Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 142

Thread: Southern Neolithic route brought Megaliths from the Levant to Western Europe

  1. #51
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Not necessarily. They could go hunting because of hunting instinct and not from real need. I have friends who still go hunting in 21 century, every time they can. They bring deer or wild boar and they eat the meat. Of course not from necessity. I have friends who go fishing, and I do it sometimes too, not from need for food, but from joy of the experience. We go pick mushrooms, again from joy doing it and taste for mushrooms alone, and not from need of extra nutrients. It can only be explained by h-g instinct still present in us. From efficiency point of view, all this time spend on walking and finding wild food, is more efficiently used when food is cultivated around the house, and animals tended close by.
    Farming versus hunting is not about lifestyle, it is about survival of offspring.
    Anyway my point is that, because they still hunted this doesn't mean that they didn't herd sheep, cows or pigs already. There many pig bones in Gobelki Tepe. How do we know they hunted them and not herded them? In this time period wild pig and domesticated one looked exactly the same and had same genome.
    PPNA Natufians didn't have domesticates nor dairy products.
    They survived on cereals, pulses, fruits and nuts.
    They were very low on proteins.
    Some meat from the gazelle hunt was more than wellcome, allthough maybe only accessible to the elite.
    In PPNB, when they had goats many tribes stopped hunting.

  2. #52
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I lack haplos and auDNA for megalithers in diverse parts of Europe - could you please give me some data it you have them? It's a very important question. THanks in advance.
    My compagnon is the real fact and figures man. He's working on it. Here some pre- elementary collection:
    http://e-v22.net/webpage/E1b-V22Studies-list.html

  3. #53
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,692
    Points
    689,607
    Level
    100
    Points: 689,607, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpenjager View Post
    Any T1* could be perfectly T1a* as well as T1a3b because of that I have not mentioned T1a*. Anyway, I believe that is very unlikely that a fourth brother lineage survived since 16000 ybp, even the three brothers known to have live descendants are miraculous. I think there is not too much haplogroups with 3 live brother branches dated of the same time.
    Why a fourth brother lineage? What I was trying to explain was that 50 to 90% of Early Neolithic male lineages are now extinct. That's why there are lots of *. If all the know modern SNPs are tested, the * shows that there are no other mutations shared with modern people and therefore that this lineage is extinct. In living people the * only means that they didn't test all Y-chromosomal SNPs (e.g. through BigY or a full genomic test) and that that individual's deep clade hasn't been identified yet. Of course we could also find new branches among ancient samples, but if they didn't survive to the present they are meaningless. There would be thousands of extinct subclades.
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  4. #54
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,692
    Points
    689,607
    Level
    100
    Points: 689,607, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    PPNA Natufians didn't have domesticates nor dairy products.
    They survived on cereals, pulses, fruits and nuts.
    They were very low on proteins.
    Some meat from the gazelle hunt was more than wellcome, allthough maybe only accessible to the elite.
    In PPNB, when they had goats many tribes stopped hunting.
    I doubt that in PPNA society meat was mainly reserved to the elite. They were closer to HG tribes than to agrarian civilisations. As you said, they only had a few crops, and those crops would have mostly complemented their ancestral hunter-gatherer diet, not the other way round. They were hunter-gatherers who did some basic cultivation on the side to diversify their diet, not farmers who hunted occasionally. Gazelles almost became extinct in the Middle East around 2500 BCE because Neolithic, Chalcolithic and EBA people kept hunting them regularly, despite having plenty of meat available from domesticated animals. PPBA Natufians who lacked domesticates would badly have needed meat from hunting. HG used to eating meat all the time cannot become vegetarian over a few generations.

  5. #55
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    I doubt that in PPNA society meat was mainly reserved to the elite. They were closer to HG tribes than to agrarian civilisations. As you said, they only had a few crops, and those crops would have mostly complemented their ancestral hunter-gatherer diet, not the other way round. They were hunter-gatherers who did some basic cultivation on the side to diversify their diet, not farmers who hunted occasionally. Gazelles almost became extinct in the Middle East around 2500 BCE because Neolithic, Chalcolithic and EBA people kept hunting them regularly, despite having plenty of meat available from domesticated animals. PPBA Natufians who lacked domesticates would badly have needed meat from hunting. HG used to eating meat all the time cannot become vegetarian over a few generations.
    yes, but in the Jordan Valley, north of the Dead Sea (Jericho, Netiv Hagdud, Gilgal, ..) the situation may have reversed quite quickly
    it is an area on the edge of the steppe, near the desert where probably supluses of cereals could be produced (there were storage facilities), and cereals probably became a commoditiy over there
    it has been suggested that the first domesticated cereals in the Tepecik area, which exported obsidian, was not grown there, but got there through trade
    it all depends on how these societies were organised and whether an elite emerged with control over the lower castes or not

  6. #56
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Why a fourth brother lineage? What I was trying to explain was that 50 to 90% of Early Neolithic male lineages are now extinct. That's why there are lots of *. If all the know modern SNPs are tested, the * shows that there are no other mutations shared with modern people and therefore that this lineage is extinct. In living people the * only means that they didn't test all Y-chromosomal SNPs (e.g. through BigY or a full genomic test) and that that individual's deep clade hasn't been identified yet. Of course we could also find new branches among ancient samples, but if they didn't survive to the present they are meaningless. There would be thousands of extinct subclades.
    Let's suppose E-V22 is an Early Neolithic marker which spread the neolithic from the Mediterranean to Northwestern Europe. Than indeed there is some full gnome evidence. Look at the latest Y-Full tree: https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V22/
    My specific deep clade is E-PH2818, my family shares this tree with a family from Wales and from Puerto Rico (=Iberian?).
    So....
    Last edited by Northener; 22-01-17 at 16:35.

  7. #57
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,000
    Points
    259,277
    Level
    100
    Points: 259,277, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    There's a difference between plant (and animal) cultivation, and domestication. Certain sites in the southern Levant have shown that the people were storing large quantities of still wild cereals. The first actual domestication took place north of there.

    "The earliest securely identified and dated examples of domestic emmer and einkorn come from sites in the Upper Euphrates valley such as Çayönü, Nevali Çori, and possibly Cafer Höyük (figure 2). These samples have been dated to about 10,500-10,200 cal BP during the Early PPNB, and indicate that emmer and einkorn domestication was well underway in the Fertile Crescent (Zohary et al, 2012: 42; Zeder, 2011: s224). The earliest domesticated barley was found in the Fertile Crescent and Anatolian Plateau from the Middle PPNB period at sites such as Tell Aswad (c. 10,200-9,550 cal BP) (Zohary, et al, 2012: 56). These discoveries have largely overturned previous acceptances that domesticated cereals first appeared in a core area in the southern Levant and subsequently spread out throughout the Near East (Zeder, 2011: s224)."

    Attachment 8397
    https://www.academia.edu/1529206/Evi...thic_Near_East

    As for how much hunting (and fishing, where appropriate) contributed to the diet of early Neolithic communities, it varied by time and place, but it's quite surprising to me how little hunting, or fishing, was done by some Neolithic groups. It's been proposed that it may have been(because domesticates acquired a quasi-religious or perhaps ritual significance.

    See:
    https://www.academia.edu/4124374/Ani...Central_Europe

    "Yet, despite a strong correlation between the LBK and the northwestward spread of domestic animals,there is regional and temporal variation in the relative frequencies of the key economic animal taxa (i.e., cattle, sheep, goat, pigs and wild game). These differences have been well documented at the regional scale of zooarchaeological analyses and a number of likely causal factors, including ecology, climate and culture, have been implicated."
    Meat consumption by type in certain EN cultures.PNG

    Animal consumption in the Neolithic.jpg


    Fishing seems to have been particularly eschewed, as John Robb notes in his book "The Mediterranean Village".
    https://books.google.com/books?id=0H...q=fish&f=false

    In some European areas there was more hunting/gathering than in others. The local landscape probably had something to do with it, how successful the crops were, how much game was actually available, how quickly it was depleted. I also wonder if it was dependent on how many local h-gs were absorbed. For example, the communities around the Iron Gates seem to have fished quite extensively, and that's also where it has been proposed that some local h-gs were incorporated into the community.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  8. #58
    MarkoZ
    Guest


    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    There's a difference between plant (and animal) cultivation, and domestication. Certain sites in the southern Levant have shown that the people were storing large quantities of still wild cereals. The first actual domestication took place north of there.

