search this blog

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Seven thousand years of French prehistory (Brunel et al. 2020)


Over at PNAS at this LINK. I'm not sure why one of the Bell Beakers, CBV95, is modeled as 100% Yamnaya-like in the paper? I've had a preliminary look at this individual and he appears to be very similar to most Corded Ware samples from Germany, with about 75% Yamnaya-related steppe ancestry. I'll revisit this issue when the authors' genotype data are released, apparently within the next few days. Here's the paper abstract:

Genomic studies conducted on ancient individuals across Europe have revealed how migrations have contributed to its present genetic landscape, but the territory of present-day France has yet to be connected to the broader European picture. We generated a large dataset comprising the complete mitochondrial genomes, Y-chromosome markers, and genotypes of a number of nuclear loci of interest of 243 individuals sampled across present-day France over a period spanning 7,000 y, complemented with a partially overlapping dataset of 58 low-coverage genomes. This panel provides a high-resolution transect of the dynamics of maternal and paternal lineages in France as well as of autosomal genotypes. Parental lineages and genomic data both revealed demographic patterns in France for the Neolithic and Bronze Age transitions consistent with neighboring regions, first with a migration wave of Anatolian farmers followed by varying degrees of admixture with autochthonous hunter-gatherers, and then substantial gene flow from individuals deriving part of their ancestry from the Pontic steppe at the onset of the Bronze Age. Our data have also highlighted the persistence of Magdalenian-associated ancestry in hunter-gatherer populations outside of Spain and thus provide arguments for an expansion of these populations at the end of the Paleolithic Period more northerly than what has been described so far. Finally, no major demographic changes were detected during the transition between the Bronze and Iron Ages.

Brunel et al., Ancient genomes from present-day France unveil 7,000 years of its demographic history, PNAS, first published May 26, 2020 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1918034117

See also...

The Boscombe Bowmen

105 comments:

Romulus said...

The Y DNA is in the supp, nothing really interesting other than a Neolithic I1 and C1a.

Samuel Andrews said...

They make lots of references to a Dataset in this paper. But, there is no Dataset provoded.

The Dataset has all the really interesting stuff. When are they going to published it?

Samuel Andrews said...

They sequenced....

293 mtDNA/Y DNA samples.
58 low coverage genomes.

I look forward to seeing the Y DNA files. Hopefully, people can break down what the R1b subclades are.

mirgould said...

Off topic, but does anyone have a link to the study this article discusses or is there no preprint available yet?

https://www.archaeology.org/issues/380-2005/digs/8604-digs-poland-viking-burials

"The discovery of the burials of four medieval knights near the Polish village of Cieple has highlighted the region’s connections to Scandinavia during the reign of the first Polish kings"

"Isotope and DNA analysis demonstrated, though, that these individuals were not locals, but instead likely immigrated from an area around Denmark. The four warrior tombs were found at the center of a necropolis that contained at least 60 other individuals, of both local and Scandinavian ancestry"

"The men were likely members of an elite group of riders that ruled part of eastern Pomerania—present-day northern Poland—perhaps on behalf of the Polish kings, according to archaeologist Sławomir Wadyl of the Archaeological Museum in Gdansk"

Archi said...

This simply reflects the well-known fact that the Celtic spread was based on the principle of elite domination. It's a purely elitist society that imposed its language.

But the French Bickers are R1b1a1a2, and the Bronze Age is R1b1a1b1. Actually, what happens there in the Iron Age in haplogroups is not shown at all.

Again the same trash, there is no table with samples and their dating. Well, why would you do that? It's so hard to give an XLS table like:

Age Culture Country Site Individual Index Date Sex Y-DNA mtDNA Genome number of SNPs Damage rate Xcontam
Source Latitude Longitude Additional information Archaeological description

Haplogroup (usually doesn't finaly typezed) Additional information Haplogroup Additional information GEDMatch number Source file pigmentation from genes pigmentation surviving

Bob Floy said...

Read it before it's "embargoed", haha.

Gaska said...

Maybe kurganists think the rest of the genetic world is stupid. The funniest thing is that we have a BB-M269 100% Yamnaya (I guess just arrived from the steppes-2.500 BC), and a BB-G2a with a 28% steppe signal (2.450 BC aprox)

1-The steppe signal was not exclusive to R1b-M269? (Olalde, Reich, Harvard etc....)
2-How is it possible that someone has a 100% Yamnaya ancestry with a female marker that has only been found in Iberia?
3-Can someone explain it to me? How many generations are needed for the Iberian signal to disappear absolutely from an individual's genome?

I think that many geneticists and amateurs are never going to get tired of making fools of themselves, autosomal models do not prove anything, they simply represent feasible percentages of ancestry. The obsession to link R1b-M269/L51 to the steppes is becoming more and more comical and it seems that the steppe virus has spread even in many regions of Europe.

Samuel Andrews said...

Origin of Celtic languages is a big part of discussion of French, Irish ancient DNA so.......

There's good discussion at anthrogenica arguing the slight shift in Iron age Western Europe does not have to be from expansion of Celtic. They don't argue it emerged in Bell Beaker. They argue it emerged sometimes in the Bronze age.

alan describes that Old Irish writings was not the language of everyday people in Ireland back then. He says it was a preserved ancient language close to proto-Celtic which was only used for special occasions.

And that the early form of Celtic in those oldest Irish writings gives the false impression Celtic is younger than it actually is.

Also, alan says there's a 500 BC Greek writing giving a name to Ireland. The name is Celtic, supposedly the name that the natives had for the island. And it confirms Celtic language was there by 500 BC.



Samuel Andrews said...

Obviously, single CelticIberian in Spain has evidence for Central European ancestry as does Britons in England. This could be from Celts. But, it could be from 1200 BC instead of 500 BC.

Because, as users at Anthrogenica mention, there's no evidence the historically documented Hallstatt/La Tene Iron age Celts ever migrated into British Isles.

Simon_W said...

A pity most of the autosomal data is low coverage. Maybe one or the other of the definite versions of the new genomes are good enough for the G25. Even the Eurogenes K15 components of the preliminary versions made quite some sense.

Urki said...

Interesting stuff. It covers a very important gap in the genetic history of Europe. France has been the demographic core of Europe from Neolithic to at least 17th a.D.

Archi said...

@Gaska

There is no R1b-M269 in Neolithic and Mesolithic Western Europe, so let him do it, your position is impossible and has always been impossible.

About the steppe sample, it really gets into the steppes on the PCA. And his mitohaplogroup is not Iberian only.

Bronze Maykop Russia Nogir 3 [OSS001.A0101 / Ossetia', kurgan 3, grave 4, ind. 1, BZNK-313/1] 3695-3545 cal BC (4857±23BP ,MAMS29813) F J2a1
Copper Baden Hungary Budakalász [I2369 / GEN15a] 3367-3103 calBCE (4545±35 BP, Poz-83634) M G2a2b2a1a1c1a J2a1a1

Archi said...

Interesting artifacts:

Cx161 ZAC Agora Cugnaux 43.3219 1.204 Middle Neolithic 2 Chasséen classique 5340 +/ 30BP (Ly-15193) 4314-4052 Occitanie (South) Haute-Garonne J.Vaquer/M. Gandelin PB 40 capture SF-MN H1 I1a2b4~

FAD9 Dolmen des Fades Pépieux 43.1751 2.4049 Early Bronze Age Early Bronze Age 3490 +/- 30BP (Ly-14874) 1893-1700 Occitanie (South) Aude J. Guilaine PB 43 capture F-BA K1b1a1 I1a2a1a1a3a2b~

BES1248 La Monédière Bessan 43.3614 3.42701 Second Iron Age "La Tène" 200-50 Occitanie (South) Hérault A. Beylier PB 53 shotgun F-IA SF-IA2 75,391 XY J1c8a2 I1

Richard Rocca said...

@Archi, there was an issue with the PNAS site, but the data files are now online.

Richard Rocca said...

@Gaska, nobody, not scientists at Harvard, not amateurs on any site agrees with you. You are alone in your fantasies and therefore the only one who is making a fool of himself. Again, where are all those pre-Bell Beaker, pre-Corded Ware samples you promised us from France, Iberia, Germany, etc.? As someone of partial Iberian ancestry, I am embarrassed for you.

Rob said...

This study suggests a much larger Magdalenian ancestry continuity than others, - even for previously published samples

Rob said...


@ Sam

''Because, as users at Anthrogenica mention, there's no evidence the historically documented Hallstatt/La Tene Iron age Celts ever migrated into British Isles.''


Really ? Such categorical claims are seldom contributory .
Halstatt & la Tene material is found in Britain. Certainly not extensive but undoubtedly present. As i said in previous thread, there was also movement from West to East. So we have ongoing contact between the Isles & continent.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ctyD4ivUGlkC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=hallstatt+culture+england,+academia&source=bl&ots=CGdqm_6ORm&sig=ACfU3U06dVfiGLGeEaDjXWziDCwHAe1vhw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwizovKYsNXpAhVn4zgGHRVHD9cQ6AEwA3oECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=hallstatt%20culture%20england%2C%20academia&f=false

Aside from Halstatt & la Tene migrations, there were further movements with the onset of Roman conquests of western Europe, a sort of 'domino effect'.

Another interesting aspect is, aside from migrations, is fluctuating demography within the Islands - some sort of LBA decline, followed by Iron Age increase .

All these factors are imoprtant to consider in addition to broad population-level continuity

Rob said...

The 2 new BB burials are interesting

The R1b-M269 with steppe ancestry is buried in a modified supine position with head to East. Seems atypical.

The G2a is from a communal burial dating to the BB period (Le dolmen des Peirières)

------------

The I1 in M.N. are amongst the earliest I1 in continental Europe. Could be a link between continental & Nordic gallery graves

Interesting how Michelsberg is dominated by a mixture of I2a and E1b. Many people had been hanging out for full-genome data from Michelsberg.

Samuel Andrews said...

R1b isn't WHG.

Some argue R1b is WHG. NEw Y DNA results this year suggest not.

Central Italy WHGs: I2a=2
Ireland WHGs: I2a=2
French WHG: I2a=1

Not just that, but majority of Y DNA in Neolithic Europe after 5000 BC is I2a. They picked that up from WHGs. If R1b were originally WHG, why is this? The only place R1b was common in Neolithic was Sardinia.

So, yeah I'd say this is the end of the idea R1b is from WHG.

Slumbery said...

@Samuel Andrews

"So, yeah I'd say this is the end of the idea R1b is from WHG.

They could have more than one lineage you know and for example V88 does come up in context that is not Siberian or Anatolian admixed. So this is not the end for the idea at all.
Statistically useful amount of Epipaleolithic Balkan samples would be interesting.

Samuel Andrews said...

ROS47, 4700-4500 BC, NE France, mtDNA H1c

This is the oldest H1c to date. H1c has also been found in Neolithic Sweden, Britain, and Germany. It is one of the more common mHG H clades in Europe today.

Also...from Bronze age Baltic.

760-425 calBCE Kivutkalns Latvia Kivutkalns215 H1c
1000 BC Jõelähtme, Harju, EST Estonia 0LS11 H1c

Northeast edge of Europe has some ancestry from Neolithic Western Europe.

Slumbery said...

I would like to clarify my comment, because it is admittedly rather vague. I do not think that R1b is a Western European lineage in LGM time depth. But WHG is pretty much a Mezolithic term and even Villabruna is somewhat of a stretch. Anything significantly older than Villabruna is more on the proto-WHG side at best.

So depending on the arrival of R1b it can be a significant lineage in WHG populations in Mezolithic context, so a WHG lineage if short. Even if it is ultimately from LGM Siberalia or something.

For the paper. There is an abundance of La Tene samples. If some of them were high resolution enough, we could do refined analyzis and know more about the Celtic migration's effect on otherwise already similar populations.

Gaska said...

@Archi said-There is no R1b-M269 in Neolithic and Mesolithic Western Europe, so let him do it, your position is impossible and has always been impossible.About the steppe sample, it really gets into the steppes on the PCA. And his mitohaplogroup is not Iberian only.Bronze Maykop Russia Nogir 3 [OSS001.A0101 / Ossetia', kurgan 3, grave 4, ind. 1, BZNK-313/1] 3695-3545 cal BC (4857±23BP ,MAMS29813) F J2a1

Archi which is impossible and also absurd is to say that a BB-M269 2,500 BC is 100% Yamnaya. This means that this lineage has to exist in the Yamnaya culture and evidently to date the geneticists have not found it. It could still be that his mother was also Yamnaya, but that is also impossible - you should know that J21a is not the same as J2a1a1

J2a1a1-Iberia
Dolmen de la Mina, Burgos, Mina2-I0404-3.777 BC
Chabola de la Hechicera, Alava-I3273-3.495 BC
Dolmen de Jentillari, Guipúzcoa, I11300/11248-HapY-I2a2a/2a-3.200 BC
Pala da Vella, Galicia-3.172 BC
Cueva de las Yurdinas, Alava-I3270-3.050 BC
Camino del Molino, 2.900 BC
El Mirador, Atapuerca, 2.623 BC
Humanejos, Madrid-BB culture-I6630-2.600 BC

That is to say, we have Iberia plagued with J2a1a1 from the Chalcolithic period, we have this lineage in iberian BB deposits without Yamnaya ancestry, and 90 years later this same haplogroup appears in a Bb deposit in the north of France in a 100% Yamnaya man. Come on Archi, Why you don't try to model that sample with the Iberian Chalcolithic it would be interesting to see the result-J2a1a1 has never been found in Yamnaya or any other steppe culture but considering that Kurganists love fairy tales, I'm sure they can come up with a wonderful explanation

Angantyr said...

