7,000BP Iberian hunter gatherer La Brana-1 had blue eyes

[Fire Haired]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=41506&d=1386791079
On top is a map of light eyes in Europe. According to the Spanish article 8,000 year old(other's say 7,000 year old) hunter gatherer La Brana-1 from northern Spain had blue eyes. Making the theory that the first person with blue eyes was a European farmer who lived 6,000-10,000ybp seem very unlikely( That theory is accepted as fact or most likely by many Eye color Wikipedia (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FEye_col or&ei=4SGpUrr2F8rayAGIvIGoBA&usg=AFQjCNFt2Wh_HEmegWzBR6nGhtifFWWQPA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.aWc)). This is more evidence for what i and others have hypothesized. That modern European paleness(skin, hair and eye color) descends from Paleolithic-Mesolithic European hunter gatherers not Neolithic farmers. I think more pigmentation genes from pre historic European hunter gatherer's will defend a opinion some people including myself have. That most European hunter gatherer's had light colored eyes and hair. The main reason I think this is because of who their closest modern relatives are.

I just read an article from Eurogenes with brand new information about a 7,000 year old Iberian hunter gatherer La Brana-1(click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2013/12/brana-1-had-blue-eyes.html)). The author Davidski says "the genome of La Brana 1 has now been fully sequenced, and the more comprehensive new data not only back up the initial findings, but also suggest that this individual had blue eyes".

He said a paper should be published in the next few weeks and he expects to see La Brana-1's Y DNA haplogroup. He said the same about ancient Pontiac steppe DNA(click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2013/06/neue-blicke-auf-zivilisa-tionen-der.html)) 4 weeks ago. Davidski is told around when the a publication will come out by the scientist's or by reporters.

I predict La Brana-1 will have Y DNA I2a1a-M26 (I2 Eupedia"Continental Europe's Mesolithic paternal lineage" (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml)). Since Y DNA I has been pretty much proven to be descended from Paleolithic-Mesolithic European hunter gatherers and there are already four I2a1's from Neolithic France. Today I2a1a-M26 is pretty exclusive in west Europe most popular in Sardinia and Iberia. La Brana-1 did have significant farmer ancestry. Both La Brana's mtDNA hg was hunter gatherer U5b2c1. Maybe La Brana-1 had a farmer Y DNA hg G2a, E1b1b V13, J(J2b or J1a), T, and there are probably other possibly hg's for farmers. Davidski thinks La Brana-1 likely had some type of R. Because of the partly west Eurasian 24,000 year old Siberian who had R*(XR1, R2)(click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2013_11_01_archive.html)). I agree with him that Y DNA R was spread out in Eurasia during the Paleolithic and Mesolithic ages. But there hasn't been any R lineages found in Europe(besides maybe R1a probably east not west though) which have been there since before the Neolithic.

Here are some articles which explain the autosomal DNA results of the La Brana's and other pre historic European hunter gatherers. Ancient DNA from Iberian Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/ancient-dna-from-iberian-mesolithic.html), The East Baltic as a refuge for Mesolithic Europeans (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feurogenes.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F0 9%2Fmore-on-east-baltic-as-refuge-for.html&ei=NsyoUtu4GKr4yQHO0ICgBA&usg=AFQjCNEhGrnUisuyusRvNsT3iycbBEAOrw&sig2=frrvdghR02OG4BZcvOQ9Jw&bvm=bv.57799294,d.aWc), And a good article explaining modern European autosomal DNA click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/modern-european-admixture-components.html).


A recent article from Dienekes(click here (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdienekes.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F11 %2Fiberian-neolithic-farmer-dna.html&ei=eBKpUoO6KMLbyQGC34CoBA&usg=AFQjCNFLCLTZlktSfdIFOfxdUPtP3vDavQ&bvm=bv.57799294,d.aWc)) talks about autosomal DNA results of a 4,000 year old Neolithic farmer from around the same area of Iberia. Here is a quote he had from his source

The Neolithic Portalón individual is genetically most similar to southern Europeans, similar to a Scandinavian Neolithic farmer and the Tyrolean Iceman. In contrast, the Neolithic Portalón individual displays little affinity to two Mesolithic samples from the near-by area, La Brana, demonstrating a distinct change in population history between 7,000 and 4,000 years ago for the northern Iberian Peninsula.


There are pigmentation genes from ~5,300BP Tyrolean iceman aka Otzi. He had fair skin, brown eyes, and dark brown hair. Copper age Pontiac steppe cultures Yamna(probably Indo European) and Catacomb culture(probably Uralic) samples were found close to the European shores of the Black sea. Had pale skin and darker eyes than average modern Europeans(for more info click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2013_06_01_archive.html)). Bronze and Iron age Kurgen people (most likely spoke Indo Iranian branch of Indo European) had pale skin, and majority light eyes and hair(click here (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theapricity.com%2Fforum%2Fsho wthread.php%3F96539-Indo-Iranian-and-Tocheiran-DNA&ei=JcmoUp_HNsugyQHB84GYCQ&usg=AFQjCNEILKy88SnJDRf2s0-Rmq4yH-N5ag&sig2=DIvZyE7vePbw82UJJD41zg&bvm=bv.57799294,d.aWc)). 24,000 year old Siberian Mal'ta had dark skin, brown eyes, and dark brown hair(click here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2013_11_01_archive.html)). Modern Sardinia people who have nearly identical results to the farmers Otzi and Gok4. In globe13, K7b, and K12b have vast majority brown eyes with some of the lowest light eye percentages in Europe.

Many people by now already know the huge difference in mtDNA between European farmers and hunter gatherers. The hunter gatherers had almost only mtDNA U and almost all under subclades U5, U4, and U2e. While the farmers mtDNA is very similar to all modern Europeans(Ancient Eurasian DNA organized (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theapricity.com%2Fforum%2Fsho wthread.php%3F96557-Ancient-Eurasian-DNA-orgnized&ei=hcqoUqyALeT8yAG_xoHIAw&usg=AFQjCNFYDuhtAxLFbJvGmOGhzMiXE_nzAg&sig2=rpxBCX9kBAGRGY9OAAx6UQ&bvm=bv.57799294,d.aWc)). Autosomal DNA from pre historic European farmers and hunter gatherer's are evidence that the so called north European clusters are descended mainly from the hunter gatherers. The so called Mediterranean clusters are descended probably solely from the farmers. Along with all the Near eastern clusters in Europe some though could have come from migrations after the Neolithic.

Since the vast majority of maternal lineages in all modern Europeans descend from farmers(maybe not). I don't understand how such a large amount of hunter gatherer blood survived. Today there are no people who really have true hunter gatherer and farmer autosomal DNA. Sardinia in a way are the only people in the same pool as Otzi and Swedish Neolithic farmers. I think the main reason for this is migrations and genetic changes that occurred throughout Europe ~5,000-3,000ybp mostly during the bronze age. It was probably primarily or solely Indo European migration's that caused this. I think Indo European migrations spread Y DNA R1a(mainly R1a1a1b1 Z283), most likely also connected with R1b1a2a1a L11 and maybe other R1b types in Europe.

A clear difference exists with the mtDNA of copper age central Europeans and Neolithic central Europeans. There is strong continum in Neolithic central Europe from ~5,000BC-3,000BC. But copper age Bell Beaker and Corded ware cultures dating at average ~2,500BC are very different and more similar to each other. Not surprisingly Bell Beaker's two Y DNA samples had R1b and two from Corded ware's(ancestral to Balto Slavic tribes) had R1a1. That is strong evidence those Bell Beaker people were very ancestral to modern west Europeans and Corded ware very ancestral to modern east Europeans. Those two are probably the source of the higher hunter gatherer ancestry in modern west and east Europeans than previous Neolithic farmers.

Another possibly reason for why there is higher amount of hunter gatherer ancestry in modern Europeans than pre historic farmers Otzi and Gok4. Is that there are not enough DNA samples especially Autosomal DNA from all the different cultures and regions of Neolithic Europe. Some may have had more Near eastern ancestry, more hunter gatherer ancestry, and maybe both. There is a very low amount of hunter gatherer mtDNA from Neolithic central European farmers. But there is a pretty high amount about 20% from Neolithic Iberian farmers possibly overall they had higher hunter gatherer ancestry.

The majority of Y DNA and mtDNA in the Balkans probably has been there since the Neolithic. Italians and people in the Balkans especially Greeks and southern Italians. Have much higher near eastern ancestry than the rest of Europe and more hunter gatherer ancestry than pre historic farmers Otzi and Gok4. It is very possibly different regions and cultures in Neolithic Europe were different from each other genetically. The high amount of hunter gatherer ancestry in modern European ethnicity's who are all traditionally farmers except Sami has to come from groups of farmers in the past.

Davidski got the info from a Spanish website Leonoticias.com click here (http://leonoticias.com/frontend/leonoticias/El-Mesolitico-leones-Afin-A-Los-Ciudadanos-Del-Norte-De-Eu-vn132622-vst306) to see the original article. Here it is translated through Google translate.


In 2006 , some hikers found in the cave of the brane - Arintero , in the municipality of León Valdelugeros , the skeletal remains of a human body. He was a man of the Mesolithic period , some 8,000 years old, accompanying another body , which was precipitated by a well , both in position of being the object of a funeral ritual. Those individuals were called Brana Brana 1 and 2 . In the remains of life that the first of the bodies still housed in one of his teeth , the samples were extracted to write a new chapter in the history of science.

In 2010 , once sequencing technology second generation was introduced in the massive investigation of samples to find the entire puzzle of DNA, the Institute of Evolutionary Biology that the Higher Council for Scientific Research ( CSIC) in Barcelona has , hands put to work to become the first team in the world capable of deciphering the entire genome of Mesolithic man in a 'race ' into where several countries.

The researcher Carles Lalueza -Fox , who participated this week in the second lecture in the series ' Arqueoleón II ' organized by the Museo de Leon threw any of the information that has been collected now , although the study is " embargoed " until publication " within weeks " . Man of the brane , ie , Brana 1 had blue eyes "for the same mutation which citizens of Northern Europe have blue " , so that "in this sense , would be similar to the current European " .


Type text or a website address or translate a document. (http://translate.google.com/?tr=f&hl=en)
Cancel (http://translate.google.com/?tr=t&hl=en)
<input name="file" id="file" style="display: none;" type="file" size="40">
Akin to northern European citizen

Mesolithic man as inhabiting the Cantabrian coast in the province of León, was " replaced " by Neolithic man was minding East culture of sedentary lifestyle , based on the domestication of animals and growing field . The Lion would be found in one of the oldest examples of this period and would "population affinities with northern Europe " , where the Neolithic soon arrived, so the sedentary man and the immediately preceding human could live .

"The individual Brana 1 curiously despite being in the south of Europe, if we were to find him a present population kinship with the city would be in northern Europe ," said Lalueza -Fox , however , has stressed that " GM is very different from the current northern Europeans ." Modern man is "the product of the Neolithic revolution " that occurred 7,000 years ago , according to the researcher says . The development of agriculture sits populations growing demographically and acquiring new habits in your diet, now rich in carbohydrates versus protein .

In search of resistance genes

The domestication of animals also led from the biological point of view " exciting changes " since the animals began to move the man, now common infectious diseases such as influenza . " When we look at current European genomes , some positions have been selected genes . We do not know if resistance to these infectious diseases we received from the domesticated. Having a previous one temporal reference Brana help discriminate which genes are involved in the response to these pathogens. "

So Lalueza -Fox argues that the remains found in Leon, once removed his entire genome for the first time in history , could have applications as well as to their "population activities " in order to analyze how man in its evolution, it has developed resistance to infectious pathogens known zoonosis. "Any biomedical research to seek immunity genes for resistance to pathogens transmitted by pets should look here because Brana 1 is prior to these phenomena."

The brane "always reference"

The discovery of the Remains of Mesolithic population in the province León is one of the Most Significant for Researchers in this field. This is so far unique copies of the Presence of men above the Neolithic in southern Europe. , Moreover, the situation of the cave, 1,489 m altitude and facing east, conservation has been good, With temperatures eight degrees on average THROUGHOUT the year. A Similar case is not known in the Iberian Peninsula.

"The brane is and will always be a benchmark," said CSIC researcher. Condition worse, submerged in water after falling into a well, the other guy is, Brana 2. "That would explain May Have Been submerged why there has not Been a good DNA sample. But it is an economic issue. With more money you could try and I would, in the future, individually retrieve the 2, but worse is preserved, Because Remains it an outstanding example. "

[Fire Haired]

We now know La Brana-1 probably had blue eyes, dark hair, and dark skin(most debatable). So with that info someone could probably make a life like reconstruction of him. Below is a reconstruction of La Brana-1 from Olalde 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12960.html). It is very debatable what skin color he had and some could interpret that reconstruction as having dark or light skin. He looks more rough and dirty than dark skinned. http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43910&d=1390789853

The new paper on the genome of La Brana-1 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12960.html) an ~8,000 year old Mesolithic hunter gatherer from northern Spain was just published today(It had already been found he had mtDNA U5b2c1 by Sanchez-Quinto 2012 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Sanchez-Quinto2012)). I just found out because of this Dienekes article Brown-skinned, blue-eyed, Y-haplogroup C-bearing European hunter-gatherer from Spain (Olalde et al. 2014) (http://Brown-skinned, blue-eyed, Y-haplogroup C-bearing European hunter-gatherer from Spain (Olalde et al. 2014)). It turns out the rumor that he had Y DNA C-V20 (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?110804-Rearcher-posted-at-Eupedia-La-Brana-1-had-Y-DNA-C-V20) is true. It was started by a member at Eupedia forum named CLF who was supposable Carles Lalueza-Fox a researcher in Olalde 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12960.html). CLF also said the paper will be out on January 27th, 2014 and I guess he was a day off but it is much better getting it today than tomorrow. Carles Lalueza-Fox was also quoted by a Spainish website saying that La Brana-1 had the blue eye mutation (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&ved=0CGcQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Feurogenes.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F1 2%2Fbrana-1-had-blue-eyes.html&ei=8HPlUqaJJtPHqAHa6IHIDQ&usg=AFQjCNGLyP0EORFsLGWjmea0Ba0JCgefWw&sig2=cNY6-_VHt8qTzGdFtxuWBw&bvm=bv.59930103,d.aWM)(probably talking about the derived alleles in SNP rs12913832 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsnpedia.com%2Findex.php%2FRs12913 832&ei=inPlUu5pgaCuAYCJgIAK&usg=AFQjCNHtVzdx9_RYDSyYm4KR8CKSXGWxkg&sig2=ifKuSGfVsVQJIf9SKi7uaA&bvm=bv.59930103,d.aWM)) which now we now know is true.

Laz 2013 (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552) just last December found that Loschbour an ~8,000 year old hunter gatherer from Luxembourg had the derived blue eye alleles in SNP rs12913832. I looked at Loschbour's 8-plex SNPs(used to predict skin and eye color) and according to the 8-plex eye color predictor there is no doubt he had blue(I think maybe also green) eyes. Loschbour was also found to probably have black hair but maybe brown, even though today most Europeans with black hair or dark brown hair also have brown eyes. Loschbour even more surprisingly had the ancestral 'dark skin" in alleles of SNP's in the three genes SLC24A5, SLC45A2, and TYR which are the most associated mutations with European light skin. In the 8-plex system used to predict skin color Loschbour did not qualify as light skinned or even light-medium skinned. In the 8-plex system having C/C alleles in SNP rs6119471 means someone probably has dark skin but Loschbour had alleles G/G.

It costs 32$ to read Olalde 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12960.html) so I can't actually read the study. I saw a figure though at the preview of the study which said La Brana-1 had the ancestral "dark skin" alleles in gene SLC45A2 (rs16891982) and gene SLC24A5 (rs1426654). A poster at Eurogenes (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/) gave me a quote from a member at the forum Anthrogencia which listed all the genes that have mutated alleles in one of their SNP's which are associated with light skin. La Brana-1 only had a few that are suppose to have medium or weak affects which is very surprising. I was shocked that the quote also said La Brana-1 did not have mutated alleles in a SNP of gene KITLG which today is around 80% in Europe and Asia. According to the 8-plex system like Loschbour, La Brana-1 was not light skinned or light-medium skinned. According to Olalde 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12960.html) La Brana-1 had either black or brown hair just like Loschbour. He was also lactose intolerant unlike most modern Europeans and just like Loschbour.

You almost never find a modern European or near eastern who has the ancestral "dark skin" alleles in gene SLC24A5 or who doesn't qualify as light-medium skinned. This was not the case at all though for Mesolithic (west)Europeans. Near easterns that spread farming to Europe mainly around 9,000-6,000ybp probably also brought most of the mutations associated with light skin in modern Europeans(both farmers Otzi and Stuttgart had the derived "light skin" alleles in SLC24A5(rs146554). At first people assumed these mutations were a sign of European ancestry but now we know they are actually a sign of near eastern ancestry.

I doubt the three main light skin mutations(in genes SLC24A5, SLC45A2, and TYR) make a big effect on skin color. The reason is that they are about as popular in near easterns as they are in Europeans. Even though it seems most Europeans have literally white skin and near easterns literally brown or light brown skin. Of course it varies but those are the normal tones.

Obviously there are other factors to creating light skin in Europeans. Today light skin, hair, and eyes are very connected to each other and correlate very well with Mesolithic European ancestry and skull shape. The distribution of near eastern ancestry in Europe is the opposite it correlates with dark hair, dark eyes, and dark skin(don't mean any Europeans are normally dark skinned just some are darker than others).

I have read some reasonable theories about how and when light skin became dominate in Europe and when light hair(it may have already been in the Mesolithic) became so popular as it is in many Europeans today. Many posters now think that after European hunter gatherers(dark skinned, mainly blue eyed, and dark haired) and near eastern farmers(light skinned, dark haired, dark eyed) mixed their hybrid decedents went through very powerful selective sweeps that created the coloring we see in Europe today. A lot say it has something to do with the lack of vitamin D in Neolithic European farmers diet and how light skinned people get more vitamin D from the sun than dark skinned people, so overtime Neolithic Europeans became lighter and lighter. I think early European farmers like around 8,000 years ago already had relatively light skin. The reason is modern Sardinians are the only nearly perfect matches Autosomally to early European farmers Stuttgart and Otzi and they have the same skin tone as other southern Europeans. Sardinians probably share almost no common ancestry with many northern Europeans in the last 7,000 yearS. I guess maybe light skin though could have become dominate separately in many different parts of Europe.

The hypothesis that hybrid near eastern-European hunter gatherers developed light and red hair doesn't make sense though. The reason is that light hair correlates very well with Mesolithic ancestry in Europe not Neolithic or another form of near eastern. Light hair is very rare in southern Europeans who have majority Neolithic or just another form of near eastern ancestry. In all of Europe today having light hair means you probably have light eyes and very light skin having dark hair probably means you have brown eyes. I don't understand how back in the Mesolithic and early Neolithic it was dark skinned people who had blue eyes and light skinned people with brown eyes.

We know that blonde hair, light skin, and light eyes were dominate in some early Indo European peoples in modern day Russia by probably at least 5,000 years ago(because of pigmentation genes from Indo Iranian immigrants in Siberia from 1,800-1,400BC). Maybe the reason today light hair and eyes correlate with Mesolithic ancestry is because the most Mesolithic like modern Europeans have mainly east European Mesolithic ancestry which they got through Indo European and Uralic migrations in the metal ages.

Now I am done talking about pigmentation. Like it says in the begging of this thread La Brana-1 had Y DNA C1a2-V20 which today has only been found in Europeans(but is unbelievable rare) it was hypothesized as being either of pre Neolithic European origin or from recent migrations by east Asians. Now we know it probably has a pre Neolithic European origin it could be from farmer inter marriage but I doubt it. Y DNA C has an almost completely exclusively non west Eurasian distribution it is very popular in eastern non Africans like Siberians and Australian aboriginals, but now we know it probably also existed in very early Europeans and possibly has been in Europe for as long as 40,000 years. I wont be surprised if there are forms of C in other west Eurasians and also in south Asians. Y DNA C and F are the two exclusively non African Y DNA haplogroups are and are brotherclades. Like the two non African mtDNA haplogroups M and N I think Y DNA F and C descendants mainly migrated together not separately. Y DNA C1a2-V20 may have an older age in Europe than Y DNA I(which was just found in Mesolithic Europeans) and might even come from a non west Eurasian people.

La Brana-1 like La Brana-2 had mtDNA U5b2c1. Which I have heard from Jaxman who has mtDNA U5b2c2 that U5b2c today is most popular in western Europe. U5b2 was the main subclade of U5 in Mesolithic central-west Europeans. I haven't really done much research on how U5 subclades are distributed there is some good info though at the FTDNA's U5 page (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/u5b/default.aspx?section=results). As it says in that link two pre-U5 samples have been found in the Czech republic dating 31,155 year old proving U5 probably originated in Europe and its lineage has been in Europe for over 30,000 years. U5 was the dominate mtDNA haplogroup of pre historic European hunter gatherers(Ancient Eurasian DNA organized 2 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theapricity.com%2Fforum%2Fsho wthread.php%3F106283-Ancient-Eurasian-DNA-Organized-2&ei=2sXpUqfPOumwyQGzkYDYCQ&usg=AFQjCNGa68d7wLwNwroClVfWb2NFyTVyUg&sig2=tAu1vVDzxmUnlSWvm-buyQ&bvm=bv.60444564,d.aWc)) and it is no surprise La Brana-1 was a member.

mtDNA, Y DNA, and autosomal DNA samples from pre historic European hunter gatherers(such as La Brana-1) are good evidence that they were descended of some of the earliest humans to arrive in Europe 30,000-50,000ybp. La Brana-1 probably traced most of his ancestry to western Europe back 10,000's of years. The people who made the famous Lascaux cave paintings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascaux)in France ~17,300 years ago were probably La Brana-1's ancestors( just related I don't mean literally his ancestors but maybe some). The fact both La Brana-1 and Loschbour had the same pigmentation means it was probably very established and old in (west)Europe by ~8,000 years ago.

People now can make accurate reconstructions of the Lascaux people, Blue eyes, dark skinned(still debatable), and black haired. There are actually many reconstructions made of people who lived in west Europe around the time the Lascaux painters lived. I was surprised that most had blue eyes but now we know there is a good chance they did, but they probably did not have light skin(debatable) or any light hair(debatable).

There was no info on La Brana-1's autosomal DNA on the Dienekes article but based on the previous study done on him he was probably mainly of the same root Loschbour was from but had some farmer and ANE(Upper Palaeolithic Siberians who were west Eurasian like but had no affinities to east Eurasians) admixture.

[Artek]

He looks somewhat like a darker Lithuanian, no wonder why they are relatively close to the mesolithic samples. Morphologically-wise he could pass along the Northern Europe.

[Anglojew]

I wish they'd define "dark".

[Artek]

I wish they'd define "dark".
Probably like a "usual" tanned skin, not a negroid or weddoid-like dark skin.

[Prince Carlo]

He probably had the same skin tone of Inuit and other Siberian people. They also have the dark skin gene AFAIK.

[Argang]

He probably had the same skin tone of Inuit and other Siberian people. They also have the dark skin gene AFAIK.

Well, he does show a degree (less than HGDP Russians but more than Adygei) of drift towards both Karitiana and Han. ;)

But on a more serious note, these particular genes are "dark" for many different populations because it's the ancestral state, and very possibly not the only genes that affect lightness.

[Fire Haired]

He probably had the same skin tone of Inuit and other Siberian people. They also have the dark skin gene AFAIK.

There is no dark skin gene there are just three mutations in genes TYR, SLC24A5, and SLC45A2 that are associated with pale skin in west Eurasians. Everyone in the world has the dark skin ancestral form of those SNP's except west Eurasians. It is definitely debatable how much those mutations effect skin color. The only one that is about 100% in Europeans and near easterns is in gene SLC24A5 the rest can be as low as 50%.

Many people assume that those mutations cause white skin. Have you seen near eastern people before? They are brownish right? Well they have the same amount of these mutations as the whitest Scandinavian people. How do you explain paler skin in northern Europe than in southern Europe and paler skin in southern Europe than in the near east even though they all have the same light skin mutations? Obviously there are other factors to creating the very pale skin we see in Europe especially northern Europeans.

From about 9,000-6,000 ybp Europe was 'conquered" by farmers from the near east. Every farmer so far tested for the light skin mutation in gene SLC24A5 has been positive and it seems they had the same amount of these mutations as present day near easterns and Europeans. These mutations were brought to Europe from the near east. We know that today farmer ancestry is by far highest in southern Europe(Sardinia people are nearly perfect matches to early European farmers) and hunter gatherer ancestry is by far highest in northern Europe. Hunter gatherer ancestry correlates very well with very light skin, light hair(majority for almost all), and light eyes(majority for all). Sardinia people who are nearly perfect matches to early European farmers can definitely be described as olive skinned and nearly 100% of them have dark hair and eyes.

For these reasons I think there are other factors to European light skin. I also think that la Brana-1 most likely had light skin because of that. If he had dark skin I doubt he had blue eyes if he had blue eyes I doubt he had dark skin.

[Peikko]

He looks somewhat like a darker Lithuanian, no wonder why they are relatively close to the mesolithic samples. Morphologically-wise he could pass along the Northern Europe.
Looks borreby, just like one would expect.

[Artek]

Looks borreby, just like one would expect.

I had a huge lol, because La Brana 1 looks almost exactly like my deceased maternal grandfather :icon_smile:
He was just blonde and balding but rest is correct ;D

[Lábaru]

He can fits in Spain today without problem, according a face features, just tanned I guess.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43910&d=1390789853

[Black Wolf]

He is my distant direct maternal line cousin given the fact that I am also U5b2c! He is U5b2c1 and I am U5b2c2. Anyways given the fact that his Y-DNA is C it seems that mtDNA from the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers of Europe survived better than the Y-DNA did which actually makes a lot of sense given the fact that the incoming farmers were patrilocal and would have probably killed off most Mesolithic males while absorbing some females into their communities. On the other hand the Y-DNA haplogroup I2 and I results for Mesolithic males from Sweden shows that some Y-DNA lineages from Mesolithic Europeans probably survived to some degree.

[Fire Haired]

He can fits in Spain today without problem, according a face features, just tanned I guess.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43910&d=1390789853

He kind of looks like your profile picture.

[Fire Haired]

He is my distant direct maternal line cousin given the fact that I am also U5b2c! He is U5b2c1 and I am U5b2c2. Anyways given the fact that his Y-DNA is C it seems that mtDNA from the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers of Europe survived better than the Y-DNA did which actually makes a lot of sense given the fact that the incoming farmers were patrilocal and would have probably killed off most Mesolithic males while absorbing some females into their communities. On the other hand the Y-DNA haplogroup I2 and I results for Mesolithic males from Sweden shows that some Y-DNA lineages from Mesolithic Europeans probably survived to some degree.

In many regions of Europe Y DNA I is much higher than mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e. There is a pretty even distribution of Mesolithic European mtDNA in Europe. Every human society pretty much is male lead. I doubt there is one reason why certain lineages from Mesolithic European and why some did not. Did farmer conquer the hunter gatherers? No one know but I guess that may be a possibility.

[Artek]

He can fits in Spain today without problem, according a face features, just tanned I guess.
Spaniards_were_always_there.png


Look at him without a beard and hair. Hardly Spaniard-looking. Those features can exist but are much more typical for a populations that are genetically closer to La Brana.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Om6uNP8WqVI/UuW0UaLeKGI/AAAAAAAAJec/8mZ_0eqk9T0/s1600/1389897619717-rekonstruktion.jpg

[Fire Haired]

Looks borreby, just like one would expect.

What is borreby. I looked some stuff up about it and I saw a map covering land from Belgium to Denmark and pictures of European people with wide noses. The wide noses and other facial features got me interested because most people in my family have much wider noses than average Europeans.

[Fire Haired]

Spaniards_were_always_there.png


Look at him without a beard and hair. Hardly Spaniard-looking. Those features can exist but are much more typical for a populations that are genetically closer to La Brana.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Om6uNP8WqVI/UuW0UaLeKGI/AAAAAAAAJec/8mZ_0eqk9T0/s1600/1389897619717-rekonstruktion.jpg

I think you are making an assumption he looks most like his closest modern relatives.

[Black Wolf]

In many regions of Europe Y DNA I is much higher than mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e. There is a pretty even distribution of Mesolithic European mtDNA in Europe. Every human society pretty much is male lead. I doubt there is one reason why certain lineages from Mesolithic European and why some did not. Did farmer conquer the hunter gatherers? No one know but I guess that may be a possibility.

INdeed most human societies are male lead. Well pretty much all are in ways but that does not mean that in some human societies especially hunter-gatherer ones that females do not play a very important part. In fact I would not be surprised if some of these ancient European Mesolithic societies were matrilocal. No doubt many were also patrilocal. They were probably mixed throughout the continent.

[Peikko]

What is borreby. I looked some stuff up about it and I saw a map covering land from Belgium to Denmark and pictures of European people with wide noses. The wide noses and other facial features got me interested because most people in my family have much wider noses than average Europeans.
Borreby looks something like this:
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe051.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe052.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe053.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe054-.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe055.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe061.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe062-.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe064.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe065.jpg

[Hevo]

Spaniards_were_always_there.png


Look at him without a beard and hair. Hardly Spaniard-looking. Those features can exist but are much more typical for a populations that are genetically closer to La Brana.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Om6uNP8WqVI/UuW0UaLeKGI/AAAAAAAAJec/8mZ_0eqk9T0/s1600/1389897619717-rekonstruktion.jpg


He looks quite North-East European @bald picture imo.

[Empecinado]

Manuel Martinez, born in Leon (Leon is near La Braña):

http://www.que.es/archivos/201107/3942911w-640x640x80.jpg

http://s5.as.com/recorte/20101217dasdasmas_11/XLCO/Ies/20101217dasdasmas_11.jpg

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4888752064234304&pid=1.7

[Fire Haired]

Borreby looks something like this:
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe051.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe052.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe053.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe054-.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe055.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe061.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe062-.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe064.jpghttp://www.theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe065.jpg

They look like normal European people just kind of stocky and wide nosed. They honestly look a lot like my grandfather but I doubt that means anything.

[Fire Haired]

Manuel Martinez, born in Leon (Leon is near La Braña):

http://www.que.es/archivos/201107/3942911w-640x640x80.jpg

http://s5.as.com/recorte/20101217dasdasmas_11/XLCO/Ies/20101217dasdasmas_11.jpg

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4888752064234304&pid=1.7

Based on the images you showed on Guide to Spainish phenotype(by region) almost all of them look like typical white Americans. There are some dark examples you don't see in north-west Europeans and almost all of them have dark hair and eyes but besides that I don't really see much of a difference.

[Fire Haired]

INdeed most human societies are male lead. Well pretty much all are in ways but that does not mean that in some human societies especially hunter-gatherer ones that females do not play a very important part. In fact I would not be surprised if some of these ancient European Mesolithic societies were matrilocal. No doubt many were also patrilocal. They were probably mixed throughout the continent.

Women don't have to have male roles to be important in society. Women naturally are different from men and so have different roles in society(you can see related but different instinct in other mammals). I don't see a high possibility that in any human society women have been the warriors, main hunters, and leaders. All of those roles need a lot of aggression and we know men naturally have more aggression than women. That is why still today in a much more gender equal society men are still the main leaders. I do think there is a good chance women could have taken roles men usually take. Maybe in hunter gatherer society there is a better chance that will be the case. We should do research on modern hunter gatherers.

Why do you think there are so many female teachers in schools(under high school)? It is because women naturally are better with children. I may be wrong on that I just know that in my grade school(pre K-8th) almost all the teachers were female. When I was at day cares or whatever as a little kid I never had one male teacher. Even my baby sitters were all female.

[Fire Haired]

Empecinado, thanks for ----> Guide to Spanish phenotypes (by region) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?106927-Guide-to-Spanish-phenotypes-%28by-regions%29)

I really hope those images are legit. Because now I feel like researching phenotype in all of west Eurasia(including ancient remains) and studying mutations that are associated with certain traits. Now we have pigmentation genes from near eastern farmers and Mesolithic Europeans. It has been discovered Mesolithic Europeans(at least west) did not have the light skin mutations had dark hair(maybe not 100%) and blue eyes(not 100%) and also that the near eastern farmers had around the same amount of the light skin mutations as modern near easterns and Europeans, had dark hair(maybe not 100%) and brown eyes(maybe not 100%).

It seems this forum is focused on phenotype stuff anyways.

[Empecinado]

Empecinado, thanks for ----> Guide to Spanish phenotypes (by region) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?106927-Guide-to-Spanish-phenotypes-%28by-regions%29)

I really hope those images are legit. Because now I feel like researching phenotype in all of west Eurasia(including ancient remains) and studying mutations that are associated with certain traits. Now we have pigmentation genes from near eastern farmers and Mesolithic Europeans. It has been discovered Mesolithic Europeans(at least west) did not have the light skin mutations had dark hair(maybe not 100%) and blue eyes(not 100%) and also that the near eastern farmers had around the same amount of the light skin mutations as modern near easterns and Europeans, had dark hair(maybe not 100%) and brown eyes(maybe not 100%).

It seems this forum is focused on phenotype stuff anyways.


I guarantee that I picked these pics without any agenda, so all the phenotypes (at least the most common ones) are displayed, in a similar proportion that you would find on the street. Besides I tried to show people from villages instead cities as long it was possible because in the cities the people are more mixed with people from other regions.

[Lábaru]

He kind of looks like your profile picture.

Hehe yes, true.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43910&d=1390789853
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/wennpic/jordi-molla-premiere-riddick-01.jpg
http://img.moviepilot.com/assets/tarantulaV2/people_images/1374765523_Jordi-Molla.jpg
http://i.bssl.es/cinetelia/2009/03/610x.jpg

[Lábaru]

Empecinado, thanks for ----> Guide to Spanish phenotypes (by region) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?106927-Guide-to-Spanish-phenotypes-%28by-regions%29)

I really hope those images are legit. Because now I feel like researching phenotype in all of west Eurasia(including ancient remains).

You can trust in him, Empecinado has chosen a very normal people, without extremes or the classic nordicism shit of the southern people of Antrophorums.

[Fire Haired]

You can trust in him, Empecinado has chosen a very normal people, without extremes or the classic nordicism shit of the southern people of Antrophorums.

I doubt those images are not from Spain but I wonder if they all come from the region he claims they are.

[Fire Haired]

I guarantee that I picked these pics without any agenda, so all the phenotypes (at least the most common ones) are displayed, in a similar proportion that you would find on the street. Besides I tried to show people from villages instead cities as long it was possible because in the cities the people are more mixed with people from other regions.

Where did you get the photos? Is there constant immigration in Spain from region to region?

[Longbowman]

The findings back up our suspicions of most 'Indigenous' European YDNA clades being extinguished (C has only been reported once or twice in ethnically European populations) but maternal continuity (U and its daughter-clade K, with exceptions). The dark skin/light eyes mix is in keeping with previous findings also.

As ever I am impressed with your genetic knowledge, Fire Haired :)

[Empecinado]

Where did you get the photos? Is there constant immigration in Spain from region to region?

I look for sport teams from villages, because in small towns the population exchanges are less likely to happen than in cities of provinces that receive many inter regional immigration. That's why I didn't show the provinces or Madrid, Barcelona or Balearic islands, because the people there is heavily mixed due the migration waves happened in the past century and it's impossible to find a group pic where all or most of its members are unmixed.

http://www.recursosacademicos.net/web/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Mapa-migraciones-internas-principales.bmp

[Fire Haired]

I look for sport teams from villages, because in small towns the population exchanges are less likely to happen than in cities of provinces that receive many inter regional immigration. That's why I didn't show the provinces or Madrid, Barcelona or Balearic islands, because the people there is heavily mixed due the migration waves happened in the past century and it's impossible to find a group pic where all or most of its members are unmixed.

Ok. DNA tests should mainly be done on people in villages then.

[Damião de Góis]

I'm still confused about his haplogroup. It's native american !?

[Fire Haired]

I'm still confused about his haplogroup. It's native american !?

No his subclade is C1a2-V20 and it has only been found in Europe. Y DNA C is probably just as old F they which takes up almost all modern non African Y DNA.

[Graham]

When was lighter pigmented skin introduced into the North? The sun adaption could have taken place when they moved out of sunny Iberia funnily enough. :)

It is medically proven. That children & adults with darker skin can develop more problems in sun-deprived areas.

[Fire Haired]

When was lighter pigmented skin introduced into the North? The sun adaption could have taken place when they moved out of sunny Iberia funnily enough. :)

It is medically proven. That children & adults with darker skin can develop more problems in sun-deprived areas.

No one ever said anything about a migration from Iberia. It is not for sure he had dark skin anyways(my reasoning is in this thread). Genetic history of Europe is very complicated.

[Fire Haired]

Empecinado, do you know if any of the same individuals were shown more than once? It is likely many played on multiple sports teams in the same town.

[Anglojew]

Spaniards_were_always_there.png


Look at him without a beard and hair. Hardly Spaniard-looking. Those features can exist but are much more typical for a populations that are genetically closer to La Brana.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Om6uNP8WqVI/UuW0UaLeKGI/AAAAAAAAJec/8mZ_0eqk9T0/s1600/1389897619717-rekonstruktion.jpg

Looks like "Hank" (Dean Norris) from Breaking Bad

http://cdn3-www.craveonline.com/assets/uploads/2013/02/file_204985_0_Dean_Norris.jpg

[Longbowman]

Ok. DNA tests should mainly be done on people in villages then.

They are.

[Longbowman]

I'm still confused about his haplogroup. It's native american !?

Only as much as R1b is Chadian ;)

[Fire Haired]

They are.

How would you know, Jew.

[Longbowman]

How would you know, Jew.

That most DNA tests are done on village-folk? Because they usually ask for people from rural areas with 4 grandparents from the same area for reference populations, Homophobe.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

How would you know, Jew.

That's not nice. Mainly they try to restrict dna testing to multigenerational natives and less cosmopolitan areas. In places like france and germany it's still hard to be sure you are dealing with long time native.

[Damião de Góis]

Only as much as R1b is Chadian ;)

You could say it's asian in origin:

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/60_Genetics/R1bHgMigration.jpg

But as for C, i have no idea of its distribution in Europe. It's usually identified as being East Asian or American:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/C%3DM130-Migration.jpg

[Longbowman]

You could say it's asian in origin:

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/60_Genetics/R1bHgMigration.jpg

But as for C, i have no idea of its distribution in Europe. It's usually identified as being East Asian or American:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/C%3DM130-Migration.jpg

Most people think R1b is West Asian. The Chadian population is the result of a fairly recent migration, like C in America. Hence the parallel.

[Empecinado]

Empecinado, do you know if any of the same individuals were shown more than once? It is likely many played on multiple sports teams in the same town.

Probably some, but not many.

[Fire Haired]

That's not nice. Mainly they try to restrict dna testing to multigenerational natives and less cosmopolitan areas. In places like france and germany it's still hard to be sure you are dealing with long time native.

It was a joke.

[Fire Haired]

That most DNA tests are done on village-folk? Because they usually ask for people from rural areas with 4 grandparents from the same area for reference populations, Homophobe.

How is hating Jews homophobic. Are you calling Jews gay? I was just joking anyways.

[Longbowman]

It was a joke.

...are you sure?

Perhaps brush up on your knowledge of jokes ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

[Longbowman]

How is hating Jews homophobic. Are you calling Jews gay? I was just joking anyways.

Oh, it was unrelated to the Jew thing, I wasn't going to call you 'Gentile,' that would have been weird.

[Fire Haired]

Most people think R1b is West Asian. The Chadian population is the result of a fairly recent migration, like C in America. Hence the parallel.

C is probably Eurasian that's it. I think C1a2-V20 though was brought to Europe way way way back by a non west Eurasian people.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

You could say it's asian in origin:

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/60_Genetics/R1bHgMigration.jpg

But as for C, i have no idea of its distribution in Europe. It's usually identified as being East Asian or American:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/C%3DM130-Migration.jpg

I'd say it's probably proto-mongol. It's not really asian, not really caucasian.

[Longbowman]

C is probably Eurasian that's it. I think C1a2-V20 though was brought to Europe way way way back by a non west Eurasian people.

Agreed.

[Insuperable]

You could say it's asian in origin:

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/60_Genetics/R1bHgMigration.jpg

But as for C, i have no idea of its distribution in Europe. It's usually identified as being East Asian or American:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/C%3DM130-Migration.jpg

Regarding C in general it can be said probably by now it is a Eurasian haplogroup with highest frequencies in eastern parts of Asia representing one of the first people to leave Africa along shores of Indian Ocean diverging from some point.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#C

[Argang]

Most people think R1b is West Asian. The Chadian population is the result of a fairly recent migration, like C in America. Hence the parallel.

C1a has two subclades according to most recent tree, C1a2 is found in Europe (La Brana is assumed to be this or close to it) and its closest "brother clade" C1a1 is found in Japan.

It's interesting that they are so far from each other.

[Fire Haired]

I can't believe some people thought I was being raciest towards Jews or something.

[Longbowman]

I can't believe some people thought I was being raciest towards Jews or something.

Fair enough. Water under the bridge, Non-Jew :)

[Black Wolf]

Women don't have to have male roles to be important in society. Women naturally are different from men and so have different roles in society(you can see related but different instinct in other mammals). I don't see a high possibility that in any human society women have been the warriors, main hunters, and leaders. All of those roles need a lot of aggression and we know men naturally have more aggression than women. That is why still today in a much more gender equal society men are still the main leaders. I do think there is a good chance women could have taken roles men usually take. Maybe in hunter gatherer society there is a better chance that will be the case. We should do research on modern hunter gatherers.

Why do you think there are so many female teachers in schools(under high school)? It is because women naturally are better with children. I may be wrong on that I just know that in my grade school(pre K-8th) almost all the teachers were female. When I was at day cares or whatever as a little kid I never had one male teacher. Even my baby sitters were all female.

I am not talking about women being the leaders 100%. But there are societies throughout the world in which clan identity and marital residence and such went through the female line. They are not as common as patrilineal societies but they did and do exist still.

[Jackson]

I am not talking about women being the leaders 100%. But there are societies throughout the world in which clan identity and marital residence and such went through the female line. They are not as common as patrilineal societies but they did and do exist still.

In some tribes of far eastern Europe and western central Asia, 20% of 'warrior' burials were female. And it was not just a cultural thing, as a number of them clearly showed healed trauma that fits with combat. Also historical references to 'Amazons'. That's just off the top of my head though so haven't got any data to hand. Generally though that's the exception rather than the rule, afaik.

[Fire Haired]

In some tribes of far eastern Europe and western central Asia, 20% of 'warrior' burials were female. And it was not just a cultural thing, as a number of them clearly showed healed trauma that fits with combat. Also historical references to 'Amazons'. That's just off the top of my head though so haven't got any data to hand. Generally though that's the exception rather than the rule, afaik.

If that state is true it is surprising. I was taught that amazons were real in School and besides it is just a story probably exaggerated.

[Jackson]

If that state is true it is surprising. I was taught that amazons were real in School and besides it is just a story probably exaggerated.

Yeah it's true, but like i say it's the exception rather than the rule. An example that, sometimes, women fulfilled the roles of warriors and hunters, but generally they tended not to.

[Fire Haired]

Yeah it's true, but like i say it's the exception rather than the rule. An example that, sometimes, women fulfilled the roles of warriors and hunters, but generally they tended not to.

We agree then.

[Empecinado]

Here we had some female bandits called "Serranas".

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BxatJFgIKWU/UTYqsjiIRpI/AAAAAAAABKk/EOKhxdMmhK8/s1600/Margarita+Cisneros.jpg

[Atlantic Islander]

Just to add the the discussion about women warriors:



The Bracari were an ancient Celtic tribe of Gallaecia, akin to the Calaicians or Gallaeci, living in the northwest of modern Portugal, in the province of Minho, between the rivers Tâmega and Cávado, around the area of the modern city of Braga (the Roman Bracara Augusta).

Appian wrote they were a very warlike people. According to him, The Bracari women warriors fought defending their town "never turning, never ever showing their backs, or uttering a cry", preferring death to captivity.

It has been long known that they spoke a Celtic language, as can be seen in the inscription dedicated to the goddess Nabia at Braga's Fonte do Ídolo (Portuguese for the Fountain of the Idol), or in the name of their town Tongobriga (in Marco de Canaveses).

At the beginning of the 1st century, the Citânia de Briteiros was their political main hill fort and seat of the "consilium gentis". It is possible that the Celtic Nemetati were an allied tribe of the Bracari, known previously as Kallaikoi.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

The 'patrirchy' nonsense comes from relatively modern times (first being athenian greeks). Europe before then was very egalitarian towards women, and easterners with european blood like iranians as well. Spartans had extensive rights for women and looked more western, athenians treated them like dirt which originates in east asia and africa.

[Empecinado]

However, Feminism is not "matriarchal". It's antimatriarcal, because is born against mothers and motherhood. Authentic northern Spanish matriarchs like my great-grandmother deeply despised feminism, feminists and all the liberal dogmas.

[Fire Haired]

The 'patrirchy' nonsense comes from relatively modern times (first being athenian greeks). Europe before then was very egalitarian towards women, and easterners with european blood like iranians as well. Spartans had extensive rights for women and looked more western, athenians treated them like dirt which originates in east asia and africa.

I can already tell you have a very biased opinion. Look around you almost every human society is male lead. You really think it is recent?

[Longbowman]

I can already tell you have a very biased opinion. Look around you almost every human society is male lead. You really think it is recent?

How do you define male-lead?

[Fire Haired]

Just to add the the discussion about women warriors

SHUT UP WOMAN!! FEED AND PLEASURE YOUR MALE MASTERS NOW!!!!! Stop typing and fulfill your female duties such as child bearing, milking children, taking care of young children, cooking and cleaning, etc. I pray to Zeus you will give birth to many great warriors(male) for your people and female servants/slaves such as yourself. If you keep up this attitude I will have you sacrificed to the Gods. I was frozen over 2,000 years ago and was just thawed about 50 years ago. In that time I have learned to speak and write in English. I am disgusted by western culture. The men are weak and let their women control them.

From: King Leonidas aka most mainly man in history.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43958&d=1390868799:

Sorry, everyone my family has been close friends with Leonidas since he was thawed about 50 years ago. My grandfather taught him to read and write and English. He must have jumped on the computer while I was taking a dump.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I can already tell you have a very biased opinion. Look around you almost every human society is male lead. You really think it is recent?

Yes it is recent, and we know when it started....

[Prisoner Of Ice]

However, Feminism is not "matriarchal". It's antimatriarcal, because is born against mothers and motherhood. Authentic northern Spanish matriarchs like my great-grandmother deeply despised feminism, feminists and all the liberal dogmas.

Yeah, it's nothing to do with 'feminism' which I find to be sexist and retarded.

[Fire Haired]

Yes it is recent, and we know when it started....

You make a lot of big claims Melonhead but never give any sources.

[Äijä]

If that state is true it is surprising. I was taught that amazons were real in School and besides it is just a story probably exaggerated.

Finland has also women warrior graves and you have historical accounts also in North and East Europe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shieldmaiden

[Black Wolf]

True strong patriarchal and patrilineal societies that were almost completely male dominated probably only came about during the Neolithic and later. Before that the gender roles were probably more balanced.

[Stimpy]

Intresting that he shows most genetic simmilarity to Scandinavians and not to modern Iberians at all.


Man, dubbed La Brana 1, also shows similarity to Scandinavian DNA

La Brana 1 shows genetic similarities to Scandinavians and also shared a common ancestor with people who lived in Siberia more than 20,000 years ago.

Despite La Brana 1's dark colour, the research revealed genetic similarities with Scandinavians from Sweden and Finland.

[Äijä]

Intresting that he shows most genetic simmilarity to Scandinavians and not to modern Iberians at all.




He looks Tydal, I've heard people having theories of them being the original Europeans, maybe they were right.
One of his grandchildren? :)
http://img806.imageshack.us/img806/8269/martinsolem.jpg

They should use Fennoscandia but I am not offended. ;)

[Fire Haired]

True strong patriarchal and patrilineal societies that were almost completely male dominated probably only came about during the Neolithic and later. Before that the gender roles were probably more balanced.

A bit of an assumption. What evidence do you have Neolithic somehow spread very male lead society all over the place? Gender roles are gender roles women don't have to be men to be equal. I know it isn't that simple but basically that's how it works.

[Fire Haired]

They should use Fennoscandia but I am not offended. ;)

The distribution of Mesolithic like skulls almost perfectly match's the distribution of Mesolithic European ancestry(based on autosomal DNA), light hair-eyes-skin. It is strange that both Loschbour and La Brana-1 had blue eyes but black hair and dark(debated) skin.

http://img1.picload.org/image/lroorlw/whg-stuff.jpg

[Black Wolf]

A bit of an assumption. What evidence do you have Neolithic somehow spread very male lead society all over the place? Gender roles are gender roles women don't have to be men to be equal. I know it isn't that simple but basically that's how it works.

And what evidence do you have that all human societies were male dominated or lead before the Neolithic?

[Prisoner Of Ice]

A bit of an assumption. What evidence do you have Neolithic somehow spread very male lead society all over the place? Gender roles are gender roles women don't have to be men to be equal. I know it isn't that simple but basically that's how it works.

No, it's not assumption, we have in depth descriptions of celts and germanics, basques and nordics, and even in church's time they were very upset with them for failing to be patriarchal enough. Letting women own property etc.

It's like the celtic language thing, it's just historical fact.

[Fire Haired]

No, it's not assumption, we have in depth descriptions of celts and germanics, basques and nordics, and even in church's time they were very upset with them for failing to be patriarchal enough. Letting women own property etc.

It's like the celtic language thing, it's just historical fact.

I can't trust anything you say because you have an agenda for almost everything. Where the Celts lesbian warriors? Human society is naturally very male lead that is just fact, deal with it. I am not saying women cant have leadership positions but generally men take leadership role. It gets so annoying when people think I am sexiest for saying that even though its the truth.

[Graham]

Clan leaders and feudal lords were male dominated. Even now large land owners are male dominated.

[Hevo]

Here we had some female bandits called "Serranas".

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BxatJFgIKWU/UTYqsjiIRpI/AAAAAAAABKk/EOKhxdMmhK8/s1600/Margarita+Cisneros.jpg

Looks badass.

[Fire Haired]

And what evidence do you have that all human societies were male dominated or lead before the Neolithic?

I don't even try to find evidence because when I see it is no big deal just like when I see a spear head.

Melonhead,

How do you explain most cave paintings and figurines(I have book about it) from pre-Neolithic Europe depicting big predators or animals like mammoths and naked women in very sexual poses? Who do you think painted and sculpted them men or women? In some the hunters have very visual pennies and in all no breasts proving their male. It is debatable whether all of those depictions of women are a form of pornography.

You see the same male and female roles in schools and in places were people were not effected the same way as people were in the Neolithic. It is a very feminist idea that modern gender roles or behavior differences are recent. It is also apart of the Marxism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism) aka anti human nature philosophy. Are peeing and eating also recent mr. Marx? Is hunting recent did we used to live in harmony with animals?

I am not saying probably what some of you think I am saying. Of course gender roles are not easily defined. You can women whatever but generally in human society men do certain things and act certain ways and women do certain things and act certain ways. That has been my point and I think most of you agree with me.

[Empecinado]

Looks badass.

Margarita Cisneros, she was forced to marry and after killing her husband moved to the mountains to run away from justice, where she robbed and killed all who resisted (13 persons), finally was sentenced to death in 1852. Not an easy girl, lol.

[Äijä]

No, it's not assumption, we have in depth descriptions of celts and germanics, basques and nordics, and even in church's time they were very upset with them for failing to be patriarchal enough. Letting women own property etc.

It's like the celtic language thing, it's just historical fact.

The church took the old cultures backwards, women and individuals had in many way better rights, naturally the old model was not good for more centralised rule and taxation

[Harkonnen]

I don't what the hell you are arguing about. Of course there were gender roles in Paleo societies and leaders were men, likely so. I think the point is that the societies weren't as rigid as compared to neolithic ones. These peoples were mobile and they were not so much tied to land & property, so if necessity asked it women could took part in the male sphere activities. People were just more egalitarian in general.

[Fire Haired]

Clan leaders and feudal lords were male dominated. Even now large land owners are male dominated.

Are you apart of some clan? I have some Scottish(lowlands from what I know) ancestry and still trying to find out if any of my ancestors were apart of certain clans. I have relatives who say they have the family tartan or something(doubt it is legit).

[Fire Haired]

The church took the old cultures backwards, women and individuals had in many way better rights, naturally the old model was not good for more centralised rule and taxation

Again with your biased hate that has anything to do with Christianity. I cant trust I think you say that is in subject of religion because it is full of biased agenda.

[Graham]

Nah clans have long since gone. From 17th and 18th Century. When the leaders of the borders were transported hung and chased. Then the Highland clans banned later and changed to landlords.

[Äijä]

Again with your biased hate that has anything to do with Christianity. I cant trust I think you say that is in subject of religion because it is full of biased agenda.

Well the church robbed land, wealth, killed and tortured people, that is a historical fact. Funny how historians agree that people had better standard of living before the church showed up.

[Fire Haired]

Well the church robbed land, wealth, killed and tortured people, that is a historical fact. Funny how historians agree that people had better standard of living before the church showed up.

The history of the conversion of Christianity in Europe is a million times more complicated than you say. When any one gains power and is connected to civilization they end up winning and oppressing at times. Why do you think we have no writings from Pagens? The Christians were much more advanced and connected with the Meditreaen world. You and many others ignore the fact that Christianity has received more willing converts than any religion. Jesus himself said preach to all nations. Early Christians were oppressed and after converting so many people across the Meditreaen and deep into Europe, Africa, and Asia Christianity had gained political power(which never turns out good). In no way do any Christians who committed any of these crimes represent what Jesus and the apostles taught. You have a deeper hate for Christians than almost any modern Christians have for ancient pagens.

You have a inaccurate view of Christianity and pagens. The whole modern idea of pagens is not who any of them were. First start out with they were human and work your way up from there.

[Fire Haired]

Nah clans have long since gone. From 17th and 18th Century. When the leaders of the borders were transported hung and chased. Then the Highland clans banned later and changed to landlords.

Okay, well I thought there were still clans. Did Scotland split from the United Kingdom? I never watch the news.

[Graham]

no. :P

[Fire Haired]

no. :P

That sucks!!!! Did you want Scotland to split from the UK? I kind of did even though it wasn't exactly a good idea. What were the vote percentages?

[Longbowman]

That sucks!!!! Did you want Scotland to split from the UK? I kind of did even though it wasn't exactly a good idea. What were the vote percentages?

The vote will be in the autumn :picard1:

[Äijä]

The crazy thing is that the independence side wants to join EU also, oxymoron.

[Black Wolf]

It is starting to look like the common shared ancestry among indigenous European Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Upper Paleolithic Siberian sample MA-1 may be related to mtDNA haplogroup U. The Y-DNA seems to be more diverse but they when it comes to mtDNA they are all members of haplogroup U.

[Longbowman]

It is starting to look like the common shared ancestry among indigenous European Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Upper Paleolithic Siberian sample MA-1 may be mtDNA haplogroup U. The Y-DNA seems to be more diverse but they when it comes to mtDNA they are all members of haplogroup U.

And gloriously, noble yet primitive U would later spawn K, that most superior of mtDNA groups.

[Pure ja]

What is borreby. I looked some stuff up about it and I saw a map covering land from Belgium to Denmark and pictures of European people with wide noses. The wide noses and other facial features got me interested because most people in my family have much wider noses than average Europeans.

Grownups usually explain that to their children as a result of excessive nosepicking ;-)
Estonians even talk about nose mining ;-) (kaevur Mati = miner Mathias)

On the other hand, open nose canals are very important for any physical activity. Some cross-country skiers even use clamps to widen their nose during ski races.

[Black Wolf]

And gloriously, noble yet primitive U would later spawn K, that most superior of mtDNA groups.

Yes think of yourself as our more advanced Neolithic cousin Massa Long. :P

[Fire Haired]

Grownups usually explain that to their children as a result of excessive nosepicking ;-)
Estonians even talk about nose mining ;-) (kaevur Mati = miner Mathias)

On the other hand, open nose canals are very important for any physical activity. Some cross-country skiers even use clamps to widen their nose during ski races.

It is a trait in most of my family. I have heard Mesolithic Europeans had wider noses than most modern.

[Fire Haired]

The vote will be in the autumn :picard1:

If I was Scottish I would 110% for it but if I was English I would be 110% against it. If I was English I would be furious.

[Longbowman]

If I was Scottish I would 110% for it but if I was English I would be 110% against it. If I was English I would be furious.

Luckily the actual Scots don't seem to be going for it.

[Longbowman]

Yes think of yourself as our more advanced Neolithic cousin Massa Long. :P

I do, Jax, faithful House Armie.

[Fire Haired]

It is starting to look like the common shared ancestry among indigenous European Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Upper Paleolithic Siberian sample MA-1 may be related to mtDNA haplogroup U. The Y-DNA seems to be more diverse but they when it comes to mtDNA they are all members of haplogroup U.

