Did the Neolithic Irish Pack Up and Go?

[Roisin1975]

In looking into the background of where our Irish ancestors came from and who came before, I keep reading how no one really knows definitively what happened to the Neolithic Irish, other than, of course, the tombs, and a handful of burials left behind. I'm wondering if perhaps the Neolithic Irish migrated elsewhere, as happened here in the U.S, when a tribal group from the Southwest left leaving behind cliff dwellings and was subsequently replaced by what we call the Pueblo people of today. Also, approximately how many Neolithic people were there estimated to be?

 

[Angela]

According to the Reich Lab (recent Patterson paper on new version of dating algorithm), 10% Neolithic ancestry remained. Almost a wipe-out, but not quite.

My guess would be it's the same as happened throughout Europe during the blitzkrieg from the steppe, i.e. most of the males wiped out or removed from the breeding pool, and some of the women added to the harems.

The difference would be less Neolithic remaining in the British Isles people because the farmer population crash had been even worse in the British Isles than in, say, Central Europe.

All those theories about how the advance of the steppe admixed people was slow, and the Neolithic y slowly weeded out has now been shown to be incorrect. It all happened within the span of 100 years.

 

[Neo-Bulwark]

the neolithic irish population didn't move anywhere (where would they move to?) they were largely extirpated with the arrival of bell beakers to Ireland ~2,500 BC (4,500 BP) and must have been a very large replacement since ireland is 90%+R1b-P312 and preceding neolithic haplogroups like I2-M284/I2-S2639 and H2 are comparatively rare in modern irish people and are likely post-neolithic reintroductions from neighboring Britain where a larger fractions of those neolithic haplogroups survived.

 

[MOESAN]

According to the Reich Lab (recent Patterson paper on new version of dating algorithm), 10% Neolithic ancestry remained. Almost a wipe-out, but not quite.

My guess would be it's the same as happened throughout Europe during the blitzkrieg from the steppe, i.e. most of the males wiped out or removed from the breeding pool, and some of the women added to the harems.

The difference would be less Neolithic remaining in the British Isles people because the farmer population crash had been even worse in the British Isles than in, say, Central Europe.

All those theories about how the advance of the steppe admixed people was slow, and the Neolithic y slowly weeded out has now been shown to be incorrect. It all happened within the span of 100 years.

That 's the general picture. But what strikes me is the very great remplacement of males in Northern and Western Europe compared to say Southwestern Europe were agriculture was ancient already and dense, and where subsequent waves (of less demic weight it's true) of southestern people introduced "evolved" societies, good metallurgy and big urbanism (tells): here, the whiping off of ancient Y haplo's have been very less evident, and the mingling of Y-haplo's in subsequent cultures perdured relatively well even in BA/IA where new intruders came. So the social level, economy and density of population have surely played some role. We could have supposed than the plague vs natural defenses or immunity aspect would have brought more destructions of ancient Y-haplo's but it isn't the case. The great plains of North would have favoured the association half-nomadic + patriarcal clannic system? BTW it's curious to see the Megalithers so called "farmers" of Northwestern Europe showed some common societal aspects with the "nomads", roughly said, of course...
It deserves some focalised study, doesn't it?

 

[Angela]

That 's the general picture. But what strikes me is the very great remplacement of males in Northern and Western Europe compared to say Southwestern Europe were agriculture was ancient already and dense, and where subsequent waves (of less demic weight it's true) of southestern people introduced "evolved" societies, good metallurgy and big urbanism (tells): here, the whiping off of ancient Y haplo's have been very less evident, and the mingling of Y-haplo's in subsequent cultures perdured relatively well even in BA/IA where new intruders came. So the social level, economy and density of population have surely played some role. We could have supposed than the plague vs natural defenses or immunity aspect would have brought more destructions of ancient Y-haplo's but it isn't the case. The great plains of North would have favoured the association half-nomadic + patriarcal clannic system? BTW it's curious to see the Megalithers so called "farmers" of Northwestern Europe showed some common societal aspects with the "nomads", roughly said, of course...
It deserves some focalised study, doesn't it?

I'm not sure that I'd say there wasn't a wipe out of Neolithic Y in the Southwest, in particular. Spain is very heavily R1b, the y signature of the steppe admixed peoples who migrated there. I mean, how much of the original farmer G2a and I2a is left in Spain and Portugal? I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but not much I would think.

On the other hand, Iberians definitely are very heavy in Neolithic farmer ancestry, as Jovialis' latest analyses show. Of course, those Bell Beakers were close to half Neolithic farmer themselves, but through their mothers, not fathers. Still, the percentages are quite a bit higher than is the case in France or Britain or Germany, where the Neolithic farmer ancestry is 40-50%, yes?

So, were the Beakers who went to Iberia predominantly male? Does that account for the disparity? Or is it also that the subsequent migrants, Romans, North Africans, Arabs, who brought the other y signatures also added to that "farmer" ancestry?

I do think that there was less disruption to the cultures of "Old Europe" in the southern parts of Europe in general. I tend to think that's why the rebound was faster, with the Etruscans, for example, being master metallurgists so early.

 

[MOESAN]

Sorry Angela I wrote "southwestern when I was thinking "southeastern"; it changes a bit the colour of my post, but I think people have understood that my tells cultures and metallurgy and agriculture evolved packages were rather southeastern-central Europe and not southwestern Europe. Sorry again. I grow old...

 

[MOESAN]

I'm a bit doubtful concerning complete replacements. We judge on accessible buryings. I suppose some refuge regions could have hidden some people, at least in some cases and in some proportions (I don't take too much risico here!). It's the question of archeology: what part of the pops it gives to look at?
When I read an increase in a specific genetic element is females mediated, I stay puzzled between two hypothesis: external alliances with (a) foreign land(s), or a later integration of the remnants of a defeated but refugied pop whose males are still and again discarded of the progeniture...

 

[Mmiikkii]

One possibility is the montanious terrain of the Balcans.
But for me the most likely explanation is closeness to the centers of civilization and metal working. If you see a map of this site you see the copper age started in Serbia, the Iron Age in Turkey...

Another possibility is that closeness made them adaptable to the invaders. Whereas men in the Atlantic fringe had been very isolated for a long time and didn't have time to catch up.

 

[Tamakore]

Also, approximately how many Neolithic people were there estimated to be?

According to the Atlas of World Population History (McEvedy and Jones), the estimated population of Ireland was "a few thousand" in the Neolithic, rising to 100,000 during the Iron Age. Scotland went from "a few hundred" in the Neolithic to 2,500 in the Bronze Age. England and Wales went from an estimated 50,000 in 2000 BC to 100,000 by 1000 BC.

To put these numbers in context, the population of France is estimated at 500,000 in 2000 BC, and the whole of Europe went from two million in 3000 BC to five million by 2000 BC. Ireland and Britain were relative population backwaters in the third millenium BC, so the population replacement by steppe admixed people may have partly been a case of being swamped by immigrants from the continent. However, there's no doubt some level of violence was involved, since most Neolithic Y lineages were wiped out.

 

[CrazyDonkey]

I have one Big Y match off of I-S7753/Y4171 (TMRCA 1900ybp/100CE), and eight off of I-Y4142 (TMRCA 1600ybp/400CE). Then 127 matches off of Y4751 (TMRCA 1550ybp/450CE). Many of these matches are shared in common with many, many other Isles Scot/Ire Big Y testers. What happened between 400CE and 450CE? The Romans abandoned Hadrian's Wall and left Britain in 420CE. Y4751 flooded south in a sudden and rapid expansion, following a severe bottleneck.

L126 was formed 5500ybp/3500BCE, most likely in the British Isles, with a TMRCA of 3100ybp/1100BCE, so likely pre-Celtic (<750CE?), and possibly pre-Bell Beaker (<2500BCE?). I believe only one ancient L126 sample (I2655 - Pabay Mor, Lewis, Western Isles, Scotland) has been found, on the Isle of Lewis (Outer Hebrides), dated to 3311ybp/1311BCE. That poses the possibility that the Western Isles and Highlands served as a Neolithic and pre-Celtic refugium.

See: https://haplotree.info/maps/ancient...=Country&searchfor=Great Britain&ybp=500000,0

 

[Neo-Bulwark]

According to the Atlas of World Population History (McEvedy and Jones), the estimated population of Ireland was "a few thousand" in the Neolithic, rising to 100,000 during the Iron Age. Scotland went from "a few hundred" in the Neolithic to 2,500 in the Bronze Age. England and Wales went from an estimated 50,000 in 2000 BC to 100,000 by 1000 BC.
To put these numbers in context, the population of France is estimated at 500,000 in 2000 BC, and the whole of Europe went from two million in 3000 BC to five million by 2000 BC. Ireland and Britain were relative population backwaters in the third millenium BC, so the population replacement by steppe admixed people may have partly been a case of being swamped by immigrants from the continent. However, there's no doubt some level of violence was involved, since most Neolithic Y lineages were wiped out.

Those population estimates for neolithic Scotland and Ireland sound off for a mesolithic population let alone a neolithic population.

 

[Tamakore]

Those population estimates for neolithic Scotland and Ireland sound off for a mesolithic population let alone a neolithic population.

Population estimates for these periods can only ever be approximate. McEvedy and Jones' estimates may be a little low in this case, although most of their other population estimates are generally comparable with other sources.

Their exact quote for Ireland is: "Ireland's prehistoric population build-up was proportionately slower than England's. Starting from a few hundred in the mesolithic, the number is unlikely to have risen to more than a few thousand in the neolithic and 100,000 in the Iron Age. Medieval growth was more impressive-......".

 

[CrazyDonkey]

Population estimates for these periods can only ever be approximate. McEvedy and Jones' estimates may be a little low in this case, although most of their other population estimates are generally comparable with other sources.

Their exact quote for Ireland is: "Ireland's prehistoric population build-up was proportionately slower than England's. Starting from a few hundred in the mesolithic, the number is unlikely to have risen to more than a few thousand in the neolithic and 100,000 in the Iron Age. Medieval growth was more impressive-......".

I suspect that there was a mixed economy (of farming, herding, hunting/fishing, and gathering) in much of neolithic Britain and Ireland, rather than intensive agriculture. While horses were brought in by the Bell Beakers, the neolithic population might have been semi-nomadic, rather than being tied to their fields year-round, and could have simply picked up and gone (north?). (Or they were already resident in the Isles and able to resist, or assimilate with, the Bell Beakers, and later the Celts and Vikings.)

In that sense, there may have been displacement as much as replacement. According to Maciamo's map, ~10% of SW Scotland and NE Ireland is I-P216, 90% of which is I-M223 (so a proxy):

We don't know, of course, how much, if any, of that dates back to before the Bell Beakers, or may have come in later, with the Bell Beakers, Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, etc.

An L126 neolithic sample has been found on the Isle of Lewis (Outer Hebrides). I-M423 neolithic samples have been found in the Orkneys, with no archaeological signs of later Bell Beaker intrusion:

I-L460
-P37.2
--M423
-P216
--M223
---P222
----CTS616
-----FGC15071
------M284
-------L126

So, at least a remnant I2a population from the neolithic surviving in the Highlands and Western Isles is certainly possible, taking into account the Highland Clearances, which denuded much of those areas of "crofters", replacing them with sheep.

 

[Angela]

I know physical anthropology is definitely out of favor, and I myself have issues with a lot of the terminology, but I can spot a Med face when I see one, and I've seen quite a few from that part of the world, and here in the U.S. among the Scots Irish in the Appalachians.
David Tennant:

Colin Morgan

Even someone like Ian Beattle

Btw, that's the Lowlands of Scotland, and the adjoining border area of England, and those were the people who were brought over by the English kings to settle in Ulster, as you probably know.

Since the average "original" Neolithic ancestry remaining in Britain is 10%, it may be highe in those places. That 10% would represent only the male line.

 

[MOESAN]

I find that only the first one shows typical enough 'mediter' proportions, the two other are more uneasy to qualify.
(I know, I split hairs!)

 

[Angela]

I find that only the first one shows typical enough 'mediter' proportions, the two other are more uneasy to qualify.
(I know, I split hairs!)

You do. That's ok. I'll give you Ian Beattle, but we'll have to disagree about Colin Morgan. I think there's a lot of Med in him, minus that skull, but then I have a huge wide skull like that too.

There's a lot of Anatolian farmer in the British; close to 50% in some models, and it shows.

 

[MOESAN]

You do. That's ok. I'll give you Ian Beattle, but we'll have to disagree about Colin Morgan. I think there's a lot of Med in him, minus that skull, but then I have a huge wide skull like that too.

There's a lot of Anatolian farmer in the British; close to 50% in some models, and it shows.

There is a difference between to share traits with and to be pretty like. Concerning the 'med' phenotypes (with what this global term includes) among British and even Irish people, it has been recognised long ago (more in West than in East, and with some exageration for some scientists), so, I have no opposition to you here. Yes, to take your words, "it shows"!