Printable View
~80% of Yamnaya males belong to haplogroup R1b, and so far not a single R1a individual has been found.
Direct inheritance between Yamnaya and Bell Beaker is clear.
However, origins of R1a and Corded Ware are as mysterious in 2026 as they were in 2015, and the progress over the past decade remains limited.
Where do you think R1a really came from?
https://i.postimg.cc/FHs2nV7m/1850.jpg
Bell Beaker's direct ancestry from Yamnaya is clear? Did they fly to Western Europe?
R1b males migrated westward first; after that, the R1a ones arrived and slammed the door shut. The question isn’t really where the R1b males came from — about 80% of Yamnaya males are R1b. The question is where the R1a males came from — and filled the space between Yamnaya and their descendants in Western Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
The in-between space — Poland, Slovakia — the R1b males crossed it on their way to Western Europe.
After that Poland and Slovakia received an influx of R1a males of a mysterious origin (not Yamnaya).
What is your best guess on the mysterious origin of R1a males who replaced the R1b ones in Poland and Slovakia? Where did they come from?
chatgpt answer. R1b became dominant in southern steppe Yamnaya elites. R1a likely rose in northern forest-steppe / steppe frontier groups closely related to them, then exploded with Corded Ware and later Sintashta.
So R1a is probably a sibling phenomenon to Yamnaya, not an alien mystery outside the steppe.
Sredny Stog, dawg
That's my guess as well that R1a males lived directly to the North of Yamnaya, but not a single burial site with a predominance of R1a males had been discovered so far, so it remains speculative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benyzero
Why are Yamnaya burial sites all R1b and no R1a? Did they intentionally segregate?
Sredny Stog is way older than Yamnaya and occupied the same geographical space.Quote:
Originally Posted by Figaro
Where did they go after they were pushed out of that area by R1b males?
Yamnaya R1b is all R1b-Z2103.
While Bell Beaker R1b is all R1b-L51, so there is also no direct continuity between these two groups. But there are samples of R1b-L51 from the Corded Ware Culture, so Corded Ware was not all R1a, R1b also existed there.
Bell Beaker R1b-L51 comes from Western Corded Ware, not directly from Yamnaya.
=====
Here you have a datasheet with R1a and R1b ancient samples sorted chronologically:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
Based on this data I started making a map of PIE expansion, but I haven't finished yet:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/4/ed...rQ&usp=sharing
R1a BattleAxe…how instrumental in forging proto-Germanic? Interaction with R1b SG/BB? Maybe related topic and sorry if kinda irrelevant here
What I was getting at is what Peterski has said, Bell Beaker is clearly directly descended from Corded Ware, not Yamnaya.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion Arm
As for the origin of R1a, one can only go by the earliest recorded sample of it, which I believe is from Northwestern Russia c.10,000 BC, Eastern Hunter Gatherers. Corded Ware were autosomally descended from the Pontic Caspian Steppe like their Yamnaya cousins though. So somewhere in that vicinity I guess, in Ukraine.
Most of the oldest R1a and R1b samples (except for R1b-V88) are from European Russia and Ukraine.
Depends on which Corded Ware.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
Corded Ware in Eastern Europe and in Battle Axe Scandinavia is only R1a with no R1b.
While Corded Ware in places Germany and the Netherlands is partially (or even mostly) R1b.
So we are dealing with two geographically and genetically disparate groups, both labelled "Corded Ware".
Bell Beakers descend specifically from Corded Ware groups that had R1b — in Germany, in the Netherlands.
I leapfrogged this part and question whether these R1b groups in Germany and the Netherlands can even be considered "Corded Ware" at all if they have a distinct origin from R1a groups to the East and North.
What do you think? Did you never notice that the label "Corded Ware" is superimposed on two distinct groups — one R1b, one R1a — which also happen to be geographically disparate.
I'm grateful for this useful information about clade specificality. Would you go as far as to say that the "Corded Ware" groups in Germany and the Netherlands do not descend from Yamnaya? If they do no descend from Yamnaya, then whom do they descend from in reality?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
For Germanic origins, please use another one of my threads;Quote:
Originally Posted by Figaro
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...ia%94-is-false
The majority of R1b in Turkey belongs to this clade. Is it only found in Yamnaya?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
These CWC groups with R1a and R1b are not distinct because R1a and R1b existed in both groups intermingled with each other.
For example in Polish Corded Ware there are also R1b samples.
In fact R1b and R1a existed intermingled with each other in Russia & Ukraine since EHG times, as you can see in my datasheet.
I leapfrogged this part because R1a Corded Ware (Battle Axe Scandinavia, Fatyanovo Russia, Sintashta/Andronovo Kazakhstan) and R1b Corded Ware (Germany, Netherlands) appear to be genetically segregated, which suggests two disparate migration waves.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
No disagreement that Bell Beakers descend from R1b Corded Ware in Germany/Netherlands, this is certain. I just reserved the "Corded Ware" label for R1a groups farther East and North to highlight the apparent geographic and genetic segregation.