@Samuel Andrews

"760-425 calBCE Kivutkalns Latvia Kivutkalns215 H1c
1000 BC Jõelähtme, Harju, EST Estonia 0LS11 H1c

Northeast edge of Europe has some ancestry from Neolithic Western Europe"

Your geographical terminology leaves a lot to be desired.

The Northeast edge of Europe lies along the Urals. The East Baltic is equidistant between France and the Urals...

Gaska said...

@Sam Andrews said So, yeah I'd say this is the end of the idea R1b is from WHG.


HaHa HA Hahaahaha, don't keep talking nonsense please

Ryan said...

@Sam - So, yeah I'd say this is the end of the idea R1b is from WHG.

EHG was half WHG, so one way or another it came from WHG.

Gaska said...

@Rocca said-Nobody, not scientists at Harvard, not amateurs on any site agrees with you. You are alone in your fantasies and therefore the only one who is making a fool of himself. Again, where are all those pre-Bell Beaker, pre-Corded Ware samples you promised us from France, Iberia, Germany, etc.? As someone of partial Iberian ancestry, I am embarrassed for you.

1-One thing you're right, apparently I'm the only one who thinks that the Kurgan Theory as explained by Harvard is a huge nonsense-NO wonder, all the others have been banned in this kind of forums-This is how dictatorships and the holy inquisition work
2-Your partial Iberian ancestry does not prevent you from being a sectarian kurganist in the style of Carlos Quiles. I am not ashamed of what you and other people of Spanish origin think, because I simply respect everyone. I just don't agree with you
3-You do not represent Spain, you do not even represent those who have a partial origin in Iberia, you represent yourself and your genetic credibility is zero. So please don't brag about your origins, you're just a bootlicker
4-Many Spanish/Portuguese/French geneticists and archaeologists disagree with the unique thinking imposed by Harvard on the Kurgan theory - your views on it have never been taken seriously

Let's see what happens with Rivollat's new paper, she's talking about R1b-L2 in the French Neolithic.We'll have to review the data from that sample

We have already won Richard, we already have three Swiss Neolithic farmers buried in collective graves, two of them with hardly any steppe ancestry, and old enough to destroy the entire theory of the Kurgans. I understand that the Kurganists ignore these samples and do not spend a second of their time talking about them. Why are you so cowardly and do not speak clearly of these Swiss cases? Why are you so afraid? Why don't you talk about Smyadovo M269 in Bulgaria-4.500 BC, why don't you recognize that ATP3 is clearly M269? When are you going to find L51 in the steppes?

You have always denied Iberian migrations related to BB culture and there is more and more evidence that these occurred (Sicily, Hungary, Poland, Germany, France, Liguria etc). More than 70% of Western BBs analysed to date can be modelled with 5-50% Iberian ancestry. Why do you insist on denying it?

This is not a question of Iberian ultra-nationalism or Basque centrism, we simply want to know the truth and people like you are collaborating in preventing many genetics fans from knowing the truth



Samuel Andrews said...

@Ryan,

Ma'lta boy, Y DNA R*, 24ky, Siberia.
Vestonia, Y DNA I*, 29ky, Central Europe

That's all you need to know. Y DNA I is from Europe, and Y DNA R is from North Asia.

Y DNA R1 was major haplogroup in Mesolithic Europe. That's because they had admix from ANE North Asia.

Gaska said...

Yeah R is from North Asia, I is from Europe, R1??????
and R1b is from Western Europe unless the Kurganists think now that Italy is in Siberia

Obviously even some EHGs are R1b, but these do not come from SIberia, but from the Baltic countries and the Balkans. Even in France you have a WHG-R1b in Iboiussieres- The Kurganist attempts to delink R1b from Western Europe are pathetic

Samuel Andrews said...

@Slumbery,

"But WHG is pretty much a Mezolithic term and even Villabruna is somewhat of a stretch. Anything significantly older than Villabruna is more on the proto-WHG side at best."

Villabruna is not pure WHG. And WHG is a lot older than Villabruna. He is our oldest WHG sample, but WHG predates him by thousands of years. WHG is probably 25,000 years old.

The main evidence for this is, that the WHG in Central/Eastern and Western Europe isn't the same kind of WHG. The mtDNA/Y DNA lines in Central/East and Western WHG split 20,000-25,000 years ago.

Moreover, what this means, is there wasn't a lot of direct input from Western Europe (Villabruna-types) into Cetral/Eastern Europe. Therefore, Villabruna-types can't be the source of their R1b.

Cpk said...

R also immigrated to Siberia from South East Asia.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Slumbery,

I do what you are saying though. WHG could have received ANE admix and R1b in Paleolithic, then there was major WHG expansion in Mesolithic. That makes sense.

But, if you agree R1b is from ANE originally, doesn't it make more sense to say R1b in Villabruna is from Eastern Europe not the other way around?

The WHGs in Western Europe closest to Villabruna are almost all I2a.

Suevi said...

@GregH

https://i.postimg.cc/fWKCRCtd/20200127-190836.jpg

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8066-Genetic-Genealogy-amp-Ancient-DNA-in-the-News-(DISCUSSION-ONLY)&p=641662&viewfull=1#post641662

Copper Axe said...

Can we check if the I1 we see in Neolithic France are "ancestral" (in a subclade manner) to the ones we see in Scandinavia?

Does this mean that a lot of the so-called Viking I1 in France (via the Normans) is actually native?

I am really surprised to see I1 in Neolithic France, I suspected it was either going to be some obscure WHG lineage in present in either the Scandinavian farmers or Western steppe herders. Interesting to say the least.

old europe said...


@Sam
R1b linked with IE expansion is clearly an EHG lineage.
But the problem is this: EHG is a very very hybrid kind of population: it is a mixing network from a south central european population and a siberian one ( Afontonova Gora)
Now one of the two must have had the upper hand upon the other because PIE is not a contact language let alone a contact language between two populations that came from different corner of Eurasia. So at the end the question is
PIE ( the skeleton of the language of course) comes from WHG or from Afontonova Gora?
Since we now know that
1) the most likely region that harboured the PIE ethnogenesis is Ukraine mesolithic and Neolithic and that they were a mix of WHG and EHG ( Ukraine
neolithic is more WHG shifted
2) That EHG is 50% WHG and 50% Afontonova Gora
3) That languages connected with ANE are mostly siberian and uralic that do not cluster with IE ( Indo uralic theory is no more mainstream)

would'n t be more likely to say that WHG in Eastern Europe= very early PIE
then of course late PIE developed trough contacts with a progress like population on one side and with the european farmers on the other ( Cucuteni, Globular Amphora)



Gaska said...

