Inequality in Bronze Age Europe

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,329
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
It's based on samples from Corded Ware, BB, and early Bronze southern Germany. I'm trying to figure out some way of getting access to the whole paper.

See:
Alissa Mittnick et al (Krause and Haak)

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2019/10/09/science.aax6219

"[h=2]Abstract[/h]Revealing and understanding the mechanisms behind social inequality in prehistoric societies is a major challenge. By combining genome wide data, isotopic evidence as well as anthropological and archaeological data, we go beyond the dominating supra-regional approaches in archaeogenetics to shed light on the complexity of social status, inheritance rules and mobility during the Bronze Age. We apply a deep micro-regional approach and analyze genome wide data of 104 human individuals deriving from farmstead-related cemeteries from the Late Neolithic to the Middle Bronze Age in southern Germany. Our results reveal that individual households lasting several generations consisted of a high-status core family and unrelated low-status individuals, a social organization accompanied by patrilocality and female exogamy, and the stability of this system over 700 years."
 
it's in line with what they already found out about megalithic farmers
and it probably already existed long before
 
Exactly.

Story as old as time...well, practically.
 
Razib Khan posted a graphic.

RNEOfGq.png


As we've discussed before, all the initial talk about "wipe outs" or replacements as the result of steppe intrusion were very overblown. At least in Southern Germany, already by the Middle Bronze Age steppe ancestry was down to what, 27%? Add in the WHG, and these people were still majority Anatolian Neolithic, something like a 60% Anatolian Neolithic/40% other split.
 
Razib Khan posted a graphic.

RNEOfGq.png


As we've discussed before, all the initial talk about "wipe outs" or replacements as the result of steppe intrusion were very overblown. At least in Southern Germany, already by the Middle Bronze Age steppe ancestry was down to what, 27%? Add in the WHG, and these people were still majority Anatolian Neolithic, something like a 60% Anatolian Neolithic/40% other split.

Something that has dissapeared can't come back.
So it didn't dissapear. But maybe it became invisible for the record.
Maybe the record are just elite burials.
And after time local DNA seeped through to the elite.
 
Last edited:
So I don't see a tremendous amount of Y-Chromosome G2a or J2. Does this imply that the Neolithic Farmer males had already been killed off by this point and we're seeing social stratification to the point of possible slavery amongst populations of R1b males?
 
Last edited:
i think of the CT/ BT cases could infact be j2 or other G :unsure:
so those CT /BTcases are probably low coverage individuals
 
For quick reference of geographic locations, cultures, and haplogroups...
#
Sample NameCountryanalysis label genetics
Cluster PCA/Admixturegenetic sexmtDNA haplogroupY haplogroupgenetic comments
1
AY2001.A0101.TF1.1RussiaSteppe MaykopSteppeFT2e
2
AY2003.A0101.TF1.1RussiaSteppe MaykopSteppeFH2a1
3
I1720RussiaMaykopCaucasusMHV?
4
BU2001.A0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeMR1b1a2a2
5
GW1001.A0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeMU2e1bR1b1a2a2
6I1723RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeMU5b2a1aR1b1a1a2a
7IV3002.A0101RussiaSteppe Maykop outlierSteppeMX1'2'3?
8KBD001RussiaLate North CaucasusSteppeMI4aR1b1a22nd degree relative of KBD002
9KBD002.A0101RussiaLate North CaucasusSteppeFW1+1192nd degree relative of KBD001
10ARM001.A0101ArmeniaKura-AraxesCaucasusFR1a1
11
ARM002.A0101; ARM003ArmeniaKura-AraxesCaucasusMK3G2bsame individual, merge bams!
12I6268RussiaMaykop NovosvobodnayaCaucasusMR1aJ2a1
13I6267RussiaMaykop NovosvobodnayaCaucasusFT2c1
14I6270RussiaMaykop NovosvobodnayaCaucasusMU1b?
15I6266RussiaMaykop NovosvobodnayaCaucasusMX2fJ2a1
16I6272RussiaMaykop NovosvobodnayaCaucasusMU1b1G2a2a
17
KDC001.A0101RussiaMBA North CaucasusCaucasusMX2iJ2b
18
KDC002.A0101RussiaMBA North CaucasusCaucasusFHV1a1
19LYG001.A0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeMH13a1a2R1b1a2
20I2051RussiaDolmen LBACaucasusMH6a1a2aJ
21MK3003.A0101RussiaCatacombSteppeFU4a2
22MK5012.A0101RussiaCatacombSteppeMU5a1b1e?
23MK5008.B0101RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusMT1a2?42K SNPs
24
MK5004RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusMT2alL2nd degree relative of MK5001
25
MK5001RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusMK1a4L2nd degree relative of MK5004
26MK5007.B0101RussiaMaykopCaucasusMU5a1b1
27MK5009.A0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeMR1a1aR1b1a2
28MK5005.C0101RussiaSteppe MaykopSteppeFtwo lineages Steppe Maykop , but mtDNA contamination
29NV3001RussiaLolaSteppeMR1bQ1a2
30OSS002.B0101RussiaMaykopCaucasusMI5JX contaminated !
31
OSS001.A0101RussiaMaykopCaucasusFJ2a1
32
PG2001RussiaEneolithic steppeSteppeMI3aR1b1
33PG2004RussiaEneolithic steppeSteppeMH2R1b1
34PG2002.A0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeFU1a1a3
35RK1003.C0101RussiaNorth CaucasusSteppeFR1a1a
36RK1007.A0101RussiaYamnaya CaucasusSteppeFT2a1
37RK1001.C0101RussiaYamnaya CaucasusSteppeMU5a1dR1b1a2
38
RK4002.B0101RussiaCatacombSteppeMU4d3R1b1a2
39
RK4001.A0101RussiaCatacombSteppeMU5a1iR1b1a2
40
SA6003.B0101RussiaCatacombSteppeMU2e3aR1b1a2
41
SA6001.A0101RussiaSteppe MaykopSteppeFU7b
42SA6004RussiaSteppe MaykopSteppeMU7bQ1a2
43SA6013.B0101RussiaSteppe Maykop outlierSteppeMI5bR1
44SA6010.A0101RussiaYamnaya CaucasusSteppeMU5a1g?
45I6278RussiaDolmen BACaucasusMT1a2..
46I6281RussiaDolmen BACaucasusFU2e1..
47
SIJ003.A0101RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusFU4c11st degree relative of SIJ002, 1st degree relative of SIJ001
48
SIJ002.A0101RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusMU4c1L1st degree relative of SIJ003, 2nd degree relative of SIJ001
49SIJ001.A01(SA6002.A01)RussiaLate MaykopCaucasusFU4c11st degree relative of SIJ003, 2nd degree relative of SIJ002
50I2055RussiaEneolithic CaucasusCaucasusMR1aJ1st degree relative of I2056
51I2056RussiaEneolithic CaucasusCaucasusMR1aJ2a
52I1722RussiaEneolithic CaucasusCaucasusFR1a1st degree relative of I2056
53VEK006.A0101RussiaKura-AraxesCaucasusFU4a21st/2nd degree relative of VEK007/VEK009?
54
VEK007.A0101; VEK009RussiaKura-AraxesCaucasusMU4a2J1VEK007=VEK009, merge bams, 2nd degree relative of VEK006?
55
VEK008.A0101RussiaKura-AraxesCaucasusMU4a2?
56VJ1001RussiaEneolithic steppeSteppeFT2a1b
57I2057RussiaMaykopCaucasusUQuestionable, coverage too low
58ZO2002.C0101RussiaYamnaya CaucasusSteppeFU5a1+@16192
 
