Evolutionary History of R1b M269 based on modern Iberian data

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,325
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
I wanted to make sure the title emphasized that this is not ancient dna despite the bow to ancient dna discoveries.

New clues to the evolutionary history of the main European paternal lineage M269: dissection of the Y-SNP S116 in Atlantic Europe and Iberia:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015114a.html

Abstract

"The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269."

It's behind a paywall so that's all I can offer. Obviously, nothing can be evaluated based on this. I'll see if at least the data tables are available.

Ed. They are, and here's the link:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/suppinfo/ejhg2015114s1.html
 
Last edited:
I can't read the article either
we allready know for a long time now there is no origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge
it looks more and more like R1b was distributed in Europe with Bell Beaker folks which started in Portugal some 4500-5000 years ago
maybe that is where P312/S116 was born, TMRCA estimates fit with this time perod
anyway knowing that the mysterious Bell Beakers spread all over western Europe in a very irregular pattern, this will be a very complicated story to unravel
but with cheaper DNA
testing and better knowledge of SNPs and Y-DNA pedigree a flood of data is going to come and more and more attempts will be made to do so
 
It's difficult to judge the validity of their conclusions without being able to read the whole paper, but the information in the Supplementary Info section doesn't at all advance the discussion or prove their main point.

It's mainly a bunch of frequency distribution tables and lists of strs.

Those frequency distribution tables for Iberia could be added to the tables being kept here, so that's a plus, but how that's supposed to prove when S116 entered Iberia and from what direction is beyond me. Maybe they flesh it out in the paper.

In terms of those frequency distributions, it's interesting, and different from prior studies, I think, in that U-152 seems to be highest in Galicia and Asturias, and DF27 in Barcelona, where I would expect U-152 to be highest if U-152 is related to Urnfield.

220px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg


We might expect DF-27 to be highest there and down the east coast if it moved into Iberia from Central Europe.
 
New clues - Iberian M269 paper

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269.


I have not read it yet
 
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

The dissection of S116 in more than 1500 individuals from Atlantic Europe and the Iberian Peninsula has provided important clues about the controversial evolutionary history of M269. First, the results do not point to an origin of M269 in the Franco–Cantabrian refuge, owing to the lack of sublineage diversity within M269, which supports the new theories proposing its origin in Eastern Europe. Second, S116 shows frequency peaks and spatial distribution that differ from those previously proposed, indicating an origin farther west, and it also shows a high frequency in the Atlantic coastline. Third, an outstanding frequency of the DF27 sublineage has been found in Iberia, with a restricted distribution pattern inside this peninsula and a frequency maximum in the area of the Franco–Cantabrian refuge. This entire panorama indicates an old arrival of M269 into Western Europe, because it has generated at least two episodes of expansion in the Franco–Cantabrian area. This study demonstrates the importance of continuing the dissection of the M269 lineage in different European populations because the discovery and study of new sublineages can adjust or even completely revise the theories about European peopling, as has been the case for the place of origin of M269.


I have not read it yet

There is already a thread dedicated to it.
 
Now the threads are merged into one.
 
OK, thanks.

This is from Anthrogenica:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...tlantic-Europe-and-Iberia-Valverde-et-al-2015

This study appears to show a few caveats that are extremely interesting nonetheless, per Table-S1 one can observe the following:

1-All the R1b-M269 found in people living in the Basque Country(both Native and nonNative) and Irish people is R1b-L11+ derived.

2- The greatest frequency(92.23%) of R1b-L11 and by extension R1b-M269 is found in Rural Basques(n=193)(which are more likely to be Native Basques instead of descendants of XIX century immigrants from other parts of Spain). This is confirmed when sampling people with Basques surnames (n=230) who attain a frequency of R1b-M269 of 92.17%.

3- Notice the stark contrast between the R1b frequency of Basque natives(n=230 R1b-M269 92.17%) and residents in the Basques Country without Basques surnames(n=111 R1b-M269 62.16%). The fact that the same pattern repeats itself in the Urban(n=148 R1b-M269 69.59%) vs Rural (n=193 R1b-M269 92.23%) is further proof that Urban environments tend be misleading when it comes to haplogroup frequencies because the population might not be native to area and more often than not is not.

