Pinhasi Ron, von Cramon-Taubadel Noreen
Department of Archaeology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Hum Biol. 2012 Feb;84(1):45-66. doi: 10.3378/027.084.0102.
Debates surrounding the nature of the Neolithic demographic transition in Europe have historically centered on two opposing models: a "demic" diffusion model whereby incoming farmers from the Near East and Anatolia effectively replaced or completely assimilated indigenous Mesolithic foraging communities, and an "indigenist" model resting on the assumption that ideas relating to agriculture and animal domestication diffused from the Near East but with little or no gene flow. The extreme versions of these dichotomous models were heavily contested primarily on the basis of archeological and modern genetic data. However, in recent years a growing acceptance has arisen of the likelihood that both processes were ongoing throughout the Neolithic transition and that a more complex, regional approach is required to fully understand the change from a foraging to a primarily agricultural mode of subsistence in Europe. Craniometric data were particularly useful for testing these more complex scenarios, as they can reliably be employed as a proxy for the genetic relationships among Mesolithic and Neolithic populations. In contrast, modern genetic data assume that modern European populations accurately reflect the genetic structure of Europe at the time of the Neolithic transition, while ancient DNA data are still not geographically or temporally detailed enough to test continent-wide processes. Here, with particular emphasis on the role of craniometric analyses, we review the current state of knowledge regarding the cultural and biological nature of the Neolithic transition in Europe.
围绕欧洲新石器时代人口转变本质的争论，历史上主要集中在两种对立模型上：一种是“人口扩散”模型，即来自近东和安纳托利亚的迁入农民有效地取代或完全同化了本土中石器时代的觅食群体；另一种是“本土主义”模型，其基于这样的假设，即与农业和动物驯化相关的观念从近东传播开来，但基因流动很少或没有。这些二分模型的极端版本主要基于考古和现代基因数据受到了激烈争论。然而，近年来，人们越来越倾向于认为这两个过程在整个新石器时代转变过程中都在进行，并且需要一种更复杂的、基于区域的方法来全面理解欧洲从觅食到以农业为主的生存方式的转变。颅骨测量数据对于检验这些更复杂的情况特别有用，因为它们可以可靠地用作中石器时代和新石器时代人群之间遗传关系的代理。相比之下，现代基因数据假设现代欧洲人群准确反映了新石器时代转变时期欧洲的遗传结构，而古代DNA数据在地理或时间上仍然不够详细，无法检验整个大陆范围的过程。在此，我们特别强调颅骨测量分析的作用，回顾了关于欧洲新石器时代转变的文化和生物学本质的当前知识状况。