I would suggest checking the archaeological information for status versus non status burials and then comparing to yDna before jumping to all sorts of conclusions.
 
Not with Hunter Gatherers, I suppose

I'm not so sure.

What happened to all the C that the Paleolithic Europeans carried once the I2 "Mesolithic" men arrived? There's barely a trace of that Paleolithic HG genetic material left in Europeans.

We could also take a look at what happened to Neanderthals.

Almost makes me rethink the whole "toxic masculinity" thing.
 
Something that has dissapeared can't come back.
So it didn't dissapear. But maybe it became invisible for the record.
Maybe the record are just elite burials.
And after time local DNA seeped through to the elite.

Yes, that was my point, as it was my point way back when the Haak paper first came out when I said the title of the paper was probably over the top and they might come to regret it as an overstatement.

You only had to look at the percentages of Anatolian Neolithic in modern central and northwestern Europe. There was no new colonization. It had to have been there all along, although the female/male skew in uniparentals tells its own tale.

The only places in Europe where Anatolian Neolithic drops way down are in Northeastern Europe where practically no one was living before the arrival of the steppe people.
 
i am a little surprised that there is no E
not even the european e-v13 ?????
in the table 1 i posted
 
i am a little surprised that there is no E
not even the european e-v13 ?????
in the table 1 i posted

I've always wondered whether the E-V13 in Southern Germany, Austria and the Tyrol, and the corresponding high levels of "Dinarics" phenotypically was the result of hangovers from the Neolithic Age or whether it was Roman Era incursion. Perhaps for uniparentals it's more the latter. There's also all those very "Roman" looking ancient samples in Szolad to consider. I'm closer to them than to a lot of modern Italian populations.
 
I'm not so sure.

What happened to all the C that the Paleolithic Europeans carried once the I2 "Mesolithic" men arrived? There's barely a trace of that Paleolithic HG genetic material left in Europeans.

We could also take a look at what happened to Neanderthals.

Almost makes me rethink the whole "toxic masculinity" thing.

The earliest populations are on the bottom of the dogpile of population replacement. Using a 90/10 split for each fused population after a successful demic replacement, the original host population genetics remaining would work out this way:
Pop A (prior to first wave)-- 100%
100 * .1
After first wave-- 10%
10 * .1
After second wave-- 1%
1 * .1
After third wave-- .1%

There is likely very little left from homo sapien sapien populations from Paleolthic, maybe nothing from Neanderthals of Western Europe, for this reason.
Most of our Neanderthal was picked up >60 kya in the Levant as part of the founder OOA population. The Neanderthal of <30 kya in Western Europe may have been annihilated without genetic issue at this point. There's barely a trace of Paleolithic hunter gatherers, a little bit more for the more recent mesolthic migrants, and then more from Neolithic and Bronze Age newcomers. Now, there are new major demic movements, birth rate differences among populations, etc. It goes on and on. Right now, Paleolithic Europeans' genetic legacy is on the bottom of the dog pile (Western European Neanderthal already crushed beneath them) and new pops are piling on everyday. Sorry to see them go.
 
Razib Khan posted a graphic.

RNEOfGq.png


As we've discussed before, all the initial talk about "wipe outs" or replacements as the result of steppe intrusion were very overblown. At least in Southern Germany, already by the Middle Bronze Age steppe ancestry was down to what, 27%? Add in the WHG, and these people were still majority Anatolian Neolithic, something like a 60% Anatolian Neolithic/40% other split.

You have some objection to statements of fact, Messier? You have some data which contradicts the above?

Do share.
 

This thread has been viewed 23638 times.

Back
Top