Stonehenge: DNA reveals origin of builders

[AphroditeWorshiper]

They didn't absorb nearly as much as Southern Europeans. And even if the Balkans did, then the Yamnaya people surely diluted a lot of the Balkans' EEF admixture.

interesting!

So Balkans it's more Yamna than EEF

[AphroditeWorshiper]

Also a lot of blondes among British Beakers (contrary to the idea that Anglo-Saxons and Vikings brought blonde hair):

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/pigmentation/

they brought Red hair to Britain too

[FinalFlash]

interesting!

So Balkans it's more Yamna than EEF

I guess it varies depending on where in the Balkans you are talking about. I don't think Albanians, Macedonians and Bulgarians are predominantly steppe-infused.

[Imperator Biff]

Neolithic Brits/Irish share most drift with Iberian EEF and came from the cardial route this is nothing new and has been known for several years now.
Modern ones don’t have any unique genetic relationship so the Atlantic facade theory is not true.

[Morena]

1. And you quoted the Arabs too... it's like unaware the current data: the EEF, which are a mix of Anatolian farmer with a little Hunter Gatherer, does not clust with the Bedouins or North Africans for obvious reasons: different genetic constitution. I showed you a map that shows you where are located EEF... which are remote (we see it on the map) of the current populations of Levant, North Africa, Near East.

In short: the EEF were neither Arabs, nor Turks, nor ancient "Semites", Celtic, etc; nor other things that "old Europeans"; that is to say, a population living before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans (so this applies as much to the Hunter Gatherer populations to the Anatolians Farmers -moreover, contrary to what one says, a genetic study showed besides that the Anatolian farmers were at least 90/95% native, with 10/5% natufian contribution admixture, which is few-), then to the Early Europeans Farmer;




2. With the current data, it is known that the term "race" can no longer be used to designate a simple color of hair and eyes combined with a specific morphology (which, moreover, changes with time, such as size) and cranial measurements; the ancient racial classification dating from before the emergence of genetics used the term "Caucasian race" (that is to say, people whose cranial measurements were neither close to those of Negroes, nor those of Asians ) in a non-genetic sense (which is normal: we did not know how to explore the DNA at the time). The racial classification was based on cranial measurements + body morphology + pigmentation: these three elements was essential to "classify" an individual.

In addition, the ancient anthropologists had different types of racial classifications, so that an individual of the "alpine" type (according to his measurements) according one anthropologist, would be considered as "Mediterranean" or "mixed" according to another anthropologist: which shows a non-homogeneity in racial classifications and, sometimes, totally subjective or ideological points of view (a scientist must remain as objective as possible), which proves that there was no "solid racial classification" even at this time;

Now, we live in 2019. If Coon and other anthropologists were still living today, he would have simply changed his racial classification to include these new genetic data.



3. The "Mediterranean race" have no genetic homogeneity. That there are non-European contributions in certain populations in Europe, yes it is a fact and we can read lots of genetic studies on this, but from there to consider that there would be a "Mediterranean race "which would imply a relative racial, cultural and linguistic homogeneity: it does not exist and it never existed.

Once again: contributions exist, be they genetic or linguistic or cultural (Christianity has semitized some things), but they are non-native contributions in general: for example, the contribution of French in the current language spoken in North Africa is a reality, but that does not mean that their genetic makeup of north african are similar to the "French people". It's a contribution, but it is not a native element to the population.

Other exemple The minimal phenician and "roman" (aka many ethnic group) contribution in South-Western Sardinia is a fact, genetically speaking, BUT it was an external element, it does not mean that the native population already had genetically and linguistically speaking a link with the Phoenicians and "Romans" (aka many ethnic group and race) at this time. Reasoning in this way is meaningless (I do not say that you think so).


Also other example:

Before, Sardinians did not speak a indo-european language, but a kind of Proto-Basque language (according to what is known). However, at present, the current Barbagians sardinians are more Indo-Europeanized in linguistic terms (contribution of an Indo-European language: Sardinian) than ancien Barbagians sardinians... but that does not mean that the ancien barbagians Sardinians had already a link with the Indo-Europeans, genetically speaking, all this because the modern Sardinians of barbagia speak an Indo-European language >>> They speak an Indo-European language because they adopted this language (which does not correspond to their genetic constitution, because the barbagians Sardinians have very little, if any, Indo-European input), but it is an objectively non-native element, but that does not change their genetic constitution: they are not more Indo-European after the adoption of this language than they were before.



4.

Concerning the "Mediterranean" traits:

There are what called "pseudo exotic traits": a Norman (since 15 generations) could have inherited the dark brown (not medium or chesnut, but dark brown, strictly) hair of his paternal grandfather; a big, potato-shaped nose of his mother; big eyebrows of his great-grandfather; a weird form of eyes of his father; strange ears of his great-grandmother ... this combination of features can make an individual aesthetically ugly and give a pseudo-exotic appearance. The ugly people in general or who have unsightly facial features may seem strange or pseudo exotic, according to people, it is not an abnormality, it is a reality, these are things that exist but it does not prove:

1. the existence of a Mediterranean race (with all that that entails);


2. That this Norman would be "Mediterranean" because superficially ""sharing traits with other peoples of North Africa and Middle Eastern or Near Eastern" ​​(knowing that these population has within it people with extremely mixed traits) according to some (I say " according to some ", because it is often subjective), does not make it a reality: genetically speaking, this person he is what he is: a Norman, with what it means: a genetic continuity with his Norman ancestors. His features are native, that this person has a combination of traits that makes him pseudo exotic in the eyes of some does not change the fact that he inherited native traits of his parents, grandparents, etc.




In conclusion:

Romanization has brought acculturation and uprooting to many indigenous peoples of Europe (and other part), so that the descendants of these acculturation and uprooted people feel so culturally and identities empty that they feel compelled to attach themselves to a culture and "inheritance" which is not theirs, which creates more uprooted beings who think themselves to be the descendants of some people.

A Sardinian of Barbagia, who is little, if any, Indo-European should not speak an Indo-European language, which is modern Sardinian (Indo-European language) because it is not his native language; it should not adopt Christianity, which is a Semitic religion and has little to do with its genetic constitution (the Semites are not "pure EEF" contrary to what one might think). He should reconnect, as much as possible, with the ancient paganism of his native people and native culture; some people will tell you that this is not possible: we can indeed say that certain elements can not be recovered (the "Paleo-Sardinian" language is extinguished, so it's impossible to recover this element), but of other elements are recoverable.

As for the Mediterranean identity:

The Romans had a culture of exoticism, expansionism and a "politic" of non-preservation of ethnic groups (like Mussolini), they saw the Sardinians of Barbagia as filthy barbarians who did not want to mix, who did not want to not be part of their "civilized Mediterranean identity" with their berber, semitic, many race and ethnic group in their "Great Roman Empire". This was not perceived as something good from the point of view of a former Sardinian Barbagia, so the Sardinians of Barbagia resisted more deeply and radically to the Romans, it was not for fun, but to preserve their ethnic group, culture, manners, language and religion. And this is great.

I totally reject this "Mediterranean identity" which is a scam that is based on an ideology linked to the fetishism of the races of North Africa and the Levant people, aka post-Roman identity heritage

Many French (and others), by the way, are fervent Mediterraneanist and sophists: they will love to tell you that a Venetian or a Basque is closer to a Palestinian or a Berber of Oran than an Irishman or a German Swiss; it's a way of saying implicitly that the Basque or the Venetian should think in this way: me, Basque/Venetian, I am closer to a Palestinian or a Berber of Oran than a Swiss German or an Irishman, so I should feel closer to these people. I should adhere to this "Great Civilized -lol- Mediterranean identity" and attack the barbares!


However, we can speak of "North-West European cluster", because unlike the supposed "Mediterranean cluster"/race (which does not exist in the sense that it is given now, that is to say: Berbers, Palestinians, Tunisians, Arabs, Basques, Gascons, Savoy, Sardinians, Catalans all of which would be part of the same cluster with a relative genetic homogeneity), we note a relative genetic homogeneity between Irish, Austrians, Danes, English, Scottish, etc. Obviously, this does not mean that all these ethnic groups are identical, hence the use of the term "relative homogeneity".

I finished my text.

What I mean by med is Southern Europe and maybe part of the Levant.
So Eff you dad. Got it.

[Graham]

The British hunter-gatherers were almost completely replaced by the Neolithic farmers, apart from one group in western Scotland, where the Neolithic inhabitants had elevated local ancestry. This could have come down to the farmer groups simply having greater numbers.

Where in the West?

Was in Kilmartin Glen last summer which has tons upon tons of Neolithic remains and have been to Lewis which is another hotspot for Neolithic Remains. Those two cover the Southern and Northern Highland, and Islands near the coast.

When you get inland in the Highlands there are parts of the Caledonian Forest that remain from the Mesoloithic Era, surrounding the lochs and rocky hills. Not practical as a farmer and can see why pockets could have existed.

[Bellbeaking]

https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.natur...559-019-0871-9


full paper:

Higher WHG in west scotland and SE england among neolithics is not news. (Brace et al 2018 also claimed as such https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/267443v1)

Reichs paper:

South-East England and Scotland show considerably higher
WHG admixture proportions. These proportions remain stable
from the Early into the Middle/Late Neolithic. To infer levels of
WHG introgression occurring between Iberian Early Neolithic
populations and early British farmers, we estimated admixture
proportions using qpAdm24. We detected little excess (~10%)
WHG ancestry beyond that already present in Iberian Early
Neolithic individuals, supporting little or no additional admixture with British hunter-gatherers, particularly in Wales and
South-West and Central England (Figs. 3, 4b and Supplementary
Table 4). This result appears to be slightly at odds with the f4
results presented in Supplementary Fig. 7, which indicate that
some British Neolithic samples share genetic affinities with
Cheddar Man over Loschbour, although it is difficult to say in
these cases whether this is due to genuine substantial admixture
with British WHGs or with other WHGs in northern Europe.
We regressed individual WHG ancestry proportions in British
Neolithic farmers (shown in Supplementary Fig. 8) against latitude and longitude and found a notably positive south-west to
north-east cline (Supplementary Fig. 15).
To further explore WHG introgression in Britain we applied
ALDER27 to pairs of Early Neolithic regional samples to estimate the
timing of WHG/ANF admixture events (Supplementary Table 3).
Only Early Neolithic farmers from western Scotland show evidence
of WHG introgression within ten generations. Two individuals
from Raschoille Cave had estimated introgression events occurring
4.0±3.4 generations before they lived, which is sufficiently recent
in their past that it probably occurred in Britain. The elevated levels
of WHG ancestry we see in Neolithic samples from South-East
England are older, and therefore probably a result of farmer–forager
interactions in mainland Europe

Suggesting multiple neolithic waves of migration rather than meerly a western entry point and diffusion from there.

The
affinities we find between Neolithic individuals from the British
Isles and modern individuals from France are consistent with populations sharing ancestry with Neolithic groups in Iberia moving into
northern France via the Atlantic seaboard and/or southern France,
mixing to a limited degree with Neolithic populations from Central
Europe before travelling across the English Channel1,2,30.
One explanation for the British Neolithic cline in WHG ancestry is that a single population moved across Britain from a western
entry point and progressively admixed with local hunter-gatherers.
This scenario is consistent with the western distribution of megalithic cultures along the Atlantic seaboard31, and is supported by
radiocarbon evidence suggesting a marginally earlier date for
the arrival of ANF ancestry in the west of Britain1
. However, the
lack of evidence for substantive WHG introgression into British
Neolithic populations—outside of western Scotland—favours this
cline, reflecting multiple source populations with variable proportions of WHG admixture having entered different parts of Britain.

south east england may have had more danubian farmer or iberian/danubian mixed farmers, who had introgressed more with mesolithics around central europe. What happened to the british HG's?

Neolithic England was the only British Isles region to have notable central euro farmer.

To test for a potential second ANF ancestry stream from Central
Europe, we explicitly modelled WHG and Early Neolithic populations in qpGraph (see Supplementary Fig. 23 and Supplementary
Table 10). The results suggest that the limited Central European
Neolithic admixture we find in British Neolithic populations is
regionally structured, with populations from England showing the
highest levels of admixture followed by those from Scotland. We
infer no Central European admixture in Neolithic farmers from
Wales. However, we caution that the model fits are poor and so
these inferences should be considered preliminary.

[mattp]

Does anyone know if there any of the British neolithic samples on Gedmatch at all? Thanks

[PaleoEuropean]

The reconstruction woman look more WHG than Farmer

Britain was inhabited and depopulated several times. We know that Western Hunter-gatherers were the majority of Megalith builders, Cheddarman could have been a stow away from Greenland (Thought to be from C hence the darker skin). Cheddarman doesn't even come close to the first inhabitant, we know that I2 came to the Isles from Doggerland and only a tiny population made it through the tsunamis and all the other crazy stuff that led to it being the ocean it is today. The hunter-gathers entombed their important dead mostly and most the remains found are in Megalithic Orkney tombs when it comes to Britain (trace back to I2 ). Because there was no genetic diversity, very very few inhabitants; urvivors I2 bottlenecked in Britian making them almost extinct several times (some lines have even gone extinct in modern times. A lot of scientist believe that when other populations came, they spread diseases and dwindled out a lot of the already thin hunter gatherers. When the Aryans, Meds etc came to Europe it helped the population bounce back most likely adding fresh dna to the pool and adding much needed women. For the most part I is more common than its female counterparts, likely due to women being less likely to survive births, diseases that Middle Eastern populations brought etc. The native European MTDNA haplogroups mostly exist where I is found, but in Western Europe it is much rarer due to the conditions I said before.

The Eastern I and U5 women probably developed anti-bodies to diseases much earlier than the Northern Europeans as they had contact with the Middle Easterners long before and were most likely the Patient Zero's for spreading the diseases that thinned some of the other populations.

[TheOldNorth]

they have too dark skin, they would've been olive colored, like spaniards or greeks. The dark skin is political propaganda saying that dark skinned people were the first in Britain, in reality, the first people in britain were darker then the modern people of the region, but no where near sub-saharan levels, they would've all died of scurvy if that were the case