    "The earliest securely identified and dated examples of domestic emmer and einkorn come from sites in the Upper Euphrates valley such as Çayönü, Nevali Çori, and possibly Cafer Höyük (figure 2). These samples have been dated to about 10,500-10,200 cal BP during the Early PPNB, and indicate that emmer and einkorn domestication was well underway in the Fertile Crescent (Zohary et al, 2012: 42; Zeder, 2011: s224). The earliest domesticated barley was found in the Fertile Crescent and Anatolian Plateau from the Middle PPNB period at sites such as Tell Aswad (c. 10,200-9,550 cal BP) (Zohary, et al, 2012: 56). These discoveries have largely overturned previous acceptances that domesticated cereals first appeared in a core area in the southern Levant and subsequently spread out throughout the Near East (Zeder, 2011: s224)."
    Seems like an apology to LeBrok is in order. I was genuinely ignorant and stuck in the 'Jordan valley paradigm'.

  9. #59
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    There's a difference between plant (and animal) cultivation, and domestication. Certain sites in the southern Levant have shown that the people were storing large quantities of still wild cereals. The first actual domestication took place north of there.

    "The earliest securely identified and dated examples of domestic emmer and einkorn come from sites in the Upper Euphrates valley such as Çayönü, Nevali Çori, and possibly Cafer Höyük (figure 2). These samples have been dated to about 10,500-10,200 cal BP during the Early PPNB, and indicate that emmer and einkorn domestication was well underway in the Fertile Crescent (Zohary et al, 2012: 42; Zeder, 2011: s224). The earliest domesticated barley was found in the Fertile Crescent and Anatolian Plateau from the Middle PPNB period at sites such as Tell Aswad (c. 10,200-9,550 cal BP) (Zohary, et al, 2012: 56). These discoveries have largely overturned previous acceptances that domesticated cereals first appeared in a core area in the southern Levant and subsequently spread out throughout the Near East (Zeder, 2011: s224)."

    Attachment 8397
    https://www.academia.edu/1529206/Evi...thic_Near_East

    As for how much hunting (and fishing, where appropriate) contributed to the diet of early Neolithic communities, it varied by time and place, but it's quite surprising to me how little hunting, or fishing, was done by some Neolithic groups. It's been proposed that it may have been(because domesticates acquired a quasi-religious or perhaps ritual significance.

    See:
    https://www.academia.edu/4124374/Ani...Central_Europe

    "Yet, despite a strong correlation between the LBK and the northwestward spread of domestic animals,there is regional and temporal variation in the relative frequencies of the key economic animal taxa (i.e., cattle, sheep, goat, pigs and wild game). These differences have been well documented at the regional scale of zooarchaeological analyses and a number of likely causal factors, including ecology, climate and culture, have been implicated."
    Meat consumption by type in certain EN cultures.PNG

    Animal consumption in the Neolithic.jpg


    Fishing seems to have been particularly eschewed, as John Robb notes in his book "The Mediterranean Village".
    https://books.google.com/books?id=0H...q=fish&f=false

    In some European areas there was more hunting/gathering than in others. The local landscape probably had something to do with it, how successful the crops were, how much game was actually available, how quickly it was depleted. I also wonder if it was dependent on how many local h-gs were absorbed. For example, the communities around the Iron Gates seem to have fished quite extensively, and that's also where it has been proposed that some local h-gs were incorporated into the community.
    I guess there are more ways leading to Rome. Maciamo is sketching the neolithic route from the Levant through the Mediterranean via the Atlantic coast upwards. There is also the possibility of an inland route through the Balkan, by the grand rivers, to central Europe and further. When I zoom out you can see in the different spread of E-V13 and E-V22. E-V13 more, Balkan, inland and his far nephew E-V22 the sea route (sublclade E-PH2818 Iberia and than to Wales and Frisia)!?

