Latest Reich talk on ancient Dna

Again, go to the original link, guys. There's a chart around 19 minutes in where he shows that the central European Bell Beaker people going into Spain were 50% Central Europe M/L Neolithic, and 50% steppe. That's the 40% I think.

That's partly why Iberians today are only 20% "steppe", although as you can see from the yDna chart, there were also other newcomers arriving after the Beakers.
 
Well it only needs 4 generations without steppe related peoples to dilute Steppe to almost none no? 1500BC is way more than 4 generations, 1000 years is like 40 generations if we assume 4 generations by centuries.

if do you look at Reich - Olalde graph / map you will see some 40% eastern ancestry by 1500 BC (WTF was done with steppe ancestry????.......), if you check Martiniano and other papers by the same century steppe ancestry was diluted to zero... just in their samples. Maybe you find something suspicious in that? or yet everything is all right if it comes from Saint Reich?
 
@Ailchu,
If you go to 19:52 in the talk you'll see that the newcomers to Iberia were 50% Central European farmer. Sorry about the prior post. I didn't see that you had amended what you said.

As for the overlap, we're definitely going to have to wait for the final published paper, but it may be that it comes from areas where they hadn't yet arrived.

this graph made me think that this "eastern" ancestry is central european. that would make a bit more sense since iberians have 20% steppe in the same graphic. but at one point he says that this eastern ancestry is ultimately related to the steppe. that would be strange. i'll just wait for the paper.
 
this graph made me think that this "eastern" ancestry is central european. that would make a bit more sense since iberians have 20% steppe in the same graphic. but at one point he says that this eastern ancestry is ultimately related to the steppe. that would be strange. i'll just wait for the paper.

There seem to have been individuals with very high steppe ancestry in France as well. More steppe ancestry than CWC.
 
LINK73B.png


The abstract about BA France that was posted recently reported the same phenomenon IIRC.

Ah, yes, now I remember. Thanks, Markod.

Very much outliers, however. Who knows, maybe an exchange with groups further east?

This is the graph to which I was referring. It's blurry, but I think you can make out that the Bell Beakers who go into Iberia are 50/50.

nLqD27Z.png
[/IMG]
 
Ah, yes, now I remember. Thanks, Markod.

Very much outliers, however. Who knows, maybe an exchange with groups further east?

This is the graph to which I was referring. It's blurry, but I think you can make out that the Bell Beakers who go into Iberia are 50/50.

nLqD27Z.png
[/IMG]

yes, but the map says 50/50 in England
wasn't that 90/10?

I guess it depends on how you define 'steppe ancestry'
 
a naive question:
are these numbers concerning only the BB setllements or allover Iberia? Today Y-R1b in Iberia is between 50 and 60% in the most of the regions, not 100%. (it's true History kept on running on after LN-Chalco) - I doubt about this 100% Y-replacement whatever the geographical source(s) -

That's also what I find weird about those results. There had to have been a really massive male-biased influxes from areas without much of the post-BA "West European" R1b subclades, with lots of J2a, E1b1b, I2 and even G2a to explain how modern Iberia has "only" 50-60% of R1b. It would've been a second major overturn of the Y-DNA distribution in the península. By the way, the Celtic and of course the Romance languages certainly date to after the Late Bronze Age in Iberia, so they probably implied population movements from Western Europe, not quite explaining most of the non-R1b chunk of the paternal lineages. Did something really decisive happen between the Middle BA and the Early IA stages?

Though I don't doubt the capacity for cruelty in ancient societies, the 100% replacement also strikes me as quite unlikely in a region as large and geographically varied as Iberia. It'd be no small "feat" even for modern states with advanced methods of slaughtering people, now just imagine for a BA migrant populaton that was a minority of the total population (or should we instead assume it was actually a huge immigration wave of mostly males?). For smaller regions I could accept that easily, but somehow I still doubt that the incoming steppe-enriched males would've managed to wipe all the males out in every corner of Iberia without any eventual mutual acculturation and assimilation. To affirm that based on some samples (how many? A few dozens from each period?) is really bold.
 
I forgot that the 500000 males assassinated it would be necessary a migration of 500000 R1b from Central Europe keeping their R1a bro's appart, getting before conquer Iberia the Iberian culture, and quitting before a chunk of steppe ancestry, and so on... sorry, I like science fiction but I hate it blended in real science

None of that makes sense (who told you that the replacement happened in the beginning of the BB cultural phenomenon, not centuries later when it had already spread to other cultures and peoples? A people is not defined solely by a certain type of pottery). Particularly your numbers are really off. What makes you think that to have a 100% replacement you need to have the same number of incoming males that the previous male population had? 100,000 men can impregnate 500,000 women just as much as 500,000 men. It's not like, quantitatively, males are as necessary as females to guarantee the reproduction of society. Also, we don't know if the post-replacement population was as large as the pre-replacement one.
 
if do you look at Reich - Olalde graph / map you will see some 40% eastern ancestry by 1500 BC (WTF was done with steppe ancestry????.......), if you check Martiniano and other papers by the same century steppe ancestry was diluted to zero... just in their samples. Maybe you find something suspicious in that? or yet everything is all right if it comes from Saint Reich?

Well, Martiniano paper is about Portugal, while Olalde is about Spain??? I think you are overlapping too much the world. Culture, Language, Lineage and Ancestry are all individually evolving with Regionalisation of the process. You dont need R1b to have an Indo-Europeanization ( c.f. rich R1a peoples ) and you dont need Indo-European languages to have R1b ( c.f. Basque ). You dismiss all probable interactions that happened day by day in Iberia.
 
That's also what I find weird about those results. There had to have been a really massive male-biased influxes from areas without much of the post-BA "West European" R1b subclades, with lots of J2a, E1b1b, I2 and even G2a to explain how modern Iberia has "only" 50-60% of R1b. It would've been a second major overturn of the Y-DNA distribution in the península. By the way, the Celtic and of course the Romance languages certainly date to after the Late Bronze Age in Iberia, so they probably implied population movements from Western Europe, not quite explaining most of the non-R1b chunk of the paternal lineages. Did something really decisive happen between the Middle BA and the Early IA stages?

Though I don't doubt the capacity for cruelty in ancient societies, the 100% replacement also strikes me as quite unlikely in a region as large and geographically varied as Iberia. It'd be no small "feat" even for modern states with advanced methods of slaughtering people, now just imagine for a BA migrant populaton that was a minority of the total population (or should we instead assume it was actually a huge immigration wave of mostly males?). For smaller regions I could accept that easily, but somehow I still doubt that the incoming steppe-enriched males would've managed to wipe all the males out in every corner of Iberia without any eventual mutual acculturation and assimilation. To affirm that based on some samples (how many? A few dozens from each period?) is really bold.

Also keep in mind that countrary to other parts of Europe, Iberia never was completely Indo-Europeanized. Wich actually makes the 60% of R1b a pretty huge factor.
 
^^

Spain was never completely Indo European, perhaps a few percent was Afro-European, mainly Euro-Maghreb some sub-Saharan euro welcome . Once in Europe and mixed, the mixture of Iberia as well as that of Germany or any other country in Europe is as European.


I only know that the tall man in the video was speaking his voice, he seemed nervous and spoke quickly.

I wonder why he was so nervous.
 
That's also what I find weird about those results. There had to have been a really massive male-biased influxes from areas without much of the post-BA "West European" R1b subclades, with lots of J2a, E1b1b, I2 and even G2a to explain how modern Iberia has "only" 50-60% of R1b. It would've been a second major overturn of the Y-DNA distribution in the península. By the way, the Celtic and of course the Romance languages certainly date to after the Late Bronze Age in Iberia, so they probably implied population movements from Western Europe, not quite explaining most of the non-R1b chunk of the paternal lineages. Did something really decisive happen between the Middle BA and the Early IA stages?

Though I don't doubt the capacity for cruelty in ancient societies, the 100% replacement also strikes me as quite unlikely in a region as large and geographically varied as Iberia. It'd be no small "feat" even for modern states with advanced methods of slaughtering people, now just imagine for a BA migrant populaton that was a minority of the total population (or should we instead assume it was actually a huge immigration wave of mostly males?). For smaller regions I could accept that easily, but somehow I still doubt that the incoming steppe-enriched males would've managed to wipe all the males out in every corner of Iberia without any eventual mutual acculturation and assimilation. To affirm that based on some samples (how many? A few dozens from each period?) is really bold.

I have the same feeling than both of you, something is not right. There's too many farmer haplogroups in today's Iberia for them to have come back en masse later. Maybe the R1b men were buried differently than the other so we only find them; maybe the farmers were peasant with little wealth and R1b were the landlord (a bit like Normans in England or Frank in western Europe)...
 
I have the same feeling than both of you, something is not right. There's too many farmer haplogroups in today's Iberia for them to have come back en masse later. Maybe the R1b men were buried differently than the other so we only find them; maybe the farmers were peasant with little wealth and R1b were the landlord (a bit like Normans in England or Frank in western Europe)...

or maybe these 'farmer haplogroups' were not farmers, but late bronze age and iron age arrivals from over the Meditteranean
starting 4 ka with La Bastida and El Argar
 
There seem to have been individuals with very high steppe ancestry in France as well. More steppe ancestry than CWC.

but if it was steppe ancestry in the plot we would only go from 50% down to 40% if we assume that the migrants were 50/50 central europeans. that wouldn't be a 40% replacement but 80%. i think reich mght have been a bit confused about the "eastern ancestry" here a little bit and said that eastern ancestry is related to the steppe while it's central european admixture with steppe. or he just didn't want to explain the details there and for him "related to steppe" means it contains steppe ancestry among other things.
 
yes, but the map says 50/50 in England
wasn't that 90/10?

I guess it depends on how you define 'steppe ancestry'

The Bell Beakers who went to Britain were 50% steppe and 50% M/L European Neolithic.

However, the population "in" Britain after the migration was 90% Beaker and 10% local Neolithic.

Reich, in particular, sort of talks in short hand and it can cause confusion. I think that's partly what caused the controversy that surfaced in the New York Times article. He shouldn't assume everyone is up on all the papers they've put out and what it all means. He should be more careful and explain in what he probably thinks is self-evident and tedious detail. Sometimes the most brilliant researchers are not always the best communicators.

In this case, he has himself pointed out that there was one "pure" North African ancient sample. I doubt it was R1b. I think some form of "E" was probably present in Iberia pre-the Iron Age, but we don't know how much. The ancient Sardinian like I2a which we know is present in Iberia is extremely unlikely to be a newcomer. It's more likely, perhaps, that Reich means "replacement" of the y over much of Iberia, rather than every nook and cranny.

Some of the J2a, like the J2a in Italy, may be movement from the east. There's La Bastida to consider. If E-V13 was spread by the Greeks we're talking Iron Age. Again, if the Phoenician and later Carthaginian presence in Iberia was larger than thought, that would explain some more J2a and "E" clades, and then, of course, there's the Muslim invasion and occupation.

I also think it's interesting that in the graph the more steppe heavy newcomers to Iberia are mostly women. We've seen indications of women being moved around before, some sort of ancient "mail order" bride system from ancestral areas.
 
I have been playing with nMonte a bit, and unless I am mistaken in my interpretations the surprise is that British Beakers seem to have an extra amount of Steppe when compared to Central European Beakers. Those two BB pops being only two to three generations apart, maybe the British BB spent less time in Central Europe and headed west before they admixed much with people there. (?)

Also, they do not seem to have been in much of a hurry to mix with locals.

R21N2Fo.png
 
None of that makes sense (who told you that the replacement happened in the beginning of the BB cultural phenomenon, not centuries later when it had already spread to other cultures and peoples? A people is not defined solely by a certain type of pottery). Particularly your numbers are really off. What makes you think that to have a 100% replacement you need to have the same number of incoming males that the previous male population had? 100,000 men can impregnate 500,000 women just as much as 500,000 men. It's not like, quantitatively, males are as necessary as females to guarantee the reproduction of society. Also, we don't know if the post-replacement population was as large as the pre-replacement one.

We also don't know how large the pre-replacement population was. It might have been reduced due to drought, famine, plague, warfare, exile/emigration, etc. The largest towns were around 1,000 inhabitants, and there were only a couple handful of those - these were nothing like the Cucuteni cities of 100,000+ that collapsed and dispersed. That some had large cemetery "enclosures" doesn't mean they had large populations. Remember that the impetus for the neolithic expansion into Iberia was mining/metallurgy, from the Aegean, and only secondarily farming.
 
- the tombs we haveare the winners ones (for the males at least), the new elites, aseverytime in lands raided by clannic barbarians of nomadic origin(even far origin sometimes) -
- I don’t buy theykilled all the defeated males ; a great number, I suppose, but Ithink some of them were ket as « castrated » slaves, someof them retreated in unaccessible zones as often – at those times Isuppose lands were less peopled and genocides as we have known laterwere not so easy ; I don’t dream people were better « souled »than today...
- the Dutch andBritish BB (if this naming is correct) are very homogenous, and themost « stepped ». The German and Czech and Polish onesare a bit more mixed, the Swiss, French and Hungarian ones even moremixed with clear southern ties (not only, SE too), and Spanish onesare more southern than northern or central - Davidski interpretsthat as a proof of the purity of the Dutch and British ones :not sure concerning culture. Rather the contrary in my mind :Iberia show some BB’s very close to the homogenous enough means ofN-W Europe, some ones in between, and more numerous ones« autochtones » to Iberia ; I think the few steppicenough of Iberia are newcomers capting the most of the aspects of BBculture of W-Iberia, giving birth to even less steppic newgenerations spite more steppic than the genuine BB’s (autosomally)-
- The question ofY-R1b-L51 is not resolved – but I don’t figure out steppicfemales learning BB pottery and Cy and delivering them in North afterreturn : rather males : so the Y-R1b-L51 and downstreamSNP’s of ancient Iberia were rather (in my view) with males comefrom North (of Iberia, not by force from Scandinavia!), overruningpost-megalithic culture men of Iberia.
I know there isnothing scientific ‘per se’ or very new in my post, but it’s myway to see the current results. We may not put facts to say more thanthey can, what some people do sometime.
 
it is very strange, that this complete turnover of Y-DNA in Iberia, which seems to have started ca 4.5 ka and was completed ca 3.8 ka didn't leave any particular archeological traces

you'd expect these overwhelming newcomers would have a completely different lifestyle
 
None of that makes sense (who told you that the replacement happened in the beginning of the BB cultural phenomenon, not centuries later when it had already spread to other cultures and peoples? A people is not defined solely by a certain type of pottery). Particularly your numbers are really off. What makes you think that to have a 100% replacement you need to have the same number of incoming males that the previous male population had? 100,000 men can impregnate 500,000 women just as much as 500,000 men. It's not like, quantitatively, males are as necessary as females to guarantee the reproduction of society. Also, we don't know if the post-replacement population was as large as the pre-replacement one.

Sorry, but I can't deal more with cult members and alike, I have the conclusion that you are not capable to have own thinkings, I can't discuss under such conditions:

- hocus-pocus, from underpopulated steppe, R1b-Z2103 conquers Central Europe, but changing it's Y-DNA to R1a, fine
- hocus-pocus, an Iberian culture (BB) is taken in Central Europe without autosomal effect, fine... but it expands back as R1b-L51 instead of R1a, and losing all previous cultural steppe traits by the way, fine.
- hocus-pocus, a 40% steppe or eastern component in Iberia needs to kill all male population (500000? 1000000?) to be replaced by 500000 or 100000 R1b machos coming without women (long trek...), fine.
- hocus-pocus, BA admixture graphs don't display any steppe component, it was lost by continuous dilution, fine.

as you and people alike can swallow all it, I only have the alternative to scare you, maybe you can wake up:

1. go to https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135962.full.pdf
2. go to extended data figure 1, admixture graph b (K=8)
3. look at Yamnaya, CWC, and Central Europe BB, check their CHG share, everything is all right?
4. look now at the Iberian side of the Beaker Complex (also a French BB), can't find that CHG?
5. ask then to yourself:
a) this only can be explained as Iberian BB were not coming from Central Europe?
b) this only can be explained as Central Europe R1b machos had a very hard gooooood time with Iberian brunettes that extracted their CHG?

com'on start to think by yourselves.
 

This thread has been viewed 97851 times.

Back
Top