PDA

View Full Version : 37 complete mtDNA haplogroup H sequences from Neolithic & Bronze Age Germany



Maciamo
24-04-13, 21:02
Brotherton et al. have just released (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n4/full/ncomms2656.html) a new paper in which they publish the full mitochondrial sequences of 39 ancient remains dating from 5000 BCE to 500 BCE. 37 of them are from Neolithic and Bronze Age Germany. The two others belong respectively to the Nuragic culture of Bronze Age Sardinia (H1aw1) and the Alpine Celtic Iron Age in what is now South Tyrol, Italy (H90). The data is in itself invaluable, but the interpretation made by the authors of the study is, as usual, very subjective and in my opinion completely mistaken.

The paper says:


The genetic affinities between Central Europe’s Bell Beakers and present-day Iberian populations is striking and throws fresh light on long-disputed archaeological models. We suggest these data indicate a considerable genetic influx from the West during the LNE.
...
This idea not only challenges traditional views of a linguistic spread of Celtic westwards from Central Europe during the Iron Age, but also implies that Indo-European languages arrived in Western Europe substantially earlier, presumably with the arrival of farming from the Near East.
...
Our new estimate is incompatible with traditional views that the majority of present-day hg H lineages were carried into Central, Northern and Eastern Europe via a post-glacial human population expansion before the Holocene (12 kya).


I do not doubt that most subclades of mt-haplogroup H were brought to Europe mainly by Neolithic farmers. There are nevertheless exceptions, and H1 and H3, two subclades very common in Iberia and in Bell Beaker sites, may well have developed (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26490-Haplogroup-H1-and-H3-entered-Europe-during-neolithic) in southwest Europe during the Mesolithic or Palaeolithic. Others, like H5a and H7 are more likely to have migrated first from the Middle East to the Pontic Steppes, then to Europe with the PIE-speakers and Y-hg R1b (=> see Identifying the original Indo-European mtDNA from isolated settlements (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25613-Identifying-the-original-Indo-European-mtDNA-from-isolated-settlements)).

But, the biggest problem with this paper is that they assume that the Y-DNA haplogroups that are most common in Europe today (R1b and R1a) were brought by the same people as those associated with the most common mtDNA haplogroups. This attitude reflects an excessively simplistic and even naive vision of population genetics.

My understanding of Indo-European migrations is that adventurous R1b men from the Pontic Steppes invaded at first Southeast Europe, where they had children mostly with local women, then progressively conquered all Central and Western Europe. The consequence of staying nearly 1000 years in the Danube basin before moving westward is that their mtDNA would have become essentially the same as that of the Neolithic people of Southeast Europe. Using the same strategy of killing or ostracising men in conquered populations and taking the women as trophies, concubines or wives, the R1b people would have become perfectly hybridised on paternal and maternal lines, pretty much as what can be observed in some Latin American countries today (with mostly European Y-DNA and a lot of Native American mtDNA).

Brotherton et al. are jumping to the wrong conclusions and attributing the spread of Indo-European languages to Neolithic farmers, and placing the origins of Celtic culture in Iberia with the Bell Beakers. I have commented enough on the ludicrousness of such theories on this forum, so I won't say more.

Here is a summary of the deep subclades identified by the study.

Linear Pottery (LBK), c. 5000 BCE, Germany

H (2x), H1bz, H1e, H1j, H23, H26, H46b, H88

Rossen culture, c. 4625-4250 BCE, Germany

H1, H5b, H16, H89

Schöningen culture, c. 4100-3950 BCE, Germany

H1e7, H10i

Baalberge culture, c. 3950-3400 BCE, Germany

H1e1a5, H7d5

Salzmünde culture, c. 3400-3025 BCE, Germany

H3 (2x)

Corded Ware, c. 2700-2400 BCE, Germany

H1, H6a1a

Bell Beaker culture, c. 2500-2050 BCE, Germany

H1, H1e7, H3b, H4a1, H5a3, H13a1a2c

Unetice culture, c. 2200-1575 BCE, Germany

H2a1a3, H3, H4a1a1a5, H7h, H11a, H82a


Three years ago, I already mentioned (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25613-Identifying-the-original-Indo-European-mtDNA-from-isolated-settlements) on this forum that mtDNA H2, H5a, H7 and H13 might all have been among Indo-European lineages associated with the spread of Y-haplogroup R1b. The Unetice culture, the first supposedly R1b culture in Central Europe, also corresponds to the first appearance of H2 and H7, while the contemporary sites here listed under Bell Beaker contain both H5a and H13. It has happened before (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28556-88-of-haplogroup-H-found-in-central-european-Bell-Beaker?p=407124#post407124) that Unetice sites were wrongly reported as Bell Beaker.

zanipolo
24-04-13, 22:09
Brotherton et al. have just released (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n4/full/ncomms2656.html) a new paper in which they publish the full mitochondrial sequences of 39 ancient remains dating from 5000 BCE to 500 BCE. 37 of them are from Neolithic and Bronze Age Germany. The two others belong respectively to the Nuragic culture of Bronze Age Sardinia (H1aw1) and the Alpine Celtic Iron Age in what is now South Tyrol, Italy (H90). The data is in itself invaluable, but the interpretation made by the authors of the study is, as usual, very subjective and in my opinion completely mistaken.

