Neolithic migration was family-based, Bronze Age invasion was male-dominated

this graph says it all

ncomms3486-f2.jpg


there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?

Out of curiosity, what would the graph look like if Neolithic societies had collapsed because of Indo-European invasions instead of naturally due to failing crops? Is the graph an average for all Europe or just one region?

A population collapse where women survive and not men sounds like an invasion to me.
 
That is a good question. Quick google gave me a lot of links. It was definitely present for elites. But how deep it was in regular society, not sure.
To my knowledge, all ancient Celtic and Germanic elites practiced polygamy. If just a tribe's chieftain had three wives instead of one, and had three times more children in average, how many generations would it take for the chieftain's Y-DNA lineage to reach 10% of the population if that population is always stable at 1000 for each generation? To make it easy let's say that all couples have one boy and one girl, but the chieftain has three of each. Only the eldest son becomes chieftain and can have three wives.

So after one generation the chieftain has tripled his Y-DNA from 1 to 3 per thousand. After the second generation it's 5 (3 chieftain's sons + 1 son for each of his brothers). Then it's 7, and so on. I let you count.

OK, the answer is 50 generations, so maybe 1000 to 1500 years. It's much faster if the system allows the chief's brothers to have three wives too.
 
So farmers were indeed struggling, leaving room for herders to outbreed them. Which leave the question, why the heavy farmer ancestry among female.

There could have been an advantage to take a local wife (linked to local knowledge I would guess, but maybe something genetic too), which translated as more kids early in the game. So when the population expanded, these herder man + farmer woman couples had a much greater number of descendants than the average herder man + herder women couples.
 
So farmers were indeed struggling, leaving room for herders to outbreed them. Which leave the question, why the heavy farmer ancestry among female.

There could have been an advantage to take a local wife (linked to local knowledge I would guess, but maybe something genetic too), which translated as more kids early in the game. So when the population expanded, these herder man + farmer woman couples had a much greater number of descendants than the average herder man + herder women couples.

DNA combined from a male and a female from 2 different tribes is better suited for natural selection than DNA from inbreeding in the same tribe.
And I suppose subsequent generations of CW males took neolithic women to breed.

The same happened in paleolithic Europe causing the Magdalenian 'El Miron' cluster 19-14 ka : all known Y-DNA of this cluster is the Gravettian I, while autosomally it resembled 35 ka Aurignacian C1a2 GoyetQ116-1.
Gravettian males must have bred with Aurignacian females during successive generations to acomplish this.

Most HG tribes were exogamous if they had the chance.
 
Off topic: if there were soooo many migrations of Yamnayans to the Corded Ware area why none was R1b???? Curious pattern.

Possible Yamnayist answer: surely the R1b herders prefered brunettes instead to blondes. Laughing time off.
 
Off topic: if there were soooo many migrations of Yamnayans to the Corded Ware area why none was R1b???? Curious pattern.

Possible Yamnayist answer: surely the R1b herders prefered brunettes instead to blondes. Laughing time off.

Interesting question, because the situation seems to mirror that of R1b-L51, but just a little earlier. It seems Yamnaya was mostly R1b(xL51). Somehow their language gets passed on to the R1a people who boom enormously in NE-Europe and carry the language as far west as Germany. Then there are the R1b-L51 people who seem to take over the baton and carry the language further west from Germany, booming in turn. It's safe to assume the language itself was no advantage so something else played. It's possible the same effect is at work each time.
 
The most simple is to turn off the Yamnayist theory and simply suppose that a R1a culture carried genes and IE language to Central Europe. If the problem was climatic, much more harsh would be the problem in European Russia, pushing them to the west, the unique escapatory way. Now even wouldn't be necessarily that such migration would be of herders or farmers taking into account what happened with the nahuan languages in Mexico.
 
Why are the two mutually exclusive? It seems logical to me R1a, Corded Ware and a number of IE-languages are connected and came from the northeast. At the same time there's no denying Yamnaya came from the southeast as far as Hungary and the lower Danube valley, it seems from adna these would have been mostly R1b(xL51). It seem logical to me that whatever languages they spoke were also IE but already split from the language(s) carried by R1a, so proto-versions of Greek and/or other Paleo-Balkan languages. The R1a group got spread further over Western Europe by R1b-L51 and some others, while R1b(xL51) and some others spread their languages over the Balkan. In the end they both come from the same source, wheter that's early Yamnaye or something before (Sredny Stog comes to mind).
 
DNA combined from a male and a female from 2 different tribes is better suited for natural selection than DNA from inbreeding in the same tribe.
And I suppose subsequent generations of CW males took neolithic women to breed.

The same happened in paleolithic Europe causing the Magdalenian 'El Miron' cluster 19-14 ka : all known Y-DNA of this cluster is the Gravettian I, while autosomally it resembled 35 ka Aurignacian C1a2 GoyetQ116-1.
Gravettian males must have bred with Aurignacian females during successive generations to acomplish this.

Most HG tribes were exogamous if they had the chance.


I agree it could have had a input and OKpossible too for Aurignacian/Gravettian
 
"Ongoing male migration from the steppe over multiple generations is therefore required to explain observed patterns of X and autosomal ancestry"

And why the Yamnayans needed several migrations to Central Europe?

"Males from the steppe and central European females show substantial ongoing migration, with continuing admixture rates of almost ½. That is, almost half of the male parents in each generation of BA individuals are new migrants from the SP population."

After all the Yamnayans were gentlemen and were not forcing the 100% of the local women... what a kidding

"This result corresponds to approximately 14 male migrants for every female migrant from the steppe contributing to the ancestry of the BA population."

Tomenable you have the mean harem of a mean Yamnayan cacique: 13 women... but the worst is that after such migration the caciques were left alone in the steppes with their harems isn't?
;)

but the best is that the cacique's sons were the responsible for the successive migratory waves? oh I think it's a good joke start...

I have not the study at hand.
I think these questions of sex biased matings are real but uneasy to weight because of the numerous factors in cause in the subsequent generations.
The fact is that even males biased colonization with strong polygamy cannot explain the remanence of Steppes auDNA in descendants. So we are obliged to imagine subsequent new waves of Steppes males - not mixed - to explain the "yamna" autosomes in N, E and NW Europe. These SIMILAR Steppic men are not the first ones sons, otherwise they would not have the same input for auDNA, being already mixed.
In this kind of sex biased, we have always the same results, in pure theory and in more "mixed" reality: too much Y-DNA of intruders, too much mt-DNA of local people, and a mean of X-DNA between autosomes (more or less local) and mt-DNA, the most local drifted;but the proportions in autosomes and X depend on one wave as opposed to new waves.
The study seems, for the little I know of it, perhaps a bit simplistic and as others I'm sure a lot of Steppic people females came with their males; and they had since a long time "neolithical" mt-DNA and X-DNA uneasy sometimes to tell from local DNA - only a peer study of SUBclades can help here -;what seems to me is that the discrepancy between the diverse aspects of the DNA has been exagerated in the study in question. And the sample can explain somethings too, as said by forumers here; Steppes intrusionS have not been always the same thing everytime evrywhere.
Just some thoughts, without sound ground by lack of details.




 
thx, here it is

and I've read it.

this graph says it all



there is the initial expansion of farmers into Eruope some 8 ka, then an additional TRB expansion some 6 ka on top of that and then a big bust ca 5.5 ka, some 6-700 years before the arrival of the CW and Bell Beaker people

the neolithic societies were simply unstable by themselves, it wasn't the IE that caused their decline, they merely came in and filled up the empty spaces

but why then would neolithic females have survived while males didn't ?


I suspect the same thing happened in SW Asia, a big bust of the neolithic societies followed by the expansion of the Semitic tribes. They even replaced the Summerians.

Maybe the wheel did it. Europe doesn't seem to have experienced a population collapse for thousands of years before 3500 B.C. so it doesn't seem to have been a regular occurrence like it would have been if climate change were to blame. Once the wheel was invented bands of warriors could rove around much more effectively sacking villages. Diseases could also spread more effectively. The increase in warfare caused the population to collapse and the Yamniks were the ones who ultimately benefitted the most from the wheel because they already were pastoralists and had stronger traditions of cattle raiding and warfare.
 
The most simple is to turn off the Yamnayist theory and simply suppose that a R1a culture carried genes and IE language to Central Europe. If the problem was climatic, much more harsh would be the problem in European Russia, pushing them to the west, the unique escapatory way. Now even wouldn't be necessarily that such migration would be of herders or farmers taking into account what happened with the nahuan languages in Mexico.

And, for curiosity, which language did the Yamnayans speak according to your view?
 
Why are the two mutually exclusive? It seems logical to me R1a, Corded Ware and a number of IE-languages are connected and came from the northeast. At the same time there's no denying Yamnaya came from the southeast as far as Hungary and the lower Danube valley, it seems from adna these would have been mostly R1b(xL51). It seem logical to me that whatever languages they spoke were also IE but already split from the language(s) carried by R1a, so proto-versions of Greek and/or other Paleo-Balkan languages. The R1a group got spread further over Western Europe by R1b-L51 and some others, while R1b(xL51) and some others spread their languages over the Balkan. In the end they both come from the same source, wheter that's early Yamnaye or something before (Sredny Stog comes to mind).

not stupid
 
And, for curiosity, which language did the Yamnayans speak according to your view?

Only DNA will say, but my bets are in supporting order: north Caucasian (they dwelt in the steppes before the Russian genocide and they used kurgans till Islamization), Altaic (not kidding with that, Afanasievo was a true Yamnayan offshot that developed just where there was the Altaic urheimat), a language related to IE but nowadays lost.
 
Only DNA will say, but my bets are in supporting order: north Caucasian (they dwelt in the steppes before the Russian genocide and they used kurgans till Islamization), Altaic (not kidding with that, Afanasievo was a true Yamnayan offshot that developed just where there was the Altaic urheimat), a language related to IE but nowadays lost.

That's also Anna Dybo's view, though you might disagree with her on the ultimate location of IE:

http://www.jolr.ru/files/(108)jlr2013-9(69-92).pdf
 
"Significant", I doubt it was very significant. Even if it was I think it's impossible for Steppe men to had been genetically significantly physically superior to Neo/Meso Men. I think this because the variation in physique among Europeans today is small. The variation among most of humanity is small.



Corded Ware arrived in NorthEastern Europe before any R1b did. "hot farmer girls", this is fantasy talk. Farmer girls shouldn't have been any hotter than Steppe girls. You guys are trying to make history a Hollywood movie. I don't know about you but for other Northern Europeans I've seen post here there's a dose of racial-centrism. That's why I started this thread. They're ok with the idea Steppe people were superior because they have more Steppe than anyone. You guys are also half or more from the Meso/Neo Europeans who you apparently think were weaklings but also had super hot women who Steppe men stole.

I think it's very possible Steppe groups or heavily admixed Steppe groups in Europe were aggressive raiding tribes like the Huns or Slavs were in early European history. However, I don't think it is possible that they simply man handled their way to dominate Europe and native European women. Biologically speaking that sounds impossible. The difference between them and Native European men would have been tiny. That explanation is too simple.

Tiny differences can give after dozens of generations significant outcomes Fire Haired. I'am more and more convinced that Maciamo has got the right direction when he stated that R1b/S21 was popularized by the Unetice culture, the first Bronze Age warriors entering Northwestern Europe. According to their burials they not only where probably beter military better equipped than the descendants of the TRB/Beaker cultures of that time. But most of all they introduced an aristocratic element, which was on to that unknown in these area's. Ok they weren't all Khan the second...but I think those 'aristocratic' chieftains where not unfamiliar with claiming of women.....(a kind of presidential privilege avant la lettre ;)
 
"Significant", I doubt it was very significant. Even if it was I think it's impossible for Steppe men to had been genetically significantly physically superior to Neo/Meso Men. I think this because the variation in physique among Europeans today is small. The variation among most of humanity is small.



Corded Ware arrived in NorthEastern Europe before any R1b did. "hot farmer girls", this is fantasy talk. Farmer girls shouldn't have been any hotter than Steppe girls. You guys are trying to make history a Hollywood movie. I don't know about you but for other Northern Europeans I've seen post here there's a dose of racial-centrism. That's why I started this thread. They're ok with the idea Steppe people were superior because they have more Steppe than anyone. You guys are also half or more from the Meso/Neo Europeans who you apparently think were weaklings but also had super hot women who Steppe men stole.

I think it's very possible Steppe groups or heavily admixed Steppe groups in Europe were aggressive raiding tribes like the Huns or Slavs were in early European history. However, I don't think it is possible that they simply man handled their way to dominate Europe and native European women. Biologically speaking that sounds impossible. The difference between them and Native European men would have been tiny. That explanation is too simple.

I don't think farmer girls were hotter. What I meant was that when invading IEs initially conquered the farmers and wiped out a large portion of their population, the more attractive nubile farmer girls were the most likely to survive and reproduce. There's no assumption of superiority except military superiority. The conquered Native Americans were also known for their bravery, resistance to pain, and skills at oratory. They were still conquered. Conquest doesn't really carry assumptions about superiority.

[FONT=&quot]There’s probably a lot of material for a PIE movie, but the unimpressive technology of the time and the lack of interest in similar period movies make it better suited for tv. Perhaps the History Channel could pick it up after Vikings is over or maybe it could go to HBO or Netflix. Seriously, the source of nearly half the world’s languages and culture should be a movie. It feels like the breakthroughs in ancient DNA are being ignored and we should already have had an episode of NOVA and a few documentaries. Neanderthals and Denisovans are getting all the attention even though we don’t have any cultural connection to them.[/FONT]
 
I don't think farmer girls were hotter. What I meant was that when invading IEs initially conquered the farmers and wiped out a large portion of their population, the more attractive nubile farmer girls were the most likely to survive and reproduce. There's no assumption of superiority except military superiority.

This is realistic.

It feels like the breakthroughs in ancient DNA are being ignored and we should already have had an episode of NOVA and a few documentaries. Neanderthals and Denisovans are getting all the attention even though we don’t have any cultural connection to them.

It is strange how there's been hardly any attention given to it.
 
What is being ignored, AGAIN, despite all the papers and all the threads and the reams of posts is that there isn't a one size fits all "invasion".

What went on in parts of the northern border regions (and perhaps even Britain) that were barely populated was different from what went on in a Central Europe that had experienced population crashes and was perhaps weakened by malnutrition and the diseases (the plague) perhaps carried by the new arrivals, which was different again from what happened, perhaps, in southern Europe, or in Anatolia and Iran, etc. in the Near East.

There are also big differences by time period. I know some people in this hobby, particularly young men, love a sort of Conan the Barbarian or Viking kind of narrative, but it doesn't fit a lot of what went on. Corded Ware only got a little bronze at the very end. They barely had copper weapons. They did not have a big military superiority over the MN people they encountered. That's very different from the Mycenaeans, for example.

You can't make one story fit all.

What I do think is true as a rather global matter is that you often have a civilized "core" built up over generations and hundreds of years which starts to develop problems, perhaps because of climate change, or environmental damage, or class differences which result in mass conflict, and populations of the periphery, perhaps nomadic herders in some areas, swoop in and take over, sometimes with pretty significant genetic changes altogether, sometimes as an elite, sometimes with broad autosomal replacement, sometimes with autosomal admixture but a yDna sweep. You see it in China, in Africa, in the Near East. It has nothing to do with "superiority" whatever the racist "philosophers" and anthropologists of the late 19th century might have thought.

If you have never read or have forgotten about all of this, you can find detailed discussions about these matters if you use the search engine.
 
What is being ignored, AGAIN, despite all the papers and all the threads and the reams of posts is that there isn't a one size fits all "invasion".

What went on in parts of the northern border regions (and perhaps even Britain) that were barely populated was different from what went on in a Central Europe that had experienced population crashes and was perhaps weakened by malnutrition and the diseases (the plague) perhaps carried by the new arrivals, which was different again from what happened, perhaps, in southern Europe, or in Anatolia and Iran, etc. in the Near East.

There are also big differences by time period. I know some people in this hobby, particularly young men, love a sort of Conan the Barbarian or Viking kind of narrative, but it doesn't fit a lot of what went on. Corded Ware only got a little bronze at the very end. They barely had copper weapons. They did not have a big military superiority over the MN people they encountered. That's very different from the Mycenaeans, for example.

You can't make one story fit all.

What I do think is true as a rather global matter is that you often have a civilized "core" built up over generations and hundreds of years which starts to develop problems, perhaps because of climate change, or environmental damage, or class differences which result in mass conflict, and populations of the periphery, perhaps nomadic herders in some areas, swoop in and take over, sometimes with pretty significant genetic changes altogether, sometimes as an elite, sometimes with broad autosomal replacement, sometimes with autosomal admixture but a yDna sweep. You see it in China, in Africa, in the Near East. It has nothing to do with "superiority" whatever the racist "philosophers" and anthropologists of the late 19th century might have thought.

If you have never read or have forgotten about all of this, you can find detailed discussions about these matters if you use the search engine.

Historically, successful barbarians invaders have at the very least been able to put a much larger percentage of their populations in the field and in the case of China, India, and the Middle East had a natural supply of horses which sedentary empires had to import from them.


Off the top of my head, I can’t think of a successful barbarian migration that wasn’t backed up with serious military prowess. Maybe the expansion of Semites into Mesopotamia is a counterexample.


Someone should point out that Conan and other Cimmerians often get captured or enslaved. He’s not always on top, except at the end of the story. The Vikings were the tail end of the migrations that occurred with the collapse of the Roman empire. Your internal weakness narrative probably a large part of the story (look what happened to lead production), but the growing military power of the Germani and the Sassanids likely became to much for the empire.


Does anyone dispute that IEs had a more martial culture than MN Europe?


My guess is that the IE expansion into Europe was triggered by the invention of the wheel rather than horses or bronze. It may have gone something like this:

  • The wheel is invented. Mobility increases drastically and individual family farms become more viable. This weakens traditional socio-political structures among farmers and strengthens new structures among IEs. It also become possible for herders to take everything they own and move to Siberia.
  • The costs of raiding long distances and taking loot decline drastically. This increases the level of warfare across Europe. Moreover, disease spreads much more quickly. This leads to devastating plagues across Europe.
  • The population declines. Remaining communities of hunter-gatherers expand at the expense of farmers because they are less affected by raiding.
  • A massive migration from the steppe begins as young steppe men seek grazing land, women, power, and everlasting renown in the West. Their martial culture and the inherent mobility of their economy give them a decisive advantage over the farmers. They destroy villages and towns, slaughter their people, destroy their agriculture, and run off with their women.
  • Surviving farmers flee into the mountains. Hunter-gatherer groups are gradually assimilated into the new IE order.


I suspect that core-periphery interactions are important for developing the periphery. War and trade with the Romans built up the Germans, with the Chinese it built up the various Northern barbarians, and and the Cucuteni and Maykop presumably did the same for the Yamnaya.
 

This thread has been viewed 47129 times.

Back
Top