World Families Forums - Beakers and P312 - is a model emerging?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 26, 2014, 09:31:44 AM
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)
| | |-+  Beakers and P312 - is a model emerging?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Beakers and P312 - is a model emerging?  (Read 6191 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #100 on: September 17, 2012, 02:44:43 PM »

Jean, I don know why you assume I have any feud with them ... I can assure you that in all this I have just opinions and no personal issues at all, and I will have no problems changing of opinion when new evidence ... is available.

I'm happy to hear this. It struck me as strange that you declared that Spanish academia would be ranged against me en masse, when that does not appear to be the case. Villar and Prosper were ahead of me, as was Almagro-Gorbea. (In fact I have to thank you for raising this issue, because it made me look back at E-Keltoi and realise that I should cite the latter. I already included the former.)
Logged
palamede
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #101 on: September 17, 2012, 02:56:52 PM »

I revisited Busby and did a hotspot analysis of the Busby Data.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.DC1/rspb20111044supp2.xls

The results are quiet revealing.
Place of highest Frequency analysis.

SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                          Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333
L11*                          Ireland W.    1.0
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106*                        Friesland.     0.426
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312*.                       Ireland W.     1.0
P312(xL21xU152).      Andulasia.     0.520
L21*.                         Ireland W.     0.93
L21*(xM222).             Ireland S.      0.63
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431
I think it must be
SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                         Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333 Certainly not Basque, maybe Bashkirs
L11                            Ireland W.    1.0 without asterique
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106                          Friesland.     0.426  without asterique
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312                          Ireland W.     1.0   without asterique
P312(xL21xU152).       Andulasia.     0.520
L21                            Ireland W.     0.93  without asterique
L21(xM222).               Ireland S.      0.63  without asterique
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431
« Last Edit: September 17, 2012, 03:01:00 PM by palamede » Logged

Y=G2a3b1a2-L497 Wallony-Charleroi; Mt=H2a2a1 Normandy-Bray
Dodecad-DiY: E Eur 9,25% W Eur 48,48% Med 28,46% W Asia 11,70%
World9: Atl-Balt 67,61% Southern 13,23% Cauc-Gedr 12,73%
K12a: North-E 39,71% Med 37,9% Cauc 12,55% Gedr 5,78% SW Asia 2,13%
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #102 on: September 17, 2012, 03:03:52 PM »

I revisited Busby and did a hotspot analysis of the Busby Data.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.DC1/rspb20111044supp2.xls

The results are quiet revealing.
Place of highest Frequency analysis.

SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                          Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333
L11*                          Ireland W.    1.0
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106*                        Friesland.     0.426
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312*.                       Ireland W.     1.0
P312(xL21xU152).      Andulasia.     0.520
L21*.                         Ireland W.     0.93
L21*(xM222).             Ireland S.      0.63
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431
I think it must be
SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                         Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333 Certainly not Basque, maybe Bashkirs
L11                            Ireland W.    1.0 without asterique
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106                          Friesland.     0.426  without asterique
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312                          Ireland W.     1.0   without asterique
P312(xL21xU152).       Andulasia.     0.520
L21                            Ireland W.     0.93  without asterique
L21(xM222).               Ireland S.      0.63  without asterique
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431


It was Basques, just from a statistically insignificant 6 samples.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #103 on: September 17, 2012, 03:09:23 PM »

I revisited Busby and did a hotspot analysis of the Busby Data.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.DC1/rspb20111044supp2.xls

The results are quiet revealing.
Place of highest Frequency analysis.

SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                          Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333
L11*                          Ireland W.    1.0
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106*                        Friesland.     0.426
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312*.                       Ireland W.     1.0
P312(xL21xU152).      Andulasia.     0.520
L21*.                         Ireland W.     0.93
L21*(xM222).             Ireland S.      0.63
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431
I think it must be
SNP                            Place.          Frequency
M269                         Ireland W.   1.0
L51.                           Ireland W.    1.0
M269 (xL11)               Basque.        0.333 Certainly not Basque, maybe Bashkirs
L11                            Ireland W.    1.0 without asterique
L11 (xU106,xP312)      England.       0.120
U106                          Friesland.     0.426  without asterique
U106xU198                 Friesland.      0.426
P312                          Ireland W.     1.0   without asterique
P312(xL21xU152).       Andulasia.     0.520
L21                            Ireland W.     0.93  without asterique
L21(xM222).               Ireland S.      0.63  without asterique
M222.                        Ireland N.      0.444
U152.                         Italy N.        0.431


I beg to differ. It is Basques. They use the S notation (with asterique).
Logged

Heber


 
R1b1a2a1a1b4  L459+ L21+ DF21+ DF13+ U198- U106- P66- P314.2- M37- M222- L96- L513- L48- L44- L4- L226- L2- L196- L195- L193- L192.1- L176.2- L165- L159.2- L148- L144- L130- L1-
Paternal L21* DF21


Maternal H1C1



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

Posts: 2012


« Reply #104 on: September 17, 2012, 03:53:35 PM »

I think though that it should be taken into account that Altantic Iberia has two phases of connectivity to the north with a gap in between as one of the articles in E-Keloi points out:

1. The Maritime bell beaker phase when it was part of a wide network which covered both future Italic and Ligurian areas (more strongly) and Celtic area (much more weakly)

2. There was a gap in between of maybe 1000 years when Atlantic Iberia was more connected to the west Med. networks as far as Italy than with the future Celtic areas. 

3. The Atlantic Bronze Age when Atlantic Iberia had a fairly strong link with the more northern Atlantic Areas.

I believe at stage 1. It was probably an undifferentiated Celto-Italic group.  In between it is likely that the Celto-Italic of Atlantic Iberia evolved along more Italic lines and this is preserved in Lusitanian and related substrates noted in other parts of Atlantic Iberia as well as Ligurian.  Finally in stage stage 3 it is only then that I think Atlantic Iberia was Celticised through contacts towards the north.  I actually think the most likely period and position that Celtic evolved from Italo-Celtic first was in the immedaite post-beaker high status links between Wessex, Armorica, Unetice cultures as well as less well known cultures in between these and on their fringes.  I think it evolved in a broad zone from the isles to northern France to west-central Europe in that period of elite interaction that seperated it somewhat from the Italic world.  All of these cultures are culturally derived from beaker too so shared a common route.  However this sphere of interaction was rather more confined than beaker as a whole and makes a good case for the origin of the Celtic dialect.  IMO this was extended to Iberia only during the Atlantic Bronze Age some centuries later. 

That is all based on timing, degree and direction of contacts over time and the positions of the earliest attested languages.   
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #105 on: September 17, 2012, 06:06:57 PM »

I should point out that Busby added data points that Myres did not have and south and central Portugal have more L11* than anything on the Baltic with a much larger sample size. In fact, the north Poland number is 1 of 17 samples and should be treated with caution. The consistent appearance in Swiss samples is also interesting.

That makes more sense. So does it then mean we are looking at a wide and very rapid spread of L11 prior to the birth's of P312 and U106?

I acknowledge that it is possible that ancient L11* expanded widely first, and then P312 and U106 were born and expanded out of different birth places far apart. The corollary is that the P312 TMRCA and the U106 TMRCA were just plain lucky in that their descendants far outpaced/outsurvived the rest of L11*.

However, I think it is far more likely that P312 and U106 were born before the widespread and successful dispersion of L11 types. The implication is they didn't originate that far from each other. I'll explain later.

Below is the explanation I promised but that I placed in the U106 early years (click here) thread.

... The L11* MRCA for P312 and U106 was a single man. It is true he could have travelled wide and far in his lifetime, but I think it is more likely he was successful because he had the full logistical support of a colonization/settlement group with him.  The early explorers, traders and trappers don't leave the mark the settlers do. Who would those colonizers/settlers be?  Probably a lot of relatives, hence the real L11* TMRCA for U106/P312 was back home and several generations dead at the time of the colonizations. Maybe the actual progenitor was not even from Western Europe at all.

This is one explanation for how P312 and U106 seem to have such distant distributions while still being closely related. Back home, they may not have really been that successful. In fact, large migrations are often (perhaps almost all the time) caused by stress and survival requirements. We can think they were kings, like a King of Stonehenge/Amesbury Archer, but maybe their parents were escapees or exiled folks from back home and just found easy pickings in Western Europe. Lucky for them.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2012, 06:23:58 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Jarman
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #106 on: September 17, 2012, 11:04:17 PM »

I should point out that Busby added data points that Myres did not have and south and central Portugal have more L11* than anything on the Baltic with a much larger sample size. In fact, the north Poland number is 1 of 17 samples and should be treated with caution. The consistent appearance in Swiss samples is also interesting.

That makes more sense. So does it then mean we are looking at a wide and very rapid spread of L11 prior to the birth's of P312 and U106?

I acknowledge that it is possible that ancient L11* expanded widely first, and then P312 and U106 were born and expanded out of different birth places far apart. The corollary is that the P312 TMRCA and the U106 TMRCA were just plain lucky in that their descendants far outpaced/outsurvived the rest of L11*.

However, I think it is far more likely that P312 and U106 were born before the widespread and successful dispersion of L11 types. The implication is they didn't originate that far from each other. I'll explain later.

Below is the explanation I promised but that I placed in the U106 early years (click here) thread.

... The L11* MRCA for P312 and U106 was a single man. It is true he could have travelled wide and far in his lifetime, but I think it is more likely he was successful because he had the full logistical support of a colonization/settlement group with him.  The early explorers, traders and trappers don't leave the mark the settlers do. Who would those colonizers/settlers be?  Probably a lot of relatives, hence the real L11* TMRCA for U106/P312 was back home and several generations dead at the time of the colonizations. Maybe the actual progenitor was not even from Western Europe at all.

This is one explanation for how P312 and U106 seem to have such distant distributions while still being closely related. Back home, they may not have really been that successful. In fact, large migrations are often (perhaps almost all the time) caused by stress and survival requirements. We can think they were kings, like a King of Stonehenge/Amesbury Archer, but maybe their parents were escapees or exiled folks from back home and just found easy pickings in Western Europe. . .