Yeh, but MA1 was apart of his own subclade which has not been found in any modern samples. mtDNA U is found all over west Eurasia and north Africa and also in south Asia. Y DNA I, C1a2-V20, and F-96 for Upper Palaeolithic Europe makes sense to me. Such early splits from the Eurasian source as C1a2-V20 and F-96 suggests those two haplogroups come from some of the earliest human migrations into Europe around 40,000-50,000 years ago while IJ or I may have come later. I know that MA1 was just as related to east Eurasians as the European hunter gatherers Loschbour and the Motolas but i don't think there is a close relation with WHG and ANE. It seems La Brana-1 had some ANE ancestry like the hunter gatherer Motola12 from Sweden but Loschbour did not.

[Black Wolf]

Yeh, but MA1 was apart of his own subclade which has not been found in any modern samples. mtDNA U is found all over west Eurasia and north Africa and also in south Asia. Y DNA I, C1a2-V20, and F-96 for Upper Palaeolithic Europe makes sense to me. Such early splits from the Eurasian source as C1a2-V20 and F-96 suggests those two haplogroups come from some of the earliest human migrations into Europe around 40,000-50,000 years ago while IJ or I may have come later. I know that MA1 was just as related to east Eurasians as the European hunter gatherers Loschbour and the Motolas but i don't think there is a close relation with WHG and ANE. It seems La Brana-1 had some ANE ancestry like the hunter gatherer Motola12 from Sweden but Loschbour did not.

WHo knows at this point really still? I was just pointing out a possible link.

[Fire Haired]

And gloriously, noble yet primitive U would later spawn K, that most superior of mtDNA groups.

U8b in the near east became K it had long split from U5, U4, U2e, U*'s, and U8(at least in the upper Palaeolithic) in Europe. K has probably been in hunter gatherers longer than it has been in farmers. Now a days most K members in Europe are lazy bums who buy food(just a joke) so not farmers.

I bet me and Jaxman have many ancestors from Mesolithic central-west Europe who looked something like this. Of course not the mothers who gave us our mtDNA U5b2a2 and U5b2c1. Tall, muscular, hunters.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=TDPRjpsq0a7WOM&tbnid=nwTCEwys70W__M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthe-rioblog.blogspot.com%2F2011_10_01_archive.html&ei=xy_oUte-FMqYqAH7gIHYCA&bvm=bv.60157871,d.aWM&psig=AFQjCNFieiB1z9VRBfTjGmZHEF_HaEfdZw&ust=1391034690936368

Here are your short and gracile, weak, farmer mtDNA K bearing ancestors.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=q8sAW-fDCgZHVM&tbnid=OP1DGxFt5B-PlM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mysocialstudiesteacher.com%2F timelines%2FNeolithic%2F&ei=MTDoUtqJBsmOrAGx1IH4Dw&bvm=bv.60157871,d.aWM&psig=AFQjCNF0VoG8HiXgFIBI5mL5Yk9wzyi4ng&ust=1391034780877823

[Fire Haired]

WHo knows at this point really still? I was just pointing out a possible link.

Davidski and other posters at Eurogenes think there is a strong relation. I know the mtDNA U could be a link but I was just pointing out the haplogroup is more complicated than=hunter gatherer. La Brana-1 and Motola12 seem to have had a lot of MA1 related ancestry so they were connected to each other probably mixed oftenly.

[Fire Haired]

I do, Jax, faithful House Armie.

Think of yourself as our weaker long lost cousin. Real men hunt and gather for their food, weak men raise their meat to be slaughtered and control plants. You darn farmers softened the world.

[Longbowman]

Think of yourself as our weaker long lost cousin. Real men hunt and gather for their food, weak men raise their meat to be slaughtered and control plants. You darn farmers softened the world.

If you were so tough, how come we won? Come on man, it wasn't even difficult. #Kpride #E1b1bpride

K is just as native to Europe as U is. They both came in from west Asia. K1a is western European, too - predates R for sure. Say K was spawned from a wayward branch of U, which is not necessarily the case, it still has U's history.

Besides, U8 is most common amongst Basques - original Europeans - and Italians.


Haplogroup K makes up a sizeable fraction of European and West Asian mtDNA lineages. It is now known it is actually a subclade of haplogroup U8b'K,[5] and is believed to have first arisen in northeastern Italy. Haplogroup UK shows some evidence of being highly protective against AIDS progression.[21]


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1523212/

You're like, our elder sister. Except less cool.

[Black Wolf]

Davidski and other posters at Eurogenes think there is a strong relation. I know the mtDNA U could be a link but I was just pointing out the haplogroup is more complicated than=hunter gatherer. La Brana-1 and Motola12 seem to have had a lot of MA1 related ancestry so they were connected to each other probably mixed oftenly.

Yes it is probably much more complex than just mtDNA haplogroup U. As Longbowman pointed out even K is distantly related to U and we know that K is Neolithic in Europe while the European U subclades such as U5, U4 and U2 are Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic in Europe.

[Fire Haired]

Yes it is probably much more complex than just mtDNA haplogroup U. As Longbowman pointed out even K is distantly related to U and we know that K is Neolithic in Europe while the European U subclades such as U5, U4 and U2 are Upper Palelithic/Mesolithic in Europe.

We understand each other now.

[Longbowman]

Yes it is probably much more complex than just mtDNA haplogroup U. As Longbowman pointed out even K is distantly related to U and we know that K is Neolithic in Europe while the European U subclades such as U5, U4 and U2 are Upper Palelithic/Mesolithic in Europe.

Distantly? It's a direct descendant. We're the new generation of indigenous Europeans. Get out the way, Grampa.

[Black Wolf]

Distantly? It's a direct descendant. We're the new generation of indigenous Europeans. Get out the way, Grampa.

Ahhh I should have said that you are a very distant maternal line cousin of us U5 people.

[Longbowman]

Ahhh I should have said that you are a very distant maternal line cousin of us U5 people.

Oh, yeah. You guys are like, our great-aunt.

[Black Wolf]

Oh, yeah. You guys are like, our great-aunt.

Who can bench press much more than you. :P

[Longbowman]

Who can bench press much more than you. :P

I'm 20. I have not yet hit my peak :rolleyes:

Teach me your ways, Auntie.

[Black Wolf]

I'm 20. I have not yet hit my peak :rolleyes:

Teach me your ways, Auntie.

Alright little niece what would you like to know?

[Prisoner Of Ice]

If you were so tough, how come we won? Come on man, it wasn't even difficult. #Kpride #E1b1bpride

K is just as native to Europe as U is. They both came in from west Asia. K1a is western European, too - predates R for sure. Say K was spawned from a wayward branch of U, which is not necessarily the case, it still has U's history.

Besides, U8 is most common amongst Basques - original Europeans - and Italians.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1523212/

You're like, our elder sister. Except less cool.

Aside from K coming from west asia, I don't think any of that is really true.

[Fire Haired]

Distantly? It's a direct descendant. We're the new generation of indigenous Europeans. Get out the way, Grampa.



Your the people who invaded and conquered most of Europe and destroyed the native cultures and way of live. mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e dominate hunter gatherers such as La Brana-1 and Loschbour were very happy and farmers who had lineages such as K ruined it. Do you think European nations who were colonizing the Americas had the right to say that to the native Americans because they were much more advanced.

That was of course all a joke. I don't think anyone really knows how the farmers spread. I know that I have probably as much farmer ancestry overall as you do.

mtDNA K has been in Europe for at least 9,000 years that isn't new by most people's standards. If anything third world immigrants to Europe and the new generation of indigenous Europeans.

[Longbowman]

Aside from K coming from west asia, I don't think any of that is really true.

Any of what?

Studies have is coming from western Europe.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I can't trust anything you say because you have an agenda for almost everything. Where the Celts lesbian warriors? Human society is naturally very male lead that is just fact, deal with it. I am not saying women cant have leadership positions but generally men take leadership role. It gets so annoying when people think I am sexiest for saying that even though its the truth.

My lesbian agenda is rearing its head again.

I don't have an agenda, that's probably why the stuff I say sounds strange to you. Mostly I poke holes in other people's BS more than anything, and there's lots of it. But you can just read some books to look this up it's not much in dispute.

[Longbowman]

Your the people who invaded and conquered most of Europe and destroyed the native cultures and way of live. mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e dominate hunter gatherers such as La Brana-1 and Loschbour were very happy and farmers who had lineages such as K ruined it. Do you think European nations who were colonizing the Americas had the right to say that to the native Americans because they were much more advanced.

That was of course all a joke. I don't think anyone really knows how the farmers spread. I know that I have probably as much farmer ancestry overall as you do.

mtDNA K has been in Europe for at least 9,000 years that isn't new by most people's standards. If anything third world immigrants to Europe and the new generation of indigenous Europeans.

Whatever, grandma. We're the new kids on the block.

U has only been here longer than K in the same way my mum's been here longer than I have :rolleyes:

[Fire Haired]

Oh, yeah. You guys are like, our great-aunt.

No more like something like 7th cousins. If I got a more expensive test it would turn out to be something like 10th cousins. The first K women were probably slaves who were constantly raped by their masters and the children were raped as they got older, and so on all the way to you.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Clan leaders and feudal lords were male dominated. Even now large land owners are male dominated.

Patriarchy developed at same time as farming, basically.

[Black Wolf]

Your the people who invaded and conquered most of Europe and destroyed the native cultures and way of live. mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e dominate hunter gatherers such as La Brana-1 and Loschbour were very happy and farmers who had lineages such as K ruined it. Do you think European nations who were colonizing the Americas had the right to say that to the native Americans because they were much more advanced.

That was of course all a joke. I don't think anyone really knows how the farmers spread. I know that I have probably as much farmer ancestry overall as you do.

mtDNA K has been in Europe for at least 9,000 years that isn't new by most people's standards. If anything third world immigrants to Europe and the new generation of indigenous Europeans.

Basically for this discussion U5, U4 and U2e are Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic origin in Europe while K is Neolithic.

[Longbowman]

No more like something like 7th cousins. If I got a more expensive test it would turn out to be something like 10th cousins. The first K women were probably slaves who were constantly raped by their masters and the children were raped as they got older, and so on all the way to you.

U in general, I meant.

From slaves to masters!

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I don't even try to find evidence because when I see it is no big deal just like when I see a spear head.

Melonhead,

How do you explain most cave paintings and figurines(I have book about it) from pre-Neolithic Europe depicting big predators or animals like mammoths and naked women in very sexual poses? Who do you think painted and sculpted them men or women? In some the hunters have very visual pennies and in all no breasts proving their male. It is debatable whether all of those depictions of women are a form of pornography.

You see the same male and female roles in schools and in places were people were not effected the same way as people were in the Neolithic. It is a very feminist idea that modern gender roles or behavior differences are recent. It is also apart of the Marxism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism) aka anti human nature philosophy. Are peeing and eating also recent mr. Marx? Is hunting recent did we used to live in harmony with animals?

I am not saying probably what some of you think I am saying. Of course gender roles are not easily defined. You can women whatever but generally in human society men do certain things and act certain ways and women do certain things and act certain ways. That has been my point and I think most of you agree with me.

Again, we know who painted them, it was women. La scaux was painted by neanderthal women, you can tell because of the handprints.

The OMG SEXUAL paintings of women are images of female goddesses. It's only modern retards who have decided that sex is exploitive to women.

[cally]

Whatever, grandma. We're the new kids on the block.

:lol: you're awesome

[Fire Haired]

Whatever, grandma. We're the new kids on the block.

U has only been here longer than K in the same way my mum's been here longer than I have :rolleyes:

I believe the phrase is spelled mom not mum:picard2:. You must be proud of your maternal line that is full of rape victims of evil farmers who conquered land from Greece-Ireland-Ukraine-Portugal. If there is a man with typical farmer Y DNA E1b1b V13 or G2a get your sister and mother and hide them. Oh snap I just realized your Y DNA haplogroup is E1b1b V13!!!!!! It's to late.

Here is some advise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHpluwP328A&feature=player_detailpage

[Black Wolf]

Again, we know who painted them, it was women. La scaux was painted by neanderthal women, you can tell because of the handprints.

The OMG SEXUAL paintings of women are images of female goddesses. It's only modern retards who have decided that sex is exploitive to women.

The Venus figurines and paintings of women could have easily been made to show the powerful status that women had in these societies. The Venus figurines look like they are all pregnant. They are probably linked to fertility rights and show that women are the ''life givers'' of a society. I have no doubt in my mind really that women were quite powerful in Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic human societies. The Neolithic revolution and farming changed that largely.

[Fire Haired]

Patriarchy developed at same time as farming, basically.

I know I seem sexiest and that is because like most people I get frustrated with people who dis agree with me. That is an assumption and I totally dis agree. It is hard to define patriarchy anyways. Basically men usually do male like things women usually do women like things.

[Weedman]

The Venus figurines and paintings of women could have easily been made to show the powerful status that women had in these societies. The Venus figurines look like they are all pregnant. They are probably linked to fertility rights and show that women are the ''life givers'' of a society. I have no doubt in my mind really that women were quite powerful in Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic human societies. The Neolithic revolution and farming changed that largely.

in most neolithic European societies ,a person's lineage was counted through the maternal line.
what clan you belonged to, the "royal" line, etc... was all counted through the mother

the Indo-Europeans changed that because their society/lineage was paternal. The differences were even shown in the religious practices/beliefs of pre-Indo European and Indo-European groups.

[Fire Haired]

The Venus figurines and paintings of women could have easily been made to show the powerful status that women had in these societies. The Venus figurines look like they are all pregnant. They are probably linked to fertility rights and show that women are the ''life givers'' of a society. I have no doubt in my mind really that women were quite powerful in Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic human societies. The Neolithic revolution and farming changed that largely.

I don't understand the idea women were powerful. Why do people even think about gender roles. Just live naturally. If it happens men are usually the leaders let it go. I doubt any society thinks about gender roles in the way we do.

The Venus statues and paintings have very exaggerated body parts some are in poses.

[Fire Haired]

in most neolithic European societies ,a person's lineage was counted through the maternal line.
what clan you belonged to, the "royal" line, etc... was all counted through the mother

the Indo-Europeans changed that because their society/lineage was paternal. The differences were even shown in the religious practices/beliefs of pre-Indo European and Indo-European groups.

The first mistake you made is you act as if you know everything about these pre historic people. Counting by the maternal line doesn't mean women were like men in our society. Women don't have to be men to be equal. That is what so many people don't understand.

[Black Wolf]

in most neolithic European societies ,a person's lineage was counted through the maternal line.
what clan you belonged to, the "royal" line, etc... was all counted through the mother

the Indo-Europeans changed that because their society/lineage was paternal. The differences were even shown in the religious practices/beliefs of pre-Indo European and Indo-European groups.

It actually seems more likely now that the Neolithic farmers such as the LBK people were not matrilineal and matrilocal but patrilineal and patrilocal. Goes along in ways with the Neolithic revolution being the time when men started to gain much more power over women. Check the link below.

http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2012/05/rip-matrilocal-egalitarian-early.html

[Black Wolf]

I don't understand the idea women were powerful. Why do people even think about gender roles. Just live naturally. If it happens men are usually the leaders let it go. I doubt any society thinks about gender roles in the way we do.

The Venus statues and paintings have very exaggerated body parts some are in poses.

Powerful as in high social status within a group. Men may be the leaders but the clan identity may be through the mother. It is a possibility for these early societies.

[Fire Haired]

It actually seems more likely now that the Neolithic farmers such as the LBK people were not matrilineal and matrilocal but patrilineal and patrilocal. Goes along in ways with the Neolithic revolution being the time when men started to gain much more power over women. Check the link below.

http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2012/05/rip-matrilocal-egalitarian-early.html

When men gained power over women? Do some research on hip-hop culture look at any form of sub cultures. Naturally the men are the masculine ones and the leaders, that's just fact. People keep pushing the feminist argument because they feel as if it offends women or something.

[Fire Haired]

Powerful as in high social status within a group. Men may be the leaders but the clan identity may be through the mother. It is a possibility for these early societies.

I guess it is possible but the idea that men and women were seen very differently in any society is unlikely.

[Longbowman]

:lol: you're awesome

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2013/197/f/d/and_i_love_you_random_citizen_by_mamsreaction-d6dova6.png

[Longbowman]

I believe the phrase is spelled mom not mum:picard2:. You must be proud of your maternal line that is full of rape victims of evil farmers who conquered land from Greece-Ireland-Ukraine-Portugal. If there is a man with typical farmer Y DNA E1b1b V13 or G2a get your sister and mother and hide them. Oh snap I just realized your Y DNA haplogroup is E1b1b V13!!!!!! It's to late.

Here is some advise

I'm proud of being from a line of winners and hot people, yeah.

What about you? You're the real invaders, R. You didn't even bring anything of value. Filthy Asiatic pigdogs, stealing our women.

[Black Wolf]

I guess it is possible but the idea that men and women were seen very differently in any society is unlikely.

What do you mean? These societies are removed from us by thousands and thousands of years. People throughout time are not the same as we are today in all ways.

[Black Wolf]

When men gained power over women? Do some research on hip-hop culture look at any form of sub cultures. Naturally the men are the masculine ones and the leaders, that's just fact. People keep pushing the feminist argument because they feel as if it offends women or something.

Women probably had more of a say in matters prior to the Neolithic. As I said clan identity and such in some groups may have even been through the female line. Things may not have always been the same way as they are today. How about thinking a bit outside the box for once chum.

[Longbowman]

Women probably had more of a say in matters prior to the Neolithic. As I said clan identity and such in some groups may have even been through the female line. Things may not have always been the same way as they are today. How about thinking a bit outside the box for once chum.

Jews have this, but they didn't originally.

[Fire Haired]

Women probably had more of a say in matters prior to the Neolithic. As I said clan identity and such in some groups may have even been through the female line. Things may not have always been the same way as they are today. How about thinking a bit outside the box for once chum.

I see what your saying. Research on modern hunter gatherers may help out. I am responding to somewhat crazy feminist who think there is either no difference between men and women or that men should all be dead. I have built up anger.

[Fire Haired]

What do you mean? These societies are removed from us by thousands and thousands of years. People throughout time are not the same as we are today in all ways.

It is a scientific fact men and women in our species have different behavior you see it all over the world.

[Fire Haired]

I'm proud of being from a line of winners and hot people, yeah.

What about you? You're the real invaders, R. You didn't even bring anything of value. Filthy Asiatic pigdogs, stealing our women.

Well my Y DNA R1b1a2a1a L11(R1b1a2a1a2a Df27?) line honorable conquered inferior people. Think about most Europeans being like Sardinia/Otzi/Stuttgart people. Disgusting right? We don't bring anything of value? Do some research. We were the dominate people of metal age Europe all the way to Siberia and India. Indo European language is the most popular language family in the world.

[Longbowman]

Well my Y DNA R1b1a2a1a L11(R1b1a2a1a2a Df27?) line honorable conquered inferior people. Think about most Europeans being like Sardinia/Otzi/Stuttgart people. Disgusting right? We don't bring anything of value? Do some research. We were the dominate people of metal age Europe all the way to Siberia and India. Indo European language is the most popular language family in the world.

Language is language. We brought agriculture and civilization. And our women are from Europe's most ancient lineages, only more progressive. You're not welcome here, newcomers.

