Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday February 23 2018, @11:28PM   Printer-friendly
from the neolithic-brexit dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

The ancient population of Britain was almost completely replaced by newcomers about 4,500 years ago, a study shows.

The findings mean modern Britons trace just a small fraction of their ancestry to the people who built Stonehenge.

The astonishing result comes from analysis of DNA extracted from 400 ancient remains across Europe.

The mammoth study, published in Nature, suggests the newcomers, known as Beaker people, replaced 90% of the British gene pool in a few hundred years.

Lead author Prof David Reich, from Harvard Medical School in Cambridge, US, said: "The magnitude and suddenness of the population replacement is highly unexpected."

The reasons remain unclear, but climate change, disease and ecological disaster could all have played a role.

People in Britain lived by hunting and gathering until agriculture was introduced from continental Europe about 6,000 years ago. These Neolithic farmers, who traced their origins to Anatolia (modern Turkey) built giant stone (or "megalithic") structures such as Stonehenge in Wiltshire, huge Earth mounds and sophisticated settlements such as Skara Brae in the Orkneys.

But towards the end of the Neolithic, about 4,450 years ago, a new way of life spread to Britain from Europe. People began burying their dead with stylised bell-shaped pots, copper daggers, arrowheads, stone wrist guards and distinctive perforated buttons.

Co-author Dr Carles Lalueza-Fox, from the Institute of Evolutionary Biology (IBE) in Barcelona, Spain, said the Beaker traditions probably started "as a kind of fashion" in Iberia after 5,000 years ago.

From here, the culture spread very fast by word of mouth to Central Europe. After it was adopted by people in Central Europe, it exploded in every direction - but through the movement of people.

Prof Reich told BBC News: "Archaeologists ever since the Second World War have been very sceptical about proposals of large-scale movements of people in prehistory. But what the genetics are showing - with the clearest example now in Britain at Beaker times - is that these large-scale migrations occurred, even after the spread of agriculture."

[...] The Nature study examines the Beaker phenomenon across Europe using DNA from hundreds more samples, including remains from Holland, Spain, the Czech Republic, Italy and France.

Another intriguing possibility links the Beaker people with the spread of Celtic languages. Although many linguistics experts believe Celtic spread thousands of years later, Dr Lalueza-Fox said: "In my view, the massive population turnover must be accompanied by a language replacement."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 24 2018, @06:46AM (1 child)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 24 2018, @06:46AM (#642917) Journal

    In that both y and mt dna strands believed to date from that original population are still found in the current population of the island, as well as in other populations derived from it at an earlier date, a result that clearly shows that no 'replacement' ever occurred?

    That's not inconsistent with genocide or replacement. There have been numerous genocides since where the targets have managed in various ways to propagate their genes onward.

    The point is while it did occur it did not occur with anything near the free-wheeling frequency that the bad writers in style at the corner of hollywood and 9mm want you to think. And while you can say the genetic evidence is 'consistent' with some pretty nasty scenarios, it's also 'consistent' with a much less nasty readings as well.

    What bad writers? There's almost nothing written of those times. And it's not like you actually disagree.

    Why automatically select the meanest thing you can possibly argue for, hrmm?

    Because that's a real possibility in this case. One population disappears right when a second population moves in.

  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Monday February 26 2018, @03:17PM

    by Arik (4543) on Monday February 26 2018, @03:17PM (#643959) Journal
    "Because that's a real possibility in this case. One population disappears right when a second population moves in."

    It doesn't. It's still present millennia later, in rather large proportions. How does that equal disappeared?

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?