PDA

View Full Version : New migration map of haplogroup R1b



Maciamo
18-07-13, 12:34
I made my first R1b migration map (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml#R1b) over four years ago. Little has changed since then in the way I see the history of R1b people. What changed are the names of subclades and the new branches of S116/P312, like DF19, DF27 and L238, or the recent discovery of the Indo-European Z2103 branch in the Middle East.

With this new map I have tried to show the geographical extent of each subclade before the evolution of its own subclades.

The map stops in the Late Bronze Age, around 1200-1000 BCE. It would have been too complex to show Iron Age migrations, like the Hallstatt-La Tène expansion or Germanic migrations.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#migration_map)
Click to enlarge

Note that I have also revised the text in the R1b History section (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#history), updated the phylogenetic tree (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#R1b-subclades), and added new famous members of R1b (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#famous_people).

GloomyGonzales
18-07-13, 15:48
It’s absolutely impossible map. First of all we all know that R1b clades L11, P312, U106, DF27, L21 are pretty much older than 2500-2000 BCE. The most reliable TMRCA counters estimate the age of these clades in a range from 4500 to 3900 BCE so according to your map these clades should have divided yet in the Pontic steppe but not in France and Germany like on your map. Secondly the oldest European R1b clades have been found in Albania and South-East Italy but not in Ukraine and Caucasus.

sparkey
18-07-13, 16:50
First of all we all know that R1b clades L11, P312, U106, DF27, L21 are pretty much older than 2500-2000 BCE. The most reliable TMRCA counters estimate the age of these clades in a range from 4500 to 3900 BCE so according to your map these clades should have divided yet in the Pontic steppe but not in France and Germany like on your map.

Which TMRCA counters are you looking at? The Nordtvedt method (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27049-More-precise-R1b-subclade-estimates-using-Nordtvedt-s-methodology) gives something pretty close to Maciamo's numbers.


Secondly the oldest European R1b clades have been found in Albania and South-East Italy but not in Ukraine and Caucasus.

Could you be more specific? Maciamo's map doesn't show R1b's main migration path into SE Europe until L23+ L51-, which seems correct. At the ht35 Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/) you can see that the earlier L23- clades are present in Ukraine and the Caucasus, as his map shows. Which subclade are you taking issue with in particular?

Maciamo
18-07-13, 16:57
It’s absolutely impossible map. First of all we all know that R1b clades L11, P312, U106, DF27, L21 are pretty much older than 2500-2000 BCE. The most reliable TMRCA counters estimate the age of these clades in a range from 4500 to 3900 BCE so according to your map these clades should have divided yet in the Pontic steppe but not in France and Germany like on your map. Secondly the oldest European R1b clades have been found in Albania and South-East Italy but not in Ukraine and Caucasus.

Firstly, ou are confusing BCE (before common era) and ybp (years before present). That's a 2000 years gap. Check again the TMRCA here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27049-More-precise-R1b-subclade-estimates-using-Nordtvedt-s-methodology).

Secondly, you are confusing TMRCA, subclade age, and date of diffusion, which are three completely different things. This map shows the diffusion/migration of subclades once they have grown enough to represent a sizeable part of the lineages in a given population. This can takes centuries or millennia after the mutation for that subclade first appeared.

It is impossible to know at present when and where any mutation first appeared. For example, the P312 mutation could have arisen in an individual living in the Balkans around 3500 BCE, just as it could have arisen 2000 years earlier in the steppes or even in Anatolia. The only thing we can know is when the lineage carrying that mutation started expanding to make up a significant part of a local population.


The oldest "European" subclade of R1b is L23, which has indeed been found in Albania (there is even a special Albanian cluster on the FTDNA project), but also in the rest of the Balkans, Greece, Anatolia and southern Italy. Actually it is found throughout Europe, but is commonest in Southeast Europe.

Fire Haired
18-07-13, 18:01
i really doubt R1b L11 came to western europe from turkey.

1. R1b L11 shows a huge connection with red hair also red hair is very popular in the area of where Indo Europeans migrated out of. it was also popular in Indo Iranien indo europeans in asia like sythiens and tocherians.

2. The Italo Celtic Germanic languages obvisouly come from R1b L11 migrations. INdo Europeans may have began in the north caucys like Maciamo says but they spread out of central Russia not the Caucus or Turkey. Their is no archielogical evidence of Indo Europeans spreading from Turkey to western Europe.

3. Germanic R1b S21 split from Italo Celtic R1b S116 about 4,500-5,000ybp in Germany not the Balkans. If R1b L11 and Italo Celtic languages spread from the Balkens then where do Germanic's come from they have been as far north as denmark for 4,000 years.

4. also if R1b L11 and Germanic italo celtic spread from turkey to the balkens. then why do two 4,600 year old y dna samples from central germany have R1b. When according to the theory they went through the balkens they should not have been in central Germany 4,600ybp.

I think there is not enough evidence Germanic italo Celtic languages migrated from Turkey to the Balkens. I think they went through Russia(like all other Indo Europeans) through eastern europe too germany.

Also i dont think there is a hug connection with antolia/turkey and Indo Europeans. Sure the Indo European language may have started in the north Caucus but the Indo European culture really took off in Russia and Ukriane.. Indo Europeans migrated to Anatolia from south Russia just 4,000-4,500ybp with the hittites. I am very doubtful any Indo Europeans migrated out of Turkey/Anatolia.

Is there any evidence of a Kurgen people in Turkey 5,000ybp i dont think so but i am not sure. The Germanics and Italo Celts had tons of Kurgens even as recent as 2,000ybp. i know R1b L23 the grandfather of R1b L11 began around the caucus and antolia but i dont think it did not migrate from there to western europe. Italo Germanic Celts had a Indo European culture traced to Russia not Antolia.

Also is there any trace of a mid eastern influnce in western ZEurope connected to Indo Europeans. The only connection is red hair which has been found in other Indo Europeans to. Also most people in the Caucus and Antolia have Y DNA J or G2a not R1b so they should have spread J or G2a not R1b.

I think we need to be cautious before saying this is for a fact how R1b migrated i defintley dont think it is. Well that was arguing against the first map Macaimo made but this map i think i agree with Southern russia to the Balkens to egrmany makes alot of sense i still think Russia to Poland to Germany also makes sense.

sparkey
18-07-13, 18:22
i really doubt R1b L11 came to western europe from turkey.

I'm still not 100% clear about the R1b migration into Europe, but Maciamo's map actually agrees with you on this. It explains the apparent R1b diversity in Turkey beautifully--by positioning it not as a launching point, but instead as a pooling point. That makes sense considering that there was likely continuous contact between modern-day Greece and modern-day Turkey.

As for L11 itself, I think it formed in Europe. Maciamo's map agrees here again. It's almost an inescapable conclusion, considering that all of its main subclades are European (and not only European, but Western or Central European). The question, then, is not how L11 got to Europe, but how L11's ancestors got to Europe.

GloomyGonzales
18-07-13, 18:23
Firstly, ou are confusing BCE (before common era) and ybp (years before present). That's a 2000 years gap. Check again the TMRCA here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27049-More-precise-R1b-subclade-estimates-using-Nordtvedt-s-methodology).

Secondly, you are confusing TMRCA, subclade age, and date of diffusion, which are three completely different things. This map shows the diffusion/migration of subclades once they have grown enough to represent a sizeable part of the lineages in a given population. This can takes centuries or millennia after the mutation for that subclade first appeared.


Yes you are right. By some reasons It's stuck in my memory that they are ~4000 BCE while in fact they are much younger. But anyway I think your map is not correct since L51, L11, P312 and U152 SNPs most likely appeared somewhere in the Southern France near Italy.

Maciamo
18-07-13, 19:31
But anyway I think your map is not correct since L51, L11, P312 and U152 SNPs most likely appeared somewhere in the Southern France near Italy.

Based on what evidence ? What Indo-European culture appeared in southern France before Central Europe ?

Dorianfinder
18-07-13, 22:37
Here are some country frequencies for U152*, L2, Z36 & Z56.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bwo12PDVxPwwSFkzVTZwN0NWYjQ/edit

Fire Haired
20-07-13, 08:44
what a second macaimo u are saying R1b went from Germany to Scandinavia but never back down to Germany. The R1b i am talking about is Germanic R1b S21/U106 so ur saying there was not a Germanic migration from Denmark to Germany. Does this mean west germanic and east Germanic languages where already in Germany before 3,000ybp. also i put 3,000 year old r1b from central Germany's haplotype into a predictor and it said 33% chance Frisian R1b 21 and 33% R1b S21* so it most likely had Germany R1b S21 and his people may have been Germanic.

mbw1986
21-07-13, 02:05
Bravo, Maciamo. The map is wonderful and effectively demonstrates the field's current understanding of the westward migration of R1b into Europe. I'm glad that you show U106 entering the Netherlands/Denmark & southern Scandinavia toward the end of the Bronze Age. Unfortunately, so many sites like to treat the Netherlands, Lower Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein as a cultural monolith, completely separate from Norway and Sweden. Your map intelligently corrects that assumption, and furthermore helps in displaying the rise of the proto-Germanic language, culture, and religion as a mesh of foreign and indigenous elements, rather than a unique creation of I1.
:good_job:

Maciamo
21-07-13, 09:07
what a second macaimo u are saying R1b went from Germany to Scandinavia but never back down to Germany. The R1b i am talking about is Germanic R1b S21/U106 so ur saying there was not a Germanic migration from Denmark to Germany. Does this mean west germanic and east Germanic languages where already in Germany before 3,000ybp. also i put 3,000 year old r1b from central Germany's haplotype into a predictor and it said 33% chance Frisian R1b 21 and 33% R1b S21* so it most likely had Germany R1b S21 and his people may have been Germanic.

Please read before posting nonsense. The map show migrations until 1000 BCE (over a thousand years before Germanic migrations started).

Fire Haired
21-07-13, 16:45
Please read before posting nonsense. The map show migrations until 1000 BCE (over a thousand years before Germanic migrations started).

ok that is true u say R1b S21 was only in the Netherlands and south Scandinavia which is the only areas Germanic culture existed in 1,000bc. I think R1b s21 never migrated from Scandinavia to Germany because where is the I1a2. Also R1b S21 is just as popular or more popular in Germany than Scandnavia and it originated in Germany so why would it disappear after migrating to Scandinavia. Also i put a 3,000 year old R1b from central Germany haplotype into a haplogroup predictor it said it was R1b S21. So maybe west Germanic language where already in Germany 3,000ybp.

Tone
21-07-13, 21:02
Great map!

The one problem I'm having is how the map reconciles with the Bell Beaker culture. If we assume that the Bell Beakers were heavy in R1B (and current evidence points that they were) then that puts R1B in Iberia around 2900 BC. The map shows R1B on the Ukrainian Steppe during this period!

Furthermore, is there any evidence that R1B was ever on the East European Steppe? I'm not aware of any. Something is not right...

Fire Haired
21-07-13, 21:21
Great map!

The one problem I'm having is how the map reconciles with the Bell Beaker culture. If we assume that the Bell Beakers were heavy in R1B (and current evidence points that they were) then that puts R1B in Iberia around 2900 BC. The map shows R1B on the Ukrainian Steppe during this period!

Bell Beaker culture was conquered by proto Germanic Italo Celts starting 5,000ybp. Thos R1b samples from Bell Beaker where in central germany from 4,600ybp exactley the palce and time Germanic Italo Celtic speakers started to dominte. This map is according to many DNA studies not assuming Indo Europeans spread R1b. R1b did not become dominte in Iberia till Hallstat Celtic migrations 2,700-2,500ybp.

R1b in Iberia is the Df27 subclade under the Italo Celtic branch R1b S116. No R1b in Europe decends from Iberian R1b.


Furthermore, is there any evidence that R1B was ever on the East European Steppe? I'm not aware of any. Something is not right...

Well R1b L23 the grandfather if germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11/P310. exists in Turkey and the caucus and the steppes. It seems that it spread to the steppes(central Russia) around 6,000-8,000ybp. Then to western Europe 5,000ybp and devloped into diff subclades. Maciamo maps describes how R1b spread pretty accurtley.

There is no evidence R1b was heavilly in western Europe in the Paleolithic cro magnon age like many people have said. Also R1b does not define western Europeans ancestry it is just a direct paternal line in aust dna(which tell full ancestry all Europeans mainly descend from people who came over 30,000ybp.

The people that spread R1b brought germanic Italo Celtic languages and probably red hair. Because red hair in europe just about only exists in the borders of R1b L11.P310 subclades and the more R1b the more red hair. Also the Indo iranien indo europeans like Sythiens where also known for red hair and the tarium mummies very old indo iraniens some had red hair.

Uralics conquered indo europeans in central russia from 4,000-5,000ybp. Remains from Indo Europeans in Russia from 6,000 and 5,000ybp had mainly brown eyes just like the uralic ethnic groups in tha area tody meaning they probably mainly decend from those early Indo europeans. The udmurts one of those ethnic groups had 15-20% red hair but less than 10% blonde hair which again is huge evidence red hair was very popular in some early Russian indo Europeans who later spread to western Europe and asia.

red hair was probably unique to Russia till 6,000ybp and unlike what alot of people think it is unrelated to blonde hair. Blonde and red hair probably popped up for the same reason but seperatly and not in the group of people. red hair is like blonde hair's unpopular little brother.

not all indo Europeans had red hair but the ones that decended from certain russian ethnic groups did. This does not mean orignalley R1b had a connection with red hair or that Indo iranien and Germanic Italo Celtic languages are related besides the indo european part.

Fire Haired
21-07-13, 21:24
Please read before posting nonsense. The map show migrations until 1000 BCE (over a thousand years before Germanic migrations started).

major Germanic migration south into germany started before 2,000ybp so not over 1,000 years after 1,000bc which was 3,000ybp.

Tone
21-07-13, 22:22
Bell Beaker culture was conquered by proto Germanic Italo Celts starting 5,000ybp. Thos R1b samples from Bell Beaker where in central germany from 4,600ybp exactley the palce and time Germanic Italo Celtic speakers started to dominte. This map is according to many DNA studies not assuming Indo Europeans spread R1b. R1b did not become dominte in Iberia till Hallstat Celtic migrations 2,700-2,500ybp.

I wouldn't go as far to declare the Bell Beaker Culture was "conquered" by Germanic Italo Celts. That's just pure conjecture (which is okay for a forum discussion). The fact is that in Central Europe, The Bell Beaker Culture gave way to the Unetice Culture about 2300 BC. It's unclear what language the people of the Unetice Culture spoke. Their language could have been a forebearer to Italic/Celtic/Germanic but it's just conjecture.

What is clear is that the R1B extracted at Kromsdorf was Bell Beaker and not Unetice. The fact is that the earliest R1B in Europe has cultural ties to Portugal via the Bell Beaker Culture. We'll see over the next decade with more sampling if there is a genetic connection to Portugal also.



Well R1b L23 the grandfather if germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11/P310. exists in Turkey and the caucus and the steppes. It seems that it spread to the steppes(central Russia) around 6,000-8,000ybp. Then to western Europe 5,000ybp and devloped into diff subclades. Maciamo maps describes how R1b spread pretty accurtley.

You could be right. However the only samples from the steppe circa 3000 bc show only R1A. No R1B has been found.




