World Families Forums - New Bell Beaker papers

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 25, 2014, 11:41:45 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  New Bell Beaker papers
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Go Down Print
Author Topic: New Bell Beaker papers  (Read 12344 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #75 on: April 12, 2012, 12:41:21 PM »

.. it's looking more as if some R1b guys came into western and northern Europe, quite a long time ago, and got along well with the local girls.

Actually it is looking as though women came along too, if you look at the changing frequencies of mtDNA haplogroups between the Neolithic and the age of metal. See Bernard's blog. Though I agree that the process was almost certainly one of gradual and incomplete replacement. 
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #76 on: April 12, 2012, 05:08:32 PM »

I think the genetics component is having a salutary effect on the discussion of what was probably going on... if only (or primarily) on the forums, so far.  Just look at the last couple of posts by Mike and Alan, on this thread -- and compare that with previous theories advanced, with more or less confidence, about Ice Age refugia, repopulation from the west of an empty Europe, conquest by metal-wielding hordes, founder effects of elites and whatnot.  I guess some of that might even have happened; but it's looking more as if some R1b guys came into western and northern Europe, quite a long time ago, and got along well with the local girls.  So there has been gradual and partial replacement, or at least augmentation (with high success), mainly of the paternal lineages.  One would think that mass migrations, as such, should have replaced the maternal ones at a fairly similar rate.

If I still had to think like an anthropologist, I might suggest looking at the Stelae People's stelae (among other sites) as places for long distance trade, maybe under the protection of some godlike, scary-powerful figure... be he dead or alive.  (I've been trying for about 35 years not to think that way, but it's hard to forget every class I ever sat in.)  Anyway, there wouldn't have been much trade, if the traders were usually killed and eaten; and there would be a lot more artifacts, if they typically traveled in armed hordes to prevent that.  So the Bell Beaker travel insurance plan (among others) probably involved religion, rather broadly defined.  Mana, the supernatural, the Wholly Other, dragons -- whatever it took.

Jean M has recently mentioned (on the thread, "Where did Germanic languages expand from?") the trading-post nature of the Isle of Thanet.  Nordic and Iberian bones in the same burial, and that sort of thing.  As I dimly recall from Jean's blog about a Wessex Archaeology project (I think), it didn't sound much like a battleground.

To be honest archaeologists can only interpret and discuss the possibilities of correlations with DNA when a reliable timeframe and phylogeny is provided by the geneticists.  Prior to a few years back we were basically being told the age of R1b is Palaeolithic and there was little refining of R1b's phylogeny so M269 was presented as a monolith.  Archaeologists have to accept that the baseline they are given to work with is reliable but it wasnt.  I spend 100s of hours reading up all sorts of obscure stuff on the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic in Europe and its spread in many countries.  It was basically pointless because the geneticists dating and phylogeny was all wrong so I was reading up on the wrong period.  However I always had a doubt in the back of my mind because the ht35 group in Turkey etc did not make sense if R1b had emerged in Iberia.  Still, on the plus side I know a lot more about the rather specialist and obscure world of European Palaeolithic cultures than I would have if I hadnt been enticed into that blind alley! 
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #77 on: April 16, 2012, 06:54:47 AM »

Not exactly a new paper, but Martine Piguet and Marie Besse, Chronology and Bell Beaker common ware, Radiocarbon,  vol. 51 (2009), no. 2, pp. 817-830 is well worth a look.  It explores origins of some of the other styles of pottery that are found with Bell Beaker. It sheds a lot of light on the interactions of Bell Beaker people.
Logged
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #78 on: April 20, 2012, 07:06:12 PM »

I collared Jackie McKinley, Osteoarchaeologist for Wessex Archaeology, at a conference and asked just that. She said that the cost of aDNA testing was prohibitive. Wessex is waiting for the price to drop.

Andrew Fitzpatrick of Wessex has given that as the reason for not testing the Amesbury Archer, along with the fact that there is no database for comparisons. I told him I was maintaining an online table of aDNA and he assumed it would be minute. He was surprised to learn of its size.

Someone should set up a sponser and ancient DNA test account for the Amesbury archer. 

That would be nice.

Arch
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #79 on: April 20, 2012, 09:03:28 PM »

I collared Jackie McKinley, Osteoarchaeologist for Wessex Archaeology, at a conference and asked just that. She said that the cost of aDNA testing was prohibitive. Wessex is waiting for the price to drop.

Andrew Fitzpatrick of Wessex has given that as the reason for not testing the Amesbury Archer, along with the fact that there is no database for comparisons. I told him I was maintaining an online table of aDNA and he assumed it would be minute. He was surprised to learn of its size.

Someone should set up a sponser and ancient DNA test account for the Amesbury archer.  

That would be nice.

Arch

I wrote Dr. Fitzpatrick about testing the Amesbury Archer a couple of years ago. He told me then pretty much the same thing: they had no plans to do so, it's hard to get dna from old bones, etc.

I would dearly love to see some aDNA from good old Arch (there, I've named him after you, Arch).

But I'm hoping he is L21+. :-)
« Last Edit: April 20, 2012, 09:04:36 PM by rms2 » Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #80 on: April 21, 2012, 02:10:01 PM »

I collared Jackie McKinley, Osteoarchaeologist for Wessex Archaeology, at a conference and asked just that. She said that the cost of aDNA testing was prohibitive. Wessex is waiting for the price to drop.

Andrew Fitzpatrick of Wessex has given that as the reason for not testing the Amesbury Archer, along with the fact that there is no database for comparisons. I told him I was maintaining an online table of aDNA and he assumed it would be minute. He was surprised to learn of its size.

Someone should set up a sponser and ancient DNA test account for the Amesbury archer.  

That would be nice.

Arch

I wrote Dr. Fitzpatrick about testing the Amesbury Archer a couple of years ago. He told me then pretty much the same thing: they had no plans to do so, it's hard to get dna from old bones, etc.

I would dearly love to see some aDNA from good old Arch (there, I've named him after you, Arch).

But I'm hoping he is L21+. :-)

Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #81 on: April 21, 2012, 02:30:53 PM »

Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

Really? Nothing!! This issue seems to be taking up an unhealthy amount of space in your mind Goldenhind. Spring has sprung you know.

Waft in my window
You blossom scents of springtime
The poor man's  pot-pourri.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #82 on: April 21, 2012, 02:55:26 PM »

Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

Really? Nothing!! This issue seems to be taking up an unhealthy amount of space in your mind Goldenhind. Spring has sprung you know.

Waft in my window
You blossom scents of springtime
The poor man's  pot-pourri.


What I meant was no result for the Archer would please me more. And it was meant to be humorous (hence the exclamation point, as I dislike smiley faces).
Certainly winning the lottery or attaining a dormant viscountcy would please me more! Even a dormant baronetcy!
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 05:16:08 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #83 on: April 21, 2012, 04:08:30 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.
Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #84 on: April 21, 2012, 05:17:24 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 05:20:18 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #85 on: April 21, 2012, 05:24:41 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)

That is obviously true, but you know darned well that if the Archer turns out to be either U106, U152, or R1a, we'll never hear the end about how the warlike Beaker "elites" dominated the poor, downtrodden, mostly L21 British aborigines, taught them how to speak Celtic (before teaching them to upgrade to a Germanic language), etc.

The Archer has already been christened "the King of Stonehenge", regardless of who the grunts were who actually built it.

It's a nightmare scenario, if you ask me.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 05:29:51 PM by rms2 » Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #86 on: April 21, 2012, 05:28:07 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Attempting to divine the motivations for other people's opinions is fraught with danger. Mine have more to do with puncturing theories which I believe are unwarranted. I know neither Jean or you believe me, but my thoughts have very little to do with my own subclade status. The only relevance that has is that it was what caused me to begin looking into the subject in the first place. If I was told tomorrow there was a lab mistake and I am actually L48, it wouldn't change my thoughts in the slightest.
So I suggest you and Jean find something more fruitful to do than attempting to psychoanalyze me.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 05:30:42 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #87 on: April 21, 2012, 05:31:08 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)

That is obviously true, but you know darned well that if the Archer turns out to be either U106, U152, or R1a, we'll never hear the end about how the warlike Beaker "elites" dominated the poor, downtrodden, mostly L21 British aborigines, taught them how to speak Celtic (before teaching them to upgrade to a Germanic language), etc.

It's a nightmare scenario, if you ask me.


Well P312 and then L11 showed that its a lot of nonsense for U152 or U106 to claim to be much different from L21 and indeed any of the other clades and made a mockery of the whole idea one clade was hunter gatherer and the other was Iron Age Celtic.  We are always going to have people who want to claim to be something special and relegate the rest to being lesser being but that is more about human psychology than DNA IMO. All L11 people were initially basically the same, must have spoken the same language etc.  
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #88 on: April 21, 2012, 05:33:47 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)

That is obviously true, but you know darned well that if the Archer turns out to be either U106, U152, or R1a, we'll never hear the end about how the warlike Beaker "elites" dominated the poor, downtrodden, mostly L21 British aborigines, taught them how to speak Celtic (before teaching them to upgrade to a Germanic language), etc.

It's a nightmare scenario, if you ask me.


Well P312 and then L11 showed that its a lot of nonsense for U152 or U106 to claim to be much different from L21 and indeed any of the other clades and made a mockery of the whole idea one clade was hunter gatherer and the other was Iron Age Celtic.  We are always going to have people who want to claim to be something special and relegate the rest to being lesser being but that is more about human psychology than DNA IMO. All L11 people were initially basically the same, must have spoken the same language etc.  

Agreed absolutely.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #89 on: April 21, 2012, 05:35:20 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Attempting to divine the motivations for other people's opinions is fraught with danger. Mine have more to do with puncturing theories which I believe are unwarranted. I know neither Jean or you believe me, but my thoughts have very little to do with my own subclade status. The only relevance that has is that it was what caused me to begin looking into the subject in the first place. If I was told tomorrow there was a lab mistake and I am actually L48, it wouldn't change my thoughts in the slightest.
So I suggest you and Jean find something more fruitful to do than attempting to psychoanalyze me.


No problem. Your posts are doing a fine job on their own.

For purposes of this public forum, I accept that your motives are all of the highest, purest sort, are only about "puncturing theories", and are not the least bit personal.

Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #90 on: April 21, 2012, 05:41:48 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)

That is obviously true, but you know darned well that if the Archer turns out to be either U106, U152, or R1a, we'll never hear the end about how the warlike Beaker "elites" dominated the poor, downtrodden, mostly L21 British aborigines, taught them how to speak Celtic (before teaching them to upgrade to a Germanic language), etc.

It's a nightmare scenario, if you ask me.


Well P312 and then L11 showed that its a lot of nonsense for U152 or U106 to claim to be much different from L21 and indeed any of the other clades and made a mockery of the whole idea one clade was hunter gatherer and the other was Iron Age Celtic.  We are always going to have people who want to claim to be something special and relegate the rest to being lesser being but that is more about human psychology than DNA IMO. All L11 people were initially basically the same, must have spoken the same language etc.  

Uh-huh.

That wouldn't make a dent in the drumbeat and bugle call were the Archer found to be U106, U152, or R1a.

And there would actually be some kind of difference if the Beaker Folk were found to be predominantly one thing and the pre-Beaker "aborigines" another.

The various L11 haplogroups aren't so inextricably mixed as to not have their own discrete distributions and apparent ethnic or tribal affiliations.

Otherwise, why bother with downstream SNPs? Let's just look at all of L11 together.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 05:44:52 PM by rms2 » Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #91 on: April 21, 2012, 05:59:24 PM »



Nothing would please me more than if he turned out to be U106!

