Ever since the publication of the Olalde et al. Beaker paper (see
here), there's been a lot of talk online about Hungarian Yamnaya as the most likely source of the Yamnaya-related, R1b-P312-rich northern Bell Beakers who went on to dominate much of Central and Western Europe during the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age.
Certainly, this is still possible, and we might find out soon if it's true because several Hungarian Yamnaya samples are apparently about to be published. But I wouldn't bet the proverbial farm on it just yet.
The most Yamnaya-like Beaker in the Olalde et al. dataset and ancient DNA record to date is from the Szigetszentmiklós burial site, which is indeed in present-day Hungary. But this individual, labeled I2787, is dated to just 2457–2201 calBCE, which isn't an early date for a Beaker and probably a couple hundred years past the proto-Beaker time frame.
Moreover, he belongs to Y-haplogroup R1b-Z2103, a paternal marker most closely associated in the ancient DNA record with eastern Yamnaya groups. And he doesn't exactly look like a classic northern Beaker, because he doesn't have a brachycephalic head with an exceedingly flat occiput (like
this).
So I'd say that this is either an acculturated Beaker of recent Yamnaya origin, or perhaps the son of a Yamnaya father and Beaker mother. Below are several qpAdm mixture models that I ran to explore the latter possibility. They look very solid.
Beaker_Hungary_I2787
Beaker_Bavaria 0.442±0.045
Yamnaya_Samara 0.558±0.045
chisq 8.562
tail prob 0.73982
Full output
Beaker_Hungary_I2787
Beaker_Czech 0.441±0.045
Yamnaya_Samara 0.559±0.045
chisq 10.009
tail prob 0.61513
Full output
Beaker_Hungary_I2787
Beaker_The_Netherlands 0.576±0.062
Yamnaya_Samara 0.424±0.062
chisq 11.469
tail prob 0.489238
Full output
The idea that I2787 is a Beaker with recent Yamnaya ancestry isn't an original one. It was put forth very eloquently and convincingly months ago by the Bell Beaker Blogger himself:
Szigetszentmiklós Cemetery (Santa's Six Foot Elves)
I2786 is another Beaker male from the Szigetszentmiklós site who shows excess Yamnaya-related ancestry compared to most other Beakers. Again, it's likely that this individual harbors recent Yamnaya ancestry, because his Y-haplogroup is I2a-M223, which has been recorded in eastern Yamnaya alongside R1b-Z2103.
So my gut feeling for now is that Hungarian Yamnaya samples will mostly belong to Y-haplogroups R1b-Z2103 and I2a-M223, rather than R1b-P312, and thus they won't fit the bill in any obvious way as the population that may have given rise to northern Beakers.
One of the oldest individuals in the ancient DNA record belonging to R1b-P312 is I5748, a Beaker dated to 2579–2233 calBCE from the Oostwoud-Tuithoorn burial site in what is now West Frisia, The Netherlands.
Interestingly, this part of Northwestern Europe was home to the Single Grave population shortly before I5748 was alive. And the Single Grave culture is a variant of the Corded Ware culture. So can anyone tell me if there's any evidence that I5748 and his kind were relative newcomers to West Frisia, from, say, somewhere in the direction of the Carpathian Basin? If not, then what are the chances that northern Beakers are by and large the descendants of the Single Grave people?
In fact, there's not much difference in terms of genome-wide genetic structure between the Beakers from the Oostwoud-Tuithoorn site and Corded Ware people from what is now Germany. The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) below illustrates this well. But, you might say, Corded Ware males by and large belong to Y-haplogroup R1a-M417. Yep, but this doesn't mean that R1b-P312 wasn't common in some Single Grave clans.
At this stage, I don't have a clue where the northern Beakers might have come from, and unfortunately I don't have any inside information about the Y-haplogroups of Hungarian Yamnaya. I don't even know if any Single Grave samples are being analyzed. But I'll leave you with this map from a recent paper by French archeologist and Beaker expert Olivier Lemercier (see
here). To me it suggests rather strongly that northern Beakers developed from the synthesis of Corded Ware newcomers to Western Europe and indigenous Western Europeans. As far as I can tell, that's what the paper basically argues as well.
See also...
Single Grave > Bell Beakers
Dutch Beakers: like no other Beakers
Late PIE ground zero now obvious; location of PIE homeland still uncertain, but...
