All Iberian men were wiped out by Yamna men 4,500 years ago

[markod]

I wouldn't use anything from the Quiles site as information; the man's anti-R1a bigotry is off-putting (seriously, did Razib Khan throw him into a garbage can when he was a teenager?), strident refusal to connect M417 to Proto-Indo-European is almost farcical; did the 'master race' R1b-L51 magically convert all the C. Europe Uralic hillbilly R1as to Indo-European and have no influence of their 'original' tongue on the resultant dialects that emerged. Uralic languages are very distinct and agglutinative; where is the trace of this on the Balto-Slavic-Indo-Iranian group?

His maps and general presentation are really good. Too bad his writing comes off more like that of preacher than a scientist (which is all too common in amateur population geneticists). I always like exploring alternative hypotheses, but when there's such a strong bias it becomes difficult to read.

https://adnaera.com/ is a neat new blog with several contributors who treat the whole topic in a more objective and detached way.

 

[Pip]

The main subclades of R1b-L151 each show signs of early development around the Western and/or Southern edges of the R1a Corded Ware zone. The evidence of intrusion into Iberia appears to be limited to particular subclades of R1b-DF27 (i.e. two stages downstream of the Corded Ware stand-off). This would suggest that conflict with Corded Ware (which ended in the elimination of most of R1a-M417's Western branches and the loss of much of its territory and culture) most likely preceded the Iberian 'wipe-out'.

We can see from L151's rapid growth and dispersal that L51 people had a mobile, adventurous culture, and there is no reason to suspect that this would have been any different before L151 started to thrive. The lack of many basal branches of L51 in both the modern and archaeological data would therefore suggest that few of these adventurous groups of the earliest L51 people would have survived. There are signs (e.g. from ATP3) that people like them were rebuffed from Northern Spain. My gut instinct is that L51 clung on to a fairly perilous existence until the threat from advancing Corded Ware people in Northern France led to them being accepted by early Bell Beaker communities there as mercenaries tasked with protection, and that it was conflict with Corded Ware that brought them to the fore as military leaders. Later perhaps, and emboldened by military success in the North, they took retribution against those within the Bell Beaker network (e.g. Iberians) who chose not to cooperate with them?

I am interested in whether any evidence exists that might conflict with this hypothesis.

 

[William Tell]

The main subclades of R1b-L151 each show signs of early development around the Western and/or Southern edges of the R1a Corded Ware zone. The evidence of intrusion into Iberia appears to be limited to particular subclades of R1b-DF27 (i.e. two stages downstream of the Corded Ware stand-off). This would suggest that conflict with Corded Ware (which ended in the elimination of most of R1a-M417's Western branches and the loss of much of its territory and culture) most likely preceded the Iberian 'wipe-out'.

We can see from L151's rapid growth and dispersal that L51 people had a mobile, adventurous culture, and there is no reason to suspect that this would have been any different before L151 started to thrive. The lack of many basal branches of L51 in both the modern and archaeological data would therefore suggest that few of these adventurous groups of the earliest L51 people would have survived. There are signs (e.g. from ATP3) that people like them were rebuffed from Northern Spain. My gut instinct is that L51 clung on to a fairly perilous existence until the threat from advancing Corded Ware people in Northern France led to them being accepted by early Bell Beaker communities there as mercenaries tasked with protection, and that it was conflict with Corded Ware that brought them to the fore as military leaders. Later perhaps, and emboldened by military success in the North, they took retribution against those within the Bell Beaker network (e.g. Iberians) who chose not to cooperate with them?

I am interested in whether any evidence exists that might conflict with this hypothesis.

Looks like mostly speculation to me, Bell Beaker is R1b like Yamnaya

 

[Pip]

Looks like mostly speculation to me, Bell Beaker is R1b like Yamnaya

Yes, although R1b is a very wide haplogroup, and is not homogeneous. You could just as well say that Bell Beaker is R1b like West African V88.

The main bases for the hypothesis are not speculative - they are (i) where the development of the earliest subclades of the L51 branch of R1b appear from the data most likely to have occurred, (ii) that the best fit for Bell Beaker mtDNA is Cucuteni + Yamnaya + RRBP Paris Basin, (iii) that Bell Beaker aDNA is much closer to Balkan and indeed R1a Corded Ware samples than to Yamnaya, (iv) that during L51's gestation period of 1,000 years before its expansion, there are only two known branches, (v) early Bell Beaker traits are found in areas where R1b is not known to have proliferated.

I'm still interested to find out whether there is any evidence that conflicts with the hypothesis.

 

[bicicleur 2]

who says BB is closer to CWC?
both are Yamna + EEF, which is logical when Yamna moves west into EEF territory,
but it doesn't prove BB to be close to CWC

 

[Olympus Mons]

The main subclades of R1b-L151 each show signs of early development around the Western and/or Southern edges of the R1a Corded Ware zone. The evidence of intrusion into Iberia appears to be limited to particular subclades of R1b-DF27 (i.e. two stages downstream of the Corded Ware stand-off). This would suggest that conflict with Corded Ware (which ended in the elimination of most of R1a-M417's Western branches and the loss of much of its territory and culture) most likely preceded the Iberian 'wipe-out'.

We can see from L151's rapid growth and dispersal that L51 people had a mobile, adventurous culture, and there is no reason to suspect that this would have been any different before L151 started to thrive. The lack of many basal branches of L51 in both the modern and archaeological data would therefore suggest that few of these adventurous groups of the earliest L51 people would have survived. There are signs (e.g. from ATP3) that people like them were rebuffed from Northern Spain. My gut instinct is that L51 clung on to a fairly perilous existence until the threat from advancing Corded Ware people in Northern France led to them being accepted by early Bell Beaker communities there as mercenaries tasked with protection, and that it was conflict with Corded Ware that brought them to the fore as military leaders. Later perhaps, and emboldened by military success in the North, they took retribution against those within the Bell Beaker network (e.g. Iberians) who chose not to cooperate with them?

I am interested in whether any evidence exists that might conflict with this hypothesis.

Pip. In the absence of proof, all speculation is good.

Just a note: THis stance of bell beaker warriors is fine. However, to what iberia is concerned one must remember that IBeria was the place where fortified settlements arouse everywhere. Rest of western europe was mostly flowers and honey a that period and iberia from 3300bc to 2700bc was a swarm of arrows and fortified places.
What I mean is places (like porto torrão or Zambujal) with 20,000 people (at least) and over 400ha, with people craft on 800 years of conflict (you don't build massive defensive wall for fun) are not easily overtaken by incoming population. so, hummm, that thingy of Warrior bell beakers elites... doesn't really look promising to what Iberia is concerned. SOmething else happened there.

 

[Olympus Mons]

who says BB is closer to CWC?
both are Yamna + EEF, which is logical when Yamna moves west into EEF territory,
but it doesn't prove BB to be close to CWC

Hi.... why is it Yamna + EEF and not EEF + Yamna?

 

[Pip]

who says BB is closer to CWC?
both are Yamna + EEF, which is logical when Yamna moves west into EEF territory,
but it doesn't prove BB to be close to CWC

If BB and CW are both identified as Yamna + EEF, then yes, it is not surprising that they are autosomally closer to each other than Yamna minus EEF.

Although I wouldn't identify them as Yamna + EEF, as this is mixing culture with autosomal DNA.

BB and CW are also more autosomally similar to each other in some other respects, e.g.
1. They both have a significantly lower CHG:EHG ratio than would be expected if either had derived from Yamna per se.
2. They both have much more variable CHG:EHG proportions than EEF:EHG proportions, indicating that their CHG components were likely to been added to their autosomal mixes more recently than their EEF components.

It looks from the data like the more Eastern people (Yamna) moved away from the more Western community that gave rise to BB and CW before this community itself split into pre-BB and pre-CW.

 

[Pip]

Pip. In the absence of proof, all speculation is good.

Just a note: THis stance of bell beaker warriors is fine. However, to what iberia is concerned one must remember that IBeria was the place where fortified settlements arouse everywhere. Rest of western europe was mostly flowers and honey a that period and iberia from 3300bc to 2700bc was a swarm of arrows and fortified places.
What I mean is places (like porto torrão or Zambujal) with 20,000 people (at least) and over 400ha, with people craft on 800 years of conflict (you don't build massive defensive wall for fun) are not easily overtaken by incoming population. so, hummm, that thingy of Warrior bell beakers elites... doesn't really look promising to what Iberia is concerned. SOmething else happened there.

Yes. I'm not sure what though.

I suppose we mustn't necessarily discount the effect that a mass turmoil in Bell Beaker society to the North might have had on Bell Beaker society in the South. The whole Bell Beaker network might have been severely disrupted - firstly by major conflict with Corded Ware populations, and then by a new more aggressive regime taking control of the more substantial Northern areas. Sometimes even minor occurrences can trigger a chain of civil disruption and social upheaval that can precipitate collapse. The effect of World War I on Russia is an example of how entire regimes and cultures can sometimes fall quite suddenly.

 

[bicicleur 2]

Hi.... why is it Yamna + EEF and not EEF + Yamna?

Yamna + EEF, which is logical when Yamna moves west into EEF territory

 

[bicicleur 2]

If BB and CW are both identified as Yamna + EEF, then yes, it is not surprising that they are autosomally closer to each other than Yamna minus EEF.