  10. #60
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,000
    Points
    259,277
    Level
    100
    Points: 259,277, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by MarkoZ View Post
    Seems like an apology to LeBrok is in order. I was genuinely ignorant and stuck in the 'Jordan valley paradigm'.
    This is just the latest research of which I'm aware, Marko. There may be something more recent that changes the picture. Archaeology isn't a static discipline after all.

    If someone knows of any such studies which contradict the above, please correct the record.

    One of the most important take aways for me about the early Neolithic is, as I said above, the difference between cultivation and domestication. The people of the southern Levant, for example, were living in settled villages, transplanting plants and tending fields of cereals, harvesting and storing hundreds and thousands of seeds, making bread etc. for hundreds and thousands of years before the first actual domestication took place. Grain stores have been found at Ohala that date to 23,000 years ago.

    So, they did have a certain amount of social organization and cooperation. Their took kit was still pretty primitive however. The housing in the Natufian was built of brush in a lot of cases. It was only in the next period that clay was used.

    Gobekli Tepe is still a puzzle to me.

  11. #61
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by MarkoZ View Post
    Seems like an apology to LeBrok is in order. I was genuinely ignorant and stuck in the 'Jordan valley paradigm'.
    the paper makes a difference between cultivation (e.g. Natufian and PPNA) and domestication (which occured not earlier than PPNB)
    this does not contradict the fact that cultiviation of cereals happened in Jordan Valley and Middle/Upper Euphrates during PPNA, they even had granaries :

    Sedentism of this time allowed for the cultivation of local grains, such as barley and wild oats, and for storage in granaries. Sites such as Dhra′ and Jericho retained a hunting lifestyle until the PPNB period, but granaries allowed for year-round occupation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_A#Crop_cultivation_and_granaries

    afaik no or little cereals or grains were cultivated east of the Euphrates, there the emphasis before PPNB was on pulses and ovicaprids

    IMO PPNB is a gradual merger of the Levant & Upper Euphrate (Natufian) people with the people from the Eastern Taurus Mts & the Zagros Mts

  12. #62
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Gobekli Tepe is still a puzzle to me.
    to me too, the map in the paper says 'inferred cultivation' happened there, but it doesn't give a date nor what crops was cultivated there

  13. #63
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Why a fourth brother lineage? What I was trying to explain was that 50 to 90% of Early Neolithic male lineages are now extinct. That's why there are lots of *. If all the know modern SNPs are tested, the * shows that there are no other mutations shared with modern people and therefore that this lineage is extinct. In living people the * only means that they didn't test all Y-chromosomal SNPs (e.g. through BigY or a full genomic test) and that that individual's deep clade hasn't been identified yet. Of course we could also find new branches among ancient samples, but if they didn't survive to the present they are meaningless. There would be thousands of extinct subclades.
    Actually, this will remain as a speculation and we don't know with certainity how much of these ancient samples belong or not to extinct lineages. Also we should remember that a lot of these "modern SNPs" did not exist in ancient times. Anyway there are a lot of ancient samples, like those belonging to T1a1*/T1a* in Karsdorf, that are not tested properly for most of the known SNPs up to date. So there is no way with the available information to know if these ancient samples belong to a extinct branch or not.

  14. #64
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Northener View Post
    My compagnon is the real fact and figures man. He's working on it. Here some pre- elementary collection:
    http://e-v22.net/webpage/E1b-V22Studies-list.html
    I understand it is a work in progress.
    Keep me updated.

  15. #65
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Southern Neolithic route brought Megaliths from the Levant to Western Europe

    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    I understand it is a work in progress.
    Keep me updated.
    The result up till know, and what is easily distracted from yfull underlines the theory of Maciamo. And I will keep you posted.


    Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum

  16. #66
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,000
    Points
    259,277
    Level
    100
    Points: 259,277, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Northener View Post
    I guess there are more ways leading to Rome. Maciamo is sketching the neolithic route from the Levant through the Mediterranean via the Atlantic coast upwards. There is also the possibility of an inland route through the Balkan, by the grand rivers, to central Europe and further. When I zoom out you can see in the different spread of E-V13 and E-V22. E-V13 more, Balkan, inland and his far nephew E-V22 the sea route (sublclade E-PH2818 Iberia and than to Wales and Frisia)!?
    No one doubts that there were two major routes of dispersal of the Neolithic into Europe. One went by sea, hopping from place to place to the Western Mediterranean and then up the Atlantic coast. The other landed first in Greece and then the Balkans. In both cases there was movement inland from the coastal areas.


    http://d10k7sivr61qqr.cloudfront.net...6/F1.large.jpg


    At a certain point the two streams met in the Paris Basin.

    I think one of the questions raised here is whether there were significant differences genetically between the people who participated in those two migration streams. From every paper I've seen, and even some of the experimental modeling, they seem to have been remarkably similar, with any differences put down to differential amounts of mixing with local h-gs in Europe.

    Y dna is a different issue, although Impressed Ware/Cardial was still heavily G2.

    Torsten Gunther et al:
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...72926.full.pdf
    Gunther et al Genes Mirror Migration-Admixture.PNG
    Click on above to enlarge.
    It can also be found on page nine of the paper.


    Olade et al:



    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VgWw-1Pyk8...-annotated.png

    You can find Gok 2 above. CO1 is Baden.

    Perhaps of interest with respect to the Gok group of Northern farmers:
    The following is based on older calculators so shouldn't be taken as gospel, but I think it's still generally accurate.


    Calculators designed for modern populations are unreliable in terms of SSA admixture in ancient samples, as the below shows. According to this, the most SSA is in Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. Otzi would have more than Gok, and Otzi is pretty clearly a southeastern European Neolithic farmer genetically even if he is Copper Age, and the ancestry as well as the technology probably owes a great deal to the Balkans.
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwmxlhXO8-...cientdna12.png

  17. #67
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    No one doubts that there were two major routes of dispersal of the Neolithic into Europe. One went by sea, hopping from place to place to the Western Mediterranean and then up the Atlantic coast. The other landed first in Greece and then the Balkans. In both cases there was movement inland from the coastal areas.


    http://d10k7sivr61qqr.cloudfront.net...6/F1.large.jpg


    At a certain point the two streams met in the Paris Basin.

    I think one of the questions raised here is whether there were significant differences genetically between the people who participated in those two migration streams. From every paper I've seen, and even some of the experimental modeling, they seem to have been remarkably similar, with any differences put down to differential amounts of mixing with local h-gs in Europe.

    Y dna is a different issue, although Impressed Ware/Cardial was still heavily G2.

    Torsten Gunther et al:
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...72926.full.pdf
    Gunther et al Genes Mirror Migration-Admixture.PNG
    Click on above to enlarge.
    It can also be found on page nine of the paper.


    Olade et al:



    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VgWw-1Pyk8...-annotated.png

    You can find Gok 2 above. CO1 is Baden.

    Perhaps of interest with respect to the Gok group of Northern farmers:






    The following is based on older calculators so shouldn't be taken as gospel, but I think it's still generally accurate.


    Calculators designed for modern populations are unreliable in terms of SSA admixture in ancient samples, as the below shows. According to this, the most SSA is in Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. Otzi would have more than Gok, and Otzi is pretty clearly a southeastern European Neolithic farmer genetically even if he is Copper Age, and the ancestry as well as the technology probably owes a great deal to the Balkans.
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwmxlhXO8-...cientdna12.png
    Inland route and sea route not differentiated?
    In the last picture I see a major difference between the Swedish and Northern Italian Farmer, the Swedish one has far more Atlantic Med and far less Caucasus.
    And you didn't pay attention to the two subclades of E1b namely E-V22 (sea route) and E-V13 (inland route).
    It would be nice if some research could go in debt on this matter.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Expansion.gif

  18. #68
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,281
    Points
    43,263
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,263, Level: 64
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 987
    Overall activity: 41.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
    and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
    that is quite clear
    but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
    also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?

  19. #69
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    This is just the latest research of which I'm aware, Marko. There may be something more recent that changes the picture. Archaeology isn't a static discipline after all.

    If someone knows of any such studies which contradict the above, please correct the record.

    One of the most important take aways for me about the early Neolithic is, as I said above, the difference between cultivation and domestication. The people of the southern Levant, for example, were living in settled villages, transplanting plants and tending fields of cereals, harvesting and storing hundreds and thousands of seeds, making bread etc. for hundreds and thousands of years before the first actual domestication took place. Grain stores have been found at Ohala that date to 23,000 years ago.

    So, they did have a certain amount of social organization and cooperation. Their took kit was still pretty primitive however. The housing in the Natufian was built of brush in a lot of cases. It was only in the next period that clay was used.

    Gobekli Tepe is still a puzzle to me.
    Right on Angela. To become a fully fledged farmer from h-g is a long transition. In known cases it took thousands of years.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  20. #70
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
    and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
    that is quite clear
    but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
    also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
    Bicicleur, may be when you stand closer to the painting, you can see more differences. Because I did some small study of E-V22 I 've seen that the migration is very differentiated from E-V13 (his far nephew). E-V22 is very cardial and E-V13 very LBK!

  21. #71
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
    and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
    That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
    but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
    also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
    It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.

  22. #72
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
    It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.
    As stated an example is E-V13 (LBK) vs E-V22 (Cardial). E-V22 is found on the cardial hotspots, med. island and coast, not related to Anatolian stock!

  23. #73
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
    and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
    that is quite clear
    but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
    also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
    It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.
    See also, Voskarides (2016): “E-V22 and E-M34 are common in the Southern Levant, Sicily, Algeria, and in Egypt and rare in Europe. These lineages, like J2b-M205, could mirror a Pottery Neolithic movement to Cyprus from the Southern Levant (Pearson R 2 coefficient of correlation of E- M34 to longitude: 0.164, p = 0.003)” On of the earliest spread to the Mediterranean is the the so called Impressed (or Cordial) Ware (7000-5500 ybp). The spread to the Mediterranean could be in several waves up until the so called Phoenicians (3500-2500 ybp)."

  24. #74
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,000
    Points
    259,277
    Level
    100
    Points: 259,277, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Ed. I see LeBrok and Bicicleur have beat me to it.:)

    Quote Originally Posted by Northener View Post
    Inland route and sea route not differentiated?
    In the last picture I see a major difference between the Swedish and Northern Italian Farmer, the Swedish one has far more Atlantic Med and far less Caucasus.
    And you pay attention to the two subclades of E1b namely E-V22 (sea route) and E-V13 (inland route).
    It would be nice if some research could go in debt on this matter.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Expansion.gif
    My point in posting that Dodecad analysis was to show how misleading it can be to use Admixture calculators created for modern populations to analyze ancient genomes unless you understand subsequent findings. According to that calculator, Otzi, who is definitely a product of the Balkan stream of the Neolithic, has more SSA than Gok, and the most is in European hunter-gatherers, which is the opposite of the assertions made here. I don't know how often it has to be said and demonstrated, but Admixture calculators based on modern modal clusters have to be interpreted very carefully, and with a knowledge of what more recent methods have shown, or they can be very misleading.

    You also have to be careful when discussing these Neolithic samples to know whether you are talking about the Early Neolithic of Impressed Ware/Cardial-Balkan Neolithic or you are talking about the Middle Neolithic. They are different, and the differences are the result of differing amounts of local h-g ancestry, not because there were differences among the farmers who came to Europe.

    If you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote and carefully re-look at all the graphics, you will see that I was discussing the initial streams of the Neolithic. Those early EEF people, whether in the Balkans, Central Europe, or Iberia, were remarkably similar to the Anatolian Neolithic people, and the Anatolian Neolithic people, who were the ones who went to Europe (actually many of them migrated from the juncture of Anatolia and northern Syria) were almost indistinguishable from one another. There was no Levant Neolithic which went to Europe versus an Anatolian Neolithic. Natufians didn't go to Europe. The major division in terms of early Near Eastern farmers was between the Anatolian Neolithic (which indeed had a chunk of Levant Neolithic in it), and the Iranian Neolithic.

    If you look at the Gunther et al graphic above, in particular, you'll see what I mean.

    You also might want to take a look at the latest Reich paper on the Neolithic people of the Near East.
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture19310.html

    I don't know if E-V22 was specifically Cardial versus E-V13 being specifically Balkan. I would say not, as the precursor of E-V13 is found in a Cardial setting in Spain, and Cardial moved from there all the way to the Paris Basin and elsewhere. Even if E-V22 was limited to Cardial, I don't see how it matters. Some differences in y Dna are to be expected. They don't translate into autosomal differences. Autosomally, these people were all very similar. We have many, many papers, and many autosomal analyses of these people to prove it. That's why I2a farmers and I1 farmers are identical to G2a farmers.

    E-V22 could also definitely have reached certain areas of Europe with later migrations, some historical. Some could have come with Phoenicians, maybe some with North Africans during the Roman Era and later. I don't see any difficulty with North African troops under the Romans spreading it to northern Europe. They were stationed in Britain and along the borders with Germania.

  25. #75
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    655
    Points
    10,493
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,493, Level: 30
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 57
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Ed. I see LeBrok and Bicicleur have beat me to it.:)



    My point in posting that Dodecad analysis was to show how misleading it can be to use Admixture calculators created for modern populations to analyze ancient genomes unless you understand subsequent findings. According to that calculator, Otzi, who is definitely a product of the Balkan stream of the Neolithic, has more SSA than Gok, and the most is in European hunter-gatherers, which is the opposite of the assertions made here. I don't know how often it has to be said and demonstrated, but Admixture calculators based on modern modal clusters have to be interpreted very carefully, and with a knowledge of what more recent methods have shown, or they can be very misleading.

    You also have to be careful when discussing these Neolithic samples to know whether you are talking about the Early Neolithic of Impressed Ware/Cardial-Balkan Neolithic or you are talking about the Middle Neolithic. They are different, and the differences are the result of differing amounts of local h-g ancestry, not because there were differences among the farmers who came to Europe.

    If you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote and carefully re-look at all the graphics, you will see that I was discussing the initial streams of the Neolithic. Those early EEF people, whether in the Balkans, Central Europe, or Iberia, were remarkably similar to the Anatolian Neolithic people, and the Anatolian Neolithic people, who were the ones who went to Europe (actually many of them migrated from the juncture of Anatolia and northern Syria) were almost indistinguishable from one another. There was no Levant Neolithic which went to Europe versus an Anatolian Neolithic. Natufians didn't go to Europe. The major division in terms of early Near Eastern farmers was between the Anatolian Neolithic (which indeed had a chunk of Levant Neolithic in it), and the Iranian Neolithic.

    If you look at the Gunther et al graphic above, in particular, you'll see what I mean.

    You also might want to take a look at the latest Reich paper on the Neolithic people of the Near East.
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture19310.html

    I don't know if E-V22 was specifically Cardial versus E-V13 being specifically Balkan. I would say not, as the precursor of E-V13 is found in a Cardial setting in Spain, and Cardial moved from there all the way to the Paris Basin and elsewhere. Even if that were the case I don't see how it matters, however. Some differences in y Dna are to be expected. They don't translate into autosomal differences. That's why I2a farmers and I1 farmers are identical to G2a farmers.
    I'am pretty sure:
    See also, Voskarides (2016): “E-V22 and E-M34 are common in the Southern Levant, Sicily, Algeria, and in Egypt and rare in Europe. These lineages, like J2b-M205, could mirror a Pottery Neolithic movement to Cyprus from the Southern Levant (Pearson R 2 coefficient of correlation of E- M34 to longitude: 0.164, p = 0.003)” On of the earliest spread to the Mediterranean is the the so called Impressed (or Cordial) Ware (7000-5500 ybp). The spread to the Mediterranean could be in several waves up until the so called Phoenicians (3500-2500 ybp)."

    I'am not so sure if E-V13 was found in Cardial Spain. if I'am well it
    could be related to E1b but are there not enough marker to classify him as E-V13. So probably an hoax. i will do research.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •