Southern Neolithic route brought Megaliths from the Levant to Western Europe

That is what I've been told about my haplogroup E-M123* that it came from the Levant trough the med. road to Northwestern Iberia where its still present there. Seems plausible explanation that this movemnt of people was connected to this culture.


your haplogroup:e-m123*
without the m34 mutation could be old in europe{ portugal }possible from neolithic period.
best regards
adam
 
The cardial V13 doesn't fit well in our current understanding of this group. But the facts are the facts: this sample was tested for the V13 SNP and was positive, so the STR-values are of no importance.

Could you please explain a little bit more. "doesn't fit well in our curent understandfing"? Why is E-V13 on Y-full so much 'younger'? Do you have a link or article?
 
Imagine that one E-V22 sailer/trader from Egypt came to Italy fell in love and had lots of sons. His impact on autosomal pool on a region was negligible and undetectable (same effect even if it wasn't one sailor but a whole boat of sailors), his E-V22 however had spread through the region and lives till today.
Win-win for both of us?

I love the sailor romantic LeBrok!
my forefathers were indeed sailorman ;)

http://www.skutsje-eenvoud.nl/img/home/slideshow/1.jpg

(the impact on Asturias, Andalusia, Sicily and Napoli was and is bigger; about 4 a 5% is E-V22)
 
@Angela,

A Cardiel guy had E-V13 not pre-E-V13. Also the Neolithic Hungarians with E1b-M78 weren't tested for V13.

Fire-Haired, where did you find that it's E-V13? Is it Genetiker? I know he's usually pretty good, but it's not the same as an academician finding that.

@Northener,

If you want to call the area at the juncture of eastern Anatolia and northern Syria "the Levant" that's your prerogative, but that's not the common understanding.

If you find data showing that Cardial farmers were any different than Balkan farmers I'd be very interested to see it.
 
Fire-Haired, where did you find that it's E-V13? Is it Genetiker? I know he's usually pretty good, but it's not the same as an academician finding that.

@Northener,

If you want to call the area at the juncture of eastern Anatolia and northern Syria "the Levant" that's your prerogative, but that's not the common understanding.

If you find data showing that Cardial farmers were any different than Balkan farmers I'd be very interested to see it.

In my opinion, I guess very regular in Europe is this the Levant :http://muslimpolitic.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/3.jpg

In gemanic speaking countries often called Morgenland.

My focus is on the E-V22 route. So this data about the differences could be bycatch. As said zooming out is: E-V13 LBK and E-V22 cardial.
 
When you look at the table. There are for the 'E-v13 person' only 4 markers. Problem 1. how can they be sure, with a 4 marker, that's E-v13?
The same Table 3 lists SNP values, which for Ave07 are derived for M35 and V13.

Problem 2. In the Yfull tree the TMRCA of E-V13 is 5400 ybp. Ok this is a model, with ranges. But 7000 ybp cardial Spain? To early....
Having the V13 SNP in itself does not mean it has all the equivalent SNPs leading to the modern V13 clade. It might be (probably is) an older branch now very rare or extinct.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion, I guess very regular in Europe is this the Levant :http://muslimpolitic.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/3.jpg

In gemanic speaking countries often called Morgenland.

My focus is on the E-V22 route. So this data about the differences could be bycatch. As said zooming out is: E-V13 LBK and E-V22 cardial.

OK, this is my last attempt. I have seen nothing to indicate that there was any movement into Europe of early farmers from south of the very northern tip of Syria. Said another way, people from the Levant Neolithic did not migrate into Europe. It was people described as Anatolian Neolithic, although the area technically includes a small part of northern Syria. Should new data come out showing that isn't the case, of course my conclusions would change.

As for E-V13 being limited to LBK, the Cardial sample indicates it might not be that simple.
 
OK, this is my last attempt. I have seen nothing to indicate that there was any movement into Europe of early farmers from south of the very northern tip of Syria. Said another way, people from the Levant Neolithic did not migrate into Europe. It was people described as Anatolian Neolithic, although the area technically includes a small part of northern Syria. Should new data come out showing that isn't the case, of course my conclusions would change.

As for E-V13 being limited to LBK, the Cardial sample indicates it might not be that simple.

