èƵ

I got caught in the middle of a bitter row over humans’ violent past

A simmering feud between geneticists and archaeologists has finally exploded. This turf war is unwise and unscientific, says Michael Marshall
A cochlea, or inner ear, from an ancient skull fragment. These are one of the bits most likely to retain DNA
The cochlea, or inner ear, from an ancient skull fragment, is one of the bits most likely to retain DNA
Kayana Szymczak/The New York T​imes/Eyevine

Once upon a time, the narrative of humanity’s past belonged largely to archaeologists and anthropologists. In recent years, geneticists have muscled in, making startling discoveries by analysing DNA from ancient specimens – and leaving some archaeologists feeling sidelined. A new study has thrown the feud into stark relief.

Geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School and his colleagues have studied DNA from 271 individuals who lived in and around what is now Spain over the past 7000 years. Some 4500 years ago, people called the Yamnaya arrived from eastern Europe. Dramatically, the local males stopped passing on their genes: their Y chromosomes were almost entirely replaced by those of the newcomers.

“That means males coming in had preferential access to local females, again and again and again,” said Reich, describing these findings at èƵ Live in London, last September. “The collision of these two populations was not a friendly one.”

I wrote about these findings for èƵ, noting that the event resembled “a violent conquest” in which the new society was “firmly under the control of the males”. When this was repeated in the Spanish newspaper El País, it elicited . They described the narrative as “unfounded” because there was no evidence of violence.

So who is right?

This is relatively recent history in a region that archaeologists have studied for decades. If there were evidence of violence, surely they would have found some. However, the DNA analysis reveals that local men didn’t pass on their genes, suggesting they were prevented from having sex.

Like the invasion of the Americas

That might not show up in the archaeological record – people do sometimes surrender without a fight. Indeed another geneticist involved in the study, Carles Lalueza-Fox at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain, now says that the event was “”. In other words, it played out over decades or centuries. But this hardly implies it was friendly.

Genetics and archaeology ought to be complementary sources of information. Instead they have ended up in a turf war. Some of the mistrust may arise from the fact that a handful of labs dominate ancient DNA research.

There is no doubt that the field is heavily influenced by a small group of people, but . Besides, dismissing genetic findings because they don’t neatly match established stories isn’t just unwise: it is also unscientific.

Science