World Families Forums - Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 30, 2014, 09:46:51 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)
| | |-+  Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Bell Beaker link to R1b confirmed by Ancient DNA  (Read 28093 times)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #400 on: May 26, 2012, 05:48:57 PM »

So I really cannot see how different branches of R1 only separated for a few thousand years could have ended up anything other than speaking cousin languages/distant dialects of the same branch (unless one of them adopted that of another group).  

Precisely. Picture just one R1b man (who happened to have the V88 mutation) deciding to settle down in a village and join the agricultural revolution. He has to learn the language of the rest of the village or play dumb the rest of his life. Their language is Proto-Afro-Asiatic. His descendants make quite a tribe of their own within a few generations and they are all speaking the adopted language of the Chap who Moved to the Village. Some of them decide to take off for North Africa when the drought comes. They are among other A-A speakers going that way, so it is just clannishness that creates the picture we have now, whereby V88 is associated with Chadic, but not the related Berber.    

That is basically what I am picturing too.  Does makee you think though that R1b around 6000BC and R1a may not have been radically different so there is a lost R1 cousin language or dialect other than the one that became proto IE.  In time depth terms the separation is just not that great.  I can certainly think of some level of mutual understanding of languages separated by around 2000 years.
Logged
Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #401 on: May 27, 2012, 02:30:09 AM »



Ok. My apologies.  Back on to the topic of R1b where do you define that refuge? Azerbaijan or Iran. The diversity of North Iranian R1b seems high. And when do you think that R1b occurred? Since South Asia lacks R1b this must have occurred after the South Asian Neolithic with a movement from the Caspian to the west Via Anatolia to Europe. Alternatively R1b could have arrived in Bell Beaker from Anatolia where it originated. This model would not have the question of no R1b in South Asia because it would assume Iran and Europe received R1b waves after the Neolithic from Anatolia.

Also saying R1 is from the Volga-Urals would imply  that the first R1 man was Northern European automatically right? What about R and R2?

I guess that's a good point about the first R1 being European (maybe not North European, more like Eurasian) if he is from the Volga R. However, I think that the Volga R. connection would be leaning towards the first R1a man. In regards to R1b, it's anybody's guess but I have my favorite pet theory of origins for R1b is in the Syunik region of Armenia. It's close to enough to Iran, close enough to the Caspian Sea, close enough to the Anatolian Peninsula where R1b diversity appears to be the highest. Origins of R1b is in Southwest Asia.

Arch



Just because he was from the Volga doesn't mean he was European. I was asking if autosomal components such as Northern European, West Asian even existed by then or was he just some  West Eurasian?

Why specifically that region? When Anatolia and Iran are better fits? I personally think narrowing down ydnas to such a small region is ridiculous. How do you know?

I am curious on what Jean M defines the Hyrcanian refuge R1b comes from as.
[/quote]

I personally don't think we will ever know exactly where R1b originated. Even if you have high variance, diversity and frequency all clumped together, it's no guarantee; we can only guess. I think it's ridiculous to target a region with a wide brush stroke and call it good. For that matter and to be absolutely certain, I would just say R1b originated in the Eastern Hemisphere. On another point of targeting areas, Anatolia and Iran in my opinion are quite large and if it's believed that R1b originated in either place, then it should based on a regional affinity of where supporting data has been collected in Anatolia or Iran for that matter. So in essence we are stuck with regions rather than countries, sub-continents, continents or hemispheres to make our best guesses as most studies are regional focused.

Arch
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #402 on: May 27, 2012, 03:35:49 AM »

I am not using an ad-hoc approach. I am in part drawing on a paper by linguist John Bengston: J. D. Bengtson, The Basque language: history and origin, International Journal of Modern Anthropology, vol. 4 (2011), pp. 43-59. It is online. He points out the agricultural vocabulary in Basque.

I disagree with his conclusion linking Basque with North Caucasian languages.
I thank you for having posted the link to this paper, very interesting. Of course I think that the link between Basque and North-East Caucasian languages is demonstrated, and from more than a century, from when Alfredo Trombetti published “Delle relazioni delle lingue caucasiche con le lingue camitosemitiche e con altri gruppi linguistici” (1902-1903) and then with the fundamental “Le origini della lingua basca” (1923-1925). Trombetti saw the “origini della lingua basca” in his wider theory of the monogenesis of the language.
Of course we don’t know where the Caucasian languages were spoken 10000 years ago, and probably the Caucasus has been a refugium from other regions nearby, and we don’t know which path has had the Basque language for arriving to Pyrenees. Someone thinks that similar languages were diffused overall in Western Europe and is trying to find some vestigial of them. And we don’t know where IE languages formed etc etc. and we don’t know where Etruscan language (and similar) formed: you all are repeating slavishly its origin from Aegean sea, which is undemonstrated and not in line with the last archaeological studies. Etruscan languages is a language of ancient Italy with Rhaetian and Camun and Trombetti thought it was intermediate between Caucasian and IE languages. We don’t know which language was spoken in Sardinia or Corsica, but makes me think the possible link of Basque *čori “bird” with Tindi č’uri-GaGa “quail” and Sardinian (from substrate) thiligugu “owl”. I interpreted in the past similar words (see also thilighelta “lizard”) like Berber-wise ones, but probably they are linked to the Caucasian ones in a wider link of the first ancient linguistic groups.

If we still hold what archaeology has demonstrated:
1)   7500 years ago agriculturalists from Italy colonized Iberia. We don’t know which language they spoke and if they were autochthonous or came from East. They could speak a Caucasian language, the ancestor of the Basque, the only one survived. We don’t know which hg. they were, but they could be mostly hg. G, that we have found at Treilles and in all the ancient findings. But I wouldn’t exclude that also R-L51* was amongst them, if we look at the RRocca’s map and the presence of this haplogroup exactly in the places that they colonized: Valencia region and Portugal.
2)   The link between Ligurian and Lusitanian, probably the ancestor of all the Celt languages which expanded to Central-North Europe from Iberia with the BB, should be later, but we don’t know another period with a colonization of Iberia from Italy before the Roman Empire, and we shouldn’t think that an unique language was spoken in Italy then. There could be many different languages like in every other place of Europe.
3)   Of course I still hold my conviction that R1b1* with YCAII=18-22 and 18-23, the intermediate haplogroup between R1b1* and R1b1a2* (Mangino/Mancini), R-L23+/150-, my R-L23/L150*, R-L51*, and why not R-P312* (not found so far) but R-DF27* yes etc. are “cosa nostra”.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Bren123
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #403 on: May 27, 2012, 07:31:46 AM »

What part of Germany is Kromsdorf located?
Logged

LDJ
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #404 on: May 27, 2012, 07:51:59 AM »

What part of Germany is Kromsdorf located?

Near Weimar in Thuringia in east central Germany between Leipzig and Erfurt here.

« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 07:53:02 AM by rms2 » Logged

Bren123
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #405 on: May 27, 2012, 08:00:21 AM »

What part of Germany is Kromsdorf located?

Near Weimar in Thuringia in east central Germany between Leipzig and Erfurt here.



Thanks!
Logged

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

Posts: 2012


« Reply #406 on: May 27, 2012, 10:14:23 AM »

Does anyone have any comments about the very distributions of the very upstream forms of R1a?  It seems to have a similar scattered more southern distribition as early R1b forms. 
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #407 on: May 27, 2012, 12:10:18 PM »

Does anyone have any comments about the very distributions of the very upstream forms of R1a?  It seems to have a similar scattered more southern distribition as early R1b forms. 

They are concentrated in West Asia and Western Europe. They are so rare so I wouldn't put too much weight into them. I find it unlikely that upstream R1a  didn't exist in Eastern Europe or the fringe of Eastern Europe and Asia where R1a originated.
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #408 on: May 27, 2012, 12:38:04 PM »

By the last researches it seems that R1a is more recent than R1b, which is at least 18.000 years old and the most ancient R1a, i.e. R-M420, has been found in Western Europe above all and none in Asia nor in India. Probably you’ll realize that my hypotheses could be wrong but are an exam of the data at our disposal. If other and different data will come out, I of course will change my hypotheses, which so far are: R1a and R1b from the Italian Refugium, Indo-European languages probably from Central Europe, where centum and satem languages separated and  probably also R1a and R1b. Satem languages are more recent than centum ones etc. etc., all things that we know very well, but probably Sindhi not
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

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

Posts: 2012


« Reply #409 on: May 27, 2012, 05:34:59 PM »

Does anyone have any comments about the very distributions of the very upstream forms of R1a?  It seems to have a similar scattered more southern distribition as early R1b forms. 

