PDA

View Full Version : Is distinctive DNA marker proof of ancient genocide?



DejaVu
14-09-13, 13:56
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/is-distinctive-dna-marker-proof-of-ancient-genocide-1.1426197

Did you know Ireland has the highest concentration of men with the R1b DNA marker? No fewer than 84 per cent of all Irish men carry this on their Y chromosome.

While this marker is also high on male Y chromosomes in parts of Britain, particularly Wales, according to commercial ancestry testing company IrelandsDNA, the high prevalence here may indicate the arrival of a lot of people at a broadly similar time who weren’t prepared to peacefully co exist with the settlers here.

“The high prevalence rates have always perplexed Irish geneticists and historians,” says Alastair Moffat of IrelandsDNA. The firm’s research proposes a new hypothesis. There is already established evidence suggesting that the first farmers, (carrying the Y chromosome lineage of ‘G’, which can be found across Europe) arrived in Kerry about 4,350BC.

According to IrelandsDNA, the so called ‘G-Men’ may have established farming in Ireland “but their successful culture was almost obliterated by what amounted to an invasion, even a genocide, some time around 2,500BC” (the frequency of G in Ireland is now only 1.5 per cent). “There’s a cemetery in Treille [France], where ancient DNA testing has been carried out and almost all men carry the ‘G’ marker but the women don’t,” says Moffat. They carry native/indigenous markers. This strongly suggests incoming groups of men. Because the R1b marker is still so prevalent in Ireland and is also frequently found in places like France and northern Spain we believed that around 2,500 BC, the R1b marker arrived in Ireland from the south.”

Moffat admits it is just a hypothesis but cites connections which lead to this theory. “The first signs of farming in Ireland were found on the Dingle peninsula in Kerry, which suggests people coming from the south,” he says. “If you look at Lebor Gabála Érenn orThe Book of the Taking of Ireland [a Middle Irish collection recounting mythical origins of life in Ireland dating from the 11th century] most of the invasions come from the south.”

The southern migrants referred to by Moffat were the Beaker people, originating from Iberia. It has also been suggested that it was they who may have brought Celtic (http://www.irishtimes.com/search/search-7.1213540?tag_organisation=Celtic&article=true)languages up the Atlantic coast.

Moffat cites archaeological evidence, from the Copper Age, to suggest this movement. “Evidence for the beginning of the Copper Age in Ireland is also found in the south, particularly Ross Island in Killarney, where a tremendous complex system of prehistoric mines exists. It’s clear that the copper was exported.

“How did these new people impose themselves in such a big way,” he asks. “It has to have been through conflict. The early people were farmers so they invested generations of effort in improving the land. When these new people show up they must have used violence to shift the ‘G-Men’. The frequency of ‘G-Men’ is tiny in Ireland. Compare the statistics: 1 per cent versus 84 percent.”

Not everyone is convinced, however. “What they [IrelandsDNA] are suggesting is based on a very strong interpretation of a small piece of a genetic pattern,” says Prof Dan Bradley from the Smurfit Institute of Genetics. “There’s no real scientific evidence to warrant the use of terms like ‘genocide’. You can’t link modern genetic variation securely through archaeological strata without ancient DNA testing also. You can certainly have conjecture and there are indeed ways of looking at the time and depth of these things. But they have very wide margins for error. The reality is I don’t think we can securely place any of these DNA marker patterns in time without ancient DNA testing.”

Ancient DNA testing has been ongoing in Ireland for the last two years by Bradley in Trinity and Prof Ron Pinhasi in the UCD School of Archaeology, who is involved with a large project of ancient DNA testing throughout Europe.

“I don’t know of any time in history where a culture came in and completely wiped out another,” says Pinhasi. “You don’t see total wipeouts, unless there is reason for a population to become extinct, like massive climate change. But we have no reason to believe Bronze Age farmers became extinct this way.

“Sure there were a lot of population movements and mixing going on at this time. That’s why modern people don’t look like neolithic people, genetically speaking, but it would have had minimal impact on the gene pool” he says. “You’re not going to have hundreds of thousands of people suddenly coming from Spain but you would definitely have had smaller groups coming in boats. Plus there’s no archeological proof of any massive warfare or battles here at that time.”

