|
|
|
|
Neolithic Europe
|
| |
|
| |
Neolithic Europe is the time between roughly from 7000 BC (the approximate time of the first farming societies in Greece) to ca.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Neolithic Europe' Start a new discussion about 'Neolithic Europe' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
Neolithic Europe is the time between roughly from 7000 BC (the approximate time of the first farming societies in Greece) to ca. 1700 BC (the beginning of the Bronze Age in northwest Europe). The Neolithic overlaps the Mesolithic and Bronze Age periods in Europe as cultural changes moved from the south east to north west at about 1km/year. The duration of the Neolithic varies from place to place, its end marked by the introduction of bronze implements: in southeast Europe it is approximately 4000 years (i.e., 7000 BC–3000 BC) while in Northwest Europe it is just under 3000 years (ca. 4500 BC–1700 BC).
Basic cultural characteristics
Regardless of specific chronology, many European Neolithic groups share basic characteristics, such as living in small-scale, presumably egalitarian, family-based communities, subsisting on domesticated plants and animals supplemented with the collection of wild plant foods and with hunting, and producing hand-made pottery, that is, pottery made without the potter's wheel. There are also many differences, with some Neolithic communities in southeastern Europe living in heavily fortified settlements of 3,000-4,000 people (e.g., Sesklo in Greece) whereas Neolithic groups in England were small (possibly 50-100 people) and highly mobile cattle-herders.
The details of the origin, chronology, social organization, subsistence practices and ideology of the peoples of Neolithic Europe are obtained from archaeology, and not historical records, since these people left none. Since the 1970s, population genetics has provided independent data on the population history of Neolithic Europe, including migration events and genetic relationships with peoples in South Asia. A further independent tool, linguistics, has contributed hypothetical reconstructions of early European languages and family trees with estimates of dating of splits, in particular theories on the relationship between speakers of Indo-European languages and Neolithic peoples. Some archaeologists believe that the expansion of Neolithic peoples from southwest Asia into Europe, marking the eclipse of Mesolithic culture, coincided with the introduction of Indo-European speakers, whereas many linguists prefer to see Indo-European languages introduced during the succeeding Bronze Age. A few see Indo-European languages starting in Paleolithic times.
Archaeology of the Neolithic
Archeologists believe that food-producing societies first emerged in the Levantine region of southwest Asia at the close of the Ice Age around 12,000 BC, and developed into a number of regionally distinctive cultures by the eighth millennium BC. Remains of food-producing societies in the Aegean have been carbon-dated to around 6500 BC at Knossos, Franchthi Cave, and a number of mainland sites in Thessaly. Neolithic groups appear soon afterwards in the Balkans and south-central Europe. The Neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe (the Balkans, Italy, and the Aegean) show some continuity with groups in southwest Asia and Anatolia (e.g., Çatalhöyük).
Current evidence suggests that Neolithic material culture was introduced to Europe via western Anatolia, and that similarities in cultures of North Africa and the Pontic steppes are due to diffusion out of Europe. All Neolithic sites in Europe contain ceramics, and contain the plants and animals domesticated in Southwest Asia: einkorn, emmer, barley, lentils, pigs, goats, sheep, and cattle. Genetic data suggest that no independent domestication of animals took place in Neolithic Europe, and that all domesticated animals were originally domesticated in Southwest Asia. The only domesticate not from Southwest Asia was broomcorn millet, domesticated in East Asia.
Archaeologists seem to agree that the culture of the early Neolithic is relatively homogeneous, compared both to the late Mesolithic and the later Neolithic. The diffusion across Europe, from the Aegean to Britain, took about 2,500 years (6500 BC - 4000 BC). The Baltic region was penetrated a bit later, around 3500 BC, and there was also a delay in settling the Pannonian plain. In general, colonization shows a "saltatory" pattern, as the Neolithic advanced from one patch of fertile alluvial soil to another, bypassing mountainous areas. Analysis of radiocarbon dates show clearly that Mesolithic and Neolithic populations lived side by side for as much as a millennium in many parts of Europe, especially in the Iberian peninsula and along the Atlantic coast.
Genetics of the Neolithic
Archaeologists agree that the technologies associated with agriculture originated in the Levant/Near East and then spread into Europe. However, debate exists whether this resulted from an active migratory process from the Near East, or merely due to cultural contact between Europeans and Near Easterners. Currently, three models summarize the proposed pattern of spread:
- 1.Demic diffusion: posits that there was active migration of farmers from the Fertile Crescent into Europe. Given their technological advantages, they would have displaced or absorbed the less numerous hunter-gathering populace. Thus, modern Europeans are primarily descended from these Neolithic farmers.
- 2.Cultural diffusion: in contrast, this model supposes that agriculture reached Europe by way of a flow of ideas and trade between the Mesolithic European population and Anatolian farmers. There was not net increase in migration during this process, and therefore, modern Europeans are descended from the “original” Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers.