That is hardly a surprise.

It is pretty obvious that one of your goals is to in some measure deprive U106 of the coveted (by somebody, somewhere) status of "Germanic".

Good luck with that.

To me it would be very disappointing if the Archer turned out to be U106 or U152. We have already had years of epic claims for those two haplogroups.

If the Archer turned out to be either, that would just be too much.

Your letting the ghost of a certain U152 cheerleader haunt you too much.  I wouldnt care if the archer was U152.  He was a visitor to stonehenge.  He didnt build it.  Its extremely likely it was us L21 guys (well the beaker phase part) :0)

That is obviously true, but you know darned well that if the Archer turns out to be either U106, U152, or R1a, we'll never hear the end about how the warlike Beaker "elites" dominated the poor, downtrodden, mostly L21 British aborigines, taught them how to speak Celtic (before teaching them to upgrade to a Germanic language), etc.

It's a nightmare scenario, if you ask me.


Well P312 and then L11 showed that its a lot of nonsense for U152 or U106 to claim to be much different from L21 and indeed any of the other clades and made a mockery of the whole idea one clade was hunter gatherer and the other was Iron Age Celtic.  We are always going to have people who want to claim to be something special and relegate the rest to being lesser being but that is more about human psychology than DNA IMO. All L11 people were initially basically the same, must have spoken the same language etc.  

Uh-huh.

That wouldn't make a dent in the drumbeat and bugle call were the Archer found to be U106, U152, or R1a.

And there would actually be some kind of difference if the Beaker Folk were found to be predominantly one thing and the pre-Beaker "aborigines" another.

The various L11 haplogroups aren't so inextricably mixed as to not have their own discrete distributions and apparent ethnic or tribal affiliations.

Otherwise, why bother with downstream SNPs? Let's just look at all of L11 together.

True but if the variance dating suggested is correct then the archer was living within a couple of centuries of p312 coming into existence, not long enough for any major diversification in culture or language.  Back in 2400BC (or thereabouts) there was no significant difference between L11 groups, assuming that the variance calculations are correct of course.      
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 09:12:51 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #92 on: April 21, 2012, 06:04:17 PM »

They'll probably never get his y-dna anyway, and, if they do, they probably won't get as far up the tree as U106 or U152. They could possibly get enough of a haplotype to predict R1a, however, and that would be just as bad, if not worse.

Whatever the Archer's haplogroup, I'll learn to live with it.

What else can one do?
Logged

Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #93 on: April 21, 2012, 06:36:48 PM »

They'll probably never get his y-dna anyway, and, if they do, they probably won't get as far up the tree as U106 or U152. They could possibly get enough of a haplotype to predict R1a, however, and that would be just as bad, if not worse.

Whatever the Archer's haplogroup, I'll learn to live with it.

What else can one do?

Because of the 'cool' factor alone, I would love for the Archer to be U152. I think the chances of that happening however are quite small. Even if he did turn up to be U152, the most important thing it would prove is a Bell Beaker + L11 link.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #94 on: April 21, 2012, 06:40:56 PM »

They'll probably never get his y-dna anyway, and, if they do, they probably won't get as far up the tree as U106 or U152. They could possibly get enough of a haplotype to predict R1a, however, and that would be just as bad, if not worse.

Whatever the Archer's haplogroup, I'll learn to live with it.

What else can one do?

Because of the 'cool' factor alone, I would love for the Archer to be U152. I think the chances of that happening however are quite small. Even if he did turn up to be U152, the most important thing it would prove is a Bell Beaker + L11 link.

I feel the same way about the cool factor. I meant no offense in saying that I don't want the Archer to turn out to be U106, U152, or R1a.

One would have had to have been around Rootsweb and dna-forums as a lowly R-M269* a few years ago to appreciate the reasons. Alan and I and a few others here were there at that time and held that status.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 06:42:02 PM by rms2 » Logged

Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #95 on: April 22, 2012, 02:43:42 AM »

I collared Jackie McKinley, Osteoarchaeologist for Wessex Archaeology, at a conference and asked just that. She said that the cost of aDNA testing was prohibitive. Wessex is waiting for the price to drop.

Andrew Fitzpatrick of Wessex has given that as the reason for not testing the Amesbury Archer, along with the fact that there is no database for comparisons. I told him I was maintaining an online table of aDNA and he assumed it would be minute. He was surprised to learn of its size.

Someone should set up a sponser and ancient DNA test account for the Amesbury archer.  

That would be nice.

Arch

I wrote Dr. Fitzpatrick about testing the Amesbury Archer a couple of years ago. He told me then pretty much the same thing: they had no plans to do so, it's hard to get dna from old bones, etc.

I would dearly love to see some aDNA from good old Arch (there, I've named him after you, Arch).

But I'm hoping he is L21+. :-)

LOL! Thanks for naming him after me. :-) I can't remember who posted the comment, but if companies like FTDNA can invest money into finding the Warrior Gene, perhaps they could find more value in analyzing aDNA instead. This would help us find our genetic heritage rather than alleged mental attributes that really mean nothing to genealogical research.

Arch
Logged
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #96 on: April 22, 2012, 02:52:03 AM »

They'll probably never get his y-dna anyway, and, if they do, they probably won't get as far up the tree as U106 or U152. They could possibly get enough of a haplotype to predict R1a, however, and that would be just as bad, if not worse.

Whatever the Archer's haplogroup, I'll learn to live with it.

What else can one do?

All I want are results so we can narrow down the geographical range of SNPs. It's  just simply too broad or spread out with modern DNA. The only real solution is getting the aDNA and dating the artefacts found with the genetic material; to include the isotopic data for geographical proximity of early childhood. Even if the Amesbury Archer turned out to be in the E haplogroup, it's still valuable data. Cool factors I can also understand, that's how FTDNA makes it money, as well House of Names, and even ShamWow!

Arch

Because of the 'cool' factor alone, I would love for the Archer to be U152. I think the chances of that happening however are quite small. Even if he did turn up to be U152, the most important thing it would prove is a Bell Beaker + L11 link.
Logged
secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #97 on: April 22, 2012, 07:49:30 AM »

The copper metallurgy began in Southern France at the end of the 4th millenium BC. See the following french paper from Laurent Carozza and Benoît Mille: Chalcolithique et complexification sociale : quelle place pour le métal dans la définition du processus de mutation des sociétés de la fin du Néolithique en France ? https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B1RIQRMwAdjpWEsxZ1Q4MXJEbDA
See the figure 7 of the paper for the dates of the Cabrières-Péret copper mine.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2012, 08:08:56 AM by secherbernard » Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #98 on: April 22, 2012, 07:56:44 AM »

LOL! Thanks for naming him after me. :-) I can't remember who posted the comment, but if companies like FTDNA can invest money into finding the Warrior Gene, perhaps they could find more value in analyzing aDNA instead. This would help us find our genetic heritage rather than alleged mental attributes that really mean nothing to genealogical research.

Arch

I suspect there are two things at play here:

1. I'm sure whoever the caretaker of the Archer is wants to publish the results themselves and not leave it to a commercial company.
2. Perhaps they are waiting for a better aDNA extraction process that doesn't destroy as much DNA.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #99 on: April 22, 2012, 08:08:02 AM »

The copper metallurgy began in Southern France at the end of the 4th millenium BC.
I have printed the paper and I am going to read it this afternoon, but about what you have said, the paper says: “Ce n’est que vers 3800-3500 av. J.-C. qu’elle atteint les Alpes, le plateau Suisse – notamment dans la culture de Pfyn – et l’Italie du nord». We know that Ötzi (3300 BC) used copper tools.

Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.106 seconds with 19 queries.