Ancient place names in Iberia

Status
Not open for further replies.
As time goes by , I fell that a lot of western europe was gallic ( gaulish ) people, from vienna, through northern Italy and southern and central germany, switzerland and all france ( early bronze age) . they traded with the britsh isles and exchanged loan words due to commerce forming a gallo-brittonic "dialect". The Iberian celtic section would have come later.
Actually, in my opinion, celtic in Britain and Iberia arrived around at the same time, with the Late Bronze age upheavals (c. 1300 BC), when the Atlantic Bronze Age emerged. Here is a map of what I believe could be the Celtic Urheimat in the middle Bronze Age, the Tumulus Cultures (c. 1600-1300/1200 BC):
MBA.jpg
Note that the "Late Wessex and Atlantic Middle Bronze Age Groups" shown in the map are not what is now usually known as the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is now used only for Atlantic Europe in the Late Bronze age
 
Last edited:
I still think the "Celtic cradle" was around Central Europe, although earlier than previously thought: It was previously associated with the Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures, but it now seems to me that it was somewhat earlier, the early phase of Proto-Celtic may have been around 1500 BC, while its definitive split (such as perhaps *kw > *p in Gallo-Brittonic) may have happened until around even 1000 BC (by which time it probably extended from Moravia to Iberia to the British Isles)...

It's not "estpátula", but pala (which comes from Latin pala, the same is probably true for the Portuguese term). Espátula means... spatula (possibly an Italian loanword?)

Yes, you are correct, it's pala - bad Spanish / English dictionary.
 
Actually, in my opinion, celtic in Britain and Iberia arrived around at the same time, with the Late Bronze age upheavals (c. 1300 BC), when the Atlantic Bronze Age emerged. Here is a map of what I believe could be the Celtic Urheimat in the middle Bronze Age, the Tumulus Cultures (c. 1600-1300/1200 BC):

Note that the "Late Wessex and Atlantic Middle Bronze Age Groups" shown in the map are not what is now usually known as the Atlantic Bronze Age, which is now used only for Atlantic Europe in the Late Bronze age

Wessex is a Atlantic culture, curiously predominant in central and southern Britain, is linked to the armorican culture (prototyp with the Middle Rhine group Beaker culture and related with the NW Spain beakers) and had wide ranging trade links with continental Europe, the Baltic, Bohemia, other atlantic zones and the Mediterranean (in some galician petroglyphs we can see swords and daggers with this procedence) and was the intrusive Beaker group that appear in Ireland.

We can see the evidence of standardization the reiterative samples in all of the registers in the Atlántic Culture influence area, from hydronyms to place names. For example, the commonly name DEVA as a river name, that aproach us to some typical idiosyncratic of the Bronze Age. Rituals related with the rivers (sword deposits, saunas, profusion of deities related with the water in the historical times), that connected directly and ideologically with the concept of the warrior indo-european world.

It is not exists discontinuity not only in Western Iberian Peninsula, the same context is applicable to other Atlantic areas (British Islands, Armórica). The evidence is all material culture is definable EXCLUSIVELY inside the atlantic sphere or an hydronym sometimes indentical, even in its suffixing (-ia-, -io, -ara, -is-ya, -us-ya, -ona, -on-ya/yo, -ana, -an-ya/yo, etc.).

The oldest celtic word *okel(l)o- (< ie. *ok-el(l)-o-,synonym of *briga, *brigs, *dunum, *arcos and considerated as Ligurian in other times) is other example of this standardization language, that we can see from Utrecht to Britannia, Alps, Liguria, Celtiberiaand in all of the Wester Iberian Peninsula or in spiritual designations like the god Lug or the callaecian SULEIS (< *sulevis) with gaul.-brit. SULEVIA. Moreover, they are so fossilized that there is no way to deduce it as newest or coming with a secondary way.

Looking your map, we can see the real influences of the Corded Ware, Globular Amphorae and Comb cultures between the Odra basin and eastern Dnieper basin, in the pre-lusacian cultures of Trzciniec and Komarow and in the Estonian baltic area. It is visible for the trans-carpathian Bronze center of production of Thuringia and the ambar trade between the baltic/greek-anatolian routes and not in the mitic celtic homeland of Central Europe.

The incidence of this cultural influences spread to NortEasth, how we can see in this maps:
abb_5a.jpg

abb_5b.jpg


Interpolation der 14C-Daten für die Schnurkeramik des Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebietes mit Hilfe des IDW. Die geringe Höhe des mittleren Alters im westlichen Nordharzvorland und der Altmark ist sicherlich auf die geringe Datenmenge zurückzuführen, während der Unterschied zwischen einigen thüringischen Gebieten und denen am unteren Saalelauf offensichtlich ist. (Interpolation of 14C-data of the Corded Ware in the Central Elbe-Saale-region with the help of the IDW. The low average of the ages in the western Nordharzvorland and the Altmark probably results from the small sample size, while obviously the disparity in age between Thuringia and the lower Saale displays real age differences.)

abb_6a.jpg

abb_6b.jpg


Interpolation der jüngsten 14C-Daten für die eingezeichneten Regionen im Mittelelbe-Saale-Gebiet. Die gegenüber anderen Kleinregionen längere Dauer der Schnurkeramik im Thüringischen wird deutlich.(Interpolation of the youngest 14C-data of the areas which are marked in the Central Elbe-Saale-region. The longer duration of Corded Ware in Thuringia is visible.)
 
Looking your map, we can see the real influences of the Corded Ware, Globular Amphorae and Comb cultures between the Odra basin and eastern Dnieper basin, in the pre-lusacian cultures of Trzciniec and Komarow and in the Estonian baltic area. It is visible for the trans-carpathian Bronze center of production of Thuringia and the ambar trade between the baltic/greek-anatolian routes and not in the mitic celtic homeland of Central Europe.

I mean you no offense, but that argument is utterly untenable, if not outright ridiculous. In the case you didn't notice, the Corded Ware Culture is Chalcolithic in Age, whereas the situation on the map that Asturrulumbo posted describes the mid-Bronze Age, which is over a millennium after the Corded Ware period. The Corded Ware Culture is so early that you cannot think of any other language stage than close to Proto-Indo-European. The Tumulus Culture, as Asturrulumbo correctly pointed out, also predates the Atlantic Bronze Age. Also, in the case you didn't notice, there is no evidence what so ever in Antiquity for Greek, Anatolian or Baltic names in Central Europe. There is also no evidence for Germanic names south of the Danube before the Migrations Period. The only logical conclusion is that the region (southern Central Europe - ie southern Germany, Bohemia, Moravia, Austria) was for all purposes Celtic, and it is utterly unconceivable how the Celtic languages could have moved in from a hypothetical western origin if there is a complete lack of such a movement in archaeology (other than the Beaker-Bell Culture, which, however, is far too early and is more likely to be connected with the earlier indigenous Megalithic traditions, rather than a phenomenon of Indo-European newcomers).

From that perspective, I agree with Asturrulumbo that the Tumulus Culture is the best candidate for the origin of the Proto-Celtic language, since it predates the great upheavals of the 13th/12th century that usher the begin of the (late) Atlantic Bronze Age.
 
The Tumulus Culture can not explain the presence of the celtic languages in Spain and in tthe Atlantic Facade, because It was the descendant of the Unetice culture and the heartland is the area previously occupied by the Unetice where we can see this element. Then it have a trans-carpathian and bohemian origen.

You do not must confuse the influences with poblational dispersion. The Únětice culture had trade links with the British Wessex culture and Ireland, for example.The distribution of the Unetice-groups (and descendants cultures) in Germany consists of several isolated areas. But the finds indicate that they are interconnected, with a gradual change from the west, with influences of the older part of the French Rhône-culture to the east, where the finds are very similar to the Austrian Unterwölbling-group.

I the other hand, Tumulus Culture of Armorica is in the way of the bell-beaker tradition, same the about the tumular origin have not a central european origin (for example the residential development architecture with circular or eliptic forms vs the predominant rectangular in Unetice-Urnfield area). Certainly that the tumulus culture take isolates areas or France, but in Greece, Serbia and in Croatia too. Then it is not celtic.