4-Another interesting thing is that most of the migration to the Basque Country occurred from areas that were once part of the Celtic Stronghold of Iberia(i.e. Galicia, Extremadura, Castillay Leon) yet their frequency of R1b-M269 is far lower than that found amongst Basques. This points to the fact that there might have been a substantial non-R1b component in Celtic speakers in nonBasque Iberia. Notice the frequency of R1b-M269 in Galicia(n=70) is 61.43% the second lowest in Iberia, and the lowest frequency of R1b-M269 is in Asturias(n=63) yet another Celtic Stronghold only having 57.14% R1b-M269. Though I caution the lower samples sizes might create distortion, but this is something that has been observed before(i.e. Adam.et.al.2008, Myres.et.al.2011).

5- This leads me to believe that the introduction of R1b-L11 lineages into the Basques must have happened from the North, not the South, otherwise we would see far lower frequencies of R1b-L11 in them. Now the interesting part is that French Basque actually have lower frequencies of R1b-M269+ at around 75% than Spanish Basques, but then again this could be due to low sample size in the French Basque side.

6- In sharp contrast to the Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012 study we see no increased frequency of R1b-L21/M529 in Basques, while the frequency is indeed somewhat greater(2.17% vs 1.8%) in Native Basques than in their nonNative citizens is still falls far too short of the ~20% frequencies reported by Martinez-Cruz.et.al.2012. It could be that most of those 20%+ frequencies were drawn from samples of ~50 people, which could point to a small sample size bias. Nonetheless we see that R1b-L21 peaks in Asturias(6.35%), Galicia(7.14%) and Cantabria(6.25%) bringing up the links between those areas and the rest of Atlantic Europe during the Atlantic Bronze Age. It also worth noting that rural inhabitants of the Basque Country actually have lower R1b-L21 frequency than their Urban counterparts. Also notice the drop in R1b-L21 frequency as one moves east and south of Cantabria.

7- R1b-U152 appears to peak in Galicia and Asturias at 7.94% and 8.57%, yet it is found at frequencies above 4% in all of Iberia except for Basques and Portuguese(n=110 R1b-U152=3.64%) where the maximum frequency peaks at 2.59% in the rural inhabitants of the Basque Country or 2.17% in the Native Basques. I wonder if this is the result of Roman influence in Iberia or the result of Celtic migrations from Central Europe.

8- The greatest frequency of R1b-D27 happens in the Basque Country, and specially in rural inhabitants of the Basque Country at 71.50%, as well as Native Basques at 70.87%, however this frequency peak is by virtue of the overall frequency of R1b-M269 in the region. Here is the frequency of R1b-DF27 as a percentage of R1b-S116/P312 in all of the sample:

Valverde.et.al.2015_Table-S1-Modified_zpsh2bq4v3h.jpg


9-Notice that while the relative frequency of R1b-D27/R1b-S116 does have the third(After Portugal(n=110) and Madrid(n=99)) highest value in Iberia in the Basque Country, the frequency amongst rural inhabitants of the Basque Country is lower at 77.97% than their Urban counterparts at 81.25%, likewise the Native Basques have a lower frequency at 77.99% than their nonNative citizen counterparts at 82.81%. Now of interests is the frequency peaks of R1b-S116*(xDF27,U152,L21,DF19,L238) in Irish(n=146) at 23.85% and Native Basques(n=230) at 17.22%, also notice the contrast between the frequency of R1b-S116* between rural(n=193) inhabitants of the Basque Country at 17.51% and Urban(n=148) inhabitants of the Basque Country at 12.50%, likewise nonNative Basques(n=111) citizens have 10.94% R1b-S116*. Also of interest is the 0% R1b-S116* found in Galicia and Asturias though this could be due to low sample size. I'm guessing some of these R1b-S116* amongst Native Basques might be R1b-M65, anybody want to take a guess at what it might be amongst Irish and Basques? R1b-DF99????

Thoughts??

And "Paleolithic" talk:

They really missed the boat IMO when they call for a Paleolithic movement, as if they completely ignored recent ancient DNA . . .

=====

I would be a good article pre-NGS-Y full sequences without the Paleolithic nonsense error. At least we have the first complete article with Iberian DF27 proportions. We can observe in the Y Full tree that R-P312-S116 branched fastly and intensively with various minor branches, so the unresolved P312(xDF27, U152, L21, L238, DF19) results are quite expected.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-P312/

=====

Yes, kind of an anachronism, a paper reminiscent of about 2006, except now they are restricting the claim to P312 (S116) rather than to all of M269, as was once done.

=====

Given that we have no more than 3 Mesolithic Samples from West of Germany and South of Sweden, and no more than 35 Neolithic samples from France/Iberian/British Isles I would hold on onto making conclusions about the status of P312 in Western Europe. Thus I don't think the authors need to ignore ancient DNA to make any claims, because most of the Western European ancient DNA comes from a single burial in Treilles, France, thus there are vast regions that remain to be sampled.

Now what do you make of the big proportion of R1b-S116* in the Irish, DF99??

=====

R1b-M269 (and its son R1b-P312) has not been found in any site in Neolithic Western Europe. R1b-M269 appears for the first time in Bell Beaker (R1b-P312 being the majority there), Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden (R1b-U106 on this case) sites. It can't be "old" as in Neolithic Europe. Furthermore, in Bell Beaker, Corded Ware and Battle-Axe Sweden an autosomal Yamnayan component was detected. Back at Yamnaya, nearly all samples have been R1b-M269 so far. It fits with the mainstream model of the spread of IE languages in Western Europe, including the timeframe.

Clearly, a 2nd "IE homeland", as Gimbutas called it, was established somewhere in Central Europe (after the steppe invasion) and from there R1b-P312 came to conquer Western Europe (the UK, France and Iberia, as well as Northern Italy).

=====

The frequencies of R1b in Iberia are rather consistent outside the Basque population at 55-65%. The higher rate among Basque may be simply due to their relative isolation and lack of immigrants to their regions. The spread of P312 and descendants almost mimics Beaker pottery to a tee. The arrival of these newcomers in the late Neolithic, and whatever their origins needs to be determined. They appear to have distinct traditions from the earlier farmers whom they supplanted and/or absorbed.

The Danish rate of R1b 37.36% is a little lower than I usually see (40-44%), but can be explained by the fact Beaker was not as influential in the north west as it was in the SW of Europe.

ADD: The higher rate of R1b can be explained in Basque if BB were almost exclusively a varied mix of P312, coupled with a lack of immigration to the region. This appears to be the case from aDNA.

=====

Yet not a single R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found east of Germany, and most of the Yamnaya samples have been R1b-Z2105 derived, which is a cousin clade to European R1b-L51 but not ancestral to it. As for the autosomal component, Corded Ware is the one that has massive amounts of Yamnaya-like ancestry and R1a majority haplogroups. The German Beaker amount of Yamnaya-like component can be easily explained with interaction with the next door neighbors who had 70%+ of the components. We know that 2000 BC Northern Iberians were still much like Neolithic farmers and Lactose Intolerant, yet 3000 BC Peripheral Basques have lactose tolerance in them.

Now I would kindly ask everybody to try to focus our attention to the thread topic which is the dissection of R1b-S116 in Iberians and to a lesser extent some Western European populations, let's leave the Paleolithic/Neolithic/Yamnaya discussion for the appropriate thread.

=====

But the Paleolithic assertion is an essential part of this paper. And not a single ancient R1b-L11 derived lineage has been found west of Germany either.

Wasn't there a paper some years ago by a group of Indian scientists that placed the origin of R1a in India? This sort of looks like an occidental version of the same sort of thing.

=====

Fair enough, but this thread is about a study that chose to ignore ancient DNA and that is IMO a major oversight. But to your point, there are plenty of active topics on ancient DNA to carry on about it here.

=====

Let me make something clear, I do am not advocating a Paleolithic/Neolithic origin of R1b-P312 in Western Europe, I'm simply mentioning that there is a great lack of ancient DNA in Western Europe, and want to add that the widespread presence of ANE/Yamnaya component in Europe, specially in Western European can be attributed to an immensely number migrations(Roman Empire, Vikings,, Celts, Germanics, etc) that have occurred in Europe since the Bronze Age. Also keep in mind that Basques who have one of the greatest(if not the greatest) frequencies of R1b-P312 in Europe have a local minimum in ANE/Yamnaya ancestry related, even lower(though not by much) than their Iberian neighbors who have far lower frequencies of R1b-M269. Yes I know we can attribute it to a founder's effect, etc, well then let's try to explain the modest R1b-U152 frequency in Sardinians and their even lower amount of Yamnaya/ANE ancestry, or how about the higher Yamnaya/ANE in Italians compared to Iberians. It's clear that R1b was not the only vector that carried ANE/Yamnaya into Southern Europe. Now I find it fascinating that the German Beaker samples are so uniformly R1b, and that the very first R1b-P312 in Europe have popped up in there, but let's wait until we get more Megalithic samples from Western Europe.

