GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-01 > 1263164512


From: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] R-L21 possible areas of origin
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 18:01:54 -0500
References: <mailman.14290.1263150923.2086.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>


>From: Alan R < >


>At present the virtually identical continental and isles dating (itself
>something that has only emerged in the last couple of calculations) means
>there is no clear evidence of direction of spread.(...) The other question
>is when? The MRCA dates suggesting a dispersal after 1500BC for L21 is
>pretty well impossible to correlate with archaeological evidence and
>thinking which hasn't seen the period after 1500BC as a period of major
>population change for a long long time.. Perhaps the archaeologists are
>wrong and major changes sometimes only leave the faintest echoes but the
>founding of so much of western Europe's population as late as that is
>incredibly counter-intuitive to the the very slight evidence for exotic
>arrivals at that time and the massive evidence of local continuity and
>evolution. (...) So unless the Iberian origin is proved wrong for beakers
>(or Iberia is shown to have simply been a stepping stone from the east in
>some way) then the beaker phenomenon cannot be linked to R1b1b2. (...) Of
>course that throws us back to the early Neolithic. That is a period where
>the evidence for major SE to west and NW population movement is pretty well
>certain. However, other than the fact that this demands the age of R1b1b2
>to be over twice as old as the MRCA calculations...



Dear Alan.

You have placed a lengthy piece here, however, it is not clear what do you
suggest, offer, state. Dating by itself does not give "direction of spread".
A serious of dating can do. The fact that R-L21 was originated 3575 years
ago does not give is a direction of their movement. However, the dating of
R1b1b2 as 5200 ybp in the Middle East, 3800 ybp in Algeria, 3700 ybp in
Iberia, and 3600 ybp on the Isles can give a hint. Then it also can give a
hint who the Beakers were, since they apparently had spread from Iberia, and
in about the same times. So why are you saying that it is "impossible to
correlate with archaeological evidence"? What "evidence" you want to see?
What size of a "major population change" do you want to see? Who told you
that the "population movement" in the early Neolithic - "this demands the
age of R1b1b2 to be over twice as old as the MRCA calculations" - was
necessarily R1b1b2? Why not R1a1? Why not I1? I2? What is a root of your
logic that wants to see ONLY R1b1b2 in early Neolithic? Any evidence for
this?

Anatole Klyosov


This thread: