The Bronze Age Population Change
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 06. 2024
- The Bronze age arrived in the British Isles with a new population group - the ancestors of the modern British population! Discover this group who came into the British isles and how this new migration affected the existing Neolithic britons.
A good source to look at the genetic change of the British isles: • Cheddar Man & the Orig...
Buy me a coffee?: ko-fi.com/alexilesuk
My Patreon: / alexilesuk
Iles Tours Website: www.ilestours.co.uk
Iles Tours Facebook: / ilestours
The Neolithic farmers in Britain were not dark skinned - we know this because their (Anatolian origin) DNA is much the same as modern Sardinians - who are not dark skinned.
Could I ask what your source is? There's been six thousand years since the Neolithic so some change is likely and a lot of migration in the Mediterranean, even though they may be similar, you cannot use them as an exact same population for the previous neolithic populations. It also doesn't take into account regional variation.
@@AlexIlesUKif I may, I have a few questions about the topic?... Namely, if 80% was replaced.. is this trackable through analyzing mutations? - if so, what caused it?
I would go with eumelanin not being compatible with cold/less sunny environments - but the polar bear's black skin has helped show that eumelanin attracts limited sunlight; whilst the uv interaction creates heat instead of florescent red... They seem to thrive just fine in relation to the climate & environment - Which stands to say that "nature finds a way".
Leucistic is a new word I've heard in regards to mutations, but I'd like to hear your input ❤️
Skin color, hair color, and eye color are determined by only very few genes.
It has been determined that light skin color is max 8500 years old and developed in the steppes.
Were the neolithic farmer skeletons sequenced with sufficient granularity to determine their skin color?
@@AlexIlesUK The Haak et al. paper looked at some skin colour genetic markers, and the Yamnaya were not appreciably more pale-skinned than the Early Neolithic Farmers. Skin colour in Europeans seems to have lightened in general since the Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age.
There is some evidence found that the drop in the neolithic farmer population was caused by a bubonic plague. This plaque was also found in Yamnaya populations but they seemed more resistant (through their herds) and due to the population drop in neolithic farmers were able to spread out over Europe replacing the remaining farmer males. Maybe that’s what happened in England in the end too although the steppe herders adopted bell beeker culture?
That's a really interesting theory! I'll need to read into that and see if I can find any articles about that!
@@AlexIlesUK I had to find it back where I heard it but it is here 😁
This part about the plaque starts a 23 minutes
czcams.com/video/bxTVSwt-jsU/video.html
Thank you very much! I'll give that a watch later! Much appreciated as I'm always wanting to learn more!
this is often put forward by researchers who dont like the idea of murdering Yamnaya men. BUT!!! The neolithic ladies carried on reproducing with yamnaya men , making them the major female contributors to subsequent populations of britain. It is stretching a point to argue that the disease of which you spoke only wiped out the male neolithic people and not the female.
I have always been fascinated with the migrations, replacements and mixings of ancient cultures. I really enjoyed this one. Thanks
Alex
You are welcome!
Its happening right now in the UK and western Europe in general. You can get a front row seat to watch cultures being replaced.
Thank you for creating this amazing video it is exactly what I was looking for in a video on the Bronze Age population changes.😊
Thank you! I would also suggest watching Tom Booths video - it's very good and in-depth!
Isn’t it to easy to say the neolithic population was subjugated or totally replaced rather than a greater population moved in and by sheer numbers their culture became the new culture of the neolithic population.
Both are valid arguments - the academics I spoke to believed it was conquest as they looked at the weight of human history since, but it would be nice if it was just a large migration.
@@AlexIlesUK have you read bryan sykes book , the blood of the isles? Really a nice read based on genetics
Not yet but I'll look out for it.
If it was just a 'nice' migration - the genes would still be there, surely?
Great video!
Thanks!
fascinating, thanks for the video
You are welcome!!
Interesting content. That lens is wild. At times it makes it seem like you’re leaning hard left and walking a circle 😆
Hope it's not too disorientating!