Remember a single R1b-P312 sample from Western Europe dating back to 3000 BC and looking like Neolithic farmers autosomally and lacking Yamnaya/ANE in them would throw the "R1b_L11 in Western Europe is from Steppe" theory upside down on its axis. Right now we have a 5000 BC farmer, who might or might not have been R1b-V88, let's keep an open mind.

=====

That's very true, but it seems less and less likely with each succeeding ancient y-dna result.

My mind is ready to open, but someone is going to have to knock on the door of it bearing some convincing evidence. A 7,000-year-old Neolithic farmer who was M269- and probably P297-, like those V88+ guys in Africa, doesn't do it for me.

=====

Just curious - you guys don't think Bell Beaker is relevant to this thread on origins of P312 in Iberia?
tongue.gif
Just throwing that out there... It's clearly not what the paper is saying, but I am using this as a counter argument.

=====

Beaker and its origins are the things that most puzzle me. Fully developed Beaker is very "kurgan" looking, but supposedly its oldest sites are in Iberia.

It's confusing. The idea that Beaker began in Iberia could be wrong (see this recent paper by Christian Jeunesse), or perhaps early Beaker in Iberia lacked any P312 but acquired it in Central Europe. Another possibility is the one suggested by Jean M in her "Stelae People" idea, i.e., a steppe people bearing P312 came to Iberia fairly early and became involved in the Iberian genesis of Beaker.


=====

I'm wondering if the R1b-U152 and R1b-L21 presence in Iberia is far more recent, one R1b-L21 due to Atlantic trades with the Isles and R1b-U152 due to the Romans or if they came with the original R1b-P312 population, in any case it's obvious that R1b-P312 entered Iberia from the North and diffused throughout, thus the North African entry given by Klyosov is I think highly unlikely, same thing with an origin of R1b-P312 in Iberia, it's very clear that Iberia is a recipient of R1b-P312 not a donor. As for the German Beakers it is my understanding that the only subclade of R1b-P312 found has been R1b-U152 thus far.

So some food for thought, an R1b-DF27 population enters Iberia? Or does an R1b-xDF27 population enter Iberia and R1b-DF27 is born in Iberia? Is that the very first layer of R1b-P312 in Iberia, or was there significant amount of R1b-U152/L21/others siblings? If we assume the birth of R1b-DF27 was outside of Iberia, then where?

=====

DF27 is extremely regular in almost all Iberian regions (around 40-50%) and we can observe in the YFull tree several basal DF27 Iberian individuals
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-DF27/
Only in the Basque Country DF27 is superior than 60% and rural or native Basque surnames are superior to 70%, so the concentration and the point of entrance was from the Basque Atlantic Pyrenees to the West and South. DF27 was born there or immediately adjacent because they were the main Iberian peopler and only minor branches moved to other distant places but never with a big concentration comparable with that pioneer region of distribution.

=====

The subclades of DF27 that are best known to be numerous in the modern Basque population are quite young (born a few centuries AD, not two or three millennia BC). They are found in an early Basque cemetery, but it likewise is several centuries AD. There has so far been no confirmed association of DF27, or any subclade of it, in Copper or Bronze Age Iberia. Many of the other subclades/branches of DF27 have their distribution weighted far to the north, northeast, and east of any place in Iberia, Basque or otherwise. Including the Nordic countries, Poland, Ukraine, and Armenia -- not just the nearby Isles, or Netherlands, where many have been misled into thinking their YDNA lineage is Basque. Some of the branches found in abundance elsewhere (especially Z295 and above) are the ancestors, not the descendants, of the DF27 Basques who live there now.

It is a very, very common error to equate modern population density with ancient presence in the same place. Once that idea takes hold, it is really hard to overturn with mere evidence.

So one possibility is that P312 and / or DF27 came from the steppe to Iberia very early and became involved in the Iberian genesis of Beaker.

Question is - did they already speak Indo-European when they came ???

Because P312 / DF27 could come to Iberia from the steppe, and could be Non-Indo-European speakers. We can't exclude such a possibility.
 