Regarding 10000 BC: yes, R1a is ultimatrly from EHG if we're going that far back.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
The question is where they lived at the time when Yamnaya occupied the Pontic Caspian steppe and my own best guess (as well as Chat GPT's guess) is that they lived directly to the North of Yamnaya.
A new question arising from a post by user Peterski: who were the real ancestors of German/Dutch Corded Ware.
My Y-Haplo is R1b-Z2103.
The oldest recorded R1b is from Italy though! That explains why I like Fettucine alla Matriciana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
No disagreement on that there have always been contact zones where R1b and R1a mixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
Even today there are in-between zones — Central Europe, Scandinavia — where both exist in significant quantities.
But your premise that R1b and R1a were fully interbred since EHG times is incorrect, and I will explain why: Certain CWC groups (Battle Axe, Fatyanovo, Sintashta/Andronovo) are all R1a, no R1b. Bell Beakers groups are all R1b, maybe exceptionally rare R1a exist, but they're just that — exceptions. And even if you look at modern situation, after several thousand years of intermixing between Europeans, you will still find lopsided ratios among modern descendants of BB and Eastern CWC. The ratio of R1b-to-R1a in modern Western Europe (British Isles, France, Iberia, Low Countries, West Germany, Switzerland, West Austria, Italy) is completely lopsided, just as the ratio of R1a-to-R1b in modern Eastern Europe (Belarus, Lithuania, Ukraine, Russia, to a lesser extent Poland, Estonia, Latvia) is also completely lopsided. In these countries the ratio between these two haplogroups varies from lopsided 5:1 to absurd 100:1, 200:1. This suggests two disparate waves, not one wave of R1a-R1b mixed soup.
There is an ongoing debate in the comment section of Davidski's Eurogenes blog regarding the origin of R1b in modern Europeans.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
People gathered multiple mesolithic WHG individuals with R1b haplogroups and are directly challenging Reich/Lazaridis dogma — their counter-claim is that R1b entered Yamnaya from the West (WHG), not from the East (EHG/ANE).
It is fascinating to observe and I have not yet taken a side.
Wasn't WHG R1b mostly R1b-V88 (which is a subclade which today exists mostly in Africa)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion Arm
In Russia & Ukraine you have many EHG samples with R1b. Both R1a and R1b are from EHG.
But R1b and R1a were fully integrated in EHG times. Have you seen the datasheet which I posted?Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion Arm
Battle Axe, Fatyanovo or Bell Beaker are the results of founder events.
Simply an older population in which both R1b and R1a existed intermingled with each other, then separated into younger populations, some of which were dominated just by R1a or just by R1b due to founder events (they descended from small numbers of founders). Also it is incorrect to operate just with macro-haplogroups like R1a or R1b. We should look at subclades. For example R1a-Z93 in Fatyanovo, R1b-P312 in Bell Beaker (there is no U106 in Bell Beaker so far, if I remember correctly), R1a-Z284 in Battle Axe, etc. Most of these cultures were dominated just by specific subclades.
Wasn't Villabruna R1b-V88? Which subclade did he belong to?Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Ketch
I have not really taken a side yet. They probably have an answer to your objection, but I did not follow closely. Yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
I'm actually not satisfied with this answer for 3 different reasons:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
1). You claim too many cultures occupying too vast geographical spaces to all be results of founding effects
2). Even if those ancient cultures as well as modern Eastern Europeans have lopsided R1a-to-R1b ratios due to founder effects, you didn't address why modern Bell Beakers as well as modern Western Europeans have lopsided R1b-to-R1a ratios (the segregation theory rests on an evidence of mutual segregation, not a one-way one)
3). Subclades don't really address the topic, no matter how many R1a clades exist, this haplogroup is vastly outnumbered by R1b among Bell Beakers and modern Western Europeans, just as R1b is vastly outnumbered by R1a among Eastern Corded Ware as well as modern Eastern Europeans
The theory of disparate migrations of R1b and R1a clans is much more tenable
But Fatyanovo is all R1a-Z93, Battle Axe is all R1a-Z284 and Bell Beaker is entirely R1b-P312.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orion Arm
It is a fact that these cultures are dominated by specific subclades, not by entire haplogroups.
So they must be the results of founder events.
Modern Western Europeans also have lopsided ratios of various R1b subclades to each other.
For example in Ireland 83% of their R1b belongs to R1b-Z290 subclade (also known as L21).
How do you explains this?
We're talking about massive geographic spaces (Bell Beakers = half of Europe, Battle Axe/Fatyanovo/Sintashta = even bigger area) being completely dominated by R1b and R1a respectively, and they follow clean geographic patterns rather than being a random mosaic. Both the scale as well as a clean geographic pattern make the theory of multiple recurring bottlenecks untenable (freak of nature odds)Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
As for the diversity of R1b clades in Western Europe, I'd say most of them developed during and after the Bell Beaker culture. R1b-L21 emerged 4500 years ago, that's chiefly within the Bell Beaker culture
Yes L21 emerged 4500 years ago and probably on the continent.
But how do you explain that only L21 males (and not males from other subclades) went to colonize Britain?
It is clear that British Bell Beaker culture was founded by one clan.
R-L754.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
SameQuote:
Originally Posted by chinshen