- 3.Pioneer model: recognises that models 1) and 2) above may represent false dichotomies. This model postulates that there was an initial, small scale migration of farmers from the Near East to certain regions of Europe. Contact with the Mesolithic Europeans subsequently spread farming technologies throughout the rest of Europe by means of trade.
Genetic studies have been utilised in the study of pre-historic population movements. On the whole, scientists agree that there is evidence for a migration during the Neolithic. However, they cannot agree on whether the Neolithic migration was small or large scale. Put another way, some geneticists theorize that the Neolithic migration was so marked that modern Europeans are primarily descended from these Neolithic settlers; whilst others posit that they are largely descended from the Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers. The major reason for such a discrepancy appears to stem from different methods used by studies. Studies analysing clusters or clines generated by variation in autosomal DNA loci point to a clear, north-western to south-eastern cline attributable to a large demic diffusion from the Near East. In contrast, studies looking at isolated frequency values of mtDNA and Y-chromosome haplogroups reveal a limited Neolithic contribution. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, and the conclusions of any study must be interpreted with caution.
Perhaps, the first scholar to posit a large-scale Neolithic migration, based on genetic evidence, was Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza. By applying principal component analysis to data from autosomal DNA (based on 120 ‘classical’ polymorphisms at blood and protein loci), Cavalli-Sforza discovered interesting clues about the genetic makeup of Europeans. Although being very genetically homogeneous, several patterns did exist. . The most important one was a north-western to south-eastern cline with a Near Eastern focus. This pattern represented the largest (28%) component of total European genetic variation. He attributed this to the spread of agriculture from the Middle East circa 10, 000 to 6, 000 years ago. Such a demographic expansion might have been propagated by the technological developments affecting food availability (in this case), giving the farmers an advantage over the relatively small-sized Palaeolithic population . Although autosomal analysis produces a clear picture of a population’s overall genetic makeup, the time depths of such patterns are not known and “associating them with particular demographic events is usually speculative”. However, a study by Chikhi (1998) analysed autosomal DNA from seven hypervariable loci. Autocorrelation analysis produced a clinal pattern closely matching that in Cavalli-Sforza’s study. Moreover, separation times between populations were estimated on the basis of a stepwise mutation model. Even when assuming low mutation rates and long generation times, the study found no evidence for population splits older than 10,000 years. “The simplest interpretation of these results is that the current nuclear gene pool largely reflects the westward and northward expansion of a Neolithic group”. . Nevertheless, others have postulated that these clines may have been generated by other demographic processes, such as the initial Palaeolithic expansion, the Mesolithic (post-glacial) re-expansions, or later (historic) colonizations.
Whilst a case can be made from the autosomal nuclear DNA data to support a Demic expansion from the Near East, the data from mtDNA analysis show a contrasting picture. Rather than a clear clinal pattern, the mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in Europe show little, if any, geographic patterning. There are more mtDNA haplogroups compared to NRY haplogroups, and most of them are ubiquitous throughout Europe. For example, haplogroup H is present at frequencies of 40 to 50% in almost every European population. Moreover, the vast majority of mtDNA lineages (60-70%) have been dated to have emerged in the Palaeolithic, often interpreted as evidence of a predominantly Palaeolithic European genetic heritage . However, Chikhi challenged the interpretation of such findings: “We argue that many mitochondrial lineages whose origin has been traced back to the Palaeolithic period probably reached Europe at a later time”.
Currently, Y- chromosomes are very popular in investigating human population histories. Unlike mtDNA haplogroups and autosomal data, they have a high degree of geographic differentiation. This could be the result of drift, a phenomenon Y-chromosomes are particularly liable to, because they have an effective population size one-quarter that of autosomes. In addition, certain social practices may have existed which reduced the effective population size of Y-chromosomes, especially polygyny (where a few, powerful “alpha” males produced many offspring with several women, whilst other men did not sire any sons) and patrilocality (whereby women were more likely to move away from their birthplace compared to men). Such practices might explain why mtDNA haplogroups are more numerous and ubiquitous compared to Y-chromosome haplogroups. Two significant studies analysing Y-chromosome data were those of Semino 2000 and Rosser 2000, which identified haplogroups J2 and E1b1b (formerly E3b) as the putative genetic signatures of migrating Neolithic farmers from Anatolia. This association was strengthened when King and Underhill (2002) found that there was a significant correlation between the distribution of Hg J2 and Neolithic painted pottery of the Cardium culture in European and Mediterranean sites. Rosser used spatial autocorrelation analysis to examine geographic differentiation of Y-chromosome HGs. This study found strong clinal patterns in haplogroup R1b and Haplogroup J2 distribution, peaking in western Europe and the Near East/Caucasus regions, respectively. . Rosser remarked that the complementary clines between R1a and J2, which together encompassed 45% of the chromosomes, resembled the first principal component in Cavalli-Sforza’s study. Moreover, the respective ages of ~23 kYa for R1b and ~ 15 kYa for J2 seemed consistent with a demic diffusion of Neolithic agriculturists carrying J2 into an R1b dominated Europe. Semino, rather, explained Cavalli-Sforza’s first component in terms of Haplogroups J1, J2 and E1b1b. She performed a correlation analysis to quantify the portion of variation in PC 1 accounted for by HGs J2 and J1 (68%) and Hg E1b1b (79%). Based on the distribution frequencies for the various haplogroups, Semino concluded that whilst there is an evidence for a Neolithic migration from the Near East toward Europe, the combined ‘Neolithic genes’ only constitute 22% of the overall European gene pool. Moreover, this frequency is clinal in its distribution, being most pronounced in the south-eastern Balkans and southern Italy.
However, later Y-DNA based studies, exploiting an increased understanding of the phylogenetic relationships of Hg J2 subclades, suggest a more complicated demographic history. They confirmed that (as far as Europe was concerned) significant frequencies (circa 20%) of haplogroup J2 were only found in mainland Greece, Crete, Bulgaria and southern Italy. More moderate values (circa 10%) were also found in the Republic of Macedonia, southern Iberia and central-northern Italy. As one moves northward from the southern Balkans into northern Balkans and central Europe, the frequency of J2 drops sharply. This suggests that the spread of agriculture might have taken a predominantly maritime, westward route, rather than a inland, northerly, spread via the Balkans into central Europe. Moreover, the studies suggest that “the large-scale clinal patterns of Hg E and Hg J reflect a mosaic of numerous small-scale, more regional population movements, replacements, and subsequent expansions overlying previous ranges” . For example, Di Giacomo 2004 associates the post-Neolithic emergence of sub-haplogroup J2f1 (M-92) with the expansion of the Greek world. The study concludes that, if anything, the expansion of Greek colonies was more significant in spreading J2 than the advance of agriculturalists from the Levant. Similarly, haplogroup E1b1b was also thought to have been introduced into the Balkans by Near Eastern agriculturalists. However, more recently discovered that the large majority of haplogroup E1b1b lineages in Europe are represented by the sub-clade E1b1b1a2- V13, which is predominantly found in the Balkans. Cruciani suggests that the timing for dispersal of European V13 from the Balkans to the rest of Europe may be much more recent, indeed no earlier than 5300 years ago. The authors therefore suggest that this might have been associated with an in situ population increase in the Balkans associated with the Balkan Bronze Age, rather than an actual migratory movement of peoples from western Asia. In summary, evidence from Y-chromosome studies points to a limited Neolithic input to the European gene pool, limited to littoral southern Europe. However, we should not make over-arching conclusions based on the evidence from one genetic locus.
In an attempt to reconcile the conflicting conclusions suggested by Y-chromosome and mtDNA HG data on the one hand, and autosomal DNA data on the other, Dupanloup performed an admixture analysis based on several autosomal loci, mtDNA and NRY haplogroup frequencies. The study was based on the assumption that Basques were modern representatives of Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers’ gene pool, and Near Eastern peoples were a proxy population for Neolithic farmers. Subsequently, they used admixture analysis to estimate the likely components of the contemporary European gene pool contributed by the two parental populations whose members hybridized at a certain moment in the past. The study suggested that the greatest Near Eastern admixture occurs in the Balkans (~80%) and Southern Italy (~60%), whilst it is least in peoples of the British Isles (estimating only a 20% contribution). Although based on several assumptions, and arriving at some aberrant results, the study authors were confident that the Neolithic shift to agriculture entailed major population dispersal from the Near East.
Another facet of genetic genealogy is the study of ancient DNA (aDNA). In order to arrive at correct conclusions about ancestry, we must compare the frequencies and distributions of haplogroups in ancient populations compared to contemporary ones. In one such study, Wolfgang Haak and Colin Renfrew extracted ancient DNA from, what they present as, early European Farmers form the Linear Pottery Culture in central Europe. The bodies contained a 25% frequency of mtDNA N1a, a haplogroup linked to the Neolithic. Today, the frequency of this haplogroup is a mere 0.2%. Haak presented this as supportive evidence for a Palaeolithic European ancestry.. However, the conclusions of Haak's study were challenged by Levy-Coffman. She suggested that Haak failed to adequately consider other demographic and evolutionary events which could have caused the scarcity of mtDNA haplogroup N1a amongst modern Europeans. Also by comparing mtDNA haplogroup frequencies between prehistoric and contemporary populations, she challenged the assumption that Basques are a population with "undiluted Palaeolithic ancestry", who are often used as genetic proxies for Palaeolithic Europeans. Rather, she places their genetic uniqueness down to centuries of endogamy, a result of their cultural and geographic isolation. Therefore, she argues that reconstructing our biological history based only on the DNA frequencies of extant populations is misleading. Ultimately, she sees contemporary Europeans as "an entirely new and modern mix formed as a result of a number of demographic and evolutionary events over time".
Whilst the relationships between various haplogroups are relatively well understood, their dating, and therefore their alleged demographic history, can vary from study to study. Although proposing some interesting theories, genetic studies have ultimtaly failed to conclusively answer the questions regarding the biological origins of modern Europeans. Geneticists are divided on the issue: some propose a predominantly Palaeolithic ancestry, others see the neolithic revolution as the major demographic event involved in the growth of the European population, whist others still see modern Europeans as a new, constantly evolving population in genetic discontinuity with our predecessors.
Language in the Neolithic
There is no direct evidence of the languages spoken in the Neolithic. Some proponents of Paleolinguistics attempt to extend the methods of historical linguistics to the Stone Age, but this has little academic support.
Discussion of hypothetic languages spoken in the European Neolithic is divided into two topics, Indo-European languages and "Pre-Indo-European" languages.
Early Indo-European languages are usually assumed to have reached Europe in the Chalcolithic or early Bronze Age, e.g. with the Corded Ware or Beaker cultures (see also Kurgan hypothesis for related discussions). The Anatolian hypothesis postulates arrival of Indo-European languages with the early Neolithic. The Old European hydronymy is taken by Hans Krahe to be the oldest reflection of the early presence of Indo-European in Europe.
Theories of "Pre-Indo-European" languages in Europe are built on scant evidence. The Basque language is the best candidate for a descendant of such a language, but since Basque is a language isolate, there is no comparative evidence to build upon. Theo Vennemann nevertheless postulates a "Vasconic" family, which he supposes had co-existed with an "Atlantic" or "Semitidic" (i.e. para-Semitic) group. Another candidate is a Tyrrhenian family which would have given rise to Etruscan and Raetic in the Iron Age, and possibly also Aegean languages such as Minoan or Pelasgian in the Bronze Age.
List of cultures and sites
Megalithic
Some Neolithic cultures listed above are known for constructing megaliths. These occur primarily on the Atlantic coast of Europe, but there are also megaliths on western Mediterranean islands.
- Circa 5000 BC: Constructions in Portugal (Évora). Emergence of the Atlantic Neolithic period, the age of agriculture along the western shores of Europe.
- Circa 4800 BC: Constructions in Brittany (Barnenez) and Poitou (Bougon).
- Circa 4000 BC: Constructions in Brittany (Carnac), Portugal (Lisbon), France (central and southern), Corsica, England and Wales.
- Circa 3700 BC: Constructions in Ireland (Knockiveagh and elsewhere).
- Circa 3600 BC: Constructions in England (Maumbury Rings and Godmanchester), and Malta (Ggantija and Mnajdra temples).
- Circa 3500 BC: Constructions in Spain (Málaga and Guadiana), Ireland (south-west), France (Arles and the north), Sardinia, Sicily, Malta (and elsewhere in the Mediterranean), Belgium (north-east) and Germany (central and south-west).
- Circa 3400 BC: Constructions in Ireland (Newgrange), Netherlands (north-east), Germany (northern and central) Sweden and Denmark.
- Circa 3200 BC: Constructions in Malta (Hagar Qim and Tarxien).
- Circa 3000 BC: Constructions in France (Saumur, Dordogne, Languedoc, Biscay, and the Mediterranean coast), Spain (Los Millares), Sicily, Belgium (Ardennes), and Orkney, as well as the first henges (circular earthworks) in Britain.
- Circa 2800 BC: Climax of the megalithic Funnel-beaker culture in Denmark, and the construction of the henge at Stonehenge.
See also
Sources
- Bellwood, Peter. (2001). "Early Agriculturalist Population Diasporas? Farming, Languages, and Genes." Annual Review of Anthropology. 30:181-207.
- Bellwood, Peter. (2004). First Farmers: The Origins of Agricultural Societies. Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 0-631-20566-7
- Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Paolo Menozzi, and Alberto Piazza. (1994). The History and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-08750-4.
- Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca. (2001). Genes, Peoples, and Languages. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-22873-1.
- Childe, V. Gordon. (1926). The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins. London: Paul, Trench, Trubner.
- Gimbutas, Marija (1991). The Civilization of the Goddess. San Francisco: Harper. ISBN 0-06-250337-5.
- Gimbutas, Marija (1989). The Language of the Goddess. Harper & Row, Publishers. ISBN 0-06-250356-1.
- Gimbutas, Marija (1982). The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe: 6500–3500 B.C. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-04655-2.
- Renfrew, Colin. (1987). Archaeology and Language. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 0-521-38675-6.
External links
|
| |
|
|
