Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: the western refugia Palaeolithic R1b concept that just will not go away

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    7,870
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    the western refugia Palaeolithic R1b concept that just will not go away

    I see Maju still is a believer in R1b 'hid' in the west during the Neolithic

    http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...=1378252973909

    Davidski seems to see R1 as doing a pincer movement in the copper age. However, he rightly raises the issue of why are the two groups moving into a Neolithic collapse vacuum be the two closely related ones. That would seem a weird coincidence to me. I can see how the idea of a pincer movement comes about but the idea of them being two suddenly revived palae groups at the opposite ends of Europe just doesnt work unless the dating is horribly out. After all most of this so-called pincer movement is L11.

    Even multiplying it by the Zhiv fudge rates would not make it older than 12000BC or so which is nothing like as old as we would expect from a palae lineage trapped in a western refuge. I have no doubt that a three fold fudge is impossible anyway based on the age that would make haplogroup I. Based on the latter the largest fudge I think is possible is doubling. That would make L11 a maximum of about 7000BC and the eastern L23 clades a maximum of about 10000BC. Even that is totally incompatible with the refugia models and far closer to the Neolithic spread. There is no pre-farming spread west noted in that timeframe. So, I do not really see why this palae R1b model still exists. It just doesnt make sense even when stretching to doubling the germline rates. Indeed, even if the age of P312 was trebled along Zhiv lines it still would only seem to come in with P312 about 11500BC and eastern L23XL51 clades coming in around 16000BC. Again this is totally incompatible with the refugia theory. The very latest possible east to west link in the palaeolithic that could have contributed to a western refuge is the Badegoulian c. 20000BC and even that is controversial. That would require a nearly 5 times fudge factor to make any sense of. That of course seems totally impossible as it would make the age of R as a whole impossibly early - over 100,000 years old.

    So, in summary, there seems to be a basic logic problem with seeing palaelithic western continuity in R1b and it is surprising to see it still had adherents. I would not be totally shocked if it was found somewhere in the Neolithic though. The evidence to date is against this but it at least seems theoretically possible within the bounds of a viable fudge. That does not appear to be the case for a paleolithic western model.

    One possible very outside bet within the double fudge factor range that could explain that sort of age, a distant link with the east but an absence in LBK is if R1b was somehow related to the strange group of late hunters, some adopting farming ideas, and pointed based pottery. It seems unlikely to me but I noticed there has been a very recent revival in the idea that the various groups with this type of pottery noted from France to Russia could be linked to an east-west movement just ahead of farming in some places and overlapping with it in others and linked to the emerging east-west north Eurasian diffusion of early pottery. There was a recent conference paper on this, I think by a Russian, suggesting some sort of pre-farming pointed based pottery wave from Russia spreading across Europe ahead of the SW Asian groups. However, I just cannot seem to find it again on the web. This is not the paper I had in mind but discusses the separate spread of pottery from farming in Eurasia

    http://www.academia.edu/3754905/Gibb...ring_2013_1-38

    I suppose in theory diffusion like that could have involved diffusion of some people associated with cermanic using hunters-gatherers. I am not convinced at all but it does provide a later hunter background, an east-west spread, a link back towards central asia and an arrival beyond eastern parts of Europe relatively late when some areas were already farming. This at least provides some echoes of some of the features of R1b phylogeny and delayed expansion in such a scenario. However, it is very low on clearcut evidence.
    Last edited by alan; 09-06-2013 at 09:30 AM.

  2. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,397
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    I didn't really find those blogs helpful.

    Am I missing something or are some of these bloggers trying to correlate Y DNA with autosomal and mt DNA mixed with either pro or con positions on migration versus continuity?

    We've looked at that on other threads and I don't think we can correlate R1b with autosomal or mt DNA in any kind of consistent way.

    Nothing is impossible, but at least as it pertains to R1b, I think it takes some contortions to try to reason that R1b in Europe has a Paleolithic inhabitant. I can only think of it as being mesmerized by current high frequency distributions with a belief in continuity.
    Last edited by TigerMW; 09-06-2013 at 02:09 PM.

  3. #3
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,343
    Sex
    Location
    California
    Ethnicity
    British-Scandinavian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF99
    mtDNA (M)
    J2a1a

    England Denmark Wales Scotland Sweden
    Some poorly informed person, probably in marketing (sorry if that is redundant), at BritainsDNA lists S116* (P312*) as "hunter-gatherer."