I consider these kind of activities like reconstructions of streams in a jacuzzi. Especially in a crowded house like the Mediterranean.
That's why I used the word zoom out to indicate that E-V13 is basically LBK doesn't rule out exceptions of course. It's not mathematics but human migration.....

And also I think that are quite more exceptions to your statement that Levantine Neolithic didn't migrate into Europe. See for example:
https://investigativegenetics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13323-016-0032-8



Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum
 
I meant to post this upthread. It's a good graphic to keep in one's files for handy reference. It's from the latest Lazaridis paper. I haven't rechecked, but I think this, like much of the work, is based on d-stats.

From: The Genetic Structure of the World's First Farmers
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311
ADMIXTURE.png

This will make you go blind, but it's also very informative...

311pgrq.jpg


If clicking on it doesn't make it large enough, this is the direct link:
http://oi65.tinypic.com/311pgrq.jpg


@Northener,
We're talking genetics, not some spot on a map. As I've said ad nauseam the farmers who went to Europe are a "genetic entity" known as the "Anatolia Neolithic" people. When the computational population geneticists dig deeper, "Anatolia Neolithic" is composed of three strands: a WHG "like" strand, something "like" a Levant Neolithic strand, and an Iran Neolithic strand.

This is what Bicicleur was talking about upthread when he said there was a mixture of Iran Neolithic and Levant Neolithic, bringing together, perhaps, grain and pulse agriculture and animal domestication, which went to Europe as a package.

However, the genetic entity known as "Levant Neolithic" did not on its own go to Europe." It only went by incorporation into what is known as "Anatolia Neolithic". So far, all of the EEF or Early Neolithic farmers in Europe, even the Cardial derived ones in Spain etc. are part of the same genetic entity.

When you've read all of the relevant papers carefully, you'll see what we're talking about.
 
I meant to post this upthread. It's a good graphic to keep in one's files for handy reference. It's from the latest Lazaridis paper. I haven't rechecked, but I think this, like much of the work, is based on d-stats.

From: The Genetic Structure of the World's First Farmers
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311
ADMIXTURE.png

This will make you go blind, but it's also very informative...

311pgrq.jpg


If clicking on it doesn't make it large enough, this is the direct link:
http://oi65.tinypic.com/311pgrq.jpg


@Northener,
We're talking genetics, not some spot on a map. As I've said ad nauseam the farmers who went to Europe are a "genetic entity" known as the "Anatolia Neolithic" people. When the computational population geneticists dig deeper, "Anatolia Neolithic" is composed of three strands: a WHG "like" strand, something "like" a Levant Neolithic strand, and an Iran Neolithic strand.

This is what Bicicleur was talking about upthread when he said there was a mixture of Iran Neolithic and Levant Neolithic, bringing together, perhaps, grain and pulse agriculture and animal domestication, which went to Europe as a package.

However, the genetic entity known as "Levant Neolithic" did not on its own go to Europe." It only went by incorporation into what is known as "Anatolia Neolithic". So far, all of the EEF or Early Neolithic farmers in Europe, even the Cardial derived ones in Spain etc. are part of the same genetic entity.

When you've read all of the relevant papers carefully, you'll see what we're talking about.

Part of your reactions are tautologies to me. When E-V22 was part of the "Anatolia neolithic" ok fine be my guest. But that doen't make it an Anatolian haplotype in geographic sense.

And is the "genetic entity" so absolute? Without any doubt?

There is even some research which state that there were direct relationship between 'neolithic' Egypt and Spain. Take for example this genetic research:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10510567
Quote: " In addition, pre-dynastic Egyptian El-Badari culture (4,500 years ago) is similar to southern Iberian Neolithic settlements with regard to pottery and animal domestication."

Another one about the influence of the Levantine culture:
"The archaeological parallels found between the pre-pottery Neolithic of the Levant and those of Cyprus and the Aegean islands in terms of radiocarbon dating, settlement architecture, material culture, cereal and domestic animal species provide evidence for a sea-mediated arrival of Levantine people to Cyprus soon after the development of the agriculture, during the late PPNA or early PPNB, and a further expansion towards the Aegean."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046922/

Some archeologist state the close relationship between North-Africa and Spain.
https://books.google.nl/books?id=MJ...#v=onepage&q=neolithic levant iberia&f=false

All from a short survey. I don't claim this is all accurat. But it's shows to me that there more options. Not just single or one track minded options.
 
