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

[Angela]

Obviously, I2a and G2a has been in Iberia long before R1b. At what time did e1b1b arrive?

I think, from the wording of the abstract, that there is one from the third millennium BC. We have some early pre-E-V13 in Cardial Neolithic as well.

 

[halfalp]

How can Varna be part of Yamnaya at all if Varna is from 4400-4100 BCE and Yamnaya is 3300-2600 BCE

So you're basically saying it's from the Steppe and not Yamnaya then? I guess that's fair, but I still think that Steppe ancestry would be present in the Balkans even in the 6th millenium BCE

Ok i understand what you mean now. Because Varna Culture had some Steppe outliers and later at the time of Yamnaya Culture, Varna Site became part of Yamnaya_Bulgaria. So basically at the time of Proper Varna Culture, they were already Steppe outliers coming from ancestors of the founder of Yamnaya in Eastern Europe and at the time of Yamnaya, the whole package came into Varna. The thing is, there is mainly no difference with Khvalynsk / Sredny Stog and Yamnaya in term of culture and ancestry. So the Steppe outlier still came from Steppe, just before Yamnaya Culture.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I think, from the wording of the abstract, that there is one from the third millennium BC. We have some early pre-E-V13 in Cardial Neolithic as well.

Angela, you're a level-headed and pretty knowledgeable person (even if you hate me), so what do you think? Is 2500 BCE not pretty early for R1b-L51 with Steppe in Iberia? Again, it is contemporaneous with the farmer Beaker samples that were used to claim the culture spread was originally with pots...

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Ok i understand what you mean now. Because Varna Culture had some Steppe outliers and later at the time of Yamnaya Culture, Varna Site became part of Yamnaya_Bulgaria. So basically at the time of Proper Varna Culture, they were already Steppe outliers coming from ancestors of the founder of Yamnaya in Eastern Europe and at the time of Yamnaya, the whole package came into Varna. The thing is, there is mainly no difference with Khvalynsk / Sredny Stog and Yamnaya in term of culture and ancestry. So the Steppe outlier still came from Steppe, just before Yamnaya Culture.

I don't know about Varna specifically, but I think Steppe ancestry in the Balkans is older than all of those cultures.

 

[halfalp]

Varna outlier is dated to over 4500 BCE, which is too early for Yamnaya. I just said that it could be from earlier Steppe cultures, but regardless, all I'm saying is that Steppe admix. in the Balkans is very very old (at least the early Chalcolithic if I had to guess), and populations with Steppe admix don't necessarily have a direct origin on the Steppe.

You cannot cheat Steppe admixture coming from somewhere else. Steppe people related with Khvalynsk and Sredny Stog probably migrate outside eastern europe before the Yamnaya expansion.

 

[Angela]

Since some of our posters seem to have trouble reading graphs....

A tiny bit of Yamnaya shows up a bit early in a few samples from the Balkans. End of story.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Come on guys, how can we still believe in Yamnaya - isn't the simplest explanation the best?

 

[halfalp]

Well it's not very possible. You cannot found a population of 60% EHG and 30% CHG in a land full of EEF and a minority of WHG. This doesn't make sense.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Since some of our posters seem to have trouble reading graphs....

A tiny bit of Yamnaya shows up a bit early in a few samples from the Balkans. End of story.

A bit early is an understatement, but let's not talk about this in this thread

 

[MOESAN]

What about this though?

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/07/a-corded-ware-related-proto-greek-from.html

That Greek sample is Neolithic.

Then there is that semi-famous Varna outlier, which has lots of Steppe too, and also definitely (massively) predates Yamnaya.

Steppe admix ? Yamnaya

question here: is autosomal DNA labelled "steppe" (or 'yamanya') intrusion the proof of a PIE or even pre-PIE speaking people's intrusion? Not for sure.

 

[halfalp]

Yes we should stop believe in those Yamnaya, they were probably just Proto-Turks.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Well it's not very possible. You cannot found a population of 60% EHG and 30% CHG in a land full of EEF and a minority of WHG. This doesn't make sense.

Let's not talk about this now, but as you know I associate L23 with metallurgy with the swastika etc.

And also, the Balkans is directly connected to the Steppe with pretty much no geographical barriers - it isn't outlandish at all. But seriously, not because you've done anything wrong or because I can't defend myself, but I'm not speaking about this anymore as it is off-topic

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

question here: is autosomal DNA labelled "steppe" (or 'yamanya') intrusion the proof of a PIE or even pre-PIE speaking people's intrusion? Not for sure.

We can never have proof, we can only make models and try and back them up with evidence. The ancient DNA has to support the models, and it can be used to discredit other models - that is its only purpose. But people abuse it, and always oversimplify, often ignoring difficult questions ("How can CWC derive from Yamnaya, both paternalistic cultures, when they have completely different Y DNA profiles?" is one example. Like children, the official answer is "muh Steppe"). This is precisely the reason that lots of outlandish conclusions were made using aDNA during its early days. As I've said before on this forum, we need to appreciate Goethe's interpretation of science, and "look at the big picture".

Also, people are so terrified of looking at skull shapes nowadays!

 

[halfalp]

We can never have proof, we can only make models and try and back them up with evidence. The ancient DNA has to support the models, and it can be used to discredit other models - that is its only purpose. But people abuse it, and always oversimplify, often ignoring difficult questions ("How can CWC derive from Yamnaya, both paternalistic cultures, when they have completely different Y DNA profiles?" is one example. Like children, the official answer is "muh Steppe"). Also, people are so terrified of looking at skull shapes nowadays!

1) We dont know everything about Khvalynsk / Sredni Stog / Yamnaya. If one day we found some Yamnaya R1a ( wich is already the case ) it gonna be closed.

2) R1a / R1b and Eastern Europe have mainly the same ancestry in those times. So the Steppe ancestry in CWC could be just common ancestry.

 

[MOESAN]

kind of answer to more than one, here under, as it comes:
- I doubt Y-R1b erased completely other Y-haplogroups -
- it is of importance to discriminate a brutal replacement of Y-haplogroups from a gradual one : the results are not the same as well concerning the allover auDNA as the linguistic consequences and/or the historical inferences -
- I suppose it?s a mistake to put all the Y-J2 of Iberia on the account of Romans or others (I think in Chalco diverse cultures of the South and the South-East in the first place, surely from Egea or Western Anatolia for a part ? the diverse Y-E1b of Iberia deserves a detailed analysis region by region -
- what we have are maps of current absolute density of Y-R1b-L51 or L11, not their relative density compared to all R1b ? I think Central-Eastern Europe could provide us higher relative %?s of L51 or/and L11 (Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Poland) ; today pop?s surveys (Busby and others) show a trail in Central Europe with L51, L11 and their upstreams and downstreams SNP?s, spite they are based upon rather small samples ? the fact L51 seems having known a quick densification in Western Europe doesn ?t mean it was born there - It could be that L51 was first among pops around Carpathian, with some ?steppe?-like or pseudo-?steppe? auDNA what is not the proof its first bearers spoke an IE language -
- even with true ?steppe? auDNA (EHG-old CHG) the weight of these DNA could very easily decrease by time on the way to South-West ; in the case of a southern way travel the original auDNA could even have been half diluted before leaving southeastern Europe ? BTW we see today in S-W Europe a gradiant in auDNA from North to South-West whatever the %?s of Y-R1b ?
- but I have hard work to figure out that a bunch of BB?s Y-R1b-L51 arrived in South Atlantic regions along mediterranean coasts gave birth to the all P312 we found among Northern BB?s and we find their descendants (from BB?s and not-BB?s) in today Western Europe, with this subclade distribution ? the prevalence of L11 rather in Northern+Northeastern Europe and the relatively neat separation of U106 from P312 doesn?t plead for a mediterranean road for L51 or at least it could be possible only in the case of at least two roads scheme from East -
- The today distribution of Y-R1b clades in Iberia is not only the result of Late Chalco-Early BA brutal invasion ; it?s the result of a succession of people came from North into Iberia, before, during and after the Urnfields and IA (Romans) ;


& : Bicicleur, I don?t see Y-I2a1b L161 and S2639 had had an Iberia distribution (based upon my poor munitions); according to Maciamo they seem rather ? so British ? and from "eastern Y-I2a1b - Y-I2a1(b) and I2a2 were found among Late Neolithic megalithic sites in Iberia but the today distribution in Iberia, rather scarce and Western + Catalonia, could be as well the result of Germanic and/or Celtic settlements, at least for some subclades (I haven?t the detail) ? maybe you have some clues I lack here ?

- I?m not sure all L-51/P312 descendants spoke IE, I don?t exclude completley a proto-basquic/aquitanian even if this hypothesis seems more and more inaccurate or weird to me ? Iberian language could have had some basquic-like elements, and DF27 is very eastern in Iberia -


Don?t take my doubts for firm believings ! Only open doors in alternative of fragile proofs -
Concerning early ?steppe? DNA in Europe, I recall, not my opinion, but the traditional mainstream about IE?s : it says first Kourgans people supposed to be IE?s appeared in Europe around 4400-4300 BC...

 

[hrvclv]

I don't understand, I know the title of this post suggests it, but it still seems somewhat early, given on Wikipedia at least the Central European Bell Beaker culture was said to have started after 2500 BCE.

Well, you can also look at it the other way round. The dates might explain a lot on the contrary.

Stricto sensu, Bell Beakers were just pots - initially produced in Portugal (from 2900 BCE onwards). Then the pottery style expanded northeastwards, perhaps with some degree of demic movement. Simultaneously, or shortly afterwards, groups from the steppe people who had just arrived in - say - Bohemia, launched long-ranging incursions into western Europe. The two streams of people (and genes) apparently interpenetrated each other in a fairly complex way.

The 'steppe' foragers may have retained contacts with the groups they had left behind (you gotta visit the fam'ly once in a while!). Trade seems to have expanded massively at the time. It probably just ran along the trails those invaders had left on their way. The Beaker pots went east. R1b , its language - such as it was, some form of Proto-Italo-Celtic - and its burial practices, went west. The newcomers married local wives. Most of the time, pottery was a female occupation. And beaker pots proved convenient for drinking beer and mead. No reason to discard them. So much more reason for "exporting" them. What I imagine is a newly established netwok of trading paths crisscrossing western Europe, running both ways.

2500 BCE fits in nicely to explain the beginning of that influx of beaker pottery into Germany. From there, shortly afterwards, it was taken to the British Isles by a massive wave of people from somewhere in, broadly, north-west Germany.

The genetic impact in Iberia, though strong in terms of y-dna in places (the west) may have been limited autosomally for some time.

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Well, at least the pots not people theory is effectively dead, in my opinion at least. Let me know if I've missed something though. The oldest farmers are only slightly older than that 2500 BCE Steppe sample, and given there would have been way more of them (and Beaker remains in Iberia were already known to be very sparse), it isn't a surprise that we haven't found Steppe samples that are as old.

 

[firetown]

We have some early pre-E-V13 in Cardial Neolithic as well.

That would be around the time the first farmer/ancestors of today's Basques arrived, correct?

 

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

Well, you can also look at it the other way round. The dates might explain a lot on the contrary.

Stricto sensu, Bell Beakers were just pots - initially produced in Portugal (from 2900 BCE onwards). Then the pottery style expanded northeastwards, perhaps with some degree of demic movement. Simultaneously, or shortly afterwards, groups from the steppe people who had just arrived in - say - Bohemia, launched long-ranging incursions into western Europe. The two streams of people (and genes) apparently interpenetrated each other in a fairly complex way.

The 'steppe' foragers may have retained contacts with the groups they had left behind (you gotta visit the fam'ly once in a while!). Trade seems to have expanded massively at the time. It probably just ran along the trails those invaders had left on their way. The Beaker pots went east. R1b , its language - such as it was, some form of Proto-Italo-Celtic - and its burial practices, went west. The newcomers married local wives. Most of the time, pottery was a female occupation. And beaker pots proved convenient for drinking beer and mead. No reason to discard them. So much more reason for "exporting" them. What I imagine is a newly established netwok of trading paths crisscrossing western Europe, running both ways.

2500 BCE fits in nicely to explain the beginning of that influx of beaker pottery into Germany. From there, shortly afterwards, it was taken to the British Isles by a massive wave of people from somewhere in, broadly, north-west Germany.

The genetic impact in Iberia, though strong in terms of y-dna in places (the west) may have been limited autosomally for some time.

Isn't that 2500 BCE Steppe sample in Iberia pretty old though? That was roughly the same time the Beaker culture in Germany commenced.

 

[hrvclv]

Isn't that 2500 BCE Steppe sample in Iberia pretty old though? That was roughly the same time the Beaker culture in Germany commenced.

Yes... that's precisely my point : as I see things, freshly arrived R1b were instrumental in spreading beaker pots back to where they came from. It all seems so simultaneous. Can't be a coincidence.