Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 85

Thread: How and where did R1b get into the Bell Beaker folks?

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,928
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    How and where did R1b get into the Bell Beaker folks?

    Alan asks a good question and it has got to be worth a thread of it own.
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    The most controversial and interesting aspect of European R1b is not really how it spread with beaker networks but more how it reached the zone where beaker networks developed. Focussing on the beaker aspect is interesting but European R1b clearly had a pre-beaker life.
    At least we have a starting point. We know for sure some form of R1b was found in Bell Beaker remains. It's the earliest (oldest) R1b ancient DNA that we've found so far.

    "Emerging genetic patterns of the european neolithic: Perspectives from a late neolithic bell beaker burial site in Germany" by Lee, et al., 2012.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...22074/abstract
    The transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture in Europe is associated with demographic changes that may have shifted the human gene pool of the region as a result of an influx of Neolithic farmers from the Near East. However, the genetic composition of populations after the earliest Neolithic, when a diverse mosaic of societies that had been fully engaged in agriculture for some time appeared in central Europe, is poorly known. At this period during the Late Neolithic (ca. 2,8002,000 BC), regionally distinctive burial patterns associated with two different cultural groups emerge, Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, and may reflect differences in how these societies were organized. Ancient DNA analyses of human remains from the Late Neolithic Bell Beaker site of Kromsdorf, Germany showed distinct mitochondrial haplotypes for six individuals, which were classified under the haplogroups I1, K1, T1, U2, U5, and W5, and two males were identified as belonging to the Y haplogroup R1b. In contrast to other Late Neolithic societies in Europe emphasizing maintenance of biological relatedness in mortuary contexts, the diversity of maternal haplotypes evident at Kromsdorf suggests that burial practices of Bell Beaker communities operated outside of social norms based on shared maternal lineages. Furthermore, our data, along with those from previous studies, indicate that modern U5-lineages may have received little, if any, contribution from the Mesolithic or Neolithic mitochondrial gene pool.
    Grave 5: ydna R1b1b2 U106-, mtdna I1, 35-50yo, no grave goods, bone age n.d.
    Grave 8: ydna R1b^, mtdna K1, 21-26yo, cup & flake grave goods, bones 2678-2547 BC
    ^unable to obtain M269 result
    Last edited by Mikewww; 04-18-2013 at 11:18 PM.

  2. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    932
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2a1

    There was a lot of discussion of the Lee et al paper on Dienekes blog in May (link).

    I want to point out that there was no evidence supporting their last statement above that there was no continuity of U5 from the Mesolithic. Perhaps it was poorly worded and that's not what they intended to say?

  3. #3
    Legacy Account
    Posts
    7,362
    Sex
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Nationality
    British
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by GailT View Post
    there was no evidence supporting their last statement above that there was no continuity of U5 from the Mesolithic.
    What we appear to see from ancient DNA is a new set of mtDNA haplogroups appear in Neolithic Europe, completely replacing U5 in many (not all) places. Then U5 reappears widely, from the ages of metal onwards, in company with Neolithic haplogroups. So we can conclude that Bell Beaker and Corded Ware carried U5 from a homeland where it had not been completely replaced, and spread it once more across territory from which it had vanished long before as hunter-gatherers faded from the scene. This newly arrived U5 would boost the stock of U5 in those places where it had survived locally, such as the NE, since the foraging way of life survived there. We should be able to demonstrate local continuity of specific U5 subclades in certain parts of Europe from Mesolithic aDNA to modern, but that seems likely to be relatively rare.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Jean M For This Useful Post:

     Silesian (04-19-2013)

  5. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,606
    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 Mikewww View Post
    Alan asks a good question and it has got to be worth a thread of it own.


    At least we have a starting point. We know for sure some form of R1b was found in Bell Beaker remains. It's the earliest (oldest) R1b ancient DNA that we've found so far.

    "Emerging genetic patterns of the european neolithic: Perspectives from a late neolithic bell beaker burial site in Germany" by Lee, et al., 2012.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...22074/abstract
    In order to get a good handle on where Bell Beaker started, we have to understand where it ended up phylogenetically. I don't think it is at all difficult to speculate that late Bell Beaker lineages where already regionally L21+ in the isles and DF27+ in Iberia.

    U152 is a little more difficult to project, but it looks like the highest branches may also be related to Bell Beaker or the preceding Copper Age cultures like Remedello.
    Last edited by R.Rocca; 04-19-2013 at 12:32 PM.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to R.Rocca For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (07-08-2019),  Rathna (04-19-2013),  Silesian (04-19-2013)

  7. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,883
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    The mtDNA change is very interesting. Unless it was selective in some way it looks migratory. One thing I find of interest is that some papers have commented on the inward looking tribal localised feel to the distribution and style choices of even immediate pre-beaker copper working. Beaker clearly saw some kind of profound change to an outward looking society where local barriers became very porous and somehow a unified (or partly unified) idealogy and expression of it spread incredibly wide. I think women may well have had an unsung role in this that maybe mtDNA may ultimatley show. I understand that the beaker mtDNA at Kromsdorf showed an outward looking marriage network and that this somehow contrasted with other cultures. There may have been a relay style movement of female lines which although perhaps in short steppes amounted to a chain that created very wide movement of mtDNA over a century or so. Also, some greater leaps may have happened in terms of higher status marriage networks where marriage was essentially for alliance and network building and high status individuals would have moved much longer distances to the patrilocal home. Indeed maybe most of the prominant beaker burials are of the higher status group and the Kromsdorf pattern may be common. That sort of network would also be very useful in spreading ideas, trends, fashions and maybe even had a linguistic impact. I am in no way trying to play down the male role as we know there was unusal mobility too among them in the beaker period. However in addition to male mobility marriage networks may have mean major changes to mtDNA geography.

  8. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    932
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2a1

    Quote Originally Posted by Jean M View Post
    What we appear to see from ancient DNA is a new set of mtDNA haplogroups appear in Neolithic Europe, completely replacing U5 in many (not all) places. Then U5 reappears widely, from the ages of metal onwards, in company with Neolithic haplogroups. So we can conclude that Bell Beaker and Corded Ware carried U5 from a homeland where it had not been completely replaced, and spread it once more across territory from which it had vanished long before as hunter-gatherers faded from the scene. This newly arrived U5 would boost the stock of U5 in those places where it had survived locally, such as the NE, since the foraging way of life survived there. We should be able to demonstrate local continuity of specific U5 subclades in certain parts of Europe from Mesolithic aDNA to modern, but that seems likely to be relatively rare.
    Jean - I agree with you on the concept of both migration and some continuity of U5, but I think the evidence suggests that continuity was not relatively rare.

    Looking at the current distribution of U5, I think we can say that Mesolithic U5 populations were probably not completely replaced anywhere in Europe, as we still find very rare and very diverse U5 subclades throughout Europe. The original Mesolithic European U5 probably survived at higher percentages in northern Europe. Perhaps there was some recent movement of rare U5 subclades from northern European reservoirs to southern Europe, and this might explain some of the current diversity of U5 in southern Europe. But I think a more likely scenario is that U5 hunter-gatherers survived everywhere, albiet at low frequency, and adopted Neolithic technologies throughout Europe. Given that Mesolithic peoples had low population density, it's possible that they could have largely survived and still represent a small component of the current population.

    U5a1h is an example of a very old branch that is only found in the Brittish Isles and seems to have undergone a bottleneck there. U5b1f is another old branch that has an Iberian or Franco Cantabrian origin and is found very rarely from Portugal to Germany, but is found in 12% of the Basques (perhaps U5b1f married into a small Basque immigrant community). And we have many other cases of rare U5 lineages that date to between 10,000 to 20,000 years ago and have been found in only one or two samples of modern Europeans. I agree that we seem to see a few dominant U5 subclades moving from the east back into central and western Europe during the Neolithic or Bronze age, and these few subclades represent a large fraction of the current U5 population in Europe, but most of the diversity of U5 in Europe appears to represent continuity from Mesolithic populations.

    So I think the evidence suggests a very complex process, with multipe waves of migration but also significant continuity of early populations. Overly broad simplifications such as those in the Lee et al. paper are almost certainly wrong, and it would be safer to recognize that there is complexity and uncertainty that can't be resolved with a small number of ancient mtDNA samples, especially when results for these samples are reported only for the control region. The small number of FMS results available seem to suggest continuity of U5 in Europe.

  9. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,928
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    ... I understand that the beaker mtDNA at Kromsdorf showed an outward looking marriage network and that this somehow contrasted with other cultures. There may have been a relay style movement of female lines which although perhaps in short steppes amounted to a chain that created very wide movement of mtDNA over a century or so. ... .
    I think I know generally what you mean by "outward looking marriage network" but what are some of the things the archaeologists see that indicate this? I'm just trying to understand this better and how that specifically applies to Beaker folks, and is this all Beaker folks or just the Rhenish or what?

  10. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,883
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Mike- in reply to your question, what I meant was pre-beaker cultures around the Alps were noted to use style of metalwork etc to define a relatively localised identity with different small areas having different styles. This is thought to have been to define themselves and mark themselves apart from others. This contrasts with the beaker package which apparently established a material identity that was accepted far and wide across borders. That is what sets the beaker package apart. it was the acceptance of a pan European idenity that linked people rather than divided them.

