Monday, April 30, 2018

Beaker G25 Ancestry Runs (Rocca)

I thought I'd cut and paste some of R. Rocca's early Beaker ancestry runs from Anthrogenica.
Check out his comments.

I'd have preferred to do this myself, but I just don't have time for anything at the moment.  But Rocca's runs are plenty for some commentary, so I'll highlight some of his observations and add a few more with snips from his post.

The first thing he does is take the oldest, directly-dated Bell Beakers and sees what they prefer among Neolithic European populations.  Makes sense.  Here's a snip from the oldest Beaker, a Dutchman.

================================================== ====
>> Beaker_The_Netherlands:I5748
>> 2579–2233 calBCE (3945±55 BP, GrN-6650C)
>>> P312+
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=2.2331"

CWC_Germany,70
France_MLN,11.4
CWC_Baltic_early,6.8
Yamnaya_Kalmykia,3.8
Yamnaya_Samara,3
Ukraine_Mesolithic,2.6
CWC_Baltic,1.4
Samara_Eneolithic,1
Beaker_Iberia,0
Remedello_BA,0

Comment #1.  You can see that like almost all Bell Beakers, the Dutchman has a very strong affinity for the Corded Ware people, either the German CWC or the Baltic CWC in various proportions.  Except in the Dutchman's case using this measure, it is a whopping 80%.

What you see in these Beakers and other runs are digits for Comb Ware, GAC, Narva or Sweden MN.  This is unquestionably NE European influence coming very directly from the Corded Ware Cultures.  The expansion of CWC in Europe was probably multi-polar, fluid and web-like, so the differences in digits among individuals might reflect the personal genealogies of particular wagon bands.  (being more or less of Swedish Battle Axe, Moravian, Dutch Single Grave, Baltic, etc, etc.)

Culturally this makes a lot of sense to me.  Phenotypically it makes sense.  The very first Mittle-Saale Beaker made sense as being half local CWC and something else.

It's not lost on me that there is a significant presence of R1b in the Narva Baltic where the CWC intruded, but that's a lot late and apparently the wrong stuff, plus we'd be looking at huge chunks of Narva (not the case).

Next, a Z2103 Malopolskan.
================================================== ====
>> Beaker_Poland:I4253
>> Z2103+
>> 2456–2207 calBCE (3850±20 BP, PSUAMS-2339)
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=2.2247"

CWC_Germany,44.4
Yamnaya_Ukraine,14.2
Vucedol,11.1
Portugal_MN,10.1
Yamnaya_Bulgaria,10.1
Iberia_Southwest_CA,6.6
Blatterhole_MN,1.6
Armenia_ChL,1.4
Poltavka,0.5

Comment #2.  Rocca notes that this Beaker is interesting in that he has a respectable chunk of Vucedol ancestry that his clan and most non-Iberian Beakers lack entirely.  I'm either right or wrong about this (I don't care in the slightest), but I'm pretty sure that a few individuals in Csepel Island, and by extension the Malopolskan region, have direct Yamnaya influence from the Tisza River region and south of this.  In fact, there's cultural influence to suggest this scenario.

I'm not denying the relatedness of the Yamnaya and Beaker Y-chromosomes.  Instead I'm just pointing out that it just ain't that simple, people.  Yes, I'm suggesting Bell Beakers and Yamnaya mixed within an erogenous zone. [cymbal shot]  I mean contact zone.


Now the Italian
================================================== ====
>> Beaker_Northern_Italy:I2478
>> P312+
>> 2194–1939 calBCE (3671±40 BP, LTL-5035A)
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=2.6952"

CWC_Germany,38.7
Iberia_Southwest_CA,35.4
Czech_MN,14.3
Yamnaya_Bulgaria,7.3
Armenia_ChL,4.3
Beaker_Iberia,0
Remedello_BA,0

Comment #3.  None of the Continental Beakers like them some Remedello, not even the Italian.  But Remedello, Vucedol and SW Iberia seem to have something together not insignificant.  He asks if this is the Stelae Road.  Some-'ems up, don't know what.


================================================== ====
>> Remedello:RISE489
>> I2a-M26
>> 2908-2578 calBCE (4185±70 BP, ETH-12188)
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=2.3032"

Spain_LNCA,29.5
Koros_EN,17.1
Czech_MN,14.6
Iberia_Southwest_CA,14.5
Tisza_LN,11.5
Vucedol,8.2
Iberia_Central_CA,4.6

================================================== ====
>> Vucedol:I3499
>> 2884-2666 calBCE (4176±28 BP, BRAMS-1304)
>> R1b1a1a2a2-Z2103
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=2.2451"

Remedello_BA,31.4
Yamnaya_Kalmykia,27.6
Anatolia_ChL,25.4
Tisza_LN,15
Levant_N,0.6

================================================== ====
>> Iberia_SW_Chalcolithic:I6601
>> 2800–2600 BCE (No radiocarbon dates, but only Copper Age Portugese sample)
>> I2
================================================== ====
[1] "distance%=3.2808"

Iberia_ChL,50
Portugal_MN,21.2
Remedello_BA,18.6
Czech_MN,7.9
Tisza_LN,2.3

Comment #4  Clearly, Bell Beakers are poking all around at low levels in the Yamnayo-sphere.  What I've seen here and in other runs is something that splits between Kalmykia and Bulgaria.  If we go back to the Dutch Beaker at the top of the page, there isn't a whole lot of clutter.  Basically we have a fairly clean ancestry of 80% Corded Ware 10% France MN/LN and 10% Yamnaya.

I5748 is early enough and clean enough that he could probably tell you about his great-grandparents on his mom and dad's sides.  Would he tell you that his father's side were full-blooded Yamnaya immigrants or is this an indication that we should be more careful in examining early steppe influence in NE France and Germany?

If you got runs, by all means post them.   

Update
Thanks to R. Rocca for posting these at Anthrogenica, I'll put up Alberto's next, then Andrew K's.

18 comments:

  1. You powerfully show it, but it is worth telling as well: the Bell Beaker folk are not genetically homogeneous. Their cultural commonalities do not arise from a simple migration story. This is not a surprise. We've know about the split between "Southern Beakers" and "Northern Beakers" for some time now.

    But, what this data does suggest is that this is not simply a case of an Iberian outlier population. The diversity is more multi-polar than that and extends over a greater geographic range - not what you would have expected from the Y-DNA data alone at all, particularly because a lot of the diversity involves not just differing indigenous populations around a shared core, but different migrant populations as well - and in more than one direction.

    We've got Iberian genes in Poland!

    This is not simply a single direction geographic cline pattern.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well there's definitely some big common denominators but yes the variance do tell different stories.

    Outside a sporadic showing in the East Group, I doubt Vucedol will show anywhere. Big falsifier for Gimbutas theory on Beaker origins.

    The degree of Baltic ancestry is surprising, but I think this says more about the CW groups that contributed to most Beakers.

    Hopefully more people will add some runs on individual Beakers.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Speaking about Gimbutas….a very intelligent researcher but with a poor understanding of culture and archeology of neolithic and copper age mainland europe west of ukraine…she tought neolithic farmers had not a war like culture…..

    she tought GAC and Baalberge were steppe derived…..she spoke of Kurgan wave 1, 2, 3 (lol). In reality now we know there was only one and still we cannot confidently say if it was an invasion or just a migration without a significant cultural and linguistic change. Not to mention that many now speak of a blending of EEF and steppe people….

    Not to mention the elephant in the room of the cremation rite wich is so important for IE since it is shared in all the diffusion area from Ireland to SC Asia and is nowhere to be found on the steppe but has its roots clearly west of Ukraine.

    Not to mention the big role played by farmers in the very acculturation and formation of steppe culture and people ( Cucuteni and Balko- Carphatian metallurgical complex)

    My take is that it were the farmers who gave the language to the steppe ….but time will tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't discount the possibility that steppe influence is present in NW Europe before the CW or much earlier as an elite. Volker Heyd discusses this in the paper linked above and he mentions in his 2007 paper the difficulty in identifying West Yamnaya graves whose indicators seem to appear surprisingly far west in the North European plain.

      I'm not a linguist but the North Pontic-Caspian makes the most sense for proto-Indo-European

      Delete
    2. And undoubtedly, there is considerable steppe-like influence in Northern Europe. Maybe not population replacement levels, but at least half. Would you agree?

      Delete
    3. I agree that in northern europe there's a big movement from the steppe…..just remember that unlike modern times ( from the enlightment on) northern europe was not back then the hub of the continent...

      just I wonder if neolithic and copper age europe was not IE speaking where are all the non indoeuropean place names gone? The pattern of european place names west of belorussia is fully IE ( obviously not all place names because big settlements, big mountains and big rivers can more easily change but you cannot find a "toponomastic pattern " that is not IE.

      What is the explanation according to you?

      Delete
    4. Can those toponyms be classified as artifacts or evidence? If evidence, of what exactly? Did the rivers have names before the Neolithic influx?
      It's a fascinating subject, but I think the evidence points elsewhere.

      Delete
    5. Toponyms like breg/brig ( thousand and thousand all over central and western europe above all) ; like car for mountains ( , carso, carnia, carinzia carpath, karakorum to cover the indoeuropean from the atlantic to india) car is the root for fortified hill that in slavic gave gora ( city). If I'm right there's also the ending of gar in many place names in India….so clearly IE.

      As for ap/ac to name places by rivers or creek or swamp….thousand and thousand all over europe ( ago/aco in Italy, ach in Germany, ac in france just see a map). Of course ab and ac is the classical indoeuropean word for water ( aqua in italian, aba/avon river in celtic; bach: creek in german) ap in sanskrit…..very IE root indeed

      Now these place names are so abundant that they must be the result of a demic phenomenon. Only the demic diffusion related to agriculture was the unified factor of the continent there are few doubt that these place names were given from the farmers. so….in conclusion the farmers spoke indoeuropean.

      there's no way to escape here.



      Delete
    6. If the farmers spoke vasconic (lol) or some other languages we would have a clear pattern of non indoeuropean place names especially in central and western europe…….quite the contrary these IE roots are more diffused right in Central Western europe………
      But I don't pretend to influence the steppe narrative… I'm just an outlier!

      Delete
    7. Why stop with the farmers? Rivers had names before LBK back to homo erectus. Are you proposing Indo-Erectus?

      Delete
    8. No... to spread all of this you need more than an HG society…however I'm open to everything…don't want to imitate the arrogance of some of the steppe fanatics…. .but you have a point there's a fringe theory, the Paleolithic Continuum Theory that points in that direction…
      Thank you for you blog ….is one of the few where steppe supporters are civilized persons

      Delete
    9. There are traces of cremation dating to the Early Bronze Age (c. 2000 B.C.) in the Pannonian Plain and along the middle Danube (i.e. generally in the Balkans and coast of the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara which is between the Black and Aegean seas). Cremation and iron smelting appear at various places in West Asia at around the same time and cremation could have gained popularity as a religious and cultural nod to the "amazing" powers of intense fire. Iron smelting and cremation, both spread by Indo-Europeans predominantly, may have been elements of the same culture. This would have been post-PIE, but the cultural leap that included both may have supplied the dynamism that lead to explosive and stable Indo-European growth thereafter.

      Delete
    10. Also, IIRC, the Beaker area and Vasconic toponyms more or less coincide.

      Delete
    11. As for cremation just take a look to this cultures in neolithic europe:

      Burned house horizon (south east europe centered on cucuteni) 4800-3200

      Neolithic Ireland ( passage grave in Newgrange et other places) timing 4000-3000

      As for copper age northern italy ( 3400-2500) look this
      https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiS5ML-menaAhVCmlkKHZl5AxEQFggrMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.academia.edu%2F35887254%2F3rd_millennium_BC_ritual_and_burial_practices_in_Lombardy&usg=AOvVaw0YEM3Il7wgojKjvxMxsOet.

      Cremation is found also in baden culture and GAC.

      Cremation appears also in BB cemeteries ( even if it is not predominant)

      I think we can define cremation as a well established "old european thing" ( completely pre-kurgan).
      This practice was taken by the mixed population (EEF+ CWC) and brought to SC asia where is a strong cultural pattern till nowadays).

      Now a burial practice is strongly correlated with religion. You can find an example in the spread of christianity. You can detect the diffusion of Christianity not only archeologically with the building of churches but also by looking at mortuary practices....in the first centuries of CE indeed cremation fades away because for very clear reasons ( belief in the resurrection of the body) it was unacceptable for the Church.
      So it is not far fetched to infer that the religion of the farmers imposed itself upon steppe people....so it is not far fetched to think that farmers were considered superior by them....but then it is not far fetched to say that steppe people accepted also the language of the farmers....
      What's your take?

      Delete
    12. As for toponyms you have two alternatives :

      1 You can affirm that they ( the examples I quoted) are post 2500 in central western europe: highly unlikely but you could be right
      2 To avoid any "risk" you can deny that they are indoeuropeans.....
      The toponyms I quoted are not indoeuropeans!!!!!
      Give me a break!

      Delete
  4. its Worthwhile to compare with Alberto's:
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qdrWR7tAPKQQtfSR1A0iUf57hhMaeTkJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. what is the methodology of these runs, do you remember.

      Delete