The paper says:



I do not doubt that mt-haplogroup H was brought to Europe mainly by Neolithic farmers. The problem is that they assume that the Y-DNA haplogroups that are most common in Europe today (R1b and R1a) were brought by the same people as those associated with the most common mtDNA haplogroups.

My understanding of Indo-European migrations is that adventurous R1b men from the Pontic Steppes invaded at first Southeast Europe, where they had children mostly with local women, then progressively conquered all Central and Western Europe. The consequence of staying nearly 1000 years in the Danube basin before moving westward is that their mtDNA would have become essentially the same as that of the Neolithic people of Southeast Europe. Using the same strategy of killing or ostracising men in conquered populations and taking the women as trophies, concubines or wives, the R1b people would have become perfectly hybridised on paternal and maternal lines, pretty much as what can be observed in some Latin American countries today (with mostly European Y-DNA and a lot of Native American mtDNA).

Brotherton et al. are jumping to the wrong conclusions and attributing the spread of Indo-European languages to Neolithic farmers, and placing the origins of Celtic culture in Iberia with the Bell Beakers. I have commented enough on the ludicrousness of such theories on this forum, so I won't say more.

Here is a summary of the deep subclades identified by the study.

Linear Pottery (LBK), c. 5000 BCE, Germany

H (2x), H1bz, H1e, H1j, H23, H26, H46b, H88

Rossen culture, c. 4625-4250 BCE, Germany

H1, H5b, H16, H89

Schöningen culture, c. 4100-3950 BCE, Germany

H1e7, H10i

Baalberge culture, c. 3950-3400 BCE, Germany

H1e1a5, H7d5

Salzmünde culture, c. 3400-3025 BCE, Germany

H3 (2x)

Corded Ware, c. 2700-2400 BCE, Germany

H1, H6a1a

Bell Beaker culture, c. 2500-2050 BCE, Germany

H1, H1e7, H3b, H4a1, H5a3, H13a1a2c

Unetice culture, c. 2200-1575 BCE, Germany

H2a1a3, H3, H4a1a1a5, H7h, H11a, H82a

so you are against most of this below

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/mtdna-haplogroup-h-and-origin-of.html

or only the YDNA concept of R1 moving from iberia to central europe.

IIRC gimbutus stated that R1 landed on the french spanish border and came from the mid-east area, this would make much more sense than the movement of people along the lush green north african plains to iberia

Nobody1
24-04-13, 22:22
Brotherton et al. (2012)
The genetic affinities between Central Europe’s Bell Beakers and present-day Iberian populations is striking and throws fresh light on long-disputed archaeological models. We suggest these data indicate a considerable genetic influx from the West during the LNE.

Nothing new, Archaeology has already long established the fact that Bell-Beaker spread from West (out of Iberia) to East.
Good to see Genetics confirming Archaeology.

Strange is only that the genetic study Brotherton et al. (2012) is arguing Linguistics, and asserting an Indo-European migration during the Neolithic.
This assertion seem to be false given the Linguistic facts (evidence) suggesting the complete opposite;
Basque is clearly a NON-Indo-European lang. and Basque is akin to ancient Iberian and ancient Aquitanian.

Antonio Arnaiz Villena - Prehistoric Iberia: Genetics, Anthropology, and Linguistics (2000)
Nonetheless, it is worth pointing out some postulated relationships between the ancient Iberian languages and present day Basque. Fortunately, the latter language has been fossilised.

Jules Michelet - History of France: From the Earliest Period to the Present Date - Vol.2 (1847)
The comparison of the ancient names of places in the Iberian peninsula with the Basque tongue, shows this tongue to have been that of the Iberians;

Strabo - Geographica (23AD)
The Aquitani differ essentially from the Gallic race, not only in language, but also in physical conformation : they resemble the Iberians more than they do the Gauls.

James Cowles Prichard - Researches Into the Physical History of Mankind, Vol.II (1826)
CAESAR informs us, that Gaul was occupied in his time by three nations, who differed from each other in language and manners. The third of these nations, viz. the Aquitani, were, as we have already observed, a branch of the Iberian stock

So based on Archaeology and now Genetics its pretty clear that Bell-Beaker spread from West to East (out of Iberia), and given the Linguistic evidence of Iberians, it was NON-Indo-European.
So Brothertons Neolithic Indo-European migration to the west is none existing.

Figure 2 - from the study
http://i37.tinypic.com/al6we0.png


also from the study: Brotherton et al. (2012)

Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC).

zanipolo
24-04-13, 23:16
Brotherton et al. (2012)
The genetic affinities between Central Europe’s Bell Beakers and present-day Iberian populations is striking and throws fresh light on long-disputed archaeological models. We suggest these data indicate a considerable genetic influx from the West during the LNE.

Nothing new, Archaeology has already long established the fact that Bell-Beaker spread from West (out of Iberia) to East.
Good to see Genetics confirming Archaeology.

Strange is only that the genetic study Brotherton et al. (2012) is arguing Linguistics, and asserting an Indo-European migration during the Neolithic.
This assertion seem to be false given the Linguistic facts (evidence) suggesting the complete opposite;
Basque is clearly a NON-Indo-European lang. and Basque is akin to ancient Iberian and ancient Aquitanian.

Antonio Arnaiz Villena - Prehistoric Iberia: Genetics, Anthropology, and Linguistics (2000)
Nonetheless, it is worth pointing out some postulated relationships between the ancient Iberian languages and present day Basque. Fortunately, the latter language has been fossilised.

Jules Michelet - History of France: From the Earliest Period to the Present Date - Vol.2 (1847)
The comparison of the ancient names of places in the Iberian peninsula with the Basque tongue, shows this tongue to have been that of the Iberians;

Strabo - Geographica (23AD)
The Aquitani differ essentially from the Gallic race, not only in language, but also in physical conformation : they resemble the Iberians more than they do the Gauls.

James Cowles Prichard - Researches Into the Physical History of Mankind, Vol.II (1826)
CAESAR informs us, that Gaul was occupied in his time by three nations, who differed from each other in language and manners. The third of these nations, viz. the Aquitani, were, as we have already observed, a branch of the Iberian stock

So based on Archaeology and now Genetics its pretty clear that Bell-Beaker spread from West to East (out of Iberia), and given the Linguistic evidence of Iberians, it was NON-Indo-European.
So Brothertons Neolithic Indo-European migration to the west is none existing.

Figure 2 - from the study
http://i37.tinypic.com/al6we0.png

I agree with most of your post, adding that Caesar also stated , the difference of the Keltoi in the southern parts of france and well as the different Galatoi in the north.
Also, aquitani became gascony, still said in the middle-ages to not really being "french" in culture, linguistrics and heritage.

Maciamo
25-04-13, 11:02
Brotherton et al. (2012)
The genetic affinities between Central Europe’s Bell Beakers and present-day Iberian populations is striking and throws fresh light on long-disputed archaeological models. We suggest these data indicate a considerable genetic influx from the West during the LNE.

Nothing new, Archaeology has already long established the fact that Bell-Beaker spread from West (out of Iberia) to East.
Good to see Genetics confirming Archaeology.

Strange is only that the genetic study Brotherton et al. (2012) is arguing Linguistics, and asserting an Indo-European migration during the Neolithic.
This assertion seem to be false given the Linguistic facts (evidence) suggesting the complete opposite;
Basque is clearly a NON-Indo-European lang. and Basque is akin to ancient Iberian and ancient Aquitanian.

Antonio Arnaiz Villena - Prehistoric Iberia: Genetics, Anthropology, and Linguistics (2000)
Nonetheless, it is worth pointing out some postulated relationships between the ancient Iberian languages and present day Basque. Fortunately, the latter language has been fossilised.

Jules Michelet - History of France: From the Earliest Period to the Present Date - Vol.2 (1847)
The comparison of the ancient names of places in the Iberian peninsula with the Basque tongue, shows this tongue to have been that of the Iberians;

Strabo - Geographica (23AD)
The Aquitani differ essentially from the Gallic race, not only in language, but also in physical conformation : they resemble the Iberians more than they do the Gauls.

James Cowles Prichard - Researches Into the Physical History of Mankind, Vol.II (1826)
CAESAR informs us, that Gaul was occupied in his time by three nations, who differed from each other in language and manners. The third of these nations, viz. the Aquitani, were, as we have already observed, a branch of the Iberian stock

So based on Archaeology and now Genetics its pretty clear that Bell-Beaker spread from West to East (out of Iberia), and given the Linguistic evidence of Iberians, it was NON-Indo-European.
So Brothertons Neolithic Indo-European migration to the west is none existing.


I agree with everything you wrote. There is no reason to believe that the Bell Beakers from Iberia were Indo-European speakers. However I have suggested before that the first IE-speakers (both R1a and R1b) might have started exploring and trading with Western Europe during the Bell Beaker period, which would explain the appearance of bronze objects and other elements linked with PIE cultures. In my eyes there were two opposite movements of population during the Beaker period:

1) a large cultural movement of Neolithic people from SE Iberia towards Central Europe.
2) the first sporadic migrations of R1b people from southern Germany into Western Europe.