[Fire Haired]

Language is language. We brought agriculture and civilization. And our women are from Europe's most ancient lineages, only more progressive.

The farmers probably had as much hunter gatherer y DNA as they had hunter gatherer mtDNA.


You're not welcome here, newcomers.

That's you guys told us in 3,000BC. Sorry but words don't stop us.

[Longbowman]

Language is language. We brought agriculture and civilization. And our women are from Europe's most ancient lineages, only more progressive.

The farmers probably had as much hunter gatherer y DNA as they had hunter gatherer mtDNA.

You're not welcome here, newcomers.

That's you guys told us in 3,000BC. Sorry but words don't stop us.

At least we can quote properly.

Face it. UK = noble indigenous women. U = old and backward. K = superior and progressive.

C/I = backwards unsophisticates.
E = agricultural civilisers.
G/J = E's servants
R = rapists.

[Fire Haired]

Whatever those are your classifications. I guess you like to be a Snob.

[Longbowman]

Whatever those are your classifications. I guess you like to be a Snob.

You guess correctly, backwards rapist :rolleyes:

[Black Wolf]

I see what your saying. Research on modern hunter gatherers may help out. I am responding to somewhat crazy feminist who think there is either no difference between men and women or that men should all be dead. I have built up anger.

Yes research on modern hunter-gatherers would help but we still will never know 100% how it was in these ancient pre-agricultural societies when it comes to social organization. As to built up anger I say ''don't we all''. :D

[Black Wolf]

It is a scientific fact men and women in our species have different behavior you see it all over the world.

Yes and people in different societies act differently than people in other ones. I don't see how men in hip-hop culture act the exact same as men in hunter-gatherer societies.

[Black Wolf]

Jews have this, but they didn't originally.

When did it come to the Jews? Religion being defined by the mother. I am curious about this.

[Longbowman]

When did it come to the Jews? Religion being defined by the mother. I am curious about this.

Sometime after the Exodus during the first millennium. Before the 6th century, it appears in religious texts after that.

[Black Wolf]

Sometime after the Exodus during the first millennium. Before the 6th century, it appears in religious texts after that.

Interesting. What was the reason for it? The change.

[Longbowman]

Interesting. What was the reason for it? The change.

Well the given answer is 'with all the rape that was going on, who knew who was truly a Jew by paternal descent?' but this seems ridiculous. Amongst other things, the change was effected throughout the Jewish religion, except Karaites. Presumably there was some catalyst where one guy complained of not being a Jew or whatever. You'll have to look it up though, I've never read the Talmud.

[Black Wolf]

Well the given answer is 'with all the rape that was going on, who knew who was truly a Jew by paternal descent?' but this seems ridiculous. Amongst other things, the change was effected throughout the Jewish religion, except Karaites. Presumably there was some catalyst where one guy complained of not being a Jew or whatever. You'll have to look it up though, I've never read the Talmud.

Hmmm cool thanks Massa Long. :P

[Fire Haired]

Yes research on modern hunter-gatherers would help but we still will never know 100% how it was in these ancient pre-agricultural societies when it comes to social organization. As to built up anger I say ''don't we all''. :D

It probably varied over time and in different hunter gatherer groups.

[Fire Haired]

Well the given answer is 'with all the rape that was going on, who knew who was truly a Jew by paternal descent?' but this seems ridiculous. Amongst other things, the change was effected throughout the Jewish religion, except Karaites. Presumably there was some catalyst where one guy complained of not being a Jew or whatever. You'll have to look it up though, I've never read the Talmud.

I know the answer to all this debate on who has a Jewish father or who has a Jewish mother. KILL THEM ALL.

Seriously though I doubt rape was so common enough it caused that major of a problem. If men have multiple wives and some have 10's of wives, one of their wives could cheat on them and have a child with another man. He wouldn't be able to find out she was missing for Dinner or whatever because he has to keep watch over so many women. Some kings had over a 1,000 wives and concubines I really doubt all the children produced were the king's.

[Longbowman]

I know the answer to all this debate on who has a Jewish father or who has a Jewish mother. KILL THEM ALL.

Be nice to the Jews. They'll mess with your credit ratings.

[Kadu]

That's you guys told us in 3,000BC. Sorry but words don't stop us.

Are you serious? I hope you know that you're as much of an HG as you are a farmer, genetically speaking of course...

[Pure ja]

I'm proud of being from a line of winners and hot people, yeah.


Who do you have in mind?
Britney? :p

[Pure ja]

Well my Y DNA R1b1a2a1a L11(R1b1a2a1a2a Df27?) line honorable conquered inferior people. Think about most Europeans being like Sardinia/Otzi/Stuttgart people. Disgusting right? We don't bring anything of value? Do some research. We were the dominate people of metal age Europe all the way to Siberia and India. Indo European language is the most popular language family in the world.

But not the brightest in PISA test results. Leave that to the finnics.

[Pure ja]

Language is language. We brought agriculture and civilization.


Civilisation as we know it has not become sustainable anywhere yet.
Unsustainables collapse sooner or later.

So thanks for nothing, in fact, thanks for less than nothing.

[Jackson]

Civilisation as we know it has not become sustainable anywhere yet.
Unsustainables collapse sooner or later.

So thanks for nothing, in fact, thanks for less than nothing.

That's true, civilization seems to have a 100% failure rate so far. :D

[Longbowman]

Who do you have in mind?
Britney? :p

Is Britney Spears hap. K?


Civilisation as we know it has not become sustainable anywhere yet.
Unsustainables collapse sooner or later.

So thanks for nothing, in fact, thanks for less than nothing.

:rolleyes:

Right.

Well, the Amish are pretty sustainable.

And even if everything were doomed, we brought you the trappings of luxury.

We set in place the system that would lead to electricity and the Internet.

So you're welcome.

[Pure ja]

We set in place the system that would lead to electricity and the Internet.


Static electricity can be produced by rubbing amber. We here on the shores of the Baltic Sea have had and used amber since 17 000 years ago. So that is for how long we have enjoyed electricity.

And you can get Internet by deploying ants.

And the art of rock paintings was also used as writings to coordinate prey hunting during paleolithic. So literacy is not that recent either.

[Longbowman]

[QUOTE]Static electricity can be produced by rubbing amber. We here on the shores of the Baltic Sea have had and used amber since 17 000 years ago. So that is for how long we have enjoyed electricity.

And yet for all those 17,000 years you did nothing and waited for the Anglosaxons to harness it for you.


And you can get Internet by deploying ants.


If it's so easy, how come you never got round to it?


And the art of rock paintings was also used as writings to coordinate prey hunting during paleolithic. So literacy is not that recent either.

Actually, this is A) a theory, and not a very good one, and B) not literacy.

[Pure ja]

[QUOTE=Pure ja;2343455]

Actually, this is A) a theory, and not a very good one, and B) not literacy.


It was literacy, in the very literary sense.

[Longbowman]

It was literacy, in the very literary sense.

literacy
ˈlɪt(ə)rəsi/Submit
noun
1.
the ability to read and write.
"tests of literacy and numeracy"
synonyms: ability to read and write, reading/writing ability, reading/writing proficiency; More

[Fire Haired]

Are you serious? I hope you know that you're as much of an HG as you are a farmer, genetically speaking of course...

It is very debatable how much WHG and EEF north-west European mixed people are. It could be more WHG and it could be more EEF. That admixture made by Laz 2013 doesn't give exact percentages of EEF and WHG plus EEF had some WHG admixture. My best guess is I have a little more EEF.

[Kadu]

It is very debatable how much WHG and EEF north-west European mixed people are. It could be more WHG and it could be more EEF. That admixture made by Laz 2013 doesn't give exact percentages of EEF and WHG plus EEF had some WHG admixture.


Other estimates were made some time ago, i.e. in Skoglund et al. 2012

44009

The white slices correlate very well with HG+ANE

[Fire Haired]

Other estimates were made some time ago, i.e. in Skoglund et al. 2012

44009

The white slices correlate very well with HG+ANE

That does seem pretty accurate to what Laz 2013 found. Through many different admixtures many people had an idea how hunter gatherer and farmer ancestry was distributed. Since Laz 2013 shows EEF came mainly from the same source as modern near easterns do extra near eastern ancestry especially in the Balkans and Italy are added to EEF. There may also be extra near eastern ancestry in other areas of Europe which really are not from early European farmers like Stuttgart.

[Jackson]

That does seem pretty accurate to what Laz 2013 found. Through many different admixtures many people had an idea how hunter gatherer and farmer ancestry was distributed. Since Laz 2013 shows EEF came mainly from the same source as modern near easterns do extra near eastern ancestry especially in the Balkans and Italy are added to EEF. There may also be extra near eastern ancestry in other areas of Europe which really are not from early European farmers like Stuttgart.

I guess it gets balanced out in the end, extra near eastern ancestry on one hand, but the EEF sample probably having a little WHG or WHG-like ancestry too.

[Fire Haired]

I guess it gets balanced out in the end, extra near eastern ancestry on one hand, but the EEF sample probably having a little WHG or WHG-like ancestry too.

That's true. EEF is probably raised by near eastern ancestry that is not from early European farmers and hunter gatherer ancestry that was in Stuttgart.

[Fire Haired]

Country or Region: Ethiopia (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ethiopia/@9.149175,40.498867,6z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x1635d0cedd6cfd2b:0x7bf6a 67f5348c55a), Population: NA, Region: Amhara (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Amhara/@11.2706336,38.0867403,8z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x16451ea0d04749c1:0xd28e8bf9f082f 4b3)

mtDNA=118

1.L(L)=69 58.47% of total, sub=69

2.L1'2'3'4'5'6(L)=57 82.6% of L(L), 48.3% of total, sub=57

3.L2'3'4'5'6(L)=56 98.24% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 81.1% of L(L), 47.45% of total, sub=56

4.L2'3'4'6(L)=52 92.8% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 91.2% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 75.3% of L(L), 44% of total, sub=52

5.L3'4'6(L)=30 57.7% of L2'3'4'6(L), 53.57% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 52.6% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 43.47% of L(L), 25.4% of total, sub=30

6.L3'4(L)=29 96.7% of L3'4'6(L), 55.7% of L2'3'4'6(L), 51.78% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 50.877% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 42% of L(L), 24.5% of total, sub=29

7.L3(L3)=21 72.4% of L3'4(L), 70% of L3'4'6,(L) 40.4% of L2'3'4'6(L), 37.5% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 36.8% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 30.4% of L(L), 17.8% of total, sub=21

8.L3e'i'k'x(L3)=10 47.6% of L3(L3), 34.48% of L3'4(L), 33.3% of L3'4'6(L), 19.2% of L2'3'4'6(L), 17.85% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 17.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 14.5% of L(L), 8.47% of total, sub=10

9.L3i(L3)=7 70% of L3e'i'k'x, 33.3% of L3(L3), 24.1% of L3'4(L), 23.3% of L3'4'6(L), 13.46% of L2'3'4'6(L), 12.5% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 12.28% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 10.1% of L(L), 5.9% of total, sub=4

10.L3i2(Former L3w (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHaplogr oup_L3_(mtDNA)&ei=82kJU8r6EamqyAHZ9YHoDA&usg=AFQjCNHxlpXVFKxqdrtTfJsUMAQ2UGhv5A&sig2=3wE9WGzFHw-Y62C8Ie-Xkg))=4 100% of L3i(L3), 33.3% of L3(L3), 24.1% of L3'4(L), 23.3% of L3'4'6(L), 13.46% of L2'3'4'6(L), 12.5% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 12.28% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 10.1% of L(L), 5.9% of total, sub=0

9.L3x(L3)=3 30% of L2e'i'k'x(L3), 14.2% of L3(L3), 10.3% of L3'4(L), 10% of L3'4'6(L), 5.7% of L2'3'4'6(L), 5.3% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 5.26% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 4.34% of L(L), 2.5% of total, sub=3

10.L3x2(L3)=2 66.7% of L3x(L3), 20% of L3e'i'k'x(L3), 9.5% of L3(L3), 6.9% of L3'4(L), 6.67% of L3'4'6(L), 3.8% of L2'3'4'6(L), 3.57% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 3.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 2.9% of L(L), 1.7% of total, sub=0

10.L3x1(L3)=1 33.3% of L3x(L3), 10% of L3e'i'k'x(L3), 4.75% of L3(L3), 3.45% of L3'4(L), 3.33% of L3'4'6(L), 1.9% of L2'3'4'6(L), 1.785% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.75% of L1'2'3'4'6(L), 1.45% of L(L), 0.85% of total, sub=0

8.L3f(L3)=6 28.57% of L3(L3), 20.68% of L3'4(L), 20% of L3'4'6(L), 11.5% of L2'3'4'6(L), 10.7% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 10.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 8.6% of L(L), 5% of total, sub=6

9.L3f*(L3)=3 50% of L3f(L3), 14.28% of L3(L3), 10.34% of L3'4(L), 10% of L3'4'6(L), 5.75% of L2'3'4'6(L), 5.35% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 4.3% of L(L), 2.5% of total, sub=0

9.L3f1(L3)=3 50% of L3f(L3), 14.28% of L3(L3), 10.34% of L3'4(L), 10% of L3'4'6(L), 5.75% of L2'3'4'6(L), 5.35% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 4.3% of L(L), 2.5% of total, sub=0

8.L3d2=3 14.28% of L3(L3), 10.3% of L3'4(L), 10% L3'4'6(L), 5.76% of L2'3'4'6(L), 5.3% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 5.2% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 4.3% of L(L), 2.5% of total, sub=0

8.L3h(L3)=2 9.5% of L3(L3), 6.9% of L3'4(L), 6.67% of L3'4'6(L), 3.8% of L2'3'4'6(L), 3.57% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 3.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 2.9% of L(L), 1.7% of total, sub=0

7.L4(L4)=8 27.5% of L3'49L), 26.67% of L3'4'6(L), 15.38% of L2'3'4'6(L), 14.28% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 14% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 11.6% of L(L), 6.8% of total, sub=8

8.L4a1(L4)=7 87.5% of L4(L4), 24% of L3'4(L), 23.3% of L3'4'6(L), 13.46% of L2'3'4'6(L), 12.5% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 12.28% of L'1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 10.1% of L(L), 5.9% of total, sub=0

8.L4b2(former L4g (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L4_(mtDNA)))=1 12.5% of L4(L4), 3.4% of L3'4(L), 3.3% of L3'4'6(L), 1.9% of L2'3'4'6(L), 1.78% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.7% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.45% of L(L), 0.8% of total, sub=0

6.L6(L6)=1 3.3% of L3'4'6(L), 1.9% of L2'3'4'6(L), 1.78% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.7% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.44% of L(L), 0.847% of total, sub=0

5.L2a'b'c'd(L2)=22 42.3% of L2'3'4'6(L), 39.28% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 38.6% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 31.88% of L(L), 18.6% of total, sub=22

6.L2a(L2)=18 81.8% of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 34.6% of L2'3'4'6(L), 32.1% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 31.578% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 26% of L(L), 15.25% of total, sub=15

7.L2a1(L2)=15 100% of L2a(L2), 81.8% of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 34.6% of L2'3'4'6(L), 32.1% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 31.578% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 26% of L(L), 15.25% of total, sub=15

8.L2a1b2(L2)=10 66.7% of L2a1(L2), 66.7% of L2a(L2), 54.5% of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 23% of L2'3'4'6(L), 21.4% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 21% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 17.4% of L(L), 10% of total, sub=0

8.L2a1c(L2)=5 33.3% of L2a1(L2), 33.3% of L2a(L2), 27.3% of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 11.5% of L2'3'4'6(L), 10.7% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 10.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 8.7% of L(L), 5% of total, sub=0

6.L2b(L2)=4 18.1% of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 7.6% of L2'3'4'6(L), 7.14% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 7% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 5.8% of L(L), 3.38% of total, sub=0

4.L5(L5)=4 7.14% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 7% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 5.8% of L(L), 3.4% of total, sub=4

5.L5a(L5)=3 75% of L5(L5), 5.3% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 5.26% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 4.3% of L(L), 2.54% of total, sub=3

6.L5a2(L5)=2 66.7% of L5a(L5), 50% of L5(L5), 3.57% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 3.5% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 2.9% of L(L), 1.7% of total, sub=0

6.L5a1(L5)=1 33.3% of L5a(l5), 25% of L5(L5), 1.8% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.75% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.45% of L(L), 0.85% of total, sub=0

5.L5b(L5)=1 25% of L5(L5), 1.78% of L2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.75% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.45% of L(L), 0.84% of total, sub=0

3.L1b(L1)=1 1.7% of L1'2'3'4'5'6(L), 1.44% of L(L), 0.8% of total, sub=0

2.L0a'b'f(L0)=12 17.4% of L(L), 10.1% of total

3.L0a(L0)=11 91.66% of L0a'b'f(L0), 16% of L(L), 9.3% of total, sub=11

4.L0a1(L0)=7 63.6% of L0a(L0), 58.33% of L0a'b'f(L0), 10% of L(L), 5.9% of total, sub=0

4.L0a2(L0)=3 27.2% of L0a(L0), 25% of L0a'b'f(L0), 4.3% of L(L), 2.5% of total, sub=0

4.L0a*(L0)=1 9.09% of L0a(L0), 8.33% of L0a'b'f(L0), 1.45% of L(L), 0.847% of total, sub=0

3.L0f(L0)=1 8.33% of L0a'b'f(L0), 1.45% of L(L), 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.M1(M)=19 16% of total, sub=14

2.M1a(M)=12 85.7% of M1(M), 13.8% of total, sub=3

3.M1a1(M)=3 100% of M1a(M), 85.7% of M1(M), 13.8% of total, sub=0

2.M1b=2 14.28% of M1(M), 2.3% of total, sub=0

1.R0a(R0a)=13 11% of total, sub=0

1.T(T)=4 3.4% of total, sub=4

2.T2(T)=3 75% of T(T), 2.5% of total, sub=0

2.T1b(T)=1 25% of T(T), 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.U(U)=4 3.4% of total, sub=4

2.U6al(U)=2 50% of U(U), 1.7% of total, sub=0

2.U2(U)=1 25% of U(U), 0.847% of total, sub=0

2.U3(U)=1 25% of U(U), 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.N1a(N)=3 2.5% of total, sub=0

1.H(H)=2 1.7% of total, sub=0

1.HV1(HV1)=1 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.J1c(J)=1 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.W(W)=1 0.847% of total, sub=0

1.X1(X)=1 0.847% of total, sub=0

Country or Region: Ethiopia, Population: NA, Region: Amhara

mtDNA=43

1.L(L)=16 37.2%* of total, sub=16

2.L4(L4)=6 37.5%* of L(L), 14%* of total, sub=6

3.L4a(L4)=4 66.7%* of L4(L4), 25%* of L(L), 9.3%* of total, sub=4

4.L4a1(L4)=3 75%* of L4a(L4), 50%* of L4(L4), 18.75%* of L(L), 7%* of total, sub=0

4.L4a*(L4)=1 25%* of L4a(L4), 16.7%* of L4(L4), 6.25%* of L(L), 2.32%* of total, sub=0

3.L4b2(L4) former L4g (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L4_(mtDNA))=2 33.3%* of L4(L4), 12.5%* of L(L), 4.65%* of total, sub=0

2.L3(L3)=5 31.25%* of L(L), 11.6%* of total, sub=5

3.L3f1(L3)=3 60%* of L3(L3), 18.75%* of L(L), 7%* of total, sub=0

3.L3e'i'k'x(L3)=2 40%* of L3(L3), 12.5%* of L(L), 4.65%* of total, sub=2

4.L3i2(L3) former L3w (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L3_(mtDNA))=1 50%* of L3e'i'k'x(L3), 20%* of L3(L3), 6.25%* of L(L), 2.32%* of total, sub=0

4.L3x1(L3)=1 50%* of L3e'i'k'x(L3), 20%* of L3(L3), 6.25%* of L(L), 2.32%* of total, sub=0

1.L2a'b'c'd(L2)=3 18.75%* of L(L), 6.9%* of total, sub=3

2.L2a1b2(L2)=2 66.7%* of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 12.5%* of L(L), 4.6%* of total, sub=0

2.L2b(L2)=1 33.3%* of L2a'b'c'd(L2), 6.25%* of L(L), 2.3%* of total, sub=0

1.L0a1(L0)=2 12.5% of L(L), 4.6% of total, sub=0

[Fire Haired]

EBA-Yam(5,000-4,500BP)

mtDNA=28

1.H(H)=7 25%* of total, sub=0

1.U(U, ?, U/K)=7 25%* of total, sub=7

2.U5(U, ?)=4 57%* of U(U, ?, U/K), 14.28%* of total, sub=3(U5(U)=1)

3.U5a1(U, ?)=3 100% of U5(U, ?), 57% of U(U, ?, U/K), 14.28% of total, sub=0(U5a1(?)=1, U5a1(U)=2)

2.U/K(U/K)=1 14.28%* of U(U, ?, U/K), 3.57%* of total, sub=0

2.U2e1h(U)=1 14.28%* of U(U, ?, U/K), 3.57%* of total, sub=0

2.U4a1(U)=1 14.28%* of U(U, ?, U/K), 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.T(T)=7 25%* of total, sub=7

2.T1(T)=4 57.14%* of T(T), 14.28%* of total, sub=3

3.T1a(T)=3 100% of T1(T), 57.14% of T(T), 14.28% of total, sub=0

2.T2(T)=3 42.8%* of T(T), 10.7%* of total, sub=3

3.T2c1(T)=2 66.7%* of T2(T), 28.57%* of T(T), 7.14%* of total, sub=0

3.T2a1b(T)=1 33.3%* of T2(T), 14.28%* of T(T), 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.K(K)=2 7.14%* of total, sub=0

1.J1 or J2b(J)=1 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.N1a1a(N)=1 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.X(X)=1 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.W6(W)=1 3.57%* of total, sub=0

1.I1a(I)=1 3.57%* of total, sub=0

Pigmentation:

rs12913832=21: A/A=15(71.4%) A/G=4(19%) G/G=2(9.5%)

rs16891982=12: C/C=4(33.3%) C/G=3(25%) G/G=5(41.67%)

rs1042602=20: C/C=18(90%) C/A=1(5%) A/A=1(5%)


Samples from the Volga region

o KAL : Kalinovka I, Samara Oblast (Middle Volga), Russia
o NIK : Nikolaevka III, Samara Oblast (Middle Volga), Russia
o POD : Podlesnyj, Samara Oblast (Middle Volga), Russia


KAL1(EBA-Yam, Kalinovka, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.744075&long=50.248737))=N1a1a(N1a), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of N1a1a but has one extra(16344T) that doesn't exist in any N1 subclades. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 A/A.




KAL2(EBA-Yam, Kalinovka, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.744075&long=50.248737))=H(H), did not list any HVR1 mutations. Pigmentation: rs12913832 G/G.




NIK1(EBA-Yam, Nikolaevka III, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.125556&long=47.205833))=T1a(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T1a. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




NIK7(EBA-Yam, Nikolaevka III, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.125556&long=47.205833))=H(H), rCRS. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




POD1(EBA-Yam, Podlesnyj, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.281578&long=50.907795))=W6(W), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of W6. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.




POD2(EBA-Yam, Podlesnyj, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=53.281578&long=50.907795))=T2c1(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of JT, T, and T2c1, but not the one for T2 but still may have had it. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.



Samples from the Don and Kuban regions

o OLE : Olennii, Krasnodar Krai (Sea of Azov), Russia
o PEJ : Peschanyi, Rostov Oblast, Russia


OLE1(EBA-Yam, Olennii, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=45.641529&long=39.705598))=T2c1(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of JT, T, and T2c1, but not the sole HVR1 defining mutation of T2(16296T) but still may have had it. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




OLE7(EBA-Yam, Olennii, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=45.641529&long=39.705598))=J1 or J2b(J), J1 and J2b have the same HVR1 defining mutations and OLE7 has all of them plus one extra HVR1 mutation(16048A), which does not exist in any JT subclades. No pigmentation alleles listed.





PEJ1(EBA-Yam, Peschanyi, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U5a1(U), has all of the HVR1 mutations of U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.


Samples from central and eastern Ukraine

o PES : Pestchanka II, central eastern Ukraine
o SUG : Kirovograd Sugokleya, central Ukraine
o VIN : Vinogradnoe, southern central Ukraine


PES7(EBA-Yam, Pestchanka II, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.598536&long=35.314148))=H(H), has two HVR1 mutations: 16209C and 16042A. 16042A does not exist in any RO subclades but 16209C exists in two H subclades: H1a1 and H5a1j. Pigmentation: rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.




SUG2(EBA-Yam, Kirovograd, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.522238&long=32.251308))=I1a(I), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of I1a. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




SUG6(EBA-Yam, Kirovograd, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.522238&long=32.251308))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation which is a defining mutation in seven H subclades: H1a'b'c'd'h, H1c3b, H1bv1, H3ak, H6, H8, H13b1(16362C). Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




SUG7(EBA-Yam, Kirovograd, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.522238&long=32.251308))=H(H), rCRS. No pigmentation alleles listed.




SUG8(EBA-Yam, Kirovograd, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.522238&long=32.251308))=H(H), rCRS. No pigmentation alleles listed.




VIN2(EBA-Yam, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=T1a(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T1a. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




VIN5(EBA-Yam, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=T1a(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T1a. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A.




VIN12(EBA-Yam, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=T1(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.



Samples from western Ukraine & Moldova


o MAJ : Mayaki, southwest Ukraine

o TET : Tetcani, northern Moldova



MAJ3(EBA-Yam, Mayaki, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.413300&long=30.276532))=U5a1(?), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5(except one but still may have had it), U5a, and U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.






MAJ4(EBA-Yam, Mayaki, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.413300&long=30.276532))=U5(U), has one of two defining HVR1 mutations of U5(16192T) and U5 is the only U subclade with it. The other HVR1 mutation listed for MAJ4 is 16311C which is a defining mutation for seven U5 subclades: U5a1f1, U5a2e, U5b1c, U5b1i, U5b2a1a(16311C), U5b2a5, and U5b3d. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




MAJ5(EBA-Yam, Mayaki, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.413300&long=30.276532))=X(X), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of X and one extra HVR1 mutation(16136C) which doesn't exist in any X subclades. Pigmentation: rs12913832 G/G, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




TET2(EBA-Yam, Tetcani,Moldova (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.183333&long=26.983333))=U4a1(U), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U4 and U4a1. No pigmentation alleles listed.



Samples from Bulgaria


o OVI : Ovchartsi, south-east Bulgaria

o POP : Popovo, south-east Bulgaria

o RIL : Riltsi, north-east Bulgaria



OV12(EBA-Yam, Ovchartsi, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=42.235930&long=26.083413))=K(K), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of K plus one extra(16290T), which does not exist in any U subclades. No pigmentation alleles.





OV13(EBA-Yam, Ovchartsi, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=42.235930&long=26.083413))=U/K(U/K), didn't list any HVR1 mutations. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs1042602 C/C.




POP1(EBA-Yam, Popovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=42.205594&long=26.736253))=T2a1b(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of JT, T, T2, and T2a1b. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




POP3(EBA-Yam, Popovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=42.205594&long=26.736253))=U2e1h(U), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U2, U2e(2/3 may have had the missing one), and U2e1h. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.




POP4(EBA-Yam, Popovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=42.205594&long=26.736253))=U5a1(U), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5(except one but still may have had it), U5a, and U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




RIL3(EBA-Yam, Riltsi, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.594204&long=27.778568))=K(K), has both of the needed HVR1 mutations to be K but also has HVR1 mutation 16192T and U5 is the only U subclade with it. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/A.

[Fire Haired]

EBA-Cat1(4,700-4,500BP) and EBA-Cat2(4,500-4,000BP)

mtDNA=27

1.U(U, U/K)=12 44.4%* of total, sub=11

2.U(U), 16356C=7 63.6% of U, 28.28% of total, sub=0

2.U5a1(U, U/K)=4 36.36% of U(U), 16.16% of total, sub=0

1.H(H)=7 26%* of total, sub=6(H-rCRS=1)

2.H(H), 16362C=4 66.7% of H(H), 17.28% of total, sub=0

2.H(H), 16234T=1 16.7% of H(H), 4.3% of total, sub=0

2.H2a1 or H(H), 16354T=1 16.7% of H(H), 4.3% of total, sub=0

1.J(J)=3 11.1%*, sub=3

2.J1b1a1(J)=2 66.7%* of J(J), 7.4%* of total, sub=0

2.J1 or J2b(J)=1 33.3%* of J(J), 3.7%* of total, sub=0

1.C4a=3 11.1%* of total, sub=3

2.C4a6=2 66.7%* of C4a, 7.4%* of total, sub=0

2.C4a3=1 33.3%* of C4a, 3.7%* of total, sub=0

1.R1(R1)=2 7.4%* of total, sub=0

1.I(I)=1 3.7%* of total, sub=0

Pigmentation:
rs12913832=22: A/A=17(77%), A/G=3(13.6%), G/G=2(9.1%)

rs16891982=8: C/C=4(50%), C/G= 3(37.5%), G/G=1(12.5%)

rs1042602=27: C/C=26(96.3%), C/A=1(3.7%), A/A=0(0%)


Samples from central and eastern Ukraine

o KNO : Krasnorechensk, eastern Ukraine
o LIS : Lisichansk, eastern Ukraine
o NEV : Nevskoe, eastern Ukraine
o NOZ : Novozvanovka II, eastern Ukraine
o SAC : Shakhta Stepnaya, eastern Ukraine
o SUG : Kirovograd Sugokleya, central Ukraine
o VIN : Vinogradnoe, southern central Ukraine


KNO4(EBA-Cat1, Krasnorechensk, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=49.210278&long=38.207500))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs1042602 C/C.




LIS1(EBA-Cat1, Lisichansk, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.913697&long=38.434641))=U5a1(U), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5(except one but still may have had it), U5a, and U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




LIS2(EBA-Cat1, Lisichansk, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.913697&long=38.434641))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




LIS3(EBA-Cat1, Lisichansk, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.913697&long=38.434641))=H2a1 or H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation(16354T) which is a defining mutation in only one H subclade, H2a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




NEV1(EBA-Cat2, Nevskoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=49.170017&long=37.975837))=U5a1(U), has all of the HVR1 mutations of U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




NEV3(EBA-Cat2, Nevskoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=49.170017&long=37.975837))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation which is a defining mutation in seven H subclades: H1a'b'c'd'h, H1c3b, H1bv1, H3ak, H6, H8, H13b1(16362C). Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




NOZ1(EBA-Cat2, Novozvanovka II, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.583056&long=38.356111))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 G/G, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




NOZ2(EBA-Cat2, Novozvanovka II, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.583056&long=38.356111)):=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.




SAC2(EBA-Cat1, Shakhta Stepnaya, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.418717&long=36.429969))=J1 or J2b(J), J1 and J2b have the same HVR1 defining mutations and SAC2 had all of them. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




SUG5(EBA-Cat2, Kirovograd, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.522238&long=32.251308))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation which is a defining mutation in seven H subclades: H1a'b'c'd'h, H1c3b, H1bv1, H3ak, H6, H8, H13b1(16362C). Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




VIN3(EBA-Cat2, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=U5a1(U/K), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5(except one but still may have had it), U5a, and U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




VIN8(EBA-Cat2, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=J1b1a1(J1), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of J1b1a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/A.



Samples from southern Russia


o PEJ : Peschanyi, Rostov Oblast, Russia

o TEM : Temrta, Rostov Oblast, Russia



PEJ2(EBA-Cat2, Peschanyi, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation(16234T) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in three H subclades: H1a1b, H13a1d, and H24a1. No pigmentation alleles listed.<o:p></o





PEJ3(EBA-Cat2, Peschanyi, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation which is a defining HVR1 mutation in seven H subclades: H1a'b'c'd'h, H1c3b, H1bv1, H3ak, H6, H8, H13b1(16362C). Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




PEJ4(EBA-Cat2, Peschanyi, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation which is a defining HVR1 mutation in seven H subclades: H1a'b'c'd'h, H1c3b, H1bv1, H3ak, H6, H8, H13b1(16362C). Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




PEJ5(EBA-Cat2, Peschanyi, Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM1(EBA-Cat2, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM2(EBA-Cat1, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=H(H), rCRS. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 G/G, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM3(EBA-Cat2, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=J1b1a1(J1), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of J1b1a1. No pigmentation alleles listed.




TEM4(EBA-Cat1, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U5a1(U/K), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5(except one but still may have had it), U5a, and U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM5(EBA-Cat1, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=R1(R1), TEM5 has one HVR1 mutation listed and is the sole HVR1 mutation which defines R1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM6(EBA-Cat1, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=R1(R1), TEM6 has one HVR1 mutation listed and is the sole HVR1 mutation which defines R1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM7(EBA-Cat1, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U(U), listed one HVR1 mutation(16356C) which is a defining HVR1 mutation in four U subclades: U5b1i, U2e3, U3a1c, and U4. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




TEM8(EBA-Cat2, Temrta Russia (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.563056&long=43.656667))=U(U), did not list any HVR1 mutations. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/G, rs1042602 C/C.


Samples from Moldova

o TET : Tetcani, northern Moldova


TET1(EBA-Cat2, Tetcani,Moldova (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=48.183333&long=26.983333))=I(I), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of N1a1b(I can also be called N1a1b2), may have also had I HVR1 defining mutations. No pigmentation alleles listed.


Samples from southwest Ukraine

The following mtDNA samples from the Odessa province were tested by Newton, J.R. (2011) (http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/theses/5/).


C4a3
C4a6 (x2)

[SobieskisavedEurope]

I thought that this date is earlier than blue eyes was even thought to have come about!?

Proof that the genetic dates are off!?

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I thought that this date is earlier than blue eyes was even thought to have come about!?

Proof that the genetic dates are off!?

They are just an estimate based on observed values of changes that have happened in last few generations, so basically they are totally meaningless.

[Fire Haired]

I thought that this date is earlier than blue eyes was even thought to have come about!?

Proof that the genetic dates are off!?

I agree.

Two ~8,000 year old Mesolithic west Europeans(as you probably already know) also had light eyes, so the light eyed individuals in this study are no surprise to people who already knew that. Light eyes don't just exist only in Europe, they can be as high as 15-20% in the near east (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theapricity.com%2Fforum%2Fsho wthread.php%3F35882-New-Hair-and-Eye-color-statistics-(2011)&ei=RP0jU_iHC-nOyQHFq4HwBg&usg=AFQjCNG1V1r38hvFfdhSjnN5K2j6DmuPUw&sig2=v_6PqYAgc_in6xt2_3dgzQ&bvm=bv.62922401,d.aWc). There is little to know Mesolithic/Upper Palaeolithic European ancestry in near easterns, just Middle eastern(such thing) and ANE(brotherclade to WHG aka Mesolithic Europeans). Light eyes is probably a west Eurasian trait that goes back to at least the Upper Palaeolithic and through selection became more popular in Europeans.

These ancient Pontiac steppe people had a very small amount of light eyes, at the highest 8-10%. That is lower than some near easterns and lower than almost all modern Europeans. Less than 40% of them had G/G alleles in SNP rs16891982, and according to SNPedia if a European does not have G/G alleles they are 7x more likely to have black hair, and today the vast majority of Europeans and around 50% of near easterns have G/G alleles. So they were also probably very dark haired also Wikipedia and other sources say G/G alleles are connected with light skin.

I think they were definitely swarthy by northern European standards. There skin I think was as pale as Caucasus people and not as dark as near easterns. Their pigmentation results are very surprising to me because early Indo Europeans in Asia(who should be their descendants) had probably over 70% light eyes and majority light hair, so even lighter than some modern east and north Europeans. Theses people are definitely not the ancestors of bronze-iron age Indo Iranians because some of the dark samples are about as old as the light Indo Iranian samples. I am very confused, where in the world did the Indo Iranians come from and where does the similar light pigmentation in modern Celts, Germans, Balto-Slavs, and Finno-Urgics come from?

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I'm proud of being from a line of winners and hot people, yeah.

What about you? You're the real invaders, R. You didn't even bring anything of value. Filthy Asiatic pigdogs, stealing our women.

I doubt that is the case, all the ancient DNA from where r1b was supposed to be from turned out to be r1a.

[blogen]

Theses people are definitely not the ancestors of bronze-iron age Indo Iranians because some of the dark samples are about as old as the light Indo Iranian samples. I am very confused, where in the world did the Indo Iranians come from and where does the similar light pigmentation in modern Celts, Germans, Balto-Slavs, and Finno-Urgics come from?

They are the ancestors. Their racial character is similar (basically Protoeuropid majority with Eastern med elements), only their pigmentation is different partially. Depigmentation happened in whole Europe in the last five thousand years.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

They are the ancestors. Their racial character is similar (basically Protoeuropid majority with Eastern med elements), only their pigmentation is different partially. Depigmentation happened in whole Europe in the last five thousand years.

Pure bullshit, just like claiming that blue eyes happened in last 5k years as has been claimed over and over.

The C clade hunter gatherer is obviously not main component of europe. Just like the mixed up r1* malta boy is obviously not ancestor of most of europe, but a mix that included some of the people of europe today as a source.

No one should expect them to be light.

R1a ancient dna turned out to be light, as expected. No r1b is found. And now we know that andronovo is not the source of r1b for sure. Since almost everyone NW europe is r1b or I clade, then without sequencing people who had those clades (whether inside or outside europe) nothing can be said about becoming light skinned.

There is stupid paper saying we got light skin from andronova, but if we got it that way we'd all be r1a or at least a large percentage, but hardly anyone is.

[Prince Carlo]

Apparently light traits were not spread by Indo Europeans. Take that Balto Slavic fruit cases.

The Mesolitich hunther gatherers were really swarty. Generally speaking the more Mesolitich, the swarthier.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Apparently light traits were not spread by Indo Europeans. Take that Balto Slavic fruit cases.

The Mesolitich hunther gatherers were really swarty. Generally speaking the more Mesolitich, the swarthier.

And apparently nothing was spread by indo europeans, genetically speaking. Except to east europe, I guess, if they were not always like that.

[Prince Carlo]

Modern and Ancient Ukrainians.

http://oi57.tinypic.com/11joxkw.jpg

[Fire Haired]

They are the ancestors. Their racial character is similar (basically Protoeuropid majority with Eastern med elements), only their pigmentation is different partially. Depigmentation happened in whole Europe in the last five thousand years.