The study also has a map:

ejhg2015114f1.jpg


Comments from Anthrogenica:

In my opinion this map is completely misleading. I believe P312 started peeling off from L11 at about the same time and place as U106. The path represented as P312 in the map I believe was likely taken by only some portion of P312, largely DF27, but again only some portion of that. The majority of L21 went northwest rather than southwest, and I think U152 split off long before P312 elements got to Spain. All subclades of P312 are well represented in Scandinavia, and I doubt very much this is due to a back migration from Iberia.

I believe this study supports the expansion of P312 in the Atlantic zone as indicated by the Hallast data.
By Atlantic, I mean the Isles, France and Iberia, with L21 and DF27 further West and U152 further East and extending into Germany.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-p312/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/iberian-dna/
My preferred route to Iberia and reflux migrations is via the Stelae People route.
It is also the shortest route either by sea or by road. If early Neolithic used boats then Bronze Age BBs could use boats and we know they were proficient coastal traders.
I am sure there was constant traffic in both directions.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/the-stelae-people/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-from-the-west/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/kemi-oba/
Remedello is noted by Allendoft as Neolithic and Bell Beaker as Bronze Age.
The pointed daggers images of late Remedello could have been adopted on early BB Stelae.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/european-bronze-age/
The expansion of DF27 appears to have happened in Iberia.
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-df27/
and DF21 in the Isles
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/r1b-l21/
DF27 is a brother to U152; both descend from one of the sons of P312/S116 (and L21, from a different son of P312). The ancient U152 Bell Beaker sample in southeastern Germany 4400 ybp [RISE563] is one indicator of the route of this population into Europe. It looks neither Iberian nor Mediterranean, except to those whose presuppositions incline them to see it as a novel exception to what they have previously hypothesized (in order to fit other, non-genetically based theories).
We can say the only relatively homogeneous regularity in all the Iberian Peninsula (except in the Basques) is DF27, because all other haplogroups and SNPs will have big Iberian regional variations. Another important question is DF27 basal diversity and again we can find Iberian branches in almost all DF27 branches, including several unique individual basal Iberian only DF27 branches, so we can think DF27 was the original Iberian R1b settler in terms of diversity, size and regular distribution in all Iberia.

About the route that R1b people took when expanding westward:

The sample is still very small but going with the evidence a more northerly route looks supported than any other. We now have pre-beaker copper age samples from north Italy and southern France that are emphatically non-R1b. Also from memory some Spanish samples that date to around the time of the earliest copper age in Iberia.

IMO its looking very much a route along the Danube or through central Europe to the north of the Danube for the ancestors of P312 people. A more southern route goes against all the ancient evidence to date. Usual caveat of very small sample though.

On possible origins of DF27 in Iberia:

It depends of age. If U106 could date to 3000BC or even slightly earlier then so does P312. If P312 dates to around 3000BC then DF27 cannot have been a great deal younger. My feeling is DF27 might be a little too old to have actually originated in beaker in Iberia which having recently chewed over the dates cannot be certain to be much more than a generation older than 2700BC. I suspect personally that DF27 emerged in west central Europe and had a founder effect in Iberia.
Archaeologically an out of the Pyrenees origin for P312 is absolute gibberish with no support at all. Also judging by the age now being suggested for U106 and its presence in CW and battleaxe P312 likely existed before beaker existed and probably before even CW existed. So I think its origin is WAY to the east of what is being suggested here. I actually find it hard to make sense of a 5000 year old steppe originated lineage (as surely all L23 is) originating anywhere much west of Ukraine. Frequencies mean absolutely nothing - that is a lesson we have learned again and again.
 
Speakers of Non-IE Iberian languages - who continued to live in Iberia until historic times (though they were intermingled with Celtic-speakers and with Non-Celtic IE speakers in the region, such as the Lusitanian-speakers) - could already have that R1b DF27 haplogroup.

Here are examples of already extinct, but recorded in history, Non-IE languages of Iberia:

Iberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_language
Tartessian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartessian_language
Aquitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquitanian_language
Turdetanian
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turdetani

Turdetanian was closely related to Tartessian.

And already extinct Non-Celtic IE languages spoken in ancient Iberia included for example:

Lusitanian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitanian_language
Sorothaptic - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorothaptic_language


And of course there were also Celtic languages in Iberia, which also got extinct later:

Celtiberian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtiberian_language
Gallaecian - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallaecian_language

So despite having a hodge-podge of Non-IE, Celtic, and Non-Celtic IE languages, we have a surprising Y-DNA homogeneity.

