Why R1b couldn't have been spread around Western Europe by the Bell Beaker people

Frankly, it takes a lot of chutzpah to put forward the country with the
lowest incidence of R1b in Europe (Ukraine) as the source of R1b.

My two cents:

I always say that genealogic genetics must be tied to some principles of documental genealogy: a surname was born at the beginning of the XI century in place A, then in the XI, XIII and XIV centuries it remained in place A, but in the XV century some bearers of that surname migrated to place B. In the XVI century, from place B some bearers migrated in places C and D, and, in the mean time, in place A it remains only one family with that surname. In the XVII century place A hasn't got any bearer of that surname, but place B, C and D has. Also, place C has the greatest number of bearers.

This is the journey of my surname.

According to your view, then I must say that place C must be the place of origin of my surname, because it has got the greatest number of bearers... well, thanks to a documental research I saw that was place A the origin.
 
joeflood said:
Look Athiudisk, seriously you are not on a winner here. First are we sure that single L23* was tested fully? As far as I know it was poor DNA so they couldn't get the subclade. It's an awful lot to hang off a sample of one.

It's not just the one sample, but the presence of Yamna-derived ancestry across Europe as well. Taking the two together, I don't see how one can conclude the theory I'm supporting is at all impossible.

Even as late as 0AD Germany was 70% forest, back then it was all forest except the river valleys. Now you are proposing that one of these very rare L23* plains dwellers slipped into the forest, presumably running away from that R1a hordes, and leaving no trail behind, made it across a thousand miles of dangerous uncharted forest. having a L51, a L151 and P312 mutation along the way, then with no support. set up a vast and mighty dynasty on the Atlantic. It goes beyond improbable.

More like L23 split into L51 and Z2103 branches in eastern Europe, with L51 (and then L11, etc.) moving westward, and its descendants expanding across the rest of Europe. They brought their support with them as they came; we're not talking about a single man with his sons alone, but a larger-scale migration. I see nothing improbable about it.

What you have to keep in mind is that Mr Western R1b on the Atlantic, Mr Eastern R1a in the Baltic, and Mr I1 too wherever he was, each descended from a single man who lived around 3000 BC, if yfull,com timings are right. So we need to get those three men into place at the right time with adequate support so that their lines can dominate in the Early Bronze population explosion.

I believe that R1 came with/brought the Bronze Age explosion, in many cases; I1 was already in place when R1 arrived. The two combined (most notably into Germanic cultures) as R1 entered from the east.

It's far more likely (and this needs quite a bit of explanation too) that R1b from the Mediterranean sailed around to Spain, set up a decent sort of Beaker colony, then expanded massively from there. They started chopping forest from the West and before too long met up with R1a chopping forest from the East. They both had steppe-type Bronze culture and probably got on alright so they formed the very disparate Corded Ware society - R1a in the East, R1b and I1 in the West.

I don't know about more likely, but it's certainly an interesting possibility. What evidence suggests to you that R1b spread throughout Europe from Iberia?

At this point, as you are committed to one thing, we may have to agree to disagree. However you going to hear a lot more about the early Bronze Atlantic Culture, I am selling it quite hard now that I have settled on a possible solution. The incidental evidence is actually fairly reasonable, and once people stop dismissing it as myth and start looking for evidence around the Atlantic using our new dating tools - instead of wasting their time on a dead end in the Ukraine - we will get a pretty solid theory I think. Certainly a lot more exciting than sheepherders.

We'll see. At present, I see no evidence to suggest R1b skipped from eastern Europe or the Levant to Iberia and then expanded from there.

No they don't, unless you mean around the Mediterranean

They do, though. We have L23 around the Black and Caspian Seas, both ancient and modern, then L51 across Europe to the west. L23 is older than L51.

From the genetics point of view there is one thing that really makes the Yamnaya a very unlikely starter for Western R1b. L51 precedes the Yamnaya, which dates 3600-2300 BC. If yfull's timings are correct L51 formed about 4100BC, 500 years earlier, and has TMRCA of 3800 BC pre Yamnaya. If they were ancestors of Western R1b, L51 would have to be ancestors of at least some of them. Where are the L51s?

In remains we haven't sampled yet. L51's father and brother are both at the eastern end of Yamnaya; why is it impossible that L51 is somewhere in that horizon as well? If L51 came from western Europe, how did it's father and brother end up north of the Caspian? I don't see a simple explanation; it's possible that, as you believe, there was a migration through the Mediterranean, but I see no reason to propose it, currently.

You really need to look at the other branch under L51, Z1111/PF7589, which also is supposed to be older than Yamnaya. I see eight on FTDNA. One in Spain, one in Italy, three in Britain, one in Greece, two unknown. Looking awfully like Atlantic-Mediterranean seagoing culture and nothing at all like Yamnaya?

I think you mean Z2111. In any event, all that demonstrates is that L51 and its descendants made it to Europe. If Z2111 means that L51 was born in western Europe, why doesn't Z2103 mean that L23 was born on the steppe?

A given clade being older than a culture doesn't really mean anything. Some people will keep the same terminal SNP without further mutations. My haplogroup is older than European settlement in the New World, but I'm still an American. Hells, there are still Y-DNA A people running around, and A predates anything we'd call civilization.

We are looking for a chain of descendants and sidelines. These do NOT occur along the path from Ukraine to the Atlantic.

Other things have occurred in the last few thousand years that might make such a direct trail hard to follow in the manner you suggest. As a relevant example, the mass migration of Slavs across eastern Europe.

They DO occur from Turkey around the Mediterranean, Greece, Italy, around into Spain and thence to Britain. Along which path would you look for your ancestors?

Looking at my own ancestors, I see U106 entering Britain (where my terminal SNP is largely found) in the last two-thousand years. The oldest U106 we have is from Corded Ware in what's now Sweden. Corded Ware drew most of its ancestry from Yamnaya, where U106's ancestor L23 has been found.

I don't see any reason as of yet to believe my ancestors in Corded Ware got there from Yamnaya by way of Spain, instead of simply moving west. If this changes, as you suspect it will, I'll obviously reconsider. :)
 
To me, the Olalde paper will require major revisions to our previous ideas. Here are some questions/thoughts/misinterpretations on the Olalde paper:

Lines 103-116, 159-163, 181-184, 297-301 seem to be saying that R1b on Great Britain and Ireland did not come through Iberia. 311-315 says they were from Netherlands.


Lines 243-246 says there were no R1b in Albion (Britain) before the Copper Age nor in Ireland before the Bronze Age. The R1b brought/arrived with the beakers.


(Beakers arrived about 2700 BC - Mt. Pleasant. The copper to bronze switch was about 2150 BC. The copper was mined in Cork and the tin in Cornwall.)


Lines 116-119, 269-272, 313-315 seem to suggest a truly massive genetic replacement. 95% replacement. That would be ethnic cleansing on steroids.
Lines 265-268, 311 say this happened 2000-2400 BC.


Wikipedia says "Integration is thought to have been peaceful". Could this have been a 'chase off all the men and marry all the women' scenario, thus resulting in a "peaceful" extermination the I2a in eastern and southern England?

Then there is this:

L161 Isles B has a relatively even distribution throughout the R1b areas of Great Britain and Ireland and it has an old TMRCA and they are much more numerous than Isles A.

Isles A is almost absent in the eastern part of Great Britain and has a young TMRCA. It is highly concentrated in Cork and to a lesser extent, throughout Ireland.

Looking for a way to explain these very different outcomes for Isles B and Isles A:

Perhaps some significant portion of Isles B (S2703?) were incorporated into the R1b tribes on the continent long before the invasion ~2,000 BC . During the invasion and subsequent ethnic cleansing, the R1b tribes exterminated Isles A except for those who found a refuge in Cork. Isles B, as an integral though minor part of R1b was planted everywhere the R1b occupied. This would explain the very different TMRCAs, frequency, and population densities.
 
Its been a long time since this thread was started I hope this gets to someone interested. There's a lot of disagreement on R1b, but I have been pondering over the emergence of curly flame-red haired people in the West of Northern Europe for some years and the following may help.

Because all these peoples exist on the WESTERN coastlines, I theorised that it emerged from people travelling by sea. The clue is that the hair gets lighter and more blonde as you go North from the Iberian Pillars of Hercules, right the way up to Scandanavia, suggesting a slow dilution effect.

There is a very ancient habitual movement, by small fishing vessels, along coastlines, pushed by storms to seek shelter in a neighbouring shore. This then rorms the basis of the "COAST HOPPING" movement, in that once the storm is over, they return to their origin. Obviously, sometimes this leads to discovering new places and to knowing how to navigate to and from these newly discovered lands. Even setting up home in the new place and / or trading / exploring them. Large expanses of sea like the Pillars of Hercules / Mediteranean / English Channel / Irish Sea / Northern route to Scandanavia can even be crossed. This seafaring can lead to thousands of miles of coast hopping over time.

What if R1b (the basic form) came from around African, from somewhere around Niger to the coastline there. Then hopped northward around the West African coastline and into the mediteranean all the way to Anatolia etc. Finally crossing the Pillars of Hercules to get to the Iberian lands, then up their west coast, to France and on to Ireland, S.West England, W. Wales, N. West Scotland, finally over the top of Scotland and off to Norway. At the same time it could move along the Northern French coastline to Belgium, Holland, Denmark and beyond. Add a few more land movements and you've got a seriously confusing map of H1b's movements, and with the emergence of new variants, its would get even more confusing.

This kind of SEA FARING movement, of people who were essentially fisherman, is without a doubt very possible, indeed Spanish, Portuguese, W. African, French and even British fisherman meet each other TODAY, while fishing for Tuna, Mackeral, Squid and the likes, some 20-100 miles off the Iberian coast.
 
Its been a long time since this thread was started I hope this gets to someone interested. There's a lot of disagreement on R1b, but I have been pondering over the emergence of curly flame-red haired people in the West of Northern Europe for some years and the following may help.

Because all these peoples exist on the WESTERN coastlines, I theorised that it emerged from people travelling by sea. The clue is that the hair gets lighter and more blonde as you go North from the Iberian Pillars of Hercules, right the way up to Scandanavia, suggesting a slow dilution effect.

There is a very ancient habitual movement, by small fishing vessels, along coastlines, pushed by storms to seek shelter in a neighbouring shore. This then rorms the basis of the "COAST HOPPING" movement, in that once the storm is over, they return to their origin. Obviously, sometimes this leads to discovering new places and to knowing how to navigate to and from these newly discovered lands. Even setting up home in the new place and / or trading / exploring them. Large expanses of sea like the Pillars of Hercules / Mediteranean / English Channel / Irish Sea / Northern route to Scandanavia can even be crossed. This seafaring can lead to thousands of miles of coast hopping over time.

What if R1b (the basic form) came from around African, from somewhere around Niger to the coastline there. Then hopped northward around the West African coastline and into the mediteranean all the way to Anatolia etc. Finally crossing the Pillars of Hercules to get to the Iberian lands, then up their west coast, to France and on to Ireland, S.West England, W. Wales, N. West Scotland, finally over the top of Scotland and off to Norway. At the same time it could move along the Northern French coastline to Belgium, Holland, Denmark and beyond. Add a few more land movements and you've got a seriously confusing map of H1b's movements, and with the emergence of new variants, its would get even more confusing.

This kind of SEA FARING movement, of people who were essentially fisherman, is without a doubt very possible, indeed Spanish, Portuguese, W. African, French and even British fisherman meet each other TODAY, while fishing for Tuna, Mackeral, Squid and the likes, some 20-100 miles off the Iberian coast.

Do observe the geographic apparent trails of the diverses upstream and downstream SNP's of Y-R1b and the upstream SNP's before Y-R. I doubt the African origin could work, even at one stage of one of the (middle) downstreams.
Concerning the coastal leaps for anY haplo, it's not impossible but concerning the concerned Y-R1b subclades of western Europe your theory does'nt work too much.
 
Do observe the geographic apparent trails of the diverses upstream and downstream SNP's of Y-R1b and the upstream SNP's before Y-R. I doubt the African origin could work, even at one stage of one of the (middle) downstreams.
Concerning the coastal leaps for anY haplo, it's not impossible but concerning the concerned Y-R1b subclades of western Europe your theory does'nt work too much.
Any sub-variants (sub-clades) could be repeated at multiple locations / times periods, as they are MUTATIONS from an original R1b, so its best not to get too stuck on hard and fast rules, that you HAVE to be able to follow them around, like a SOLID trail of evidence.

Whilst the broad brush approach works, you'll find that the fine details may NOT always be so easy to follow. It might be an idea to study the mutation rate to determine the likelyhood of multiple mutation (parallel or otherwise) occurances to give some idea of whether they occur commonly or rarely, noting that this may vary with any local selectivity for/against the mutation.

Note that once mainland Britain was cut off from Europe, it would ONLY be accessible by SEAFARING peoples, thus accounting for the decline in the original population of post glacial hunter/herder/gatherers (did they leave whilst still able to ? maybe, I am assuming they were there to follow the herds of reindeer who could have just left and not come back the following summer) and subsequent replacement by farming ("beaker") peoples. If those farming peoples had access to seafarers like an off-shore fishing community (say because they had a common ancestry). This might ALSO mean some of the ancestors that built Britain's Stone Henges are today living somewhere in Scandanavia, as they followed the reindeer which never returned.

It seems so obvious that it is far TOO co-incidental that R1b is highly prevalent in the WESTERN COASTAL ZONES of Europe, then slowly getting rarer and rarer as you go EAST, even inside particular lands, especially when you come away from western coastal regions and western coastal accessible large river systems.
 
My two cents:

I always say that genealogic genetics must be tied to some principles of documental genealogy: a surname was born at the beginning of the XI century in place A, then in the XI, XIII and XIV centuries it remained in place A, but in the XV century some bearers of that surname migrated to place B. In the XVI century, from place B some bearers migrated in places C and D, and, in the mean time, in place A it remains only one family with that surname. In the XVII century place A hasn't got any bearer of that surname, but place B, C and D has. Also, place C has the greatest number of bearers.

This is the journey of my surname.

According to your view, then I must say that place C must be the place of origin of my surname, because it has got the greatest number of bearers... well, thanks to a documental research I saw that was place A the origin.
Your statement is valuable for seldom surnames, but from my personal experience of surnames, I can say that relatively dense surnames in a region tend to keep their density "leadership" in their region of origin, and the regions of migration don't present so a density, except if the region of origin knows a drastic diminution of population for some extraordinary reason. As a whole, in modern times, the density decreases slowly in the region of origin but the surname does'nt acquire a big density in the diverse host regions (migratory terminals) as theses last regions are very often "sink" places where all origins mix by time.
Maybe we may not compare conquests or colonisations of old times (with male elites supremacy to the present times.
 
Any sub-variants (sub-clades) could be repeated at multiple locations / times periods, as they are MUTATIONS from an original R1b, so its best not to get too stuck on hard and fast rules, that you HAVE to be able to follow them around, like a SOLID trail of evidence.

Whilst the broad brush approach works, you'll find that the fine details may NOT always be so easy to follow. It might be an idea to study the mutation rate to determine the likelyhood of multiple mutation (parallel or otherwise) occurances to give some idea of whether they occur commonly or rarely, noting that this may vary with any local selectivity for/against the mutation.

Note that once mainland Britain was cut off from Europe, it would ONLY be accessible by SEAFARING peoples, thus accounting for the decline in the original population of post glacial hunter/herder/gatherers (did they leave whilst still able to ? maybe, I am assuming they were there to follow the herds of reindeer who could have just left and not come back the following summer) and subsequent replacement by farming ("beaker") peoples. If those farming peoples had access to seafarers like an off-shore fishing community (say because they had a common ancestry). This might ALSO mean some of the ancestors that built Britain's Stone Henges are today living somewhere in Scandanavia, as they followed the reindeer which never returned.

It seems so obvious that it is far TOO co-incidental that R1b is highly prevalent in the WESTERN COASTAL ZONES of Europe, then slowly getting rarer and rarer as you go EAST, even inside particular lands, especially when you come away from western coastal regions and western coastal accessible large river systems.
HergG

Any sub-variants (sub-clades) could be repeated at multiple locations / times periods, as they are MUTATIONS from an original R1b, so its best not to get too stuck on hard and fast rules, that you HAVE to be able to follow them around, like a SOLID trail of evidence.



Moesan

The SNP’s are chosen as more valuable markers than STR’s because they seem occurring only one time on long enough periods and when the subclades they produce are found in far places we can trace logically enough their path and link it to historical/archeological data.concerning the progression of Y-R1b downstreams SNP’s of M29 we have some sketch showing a rather terrestrial East to West path. The distribution of principal post-P312 in Europe (L21, L28/U152, DF27) seems indicating a first introgression of L21 in West (pushed to Northwest later), and then U152 (rather Central) and DF27 (rather Southwest), with some intrication between them hard to give it a precise date.There is no hard science here, I avow, but a most plausible sketch. The relatively light imput of L21 in northern Spain/Basque country and the symetrical input of DF27 in North and the Great Isles could be the result of some interactions during the so called Atlantic Bronze period.



HergG
Whilst the broad brush approach works, you'll find that the fine details may NOT always be so easy to follow. It might be an idea to study the mutation rate to determine the likelyhood of multiple mutation (parallel or otherwise) occurances to give some idea of whether they occur commonly or rarely, noting that this may vary with any local selectivity for/against the mutation.



Moesan

Nobody never said it’s easy. Maybe some peculiarities linked to the Y-haplo’s could give them the possibility to increase in density or to tend to fade out by natural selection. But we may not base a reasoning on this without more knowledge. A bulk for a SNP can more easily explain some dispersion of weak densities around, the opposite cannot, IMO. This kept aside, a multiple occurrence of the same mutation on the same haplo background in diverse places and times implies the same incertainty for all theories ! Not a positive argument...


HergG
Note that once mainland Britain was cut off from Europe, it would ONLY be accessible by SEAFARING peoples, thus accounting for the decline in the original population of post glacial hunter/herder/gatherers (did they leave whilst still able to ? maybe, I am assuming they were there to follow the herds of reindeer who could have just left and not come back the following summer) and subsequent replacement by farming ("beaker") peoples. If those farming peoples had access to seafarers like an off-shore fishing community (say because they had a common ancestry). This might ALSO mean some of the ancestors that built Britain's Stone Henges are today living somewhere in Scandanavia, as they followed the reindeer which never returned.



Moesan

Puzzling question.Nobody knows exactly what was the lifestyle of late Mesolithic people in Britain. Were they still hunting only big games ? Based on other places it seems they had already a differentiated food. It isn’t sure a majority of hunters-gatherers (foragers) followed cold climate animals. Mankind had already big skills to adapt to changes in environment, and I read somewhere it seems Mesolithic people in Britain lived often near watercourses, and surely the coasts like the Teviec people of brittany, ate fish too and other things provided by the more and more wooden areas. In northern and western Europe hunters-gatherers survived locally spite the climate changes and mixed later with farmers. But their density was lighter than the farmers one for evident reasons.

BTW Beaker people were not the first « farmers » in Britain.

I strongly doubt the hunters-gatherers would have taken part in the first Stone Henge building, I think it was the first farmers who did it, before Beakers and maybe others did some works too in Stone Henge. So if some of the first Stone Henge builders (around 3100-2800 BC) went to Scandinavia, it was not to follow the reindeers, I think ! The auDNA in Stone Henge (Windmill Hill culture people ?) was a rather EEF’s one. Yes, Neolithic people, coined Long Barrows people went effectively to Scandinavia and northern Europe (influence on Funnelbeaker?) if I remember correctly. No link with reindeers and hunters-gatherers.


HergG

It seems so obvious that it is far TOO co-incidental that R1b is highly prevalent in the WESTERN COASTAL ZONES of Europe, then slowly getting rarer and rarer as you go EAST, even inside particular lands, especially when you come away from western coastal regions and western coastal accessible large river systems.



Moesan

People move on, it isn’t new. Sometimes by waves, and one wave can cover a preceding one, overwhelm it or sweep it. The Y-R1b distribution isn’t level, and even in Central-East Europe you can find some remnants of Y-R1b people. Their subclades distributions are more diverse there except in some places, and as a whole lack the overwhelming dominance of recent downstream SNP ‘s we can find in western Europe. In western Europe, the geography of places of very dominant SNP’s doesn’t reflect a coastal primary expansion IMO, and Atlantic shores R1b distribution doesn’t fit with a place of origin. It’s only at a higher resolution that we see some « chassés-croisés » and bridge heads which take place after the great terrestrial expansion, apparently. And in these cases very often the known History can explain it very well, except some cases of possible founder effect.

As an example we can mention the surprising U-152 presence in central Turkey : the Galatians story give us the explanation : not a place of origin.But U152 is not a very upstream subclade, is it ?

It seems to me you forget the later history of Eastern and Central Europe after the first waves of Steppic DNA into our small world. Just my point, not god’s word. As a whole the current ancient DNA we have at hand confirms the East-West travel.
 
HergG

Any sub-variants (sub-clades) could be repeated at multiple locations / times periods, as they are MUTATIONS from an original R1b, so its best not to get too stuck on hard and fast rules, that you HAVE to be able to follow them around, like a SOLID trail of evidence.



Moesan

The SNP’s are chosen as more valuable markers than STR’s because they seem occurring only one time on long enough periods and when the subclades they produce are found in far places we can trace logically enough their path and link it to historical/archeological data.concerning the progression of Y-R1b downstreams SNP’s of M29 we have some sketch showing a rather terrestrial East to West path. The distribution of principal post-P312 in Europe (L21, L28/U152, DF27) seems indicating a first introgression of L21 in West (pushed to Northwest later), and then U152 (rather Central) and DF27 (rather Southwest), with some intrication between them hard to give it a precise date.There is no hard science here, I avow, but a most plausible sketch. The relatively light imput of L21 in northern Spain/Basque country and the symetrical input of DF27 in North and the Great Isles could be the result of some interactions during the so called Atlantic Bronze period.



HergG
Whilst the broad brush approach works, you'll find that the fine details may NOT always be so easy to follow. It might be an idea to study the mutation rate to determine the likelyhood of multiple mutation (parallel or otherwise) occurances to give some idea of whether they occur commonly or rarely, noting that this may vary with any local selectivity for/against the mutation.



Moesan

Nobody never said it’s easy. Maybe some peculiarities linked to the Y-haplo’s could give them the possibility to increase in density or to tend to fade out by natural selection. But we may not base a reasoning on this without more knowledge. A bulk for a SNP can more easily explain some dispersion of weak densities around, the opposite cannot, IMO. This kept aside, a multiple occurrence of the same mutation on the same haplo background in diverse places and times implies the same incertainty for all theories ! Not a positive argument...


HergG
Note that once mainland Britain was cut off from Europe, it would ONLY be accessible by SEAFARING peoples, thus accounting for the decline in the original population of post glacial hunter/herder/gatherers (did they leave whilst still able to ? maybe, I am assuming they were there to follow the herds of reindeer who could have just left and not come back the following summer) and subsequent replacement by farming ("beaker") peoples. If those farming peoples had access to seafarers like an off-shore fishing community (say because they had a common ancestry). This might ALSO mean some of the ancestors that built Britain's Stone Henges are today living somewhere in Scandanavia, as they followed the reindeer which never returned.



Moesan

Puzzling question.Nobody knows exactly what was the lifestyle of late Mesolithic people in Britain. Were they still hunting only big games ? Based on other places it seems they had already a differentiated food. It isn’t sure a majority of hunters-gatherers (foragers) followed cold climate animals. Mankind had already big skills to adapt to changes in environment, and I read somewhere it seems Mesolithic people in Britain lived often near watercourses, and surely the coasts like the Teviec people of brittany, ate fish too and other things provided by the more and more wooden areas. In northern and western Europe hunters-gatherers survived locally spite the climate changes and mixed later with farmers. But their density was lighter than the farmers one for evident reasons.

