GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1291792127


From: "Lancaster-Boon" <>
Subject: [DNA] NW European R1b from Iberia?
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 08:08:47 +0100


Dear Robert and Sam

Thanks for your thoughts on the discussion. I think you are right to some
extent. That there at least archaeological signs of links between Iberia and
the Maghreb is fine by me. But...

1. Links between Egypt and Europe need no special theory. Europe and Egypt
were linked culturally during the classical period. Greek was a language of
contact in both places for a very long time, and Rome (and then
Constantinople) was an administrative capital linking both places.

2. More specifically looking at the Maghreb and Iberia, not every link
between Iberia and the Maghreb will fit Anatole's requirments such as
timing.

3. And none of the links I am aware give any reason to suspect a major
migration from Anatolia and THEN on to the Maghreb to Iberia. This is
something very specific, and evidence for this would be useful for Anatole.
Can you think of any?

4. Archaelogical evidence of contact is often down to things like trade, not
the actual movement of people. So archaelogical evidence for the movement of
peoples is not always the same as archaeological evidence for contact. For
the period we are discussing, much more important for a theory like
Anatole's would be genetic or linguistic evidence.

5. I suppose that Anatole himself realizes that his theory needs different
evidence than the types you mention. His own explanation about what evidence
he has was that R-P312* frequency is higher in Iberia than in other places.

I have pointed out that this is not a logically correct approach to the
data. R-P312* STR diversity (implying relative ages) is what should be
examined, and in this respect Iberia show no signs of having older R-P312.
Relative frequencies are affected by all sorts of things - in this case the
undisputed more recent increase in frequencies of R-L21 and R-U106 in many
parts of Northern Europe. In order to avoid misunderstandings by being too
unclear I will say it fairly strongly because this is just logic: we really
do know that to ignore such an agreed fact will lead to error.

6. I guess he would add that his theory also fits with one out of many ideas
about the Bell Beaker culture, but I do not see fitting with a "one out of
many" theory as evidence in any way. Having two minority theories which fit
each other is "building upon a foundation of sand".

7. The other question I note Anatole did not want to answer was about the
relative ages of the R1b clades in question. As we've discussed many times
on this forum and others there is a remarkable similarty of ages between
quite a few of them, both parents and siblings and cousins and indeed
grandparents etc etc, making it highly likely that they all dispersed from a
small region during a short period of time. Having some of them disperse
from the Middle East and some from Iberia after a long migration is not
parsimonious, to say the least.

Best Regards
Andrew


This thread: