PDA

View Full Version : Origin of the basques (revisit)



Tabaccus Maximus
27-01-14, 22:13
Now that everyone has had time to digest the latest Mesolithic La Brana (C-V20 + U5), I thought it would be a good time to revisit Basque origins based on what we have learned about Mesolithic Europe, especially Spain...


MESOLITHIC EUROS.............................. BASQUES

NO R1B ...................ALMOST ALL R1B (M269, P312)

LACTOSE INTOLERANT ..........LACTOSE PERSISTENT

VERY DARK HUE ..................OLIVE TO LIGHT SKIN

DARK HAIR.................................... VARIED

U4, U5, U8 ....................... H1, H3, H5, U'S & *'S

BRUTE .......................................GRACILE

LONG HEADED .................SHORT TO MESO HEADED

LONG FACED ...........................SHORT FACED

BLUE EYES (poss)...........................VARIED



In my mind, it has become increasing clear that Basques do not represent a relict of old Europe.
Anyone believe they are in some way a relict population?

ElHorsto
27-01-14, 23:03
Now that everyone has had time to digest the latest Mesolithic La Brana (C-V20 + U5), I thought it would be a good time to revisit Basque origins based on what we have learned about Mesolithic Europe, especially Spain...


MESOLITHIC........................................ ............ EUROPEANS BASQUES

NO R1B .................................................. .......ALMOST ALL R1B (M269, P312)

LACTOSE INTOLERANT .................................. UNIVERSAL LACTASE PERSISTENT

VERY DARK HUE ...............................................OLI VE TO LIGHT SKIN

DARK HAIR.............................................. .................... VARIED

U4, U5, U8 .................................................. .. H1, H3, H5, SEVERAL U'S AND *'S

BRUTE .................................................. .......................GRACILE

HIGHLY LONG HEADED ...................................SHORT TO MESOCEPHLIC HEADED

LONG FACED .................................................. ............SHORT FACED

BLUE EYES (poss)........................................ VARIED (BLUE, GREEN, HAZEL, BROWN)



In my mind, it has become increasing clear that Basques do not represent a relict of old Europe.
Anyone believe they are in some way a relict population?

Indeed they don't seem very much relic. They seem to have a similar history like Sardinians with just a little bit more HG and also a bit bronze-age admix. Here is again the autosomal table from Lazaridis et al. La Brana was close with Loschbourg in the WHG cluster of the PCA plot. I have sorted the table by WGH:





EEF
WHG
ANE


Estonian
0.322
0.495
0.183


Lithuanian
0.364
0.464
0.172


Icelandic
0.394
0.456
0.15


Belorussian
0.418
0.431
0.151


Scottish
0.39
0.428
0.182


Norwegian
0.411
0.428
0.161


Ukrainian
0.462
0.387
0.151


Orcadian
0.457
0.385
0.158


English
0.495
0.364
0.141


Czech
0.495
0.338
0.167


French
0.554
0.311
0.135


Croatian
0.561
0.293
0.145


Basque

0.593
0.293
0.114


Hungarian
0.558
0.264
0.179


French_South
0.675
0.195
0.13


Bergamo
0.715
0.177
0.108


Sardinian
0.817
0.175
0.008


Bulgarian
0.712
0.147
0.141


Tuscan
0.746
0.136
0.118


Pais_Vasco

0.713

0.125
0.163


Albanian
0.781
0.092
0.127


Spanish
0.809
0.068
0.123


Greek
0.792
0.058
0.151


Ashkenazi
0.931
0
0.069


Maltese
0.932
0
0.068


Sicilian
0.903
0
0.097

Angela
28-01-14, 00:14
Indeed they don't seem very much relic. They seem to have a similar history like Sardinians with just a little bit more HG and also a bit bronze-age admix. Here is again the autosomal table from Lazaridis et al. La Brana was close with Loschbourg in the WHG cluster of the PCA plot. I have sorted the table by WGH:





EEF
WHG
ANE


Estonian
0.322
0.495
0.183


Lithuanian
0.364
0.464
0.172


Icelandic
0.394
0.456
0.15


Belorussian
0.418
0.431
0.151


Scottish
0.39
0.428
0.182


Norwegian
0.411
0.428
0.161


Ukrainian
0.462
0.387
0.151


Orcadian
0.457
0.385
0.158


English
0.495
0.364
0.141


Czech
0.495
0.338
0.167


French
0.554
0.311
0.135


Croatian
0.561
0.293
0.145


Basque

0.593
0.293
0.114


Hungarian
0.558
0.264
0.179


French_South
0.675
0.195
0.13


Bergamo
0.715
0.177
0.108


Sardinian
0.817
0.175
0.008


Bulgarian
0.712
0.147
0.141


Tuscan
0.746
0.136
0.118


Pais_Vasco

0.713

0.125
0.163


Albanian
0.781
0.092
0.127


Spanish
0.809
0.068
0.123


Greek
0.792
0.058
0.151


Ashkenazi
0.931
0
0.069


Maltese
0.932
0
0.068


Sicilian
0.903
0
0.097




You know, sometimes I think we go around and go around and end up where we started. Forty years ago, Cavalli-Sforza said that the closest autosomal match for northern Italians were the people of the Balkans and the southern French, and there are the new numbers that confirm it. It just goes to show that PCA's based on only European populations and on two dimensions don't really tell the whole story, although they can reproduce the map of Europe pretty handily, I'll admit.

Tabaccus Maximus
28-01-14, 01:06
Good points. Here's something that crossed my mind while looking at the Near East and Transcaucasus the last several weeks.

I believed until recently that Basques were a hybrid population consisting of R1b (Indo-European speaking men), Native (Basque speaking women), with time and founder effects working strongly in a endogamous population.

I have now wondered if the Basques are in fact a more uniform population that migrated as a whole, rather than being a recent composite.

There are several peculiarities [muliti-disciplinary] of the Basque/Iberians that I think may betray their origins if they were a uniform population prior to their current state.

1) Ergative-Absolute, Agglutinative language with typological similarities of proto-Kartvelian in the Southern Caucasus.

2) Very high R1b (M269) & H1, H3, H5. (I believe this could be indicative of [a type of Uruk-ized population], in the Southern Caucasus.
a) I'll point out again, that H3 and H5 have been found in Halafian and Ubaidian contexts.
b) I'll point out again, that the supposed H* samples taken from Paleolithic cave floors in Spain are extreme outliers and do not conform to what is known from Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe and does not fit any 'LGM expansion' scenario.
c) The spread of H1 and H3 in North Africa likely came from the Near East with R1b-V88, not Magdalenian Spain!
d) The appearance of Beaker Culture (in which these uniparental markers rule) was an abrupt change in techology, material culture, burial patterns and religious beliefs from the native population in Spain.

3) Somewhat limited re-constructed mythology featuring Mari and Maju who appear very, uh hum, Caucasian IMHO.

I would postulate, that Uruk-ized, Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative, Caucasian natives were possibly flushed from the Causcasus during the slow build-up of the Yamnaya Culture, north of the Caucasus. Or perhaps, they were part of a larger advanced techological horizon that spead from the Caucasus and Yamnaya about the same time?
Beginning in approximately 3300 b.c. and culminating in 2900 b.c., native, Uruk-ized Caucasian peoples of the Northern and Trans-Caucasus flooded into the Near East.
Call it the Trans-Caucasian reflux theory.

When you look at the Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative peoples in the Near East at that time, ie. Hattians, Hurrians, Sumerians, they seem to appear in areas where other people had lived before. The Hurrians are easier to place in the South East Caucasus initially and the short-headed Sumerians only appear in Mespotamia around 3100 b.c., probably in the Jemdet Nasr period. The Hattians were replaced by the Hittites, but the Hattians themselves may have replaced an earlier Indo-European substrate.

If people were leaving or being flushed out of the Caucasus and North Black Sea about this time, I suppose one of those could be the Kemi-Oban people.
Maybe the first Indo-Europeans in Western Europe came as a result of these "Yamnaya" upheavals and were always seperate linguistic categories.

Does it strike anyone odd that the two languages that are spoken in Western Europe are:
1) An Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative language with some typological similarities to proto-Kartevelian
2) A Centum language

??

ElHorsto
28-01-14, 02:05
Good points. Here's something that crossed my mind while looking at the Near East and Transcaucasus the last several weeks.

I believed until recently that Basques were a hybrid population consisting of R1b (Indo-European speaking men), Native (Basque speaking women), with time and founder effects working strongly in a endogamous population.

I have now wondered if the Basques are in fact a more uniform population that migrated as a whole, rather than being a recent composite.

There are several peculiarities [muliti-disciplinary] of the Basque/Iberians that I think may betray their origins if they were a uniform population prior to their current state.

1) Ergative-Absolute, Agglutinative language with typological similarities of proto-Kartvelian in the Southern Caucasus.

2) Very high R1b (M269) & H1, H3, H5. (I believe this could be indicative of [a type of Uruk-ized population], in the Southern Caucasus.
a) I'll point out again, that H3 and H5 have been found in Halafian and Ubaidian contexts.
b) I'll point out again, that the supposed H* samples taken from Paleolithic cave floors in Spain are extreme outliers and do not conform to what is known from Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe and does not fit any 'LGM expansion' scenario.
c) The spread of H1 and H3 in North Africa likely came from the Near East with R1b-V88, not Magdalenian Spain!
d) The appearance of Beaker Culture (in which these uniparental markers rule) was an abrupt change in techology, material culture, burial patterns and religious beliefs from the native population in Spain.

3) Somewhat limited re-constructed mythology featuring Mari and Maju who appear very, uh hum, Caucasian IMHO.

I would postulate, that Uruk-ized, Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative, Caucasian natives were possibly flushed from the Causcasus during the slow build-up of the Yamnaya Culture, north of the Caucasus. Or perhaps, they were part of a larger advanced techological horizon that spead from the Caucasus and Yamnaya about the same time?
Beginning in approximately 3300 b.c. and culminating in 2900 b.c., native, Uruk-ized Caucasian peoples of the Northern and Trans-Caucasus flooded into the Near East.
Call it the Trans-Caucasian reflux theory.

When you look at the Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative peoples in the Near East at that time, ie. Hattians, Hurrians, Sumerians, they seem to appear in areas where other people had lived before. The Hurrians are easier to place in the South East Caucasus initially and the short-headed Sumerians only appear in Mespotamia around 3100 b.c., probably in the Jemdet Nasr period. The Hattians were replaced by the Hittites, but the Hattians themselves may have replaced an earlier Indo-European substrate.

If people were leaving or being flushed out of the Caucasus and North Black Sea about this time, I suppose one of those could be the Kemi-Oban people.
Maybe the first Indo-Europeans in Western Europe came as a result of these "Yamnaya" upheavals and were always seperate linguistic categories.

Does it strike anyone odd that the two languages that are spoken in Western Europe are:
1) An Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative language with some typological similarities to proto-Kartevelian
2) A Centum language

??

All interesting points which I can not comment all due to lack of knowledge, in particular linguistic.
There is one argument against Caucasian origin in that Basques are among those europeans who carry the least "Caucasus" admixture in terms of Georgian-like, etc. But they have that "Gedrosian" admixture which is very certainly a late introduction because it is absent in all neolithic and paleolithic samples of that time in west europe. So yes, something strange and somewhat exotic happened to west europe and Basque country in particular. Gedrosian is strong nowadays in Caucasus too, but the problem is that it's always entangled with "Caucasus" admixture there. I still think it is possible that Basques came from the region somewhere south of Caucasus, namely at a time where Gedrosia was yet "pure" there (if it really was there, just speculation). The Sumerian language is an isolate like basque, and some scholars linked Basque to Sumerian, although it was not accepted by the mainstream. Maybe the emergence of semitic languages around 3500 BC was accompanied by the merger and spread of "Caucasus" and SW-Asian/afroasiatic which diluted the assumed aboriginal "Gedrosian"-like peoples in that region. Maybe the proto-Basques escaped to Iberia before that happened. Place of R1b-origin would also roughly match this scenario, which would open a competing story to the Indo-European-R1b story.

Another competing theory I once read in another forum where I think 'Polako' issued the idea that Iberians and Basque R1b came from Minoans from Crete and today Basques mostly descend from ancient population of the east mediterranean, before it got admixed by other peoples. There is indeed some old R1b in Crete today. Another hint is Bull worship in both, Minoan civilization and today Iberians/Basques. Problem is that "Gedrosian" is too weak today in Crete, but who knows how it was 7000 years ago. Maybe ancient Minoans were more West-Asian-Gedrosian than the subsequent Greeks.

Interesting is also to note that the EEF/WHG/ANE table shows that ANE for 'Pais_Vasco' is higher than in all neighbouring countries incl. Italy, despite we know that ANE as well as K12b_Gedrosian (ANE and "West_Asian" admixtures are related and do overlap) was absent in West Europe before Bronze age. It would be revealing to know whether that elevated Basque ANE came along with more EEF or rather with more WHG.

That being said I'm still rather inclined towards a IEan source of ANE/Gedrosian in Basques, because Gedrosian_K12b was not confirmed anymore in Basques by Lazaridis et al admixtures (but still confirmed "West-Asian" for other west europeans), but ANE was still very strong. That would hint towards an influx from the north-east to Basque contry.
Basques remain mysterious.

Sile
28-01-14, 07:48
Indeed they don't seem very much relic. They seem to have a similar history like Sardinians with just a little bit more HG and also a bit bronze-age admix. Here is again the autosomal table from Lazaridis et al. La Brana was close with Loschbourg in the WHG cluster of the PCA plot. I have sorted the table by WGH:





EEF
WHG
ANE


Estonian
0.322
0.495
0.183


Lithuanian
0.364
0.464
0.172


Icelandic
0.394
0.456
0.15


Belorussian
0.418
0.431
0.151


Scottish
0.39
0.428
0.182


Norwegian
0.411
0.428
0.161


Ukrainian
0.462
0.387
0.151


Orcadian
0.457
0.385
0.158


English
0.495
0.364
0.141


Czech
0.495
0.338
0.167


French
0.554
0.311
0.135


Croatian
0.561
0.293
0.145


Basque

0.593
0.293
0.114


Hungarian
0.558
0.264
0.179


French_South
0.675
0.195
0.13


Bergamo
0.715
0.177
0.108


Sardinian
0.817
0.175
0.008


Bulgarian
0.712
0.147
0.141


Tuscan
0.746
0.136
0.118


Pais_Vasco

0.713

0.125
0.163


Albanian
0.781
0.092
0.127


Spanish
0.809
0.068
0.123


Greek
0.792
0.058
0.151


Ashkenazi
0.931
0
0.069


Maltese
0.932
0
0.068


Sicilian
0.903
0
0.097




so that's how Ftdna PF states me on the border of France and Italy

me
EEF 69.21
WHG 20.20
ANE 10.59

EEF = french_south or Bergamo
WHG = french_south
ANE = Bergamo

Doug is ahead of his time

Sile
28-01-14, 07:49
so that's how Ftdna PF states me on the border of France and Italy

me
EEF 69.21
WHG 20.20
ANE 10.59

EEF = french_south or Bergamo
WHG = french_south
ANE = Bergamo

Doug is ahead of his time:good_job::laughing::heart:

Maciamo
28-01-14, 11:38
In my mind, it has become increasing clear that Basques do not represent a relict of old Europe.
Anyone believe they are in some way a relict population?