In any case, it seems that DF27 is the most native of all R1b lineages in Iberia.

So it would seem that DF27 was the lineage of Non-IE speakers, and modern frequency among the Basques confirms it.

It does not mean that it did not come from the steppe, though. Question is if those were originally Indo-Europeans, or not.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the expansion from the steppe into Europe included both IE speakers and another linguistic group ???

Or those Non-IE speakers descended from IE males who married Non-IE women and adopted their languages ???

Iberia is an interesting case because it was one of places where Non-IE languages survived for a very long time.

Non-IE languages in Iberia survived until the Roman conquest and until the adoption of Latin by its people.
 
The major value of the paper is in providing frequency figures for R1b in Iberia from what I can see, and maybe providing some clues about gene flow within the peninsula.

I certainly don't think that data proves their map is correct or that this all happened in the Paleolithic. For that to be the case everything we know about dating and the "young" ages for L11 and down stream would have to be thrown out. I find it rather bizarre, in fact, that they make a bow to steppe dispersals and then place it in the Paleolithic. Do they think the subclades found in Samara Yamnaya people hadn't mutated in tens of thousands of years?

One thing we've learned is that modern frequency distributions may or may not have anything to do with origins and direction of gene flow. This kind of thinking seems very anachronistic.

As for Beakers, no offense to anyone, but until we get some ancient dna there will be no resolution of this issue. The question is, were the original Beaker people G2 and I2 people who brought some technology and culture to central Europe which was adopted by incoming R1b people, or did R1b people get to Iberia in time for the genesis of early Beaker and then move to central Europe. I don't know, and neither does anyone else. The only way to know is to analyze an early Beaker sample.

If I had to choose an option, I might go for what's behind door number 1, partly because from what I remember of the archaeology (the description of the pots etc) of the first German Bell Beaker it appeared more primitive than what had been produced in Iberia.

Imo, the answer to these questions isn't going to come from a province by province run down of frequency distributions of different types of R1b in modern Iberia.
 
It would really be much easier if DF27 was not under M269. :)

I certainly don't think that data proves their map is correct or that this all happened in the Paleolithic. For that to be the case everything we know about dating and the "young" ages for L11 and down stream would have to be thrown out. I find it rather bizarre, in fact, that they make a bow to steppe dispersions and then place it in the Paleolithic. Do they think the subclades found in Samara Yamnaya people didn't mutate in tens of thousands of years?

DF27 looks steppe-derived during the Chalcolithic period, just like the rest of P312 and M269.

But we do know that until the very Roman conquest in Iberia there lived at least as many Non-IE speakers as IE speakers.

Does it mean that not only Indo-Europeans came from the steppe, and that not all of R1b M269 people spoke Indo-European?

Or do we really believe that all those Non-IE Iberians, Tartessians, Aquitanians and Turdetanians were Non-R1b peoples?
 
It would really be much easier if DF27 was not under M269. :)



DF27 looks steppe-derived during the Chalcolithic period, just like the rest of P312 and M269.

But we do know that until the very Roman conquest in Iberia there lived at least as many Non-IE speakers as IE speakers.

Does it mean that not only Indo-Europeans came from the steppe, and that not all of R1b M269 people spoke Indo-European?

Or do we really believe that all those Non-IE Iberians, Tartessians, Aquitanians and Turdetanians were Non-R1b peoples?


It's definitely a puzzle, Tomenable. I don't know the answer. If anyone's figured it out, I'm all ears.:)

If some steppe R1b people did not speak Indo-European languages, then it would make sense of it all neatly, but that would be turning everything on its head. Where would they have come from that they didn't speak a form of Indo-European? If they stayed on the steppe until 3,000 BC or so how could they have avoided speaking Indo-European? Maybe they were in Cucuteni or somewhere else in the Balkans where they adopted the languages of the Neolithic farmers? Or maybe they moved to certain areas in the Balkans before Indo-European was really established and then got pushed out? This is just wild, idle speculation though, unsupported by any evidence. Then there's the question of how did they get to eastern Spain, although we could speculate it was by sea. Might they have been connected with Or were those people J2? If the ancestors of the Iberians were R1b they would presumably carried upstream clades though, yes?

Of course, there's always Koch out there who purports to think that Tartessian is Celtic, and that Celtic developed out of the Atlantic Bronze Age, but he doesn't seem to have convinced many people, and it doesn't explain all the R1b in the eastern parts of Spain.

In terms of other explanations for the route of the Celtic languages into Iberia, there does seem to be a definite "western" tilt to them,yes? So, if they came into Iberia from central Europe relatively late, did they come through the Pyrenees at the western end, or did they wind up there because the areas further east were more densely populated? Or, might the western areas have been more suited to cattle herding than the east? I don't know enough about land use in ancient Iberia to have a definite opinion, but it seems possible. Someone you quoted speculated that the high DF27 in the Basques proves that was the route. I don't see that as necessarily the case given how young the Basque clades are and the fact that this looks so much like a pretty recent founder effect.

Speaking of the Basques, Aquitanian looks as if it's related to Basque, and I've seen speculations that the Basques are descended from Aquitanians who retreated into the Pyrenees. Then supposedly men from the surrounding area, R1b men, and downstream DF27 at that, married into the community but adopted the language of their wives. It could happen, I'm sure, but we're talking about huge swathes of the Iberian peninsula where we would have to hypothesize that this happened. Of course, we don't have good data or at least extensive data from Aquitaine in France, so maybe DF7 is very concentrated there as well. If it is, then we've got a whole other large area where steppe people adopted other languages.

I don't know about Iberian either. It used to be speculated that the Ligures and the Iberians were related peoples, both being descendents of the Cardial Neolithic. Then linguists started saying the ancient Ligurian language (not the modern Ligurian variant of Italian) was an Indo-European language from before Italo-Celtic differentiated. Nothing like that is claimed for Iberian however. So perhaps it's true for both the ancient Ligurian and Iberian peoples, but the Ligurians mixed with an Indo-European group arriving from the area of modern France, and later "Celtic" speakers once again arrived in the first millenium BC, creating the documented Celt-Ligurians, and that nothing similar happened with the Iberians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligures

Maybe, until very late in the game, R1b was more frequent in the west but everything got mixed because of the planned population relocations during the Reconquista. I've always felt that given that fact it's very difficult to figure out the movement of R1b into and around the Iberian peninsula.
 
If the first IE in Iberia were an artisan/trader minority connected to copper then they may have adopted the language of the majority population.

DF27 seems to be centered very near an ancient copper producing region in the Pyrenees

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-DF27.gif

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...4m2!3m1!1s0xd50d95992853d1d:0x40665174813aea0

(I should try and google the other two df27 peaks in Iberia to see if they have a copper connection also.)

Brittany had silver and gold mines.

Ireland, Wales and SW England had gold, silver and copper (and later tin). The western edge of Norway has copper.

The Basque country has a minority of the clade that became the Irish clade.

#

If correct I don't know if you could call these people Celtic or not. I think they likely came from the same place but if they were originally a minority they may have adopted or partially adopted the language / culture / religion of the majority.

If correct the full La Tene / Hallstatt Celts arrived from Central Europe later.

#

The gist of the argument would be during the metal ages the source regions for population expansion hopped around in a sequence from
- first farmer regions
- copper producing regions
- a subset of the above regions which had arsenic copper or copper+tin to make bronze (which regions had those???)
- iron producing regions (e.g. La Tene/Halstatt)

#

also this could explain HG resurgence as a founder effect if the miners went into remote mountain regions after copper and married local HG women and expanded dramatically later
 
This R1b-L11 folk seems to be related to Troy.
Troy was founded at 3000BC. And there is a theory that their language is IE Luwian related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_language

I've always leaned in that direction myself. However, the upcoming paper seems to indicate that a sample from barely a few kilometers from the site of Troy was very Neolithic farmer like indeed.

Of course, there have been many "Troys", and the inhabitants of one level were not necessarily autosomally like the inhabitants of a prior level.

Without a sample from later periods at Troy I don't know how it could be proved. I'm not totally convinced that their culture necessarily tells the tale, either. Look at some parts of the Hungarian Neolithic and Remedello.
 
I've always leaned in that direction myself. However, the upcoming paper seems to indicate that a sample from barely a few kilometers from the site of Troy was very Neolithic farmer like indeed.

But the sample is from Late Neolithic, Troy foundation is quite late. And it could be a sudden appearance of new people. But anyway let's wait that sample and his real age.
 

This thread has been viewed 33618 times.

Back
Top