It seems that some French scientists do not know how to handle qdAdm, it is absolutely impossible for CVB95 to be 100% of Yamnayan ancestry - that does a lot of damage to the prestige of the kurganists because it gives the opportunity to other fanatics to say that there was a direct migration from the steppes and that the eastern BBs are the origin of the western Bbs when it is exactly the opposit-I guess CQ still hasn't been able to assimilate that we have R1b-M269 in Swiss dolmens without steppe ancestry in the 27th century BC-It reminds me of Maju and his theory of Artenacian culture-

I believe that European geneticists need a course in rapid learning of certain autosomal tools inverted by the Harvardians - I am sure Patterson will be happy to help them - we recently saw the Furtwängler disaster, If someone reviews their percentage of steppe ancestry they will realize that something is really wrong with this issue - Over 20 European Neolithic farmers including some in Scotland have significant levels of steppe ancestry - All those levels as in Brunel's paper are intentionally or incompetently inflated in an attempt to make everything much more Yamnaya



Archi said...

@Gaska

"This means that this lineage has to exist in the Yamnaya culture and evidently to date the geneticists have not found it."

Don't be twisted, I didn't say it was Yamnaya, I wrote the word Steppe, it's different concepts.

In this paper, again the same disease, they do not calculate the objective criterion ADMIXTURE,that is unacceptable, but calculate only qpAdm, which unfortunately there is a subjective model dependent on many accidents.

"It could still be that his mother was also Yamnaya, but that is also impossible - you should know that J21a is not the same as J2a1a1"

Don't circumcise my words, I wrote that you've ignored my statement
Archi said...
Copper Baden Hungary Budakalász [I2369 / GEN15a] 3367-3103 calBCE (4545±35 BP, Poz-83634) M G2a2b2a1a1c1a J2a1a1
May 27, 2020 at 4:11 PM
because your goal is just to fool. Believe me, there's no one who hasn't seen the stupidity of your position, you're already being ignored by everyone.

"J2a1a1-Iberia"

J2a1a1 is not Iberia, it came to Iberia from the Near East. The fact that it seems to be a lot in Iberia is a consequence of the excessively large number of samples in Iberia, compared to the small number in other places.

Davidski said...

@Gaska

All of the French and Swiss samples with M269 have steppe ancestry.

Stop lying or I'll ban you. If you do insist on pushing your highly irrational stance here, at least do it honestly.

Gaska said...

OK Archi there is NO J2a1 in the steppes, so it's impossible for that man to be 100% Yamnaya

@Archi said-Because your goal is just to fool. Believe me, there's no one who hasn't seen the stupidity of your position, you're already being ignored by everyone.

You are rude and I don't care if people believe me or not, what kurganists have to do is look for arguments because that mitochondrial lineage is absolutely Iberian-I have sent you 8 J2a1a1 samples in Iberia between 3,700 and 2,600 BC and you send a case from the Baden culture in Hungary. then I suppose you'll agree with me on these points

1-With the data we have that lineage is 8 times more frequent in Iberia than in Hungary
2-In Iberia it covers a period of more than 1,000 years, which means genetic continuity, something that you cannot demonstrate with the case of Hungary.
3-In Iberia, it appear BB deposits, which are also much more recent than the French or Spanish ones
4- In any case Baden is a neolithic culture that has absolutely nothing to do with the steppes so you would still have to explain how it is possible that a neolithic lineage becomes 100% Yamnaya in 2500 BC

Then obviously the autosomal composition tells us a totally different story from what the uniparental markers say, something is very very very wrong

Gaska said...

I'm not lying, Furtwängler's paper as well as Brunel's one is an autosomal disaster-Yes theoretically Auvernier and Burgaschisee have a small percentage of steppe signal 20-30% - But there are also many Neolithic farmers with very high percentages.

Furtwängler (2.020)-I2629 (2.980 BC)-Isbister, Orkney-HapY-I2- Mit-J1c1b-
WHG (0.177) AF (0.355) Yamnaya (0.468)
then we have the steppe signal in Scotland at the end of the Neolithic related to HapY-I2

How about this?

*Furtwängler (2.020)-I6472 (2.301 BC)-La Magdalena, Madrid
-HapY-R1b-P312-Hap Mit-HV0b-
WHG (0.225) AF (0.726) Yam (0.049)-R1b-P312-4.9% steppe ancestry-You also have VK531 with zero steppe

I'm lying when I say these qpdam models are being misused - either the steppe ancestry is artificially inflated or they've made a mistake, maybe they should listen to Patterson's recommendations on how to use these tools

This is your home and you can ban anyone you want, but don't accuse me of lying

Davidski said...

@Gaska

Well, you're either lying or you're stupid, because I looked at those M269 samples and they do have steppe ancestry. It's impossible to explain their behavior in my analyses without it.

Archi said...

@old europe @Sam @Ryan

"2) That EHG is 50% WHG and 50% Afontonova Gora"
"EHG was half WHG, so one way or another it came from WHG."

That are completely erroneous statements. EHG is not the sum of WHG and AG, moreover, AG2 itself already has 30% "WHG", that of course is impossible, because AG is much older than WHG. This in the WHG contains 30% of AG2!

See carefully! https://i.ibb.co/b66hTgc/image.png


Archi said...

@Gaska

"You are rude and I don't care if people believe me or not, what kurganists have to do is look for arguments because that mitochondrial lineage is absolutely Iberian-I have sent you 8 J2a1a1 samples in Iberia between 3,700 and 2,600 BC and you send a case from the Baden culture in Hungary. then I suppose you'll agree with me on these points

1-With the data we have that lineage is 8 times more frequent in Iberia than in Hungary
2-In Iberia it covers a period of more than 1,000 years, which means genetic continuity, something that you cannot demonstrate with the case of Hungary.
3-In Iberia, it appear BB deposits, which are also much more recent than the French or Spanish ones
4- In any case Baden is a neolithic culture that has absolutely nothing to do with the steppes"

You're a liar and a stupid and rudeness person. I wrote you that Iberia isn't representative:
" J2a1a1 is not Iberia, it came to Iberia from the Near East. The fact that it seems to be a lot in Iberia is a consequence of the excessively large number of samples in Iberia, compared to the small number in other places.
May 28, 2020 at 2:53 AM",
but you ignored it, and brazenly ignore my words, it's just rudeness.

Baden has a cultural influence from the steppe, so don't twist it.

Jatt_Scythian said...

@Cpk

We have y P in North Eurasia. Most likely R originated in North Eurasia.

Dave the Slothtopus said...

The good news: My mtDNA subclade is finally being discussed.
The bad news: It's being discussed by Gaska.

I'm J2a1a1 (actually J2a1a1e), but my MDKA is from the Levant in the 1800s; so I don't know if my line just never left the area since the neolithic, or got reintroduced. These days there's more J2a1a1e in the countries bordering the Baltic than anywhere else. Maybe it followed a trade route?
From FTDNA's members:
J2a1a1e Norway 9
J2a1a1e Germany 7
J2a1a1e Sweden 7
J2a1a1e France 6
J2a1a1e Denmark 3
J2a1a1e Italy 3
J2a1a1e Russian Federation 3
J2a1a1e Syrian Arab Republic 2
J2a1a1e United Kingdom 2
J2a1a1e Estonia 1
J2a1a1e Finland 1
J2a1a1e Ireland 1
J2a1a1e Latvia 1
J2a1a1e Lithuania 1
J2a1a1e Poland 1
J2a1a1e South Africa 1
J2a1a1e Switzerland 1
J2a1a1e Turkey 1

Matt said...

Quick few Vahaduo using CBV95 data that David provided, some other NW European Beaker, and high steppe early R1b-M269 - https://imgur.com/a/rpXuzGf

CBV95 seems higher steppe and also earlier than other samples assigned to Beaker so far, may slightly better represent earliest populations moving into Netherlands, Britain etc slightly better than Beaker_NLD do, who are generally later to the tune of 10 generations or so (though earliest Beaker_NLD only 100 years later, if going by median of dates provided), and so may have some more time to receive more admixture.

Vladimir said...


Is this information known?

Lepenski Vir (∼6,000/5,950-5,500 cal BC)
Lepe22 Lepenski Vir local range female J2a1a1

Palaeogenomic and Biostatistical Analysis of Ancient DNA Data from Mesolithic and Neolithic Skeletal Remains
Dissertation
submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
Doktor der Naturwissenschaften at Faculty of Biology
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz
Zuzana Hofmanov´a
Mainz, 2016

https://d-nb.info/113609640X/34

Apparently haplogroup Mt J2a1a1 came to Europe together with R1b-V2219

JuanRivera said...

Brand new papers on the Near East:

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30572-9
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30509-2
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30487-6

Some of them are paywalled.

Jatt_Scythian said...

Anything interesting from these papers?

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30487-6?utm_medium=homepage

https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(20)30509-2.pdf?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867420305092%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

JuanRivera said...

Plus this one:

https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(20)30155-5

Matt said...

Some quick models using Vahaduo of steppe ancestry in NW Europe, here using NLD+GBR+NE FRA as that (and some of the high Steppe Swiss samples in some models): https://imgur.com/a/kOcqp7z

The trends in the average steppe ancestry are not *that* strong (though there are some) but trends in the highest steppe ancestry are stronger. Because there are early outliers with low steppe ancestry as well as high. I would guess there looks like a trend of about 10-15% reduction in ceiling of steppe ancestry for about 1000 years between 2500-1500 BCE, then slower change thereafter

Slumbery said...

@Samuel Andrews

"But, if you agree R1b is from ANE originally, doesn't it make more sense to say R1b in Villabruna is from Eastern Europe not the other way around?

You are right, that is a more likely scenario. (In fact if R1b is from ANE post-LGM and not locally developed from a pre-LGM R branch, then it is almost certain.)
I was just saying that the idea that the later abundant R1b branches might be rooted in a population that was dominantly "WHG" is not dead. However I do not have an argument for the idea that they might be rooted in Western Europe geographically. I do not think that more eastern (Balkan and Ukraine) Mezolithic HG-s had any significant post LGM admixture from the region that can be strictly called Western Europe and the Magdalenian ancestry showing up in France is no Friend of that idea either. (However note that there was no such ancestry in Italy.)
Also it is a _might_ be. I remain agnostic.

Archi said...

Three big papers about Near East and none of the Hittite! Only in this article "The Genomic History of the Bronze Age Southern Levant" there are candidates in the Hittites:

I10768 Megiddo_MLBA 1600-1500 BCE MB III - LB I petrous 76 1240k+ S10768.E1.L1 8,44 137,7 0,244 [0.989,0.999] J2a2a2 0,26 0,46 1,49 361299 0,007 1,25 M R1b1a1a2

I2189 Megiddo_I2189 (outlier) 1600-1500 BCE MB III - LB I petrous 84 1240k, mtDNA+3000SNPs S2189.E1.L1 28,00 44,2 0,228 [0.996,1.000] U3b 0,132 0,14 1,33 134341 n/a (200 SNPs) n/a (200 SNPs) M R

I2200 Megiddo_I2200 (outlier) 1600-1500 BCE MB III - LB I petrous 73 1240k, mtDNA+3000SNPs S2200.E1.L1 24,33 184 0,175 [0.988,0.996] U3b 0,178 1,67 3,49 611641 n/a (<female) n/a (<female) F

R1b1a1a2 is BY15590 by ISOGG 2019

No access to "Genomic History of Neolithic to Bronze Age Anatolia, Northern Levant, and Southern Caucasus".

JuanRivera said...

A sample in the Northern Levant has ancestry from Central Asia. Is it a Mitanni?

Archi said...


This is a real mockery, three big papers about the Middle East and Anatolia, and not one Hittite sample.

Do they even refuse to test anything related to the Hittites?


Vladimir said...

Arslantepe has Y V1636 Mt K1a17a 3361-3105 Cl BC

Cpk said...

Anyone has access to Genomic History of Anatolia? Looks like no steppe ancestry in Anatolia once again.

Samuel Andrews said...

@ Dave Slothtopus,
"I'm J2a1a1 (actually J2a1a1e), but my MDKA is from the Levant in the 1800s; so I don't know if my line just never left the area since the neolithic, or got reintroduced."

I think your J2a1a1 is indigenous to Levant. Because in my spreadsheets, J2a1a1 is at 2% in Lebanon and Jordan. And As you see in your FTDNA project J2a1a1 does exist in Middle East. But It is basically completely absent elsewhere in Middle East which is weird.

Other than the Levant, it basically only exists in Europe. It ranges from 0.5-1% in most of Europe. In Neolithic Europe ancient DNA J2a1a1 is most frequent in Spaina at 2%. It is basically absent elsewhere in Neolithic Europe.

J2a itself originated somewhere near Levant like 20,000+ years ago. Its sister clade J2a2 is exclusive to Natufian-rich countries. And the oldest J2a2 comes from a Natufian sample.

Jatt_Scythian said...

Makes sense for it to be Mitanni. Did you manage to get her haplogroup?

epoch said...

@Slumberly

Magdalenian ancestry popped up in Eastern Europe as well: Globular Amphora Culture samples from Poland were modeled with 3% GoyetQ2 or El Miron by this paper:

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(19)30145-9#secsectitle0230
https://www.cell.com/cms/10.1016/j.cub.2019.02.006/attachment/8e874e41-194f-4f17-b125-b41e09b30069/mmc2.xlsx

The Dzudzuana preprint has Latvia_HG with 10% El Miron and Iron_Gates_HG with 4%.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2018/09/20/423079.DC1/423079-1.pdf

Matt said...

Re; Genomic History of Neolithic to Bronze Age Anatolia, Northern Levant, and Southern Caucasus, the paper's main results are paywalled. But using their Table S6, I would hazard that what seems like an Eneolithic / "Caucasus En" population which they've sample G.Caucasus_a_En, might have about 65% CHG/IranN ancestry, while there is another L.Caucasus_C that might have about 70%.

Basically by comparing the proportions of ancestry for Copper Age and Bronze Age between their models with CHG and the above. The models with a higher passing p value with TellKurdu_EC suggest that CHG/IranN should be slightly higher, by about 5-10%, and the models that seem to work "best" (if higher p is better) are TellKurdu_EC and some CHG/Caucasus related source.

It seems like even the earliest samples from Caucasus they have included have *some* Barcin related ancestry.

Matt said...

That method I mentioned above on their Table S6 gives strange results on their G.Caucasus_b_En population (because the fraction of ancestry from G.Caucasus_b_En is lower than CHG, G.Caucasus_b_En would have to be more CHG than CHG, which doesn't make sense.) So I don't know - see what these populations are like in the unpaywalled version when there is one...

Rob said...

@ Archi

“ That are completely erroneous statements. EHG is not the sum of WHG and AG, moreover, AG2 itself already has 30% "WHG", that of course is impossible, because AG is much older than WHG. This in the WHG contains 30% of AG2!

See carefully! https://i.ibb.co/b66hTgc/image.png”

You can’t make inferences about Palaeolithic demography just by looking at an ADMIXTURE plot

mary said...

@Rob
Not only is the plot just a model, but the model shown is just the opposite of what he is saying. In the chart, Afontova Gora is clearly 30% WHG, and not the opposite. The color that is most associated with ANE is dark blue, and in the plot there is no such component in WHG. Again, I know it's just a model, but it doesn't sound bad. Consider that the WHG lineage may be so old that Lazaridis modeled individuals from the central European Gravetian as being WHG + Sungir.

Simon_W said...

@Gaska
I wouldn't call 20-30% Steppe a small percentage or hardly anything. It's tantamount to one grandparent and Maju for instance doesn't have more Basque ancestry than this, IIRC correctly.

Simon_W said...

Imho a small percentage would be something between 1 and 5%. Hardly anything would mean <1%.

Ryan said...

@Sam - "Y DNA R1 was major haplogroup in Mesolithic Europe. That's because they had admix from ANE North Asia."

Sure. But when canonical WHG has R1b (probably from an earlier ANE source), that kind of proves my point.

Dave the Slothtopus said...

Thanks for your post, Sam! I often wonder, since I've volunteered my results to a couple services, if they weren't actually "comparing me with me" in some breakdowns of J2a1a1e with MDKA in the Levant (I'm actually J2a1a1e). It hops around like crazy, as does regular J2a1a1: Besides the J2a1a1 chalcolithic Iberian and Baden/Hungary samples, it seems like there is a gap, then "French Beaker" (CBV95) followed by Egyptian mummy ~1388 BC (JK2887).

Simon_W said...

Some observations on Figure S 4-1, the PCA:

- There is only one LBA individual from Alsace, but it has a Spanish shift, on the border between French and Spanish. In contrast the IA samples from Alsace are more northern, they cluster on the East/Southeastern half of the modern French. Might be a coincidence, but Maybe there is more to it. The Hallstatt samples form a tighter cluster, while the La Tène samples are a bit more diverse and in particular have a couple of more northern individuals.

- In Occitanie the EBA is diverse, some plot with Alsace IA, while a third one plots with modern Spanish. By the MBA these differences have been watered down and all plot more or less with the Spanish. In the La Tène era the pattern of the EBA is kind of repeated: Some cluster with Alsace IA and some with the modern Southern French between the Spanish and the Basques. This is in line with the late arrival of the Celts in this area.

- I can't spot the La Tène individual from the Hauts-de-France. Seems to be covered up by other samples.

J.S. said...

Simon_W

If i am not mistaken, two SF-IA2 plot with the more South Westerners French, while one SF-BA1 and two SF-BA2 plot in the Spanish core samples.

Two EF-IA2 plot between Italian, Spanish and French and three EF-BA1 plot in the Scottish, English and Hungarian area.

Were is the supposed Celts late arrival?

Simon_W said...

@J.S.

I meant a late Celtic arrival in southern Occitanie, so eastern France is irrelevant here. Unfortunately there is no Hallstatt sample from southern France, but the high diversity in the La Tène era (in Southern France) suggests a late arrival of Celts (there), because if they had arrived earlier, the population would have been more homogenized due to intermixing.

J.S. said...

Simon_W


Well, let's posit you are right about the late Celts arrival in Southern France; how do you explain the authors conclusion?

zardos said...

The beginning of the Iron Age latest seems to be accompanied by E1b and G2 individuals coming from the East and possibly I1 from the North, unless the I1 is a local survivor. I think the uniparentals need to be inspected more carefully, because they are key. Autosomally the change in the LBA/Iron Age might be much less pronounced.

Simon_W said...

@J.S.

Because they didn't analyse the BA/IA transition in Southern France separately. In their analyses all IA samples are thrown into one pot.

It's relatively uncontroversial that the Celts reached the Mediterranean coast of France late. The periplus of Pseudo-Scylax for instance, a compilation of geographical information from the 4th century BC, says:

"3. LIGYANS AND IBERIANS. And from Iberians there adjoin the Ligyans and Iberians mixed, as far as the river Rhodanos. The coastal voyage of Ligyans from Emporion as far as Rhodanos river of two days and of one night. 4. LIGYES. From Rhodanos river there adjoin Ligyans as far as Antion. In this territory is a Hellenic city, Massalia, with* a harbour **. These cities are colonists from Massalia. And the coastal voyage of this territory is from Rhodanos river as far as Antion of 4 days and four nights."

http://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/AUTHORS/Scylax-GB2002.pdf

J.S. said...

Simon_W

https://www.academia.edu/1931957/Greeks_Celts_and_Ligurians_in_South-East_Gaul_Ethnicity_and_Archaeology

Simon_W said...

@Zardos
The earliest attested Celtic language, Lepontic, is associated with the IA Golasecca culture, which is derived from the LBA Canegrate culture, which in turn shows an affinity to the western Urnfield area: eastern France, Switzerland, upper Rhine. Therefore I suppose that Celtic was already present in the western Urnfield culture.

Simon_W said...

@J.S.
Thanks, I'll have a look at it later.

@all
So the La Tene samples with the label COL are really from the Colmar area. Hence they are probably Raurici. It's amazing that the preliminary version of COL11 is so much northwestern-like. Closest to Galway in Connaught according to Domen and closest to North English according to the updated innofficial Eurogenes K15 spreadsheet. May there have been migrants from Britain around Colmar?

Simon_W said...

According to the R1b and subclades project on FTDNA there is an interesting concentration of R1b-L21 in the wider area around Frankfurt a.M. Could be quite ancient?

Matt said...

Rivollat's study is out as well - https://phys.org/news/2020-05-heightened-interaction-neolithic-migrants-hunter-gatherers.html

"High levels of hunter-gatherer ancestry in early farmers from France

The new results showed evidence for a higher level of admixture, or the combination of genetic information from genetically distant populations, between early migrant farmers and local hunter-gatherers in France. The genetic mixture in this region is unprecedented in the rest of Europe for the early stages of the Neolithic expansion. The genetic contribution of hunter-gatherers is particularly high in the south of France, roughly 31% on average, compared with 3% in Central Europe or 13% in the Iberian Peninsula."


Southern France may be a hotspot for enrichment of subsequent ancestry in Iberia and Atlantic coastal neolithic. Will have to read the rest.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Matt,
"Southern France may be a hotspot for enrichment of subsequent ancestry in Iberia and Atlantic coastal neolithic. Will have to read the rest."

Yes, high HG admix and Western farmer affinity go hand in hand in aleady published DNA.

This explains early Neolithic outliers in Central Italy with 24% hunter gatherer admix and close affiliation to Iberian farmers. He may have come directly from France.

Another detail, I notice, is in each site the majority of males belong to a very specific Y haplogroups dominates suggesting many Neolithic farmers from the beginning were patrilineal and that it is not something which began with Megalithic culture.'

This is even true for the LBK sites in Germany in this study.

Archi said...

@Rob @mary

I can. It's the same with other methods, their statements are wrong. It is depicted there that I say, the color reference there refers to the restriction of the coefficient K and the peculiarities of the algorithm ADMIXTURE, this color is much more ancient MA1 as well. WHG is a young component, it is much younger than AG2 and MA1, it does not exist in Paleolithic Europe. It was formed from a mixture of a coming (Siberian or Dzudzuana) component and local European Paleolithic components.

zardos said...

@Sam: I agree with Celtic first spreading with Urnfield, but the problem with Urnfield are the cremation practise and the fact that Urnfield was still not exclusively Celtic, but definitely included other ethnicities, so rather Italo-Celtic than Proto-Celtic. Celtic before La Tene is a difficult thing, but before Western Hallstatt emerged, there is no clear association imho.

J.S. said...

@Zardos @Sam

Do you really believe Celtic is an (genetic)ethnicity per se, rather than a cultural/lingustic landscape?

Matt said...

@Sam, on this topic of exact Western farmers ancestry (mentioned in the other thread, but I'll continue here as more appropriate), I've actually been doing a quick experiment on G25 data over the past couple days that shapes my opinion on that.

My opinion at the moment is that the Western farmers ancestry probably split from the earliest SE European farmers (ROU_N, ITA_Grotta_Continenza_N, MKD_N, SRB_N, HRV_Cardial_N, HUN_Koros_N) very early on around 6500 BCE (probably splitting into the Cardial route from the Adriatic coast), however after they had probably split from Barcin within Anatolia and begun to enter Europe around 7500 BCE.

You are right that there is a difference, but I basically think that the normal archaeological model where a single / unstructured entry from Anatolia to Greece/Southern Balkans happens, then the split happens in SE Europe, is OK. To my view there isn't a need for a preexisting structured dispersal into Europe from structured Anatolian populations.

Basically, to explain a bit more, I can try to simulate a "true" Western farmer ancestor by working out proportions of "farmer" vs "HG" ancestry in Vahaduo, for a set of Middle Neolithic farmers, then use regression equations these proportions and G25 on the Middle Neolithic farmers to estimate a position on G25 for true source.

This is something I've done before on the Baltic_BA populations, that Arza will likely remember.

When I do this, in this case I used the British Isles Neolithic as my MN pop, the model that comes out has a slight excess of affinity to early SE European farmers over Barcin.

So I think they drifted together at some point after splitting from Barcin.

I can't totally say that there wasn't population structure in Anatolia before farmer dispersals (you may be right, it's not a crazy suggestion). But the vast majority of difference of Western EN->MN farmers seems to be explained through some combination of later drift and WHG admixture that is difficult to exactly unpick. Only a small bit looks to be due to differences between early farmers, and that seems to be explainable by drift. And that small drift happening during initial dispersal into Europe matches with archaeology as far as I know.

If anyone is interested in these simulated populations I've mentioned, here's a look at where they sit on Global 25 views in Vahaduo: https://imgur.com/a/yW1XlaD

They load very typically like real ancient farmer and HG in Vahaduo's West Eurasian PCA, while showing stronger loading on PCA based on present day Europeans than any real ancient HG or farmers (particularly than ancient HG). And this is *without* basing them on any modern day DNA at all, just MN farmers and Baltic_BA.

The actual reason for why these simulated samples sit as they do is hard to unpick but it certainly supports the model where MN farmers of various sorts had a stronger contribution to NW Europeans, while NE Europeans mainly have composites of NE CWC+HG population and SE European farmer population with very little HG that just look similar in broad West Eurasia PCA (and then Central Europeans are clinal between these extremes).

Here's a datasheet too (with the simulations and some other points of reference, to use on Vahaduo G25 views): https://pastebin.com/k9NdsbH8

zardos said...

@J.S.
I think Proto-Celts spread first from within the Tumulus Culture in the Urnfield horizon and stabilised in Western Hallstatt. Its spread was to a large degree by elite dominance, but it surely was an ethnicity with genetic characteristics, which however assimilated a lot of people where they came to. I just want to quote from Caesar that that Celtic nobles had masses of people under their spell. So while not as clearly hiearchical and special as Hallstatt, it was still an elite warrior culture. This also means the spreaders of Celtic Iron Age culture could be few in numbers, positioning themselves on top of existing, probably even related cultural groups.

Simon_W said...

@Zardos & J.S.

Why do you guys confuse me with Sam? Your replies @Sam were referring to stuff I was saying.

@J.S.

I've now read that chapter by Collin Bouffier and Garcia that you linked. It has some interesting points, but they didn't convince me that the Ligurians were just Celts.

https://www.academia.edu/24851735/La_lingua_degli_antichi_Liguri._Iscrizioni_e_figure_sacre_su_due_rocce_di_Campocatino_Alpi_Apuane_

https://www.academia.edu/23414809/LINGUA_SCRITTURA_DIVINITÀ_E_ARTE_RUPESTRE_DEGLI_ANTICHI_LIGURI_5._L_ISCRIZIONE_DI_BEVERINO_LA_SPEZIA_2016

Simon_W said...

@J.S.
Collin Bouffier and Garcia seem to have a typical postmodern and constructivist view of the Celts. It may well be that the name Celts or Keltoi was invented by the Greeks and originally applied only to one tribe in the south. But this cannot refute the existence of a Celtic language family and this family is certainly not a construct of the Greeks. And it's outright ridiculous that they deny that there was a Celtic Urheimat and expansion. E.g. they deny that the Celts expanded to Spain. Then how the heck do they explain the existence of Celtic language in Iberia? The only possible alternative would be a Celtic Urheimat in Iberia, but that's not an option.

Simon_W said...

@J.S.

The Celts in Occitanie and near Toulouse were known as the Volcae. There is the theory that this name was the root of the Germanic term Welsche/Welsh, which would presuppose an origin of the Volcae near the Germanics.

old europe said...


@Simon _W

The Volcae migreted also in what is today Germany just south of the Hartz region. probably the germanic tribes that were located just north of the hartz range took their name as a collective for all the celts.

Simon_W said...

Yes, and even for Romanised people, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/walhaz

Rob said...

@ Matt @ Sam

THe 2 French papers seem to come to slightly different conclusions about Meso - Neolithic structyre in western Europe.
However, the Rivollaut study nicely outlines that Cardial farmers are all slightly different
I think this just related to them 'capturing' samples at different points of the WHG-> EEF ingrogression, which could have varied in time & space.
If anyone is different, it is the early LBK, because they are a more bottle-necked early dispersal to central Europe (with high mtDNA N1, etc)

zardos said...

@Rob: As I read it, they detected the male HG takeover which I proposed for quite some time in Southern French, with a possible, not documented event in Northern Italy. They write the HG ancestry spread from this I2a/WHG shifted Southern French clans up the North, with little, but noticeable WHG impact elsewhere, like PWC in the fringe Loess areas. So this is more than a simple variation inside of Cardial, because these Southern French clans were I2a/WHG shifted, while the Iberian Cardial were not and even later not as much.
This Southern French HG which adopted Neolithic cultural elements and wives from Cardial might prove to be really crucial for what happened in the Middle Neolithic, in Megalithic and TRB/GAC even, probably most of the I2a/WHG shift later seen can be attributed to their expansions in the West and North.

Ric Hern said...

So how did Ireland become Celtic ? A need to trade with Celtic Neighbours ? Religion ? The Elite dominance does not make sense during the Late Bronze Age/Iron Age.

The only thing that makes sense to me is the Middle Bronze Age at latest with a dialect levelling event during this time forming Q-Celtic. Personally I can not rule out the connection between Q-Celtic and Q-Italic Languages...Q-Celtic seems to be an older form because of this or at least was related to close dialects spoken in Western parts of Europe before P-Celtic became dominant in most of that areas.

zardos said...

Looking at the Iron Age in Ireland, nothing is for certain it seems, because the current research doesn't even agree on when it started. It is however clear that Ireland became connected to the wider Iron Age cultures of continental Europe, especially in the the La Tene period, even with the sparse artefacts available. I can just say for Central Europe that the introduction of Iron metals meant a lot and changed the cultural landscape on a grand scale. Whereever there is a good record, there is substantial turmoil. The more we get to know from Ireland, the more we see it there too, probably somewhat less pronounced. I think the transition from Bronze to Iron Age is still somewhat the most underestimated of the big changes taking place in prehistory, yet it was really, really important and made an impact on all areas of society.

Angantyr said...

@zardos

That PWC signal in the TGM009 specimen from late TRB Tangermünde in Saxony-Anhalt must be something else. This guy lived at the same time as PWC first appeared in east-central Sweden, 1000 km away, so actual PWC admixture doesn't make sense.

Rivollat et al. refer to a paper about contacts between TRB and Ertebølle, but that happened a thousand years earlier and we have no reason to believe that Ertebølle people were a majority SHG/minority EEF mixture like PWC. The only possible Ertebølle genome described to date, the chewing gum girl from Lolland, was plain WHG.

I wonder if PWC is contributing a bit of WHG rich TRB specific drift to their model, since Motala SHGs didn't work when they tried them. A look at those contemporary and nearby Ostorf late HGs that we only have the mtDNAs from would be interesting.

Rob said...

@ Zardos

There would have been G2a-rich French cardials too; in phase 1; which isn’t sampled

“ As I read it, they detected the male HG takeover which I proposed for quite some time in Southern French, with a possible, not documented event in Northern Italy.”

However the I2a1a. & I2a1b are found in Rhone & Paris basin; not yet in Mesolithic Italy
So possibly a different scenario could have occurred

zardos said...

@Angantyr: Good you mention Ertebølle, because who knows what kind of variation they harboured. Not a small forager population after all. What you say just points to all the data points still missing.

@Rob: But how much is there from Northern Italy from the time in question? So you propose a later takeover further North, with the samples published just missing the initial spread of relatively pure, full scale G2a/H2 Neolithic clans? The takeover, introgression happened further North and pushed down to Southern France fast?

Rob said...

@ Zardos

Although from a later period; this study found high % of G2a in southern France
https://www.pnas.org/content/108/24/9788

At this stage ; “my scenario” is just a possible alternative

zardos said...

@Rob: Does your alternative include the possibility of the LBK push being responsible for Northern Cardial related people moving back South again?

Quotation from the Cassidy thesis:
"Cardial Ware is seen in the Limburg and La Hoguette pottery styles, found inland along the western fringes of LBK’s early distribution (Thorpe 2003; Hofmann 2016). These ceramic types, thought to be the result of indigenous interaction with more southern Impressed Ware groups, may have predated the arrival of LBK in some regions, and indeed are clearly replaced by LBK ware in many areas at a later date, including the southern Netherlands (~5,300 BC) (Cunliffe 2008)."

Could this indigenous interaction in the North being the source? In any case that region in which Mesolithic, Cardial and LBK traditions met and pushed each other mgiht have been quite dynamic, innovative and being responsible for the change. You agree, or do you think I'm off?
Seems to be right now, after the last papers on Southern French Cardial and Michslsberg, the best alternative to a Southern origin probably.

J.S. said...

We still do not know the percentage of genetic continuity between the Iron Age Gauls & the modern French.

mary said...

@Archi

Your conclusion is exactly the opposite of what Lazaridis says.

mary said...

And of course, it is not the component that is young. It is the individuals used in the study who are. Nothing prevents "light blue" from being a much older strain, of which Villabruna 1 is a relatively pure representative.

Ric Hern said...

So the Gauls basically developed out of the Local Bronze Age population. What was the population size during the Late Bronze Age in France ? A Million ? Certainly must have been significantly more than Ireland which was estimated to have a population of +-200 000 during the Bronze Age.

Ric Hern said...

How do you change the Language of a Million people without no major demographics changes ?

J.S. said...

@ Ric Hern

Colonisation and cultural imperialism, I guess.