I really enjoyed your video. It’s a sizzlingly hot topic that you covered well. The same thing happened in Scandinavia - cordedware (AKA battle-axe-culture) move in and the existing funnel-neck beaker folk disappear - the clue is in the name “battle-axe”. I’m sure the Neolithic farmers in both Britain & Scandinavia were Y-haplogroup I2 which is today extremely rare, so although you say there was a resurgence can we conclude it wasn’t the male dna that resurged but female dna ? (Beaker folk had Y-haplogroup R1b I believe ?).
I would love to see you do a video on the amazing story of Y-haplogroup I1 which may have been reduced to a single human being in the paelolithic but made a comeback in the Bronze Age despite R1b cordedware wiping out I2 farmers.
I'm sorry I didn't see this until now! I've put it on my list! :)
Very well explained
Many thanks!
Do you think the Beaker peoples spoke Proto Celtic? Furthermore, do you think the Northern v Southern Beakers could be the derivative of the difference in P/Q celtic languages? I really value your opinion!
I have been really interested in the P vs Q celtic divide and a bit stumped as to how Irish Gaelic Q celtic language retains the Q from PIE despite being the farthest from the understood origin of PIE, yet Gaulish was a P celtic language. I have wondered, of course pure speculation because none of us can know for sure, if it is possible the Southern “iberian” Beaker peoples spoke an early Proto-Celtic retaining the Q/K sound later forming the Goidelic languages and spread up the Atlantic whereas the Northern Beakers developed a P celtic that then influenced the Brythonic languages. I hope one day we find more samples of Lepontic and Celtiberian to better confirm their Q/P celtic formations!
What do you think?
Hello Julien,
I can't really talk as an expert but from what I've seen there's the Beaker migration and then between 1300 and 1200 BC a secondary migration into The South and East of England occurs that's seems to come from South east France and Switzerland. So I personally think that was when a new dialect came in and the two groups could likely understand each other. I also think there's something to be said that Caesar said that the South and Eastern tribes were similar to the Belgic tribes so there could be later migration too. That or there was a cultural influence to the region. The other versions of 'Celtic' I can't comment on. I'm sorry about that.
The simplest explanation of Q-Celtic in Ireland is that it was the language of the R-L21 haplogroup mass migration to Britain and Ireland circa 2500 BC. P-Celtic arose on the continent and migrated to Britain with the later wave of mass migration of R-L21 people to southern Britain.
Yes Bell beaker yammya
I also have the I-M170 haplo-group from my dads side of the family
Beaker culture can't have come from iberia because the people don't. The beaker style could just as well be derived from corded ware
Hi, first of all - thank you for commenting. You've got an amazing channel and I respect your work. Secondly I was working from the academic information I had at the time from speaking to archeologists who said there was two migrations one from Iberia and the other from the pontic step who mixed in the Netherlands. I will always strive to study and learn more so I'll look into it again, but it's going to be a while away as I've got quite a list of videos to make in the meantime. Thanks again though.
Alex
UPDATE - After this I went back to my sources and chatted to Clive Waddington 'Our Burial 1 at Low Hauxley turned out to be a young man (c. 17-20 yrs old) with male Steppic ancestry and south Iberian ancestry on his female lineage (ie. meeting of Beaker and Corded Ware culture peoples in the Low Countries and then those people coming over to Britain)'.
Best wishes,
Alex
@@AlexIlesUK Dear Alex
I am aware of the orthodoxy among archaeologists that the material culture of Bell Beakers originates in Portugal. However, this is based primarily on the similarity of early Bell Beakers in Portugal with earlier pottery, yet in my opinion and many others now, Bell beaker culture originates in the netherlands where it was preceded by single grave culture the pottery of which is very similar to bell beakers. The claim that BBC is caused by a mix of SGC with Iberian migrants is, as far as i am aware, unsubstantiated by evidence. A maternal lineage of EEF people in Iberia is not necessarily different from that of EEF people in Holland or France. Is there such a thing as an exclusively Iberian neolithic lineage? what about isotope analysis? No evidence of early Dutch Beaker folk having been raised on an iberian diet. The material culture of the Bell Beaker folk is almost the same as corded ware culture, but is not at all similar to Neolithic Iberian megalith culture. This old orthodoxy is persistent but it needs to be questioned properly
Thanks for that and I will look into all of those points. I just wanted to show that I had not pulled my research from thin air and I appreciate the response. Its something I am wanting to read more into as I find it fancinating these 'between' periods of human history. As always more research is required!
@@AlexIlesUK I am sure you did not pull it from thin air. I know that the iberian origin is a very old and established theory for over 100 years. The genetic evidence showing a Rhine origin resulted in an attempt to synchronise the old theory with the new evidence instead of looking at it all with fresh eyes, which when done, makes iberia impossible as an origin
what was the name of the Dr? Tom what? thank you and great vid
Thanks Ryan it's Dr Tom Booth: www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/departments-and-staff/staff-directory/tom-booth.html
How can you tell physical traits from skeletal remains ? Such as Hair color etc ?
The use DNA signatures from modern populations and then link them to the DNA signatures in ancient populations. So they look for the DNA for skin, eyes and hair and compare them. It's very interesting.
@@AlexIlesUK I wonder how closely related they are to the scandinavian population ?
I believe the Scandinavians are related to the Cordware culture which the Beakers originated from in Germany, but I would need to do more reading and research to be certain - it's not an area I have read a lot about, but I know that the people of the North Sea basin (from Brittany all the way round to Norway in a Cresent) are closely related.
@@AlexIlesUK Scandinavians (and historical Germanic peoples) seem to be a mix of the people from both the Battle-Axe Culture subgroup of the CWC and a later Bell Beaker population that penetrated into Scandinavia.
Interesting how everyone migrated to Britain
It's fascinating!
Not to mention how many of those migrants slaughtered the people they found.
why change the habit of a lifetime?
@@AlexIlesUK
What's the context
Well the bronze age people were still mostly European hunter gatherer taking all their admixture into account, and so the bronze age actually saw a return of european hunter gatherer admixture to a lot of previously more ENF inclined areas.
Could you cite your sources, I'm interested to read about that.
@@AlexIlesUK and then further hunter gatherer DNA especially in northern Europe would come from the mixing of the yamnaya and hunter gatherer cultures, and further down the ENF/WHG mixed cultures. The Pitted Warw culture was actually thriving at the time or the indo europeans, and mixed with the battle axe culture to form the Nordic Bronze age society.
Do you have any sources for that. You've said 'would' which suggest that what you are we saying is not evidence based but theoretical.
@@AlexIlesUK has my first comment not came through? wait gimme a sec
@@stonedape2406 waiting for a source
You did not mention the haplogroups. My Y-DNA haplogroup is I-M223. How does that fit into the story. Weren't the Beaker and Yamnayas R haplogroups?
Might I suggest you read the original report - I think it will have all the answers you are looking for: Olalde, I & Brace, S & Allentoft, M & Armit, I & Kristiansen, K & Booth, T & Rohland, N & Mallick, S & Szécsényi-Nagy, A & Mittnik, A & Altena, E & Lipson, M & Lazaridis, I & Harper, T & Patterson, N & Broomandkhoshbacht, N & Diekmann, Y & Faltyskova, Z & Fernandes, D & Reich, D. (2018). The “Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe”. Nature. Volume 555. 543-543.
Haplogtoup I came from Nordic people so probably germanic invasions
I also have the I-M170 haplo group
Celtic languages came to the british isles in two waves. U said that the beaker people originated in northern spain and portugal and migrated to the benelux region before mixing coming to the british isles. This would make sense because the earliest post-neolithic humans to settle the british isles came from the iberian peninsula, thats a fact. This is proven by the high percentage of the mediteranean phenotype in native britons, and the fact that the closest genetic relatives of the Irish r people from northern spain among other things like genetic analysis and carbon dating of human remains in the british isles from that period. This would also explain the origin of celtic languages in the british isles, being as celtic languages were spoken all the way from Turkey to Portugal and almost everywhere inbetween before the spread of the Roman empire and Slavic and Germanic tribes. This would perfectly explain the origin of the Goidelic (gaelic) sub-branch of celtic languages spoken in Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Mann. The later wave of celtic culture and dna to the british isles came from France (or Gaul) as u also said, this explain this Brythonic sub-branch of celtic languages spoken in Wales, Cornwall, Brittany in northern France, and England and Scotland before the spread of the English Language. All three of these languages show little similarity to the Goidelic celtic languages aside from sharing a common linguistic ancestor being Proto-Celtic. These languages do however share striking similarities with the ancient celtic languages spoken in France before the spread of Latin (the linguistic ancestor of modern French) and the roman empire. That being said it is most likely that the Celtic people who came to Britain from France spoke Gaulish (the most widespread celtic language of Pre-Roman France) or a very close relative/sister language of Gaulish.