The mapping out of ancient genetics of populations from 45,000BC to the Bronze Age, now under way, may very possibly reveal many misconceptions about our past.

Fire Haired
14-09-13, 18:16
It is true i have been trying to show this one of the worst genocides in human history happened in Britain and Ireland when the bronze age Celts arrived 4,500-4,000ybp. They almost completely killed off the natives worse than the Spanish did to South and central native Americans. U should click on this British and Irish ancestry almost all from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres).

So before Germanic invasions in 400-600ad everyone in Britain and Ireland would be like Irish same Y DNA, So r1b would be over 80% everywhere red hair would be 10-15% everywhere. 31 Y DNA samples from Neolithic Europe G2a=24(G2a3=1), I2a1a M26=4, E1b1b V13=1, F(XI,J,K,G,H)=1, F(I,J,K,G,H). 4 of them being in northern spain from 7,000ybp three G2a and one E1b1b V13 22 from southwestern France from 5,000ybp 19 G2a and 2 I2a1a M26 two 4.725 year old Y DNa samples from western France both I2a1a M26. Those areas today have about 80% R1b specifically Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 P312/S116.

The Germanic Italo Celts arrived in central Germany only 5,000ybp. click here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts) for more explanation about how they spread in western Europe. The Germanic Italo Celts first conquered and mixed cultrally with native Bell Beaker culture. Which is why the ancestral culture to Celtic and Italc tribes Unetice (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUnetice _culture&ei=ooo0UprxH4OvqQGIoIDoBA&usg=AFQjCNHc8lcvsnusjlaUeXCZFsQBFHVzcw&sig2=9MYsYBtR0ge4xkzuiaRtxw&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM) is officially said to descend from Bell BEaker same with ancestral culture to Germanic tribes Nordic bronze age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Bronze_Age). The arrival of bronze age BEll BEaker people in Ireland and BRitian first about 4,500ybp is probably the arrival of proto Insular Celtic speakers with mainly R1b1a2a1a2c L21 with some newly devloped I2a2a1 M284 which they got from inter marraige with native central Europeans who had I2a2a then they developed their own form.

The only Y DNa i could find in the British isles that was there before Celtic invasion is I2a1b3 L161.1 it would have arrived with the farmers then also probably some G2a and E1b1b V13 maybe even J1 and J2. But those only add up really to 1-5% of the native Neolithic people's paternal lineages survived. Everything is connecting right now its crazy the mystery of heavy R1b in west europe and origin of Germanic Italo Celtic languages is being solved. I know many people will be stubborn to believe Germanic and Italo celtic languages form a family or that Genetics has anything to do with it. Genetics has discovered so much with INdo Europeans period and can do the same for so many other things in history. y DNa spread by Indo Europeans (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91971-Y-DNA-spread-by-Indo-Europeans-(R1a1a1-M417-R1b1a2a1-L51)-(R1b1a2a-L23-R1b1a1-M73-Etc-))

sparkey
17-09-13, 01:49
Lots of things are wrong with Moffat's hypothesis:



There are too many alternate explanations to suggest genocide as a primary cause of R1b's displacement of Neolithic lineages (think genetic drift, relative population sizes, patriarchal tribal relations, etc.)
Just because an ancient Beaker sample had R1b does not mean that Irish R1b originated in the same place as Beaker culture
Association of Beaker culture with Celtic language spread is not based on much
The Treilles mtDNA samples were not particularly indicative of being "native/indigenous"; they were pretty similar to modern Italians and even closer to Turks per Dienekes (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/y-chromosome-mtdna-and-autosomal-dna.html), and temporal resolution of those lineages is insufficient to draw more conclusions anyway
Either way, differences in Y-DNA and mtDNA overall "indigenousness" aren't unexpected


Ah well, at least we got a news article that didn't assume a Paleolithic origin of R1b for once!

