Page 28 of 151 FirstFirst ... 1826272829303878128 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 1509

Thread: 50% replacement in GB Patterson et al in review

  1. #271
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,411
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    Hey cremation in pits with weapons started in Ireland ! We have one from 9500 years ago ;0) http://irisharchaeology.ie/2013/03/a...ldest-burials/
    good to know... fantastic...off topic but this is another piece of the puzzle that fits in the general reconstruction of the great saga of the WHG

    The reasoning behind this practice is uncertain but it is possible that part of the cremated bone was kept by the living as ancestral relics (see Brook 2006, 80) or else that selected fragments were deposited in the adjacent River Shannon. This latter option is paralleled in modern India, where some cremations burials are still deposited in the sacred waters of the River Ganges.


    there are scattered but real evidence of cremation in Sredni Stog. Also quite a good number of cremation among the eastern bell beaker. Cucuteni was all in on cremation but that is old news
    Last edited by etrusco; 10-17-2021 at 02:27 PM.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to etrusco For This Useful Post:

     alan (10-17-2021),  Finn (10-17-2021),  Hando (11-16-2021),  R.Rocca (10-17-2021)

  3. #272
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,411
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    delete

  4. #273
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    6,308
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1bU106/ DF96

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    I’d strongly advise not to construct migration history on the basis of the distribution of an elite status object or two. That is a very old fashioned approach that is rarely used today: it’s be like implying global invasion from the iPhone people.
    That's to easy my friend, imo Riverman has got a clue here....hear hear! Urnfield is imo the new stage of what Tumulus started. Next level. The spread of Tumulus/Urnfield warriors is not an idee fixe. Just like brides from a distant places in their network.

    Also underlined by this:
    The origin of Tumulus culture may therefore be perceived as having stemmed primarily from dynamic socio-political and ideological changes and the quick pan-European transmission of the set of attractive ‘Dionysian’ models. Signs of the presence of professional warriors or even chiefs (the most instructive example being the warrior from Hagenau; Boos 2000, 106f. further literature therein) and direct evidence of fighting (e.g., the bronze arrowhead found in the bone of the deceased interred in a mound in the famous burial ground in Schwarza in southern Thuringia; Feustel 1958, Abb. XXXII: 4-6) can be found in various regions of the new culture’s area of habitation.

    Despite its pan-European scope, the culture was homogenous, but not devoid of peculiarities (differences) that were local in nature. In a very short period of time – only a few generations – the identifiers of this formation spread from its heartland in the upper Danube and upper Rhine basin to the east, towards the Carpathian Basin, and to the north-east – as far as the area between the Odra and the middle Vistula basin in present-day Poland.

    The attractive ideology would then have spread to the west and north-west and be adapted by the ‘post-Early-Bronze’, de-centralized and mobile communities (most likely based on kinship) of animal farmers inhabiting the upper Danube basin and the upper Rhine basin, as well as by the peoples of the Nordic regions (Vandkilde 2014, Fig. 5). This process went hand in hand with the dissemination of the custom of tumulus-building and the associated religious concepts, funerary practices, and territorial behaviour.

    The success of the new model lay in the favourable combination of three elements: the power of hierarchized, de-centralized, and mobile kinship-based social structures (military aristocracy-warriors, their clients and families), control over resources and long-distance trade routes, and the dissemination of metallurgy techniques (especially methods of casting).
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._metallurgists

    This certainly went along with the spread of Y-DNA lines (beneath R1b U106 for example). Iain mc Donald has already been able to tentative reconstruct some lines specific beneath DF96 and DF98. That is corresponding with this Tumulus and also Urnfield spread.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-16-2021)

  6. #274
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,141
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Italy was among the first indeed and this being directly related to Urnfield and the Sea Peoples too. But if you look more carefully at the map, and consider the papers dealing with this problem in detail, you will note that Central European pieces being of the same age or older. Yet Italy clearly was among the first centres for this type of sword, that's true. And its not by chance that Proto-Villanovan and Middle Danubian Urnfield, but especially Gava/Channelled Ware show some similarities, not just in weaponry, but in ceramic and other cultural traditions as well.
    Its a complex picture, but while we can debate Pannonia-Carpathians vs. Italy, there can't be any debate about France. That's a completely different timing and distribution, and like in the Balkans, its not about related Tumulus cultural formations which did also exchange, but its a disruption and invasion, rather. Because the elite sword warriors crossed major cultural boundaries to the West and South, which weren't crossed for many generations before and in which areas they were most disruptive.

    From the same paper:


    (p. 376)

    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...e_1500-1100_bc
    I see only one older dot, as as we have seen from Bell Beaker shards being thrown into older Iberian mass graves, sometimes wrongly dated material leads to false conclusions. Either way, I don't really have a string opinion one way or another, so I'll drop it.
    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:

     Hando (11-16-2021)

  8. #275
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,481
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
    There are a few Tollense Valley warriors that match the Lech Valley BA samples from Southern Germany, so I would say these traders must've also been in the thick of things during the battle in northern Germany.
    This was Europe-wide, there were Europe-wide conflicts and wars going on in this period. My quotations are more concentrated on E-V13 and Carpathian-related connections, but they are true for the whole of Europe, because it was all interconnected:
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post808846

    It wasn't global, but it affected all of West Eurasia one could say. New powerful warrior elites began to conduct major wars, trade wars and ressource embargoes which affected major parts of the continent, West Asia and North Africa. In the centre of this development, this "radicalisation" was the Middle Danubian and Carpathian sphere of Urnfield. We see this also in the record in the Transcarpathians, one of the centres for Gava/Channelled Ware. There was a massive increase not just of new sword types, but also new spearheads, instead of the old axe types. So they were producing for well organised, disciplined armies, not just small groups of warriors.

    And when there was little left to take North, East and South, the Western groups looked were the belly was still soft, towards people which lagged massively behind: This was the West. And then from about 1.100-600 BC they worked their way through. And these Western pioneers, mercenaries, warlords, specialists, were most likely the true carriers of Celtic. Note that the Lepontic group, even if being that early in Italy, could have split at the earliest stage of the development, or even before, from those groups heading West. But the pattern is just very clear and obvious and leaves little doubts.
    We only need to get a genetic impact from this movement. 50 % wouldn't be just enough, but more than enough, even if a lot of it would have come from allied marriage exchange later, after the Urnfield warrior elite got in charge first.

    Terramare serves in Italy a similar purpose as Gava in the East. Hard to imagine it being completely unrelated to Italics, obviously.

    Quote Originally Posted by R.Rocca View Post
    I see only one older dot, as as we have seen from Bell Beaker shards being thrown into older Iberian mass graves, sometimes wrongly dated material leads to false conclusions. Either way, I don't really have a string opinion one way or another, so I'll drop it.
    Two things: First, there are 4 dots, but actually there are even much more, secondly the density and production centres are much bigger. Thirdly, they are roughly the same age. So what we deal with here, in all likelihood, is that there was a quick transfer between Northern Italy and Pannonia-Carpathians. We can't even say exactly in which direction, or how it happened, but a Danubian sphere origin is more likely, considering the precursors.
    In Italy it was just adopted very early, very effectively. After that, Italy was up to the Thraco-Cimmerian horizon, more of "a giver" than "a taker" of population movements. They contributed to movements to the East Mediterranean, including Greece, in particular. Which I would related to Lemnians among others. Proto-Villanovan is a complex thing, especially because of the Etruscans, but culturally its association is obvious.

    My personal guess at the moment might be that the South Alpine and Italian workshops were well connected and quick in adopting the new technologies. So they were not outside of the network nor left behind - like the Southern Balkan or Western Europe was, which became both easy prey once the new centralised systems came into crisis around 13-10th century BC. If Italics were already present with Terramare, just if, they must have done better. Their relative lack of E-V13 in comparison to the more clearly Central European Urnfield and Hallstatt related groups might speak for that as well.
    Last edited by Riverman; 10-17-2021 at 02:54 PM.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Finn (10-17-2021),  Hando (11-16-2021)

  10. #276
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    6,308
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1bU106/ DF96

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Psynome View Post
    Yes, I've found the Kristiansen papers to be very helpful on the MBA. Here's a quote from another paper "Warfare and the political Economy: Europe 1500-1100 BC" https://www.academia.edu/42287234/Wa...e_1500_1100_BC

    Regarding contacts between proto-Celtic and proto-Germanic: "The distribution of octagonally hilted swords suggests that traders from south Germany were settling in Denmark and were active in organizing long distance trade in collaboration with warriors of the flange hilted sword."

    Attachment 47050
    Wow that is corresponding with Ling (2019):

    Hence, it is perhaps more logical to assume that copper from the Italian Alps was transferred by Tumulus middle men, at the southern branch of Weser, and from there they could have used the copper to trade Baltic amber with the riverine travelling Scandinavians. Another potential scenario was that Tumulus groups transported the copper to the river mouth of either Weser or Rhine for further exchange with other groups from Northern Europe.

    Thus, looking into the evidence of interaction and trade 1500–1300 BCE the second scenario seems after all to be the more plausible, i.e. that the south German swords originated from basically the same sources as swords in Scandinavia and Italy. Considering the many finds of Baltic amber in Tumulus graves in the southern part of the Weser region, dated to 1500–1300 BCE, we suggest here that Weser constituted one of the main routes for the Scandinavian travellers in the Bronze Age, like in the much later Viking Age. This route was probably already established by 1600 BCE (Fig. 19), as demonstrated by finds of swords and Baltic amber (Laux, 2009; Woltermann, 2012, Woltermann, 2016). Italian copper is identified not just in swords but also in other object categories in Scandinavia, e.g. jewellery (Melheim et al., 2018a). The results indicate that from 1500 BCE, the Scandinavian groups, relied mostly on copper from the Italian Alps, while northern Germany got copper from the Slovakian ore Mountains, with additional input from Mitterberg and Italy.
    Next stage would indeed be settlement of these Tumulus/Urnfield folk.

    What is obvious Sinn Williams paper is that there are supposes Celtic name giving in Schleswig, the heartland of the later Anglo-Saxons (imo the Germanic 'Urheimat').
    Settlement of the Tumulus/Urnfield people? Thanks JmcB!


  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-16-2021),  jadegreg (10-17-2021),  Psynome (10-17-2021),  Riverman (10-17-2021)

  12. #277
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,202
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    I am in no way saying that no urnfield involved a change of hegemony and language but it’s already clear that it very often didn’t and was often the result of a friendly network. I do believe genes also tend to travel among friendly networks but I think the main differentiation between an invasion and an intensive acculturation by friendly networking will be that the yDNA won’t shift much in the latter. That’s not to say NO males move in networks. Craftsmen and others may well and some foster children from other areas of the network might never make it home (but if so they should be no older than 16/17).

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-16-2021)

  14. #278
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,567
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    Question what is the story? And then where is the difference (to?)?
    Do you think that Bavaria and Netherlands did have the same history, with the same populations, even 3000 years ago or more?

    Anyway, that isn’t really the point. There is limited continuity since BA, even in Netherlands. Using modern local populations to extrapolate what the population was 3000 or 4000 years has a limited interest, since most likely inaccurate in most cases.

    You pointed to Franks not from Jutland. True. But it doesn’t mean they didn’t replace Belgo-roman population in larges areas.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Hando (11-16-2021)

  16. #279
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,481
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    I am in no way saying that no urnfield involved a change of hegemony and language but it’s already clear that it very often didn’t and was often the result of a friendly network. I do believe genes also tend to travel among friendly networks but I think the main differentiation between an invasion and an intensive acculturation by friendly networking will be that the yDNA won’t shift much in the latter. That’s not to say NO males move in networks. Craftsmen and others may well and some foster children from other areas of the network might never make it home (but if so they should be no older than 16/17).
    Friendly networks are more likely between similar people, which have the same codes, traditions and ancestry. While both the Atlantic Bronze Age networks and Western Central Europeans descended from Bell Beakers, there were just worlds between them and Urnfield didn't close the gap, but widened it with religious frenzy. From Unetice on the later centres for Urnfielders were cut off from the Western Bell Beaker groups which kept much of the old ways alive. Then comes Tumulus culture and there is really little which connects these spheres. And then we see, with Urnfield and its techno-complex, this rapid shift and expansion deep into the Atlantic territory, while all the Atlantic networks collapse one by one. Now we hear that exactly in this period of time there might have been up to 50 % genetic replacement from the continent! I mean what else? This is just about adding 1+1...

    Its the same it is with E-V13 in the East, its a simple model which just fits the pattern and all alternatives are dead. The only thing that complicates the issue is that the influx of the warrior elites might have been initially moderate and we deal with really, really close people genetically, even if they were culturally, ethnolinguistically, more than 1.000 years apart. I mean more than 1.000 years! Seriously, even if they were exactly the same people before, they won't have been after more than 1.000 years.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Finn (10-17-2021),  Hando (11-16-2021)

  18. #280
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,567
    Sex
    Location
    French Flanders
    Ethnicity
    Northwestern European
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b L21>DF13
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a29a

    France Belgium Flanders Wallonia Occitania France Bretagne
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    I am in no way saying that no urnfield involved a change of hegemony and language but it’s already clear that it very often didn’t and was often the result of a friendly network. I do believe genes also tend to travel among friendly networks but I think the main differentiation between an invasion and an intensive acculturation by friendly networking will be that the yDNA won’t shift much in the latter. That’s not to say NO males move in networks. Craftsmen and others may well and some foster children from other areas of the network might never make it home (but if so they should be no older than 16/17).
    Not too sure about it.

    If Urnfield men replaced local men, at least at the highest social level, I am far from sure it was the result of « friendly relations ». If it happened, it is very likely that locals didn’t get the choice.

    We will see when we could have access to some Urnfield samples (probably from the fringes of their territory, where they less likely to have been cremated). But I would not be surprised if they did have a genetic impact.
    Last edited by ffoucart; 10-17-2021 at 03:06 PM.

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ffoucart For This Useful Post:

     Finn (10-17-2021),  Hando (11-16-2021)

Page 28 of 151 FirstFirst ... 1826272829303878128 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 254
    Last Post: 06-08-2020, 02:22 PM
  2. Early replacement of West Eurasian male Y chromosomes from the east
    By VladimirTaraskin in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 01-01-2020, 05:44 PM
  3. Population Replacement in Early Neolithic Britain
    By rozenfeld in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 10-04-2019, 04:51 PM
  4. Ancient Admixture in Human History (Patterson et al 2012)
    By Jean M in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-07-2012, 10:45 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
  •