The only place where this starts to fall apart is where u said the Beakers mixed with the Yamnaya before coming to britain. The Celtic language group is a branch of the Indo-European language family, making up the majority of the languages of Europe, Persia, parts of the Caucasus, and North India. This Family includes all languages in Europe except Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian (Uralic), Turkish (Turkic/Altaic), and Basque (isolate). The Yamnaya r the people credited with spreading the Proto-Indo-European Language to Europe, meaning that if the beaker people from Spain/Portugal were infact celtic speakers, the Yamnaya would have already come into contact with them before the bronze age. The celtic languages r most closely related to the Italic languages (which includes latin and its descendants such as French, Spanish, Italian, and Romanian which r the only surviving italic languages). The corded-ware people were also not the Yamnaya, but more like their descendants who would have spoke a sort of proto-germano-balto-slavic dialect of Proto-Indo-European. This makes more sense when accounting for the origin of celtic languages in britain than proposing that the beaker people met the actual original proto-indo-european speaking Yamnaya right before they came to Britain. The proto-celtic language pre-dates the presence of celtic languages in the british isles. This becomes especially apparent when u consider the italo-celtic linguistic connection meaning a common ancestor exsisted between Proto-Indo-Europran AND proto-celtic and proto-italic. Its unlikely that, after proto-indo-european evolved once into proto-italo-celtic, then evolved again into proto-celtic (and possibly again after that before reaching the british isles), proto-indo-european would then still be spoken by the Yamnaya people all those generations later.
That's an amazing comment and I'm going to have to read through it a couple of times, but I can tell you enjoyed the video! Thanks Your Mum.
@@AlexIlesUK thank u, sorry for any spelling and grammar mistakes i always make alot of them.
Don't worry, on this channel you will never be judged on spelling! I'm dyslexic and honestly hate people being unpleasant to people about spelling and grammar. Language is always evolving and changing so as long as you get what I'm saying and I understand you we are doing great!
Brythonic spread to northern France (Brittany) during the spread of the English language (not before). They spread from the southern coast of Britain to France under pressure of the Anglo-Saxon expansion, which is why Breton is closely related to Cornish.
I absolutely loved the content of this video. Please don't be offended but I would have found it much easier to watch if you had just stood still, or maybe sauntered about a bit. The hard trekking was really distracting. Difficult to watch and to hear. But then, I'm ancient!
I have never read anywhere that there seems to have been a slight resurgence of Neolithic people c 2,100 BC. How amazing. Your theory as to why makes a lot of sense to me. Thank you for sharing your insights......really fascinating. 🤗🤗🤗
Don't worry, other people have said that too, some people love it others don't buy I've learnt since I last filmed that :) glad you like the content. I'm currently writing my masters dissertation so I'm not making videos currently but I will again in the winter :)
Beaker Grove!!! A tv drama series about the beaker peoples.
Nice and I very much like the pun!!
I have the I-L126 mutation which is deemed the "ancient British" gene and supposedly exclusively British since 5000 BC. It has been traced to a specific ancestor 7000 years ago, long before the Beaker people. Essentially my DNA survives from the original British Population that was supposedly "replaced" by the Beaker people. I am not the only one, the mutation has been found in Scotland, Ireland and England as well as Wales.. There are also a lot of "possibly" statements here, which is very typical of archaeology and apparently, Geneticists. For many years, the logic of an archaeologist goes as follows "probably this tooth we found in a cave was a hominid" and then "probably, if this tooth was a hominid, this was an individual from 40,000 years ago who was a hunter gatherer. And probably, this person used stone tools. Probably in the use of Stone tools they had a basic family structure. Probably this person had a mate, and the phonology of ancient peoples indicates that they were probably monosyllabic speakers, and M was the easiest for them to say. So, we believe this individual was named MIM and his wife was named MUM." Im finding that geneticists can sequence 8 people from 10,000 years ago and make broad sweeping statements about population movements across continents. We dont even know how many people there were. 100? a million? Is it possible to make these statements from a few different people? You could check the DNA from three people who had really big ears in the US and then extrapolate that all Americans had Big ears. But the fact is very much in question.
