The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form

被引:26
作者
Brace, CL [1 ]
Seguchi, N
Quintyn, CB
Fox, SC
Nelson, AR
Manolis, SK
Pan, QF
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Museum Anthropol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Dept Anthropol, Bloomsburg, PA 17815 USA
[3] Univ Montana, Dept Anthropol, Missoula, MT 59812 USA
[4] Amer Sch Class Studies Athens, Weiner Lab, GR-10676 Athens, Greece
[5] Univ Michigan, Museum Anthropol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[6] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Fac Biol, GR-15781 Athens, Greece
[7] Chinese Acad Social Sci, Inst Archaeol, Beijing 100710, Peoples R China
关键词
craniometrics; Neolithic versus modern form; prehistoric versus modern European form; Basque and Canary Islands placement; Cro-Magnon reassessment;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.0509801102
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Many human craniofacial dimensions are largely of neutral adaptive significance, and an analysis of their variation can serve as an indication of the extent to which any given population is genetically related to or differs from any other. When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of human populations are used to generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show that they are closely related to each other. The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques and Canary islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.
引用
收藏
页码:242 / 247
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]  
ALBRECHT GH, 1980, AM ZOOL, V20, P679
[2]  
Ammerman A. J., 1984, NEOLITHIC TRANSITION
[3]  
Ammerman A. J., 1973, EXPLANATION CULTURE, P343
[4]   MEASURING RATE OF SPREAD OF EARLY FARMING IN EUROPE [J].
AMMERMAN, AJ ;
CAVALLIS.LL .
MAN, 1971, 6 (04) :674-688
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis
[6]  
[Anonymous], ORIGIN SPREAD AGR PA
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1986, HUNTERS TRANSITION
[8]   Guest editorial: East to West - Agricultural origins and dispersal into Europe [J].
Bar-Yosef, O .
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY, 2004, 45 :S1-S3
[9]  
Bar-Yosef O, 1998, EVOL ANTHROPOL, V6, P159, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)6:5<159::AID-EVAN4>3.0.CO
[10]  
2-7