The people that spread R1b brought germanic Italo Celtic languages and probably red hair. Because red hair in europe just about only exists in the borders of R1b L11.P310 subclades and the more R1b the more red hair. Also the Indo iranien indo europeans like Sythiens where also known for red hair and the tarium mummies very old indo iraniens some had red hair.

Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. Not meaning to derail this thread, but the simplest explanation for red hair is that it is very old and has been in Europe for a very long time.... probably as an indigenous trait. In very simple terms, R1B is ultimately from the sunny Middle-East (as recent as the Neolithic). The most logical place for an ancient, low sunlight trait like red hair to develop (over time) is a low sunlight place, like say, the fringes of Europe. R1B men "married" this trait when they invaded Europe. But that's just conjecture on my part. :)

Tone
21-07-13, 22:57
Wait a minute -- I'm a novice at genetics so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm looking over the Bell Beaker Kromsdorf sample and it shows as M269. The map shows M269 on the steppe circa 4,000 - 2500 bc with L51 and L11 arriving in Central Europe about 2500 bc.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no evidence that M269 (the father of L51, L11, etc) was ever on the steppe circa 3,000 bc. However there is evidence that it was in Central Europe around 2500 bc. (Kromsdorf). There is also evidence that this Kromsdorf R1B M269 was connected to Iberia via the Bell Beaker expansion circa 3000 bc.

Based on that, I'll bet R1B M269 arrived in Central Europe not from the steppe, but from Iberia with the spread of the Bell Beakers. And R1B M269 got to the Iberian peninsula by boat from Anatolia/Middle East/Balkans. R1B was never on the steppe in ancient times. Obviously we need Iberian Bell Beaker samples from 3000 bc. to prove or disprove my conjecture. It will be fun to see how this plays out.

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 00:31
UOTE=Tone;412351]I wouldn't go as far to declare the Bell Beaker Culture was "conquered" by Germanic Italo Celts. That's just pure conjecture (which is okay for a forum discussion). The fact is that in Central Europe, The Bell Beaker Culture gave way to the Unetice Culture about 2300 BC. It's unclear what language the people of the Unetice Culture spoke. Their language could have been a forebearer to Italic/Celtic/Germanic but it's just conjecture. [/QUOTE]

Unetice culture had Torcs a celtic signature and tartens like Celts. They where without a doubt the ancestral culture to Celts well actulle they where Italo Celtic speakers. Yes according to what experts who have studied this since the 1800's is that Unetice comes from Bell Beaker but Unetice had Kurgens a Indo European burail they where Indo Europeans. Bell beaker did not Bell Beaker was defintley conquered by Germanic Italo Celts. The Celst as recent as 2,700-2,500ybp conquered Iberia and Italo Celtic R1b S116 is over 60% in Iberia the germanic italo Celts did the same to Bell Beaker. I explained that the Italo Celts where incredible (click here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28885-R1b-S28-and-R1b-S116-Beast-Bronze-and-Iron-age-warrior-DNA-marker) to see) warriors and that they conquered western europe Maciamo the head of this web site says the same (click here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml) to see).

The most important Gods in Indo European religion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_religion) are very war like Gods like Thor and Indra. rig veda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigveda) is Indo iranien Indo European speakers admitted to conquering the indus valley. In the Irish book of invasions (http://www.timelessmyths.com/celtic/invasions.html) they say their Celtic ancestors invaded and conquered Ireland. Archaeology shows Indo European culture taking over non Indo European cultures by force. When a people group is conquered the old y dna is replaced by the invading Y DNA because Y DNA is a paternal linage and men fight in wars. There is no arguing Bell Beaker was conquered by Germanic Italo Celts. That is why Indo European language spread they where not peace loving the Indo Europeans where conqueres their culture was a very warrior culture. That is why i give the period of 5,000-2,000ybp in Europe the name the Indo European warrior period Rome and the Greeks put a end to those cultures and before that their indo european cultures where changed by Mediterranean civilizations.


What is clear is that the R1B extracted at Kromsdorf was Bell Beaker and not Unetice. The fact is that the earliest R1B in Europe has cultural ties to Portugal via the Bell Beaker Culture. We'll see over the next decade with more sampling if there is a genetic connection to Portugal also.

Well we dont have Y DNA from Unetice. also it is clear that 31 y DNA samples from Neolithic and Chaloithic western Europe 26 had G2a, 4 had I2a1a, and one had E1b1b V13 non with R1b. R1b in Iberia is a Italo Celtic subclade that came just 2,700-2,500ybp there is no evidence of a ancestral subclade in Iberia of Germanic and Italo Celtic R1b.

We should except R1b to be in 4,600 year old central Germany Y DNA samples. That is exactly the place and time Germanic Italo Celts started to conquer. When we say Bell Beaker culture we are going off of what Archaeologist since the 1800's have said even though there where new Indo European culture that formed by conquering and mixing with Bell Beaker like Unetice.

There is no R1b connection to Iberia the oldest R1b period in western Europe is only 5,000-8,000 years old it comes from Indo European migrations. I dont undertand when people say R1b came to ireland from iberia do they forget tat r1b is very well spread out in formally Celtic territories. and that all of Iberia(except eastern Iberia) was Celtic speaking from 2,600-2,300ybp. and that they have a subclade of Italo Celtic R1b S116 and that Basque's ancestors the Aquitanian people where seen as Celts cultralley according to Caesar there is no doubt R1b in Iberia is from Celts.




You could be right. However the only samples from the steppe circa 3000 bc show only R1A. No R1B has been found.

wait so ur saying they have 5,000 year old R1a from the steppes i have not heard of that all i know is they have 6 y dna samples that are 6,000 and 5,000 years old from indo european yamna culture kurgens but have not realsed the results yet.






Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. Not meaning to derail this thread, but the simplest explanation for red hair is that it is very old and has been in Europe for a very long time.... probably as an indigenous trait. In very simple terms, R1B is ultimately from the sunny Middle-East (as recent as the Neolithic). The most logical place for an ancient, low sunlight trait like red hair to develop (over time) is a low sunlight place, like say, the fringes of Europe. R1B men "married" this trait when they invaded Europe. But that's just conjecture on my part. :)

i think there is defintley a correlation with red hair and r1b l11/p310 subclades in europe. western Europeans assume every group of white people have red hair put they dont realize their the only ones besides udmurt people. So i think u might be asssuming because u grew up in western europe or america red hair is very spread out. It totally correlates with R1b in Europe. Also some Indo iranien speakers have red hair and the Sythiens where known for it and of course the Indo iranien tarium mummies click here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28824-Early-Indo-Iranien-remains-Y-DNA-mtDNA-hair-color-and-eye-color) it explains indo iranien hair color.

also the only other people with red hair are udmurts who have 15-20% and other russians around the volga around them. They are in the area Indo Iraniens and Germanic Italo Celts spread from. Also Indo European cultures in that area where conquered by Uralic cultures 5,000-4,000ybp and Udmurts speak a Uralic language and they most likely mainly decend from early Indo Europeans related to Germanic Italo Celts and Indo Iraniens.

also some berbers have red hair in moorco the ethhnic group that has some red hair is also known for blonde hair and pale skin. Somehow they had inter marriage with a very Germanic Celtic Indo iranien looking people 1,000's of years ago. There is no evidence of major Celtic, Germanic, or Indo iranien inter marraige click here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28865-Where-do-the-white-kablye-of-north-africa-come-from) it is a thread about these Berbers they are the largest Berber ethnic group

What really suprises me is the Samartiens(decended of ancient Jews) who left the Jewish faith and inter married a little bit with none jews they also have some red hair. eve though there are only 700 left and there have been DNA tests on all of them they have no European blood also they have not inter married with any non samartiens for over 2,000 years. I saw modern pictures of them they look extremly white but then pictures from the 1900's they had brown skin and looked mid eastern. maybe the modern samartien redheads are a hoax because of the stertype jews have alot of red hair even though it probably come from european inter marriage and because some people say king david was a redhead.

but besides the Samaritans all red hair is connected to Indo Europeans and Russia. I think it originated in russia 12,000-20,000ybp but it may have a different and older age than that which could explain red hair in Samaritans and some berbers in north Africa.

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 00:34
Wait a minute -- I'm a novice at genetics so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm looking over the Bell Beaker Kromsdorf sample and it shows as M269. The map shows M269 on the steppe circa 4,000 - 2500 bc with L51 and L11 arriving in Central Europe about 2500 bc.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no evidence that M269 (the father of L51, L11, etc) was ever on the steppe circa 3,000 bc. However there is evidence that it was in Central Europe around 2500 bc. (Kromsdorf). There is also evidence that this Kromsdorf R1B M269 was connected to Iberia via the Bell Beaker expansion circa 3000 bc.

Based on that, I'll bet R1B M269 arrived in Central Europe not from the steppe, but from Iberia with the spread of the Bell Beakers. And R1B M269 got to the Iberian peninsula by boat from Anatolia/Middle East/Balkans. R1B was never on the steppe in ancient times. Obviously we need Iberian Bell Beaker samples from 3000 bc. to prove or disprove my conjecture. It will be fun to see how this plays out.

they did not test the r1b for R1b L51 or L11 so we dont know but it almost deifntley had one of those two. When my dad took a anctry.c om dna test they said he had R1b because they did not test him for subclades then he took a genographic test they say he has r1b l11/p310 but he defintley has sometype of subclade. There is no evidence with subclades and other types that R1b expanded from Iberia R1b in Iberia is a very young Subclade that came from Celts it is not ancestry to any European subclades.

Tone
22-07-13, 03:32
We should except R1b to be in 4,600 year old central Germany Y DNA samples. That is exactly the place and time Germanic Italo Celts started to conquer. When we say Bell Beaker culture we are going off of what Archaeologist since the 1800's have said even though there where new Indo European culture that formed by conquering and mixing with Bell Beaker like Unetice.


I agree with you that Unetice was a warrior culture and was almost definitely the forebearer to Germanic/Celtic/Italic. They probably spoke an Indo-European language and when finally tested they will most likely be largely R1B.


However, the 4600 year old German sample was from the Bell Beaker Culture, not Unetice. And it was R1B. That's just the fact of the matter. You could dismiss this R1B as being from the future Unetice warriors who were in the midst of conquering the Bell-Beakers, but I think you might be bending the facts to fit your theory.


Until other evidence is found, the theory has to be that Unetice culture replace an r1b Bell Beaker culture in central Europe. I believe Unetice culture was a hybrid between Bell Beaker and Corded Ware. Unetice probably was predominantly r1b but had the culture of and language of Corded Ware. But that's just a theory and I don't claim to be right. :)




wait so ur saying they have 5,000 year old R1a from the steppes i have not heard of that all i know is they have 6 y dna samples that are 6,000 and 5,000 years old from indo european yamna culture kurgens but have not realsed the results yet.


I'm sorry I probably have my dates wrong. I thought they extracted r1a from Kurgan mounds.



they did not test the r1b for R1b L51 or L11 so we dont know but it almost deifntley had one of those two. When my dad took a anctry.c om dna test they said he had R1b because they did not test him for subclades then he took a genographic test they say he has r1b l11/p310 but he defintley has sometype of subclade.


Okay. I understand. Thanks. :)

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 04:41
I agree with you that Unetice was a warrior culture and was almost definitely the forebearer to Germanic/Celtic/Italic. They probably spoke an Indo-European language and when finally tested they will most likely be largely R1B.


However, the 4600 year old German sample was from the Bell Beaker Culture, not Unetice. And it was R1B. That's just the fact of the matter. You could dismiss this R1B as being from the future Unetice warriors who were in the midst of conquering the Bell-Beakers, but I think you might be bending the facts to fit your theory.


Until other evidence is found, the theory has to be that Unetice culture replace an r1b Bell Beaker culture in central Europe. I believe Unetice culture was a hybrid between Bell Beaker and Corded Ware. Unetice probably was predominantly r1b but had the culture of and language of Corded Ware. But that's just a theory and I don't claim to be right. :)

i used to think the eact same think like a few months ago. i assumed the bell eaker R1b came from Corded ware there is really no DNA evidence of that R1b seems to have spread from the Balkens or Poland but defintley not from Corded ware culture.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg



Corded ware almost defintley spoke proto Balto Slavic they also expanded to Scandinavia which explains Scandinavian R1a Z284 a brother to Balto Slavic R1a. Germanic Italo Celts come from a different source i think archilogist need to look for indo european signs in Bell Beaker around 4,500-5,000ybp it would have been there i think and the R1b from 4,600 year old remains in my opinion proves the Germanic italo Celtic conquers had arrived.

It was Italo Celtic that came from Unetice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unetice_culture) Germanic languages would have probably started in northern Germany but the first culture they started was Nordic bronze age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age) 4,000ybp. Germanic languages spread from northern Germany and south Scandinavia mainly just 2,500-2,000ybp.

that is the long held theory but i kind of dis agree 3,000 year old R1b from Germany i tested its haplotype it almost for sure had Germanic R1b S21. so some Urnfield people in Germany (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUrnfiel d_culture&ei=XpvsUdbOBoXMyQHO2YHoAg&usg=AFQjCNFiQZ9OiLC2boFrSbQAv9K1jC8CZg) 4,000-3,000ybp spoke a related language to German or they spoke the ancestral language to all non Scandinavian German languages. Also there is no Y DNA evidence of a recent migration from south Scandinavia too the rest of Europe almost all Scandinavian I1 is I1a2 and almost all non Scandinavian I1 is I1a1,I1a3, and I1a4. So that makes me think there was never a major Scandinavian German migration maybe a migration from north Germany.



I'm sorry I probably have my dates wrong. I thought they extracted r1a from Kurgan mounds.

well all indo Iranian kurgen mounds in central asia Y DNA tested had R1a1a dating as old as 4,000ybp and as early as 1,600ybp. These Indo iraniens where most related to sythiens they had mostly light hair and eyes with some red hair. So they where not Indus valley and the ancient perians just want to make that clear. i know the name Indo Iranian sounds like they came from iran or india these ones did not.

also two corded ware culture R1a samples from 4,600ybp i think came from kurgen burails but we do know corded ware had kurgens. The 6 y dna samples from 6,000 and 5,000 ybp in Russian yamna culture most likely had R1a1a1b. The father of Balto Slavic Corded ware R1a1a1b1 and Indo Iranian Sinishta R1a1a1b2. Yamna was the father of Indo Iranian and Balto Slavic cultures. So they also most likely had Indo Iranian and Balto Slavic's R1a father.

nordicwarrior
22-07-13, 06:18
...Also there is no Y DNA evidence of a recent migration from south Scandinavia too the rest of Europe almost all Scandinavian I1 is I1a2 and almost all non Scandinavian I1 is I1a1,I1a3, and I1a4. So that makes me think there was never a major Scandinavian German migration maybe a migration from north Germany... F.H. I can see your point about the link between R1b and red-hair. But regarding I1 clades... you have these branches divided up into precise geographical areas. If you reference the latest maps on FTDNA this simply isn't the case. Please check out M253, L22, and P30. The real spreads are much greater than you're allowing for in your argument.

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 06:29
F.H. I can see your point about the link between R1b and red-hair. But regarding I1 clades... you have these branches divided up into precise geographical areas. If you reference the latest maps on FTDNA this simply isn't the case. Please check out M253, L22, and P130. The real spreads are much greater than you're allowing for in your argument.

ur right on that i do exaggerate the differnt I1 subclades and where they are found. But i dont think it changes the fact that I1 in non Scandinavian Europe is mainly diff subclades than in Scandinavia and probably does not come from Germanic migrations out of south Scandinavia but maybe Germany. Also that since German I1 subclades are mainly different from Scandinavian I1 subclades that German I1 and Scandinavian I1 comes from a pre Germanic language source. Also that I1 was alrady popular in non Scandinavian parts of Europe before Germanic languages maybe morepopular than today.

nordicwarrior
22-07-13, 06:44
...Also that I1 was alrady popular in non Scandinavian parts of Europe before Germanic languages maybe morepopular than today. Wouldn't that go without saying? I mean I1 clades would have had to have walked and/or boated northward at some point and being that no other major paternal hg's were around it would only make sense their numbers would be highest. Remember the bottle-necks associated with I1 clades and then plug in my hide-out theory. Kind of makes sense, no?

zanipolo
22-07-13, 08:17
Wouldn't that go without saying? I mean I1 clades would have had to have walked and/or boated northward at some point and being that no other major paternal hg's were around it would only make sense their numbers would be highest. Remember the bottle-necks associated with I1 clades and then plug in my hide-out theory. Kind of makes sense, no?

you know that crossing from the south baltic sea lands to southern sweden or gotland in less distance that the crossing of the Aegean sea.

If phoenicians could sail from the levant to northern-west france, that spit of water called the Baltic is nothing

zanipolo
22-07-13, 08:20
I made my first R1b migration map (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml#R1b) over four years ago. Little has changed since then in the way I see the history of R1b people. What changed are the names of subclades and the new branches of S116/P312, like DF19, DF27 and L238, or the recent discovery of the Indo-European Z2103 branch in the Middle East.

With this new map I have tried to show the geographical extent of each subclade before the evolution of its own subclades.

The map stops in the Late Bronze Age, around 1200-1000 BCE. It would have been too complex to show Iron Age migrations, like the Hallstatt-La Tène expansion or Germanic migrations.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/R1b-migration-map.jpg (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#migration_map)
Click to enlarge

Note that I have also revised the text in the R1b History section (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#history), updated the phylogenetic tree (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#R1b-subclades), and added new famous members of R1b (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#famous_people).

Why are most of your maps have a void of the Dalmatian coast, like some kind of plagued area?

Maciamo
22-07-13, 08:53
Why are most of your maps have a void of the Dalmatian coast, like some kind of plagued area?

Most of my maps ? I only made two migration maps, for R1a and R1b. As I said before, I cannot invent data. My maps are based on archeological records of Indo-European cultures. There is no trace of them in Dalmatia before 1000 BCE (actually that's about the time when the Illyrians could have started migrating to Dalmatia, but it's rather fuzzy). That also explains why R1b is so low in Dalmatia, esp. in Bosnia.

Most R1a came to Dalmatia with the Slavic migrations, approx. 1500 years after when my maps end.

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 08:56
Maciamo

Since R1b M269 was born in the pontic steppe that means it is European. and that all Indo European R1b is decended from the Pontic caspien steppe just like Indo European R1a. Also isnt R1b M269 from like over 10,000ybp so that would mean there was not a bronze age migration from the mid east to the steppes. also that Indo European languages most likely originated in the steppes not the caucus with ancestral culture to maykop.

So there was no Bronze age or Neloithic R1b migration from the mid east to the steppes. was it more like a Paloithic migrations that did not bring Indo European languages. Also it seems u say that possibly Hittite R1b L584 decends from south east European R1b L150 and brother to Germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11/P310. Which could mean their languages are realted in some way.

Also that southeast Europe faced a huge Indo European R1b M269 migration from Ukraine about 6,000ybp. Is there any evidence of a Indo European culture in that area at that time that migrated to Germany and Antolia. Also that R1b M269 subclades evolved in southeast europe mainly bulgaira for 2,000 years so there has to be signs of a indo european culture there.

I know it seems there is a high connection with Germanic Italo Celtic R1b and red hair possibly since they stayed in Bulgaria according to your map for 2,000 years. That is why the Thracen and Dacen Indo European in Bulgaira where known for red hair it was mentioned in Greek writting as old as 2,900ybp. i wonder if any red hair in antolia is some hwo connected with hittites. also possibly u where right all indo european r1b has connections with red hair which could expalin R1b M73 in indo iraniens and that they where known for red hair.

but connecting all Indo European r1b to red hair seems way to simple to be true. Why are there no redheads in bulgaria today or at least a very very small amount even though the Thracens and Daciens where known for it. does this mean there was some type of population replacement in Bulgaria.

also isnt the Armenian language the oldest branch if the indo european language. and since they have u placed R1b1a the ancester to all Indo European R1b in Armenia could that mean R1b is really the source of Indo European languages.

Fire Haired
22-07-13, 09:19
Wouldn't that go without saying? I mean I1 clades would have had to walked and/or boated northward at some point and being that no other major groups were around it would only make sense their numbers would be highest. Remember the bottle-necks associated with I1 clades and then plug in my hide-out theory. Kind of makes sense, no?

I guess the bottleneck I1 subclades supports they where small isolated groups that stemmed from the same source like European jews who show alot of Y DNA bottlenecks. It could have happened before Indo European invasion. I dont think I1a2 which is spread out in all of Scandinavia is from I1a going by boat running away from hg R1 or hg G2a. It was probably a migration that came 11,000ybp from Germany when Scandinavia became livable.

hg I defintley had to retreat at times but i think they where just conquered and mixed with other y dna. also hg I has subclades so to say no major groups around them u must mean no none I1a2 in scandnavia around them or no none I2a1b in eastern europe.

It seems like I2a1a and I2a1b in the western Mediterranean and eastern Europe spread from a south European ice age refuge about 20,000-15,000ybp. Possibly I2a2 which is centered in central Europe may have also spread from a southern European ice age refuge. I1 seems to be most popular in Scandnavia and central Europe Scandnavia is mainly I1a2 and central Europe is mainly I1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b. I1a probably migrated from central europe to Scandinavia 11,000ybp. but alot stayed and it was probably the main Y DNA haplogroup of pre Indo European central Europeans. I1 may have started in cenatral europe and evolved out of I1* that also came from a south European refuge

I would like to see a y DNA I migration map from Maciamo like he makes R1a and R1b migration maps. I think most spread across Europe after the last ice age. but the I1 being only 5,000 years old just does not make any sense it would be complicated.

zanipolo
22-07-13, 11:33
Most of my maps ? I only made two migration maps, for R1a and R1b. As I said before, I cannot invent data. My maps are based on archeological records of Indo-European cultures. There is no trace of them in Dalmatia before 1000 BCE (actually that's about the time when the Illyrians could have started migrating to Dalmatia, but it's rather fuzzy). That also explains why R1b is so low in Dalmatia, esp. in Bosnia.

Most R1a came to Dalmatia with the Slavic migrations, approx. 1500 years after when my maps end.

I seen plenty of maps with this void...maybe not all your maps , but plenty of maps.

If I2a is so strong in Dalmatia now and it came from Ukraine where KenN states, then surely what was occupying ( Hgs) this void area in your maps? ..........G2 or R1b, or

Maciamo
22-07-13, 11:50
I seen plenty of maps with this void...maybe not all your maps , but plenty of maps.

If I2a is so strong in Dalmatia now and it came from Ukraine where KenN states, then surely what was occupying ( Hgs) this void area in your maps? ..........G2 or R1b, or

I don't understand your question. You talk about maps but seem to mix Bronze Age migration maps with modern distribution maps. Are you trying to ask what haplogroup was present in Dalmatia before the Slavic migrations brought I2a1b and R1a ? If that is your question, then the answer is also I2a1b (but not the Carpathian variety), and probably G2a, E1b1b, J and T. But I didn't make maps showing ancient frequencies.

Maciamo
22-07-13, 11:57
Since R1b M269 was born in the pontic steppe that means it is European. and that all Indo European R1b is decended from the Pontic caspien steppe just like Indo European R1a. Also isnt R1b M269 from like over 10,000ybp so that would mean there was not a bronze age migration from the mid east to the steppes. also that Indo European languages most likely originated in the steppes not the caucus with ancestral culture to maykop.

I never said that M269 "was born in the Pontic Steppe". It spread from the Pontic Steppe. That is very different. M269 surely originated in the Middle East. Let me use this analogy. A lit of modern Americans belong to R1b-U106. A lot of these R1b-U106 lineages came from Britain, but it didn't originate there. It came to Britain with the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings. And before that R1b-U106 came from Central Europe, and probably from the steppes. We cannot know for sure where the mutation first appeared. With STR we can only vaguely estimate when the most recent common ancestor of the lineages surviving to this day lived. But what if a lot of side branches of that lineage died out a long time ago ? The very first ancestor carrying that mutation could be much much older.


Also that southeast Europe faced a huge Indo European R1b M269 migration from Ukraine about 6,000ybp. Is there any evidence of a Indo European culture in that area at that time that migrated to Germany and Antolia. Also that R1b M269 subclades evolved in southeast europe mainly bulgaira for 2,000 years so there has to be signs of a indo european culture there.


Yes, there is plenty of archaeological evidence. I have made a very concise summary here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#Indo-European), but I'd recommend you to read books on the Bronze Age in Europe, like The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0691058873?ie=UTF8&tag=eupedia-21&link_code=as3&camp=2506&creative=9298&creativeASIN=0691058873).


but connecting all Indo European r1b to red hair seems way to simple to be true. Why are there no redheads in bulgaria today or at least a very very small amount even though the Thracens and Daciens where known for it. does this mean there was some type of population replacement in Bulgaria.

Some type of population replacement ? Bulgaria is probably the part of Europe that underwent the most population replacements since the Neolithic. It is the connection point between the Middle East, Europe and the Pontic Steppe. All migrants in any direction passed through Bulgaria. The southern Balkans are the most genetically mixed part of Europe, and Bulgaria probably on top among them.


also isnt the Armenian language the oldest branch if the indo european language. and since they have u placed R1b1a the ancester to all Indo European R1b in Armenia could that mean R1b is really the source of Indo European languages.

No, Armenian is not the oldest branch of IE. It is an isolated branch like Tocharian, because it was cut off from other branches after the steppe migrations. The Armenian branch crossed back to the southern side of the Caucasus from the steppe. It cannot be the original branch from which others stem because it is not more archaic and already includes borrowings from Uralic languages, which could only have happened in the steppes.

zanipolo
22-07-13, 13:17
I don't understand your question. You talk about maps but seem to mix Bronze Age migration maps with modern distribution maps. Are you trying to ask what haplogroup was present in Dalmatia before the Slavic migrations brought I2a1b and R1a ? If that is your question, then the answer is also I2a1b (but not the Carpathian variety), and probably G2a, E1b1b, J and T. But I didn't make maps showing ancient frequencies.

I2a1b but not the Carpathian variety ...?................then which SNPs are we talking about?

nordicwarrior
22-07-13, 15:07
...I dont think I1a2 which is spread out in all of Scandinavia is from I1a going by boat running away from hg R1 or hg G2a...
I would like to see a y DNA I migration map from Maciamo like he makes R1a and R1b migration maps. I think most spread across Europe after the last ice age. but the I1 being only 5,000 years old just does not make any sense it would be complicated. I almost admire the way you keep plugging your G2a theory, sneaking that one in whenever possible! :) Don't buy it, so sorry. However persistence is a useful tool in these debates and I'm guessing we will see this mentioned again. Regarding the possible I1 maps, I don't know if it's possible to pin such a mobile group (boat travelling from the start plus sizable migratory patterns) to narrowly fixed geographical points. Back to the R1b map... it looks like the question of the Basques is now answered (paternal lineage anyway). I'm not an R1b expert, but this map makes it appear pretty straight-forward.

Tone
23-07-13, 17:17
I've been doing a little more research and thinking and I still believe this map is not entirely accurate. Evidence points to the Bell Beakers being R1B. Evidence also points to Bell Beakers expanding from Iberia circa 2900-2500 bc. Evidence also points to the Bell Beakers being a maritime culture, at least initially. There should be some sort of remanent signal of this West to East r1B expansion, if it indeed occurred.


I believe L51 is the culprit.


There is a map of L51 floating around the internet and in fact there was a thread dealing with this on Eupedia here:

eupedia.com/forum/threads/27564-Where-did-R1b-L51-originate. (You have to put the html tag in front, Eupedia won't let me post links with only 4 posts to my name)

(or google "L51 Bell Beaker")

Basically, this map shows L51 is concentrated in the highlands of Southern France with hotspots in Portugal and Ireland. I believe this is a genetic signal of the Bell Beakers.


It is clear L23 was in Balkans. There is no firm evidence L51 moved up the Danube into Central Europe. Based on L51 distribution, it's more likely L51 (or maybe even L23) went to Iberia/Southern France via boat and founded the Bell Beaker culture. From there they moved to Central Europe. L11 is the Northern limit of this migration. From Central Europe they then back-migrated Westward as P312, L21, DF27, etc.


This scenario seems to fit better, in humblest of opinions.

sparkey
23-07-13, 18:14
I've been doing a little more research and thinking and I still believe this map is not entirely accurate. Evidence points to the Bell Beakers being R1B. Evidence also points to Bell Beakers expanding from Iberia circa 2900-2500 bc. Evidence also points to the Bell Beakers being a maritime culture, at least initially. There should be some sort of remanent signal of this West to East r1B expansion, if it indeed occurred.

Even if that's the case, how do you suppose R1b got to Iberia to begin with? What mechanism drove it so far westward?


I believe L51 is the culprit.


There is a map of L51 floating around the internet and in fact there was a thread dealing with this on Eupedia here:

eupedia.com/forum/threads/27564-Where-did-R1b-L51-originate. (You have to put the html tag in front, Eupedia won't let me post links with only 4 posts to my name)

(or google "L51 Bell Beaker")

Basically, this map shows L51 is concentrated in the highlands of Southern France with hotspots in Portugal and Ireland. I believe this is a genetic signal of the Bell Beakers.


It is clear L23 was in Balkans. There is no firm evidence L51 moved up the Danube into Central Europe. Based on L51 distribution, it's more likely L51 (or maybe even L23) went to Iberia/Southern France via boat and founded the Bell Beaker culture.

So they imported the native Balkans Beaker culture... wait, huh? I still don't understand what mechanism you're proposing that would have driven members of a certain R1b subclade "via boat" to found a culture. Where are the Beaker parallels to the east?

Quoting myself from the thread you linked:


Actually one of the few true L51* samples we have is from Croatia, so I don't know where "absent from the Balkans" is coming from. We also have samples from the thinly-sampled countries of Turkey and Yemen. Combined with its presence in Poland and Hungary (which seems to be missing from the map as well), I think that there's a good case for an Eastern European or even Near Eastern origin for the L51 marker itself. That said, its expansion on Western Europe is notable, and understanding it is vital for understanding the origin of L11, which I've become increasingly convinced is European in origin.

Samples are thin, but a Danubean origin still seems plausible to me. Proposing that there's a gap so there must have been boats! seems like much more of a reach to me.

All said, I actually don't disagree with you that the Beaker culture seems like an intriguing possibility to be connected to the R1b spread somehow, I just think your proposed mechanism is poorly supported and not particularly plausible. IMHO the most likely scenario is somewhere between a Beaker-origin theory and an IE theory... in which IE or IE-like migrations pulled eastern haplogroups, including R1b, westward, then Beaker culture ("industry" is perhaps more appropriate) acted as a catalyst to spread these eastern haplogroups (particularly R1b) within Western Europe, and then later internal expansions of the groups within or neighboring the industry led to R1b having a majority in the region. It's more complicated to explain, but I have trouble coming up with anything that fits the data more simply at the moment.

Sennevini
23-07-13, 19:39
I like the map, it is very clear; though, I don't agree with the route of M269 through the steppes. I think it travelled through Anatolia. I know the R1b IE theory. If I would say, M269 travelled trough Anatolia, becoming Indo-Europeanised in the Eastern Balkans, and travelling as such to the west.

Tone
23-07-13, 20:59
Even if that's the case, how do you suppose R1b got to Iberia to begin with? What mechanism drove it so far westward?

So they imported the native Balkans Beaker culture... wait, huh? I still don't understand what mechanism you're proposing that would have driven members of a certain R1b subclade "via boat" to found a culture. Where are the Beaker parallels to the east?

Samples are thin, but a Danubean origin still seems plausible to me. Proposing that there's a gap so there must have been boats! seems like much more of a reach to me.


L51 is definitely in southern France, Portugal, and Ireland. We agree on that. It either got there by foot or by boat. I agree that the Danubean route is plausible, but a maritime route should at least be considered, since L51 is scarce in the Danubean plain but seems to pop up in South West Europe and Ireland.

I certainly respect your opinion to disagree, but I personally don't think it's that far-fetched to imagine that L51 (or even L23) were a maritime folk. Early clades of r1B are loaded around the Black Sea. History is full of migratory boat-people (Phonecians, Greeks, English, Spanish, etc.). We know that the Bell Beakers were a maritime folk, this alone should lead to the consideration that L51 (if it is Bell Beaker) could possibly have been maritime.

Why did they go to Iberia (and Southern France, and Italy, and Ireland)? Why is there no material link between Bell Beakers and the Balkans? I don't know. This is pure conjecture, but early r1B clades were probably metal workers. Iberia and Ireland are prime targets to exploit for metals. Just like with more recent boat migrations, Iberia at the time could have offered cheap land, easily conquerable natives, abundant resources, and opportunity for trade. As for why there is no link between the Bell Beakers and the Balkans, I can only offer that Bell Beaker culture was something new, and could have developed in Iberia from an isolated people who immigrated from the Balkans hundreds of years earlier and had no ties anymore. But this is all conjecture. I'm just trying to think outside the box and offer alternatives for solving the puzzle.

And for me, the Bell Beakers are a puzzle. :)

Fire Haired
23-07-13, 21:19
I almost admire the way you keep plugging your G2a theory, sneaking that one in whenever possible! :) Don't buy it, so sorry. However persistence is a useful tool in these debates and I'm guessing we will see this mentioned again. Regarding the possible I1 maps, I don't know if it's possible to pin such a mobile group (boat travelling from the start plus sizable migratory patterns) to narrowly fixed geographical points. Back to the R1b map... it looks like the question of the Basques is now answered (paternal lineage anyway). I'm not an R1b expert, but this map makes it appear pretty straight-forward.

there was a G2a invasion of Europe before R1. That is just a fact that is why 26 of 31 Neolithic Y DNA samples had G2a. U cant just always give the excuse well the hunter gathers did not have advanced burails that is just an assumption otzie the ice man who had G2a we did not look for him we found him covered in ice in the middle of no where.

the fact is that there where almost no hunter gathers in mainland Europe 6,000ybp so no wonder we dont find them theyw here not there. Also the G2a y dna I ratio in France, Italy, and Spain G2a is way way more than hg I eastern Europe, central, and northern Europe is a different story. U cant keep ignoring this G2a came before R1 and it did invade hg I. western Europeans 6,000ybp had mainly G2a that is just that plain fact modern DNa and ancient DNA proves that.

For ur boat theory i tinik the BRitis isles is the best place to look. Britian has for some reason a branch of the eastern European I2a1b and it is pre Celtic how the heck did it get there maybe they where running away from G2a i dont know. Also britian has its own subclade of I2a2 which is dated as about 3,000 years old so it may be from celtic invasion or not but possibly ur boat theory is right. Y DNa I was probably dominate in Neolithic Britain and Ireland possibly because it is a Island. But farming still spread there so the hunter gathers cant run for long.

I think u need to remember the farmers also had boats and found there way into those islands or whatever eventulley everyone became a farmer so hg I did not hide forever.

sparkey
23-07-13, 21:42
And for me, the Bell Beakers are a puzzle. :)

Great bottom line and good explanatory post, thanks.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 05:08
I've been doing a little more research and thinking and I still believe this map is not entirely accurate. Evidence points to the Bell Beakers being R1B. Evidence also points to Bell Beakers expanding from Iberia circa 2900-2500 bc. Evidence also points to the Bell Beakers being a maritime culture, at least initially. There should be some sort of remanent signal of this West to East r1B expansion, if it indeed occurred.


I believe L51 is the culprit.


There is a map of L51 floating around the internet and in fact there was a thread dealing with this on Eupedia here:

eupedia.com/forum/threads/27564-Where-did-R1b-L51-originate. (You have to put the html tag in front, Eupedia won't let me post links with only 4 posts to my name)

(or google "L51 Bell Beaker")

Basically, this map shows L51 is concentrated in the highlands of Southern France with hotspots in Portugal and Ireland. I believe this is a genetic signal of the Bell Beakers.


It is clear L23 was in Balkans. There is no firm evidence L51 moved up the Danube into Central Europe. Based on L51 distribution, it's more likely L51 (or maybe even L23) went to Iberia/Southern France via boat and founded the Bell Beaker culture. From there they moved to Central Europe. L11 is the Northern limit of this migration. From Central Europe they then back-migrated Westward as P312, L21, DF27, etc.

This scenario seems to fit better, in humblest of opinions.

I think you are talking about the frequency map that Richard Rocca drew for L51xL11 that showed Southern France, the Rhine Valley and NW Italy as being the highest frequency.

This is fine, but frequency is not a good indicator of origin. L51xL11, as we know it, does not look more diverse than L11, or if so, barely. All the L51xL11 that we know of is DYS426=13 while L11 is dominantly DYS426=12 with some 13. Also, at the earlier branching L23xL51 is dominantly DYS426=12. 426 is very slow. All of the L51xL11 so far is Z2113+.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/R1b_Descendency_Tree.jpg

The net is that the L51xL11 is a single brother to L11, not a diverse paragroup. Still, I think understanding it is important and may provide clues....

but then there is the new information from the Austrian DNA study that came after Richard drew the map. The highest frequencies yet for L51xL11 (probably Z2113). It's in Austria near the Danube.

Take a look at the Lucotte study that came out this year on R1b-h35 haplotypes... they call it the Armenian Haplotype sometimes. They draw a distribution map that shows the distribution through the Balkans, the very southern tip of Italy and also in the Caucasus and Anatolia. Those haplotypes in the study look almost all like L23xL51, which is probably Z2103/Z2105. It is probably not a paragroup, but there is a difference. L23xL51 (probable Z2103/Z2105) has significantly higher STR diversity. East R1b is older than west R1b. It doesn't really look like a Central Europe to SW Asia/Caucasus migration.

I think the red herrings may actually be
1) the dating of Beaker pottery in Portugal... pots aren't people
2) R1b was not the only player in our Kromdorf Germany Beaker ancient DNA.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 05:37
...
Why did they go to Iberia (and Southern France, and Italy, and Ireland)? Why is there no material link between Bell Beakers and the Balkans? I don't know. This is pure conjecture, but early r1B clades were probably metal workers. Iberia and Ireland are prime targets to exploit for metals. Just like with more recent boat migrations, Iberia at the time could have offered cheap land, easily conquerable natives, abundant resources, and opportunity for trade. As for why there is no link between the Bell Beakers and the Balkans, I can only offer that Bell Beaker culture was something new, and could have developed in Iberia from an isolated people who immigrated from the Balkans hundreds of years earlier and had no ties anymore. But this is all conjecture. I'm just trying to think outside the box and offer alternatives for solving the puzzle.

And for me, the Bell Beakers are a puzzle. :)

I don't think he signs on this forum very often, but there is an archaeologist digging into this stuff in a very passionate way. All I can figure is he retired and loves to read. He does have his opinions, but as far as I can tell, he is very objective and will change his opinions as new information comes in.

He's dug up several papers on metal working and they seem pertinent. This is all new to me, but I've just learned that the early European Chalcolithic (copper) working was based on a set of technologies and practices that are classified as the Carpo-Balkans Metallurgy Province, CBMP for short.

A distinct early copper working zone involved Eastern Anatolia, Northern Iran and had connections the Southern Levant was called the Circumpontic Metallurgy Province, CMP for short. The Maykops were CMP practioners. One of the scientists, Amzallag if I remember correctly, believes the CMP had the advantage of the first furnace technologies whereas the CBMP did not use furnaces for smelting. I'm not sure if it was climate related or what, but the CBMP collapsed and the CMP took over and quickly expanded through Western Europe from the East. Amzallag says the Beakers used CMP technologies. His "Synthesis Theory" says that copper in and of itself did not dramatically change Europe, but when the furnace smelting practices came in the dramatic culture changes took place.

Fire Haired
24-07-13, 07:57
tone u know R1b came to Iberia just 2,700ybp with Celtic migrations so when u are talking about Indo Europeans in Iberia it is in historcal times.

Tone
24-07-13, 08:54
Great bottom line and good explanatory post, thanks.
And thank you.



I think you are talking about the frequency map that Richard Rocca drew for L51xL11 that showed Southern France, the Rhine Valley and NW Italy as being the highest frequency.


This is fine, but frequency is not a good indicator of origin.


…..
I think the red herrings may actually be
1) the dating of Beaker pottery in Portugal... pots aren't people
2) R1b was not the only player in our Kromdorf Germany Beaker ancient DNA.
Good points and a lot of information to digest. :) I agree with your red herrings, but I kinda' think pots are people, or at least the same people used the same pots. We'll see how it all plays out once more Bell Beaker DNA is analyzed.



Amzallag says the Beakers used CMP technologies. His "Synthesis Theory" says that copper in and of itself did not dramatically change Europe, but when the furnace smelting practices came in the dramatic culture changes took place.
Very interesting post, thanks. It seems there was some sort of technical revolution going on in Europe around 2900 bc. And I'd also hazard a guess that the Corded Ware folk also had an advantage in furnace smelting.



tone u know R1b came to Iberia just 2,700ybp with Celtic migrations so when u are talking about Indo Europeans in Iberia it is in historcal times.
It all comes back to this, right? Was R1B in Iberia before the Celts? I don't know. But L51 is there. The Bell Beakers expanded out of there. R1B has been connected to the Bell Beakers. One could hypothesize that R1B Bell Beakers were in Iberia a almost 1500 years before the Celts arrived from Central Europe.


If (and this is a big "if") this hypothesis were true, then you are right that Indo-Europeans arrived in Iberia 2700 years before present because the Bell Beakers were probably not Indo-European. They could have been R1B but probably not Indo-European.


Maybe older R1B did not speak an Indo-European language at all. Maybe R1B picked up Indo-European language in Central Europe where they interacted with the Corded Ware folk. Maybe. We are talking about a time period of over a thousand years.


And again, I'm just wondering and throwing stuff out there for discussion. Please feel free to poke holes in my stupid theories. :)

nordicwarrior
24-07-13, 12:14
...But farming still spread there so the hunter gathers cant run for long.

I think u need to remember the farmers also had boats and found there way into those islands or whatever eventulley everyone became a farmer so hg I did not hide forever. I have G2a as herders more than farmers. G2a definitely made population gains in the Neolithic, but if one group was centered around rivers/ sea-shores and the other was geared more toward hilly/mountainous terrain for their animals, I don't see major conflict brewing from these arrangements. I do see trading opportunities though. Whatever the case, it appears both had to proceed to pockets of safety when R1b showed up.

Ziober
24-07-13, 13:28
based on what evidence ? What indo-european culture appeared in southern france before central europe ?

the celtic one.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 15:53
tone u know R1b came to Iberia just 2,700ybp with Celtic migrations so when u are talking about Indo Europeans in Iberia it is in historcal times.

I'm not sure how you are defining Celtics but there may have been R1b types, at least some, in Iberia before Proto-Celtic was spoken.

How do you know Indo-European speaking people did not reach Iberia before 1700 BC?

How do you know some R1b types did not reach Iberia before 1700 BC? As was also noted, even if they were, we don't know what they spoke.

We know we have R1b found in the Kromsdorf, Germany Bell Beaker site at 2500-2600 BC so R1b existed in West/Central Europe much earlier than 1700 BC. That does not mean they were in Iberia then, but how do we know they weren't?

Mikewww
24-07-13, 16:12
... I agree with your red herrings, but I kinda' think pots are people, or at least the same people used the same pots. ...
Not so.

Even pots are not pots. In other words, not all forms of Bell Beaker pottery were the same across Europe. This is a pretty large area and they didn't have the internet or TV to keep up on the latest styles in pottery or what have you.

... but we are talking about people anyway. All Bell Beaker folks were not alike. That is proven. Read Desideri's studies on the dental traits of Bell Beaker people. Also Heyd, and Harrison and Heyd describe the different regional groups of Bell Beaker folks. There were some conflicts, too, between the groups. I think one the papers is titled "When East meets West". In another paper, Desideri has a reflux theory where Beaker folks from the Iberian area met up with those from the east, in the Corded Ware interaction zone, and then there was a bounce back of new people from Central Europe westward.

Not sure if I can figure out what that means related to R1b types, if anything... but pots are not people and all Bell Beaker people were not the same.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 16:54
the celtic one.

The phasing from PIE to PIE dialects to IE derivatives and dialects and derivatives of those is not a series of big, singular steps.

It's more of a continuum of language developments, cultural ebbs and flows, expansions, absorptions and the like. Celtic as we think of it (which may be different perspectives) does not really stand alone.... It is really IE version 1.7a or something like that. There were a series of developments prior to it leading back to PIE. We can probably think of Germanic as 1.2.9 or something like that. I'm just saying these things didn't parachute in from nowhere. The evolved from one another and also borrowed from one another.

Nobody1
24-07-13, 17:10
Indo-Europeans in Iberia ~1700BC and
Bell Beaker culture being Indo-European...................

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/popcorn_jon_stewart.gif

.....................doesnt get any better than this

Tone
24-07-13, 17:27
... but we are talking about people anyway. All Bell Beaker folks were not alike. That is proven. Read Desideri's studies on the dental traits of Bell Beaker people. Also Heyd, and Harrison and Heyd describe the different regional groups of Bell Beaker folks. There were some conflicts, too, between the groups. I think one the papers is titled "When East meets West". In another paper, Desideri has a reflux theory where Beaker folks from the Iberian area met up with those from the east, in the Corded Ware interaction zone, and then there was a bounce back of new people from Central Europe westward.

Not sure if I can figure out what that means related to R1b types, if anything... but pots are not people and all Bell Beaker people were not the same.
Point taken. :)

The reflux theory you mentioned by Desideri interests me. I've heard something similar to this before in a recent genetic study of the Iberian peninsula (sorry I can't seem to be able to dig up where I read that right now).

Maciamo
24-07-13, 17:29
the celtic one.

Please cite the name of an archaeological culture.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 18:11
It seems there was some sort of technical revolution going on in Europe around 2900 bc. And I'd also hazard a guess that the Corded Ware folk also had an advantage in furnace smelting....

I have read elsewhere (not in the below) that the Hungarian-Cspel Bell Beaker folks and the Corded Ware folks near them used the same metallurgy processes. I don't know how that ties into Amzallag's theories.

Amzallag is the one pushing the "Synthesis" theory and importance of furnace smelting.

"From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations: The Synthetic Theory" by Nissim Amzallag

He has received strong disagreement from Thornton and Roberts, but he rebutted their rebuttal pretty effectively in my opinion.

I consider this with a grain of salt. It is a theory and just like pots aren't people, metals aren't people either, but you do need the blacksmiths. Furnace smelting does appear to be a dramatic enhancement and where it went, societies changed.

Amzallag wrote,

"Crucible smelting is considered the earliest mode of copper production. Its replacement by furnace smelting everywhere (except in pre-Columbian metallurgy) is justified by the improvements introduced.
...
[along with furnace metallurgy] Other innovations are attested during the course of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant.
...
Outside of the southern Levant, furnace smelting is fairly common in the late fifth millennium B.C.E. in the northern Euphrates area, a region where copper was already produced by crucible smelting. Many furnaces have been identified around Derirmentep [in Anatolia]".
....
Furnace metallurgy is found in the southern Caucasus from the early fourth millennium B.C.E. It appears a few centuries later in the northern Caucasus, at the earliest stage of development of the Maikup (Kurgan) culture."
...
Communication between the Levant and the Caucasus is evident during the Chalcolithic period.
...
The presence of furnace metallurgy has been acknowledged in southeastern Europe from the end of the fourth millennium. Its sudden occurrence at a mature stage follows a long period of cultural regression, the so-called Balkan Dark Age characterized by the decline of copper product (crucible smelting) and the abandonment of many settlements.
...
The spread of furnace metallurgy in Central Asia is related to the expansion of the northern Caucasian Maikop culture from the early third millennium B.C.E.
...
In Crete, furnace smelting also appears suddenly in the third millennium B.C.E. at an advanced stage of development.
...
Furnace metallurgy was progressively expanding in the western part of the Mediterranean basin (Sardinia, Italy, southern France, and North Africa) through a pattern that parallels the spread of the Bell Beaker culture. Also on continental Europe, furnace metallurgy was diffusing concurrently with the spread of the Bell Beaker culture.
...
During the second millennium B.C.E. furnace metallurgy spread toward the limits of the ancient world: it reached the British Isles, and two distinct paths (the Baltic Sea and rivers from central Europe) led to Scandinavia and Finland.
...
The Dynamic Expansion of Furnace Metallurgy...
In Europe, this dynamic is related to slow and multidirectional pattern of Bell Beaker people, suggesting it is not directly motivated by the search for new mining resources. Rather the expansion of a metallurgical domain looks like a combination of the desire of populations to join the metallurgical domain and the need, for the smiths, to migrate to new horizons. It is defined here as a centrifugal process of expansion.
...
(the introduction of furnace metallurgy) brought about profound changes that deeply influenced the emergence of Bronze Age societies."

In the quotes above, the brackets are mine but the words in parentheses are Amzallag's.

Ziober
24-07-13, 18:12
Why are most of your maps have a void of the Dalmatian coast, like some kind of plagued area?

You got it Zanipolo. In fact that area probably was very important indeed:

http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/txumi_ledauno/StelaePeople_zps24790e03.jpg



I think this thread would be helpful: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28544-Question-about-R1b-and-IE-languages-in-Iberia

Mikewww
24-07-13, 18:38
You got it Zanipolo. In fact that area probably was very important indeed:

http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/txumi_ledauno/StelaePeople_zps24790e03.jpg

I think this thread would be helpful: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28544-Question-about-R1b-and-IE-languages-in-Iberia

I asked Jean, the author of that map, what happened to the black line of Stelae going through continental Europe. She said the Stelae trail in that direction went cold, but she thinks the people kept going towards the Low Countries and ultimately resulted in the Rhenish Bell Beakers and finally the Beakers in Britain... the Amesbury Archer and such. I can't find those posts, so that is just by memory. She has a book coming this fall so we'll see how specific she is about this.

There is something to be said for that, since the R1b-P312 folks in Iberia are very heavily DF27+ while the P312 type in Northern France and particularly the Isles is dominated by L21+ (S145).

Nobody1
24-07-13, 19:00
I asked Jean, the author of that map, what happened to the black line of Stelae going through continental Europe. She said the Stelae trail in that direction went cold, but she thinks the people kept going towards the Low Countries and ultimately resulted in the Rhenish Bell Beakers and finally the Beakers in Britain... the Amesbury Archer and such. I can't find those posts, so that is just by memory. She has a book coming this fall so we'll see how specific she is about this.

There is something to be said for that, since the R1b-P312 folks in Iberia are very heavily DF27+ while the P312 type in Northern France and particularly the Isles is dominated by L21+ (S145).

How do you know that the "Stelae People" carried R1b into Europe when the only known remains from such a culture Remedello I
was G2a [Ötzi 3300 BC]; doesnt seem to fit .... or does it;

Arco Stele - 3rd Mil. BC - Remedello II
(decorated with Copper Daggers/Halberds/Axes) compare with Kurgan steles
http://www.comune.pisa.it/gr-archeologico/musvir/stele/arco1.jpghttp://www.rupestre.net/tracce/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cropped-arco_stele_I.jpg

Nobody1
24-07-13, 19:22
Doesnt look as scientific as the other map, and Gimbutas surely doesnt reach the likes of jean;
But thats the Indo-European (first wave) Chalcolithic culture spread;

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Gimbutas/GimbutasCivilizationOfTheGoddess/BC3500GimbutasMKurganFig10-13.gif

Tone
24-07-13, 19:23
Amzallag is the one pushing the "Synthesis" theory and importance of furnace smelting.

"From Metallurgy to Bronze Age Civilizations: The Synthetic Theory" by Nissim Amzallag

Great stuff. It obviously makes sense that some sort of technical advantage is behind the expansion of empire and peoples. We've seen that in historical times with the advent of industrialization It seems metal-smithing is suspect #1 in the expansion of the Bell Beakers (and maybe R1B in general into Europe either through the South West or through the Danubian plain).

Taranis
24-07-13, 19:30
I asked Jean, the author of that map, what happened to the black line of Stelae going through continental Europe. She said the Stelae trail in that direction went cold, but she thinks the people kept going towards the Low Countries and ultimately resulted in the Rhenish Bell Beakers and finally the Beakers in Britain... the Amesbury Archer and such. I can't find those posts, so that is just by memory. She has a book coming this fall so we'll see how specific she is about this.

There is something to be said for that, since the R1b-P312 folks in Iberia are very heavily DF27+ while the P312 type in Northern France and particularly the Isles is dominated by L21+ (S145).

I have to admit that the overall distribution pattern of R1b (well, broadly L51 and it's subclades) seems to match up with the overall extend of the Beaker-Bell Culture. However, as I noted in the past, the distribution pattern of the subclades inside Western Europe doesn't add up with the expansion pattern of the Beaker-Bell Culture. If Beaker-Bell really migrated - by some maritime route - more or less straight to Portugal and radiated across Europe from there, I'd expect the oldest subclades of R1b (L51, basically) to cluster in Iberia, and frankly, that doesn't seem to be the case. So in my opinion, there must be a solution for this, and I can see three possibilities:

1) the chronology / dating of Beaker-Bell is off, and the oldest sites really are at the western edge of the Alps, not in Portugal.

2) Beaker-Bell has multiple origins, so that Beaker-Bell metalware indeed originated in Portugal but the demic movement occured from Central Europe.

3) the expansion of R1b did not actually follow the expansion of Beaker-Bell, but it's disappearance.

(I will not make any statement on the ethnic or lingustic association for the Beaker-Bell people, as frankly, I am tired of getting a beating from the experts for that type of speculation :rolleyes2: )


How do you know that the "Stelae People" carried R1b into Europe when the only known remains from such a culture Remedello I
was G2a [Ötzi 3300 BC]; doesnt seem to fit .... or does it;

Arco Stele - 3rd Mil. BC - Remedello II
(decorated with Daggers/Halberds/Axes) compare with Kurgan steles

You bring up a good topic with Ötzi. Something that always bugged me about that 'Stelae People' map and the association with R1b is Sardinia: autosomally Ötzi is closest with modern Sardinians, and modern Sardinians are also heavy in the Y-haplogroups G2a and I2, which were found in Neolithic sites. If Beaker-Bell started with the demic movement of these 'Stelae People', and this migration went through Sardinia early on, then why are Sardinians most representative of the pre-Beaker situation?

With Maciamo's map, I (mostly) agree on his spread patterns, but I can't agree on some of the dates. In particular the timing, as that seems to somewhat contradict the Kromsdorf site.

Tone
24-07-13, 19:56
You got it Zanipolo. In fact that area probably was very important indeed:

http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/txumi_ledauno/StelaePeople_zps24790e03.jpg



I think this thread would be helpful: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28544-Question-about-R1b-and-IE-languages-in-Iberia

L51:

5955

There is obviously an apparent correlation. However, I am refraining from drawing any conclusions. Is the timing right for Stelae people and L51? I'm reading the Stelae people were from the 4th and 3rd millennia bc which is probably a little too early for L51. Or is it? Perhaps they are unrelated (the Stelae being y-dna "G" maybe), and just following the same route but at different times a thousand years apart? Or maybe r1B makes and entrance very early into Western Europe. I don't know.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 21:52
How do you know that the "Stelae People" carried R1b into Europe when the only known remains from such a culture Remedello I
was G2a [Ötzi 3300 BC]; doesnt seem to fit .... or does it;

Arco Stele - 3rd Mil. BC - Remedello II
(decorated with Copper Daggers/Halberds/Axes) compare with Kurgan steles
http://www.comune.pisa.it/gr-archeologico/musvir/stele/arco1.jpghttp://www.rupestre.net/tracce/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cropped-arco_stele_I.jpg

This is Jeans hypothesis, not mine. However, not to be transparent, I think that Jean's hypothesis appears sound, I'm just not the person to argue on her behalf. Jean M has discussed this, possibly, even on this forum. We need to go look for her remarks. I think we are within only 45-60 days of her book being available.

We need to be careful in assumptions though. The Stelae may only have been used by elite people, as were the Kurgan burials. There is no reason to think any of this groups were pure of anything, although there is something called "amplification" that may have eventually led to one group to have eventually swamped the others gene-wise.

We also need to be careful with ancient DNA. One or two finds are not a broad-based scientific survey. I'm not sure if we'll have a good representative survey of ancient DNA. There are time, geographic, ethnic and social strata dimensions that should be accounted for in surveys.

Here is a tough thing to grapple with that confounds ancient DNA testing to some degree. Ancient populations may have largely died off, particularly on the paternal lineage side of things. Even though R1b-L11 accounts for 110 million men in modern Europe, the best we can tell with TMRCA estimates from long haplotypes is that these men are related to one guy that existed about 3000 BC, give or take. It may be hard to find much L11+ or even L23+ L11- around back then. There just weren't many, maybe. There is no requirement for there have been a large population of R1b back then.

Maciamo
24-07-13, 22:18
You got it Zanipolo. In fact that area probably was very important indeed:

http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/txumi_ledauno/StelaePeople_zps24790e03.jpg


I'd still like to know what cultures are associated with the stellae following the pink arrows. Based on the period I can only see the Bell Beaker culture. There are several major problems with the hypothesis that R1b spread around Western Europe through the Bell Beaker people and culture:

1) The oldest subclades of R1b after the Balkans (L51, L11) should all be found in western Iberia, while they are found between Hungary and Scandinavia.

2) R1b-U106 would have developed in Iberia side by side of P312. So how did it end up in northern Germany and Scandinavia and nowhere near south-west Europe ?

3) It is rather far-fetched that the R1b people stopped following the Danube and instead crossed the Alps, made thousands of boats to migrate to Corsica, then Sardinia, then all the way to Portugal and Galicia to start a new culture. How do steppe tribe with a long pastoralist tradition and riding on horses suddenly turn into a maritime people ? Additionally both Portugal and Galicia have the lowest frequency of R1b in Iberia, but plenty of E1b1b, G2a and J2.

4) It would take thousands of well-armed soldiers to invade a densely settled place like the Atlantic coast of Neolithic Iberia. If the R1b people were numerous and powerful enough to do it, why not continue to Central Europe or even take over the whole Italian peninsula ? Why seek the furthest possible place as a launching pad to conquer all Western Europe ? That just doesn't make any sense.

5) The Bell Beaker culture started as a late Neolithic or early Chalcolithic society. The R1b cultures of the Balkans were already in the Bronze Age. It is only because R1b had bronze weapons that they could overthrow the rich, advanced and populous Chalcolithic cultures of south-east Europe so easily. They would have needed their bronze weapons to conquer Iberia too. So how comes that the early Beakers of Iberia had no knowledge of bronze working ? This argument alone is enough to destroy the hypothesis that R1b steppe people founded the Beaker culture in Iberia.


An alternative theory which I could accept (but do not favour) is this one:

R1b people split in two groups after reaching modern Austria. One group continue to the north-west and found the Unetice culture. Another group went around the Alps, either by southern Germany or by northern Italy, ended up in southern France, and then migrated to Iberia, where the (peacefully) mixed with the locals (perhaps because they were vastly outnumbered) and developed the Bell Beaker culture.

In any case, I regard the Bell Beakers as more of a cultural phenomenon than a true ethnic-based culture. Beakers could well have propagated around Europe along the trade routes already established by the Megalithic people. People don't just invade and replace other people without greatly superior technology. The bottom line is that Beaker people were originally a Neolithic people. They could not have conquered and replaced other Neolithic people from western Europe. Therefore they are not the culture with which R1b spread around western Europe.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 22:53
L51:

5955

There is obviously an apparent correlation. However, I am refraining from drawing any conclusions. Is the timing right for Stelae people and L51? I'm reading the Stelae people were from the 4th and 3rd millennia bc which is probably a little too early for L51. Or is it? Perhaps they are unrelated (the Stelae being y-dna "G" maybe), and just following the same route but at different times a thousand years apart? Or maybe r1B makes and entrance very early into Western Europe. I don't know.

Please note that that Rocca's map is L51xL11 (which are probably DYS426=13 Z2113+) and it generally has very low frequencies. About the maximum is 5%.

At the time we were not aware of the data in this study of East Tyrol.

"Pasture Names with Romance and Slavic Roots Facilitate Dissection of Y Chromosome Variation in an Exclusively German-Speaking Alpine Range" by Niederstatter, et al.

The Tyrol, Austria region A (former Romance speaking areas (Puster, Gail and Villigraten valley) has L51xL11 (in the study this is R-M412/S167*) at a 14% frequency. 14% is an outstanding level for L51xL11 and would be by far the darkest point on Rocca's map.

On another forum Rocca has noted this is near some early copper working site.

I think other considerations are that this location is the first time (from an east to west perpective - furthest east) so far that L23+ L51+ L11- overtakes L23+ L51-, frequency-wise.

Fire Haired
24-07-13, 23:09
R1b came to Iberia with Celtic Hallstat migrations at the very very very earliest 3,000ybp. R1b is very popular in Iberia today but it has only been like that for about 2,500 years. Iberia has a very very young R1b subclade R1b Df27 if R1b in western Europe spread from Iberia u would find R1b L51, R1b L11/P310.

R1b P297 spread with Indo European languages. It was first in the norther middle east then got to the steppes(central Russia) and formed into R1b M269 and R1b M73. R1b M73 spread as a small minorty with indo Iranian languages who spread out of Russia with Sinshta (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSintash ta_culture&ei=TUHwUbyZAYXjqAGbpICYDw&usg=AFQjCNE5UwgrXIqIYbfZOnazekbu0OG_Jg)- Abasevho (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abashevo_culture) cultures. R1b M269 spread probably to the Balkans (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBalkan s&ei=dkHwUbHWHcfsrgG43IHQCQ&usg=AFQjCNGqOa_DOWG8VQqvADWFKHv1luyqhQ) or somewhere else in eastern Europe from the steppes about 6,000-7,000ybp. Then R1b M269 formed into R1b L51 and spread with Germanic Italo Celtic languages to western Europe about 5,000ybp. By 4,500ybp they where already conquering just about all Bell Beaker (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBeaker_ culture&ei=jkHwUZi_MpHKqAH5rYD4Aw&usg=AFQjCNGHE0meTJn8GI3H7bY1LYnItUwLmw) in Germany that is why two 4,600 year old Germany Bell Beaker remains had R1b one was for sure R1b M269.

R1b L11 split into R1b S116 which went to southern France and Germany and started Unetice culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUnetice _culture&ei=pUHwUafcNcmfrAGar4CwDA&usg=AFQjCNHc8lcvsnusjlaUeXCZFsQBFHVzcw) and spook proto Italo Celtic. R1b U106 spread to northern Germany eventulley starting the Nordic Bronze age (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FNordic _Bronze_Age&ei=wkHwUcv9JdO1qQHRj4HwAw&usg=AFQjCNHyReAh9UF7Nim3VvyCyjc1txQcyA) about 4,000ybp. Some R1b U106 was also in the Urnfield culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUrnfiel d_culture&ei=3kHwUbyABMvcqQGCnIGIDw&usg=AFQjCNFiQZ9OiLC2boFrSbQAv9K1jC8CZg) because 3,000 year old Urnfield R1b i tested its haplotype is was almost for sure R1b U106.

R1b S116 split into R1b U152, R1b L21, R1b Df27.

R1b L21 spread to the British isles with proto Insular Celtic language (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FInsular _Celtic_languages&ei=-EHwUea_Ccf-qgGd64HYDQ&usg=AFQjCNEiWAtqoMSmTb7As-oYR6apz8lbcQ) about 4,000-3,000ybp. R1b U152 where some of the earliest Iron makers in Europe they lived around Switzerland and Austria some spook proto Italic some spoke a Gaulic Celtic language. The Italics migrated and conquered Italy from 3,200-2,800ybp and started Villnoaven culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FVillano van_culture&ei=IELwUbavDMTBrgHU8oDACw&usg=AFQjCNEomyEEihCqZAFE9TdgjfgZ461ePA). The R1b U152 Celts mainly spread their iron making and conquered parts of France and became the Gauls. They also spread Hallestat culture to Iberia but had R1b Df27 from 2,700-2,500ybp. Hallestat (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHallst att_culture&ei=OELwUenQIdCNrQGl9YHgAw&usg=AFQjCNFr5hGvgy2b2kVdSHlP8dZOSOISdA)started La dene culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_T%C3%A8ne_culture) both cultures combined where extremely spread out and conquered many areas in eastern Europe to.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif

R1b in western Europe is defintley connected with Germanic Italo Celtic languages. there is no way it spread from Bell Beaker in Iberia. the R1b in 4,600 year old Bell Beaker in Germany totally goes with what i am saying because by that time R1b and Germanic Italo Celts had conquered bell Beaker in Germany.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 23:12
... The bottom line is that Beaker people were originally a Neolithic people. They could not have conquered and replaced other Neolithic people from western Europe. Therefore they are not the culture with which R1b spread around western Europe.

How do you know the Beaker people were originally a Neolithic people? EDIT: deleted error.

You are saying that the Beakers could not have conquered from Western Europe? Are you assuming that the all Beaker folk types originated in Portugal with the first identification of the pottery?

The various regional groups may have different mixes. Are you assuming all Beaker people were of one genetic type? Some of the regional groups, i.e. continental, might have been more successful, per the reflux theory.

Also, is it really required that they conquered Western Europe in one fell swoop? I think in some of your writings you talk of thousands of years of Celtic chieftain dominance. This is what I would call amplification.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 23:26
I'd still like to know what cultures are associated with the stellae following the pink arrows. Based on the period I can only see the Bell Beaker culture. There are several major problems with the hypothesis that R1b spread around Western Europe through the Bell Beaker people and culture:

1) The oldest subclades of R1b after the Balkans (L51, L11) should all be found in western Iberia, while they are found between Hungary and Scandinavia.

2) R1b-U106 would have developed in Iberia side by side of P312. So how did it end up in northern Germany and Scandinavia and nowhere near south-west Europe ?

....

This is not Jean's R1b migration map. She has another map for that she calls speculative.

This Stelae trail map is just that, a Stelae trail. The black line/trail may have been most important genetically. I think Jean would agree with that.

I agree with you that an overland migration for R1b-L51/L11 into Western/Central Europe is most likely. Just look at the P312 configuration, U152 in Cisalpine Gaul & Rhine, L21 in N.France& Isles, DF27 in S.France & Iberia. The is configuration suggests and launching from land probably from around the Alps or somewhere along the Danube. The U106 positioning in the German Language area also pulls us towards a continental land route - agreed.

I think the main point of her Stelae trail was to show a linkage from Kemi Oba into Europe. That's it. It think she referred to Harrison and Heyd in describing this.

Fire Haired
24-07-13, 23:29
Mikewww there is no Y DNA I found in Bell Beaker culture remains. Is there if there is can u give me the source

Mikewww
24-07-13, 23:48
.... R1b in western Europe is defintley connected with Germanic Italo Celtic languages. there is no way it spread from Bell Beaker in Iberia. the R1b in 4,600 year old Bell Beaker in Germany totally goes with what i am saying because by that time R1b and Germanic Italo Celts had conquered bell Beaker in Germany.

Who is saying that all Bell Beaker types of folks originated in Iberia and that there must be some one for one correspondence of pots to people... or should I say men since we are talking about Y haplogroups? My understanding is the women made the pottery, anyway.

Please be sure to read some of the cranium data and to read Desideri. She makes the case that some regional types of Beaker folks involved new people where as some were more of an outgrowth of the prior.

Mikewww
24-07-13, 23:56
Mikewww there is no Y DNA I found in Bell Beaker culture remains. Is there if there is can u give me the source

There are a large number of studies and articles on the internet on R1b. We are fortunate in that regards.

"Emerging genetic patterns of the European Neolithic: perspectives from a late Neolithic Bell Beaker burial site in Germany" by Lee, et al., 2012.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22552938


"Ancient DNA analyses of human remains from the Late Neolithic Bell Beaker site of Kromsdorf, Germany showed distinct mitochondrial haplotypes for ... and two males were identified as belonging to the Y haplogroup R1b"

I made a mistake earlier. It was the Urnfield (Lichenstein) ancient DNA where we found both R1b and I. There were just these two males identified at Kromsdorf, both R1b. This is the oldest R1b find we have, period (2600 BC or so).

Fire Haired
25-07-13, 00:06
the I from Urnfield is I2a2b. Also the R!b i but its haplotype on haplogroup predictors every single one said it is for sure R1b S21 which is Germanic. R1b S21 was already in mainland Germany also that some Urnfield spoke a Germanic language or a language extremely related to Germanic.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 00:16
... R1b P297 spread with Indo European languages. It was first in the norther middle east then got to the steppes(central Russia) and formed into R1b M269 and R1b M73.

Are you sure about this? I don't think many people are asserting Indo-European languages started out in the northern Middle East. Are you saying they started in Iran?


R1b M73 spread as a small minorty with indo Iranian languages who spread out of Russia with Sinshta (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSintash ta_culture&ei=TUHwUbyZAYXjqAGbpICYDw&usg=AFQjCNE5UwgrXIqIYbfZOnazekbu0OG_Jg)- Abasevho (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abashevo_culture) cultures.

Could be, but why do you think M73 spread with Indo-Iranians?


... The R1b U152 Celts mainly spread their iron making and conquered parts of France and became the Gauls. ... They also spread Hallestat culture to Iberia but had R1b Df27 from 2,700-2,500ybp. Hallestat (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHallst att_culture&ei=OELwUenQIdCNrQGl9YHgAw&usg=AFQjCNFr5hGvgy2b2kVdSHlP8dZOSOISdA)started La dene culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_T%C3%A8ne_culture) both cultures combined where extremely spread out and conquered many areas in eastern Europe to.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif
...

It looks like you are saying DF27 came into Iberia with Hallstatt and possibly with La Tene. Is that right? DF27 is probably as old as U152 and both are probably older than L21. Diversity in Iberia for DF27 is high so I think it could have been there a long time. Is there any reason why you think DF27 was not in Iberia prior to Hallstatt?

When and how do you think P-Celtic arose in France? That could be important timing-wise?

Fire Haired
25-07-13, 00:47
Are you sure about this? I don't think many people are asserting Indo-European languages started out in the northern Middle East. Are you saying they started in Iran?

no all i am saying is R1b P297 was a proto Indo European haplogroup. That does not mean the language started in the mid east R1b P297 migrted to Russia from the northern mid east. No matter what the language spread out of Russia and Ukraine but i still think it is possible R1b )927 in the caucus and northern mid east started the language.




Could be, but why do you think M73 spread with Indo-Iranians?
because it exists in central asia and india there is a good chance is spread with Idno iranians or at least some. Just like how R1a1a1a spread with Italo Celtic Germanic celts even though they had vast majority R1b L51 and R1b L11/P310.




It looks like you are saying DF27 came into Iberia with Hallstatt and possibly with La Tene. Is that right? DF27 is probably as old as U152 and both are probably older than L21. Diversity in Iberia for DF27 is high so I think it could have been there a long time. Is there any reason why you think DF27 was not in Iberia prior to Hallstatt?

Df27 is a R1b S116 subclade R1b S116 is the Italo Celtic haplogroup. It came to Iberia with italo Celtic speakers the first and only ones to migrate to Iberia in a major way where Hallstatt Celts who came 2,700ybp. So yes R1b Df27 has been in Iberia for only 2,700 years at the most. R1b Df27 may be as old as R1b U152 or R1b L21 but maybe not at the most it is probably 3,500-4,000 years old. So it makes sense it came to Iberia from France 2,700ybp. R1b U152 migrated to Italy just 3,000-3,200ybp at the earliest and now it is 40% or more in Italians. The reason R1b Df27 spread so quickly and recently in Iberia is Conquest in wars the native Y DNA haplogroup lines are killed off and it is a quick process by 200 years most of Iberia was speaking a Celtic language.


When and how do you think P-Celtic arose in France? That could be important timing-wise?

i dont know the P- Celtic stuff i dont think is a language family. click here it talks about all the Celtic languages. CeltIberian is in the continental Celtic family just like Gaulic. Also Insular Celtic is kind off special it did not migrate with hallstat and LA dene culture. So it came to Britain and Ireland well over 3,000ybp. Also it seems all other Celtic languages where conquered by Hallstatt and La dene Celtic languages.

Nobody1
25-07-13, 00:55
When and how do you think P-Celtic arose in France? That could be important timing-wise?

P-Celtic is connected to P-Italic (common root) so we are talking about the Terremare split [1500 BC] and
Tumulus expansion west [1600-1200 BC] - more substantial expansions (west) occurred during the Urnfield culture;

Wagon burials - Urnfield culture
http://imageshack.us/a/img827/7497/mjto.png

The Indo-European proto-Keltic migration across modern France occurred from 1600-800 BC;
With Aquitania remaining Iberian [NON-Indo-European] and everything east of the Rhone Ligurian [NON-Indo-European] all the way into Roman times;

Mikewww
25-07-13, 02:02
P-Celtic is connected to P-Italic (common root) so we are talking about the Terremare split [1500 BC] and
Tumulus expansion west [1600-1200 BC] - more substantial expansions (west) occurred during the Urnfield culture;

Wagon burials - Urnfield culture
http://imageshack.us/a/img827/7497/mjto.png

We do have an Urnfielder R1b ancient find at Lichenstein, BTW.

The reason I ask about P-Celtic development is this would be important to Firehair's proposals on Hallstatt, which is after Urnfield coming into Iberia. We know Gaulish is P-Celtic at a later date, but if people coming from France into Iberia were Hallstatt they might have been P-Celtic speaking. However, we don't see that in Iberia's older Celtic. It is archaic Q-Celtic, more like the Irish.

This might lead one to consider the Atlantic Bronze Age as a time and place of early Celtic development. There are very prominent people who agree with this. Namely Koch, the linguist, and Cunliffe, the archaeologist. They collaborated on the book "Celtic from the West". This would be pre-Hallstatt. Notice it is not "Celtic from Central Europe" ???



The Indo-European proto-Keltic migration across modern France occurred from 1600-800 BC; With Aquitania remaining Iberian [NON-Indo-European] and everything east of the Rhone Ligurian [NON-Indo-European] all the way into Roman times;

How do you know no IE was spoken east of the Rhone prior to Roman times? Koch and Cunliffe disagree with you. Do we even know Ligurian is not IE? Whoever puts together the Wikipedia article chose a source that says Ligurian is Indo-European.

"The Ligurian language.... Very little is known about this language (mainly place names and personal names remain) which is generally believed to have been, in the 1st millennium BCE, Indo-European; it appears to have shared many features with other Indo-European languages, primarily Celtic (Gaulish) and Italic (Latin and the Osco-Umbrian languages)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligurian_language_%28ancient%29

Nobody1
25-07-13, 02:50
We do have an Urnfielder R1b ancient find at Lichenstein, BTW.

Finding R1b in the Urnfield culture zone is not much of a sensation after Bell-Beaker Kromsdorf;
Depends however on the subclade;
Do you know what subclade?


The reason I ask is this would be important to Firehair's proposals on Hallstatt, which is after Urnfield coming into Iberia. We know Gaulish is P-Celtic at a later date, but if people coming from France into Iberia were Hallstatt they might have been P-Celtic speaking. However, we don't see that in Iberia's older Celtic. It is archaic Q-Celtic, more like the Irish.

Do you know about Mil Espaine - there might be more to this Irish/Celto-Iberian Q-Celtic [Gaelic] link than just coincidence and speculations;



This might lead one to consider the Atlantic Bronze Age as a time and place of early Celtic development. There are very prominent people who agree with this. Namely Koch, the linguist, and Cunliffe, the archaeologist. They collaborated on the book "Celtic from the West". This would be pre-Hallstatt. Notice it is not "Celtic from Central Europe" ???

Its debunked;
All in all a good informative book; but Kochs Tartessian theory was debunked; its not an Indo-European language;


How do you know no IE was spoken east of the Rhone prior to Roman times? Koch and Cunliffe disagree with you. Do we even know Ligurian is not IE. Whoever puts together the Wikipedia article chose a source that says Ligurian is Indo-European.
"The Ligurian language.... Very little is known about this language (mainly place names and personal names remain) which is generally believed to have been, in the 1st millennium BCE, Indo-European; it appears to have shared many features with other Indo-European languages, primarily Celtic (Gaulish) and Italic (Latin and the Osco-Umbrian languages"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligurian_language_%28ancient%29

Thats a long debate;
It involves the emergence of Bronze-age Indo-Europeans in the Po Valley and
the intermixing with the Pre-Indo-European peoples (Ligurians)

Paul MacKendrick - The Mute Stones Speak (1962)
The terremare are important: they preserve the memory of an immigrant population, [U]distinct in culture from the aborigines. The distinguishing marks of this new culture are knowledge of metal-working, a pottery identifiable by its exaggerated half-moon handles, and the practice of cremation rather than inhumation. On the evidence, we must suppose that this new culture emerged about 1500 B.C. as a fusion of indigenous hut-dwellers and immigrant lakedwellers. Bronze (Horse) bits found in their settlements show that they had domesticated the horse, and there is some evidence, outside the terremare, for dogs as well, described by Randall-Maclver as "doubtless good woolly animals of a fair size."


I have posted a lot about this topic all across this forum (Sources/Quotes from Archaeology & History) just got to find it all;


As for the Ligurians and their territory:

Edwin Guest - Origines Celticae (1883)
Emporion lay a little north of Barcelona, and in calling it the 'Liguan Emporion', Scylax agrees with Thucydides, who represents the Iberian Sicanoi as having been expelled by the Ligues (Ligures) from the Sikanos, i.e. from the basin of the Ebro.
Next to the Ligues, who dwelt in the neighbourhood of this river, came the mixed Iberes, who reached as far as the Rhone. Festus Avienus makes this river the dividing line between the Iberes and the Ligures, who inhabited the Alpine district.

Henry Malden - History of Rome (1830)
Pliny held the Sallyi, Deceates, and Oxybii, tribes upon the coast, to be Ligurians. Strabo is more cautious; and informs us that later writers called the Salyes, who extended along the coast a little further than Massalia (Marseilles), Celto-Ligyes (that is, Gallo-Ligurians), from the intermixture of the Gaulish population; but that the earlier Greeks called them Ligyes, and the country which the Massaliots occupied, Ligystic or Ligurian; and assigned to the Ligurians......This agrees with the account of Scylax, who makes the Rhone the limit of the pure Ligurians.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 05:52
no all i am saying is R1b P297 was a proto Indo European haplogroup. That does not mean the language started in the mid east R1b P297 migrted to Russia from the northern mid east. No matter what the language spread out of Russia and Ukraine but i still think it is possible R1b )927 in the caucus and northern mid east started the language.
I don't think many haplogroups are pure much of anything language-wise but I think you are just saying P297* was present in the PIE homeland as PIE developed, right? You mean P297* (pre-M269) rather than something downstream of it? Yes or no?


because it exists in central asia and india there is a good chance is spread with Idno iranians or at least some. Just like how R1a1a1a spread with Italo Celtic Germanic celts even though they had vast majority R1b L51 and R1b L11/P310.

What is the evidence that R1a1a1a spread with Italics or Celtics?


Df27 is a R1b S116 subclade R1b S116 is the Italo Celtic haplogroup. It came to Iberia with italo Celtic speakers the first and only ones to migrate to Iberia in a major way where Hallstatt Celts who came 2,700ybp. So yes R1b Df27 has been in Iberia for only 2,700 years at the most.
I think you are using the words "italo Celtic" to mean either or any of above. I'm not sure. If the Hallstatt Celts were Celts they were speaking Celtic not Italic. You can't have it both ways. Were Hallstatt folks Celts or not? I think they were Celts.

There is such a thing as pre-Celtic Western IE dialects/languages which would be on the Italo-Celtic branch of the IE language tree. Of course at this point we would be talking pre-Italic too.


R1b Df27 may be as old as R1b U152 or R1b L21 but maybe not at the most it is probably 3,500-4,000 years old. So it makes sense it came to Iberia from France 2,700ybp. R1b U152 migrated to Italy just 3,000-3,200ybp at the earliest and now it is 40% or more in Italians. The reason R1b Df27 spread so quickly and recently in Iberia is Conquest in wars the native Y DNA haplogroup lines are killed off and it is a quick process by 200 years most of Iberia was speaking a Celtic language.
My understanding is that the Iberians were fierce fighters and after a long struggle they essentially integrated, hence the Celtiberians. Is anyone saying the Iberians were totally killed off?

How do we know R1b-DF27 spread recently and quickly in Iberia. I agree with you that they came into Iberia from the continent, but how do we know that was Hallstatt or later? DF27 is at least a 1000 years older.


i dont know the P- Celtic stuff i dont think is a language family. click here it talks about all the Celtic languages. CeltIberian is in the continental Celtic family just like Gaulic. Also Insular Celtic is kind off special it did not migrate with hallstat and LA dene culture. So it came to Britain and Ireland well over 3,000ybp. Also it seems all other Celtic languages where conquered by Hallstatt and La dene Celtic languages.
P-Celtic can be a test for your proposals. I don't necessarily that conversions to "p" sounds happened in parallel both on the continent and in the Isles. Maybe so but don't forget that the Gaulish P-Celtic folks were right cross the channel from the Brythonic P-Celtic folks.

Back to Iberia. Iberian Celtic languages were like Celtic languages in Ireland and probably early Britain. They were archaic and did not include the "P-Celtic" innovations. Okay, now let's go over to nobodyknows recent post where he proposes that P-Celtic happened during the Urnfield timeframe which is before Hallstatt and in overlapping territorities. We know later Celtic speakers in the area, the Gauls, spoke P-Celtic. What about Hallstatt and La Tene?

Your proposal is that Hallstatt and some La Tene is what brought R1b and Celtic into Iberia for the first time.

How come the old IE languages in Iberia were archaic Q-Celtic and Italic-like, which would indicate the timeframe when Celtic and Italic were splitting? Where's the P-Celtic from Gaul?

Mikewww
25-07-13, 05:59
Finding R1b in the Urnfield culture zone is not much of a sensation after Bell-Beaker Kromsdorf;
Depends however on the subclade;
Do you know what subclade?
[/I]

I agree, R1b in Urnfield is not a sensation but it is helpful to know.

I do not know the subclade of the Kromsdorf Bell-Beaker R1b. You can read the paper as well as I. My understanding from the follow-up is that the R1b was U106-, and that's all they can say. They could not say the P312 status which is too bad. Kromsdorf is not Southern Germany, though. It is in Thuringia.

Do you have any other information on it?

Mikewww
25-07-13, 06:02
Its debunked;
All in all a good informative book; but Kochs Tartessian theory was debunked; its not an Indo-European language;
[/I]

I didn't know it was proven debunked. Who proved it debunked and how?

I take you are still assertive that there was no IE west of the Rhone before Roman times. How do you prove that?

Have you proven that Ligurian is non-Indo-European?

Nobody1
25-07-13, 06:21
I didn't know it was proven debunked. Who proved it debunked and how?

Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium: Vol. 29 / 2009
http://books.google.de/books?id=8Y2CO10-vsgC&pg=PA7&dq=tartessian+non+indo-european&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lqbwUZj1HKev4ATO5IGoBg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=tartessian%20non%20indo-european&f=false

Guess the language debunks itself for being (not) an Indo-European language;
There is written evidence and its not Indo-European;


I take you are still assertive that there was no IE west of the Rhone before Roman times. How do you prove that?

West ? of the Rhone ?


I do not know the subclade of the Kromsdorf Bell-Beaker R1b. You can read the paper as well as I. My understanding from the follow-up is that the R1b was U106-, and that's all they can say.

Whats U-106; Urnfield or Bell-Beaker ?


Do you have any other information on it?

No;
Can you post a link to that study; i only have Eulau;

Eulau / R1a - Corded Ware Culture
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/47/18226.long




Have you proven that Ligurian is non-Indo-European?

http://replygif.net/i/1167.gif

Mikewww
25-07-13, 06:23
.. Do you know about Mil Espaine - there might be more to this Irish/Celto-Iberian Q-Celtic [Gaelic] link than just coincidence and speculations; ....

Sure, doesn't every Irishman (well, Irish-American)? I don't know about any related truths though. It sounds like a myth, although there does seem to be a glimmer or archaic Celtic from Ireland to Iberia. In that regards, it may be an echo of the Atlantic Bronze Age.

However, Irish and British R1b are quite different overall than Iberian. This is what L21 and DF27 are showing us.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 06:31
... The Indo-European proto-Keltic migration across modern France occurred from 1600-800 BC;
With Aquitania remaining Iberian [NON-Indo-European] and everything east of the Rhone Ligurian [NON-Indo-European] all the way into Roman times;

I apologize as I probably misunderstood you.

Are you saying Ligurian is proven non-Indo-European?

Are you saying everything in SW France (Aquitaine) and Iberia was non-Indo-European until Roman times?

If the answer to either is yes, please explain. I looked at your link to a google/books page or something but it was restricted. Please explain the key points of your proofs directly.

"Celtic from the West: Alternative Perspectives from Archaeology, Genetics, Language and Literature" by Koch and Cunliffe, 2009. I'm sure the books from the 1800s and 1960s are very nice, but this is a very recent book by two highly esteemed authors and legitimate authorities. They have access to the latest dating, archaeological and linguistic data. They are a bit behind on the genetics though, but at least they thought about it.

This book is an exploration of the new idea that the Celtic languages originated in the Atlantic Zone during the Bronze Age, approached from various perspectives: pro and con, archaeology, genetics, and philology. This 'Celtic Atlantic Bronze Age' theory represents a major departure from the long-established, but increasingly problematic scenario in which the story of the Ancient Celtic languages and that of peoples called Keltoi 'Celts' are closely bound up with the archaeology of the Hallstatt and La Tene cultures of Iron Age west-central Europe. The 'Celtic from the West' proposal was first presented in Barry Cunliffe's Facing the Ocean (2001) and has subsequently found resonance amongst geneticists. It provoked controversy on the part of some linguists, though is significantly in accord with John Koch's findings in Tartessian (2009). The present collection is intended to pursue the question further in order to determine whether this earlier and more westerly starting point might now be developed as a more robust foundation for Celtic studies. As well as having this specific aim, a more general purpose of Celtic from the West is to bring to an English-language readership some of the rapidly unfolding and too often neglected evidence of the pre-Roman peoples and languages of the western Iberian Peninsula. Celtic from the West is an outgrowth of a multidisciplinary conference held at the National Library of Wales in Aberystwyth in December 2008. In addition to 11 chapters, the book includes 45 distribution maps and a further 80 illustrations. The conference and collaborative volume mark the launch of a multi-year research initiative undertaken by the University of Wales Centre for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies [CAWCS]: Ancient Britain and the Atlantic Zone [ABrAZo]. Contributors: (Archaeology) Barry Cunliffe; Raimund Karl; Amilcar Guerra; (Genetics) Brian McEvoy & Daniel Bradley; Stephen Oppenheimer; Ellen Rrvik; (Language & Literature) Graham Isaac; David Parsons; John T. Koch; Philip Freeman; Dagmar S. Wodtko.
http://www.amazon.com/books/dp/1842174754

I actually don't agree with "Celtic from the West". I'm just trying to make the point that it is far, far, far from proven that IE languages were not spoken along the Atlantic long before Hallstatt folks.

IE speaking people may have reached this far much earlier than traditional Hallstatt thinking. PIE is much older than Hallstatt and there are artifacts, such as the Stelae, that provide evidence of links all the way from the the Steppes to the Atlantic.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 06:36
... Whats U-106; Urnfield or Bell-Beaker ? ...

U106 is an SNP also known as S21.

I don't think it was actually in the main narrative of the article on Kromsdorf, but I've read several times that the R1b in the Beaker folks was U106-, in other words NOT U106. Again this is Thuringia.


I don't have the study on hand, but I am reading other reports (World Families (http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=10580.0) and elsewhere) that they also tested U106 in addition to M269. Why they tested U106 rather than something more useful, I'm not sure... maybe to make it comparable to other ancient DNA studies. Anyway, predictably, they were U106-.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-27508.html

Nobody1
25-07-13, 06:40
I apologize as I probably misunderstood you.

Are you saying Ligurian is proven non-Indo-European?

Are you saying everything in SW France (Aquitaine) and Iberia was non-Indo-European until Roman times?

If the answer to either is yes, please explain. I looked at your link to a google/books page or something but it was restricted. Please explain the key points of your proofs directly.

No you understood exactly; Iberians and Ligurians are non-Indo-Europeans (pre-Indo-Europeans)

Charles Anthon - A classical dictionary (1841)
"The Aquitani, according to Strabo (190), differed from the Gallic race both in physical constitution and in language. They resembled, he tells us, the Iberians rather than 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"

The Basques today still speak a non-Indo-European language;

---

As for the Ligurians; i will scout this forum and return with the quotes; i have to find them first (again);

Nobody1
25-07-13, 06:46
U106 is an SNP also known as S21.


http://replygif.net/i/1037.gif



I don't think it was actually in the main narrative of the article on Kromsdorf, but I've read several times that the R1b in the Beaker folks was U106-, in other words NOT U106. Again this is Thuringia.

Ok, now i get it; Kromsdorf is U106minus --- got it; thanks
Would have surprised me if Bell-Beaker were U106;

Nobody1
25-07-13, 07:14
I'm just trying to make the point that it is far, far, far from proven that IE languages were not spoken along the Atlantic long before Hallstatt folks

http://replygif.net/i/1114.gif

zanipolo
25-07-13, 08:17
Most of my maps ? I only made two migration maps, for R1a and R1b. As I said before, I cannot invent data. My maps are based on archeological records of Indo-European cultures. There is no trace of them in Dalmatia before 1000 BCE (actually that's about the time when the Illyrians could have started migrating to Dalmatia, but it's rather fuzzy). That also explains why R1b is so low in Dalmatia, esp. in Bosnia.

Most R1a came to Dalmatia with the Slavic migrations, approx. 1500 years after when my maps end.

same map as yours in this link

http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/R1b.pdf

interesting, some of the information

Maciamo
25-07-13, 08:28
How do you know the Beaker people were originally a Neolithic people?

Because that is what it says in archaeology books. Only the late Beaker period had bronze artefacts, and I believe that the reason is that these sites were actually Indo-European cultures that had acquired Beaker pottery by trade (or the opposite, Beaker people who acquired bronze artefacts by trade).


You are saying that the Beakers could not have conquered from Western Europe? Are you assuming that the all Beaker folk types originated in Portugal with the first identification of the pottery?

The various regional groups may have different mixes. Are you assuming all Beaker people were of one genetic type? Some of the regional groups, i.e. continental, might have been more successful, per the reflux theory.

The archaeological record points to a West Iberian origin of the Beaker culture. I don't think that the people using bell beakers throughout western Europe were descended from the tribe that invented bell beakers. The only genetic similarity between Western Europeans at the time stemmed from their shared Mesolithic and Neolithic ancestry (Megalithic culture, associated with mtDNA H1 and H3 among others, and Y-DNA I2, G2a and E1b1b). As you said yourself the dental traits of Bell Beaker people show that they were not one genetic type.


Also, is it really required that they conquered Western Europe in one fell swoop? I think in some of your writings you talk of thousands of years of Celtic chieftain dominance. This is what I would call amplification.

Obviously they were several waves between the early Bronze Age and late Iron Age. That's how various subclades of R1b spread. But from the start R1b took over all western Europe, even if they were an elite minority at the beginning.