I fully understand your position and argument. It's one of the issues I have with using Cheddar man as the only example of the Mesolithic population of the British isles. There are substantially more neolithic and Bronze age burials so we can draw much better information. About 4-6% of all British people's DNA is from the Neolithic population today so I fully believe you that you carry that DNA, I likely carry it too. Archiology requires patterns. You look for the same patterns and then you connect it to science such as carbon dating, isotopes, DNA and styles of pottery and you build a pattern. Sometimes you don't have the full image so you go away and someone else looks at your work and says 'oh you were nearly there but did you see this' and a new theory is created. As these people didn't leave a written system that we know about we can't see what they thought or how they structured their lives. Great point though.
As far as i understand those Y haplo groups they are very stable and handed down from father to son. Every generation the part of the dna from earlier generations is becoming smaller in its pieces and from generation 6 on you might have nothing left from your grand-xxx-granddad except the y-haplo group, because by chance those other parts are the parts that didn't make it. Or you get a bigger chunk from the grand-xxx-granddad than the probability would assume, lets say 20%. It is unpredictable. When somebody different looking immigrates to another place and founds a family, after some generations even with the same haplo group handed down the grand-xxx-grand children are indistinguishable from the people around them.
Amazing nice to see someone of the original Britons, I would love to learn more about ur heritage
How did you find out about your genetic breakdown? Most ancestry tests just slap ethnicity on it from the modern era.
This is fascinating stuff and makes a lot sense. But the Roman's didn't conjure the Pict. So are Pict the older Beaker people or the pre neolithic before them.
The Picts are first mentioned by the Romans and are likely to be just a name for the Iron Age British north of the wall, as proven by recent genetic studies. I'll try to do a video on it soon.
Nice walk, but you're "overview" is quite wrong. Yamnaya is R1b. Corded ware is R1a. They're different people (think Germanic = R1b, Slavs = R1a). Neither group came from the other. Corded ware branches off into Beaker, they didn't "meet up and combine" or hybridize. Beaker is merely a Corded ware adaptation to new conditions.
Could you reference me the research so I can update my knowledge please?
You need hiking boots. Love your info about these peoples.
My good sir! I have hiking boots! Have a look on the channel I get out and about a lot. Glad you enjoyed it!
@@AlexIlesUK If you were wearing them in the video, I'm the one who needs something; new glasses! Or maybe that's just a really pebbly , dangerous looking path. anyway, your stuff is great. I am now googling all about these various groups you talked about.
I think I was wearing my red or brown boots and yes that parth coming down the hill from the bronze age burial cairn is a bit scary! I did that in one take and nearly fell at one point! Can't let that get in the way of history though!! :) Thanks again!
They have Otzi , you should do some research on that mummy.
At some point I'm sure I will
Thanks, very informative.
Shall we raise a tankard of Guinness to the Beaker Boys? Those purveyors of the first Agricultural Revolution? Or shall we judge them as too genocidal to warrant a toast?
I say toast, and understand we don't know what was in their mind and was going on four and a half thousand years ago!!
As an I-L126 mutation survivor of the Beaker Holocaust, I would be offended.
Well part of you is, the chances are due to available partners you've got some Beaker people DNA too, it's not possible for someone to be 100% Neolithic farmer today! But I hope everyone's getting on now!!
That's why the "intermediate" skin tone is always portrayed as something you'd see in India, which is very dark. Plays on the momentum of euro-guilt we are supposed to have for merely existing in this world and a sense that our homelands don't actually belong to us
@@grottybt5006you mean like the aboriginals & the Australians?
There's a skin colour difference in the title pic worthy of a BBC history rewrite - but no explanation.
I do talk about the population changes in the episode, it's the point of the video! If you want a debate on skin tones though, you may want to go to another channel.
I thought that the beaker people had hard chittinous noses.
Ah I think you may have them confused with the Beak people. Another common mistake is that they were related to Beaker from the Muppets.
@@AlexIlesUK So have DNA studies completely ruled out the muppet hypothesis?
Well judging by modern populations, not by a long shot. Further research is required but a desk based research project studying interactions on Social media suggest that Muppet DNA is alive and well in modern populations!
So are the beaker people the Western Celts ?
I believe they made up a lot of their genetics, but I think Celt is more cultural than genetic.
Please would you differentiate clearly between male and female /mitrochondrial DNA in discussing these population changes? This is great content but overrushed when taken in as new info. Also sources of information please. Is 'Celtic' not now defunct in these discussions? Going to turn speed of down to 50 % and try again.
Hello! I did my research and I'd suggest the following paper for the breakdown of Male and Female mitrochondrial change. www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04287-4 it explains all the science. I do speak a bit fast so sorry about that!!
Celtic is not defunct. It’s still a language branch of Indo-European. What is defunct is the mythology of the British Isles being populated by Iron Age Celts from Iberia.
Beaker was just a material culture, not a people group - not in terms of the population replacement of the British Isles at least.
Interesting. Are you advocating that it was a technology change then?
Not really. They are all R1b. If it was a material culture you would find R1a and I1’s mixed with them
Genocide: R1 killed J1
You mean I1?
We all come from them even my Irish ancestors
If you're from Western Europe yes!
@@AlexIlesUK Mainly where my ancestors come from
Yea the cheddar man or whatever didn’t look at all like a Guatemalan. So there’s that.
Interesting comparison. I've never been to Guatemala to know, but I've read the paper on Cheddar man so that's probably more in my favour.
I think bell beakers are from North Africa and traveled from Morocco to Spain. I do think they come from northern migrations but the reason they have certain it’s because it’s even older migrations. The Irish bell beaker are not yamnaya or corded ware they don’t have a proven link of origin and I’m not afraid to begin to start stressing r1b didn’t come directly from any Russian steppe migration or people it can’t be found. There is no link or trace to the Russian steppes it’s just an association. The Russian steppe people have had N haplogroup all the way from out of East Africa an ancient dna in those populations. The r1b in Europeans is from lost North African populations. Even Africa r1b v 88 is in Chad from a long time ago but they’re still mostly subsaharan but it’s still a big clue. Africa has had some r1b from time frames that go before any of these migrations. There is no single r1b route the populations never exist and if you can find these steppe migrations routes because the populations dna is saying otherwise. The rh - is also saying otherwise. These Russian steppe people aren’t rh - don’t exist ??? Russians Asians would have given us more if there dna we don’t have it and nobody seems to find this weird. It’s obvious Western Europeans, basque, canary island Guanches, Saudi Arabia, Atlas Mountains, have separate groups of rh - components to their blood. The rh - should exist more in Russian steppe ancestry but it does not seem to exist.
Where are all the Asian and Russian and steppe rh - people ??? They don’t exist ?
What I’m implying is the claim of a Russian steppe migration is only from the idea of a relation to yamnaya but not any direct actual yamnaya group ???
It's backed up by genetics and artifacts.
Please see my response below
I don't understand your question
Corded ware doesn't come from Yamnaya...
Yes it's from southern and central Europe area. Apologies if I've made a mistake
@@AlexIlesUK Corded ware are from the forest steppe area of Eastern Europe, their ancestor was Sredni Stog culture. Autosomally "steppe" but with predominance of R1a
Alex, you might be interested in this
the yamnaya advance was vastly predominantly male.
following on from that fact, a few years after the yamnaya arrived in england no more male neolithic genetics are found in the subsequent generations.#
the male neolithic genes disappeared. BUT!! the female neolithic genetics carried on into subsequent generations un attenuated. Considering the yamanay were one of the most violent peoples they have walked the earth may i suggest that the male yamnaya murdered all the neolithic men and then stole the neolithic women. I will if you want get a reference for the genetic survey that shows what i have stated above
thanks for your excellent stuff
Please do tell me the reference for that information I'd like to read up on that.
dear alex
i can see in my mids eye the genetic results supporting what i said. i have done some research but havent found it yet but i will keep trying as you seem genuinly interested@@AlexIlesUK
Rh positive kill negative blood type s
It's been a while, hope you are well.
@@AlexIlesUK kill negative blood type s
@@AlexIlesUKdon't like it now mars and planet x
@@AlexIlesUK tall grey's
@@AlexIlesUK et alien demon devil angel s