Sennevini
25-04-13, 14:04
So, now we know H is likely to be neolithic. It is terribly wrong to my taste that they connect this with spread of Celtic. Genetics is not one-to-one with language. It is also not yet possible to make a connection between H and R1b.

I do however like the theory that H and R1b might be connected, and were part of a large expansion of the Bell Beaker folks. Then, it seems that in Central Europe a nice interaction was between BB and Corded Ware. In this transition area I believe Celtic language was spread westwards, taking over in language most of whatever Bell Beakers were speaking. That's my theory for now. Celtic is of later date than Bell Beaker in West Europe.

Maybe we all will know more in later years, because I heard a project is running in which also Unetice DNA is being researched, also with Y-dna. Really seeing forward to that.

adamo
25-04-13, 14:24
Sennevini I also believe that the cro-magnon, European continent dominating mtdna H women are linked to R1b and I men, these where their ancient mate choices to me as in my opinion these men where the men that accompanied H and V women.

Sennevini
25-04-13, 16:49
I don't think it's Cro Magnon, that's too far ago, before R1b existed. There has happened a lot since then, think of many layers of new people coming in. I view R1b at least as late neolithic arriving in Europe. How? From the South of the Black Sea, along the Danube to West-Europe, and spreading explosively from there. But let's keep this thread on mt dna H which seems neolithic.

Maciamo
25-04-13, 17:13
I have updated my comments in the OP.

Nobody1
25-04-13, 17:31
I agree with everything you wrote. There is no reason to believe that the Bell Beakers from Iberia were Indo-European speakers. However I have suggested before that the first IE-speakers (both R1a and R1b) might have started exploring and trading with Western Europe during the Bell Beaker period, which would explain the appearance of bronze objects and other elements linked with PIE cultures. In my eyes there were two opposite movements of population during the Beaker period:

1) a large cultural movement of Neolithic people from SE Iberia towards Central Europe.
2) the first sporadic migrations of R1b people from southern Germany into Western Europe.

Thats for sure,
the first substantial Indo-European culture complex was the Corded-Ware Culture [east-west] and it was contemporary with Bell-Beaker [west-east] and even collided (overlapped) with Bell-Beaker in central Europe.

http://s39.radikal.ru/i086/0901/b0/447b1cabb2a0.jpg

But it was the successive Indo-European waves [East-West] and its cultures (Unetice / Tumulus / Bronze Age Urnfield & Lausitz) that dominated Central, Northern and Southern (Balkans/Italy) Europe.

Apparently the Authors of this study only hypothesised that Bell-Beaker could have been Indo-European based on only 2 criteria:
1.) a ficticious (archaeologically non attested) precursor migration - that never happened
2.) Tartessian theory (Koch), which is false since Tartessian is a non-Indo-European language most akin to Basque.

what i find amazing about the study is this:

Brotherton et al. (2012)
Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC).

So the study actually confirms mtDNA hg H to be Pre-Indo-European (since there were no established Indo-Europeans in Europe ~4000 BC and def not in Iberia) and the study is very valuable in confirming Archaeology that Bell-Beaker was a West-East (out of Iberia) spread and also what Anthropology has revealed, an internal (european) Pre-Indo-European migration into Iberia - strongly connected with the emergence of Bell-Beaker culture.

zanipolo
25-04-13, 21:03
Thats for sure,
the first substantial Indo-European culture complex was the Corded-Ware Culture [east-west] and it was contemporary with Bell-Beaker [west-east] and even collided (overlapped) with Bell-Beaker in central Europe.

http://s39.radikal.ru/i086/0901/b0/447b1cabb2a0.jpg

But it was the successive Indo-European waves [East-West] and its cultures (Unetice / Tumulus / Bronze Age Urnfield & Lausitz) that dominated Central, Northern and Southern (Balkans/Italy) Europe.

Apparently the Authors of this study only hypothesised that Bell-Beaker could have been Indo-European based on only 2 criteria:
1.) a ficticious (archaeologically non attested) precursor migration - that never happened
2.) Tartessian theory (Koch), which is false since Tartessian is a non-Indo-European language most akin to Basque.

what i find amazing about the study is this:

Brotherton et al. (2012)
Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC).

So the study actually confirms mtDNA hg H to be Pre-Indo-European (since there were no established Indo-Europeans in Europe ~4000 BC and def not in Iberia) but the study is very valuable in confirming Archaeology that Bell-Beaker was a West-East (out of Iberia) spread and also what Anthropology has revealed, an internal (european) Pre-Indo-European migration into Iberia - strongly connected with the emergence of Bell-Beaker culture.


In regards your map, isn't the south france/spain blob indicate the neolithic expansion dated by academia to 4700BC
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/2871865

surely H still commenced as a central asian marker