248 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 248 of 248@ Samuel Andrews- "Why you say there is only one Beaker culture? I read through supplements. Most Iberia Beaker with Steppe-admix have 'North Beaker' burials & burial goods. One clusters with 'North Beaker' (not in G25 PCA), had R1b, & had a Tumili burial. This rules out idea, Steppe admix arrived with European trade contacts. They migrated into Iberia"
Here I do not agree with you, there is only one BB culture, or if you prefer a BB civilization.
That civilization lasted 800 years (2,800-2,000BC) and had 3 major differentiated groups -
1-Iberian (Spain, Portugal, Aquitaine, Occitania, Pyrenees, Atlantic Facade, Liguria, Balearic Islands, Sardinia, Sicily and sporadic settlements in northern Morocco)
2.- Central European (Alps, Bavaria, Saxony, Switzerland, Alsace, and settlements in Netherlands, Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, Moravia)
3.- Great Britain, Ireland- with migrations from different points of continental Europe (Cassidy)
And you are right, There were migrations that entered Iberia and migrations that left Iberia. The percentage of steppe ancestry in the cases of Iberian P312 is very small. I do not know if you've checked it.
Sorry but you sound like you want R1b to be from anywhere but the steppe. Baltic R1b-P297 cannot explain modern R1b-M269 anywhere.
If the hungarian yamnaya werent L51 then what were they? Its hard to imagine that a dense population of mostly Z2103 went to hungary stayed there. I still think its most likely that the Hungarian Yamnaya ancestry moved west via the beakers.
It has long been obvious that northern beakers have more steppe than Eastern beakers. This could be explained in a few ways.
1) The Northern Beakers represented a faster migration from the steppe than the Eastern Beakers, and thus they mixed less. However, this seems like special pleading.
2) The Eastern Beakers were diverse and Northern Beakers were a subset of Eastern Beakers which happened to have higher steppe.
3) Northern Beakers are a mix of Eastern Beakers and X.
@Colin
I suspect that Hungarian Yamnaya samples will mostly belong to R1b-Z2103 and I2a-M223, or maybe even the other way around. That's because steppe ancestry in the Carpathian Basin and the Balkans dating to the Yamnaya and immediate post-Yamnaya periods is associated with these Y-haplogroups, like, for instance, in Bulgarian Yamnaya, Tumulus, and Vucedol samples.
And I think it's pretty easy to answer why the northwestern Beakers show more steppe ancestry than the eastern Beakers: the eastern Beakers are a mixture of northwestern Beakers and various acculturated groups, including those with very little steppe ancestry.
In other words, it looks like the Beaker Urheimat was in the Rhine region, and home to those quintessential, brachycephalic, R1b-P312-rich Rhenish Beakers.
Take a look at my PCA showing how the Hungarian Beakers cluster compared to the Rhenish Beakers. The Hungarian Beakers look like a mix between the Rhenish Beakers and local Neolithic farmers and Hungarian Yamnaya.
Rhenish Beakers vs Hungarian Beakers
No wonder those Hungarian Beakers were mesocephalic.
To elaborate some more...
The Rhenish and British Beakers fit into a cline of decreasing east to west steppe ancestry with Corded Ware, not with other Beakers.
Why? Because they are the descendants of Corded Ware, and the source of most of the steppe ancestry in other Beakers.
@Davidski I don't know exactly but the Northern Beaker evolved out of Corded Ware/single grave could be one of the reasons why in the Dutch population there is a split between North and South, above and below the Rhine.
Above the Rhine is influenced by the Nordics, but the LN/BA factor is may be underestameted.
The NE Dutch Beakers and the NW German Beakers are usually seen as one conglomerat.
But what about the split R1b P312 is BB and R1b U106 is the phaase immediately afterwards, the Sogel-Wohlde/ Elp culture???? Any thoughts????
Could you post the sheet of the West Eurasian PCA? (Please add Hungarian BB and Iberian_BB_no_steppe)
@ Them meee
If we are guided by ancient Dna to establish the origin of a haplogroup then I think Davidski is right, because the samples of P312 in Saxony and the Netherlands are older than in the rest of Europe, then that is currently its origin. If L51 appeared in the steppes it would have Ukrainian origin and if it appears in Spain it would have Iberian origin.
I believe that there were Iberian migrations of women and men (2,600-2,500 BC) but I have to admit that it is impossible for them to be P312 at least at first. Some central European BBs in Germany (G2) and Hungary (I2) could have Iberian origin or simply be descendants of established Neolithic farmers in those regions. What I have no doubt is about the female migrations.
I think you will never find L51 in Ukraine (in any of the steppe cultures ), and since in Spain (which is one of the countries in the world where more cases of prehistoric DNA are known), has not appeared either, the solution is very simple- Germany where there is also samples of very old R1b- Blatterhole (V88), Kromsdorf (M343).
The BB Germans resemble the Hungarians as an egg to an orange.
And regarding the Basques, we'll have to keep thinking how the hell we are 93% R1b and yet our language is not Indo-European, but obviously that's our problem. The only possible explanation is that small migrations were produced and that were acculturated slowly or that the Euzkera is not as old as we think or that has some kind of relationship with PIE
Basques have enough steppe ancestry to explain a founder effect of R1b-M269. Tough luck with the Oppenheimer-esque/BBB idea that R1b-M269 came from Mesolithic Germany.
Bavaria Beaker is explainable diverse. In cemeteries where all the individuals were contemporaries, there's a huge range of variation. It's pretty obvious eastern Beaker R1b U152+ is a sink not a source.
@Davidski
"I suspect that Hungarian Yamnaya samples will mostly belong to R1b-Z2103 and I2a-M223"
I doubt I2a-M223 was major in Yamnaya. The one in Bulgaria probably had a local Balkan paternal lineage. His lineage is in several EBA Bulgaria samples with no Steppe admixture. But this is an unimportant detail.
@Samuel
To my knowledge, the I2a found in Yamnaya are all S12195, a specific subclade with a likely origin in Ukraine Mesolithic.
Therefore not with a recent local origin.
@Samuel Andrews
I doubt I2a-M223 was major in Yamnaya. The one in Bulgaria probably had a local Balkan paternal lineage. His lineage is in several EBA Bulgaria samples with no Steppe admixture. But this is an unimportant detail.
Can you show me a sample with I2a2a1b1b that doesn't have any steppe admixture? I'm not aware of any to date.
Ukraine_Neolithic I1738 I2a2a1b1b 5473-5326 calBCE
Yamnaya_Bulgaria Bul4 I2a2a1b1b 3012-2900 calBCE
Balkans_BronzeAge I2165 I2a2a1b1b 3020-2895 calBCE
Yamnaya_Kalmykia RISE552 I2a2a1b1b 2849-2143 calBCE
@huijbregts
Could you post the sheet of the West Eurasian PCA? (Please add Hungarian BB and Iberian_BB_no_steppe)
See here...
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/05/new-pca-featuring-botai-horse-tamers.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hbYWDXufDZBj-ZVOcUdOHCgTmKsWXBgw/view?usp=sharing
I2175, I2176 have I2a2a1b1. Don't know if they're negative for I2a2a1b1b. I didn't notice a UkraineHG had I2a2a1b1b. That weighs over for a non-Balkan origin of Yamnaya's I2a2a1b1b. Still, I doubt it was major lineage in any Yamnaya.
I think you'll see that there will be plenty of I2a2a1b1b in Bulgarian and Hungarian Yamnaya, as well as in related Tumulus groups from the Balkans.
Bul6 has I2a2. Bul8 has yhg I. All Bulgaria EBA (3000 BC) samples y HG I2a2 have strange ancestry composition of: 10% CHG/IranN & 20% Balkan Hg along with normal Balkan farmer ancestry.
So, maybe they represent an ethnic group in EBA Bulgaria with unique ancestry & Y chromosome.
Are you referring to unpublished results.
Globular bam files availble.
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/ERP110657
No, I'm talking about the fact that the first two samples associated with Yamnaya expansions into the Balkans have come back I2a2a1b1b.
Yamnaya_Bulgaria Bul4 I2a2a1b1b 3012-2900 calBCE
Balkans_BronzeAge I2165 I2a2a1b1b 3020-2895 calBCE
@davidski
If Hungarian Yamnaya was predominantly Z2103 then wouldnt we expect to see a lot more of it in that area later on? Z2103 has never appeared highly prominent in that area of Europe post Hungarian Yamnaya.
@Colin
The Carpathian Basin and parts of the Balkans have been repopulated several times over since the Bronze Age, but Z2103 is still fairly common in the region, especially in the Balkans.
Also, it's obvious that Beaker_Hungary I2787 has paternal Hungarian Yamnaya ancestry, because he's an outlier with around 75% Yamnaya ancestry and he belongs to Z2103.
So there will be plenty of Z2103 in Hungarian Yamnaya.
The Bell Beaker folk of central Europe seem to have been mixed with Corded Ware. But the Bell Beakers of western Europe certainly weren't Yamnaya. Closely related genetically, of course, but they didn't have an IE culture and weren't even Bronze Age until they entered southwestern Britain, which has a lot of tin. And when the Iberian peninsula enters the historical record, the only IE languages spoken there were Celtic ones. There's no historical record of pre-Celtic France, Britain or Ireland but some linguists claim to see a Vasconic substratum. So it seems likely that western Europe, other than Italy, was IEized by the Celts, who were mainly R1b but has a substantial minority of R1A. And they were an outgrowth of the Urnfield Culture, which was an outgrowth of the Tumulus Culture, which definitely seems to have had a material IE culture with pit graves, etc. So perhaps the Celts were descended primarily from people who were IEized by another culture, and they then spread an IE language and culture to western Europe. So perhaps the IEization of western Europe (other than Italy) was a chance thing, not withstanding the close genetic connection. But I'm sure some folk are too in love with the idea of Yamnay warriors sweeping westward to the Atlantic to seriously consider the possibility.
@Vape
The Rhenish Beakers don't appear to be mixed with Corded Ware. They just look like a homogeneous, sightly more westerly variant of Corded Ware.
Their physique matches their DNA, because they don't exactly resemble any Corded Ware group, especially considering their mostly brachycephalic skulls.
People like this migrated to Britain, France, Iberia, Italy, Hungary, Poland etc., taking their DNA, distinct physical characteristics, and northern Bell Beaker cultural package with them.
We know this, because their descendants pop up in all of these places, and closely resemble the Rhenish Beakers unless they're heavily mixed with the locals.
I don't know how to square linguistics theories with this, but it seems to me that you're trying a bit too hard to do that, and forgetting the basics that I just outlined above.
I guess old habits die hard, huh? It’s hard to leave Sykes, Oppenheimer and Venneman behind and move with the data, I guess...
@Vape,
"But I'm sure some folk are too in love with the idea of Yamnay warriors sweeping westward to the Atlantic to seriously consider the possibility."
That's kind of exactly what archaeology shows. Bell beaker's male burials have lots weaponry. Archaeologist believe they represent actual warriors. Their warrior burial traditions were passed down from their Yamnaya-like PC Steppe ancestors.
Ancient DNA has opened pandora's box for origins of Indo Europeans. Bell beaker is an intricate part of the story. It can't left out.
Basically, what see is in 3rd millennium BC, Europe was overtaken by IE-speaking clans from the PC Steppe. Corded Ware rose to dominate northern & eastern Europe. Bell Beaker overtook western Europe in an equally dramatic fashion.
Early Bell Beaker in Iberia isn't true Bell beaker. The full Bell beaker cultural package originated in a population of about 60% Steppe origin. Like, David, we see that within handful of generations they spread across all of western & central Europe & British Isles.
Fully developed Bell Beaker culture, simply represents Indo European 'invasion' into western Europe.
We can be sure they spoke an Indo European language. It wasn't Celtic. That doesn't matter. Corded Ware didn't speak Slavic or Baltic. That doesn't matter either.
Corded Ware & Bell beaker are too old to be relevant to widespread modern language families. What matters, is they were the beginning of the predominance of IE language in Europe. Different IE subranches died out, new ones came to dominate. But all of them trace back to this first IE expansion.
If Celtic have a Vasconic substratum shouldn't all Languages originating in the Northwest Block (R1b P312) share this Vasconic substratum ? Or was Vasconic spread as far as Hallstatt or even Hungary ? If the Bell Beaker people replaced more than 90 % of people in Britain and Ireland how precisely did those 10% manage to leave a trace of their Language ? Or did GAC/TRB also speak Vasconic ? Considering all these things makes me think either two things. Celtic somehow spread from Iberia or Southern France after the Bell Beaker admixture in that area. Or the similarities between Basque and Celtic were seperate innovations.
@All
I've got more, indirect, but difficult to brush off, evidence that North Sea Corded Ware/Single Grave populations were rich in R1b-P312 and may have lacked R1a.
But considering the number of comments here, I'll have to do a new blog post about that.
@ Davidski
Thanks. That will be helpful.
Great work, David.
Hopefully, you've cleared up one great big mystery that's perplexed and fascinated historians and scholars of all stripes for centuries - namely, the (true and real) ultimate ethnic origin of the British.
The ramifications of this work cannot be underestimated enough.
Sorry, meant 'overestimated'. :)
I do not know how Kristiansen continues to talk about violent conquests when no archaeological evidence has been found throughout Western Europe.Those theories of violence only serve to say that the Spaniards, as we are mostly descendants of those warriors of the steppes, inherit from them the violent behaviors and the expansionist mentality (conquest of America etc ...)
The northern limit of the Euzkera in historical times (Roman conquest) is the territory of the Aquitanians (Garonne river). We have hundreds of Celtiberian inscriptions in Spain and we have not been able to decipher them with the Basque language, nor with the Iberian, not with the Tartessian, but we know that the Celtiberian is similar to the ancient Celtic.
However, Basque and Iberian (spoken in the western half of Iberia) seem related. For example, the city of Granada was called in Ibero Iliberis and "new city" in Basque is Uriberri. The relationship seems obvious but not everyone agrees. The languages in Spain are a damn puzzle. There is only one possibility that there would be a Vasconic substratum in other languages of Europe- if Basque was a Neolithic language linked to the expansion of agriculture from Anatolia and that is impossible to prove (at least for the time being).
@ Diego
''The languages in Spain are a damn puzzle. There is only one possibility that there would be a Vasconic substratum in other languages of Europe- if Basque was a Neolithic language linked to the expansion of agriculture from Anatolia and that is impossible to prove (at least for the time being).''
Yes this is quite some mystery, because there were no concrete ''Neolithic'' groups left in Iberia after 2000 BC from whom to descend. The Los Millares culture zone was completely depopulated, abandoned or slaughtered.
'' Southern Chalcolithic communities disappeared completely by 2200 BCE, while the Argaric society emerged between c. 2200 and 2000 BCE in the coastal and pre-littoral areas of Almería and Murcia. The first individual and double burials in the vicinity of inhabited areas can be dated shortly before 2200''
We already know that El Agar are R1b -M269...
AWood:
“Khvalynsk as an origin for P312+ would be a bit of a stretch”.
Khvalynsk / Samara region in Repin culture is most likely origination of L51. I never said it was origination of P311/12 which is more Germanic tribe, but that is so broad it it is meaningless. That is more or less my point. The resolution on this stuff still sucks. It’s frustrating.
Great post from Davidski. Yes it makes a lot off sense that the proto Bell Beaker R1b moved deep into Europe with CWC.
Here is a phylogenetic tree of IE languages from Chang et al.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/95/d3/84/95d38442074c730a5b4e600662ae9148.jpg
As one can see Celto-Italic, Germanic, Balto-Slavic and Indo Iranian form their own node which can be easily linked to CWC+BB and their derivatives.
While Greek, Armenian and Albanian form their node which can be linked to Yamna and it's derivatives like Catacomb culture, Vucedol, Multi Cordoned Ware etc.
When I look at the scatterplots of Eurogenes West-Eurasian PCA, my impression is that BB-Netherlands cannot be discriminated from BB_Britain.
This may explain why some modern Duch samples are strongly attracted by modern British samples.
My impression is reinforced when I do a supervised classification with Random forests.
@Diego,
"I do not know how Kristiansen continues to talk about violent conquests when no archaeological evidence has been found throughout Western Europe.Those theories of violence only serve to say that the Spaniards, as we are mostly descendants of those warriors of the steppes, inherit from them the violent behaviors and the expansionist mentality (conquest of America etc ...)"
I agree, there's no evidence of large scale violence. Even if there was violent take over would it show in archaeology? Maybe archaeology has its limits.
Anyways, I don't believe anybody will conclude Spaniard conquest of Americas is related to R1b P312 expansion. That's just stupid.
@ Sam
''Why you say there is only one Beaker culture? .''
Because that's the truth. There is only one BB culture, and its from the East.
The pre-Beaker Iberian cultures had idols, figurines, enclosures, ivory, etc. Doesn't seem very bell -beaker to me.
@ Diego
''I do not know how Kristiansen continues to talk about violent conquests when no archaeological evidence has been found throughout Western Europe.''
There's plenty of evidence for this. But it's certainly not limited to Beaker, or Iberia. It happened since at least the Mesolithic, and every culture practiced violence in some way, What happened happened. Its a fact. We can learn about ourselves and help understand the future from it without fear of anyone holding over modern groups, even if some circles do.
@Davisdki
By the way, thank you for letting me participate in this forum, because I suppose you know I have a perpetual ban on anthrogenica.
For all the fans of the genetic history of Europe it is essential to keep open blogs like this where you can freely express what everyone thinks, as long as it is respectful of the contrary opinions. Only in this way will we be able to advance in the knowledge of our ancestors. I have to admit that it is a great source of information for all of us.
I agree with you in the differentiation between the German/Dutch BBs and the eastern Hungarian BBs, the possibility of relating the origin of P312 (and perhaps also L51) in Central Europe and the more than obvious relationship with the CWC (specially involved in the transmission of the steppe ancestry)
It seems that other intelligent people in other forums have begun to assume that maybe L51 left the steppes much sooner than they thought or defended, and that perhaps the impossibility of relating by male way Yamnaya (Z2013/I2), CWC (R1a) and BBC (P312) means that R1b-P312 has no origin in the Pontic steppe but in Central Europe, probably in some Western group of the CW.I think Stockhammer has a lot of the explanation we are looking for, I have tried to get information about it and the truth is that they do not want to say anything until they publish their Lech Valley results.
For a long time I defended in other forums a western origin of P312 (Franco-Cantabrian region, that is, northern Spain, the Pyrenees, Aquitaine and Occitania). This is not far from the Rhenish BBs and since looking for an exact location seems absolutely impossible to me, I find that explanation is much more reasonable and intelligent. For us Germany since the Cold War is still Western Europe.
@mono
Thanks. I think you're onto something there.
ADenseWood:
“Khvalynsk as an origin for P312+ would be a bit of a stretch based on all available data”..
I never said that...
L51 is Repin culture 4000BC. P311/12 is later “somewhere” west of that. The resolution sucks.
@ Dragos- "Because that's the truth. There is only one BB culture, and its from the East.
The pre-Beaker Iberian cultures had idols, figurines, enclosures, ivory, etc. Doesn't seem very bell -beaker to me"
There is only one BB culture but with different groups (pottery, burial customs). The cultural and genetic relationships between these groups are evident although we lack many answers. For example, Iberian ceramic styles and Palmela type spearheads are only found in Spain, France, Italy, Sicily and Sardinia. Never in Germany or Poland. Other Central European styles never appear in Iberia, then if R1b P312 entered Iberia after 2,500 BC, it is possible that it did not bring its customs to the Iberian peninsula ?. The answer is not that the origin of P312 is Iberian, but that they were small migrations that adopted the autochthonous culture.
Absolutely all the BB package is present in the Iberian chalcolithic cultures and many elements also in the Italian ones (Remedello etc). I speak of copper tanged daggers, ivory buttons V perforated, dresses, copper awls, pottery, boar's tusk pendants, wristguards, etc ... I believe that afterwards they were used in function of a new ideology (warriors-metallurgical specialists , hunters), but they existed previously.
@Samuel Andrews "Anyways, I don't believe anybody will conclude Spaniard conquest of Americas is related to R1b P312 expansion. That's just stupid"
You'd be amazed to know what a lot of people say about Spaniards in Latin American forums. Of course, to be honest, they not only link the Spaniards with violence, they also link the English, French and other Europeans. Apparently we have been carrying the violence in our genes for 4,500 years. In any case, violence has always been linked to the history of humanity, and I have to admit that Spaniards have always been especially bellicose.
The truth is we are not especially proud of the way in which the conquest took place. We did the same thing that the Romans did with our Celtiberian ancestors.
@mono
I can't believe it took me this long to read Garrett and Chang. I got hung up in the Ringe model. But the Chang tree lines up almost flawlessly with our archaeogenetic evidence. Wow.
I'm now leaning toward the Dutch/Rhenish hypothesis. Let's see what happens.
It is strange that in modern europe brachycephaly peaks in the balkans, and the tallest brachycephals are from yugoslavia. Wonder how they relate to the beakers.
"That's kind of exactly what archaeology shows. Bell beaker's male burials have lots weaponry. Archaeologist believe they represent actual warriors. Their warrior burial traditions were passed down from their Yamnaya-like PC Steppe ancestors." No, that isn't what archeology shows, not in western Europe. As I mentioned, the Iberian Bell Beaker folk weren't even bronze age initially. Western Bell Beaker folk only became Bronze Age after they entered southwestern Britain, which is rich in tin.
The Ancient Iberian Genomes study, PRJEB29189 Y-DNA haplogroups are as follows:
ENA Study PRJEB29189
LU339 "partial" I-Y3749
AMM080/Y4661/FGC7133+
FGC7139/Y3749-
LD270 "partial" H-Y20838
Z19077+
Z19083+
Z19118+
Y21665-
Y21636-
Y20840-
Y20836-
Y21673-
Y21633-
Y21635-
Y21640-
COV20126 I-Y34539*
A spreadsheet of all the Y SNPs for these ancient Iberian individuals
TO Diego Arroyo de Lagasca Encinas:
Re: your comments and questions about the Basques and their language
I thought you might be interested in reading some of my papers on www.academia.be:
1. Basic views:
https://www.academia.edu/25048339/The_Grandfather_the_Uncle_and_the_Cousin_of_Proto-Indo-European_-_Revised_22.12.2018
2. Application to Celtic genesis
https://www.academia.edu/9796216/Celtic_and_the_Adriatic_-_A_completely_reconsidered_view_of_Celtic_linguistic_prehistory_-_Updated_18.12.2018
3. Application to the Iberian language history:
https://www.academia.edu/5179960/Iberian_and_the_Urals_Iberian_and_Basque_as_descendants_of_the_eastern_PIE-related_ancestor_of_Paleo-European_in_the_Eurasian_steppes_-_A_completely_reconsidered_view_of_the_genesis_of_Iberian_-17.10.2018
In brief, I posit that the wider PIE-PE (Paleo-European) homeland in the Eurasian steppes, consisted of two areas, a western one with PIE, and an eastern one with PE. PIE migrated a lot later, and had already reached an early flective stage. PE migrated earlier and remained far more conservative, remaining agglutinative; its migration coincides with the early neolithic farmers (Cardial and LBK, ca. 6th millennium). Part of PE, later known as Iberian (and probably the very earliest Illyrian before its IE-ization) lingered on in the east (Anatolia etc.) until it was crowded out by the Anatolian IE invasions. It reached Iberia around 3000 BCE. Lusitanian is seen as the Italoid ancestor of Celtic in general, and as an immigration by sea from Dalmatia to Lisbon ca. 2,200 BCE.
Remarkably, I arrive at the same conclusion as e.g. Fred Woudhuizen, that the labialization of the IE labiovelars (Italic, Celtic, Greek, ...) happened around 1200-1000 BCE simultaneously as an areal phenomenon in the northern hinterland of the Balkans (say Austria to Epirus). So, the homeland of P-Celtic is Hallstatt, while the original homeland of Celtic (hence Q-Celtic) is central Spain, ca. 1,900-1,600 BCE. I consider the Beaker phenomenon as a fashion that spread across ethnic and linguistic boundaries.
Recently, I came to the insight that the eastern PE homeland may actually be the first location of the common ancestor of PE-PIE, which later, after the departure of the PE branch/split-off, shifted further west to the traditional homeland of PIE, largely west of the Urals.
I want to use this opportunity to appreciate Dr Ekpen for the good work that his doing around the world, many of you must have ahead of him and what his doing. The reason why I'm appreciating him on this site is because maybe someone out there is facing the same challenge and he/she don't know what to do next to fix the issue, Dr Ekpen is a great spell caster and friendly also, if you have problem in your relationship you can contact him right way and he will be clad to help you out. Contact him now via email at ekpentemple@gmail.com or on whatsaap +2347050270218.
I have an X2c1 paternal side grandmother and on the DNA portal I am getting percentages for the Baltic region and Neolithic Ireland. Everyone seems to look at the West for early migration to Britain. My husband is V15a via an Irish mother and that was an early line from Scandinavia as well.
Post a Comment