Fire Haired
17-09-13, 02:45
Lots of things are wrong with Moffat's hypothesis:



There are too many alternate explanations to suggest genocide as a primary cause of R1b's displacement of Neolithic lineages (think genetic drift, relative population sizes, patriarchal tribal relations, etc.)
Just because an ancient Beaker sample had R1b does not mean that Irish R1b originated in the same place as Beaker culture
Association of Beaker culture with Celtic language spread is not based on much
The Treilles mtDNA samples were not particularly indicative of being "native/indigenous"; they were pretty similar to modern Italians and even closer to Turks per Dienekes (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/y-chromosome-mtdna-and-autosomal-dna.html), and temporal resolution of those lineages is insufficient to draw more conclusions anyway
Either way, differences in Y-DNA and mtDNA overall "indigenousness" aren't unexpected


Ah well, at least we got a news article that didn't assume a Paleolithic origin of R1b for once!

For on ething how do u explain that 50% of the paternal lineages in western Europe not just British iseles was taken by a invasive R1b1a2a1a L11 people. Look at Unetice culture which had kurgens and its decendats they spread acroos western europe. Look at Nordic bronze age culture. It is obvious u cant keep saying we dont know why R1b L11 kept becoming dominte it was the same reason each time. Conquest is the reason i dont see going around that. Same reason why Indo Iranian R1a1a1b2 Z93 is so popular in India look at the RIg Veda they conquered India. I understand u have to consider all possibltes but right now conquest is pretty obvious. That is almost the only way Indo European languages spread.

If u look at it the ancestral language to Germanic Italo Celtic would have at somepoint gotten out of southern Ukriane who knows what route they took but eventulley got to central Germany about 5,000ybp. They would have had chariots, probably bronze weapons, i dont know if this is unqie but war like Gods like Thor and Indra i am not saying they worshipped Thor but a God similar to him like his ancestral version. Just lok at the swords from Unetice culture in central Europe they are pretty impressive and their 4,000 years old. Look at the 3,600 year old Sun chariot from Nordic bronze age culture. They had the ability to conquer people and it is pretty obvious there was something about steppe Indo European culture that allowed them to do that over and over again.

I don't think genetic drift can explain why Indo European paternal lineages are so popular. Why did it happen over and over again over thousands of years. In my opinon people in the British isles owe almost all of their ancestry to Celtic and Germanic invaders of course the Germanic ones came from 400-600ad. British ancestry almost all from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres). U can see the native Neolithic peopl's Paternal lineages were almost completly killed off I2a1b3 L161.1, maybe also some G2a, E1b1b V13, and J1 and J2. Maciamo agreed with me it was killed off not random genetic drift. So we are talking about intentional bronze age Celtic conquest of the British isles just like the Germans intentionally conquered southern Britian in 400-600ad but the Celts did much worse. There deifntley is a connection with the distribution of K12b Gedorsian and R1b in Europe and the distribution of red hair and R1b L11 British isles mainly the areas that have stayed almost 100% Celtic Irlenad, Wales, highlands of Scotland have the highest in Europe for both so i assumed highest Germanic Italo Celtic ancestry. Since red hair is recessive and it is 10-15% it makes sense the native Neolithic people were nearly completely killed off.

Since Germanic Italo Celtic's father R1b1a2a L23 is so popular around Anatolia, Caucus and Iraq about 20-30% i dont know it may have orignated there. No matter how u put it at some point either R1b1a P297, R1b1a2 M269, or R1b1a2a L23 migrated to Europe through Antolia to southeast Europe or Caucus to southern Russia and Ukraine then eventulley to west Europe. So it was originally mid eastern almost no red hair. So the red hair comes from a group of east Europeans they inter married with or conquered while migrating 6,000-10,000ybp. So i was thinking maybe u can trace the red hair through mtDNA if u really go deep in subclades since Europe and the mid east have so many of the same haplogroups.

There are not enough Treliss mtDNA samples to say who there mtDNA is most similar to today. All of their H was Paleolithic southwest European H1 and H3 which both spread throughout Europe and northwest Africa starting about 19,000ybp.