Inequality in Bronze Age Europe

So then G2a and J2a were most likely slaves?

Peasants, whose elites had been lopped off. Tenants, not slaves, who owed a portion of their production to their "laird".
 
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.

a bit simplistic, isnt it?
 
a bit simplistic, isnt it?

Sort of like your response. That post wasn't meant to be more than a simplified illustration of how the genetic contribution of original inhabitants diminishes or even perishes following successive migrations of later populations, each with reproductive advantages to the current, native populations they are subsuming. What do you want, an essay?
 
IE tribes who colonized W.Europe themselves were minority lineage in E.Europe so how did they manage to wipe out the local farmers to near extinction? IMHO it must have been founder effect of small tribe at the top of the power pyramid becoming dominant lineage over time instead of local farmer tribes being killed by invaders because its extremely hard to wage war from village to village which must have spread over thousands of miles of area. So popular beliefs of polygamy, mass killings of locals by new settlers in BA must be completely wrong for local farmers could have had advantage of 10-1 in numbers which would make it extremely strong defense-wise. When we talk of complete dominance of ydna E-M81 in N.Africa we always say founder effect phenomena yet in IEs case I don't know why people come to baseless conclusions of things like polygamy, mass murders which holds no weight IMHO. I even question the Yamna connection of bronze age IE settlers because they could well be from southern Balkans who could have been farmers themselves migrating with the ydna G tribes but in extremely low numbers we see some Caucasian admixture together with farmer admixture in Neolithic Balkans too so its not just yamna who possessed Caucasian admixture. If questoins of how 1% of population could become half of population without much bloodshed then please study Mtdna H's history in Europe which from 1% in Mesolithic became 22% in Neolithic then 44% in Iron age wow!
 
So how come the farmer mtDna survived but the farmer yDna didn't?

It won't wash, friend.

Plus, it didn't just happen in Europe, it happened all over the world: Africa, Near East (not lots of G2a there except in the strongholds of the mountains is there?), China, Japan, you name it.
 
Sort of like your response. That post wasn't meant to be more than a simplified illustration of how the genetic contribution of original inhabitants diminishes or even perishes following successive migrations of later populations, each with reproductive advantages to the current, native populations they are subsuming. What do you want, an essay?

Not an essay, of course. But this "mathematic" approach of yours was very theorical. But thanks, I think I catched your reasoning. Was it necessary to us under this naked form? No problem. I see you have some kind of humor (a bit acid?).
 
So how come the farmer mtDna survived but the farmer yDna didn't?

It won't wash, friend.

Plus, it didn't just happen in Europe, it happened all over the world: Africa, Near East (not lots of G2a there except in the strongholds of the mountains is there?), China, Japan, you name it.
I thought scenarios in which IE tribes inter-marrying with farmer tribes on equal bases(ydna, mtdna equally transmitted) then one tribe gets purely accidental reproductive advantage due to many social aspects like higher social standing, hierarchy which encourages population growth as in Amish, Hutterites finally result in skewed ydna\mtdna in the population who then become dominant, let's see today R1b lineage is not utterly dominant they just make 51% of the population. My doubts arose because early R1b subclades were so rare in BA only in later times they expanded several centuries after initial settlement.
 
I thought scenarios in which IE tribes inter-marrying with farmer tribes on equal bases(ydna, mtdna equally transmitted) then one tribe gets purely accidental reproductive advantage due to many social aspects like higher social standing, hierarchy which encourages population growth as in Amish, Hutterites finally result in skewed ydna\mtdna in the population who then become dominant, let's see today R1b lineage is not utterly dominant they just make 51% of the population. My doubts arose because early R1b subclades were so rare in BA only in later times they expanded several centuries after initial settlement.

I doubt that is an explanation for world wide instances where, after a mass migration, the yDna of the invaders just happens to be the one which survives, while the local mtDna does survive. It's happened too many times, in too many places, in too many eras. It can't be coincidental, although all my job training probably does incline me to view "coincidences" as an explanation for human behavior more than skeptically.

Personally, I don't like it, and would prefer that wasn't the case, particularly, perhaps, because I carry both the invader ydna and mtdna, while my autosomal dna is much more local.

However, facts are facts, and those are facts which are very difficult to explain away in a PC manner.
 
And whether yDNA strains were eliminated at the start (ethnic cleansing) or relegated to the sidelines and weeded out over time (due to privilege), the result is the same. Ultimately the information transmitted via yDNA is very limited (paternal lineage, mostly) - language and cultural transmission is much more powerful.
 

This thread has been viewed 23639 times.

Back
Top