I think what you say could be true about their skeletal feature but the pigmentation proves these people were not their ancestors. Their pigmentation is radically different, the indo Iranians had something like 70-90% light eyes while Pontiac steppe people(including ones less than 1,000 years older than them) had around 90% brown eyes or more. The Pontiac steppe people likely had less than 5% light hair while the Indo Iranians likely had majority and some red hair(prove in ancient writings-art, partial modern descendants, and bronze age mummies). The difference in hair-eye color is greater than the difference between Spainish and Swedish. Spainish and Swedish though have the same percentages of 'light skin" mutations while these ancient indo Iranians and Pontiac steppe people did not, so you can argue the difference in pigmentation was greater.

The Indo Iranians migrated to Asia during the bronze age and made some back migrations to Europe during the iron age(but very very small genetic impact and only on eastern Europe), so if they depigmented in possibly less than a 1,000 years while in Asia that still doesn't explain similar light pigmentation(that probably comes from the same source) in Europe today.

Once there are genomes from bronze age Indo Iranians and early bronze age Indo Europeans in eastern Europe there will be prove they were two very different people. The mtDNA between the Pontiac steppe people and bronze-iron age Indo Iranians is very very similar but that could just because they had mtDNA from the same farmers and hunter gatherers of eastern Europe. I think the Indo Iranians descended from originally a non Indo European who by contact with darker pigmented Yamna people became Indo Europeans(maybe not willingly) and migrated to Asia. Its possible a related group to them also migrated into Europe and can explain similar light pigmentation in Balto-Slavs, Celts, and Germans.

[blogen]

Pure bullshit, just like claiming that blue eyes happened in last 5k years as has been claimed over and over.
The C clade hunter gatherer is obviously not main component of europe. Just like the mixed up r1* malta boy is obviously not ancestor of most of europe, but a mix that included some of the people of europe today as a source.

No, they are not the ancestors of the Europeans (a few part of the C clade h&g peoples yes).


No one should expect them to be light.
R1a ancient dna turned out to be light, as expected. No r1b is found. And now we know that andronovo is not the source of r1b for sure. Since almost everyone NW europe is r1b or I clade, then without sequencing people who had those clades (whether inside or outside europe) nothing can be said about becoming light skinned.
There is stupid paper saying we got light skin from andronova, but if we got it that way we'd all be r1a or at least a large percentage, but hardly anyone is.

There were depigmentation in every European neolithic population. The light color complexity of the Nordoids and the Cromagnoids are different origin, they were different populations. And the great part of the redheads were different origin likewise!

Now, we know it already there was a depigmented steppe population too.

[Fire Haired]

Modern and Ancient Ukrainians.

http://oi57.tinypic.com/11joxkw.jpg

Evolution, population replacement, or both.

[Fire Haired]

And apparently nothing was spread by indo europeans, genetically speaking. Except to east europe, I guess, if they were not always like that.

Uh, what? Y DNA R1a M417, possibly R1b L11(and other R1b subclades), possibly other Y DNA. The huge difference in mtDNA between copper-bronze age central Europeans and Neolithic is because of the Indo Europeans, the higher amount of WHG and ANE throughout Europe today than in Neolithic farmers probably has something to do with Indo Europeans, Indo Europeans may be the main ancestors of many west and east Europeans.

[Fire Haired]

Apparently light traits were not spread by Indo Europeans. Take that Balto Slavic fruit cases.

The Mesolitich hunther gatherers were really swarty. Generally speaking the more Mesolitich, the swarthier.

I think Indo Europeans played a huge role in creating light pigmentation in northern Europe. If they are not the source who is? The first Indo Europeans were swathy but not all early ones were(I.E, Indo Iranians) so who couldn't a lighter originally non Indo European people be the source of extreme light pigmentation in much of northern Europe?

[Fire Haired]

No, they are not the ancestors of the Europeans (a few part of the C clade h&g peoples yes).



There were depigmentation in every European neolithic population. The light color complexity of the Nordoids and the Cromagnoids are different origin, they were different populations. And the great part of the redheads were different origin likewise!

Now, we know it already there was a depigmented steppe population too.

I don't know what Nordids and Cromagnoids are, you should base stuff on DNA and suggest anthropology stuff. Pigmentation between Andronovo and modern Europeans is from the same source it did not evolve twice. Also a good question to ask is why does everyone assume evolution always is in light pigmentation's favour? That doesn't make sense to me.

[blogen]

I think what you say could be true about their skeletal feature but the pigmentation proves these people were not their ancestors. Their pigmentation is radically different

And? For example the CCR5-Δ32 chemokine receptor's case: This is a ~2-3 thousand years old mutation and the spread of the Δ32 is a conseqvence of the medieval plague. Before the plague only 1 person in 20,000 had the CCR5-Δ32 mutation, but now:

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/8761/ipsv.png

Few hundred years and this mutation spreads in the north and central European population's ten percentages or more under some hundred years. This is usual. A population is quickly replaced genetically under some thousand years, but not the basic racial characters, since a new population does not come to the area. This is the populations inner evolution only.

And this happened to the colour complexion of the European populations too! Especially in the steppe, where the population sizes were small.

[Fire Haired]

Early ENL(6,500-5,000BP) and Late ENL(5,500-4,000BP)

mtDNA=10

1.H(H)=4 40%* of total, sub=4

2.H(H), rCRS=2 50%* of H(H), 20%* of total, sub=0

2.H5(H)=1 20%* of H(H), 10%* of total, sub=0

2.H(H), 16261T=1 20%* of H(H), 10%* of total, sub=0

1.U5a(U, U/k)=3 30%* of total, sub=3

2.U5a1(U, U/K)=2 66.7%* of U5a(U, U/K), 20%* of total, sub=0

2.U5a2a(U)=1 33.3%* of U5a(U, U/K), 10%* of total, sub=0

1.T2(T)=2 20%* of total, sub=2

2.T2b(T)=1 50%* of T2(T), 10%* of total, sub=0

2.T2e(T)=1 50%* of T2(T), 10%* of total, sub=0

1.W(W)=1 10%* of total, sub=0

Pigmentation:

rs12913832: A/A=4 A/G=0 G/G=0

rs16891982: C/C=1 C/G=1 G/G=0

rs1042602: C/C=4 C/A=0 A/A=0


Samples from Ukraine


o VIN : Vinogradnoe, south-eastern Ukraine
o MAJ : Mayaki, southern central Ukraine
o MOB: Molyukhov, central Ukraine





VIN1(Early ENL, Vinogradnoe, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=47.334703&long=35.666093))=H(H), rCRS. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/G, rs1042602 C/C.




MAJ8(Late ENL, Mayaki, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.413300&long=30.276532))=T2b(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T2b. No pigmentation alleles listed.




MAJ9(Late ENL, Mayaki, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=46.413300&long=30.276532))=W(W), has all of the HVR1 defining mutations of W. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs16891982 C/C, rs1042602 C/C.

.


MOB1(Late ENL, Molyukhov Bugor, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=49.115710&long=32.509085))=U5a1(U), has all of the HVR1 mutations of U5a1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




MOB3(Late ENL, Molyukhov Bugor, Ukraine (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=49.115710&long=32.509085))=U5a1(U/K), has all of the HVR1 mutations of U5a1. No pigmentation alleles listed.



Samples from Bulgaria

o SMY : Smyadovo, eastern Bulgaria
o DUR : Durankulak, north-eastern Bulgaria




SMY3(Early ENL, Smyadovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.051196&long=26.990642))=H, rCRS. No pigmentation alleles listed.




SMY4(Early ENL, Smyadovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.051196&long=26.990642))=H5(H), listed one HVR1 mutation(16304C) and H5 is the only H subclade with it. No pigmentation alleles listed.




SMY9(Early ENL, Smyadovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.051196&long=26.990642))=H(H), listed one HVR1 mutation(16261T) which exists in three H subclades: H1as1a, H7a1, H13a1a1d, and H13b1. Pigmentation: rs12913832 A/A, rs1042602 C/C.




SMY11(Early ENL, Smyadovo, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.051196&long=26.990642))=T2e(T), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of T2e but has one extra HVR1 mutation(16269G) which does not exist in any T subclades. No pigmentation alleles listed.




DUR1(Late ENL, Durankulak, Bulgaria (http://www.latlong.net/c/?lat=43.687143&long=28.531102))=U5a2a(U), has all of the defining HVR1 mutations of U5, U5a, not the single one for U5a2(may have had it), but both of the ones for U5a2a. No pigmentation alleles listed.

[Fire Haired]

And? For example the CCR5-Δ32 chemokine receptor's case: This is a ~2-3 thousand years old mutation and the spread of the Δ32 is a conseqvence of the medieval plague. Before the plague only 1 person in 20,000 had the CCR5-Δ32 mutation, but now:

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/8761/ipsv.png

Few hundred years and this mutation spreads in the north and central European population's ten percentages or more under some hundred years. This is usual. A population is quickly replaced genetically under some thousand years, but not the basic racial characters, since a new population does not come to the area. This is the populations inner evolution only.

And this happened to the colour complexion of the European populations too! Especially in the steppe, where the population sizes were small.

I guess that is possible, do they have ancient DNA prove of that mutation your talking about why can't they be wrong about that too? Change in pigmentation is much more radical because people would notice it. Also you try to force light pigmentation to be as young as possible, why would evolution always be in its favor. Extreme depigmentation of Indo Iranians does not explain nearly identically pigmentation in north-east Europe. Also light eyes already existed and were popular in the Mesolithic, so eye color difference could just be because of differences in amounts of WHG and EEF ancestry. There was major population replacement in much of Europe during the metal ages and it was probably caused mainly by Indo Europeans.

[blogen]

I don't know what Nordids and Cromagnoids are, you should base stuff on DNA and suggest anthropology stuff. Pigmentation between Andronovo and modern Europeans is from the same source it did not evolve twice. Also a good question to ask is why does everyone assume evolution always is in light pigmentation's favour? That doesn't make sense to me.

No. There were no paleoanthropological connection between the Eastern European steppe and Scandinavia. The proto-Nordoids never lived in the steppe, the first Nordoid remains are attached to the Balkan Neolithic and heavy to separate them from the early Atlanto med residues. So presumably the depigmentation of the Nordoids happened in the German-Polish plain between 4-2000BC.

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/1816/w3b6.jpg

There are no other place and time to this.

The fully depigmented races (not all of the representatives of the race, but a part of them) and the presumbaly depigmentetion centers and time:
West-Central Europe:
- Cromagnoids: between the mesolithic and the Bronze age
- Nordoids: between the early neolithic and the Bronze age

Eastern Europe:
- Cromagnoids: between the mesolithic and the Bronze age

The partially depigmetned races:
West-Central Europe:
- Lapponoids: between the mesolithic and the Bronze or Iron age
- Altanto meds: between the neolithic and the Iron age

West-Southern Europe:
- European Alpinoids: between the early neolithic and the Bronze age
- European Dinarids (Eastern and Western too!): between the early neolithic and the Bronze age
- other European Mediterranids: between the neolithic and the last few thousands years

Eastern Europe:
- Eastern meds: between the mesolithic and the Bronze age
- Eastern Dinarids: between the mesolithic and the Bronze age

[blogen]

I guess that is possible, do they have ancient DNA prove of that mutation your talking about why can't they be wrong about that too? Change in pigmentation is much more radical because people would notice it. Also you try to force light pigmentation to be as young as possible, why would evolution always be in its favor. Extreme depigmentation of Indo Iranians does not explain nearly identically pigmentation in north-east Europe. Also light eyes already existed and were popular in the Mesolithic, so eye color difference could just be because of differences in amounts of WHG and EEF ancestry. There was major population replacement in much of Europe during the metal ages and it was probably caused mainly by Indo Europeans.

Swarthy folks came to north always, this is the reason. Everything else only evolution because of the mortality rates before the modern medical science and maybe sexual selection. The biological benefits of the clear skin in the north, the strengthening effect of the epidemics and famines, the geographical rifts and the small size prehistoric populations were the catalisators. And the early neolithic genes are the dominant genes in Europe until today:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257/F3.large.jpg

[Fire Haired]

Swarthy folks came to north always, this is the reason. Everything else only evolution because of the mortality rates before the modern medical science and maybe sexual selection. The biological benefits of the clear skin in the north, the strengthening effect of the epidemics and famines, the geographical rifts and the small size prehistoric populations were the catalisators. And the early neolithic genes are the dominant genes in Europe until today:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/257/F3.large.jpg

You only look for the youngest possible age of light pigmentation that's your problem, your close minded. WHG is correlated with light pigmentation, I don't think any excuses can explain the correlation. Does light pigmentation really help in a northern climate? I don't do better in the cold than black people, I see no reason why that would cause light skin to evolve.

[blogen]

You only look for the youngest possible age of light pigmentation that's your problem, your close minded. WHG is correlated with light pigmentation, I don't think any excuses can explain the correlation.

We do not know one single early date. So, all early depigmentation theory is unsubstantiated assumption today.


Does light pigmentation really help in a northern climate? I don't do better in the cold than black people, I see no reason why that would cause light skin to evolve.

Vitamin D production. For example:

"In the United States and other developed nations, milk is now usually fortified with vitamins D and A in order to prevent developmental problems such as those described above. However, the popularity of carbonated soft drinks and other alternatives to milk along with a decrease in the amount of time spent outdoors has led to a considerable rise in the rate of rickets disease. Not surprisingly, vitamin D deficiency is most acute in the winter in temperate and colder zones, especially among people of African ancestry. There is a growing epidemic of vitamin D deficiency in the United States. The 2007-2008 "National Government Health and Nutrition Examination Survey" found that only 23% of teens and adults had a sufficient amount of this essential vitamin in their blood. It was 45% a decade earlier. The rate for African Americans in particular was far worse. It has dropped from 12% to only 3% having what doctors consider to be an adequate amount of vitamin D for overall good health. Given this difference, it is not surprising that 15% African American women have pelvis deformities, while the rate among European Americans is only 2%."
source (http://anthro.palomar.edu/adapt/adapt_4.htm)

"Vitamin D deficiencies—especially in African-Americans and people with darker skin tones—could raise the risk for developing conditions that include cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, according to several new studies.
As many as 36 percent of Americans are vitamin D deficient, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. That number could be more than double for African-Americans, according to geneticist Rick Kittles, associate professor at the University of Chicago in the Biological Sciences Division.
“Individuals who have moderate to high dark skin color make much less vitamin D,” Kittles said. “There have been some interesting studies recently which suggest that almost 75 percent of African Americans are vitamin D insufficient, which has a lot of implications as it relates to health of African-Americans.”

"
source (http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=162068)

[Argang]

No, they are not the ancestors of the Europeans (a few part of the C clade h&g peoples yes).


Not a direct ancestor, but autosomally La Braña-like people have certainly contributed to European ancestry, especially in the north and east as the sample has more similarity to North and East Europeans than to anyone else.

[blogen]

Not a direct ancestor, but autosomally La Braña-like people have certainly contributed to European ancestry, especially in the north and east as the sample has more similarity to North and East Europeans than to anyone else.

This is fact. And the survivor mesolithic Cromagnoid and Lapponoid population's proportion was the most considerable one on this area.

[Longbowman]

I doubt that is the case, all the ancient DNA from where r1b was supposed to be from turned out to be r1a.

I know your opinions on Neanderthals and hap. R but the scientific consensus is against you. The R1b/R1a thing isn't true and if it is it's not relevant. R1b didn't evolve in Europe anyhow and is found natively in the Middle East and Central Asia, in addition to Western Africa.

[Argang]

What I'd really like to see is pigmentation traits (and autosomals too) from the sites marked red.

http://openi.nlm.nih.gov/imgs/512/217/3573127/3573127_pgen.1003296.g001.png

If they are "swarthy" too, the options for origin of European pigmentation SNP's get low indeed, it's pretty much Middle East or Central Asia.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

What I'd really like to see is pigmentation traits (and autosomals too) from the sites marked red.

http://openi.nlm.nih.gov/imgs/512/217/3573127/3573127_pgen.1003296.g001.png

If they are "swarthy" too, the options for origin of European pigmentation SNP's get low indeed, it's pretty much Middle East or Central Asia.

The scando sites have I clade in the find mostly. All the megalithic sites are associated with I clades, and they covered all of europe. I highly doubt they were swarthoids, and I don't think any idiot claims that I clade is newcomer to europe like they do with r1b. I doubt even more they picked up light skin from middle east or andronovo.

So this whole thing is pretty ridiculous. of course we don't expect the late neolithic swarthy farmer invaders to be light. Like blogen's post showed, they came, conquered, and then got slaughteered/assimilated.

[Smeagol]

I know your opinions on Neanderthals and hap. R but the scientific consensus is against you. The R1b/R1a thing isn't true and if it is it's not relevant. R1b didn't evolve in Europe anyhow and is found natively in the Middle East and Central Asia, in addition to Western Africa.

It was probably spread to Western Africa by Afroasiatic speaking Neolithic Farmers.

[Oneeye]

He looks like a hairy Chairmanofthebored in that composite.

[Fire Haired]

What I'd really like to see is pigmentation traits (and autosomals too) from the sites marked red.

http://openi.nlm.nih.gov/imgs/512/217/3573127/3573127_pgen.1003296.g001.png

If they are "swarthy" too, the options for origin of European pigmentation SNP's get low indeed, it's pretty much Middle East or Central Asia.

No one knows all the reasons why Europeans are paler than near easterns and why north Europeans are paler than south Europeans. Your opinion on how dark these ancient people were is based on current knowledge. The three main Mutations said to create European light skin mutations actually originated in the near east and all are just as popular in brown skinned near easterns as they are in snow white Scandinavians and all Europeans, except the one in SLC45A2 which is nearly 100% in Europe and 50% in the near east.

People forget that all of Europe which as a variety of ethnic groups many who go back to at least the bronze age have the same basic white skin. People also seem to ignore the fact that light-skin-hair-eyes in Europe correlate with Mesolithic hunter gatherer ancestry, that light skin in west Eurasia(for almost every individual in a population) is very exclusive to Europe just like WHG-Y DNA I-mtDNA U5-and other Mesolithic European descended things. People also seem to ignore that light hair and eyes are directly connected to each other. So why would brown eyed near eastern farmers not blue eyed hunter gatherers be the source of light hair?

Have you seen near eastern people before? Despite the fact that if you go far back Europeans and near easterns are very related and that all Europeans have majority near eastern ancestry except northern Europeans(but north-west Europeans may have as much as 50%), near eastern people look very foreign and it doesn't matter if they grow up in a western nation. Some do have pale like skin but the vast majority have brownish skin. I don't understand how European's near eastern ancestry is why they are pale skinned, Mesolithic makes more sense.

I know ancient DNA does suggest pale skin in Europe became dominate during or after the Neolithic and maybe from their near eastern ancestry, but all evidence in modern people points towards a Mesolithic origin. There are to many holes in the near eastern light skin theory. I think it is possible but I always correct people when they don't see the evidence of a Mesolithic origin when looking at modern people.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

I know your opinions on Neanderthals and hap. R but the scientific consensus is against you. The R1b/R1a thing isn't true and if it is it's not relevant. R1b didn't evolve in Europe anyhow and is found natively in the Middle East and Central Asia, in addition to Western Africa.

