Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
09-29-2023, 10:47 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-08-2023, 12:59 AM by Albruic.
Edit Reason: Adjusted text formating.
)
Okay, I'm starting this thread up again here at the new place, because this is an interesting topic for me.
So here's my basic reasoning, based on all that we know so far.
1. L21 is probably too old to have originated in the British Isles, since it was born ~2600 BC and did not arrive in Britain until ~2400 BC. (I am aware of the 95% confidence interval for L21. We can discuss that, if you’d like.)
2. L21 arrived in Britain with Beaker people from the Continent ~2400 BC (the Olalde et al Beaker paper makes that pretty obvious).
3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
Conclusion -
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
It seems to me this is pretty solid, unless L21 turns out to be a lot younger than we currently think it is, or we find out Beaker arrived in Britain a lot earlier, neither of which seems likely.
Okay, so here's my reasoning, based on all that has been said so far.
1. L21 is probably too old to have originated in the British Isles, since it was born ~2600 BC and did not arrive in Britain until ~2400 BC.
2. L21 arrived in Britain with Beaker people from the Continent ~2400 BC (the Olalde et al Beaker paper makes that pretty obvious).
3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and
the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
It seems to me this is pretty solid, unless L21 turns out to be a lot younger than we currently think it is, or we find out Beaker arrived in Britain a lot earlier, neither of which seems likely. Okay, so here's my reasoning, based on all that has been said so far.
1. L21 is probably too old to have originated in the British Isles, since it was born ~2600 BC and did not arrive in Britain until ~2400 BC.
2. L21 arrived in Britain with Beaker people from the Continent ~2400 BC (the Olalde et al Beaker paper makes that pretty obvious).
3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and
the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
It seems to me this is pretty solid, unless L21 turns out to be a lot younger than we currently think it is, or we find out Beaker arrived in Britain a lot earlier, neither of which seems likely.
Okay, so here's my reasoning, based on all that has been said so far.
1. L21 is probably too old to have originated in the British Isles, since it was born ~2600 BC and did not arrive in Britain until ~2400 BC.
2. L21 arrived in Britain with Beaker people from the Continent ~2400 BC (the Olalde et al Beaker paper makes that pretty obvious).
3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and
the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
It seems to me this is pretty solid, unless L21 turns out to be a lot younger than we currently think it is, or we find out Beaker arrived in Britain a lot earlier, neither of which seems likely. Okay, so here's my reasoning, based on all that has been said so far.
1. L21 is probably too old to have originated in the British Isles, since it was born ~2600 BC and did not arrive in Britain until ~2400 BC.
2. L21 arrived in Britain with Beaker people from the Continent ~2400 BC (the Olalde et al Beaker paper makes that pretty obvious).
3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and
the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
It seems to me this is pretty solid, unless L21 turns out to be a lot younger than we currently think it is, or we find out Beaker arrived in Britain a lot earlier, neither of which seems likely.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
09-30-2023, 05:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2023, 06:08 PM by rmstevens2.)
Let's begin with numbers 1 and 2 in the OP above.
Here's what the R-L21 "Haplogroup Story" in FTDNA Discover says today:
Quote:The man who is the most recent common ancestor of this line is estimated to have been born around 2650 BCE.
So, FTDNA has once again bumped the TMRCA of R1b-L21 back to 2650 BC.
Here's the 95% confidence interval for L21:
Quote:With a 95% probability, the most recent common ancestor of all members of haplogroup R-L21 was born between the years 3316 and 2071 BCE. The most likely estimate is 2652 BCE, rounded to 2650 BCE.
That's a broad range, which leaves one free to argue that since Beaker arrived in Britain around 2400 BC, and L21 has been found in early British Beaker men, but not in Britain before Beaker, L21 could have been born in Britain if it was actually born in 2400 BC or later, rather than around 2650 BC. That wide confidence interval allows one to believe that L21 may have been born around 2400 BC or later.
But how likely is it that FTDNA's 2650 BC estimate is wrong, and L21 was actually born in Britain after 2400 BC?
Not very.
For one thing, the oldest British Beaker man we currently know about, who is known in FTDNA Discover's Ancient Connections as "Low Hauxley 70" (sample KD070 from the 2022 Dulias et al paper, "Ancient DNA at the Edge of the World: Continental Immigration and the Persistence of Neolithic Male Lineages in Bronze Age Orkney"), is c14 dated to 2464-2209 BC. He was already R1b-DF13, two steps downstream of L21 (L21>S552>DF13). The midpoint of Low Hauxley's c14 date range is ~2336 BC, so we know DF13 was already in existence by then. FTDNA discover estimates that the MRCA of DF13 was born about 2500 BC, which also predates (or perhaps roughly coincides with) the arrival of Beaker in Britain.
If the earliest R1b-L21 British Beaker man we currently know of was not merely R1b-L21, but was actually R1b-DF13, two steps downstream of L21, and he can be dated pretty confidently to ~2336 BC, then it isn't likely that R1b-L21 was born after 2400 BC.
L21 is not found in Britain before the arrival of Beaker ~2400 BC (see the 2018 Olalde et al paper, "The Beaker Phenomenon and the Genomic Transformation of Northwest Europe"). Therefore, if L21 was born well before 2400 BC, it had to have been born on the Continent, probably in early Beaker or in Beaker's immediate ancestor, Single Grave Corded Ware.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
09-30-2023, 09:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2023, 10:26 PM by rmstevens2.)
Let me address numbers 3 and 4 in the OP above:
Quote:3. The Beaker people who went to Britain came (for the most part) from the Lower Rhine region (according to Heyd, van der Waals, Glasbergen, and the apparent autosomal connection between Dutch and British Beaker).
4. Beaker (at least Dutch Beaker) was derived from the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
Let's start with what Olalde et al say about the autosomal connection between British Beaker, at least southern British Beaker, and Dutch Beaker (on page 4 of their 2018 paper, "The Beaker Phenomenon and the Genomic Transformation of Northwest Europe"):
Quote:Among the continental Beaker-complex groups analysed in our data set, individuals from Oostwoud, the Netherlands, are the most closely related to the large majority of Beaker-complex-associated individuals from southern Britain (n=27). The two groups had almost identical steppe-related ancestry proportions (Fig. 2a), the highest level of shared genetic drift (Extended Data Fig. 6b) and were symmetrically related to most ancient populations (Extended Data Fig. 6a), which shows that they are likely derived from the same ancestral population with limited mixture into either group. This does not necessarily imply that the Oostwoud individuals are direct ancestors of the British individuals, but it does show that they were closely related genetically to the population—perhaps yet to be sampled—that moved into Britain from continental Europe.
The following is from page 31 of 47 of archaeologist Völker Heyd's 2021 paper, "Yamnaya, Corded Wares, and Bell Beakers on the Move":
Quote:I would not be surprised if there will soon be visible Y-chromosome differences between the Lower and Upper Rhine. Within a few generations, at some point around 2500 BC, this radiation turned into a proper demic event. It would send Bell Beaker users, as descendants of local Single Grave Culture/Corded Ware users rich in steppe ancestry, on the move to regions further to the west, triggering the ‘Beakerisation’ of Britain and Ireland, and the Rückstrom to France and finally Iberia.
Here's Figure 15 from Heyd's aforementioned paper showing the Lower Rhine as the staging area for the Beaker people who went to Britain.
This is from page 37 of the 1955 paper by Van Der Waals and Glasbergen, "Beaker Types and their Distribution in the Netherlands":
Quote:The crossing of the North Sea. In Great Britain, the phenomenon of zone contraction also offers a key for a new approach to the Beaker problem. Influxes from the Low Countries are obvious. In Scotland and northern England Bell Beakers with zone-contraction and Beakers with the first bridging of the plain zones show direct relationship to the types 2Ib and 2Ic of the Dutch true Bell Beaker series. Can it be fortuitous that in the same parts of Great Britain all-over corded Beakers with ornamentation inside the rim - direct analogies to our type 2IIb - are represented? The crossing of the North Sea by Beaker elements from the central Netherlands took place in stages 2Ib/c/2IIb of the Dutch Bell Beaker evolution. The invaders from overseas first looked for thinly populated, remote parts of the British Isles. There a local evolution started, and later the culture spread over large areas. Abercromby's A-Beakers and the Dutch Bell Beakers of Veluwe type - phases 2Id-f of the true Bell Beaker series - constitute local evolutions.
Amsterdam/Groningen, December I955.
And this is from page 470 of "Corded Ware from East to West", by Janusz Czebreszuk, pages 467-475 in the book, Ancient Europe 8000 B.C.–A.D. 1000: Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World (edited by Peter Bogucki and Pam Crabtree; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2004):
Quote:Protruding Foot Beaker Culture. The Protruding Foot Beaker culture is the best-known part of the Corded Ware story. It is found along the Lower Rhine, in a key place for long-range contacts between the British Isles and the Alpine area, as well as along the Atlantic shore to the Baltic Sea. There exists an accurate typology of its basic object: the beaker. Much is known about the culture’s settlements. To assure proper living conditions (that is, a dry place on the wet landscape of the Rhine Delta), permanent settlements were built on artificial platforms consisting of layers of shells, organic remains, and clay. The dwellings were rectangular huts of post construction. The funeral rites were characterized by the presence of flat graves as well as barrows, in which according to the Corded Ware custom, only one individual was laid. The Protruding Foot Beaker culture is also important because in 1955 Johannes D. van der Waals and Willem Glasbergen were able to demonstrate stylistic links that its beakers shared with the Bell Beakers. This became a basis for one of the main models for the genesis of the Bell Beakers called the “Dutch Model.”
Probably this post is too long, but here's just a little more.
Regarding number 5 in the OP above:
Quote:Conclusion -
5. L21 originated in very early Dutch/NW German Beaker or in the Protruding Foot Beaker variant of Single Grave Corded Ware in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany.
Let's stipulate for now that FTDNA is right and the man who is the MRCA of all L21 men was born about 2650 BC. Let's also stipulate that he was born in the Lower Rhine region. So, was he a very early Beaker man, or a man of the Protruding Foot Beaker/Single Grave variant of Corded Ware?
My money right now is on the latter, because I think 2650 BC is a little early for Beaker, but maybe someone else knows differently. How old are the oldest Beaker remains in the Netherlands/NW Germany? I don't think they're much older than ~2500 BC, but I could be wrong.
Here's a little of what Davidski has to say about the Beaker being derived from Single Grave Corded Ware.
Eurogenes: Single Grave>Bell Beakers
I was looking back at the R1b-L21 and DF13 British Beaker men from Olalde et al (2018) and also one from Dulias et al (2022), and I am amazed at the high percentages of Yamnaya_Samara DNA ("steppe DNA") most of them had. Many of them were in excess of 60%, which is Corded Ware level. This seems to me to bolster the idea that the Beaker men who went to Britain were descendants of Single Grave Corded Ware people in the Lower Rhine/NW Germany and maybe Denmark.
I found these percentages by way of a Furtwängler et al (2020) spreadsheet. A couple of Olalde et al's British Beaker L21s were missing, so I don't have steppe DNA percentages for them.
Anyway, here are those I could find from highest steppe DNA to lowest ("cal BC" indicates a sample that was directly c14 dated):
I2565 (L21) 98.5% (2456-2146 cal BC) ("The Companion" - "Amesbury Down 2565" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I2417 (L21) 77.5% (2500-2100 BC) (One of the Boscombe Bowmen - "Amesbury Down 2417" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
KD070 (DF13) 72.6% (2464-2209 cal BC) ("Low Hauxley 70" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I6775 (L21) 68.7% (2400-2000 BC) ("Wick Barrow 6775" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I4950 (DF13) 67.7% (2400-2000 BC) ("Upavon 4950" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I6777 (L21) 66% (2400-2000 BC) ("Wilsford 6777" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I5513 (DF13) 61.9% (2500-1800 BC) ("Figheldean 5513" in FTDNA's Ancient Connections)
I2447 (DF13) 58.9% (2400-2040 BC)
I2445 (DF13) 57.2% (2137-1930 cal BC)
I2452 (DF13) 54.8% (2277-1920 cal BC)
I2453 (DF13) 48.4% (2289-2091 cal BC)
I3256 (DF13) 47.2% (2204-2029 cal BC)
I5379 (L21) 29.1% (2470-2290 BC)
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
10-01-2023, 01:00 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2023, 01:00 AM by rmstevens2.)
So far, I am the only one posting in this thread, but alright.
Have you all seen the recent Family Tree DNA Blog post by Dr. Miguel Vilar?
Globetrekker, Part 3: We Are Making History
Here's the part that is relevant to the topic of this thread:
Quote:Haplogroup R-L21 Emerged During Bronze Age Britain
Within R, there is a specific haplogroup known as R-L21 that demonstrates a strong link to the island of Great Britain. The oldest individuals that belong to haplogroup R-L21 have all been found in remains associated with the early Bronze Age Bell Beaker culture. The Bell Beaker culture itself first arose in Central Europe around 2,800 BCE but quickly spread to Great Britain around the time that R-L21 first arose. The only direct archaeogenetic evidence of R-L21 points to Britain, where the lineage remains high in frequency among people today and is much less common outside of that region.
The absence of R-L21 among ancient continental peoples may suggest the lineage first arose on the island. However, its association with the Bell Beaker materials and its rapid dispersal across Britain during the Bronze Age suggest that it likely arose just outside Britain and spread as newcomers and their advanced technologies reached the islands and replaced earlier settlers. The age, directionality, and association with the Bell Beaker remains suggest R-L21 played a key role in ancient British history.
FTDNA's Globetrekker now shows R-L21 as originating on the Continent in the area of Pas-de-Calais. Not too far off.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
10-01-2023, 07:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2023, 07:50 PM by alanarchae.)
I believe from past reading that the scottish and northern english (Low Huxley is far northeast England) beaker phase was likely marginally later than southern English but a aliterally only by a decade or so. The scottish and northern english beaker phase has been seen as a small scale folk movement hugging the coast and showing a interesting Dutch type aspects. It seems to have lacked the richness and signs of control of an important node of exchange compared to southern England/Wessex. If he is a stray from that beaker tradition he is likely at least 2nd or 3rd generation as that tradition started a couple of generations prior to 2330BC.
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
Low Huxley seems to have a corded beaker and was in an easy-west orientated cist lying on his right side facing north. He is reckoned to be the founding individual of a cemetery used into the EBA. It’s interesting that the founding individual (Mr DF13) followed the classic beaker burial type of north/east England and Scotland which some have compared with Dutch burials. A small coast hugging folk movement in those areas has been implied. This guy was buried right on the coast. This kind of beaker tradition is found from the Humber around Hull to the north/east tip of scotland. This guy was buried near east coast part of the Anglo-Scottish border about 180 miles north of the southernmost part of this type of beaker tradition. He was roughly half way along the south-north distribution of this beaker subgroup as the crow flies. So he is unlikely to be the first in this beaker grouping. The Hull area on the Humber is still the biggest and shortest ferry route between Britain and the Low Countries. It wouldn’t surprise me if this beaker group first landed there. However a lot of the coast further south to the Wash is low and likely any remains obliterated. So a coast hugging beaker group could have made landfall a little further south than is apparent today. I do not believe anyone launched blindly into the north sea from Holland. They almost certainly would have limited the time out of sight of land and it’s hard to believe they’d have landed further north than East Anglia. They seem to have not gone up the Thames. That seems to have been taken by other beaker groups.
This includes layouts of the Low Hauxley cemetery.
https://roundmounds.wordpress.com/2016/1...es-part-2/
As an aside, it’s interesting that British beaker very broadly divided into fairly distinct southern and northern traditions but both were likely L21 dominated and it seems very likely they were both DF13 derived. That is likely telling us that L21 dominated the bulk of the continental English channel and the low countries north sea coast c. 2450-2200BC anyway.
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
Hmmm . . .
I wonder what happened to the "Like" button. I was going to give you likes for those posts, Alan, but there's no "Like" button.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
this is a v good summary of british beaker. It confirms the long held belief of two different slightly different streams into Britain - one in southern England (especially Wessex) that seemed to have rich elements and networked widely and another one in northern England and Scotland that looks like it coast hugged north along the north sea coast. A direct link to Holland is theorised about the latter. The interesting thing is that Low Hauxley is an example of the northern group. But on the other hand L21’s are also present in the southern English group.
https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
The southern group is more ecclectic and it has been hypothecised that they arrived from a subset of Rhenish with somewhat more influence from central Europe shown in burial rites (the NE-SE or N-S orientation with male on left facing east or north/east and the female on the right also facing east or north/east). The northern british group has the E-W single grave type orientation but classic bell beaker gender rulers - male on left/female on right (but facing a different direction from single grave). So not like the E-W single grave which has the opposite rules of right and left. It almost looks like a hybrid of central European side rules but single grave E-W orientation. Apparently a few examples of north british type beaker orientation/gender rules exist in Holland and so of course do examples of south British type rules. So my thoughts are that the south British rules were likely Rhenish groups bang on the Rhine and in a position to receive influence from further up the Rhine where central European type beaker burial traditions were known. https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
If I had to guess i’d suggest the north British group’s roots were a bit further north-east into Holland and less on the Rhine highway/more conservative with single grave-beaker hybrid traits remaining .
However I really need to find the following
1. Something better on the grave cut orientation and body positioning of Dutch beakers
2. I’d also be very curious to see the same for the middle rhine area. I know the upper rhine was basically central European beaker group but i’m not sure of the trends of the mid rhine
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
I read that Heise paper a few years ago. I need to re-read it. As I recall, there are some Beaker burials in Britain with Corded Ware orientation.
One thing to note about Low Hauxley is that he had CW-level steppe DNA: 72.6%.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 483
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: LebaGermish
Nationality: USA
Y-DNA (P): P312>DF19>DF88
Y-DNA (M): J2a1 Z6065>Y7702>M47
mtDNA (M): J2a1a1e
mtDNA (P): H1j
(10-01-2023, 07:43 PM)alanarchae Wrote: I believe from past reading that the scottish and northern english (Low Huxley is far northeast England) beaker phase was likely marginally later than southern English but a aliterally only by a decade or so. The scottish and northern english beaker phase has been seen as a small scale folk movement hugging the coast and showing a interesting Dutch type aspects. It seems to have lacked the richness and signs of control of an important node of exchange compared to southern England/Wessex. If he is a stray from that beaker tradition he is likely at least 2nd or 3rd generation as that tradition started a couple of generations prior to 2330BC.
If DF19 (and maybe U106) is ever found in an Isles Beaker population (and so far there isn't any at all), I would not at all be surprised if they are in the northern group.
Someone once posted a map showing trade/currents basically dividing the continent at the Rhine mouth. I think all the northern Beakers so far are L21 if identified that well?
Everything south had an easier time going back and forth to southern Britain, while north of the Rhine delta, you had Veluwe/Jutland commerce from at least the Beaker era. Maybe L21 started off in a position where they could do either route, perhaps in some way controlling westward migration.
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
(10-02-2023, 02:58 PM)alanarchae Wrote: this is a v good summary of british beaker. It confirms the long held belief of two different slightly different streams into Britain - one in southern England (especially Wessex) that seemed to have rich elements and networked widely and another one in northern England and Scotland that looks like it coast hugged north along the north sea coast. A direct link to Holland is theorised about the latter. The interesting thing is that Low Hauxley is an example of the northern group. But on the other hand L21’s are also present in the southern English group.
https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
The southern group is more ecclectic and it has been hypothecised that they arrived from a subset of Rhenish with somewhat more influence from central Europe shown in burial rites (the NE-SE or N-S orientation with male on left facing east or north/east and the female on the right also facing east or north/east). The northern british group has the E-W single grave type orientation but classic bell beaker gender rulers - male on left/female on right (but facing a different direction from single grave). So not like the E-W single grave which has the opposite rules of right and left. It almost looks like a hybrid of central European side rules but single grave E-W orientation. Apparently a few examples of north british type beaker orientation/gender rules exist in Holland and so of course do examples of south British type rules. So my thoughts are that the south British rules were likely Rhenish groups bang on the Rhine and in a position to receive influence from further up the Rhine where central European type beaker burial traditions were known. https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
If I had to guess i’d suggest the north British group’s roots were a bit further north-east into Holland and less on the Rhine highway/more conservative with single grave-beaker hybrid traits remaining .
However I really need to find the following
1. Something better on the grave cut orientation and body positioning of Dutch beakers
2. I’d also be very curious to see the same for the middle rhine area. I know the upper rhine was basically central European beaker group but i’m not sure of the trends of the mid rhine
(10-02-2023, 05:14 PM)rmstevens2 Wrote: I read that Heise paper a few years ago. I need to re-read it. As I recall, there are some Beaker burials in Britain with Corded Ware orientation.
One thing to note about Low Hauxley is that he had CW-level steppe DNA: 72.6%.
Low Hauxley cist 1 is the DF13 isn’t he? He seems to be buried east-west with his head at the east, lying on his right side facing north. Pretty strange beaker orientation though he is undoubtedly a bell beaker burial.
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
(10-02-2023, 05:14 PM)rmstevens2 Wrote: I read that Heise paper a few years ago. I need to re-read it. As I recall, there are some Beaker burials in Britain with Corded Ware orientation.
One thing to note about Low Hauxley is that he had CW-level steppe DNA: 72.6%.
according to the thesis the beaker burials most like the north British ones are to the west of this river https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJssel
Of course Holland has radically altered form due to reclamation etc but the wiki entry discussed this
Posts: 1,645
Threads: 74
Joined: Sep 2023
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: British
Y-DNA (P): R-FGC36981
Y-DNA (M): R-FT418639
mtDNA (M): U5a2c3a
mtDNA (P): K1a1
(10-02-2023, 06:29 PM)alanarchae Wrote: (10-02-2023, 02:58 PM)alanarchae Wrote: this is a v good summary of british beaker. It confirms the long held belief of two different slightly different streams into Britain - one in southern England (especially Wessex) that seemed to have rich elements and networked widely and another one in northern England and Scotland that looks like it coast hugged north along the north sea coast. A direct link to Holland is theorised about the latter. The interesting thing is that Low Hauxley is an example of the northern group. But on the other hand L21’s are also present in the southern English group.
https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
The southern group is more ecclectic and it has been hypothecised that they arrived from a subset of Rhenish with somewhat more influence from central Europe shown in burial rites (the NE-SE or N-S orientation with male on left facing east or north/east and the female on the right also facing east or north/east). The northern british group has the E-W single grave type orientation but classic bell beaker gender rulers - male on left/female on right (but facing a different direction from single grave). So not like the E-W single grave which has the opposite rules of right and left. It almost looks like a hybrid of central European side rules but single grave E-W orientation. Apparently a few examples of north british type beaker orientation/gender rules exist in Holland and so of course do examples of south British type rules. So my thoughts are that the south British rules were likely Rhenish groups bang on the Rhine and in a position to receive influence from further up the Rhine where central European type beaker burial traditions were known. https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/18...sequence=4
If I had to guess i’d suggest the north British group’s roots were a bit further north-east into Holland and less on the Rhine highway/more conservative with single grave-beaker hybrid traits remaining .
However I really need to find the following
1. Something better on the grave cut orientation and body positioning of Dutch beakers
2. I’d also be very curious to see the same for the middle rhine area. I know the upper rhine was basically central European beaker group but i’m not sure of the trends of the mid rhine
(10-02-2023, 05:14 PM)rmstevens2 Wrote: I read that Heise paper a few years ago. I need to re-read it. As I recall, there are some Beaker burials in Britain with Corded Ware orientation.
One thing to note about Low Hauxley is that he had CW-level steppe DNA: 72.6%.
Low Hauxley cist 1 is the DF13 isn’t he? He seems to be buried east-west with his head at the east, lying on his right side facing north. Pretty strange beaker orientation though he is undoubtedly a bell beaker burial.
Yes, Low Hauxley is R1b-DF13, and he is the oldest L21 Beaker sample we have, at least the oldest one that made FTDNA's cut to get into Ancient Connections.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
digging into the geography of Holland, the description in the thesis of the area of the Netherlands with the burials closest to the northern British beakers seems to correspond with the Veluwe area
Posts: 905
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2023
Gender: Undisclosed
(10-02-2023, 06:06 PM)Dewsloth Wrote: (10-01-2023, 07:43 PM)alanarchae Wrote: I believe from past reading that the scottish and northern english (Low Huxley is far northeast England) beaker phase was likely marginally later than southern English but a aliterally only by a decade or so. The scottish and northern english beaker phase has been seen as a small scale folk movement hugging the coast and showing a interesting Dutch type aspects. It seems to have lacked the richness and signs of control of an important node of exchange compared to southern England/Wessex. If he is a stray from that beaker tradition he is likely at least 2nd or 3rd generation as that tradition started a couple of generations prior to 2330BC.
If DF19 (and maybe U106) is ever found in an Isles Beaker population (and so far there isn't any at all), I would not at all be surprised if they are in the northern group.
Someone once posted a map showing trade/currents basically dividing the continent at the Rhine mouth. I think all the northern Beakers so far are L21 if identified that well?
Everything south had an easier time going back and forth to southern Britain, while north of the Rhine delta, you had Veluwe/Jutland commerce from at least the Beaker era. Maybe L21 started off in a position where they could do either route, perhaps in some way controlling westward migration. Sounds like the Veluwe area is the one with the beaker burial tradition (in terms of grave orientation and body positions) closest to the north British. I’d love to see a map of that area c.2500BC given all the changes to the land, coast and paths of rivers since then. It’s a very confusing country to get your head around its historical geography! It’s seems that the river IJssel that ran through the eastern edge of the Veluwe reaches both the Rhine near Arnhem and also reaches the sea to the north. But i’m not sure what the origin path of the river was in the beaker era. It apparently didn’t originally link into hit Rhine system -that was the Roman’s doing - but instead originated in Germany before turning turning north around Doesburg following its current path along the east side of the Veluwe uplands before turning west to the sea (part of the bit inside the ‘hook’) near Kampen. But apparently that area was on land and a group of lakes in prehistory and these are mentioned in classical sources. So i’m not sure what the best route of access to the sea from Veluwe was c.2450BC.
|