The spread of 'Steppe' DNA and autosomal best-fit analysis

I suspect that the "Bell Beaker phenomenon" was a religious one, a mystery cult, carried forth by missionary "priests" who neither married nor bred, an initiation and conversion, in other words, rather than a migration that settled down and interbred.

Possibly, aided by technological know-how and trade.

But how then did Bell Beaker fall into the hands of the highly-reproductive, Steppe-DNA-bearing R1b-312 dynasty? Perhaps, as war-like metallurgists, they were brought in as bodyguards to the priests/traders? Or perhaps they were a branch of the priesthood which threw off its vow of celibacy? (Although I am always doubtful about hypothesising complete reversals of behaviour.)
 
Well in any case Shulaveri isn't a metallurgical culture - but still, even with your maps (which are very clear), you still haven't said why you believe in Shulaveri over any other hypothesis. As I said, as Max Planck essentially fully agrees with you at least as far as the Urheimat, I'd like to know this why. What about Shulaveri jumped out at you, something must have besides having a cool name.

You seem to be interested in my thought process for the shulaverian hypothesis (which I am grateful), and also state that MPI SHH is now pushing something similar to the Shulaverian hypothesis (thanks again).

... Let me structure a good answer and get back to you because it's complex.
Remember... My first post ever about it was (in Portuguese actually) - "it's all about grapes, dogs and horses".
Couldn't back then care less about R1b or PIE or aDna or... Then it was so obvious, and still is, and things just piled ..
 
Probably an inaccurate modeling?
I doubt the L51 sample without Steppe is inaccurate modelling, as there are other similar examples in different European locations, as I have identified.
The key to explaining this is the high relative standard deviation in CHG component proportions in both Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, indicating that Steppe DNA was a late, and therefore patchy, addition to the autosomal mix.
 
The key to explaining this is the high relative standard deviation in CHG component proportions in both Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, indicating that Steppe DNA was a late, and therefore patchy, addition to the autosomal mix.

So when and where was Steppe DNA added to the autosomal mix?

Statistical analysis of Bell Beaker aDNA provides a rough answer:
The only positive correlation coefficient between Bell Beaker autosomal components is the strongly positive 0.59 reading for the correlation between its WHG and CHG. A substantial proportion of these two minority Bell Beaker components was clearly admixed into the pre-Bell Beaker population together, and the only data I can find to match this is admixed Yamnayan/Ukrainian incursion into the Balkans that arose at some point before 3,200 BC.

This seems to have been the factor that pushed the predominantly EHG/EEF-admixed pre-Bell Beaker population westwards out of the Balkans or Moldova at some point between 4,000 and 3,200 BC, and I don't see signs that its autosomal DNA changed markedly after that point before it developed into German Bell Beaker.

I still do not see any clear evidence in DNA to determine the route by which it ended up in Northern France and most likely North Central Spain. It could have been the Mediterranean route (along with R1b-PF7562), the Danubian route or the route North of the Carpathians and perhaps along the Megalithic Baltic/Atlantic fringes. Perhaps, due to the likely bottlenecking of L51, the DNA evidence for this route may never be found?
 
realy if that is the soffistication of actual AI we must wait many years to be controlled by all-time-spamming bots
:)
 
You seem to be interested in my thought process for the shulaverian hypothesis (which I am grateful), and also state that MPI SHH is now pushing something similar to the Shulaverian hypothesis (thanks again).

... Let me structure a good answer and get back to you because it's complex.
Remember... My first post ever about it was (in Portuguese actually) - "it's all about grapes, dogs and horses".
Couldn't back then care less about R1b or PIE or aDna or... Then it was so obvious, and still is, and things just piled ..
m interested in the number/numeric system that you attribute the migration with. Do you have any supporting evidence verbal and or written , for example the basic numbers from 1-10?
 
Yes, it's feasible, although in practice I doubt it worked like that:
1. The sons of the official wives would most likely have been the leaders, and the ones to have more children and to venture further.
2. The sons of the concubines would have taken women from among daughters of the concubines, preserving the Steppe component.
3. Women probably generally did accompany or follow, otherwise left without men their own communities would have perished.
4. If the sons of the initial bearers of Steppe lineages had all ventured elsewhere and the Steppe DNA in their communities had diminished and perished, it is likely that many of the Steppe cultural practices would also have ended up marginalised and would have perished with it.

From what I can see of the data, Steppe autosomal and mitochondrial DNA was generally preserved in its new locations, together with Steppe culture, and the extent of exogamy has probably been exaggerated.

Here we speak of BB's. Their mt DNA is a mix of western and eastern DNA (EHG + local recent eastern Neolithic) as a whole, despite unleven ; a new Neolithic package, of course, not only the first layerof EN. It would deserve an analysis date by date place by place, but then our current sample is meager.
But their auDNA in France, Germany, Czechia, Hungary, Switzerland is very widely spread. Only British and Dutch BB's seem more concentrated in their auDNA; Nevertheless, at first sight, all their Y-lineages seem close one to another by not too far origin; what can explain the heterogeneity in the other BB if not extra-wives?
Homogeneity itself doesn't exclude admixtures, but then homogeneized asmixture (the final one or the primary one?)
I would like to find the data Beaker by Beaker with auDNA estimations in every case.
 
I wrote something a bit stupid; looking at Olalde seemingly the most of Y-haplos in Iberia are not Y-R1b but other ones, present since EN and MN. It could confirm the presentiment I share with a lot, that the spread of BB pack, completed and often limited to "luxe" small pottery beside the arrows, cutlasses and bows armbands, was launched by people who were not the early original BB's makers. Maybe somemore Yhaplos from Iberia BB's could change this conclusion?
 
You seem to be interested in my thought process for the shulaverian hypothesis (which I am grateful), and also state that MPI SHH is now pushing something similar to the Shulaverian hypothesis (thanks again).

... Let me structure a good answer and get back to you because it's complex.
Remember... My first post ever about it was (in Portuguese actually) - "it's all about grapes, dogs and horses".
Couldn't back then care less about R1b or PIE or aDna or... Then it was so obvious, and still is, and things just piled ..

ToBeOrNotToBe

A concise explanation for a 50 page hypothesis is hard.
The question is: why the Shulaveri and only the Shulaveri, against what everyone said at the time (2015) … Tmrca, PIE dates, origin, etc.
So, disengage the ACC (anterior cingulate cortex), especial if you are a political left leaning person, because I will not have time to explain.
It started as:

  1. why is it that the only Mtdna dog haplogroup D is the most ancient Portuguese colossal dog whose origin nobody knows and the Kangal dog in eastern Anatolia (also Spanish galgo, and recently found a north African Berber dog)? If it where agriculture, that haplogroup would be all over. They do have specific haplotypes only to them both…
  2. Why is that at the exact region of the original bell beaker, better where VNSP was, it’s a river called the Sorraia… which is known for the sorraia horse that has many tarpan like traits and genetically closer to Przewalski's horse than any other Iberian horse. What is it doing there today at the region of the large and beautiful Lusitano horse? Who brought it?
  3. Why is that Portugal grape/wine casts, have so many similitudes to south Caucasus? The genetic CVe/CVG ratios for some of the castes, from the specific region of bell beaker is so big that must have been harvested for millennia. There is one from there, the Sercial caste (nickname “dog choker”) is 43! (it huge). The variance of castes in Portugal for wine castes is 2.6. in Spain is 0.8 in France 0.2… Bigger only in eastern Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia (?!?) … starting to get a picture? - Recently at eurogenes there was a discussion about an innovative idea from I think Toronto university that the IE languages followed the wine making… dudes, 3 years late. I started saying that in 2015!!!!
  4. Architecture…. Is really any difference between the Shulaveri -shomu round architecture and late stage enclosures…. And Iberian Castros settlements and enclosure places?? People take long to change the way they make houses.
  5. Then, I remembered reading about how in south Iberia late Neolithic , 3300bc – 2800bc (it showed spelt cereals (aka the bell beaker preferred cereal)….so, where does Spelt shows first? Confirmed in the Shualveri-Shomu (unconfirmed also same time in Balkans). So follow spelt and you will see where you end up.
  6. Follow carnelian beads (from 5000bc-4000bc) see where it was found.
  7. Follow copper (beads first and Awls) and see where it leads you....
  8. etc

These are just a few. I could go with another 50.
 
Possibly, aided by technological know-how and trade.

But how then did Bell Beaker fall into the hands of the highly-reproductive, Steppe-DNA-bearing R1b-312 dynasty? Perhaps, as war-like metallurgists, they were brought in as bodyguards to the priests/traders? Or perhaps they were a branch of the priesthood which threw off its vow of celibacy? (Although I am always doubtful about hypothesising complete reversals of behaviour.)

There is no evidence to prove that Bell Beaker users were metal prospectors, workers or traders, nor that they had special metallurgical expertise. Access to special resources or technology cannot be ascertained, and the compositions of Bell Beaker metal artefacts do not show indications of an exceptional role in distributing fahlore-copper by its carriers. Fahlore-copper had already been in use at an earlier date. In contrast, “Bell Beaker metallurgy” is part of the general metallurgical traditions of the 3rd millennium BC.

https://www.iansa.eu/papers/IANSA-2010-01-02-merkl.pdf

Alcolytes outnumber priests and aren't bound by vows of celibacy.

The presence of typical copper daggers as grave goods likely points to a warrior aristocracy. Both Iberia and the Tyrol were areas of copper production, with the likely surplus production (wealth) leading to trade (and other relations) across cultural borders.

We now know that the so-called "reflux" was simply a flux. What impelled or drew it is highly debatable. Or it could have been a combination of push and pull factors. Did pilgrimages to megalithic "shrines" precede invasion and plundering of fortified settlements, once the wealth they held became evident? Or was it climate change and drought that impelled them to pick up and move south in search of greener grass? Or famine and plague? Or something more mundane, such as the escalating price of native brides, driving some "adventurers" to go where the "pickings" were easier.

Nor can we assume that Iberia was particularly densely settled throughout, despite a scattering of settlements holding up to a thousand or so. That many were fortified could be as much evidence of internecine warfare (disunity) between them as fear of foreign incursions.
 
I didn't know dogs had haplogroups; what's the springer spaniel haplogroup?
 
I didn't know dogs had haplogroups; what's the springer spaniel haplogroup?
yes, 97% are Mtdna A,B,C.

Portuguese Serra da estrela, Eastern Turkey kangal , spanish galgo and North Africa Aidi are Mtdna HG D...

this is what I was writting in 2015 to Maju....
"II nquire in portugal about the serra da estrela dog and experts will shrug their shoulders and say they were “always” here . Does anyone think is a fluke that a genetic MTtdna studies made on Dogs all around the world, for over 700 specimens, builds up Haplogroup D Clustering the only Portuguese autochthonous dog we have the huge Serra da Estrela with just four dogs making their one specific Dna haplogroup D ? Go figure which - the kangal (eastern anatolia near caucasus) the Spanish galgo and a Scandinavian dog… and even so the Scandinavian is 5-8 mutational steps further than the Kangal and the Portuguese do (see a1). And all this Dogs are related to the Caucasus Speppard. Just look at pics of those dogs and the caucasus sheppard and you understand why they are so genetically related.
A1 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166218X08003703

and now that we are at it, regarding another portuguese isolated dog the Castro laboreiro... notice the name castro, has in chalcolithic settlements... this dog is found only in the region and known to be an isolated.

" Considering all haplotypes from Savolainen and others (2002) and Vil ` and others (1997), the guanine in position 422 is found in one dog from East Asia (isolate: A56, accession number: AF531707). However, the Castro Laboreiro Watchdog haplotype remains unique when compared with this East Asian dog due to a difference in another nucleotide position (position 430). Although less likely, this haplotype may represent a lineage tracing back to the livestock guarding dogs dispersal from Southwest Asia (as- sociated with human migrations), where l
 
Last edited:
Alcolytes outnumber priests and aren't bound by vows of celibacy.

The presence of typical copper daggers as grave goods likely points to a warrior aristocracy.
Are you saying that L51 were the warrior aristocracy that were selected to be acolytes (bodyguards/minders) to the priests? If so, this is also my gut instinct.
 
Here we speak of BB's. Their mt DNA is a mix of western and eastern DNA (EHG + local recent eastern Neolithic) as a whole, despite unleven ; a new Neolithic package, of course, not only the first layerof EN. It would deserve an analysis date by date place by place, but then our current sample is meager.
But their auDNA in France, Germany, Czechia, Hungary, Switzerland is very widely spread. Only British and Dutch BB's seem more concentrated in their auDNA; Nevertheless, at first sight, all their Y-lineages seem close one to another by not too far origin; what can explain the heterogeneity in the other BB if not extra-wives?
Homogeneity itself doesn't exclude admixtures, but then homogeneized asmixture (the final one or the primary one?)
I would like to find the data Beaker by Beaker with auDNA estimations in every case.

Surprisingly, the RSD statistics on German Bell Beaker suggest that their autosomal components are longstanding (certainly preceding Corded Ware admixtures), and fit better with eastern EEF and eastern WHG. Apart from some very minor mtDNA fits with Paris Basin Neolithic, all other best-fits are with DNA found predominantly in the stretch between Bulgaria and Poland. I do not see much sign of Bell Beaker exogamy during or immediately prior to the Bell Beaker period, and the data suggests its admixture most likely occurred almost exclusively in the East Central Europe at an earlier date.

The RSDs would suggest that EHG and EEF/Anatolian components within Bell Beaker are of a similar age, i.e. that the core population from which it descended was formed by a melting pot of both of these components. As the best-fit data suggests a Khvalysnk/Central Anatolian mix first appearing in Chalcolithic Bulgaria, I would suggest the initial admixture formed from the joining of some Eastern Pontic EHG with some North East Anatolian, and a migration either cross Pontic or along the Pontic's southern coastline into Bulgaria during the early to mid 5th millennium BC, which I suppose would make it consistent with a possible Shulaverian origin.
 
When did pre-Bell Beaker R1b-L51 move into Western Europe?

I would estimate that it came after Suvorovo 4,000 BC, preceded 3,300 BC (both ATP3 appearing in North Central Spain and the Chalcolithic people of the Eastern Balkans being replaced by a CHG-infused population from Ukraine), and that it arrived not long after the 3,700 BC estimated date at which R1b-L51 started branching (with both branches having estimated coalescence points in France). Say mid 4th millennium BC? (Probably some time before it flourished.) And it was already heavily EEF-admixed before it got there.
 
Are you saying that L51 were the warrior aristocracy that were selected to be acolytes (bodyguards/minders) to the priests? If so, this is also my gut instinct.

I'm thinking convert/initiates, from among a central European warrior aristocracy, who assisted/participated in ceremonies (initiations, sacrifices, etc.). It would explain how the Beaker cultural package, but not their genes, was transmitted.
 
When did pre-Bell Beaker R1b-L51 move into Western Europe?

I would estimate that it came after Suvorovo 4,000 BC, preceded 3,300 BC (both ATP3 appearing in North Central Spain and the Chalcolithic people of the Eastern Balkans being replaced by a CHG-infused population from Ukraine), and that it arrived not long after the 3,700 BC estimated date at which R1b-L51 started branching (with both branches having estimated coalescence points in France). Say mid 4th millennium BC? (Probably some time before it flourished.) And it was already heavily EEF-admixed before it got there.

Much too early for an R1b migration into Iberia, it seems to me. Someone could have walked there from the steppes, or caught a boat - but, unless accompanied by others, would be an isolated outlier. Marco Polo made it to China, but didn't have any genetic impact.
 
I'm thinking convert/initiates, from among a central European warrior aristocracy, who assisted/participated in ceremonies (initiations, sacrifices, etc.). It would explain how the Beaker cultural package, but not their genes, was transmitted.
The spread of the L51 genes would suggest they at least accompanied any roving Bell Beaker priesthood and presumably took the role of their protectors.
How do you come to the conclusion that the priests would have been celibate? If so, this might explain the L51 bottleneck until one branch perhaps chose to stray from the tradition.
I'm not sure that L51 would have been a widespread warrior aristocracy before Bell Beaker, as there is little or no sign of them in the archaeological record. Their numbers look too small.
 

This thread has been viewed 105159 times.

Back
Top