Although I wouldn't identify them as Yamna + EEF, as this is mixing culture with autosomal DNA.

BB and CW are also more autosomally similar to each other in some other respects, e.g.
1. They both have a significantly lower CHG:EHG ratio than would be expected if either had derived from Yamna per se.
2. They both have much more variable CHG:EHG proportions than EEF:EHG proportions, indicating that their CHG components were likely to been added to their autosomal mixes more recently than their EEF components.

It looks from the data like the more Eastern people (Yamna) moved away from the more Western community that gave rise to BB and CW before this community itself split into pre-BB and pre-CW.

interesting

can you provide a link where all this is explained in detail?

 

[bicicleur 2]

Yes. I'm not sure what though.

I suppose we mustn't necessarily discount the effect that a mass turmoil in Bell Beaker society to the North might have had on Bell Beaker society in the South. The whole Bell Beaker network might have been severely disrupted - firstly by major conflict with Corded Ware populations, and then by a new more aggressive regime taking control of the more substantial Northern areas. Sometimes even minor occurrences can trigger a chain of civil disruption and social upheaval that can precipitate collapse. The effect of World War I on Russia is an example of how entire regimes and cultures can sometimes fall quite suddenly.

yes, there were fortifications in Iberia, even a few centuries before Iberian bell beakers appeared
but do you have reason to suppose corded ware and bell beaker folks were violent?

many neolithic settlements in Europe dissapeared prior to corded ware and also before arrival of yersenia pestis in Europe,
so for unknown reasons

 

[Pip]

interesting
can you provide a link where all this is explained in detail?

No, I just ran a statistical analysis on a database of samples showing on Genetiker's website.

 

[Pip]

yes, there were fortifications in Iberia, even a few centuries before Iberian bell beakers appeared
but do you have reason to suppose corded ware and bell beaker folks were violent?

many neolithic settlements in Europe dissapeared prior to corded ware and also before arrival of yersenia pestis in Europe,
so for unknown reasons

When apparently small source populations like R1a-M417 and R1b-L51 spread quickly over large areas, virtually wholly replacing other populations in the process, I suspect that violence or the threat of violence usually has a part to play in this, but there may have been other important factors as well.

 

[Terrance Stuart]

Curious about who the Iberian men were that were eliminated. As to how, I would think warfare is likely a part of it, as the invading group was adept at warfare and by the time they reached the Iberian area they were very well schooled. Disease may have been a part of it as they traveled far and may have had the population mass to have inculcated disease resistance for themselves.

 

[Pip]

Curious about who the Iberian men were that were eliminated. As to how, I would think warfare is likely a part of it, as the invading group was adept at warfare and by the time they reached the Iberian area they were very well schooled. Disease may have been a part of it as they traveled far and may have had the population mass to have inculcated disease resistance for themselves.

I don't know what Reich found, but previously-obtained data would suggest that these Iberian men were predominantly from North East Mediterranean Cardial culture stock (G2a2, E1b1b, H2, J2a1 and R1b1a2), together with a minority of prior lineages (I2 and C1).
Disease may well have played a part, although I'm not sure this would explain why the Iberian male lines seem to have been impacted to a much greater degree than the female lines.

 

[MOESAN]

ecept if the site of the resistance gene is on X-chromosome, I don't see (as says PIP) why males would be stroken very most often than females, among Neolithic people's descendants. We could think that West Europe was a bit outside the "eye" of the plague, but then Iberian males too would have escaped the most of the plague, or...?

 

[CrazyDonkey]

Curious about who the Iberian men were that were eliminated. As to how, I would think warfare is likely a part of it, as the invading group was adept at warfare and by the time they reached the Iberian area they were very well schooled. Disease may have been a part of it as they traveled far and may have had the population mass to have inculcated disease resistance for themselves.

Plague often accompanies famine. The invaders would have captured food stores and controlled land (for food production), disbursing it to their favorites and clients. Native women would have been more likely to be taken as wives or personal servants, and fed, while native men would have been more likely to be enslaved, and thus underfed, if not simply killed or left to starve. This discrepancy would have been even greater in the case of a strongly male-biased invasion. Polygamy would have accentuated it.

 

[CrazyDonkey]

On the combined effects of polygamy, primogeniture, and the price of brides:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201801/the-pros-and-cons-polygamy

A man who takes more than one wife satisfies some of his sexual urges, signals his high social status, and generally feels happier about himself. His many children supply him with a ready source of labor, and the means, through arranged marriages, to forge multiple social, economic, and political alliances. Polygyny may be costly, but in the long term, it can make a rich man richer.

Polygyny might even benefit the women involved, who may come to enjoy one another’s company and share out the burdens of housekeeping and childrearing. Younger wives may add to the social standing of the first wife, while at the same time reducing her workload.

Polygyny also has many drawbacks, particularly when seen through a modern, western lens. First and foremost, it sanctions and perpetuates gender inequality, with co-wives officially and patently subordinated to their husband. Women in polygynous unions tend to marry at a younger age, into a setup that, by its very nature, fosters jealousy, competition, and conflict, with instances of co-wives poisoning one another’s offspring in a bid to advantage their own. Although the husband ought in principle to treat his co-wives equally, in practice he will almost inevitably favor one over the others—most likely the youngest, most recent one.

While polygyny may benefit the men involved, it denies wives to other men, especially young, low-status men, who tend to measure their success by their manhood, that is, by the twin parameters of social status and fertility. With little to lose, these frustrated men are much more likely to turn to crime and violence, including sexual violence and warmongering.

All this is only aggravated by the brideprice, a payment from the groom to the bride’s family. Brideprice is a frequent feature of polygynous unions and is intended to compensate the bride’s family for the loss of a pair of hands. Divorce typically requires that the brideprice be returned, forcing many women to remain in miserable or abusive marriages. If polygamous unions are common, the resulting shortage of brides inflates the brideprice, raising the age at which young men can afford to marry while incentivizing families to hive off their daughters at the soonest opportunity, even at the cost of interrupting their education. Brideprice if often paid in cows, and, to afford a bride, young men may resort to cattle raids and other forms of crime.

Polygyny also tends to disadvantage the offspring. On the one hand, children in polygamous families share in the genes of an alpha male and stand to benefit from his protection, resources, influence, outlook, and expertise. But on the other hand, their mothers are younger and less educated, and they receive a divided share of their father’s attention, which may be directed at his latest wife, or at amassing resources for his next one.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...only-trying-to-win-their-future-wives-hearts/

The growth of polygamy and social inequality in the late Iron Age meant that richer men took many wives, or concubines, causing an inbalance in the male-female sex ratio.

Suddenly young poor men had little chance of securing a wife unless they became rich and well-known quickly, says Prof Collard. And raiding was a shortcut to heroism and treasure, he believes.

“In a population where just a few powerful older men are able to have multiple concubines you end up with a large number of young single men quite rapidly. Some men would have two to three wives, but the Norse sagas say that some princes had limitless numbers.

“So raiding was a way to build up wealth and power. Men could gain a place in society, and the chance for wives if they took part in raids and proved their masculinity and came back wealthy.

“Because polygynous marriage increases male-male competition by creating a pool of unmarried men, it increases risky status-elevating behaviour.”

Recent studies found that aggression rises when there is a shift in the male-female sex ratio and where the percentage of unmarried men is greater, the rates of rape, murder, assault, theft and fraud also rise.

New research has also shown that Yanomamo tribes in South America resort to inter-village raiding for polygamous marriages.

And the archaeological evidence of the graves of Viking raiding parties also suggests that sailors were young males, rather than seasoned soldiers.

“It is possible that the combined effects of polygyny, concubinage and social stratification simply reached a tipping point that led to a surge in raiding.

“With elite men monopolising an increasing percentage of women, many low-status men would have found it difficult to marry unless they were willing to engage in risky activites to improve wealth and status.”

 

[hrvclv]

@CrazyDonkey

Your quotes remind me of the Irish legends that describe the life and feats of Fionn of the Fianna. Though they are filled with supernatural events that seem to deprive them of historical significance, some aspects of those narratives are corroborated by reliable sources. They suggest that in early medieval Ireland, a form of local ver sacrum still existed, which didn't imply exploring new territories, but simply living off the land, hunting and warring, while at the same time providing a mercenary force for the High King or the nobility. Here is what wiki says about those Fianna :

The historical institution of the fiann is known from references in early medieval Irish law tracts. A fiann was made up of landless young men and women, often young aristocrats who had not yet come into their inheritance of land. A member of a fiann was called a fénnid; the leader of a fiann was a rígfénnid (literally "king-fénnid).

Geoffrey Keating, in his 17th-century History of Ireland, says that during the winter the fianna were quartered and fed by the nobility, during which time they would keep order on their behalf, but during the summer, from Beltaine to Samhain, they were obliged to live by hunting for food and for pelts to sell. Keating's History is more a compilation of traditions than a reliable history, but in this case scholars point to references in early Irish poetry and the existence of a closed hunting season for deer and wild boar between Samhain and Beltaine in medieval Scotland as corroboration.

In the legends, Fionn Mac Cumhail (Finn McCool) and his men die because their team of super-warriors has become so efficient and self-sufficient that they get to be seen as a threat by the central power. So the High King looses all his armies on them, and the Fianna are outnumbered, massacred and scattered.