Summary
The site of Uğurlu on the island of Gökçeada (Imbros) is the earliest known Neolithic settlement within the Aegean Islands (c.6800–4500 cal. BC). In total, 37 pits, associated with a rich ...variety of artefacts as well as human and animal bones were excavated in the Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic levels of the site (c.5900–4500 BC). The pits belonging to the early sixth millennium BC levels of Uğurlu were small and located within the houses that seem to have gone through multiple episodes of house destruction and renovation rituals. During the late sixth millennium BC, this area became the focus of extensive pit‐digging activity, when large pits involving rich variety of artefacts were set within the courtyard of a special building (Building 4). Among the pits, a collective human burial pit (P188) incorporating the remains of 11 individuals and another pit (P52) involving a partial human skeleton were also found. From a comparative point of view, the construction techniques of these pits, their spatio‐temporal relations as well as their associated archaeological artefacts resemble the Anatolian and Near Eastern Neolithic practices of house destruction and renovation cycles, which are activities related to the ancestor cults of the region. We argue that all of these practices reflect public events during which social relations were negotiated through the agency of place. The differences observed during the sixth millennium BC at Uğurlu reflect the changing concepts of place and society in the immediate aftermath of the Neolithic Process, when interactions with the Balkans as well as the Aegean intensified in this region.
The social organization of the first fully sedentary societies that emerged during the Neolithic period in Southwest Asia remains enigmatic,1 mainly because material culture studies provide limited ...insight into this issue. However, because Neolithic Anatolian communities often buried their dead beneath domestic buildings,2 household composition and social structure can be studied through these human remains. Here, we describe genetic relatedness among co-burials associated with domestic buildings in Neolithic Anatolia using 59 ancient genomes, including 22 new genomes from Aşıklı Höyük and Çatalhöyük. We infer pedigree relationships by simultaneously analyzing multiple types of information, including autosomal and X chromosome kinship coefficients, maternal markers, and radiocarbon dating. In two early Neolithic villages dating to the 9th and 8th millennia BCE, Aşıklı Höyük and Boncuklu, we discover that siblings and parent-offspring pairings were frequent within domestic structures, which provides the first direct indication of close genetic relationships among co-burials. In contrast, in the 7th millennium BCE sites of Çatalhöyük and Barcın, where we study subadults interred within and around houses, we find close genetic relatives to be rare. Hence, genetic relatedness may not have played a major role in the choice of burial location at these latter two sites, at least for subadults. This supports the hypothesis that in Çatalhöyük,3–5 and possibly in some other Neolithic communities, domestic structures may have served as burial location for social units incorporating biologically unrelated individuals. Our results underscore the diversity of kin structures in Neolithic communities during this important phase of sociocultural development.
•Genetic kinship estimated from co-buried individuals’ genomes in Neolithic Anatolia•Close relatives are common among co-burials in Aşıklı and Boncuklu•Many unrelated infants found buried in the same building in Çatalhöyük and Barcın•Neolithic societies in Southwest Asia may have held diverse concepts of kinship
Yaka et al. use ancient genomes from Neolithic Anatolia and present evidence for diverse concepts of social kinship in Neolithic societies. In some communities, like Çatalhöyük, many genetically unrelated infants were buried together inside the same buildings, whereas in other sites, people buried together were frequently close biological kin.
The history of human inbreeding is controversial.1 In particular, how the development of sedentary and/or agricultural societies may have influenced overall inbreeding levels, relative to those of ...hunter-gatherer communities, is unclear.2–5 Here, we present an approach for reliable estimation of runs of homozygosity (ROHs) in genomes with ≥3× mean sequence coverage across >1 million SNPs and apply this to 411 ancient Eurasian genomes from the last 15,000 years.5–34 We show that the frequency of inbreeding, as measured by ROHs, has decreased over time. The strongest effect is associated with the Neolithic transition, but the trend has since continued, indicating a population size effect on inbreeding prevalence. We further show that most inbreeding in our historical sample can be attributed to small population size instead of consanguinity. Cases of high consanguinity were rare and only observed among members of farming societies in our sample. Despite the lack of evidence for common consanguinity in our ancient sample, consanguineous traditions are today prevalent in various modern-day Eurasian societies,1,35–37 suggesting that such practices may have become widespread within the last few millennia.
•A study of 411 ancient genomes shows inbreeding decreased over time•The decrease appears linked with population size increase enabled by agriculture•Extreme consanguineous matings did occur among agriculturalists but were rare
Ceballos et al. study 411 ancient genomes from west and central Eurasia to show that overall inbreeding levels have decreased over time, most likely owing to population size increases with agriculture. The sample contains highly consanguineous ancient individuals, but these are rare, and all come from agriculturalist backgrounds.
We present a spatiotemporal picture of human genetic diversity in Anatolia, Iran, Levant, South Caucasus, and the Aegean, a broad region that experienced the earliest Neolithic transition and the ...emergence of complex hierarchical societies. Combining 35 new ancient shotgun genomes with 382 ancient and 23 present-day published genomes, we found that genetic diversity within each region steadily increased through the Holocene. We further observed that the inferred sources of gene flow shifted in time. In the first half of the Holocene, Southwest Asian and the East Mediterranean populations homogenized among themselves. Starting with the Bronze Age, however, regional populations diverged from each other, most likely driven by gene flow from external sources, which we term “the expanding mobility model.” Interestingly, this increase in inter-regional divergence can be captured by outgroup-f3-based genetic distances, but not by the commonly used FST statistic, due to the sensitivity of FST, but not outgroup-f3, to within-population diversity. Finally, we report a temporal trend of increasing male bias in admixture events through the Holocene.
•Genetic diversity in Southwest Asia increased continuously through the Holocene•Regional populations admixed among themselves with the Neolithic•After the Bronze Age, populations diverged from each other via distant gene flow•Male-to-female bias increased over time in inter-regional human movements
Koptekin et al. use ancient genomes to infer population movements in Southwest Asia through 10,000 years, which saw the emergence of agriculture and later of complex societies with distant connections. The authors propose “the expanding mobility model,” where migration ranges increased over time, accompanied by growing male bias in movements.
Upper Mesopotamia played a key role in the Neolithic Transition in Southwest Asia through marked innovations in symbolism, technology, and diet. We present 13 ancient genomes (c. 8500 to 7500 cal ...BCE) from Pre-Pottery Neolithic Çayönü in the Tigris basin together with bioarchaeological and material culture data. Our findings reveal that Çayönü was a genetically diverse population, carrying mixed ancestry from western and eastern Fertile Crescent, and that the community received immigrants. Our results further suggest that the community was organized along biological family lines. We document bodily interventions such as head shaping and cauterization among the individuals examined, reflecting Çayönü’s cultural ingenuity. Last, we identify Upper Mesopotamia as the likely source of eastern gene flow into Neolithic Anatolia, in line with material culture evidence. We hypothesize that Upper Mesopotamia’s cultural dynamism during the Neolithic Transition was the product not only of its fertile lands but also of its interregional demographic connections.
Neolithic Upper Mesopotamia was a center of cultural innovation; ancient genomes now reveal that it was also a migration hub.
PDF