  4. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    7,870
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    I found the paper I couldnt get my hands on earlier - the one that speculated that there was a non-farming 'Neolithic' wave from perhaps the Urals area earlier in some areas than farming. In eastern terminology the Neolithic just means pottery using whereas in the west we use the word to mean early farmers. Its one of those mathematical models that I am generally wary of. Nevertheless its worth discussing even if only to put the idea down.

    http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/docu...Pdavison34.pdf

    Although most of these ceramic using hunter groups are from eastern and northern Europe, they do also mention similar groups in the west like La Hoguette and Roucadour in France. Others with similar ideas also discuss Limberg and Dutch and Belgian groups like Swifterbant. My feeling is that its easy in soft focus to point to a bunch of pottery using hunters and link the dots but the specifics make this unconvincing. On the other hand the idea of pottery spreading by diffusion among hunters from east to west well ahead of farming in its more eastern zone is accepted but in western Europe its more complex because it overlaps with the early farming period and could be a borrowing from the farmers. The pointed base pottery seems distinctive on the surface of it all but it has been argued in terms of Swifterbant that that is a minority shape and has a functional role.

    I only bring all of this up because these kind of arguements involving a non-farming east to west spread will probably be used as the last refuge of the pre-farming R1b spread school of thought. I am not supporting the idea.


    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    I see Maju still is a believer in R1b 'hid' in the west during the Neolithic

    http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...=1378252973909

    Davidski seems to see R1 as doing a pincer movement in the copper age. However, he rightly raises the issue of why are the two groups moving into a Neolithic collapse vacuum be the two closely related ones. That would seem a weird coincidence to me. I can see how the idea of a pincer movement comes about but the idea of them being two suddenly revived palae groups at the opposite ends of Europe just doesnt work unless the dating is horribly out. After all most of this so-called pincer movement is L11.

    Even multiplying it by the Zhiv fudge rates would not make it older than 12000BC or so which is nothing like as old as we would expect from a palae lineage trapped in a western refuge. I have no doubt that a three fold fudge is impossible anyway based on the age that would make haplogroup I. Based on the latter the largest fudge I think is possible is doubling. That would make L11 a maximum of about 7000BC and the eastern L23 clades a maximum of about 10000BC. Even that is totally incompatible with the refugia models and far closer to the Neolithic spread. There is no pre-farming spread west noted in that timeframe. So, I do not really see why this palae R1b model still exists. It just doesnt make sense even when stretching to doubling the germline rates. Indeed, even if the age of P312 was trebled along Zhiv lines it still would only seem to come in with P312 about 11500BC and eastern L23XL51 clades coming in around 16000BC. Again this is totally incompatible with the refugia theory. The very latest possible east to west link in the palaeolithic that could have contributed to a western refuge is the Badegoulian c. 20000BC and even that is controversial. That would require a nearly 5 times fudge factor to make any sense of. That of course seems totally impossible as it would make the age of R as a whole impossibly early - over 100,000 years old.

    So, in summary, there seems to be a basic logic problem with seeing palaelithic western continuity in R1b and it is surprising to see it still had adherents. I would not be totally shocked if it was found somewhere in the Neolithic though. The evidence to date is against this but it at least seems theoretically possible within the bounds of a viable fudge. That does not appear to be the case for a paleolithic western model.

    One possible very outside bet within the double fudge factor range that could explain that sort of age, a distant link with the east but an absence in LBK is if R1b was somehow related to the strange group of late hunters, some adopting farming ideas, and pointed based pottery. It seems unlikely to me but I noticed there has been a very recent revival in the idea that the various groups with this type of pottery noted from France to Russia could be linked to an east-west movement just ahead of farming in some places and overlapping with it in others and linked to the emerging east-west north Eurasian diffusion of early pottery. There was a recent conference paper on this, I think by a Russian, suggesting some sort of pre-farming pointed based pottery wave from Russia spreading across Europe ahead of the SW Asian groups. However, I just cannot seem to find it again on the web. This is not the paper I had in mind but discusses the separate spread of pottery from farming in Eurasia

    http://www.academia.edu/3754905/Gibb...ring_2013_1-38

    I suppose in theory diffusion like that could have involved diffusion of some people associated with cermanic using hunters-gatherers. I am not convinced at all but it does provide a later hunter background, an east-west spread, a link back towards central asia and an arrival beyond eastern parts of Europe relatively late when some areas were already farming. This at least provides some echoes of some of the features of R1b phylogeny and delayed expansion in such a scenario. However, it is very low on clearcut evidence.

  5. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    7,870
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    I agree Mike. However I think the spread of eastern European connections among the late hunters through the the medium of pottery among hunters will be their final fallback position even though the extending of this to late hunters in western Europe beyond the north European plain is much more questionable due to the fact farmers had arrived nearby those groups by the time the pottery becomes apparent there. Certainly, no matter how one dresses it up such a fall back position, it would still essentially require an east-west spread in the early Neolithic period with the only difference being that it was from the east European plain and involved pottery using late hunters instead of SW Asia involving farmers.

    I suspect a line of arguement might go that the phylogeny of R1b in a latitudinal sense would broadly fit the spread of this late hunter pottery from the east of Russia from c. 15000BC to western Europe around 5000BC.

    http://www.ffzg.unizg.hr/arheo/ska/t...sal.pdf‎

    I dont think it works when you look at the big differences among the pottery using hunters but I suspect that line of reasoning might be a fall back position for those who are allergic to the idea of farmers or copper workers. The fact that one of the groups sometimes mentioned is in the Pyrenees will be another attraction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikewww View Post
    I didn't really find those blogs helpful.

    Am I missing something or are some of these bloggers trying to correlate Y DNA with autosomal and mt DNA mixed with either pro or con positions on migration versus continuity?

    We've looked at that on other threads and I don't think we can correlate R1b with autosomal or mt DNA in any kind of consistent way.

    Nothing is impossible, but at least as it pertains to R1b, I think it takes some contortions to try to reason that R1b in Europe has a Paleolithic inhabitant. I can only think of it as being mesmerized by current high frequency distributions with a belief in continuity.
    Last edited by alan; 09-06-2013 at 04:34 PM.

  6. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,961
    Sex
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Italo-Iberian
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152+L2+FGC10543
    mtDNA (M)
    H4a1-T152C!

    United States of America Italy 1861-1946 Spain
    The biggest hurdle against a Palaeolithic presence for R1b in Western Europe is the same today as it has been for the last five years - ancient DNA simply does not support it. Even if not all 'refigia' are tested for, you would at least expect some of it to have trickled into other cultures and have shown up by now.
    Last edited by R.Rocca; 09-06-2013 at 05:49 PM.
    Paternal: R1b-U152 >> L2 >> FGC10543 >> PR5365, Pietro Rocca, b. 1559, Agira, Sicily, Italy
    Maternal: H4a1-T152C!, Maria Coto, b. ~1864, Galicia, Spain
    Mother's Paternal: J1+ FGC4745/FGC4766+ PF5019+, Gerardo Caprio, b. 1879, Caposele, Avellino, Campania, Italy
    Father's Maternal: T2b-C150T, Francisca Santa Cruz, b.1916, Garganchon, Burgos, Spain
    Paternal Great (x3) Grandfather: R1b-U106 >> L48 >> CTS2509, Filippo Ensabella, b.~1836, Agira, Sicily, Italy

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to R.Rocca For This Useful Post:

     rms2 (09-07-2013)

  8. #7
    Member
    Posts
    33
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Ethnicity
    Scottish, English, German
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    As a new poster, I hope I won't be accused of hijacking the thread by returning to the concept of when R1b entered those areas where it predominates today (Britain, Ireland and the Basque country of Spain and France). I've read the genetic arguments as to why R1b is more recent than had been assumed, and why it must have originated further east, but I've also noticed that the field of DNA research is evolving rapidly, and what was gospel a few years ago is overturned now. So I'd be more convinced by the comments about lack of ancient R1b in those areas where it's strongest now, except for the fact that there don't seem to be any Y DNA samples prior to 4500 BP for Britain, Ireland or the Basque country. None, nada. I find a claim that R1b wasn't present to be unconvincing when there's no evidence one way or the other. Or are folks treating all of Western Europe as a unity and assuming that Y DNA profiles for Germany, eastern France or eastern Spain can be taken as evidence for Ireland, Britain and the Basque country prior to 4500 BP, despite the current differences in DNA signatures? If so, is the R1b find for Germany proof that R1b was present in Britain, Ireland or the Basque country? Or can we perhaps stop referring to lack of any evidence about Y DNA in a particular as proof of the absence of R1b in that area and admit that the evidence is solely genetic? If so, I'll have to admit to being at a disadvantage in the argument, since I'm not a geneticist. Perhaps the current models are correct, but I won't be convinced until I see evidence as to what lineages actually were anciently present in those areas where R1b now predominates.

  9. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    7,870
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    There is more to it than that. The phylogeny or chain of SNPs makes it essentially impossible for western R1b clades like DF27, L21 etc to have come from anywhere other than the east end of Europe or nearby areas of Asia and those clades are WAY downstream from those in somewhere like Iran etc. Counting SNPs or calculating STR variance indicates that the western R1b clades are apparently only about a quarter of the total age of R1. The age of R1 is currently placed about 18,000 years ago - a quarter of that is 4500 years ago or 2500BC. Now even if the anchor date for R1 is too young it cannot be older than the likely date of the permanent settlement of modern humans into central Asia/Iran and the western European clades cannot be more than a quarter of that. So its incredibly unlikely that the young clades of R1b found in western Europe could be much older than 8000 years old.