I don't know who said that the Basques descended mostly/exclusively from Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. This is the kind of misconception propagated by National Geographic, who also used to claim that R1b was the haplogroup of Cro-Magnon.

For my part, I have maintained for all the years I have been active in population genetics that R1b came with the PIE from the Pontic Steppe, not from Palaeolithic or Mesolithic Europeans. It is clear from the modern Y-DNA lineages that before being overtaken by R1b men, the Basques belonged to a typical blend of Mesolithic I2a1 (about 41% originally) and Neolithic/Chalcolithic E1b1b (20%), J2 (20%), G2a (13%) and J1 (6%)*. After all people from the Basque Country didn't stay hunter-gatherers throughout the Neolithic. I2a1 remained much higher in the Pyrénnées because it was a harsh environment for agriculture and hunter-gatherers survived in isolation from Neolithic farmers there at least until the Bronze Age.

I have explained many times over the years that the Basques inherited Indo-European lineages almost only through the paternal side (R1b), but preserved most of their Neolithic maternal lineages. Although the Basques do carry some Mesolithic lineages like U5, most of the mtDNA is actually Neolithic (J1c, K1a, T2, X2 and some H subclades like H5a and H13).

There are two haplogroups found at high frequencies among the Basques, H1 and V, which origin remains unclear. Neither of them have been found before the Neolithic, although there are good reasons to believe that they were already in Europe during the Mesolithic. For example, the Saami have only U5 and V and are almost exclusively descended from Mesolithic Europeans. Another argument is that H1 and V are both rare in the Near East and have a much bigger diversity in Europe.

H1 was found in Neolithic Europe, but was also certainly an important Indo-European lineage, notably the H1b and H1c subclades, which are found throughout Central Asia and Siberia. But the Basques belong mostly to the H1e1a1, H1j1, H1t1a and H1av1 subclades. I don't have enough information about their distribution in the rest of the world to judge their origin, but they are clearly not the typical IE subclades.

Like H1, U5 was a major Indo-European lineage, so it cannot be completely excluded that some Basque U5 came with the R1b invaders. However the Basques belong essentially to two U5 subclades quite specific to them: U5b1c1a and U5b1f. Both are found primarily in the Pyrénées, so there are good chances that these are Mesolithic remnants linked to I2a1, and not new arrivals brought alongside R1b.

V was also an Indo-European subclade, and along with U5 and J1b1a could have been one of the the three original maternal lineages of R1b tribes (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#mtDNA). The Basques belong to V1a and V22. I don't have enough data either to determine if these are Mesolithic or IE.


* If present among the Basques, J2b2 and G2a3b1 could have come alongside R1b, rather than during the Neolithic.

Sile
28-01-14, 19:11
All interesting points which I can not comment all due to lack of knowledge, in particular linguistic.
There is one argument against Caucasian origin in that Basques are among those europeans who carry the least "Caucasus" admixture in terms of Georgian-like, etc. But they have that "Gedrosian" admixture which is very certainly a late introduction because it is absent in all neolithic and paleolithic samples of that time in west europe. So yes, something strange and somewhat exotic happened to west europe and Basque country in particular. Gedrosian is strong nowadays in Caucasus too, but the problem is that it's always entangled with "Caucasus" admixture there. I still think it is possible that Basques came from the region somewhere south of Caucasus, namely at a time where Gedrosia was yet "pure" there (if it really was there, just speculation). The Sumerian language is an isolate like basque, and some scholars linked Basque to Sumerian, although it was not accepted by the mainstream. Maybe the emergence of semitic languages around 3500 BC was accompanied by the merger and spread of "Caucasus" and SW-Asian/afroasiatic which diluted the assumed aboriginal "Gedrosian"-like peoples in that region. Maybe the proto-Basques escaped to Iberia before that happened. Place of R1b-origin would also roughly match this scenario, which would open a competing story to the Indo-European-R1b story.

Another competing theory I once read in another forum where I think 'Polako' issued the idea that Iberians and Basque R1b came from Minoans from Crete and today Basques mostly descend from ancient population of the east mediterranean, before it got admixed by other peoples. There is indeed some old R1b in Crete today. Another hint is Bull worship in both, Minoan civilization and today Iberians/Basques. Problem is that "Gedrosian" is too weak today in Crete, but who knows how it was 7000 years ago. Maybe ancient Minoans were more West-Asian-Gedrosian than the subsequent Greeks.

Interesting is also to note that the EEF/WHG/ANE table shows that ANE for 'Pais_Vasco' is higher than in all neighbouring countries incl. Italy, despite we know that ANE as well as K12b_Gedrosian (ANE and "West_Asian" admixtures are related and do overlap) was absent in West Europe before Bronze age. It would be revealing to know whether that elevated Basque ANE came along with more EEF or rather with more WHG.

That being said I'm still rather inclined towards a IEan source of ANE/Gedrosian in Basques, because Gedrosian_K12b was not confirmed anymore in Basques by Lazaridis et al admixtures (but still confirmed "West-Asian" for other west europeans), but ANE was still very strong. That would hint towards an influx from the north-east to Basque contry.
Basques remain mysterious.

In some genetic papers Pais_Vasco refers to french basques, named after the duke of Vasconia's wars in stopping the Aquitaines moving further south.
Does it mean french basques in this paper?

Tabaccus Maximus
28-01-14, 21:43
There is one argument against Caucasian origin in that Basques are among those europeans who carry the least "Caucasus" admixture in terms of Georgian-like, etc.

That is a good point. Certainly the lack of the Caucasian component would seem to argue against a Caucasus origin for the Basques.

However, there could be another explanation. The modern "Caucasus component" isn't evenly distributed throughout the Caucasus. Looking at Maciamo's map, it appears very strong in the Western Trans-Caucasus, damningly in the area where Kartvelian languages are spoken.

Interestingly, it appears only ordinary in its percentage in the upper half of the Caucasus approaching levels not much different from Eastern or Western Europe.

Why would this component appear so strong south of the Transcaucasus but so weak north of the transcaucasus?
There are more male Caucasian lineages in Europe, but very few to the Middle East. Maternal lineages are about the same both directions. (???)

Interesting questions.

MOESAN
31-01-14, 23:49
Now that everyone has had time to digest the latest Mesolithic La Brana (C-V20 + U5), I thought it would be a good time to revisit Basque origins based on what we have learned about Mesolithic Europe, especially Spain...


MESOLITHIC EUROS.............................. BASQUES

NO R1B ...................ALMOST ALL R1B (M269, P312)

LACTOSE INTOLERANT ..........LACTOSE PERSISTENT

VERY DARK HUE ..................OLIVE TO LIGHT SKIN

DARK HAIR.................................... VARIED

U4, U5, U8 ....................... H1, H3, H5, U'S & *'S

BRUTE .......................................GRACILE

LONG HEADED .................SHORT TO MESO HEADED

LONG FACED ...........................SHORT FACED

BLUE EYES (poss)...........................VARIED



In my mind, it has become increasing clear that Basques do not represent a relict of old Europe.
Anyone believe they are in some way a relict population?

Sorry I disagree for some parts:
waiting more data about ancient DNA I make the fôllowing observations:
the "dark" skin of Meoslithic is the most sensible hypothesis at this stage, not a certitude
as a whole we have to less mesolithical people: yet, the crania of La Braña 1 is radically different from a Motala one and from the Loschbour one: at this stage we cannot generalize neither for La Braña nor for LOschbour or Motala and overall Europe...
faces of modern Basques are middle to long rather to short, even if some remnants of shortfaced men remain
the La Braña don't seem being "brutal" if it is the case for Loschbour and surely for Motala (not clear plicture) and some Basques have "brutal" faces yet
we have to be cautious bfore to conclude
BUT as you I believe Basques of today are not ONLY the direct descendants of mesolithical Peope of Iberia OR RATHER I WOULD SAY of the descendants of paleolithical people of Iberia and surroundings stayed there in Mesolithic, because I think (a bet) new more 'mediterranean' people arrived at last Mesolithic in Iberia (and Sardinia?) before true cultural Neolithic... and Basques received some influx from 'megalitihic' people too, if not a lot from classical 'cardial' neolithical people first wave - I do'nt speake here of possible northern populations possibly associated with I-Eans tribes -

MOESAN
31-01-14, 23:53
I add Basques of Spain are (were) between subdolicho-mesocephals (78-79 of 1940's) and Basques of France are (were) between meso-sub-brachycephals (83-84 of 1940's) in a possible variation between (populational) 72 and 89...

LeBrok
01-02-14, 22:28
Was this paper mentioned on Basque threads here? I don't remember, but it is fairly old though. It boldly states this:

Basques, Portuguese, Spaniards, and Algerians have been studied for HLA and mitochondrial DNA markers, and the data analysis suggests that pre-Neolithic gene flow into Iberia came from ancient white North Africans (Hamites). The Basque language has also been used to translate the Iberian-Tartesian language and also Etruscan and Minoan Linear A. Physical anthropometry of Iberian Mesolithic and Neolithic skeletons does not support the demic replacement in Iberia of preexisting Mesolithic people by Neolithic
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10510567
I can't find a way accessing the whole thing.

Wilhelm
01-02-14, 23:41
Was this paper mentioned on Basque threads here? I don't remember, but it is fairly old though. It boldly states this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10510567
I can't find a way accessing the whole thing.
My goodness, this is from 1999, that's like the prehistory of genetics..

MOESAN
02-02-14, 00:19
My goodness, this is from 1999, that's like the prehistory of genetics..

again this mocking or bashing concerning "old" science" (1999: how old!!!) - we find shit in every science period and good stuff too
by the way I red a study about this HLA comparisons including Sardinians, Basques, Madrid people and Alger town people (that is not proved to be only 'berber' = 'hamitic') - I posted about that yet
this abstract conclusion you mention here is an EXTRAPOLATION engaging only the people who mad it! in fact the conlusions I red, me, were that by some aspects, the Basques, Madrilenes and Algerians of Alger had some common genes, but that said, it showed Basques are closer to Madrilenes and had too some special links with Sardinians and more than that shared like Madrilenes some genes with Atlantic population and some genes with Central Europe (Celtic cradle?) -
so NO simplification, contrary to the rule in the link you cites, and here, I agree with you when I disagree for your irrespect for some science which don't deserve it

so I think Basques for the most have post paleo mesolithical heritage + a lot of largely named 'mediterranean' but arrived there for the most before neolithic or sometimes with N-African neolithic; no important demic 'Cardial', and just some atlantic megalithic (rulers?) what can include east-mediterraneans + other mesolithical people (akin to the first ones)... the central Europe HLA could prove some light impact of more northern and eastern people
concerning faces, all of us, let's separate broad cromagnoid faces with soft frontal lines from the later arrived but more brutal long faced combe-capelle-brünn people with their receding frontal

martiko
17-02-14, 01:36
again this mocking or bashing concerning "old" science" (1999: how old!!!) - we find shit in every science period and good stuff too
by the way I red a study about this HLA comparisons including Sardinians, Basques, Madrid people and Alger town people (that is not proved to be only 'berber' = 'hamitic') - I posted about that yet
this abstract conclusion you mention here is an EXTRAPOLATION engaging only the people who mad it! in fact the conlusions I red, me, were that by some aspects, the Basques, Madrilenes and Algerians of Alger had some common genes, but that said, it showed Basques are closer to Madrilenes and had too some special links with Sardinians and more than that shared like Madrilenes some genes with Atlantic population and some genes with Central Europe (Celtic cradle?) -
so NO simplification, contrary to the rule in the link you cites, and here, I agree with you when I disagree for your irrespect for some science which don't deserve it

so I think Basques for the most have post paleo mesolithical heritage + a lot of largely named 'mediterranean' but arrived there for the most before neolithic or sometimes with N-African neolithic; no important demic 'Cardial', and just some atlantic megalithic (rulers?) what can include east-mediterraneans + other mesolithical people (akin to the first ones)... the central Europe HLA could prove some light impact of more northern and eastern people
concerning faces, all of us, let's separate broad cromagnoid faces with soft frontal lines from the later arrived but more brutal long faced combe-capelle-brünn people with their receding frontal

I think you are mistaken, a large bio-medical study, two years before, and for all the peoples of Europe, was between the other shows the great similarities between Basque and Irish, and less between Irish and Welsh or between Basque and Sardinian. France and the closest Basque people were Gascon and Breton. What seems natural for people familiar with the Basque and Breton or gascon.
It was also clear that the Basque despite their small numbers have more genetic variation that brought together Irish and Scottish.
I wonder why this proximity between Basque, Irish, Breton, because in the Basque L21 that is second behind df27 marker in Basque. but I do not have the answer, we can think of weddings over the centuries can be but nothing is obvious. This is what some called the Celtic crown (Atlantic frontage) can be.

Angela
17-02-14, 07:03
again this mocking or bashing concerning "old" science" (1999: how old!!!) - we find shit in every science period and good stuff too
by the way I red a study about this HLA comparisons including Sardinians, Basques, Madrid people and Alger town people (that is not proved to be only 'berber' = 'hamitic') - I posted about that yet
this abstract conclusion you mention here is an EXTRAPOLATION engaging only the people who mad it! in fact the conlusions I red, me, were that by some aspects, the Basques, Madrilenes and Algerians of Alger had some common genes, but that said, it showed Basques are closer to Madrilenes and had too some special links with Sardinians and more than that shared like Madrilenes some genes with Atlantic population and some genes with Central Europe (Celtic cradle?) -
so NO simplification, contrary to the rule in the link you cites, and here, I agree with you when I disagree for your irrespect for some science which don't deserve it

so I think Basques for the most have post paleo mesolithical heritage + a lot of largely named 'mediterranean' but arrived there for the most before neolithic or sometimes with N-African neolithic; no important demic 'Cardial', and just some atlantic megalithic (rulers?) what can include east-mediterraneans + other mesolithical people (akin to the first ones)... the central Europe HLA could prove some light impact of more northern and eastern people
concerning faces, all of us, let's separate broad cromagnoid faces with soft frontal lines from the later arrived but more brutal long faced combe-capelle-brünn people with their receding frontal


I can't see how the Basques have a Mesolithic origin, unless La Brana, Loschbour and the Swedish hunter gatherers sequenced so far are not representative of all the Mesolithic populations in Iberia. As you know, the data so far says they are yDNA "I", and mtDNA "U", and neither are all that common in Iberia. Also, we know La Brana is autosomally related to north east Baltic populations, not the Basque. Unless you feel that other Mesolithic samples not yet studied will provide a very different picture?

Also, how would you factor in the high levels of R1b1b1 in the Basque and the rest of Iberia? Are you positing a mesolithic origin for that as well? The only Mesolithic sample we have from Iberia isn't R1b, and also I haven't seen any traces in the research of upstream clades of R1b in North Africa. Unless you believe the Mesolithic samples we are likely to find in the future will carry some other yDNA signature. I have thought, for example, that it's possible that yDNA E-V13 arrived in the Balkans prior to the Neolithic.

Then there's the fact that Iberians are very high in the EEF component, and the sample on which that component is measured is a woman from the LBK culture, so we're talking about a group from the Balkans by way of Anatolia.

And if the high prevalence of the EEF component isn't tied to R1b, then what y haplogroups carried it, or are we going to say that it was mostly carried by the women because the R1b migration was male mediated?

As for the whole issue of the Celts, the only thing I've seen in the literature is one movement from central Europe. Even so, the groups that spoke Celtic must have had varied autosomal components, or else their movement into the Iberian peninsula could not have involved population replacement, because the EEF percentages in Iberia are much different from those in Ireland and Scotland for example, or even from England.

