNA.

[[[ Mikewww/Moderator on 06/07/2013: You may be right, but if we want to go deeper in that, let's startup a thread on R1b and languages or R1b in Iberia or something like that.]]]

I was merely responding to something you quoted Mallory as having said, "other remnant non Indo-European central Mediterranean populations, such as the Basques," and feel no desire to debate the remnancy of the Basque population, as such. The M153+ detail of it has not been there longer than the lifetime of that SNP, well under 2,000 years and of course well within the Indo-European era, including for that geographical area.


[[[ Mikewww/Moderator on 06/07/2013: I know. I wish I wouldn't have quoted the full sentence of Mallory but I feel I "over-excerpt" (abbreviate quotes) as it is. My moderation point to you is if you think something (i.e. Basques) is important and it has nothing to do with this thread, start a new one. This is just out of respect for those who are interested in M269 in Italy. ]]]

alan
06-07-2013, 11:45 PM
I have never (or for not very long) thought of R1b as Cardial associated. If it was in any way linked it would only make any sort of sense if it was L23XL51 linked and even then it falls down in the detail. It has the same problem as LBK - it only correlates geographically with the part of R1b. There are a whole host of other reasons including ancient DNA but I dont really have the energy to go over that old ground right now.

However, Italy is very important I think in the arrival of R1b in western Europe - close at its north to the zone where L51 probably started making progress and its south end seems to have recieved L23XL51 from the south-east judging by the cline. This was apparently not especially early judging from variance and gives the impression of originating in Albania, Greece and maybe Asia Minor to me. The Etruscans could also have brought a portion of L23XL51 to Tuscany if their suggested origin point and date is correct. I see L51* as earlier and entering from the Alps. Those copper age cultures like Remedello etc are very very interesting although I am still a little unclear as to their origins other than that they seen to coincide with the appearance of developed copper working and mining from the east at some point around 3500BC give or take a century or so and in the case of Remedello has a strong connection with the pre-beaker stelae in the Alps. That still looks like the smoking gun of L51 in Italy to me. A route up the Danube from around Hungary and Austria to the Alps seems most likely on several grounds.

TigerMW
06-08-2013, 01:47 AM
I have never (or for not very long) thought of R1b as Cardial associated.
Well, if we don't think R1b was associated with the large Cardial Wares Neolithic advance that made it all the way to Iberia, and we think it is way too young for a Paleolithic Italian refugium, then we are left with the late Neolithic and Chalcolithic. Some may beg to differ.

R.Rocca
06-08-2013, 03:22 AM
Well, if we don't think R1b was associated with the large Cardial Wares Neolithic advance that made it all the way to Iberia, and we think it is way too young for a Paleolithic Italian refugium, then we are left with the late Neolithic and Chalcolithic. Some may beg to differ.

That seems to be where the recent Boattini et al. study puts all haplogroups except for G2a:

"...in contrast to mtDNA age estimates, almost all Y-chromosome estimates fall between late Neolithic and the Bronze Age."

On the surface, a Cardial R1b origin followed up by a later Bell Beaker spread is very attractive, but ancient DNA has gone completely against that notion. I understand that with such few samples we may have just gotten unlucky, but every time another ancient G2a, E-V13, I2a1 etc. sample shows up anywhere in Europe, it is really a strike against a Cardial R1b link.

The only scenario I can see for an early R1b presence in Italy is based on something Boattini et al. mentioned regarding the Italian Neolithic:

"According to the most recent syntheses, the Neolithic revolution diffused in Italy following two independent routes along the Adriatic (Eastern) and the Tyrrhenian (Western) coasts."

While Wikipedia makes no distinction, the Adriatic Neolithic was Impressed Ware and the Tyrrhenian was Cardial Ware. It could very well be that each of these two Neolithic groups carried different haplogroups with one being R1b. However, I think it more likely that even if each route carried different haplogroups, neither was R1b and instead was a combo of G2a, E-V13, I2a1 etc.

TigerMW
06-08-2013, 03:51 AM
...
"According to the most recent syntheses, the Neolithic revolution diffused in Italy following two independent routes along the Adriatic (Eastern) and the Tyrrhenian (Western) coasts."

Where is Boattini getting this? Is there archaeological data that attest to this? When does the Cardial Wares reach North Italy or Cisalpine Gaul? or to what extent?

Jean M
06-08-2013, 08:22 AM
"According to the most recent syntheses, the Neolithic revolution diffused in Italy following two independent routes along the Adriatic (Eastern) and the Tyrrhenian (Western) coasts."

While Wikipedia makes no distinction, the Adriatic Neolithic was Impressed Ware and the Tyrrhenian was Cardial Ware.

Cardial is just a type of Impressed Ware which used the cardium shell to make the impressions. I doubt if it had a completely different origin. The use of the cardial shell is useful to archaeologists, as it enables them to track the route from Italy to Iberia (which was very fast.)

465

R.Rocca
06-08-2013, 10:52 AM
Cardial is just a type of Impressed Ware which used the cardium shell to make the impressions. I doubt if it had a completely different origin. The use of the cardial shell is useful to archaeologists, as it enables them to track the route from Italy to Iberia (which was very fast.)


There is debate about the link between Cardial and Impressed Ware, just like there is debate about Bell Beakers being derivatives of Protruding Foot Beakers, or Corded Ware, or Yamnaya Ware. Besides, there is a span of 900 years between the appearance of Impressed and Cardial, and even if the pottery tradition is derived, it doesn't guarantee that men of the same haplogroup were involved in their creation (as in the case of Corded Ware aDNA).

Here is a map with Impressed and Cardial separated out...

466

R.Rocca
06-08-2013, 12:48 PM
Where is Boattini getting this? Is there archaeological data that attest to this? When does the Cardial Wares reach North Italy or Cisalpine Gaul? or to what extent?

His source:

Pessina A, Tine V (2008) Archeologia del Neolitico. L'Italia tra il Vi e il IV millennio a.C. Roma: Carrocci editore. 375.

I told myself I wouldn't spend any money on books until after my Full Genomes results came back, but it was too tempting. I should have the book in two weeks or so. I'll let you know what it says.

alan
06-09-2013, 02:00 AM
Well, if we don't think R1b was associated with the large Cardial Wares Neolithic advance that made it all the way to Iberia, and we think it is way too young for a Paleolithic Italian refugium, then we are left with the late Neolithic and Chalcolithic. Some may beg to differ.


Seems that way. Cardial had reached the west Med. by 6000BC and had completed its spread by 5500BC. It never extended north of the Loire. RR mentioned the concept of a Cardial spread for R1b into the Cardial areas followed by a spread into temperate western Europe with beaker. However, there is a gap of around 3000 years between even the latest part of the Cardial movement and beaker. If R1b was connected by that we would expect to see a pattern of R1b being 3000 years older in the zone settled by Cardial than in the zone that was not settled by Cardial but was later settled by beaker. That would make variance bimodal with the south of Europe expected to have a variance nearly twice that of northern and central Europe. Or to give a specific example Cardial arrived in Iberia about 7500 years ago while beaker arrived in the Ireland 4500 years ago. Both are P312 dominated areas. There is simply no reflection in variance of the contrast in age a 'cardial then beaker' model would imply. As far as I can see the Cardial and beaker model just could never have worked.

Jean M
06-09-2013, 10:18 AM
There is debate about the link between Cardial and Impressed Ware
Really? I have missed all this excitement. :)


there is a span of 900 years between the appearance of Impressed and Cardial

I assume you mean between the first appearance of each type in Italy. Impresso seems to have arrived with the wave of farmers fleeing the Near East after the climate shock of 6200 BC, but it took centuries to spread along the Adriatic shores. It did not disappear before the first Cardial. There is overlap. In Southern France we now know that Italian-style Impressed Ware marked the first arrival of Neolithic farmers c. 5700 BC, though these sites are few in number. This pottery included impressions made with the cardium shell (Guilaine and Manen 2007). The true Cardial then followed c. 5400 BC, and swept rapidly from Central Italy to Iberia (Zilhão 2000 and 2001). In Iberia too Cardial does not seem to mark the earliest arrival of Neolithic farmers, since there are a few earlier sites very similar to the North African Neolithic (Cortés Sánchez 2012). So Cardial has lost its pioneer status strictly speaking, but seems to reflect a sea-faring push to find territories not yet settled.

I couldn't agree more that pots are not people! We need to resist the temptation to assume that a pottery type can be invariably equated with one (and one only) Y-DNA haplogroup. The people bringing farming could easily have included more than one haplogroup in a ship-load. And women deciding to try a new type of pottery decoration did not have to get married first to a chap with a haplogroup completely different from that of their father. :)

From ancient DNA, we can conclude that farmers of the Impressed Ware/Cardial tradition were overall pretty heavy in G2a (P15), exactly like the LBK people (who made a distinctly different kind of pottery) but we have also one E1b1b1a1b (V13) 5000 BC in Avellaner Cave, Catalonia, and two I2a1 (P37.2) males in the Treilles cave 3000 BC. Its descendant I2a1a (M26) represents about 37% of the Y-DNA in Sardinia, which suggests a founder effect. (Although hunter-gatherers had visited Sardinia, it had been empty for 1000 years before farmers arrived. So just one man carrying I2a1 could become one of the founding fathers of a new community.)

Jean M
06-09-2013, 10:40 AM
I understand that with such few samples we may have just gotten unlucky, but every time another ancient G2a, E-V13, I2a1 etc. sample shows up anywhere in Europe, it is really a strike against a Cardial R1b link.


I agree with both points. It is not impossible for some R1b to turn up eventually in Neolithic sites in Europe, but I would guess at these being mainly Late Neolithic via Anatolia, rather than first wave.

alan
06-09-2013, 10:42 AM
I found this suggestion that Carial people may have also passed north through the Bosphorus and settled the now-flooded Neolithic Black Sea's northern shores in Ukraine interesting.

http://www.academia.edu/1117486/A_new_approach_to_the_problem_of_the_Neolithisatio n_of_the_North-Pontic_area_is_there_a_north-eastern_kind_of_Mediterranean_Impresso_pottery

Jean M
06-09-2013, 10:52 AM
Yes I saw that paper. Like many others, it doesn't really make a distinction between Impresso and Cardial. Perfectly reasonably idea that some farmers took a sea route that way. The Neolithicisation process gets more complex, the closer we look at it.

alan
06-09-2013, 12:25 PM
If R1b had hitched a life west in small numbers with the first farmers then according to the most popular central variance dates it would have been in a pre-M269 and pre-V88 form. I suppose that would be P297* and P25*. Does that even exist anywhere bearing in mind that almost all P25* in old studies has proven to bee V88.

Jean M
06-09-2013, 12:36 PM
Yes I know. It's not impossible that we could find some early R1b in aDNA with no modern descendants. But I'm not holding my breath for it in the first wave of the European Neolithic.

TigerMW
06-27-2013, 04:41 PM
Yes I know. It's not impossible that we could find some early R1b in aDNA with no modern descendants. But I'm not holding my breath for it in the first wave of the European Neolithic.

This is one of the problems with ancient DNA and some of the arguments back and forth on STRs, which is discussed in the STR Wars thread. Just because we find ancient DNA of a particular haplogroup, doesn't mean that the modern distribution of the same haplogroup is descended from people in the ancient DNA location. The ancient DNA lineages may have gone extinct as most paternal lineages have done.