The Neolithic Pitted Ware culture foragers were culturally but not genetically influenced by the Battle Axe culture herders

Alexandra Coutinho,Arielle R Munters,Mattias Jakobsson,Helena Malmström,Torsten Günther,Emma M Svensson,Anders Götherström,Jan Storå

doi:10.1002/ajpa.24079

Abstract

In order to understand contacts between cultural spheres in the third millennium BC, we investigated the impact of a new herder culture, the Battle Axe culture, arriving to Scandinavia on the people of the sub-Neolithic hunter-gatherer Pitted Ware culture. By investigating the genetic make-up of Pitted Ware culture people from two types of burials (typical Pitted Ware culture burials and Battle Axe culture-influenced burials), we could determine the impact of migration and the impact of cultural influences. We sequenced and analyzed the genomes of 25 individuals from typical Pitted Ware culture burials and from Pitted Ware culture burials with Battle Axe culture influences in order to determine if the different burial types were associated with different gene-pools. The genomic data show that all individuals belonged to one genetic population-a population associated with the Pitted Ware culture-irrespective of the burial style. We conclude that the Pitted Ware culture communities were not impacted by gene-flow, that is, via migration or exchange of mates. These different cultural expressions in the Pitted Ware culture burials are instead a consequence of cultural exchange.

Highlights

Helena Malmström and Mattias Jakobsson should be considered joint senior authors.Archeological interpretations of material culture were for a long time one of the dominant approaches in understanding past human societies and demographic changes
Twelve were buried in a supine position typical for Pitted Ware culture (PWC) and 11 individuals displayed Battle Axe culture (BAC) influences by either being buried in a hocker position or having battle axes or other artifacts common to the BAC associated with the grave
When comparing these PWC individuals, we refer to the latter ones as “BAC influenced” individuals

Summary

Introduction

Archeological interpretations of material culture were for a long time one of the dominant approaches in understanding past human societies and demographic changes. Based on recent archeogenetic investigations, it has become evident that human mobility, including large-scale migrations has shaped social and cultural development in many areas (Lazaridis et al, 2014; Skoglund et al, 2012; Skoglund, Malmström, et al, 2014). These new results have revitalized the debate on how changes and patterns seen in the archeological material record relate to human populations (Kristiansen et al, 2017). There are concerns that interpretations may sometimes be oversimplified, which could lead to narrowing perspectives on both cultural entities and human groups, with potential unwarranted reinforcements of past “explanatory paradigms” (Furholt, 2018; Heyd, 2017; Hofmann, 2015)

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Conclusion