Experts discover new information on cultural exchange between different genetic groups and burials of close genetic relatives in the Stonehenge landscape from supplementary information of largest study of ancient DNA from Britain

The new research uses data from a 2018 study, which is still the largest analysis of ancient DNA from Britain ever conducted, that identified a >90% replacement of the genetic ancestry of people living in Britain between 2500-2100 BC. This coincided with the introduction of ‘Beaker’ material culture and burial practices, and was interpreted to indicate that there were substantial movements of people into Britain from continental Europe during this period.

At the time it was published, popular coverage of the original study speculated that this was a rapid event, potentially involving ‘invasion’ by male warriors, but the new study has found from detailed analysis that it was more likely a long-term process, taking place over maybe 10-16 generations, with both men and women moving for a variety of reasons that might have included exchange, pilgrimage, and the pasturing of animals. Incoming populations and their descendants tended to bury their dead, but local groups probably continued to cremate their dead, which destroys the DNA, or treat them in ways which leave no record. The archaeologically ‘invisible’ local population are only seen when they have children with groups who buried their dead. This may be partly responsible for why this change in ancestry appeared so rapid at first.

Dr Tom Booth, archaeologist at The Francis Crick Institute has said: ‘Initially it looks like groups of ‘locals’ and ‘incomers’ and their descendants lived in parallel with one another to some extent – occupying the same landscapes, slowly integrating and only having children with each other infrequently. After around 300 years they start having children together more liberally – it’s at this point, the older population then have a much lower genetic legacy overall. Why they have such a small overall genetic legacy is still a mystery. It could be that there just weren’t so many people living in Britain at the time these Beaker groups move in from continental Europe.’

Prof Ian Barnes, Researcher and Division Lead at the Natural History Museum has said: ‘An issue we face is that we also don’t know how many people there were from either group, although population size may be declining in the local population of Britain at the end of Neolithic. It may be that the reason why we seem to pick up so many genetic relatives in the Bronze Age is because only small groups of people were moving into Britain.’

The new study also highlights how genetic ties were referenced variably in death among burials in the Stonehenge landscape. A man and his juvenile son were buried next to one another in a cemetery on Amesbury Down. By contrast, a man, his nephew and his nephew’s daughter were buried across three different cemeteries separated by several kilometres. A young man was buried on Boscombe Down with the skull of his paternal cousin or half-brother at his feet. 

Prof. Joanna Brück, archaeologist at University College Dublin, said: ‘Existing interpretations of the genetic evidence paint a picture of a patriarchal society, in which male immigrants married local women. Our research shows that although links with paternal relatives were important, kinship organization was variable, and other relationships, including with maternal kin, were also significant. Sometimes, people who were not genetically related to each other could also be viewed as kin’.

The study found that it is likely there was cultural exchange between existing local groups and incomers. Dr Booth continues ‘Even though they have no ancestry from the older population, they incorporate their monuments into their belief systems very quickly. They are burying people in these areas to reference these monuments as prestigious areas to bury their dead even though it wasn’t their genetic ancestors who built them. Stonehenge and its surrounding landscape are emblematic to a certain extent because it’s important to all groups in this period and when they integrate, it maintains its importance.’

The paper was published in Cambridge Archaeological Journal on 11 February 2021.

Notes for editors 

Media contact: Tel: +44 (0)779 969 0151 Email: press@nhm.ac.uk 

About the Natural History Museum:

The Natural History Museum is both a world-leading science research centre and the most-visited natural history museum in Europe. With a vision of a future in which both people and the planet thrive, it is uniquely positioned to be a powerful champion for balancing humanity’s needs with those of the natural world.

It is custodian of one of the world’s most important scientific collections comprising over 80 million specimens. The scale of this collection enables researchers from all over the world to document how species have and continue to respond to environmental changes - which is vital in helping predict what might happen in the future and informing future policies and plans to help the planet.

The Museum’s 300 scientists continue to represent one of the largest groups in the world studying and enabling research into every aspect of the natural world. Their science is contributing critical data to help the global fight to save the future of the planet from the major threats of climate change and biodiversity loss through to finding solutions such as the sustainable extraction of natural resources.

The Museum uses its enormous global reach and influence to meet its mission to create advocates for the planet - to inform, inspire and empower everyone to make a difference for nature. We welcome over five million visitors each year; our digital output reaches hundreds of thousands of people in over 200 countries each month and our touring exhibitions have been seen by around 30 million people in the last 10 years.

The Francis Crick Institute is a biomedical discovery institute dedicated to understanding the fundamental biology underlying health and disease. Its work is helping to understand why disease develops and to translate discoveries into new ways to prevent, diagnose and treat illnesses such as cancer, heart disease, stroke, infections, and neurodegenerative diseases.

An independent organisation, its founding partners are the Medical Research Council (MRC), Cancer Research UK, Wellcome, UCL (University College London), Imperial College London and King’s College London.

The Crick was formed in 2015, and in 2016 it moved into a brand new state-of-the-art building in central London which brings together 1500 scientists and support staff working collaboratively across disciplines, making it the biggest biomedical research facility under a single roof in Europe. http://crick.ac.uk/