They are concentrated in West Asia and Western Europe. They are so rare so I wouldn't put too much weight into them. I find it unlikely that upstream R1a  didn't exist in Eastern Europe or the fringe of Eastern Europe and Asia where R1a originated.

I think its very much a mega leap of faith to think that the current distribution of upstream forms tells us the origin.  The origin of R1a* could be anywhere from the Balkans to India longitudinally and several latitudes are possible.  Same with R1b.  I dont think the impact of single people and their lineages should ever be underestimated.

I think though that the lack of an early substantial tree like pattern in R1b prior to 3000BC or later does seem to indicate something and a similar thing can be extrapolated for early R1a.  Both R1 super-clades seem to share this lack of take off in say 6000BC that is apparent in E, J and G.  The most obvious explanation for this, which fits the ancient DNA of the early Neolithic to date and fits variance is that both R1a and R1b were somewhat backwards or removed in terms of the initial takeup of farming.  I am growing less convinced that R1b was among the early farmers anywhere, with maybe some elements straying in around 5000BC from some non-farming area to the north.  The main evidence for this is purely the R1b tree pre-L23.  It just doesnt have the pattern expected of becoming part of the farming bonanza until fairly late except perhaps a few stray lines.   That all leads me to think R1b may have had a very R1a-like story.  It does seem to me that both R1a and R1b first appear in the ancient DNA evidence at a similar time c. 2800-2500BC.  Both first appear in roughly the same area although I understand that is just chance in terms of DNA testing.  Both seem dominated by copper age clades.  I just wonder if we are trying to contrast early R1a and R1b too much based on their different trajectories c. 3000-2400BC. The evidence is slowly looking them look rather similar.  Its also clear to me that they would have spoken at least distantly related dialects. 
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #410 on: May 27, 2012, 08:23:45 PM »

I am starting to believe that the history of R1b and R1a before their late Neolithic expansion is written into their trees and the straight little branching nature until fairly late in the Neolithic.  They do seem to me to be the terrible twins with so much in common in that sense.  The history of R1a prior to the later Neolithic is interpreted as late steppes Mesolithic and that does seem plausible.  Unlike some haplogroups, R1a and R1b both seem to lack the bushy branching until late in the Neolithic.  It just seems more and more likely with the ancient DNA evidence and the variance calculations (which are supported by ancient DNA) and the shape of the pre-4000BC trees that both R1a and R1b were late Mesolithic hunter groups somewhere in eastern Europe or its border with Asia.  I suspect now that they were not far from each other and that they only acquired farming practices around 5000-3000BC when the branching seems to start.  That might tend to place them in the same sort of background as that often stated for R1a.  Where do you get late Mesolithic groups who remained outside agriculture until really quite late but were also able to send the odd person like Mr V88 and Mr L23 into the farming zone?  Here is a hunch.  When R1b really burst onto the scene it seems they had a maritime tradition judging by Bell Beakers.  I would suggest they were fishers on the Black or Caspian Sea or thereabouts. Fishing groups even in modern times are notorious for rarely marrying out and living as if their land orientated neighbours 1 mile away didnt exist.  I dont know enough about the very late hunter-fishers in those area (although I will have a dig into it).  I know the whole Mesolithic of the Black Sea western shores from Thrace (and perhaps even the north coast of Anatolia) to the Crimea have at various points been described as linked which is not all that surprising.

 
Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #411 on: May 28, 2012, 12:29:46 PM »

Does anyone have any comments about the very distributions of the very upstream forms of R1a?  It seems to have a similar scattered more southern distribition as early R1b forms. 

They are concentrated in West Asia and Western Europe. They are so rare so I wouldn't put too much weight into them. I find it unlikely that upstream R1a  didn't exist in Eastern Europe or the fringe of Eastern Europe and Asia where R1a originated.

I think its very much a mega leap of faith to think that the current distribution of upstream forms tells us the origin.  The origin of R1a* could be anywhere from the Balkans to India longitudinally and several latitudes are possible.  Same with R1b.  I dont think the impact of single people and their lineages should ever be underestimated.