I hope you don't think I'm badgering you with these questions. I'm trying to build a coherent picture of these population movements into Europe, and somehow the answers have to incorporate all the data we're accumulating, mtDNA, yDNA, autosomal DNA and anthropological data as well.

martiko
18-02-14, 01:22
I don't know who said that the Basques descended mostly/exclusively from Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. This is the kind of misconception propagated by National Geographic, who also used to claim that R1b was the haplogroup of Cro-Magnon.

For my part, I have maintained for all the years I have been active in population genetics that R1b came with the PIE from the Pontic Steppe, not from Palaeolithic or Mesolithic Europeans. It is clear from the modern Y-DNA lineages that before being overtaken by R1b men, the Basques belonged to a typical blend of Mesolithic I2a1 (about 41% originally) and Neolithic/Chalcolithic E1b1b (20%), J2 (20%), G2a (13%) and J1 (6%)*. After all people from the Basque Country didn't stay hunter-gatherers throughout the Neolithic. I2a1 remained much higher in the Pyrénnées because it was a harsh environment for agriculture and hunter-gatherers survived in isolation from Neolithic farmers there at least until the Bronze Age.

I have explained many times over the years that the Basques inherited Indo-European lineages almost only through the paternal side (R1b), but preserved most of their Neolithic maternal lineages. Although the Basques do carry some Mesolithic lineages like U5, most of the mtDNA is actually Neolithic (J1c, K1a, T2, X2 and some H subclades like H5a and H13).

There are two haplogroups found at high frequencies among the Basques, H1 and V, which origin remains unclear. Neither of them have been found before the Neolithic, although there are good reasons to believe that they were already in Europe during the Mesolithic. For example, the Saami have only U5 and V and are almost exclusively descended from Mesolithic Europeans. Another argument is that H1 and V are both rare in the Near East and have a much bigger diversity in Europe.

H1 was found in Neolithic Europe, but was also certainly an important Indo-European lineage, notably the H1b and H1c subclades, which are found throughout Central Asia and Siberia. But the Basques belong mostly to the H1e1a1, H1j1, H1t1a and H1av1 subclades. I don't have enough information about their distribution in the rest of the world to judge their origin, but they are clearly not the typical IE subclades.

Like H1, U5 was a major Indo-European lineage, so it cannot be completely excluded that some Basque U5 came with the R1b invaders. However the Basques belong essentially to two U5 subclades quite specific to them: U5b1c1a and U5b1f. Both are found primarily in the Pyrénées, so there are good chances that these are Mesolithic remnants linked to I2a1, and not new arrivals brought alongside R1b.

V was also an Indo-European subclade, and along with U5 and J1b1a could have been one of the the three original maternal lineages of R1b tribes (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#mtDNA). The Basques belong to V1a and V22. I don't have enough data either to determine if these are Mesolithic or IE.


* If present among the Basques, J2b2 and G2a3b1 could have come alongside R1b, rather than during the Neolithic.
in the most ancient relic of the Basque in the Basque country; which is the site of the necropolis of Aldata, they find no group G and J; the opposite finds they find R1a (indo-Iranian) and Q1 (Mongolian) and of course the ecrasante majority with R * (R1b R1a) and some identified I1 being their allies, the frank soldiers, identified with their clothing.(necropolis of the 8th century)

MOESAN
21-02-14, 18:24
I think you are mistaken, a large bio-medical study, two years before, and for all the peoples of Europe, was between the other shows the great similarities between Basque and Irish, and less between Irish and Welsh or between Basque and Sardinian. France and the closest Basque people were Gascon and Breton. What seems natural for people familiar with the Basque and Breton or gascon.
It was also clear that the Basque despite their small numbers have more genetic variation that brought together Irish and Scottish.
I wonder why this proximity between Basque, Irish, Breton, because in the Basque L21 that is second behind df27 marker in Basque. but I do not have the answer, we can think of weddings over the centuries can be but nothing is obvious. This is what some called the Celtic crown (Atlantic frontage) can be.

OK: some study... Could you give me the link, I'm interested even if a study does not make the law - thanks beforehand
but I don't understand why you say I'm mistaken bacause you don't criticize my post point by point, just putting other points: irish or welsh people have some common components with Basques and others, some pre-neolithical, some neolithical and others post-neolithical so...?

MOESAN
22-02-14, 01:41
I can't see how the Basques have a Mesolithic origin, unless La Brana, Loschbour and the Swedish hunter gatherers sequenced so far are not representative of all the Mesolithic populations in Iberia. As you know, the data so far says they are yDNA "I", and mtDNA "U", and neither are all that common in Iberia. Also, we know La Brana is autosomally related to north east Baltic populations, not the Basque. Unless you feel that other Mesolithic samples not yet studied will provide a very different picture?


&&&: just a practical detail: mt DNA can be «washed» very easily, living no trace of itself when the biallelic autosomals passed by the previous female population can survive: a male population can take some «foreign» autosomals along the previously corresponding «mtDNA» when mating with a new female population – if they agregate an other new female population, they would pass a lot of their biallelic mixture to their descendants, but less of the mtDNA because fathers cannot pass (for the big majority) their mt DNA even to their daughters. Assimetry here >> drift.


Male or female mediated HGs %s are not always the exact reflect of autosomals %s (I would have prefered!) - and I think Y-I2a1 was denser in Basque country before historical times – and for I know, mt-U is not so low there comapred to other regions...
La Brana fellow is labelled 'north-east baltic': maybe were he only more vaguely 'northern european'? Otherwise, no, I don't figure out a too different picture of Mesolithic people in Iberia, but surely some differences: just recalling it was not an homogenous population for me but already a mix of 2 phyla with regional variations, in Europe as in Iberia – the autosomals labellization is for me unprecise even if a necessary step onwards the solution -

Also, how would you factor in the high levels of R1b1b1 in the Basque and the rest of Iberia? Are you positing a mesolithic origin for that as well? The only Mesolithic sample we have from Iberia isn't R1b, and also I haven't seen any traces in the research of upstream clades of R1b in North Africa. Unless you believe the Mesolithic samples we are likely to find in the future will carry some other yDNA signature. I have thought, for example, that it's possible that yDNA E-V13 arrived in the Balkans prior to the Neolithic.


And I never said (even if I confess I was unprecise me too) the mesolithical component among Basques was making the bulk of basques autosomals, but I think there is a bigger proportion than among some other regions of Iberia – I wrote I thought they received a very first wave of 'mediterraneans, before true Neolithic! It is not the same – by the way I say here I think Basques of France are a little bit more «basque» than the basques of Spain (modern industrial attractivity of Southern Basque country, but also more complicated history, even in ancient times concerning mt DNA – I 've to find my source here) -

Then there's the fact that Iberians are very high in the EEF component, and the sample on which that component is measured is a woman from the LBK culture, so we're talking about a group from the Balkans by way of Anatolia.


I agree (it is so evident) with the higher so called 'EEF' component, even if it would deserve a better definition, the genetic definition (nature) being tied too tightly to agricultural neolithic (culture) in this case. By the way, a little survey says they were differences among the so called «neolithical agricultural populations» of Europe, as the differences for mt-DNA between West Hungary LBK's and East Hungary ALPC's*- As for 'north' or 'baltic', the autosomal pooling conceals maybe more than a component at smaller grain... and 'Stuttgart' is maybe not the better example for a genuine 'EEF' - but Basques here again seem to me a bit more archaic than other Iberians as a whole (but some Spain or Portugal regions could deserve also more attention?) - I still have big doubts about the identity of iberian Neolithic period people with danubian farmers of the same time – this 'EEF' seems to me a melting pot result of bad crossed surveys with heterogenous elements -
... hum... this new analysis produced results very different from the Dodecad ones concerning modern populations??? -
*: try: http://forwhattheywereweare.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/54c7a-hungaryneolithicbanffy.png?w=6408h=360

And if the high prevalence of the EEF component isn't tied to R1b, then what y haplogroups carried it, or are we going to say that it was mostly carried by the women because the R1b migration was male mediated?


Y-R1b appears to me a male HG concealing diverses autosomals populations, some send by it, others acquired in place(s)...but in this mix it seems mt-H3 + mt H5 have some importance: were they associated with Y-R1b at the beginning??? I 'd dreamed at some point in a possible introgretion of Y-R1b (L23?........)+ mt-H in the mediterranean area, taking foot in southern Italy and France, and in eastern Spain, maybe with places in North Africa (Maghreb), having in mind the celtic legends so controversed: the scenario would have been then a few people developping demographically, more quickly in central East of France (baby boom here again), maybe Bell Beakers – but the very overwhelming domination of Y-R1b on Atlantic shores, with almost NO Y-J2, NO Y-J1, NO Y-E1B, NO G2a, all that is an obstacle to this hypothesis, for me. I still see the most of Y-R1b down L23 arriving through North-East or East-Central Europe: so: 'EEF' as reference for them: no, thanks, unless a distinct element pushed in the 'EEF' bag by mistake - but mt H3/H5 could have been in Iberia for a long enough time (encompassing the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition time) and send the western component of 'EEF'.They were maybe an old form of 'western mediterranean' and gained ground in central and northern Europe not only at post paleolithical times (diverses emigration in North from S-Europe, even North Africa) BUT AT ENEOLITHICAL AND EARLY METAL AGES, being the female incorportated in the megalithic province and after in the Atlantic Bronze Age where Y-R1b, come from East and colonizing West, may have played a big role of osmose and homogeneization? The former so called «mediterraneans» of western Europe showed far more links with 'cromagnoids' than with true eastern 'mediterraneans' but evolved in a changed climatic environment – the basques are not as a whole direct descendants of paleo-mesolithic people of Franco-Cantabricas (they have some parts, nevertheless) but are not for that assimilable to true neolithical Near Eastern people: autosomals even if unparfect, prove it -

As for the whole issue of the Celts, the only thing I've seen in the literature is one movement from central Europe. Even so, the groups that spoke Celtic must have had varied autosomal components, or else their movement into the Iberian peninsula could not have involved population replacement, because the EEF percentages in Iberia are much different from those in Ireland and Scotland for example, or even from England.


I agree for the most, look above – the farther the colonization, the farther the crossings and admixtures – I think too proto-historical Celts came at last from Central Europe (their male ancestors from farther in East), but in at least two big waves, the first at Bronze Age and not at Iron Age -

I hope you don't think I'm badgering you with these questions. I'm trying to build a coherent picture of these population movements into Europe, and somehow the answers have to incorporate all the data we're accumulating, mtDNA, yDNA, autosomal DNA and anthropological data as well.

No problem! I 'm like you: I try to understand something among all these moves – but, maybe as you, I don't wait too much precision from DNA studies, the crossings having taken place more an more as History was running -

MOESAN
22-02-14, 01:43
sorry Angela and all of yours: I tried to answer Angela bit by bit but I made a mess - you will be obliged to devine what is her's and what in mine: I had written my thoughts in oblique letters but all the text turned like that!

martiko
22-02-14, 04:08
OK: some study... Could you give me the link, I'm interested even if a study does not make the law - thanks beforehand
but I don't understand why you say I'm mistaken bacause you don't criticize my post point by point, just putting other points: irish or welsh people have some common components with Basques and others, some pre-neolithical, some neolithical and others post-neolithical so...?

sorry but this was two years before and I have not stored the document.
But I give you against a document which you will be pleased and you will strengthen your positions, and personally after read, I wondered how I could have children with a woman not Basque.
you will notice that for this study, he said they have not used or genetic ill or mentally or ..... it's weird it reminds me of someone. But how can we know if they have genetic diseases before having genetic study?
It is advisable to laugh! this is the best remedy.




http://jacques.tourtaux.over-blog.com.over-blog.com/article-une-etude-genetique-confirme-que-le-peuple-basque-presente-des-difference-importantes-avec-les-autres-populations-europeennes-51017941.html

MOESAN
22-02-14, 11:45
[QUOTE=Angela;426688]I can't see how the Basques have a Mesolithic origin, unless La Brana, Loschbour and the Swedish hunter gatherers sequenced so far are not representative of all the Mesolithic populations in Iberia. As you know, the data so far says they are yDNA "I", and mtDNA "U", and neither are all that common in Iberia. Also, we know La Brana is autosomally related to north east Baltic populations, not the Basque. Unless you feel that other Mesolithic samples not yet studied will provide a very different picture?

coming back again on the question of today Basques and mesolithical and neolithical populations (very poor sample for autosomals and very poor detailed autosomals analysis:
a survey asbtract (taken by me in a blog I confess) considers Basques are farther from 'Stuttgart' farmer than Maltese, Askhenazes, Sicilians, Sardinians, Spaniards (whole), Tuscans, Greeks, Albanians, Bergamo people and Bulgarians (in this order, the closer to 'Stuttgart' being the Maltese) - and the France Basques are even farther, farther than southern French people, just before Croatian and France (whole) and Hungarians - we can suppose someones as Croatians have surely some good remnants of pre-neolithical HG's? - the 'north european' component of some Dodecad poolings have surely some sense too, has it not? -
and it seems debated, but some scholars said mt-H3, considering evolution rate and phylologic tree, could be as old as Upper Paleolithic end (where? Iberia?)- I have no knowledge to judge this affirmation - and someones else said some mt-H were present in Iberia before 7500 BC (Mesolithic) - its presence in Finland and Scandinavia and E-Baltic have surely some implications? - I cannot check that, sure... by the way, La Brana 2 would present 24,8% OF 'MEDITERRANEAN' COMPONENT in some survey... for me, Mesolithic was already the period of some movements and crossings ...
no objection for a Mesolithical or late Upper Paleolithical presence of Y-E1b (V13 ancestors) in S-E Europe: in Iberia, I think V13 came later (early Neolithic?) -

martiko
22-02-14, 20:07
.............................................
I hope you don't think I'm badgering you with these questions. I'm trying to build a coherent picture of these population movements into Europe, and somehow the answers have to incorporate all the data we're accumulating, mtDNA, yDNA, autosomal DNA and anthropological data as well.

obviously ! it is better to accumulate the facts proved more than certainties.

Angela
22-02-14, 21:04
[QUOTE=Angela;426688]I can't see how the Basques have a Mesolithic origin, unless La Brana, Loschbour and the Swedish hunter gatherers sequenced so far are not representative of all the Mesolithic populations in Iberia. As you know, the data so far says they are yDNA "I", and mtDNA "U", and neither are all that common in Iberia. Also, we know La Brana is autosomally related to north east Baltic populations, not the Basque. Unless you feel that other Mesolithic samples not yet studied will provide a very different picture?

coming back again on the question of today Basques and mesolithical and neolithical populations (very poor sample for autosomals and very poor detailed autosomals analysis:
a survey asbtract (taken by me in a blog I confess) considers Basques are farther from 'Stuttgart' farmer than Maltese, Askhenazes, Sicilians, Sardinians, Spaniards (whole), Tuscans, Greeks, Albanians, Bergamo people and Bulgarians (in this order, the closer to 'Stuttgart' being the Maltese) - and the France Basques are even farther, farther than southern French people, just before Croatian and France (whole) and Hungarians - we can suppose someones as Croatians have surely some good remnants of pre-neolithical HG's? - the 'north european' component of some Dodecad poolings have surely some sense too, has it not? -
and it seems debated, but some scholars said mt-H3, considering evolution rate and phylologic tree, could be as old as Upper Paleolithic end (where? Iberia?)- I have no knowledge to judge this affirmation - and someones else said some mt-H were present in Iberia before 7500 BC (Mesolithic) - its presence in Finland and Scandinavia and E-Baltic have surely some implications? - I cannot check that, sure... by the way, La Brana 2 would present 24,8% OF 'MEDITERRANEAN' COMPONENT in some survey... for me, Mesolithic was already the period of some movements and crossings ...
no objection for a Mesolithical or late Upper Paleolithical presence of Y-E1b (V13 ancestors) in S-E Europe: in Iberia, I think V13 came later (early Neolithic?) -


Clearly, I wasn't as precise with my language as I should have been. I don't doubt that there is WHG in the Basques. My point was that one theory about them held that they were a remnant or "pure" representative of paleolithic/mesolithic people. That's been proved to be incorrect since, using the genomes currently available to us, they are almost 60% EEF, and EEF is a Near Eastern farmer by way of the Balkans.

Basques:
EEF-.593
WHG-.293
ANE-.114

You can find the percentages for all the sampled populations on page 10 of this set of extended figures and tables:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2013/12/23/001552.DC1/001552-1.pdf

The analysis to which you were referring must have been based on this graphic from Lazaridis et al: http://imageshack.com/a/img32/6987/vqot.png
There are indeed European populations with EEF percentages higher than theirs...

Of course, this may change with the sequencing of more southern European mesolithic peoples, I suppose.

I do agree that some of these movements may have been late mesolithic as well as early Neolithic, and yes, given what samples we have so far, E-V13 seems to be Neolithic or later in Iberia.

Greying Wanderer
23-02-14, 10:15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture

Where did the Cucuteni go? If they were displaced by PIE raids then maybe they moved west to get away from them. If the actual IE expansion happened later after they'd developed their horse tech then maybe the Basques are a relic of mesolithic Europeans from what is now Romania.

MOESAN
23-02-14, 14:01
[QUOTE=MOESAN;426925]


Clearly, I wasn't as precise with my language as I should have been. I don't doubt that there is WHG in the Basques. My point was that one theory about them held that they were a remnant or "pure" representative of paleolithic/mesolithic people. That's been proved to be incorrect since, using the genomes currently available to us, they are almost 60% EEF, and EEF is a Near Eastern farmer by way of the Balkans.

Basques:
EEF-.593
WHG-.293
ANE-.114

You can find the percentages for all the sampled populations on page 10 of this set of extended figures and tables:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2013/12/23/001552.DC1/001552-1.pdf

The analysis to which you were referring must have been based on this graphic from Lazaridis et al: http://imageshack.com/a/img32/6987/vqot.png
There are indeed European populations with EEF percentages higher than theirs...

Of course, this may change with the sequencing of more southern European mesolithic peoples, I suppose.

I do agree that some of these movements may have been late mesolithic as well as early Neolithic, and yes, given what samples we have so far, E-V13 seems to be Neolithic or later in Iberia.

OK I agree: I was just justifying myself and trying to be more precise - in others of my post in different threads I already wrote I did not believe Basques were a dominantly paleo or mesolithical population - I believed it was clear .
have a good sunday

Angela
23-02-14, 20:38
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture

Where did the Cucuteni go? If they were displaced by PIE raids then maybe they moved west to get away from them. If the actual IE expansion happened later after they'd developed their horse tech then maybe the Basques are a relic of mesolithic Europeans from what is now Romania.

Well, they have an EEF score of 60%, and EEF is basically the LBK woman who is a Near Eastern farmer by way of the Balkans with perhaps some additional WHG, so I don't see how it's possible for them to be a relic of a mesolithic population.

martiko
24-02-14, 00:25
Well, they have an EEF score of 60%, and EEF is basically the LBK woman who is a Near Eastern farmer by way of the Balkans with perhaps some additional WHG, so I don't see how it's possible for them to be a relic of a mesolithic population.
If, in Russia, people are still communists therefore means that no logic can convince the most entrenched beliefs. Do not bother more for it.
Why wear debunking statues, the time will.

Greying Wanderer
24-02-14, 10:20
Well, they have an EEF score of 60%, and EEF is basically the LBK woman who is a Near Eastern farmer by way of the Balkans with perhaps some additional WHG, so I don't see how it's possible for them to be a relic of a mesolithic population.

Fair point. I was thinking more in terms of the language.

simplified speculative sequence
1) I/U forager population mostly displaced by neolithic G/H farmer population except in the far north
2) G/H population mostly replaced by a copper age volkwanderung R1b/U ex-cucuteni population displaced from the region west of the Black Sea by the PIE
3) some H females remain and selection in place for farmer alleles via that female line (EEF percentage increases this way)**
4) Bronze Age Indo-European R1a/R1b expansion almost everywhere but missing the Basques
5) Basques end up relic of cucuteni y dna and neolithic farmer mtdna and non IE language.

** alternatively a roman foundation style admixture where a few shiploads of R1b males land somewhere and kidnap wives from nearby farmers -> instant 50% EEF admixture in the kids

I think the key point is that unless I'm missing something a logical corollary of what has been said vis a vis the strong selection of farmer genes like SLC24A5 **requires** either a roman style 50/50 admixture event or that EEF **increased** over time and yet if LBK was over-run then it can't be from the male line so it must be from the female. As there's a clear signal of mtdna H increasing over time in various regions that might be it - or not. Regardless of the mtdna H idea though if genes like SLC24A5 were initially farmer genes and they have been strongly selected for then logically (i think) either the admixture was a one-off Sabine type event with a 50% EEF outcome or the percentage of EEF must have been gone up over time.

Angela
24-02-14, 22:53
Fair point. I was thinking more in terms of the language.

simplified speculative sequence
1) I/U forager population mostly displaced by neolithic G/H farmer population except in the far north
2) G/H population mostly replaced by a copper age volkwanderung R1b/U ex-cucuteni population displaced from the region west of the Black Sea by the PIE
3) some H females remain and selection in place for farmer alleles via that female line (EEF percentage increases this way)**
4) Bronze Age Indo-European R1a/R1b expansion almost everywhere but missing the Basques
5) Basques end up relic of cucuteni y dna and neolithic farmer mtdna and non IE language.

** alternatively a roman foundation style admixture where a few shiploads of R1b males land somewhere and kidnap wives from nearby farmers -> instant 50% EEF admixture in the kids

I think the key point is that unless I'm missing something a logical corollary of what has been said vis a vis the strong selection of farmer genes like SLC24A5 **requires** either a roman style 50/50 admixture event or that EEF **increased** over time and yet if LBK was over-run then it can't be from the male line so it must be from the female. As there's a clear signal of mtdna H increasing over time in various regions that might be it - or not. Regardless of the mtdna H idea though if genes like SLC24A5 were initially farmer genes and they have been strongly selected for then logically (i think) either the admixture was a one-off Sabine type event with a 50% EEF outcome or the percentage of EEF must have been gone up over time.


You began by saying that the Basques are a relic of mesolithic Europeans from what is now Romania. Then you said you were speaking mainly of linguistics(?) and then moved into a speculation that the Basques are descended from people from Cucuteni who carried R1b and mtDNA U. Trying to connect the two, I think you are implying that the Cucuteni people were Mesolithic? I think there's zero evidence for that.

We have absolutely no idea who the Cucuteni were in terms of uniparental markers or autosomal admixture in Lazaridis et al terms. I highly doubt, however, that these people were majority WHG. At the most, I think they would have been an EEF population possibly mixed with some steppe elements with higher WHG and ANE.

Also, I really don't see any substantial replacement of the Neolithic population anywhere in Europe where it previously existed in great numbers. You really can't use yDNA signatures to track this in my opinion, as they are far too volatile, and subject to drift, not to mention that we don't really understand selection in regards to yDNA.

I think we need to place EEF levels in Europe in context. In those places in Europe where there were dense neolithic populations, EEF levels are still at 70% or above. In central Europe, perhaps owing to climate change (although that has recently been discounted), environmental degradation owing to over use of the land, and/or disease, there does appear to have been a decrease in the population. The last things I remember reading about the Neolithic in Britain indicate that the Neolithic population definitely declined. However, the EEF level in England still hovers around 50%, as it does in Germany. Of course, as I postulated above, the newer migration groups from the Bronze Age to the post Roman Age carried some EEF of their own.

The far northeastern countries in Europe, which have very low populations even to this day, and which also might have been a refuge for WHG populations to which a Uralic element was added, are the only populations where EEF falls below 40%. By the time you get to the Ukraine, the level is at 46%. According to Lazaridis et al, the average EEF level for all of Europe is 57%. If you take all of Europe west of Poland and add the Balkans, the average level would be even higher. And that is because of admixture not with a pigmentation gene, but with actual Neolithic peoples, and it seems to me that this admixture took place in Europe at different times, and sometimes at multiple times depending on the location. So, I find this talk of "replacement" rather misleading. The only replacement that occurred seems to have occurred with yDNA R lineages, and I'm not convinced that we won't find that certain y lineages have selective advantages which we don't yet understand.

In terms of the Basques specifically, their EEF levels don't require any special explanation so far as I can see. Their 60% level fits in perfectly with their geographic location in Europe, in between the 70% level of the Spanish to their south and the 60% and perhaps higher levels of France to their north. This also fits in with the location that some scholars have posited for their ethnogenesis, which is southwestern France.

martiko
24-02-14, 23:46
...............

In terms of the Basques specifically, their EEF levels don't require any special explanation so far as I can see. Their 60% level fits in perfectly with their geographic location in Europe, in between the 70% level of the Spanish to their south and the 60% and perhaps higher levels of France to their north. This also fits in with the location that some scholars have posited for their ethnogenesis, which is southwestern France.

really Angela you are right level is not 60 % but 70 %; to use the good figures it is better to speculate.

The most appropriate issued theory is that of BernardSeicher, which turns problem: he thinks that basques speak a language of origin of the group R1 and asks question if the air of the augment corresponds to a pidgin zone from which langage IE comes. Therefore can being they could deduct that there is language proto-Indo-European not more for instance than there is proto-French language which is not a dialect in origin.
It is possible that each language has its own IE entity under a share of its origin and IE languages ​​are a result of consensus, and not a baseline
This theory as says Bernard has advantage to correspond with genetics where the others collapse.
I think this theory and reckless, if we can keep going in circles endlessly.

Greying Wanderer
25-02-14, 14:01
@Angela
"Also, I really don't see any substantial replacement of the Neolithic population anywhere in Europe where it previously existed in great numbers. You really can't use yDNA signatures to track this in my opinion, as they are far too volatile, and subject to drift, not to mention that we don't really understand selection in regards to yDNA."

There was an almost total replacement of the EEF y dna in central Europe. As you say there is more than one possible explanation for that of course but one of those possible explanations is the EEF farmers were over-run. Taking that possibility as a premise then leads to the question of how could the EEF percentage be high if the farmers were over-run? One possibility is the surviving EEF females had beneficial genes which were strongly selected for. Is there evidence for strong selection on those genes, yes. Is there evidence for farmer mtdna increasing over time, yes. If you work the logic backwards from those two points then it hints at the farmers being over-run.

You're right about Cucuteni of course, I am just guessing there as i am interested in them and they lived right next to the PIE zone and their disappearance overlaps the PIE transition to Yamnaya so they make an interesting candidate for a westward moving volkwanderung in the period just before the LBK population decline - but that is just speculating for fun.

Angela
25-02-14, 20:09
"

There was an almost total replacement of the EEF y dna in central Europe. As you say there is more than one possible explanation for that of course but one of those possible explanations is the EEF farmers were over-run. Taking that possibility as a premise then leads to the question of how could the EEF percentage be high if the farmers were over-run? One possibility is the surviving EEF females had beneficial genes which were strongly selected for. Is there evidence for strong selection on those genes, yes. Is there evidence for farmer mtdna increasing over time, yes. If you work the logic backwards from those two points then it hints at the farmers being over-run.


This is where I have my strongest disagreement with your position. The beneficial genes to which you're referring are only partly located on the mtdna. Many of them, the pigmentation genes, for example, are part of autosomal variation. Additionally, even when combined, we would be talking about a very small percentage of genomic variation.

This *can't* have been a case where a large Bronze Age group of peoples migrated into Europe and mated with a few females of the prior population and then beneficial alleles just surfaced among a mostly newcomer population, or where just certain mtDNA lines were the subject of positive selection. Prior to Lazaridis et al, and even the prior Reich lab papers, it might have been possible to hold that position, but it is completely unsupported as things now stand.

You would never wind up with 50% EEF levels in northern Europeans in that way. When Lazaridis et al says 50% of the genome of the Germans is EEF, to take one example, they mean that the computer scanned the total genome of the three ancient samples and the total genome of modern samples, and in terms of the total autosomal make up of a population like the Germans, not just a few percentage points that could be attributable to certain beneficial alleles or to the mtDNA, it turns out that there is a 50% overlap between this modern population and the Stuttgart woman.

Even assuming that the Bronze Age populations were very large in number, and without taking into consideration the fact that even, as just one example, a slight increase of the ability to father males of the R1b and R1a lines might over thousands of years result in a dramatic shift in frequency of certain yDNA lines, the only way that such high levels of EEF could appear in northern Europeans is if these Bronze Age migrations were mostly male mediated. I think that's also a conclusion that can be drawn from the ancient mtDNA paper to which I linked upthread. A very small percentage of "new" mtDNA appears in the cultures most likely to have experienced gene flow from the east.

I don't know how to explain my thinking on this any better than I have...I just don't think admixture works in the way you envision if I am understanding you correctly.

Ed.I also think it's important to note that the "Kurgan" archaeological trail which most people link to the "Indo-Europeans" ends in Hungary. I'm not aware of any paper that claims to find evidence of large scale migration into western Europe from that point. There is also zero archaeological evidence found to date of any large scale massacre of the prior Neolithic populations of central and northern Europe, which is what you seem to be be envisaging.

Should that evidence surface, I would, of course, have to change my position. Speaking personally, I would, however, find that disturbing...I prefer not to think, absent some convincing evidence, that some of my ancestors were homicidal maniacs who virtually committed a holocaust on another set of my ancestors. It's bad enough having to accept the behavior of my Roman ancestors against my Celt-Ligurian ancestors, even if we're talking about a different level of inhumanity.

That's emotion, and my moral consciousness speaking, of course, but still...

Greying Wanderer
26-02-14, 00:36
@Angela

"The beneficial genes to which you're referring are only partly located on the mtdna. Many of them, the pigmentation genes, for example, are part of autosomal variation."

Yes, fair comment as I am being very sloppy in describing my thinking.

I am talking about autosomal dna **via** the maternal line not specifically mtdna. I should be more careful.

If you have
1) Two historic populations A and B
2) These two populations mix
3) Only B had copies of some advantageous alleles
4) Those advantage alleles were strongly selected for in the past.
then B's autosomal percentage **must** have increased during that period of selection because the mechanism of reproduction doesn't allow for getting those alleles separately. Kids are automatically 50%.

"You would never wind up with 50% EEF levels in northern Europeans in that way."

A Roman foundation myth type admixture would automatically get 50% in the first generation. However in a situation where the surviving LBK population was only 10% at the start of admixture could they eventually get to 50% of autosomal via the strong selection on some of their genes? I wonder.

"as just one example, a slight increase of the ability to father males of the R1b and R1a lines might over thousands of years result in a dramatic shift in frequency of certain yDNA lines"

Sure, there are other possibilities as well.

"I think that's also a conclusion that can be drawn from the ancient mtDNA paper to which I linked upthread. A very small percentage of "new" mtDNA appears in the cultures most likely to have experienced gene flow from the east."

Yes but that's my point. A change in mtdna frequencies **if** there are two starting populations will automatically includes changes in autosomal dna through the mechanics of reproduction.

"the "Kurgan" archaeological trail which most people link to the "Indo-Europeans" ends in Hungary"

That's what makes me wonder if events further west (if there were any) were part of a domino effect.

"I prefer not to think, absent some convincing evidence, that some of my ancestors were homicidal maniacs who virtually committed a holocaust on another set of my ancestors"

understandable although if they'd been displaced off their own territory they may not have had a choice.

Alan
26-02-14, 04:05
Now that everyone has had time to digest the latest Mesolithic La Brana (C-V20 + U5), I thought it would be a good time to revisit Basque origins based on what we have learned about Mesolithic Europe, especially Spain...


MESOLITHIC EUROS.............................. BASQUES

NO R1B ...................ALMOST ALL R1B (M269, P312)

LACTOSE INTOLERANT ..........LACTOSE PERSISTENT

VERY DARK HUE ..................OLIVE TO LIGHT SKIN

DARK HAIR.................................... VARIED

U4, U5, U8 ....................... H1, H3, H5, U'S & *'S

BRUTE .......................................GRACILE

LONG HEADED .................SHORT TO MESO HEADED

LONG FACED ...........................SHORT FACED

BLUE EYES (poss)...........................VARIED



In my mind, it has become increasing clear that Basques do not represent a relict of old Europe.
Anyone believe they are in some way a relict population?

Basques like Sardinians are the relict of Neolithic farmers which had mixed witht he Mesolithic Hunters and Gatherers of the region.

Alan
26-02-14, 04:30
All interesting points which I can not comment all due to lack of knowledge, in particular linguistic.
There is one argument against Caucasian origin in that Basques are among those europeans who carry the least "Caucasus" admixture in terms of Georgian-like, etc. But they have that "Gedrosian" admixture which is very certainly a late introduction because it is absent in all neolithic and paleolithic samples of that time in west europe. So yes, something strange and somewhat exotic happened to west europe and Basque country in particular. Gedrosian is strong nowadays in Caucasus too, but the problem is that it's always entangled with "Caucasus" admixture there. I still think it is possible that Basques came from the region somewhere south of Caucasus, namely at a time where Gedrosia was yet "pure" there (if it really was there, just speculation). The Sumerian language is an isolate like basque, and some scholars linked Basque to Sumerian, although it was not accepted by the mainstream. Maybe the emergence of semitic languages around 3500 BC was accompanied by the merger and spread of "Caucasus" and SW-Asian/afroasiatic which diluted the assumed aboriginal "Gedrosian"-like peoples in that region. Maybe the proto-Basques escaped to Iberia before that happened. Place of R1b-origin would also roughly match this scenario, which would open a competing story to the Indo-European-R1b story.

Another competing theory I once read in another forum where I think 'Polako' issued the idea that Iberians and Basque R1b came from Minoans from Crete and today Basques mostly descend from ancient population of the east mediterranean, before it got admixed by other peoples. There is indeed some old R1b in Crete today. Another hint is Bull worship in both, Minoan civilization and today Iberians/Basques. Problem is that "Gedrosian" is too weak today in Crete, but who knows how it was 7000 years ago. Maybe ancient Minoans were more West-Asian-Gedrosian than the subsequent Greeks.

Interesting is also to note that the EEF/WHG/ANE table shows that ANE for 'Pais_Vasco' is higher than in all neighbouring countries incl. Italy, despite we know that ANE as well as K12b_Gedrosian (ANE and "West_Asian" admixtures are related and do overlap) was absent in West Europe before Bronze age. It would be revealing to know whether that elevated Basque ANE came along with more EEF or rather with more WHG.

That being said I'm still rather inclined towards a IEan source of ANE/Gedrosian in Basques, because Gedrosian_K12b was not confirmed anymore in Basques by Lazaridis et al admixtures (but still confirmed "West-Asian" for other west europeans), but ANE was still very strong. That would hint towards an influx from the north-east to Basque contry.
Basques remain mysterious.

Dear El Horsto

After all that reveals with Mal'ta Stuttgart, Ötzi etc. yet you still make the mistake to try to explain the origin of certain population with modern components and their modern distribution. If as near as the Iron Age the Balkans was still populated by Ötzi like people, why should we expect that during the Neolithic the Caucasus or any other part of the Near East was even remotely "Caucasus" or "Gedrosia" like?

To understand the development in the Near East we first need to understand what Caucasus_Gedrosia really is and of what it is made of. Gedrosia is ANE with farmer admixture. Caucasus is similar just with some more additional farmer admixture. Basically what we see is a ANE admixture spreading more into Western parts of the Near East and the Caucasus from the eastern and northern shores (Iranian Plateau, South_Central Asia and the Pontic_Caspian Steppes) and mixing with the farmer populations. Gedrosia and Caucasus are the results of these mixings. Mal'ta wasn't Gedrosia_Caucasus admixed but some of the genes inside the Mal'ta genome are ancestral to Gedrosia_Caucasus_Kalash and formed these components.

The "Gedrosia" in Basques is likely an Indo European signature.

martiko
26-02-14, 12:16
.

Does it strike anyone odd that the two languages that are spoken in Western Europe are:
1) An Ergative-Absolutive-Agglutinative language with some typological similarities to proto-Kartevelian
2) A Centum language

??
Relevant question


http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Post par ElHorsto http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=425452#post425452)
That would hint towards an influx from the north-east to Basque contry.
Basques remain mysterious.
This is a beautiful conclusion.
You are on the same conclusion as EM Hemingway.
And I appreciate that it be so, our mystery our difference; is our treasure.

ElHorsto
26-02-14, 14:12
Dear El Horsto

After all that reveals with Mal'ta Stuttgart, Ötzi etc. yet you make the mistake to try to explain the origin of certain population with modern components and their modern distribution.


I still take them into account, yes.



If as near as the Iron Age the Balkans was still populated by Ötzi like people,


You mean the Thracian sample? The Balkans is not the Near-East and I don't think he resembles Sardinians in particular. I think the authors concluded that because the Thracian was mostly south-european and Sardinians are the most south-european-like today. And I think it's because in many admixtures the 'Caucasus' component gets subjugated by 'mediterranean'. And regarding Ötzi, he in fact showed some hints of 'Caucasus' admixture (10-20% in some runs) when compared to Gök4 who had none in the same runs, so there must have been some difference already.



why should we expect that during the Neolithic the Caucasus or any other part of the Near East was even remotely "Caucasus" or "Gedrosia" like?


I think 'Caucasus' started to spread in the near-east while the yet non-'Caucasus' farmers spread to europe - yes, during the neolithic. Otherwise I find it hard to explain how the whole near-east including Arabia is flooded by 'Caucasus' today. Even assuming that you are right, 'Caucasus' eventually made it into the near-east and Basques must have escaped before 'Caucasus' arrival (under assumption of this one particular theory that Basques have a possible Caucasus link, which I don't really believe). Else, Kartvelian language (again assuming a basque link) must have developed in a 0% 'Caucasus' population, which I find not plausible given that 'Caucasus' is modal in Georgians today.

Also the Caucasus mountains provide the environment for isolation and development of specific autosomal components in small pockets. Also north-east europe is more 'Caucasus' admixed today, while north-west europe is more 'Gedrosia' admixed, despite NE europe has less farmer admixture. It is one of the reasons why I don't think that 'Caucasus' is just 'Gedrosia' plus a little more farmer admixture.



To understand the development in the Near East we first need to understand what Caucasus_Gedrosia really is and of what it is made of. Gedrosia is ANE with farmer admixture. Caucasus is similar just with some more additional farmer admixture. Basically what we see is a ANE admixture spreading more into Western parts of the Near East and the Caucasus from the eastern and northern shores (Iranian Plateau, South_Central Asia and the Pontic_Caspian Steppes) and mixing with the farmer populations. Gedrosia and Caucasus are the results of these mixings. Mal'ta wasn't Gedrosia_Caucasus admixed but some of the genes inside the Mal'ta genome are ancestral to Gedrosia_Caucasus_Kalash and formed these components.


In my understanding Mal'ta was directly ancestral to 'Gedrosia' and Kalash only, but not to 'Caucasus'. 'Caucasus' is certainly related, but it is not clear at all how.



The "Gedrosia" in Basques is likely an Indo European signature.

Sure, most likely Indo European or other metal working culture from the east, but I was also musing about some other indepentend possibilities.

Angela
26-02-14, 16:21
I agree with that and would only add that the ANE probably also spread into Europe from a more northerly region as well. I see it as an advance along a very long north/south front.

As far as the Basques are concerned, and indeed southwestern France and Iberia in general, the migrations from Central Europe, dated to around 2000 B.C. are probably the source of this ANE. Based on the currently available evidence, these peoples would have been primarily R1b, but much diluted autosomally compared to the original source populations, and already carrying EEF as well as WHG and ANE, which is why the Basques remain 60% EEF, and only 11% ANE.

In terms of overall percentages for the three major components, the Basque numbers are precisely what one would expect them to be given their geographical location in Europe; therefore, I don't see how any exotic source for them is either required or logical.

The only "mystery" is why they don't, like their neighbors, speak an Indo-European language.

Sile
27-02-14, 08:32
You would never wind up with 50% EEF levels in northern Europeans in that way. When Lazaridis et al says 50% of the genome of the Germans is EEF, to take one example, they mean that the computer scanned the total genome of the three ancient samples and the total genome of modern samples, and in terms of the total autosomal make up of a population like the Germans, not just a few percentage points that could be attributable to certain beneficial alleles or to the mtDNA, it turns out that there is a 50% overlap between this modern population and the Stuttgart woman.

Even assuming that the Bronze Age populations were very large in number, and without taking into consideration the fact that even, as just one example, a slight increase of the ability to father males of the R1b and R1a lines might over thousands of years result in a dramatic shift in frequency of certain yDNA lines, the only way that such high levels of EEF could appear in northern Europeans is if these Bronze Age migrations were mostly male mediated. I think that's also a conclusion that can be drawn from the ancient mtDNA paper to which I linked upthread. A very small percentage of "new" mtDNA appears in the cultures most likely to have experienced gene flow from the east.



This would mean that if new ancient samples where discovered then the numbers would change by a greater degree ......ATM my EEF stands at 69.21 ...it could move 10 points by a new find(s) if I understood what you meant.

Angela
27-02-14, 22:12
This would mean that if new ancient samples where discovered then the numbers would change by a greater degree ......ATM my EEF stands at 69.21 ...it could move 10 points by a new find(s) if I understood what you meant.

That's virtually identical to the 70% level found for northern Italians in general.

That isn't precisely what I meant. I think that when whole genomes of "Mesolithic" peoples from the Balkans, Greece, perhaps Italy, are sequenced and subjected to the kind of analysis done by Lazaridis et al, it's *possible* that they were already EEF like. This is pure speculation, of course. I only think that it might be a possibility because of the mtDNA results released about Greek mesolithic samples in which not a single "U" mtDNA was found, and instead, there was a high preponderance of what we are accustomed to think of as "Neolithic" lineages. I've also often wondered how likely it is that Mesolithic peoples in the southeastern Balkans were substantially different from the "farmer" peoples of adjacent Anatolia. Every "farmer" culture was first a hunter-gatherer culture after all, and the distance between those two areas is miniscule in the grand scheme of things.

Alternatively, the hunter gatherers of the Balkans and Italy might turn out to not be EEF, but to be at the same time substantially different from both WHG and ANE. In that case, since you'd be dividing the "pie" into four instead of three pieces, the EEF component might go down for all Europeans.

I don't know if that makes sense.

MOESAN
28-02-14, 17:18
That's virtually identical to the 70% level found for northern Italians in general.

That isn't precisely what I meant. I think that when whole genomes of "Mesolithic" peoples from the Balkans, Greece, perhaps Italy, are sequenced and subjected to the kind of analysis done by Lazaridis et al, it's *possible* that they were already EEF like. This is pure speculation, of course. I only think that it might be a possibility because of the mtDNA results released about Greek mesolithic samples in which not a single "U" mtDNA was found, and instead, there was a high preponderance of what we are accustomed to think of as "Neolithic" lineages. I've also often wondered how likely it is that Mesolithic peoples in the southeastern Balkans were substantially different from the "farmer" peoples of adjacent Anatolia. Every "farmer" culture was first a hunter-gatherer culture after all, and the distance between those two areas is miniscule in the grand scheme of things.

Alternatively, the hunter gatherers of the Balkans and Italy might turn out to not be EEF, but to be at the same time substantially different from both WHG and ANE. In that case, since you'd be dividing the "pie" into four instead of three pieces, the EEF component might go down for all Europeans.

I don't know if that makes sense.

it makes sense!
I think you are right when you suppose like me the cultural-economical new finds (agriculture) could occur in a place which is only a peace of a greater human group territory:
the newly agricultors are not obliged to be different from their still hunter-gatherer neighbours, not EVERYWHERE
I confess I would be very glad if things were so simple as different/same culture - different/same genes - different/same language: helas! too easy: it is the ineterest and the boring aspect of History... but we keep on "working" (or "musing")...

Sile
28-02-14, 19:58
That's virtually identical to the 70% level found for northern Italians in general.

That isn't precisely what I meant. I think that when whole genomes of "Mesolithic" peoples from the Balkans, Greece, perhaps Italy, are sequenced and subjected to the kind of analysis done by Lazaridis et al, it's *possible* that they were already EEF like. This is pure speculation, of course. I only think that it might be a possibility because of the mtDNA results released about Greek mesolithic samples in which not a single "U" mtDNA was found, and instead, there was a high preponderance of what we are accustomed to think of as "Neolithic" lineages. I've also often wondered how likely it is that Mesolithic peoples in the southeastern Balkans were substantially different from the "farmer" peoples of adjacent Anatolia. Every "farmer" culture was first a hunter-gatherer culture after all, and the distance between those two areas is miniscule in the grand scheme of things.

Alternatively, the hunter gatherers of the Balkans and Italy might turn out to not be EEF, but to be at the same time substantially different from both WHG and ANE. In that case, since you'd be dividing the "pie" into four instead of three pieces, the EEF component might go down for all Europeans.

I don't know if that makes sense.

thanks, understood

BTW , with my WHG and ANE , I sit between Bergamo ( north Italians ) and South France:rolleyes2:

Angela
28-02-14, 21:03
thanks, understood

BTW , with my WHG and ANE , I sit between Bergamo ( north Italians ) and South France:rolleyes2:

Yes, precisely between.
Southwest French-Gascons?-67.5
Northern Italians-Bergamo-71.5
Sile-69.5

A lot of places in southern Europe seem to hover around that 70% number, just like a lot of central Europe hovers around the 50-55% number. (and England for example)



I wonder if the SE French would have a similar 68% or even higher level? I would guess it would be at least the same, but there might be slight differences even within the region.

In terms of all of Europe south of the Alps and the Carpathians, the only areas with a more "northern" swing are northern? France at 55, and Crotia with a similar number.

The Spanish swing the other way, with a score of 81, surpassing the Greek 79% level. Of course, Sicily, along with Malta, comes in even higher.

Interesting also how the French Basque come in at 59%, but Pais Vasco is 71%.

MOESAN
28-02-14, 23:29
there are some differences between the two basque communauties, the northern ones (France) being supposed to be "purer" as a whole - the spanish part is slightly heterogenous according to regions but also to industrial towns opposed to rural places - I would say that for the outside look, Basques of some regions of S-Basque cpuntry seem showing a stronger 'megalithic people' impact than the France ones -
the France Basques (the old ethnic ones) were supposed by the past scholars to present too some endogamic drifts and deviations, even concerning physical aspect

Alan
02-03-14, 02:38
I still take them into account, yes.



[QUOTE]You mean the Thracian sample? The Balkans is not the Near-East and I don't think he resembles Sardinians in particular. I think the authors concluded that because the Thracian was mostly south-european and Sardinians are the most south-european-like today. And I think it's because in many admixtures the 'Caucasus' component gets subjugated by 'mediterranean'. And regarding Ötzi, he in fact showed some hints of 'Caucasus' admixture (10-20% in some runs) when compared to Gök4 who had none in the same runs, so there must have been some difference already.


I never said he resembles Sardinians nor did I said Sardinians are representative for the Neolithic people. I said the Thracian man (Thracia is the closest you can get to Western Asia) was fully Ötzi like while he should actually show more traces of "West Asian" or "Caucasus" if the Neolithic farmers were Caucasus like but he didn't, he was almost exactly like Ötzi with no additional "West Asian" admixture.

So my point is if individuals from Iron Age! Thracia were fully Mediterranean like while modern Balkanians even have more Caucasus admixture, why should we expect the Near East to have been Caucasus_Gedrosia dominated during the Neolithic. This is something I already wrote in Dienekes blog spot.

Sorry you again have a major mistake in your thinking. NOT Caucasus gets subjugated by Mediterranean BUT Mediterranean gets subjugated by Caucasus these kind of things are clear from Dienekes own articles. This is why Ötzi shows some "Caucasus" in K12, These genes are in fact Southern which got subjugated by Caucasus. But taken out the Southern from Caucasus. Ötzi shows no traces of the West Asian like genes as we see in the lower K's

Mediterranean/Southern appears in the lower K's (lower K's = more ancient/ more ancestral) while Caucasus only appears in the higher K's (K12).

Also we see from Dienekes's own break up of K12 and K7 components that it is Caucasus which subjugates parts of Mediterranean and I already explained this in my previous post.

Caucasus is basically Gedrosia with additional "Farmer" (Mediterranean) component. Please see here. -> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v80ztSRUM9E/UE3JklSVh5I/AAAAAAAAGUg/cUR5Ps2TBA8/s1600/_7.png

Gedrosia is basically "Proto West Asian" + 8% ANI in modern components or defined in ancient components 60% ANE and 40% farmer (my estimation).

Caucasus is basically "Proto West Asian" + additional Southern (Mediterranean) and few North European or in ancient components 40% ANE and 60% farmer.







I think 'Caucasus' started to spread in the near-east while the yet non-'Caucasus' farmers spread to europe - yes, during the neolithic. Otherwise I find it hard to explain how the whole near-east including Arabia is flooded by 'Caucasus' today. Even assuming that you are right, 'Caucasus' eventually made it into the near-east and Basques must have escaped before 'Caucasus' arrival (under assumption of this one particular theory that Basques have a possible Caucasus link, which I don't really believe). Else, Kartvelian language (again assuming a basque link) must have developed in a 0% 'Caucasus' population, which I find not plausible given that 'Caucasus' is modal in Georgians today.


Friend you still make the mistake that you think in modern components which causes flaws in this theory. The "whole" Near East was not "flooded" by Caucasus like people which replaced Mediterranean entirely. The Caucasus+Gedrosia components themselves ARE the modern results of the ANE admixing INTO the wider Near East. This is exactly what I tried to explain you in my first post. Mediterranean component is not to 100% the component of farmers. Mediterranean component itself is made up of an more ancient component (early farmers) with additional (~15%) WHG admixture. WHILE Caucasus itself is made up of 60% farmer + 40% ANE. In other words Caucasus did not replace farmer component. Back than it likely didn't even exist. But it first appeared as result of farmers crossing with ANE people. So around 50% of the genes in the Caucasus which have merged into "West Asian" are in fact descend from an older farmer like people while the other 50% is descend from an ANE like people. But since these components like "Caucasus", "Mediterranean" etc were taken as granted to be ancestral, we thought Caucasus was an entirely different component from Mediterranean just showing close affinities to each other. But nowadays we know that allot of the genes which made the Caucasus and Mediterranean components appear had one related ancestors (farmer component).


Also the Caucasus mountains provide the environment for isolation and development of specific autosomal components in small pockets. Also north-east europe is more 'Caucasus' admixed today, while north-west europe is more 'Gedrosia' admixed, despite NE europe has less farmer admixture. It is one of the reasons why I don't think that 'Caucasus' is just 'Gedrosia' plus a little more farmer admixture.

The Neolithic farmers reached Northwest Europe when there wasn't anything called Gedrosia nor Caucasus. These few percentages more of "Gedrosia" which we see in Northwest Europe are the remnants of the Indo Europeans which brought it with them as part of an older and bigger component. It all appears more complicated because we still think and try to explain these things with modern components.




In my understanding Mal'ta was directly ancestral to 'Gedrosia' and Kalash only, but not to 'Caucasus'. 'Caucasus' is certainly related, but it is not clear at all how.


Right Gedrosia and Kalash appear more to be descend from Mal'ta but the genes among Caucasus which are descend from Mal'ta got eaten up mostly by European in the Mal'ta paper.

ElHorsto
02-03-14, 17:01
I never said he resembles Sardinians nor did I said Sardinians are representative for the Neolithic people. I said the Thracian man (Thracia is the closest you can get to Western Asia) was fully Ötzi like while he should actually show more traces of "West Asian" or "Caucasus" if the Neolithic farmers were Caucasus like but he didn't, he was almost exactly like Ötzi with no additional "West Asian" admixture.

So my point is if individuals from Iron Age! Thracia were fully Mediterranean like while modern Balkanians even have more Caucasus admixture, why should we expect the Near East to have been Caucasus_Gedrosia dominated during the Neolithic. This is something I already wrote in Dienekes blog spot.


I see your point, but I did not claim that the near-east already was dominated by 'Cacuasus' during the neolithic. Read again more carefully please, I said that it started to spread during the neolithic and there are places where it eventually dominates like today in Georgia. If you disagree then no problem, because I'm doing bets only, the problem I have is that you present your bets as facts.
I find it not plausible that the whole near-east was purely southern/mediterranean during the whole neolithic, because ANE likely was strong already in neighbouring Iran and for sure in BMAC and Harrappan culture. It is off to assume they were mediterranean/southern, even Ötzi-like. See here, this can not all (except NW-europe) be the result of post-neolithic migrations only:
http://imageshack.us/a/img802/8164/ya7s.png



Sorry you again have a major mistake in your thinking. NOT Caucasus gets subjugated by Mediterranean BUT Mediterranean gets subjugated by Caucasus these kind of things are clear from Dienekes own articles. This is why Ötzi shows some "Caucasus" in K12, These genes are in fact Southern which got subjugated by Caucasus. But taken out the Southern from Caucasus. Ötzi shows no traces of the West Asian like genes as we see in the lower K's


I think your mistakes are to ignore that
1. the same ancestral autosomal can split-up.
2. isolation and genetic drift can happen.
3. you confuse the meaning of ancestry and calculator subjugation.

You can be perfectly right that the 'Caucasus' signal in Ötzi comes from the old southern/mediterranean (or whichever) component, but at the same time it still can be unique such that it leads some calculators to create an own component like 'Caucasus'. This would make 'Caucasus' not obsolete as an independent migrational signal. And then why does Gok4 not show any 'Caucasus' in any run, while Ötzi in some does?



Mediterranean/Southern appears in the lower K's (lower K's = more ancient/ more ancestral) while Caucasus only appears in the higher K's (K12).
Also we see from Dienekes's own break up of K12 and K7 components that it is Caucasus which subjugates parts of Mediterranean and I already explained this in my previous post.


Caucasus is basically Gedrosia with additional "Farmer" (Mediterranean) component. Please see here. -> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v80ztSRUM9E/UE3JklSVh5I/AAAAAAAAGUg/cUR5Ps2TBA8/s1600/_7.png

Gedrosia is basically "Proto West Asian" + 8% ANI in modern components or defined in ancient components 60% ANE and 40% farmer (my estimation).

Caucasus is basically "Proto West Asian" + additional Southern (Mediterranean) and few North European or in ancient components 40% ANE and 60% farmer.


That might actually be true and it looks already different from what you posted before, no objection. We disagree about the timing. Yet I would not take the image too literally. Mind the misinterpretations of the Mat'ta genome where some erroneously believed to see an admixed individual.



...
In other words Caucasus did not replace farmer component.
...


Again, this was not what I claimed.



...
Back than it likely didn't even exist.
...


This is what I question.



But it first appeared as result of farmers crossing with ANE people. So around 50% of the genes in the Caucasus which have merged into "West Asian" are in fact descend from an older farmer like people while the other 50% is descend from an ANE like people. But since these components like "Caucasus", "Mediterranean" etc were taken as granted to be ancestral, we thought Caucasus was an entirely different component from Mediterranean just showing close affinities to each other. But nowadays we know that allot of the genes which made the Caucasus and Mediterranean components appear had one related ancestors (farmer component).


Whatever, it's the timing where we disagree.
You might want to dig in the forum and find out that actually I was the first one here who questioned the ancientness of 'Caucasus' compared to 'Southern/Mediterranean' by using the same Dieneke's image you mention now. I still don't understand how you conclude that any slight 'Caucasus' signal is obsolete when it shows. Even if it originates from a more ancestral 'Southern' or whatever, it still can have meaning.



The Neolithic farmers reached Northwest Europe when there wasn't anything called Gedrosia nor Caucasus. These few percentages more of "Gedrosia" which we see in Northwest Europe are the remnants of the Indo Europeans which brought it with them as part of an older and bigger component. It all appears more complicated because we still think and try to explain these things with modern components.


Strawman. I kept saying this all over long ago, this is not my point. I know that no Gedrosia has been found so far in mesolithic and neolithic europe. Only Ötzi showed some inconsistency regarding 'Caucasus', so I wonder why not all farmers? I find it not very probable that coincidentally only the 'souther' part which is part of the 'caucasus' component was erased by WHG admixture.

Sile
02-03-14, 20:28
Strawman. I kept saying this all over long ago, this is not my point. I know that no Gedrosia has been found so far in mesolithic and neolithic europe. Only Ötzi showed some inconsistency regarding 'Caucasus', so I wonder why not all farmers? I find it not very probable that coincidentally only the 'souther' part which is part of the 'caucasus' component was erased by WHG admixture.

I do not recall otzi ever being branded a farmer.....a hunter yes

Sile
02-03-14, 20:35
Yes, precisely between.
Southwest French-Gascons?-67.5
Northern Italians-Bergamo-71.5
Sile-69.5

A lot of places in southern Europe seem to hover around that 70% number, just like a lot of central Europe hovers around the 50-55% number. (and England for example)



I wonder if the SE French would have a similar 68% or even higher level? I would guess it would be at least the same, but there might be slight differences even within the region.

In terms of all of Europe south of the Alps and the Carpathians, the only areas with a more "northern" swing are northern? France at 55, and Crotia with a similar number.

The Spanish swing the other way, with a score of 81, surpassing the Greek 79% level. Of course, Sicily, along with Malta, comes in even higher.

Interesting also how the French Basque come in at 59%, but Pais Vasco is 71%.

thanks , i found the breakup

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2240/q1is.png

I am
EEF 69.21
WHG 20.20
ANE 10.59

so if I read it correctly, I am
EEF = 50% south franch and 50% bergamo ( bulgarian ?)
WHG = south french
ANE = Bergamo
(http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2240/q1is.png)

Sile
02-03-14, 21:44
Its surprising that apart from the WHG, the spanish and albanians are nearly identical. And as you say croatians are the most northern of the balkan people....a lot of difference.

In regards to Bergamo....if we use it as others do, then there is a swiss and tyrolese component added in

Basques - if there is a difference , as noted, which is so great between french and spanish basques, then are they the same ethnicity or is the term basque purely linguistic for these two ?

martiko
02-03-14, 23:22
I am amazed at the difference between Basque, I have not seen, but I do not know those who live in Spanish Basque country because I live in France and I contacted him, as Basque, through my family who did not speak with the Spanish Basque country.
It is true that to destroy the Basque many Spaniards are introduced by Franco.
Perhaps this is what explains the difference between Basque under Spanish rule, and basque in French domination. Is that there has been no import esqpagnols or French in the Basque country under French domination.
the Basque country nobody talks about Caucasian language, or like, this is a fact!

my parents are spanish Basque 6280



Population



North_Atlantic
49.01%


Baltic
14.85%


West_Med
23.87%


West_Asian
5.72%


East_Med
5.50%










East_Asian
0.46%





Amerindian
0.60%












West Med 23.87+East Med 5.5+West Asian 5.72= 30.09 Mediterranean

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0eqw4oE2u0
Hegazti txikiak izan nintzen
Esan zidaten,
kaiola
Jaio nintzen,
Orduan nuen arrano bat bihurtu zen
Hautsitako kaiola euli
Beldur naiz,
Dut uste liburua
Atsegin izan dut,
Dut ireki
hegan egin zidan,
baina laster konturatu nintzen
harkaitz baten hanka
da lotutako
kate motz eta astun.




Translation and explanation of the song Txori Ttikia:
When I was little bird they told me I was born to live in a cage.
Later, when an eagle I turned, dreading to see me flee by breaking the cage, they made me believe that I was free.

Then they opened the doors for me to fly, but I realized very quickly that my leg was tied to a rock by a short and heavy chain.

Alan
02-03-14, 23:23
El Horsto

you are right, it seems we are getting closer with our thoughts just a few differences in timing and explanation.

Unfortunately I don't have the time to give another detailed answer.

My only point was that the "Caucasus or Gedrosia " components which nowadays dominate the Near East didn't exist back than so Ötzi or the "proto Basques" don't need to show any sign of Caucasus like component (since Caucasus is a relatively knew evolved component) to be from somewhere in the Caucasus. Note I am not claiming that they are from the Caucasus but it is possible that they are from a place where the Caucasian languages might have originated from too. (fertile crescent).

ElHorsto
03-03-14, 00:49
El Horsto

you are right, it seems we are getting closer with our thoughts just a few differences in timing and explanation.

Unfortunately I don't have the time to give another detailed answer.

My only point was that the "Caucasus or Gedrosia " components which nowadays dominate the Near East didn't exist back than so Ötzi or the "proto Basques" don't need to show any sign of Caucasus like component (since Caucasus is a relatively knew evolved component) to be from somewhere in the Caucasus. Note I am not claiming that they are from the Caucasus but it is possible that they are from a place where the Caucasian languages might have originated from too. (fertile crescent).

Sure it is possible, I just meant that there are many other than basque populations living today who are much closer genetically to Georgians despite they don't speak Basque nor Kartvelian. This is no killer argument, just a blemish for this theory.

Angela
03-03-14, 01:51
thanks , i found the breakup

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2240/q1is.png

I am
EEF 69.21
WHG 20.20
ANE 10.59

so if I read it correctly, I am
EEF = 50% south franch and 50% bergamo ( bulgarian ?)
WHG = south french
ANE = Bergamo
(http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2240/q1is.png)

I'm afraid that isn't how it works. All European populations have all three elements, just in different proportions, although, as I said, the proportions by region are strikingly similar. Bergamo has WHG and EEF as well.
Bergamo:
EEF: 71.5
WHG: 17.7
ANE: 10.8

I don't see how your levels have anything to do with the southwest French. You have the levels typical for someone from your area. Your levels show a basically northern Italian signature, with perhaps a slight Balkan input.

Take a look at all three columns for each population at the link I provided above.
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2013/12/23/001552.DC1/001552-1.pdf



And Oetzi wasn't a hunter-gatherer. His people were way beyond that...past the Neolithic and into the metal ages. He not only carried a copper tool, he had high arsenic levels in his blood, an indication that he may have been a metal smith. These people just hunted to supplement their diet.

Angela
03-03-14, 01:57
I am amazed at the difference between Basque, I have not seen, but I do not know those who live in Spanish Basque country because I live in France and I contacted him, as Basque, through my family who did not speak with the Spanish Basque country.
It is true that to destroy the Basque many Spaniards are introduced by Franco.
Perhaps this is what explains the difference between Basque under Spanish rule, and basque in French domination. Is that there has been no import esqpagnols or French in the Basque country under French domination.
the Basque country nobody talks about Caucasian language, or like, this is a fact!

my parents are spanish Basque 6280



Population



North_Atlantic
49.01%


Baltic
14.85%


West_Med
23.87%


West_Asian
5.72%


East_Med
5.50%










East_Asian
0.46%





Amerindian
0.60%












West Med 23.87+East Med 5.5+West Asian 5.72= 30.09 Mediterranean

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0eqw4oE2u0
Hegazti txikiak izan nintzen
Esan zidaten,
kaiola
Jaio nintzen,
Orduan nuen arrano bat bihurtu zen
Hautsitako kaiola euli
Beldur naiz,
Dut uste liburua
Atsegin izan dut,
Dut ireki
hegan egin zidan,
baina laster konturatu nintzen
harkaitz baten hanka
da lotutako
kate motz eta astun.




Translation and explanation of the song Txori Ttikia:
When I was little bird they told me I was born to live in a cage.
Later, when an eagle I turned, dreading to see me flee by breaking the cage, they made me believe that I was free.

Then they opened the doors for me to fly, but I realized very quickly that my leg was tied to a rock by a short and heavy chain.

The "Mediterranean" of these calculators can't be compared to the EEF of Lazaridis et al. North Atlantic and Baltic contain high levels of EEF as well. I'm afraid those calculators were misread by many as representing truly ancestral populations, when that was not the case. To get to their real meaning, you had to pay attention to the posts where Dienekes showed how they could be expressed in terms of one another.

Sile
03-03-14, 03:41
I'm afraid that isn't how it works. All European populations have all three elements, just in different proportions, although, as I said, the proportions by region are strikingly similar. Bergamo has WHG and EEF as well.
Bergamo:
EEF: 71.5
WHG: 17.7
ANE: 10.8

I don't see how your levels have anything to do with the southwest French. You have the levels typical for someone from your area. Your levels show a basically northern Italian signature, with perhaps a slight Balkan input.

Take a look at all three columns for each population at the link I provided above.
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2013/12/23/001552.DC1/001552-1.pdf



And Oetzi wasn't a hunter-gatherer. His people were way beyond that...past the Neolithic and into the metal ages. He not only carried a copper tool, he had high arsenic levels in his blood, an indication that he may have been a metal smith. These people just hunted to supplement their diet.

thanks

There is no southwest French it is south french .....from marseilles to nice ( provenzal area )

the instructions I got for plotting EEF, WHG and ANE is to run lines between the closest 2 , plot the number and then do same system for other 2 ( WHG ANE ) and then link the dots.......inside this triangle would be one's marker.


wasn't otzi trading between modern trentino and north tyrol ..............IIRC they ( scholars) knew his path back and forwards in the alps.....does not indicate a farmer , neither a herder, unless he was killed for his herd.

slight balkan!!! ......grandmother and her capoistrian- venetian family ...LOL

Alan
03-03-14, 08:26
Sure it is possible, I just meant that there are many other than basque populations living today who are much closer genetically to Georgians despite they don't speak Basque nor Kartvelian. This is no killer argument, just a blemish for this theory.


Well, yes you are right and I don't disagree the ergativity in basque and Georgian could also simply be from some proto farmer language spoken in the fertile crescent. I just wanted to clarify that components like Caucasus_Gedrosia, North Euro probably formed around the Bronze Age (maybe even later). Even North European very likely has a good chunk of other admixture (proto farmer?) additional to the ANE in it.

ElHorsto
03-03-14, 21:29
I do not recall otzi ever being branded a farmer.....a hunter yes

Hunter or not, he does not belong to mesolithic hunter-gatherers but to a chalcolitic culture.

Angela
03-03-14, 22:06
thanks

There is no southwest French it is south french .....from marseilles to nice ( provenzal area )

the instructions I got for plotting EEF, WHG and ANE is to run lines between the closest 2 , plot the number and then do same system for other 2 ( WHG ANE ) and then link the dots.......inside this triangle would be one's marker.


wasn't otzi trading between modern trentino and north tyrol ..............IIRC they ( scholars) knew his path back and forwards in the alps.....does not indicate a farmer , neither a herder, unless he was killed for his herd.

slight balkan!!! ......grandmother and her capoistrian- venetian family ...LOL

I'm sorry, I'm not following you here. May I ask where and from whom you heard about this method for plotting your ancestry in terms of the relationship between EEF, WHG and ANE?

In terms of my comment about a north Balkan influence, obviously I was not speaking about anything necessarily within a genealogical time frame. However, in terms of pre-history, there are many postulated gene flows from the northern Balkans, among others, into northeastern Italy. I'm sure you're well aware of them. (Of course, there was gene flow from the Balkans into all of Italy, but that influence is stronger east of the Apennines, and in the northeast. I've seen the results of a number of northeastern Italians on 23andme, and that pull from the Balkans Balkans is clear in terms of where they plot, their "cousins" and other things.)

As to Otzi's cultural affiliations, it is difficult to be too precise, because such conclusions are heavily based on ceramics, burial practices etc. among other things, and Otzi was killed in the mountains, not in his settlement. Some have speculated that he was a member of the Tamins-Carasso-Isera 5 Alpine culture, but it is just speculation so far. There were obviously also ties between Otzi's people and those of the Copper Age Remedello culture of northern Italy, as the blade is fashioned in the Remedello style.

What is beyond doubt, however, is that he was a man of the Copper Age, or, if you prefer, the late Neolithic. The age of the hunter-gatherers had long passed in this part of Europe. The fact that he happened to be hunting wild game, and had just gorged himself on the meat of these wild animals in no way contradicts that fact...hunting was often used in northern Italy and the greater Alpine regions to supplement the Neolithic diet. In addition, Oetzi may well have been on the run in these mountains, and merely using his survival skills.

One way we know that he was a man of the Neolithic, if it wasn't clear in other ways, is that his diet is Neolithic, as evidenced by analysis of his intestinal contents and by hair analysis as well.

From Wiki:

Analysis of Ötzi's intestinal contents showed two meals (the last one consumed about eight hours before his death), one of chamois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamois) meat, the other of red deer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_deer) and herb bread. Both were eaten with grain as well as roots and fruits. The grain from both meals was a highly processed einkorn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkorn) wheat bran,[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-15) quite possibly eaten in the form of bread. In the proximity of the body, and thus possibly originating from the Iceman's provisions, chaff and grains of einkorn and barley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley), and seeds of flax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax) and poppy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppy) were discovered, as well as kernels of sloes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prunus_spinosa) (small plumlike fruits of the blackthorn tree) and various seeds of berries growing in the wild.[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-16) Hair analysis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_analysis) was used to examine his diet from several months before.

Hunter Gatherers didn't consume bread made of highly processed eikhorn wheat.

In addition:
Ötzi's teeth showed considerable internal deterioration from cavities. These oral pathologies may have been brought about by his grain-heavy, high carbohydrate diet.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-22)

Analysis has also shown that:
By examining the proportions of Ötzi's tibia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibia), femur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femur) and pelvis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_pelvis), Christopher Ruff has determined that Ötzi's lifestyle included long walks over hilly terrain. This degree of mobility is not characteristic of other Copper Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_Age) Europeans. Ruff proposes that this may indicate that Ötzi was a high-altitude shepherd.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-19)

So, he may indeed have been a shepherd. Regardless, herding is a development from the Neolithic revolution. Hunter Gatherers were not herders. Domesticated animals had to be bred for hundreds if not thousands of years, and learning domestic animal managment required other hundreds of years. Herding was just the type of Neolithic economy that was practiced in marginal areas that weren't suited to Neolithic crops.

In addition:
High levels of both copper particles and arsenic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic) were found in Ötzi's hair. This, along with Ötzi's copper axe which is 99.7% pure copper, has led scientists to speculate that Ötzi was involved in copper smelting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smelting).[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-18)

So, he might have been traveling because of his craft. Regardless, I don't see, given all this detailed evidence, how he wouldn't have been living in a farming community.

He probably did not trade for his copper items; he created them of either Alpine copper, or, as I have seen stated, copper from the Ligurian copper mines.

Sile
04-03-14, 19:52
I'm sorry, I'm not following you here. May I ask where and from whom you heard about this method for plotting your ancestry in terms of the relationship between EEF, WHG and ANE?
other forum


In terms of my comment about a north Balkan influence, obviously I was not speaking about anything necessarily within a genealogical time frame. However, in terms of pre-history, there are many postulated gene flows from the northern Balkans, among others, into northeastern Italy. I'm sure you're well aware of them. (Of course, there was gene flow from the Balkans into all of Italy, but that influence is stronger east of the Apennines, and in the northeast. I've seen the results of a number of northeastern Italians on 23andme, and that pull from the Balkans Balkans is clear in terms of where they plot, their "cousins" and other things.)

Doug agrees with you in what he told me, italian/austrian/slovenian area, even though he marked my 3 dots on his map to the french/italian/swiss borders

and history states that the balkans was attached to italy by land as far south as ancona!


As to Otzi's cultural affiliations, it is difficult to be too precise, because such conclusions are heavily based on ceramics, burial practices etc. among other things, and Otzi was killed in the mountains, not in his settlement. Some have speculated that he was a member of the Tamins-Carasso-Isera 5 Alpine culture, but it is just speculation so far. There were obviously also ties between Otzi's people and those of the Copper Age Remedello culture of northern Italy, as the blade is fashioned in the Remedello style.

What is beyond doubt, however, is that he was a man of the Copper Age, or, if you prefer, the late Neolithic. The age of the hunter-gatherers had long passed in this part of Europe. The fact that he happened to be hunting wild game, and had just gorged himself on the meat of these wild animals in no way contradicts that fact...hunting was often used in northern Italy and the greater Alpine regions to supplement the Neolithic diet. In addition, Oetzi may well have been on the run in these mountains, and merely using his survival skills.

One way we know that he was a man of the Neolithic, if it wasn't clear in other ways, is that his diet is Neolithic, as evidenced by analysis of his intestinal contents and by hair analysis as well.

From Wiki:

Analysis of Ötzi's intestinal contents showed two meals (the last one consumed about eight hours before his death), one of chamois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamois) meat, the other of red deer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_deer) and herb bread. Both were eaten with grain as well as roots and fruits. The grain from both meals was a highly processed einkorn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkorn) wheat bran,[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-15) quite possibly eaten in the form of bread. In the proximity of the body, and thus possibly originating from the Iceman's provisions, chaff and grains of einkorn and barley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley), and seeds of flax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax) and poppy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppy) were discovered, as well as kernels of sloes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prunus_spinosa) (small plumlike fruits of the blackthorn tree) and various seeds of berries growing in the wild.[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-16) Hair analysis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_analysis) was used to examine his diet from several months before.

Hunter Gatherers didn't consume bread made of highly processed eikhorn wheat.

In addition:
Ötzi's teeth showed considerable internal deterioration from cavities. These oral pathologies may have been brought about by his grain-heavy, high carbohydrate diet.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-22)

Analysis has also shown that:
By examining the proportions of Ötzi's tibia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibia), femur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femur) and pelvis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_pelvis), Christopher Ruff has determined that Ötzi's lifestyle included long walks over hilly terrain. This degree of mobility is not characteristic of other Copper Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_Age) Europeans. Ruff proposes that this may indicate that Ötzi was a high-altitude shepherd.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-19)

So, he may indeed have been a shepherd. Regardless, herding is a development from the Neolithic revolution. Hunter Gatherers were not herders. Domesticated animals had to be bred for hundreds if not thousands of years, and learning domestic animal managment required other hundreds of years. Herding was just the type of Neolithic economy that was practiced in marginal areas that weren't suited to Neolithic crops.

In addition:
High levels of both copper particles and arsenic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic) were found in Ötzi's hair. This, along with Ötzi's copper axe which is 99.7% pure copper, has led scientists to speculate that Ötzi was involved in copper smelting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smelting).[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%c3%96tzi_the_Iceman#cite_note-18)

So, he might have been traveling because of his craft. Regardless, I don't see, given all this detailed evidence, how he wouldn't have been living in a farming community.

He probably did not trade for his copper items; he created them of either Alpine copper, or, as I have seen stated, copper from the Ligurian copper mines.
[/QUOTE]

What I am saying is....if he was a farmer he would be less likely to go travelling 100 of kilometres back and forth, these are signs he was something other than a farmer, we are talking about the alps and not some flat pastural lands

Angela
05-03-14, 04:28
What I am saying is....if he was a farmer he would be less likely to go travelling 100 of kilometres back and forth, these are signs he was something other than a farmer, we are talking about the alps and not some flat pastural lands


Regularly traveled back and forth hundreds of kilometers? I'm not aware of any data which supports that.

Wiki...
"Analysis of pollen, dust grains and the isotopic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope) composition of his tooth enamel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth_enamel) indicates that he spent his childhood near the present village of Feldthurns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldthurns), north of Bolzano, but later went to live in valleys about 50 kilometres farther north.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi#cite_note-12)

Both of these areas are within Italy and south of the place where his body was found.

This is a map showing the track of the journey during which he died; why he made it will probably never be known:
http://donsmaps.com/images10/icemanmapsm.jpg

It's interesting that the Neolithic settlement area where it is speculated he might have lived is on a trade route. A menhir typical of the Copper Age has been found there...

This is the analysis of what some of the evidence has to say about his lifestyle:
"For his childhood, the researchers matched the oxygen-isotope ratios in tooth enamel to waters in a few valleys about 60 kilometers southeast of the discovery site. This area includes a copper-age archeological site Feldthurns, where soils closely match the strontium-lead isotopes in the Iceman's teeth. Feldthurns also features a menhir -- a one-piece stone carving -- typical of copper-age Europe, and it is here, Müller says, that Iceman may have called home, at least while a young sprout.

Although the study demonstrates the precision of isotopic analysis, it only paints a part of Iceman's life, Müller wrote. "Our data are consistent with the Iceman spending one to two months per year (decreasing over his life) as a shepherd herding sheep or goats at pastures at high altitudes, above the timber line. This 'transhumance' has been practiced for about six millennia in the Alps, as deduced from the pollen spectrum in bog profiles, and it is still performed today. The shepherd hypothesis has been a favored hypothesis of the Iceman's occupation for a few years, but it is not certain, of course."
http://whyfiles.org/shorties/140mummy_iceman/

As I said, it is possible that he spent a great deal of his time involved in the making of copper instruments, as well.


Btw, traversing many kilometers would be totally typical for someone practicing transhumant herding...and herding is just a sub-type of agriculture. Just as one example, the peasants of the Alpi Apuane used to graze their animals high in the mountains in the summer, and bring them back down to lower altitudes in the fall. Often, the very young, or the very old, were designated to watch the herds up in the mountains. At other times, larger groups would make the move. The same was true in the Ligurian Apennines and the Tuscan/Emilian Apennines. They took simple cheese making utensils with them for part of their sustenance.

They look sufficiently like mountains, yes?

Pastore Apuano with his herding dog...
http://www.tipresentoilcane.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/apuano_aper.jpg

Transumanza:
http://www.barganews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/transumanza-3-di-7.jpg



These are the kinds of rough dwellings in which they lived before they went back to their lower elevation villages. In Liguria it's called a casella.
http://beniculturali.altaviadeimontiliguri.it/beniAVML/resources/cms/images/casella_d0.jpg

https://www.google.it/search?q=transumanza+nelle+Alpi+Apuane&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=p3sWU53UJdPI0AGehoHYDQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1252&bih=588#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=bFpwUqnyUVnloM%253A%3BSTvY7ZZzSvNMVM%3Bhttp% 253A%252F%252Fwww.barganews.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2011%252F11%252Ftransumanz a-3-di-7.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.barganews.com%252F2 011%252F11%252F05%252Fla-transumanza-non-e-un-pranzo-di-gala%252F%3B640%3B480

I'm just putting this picture because I like it!
http://www.quotazero.com/album/albums/userpics/10902/transumanza_a_mendatica_-_mucche_e_campanacci_3_by_enrico_pelos.jpg

We're fond of our cows, and if we're fond of them, they too have to be prettied up...

LeBrok
05-03-14, 04:53
http://beniculturali.altaviadeimontiliguri.it/beniAVML/resources/cms/images/casella_d0.jpg


That's the coolest stone igloo I've ever seen!

LeBrok
05-03-14, 05:11
other forum


What I am saying is....if he was a farmer he would be less likely to go travelling 100 of kilometres back and forth, these are signs he was something other than a farmer, we are talking about the alps and not some flat pastural lands

I'm not sure what are you trying to say? He was a hunter therefore he was exclusively WHG? Or that he was typical Early European Farmer (with some WHG) who became a hunter as an occupation?

Sile
05-03-14, 11:42
Regularly traveled back and forth hundreds of kilometers? I'm not aware of any data which supports that.

Wiki...
"Analysis of pollen, dust grains and the isotopic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope) composition of his tooth enamel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth_enamel) indicates that he spent his childhood near the present village of Feldthurns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldthurns), north of Bolzano, but later went to live in valleys about 50 kilometres farther north.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi#cite_note-12)

Both of these areas are within Italy and south of the place where his body was found.

This is a map showing the track of the journey during which he died; why he made it will probably never be known:
http://donsmaps.com/images10/icemanmapsm.jpg

It's interesting that the Neolithic settlement area where it is speculated he might have lived is on a trade route. A menhir typical of the Copper Age has been found there...

This is the analysis of what some of the evidence has to say about his lifestyle:
"For his childhood, the researchers matched the oxygen-isotope ratios in tooth enamel to waters in a few valleys about 60 kilometers southeast of the discovery site. This area includes a copper-age archeological site Feldthurns, where soils closely match the strontium-lead isotopes in the Iceman's teeth. Feldthurns also features a menhir -- a one-piece stone carving -- typical of copper-age Europe, and it is here, Müller says, that Iceman may have called home, at least while a young sprout.

Although the study demonstrates the precision of isotopic analysis, it only paints a part of Iceman's life, Müller wrote. "Our data are consistent with the Iceman spending one to two months per year (decreasing over his life) as a shepherd herding sheep or goats at pastures at high altitudes, above the timber line. This 'transhumance' has been practiced for about six millennia in the Alps, as deduced from the pollen spectrum in bog profiles, and it is still performed today. The shepherd hypothesis has been a favored hypothesis of the Iceman's occupation for a few years, but it is not certain, of course."
http://whyfiles.org/shorties/140mummy_iceman/

As I said, it is possible that he spent a great deal of his time involved in the making of copper instruments, as well.


Btw, traversing many kilometers would be totally typical for someone practicing transhumant herding...and herding is just a sub-type of agriculture. Just as one example, the peasants of the Alpi Apuane used to graze their animals high in the mountains in the summer, and bring them back down to lower altitudes in the fall. Often, the very young, or the very old, were designated to watch the herds up in the mountains. At other times, larger groups would make the move. The same was true in the Ligurian Apennines and the Tuscan/Emilian Apennines. They took simple cheese making utensils with them for part of their sustenance.

.

he died 100 kilometres away as the crow flies, 5000 years ago, maybe no tracks or paths what is he farming or herding

http://imageshack.com/scaled/medium/196/36or.jpg (http://imageshack.com/photo/my-images/196/36or.jpg/) Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.com)

Angela
05-03-14, 22:09
he died 100 kilometres away as the crow flies, 5000 years ago, maybe no tracks or paths what is he farming or herding

http://imageshack.com/scaled/medium/196/36or.jpg (http://imageshack.com/photo/my-images/196/36or.jpg/) Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.com)

I'm going to try this one last time. You began by saying he was a hunter-gatherer...that is absurd. No analysis of him or his culture has ever suggested any such thing. It would be a total anomaly given his time and place. Hunter gatherers hadn't been in this area for a thousand years or more. He was a man of the late Neolithic (as evidenced by his stomach contents among many other things) or perhaps said in a different way, the early Metal Ages, as evidenced by the fact that he carried a COPPER ax, and had high levels of arsenic in his blood. There is a huge difference between being a hunter-gatherer and being a late Neolithic man who HUNTS. I don't know how to make this any clearer.

As to what motivated his last back and forth trip into the mountains, no one knows. Numerous researchers have proposed numerous theories...perhaps he was fleeing from an enemy, perhaps he was part of a group that had been involved in a raiding party. These are just some of the proposed theories.

I've posted a few links up thread. A simple google search will produce many more. Perhaps you could read them and post your synopses on one of our Oetzi threads.

None of that, however, has anything to do with the kind of culture within which he lived, which was a Late Neolithic one that grew crops and probably practiced transhumance, as well as being involved in metal working. Transumanza is the form of agriculture where people sow their crops in the lower elevations, but, in addition, drive their domesticated animals to high mountain pastures in the summer and then bring them back down to their settlements in the fall. It's been practiced in mountainous areas of Italy for thousands of years, all over Europe in marginal lands for that matter. I fail to see why this is a difficult concept to grasp.

We also know that Oetzi spent his entire life living in a few valleys south of the current Austria/Italy border.

And now, my patience for discussing this issue is at an end, and it is off-topic for this thread, to boot.

LeBrok
05-03-14, 22:59
Oetzi turns out to be 51.9% "Southern" and 43.1% "Atlantic_Baltic" in the K=7 analysis, with noise levels of the other components. The salient point is that he seems to be lacking the "West Asian" component, unlike most Europeans, except Basques and Sardinians, who have:

Basques: 27.6% "Southern" and 69.5% "Atlantic_Baltic"
Sardinians: 46.2% "Southern" and 52% "Atlantic_Baltic"
http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2012/03/first-look-at-genome-of-tyrolean-iceman.html

I'm not sure, but I think Otzi would have higher EEF admixture than even Sardinians today, therefore genetically super farmer.

Alan
05-03-14, 23:16
he died 100 kilometres away as the crow flies, 5000 years ago, maybe no tracks or paths what is he farming or herding

http://imageshack.com/scaled/medium/196/36or.jpg (http://imageshack.com/photo/my-images/196/36or.jpg/) Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.com)


half nomadic herders are known to travel from two places back and forth depending on the season.

And as far as I know about Ötzi, scientist are pretty convinced that he was murdered while fleeing.

Angela
05-03-14, 23:22
http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2012/03/first-look-at-genome-of-tyrolean-iceman.html

I'm not sure, but I think Otzi would have higher EEF admixture than even Sardinians today, therefore genetically super farmer.

Correct...

Sile
06-03-14, 08:09
I'm going to try this one last time. You began by saying he was a hunter-gatherer...that is absurd. No analysis of him or his culture has ever suggested any such thing. It would be a total anomaly given his time and place. Hunter gatherers hadn't been in this area for a thousand years or more. He was a man of the late Neolithic (as evidenced by his stomach contents among many other things) or perhaps said in a different way, the early Metal Ages, as evidenced by the fact that he carried a COPPER ax, and had high levels of arsenic in his blood. There is a huge difference between being a hunter-gatherer and being a late Neolithic man who HUNTS. I don't know how to make this any clearer.

As to what motivated his last back and forth trip into the mountains, no one knows. Numerous researchers have proposed numerous theories...perhaps he was fleeing from an enemy, perhaps he was part of a group that had been involved in a raiding party. These are just some of the proposed theories.

I've posted a few links up thread. A simple google search will produce many more. Perhaps you could read them and post your synopses on one of our Oetzi threads.

None of that, however, has anything to do with the kind of culture within which he lived, which was a Late Neolithic one that grew crops and probably practiced transhumance, as well as being involved in metal working. Transumanza is the form of agriculture where people sow their crops in the lower elevations, but, in addition, drive their domesticated animals to high mountain pastures in the summer and then bring them back down to their settlements in the fall. It's been practiced in mountainous areas of Italy for thousands of years, all over Europe in marginal lands for that matter. I fail to see why this is a difficult concept to grasp.

We also know that Oetzi spent his entire life living in a few valleys south of the current Austria/Italy border.

And now, my patience for discussing this issue is at an end, and it is off-topic for this thread, to boot.

I really do not know why you are upset,
Hunter-gathers did not just vanish overnight once farmers appeared.

Ok, he was a neolithic man that hunts, I accept that, but I cannot see anywhere where he "farmed" in a small area, he traveled, maybe swapping game for grain from farmers, etc...........the point is that he was known to have moved around a lot

Alan
06-03-14, 10:07
I really do not know why you are upset,
Hunter-gathers did not just vanish overnight once farmers appeared.

Ok, he was a neolithic man that hunts, I accept that, but I cannot see anywhere where he "farmed" in a small area, he traveled, maybe swapping game for grain from farmers, etc...........the point is that he was known to have moved around a lot

It's his DNA, which is almost completely different from that of Mesolithic Hunters, which as we already know makes it completely impossible that he is simply an "acculturated" Hunter.

Sile
06-03-14, 10:33
It's his DNA, which is almost completely different from that of Mesolithic Hunters, which as we already know makes it completely impossible that he is simply an "acculturated" Hunter.

Isn't this what we are talking about
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9159/6g9k.png


WHG and WHG/ANE: indigenous European hunter-gatherers
EEF: mixed European/Near Eastern Neolithic farmers
ANE/WHG: Proto-Indo-European invaders from the Eastern European steppe
ENA/ANE: early Uralics from the Volga-Ural region
EEF/WHG/ANE: late Indo-Europeans (ie. Celts, Germanics and Slavs)


http://imageshack.com/a/img812/1967/pp61.png

Otzi early copper age 3,300BC and Stuttgart early Neolithic 5,500BC) had derived A/A alleles in rs1426554(in gene SLC24A5).
Loschbour(La Brana-1 may have been close) had 100% distinct fully European ancestry a form that laz 2013 found may only exist in Europe today. In northern Europe it is very high in at least north-eastern Europe Mesolithic ancestry is the majority.
Stuttgart and Otzi though had majority near eastern ancestry with some European hunter gatherer blood.

Alan
06-03-14, 16:54
Isn't this what we are talking about
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9159/6g9k.png


WHG and WHG/ANE: indigenous European hunter-gatherers
EEF: mixed European/Near Eastern Neolithic farmers
ANE/WHG: Proto-Indo-European invaders from the Eastern European steppe
ENA/ANE: early Uralics from the Volga-Ural region
EEF/WHG/ANE: late Indo-Europeans (ie. Celts, Germanics and Slavs)


http://imageshack.com/a/img812/1967/pp61.png

Otzi early copper age 3,300BC and Stuttgart early Neolithic 5,500BC) had derived A/A alleles in rs1426554(in gene SLC24A5).
Loschbour(La Brana-1 may have been close) had 100% distinct fully European ancestry a form that laz 2013 found may only exist in Europe today. In northern Europe it is very high in at least north-eastern Europe Mesolithic ancestry is the majority.
Stuttgart and Otzi though had majority near eastern ancestry with some European hunter gatherer blood.





I know what you are saying, it is correct for most but EEF is not a balanced mix of European and Near Eastern farmer. It's not 50/50.

It's more around the 80-90% Near Eastern farmer + 10-20% WHG admixture which they catch up first in the Balkans.

From your other posts it sounded like you tried to argue that Oetzi was not a farmer but basically a Hunter because he was traveling through the mountains.

LeBrok
06-03-14, 18:39
I really do not know why you are upset,
Hunter-gathers did not just vanish overnight once farmers appeared.
Otzi lived 5,000 years after first farmers showed up in europe.

Why would you say overnight? I'm sure you know how long 5,000 years is.






Ok, he was a neolithic man that hunts, I accept that, but I cannot see anywhere where he "farmed" in a small area, he traveled, maybe swapping game for grain from farmers, etc...........the point is that he was known to have moved around a lot

Nobody would argue much if from beginning you said that he was genetically a neolithic farmer who was possibly hunting in the area.

Aberdeen
07-03-14, 00:12
I grew up the son of a farmer, and I used to hunt quite a bit. And I was born a few years after Otzi.

Sile
07-03-14, 08:07
I grew up the son of a farmer, and I used to hunt quite a bit. And I was born a few years after Otzi.

hmm.....related!

martiko
12-03-14, 23:50
http://beniculturali.altaviadeimontiliguri.it/beniAVML/resources/cms/images/casella_d0.jpg


HAHAHAH ! J'agre.

martiko
13-03-14, 00:35
impractical Ethnology this people so weird. the ancestor masquerade carnival avit place in the heart of winter in February, but today it is also summer season, because Basque immigrants returning home to relive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRjdO7Naq-w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3f-jW_eCeo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rW3Qvkli1k

and also listen to some Basque

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtDAbDyc0-4

Angela
13-03-14, 15:55
@Martiko, I'm surprised you find them so surprising...I remember similar huts from Basque country very well...you can tell I was quite an avid hikerhttp://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/smilies/main/smile.gif

This one on the Pilgrimage Way to Compostela isn't quite round, but the dry stone construction is, of course, identical...I've seen similar huts in the Balkans as well...quite a widespread phenomenon.

http://www.santiago-compostela.net/pix/chemin046.jpg

Aberdeen
13-03-14, 16:44
Round "beehive" huts were still being used for storage in some parts of rural Canada in the late 20th century. I was told that the style was brought here by Scottish Highland and Irish settlers, and that at one time people used to keep small livestock such as sheep in such buildings, or even live in them. But I don't think there's necessarily a cultural connection between different groups in Europe that build in that style. It's a very easy way to make a building, and farmers would have lots of stones that they cleared from their fields.