    So, at an outside stretch it is theoretically possible that R1b could have spread west around then with early Neolithic peoples but the western ice age hunter-gatherer refugia model appears to be mathematically impossible. Although the hunter-gatherer Franco-Cantabrian ice age refugia option appears dead and an association with the first farmers to reach the west looks unlikely, I do not think everyone has totally written off the possibility of something like a middle Neolithic movement from the east c. 5000BC. The copper age model is the favourite at present but we are all aware there is enough doubt on absolute dating to make ruling out something like a spread west in the middle Neolithic impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Curious View Post
    As a new poster, I hope I won't be accused of hijacking the thread by returning to the concept of when R1b entered those areas where it predominates today (Britain, Ireland and the Basque country of Spain and France). I've read the genetic arguments as to why R1b is more recent than had been assumed, and why it must have originated further east, but I've also noticed that the field of DNA research is evolving rapidly, and what was gospel a few years ago is overturned now. So I'd be more convinced by the comments about lack of ancient R1b in those areas where it's strongest now, except for the fact that there don't seem to be any Y DNA samples prior to 4500 BP for Britain, Ireland or the Basque country. None, nada. I find a claim that R1b wasn't present to be unconvincing when there's no evidence one way or the other. Or are folks treating all of Western Europe as a unity and assuming that Y DNA profiles for Germany, eastern France or eastern Spain can be taken as evidence for Ireland, Britain and the Basque country prior to 4500 BP, despite the current differences in DNA signatures? If so, is the R1b find for Germany proof that R1b was present in Britain, Ireland or the Basque country? Or can we perhaps stop referring to lack of any evidence about Y DNA in a particular as proof of the absence of R1b in that area and admit that the evidence is solely genetic? If so, I'll have to admit to being at a disadvantage in the argument, since I'm not a geneticist. Perhaps the current models are correct, but I won't be convinced until I see evidence as to what lineages actually were anciently present in those areas where R1b now predominates.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     razyn (09-06-2013),  rms2 (09-07-2013)

  11. #9
    Member
    Posts
    33
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Ethnicity
    Scottish, English, German
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    I've already admitted that I don't know enough about genetics to argue about when R1b evolved or where it appears to have evolved, alan, although I did read something recently about some geneticists questioning whether STR variances are as good a predictor as they had assumed. So, as I inferred, I'll trust the genetic argument about R1b if it holds up over time. I was just trying to cure a few folks from adding, at the end of a learned dissertation about genetics and R1b, a comment along the lines of "and if R1b was ancient in Atlantic Europe, why isn't there any evidence that it was there along with other Y haplotypes". At this point, there doesn't seem to be any evidence one way or the other about any Y haplotype in Atlantic Europe prior to the IE expansion. Since the genetic arguments do sound convincing, as far as I can tell, it may well be that when enough testing of old bones is done we'll find that R1b was indeed lacking in Paleolithic and Neolithic Atlantic Europe. But it appears that the testing hasn't been done yet.

  12. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    578
    Sex
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Ethnicity
    British
    Nationality
    English
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1-L22
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a1b4

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikewww View Post
    I didn't really find those blogs helpful.

    Am I missing something or are some of these bloggers trying to correlate Y DNA with autosomal and mt DNA mixed with either pro or con positions on migration versus continuity?

    We've looked at that on other threads and I don't think we can correlate R1b with autosomal or mt DNA in any kind of consistent way.

    Nothing is impossible, but at least as it pertains to R1b, I think it takes some contortions to try to reason that R1b in Europe has a Paleolithic inhabitant. I can only think of it as being mesmerized by current high frequency distributions with a belief in continuity.
    This is true. Although R1b does kinda correlate with Atlantic/Western European components that show up as the major component up most of the Atlantic fringe, and also with the so called 'Gedrosian' components - That is - relatively speaking - quite high in places very high in R1b like Ireland. And also that the western European autosomal cluster is more closely related to the eastern European one than the Mediterranean one. So it looks like at this component has spread from east to west it has gradually changed through contact with one that has spread from the near east to the Mediterranean, which happens to coincide with the westernmost areas of Europe. Although it is far from a solid connection i think it is a hint anyway.
    Y-DNA: I1* (Ware, Hertfordshire)
    MT-DNA: U5a1b4 (Boughton Aluph, Kent)
    Father's MT-DNA: J1c8 (Wolverhampton, Staffordshire)
    Grandfather's MT-DNA: H1b (Littlehampton, Sussex)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. last and late glacial refugia east europe, eurasia and similar
    By paoloferrari in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 08-15-2017, 08:50 AM
  2. Ibn Khaldun and the concept of Asabiyyah or ‘group feeling’
    By NK19191 in forum General Sociology/Ethnology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-15-2016, 10:47 PM
  3. Palaeolithic DNA
    By Fire Haired in forum Other
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-22-2013, 03:14 AM
  4. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-15-2013, 07:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •