Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-09 > 1220326864

From: "David Faux" <>
Subject: [DNA] Age of R1b
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 20:41:04 -0700


I do not intend to get involved in another round of futile arguments about
cultural diffusion, demic diffusion and wave of advance. Suffice it to say
that I agree with archaeologists Cunliffe (2008) as well as Zeder (2008).
In other words there was little demic diffusion beyond the Greek Mainland;
and that most of the Neolithic settlement was maritime based via a series of
nucleated settlements along the Mediterranean which expanded to the
hinterland (northward) only via the acculturated locals (descendants of
Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.

As to the "infamous Zhivotovsky coefficients", I know you are a biochemist
and respected scientist - but I don't know you. I correspond with Peter
Underhill a co-author of the Zhivotovsky, Underhill and Feldman (2006)
paper, and I have the utmost respect for his work. I have also studied this
paper and find the arguments sound. Articles using these cooefficients have
been published in Molecular Biology and Evolution and American Journal of
Human Genetics and passed the peer - review process without evident
difficulties. In addition, Dr. Underhill is still using this approach in
his most recent work,

David K. Faux.

David Faux wrote:

>It is inconceivable how these "young dates" could in any
way tally with either the archaeological record of the present day
demographics of Europe.

My response: Not quite so. Radiocarbon analysis of the earliest Neolithic
sites across Europe suggests the arrival time of migrants to Scotland by
5,500 years BP (Gray & Atkinson, Nature, v. 426, pp. 435-439, 2003). Other
data - 5820+/-130 ybp in Poland, 5840+/-70 ybp in England, 5645+/-100 in
Ireland (Atkinson & Gray, 2006: Gkiasta et al, 2003; Innes et al, 2003).
Bryan Sykes in his Saxons, Vikings, and Celts gives dates of 4500-6000 years
BP for arrival of Neolithic farmers in Europe.

>There is nothing in the published literature...

Yes, tough luck. It is a common sign of rapidly advancing science.

...>but a number of studies have posited a date circa 10,000 years ago for
R1a1. No where is it reported
that the age is "confirmed to be 5000 years"...

As I have described here earlier, the earliest traces for R1a1 are in the
Balkans (12200 ybp), that all over Europe 4400-5200 ybp, in the Russian
plains 4500 ybp, in India 3500 ybp.

R1b - in Asia 16,000 years ago, the Caucasus 11,400 ybp, Europe - around
3800-4500 ybp

>As an example of the error in the dates below, Contu et al. (2008)
provided an estimate of 28,000 years for the R-M269 of Sardinia (which could
be R-U152).

3525 years BP - that what Contu et al data show, directly from the oldest
branch of the haplotypes R-M269, 5025 ybp - the earliest possible
extrapolation from several branches of haplotypes. However, K-R and R1 from
the same paper show 10400 years BP. Contu et al have not even used all of
their 8-marker haplotypes, they removed two of them for calculations. Plus
(rather minus) they have used the infamous Zhivotovsky coefficients, greatly
increasing their already wrong estimates.

This thread: