GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-12 > 1228295181


From: Alan R <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TRMCA for R1b1
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:06:21 +0000 (GMT)


I think this argument is being somewhat deflected.  It appears that Dieneke is mainly arguing against assuming an Asian origin while the others are arguing against an Iberian origin.  There is a lot of room in between.  Personally, I wouldn't rule out a south-east European origin.  Anatolie is convinced that R1a is Balkan in origin and if so then R1 may not have been too far away.  The period of separation of R1b from the R1 that led to R1a seems to have been during the late glacial maximum and that would likely have restricted R1's opportunities for spreading in several  directions other than south.  So I wouldn't rule out a SE European origin. 

However, the main point of this debate is regarding a western refugia origin.  Now, I think that is a very unlikely scenario for reasons outlined in my previous post: its distribution requires a two step solution: west/central Europe getting its R1b in the Upper Palaeolithic/Magadalenian starting 15,000 years ago and places like Italy, the east Mediterranean, Turkey, eastern Europe, Asian not likely to have received any west-east intrusions until late prehistory (say 3000 years ago or less).  That is the truth of west-east movements in European prehistory.  They are very rare and there was a 12,000 year gap between the two west-east phases.  Both phases are required to sustain an Iberian origin for the present distribution of all M269.  Surely the fact that western M269 would have been 7 times older (in the refugia itself) and 5 times older (in the west/central European Upper Palaeolithic Magdalenian spread) than in southern and south-east
Europe and Anatolia and SW Asia couldn't fail to stand out like a sore thumb.  It doesn't and in fact the opposite is apparent.  Therefore the only scenario that would explain the distribution of R1b today from an Iberian origin point fails.

So, lets keep the debate to 'for and against' an Iberian origin instead of arguing which part of the east Mediterranean area may or may not have been involved.  That is an argument that cannot be absolutely decided until a better sample is available but IMO we can conclude on the Iberian origin theory right now. 

Alan 


This thread: