Solutions or illusions? An analysis of the available palaeogenetic evidence from the origins of the Neolithic in the Iberian Peninsula

Abstract

If there is something that can be defined as the "Sisyphus' rock of human sciences that would be the wide array of circumstances, interpretations and processes generated by human beings and their numberless organizations, with regard to groups, communities, collectives, languages… "Cultures". Thus, when (pre)historians have the chance to resort to hard sciences, they cling tightly to it, sometimes even with a blind trust, in the hope of finding a reference point for their intrinsically human-and therefore multidimensional and multifocalinterpretations, open to different possible solutions. In recent years the study of the past has placed its trust in dating techniques,particularly in 14C-, in statistical analyses and in genetic studies, among other such possibilities, in a way that they could be considered as the new "guide fossils" in prehistorical research. For instance, the chronology of a domestic animal or plant would be taken as an undeniable marker of the "Neolithic" period, and something similar could be said of the hypothetical presence of a Near Eastern haplogroup in a VI millennium BC European individual. However, from a (pre)historic viewpoint, things are not so clear or so "hard". The present paper focuses on the analysis of the palaeogenetic data available for the Neolithisation process and the Early Neolithic period in the Iberian Peninsula. We have considered the information from a historical and anthropological perspective in an attempt to understand and complement the interpretations derived from the geneticists themselves. Moreover, a part of the paper is devoted to explain the archaeological consequences of the types of analysis carried out and the results of such studies. The final goal would be to broaden the possible interpretations of the Neolithisation process and the Early Neolithic period in this territory. 2) PALAEOGENETIC EVIDENCE OF THE MESOLITHIC-NEOLITHIC TRANSITION IN EUROPE Understanding the jargon commonly used in genetics can be challenging for an unfamiliar audience, this being probably the main cause of misinterpretation of genetic data by non-experts. With this in mind, the main concepts used in population genetic studies have been compiled in supplementary information and explained in a simple way, starting from the very basics (Supplementary Information 1). During the last few years we have witnessed an exponential increase in the quantity (and quality) of prehistoric human paleogenetic data. Two main factors have contributed to this fact, namely the development of a new genotyping technique-the so-called Next Generation Sequencing or NGS-and a new sampling strategy targeting the densest of the bones-the petrous

Investigating Neolithic caprine husbandry in the Central Pyrenees: Insights from a multi-proxy study at Els Trocs cave (Bisaurri, Spain)

“…BC. Similarly, the fast dispersion of the Neolithic way of life after the arrival of the first farming communities in the Iberian Peninsula testifies to interregional contacts and communication networks [12,104], that may have encompassed multidirectional and variable distance journeys. No matter how settled a community may have been, there would have always existed segments that had greater mobility [105].…”

Symbols in motion: Flexible cultural boundaries and the fast spread of the Neolithic in the western Mediterranean

“…Genetic studies indicate that the last foragers and the first farmers developed social and cultural relationships more closely tied than previously indicated through components of the material culture [ 139 ]. Biological data and chronological models support a pattern of diffusion implying geographically discontinuous contacts between local foragers and incoming farmers, but repeated in time [ 9 , 140 , 141 ].…”

De la Meseta a los Pirineos: génesis, desarrollo y perspectivas de un proyecto multidisciplinar sobre la neolitización peninsular

“…Varios de ellos presentan heridas de puntas líticas, y la mayoría numerosísimas fracturas perimortem. Desde el punto de vista genético son, además poblaciones, que no guardan apenas paralelos con las más características del comienzo del Neolítico en la Península (García et al, 2018), y sí con otras contemporáneas de otras regiones europeas, especialmente del interior, como las comunidades de la Cerámica de Bandas (LBK). • Trocs II: se fecha a mediados del V milenio cal BC, y presenta un pavimento pétreo, que no llega a cubrir toda el área, y que se apoya en un relleno sedimentario arcilloso, poco fértil en términos arqueológicos, utilizado para regularizar el desnivel natural de la cueva y permitir la construcción de dicho suelo.…”

“…Se han producido descubrimientos muy relevantes en distintas áreas de conocimiento que han suscitado un interesante y fructífero debate en torno a ciertos aspectos fundamentales: A) Las relaciones interregionales que pueden detectarse mediante el estudio de las colecciones cerámicas y de la industria lítica (sobre todo de instrumentos concretos como las hoces y los microlitos geométricos). B) Los análisis de ADN antiguo, tanto de los restos humanos, con todas sus limitaciones y problemas (García et al, 2018), como de los animales domésticos (Scheu 2017). C) La datación del proceso de neolitización a través del C14, centrando los esfuerzos en conseguir más fechas sobre muestras de vida corta identificadas como domésticos, y evitar así los problemas metodológicos e interpretativos derivados del carbón (Rojo et al, 2006;Bernabeu 2006).…”