However many (or seemingly few) generations of L11* there were, at some point there was a parting of the ways and one maybe went west and another maybe went north. The starting and ending points we keep wishing we were smart enough to figure out with inadequate data.  Current variance aside I still wonder about the affect of the early pre-Roman Iron Age climate change on early U106.

. . . Lucky for them.
And us.
Logged
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #107 on: September 21, 2012, 07:44:31 AM »

I think though that it should be taken into account that Altantic Iberia has two phases of connectivity to the north with a gap in between as one of the articles in E-Keloi points out:

1. The Maritime bell beaker phase when it was part of a wide network which covered both future Italic and Ligurian areas (more strongly) and Celtic area (much more weakly)

2. There was a gap in between of maybe 1000 years when Atlantic Iberia was more connected to the west Med. networks as far as Italy than with the future Celtic areas. 

3. The Atlantic Bronze Age when Atlantic Iberia had a fairly strong link with the more northern Atlantic Areas.

I believe at stage 1. It was probably an undifferentiated Celto-Italic group.  In between it is likely that the Celto-Italic of Atlantic Iberia evolved along more Italic lines and this is preserved in Lusitanian and related substrates noted in other parts of Atlantic Iberia as well as Ligurian.  Finally in stage stage 3 it is only then that I think Atlantic Iberia was Celticised through contacts towards the north.  I actually think the most likely period and position that Celtic evolved from Italo-Celtic first was in the immedaite post-beaker high status links between Wessex, Armorica, Unetice cultures as well as less well known cultures in between these and on their fringes.  I think it evolved in a broad zone from the isles to northern France to west-central Europe in that period of elite interaction that seperated it somewhat from the Italic world.  All of these cultures are culturally derived from beaker too so shared a common route.  However this sphere of interaction was rather more confined than beaker as a whole and makes a good case for the origin of the Celtic dialect.  IMO this was extended to Iberia only during the Atlantic Bronze Age some centuries later. 

That is all based on timing, degree and direction of contacts over time and the positions of the earliest attested languages.   

Alan,

Here are a number of images from Cunliffes, Britian Begins, which also appears on Google Books. I am currently reading it on Kindle. It is a great read.
It clearly illustrates the Atlantic Migration from the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Copper, Bronze and Iron Ages inclusing Bell Beaker and Cardial Ware migrations.

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-migrations/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-migrations-dna/
Logged

Heber


 
R1b1a2a1a1b4  L459+ L21+ DF21+ DF13+ U198- U106- P66- P314.2- M37- M222- L96- L513- L48- L44- L4- L226- L2- L196- L195- L193- L192.1- L176.2- L165- L159.2- L148- L144- L130- L1-
Paternal L21* DF21


Maternal H1C1



avalon
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #108 on: September 21, 2012, 09:58:18 AM »

I think though that it should be taken into account that Altantic Iberia has two phases of connectivity to the north with a gap in between as one of the articles in E-Keloi points out:

1. The Maritime bell beaker phase when it was part of a wide network which covered both future Italic and Ligurian areas (more strongly) and Celtic area (much more weakly)

2. There was a gap in between of maybe 1000 years when Atlantic Iberia was more connected to the west Med. networks as far as Italy than with the future Celtic areas. 

3. The Atlantic Bronze Age when Atlantic Iberia had a fairly strong link with the more northern Atlantic Areas.

I believe at stage 1. It was probably an undifferentiated Celto-Italic group.  In between it is likely that the Celto-Italic of Atlantic Iberia evolved along more Italic lines and this is preserved in Lusitanian and related substrates noted in other parts of Atlantic Iberia as well as Ligurian.  Finally in stage stage 3 it is only then that I think Atlantic Iberia was Celticised through contacts towards the north.  I actually think the most likely period and position that Celtic evolved from Italo-Celtic first was in the immedaite post-beaker high status links between Wessex, Armorica, Unetice cultures as well as less well known cultures in between these and on their fringes.  I think it evolved in a broad zone from the isles to northern France to west-central Europe in that period of elite interaction that seperated it somewhat from the Italic world.  All of these cultures are culturally derived from beaker too so shared a common route.  However this sphere of interaction was rather more confined than beaker as a whole and makes a good case for the origin of the Celtic dialect.  IMO this was extended to Iberia only during the Atlantic Bronze Age some centuries later. 

That is all based on timing, degree and direction of contacts over time and the positions of the earliest attested languages.   

Alan,

Here are a number of images from Cunliffes, Britian Begins, which also appears on Google Books. I am currently reading it on Kindle. It is a great read.
It clearly illustrates the Atlantic Migration from the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Copper, Bronze and Iron Ages inclusing Bell Beaker and Cardial Ware migrations.

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-migrations/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-migrations-dna/

Thanks for the nice maps from "Britain Begins" which is a must buy when it comes out in book form.

Maybe Tacitus was right after all when he said Iberians had crossed over to Britain in ancient times. ;)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 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 18 queries.