Look at the coverage it has. Africa is on the verge, but it centers in western europe. Since we don't have any ancient r1b except in one bell beaker site you really can't make much conclusion. But all the supposed homelands besides europe, all the genes come back as non r1b. The fact andronovo y-dna is all r1a destroys the whole migration idea. All the homelands but west europe or possibly north africa are long since eliminated.

[Longbowman]

Look at the coverage it has. Africa is on the verge, but it centers in western europe. Since we don't have any ancient r1b except in one bell beaker site you really can't make much conclusion. But all the supposed homelands besides europe, all the genes come back as non r1b. The fact andronovo y-dna is all r1a destroys the whole migration idea. All the homelands but west europe or possibly north africa are long since eliminated.

Can't say this is right at all, it's also huge in the Indo-Aryan areas and strongly correlates with IE languages. Ancient European yDNA is never R (ancient = pre-Neolithic, certainly Ice Age and before).

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Can't say this is right at all, it's also huge in the Indo-Aryan areas and strongly correlates with IE languages. Ancient European yDNA is never R (ancient = pre-Neolithic, certainly Ice Age and before).

There's no r1b found in central asia or andronova though. Since andronovo is supposed to be where it comes from why isn't it there? It's pretty obvious the places that have r1 have always had them since it formed. I assume it's same with r1b, even if none is found. Not finding it, especially on farm sites, means nothing when you have not found it anywhere else.

Archaeology sites aren't random, they are convenience sample.

[Longbowman]

There's no r1b found in central asia or andronova though. Since andronovo is supposed to be where it comes from why isn't it there? It's pretty obvious the places that have r1 have always had them since it formed. I assume it's same with r1b, even if none is found. Not finding it, especially on farm sites, means nothing when you have not found it anywhere else.

Archaeology sites aren't random, they are convenience sample.

R1a and R in generally is thought to be Middle Eastern originally if you look at R*.

[Kale]

Mal'ta:
R*...pretty close to the root
24,000 years old..pretty close to the estimated age of the haplogroup.
Location...central Russia

I don't think we actually have any ancient samples from central Russia that don't have R. Then again I can't find the old masterlink that had all the ancient DNA ever discovered listed.

[Argang]

Mal'ta:
R*...pretty close to the root
24,000 years old..pretty close to the estimated age of the haplogroup.
Location...central Russia

I don't think we actually have any ancient samples from central Russia that don't have R. Then again I can't find the old masterlink that had all the ancient DNA ever discovered listed.

Mal'ta is from central Siberia which is not really the same as central Russia. The more western Russian samples of ancient Y-DNA are R1a, but also over 20.000 years more recent.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Well, there are I think 5K year old r1a in andronovo, maybe 6k. That was supposed to be where r1b came from though, if it came from the east.

And 4k years old in LBK for r1b, but only one sample.

I think any hypothesis where r1b leaps past r1a is complete bunk, so it basically has to have already been somewhere in the west by then. Actually seems pretty simple to me, early celts all cremated and so did the early greeks, so of course you won't find any DNA for them.

[Artek]

R1a and R in generally is thought to be Middle Eastern originally if you look at R*.
It's Central Asian


Well, there are I think 5K year old r1a in andronovo, maybe 6k. That was supposed to be where r1b came from though, if it came from the east.

And 4k years old in LBK for r1b, but only one sample.
4k years old LBK for R1b? Where, have I missed something?

[Longbowman]

Well, there are I think 5K year old r1a in andronovo, maybe 6k. That was supposed to be where r1b came from though, if it came from the east.

And 4k years old in LBK for r1b, but only one sample.

I think any hypothesis where r1b leaps past r1a is complete bunk, so it basically has to have already been somewhere in the west by then. Actually seems pretty simple to me, early celts all cremated and so did the early greeks, so of course you won't find any DNA for them.

Even if true - and we have plenty of bog bodies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog_body)for the Celts, that I know for sure - the Celts and Greeks would have lots of R because they were Indo-European import.

R1b isn't European either. Both have Eastern origins.

[Kale]

Something like this?45636

[blogen]

This is my view:
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3862/ift8.jpg
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6753/dlyg.jpg

[Fire Haired]

This is my view:
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3862/ift8.jpg
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6753/dlyg.jpg

I don't know enough about polygenetic distribution of Y DNA P to say anything specific migration. From what I do know R1b probably originated in west Asia and R1a probably in or near Europe. Y DNA P did not exist in Stuttgart-like early European farmers so Y DNA R1b or its ancestral form may have been brought by an ANE people to west Asia. Also most R1a today(vast majority M417) was spread with Indo Europeans.

[Fire Haired]

Well, there are I think 5K year old r1a in andronovo, maybe 6k. That was supposed to be where r1b came from though, if it came from the east.

And 4k years old in LBK for r1b, but only one sample.

I think any hypothesis where r1b leaps past r1a is complete bunk, so it basically has to have already been somewhere in the west by then. Actually seems pretty simple to me, early celts all cremated and so did the early greeks, so of course you won't find any DNA for them.

The Andronovo samples are dated to 1,800-1,400BC. The 4,600-4,500 year old R1b samples are from Bell beaker culture. The Andronovo people were immigrants from eastern Europe anyways. R1b is supposed to come from west Asia not Siberia. Bell Beaker R1b is just constant with when R1b L51 is expected to have arrived in central Europe it doesn't support a an origin in central Europe at all.

Who ever said R1a leaped over R1b? I don't know what your talking about. There are already some mtDNA samples from La Tene Celts in Germany.

[Artek]

This is my view:
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3862/ift8.jpg
I've modified it slightly
45642

[Argang]

The Andronovo samples are dated to 1,800-1,400BC. The 4,600-4,500 year old R1b samples are from Bell beaker culture. The Andronovo people were immigrants from eastern Europe anyways. R1b is supposed to come from west Asia not Siberia. Bell Beaker R1b is just constant with when R1b L51 is expected to have arrived in central Europe it doesn't support a an origin in central Europe at all.

Who ever said R1a leaped over R1b? I don't know what your talking about. There are already some mtDNA samples from La Tene Celts in Germany.

Y-DNA might take years to follow. Those Southern Russian/Ukrainian samples being a good example. We may see ancient celtic pigmentation SNP's before Y-DNA. :rolleyes:

[Kale]

This is my view:
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3862/ift8.jpg

Not too different.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

This is my view:
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3862/ift8.jpg
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6753/dlyg.jpg

R was already in siberia so you can scratch that. You can't really go from a bunch of clades just splitting at once and moving as they do anyway, that's ridiculous. It takes time and distance to have two separate clades like that.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

The Andronovo samples are dated to 1,800-1,400BC.

3800 - 3400 years ago. Well, so when did r1b come then, if it really was not in europe until then.



The 4,600-4,500 year old R1b samples are from Bell beaker culture. The Andronovo people were immigrants from eastern Europe anyways.

Says who? This is new to me, every bit of archaeology says migrations came east to west, and the whole theory of them coming out of east pegged andronovo as the source. Clearly with these timeframes and DNA samples it did NOT come from there, and something even further off is even sillier. Italic r1b came to italy before 1000 BC. And it barely made any impact whatsoever on italy, let alone whole of europe. So in some unknown point between 1000 and 2000 BC r1b was supposed to have flooded all of europe from parts unknown, without passing/mingling with r1a OR picking up italic r1b version. It's just incredibly ridiculous. We know the r1b was there because the basques are super r1b and they were there before romans.



R1b is supposed to come from west Asia not Siberia. Bell Beaker R1b is just constant with when R1b L51 is expected to have arrived in central Europe it doesn't support a an origin in central Europe at all.

Again, since when? Who made this up? The story changes every day, it seems. Suddenly andronovo is not an option so something even more unlikely is tossed out.



Who ever said R1a leaped over R1b? I don't know what your talking about. There are already some mtDNA samples from La Tene Celts in Germany.

Because it would have had to have to come from the east, obviously. And if it came on a southern route and yet completely avoided r1a then it should have picked up some italic r1b.

And it would have had to have been a cataclysmic migration 100 times bigger than the one of the romans as well, which nobody has any legends or written records of.

[Argang]

Did some study actually suggest Andronovo as the origin point of R1b? I'm not aware of such.

[blogen]

Did some study actually suggest Andronovo as the origin point of R1b? I'm not aware of such.

Definitely not and the R1b was presumably the pre-Indoeuropean neolithic farmers' fundamental gene in South-western and Western Europe. But maybe the R1b was common between the Indoeuropean neolithic population in the Balkan and Central Europe too. The R1a is definitely connected to the spread or inluence of the Indoeuropean Satem peoples.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Did some study actually suggest Andronovo as the origin point of R1b? I'm not aware of such.

No study has, but this is what people like maciamo at eupedia have been claiming, unless story has changed.

Theory I hear all the time is that r1b came to europe very recently, basically just before romans. I don't see any real anthropologists suggesting this but it is brunted about as though it's fact.

[Argang]

No study has, but this is what people like maciamo at eupedia have been claiming, unless story has changed.

Eupedia's R1b article currently pushes the idea that R1b was the southern half of proto-indo-europeans in the Pontic-Caspian steppe and came there as a part of Dnieper-Donets culture, but was in Anatolia before that.

[blogen]

No study has, but this is what people like maciamo at eupedia have been claiming, unless story has changed.
Theory I hear all the time is that r1b came to europe very recently, basically just before romans. I don't see any real anthropologists suggesting this but it is brunted about as though it's fact.

No, here are two Bell Beaker R1b sample from 2,678–2,547 cal BC: R1b1b2 and R1b (http://www.academia.edu/1596369/Emerging_genetic_patterns_of_the_European_Neolithi c_perspectives_from_a_Late_Neolithic_Bell_Beaker_b urial_site_in_Germany)

[Fire Haired]

Definitely not and the R1b was presumably the pre-Indoeuropean neolithic farmers' fundamental gene in South-western and Western Europe. But maybe the R1b was common between the Indoeuropean neolithic population in the Balkan and Central Europe too. The R1a is definitely connected to the spread or inluence of the Indoeuropean Satem peoples.

R1b is not associated with LBK or Cardiel cultures and was supposable brought to Europe(at least western) after the Neolithic probably with Indo Europeans.

[Longbowman]

No study has, but this is what people like maciamo at eupedia have been claiming, unless story has changed.

Theory I hear all the time is that r1b came to europe very recently, basically just before romans. I don't see any real anthropologists suggesting this but it is brunted about as though it's fact.

Most anthropologists think it came with the Indo-Europeans, reaching Britain around 3-3,500 years ago.

[Longbowman]

3800 - 3400 years ago. Well, so when did r1b come then, if it really was not in europe until then.


Says who? This is new to me, every bit of archaeology says migrations came east to west, and the whole theory of them coming out of east pegged andronovo as the source. Clearly with these timeframes and DNA samples it did NOT come from there, and something even further off is even sillier. Italic r1b came to italy before 1000 BC. And it barely made any impact whatsoever on italy, let alone whole of europe. So in some unknown point between 1000 and 2000 BC r1b was supposed to have flooded all of europe from parts unknown, without passing/mingling with r1a OR picking up italic r1b version. It's just incredibly ridiculous. We know the r1b was there because the basques are super r1b and they were there before romans.


Again, since when? Who made this up? The story changes every day, it seems. Suddenly andronovo is not an option so something even more unlikely is tossed out.



Because it would have had to have to come from the east, obviously. And if it came on a southern route and yet completely avoided r1a then it should have picked up some italic r1b.

And it would have had to have been a cataclysmic migration 100 times bigger than the one of the romans as well, which nobody has any legends or written records of.

Ancient Basque DNA is hugely different from contemporary Basque DNA.

On the mtDNA line, for example, old sites come up at about 25% U8 but today it's around 1%.

[Artek]

Ancient Basque DNA is hugely different from contemporary Basque DNA.

On the mtDNA line, for example, old sites come up at about 25% U8 but today it's around 1%.
The next thing would be to prove anyhow, that R1b lines in Basques were introduced later but replacing of most Y-DNA lines haven't changed them much culturally-wise. Such scenario is possible and was discussed many times on various forums. I see pre-R1b Basques as a G2a+I2+E-V13 folk, just like Sardinians.

[Fire Haired]

Ancient Basque DNA is hugely different from contemporary Basque DNA.

On the mtDNA line, for example, old sites come up at about 25% U8 but today it's around 1%.

I can't detect any obvious difference between Neolithic Iberian mtDNA and modern Iberian and Basque mtDNA. I haven't really looked into detail for either though. From what I know there hasn't been any full sequence mtDNA results from Neolithic Iberians, just La Brana-1 and La Brana-2 who were Mesolithic(with a tiny winy pit of farmer ancestry) and had a Mesolithic maternal lineage U5b2c1.

Autosomally Iberians have the second highest amount of Stuttgart-like ancestry in Europe(Sardinians are number one). Besides some post-Neolithic north-west European like admixture(via Celts) I don't think modern Iberians(especially Basque) are any different from Neolithic ones. Plus Iberians and especially Basque probably have the highest amount of native Mesolithic west European ancestry(La Brana-1's people). Its obvious when looking at admixtures and a IBS(Identity, by decent, that's all I know) that Davidski at Eurogenes posted, French Basque share more with la Brana-1 than Danish and other Europeans who have more Mesolithic ancestry. Modern and Neolithic Y DNA of course are very different mainly because of the R1b L11 phenomenon that swept over all of western Europe in the last 5,000 years. I still think it was probably spread by Indo Europeans but who knows.

[Fire Haired]

No study has, but this is what people like maciamo at eupedia have been claiming, unless story has changed.

Theory I hear all the time is that r1b came to europe very recently, basically just before romans. I don't see any real anthropologists suggesting this but it is brunted about as though it's fact.

People who say R1b spread after the Roman empire probably have sometype of agenda and are nuts. The process of how it became dominate is probably very complicated and maybe it took time(elite domince).

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Ancient Basque DNA is hugely different from contemporary Basque DNA.

On the mtDNA line, for example, old sites come up at about 25% U8 but today it's around 1%.

1000 BC brings us to historical times. We know for fact basques were there already and did not get conquered or displaced.

So all this crap absolutely has to come before 1000 BC.

Since the Iberian language seems related to Basque, it probably had to happen at least 1000 years before that, as well.

So we are now talking about a bounding of a few hundred years for all this massive stuff to happen, and if basque and iberian languages are really related, then it's completely impossible.

It's yet another anthropology theory that doesn't pay attention to history or archaeology, and therefore it's just utter crap. There's no evidence for it whatsoever, and it's almost completely falsified by all the facts we do have.

[Fire Haired]

1000 BC brings us to historical times. We know for fact basques were there already and did not get conquered or displaced.

So all this crap absolutely has to come before 1000 BC.

Since the Iberian language seems related to Basque, it probably had to happen at least 1000 years before that, as well.

So we are now talking about a bounding of a few hundred years for all this massive stuff to happen, and if basque and iberian languages are really related, then it's completely impossible.

It's yet another anthropology theory that doesn't pay attention to history or archaeology, and therefore it's just utter crap. There's no evidence for it whatsoever, and it's almost completely falsified by all the facts we do have.

In almost all of Europe historic times began about 2,000 or less years ago. To become apart of historic times your people or another people who know you have to be able to write and modern people have to have those writings. So historic times is a very recent thing. A lot could have happened inbetween 1,000BC and the time Romans began writing about people in Iberia and western France so you can't assume its impossible.

The Aquitani spoke related and ancestral languages to Basque and they were mainly in western France not Iberia, just saying. It would make sense Basque is related to Iberian but still what does that prove?

[Longbowman]

1000 BC brings us to historical times. We know for fact basques were there already and did not get conquered or displaced.

So all this crap absolutely has to come before 1000 BC.

Since the Iberian language seems related to Basque, it probably had to happen at least 1000 years before that, as well.

So we are now talking about a bounding of a few hundred years for all this massive stuff to happen, and if basque and iberian languages are really related, then it's completely impossible.

It's yet another anthropology theory that doesn't pay attention to history or archaeology, and therefore it's just utter crap. There's no evidence for it whatsoever, and it's almost completely falsified by all the facts we do have.

No, none of this is right. Furthermore genetic exchanges have completely changed the Basque genetic makeup from the early Neolithic, which is when R first came to Europe. As I have already said.

[Kale]

Didn't somebody post a link not too long ago showing the Basque y-dna pool hasn't changed, like at all, in the last 1500 years?

[Fire Haired]

Didn't somebody post a link not too long ago showing the Basque y-dna pool hasn't changed, like at all, in the last 1500 years?

Yes there is around 1500 year old Y DNA from basque country and its no differnt from modern ones(click here (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/medievaldna.shtml)). No one should be surprised by that since its from historical times and we would know if there was some major genetic change in basque country since then.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

In almost all of Europe historic times began about 2,000 or less years ago. To become apart of historic times your people or another people who know you have to be able to write and modern people have to have those writings. So historic times is a very recent thing. A lot could have happened inbetween 1,000BC and the time Romans began writing about people in Iberia and western France so you can't assume its impossible.

The Aquitani spoke related and ancestral languages to Basque and they were mainly in western France not Iberia, just saying. It would make sense Basque is related to Iberian but still what does that prove?

Aquetani, turdetani, and a couple more are all related languages. They were there before romans showed up, and in fact the turdetani they knew were not the originals. They knew about iberia basically from their foundation almost.

We know that the turdetani the romans knew of came from elsewhere at 1000 BC, for example. We also know they were not the original ones who founded the city, but they were related to iberians. So NO actually we do know it's got to be back further than that. Since there's archaeological continuity going back even further it becomes even more unlikely.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/02/human-admixture-common-in-human-history.html

No significant race mixing detected in UK for many thousands of years. So if they came to europe, they did so on magic carpets and didn't find anyone here when they came.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

No, none of this is right. Furthermore genetic exchanges have completely changed the Basque genetic makeup from the early Neolithic, which is when R first came to Europe. As I have already said.

:lol:

I guess I should have just said that to yo to start with. No, everything you say is wrong, sorry. Well, obviously you are newcomer to this stuff so it's kind of silly to try and just say I am categorically wrong without showing how.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Didn't somebody post a link not too long ago showing the Basque y-dna pool hasn't changed, like at all, in the last 1500 years?

Not in last few thousand years. For older results mainly they (irritatingly) don't do a full mtdna analysis or even any y-dna analysis. So you are left guessing as to what is H and what is U, because U is upstream from H so if you don't test enough you won't know. Spanish are extremely, crazily biased against the basques, because the basques are the most ancient people of the area and yet want to have independence. So it's no surprise they skew results against basques both linguistically and when doing DNA measurements - basically they are defrauding by not doing any tests that would prove the basques correct in their belief they have been there for many thousands of years.

Regardless, Longbowman is wrong about the DNA and about this theory. Tests on the most ancient mtdna are inconclusive because of the improper manner in which they were conducted, and also don't say shit about the r1b question anyway. But probably they are H mtdna, not U anyway. In which case entire kurgan hypothesis is bullshit.

Now I don't doubt there were migrations, but I am very certain that most of the 'germanic' y-dna was actually r1a, and also that they made about the same genetic impact on europe as a whole as a fart in the wind.