BTW Beaker people were not the first « farmers » in Britain.

I strongly doubt the hunters-gatherers would have taken part in the first Stone Henge building, I think it was the first farmers who did it, before Beakers and maybe others did some works too in Stone Henge. So if some of the first Stone Henge builders (around 3100-2800 BC) went to Scandinavia, it was not to follow the reindeers, I think ! The auDNA in Stone Henge (Windmill Hill culture people ?) was a rather EEF’s one. Yes, Neolithic people, coined Long Barrows people went effectively to Scandinavia and northern Europe (influence on Funnelbeaker?) if I remember correctly. No link with reindeers and hunters-gatherers.


HergG

It seems so obvious that it is far TOO co-incidental that R1b is highly prevalent in the WESTERN COASTAL ZONES of Europe, then slowly getting rarer and rarer as you go EAST, even inside particular lands, especially when you come away from western coastal regions and western coastal accessible large river systems.



Moesan

People move on, it isn’t new. Sometimes by waves, and one wave can cover a preceding one, overwhelm it or sweep it. The Y-R1b distribution isn’t level, and even in Central-East Europe you can find some remnants of Y-R1b people. Their subclades distributions are more diverse there except in some places, and as a whole lack the overwhelming dominance of recent downstream SNP ‘s we can find in western Europe. In western Europe, the geography of places of very dominant SNP’s doesn’t reflect a coastal primary expansion IMO, and Atlantic shores R1b distribution doesn’t fit with a place of origin. It’s only at a higher resolution that we see some « chassés-croisés » and bridge heads which take place after the great terrestrial expansion, apparently. And in these cases very often the known History can explain it very well, except some cases of possible founder effect.

As an example we can mention the surprising U-152 presence in central Turkey : the Galatians story give us the explanation : not a place of origin.But U152 is not a very upstream subclade, is it ?

It seems to me you forget the later history of Eastern and Central Europe after the first waves of Steppic DNA into our small world. Just my point, not god’s word. As a whole the current ancient DNA we have at hand confirms the East-West travel.
For the first two points replied to, as I tried to indicate, the data needed to make hard and fast conclusions is very large. So try to use broad brush for what we have and try not to get entrenched hard and fast, without statistical analysis of as much relevant data as can be found or generated. It takes very large amounts of genome data just to follow a small group, there more than just the single R1b to be considered, it may well be completed analysis will show up the distinct lineages.

If you view the important (regarding this discussion) people who entered the British area of Europe, then you start with the remnant Mesolithic who in their later years turned from nomadic herdsman hunter gatherers (9kBC) to herdsman, gathers, farmers - some crops & domesticated animals (4.5kBC). If you imagine Britain being cut off from Europe about 6kBC (when the Great Norwegian tidal wave hit circa 6100BC), you understand that they had little choice as they (if the tadal wave occurred in Winter), but remain and do what they could to survive, even if the majority of the Reindeer (and herders) had gone south (east) for the winter. FYI reindeer did not disappear from Bitain until 1300AD. As you come into the Neolithic, now cut off, this process of being more farming people continues. Indeed early R1b settler/fishermen may have brought this technology anytime after say 6000BC.

Then mass migration occurs around 2500BC and the early Beaker peoples moved in, the remnant (perhaps cross bred with those fisherman/settlers) could also now take advantage of the sea traffic and take the return journey back to the mainland, as returning vessels would have needed a cargo. So Beakers INBOUND and Peleolithic-Mesolithic-Neolithic (British) OUTBOUND. Now the mystery of where the Mesolithic-Neolithic British genes went to is solved.

I've no doubt all manner of peoples living along shorelines and rivers fished. But peoples are inshore fishermen, they were NOT offshore fishermen, as I have proposed. You can catch all types of fish on just flat sands/beaches and straw, net, sticks if you want, plus the shellfish. Estuarine river mouths at one time were full of eel traps. Flat sands/shingle had flatfish, cod, and bass traps before they were outlawed.

The movements of man were simply huge, and their reasons seem unfathomable. Why would a people from east of Ukraine (possibly Russia) stop there and build a round stonehenge in Ukraine and then move on all the way to Britain? I can only imagine a Mesolithic migration / travel route from the east due west through Europe to the west coast. Was that henge a stop off point, a way marker or what? Were they walking to the sunset, to as far as they could go?

This why I became interested in the ginger hair (associated with Celts), because they seem to have taken over the places these earlier Mesolithic peoples had left monuments (where upon some Celts then set themselves up as Druid priests using these monuments).

So did the Mesolithic Britains go North/East to Scandanavia or just East as far as they could go walking towards the sunrise.
 
Last edited:
@HergG
you wrote:
For the first two points replied to, as I tried to indicate, the data needed to make hard and fast conclusions is very large. So try to use broad brush for what we have and try not to get entrenched hard and fast, without statistical analysis of as much relevant data as can be found or generated. It takes very large amounts of genome data just to follow a small group, there more than just the single R1b to be considered, it may well be completed analysis will show up the distinct lineages.

Moesan answered:
So why are you basing your first reasonings on the presence and supposed moves of Y-R1b if the Y-haplo's have so little weight?
I 've some work to try to understand your points.
 
Late thoughts
Concerning founder effect, I think the first micro-"explosion" may be under effects of hazard and density of pop in new settlements, but after some generations, the success of a subclade is more or less acquired and depends more on social/political/military statute and genders statutes than pure hazard, does itn't?

Besides, when speaking of origins (with the notions of ethny and cultural group) we have to keep in mind that a subclade knows new mutations creating sub-subclades and so on, faster according to the population size. Presenting a different subclade doesn't mean a rupture of the genealogic chain (!) or a global genetic difference, at least when we speak of SNP's relatively close in time of birthdate. The Y-R1b-P312 people who gave birth to say L21, U152, DF27 by instance where not the same individuals but nothing tell us that they were entirely different people living in clearly distinct ethnies at first. ATW a bunch of downstream (kown) different mutations in an Y-haplo chain is just a provisory stage and has nothing decisive in itself to discriminate pop’s. Posterity and late developments can give a mutation an important weight in history or at the opposite can drown it in the multitude.

Individuals are little by themselves, they need partners.

To come back to the beginning of this thread, I ‘m not sure Y-R1b-L21 is born in the Great Isles. We cannot be sure of anything here. L21 is common in Brittany (where it could be a return) and in western France today, but its not negligible presence in more continental lands doesn’t plead for a necessary birthplace in the Isles. Sure enough it knowed a strong increase in density in the Isles, even more in Ireland, but we need more downstream SNP’s under L21 on the continent and more ancient L21 on it too, to make any supposition sure.
 
@HergG
you wrote:
For the first two points replied to, as I tried to indicate, the data needed to make hard and fast conclusions is very large. So try to use broad brush for what we have and try not to get entrenched hard and fast, without statistical analysis of as much relevant data as can be found or generated. It takes very large amounts of genome data just to follow a small group, there more than just the single R1b to be considered, it may well be completed analysis will show up the distinct lineages.

Moesan answered:
So why are you basing your first reasonings on the presence and supposed moves of Y-R1b if the Y-haplo's have so little weight?
I 've some work to try to understand your points.
Because, as I understand it, the R1b has a very large amount of data to back it up, particularly in UK and Ireland. Where the data gets thin then obviously a little less emphasis on it needs to be placed, which is why I talk of broad brush approach, as the data across along a wide track (brush mark) is less likely to be unimportant (so more likely to be the correct impression) as the data along a track builds up. In all, the R1b data itself is a large data set and growing fast. Maybe there is a statistical model package out there which will be able to make a quality analysis of the R1b data, might be a way forward. Following migration patterns (brush mark tracks) is very illuminating and takes the guesswork out of the subject.

I hope this helps someone studying this subject, even if I am proved wrong. Believe me, scientific debate & progress is the only way forward, it provides a tool to see the ancestors with, and takes the guesswork out of all kinds of things. I have found that there's no substitute for down to earth reasons for things early ancestors did, rather that the commonly ascribed "religious / mystical". We must never forget that the BULK of the people had to SURVIVE, often in the most extreme conditions (from today's point of view), "living on the edge" of existence, so to speak. For fishermen/herders/hunter/gatherers this was not so REAL as the source of food was naturally provided, but for farmers a single bad year's crop could wipe you ALL out, unless you had a back-up plan, and my guess is that back-up plan was herding/hunting/fishng/gathering.

BUT I still go back to the RED haired peoples, all the way up the western sea-board of Europe, gradually getting lighter (blonder), by genetic dilution, as it goes. WHY just the WESTERN sea-board side (I'm ignoring the subsequent movements east)? Its got to be sea-farers and their origin, maybe, appears to be NIGER in Africa, maybe ! Reminds me of the 13th-18th century European (Spain, Portugal, England, Holland) fleets, exploring / shipping / trading / colonising their way around the OCEANs of the world.
 
red hairs in Europe are not tightly linked to Atlantic shores, and distribution we see now could be very different from what it was 3000 or 4000 years ago.
Spain, Portugal: reds: 0,3% a a whole, only a bit more in North, and even more in Northwest (Galicia/Asturias).
SW FRance: around 0,6/0,8% - Western France : 0,8/1,2% ? Brittany show(ed) about 3,0 to 4,0% in ancient times (1940's) in West, around 2,0% in East Brittany. In France, North (around 3,0%), Northeast (2,0%) and central East: (1,5/2,0%) had more red haired people than West, except Brittany and Normandy. Western Norway could have a lot of red hairs (4,0%?) in some districts, compared with the national mean of 1,7%, and we may suppose they come from Britain and Ireland, but some districts of Denmark had also 4,0% (parts of Jutland), and in Southeastern Sweden they found 4,0 to 5,0% in regions where I doubt that N-W Europe people came at Viking times.
Some districts of Alemannic Switzerland had 2,0% to 3,0%. But they are far from Western shores of Europe.
We need more solid proofs but I think that the red hairs came between 2500 and 1500 from East (Central Europe) before being pushed on the N-W side of Europe. When a say "red hairs came", I think "populations rich for red hairs came"!!!
The today high frequency of red haired people in N-W Europe may have been magnified by drift of any sort and also founder effects that I cannot date by myself. It's of interest to notice that diverse mutations produce(d) red hairs and that N-W Europe seems having taken advantge of 3 of the more common mutations: send by different pop's?
This isn't an answer to your theory but a factual precision.
 
red hairs in Europe are not tightly linked to Atlantic shores, and distribution we see now could be very different from what it was 3000 or 4000 years ago.
Spain, Portugal: reds: 0,3% a a whole, only a bit more in North, and even more in Northwest (Galicia/Asturias).
SW FRance: around 0,6/0,8% - Western France : 0,8/1,2% ? Brittany show(ed) about 3,0 to 4,0% in ancient times (1940's) in West, around 2,0% in East Brittany. In France, North (around 3,0%), Northeast (2,0%) and central East: (1,5/2,0%) had more red haired people than West, except Brittany and Normandy. Western Norway could have a lot of red hairs (4,0%?) in some districts, compared with the national mean of 1,7%, and we may suppose they come from Britain and Ireland, but some districts of Denmark had also 4,0% (parts of Jutland), and in Southeastern Sweden they found 4,0 to 5,0% in regions where I doubt that N-W Europe people came at Viking times.
Some districts of Alemannic Switzerland had 2,0% to 3,0%. But they are far from Western shores of Europe.
We need more solid proofs but I think that the red hairs came between 2500 and 1500 from East (Central Europe) before being pushed on the N-W side of Europe. When a say "red hairs came", I think "populations rich for red hairs came"!!!
The today high frequency of red haired people in N-W Europe may have been magnified by drift of any sort and also founder effects that I cannot date by myself. It's of interest to notice that diverse mutations produce(d) red hairs and that N-W Europe seems having taken advantge of 3 of the more common mutations: send by different pop's?
This isn't an answer to your theory but a factual precision.
I'm curious if these figures could be misconstrued from people hair dying? In iberia at least many women dye their hair blonde and ginger... I had many in my family who did it. Not super uncommon in more northern areas either. Not discounting the fact that red hairs naturally exist btw, just questioning the accuracy. Personally it gotta be extremely rare even in the northern fringes of iberia to find naturally ginger people. More common in more endogamous northern european fringes, you can find it in Russia as well. So not just on coastal areas.
 

Why R1b couldn't have been spread around Western Europe by the Bell Beaker people​

Technically the title is true, but it's not.
Attention, this is my opinion based on several articles I have read in recent weeks, but I consider that Bell Beakers originated mainly in Portugal and as such in Iberia.

Having said that, I think that R1b was indeed spread by Bell Beakers, but through crossings between Bell Beakers and Corded Ware, as in the images below.
 

Attachments

  • os 3 ydna.png
    os 3 ydna.png
    615 KB · Views: 63
  • bell beaker migration.jpg
    bell beaker migration.jpg
    93.4 KB · Views: 67
  • corded beakers.jpg
    corded beakers.jpg
    308 KB · Views: 61

Why R1b couldn't have been spread around Western Europe by the Bell Beaker people​

Technically the title is true, but it's not.
Attention, this is my opinion based on several articles I have read in recent weeks, but I consider that Bell Beakers originated mainly in Portugal and as such in Iberia.

Having said that, I think that R1b was indeed spread by Bell Beakers, but through crossings between Bell Beakers and Corded Ware, as in the images below.
When we speak todate of Bell Beakers, we speak of Northern and Central Bell Beakers. These groups don't show any weighty input of S-W Europe (Iberia) auDNA or mt-DNA if I read well. Now, the origin of the kind of pottery, more evidently the high classes kit of pottery (and some other specific and limited artefacts) is subject of debate, and I avow I'm rather for a Portugal-West Spanish origin of the first Bell Beakers as a cultural marker, without being sure. Adoption/partial acculturation by future north-BB's pioneers (or "prosectors") "touring" in Iberia around the 2600's???. Only MO.
 
BTW we cannot say the first future northern BB's were identical to CWC. Not certainty IMO. EVen in the regions where they were neighbours they were different.
 

This thread has been viewed 146535 times.

Back
Top