This
is a careful analysis of the apparent DNA distribution throughout Europe . It is
observed that two groups of peoples emerged by way of naturally expanding
populations. The Southern one is
presumed to originate out of the Levant to dominate the Mediterranean littoral.
I see no reason to do other than
presume the initial flow from Anatolia into Crete
as pretty indicative of what was going on.
The issue is determining the application of agriculture. It is not to hard to imagine a small group of
agriculturalists traveling a great distance to an ample well watered plain,
rising in population there and then returning the way they came to establish a
stronger and different base in their original homeland.
To some degree we saw this happen
in Northern Europe . Tribes constantly left the German lands to
settle in the Roman world. Yet centuries
later, newly settled tribes on the Rhine
picked up their axes and began chopping their way East to create something
quite different.
It is dangerous to underestimate
ancient mobility.
Again the writer is looking for a
Northern center where there simply may not be one at all. Presume instead that cattle husbandry was
happily adopted early allowing all populations to grow internally and whatever
grain production took place was not the dominant factor driving population
expansion.
A settled cattle trading culture
would retain much of the old ways yet gene exchange was certainly underway.
Thus while a water borne
settlement diaspora is likely in the South, it was not so likely in the
North. Our mistake is to presume
knowledge only moves with the population itself. That was never true. Women in particular were exchanged and each
brought their clans skills with them. A
few centuries and genes and skills would become universally distributed across Europe .
Northwest Eurasians
+ Southwest Eurasians + Mesolithic survivors =
modern Europeans
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2012
For a long time, it was generally accepted that Europeans were direct
descendants of Palaeolithic settlers of the continent, with some Middle Eastern
ancestry in the Mediterranean regions, courtesy of Neolithic farmers. However,
in the last few years, largely thanks to ancient DNA results, it dawned on most
people that such a scenario was unrealistic. It now seems that Europe was populated after the Ice Age in a big way, by
multiple waves of migrants from almost all directions, but especially from the
southeast.
Getting to grips with the finer details of the peopling of
The map below, produced by one of my project members, surmises very
nicely the most pertinent information from those runs (thanks FR7!). It shows
the relative spread of three key genetic clusters, from the K=13, in
a wide range of populations from Europe, North Africa, and West, Central and
South Asia (i.e. the data represents the nature of West Eurasian alleles in the
sampled groups, with only three clusters considered). The yellow is best
described as Mediterranean or Southwest
Eurasian, while the cyan and magenta, which are sister clades, and can be
viewed as one cluster for the time being, as Northwest Eurasian.
Thus, it appears as if modern Europeans are made up of two major Neolithic groups, which are related, but at some point became distinct enough to leave persistent signals of that split. They spread into different parts of Western Asia before moving into
The Northwest Eurasians possibly originated in the northern
In any case, the situation several thousand years ago might have been very different, and the origins of the Northwest Eurasians in the northern
After their initial spread, it appears as if the Northwest Eurasians inhaled varying amounts of native Mesolithic groups in their newly acquired territories west, north and east of the
We can follow the same logic when talking about the differentiation between modern descendants of
I’m convinced that the scenario of the peopling of Europe outlined above, by two basic stocks of migrants from Neolithic
However, that was the easy part. The hard part is linking the myriad of movements of these Southwest and
Perhaps the simplest and most diplomatic thing to do for the time being, would be to associate the entire Northwest Eurasian group with an early (Neolithic) spread of Indo-European languages from somewhere on the border between West Asia and Europe? I know that would work for a lot of people, specifically those who’d like to see an Indo-European urhemait in Asia, as opposed to
As already mentioned, the
Indeed, there seems to be a correlation between the highest relative frequencies of the
Below are two maps that isolate the relative frequencies of the North Atlantic (cyan) and Baltic (magenta) components, versus each other and the Southwest Eurasian cluster, to better show the hole in the distribution of the North Atlantic. To be sure, this North Atlantic can be broken down further, but only with more a comprehensive sampling strategy, especially of Northern and
That’s my take on what the data is showing, and other explanations are possible. But I don’t really know what they might be? I should also mention that the potentially proto-Indo-European Baltic cluster shows a remarkable correlation with the spread of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, and ancient DNA rich in this haplogroup from supposed early Indo-Europeans. I’ve blogged quite a bit about that over the years, so I’ll just post some links to those posts:
Bronze Age Tarim Basin "Caucasoids" carried R1a1 (and European mtDNA lineages too)
Craniometric links between Central European Funnelbeaker folk and early Indo-European steppe tribes
By the way, does anyone know when we’ll finally get full genome sequences of a few corpses from Corded Ware, Yamnaya and Andronovo digs? I was hoping to see a lot more by now in terms of ancient DNA, than a couple of PCA plots showing old Oetzi against a backdrop of limited reference samples.
No comments:
Post a Comment