Other thing is to say that the tumulus culture coincides with the emergence of the militar aristocracy in the atlantic facade as in central Europe, but it was for differents ways.

The stude of Müller talk about the previuos 'influences', that spreads direction NE.
 
We can see the evidence of standardization the reiterative samples in all of the registers in the Atlántic Culture influence area, from hydronyms to place names. For example, the commonly name DEVA as a river name, that aproach us to some typical idiosyncratic of the Bronze Age. Rituals related with the rivers (sword deposits, saunas, profusion of deities related with the water in the historical times), that connected directly and ideologically with the concept of the warrior indo-european world.

It is not exists discontinuity not only in Western Iberian Peninsula, the same context is applicable to other Atlantic areas (British Islands, Armórica). The evidence is all material culture is definable EXCLUSIVELY inside the atlantic sphere or an hydronym sometimes indentical, even in its suffixing (-ia-, -io, -ara, -is-ya, -us-ya, -ona, -on-ya/yo, -ana, -an-ya/yo, etc.).

The hydronym Deva comes from an IE deity name (*Dyēus Ph2tēr )that doesn't appear in Celtic. If anything, it makes a point for the existence of a Pre-Celtic IE language in Iberia. I would put it within the context of Krahe's "Old European Hydronimy":
In a number of significant publications beginning in 1954 and running up to 1969, Krahe proposed that river names which covered the area from the Atlantic Ocean to the Baltic Sea were created prior to 1500 BCE, and predated the formation of the Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Illyrian, Venetic and Italic branches of Indo-European. Arguing that hydronyms provide evidence of the oldest layers of the lexicon of a language system, Krahe assessed the system of river names from this region and concluded that on the basis of similarities that they shared with each other that they constituted a group descended from a common system which Krahe called ‘‘Old European’’. For Krahe the Old European construct constituted an intermediate layer somewhere between PIE and the emergence of the Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Illyrian, Venetic, Italic cluster of western languages.
Perhaps the Beaker culture (as well as other Chalcolithic horizons in Europe) could be equated with this hypothetical hydronymy, among which are rivers such as the Duero, the Drava , the Oder and the Vistula.
 
The Tumulus Culture can not explain the presence of the celtic languages in Spain and in tthe Atlantic Facade, because It was the descendant of the Unetice culture and the heartland is the area previously occupied by the Unetice where we can see this element. Then it have a trans-carpathian and bohemian origen.

You do not must confuse the influences with poblational dispersion. The Únětice culture had trade links with the British Wessex culture and Ireland, for example.The distribution of the Unetice-groups (and descendants cultures) in Germany consists of several isolated areas. But the finds indicate that they are interconnected, with a gradual change from the west, with influences of the older part of the French Rhône-culture to the east, where the finds are very similar to the Austrian Unterwölbling-group.

I the other hand, Tumulus Culture of Armorica is in the way of the bell-beaker tradition, same the about the tumular origin have not a central european origin (for example the residential development architecture with circular or eliptic forms vs the predominant rectangular in Unetice-Urnfield area). Certainly that the tumulus culture take isolates areas or France, but in Greece, Serbia and in Croatia too. Then it is not celtic.

Other thing is to say that the tumulus culture coincides with the emergence of the militar aristocracy in the atlantic facade as in central Europe, but it was for differents ways.

The stude of Müller talk about the previuos 'influences', that spreads direction NE.

I think you do have a false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages. I am under the impression that you somehow still make the assumption that the Celtic languages somehow come out of thin air and never interacted with any other branches of IE whatsoever. This is a completely false view, due to the abundance of common Italo-Celtic forms (notably, shared words for gold, silver and tin, as well the o-stem genitive -ī, which is attested in Gaulish, Ogham Irish, Latin and Umbrian). An origin in the east, in close proximity to Proto-Italic, but also contact with the Proto-Greek speakers (mind you, an early form of Greek is actually attested contemporary to the Tumulus Culture, thanks to the Linear B inscriptions) is something that must be considered very likely. These are all features that you would not expect if - as you seem to assume - the Celtic languages somehow developed in total isolation in the West.

Also, as mentioned, there is the strong discontinuity in the Atlantic region from the transition between middle and late Bronze Age, notably the end of the Wessex Culture in Britain, but also the end of the (still Chalcolithic!) VNSP Culture in Portugal, being replaced by the Late Bronze Age. This occurs simultaneously to the great upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, and it remains the most likely arrival point for the Celtic languages in the Atlantic region.

EDIT: I would also like to reiterate what I have said several times in this thread: the survival of non-Indo-European languages (Basque-Aquitanian, Iberian and Tartessian) in the Atlantic region makes absolutely no sense if we assume that the Atlantic region was Indo-Europeanized as early as the 29-25th century BC, especially starting out in Iberia. And it makes even less sense in such a context that the Basques have non-IE terms for metals and metal-working. Even if we give the situation the benefit of doubt and assume that the Basques (as well as Iberians and Tartessian) managed to survive despite being already surrounded by Indo-Europeans for some 2000 years (by the time of classical Antiquity), we would expect them to have adopted Indo-European terms for metals and metal-working. There is also the issue that there are surprisingly few Celtic loans into Basques, which would be also expected if there was such a prolonged time of contact. Likewise, the assumption that Basque is a latecomer which arrived after the Celtic languages (a position which is rejected by the majority of linguists) does not really solve the problem, since Basque is after all an isolate language (with the only potentially related language being Iberian) and there is no possibility to explain where it came from out of such a sudden. Likewise, the assumption that Central Europe was non-Indo-European while the Atlantic Façade was already Proto-Celtic in the Copper Age is equally unsupported in any way, due to the fact that the (Proto-Indo-European) Corded Ware Culture expanded into Central Europe before the Beaker-Bell Culture did. Due to this, and it's general nature as an isolate language, it's far more likely that the Basque language is indeed native to Western Europe since at least Neolithic times, and that the ancient Basques were part of a non-Indo-European Copper Age that existed in Western Europe.
 
Last edited:
The hydronym Deva comes from an IE deity name (*Dyēus Ph2tēr )that doesn't appear in Celtic.[...] it makes a point for the existence of a Pre-Celtic IE language in Iberia. I would put it within the context of Krahe's "Old European Hydronimy".

What do you say? When? Where can I read this newest opinion? Are you saying that protocelt. *deiwa- > celt. *dêva/*dîva 'goddess' from ie. *deih2- ‘shine’ (cf. IEW:183-87; LIV:108; CPNE:82; EGOW:51; GPC:1101; LEIA D-64; PECA:41; GPN:191-92; KGP:190-91;ACPN:70-71; DLG:142-43; PNPG, Celtic Elements, s.v. dēuo-, dīuo-), are not celtic? Are you saying that gaulish names (rivers, towns, gods and personal names) like DEVA/DIVA, DEVONA/DIVONA, DEVONISSA, DEVACARO, DEVIATIS, DEVIGNATA, DEVILIVS, DEVILIA, DEVIO, DEVOGARIOS, DEVOGDONIOI, DEVOXDONIO, DEVOGNATA, DEIVICIACOS/DEVICIACOS/DIVICIACOS, DEVOIALON, DEVOCARVS, DEVONOS, DEVORIX, DEVORTOMV are not celtic?

What are you saying?

And the Wessex Culture is linked with the armorican bell-beaker culture, and is intrusive in Ireland.

false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages?

Looks, if I admite that is the Tumulus Culture where the celtic populations descendant, where is its heartland? In Hungary?, Boheme?, Poland?, Thuringia?, Pomeranian? isolated areas of Rhineland and East of France?, Greece, Serbia, Croatia, Macedonia? Where? In the homeland of the Tumulus Culture, Hungary and South Poland, perhaps?

Or we must think in the particular, personal and expansive aquitanian Tumulus Culture? Is it Celtic too?

If I have to admite it, how can I explain the gradual change from the west, with influences of the older part of the French Rhône-culture to the east, where the finds are very similar to the Austrian Unterwölbling-group? How?

It is a great error think that Wessex does not belong to the Beaker culture...You must to do a lot of research about this. Momentarily, you can consult in Wikipedia how Wessex is conected with armorican, the Netherlands beakers and Middle Rhine group of Beaker culture. But you need more information about this.

Is not other way Taranis, central Europe is not the celtic homeland. It is part of the celtic homeland.
 
false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages?

*snip*

Well, I'm under the impression you really did not read my post. Otherwise, you would not ask something like that. Therefore, I will repost it:

I think you do have a false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages. I am under the impression that you somehow still make the assumption that the Celtic languages somehow come out of thin air and never interacted with any other branches of IE whatsoever. This is a completely false view, due to the abundance of common Italo-Celtic forms (notably, shared words for gold, silver and tin, as well the o-stem genitive -ī, which is attested in Gaulish, Ogham Irish, Latin and Umbrian). An origin in the east, in close proximity to Proto-Italic, but also contact with the Proto-Greek speakers (mind you, an early form of Greek is actually attested contemporary to the Tumulus Culture, thanks to the Linear B inscriptions) is something that must be considered very likely. These are all features that you would not expect if - as you seem to assume - the Celtic languages somehow developed in total isolation in the West.

Also, as mentioned, there is the strong discontinuity in the Atlantic region from the transition between middle and late Bronze Age, notably the end of the Wessex Culture in Britain, but also the end of the (still Chalcolithic!) VNSP Culture in Portugal, being replaced by the Late Bronze Age. This occurs simultaneously to the great upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, and it remains the most likely arrival point for the Celtic languages in the Atlantic region.

EDIT: I would also like to reiterate what I have said several times in this thread: the survival of non-Indo-European languages (Basque-Aquitanian, Iberian and Tartessian) in the Atlantic region makes absolutely no sense if we assume that the Atlantic region was Indo-Europeanized as early as the 29-25th century BC, especially starting out in Iberia. And it makes even less sense in such a context that the Basques have non-IE terms for metals and metal-working. Even if we give the situation the benefit of doubt and assume that the Basques (as well as Iberians and Tartessian) managed to survive despite being already surrounded by Indo-Europeans for some 2000 years (by the time of classical Antiquity), we would expect them to have adopted Indo-European terms for metals and metal-working. There is also the issue that there are surprisingly few Celtic loans into Basques, which would be also expected if there was such a prolonged time of contact. Likewise, the assumption that Basque is a latecomer which arrived after the Celtic languages (a position which is rejected by the majority of linguists) does not really solve the problem, since Basque is after all an isolate language (with the only potentially related language being Iberian) and there is no possibility to explain where it came from out of such a sudden. Likewise, the assumption that Central Europe was non-Indo-European while the Atlantic Façade was already Proto-Celtic in the Copper Age is equally unsupported in any way, due to the fact that the (Proto-Indo-European) Corded Ware Culture expanded into Central Europe before the Beaker-Bell Culture did. Due to this, and it's general nature as an isolate language, it's far more likely that the Basque language is indeed native to Western Europe since at least Neolithic times, and that the ancient Basques were part of a non-Indo-European Copper Age that existed in Western Europe.

In a nutshell, you are still thinking too early.

EDIT: Regarding Basque, I would strongly recommend taking a look into the works of the late Robert Lawrence Trask. He did work on an etymological dictionary of the Basque language, and he noted the very small number of Celtic loans.
 
I understand: I think you do have a false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages. (your words)

I think that you do not kow nothing about the Bell Beaker, Tumulus Culture or Wessex Culturs, as to say that DEVA is a pre-celtic or alteuropäisch word...terrible!!! You hear Wessex vs. tumuli and you think that is the post-Unetiçe Tumulus Culture. You must to get more information about the of the Bronze Age ending in Iberia, because you do not know what the archaeological reality in South France, Pirineos, NE and East of Spain, northern of the Plateau Superior is?

For example, can you explain what the 'Itxauri Culture' is? The 'Cortes de Navarra' Culture? What happen in Aquitania in the urnfield times?

Can do you explain why the archaeologist want said with 'failed indo-europeisation' when they to refer to the NE Iberian urnenfield?

I am waiting about the germanic translation of Bainochaîmai, Bonochaîmai.

I repeat..central Europe is part of the celtic homeland, but not the heartland..in this way, you must look to Atlantic Facade and western Europe.
 
And it makes even less sense in such a context that the Basques have non-IE terms for metals and metal-working. Even if we give the situation the benefit of doubt and assume that the Basques (as well as Iberians and Tartessian) managed to survive despite being already surrounded by Indo-Europeans for some 2000 years (by the time of classical Antiquity), we would expect them to have adopted Indo-European terms for metals and metal-working.

Regarding this, have you read Jean Manco's article "Basque from Cucuteni"?

The fact that one Basque word for silver was derived from the word for gold suggests that Proto-Basque arose in a region where gold was discovered first. That points to the eastern Balkans, and cultures such as the Cucuteni culture adjacent to the European steppe, where Proto-Indo-European was developing around that time. The Ozieri Culture which sprang up in Sardinia c. 4000 BC has much in common with that of Cucuteni. You will recall that a recent book finds linguistic connections between Paleo-Sardinian by linguists, paleo-Basque and paleo-Iberian
 
I understand: I think you do have a false assumption about the origin of the Celtic languages. (your words)

I think that you do not kow nothing about the Bell Beaker, Tumulus Culture or Wessex Culturs, as to say that DEVA is a pre-celtic or alteuropäisch word...terrible!!!

I did not state that. I think Asturrulumbo may instead have meant the name element 'Dur-', which Krahe indeed identified as Alteuropäisch, and which is also attested from northwestern Iberia (notably the Duero river).

You hear Wessex vs. tumuli and you think that is the post-lusacian Tumulus Culture. And you must to get more information about the of the Bronze Age ending in Iberia, because you do not know what the archaeological reality in South France, Pirineos, NE and East of Spain, northern of the Plateau Superior is?

Well, as I said, it does not matter. While it is correct that the Wessex Culture bears continuity with earlier Beaker-Bell traditions, it predates the great upheavals and it predates the Late Atlantic Bronze Age. I've provided more than one example of that discontinuity.

For example, can you explain what the 'Itxauri Culture' is? and I am waiting about the translation of Bainochaîmai, Bonochaîmai.

I've provided dozens of other examples of Celtic name evidence in Central Europe. What does it tell me that you seek out the one word that is Germanicized ("Boii home") and ignore the other words that have readily identifiable Celtic etymologies? Such as "Gabretae Forest", "Eburodunum", "Lugidunum", "Segodunum" or "Celamantia" (look a few pages back, my actual list was far longer). We also established that a Celtic etymology of the word 'Boii' is viable even if the exact meaning is disputed (though it should be reiterated that there word 'Bó' = cattle exists even in Irish), and I also mentioned that the Marcomanni conquered the area in the 1st century BC. The term "Bainochaîmai" appears in Ptolemy's geography in the 2nd century AD, a time by which the area was Germanic. However, the assumption that Central Europe wasn't really Celtic to begin with is a fallacy, which I elaborated earlier. The first is that there is a complete absence of Germanic place names south of the Danube before the Migrations Period, the second is the considerable number of Celtic loanwords into Proto-Germanic and the third is the presence of Celtic place names as far north as the Main river and even Silesia.
 
The hydronym Deva comes from an IE deity name (*Dyēus Ph2tēr )that doesn't appear in Celtic.[...] it makes a point for the existence of a Pre-Celtic IE language in Iberia. I would put it within the context of Krahe's "Old European Hydronimy".

Wessex...discontinuity? Do you know the petrogliphs of Oia, Santiago and Mogor in Galicia? what kind of swords do you see there? Wessex....Is it discontinuity? and the gold metal work techniques that you see in Wessex where do believe you it comes? Galicia...is it discontinuity? and the spears that you see in the Huelva Bay where come?...Armorica and Brittania..
 
Regarding this, have you read Jean Manco's article "Basque from Cucuteni"?