I think though that the lack of an early substantial tree like pattern in R1b prior to 3000BC or later does seem to indicate something and a similar thing can be extrapolated for early R1a.  Both R1 super-clades seem to share this lack of take off in say 6000BC that is apparent in E, J and G.  The most obvious explanation for this, which fits the ancient DNA of the early Neolithic to date and fits variance is that both R1a and R1b were somewhat backwards or removed in terms of the initial takeup of farming.  I am growing less convinced that R1b was among the early farmers anywhere, with maybe some elements straying in around 5000BC from some non-farming area to the north.  The main evidence for this is purely the R1b tree pre-L23.  It just doesnt have the pattern expected of becoming part of the farming bonanza until fairly late except perhaps a few stray lines.   That all leads me to think R1b may have had a very R1a-like story.  It does seem to me that both R1a and R1b first appear in the ancient DNA evidence at a similar time c. 2800-2500BC.  Both first appear in roughly the same area although I understand that is just chance in terms of DNA testing.  Both seem dominated by copper age clades.  I just wonder if we are trying to contrast early R1a and R1b too much based on their different trajectories c. 3000-2400BC. The evidence is slowly looking them look rather similar.  Its also clear to me that they would have spoken at least distantly related dialects. 

I agree with that. Which is why I don't put much into them. R1a originated at the border between Asia and Europe imo. The upstream clades would tell you they came from Western Europe or Western Asia.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #412 on: May 29, 2012, 01:32:32 PM »

By the last researches it seems that R1a is more recent than R1b, which is at least 18.000 years old ...
How do you know R1b is at least 18k ybp?  Karafet, 2008, has the TMRCA for R1 as 18.5k ybp using what they call a "novel SNP counting" method.  That 18.5k would be a maximum age range for R1b, not a minimum.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2012, 01:37:47 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #413 on: May 29, 2012, 01:43:08 PM »

See the last classification of Terry, I thought was Ken Nordtvedt, knowing very well hg. I, but it seems you said to me he is another person. Anyway he has an update of the age of the haplogroups, and R1b is about 18,000 years old and R1 about 25,000 if I remember well.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #414 on: May 29, 2012, 01:51:52 PM »

See the last classification of Terry, I thought was Ken Nordtvedt, knowing very well hg. I, but it seems you said to me he is another person. Anyway he has an update of the age of the haplogroups, and R1b is about 18,000 years old and R1 about 25,000 if I remember well.
I have found the page I printed and this is the link:

http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Arch Y.
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


« Reply #415 on: May 31, 2012, 03:18:24 AM »

Here is an interesting link to a video about Nebra. This is only a mere 20 miles or so from the Bell Beaker finds in Kromsdorf. Basically, this is Germany's Stonehenge! If I'm not mistaken there is also an ancient calendar near Heuneburg in the Black Forest, I'll have to dig up the info.

Arch

Here is the link! BTW, at 23 minutes, 25 seconds should interest many of you.

http://tinyurl.com/6lr44xo
« Last Edit: May 31, 2012, 03:27:40 AM by Arch Y. » Logged
OConnor
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 676


« Reply #416 on: May 31, 2012, 01:37:04 PM »

Apparently this news article suggests many changes in Norway around 4000 years ago. Could this be part of the Beaker People movement?

http://sciencenordic.com/immigration-stone-age
Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b4


R-DF13**(L21>DF13)
M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P108+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P305+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, M173+, M269+, M343+, P312+, L21+, DF13+, M207+, P25+, L11+, L138+, L141+, L15+, L150+, L16+, L23+, L51+, L52+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, P69+, P9.1+, P97+, PK1+, SRY10831.1+, L21+, L226-, M37-, M222-, L96-, L193-, L144-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, DF49-, L371-, DF41-, L513-, L555-, L1335-, L1406-, Z251-, L526-, L130-, L144-, L159.2-, L192.1-, L193-, L195-, L96-, DF21-, Z255-, DF23-, DF1-, Z253-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, P66-

12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18


rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #417 on: May 31, 2012, 07:25:18 PM »

Apparently this news article suggests many changes in Norway around 4000 years ago. Could this be part of the Beaker People movement?

http://sciencenordic.com/immigration-stone-age

Could be. This paper discusses Bell Beaker finds in Denmark and Norway. Its author, Christopher Prescott, is the archaeologist shown in the photo at the link you posted above.
Logged

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #418 on: June 06, 2012, 10:23:04 AM »

Here is a french Beaker Bell info site
Links: The Beaker / Links Beakers
http://ubprehistoire.free.fr/Liens-Campaniforme.html

Translated to English
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fubprehistoire.free.fr%2FLiens-Campaniforme.html

Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 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 0.109 seconds with 19 queries.