    Anyway in terms of the topic, I stumbled across this paper

    http://www.academia.edu/1633041/Copp..._Social_Demand

    it relates to the fascinating pre-beaker copper age of Iberia. On other forums I have tried to dig into details of the pre-beaker post-Capatho-Balkans spread of copper working including the Circumpontic Metallurgical Provence and the spread of post-Carpatho-Balkan metalworking and mining through the Alps, Italy and Liguria. c. 3500-3000BC. Ultimately this surely is linked to the pre-beaker Iberian copper age too. One thing that struck me when digging into the Carpatho-Balkan and CMP traditions is how very ornament orientated the former was and how this contrasted with the CMP where weapons and tools were much more prominent. Well, this seems to have also been the case with the pre-beaker Italian copper age cultures like Remedello. Now this paper seems to say the same is true about pre-beaker Iberian copper age metal work, something that I have found it hard to find a lot of information about on the web. I also found this paper on analysis of the metal of that period in Iberia although its rather technical

    http://run.unl.pt/bitstream/10362/62...reira_2011.pdf

  11. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,928
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    ...Anyway in terms of the topic, I stumbled across this paper

    http://www.academia.edu/1633041/Copp..._Social_Demand

    it relates to the fascinating pre-beaker copper age of Iberia. On other forums I have tried to dig into details of the pre-beaker post-Capatho-Balkans spread of copper working including the Circumpontic Metallurgical Provence and the spread of post-Carpatho-Balkan metalworking and mining through the Alps, Italy and Liguria. c. 3500-3000BC. Ultimately this surely is linked to the pre-beaker Iberian copper age too. One thing that struck me when digging into the Carpatho-Balkan and CMP traditions is how very ornament orientated the former was and how this contrasted with the CMP where weapons and tools were much more prominent. Well, this seems to have also been the case with the pre-beaker Italian copper age cultures like Remedello. Now this paper seems to say the same is true about pre-beaker Iberian copper age metal work, something that I have found it hard to find a lot of information about on the web. I also found this paper on analysis of the metal of that period in Iberia although its rather technical

    http://run.unl.pt/bitstream/10362/62...reira_2011.pdf
    Thanks, Alan. Looks like another correlation with the potential smoking gun of metallurgy.

    From "From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations: The Synthetic Theory" by Amzallag
    Quote Originally Posted by Amzallag
    scholars frequently do not devote enough attention to the way copper is produced.
    ...
    furnace smelting, as soon as it came into being, immediately replaced crucible smelting.
    ...
    if the bowl furnace is no more than an enlarged crucible, we would expect to find a gradual evolution in shape and size from crucible to bowl furnace. This is not the case.
    ...
    Furnace metallurgy was progressively expanding in the western part of the Mediterranean basin (Sardinia, Italy, southern France, and North Africa) through a pattern that parallels the spread of the Bell Beaker cultures. Also on continental Europe, furnace metallurgy was diffusing concurrently with the spread of Bell Beaker culture.
    ...
    In Europe, this dynamic is related to the slow and multidirectional pattern of migration of the Bell Beaker people, suggesting it is not directly motivated by the search for new mining resources. Rather, the expansion of a metallurigical domain looks like a combination of the desire of populations to join the metallurgical domain and the need, for the smiths, to migrate toward new horizons.
    http://www.ajaonline.org/sites/defau...Amzallag_0.pdf

    Amzallag's interpretation of the evidence is that the Beaker folks were using furnace smelting and of course that furnace smelting comes from the CMP (Circumpontic Metallurgy Province.) This correlation makes sense. If the Beaker people were using (and selling) metals usefully as tools and weapons, rather than as ornaments, a higher production system like furnace smelting (vs. crucible smelting) would be helpful. The shoe fits.

    I also think the Po River basin connection through to Liguria and southern France fits a little better with an L51/L11 trail than trying to bring the L51/L11 lineage through the boot of Italy with the early Neolithic or stringing them along North African coast to southern Iberia. That is not to say they did not touch North Africa, but just that the Po basin is a better vector for eventually hitting high diversity spot for P312 in southern France as well as spinning off U106 to the north somehow along the way.
    Last edited by Mikewww; 05-02-2013 at 10:06 PM.

  12. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,883
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    http://www.academia.edu/1633041/Copp..._Social_Demand

    Having read the first paper now (I often post before I have read a paper myself if I think it is important) it does make a case that Iberian copper working may have essentially been a native development and rebutts the arguements that link it to a spread from points east such as France. The paper is so recent that I dont think the rebuttal has been rebutted yet. That of course would have major implications on the idea of the spread of copper spreading R1b as far as Iberia in the pre-beaker era. However, I dont think that arguement is done and dusted yet. For instance it would seem a heck of a coincidence if copper working was invented completely independently just before 3000BC at the same time as it was arriving in France from the east.

    Maybe a half way house arguement is that the Iberians became aware of copper working in France and the basic concept but then tried to copy it without the movement of outside expert lineages. That of course would still remove this window of movement for R1b into Iberia from the east.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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