No, I have not read that before. I have heard however about the suggestion of a connection between the Paleo-Sardinians and the Basques and/or Iberians. The interesting part is that there is also genetic backup for this in respect for the distribution of I2a1, which after all reaches the highest distributions in Sardinia and the Basque country, and I2a1 is in my opinion the most likely canidate for the main Y-Haplogroup carried by the Megalithic builders. From that perspective, I personally would not be surprised if it turns out that the Beaker-Bell people were predominantly I2a1 rather than R1b.
 
I personally would not be surprised if it turns out that the Beaker-Bell people were predominantly I2a1 rather than R1b.

That would explain the absence of R1b in North Africa; a place where Bell beaker people have been
 
What do you say?

I said "I personally would not be surprised if it turns out that the Beaker-Bell people were predominantly I2a1 rather than R1b." If the Beaker-Bell phenomenon was a local, aboriginal tradition, it would be expected that they did not carry any samples of R1b.

The oldest samples of R1b thus far in Europe was found in skeletons attributed to the Urnfield Culture, dated to circa 1000 BC, and we know it decisively to be absent in the Neolithic. From that perspective the question of wether R1b arrived in Western Europe during the Copper Age (read: Beaker Bell) or later (Bronze Age) is still unanswered.

Thus far, there is no sample of Beaker-Bell YDNA yet, and the findings of Beaker-Bell mitochondrial DNA have been ambiguous, due to the fact that it's very difficult thus far to correlate YDNA and mDNA due to the very different nature of Y-chromosomes and mitochondria. So, we do not know until samples of Beaker-Bell YDNA are published.
 
Aha, okey....and I am Santa Teresa de Calcuta...

Now I can understand:

Galicia I2a1 1.5%,
suebian and marcomani I 12%
R1b 60-63%
G2a 12%
M-81 7%
and rest is variable, phoenician, goths, vikings, etc.

Bell-Beaker..aborigen in all of Western Europe to west Polonia? Where the predominant y-dna is R1b?
 
Aha, okey....and I am Santa Teresa de Calcuta...

Now I can understand:

Galicia I2a1 1.5%,
suebian and marcomani I 12%
R1b 60-63%
G2a 12%
M-81 7%
and rest is varieted, phoenician, goths, vikings, etc.


Only 7% of haplogroup E?
 
Alright, I may have been a bit reckless when taking into account Deva as part of the Old European Hydronymy; the point remains the same: If the Beaker culture was Indo-European, I would equate it with the "Old European Hydronymy" Hans Krahe described (which as I have said includes the Drava, Duero, Oder, Vistula, etc.), as it makes little sense to me to have the Celtic languages split at so early a date.
Drawing from the discussion here and my own views, I would make a hypothetical timeline on the Celtic languages:
-C. 2300 BC:The Unetice culture of Central Europe in the Early Bronze Age begins.I would propose this to be ascribed to Proto-Italo-Celtic speaking peoples
-C. 1700 BC: The Terramare culture of Northern Italy (c. 1700-1150 BC) begins. This could perhaps represent a Proto-Italic speaking folk that migrated from Central Europe, given its archaeological affinities. This would thus also be the date of the split of Proto-Italo-Celtic
terramare.JPG
-C. 1600 BC: The Middle Bronze Age Tumulus Culture (1600-1300/1200 BC, in my opinion early Proto-Celtic) emerges (evolving from Unetice), and spreads west and southeast
MBA.jpg
-C. 1600-1300 BC: "Early Proto-Celtic" linguistic phase (*gw > *b?)
-C. 1300 BC: The Atlantic Bronze Age emerges. I would interpret it as an expansion of the Tumulus Culture during the population upheavals of the Late Bronze Age
-C. 1300-1000 BC: "Late Proto-Celtic" linguistic phase
C. 1200 BC: Lusitanian in the west of Iberia splits from Proto-Celtic
C. 1200-1000 BC: Plosive de-aspiration, PIE *p disappears (except before s and t, where it turns into *xs and *xt)
C. 1000 BC: Definitive split of the Celtic languages (*kw > *p in Gallo-Brittonic?, similar splits in Goidelic and Celtiberian)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 154636 times.

Back
Top