Every discipline has its terminology, including population genetics. If you don't want to learn this terminology, what it means, and the genetics it illuminates, then don't.

A paper from 1999 has no probative value with regard to the genetics of the Early Neolithic farmers of the Near East because we didn't have that ancient dna then. Even two years ago, which is the date of the other paper, we didn't have these genomes. The paper on them is dated to the middle of 2016. Nor did we have the latest archaeological dating and testing of these Neolithic sites.

All I have been attempting to do is to provide you with the most recent data and papers on the subject, papers, by the way, from the premier genetics labs in the world. Maybe it will change tomorrow, and we'll find that some Cardial people came from somewhere deep in the Levant, and were different from the Balkan Neolithic people who took a more northern route, but so far this is what the data shows, because the Cardial descended Iberian Neolithic people don't show that. This is information which many of us already know because we've read and studied the papers. If you don't want to read them, fine, don't.

As for V22, maybe it hitched a ride with the Cardial folks but not with the folks who ended up in the Balkans. Maybe some of it came earlier, pre-Neolithic. Maybe some of it came with historical migrations. It's immaterial to me. None of that changes any of the above. Uni-parental markers don't necessarily indicate autosomal make-up.
 
Every discipline has its terminology, including population genetics. If you don't want to learn this terminology, what it means, and the genetics it illuminates, then don't.

A paper from 1999 has no probative value with regard to the genetics of the Early Neolithic farmers of the Near East because we didn't have that ancient dna then. Even two years ago, which is the date of the other paper, we didn't have these genomes. The paper on them is dated to the middle of 2016. Nor did we have the latest archaeological dating and testing of these Neolithic sites.

All I have been attempting to do is to provide you with the most recent data and papers on the subject, papers, by the way, from the premier genetics labs in the world. Maybe it will change tomorrow, and we'll find that some Cardial people came from somewhere deep in the Levant, and were different from the Balkan Neolithic people who took a more northern route, but so far this is what the data shows, because the Cardial descended Iberian Neolithic people don't show that. This is information which many of us already know because we've read and studied the papers. If you don't want to read them, fine, don't.

As for V22, maybe it hitched a ride with the Cardial folks but not with the folks who ended up in the Balkans. Maybe some of it came earlier, pre-Neolithic. Maybe some of it came with historical migrations. It's immaterial to me. None of that changes any of the above. Uni-parental markers don't necessarily indicate autosomal make-up.

Of course I want to read it. I just scanned it. And I will read it too.
I'am not in into some kind of terminology. I guess that's typical for an historian. Sometimes more an art than science ;)
And I'am convinced that whatever models we create even by the biggest big data we aren't able to reconstruct the past, including the migrational past, completely. It escapes the models, including the 'genetic models'. Nevertheless it's the best we can do. But it will be a discussion and revision without an end.....
But for now I agree with: 'As for V22, maybe it hitched a ride with the Cardial folks but not with the folks who ended up in the Balkans. Maybe some of it came earlier, pre-Neolithic. Maybe some of it came with historical migrations.':)
 
this may be relevant to the topic of megalithism in western Europe

Before the Pyramids...
[FONT=arial !important]Neolithic peoples in France constructed huge tombs that are today only visible from the air.

http://archive.archaeology.org/online/features/neolithic/

[/FONT]

[FONT=arial !important]The Cerny culture occupies mostly the Yonne and Seine river basins and developed between 4500 and 4000 B.C. European regionalization began at Cerny, with groups settling in small areas and beginning to develop unique life-styles. While we are very familiar with Cerny ceramics (exemplified by the sherds Bailloud examined), their economy (a mixture of farming and hunting), and some of their necropolises. Their settlements pose a problem for archaeologists. While the houses of their predecessors are easy to find, those belonging to Cerny are still difficult to discern.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial !important]The Cerny people represent a great stride in European history. In the sixth millennium B.C., the first Danubians had introduced agriculture, but they settled only on light soils in valley bottoms, their tools and agricultural technique not permitting them to cultivate heavier soils at higher elevations. In the next millennium the Cerny people began the conquest of the plateaus. It is hypothesized that they used plows drawn by oxen and perhaps horses, which had served until then only for food, vastly increasing the cultivable surface of the land to feed a rising population. The Cerny people were the first in Europe to grow wheat as their principal cereal. Raw materials such as flint were systematically exploited, and mining started to appear. Perhaps most impressive was their construction of the monumental necropolises represented by the trenches we see today, the first of their kind in the world.

[/FONT]
Since very little remains of these monuments, we must try to imagine them at the time of their splendor. One of the most spectacular is located at the Passy site and has been carbon-dated to between 4463 and 4279 B.C. One of the longest of the necropolises is monument 5, which consists of two parallel ditches 21 feet apart, increasing to 48 feet in the east, each more than 850 feet long. At one end the ditches terminate in a circular area some 150 feet in diameter. These ditches contained palisades, wooden fences marking the necropolises. We think they were constructed in one of three ways: The ditches' earth was heaped between them to form a long barrow, higher at the eastern end; the ditches served as the foundation of a palisade, or wooden fence surrounding the barrow, or some mixture of these two techniques, with palisades sustaining the earth to create a terraced architecture. That they were built in wood and earth implies considerable effort. Numerous large trees had to be cut down with burnished adzes, then stripped of their branches and transported. The volume of moved earth was tremendous considering that the Cerny people had no knowledge of metals and had to use the backs of animals or wooden buckets.

image.php


the author supposes an autochtone development, but I doubt that
it may be an incoming elite ruling over the autochtones
oxens and megalithism spread further than just this part of France

I think the 2nd wave of farming into Europe followed very soon after the 1st, only a few centuries later
Vinca culture started already 7.7 ka, and there are a few cultures in the Balkans of which very little is known

The Dudeşti culture is a farming/herding culture that occupied part of Romania in the 6th millennium BC, typified by semi-subterranean habitations (Zemlyanki) on the edges of low plateaus. This culture contributed to the origin of both the subsequent Hamangia culture and the Boian culture. It was named after Dudeşti, a quarter in the southeast of Bucharest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudești_culture

the 2nd wave of farming into Europe may have been forced out of the Middle East because of the 8.2 ka climate event which also triggered herders and farmers migrations into Africa, NW Iran, Central Asia and Armenia
 
neolithic1.jpeg

kurgans in central France by 4500 BC?

yes, the Yamnayans had very good wooden time-travel-machines, quite clear case...
 
I'm not sure it could help too much here because the thesis in play concerns old periods of Neolithic, but on "For What They Were We Are" blog there are some interestings complies of results on ancient mt-DNA in Iberia since January 2017 and it spans a long bit of time - I copied them - ...
 
Amazing interaction sphere diagram.
 
who's talking about Kurgans?
while you're at it, maybe you should atribute Stone Henge, Göbekli Tepe and the piramids to Yamnayans as well

No, nobody mentioned kurgans, it only was fine irony...
 
I meant to post this upthread. It's a good graphic to keep in one's files for handy reference. It's from the latest Lazaridis paper. I haven't rechecked, but I think this, like much of the work, is based on d-stats.

From: The Genetic Structure of the World's First Farmers
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311
ADMIXTURE.png

This will make you go blind, but it's also very informative...

311pgrq.jpg


If clicking on it doesn't make it large enough, this is the direct link:
http://oi65.tinypic.com/311pgrq.jpg


@Northener,
We're talking genetics, not some spot on a map. As I've said ad nauseam the farmers who went to Europe are a "genetic entity" known as the "Anatolia Neolithic" people. When the computational population geneticists dig deeper, "Anatolia Neolithic" is composed of three strands: a WHG "like" strand, something "like" a Levant Neolithic strand, and an Iran Neolithic strand.

This is what Bicicleur was talking about upthread when he said there was a mixture of Iran Neolithic and Levant Neolithic, bringing together, perhaps, grain and pulse agriculture and animal domestication, which went to Europe as a package.

However, the genetic entity known as "Levant Neolithic" did not on its own go to Europe." It only went by incorporation into what is known as "Anatolia Neolithic". So far, all of the EEF or Early Neolithic farmers in Europe, even the Cardial derived ones in Spain etc. are part of the same genetic entity.

When you've read all of the relevant papers carefully, you'll see what we're talking about.


But, if i understand the graphic corectly it does not mean that Hotu_Iran or CHG had contributed to EHG, but EHG that had contributed of both, or do i understand badly the graphic ?
 

This thread has been viewed 92574 times.

Back
Top