R1b's arrival in Europe - Tumulus culture or Bell Beaker?

bertrand

Regular Member
Messages
56
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Location
New York
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b-U152
Hello,

After reading David Anthony's book "The wheel the Horse and Language" i became fairly convinced that the R1b and R1a haplogroups where at the origin of IE languages and spread to Western Europe through the Steppes thanks to early domestication of the horse and the mutation providing milk tolerance for adults.

This culture was nomadic, so it left little archeological remains except for tumuli where the dead were burried.

Anthony makes a convincing demonstration how such tumuli started to spread westward first to Romania (around 4200 BC and then up the danube valley until it reached Eastern Hungary around 2500BC.

Later, the spread of the tumuli continued west to West germany, Switzerland and Alsace where the tumuli appeared in the forest of Haguenau around 1500BC. Still later the wave spread to Northern Italy and Eastern France.

The spread of the Tumuli culture is consistent with the spread of the middle bronze age. But the recent discovery in Germany of two R1b dating back to 2500BC seems a little early to be part of the Tumulus culture and more consistent with a bell beaker spread.

Does anyone have any information with respect to the presence of tumuli in the bell beaker culture that could indicate an assimilation of tumuli people in the bell beaker without destruction?

Thanks

Bertrand
 
Interesting, I can't answer your question but is the book worth reading?
 
Interesting, I can't answer your question but is the book worth reading?

A must in my opinion for whoever is interested in the origin of Indo-European languages and the domestication of the horse.

I should add to my previous quote that since the Bell Beaker culture originates in Portugal around 2900BC and then spreads east, it is unlikely that the spread of Bell Beakers is related to the spread of R1bs; rather it seems that the diffusion of the bell beaker "cultural package" east of the Rhine was welcome by the arriving R1bs up the Danube valley.

Bertrand
 
Bell Beaker obviously.Anyway the succeeding of Central European cultures goes like this Bell Beakers>Unetice Culture>Tumulus Culture.
 
A must in my opinion for whoever is interested in the origin of Indo-European languages and the domestication of the horse.

I should add to my previous quote that since the Bell Beaker culture originates in Portugal around 2900BC and then spreads east, it is unlikely that the spread of Bell Beakers is related to the spread of R1bs; rather it seems that the diffusion of the bell beaker "cultural package" east of the Rhine was welcome by the arriving R1bs up the Danube valley.

Bertrand

I thought this was the case as well,
R1 into europe via the caucauses and north of the black sea and G into europe via anatolia and the balkans.
 
Hello,

After reading David Anthony's book "The wheel the Horse and Language" i became fairly convinced that the R1b and R1a haplogroups where at the origin of IE languages and spread to Western Europe through the Steppes thanks to early domestication of the horse and the mutation providing milk tolerance for adults.

This culture was nomadic, so it left little archeological remains except for tumuli where the dead were burried.

Anthony makes a convincing demonstration how such tumuli started to spread westward first to Romania (around 4200 BC and then up the danube valley until it reached Eastern Hungary around 2500BC.

Bertrand

I’ve thought about it for a while coz I could not explain why the majority of R1a Z283+ Z282- and R1a Z283+ Z282+ M458- Z280- Z284- clades were found so far to the West from the Pontic Steppe (see the map below)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/81708018@N05/7655052340/in/photostream

Red pins – R1a Z283+ Z282-
Green pins – R1a Z283+ Z282+ M458- Z280- Z284-

Now I think such distribution can be explained if we presume that R1a Z283+ guys migrated from the present day Romania and moved by the Danube to the South Germany where Z282 SNP appeared.
Further some R1a Z283+ Z282+ guys moved in the Western Germany and then some to the Britten while R1a Z283+ Z282+ Z284+ guys moved to the Northern Germany, R1a Z283+ Z282+ M458+guys to the Central Poland and R1a Z283+ Z282+ Z280+ guys to the Northern Poland (Baltic seashore) and from there part of R1a-Z280 guys moved to the East in the Central Russia and Ukraine (Fatyanovo and Middle Dnepr) and to the Volga and Ural Region (Abashevo).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/81708018@N05/7655057224/in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/81708018@N05/7655059874/in/photostream

According to this scenario Thracians, Cimmerians and Mycenaean (those who did not take part in migrations) should be R1a-Z93*/Z283* maybe with some R1a-Z280.
Fatyanovo - R1a-Z280
Middle Dnepr - R1a-Z280 and R1a-Z93*/Z283*
Abashevo - R1a-Z280 and R1a-L342
Andronovo - R1a-L342
 
A must in my opinion for whoever is interested in the origin of Indo-European languages and the domestication of the horse.

I should add to my previous quote that since the Bell Beaker culture originates in Portugal around 2900BC and then spreads east, it is unlikely that the spread of Bell Beakers is related to the spread of R1bs; rather it seems that the diffusion of the bell beaker "cultural package" east of the Rhine was welcome by the arriving R1bs up the Danube valley.

Bertrand

I think that the finding of R1b in a Beaker sample is good evidence for the spread of R1b being linked to Beaker culture. But that doesn't mean that R1b was necessarily part of the earliest Beaker population. It's very possible that it could have been a minority clade to the east of Beaker culture in Beaker culture's early days, which was able to spread throughout the extent of the Beakers' geographic area once Beaker culture reached it. That's what I've meant before when I've speculated that Beaker culture could have been a "catalyst" for R1b.

The first major culture coming directly out of an R1b dominant population, in that case, would probably have been Unetice Culture.
 
I think that the finding of R1b in a Beaker sample is good evidence for the spread of R1b being linked to Beaker culture. But that doesn't mean that R1b was necessarily part of the earliest Beaker population. It's very possible that it could have been a minority clade to the east of Beaker culture in Beaker culture's early days, which was able to spread throughout the extent of the Beakers' geographic area once Beaker culture reached it. That's what I've meant before when I've speculated that Beaker culture could have been a "catalyst" for R1b.

The first major culture coming directly out of an R1b dominant population, in that case, would probably have been Unetice Culture.

It could be that the Unetice Culture was the first one with a R1b dominant population and that R1b was a minority in the Bell Beaker populations. I don't know.

What's your reasoning?
 
It could be that the Unetice Culture was the first one with a R1b dominant population and that R1b was a minority in the Bell Beaker populations. I don't know.

What's your reasoning?

Some evidence:


  • R1b was found in a Beaker sample (so must have been part of the culture somehow)
  • STR dating of major modern R1b subclades has tended to place their origin as contemporary with Beaker culture (or even after), rather than before, indicating that their spread came largely later
  • Beaker culture apparently spread west-to-east, but R1b-L11 has ancestors that apparently spread east-to-west

Of course, I don't know, either. It just seems like a reasonable proposal to me at the moment. I'm willing to reconsider if we start finding overwhelming R1b frequency at every time and location of Beaker culture, or a dip in R1b frequency in Unetice culture, or something. Better subclade testing of ancient R1b samples would also help a lot.
 
Some evidence:


  • R1b was found in a Beaker sample (so must have been part of the culture somehow)
  • STR dating of major modern R1b subclades has tended to place their origin as contemporary with Beaker culture (or even after), rather than before, indicating that their spread came largely later
  • Beaker culture apparently spread west-to-east, but R1b-L11 has ancestors that apparently spread east-to-west

Balkans is noted for having older R1b clades than Western Europe and younger than West Asia.
 
Balkans is noted for having older R1b clades than Western Europe and younger than West Asia.

Yeah, that's basically what I'm getting at, although it's worth noting that most Balkans R1b is ht35, which is a cousin, rather than an ancestor, of R1b-L11. I'm thinking specifically of the L51* distribution, which is very thin, but telling, including a Balkans sample or two IIRC.
 
There are so many scenarios possible according the arrival of R1b in Western Europe;
if we look at the different branches, (from L11 onwards) it looks to me, the center of diversity lies in France. (need more French data...).
Lastly, I was thinking, what if R1b was an Indo-Europeanized marker. A scenario like that might have been the following:

If R1b-M269 was a non-Indo-European marker, and spread first to the Balkan from Anatolia, later on over sea to southern France - R1b's seem good sea men, I think we should not underestimate the faring skills -, where it soon became part of the spread of Bell Beaker.
Then, in southern-Germany, parts of it would have come in touch with the R1a Indo-European elite, and take over their PIE-dialect (Pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic, then happening before anything satem-like), spreading it as R1b folk (Urnfield etc.) over Western Europe (as Proto-Italo-Celtic), not influencing the Basque R1b's.
For a parallel: Romans imposing their language over the Iberian people, who, later, as Spaniards dominate in some American colonies.

Just a thought experiment I think may be worth looking at.
 
I like the thought process, Sennevini. Some remaining things to square if your hypothetical model of a purely non-IE introduction of R1b-M269 to Europe is correct:


  • R1a and R1b would have been part of entirely different populations under that model, but it's not realistic to expect that these populations would have been purely a single haplogroup. What are the minority clades each would have been associated with?
  • Why do Basques not have greater R1b-M269 diversity if they are the non-Indo-Europeanized, non-expanded representatives of the initial R1b-M269 expansion on Europe? As you indicate, the French seem to have greater R1b-M269 diversity than they do.
  • How do we explain the fact that within Iran, there is a positive correlation between R1b-M269 and ethnic groups that speak an IE language? A separate, Eastern Indo-Europeanization of R1b-M269?
 
There are so many scenarios possible according the arrival of R1b in Western Europe;
if we look at the different branches, (from L11 onwards) it looks to me, the center of diversity lies in France. (need more French data...).
Lastly, I was thinking, what if R1b was an Indo-Europeanized marker. A scenario like that might have been the following:

If R1b-M269 was a non-Indo-European marker, and spread first to the Balkan from Anatolia, later on over sea to southern France - R1b's seem good sea men, I think we should not underestimate the faring skills -, where it soon became part of the spread of Bell Beaker.
Then, in southern-Germany, parts of it would have come in touch with the R1a Indo-European elite, and take over their PIE-dialect (Pre-Proto-Italo-Celtic, then happening before anything satem-like), spreading it as R1b folk (Urnfield etc.) over Western Europe (as Proto-Italo-Celtic), not influencing the Basque R1b's.
For a parallel: Romans imposing their language over the Iberian people, who, later, as Spaniards dominate in some American colonies.

Just a thought experiment I think may be worth looking at.
For a while this scenario is considered as the bestexplanation of spreading IE in the Western Europe.The majority of non-R1b biased guys sooner or later come to the similar model. Yes.You are not the first one. To make this scenario more solid it would be perfectto clarify the following details:
1. What R1a and R1b clades were initially involvedin the fusion of Corded Ware and Bell Beaker guys that resulted in appearanceof proto-italo-celtic culture?
2. Other haplogroups involved in this process. Inmy opinion we should more seriously consider participation in this process ofsome clades of I1.
3. More information about R1a clades from placesassociated with spread of Urnfield culture.
 
Well, a lot to cover;


For Sparkey:


Maybe R1b then was accompagnied with small amounts of J2; todays maps show a
significant amount of J2 in western Europe; where is it in the ancient DNA
(might be a question for a different tread).

Considering the Basques, maybe with the arrival of R1b there, the land became
saturated, full, and wasn't there any option left for the Indo-Europeanized
tribes (U152, L21?) to access Basque lands. (Maybe they had a culture in which
Indo-European was not conceived as the prestigious language).

France is large, and full of forests, rivers, and some open land. Place enough
to travel, settle, battle, without the land "getting full" - if there
is a difference between Basque and French lands.

In Iran there may have happened a same kind of language switching - I know this
is not a stong argument that it did, but it could.


For Gonzales:

I don't know a lot about the western R1a clades; but in any case, the frequency
of it, weakens when going to the west. I don't think R1a participated - or
maybe as a trace group within R1b- in the spread of Proto-Italo-Celtic.

Isn't I1 associated with later Germanic expansions, when it became
Germanicized?
 
  • Why do Basques not have greater R1b-M269 diversity if they are the non-Indo-Europeanized, non-expanded representatives of the initial R1b-M269 expansion on Europe? As you indicate, the French seem to have greater R1b-M269 diversity than they do.

Yes, I don't think the Basques are the key. They have low diversity in their R1b. They do have one form of hg I that is unusual and is also found in Sardinia so there may be some other kind of correlation there.
 
Well, a lot to cover;
I don't know a lot about the western R1a clades; but in any case, the frequency
of it, weakens when going to the west. I don't think R1a participated - or
maybe as a trace group within R1b- in the spread of Proto-Italo-Celtic.

Isn't I1 associated with later Germanic expansions, when it became
Germanicized?

It's a bit interesting that R1b-U106 is a bit thicker in traditional Germanic areas. R1b-P312 is very, very thick in old Celtic areas although it also appears to some degrees in Germanic and Italic areas.
 

Here is a list of the PIE base word set that are hypothesized to be the ancestral words for commonly derived words in all IE languages.

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/ielex/PokornyMaster-X.html

I went through it and it is clear, in my opinion, that PIE didn't start breaking up until after the secondary agricultural products revolution. There are words for cattle, pigs, horses, milk, etc.

There is a word for ore (metal) as well as army/warrior and of course, wheel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_products_revolution
Wikipedia says, "The seeming contradiction between the zooarchaeological and residue studies appears to be a matter of scale. The residues indicate that milking may have played a role in domestic animal exploitation from the later Neolithic. The zooarchaeological studies indicate that there was a massive change in the scale of such production strategies during the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age."

I can't find any reference ito either emmer or einkhorn wheat in PIE, which were the two main kinds in the Early Neolithic expansions.

I can't find any references to olive trees or olive oil in PIE, even though animal fats and butter are referenced. Are the words for olive in the old Celtic and old Italic languages derived from the same base? Does anyone know? If they were, that might tell us something about the Celtic/Italic split. They might have picked up the use of olive products before their split but after PIE if they have the same base word.
 

This thread has been viewed 38964 times.

Back
Top