Maciamo
25-07-13, 08:42
same map as yours in this link

http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/R1b.pdf

interesting, some of the information

That's and copy and paste of my R1b page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml) on Eupedia. The map is also mine, the old one from 2009 I mention in the first post of this thread.

Fire Haired
25-07-13, 09:08
That's and copy and paste of my R1b page (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml) on Eupedia. The map is also mine, the old one from 2009 I mention in the first post of this thread.

how do u make these maps and where do u get the info. I know u dont use Microsoft office u must have some very advanced computer. I mean how do u know how lets say R1a is distributed exactley in every little spot do u every guess. I doubt they have Y DNA from every little region or city. If u make them solely that is incredible that must take alot of different resources and tons of work.

I attempted to make a distributions map of west Asian aust DNa in the globe13 test. here is where i got my info i used MS paint.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=2
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5957&d=1374427801


India was the hardest DRaviden ethnic groups in eastern India had almost no west Asian while India Iranian groups had tons. I did not know who to repsent diff parts of Asia because Dravidian are so diff from Indo Iranian speakers. I also notcied Indo Iranian speakers have usuelly at least 5% north euro while their neighbors have almost none. For example Kurds have 4,8% north euro assyrians who live in teh same area 0%. It is very consitant.

i made a thread of the Human family tree according to aust DNA in the globe13 test. here is a link to it http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28822-Human-Family-Tree-discovered-through-globe13-austomnal-DNA

The Caucasin family is North euro- west Asian and southwest asian-Mediterranean but north euro and west asian are much more related.(disbution of west Asian can give an idea where Europeans ancestors lived before Europe and how they migrated. it seems they migrated either through Turkey or Caucus) I noticed that south asia was in between the Oceania Monloid family, caucasin, and sub sahren african there a unque group. Dravidians are not Caucasians. Other reasons why i dont think they are is they dont have brown hair. Brown hair is very popular in Europeans, mid easterns, and north Africans but is almost non existnt in the rest of the world. also mid easterns and north africans have brown to light brown skin unlike south Asians aka Dravidian who have almost totally black skin because of inter marriage Pakistani skin is a little darker than for example assyrians.

Another reason is the genes they have discovered so far for pale skin in Europeans also exists in north Africans and mid easterns but a t a lower rate. but Dravidian dont have those genes another phiscal triat they dont have that Caucasians do. i am not sure but dont Dravidian not have any Caucasian mtDNA haplogroups RO(and descendants), U(including K), JT(and decadents), X, I, W. From what i have read on their mtdan which is not alot they have mainly R but not RO. Their Y DNA and mtDNA is most related to Oceania Mongoloid like Chinese or Australian aboriginals.

I know they have Caucasian skulls, facial features, body hair, body build. But they are not in the same family as Mid eastern, north Africans, and Europeans. They are most likely long lost relatives that is why they have Caucasian features they are kind off their own race but probably most related to Caucasians.

GloomyGonzales
25-07-13, 09:40
We do have an Urnfielder R1b ancient find at Lichenstein, BTW.


It's strange that speaking about the Lichtenstein Cave you mention only r1b (in fact only one R1b sample was found) and say nothing about two R1a and a lot of I2 samples.

Maciamo
25-07-13, 09:48
how do u make these maps and where do u get the info. I know u dont use Microsoft office u must have some very advanced computer. I mean how do u know how lets say R1a is distributed exactley in every little spot do u every guess. I doubt they have Y DNA from every little region or city. If u make them solely that is incredible that must take alot of different resources and tons of work.

I use Photoshop. All my maps are 'hand-made'. I draw them pixel by pixel, and it does take a few hours to make each map, even after I have collected all the data.

Fire Haired
25-07-13, 10:23
I use Photoshop. All my maps are 'hand-made'. I draw them pixel by pixel, and it does take a few hours to make each map, even after I have collected all the data.

that is incredible it took me hours and hours over a 2 week to make the west Asian map. I want to get some photoshop now. Thanks for making these maps. I cant find nearlly as good info on any website or source i an find here. When u talk about R1b or R1a u really give an idea how it spread unlike Wikipedia.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 14:46
No you understood exactly; Iberians and Ligurians are non-Indo-Europeans (pre-Indo-Europeans)

Charles Anthon - A classical dictionary (1841)
"The Aquitani, according to Strabo (190), differed from the Gallic race both in physical constitution and in language. They resembled, he tells us, the Iberians rather than 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"

The Basques today still speak a non-Indo-European language;

---

As for the Ligurians; i will scout this forum and return with the quotes; i have to find them first (again);

I agree that Basque is not an IE language. I don't know that much about the Iberians but I'm not sure it is a given that the Basques descend from the Iberians.

I'm pretty sure it is not a given that Ligurian is non-IE. I can't claim that is IE, although some linquists have said that it is. I'm just saying we don't know and it could have been IE. It also follows I'm saying that IE languages may have been spoken in Iberia before Hallstatt. How can we know they weren't? IE is old enough for sure.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 15:45
How do you know the Beaker people were originally a Neolithic people?


Because that is what it says in archaeology books. Only the late Beaker period had bronze artefacts, and I believe that the reason is that these sites were actually Indo-European cultures that had acquired Beaker pottery by trade (or the opposite, Beaker people who acquired bronze artefacts by trade).

Well, I guess in one sense all people of the Chalcolithic either descend from Neolithic people or Neolithic and Mesolithic people. The question where the people from before the Beakers came about?

It may be different by region and time is my point, which it appears you agree with as you note below.
The archaeological record points to a West Iberian origin of the Beaker culture. I don't think that the people using bell beakers throughout western Europe were descended from the tribe that invented bell beakers. The only genetic similarity between Western Europeans at the time stemmed from their shared Mesolithic and Neolithic ancestry (Megalithic culture, associated with mtDNA H1 and H3 among others, and Y-DNA I2, G2a and E1b1b). As you said yourself the dental traits of Bell Beaker people show that they were not one genetic type...

I'm sure you've read this but for the others,

"Europe During the Third Millennium BC and Bell Beaker Culture Phenomenon: Peopling History Through Dental Non-Metric Traits Study" by Desideri, 2008.


"Phase 2: Part of the Corded Ware on the edge of the phenomenon was individualized and adopted, by borrowing, some of the western Bell Beaker traditions. Diffusion of this new society - the Beakers - continued toward the east. At the same, certain eastern elements diffused toward the west."

She actually makes a distinction and talks about this "bounce back" or reflux of people westward as "Beakers" rather than "Bell Beakers" but she is only one I know of uses that terminology distinction. Most seem to just refer to different regions of Bell Beaker folks. I think GloomyGonzales supports this idea, Gloomy? Maybe we should call Desideri's westward phase II Beakers something like Beakerized Corded Ware people.

I am very interested in your comment on the timing of metallurgy within the Bell Beakers. I've been told that Beaker folks in Portugal did have copper so I'd like to understand more about what metallurgical practices the Beakers had, when and where.

The Amzallag work on metallurgy has caused me to rethink that metalworking is not metalworking is not metalworking. There are significant differences in the technologies. Perhaps the furnace smelting was not in the original Bell Beaker cultures but came in later. There would be some sense if this aligned with the Desider's Phase 2.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 16:01
It's strange that speaking about the Lichtenstein Cave you mention only r1b (in fact only one R1b sample was found) and say nothing about two R1a and a lot of I2 samples.


Is it really that strange to focus on R1b in a thread titled "New migration map of haplogroup R1b" ?

If you read the thread back around post #66 and the vicinity you'll see where I said things like,

... It was the Urnfield (Lichenstein) ancient DNA where we found both R1b and I.

.. The various regional groups may have different mixes. Are you assuming all Beaker people were of one genetic type? Some of the regional groups, i.e. continental, might have been more successful, per the reflux theory.


I'm clearly not a purist and in no way suggest the Beakers or Urnfielders were pure of any one haplogroup. It would seem hard to believe if they were, I think.

In fact, that was the point I was trying to make in getting into this part of the conversation, that these people were probably mixed and probably have regional variations.

However, I apologize because in my Urnfield quote I was going by memory and I forgot to mention R1a when I mentioned haplogroups R1b and I. I guess one needs to be extra sensitive in giving equal billing or something, but let me restate clearly I do NOT advocate single culture = single haplogroup correlations in any kind of exclusive manner.

Mikewww
25-07-13, 16:12
I use Photoshop. All my maps are 'hand-made'. I draw them pixel by pixel, and it does take a few hours to make each map, even after I have collected all the data.
Thanks to Maciamo for his work on this. The maps are very helpful. Besides the graphics work, there must be a lot of behind the scenes work to gather, transform and collate the data in a logical way.
... from a selfish perspective, have you had a chance to look at and project DF27 yet?

Taranis
25-07-13, 16:33
I apologize as I probably misunderstood you.

Are you saying Ligurian is proven non-Indo-European?

Are you saying everything in SW France (Aquitaine) and Iberia was non-Indo-European until Roman times?

If the answer to either is yes, please explain. I looked at your link to a google/books page or something but it was restricted. Please explain the key points of your proofs directly.

"Celtic from the West: Alternative Perspectives from Archaeology, Genetics, Language and Literature" by Koch and Cunliffe, 2009. I'm sure the books from the 1800s and 1960s are very nice, but this is a very recent book by two highly esteemed authors and legitimate authorities. They have access to the latest dating, archaeological and linguistic data. They are a bit behind on the genetics though, but at least they thought about it.
This book is an exploration of the new idea that the Celtic languages originated in the Atlantic Zone during the Bronze Age, approached from various perspectives: pro and con, archaeology, genetics, and philology. This 'Celtic Atlantic Bronze Age' theory represents a major departure from the long-established, but increasingly problematic scenario in which the story of the Ancient Celtic languages and that of peoples called Keltoi 'Celts' are closely bound up with the archaeology of the Hallstatt and La Tene cultures of Iron Age west-central Europe. The 'Celtic from the West' proposal was first presented in Barry Cunliffe's Facing the Ocean (2001) and has subsequently found resonance amongst geneticists. It provoked controversy on the part of some linguists, though is significantly in accord with John Koch's findings in Tartessian (2009). The present collection is intended to pursue the question further in order to determine whether this earlier and more westerly starting point might now be developed as a more robust foundation for Celtic studies. As well as having this specific aim, a more general purpose of Celtic from the West is to bring to an English-language readership some of the rapidly unfolding and too often neglected evidence of the pre-Roman peoples and languages of the western Iberian Peninsula. Celtic from the West is an outgrowth of a multidisciplinary conference held at the National Library of Wales in Aberystwyth in December 2008. In addition to 11 chapters, the book includes 45 distribution maps and a further 80 illustrations. The conference and collaborative volume mark the launch of a multi-year research initiative undertaken by the University of Wales Centre for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies [CAWCS]: Ancient Britain and the Atlantic Zone [ABrAZo]. Contributors: (Archaeology) Barry Cunliffe; Raimund Karl; Amilcar Guerra; (Genetics) Brian McEvoy & Daniel Bradley; Stephen Oppenheimer; Ellen Rrvik; (Language & Literature) Graham Isaac; David Parsons; John T. Koch; Philip Freeman; Dagmar S. Wodtko.
http://www.amazon.com/books/dp/1842174754

I actually don't agree with "Celtic from the West". I'm just trying to make the point that it is far, far, far from proven that IE languages were not spoken along the Atlantic long before Hallstatt folks.

IE speaking people may have reached this far much earlier than traditional Hallstatt thinking. PIE is much older than Hallstatt and there are artifacts, such as the Stelae, that provide evidence of links all the way from the the Steppes to the Atlantic.

I have to say this, the ideas brought up in "Celtic from the West" can be broken down into three pieces:

1) Celtic languages were spoken in the Atlantic region before the emergence of the Hallstatt Culture (or rather, the detachment of Celtic languages and culture from the Hallstatt Culture).

2) Celtic languages evolved in the Atlantic region.

3) Tartessian was a Celtic language.

Now I personally am totally fine with #1 (especially if we really assume that the Beaker-Bell Culture was indeed Indo-European), but I am seeing a lot of problems with #2 and I have my doubts on #3.

The greatest problem I have with the Celtic-from-the-West idea is that after all Indo-European languages spread from the East (it does not matter which scenario for the origin you prefer, all scenarios place the origin further eastwards), and you have to explain how the ancestor of the Celtic languages wound up so far in the west (Beaker-Bell could explain this perfectly, of course). The other problem I have is when you say that the Atlantic Bronze Age was (exclusively) Celtic, what does this make of the bearers of the (for the greater part simultaneous, but further eastward) Hallstatt Culture? I'd be fine with the idea that Hallstatt was something else (but what?), that Celtic languages evolved on two fronts (which some board members suggested before), but if you make such a huge paradigm shift, I think you can't ignore such a problem altogether.

With regard for #3, I would recommend this (http://www.bmcreview.org/2011/09/20110957.html).


The Indo-European proto-Keltic migration across modern France occurred from 1600-800 BC;
With Aquitania remaining Iberian [NON-Indo-European] and everything east of the Rhone Ligurian [NON-Indo-European] all the way into Roman times;

Nobody1, I would greatly appreciate it if you were to present us your evidence that Ligurian was non-Indo-European (ideally in a separate thread, in the Linguistics sub-forum). And by "present us your evidence", I don't mean "quote some 19th century guy"... :wary2:

Nobody1
26-07-13, 00:35
present us your evidence that Ligurian was non-Indo-European ....... And by "present us your evidence", I don't mean "quote some 19th century guy"... :wary2:


http://replygif.net/i/247.gif

Ziober
28-07-13, 12:12
About Mil Espaine (milesians) :


Sure, doesn't every Irishman (well, Irish-American)? I don't know about any related truths though. It sounds like a myth, although there does seem to be a glimmer or archaic Celtic from Ireland to Iberia. In that regards, it may be an echo of the Atlantic Bronze Age.

However, Irish and British R1b are quite different overall than Iberian. This is what L21 and DF27 are showing us.


It sounds like a myth, but a myth with a big monument near to Hercules tower in La Coruña, Spain:

http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/txumi_ledauno/0001breogan_zps3d2bd0bc.jpg

I Think it was a myth until the genetic evidences, not yet at all.

This is Breogan, who (in the myth) had viewed the irish coasts from the Galician coast and told it to his people to bring them to Eire.

Mikewww
29-07-13, 20:09
I have to say this, the ideas brought up in "Celtic from the West" can be broken down into three pieces:

1) Celtic languages were spoken in the Atlantic region before the emergence of the Hallstatt Culture (or rather, the detachment of Celtic languages and culture from the Hallstatt Culture).

2) Celtic languages evolved in the Atlantic region.

3) Tartessian was a Celtic language.

Now I personally am totally fine with #1 (especially if we really assume that the Beaker-Bell Culture was indeed Indo-European), but I am seeing a lot of problems with #2 and I have my doubts on #3....

Thank you for your thoughtful response, Taranis. I will read the link you referred. I don't necessarily think Tartessian was Celtic or that Celtic did come from the "west" per Koch and Cunliffe. I don't really know, but I think it is highly possible and even probable that IE languages were spoken in Iberia before the Hallstatt folks reached there, though.

Ziober
30-07-13, 17:53
The only tribe called by themselves celts were the celticis, in the SW of Iberia (Andalucia). And it is the only country with celtic coins.