The Beaker Bell Phenomenon

[Goga]

if you take a look at the various R1b markers relevant for Western Europe, they are consistently younger:

L23 - 5000 BC
L11 - 4,000 BC
P312 - 3,300 BC
U106 - 1,500 BC
U152 - 1,500 BC
L21 - 2,000 BC
Z196 - 1,800 BC

Yeah, all these mutations are very young and they all occurred in Europe. But R1b lineage in general is at least 18,000 years old! So R1b in every European male is at least 18,000 years old.
It's even possible that your most recent mutation of R1b was 50 years ago. But this doesn't mean tha your R1b is 50 years old. It's still at least 18,000 years old!

 

[Goga]

According to you is the mutation of L23 7,000 years old and that L23 is native to Europe. It means that R1b in Europe is at least 7,000 years old! Older and it was even before the Neolithic Europe (7,000-6,500)!

Etc. etc...

 

[Taranis]

Yeah, all these mutations are very young and they all occurred in Europe. But R1b lineage in general is at least 18,000 years old! So R1b in every European male is at least 18,000 years old.
It's even possible that your most recent mutation of R1b was 50 years ago. But this doesn't mean tha your R1b is 50 years old. It's still at least 18,000 years old!

According to you is the mutation of L23 7,000 years old and that L23 is native to Europe. It means that R1b in Europe is at least 7,000 years old! Older and it was even before the Neolithic Europe (7,000-6,500)!

Etc. etc...

Sorry, you are again making completely false assumption here. You're also clearly contradicting yourself because earlier you said 7000 BC (9000 years before present), and the dates I gave are all younger than 9000 YBP. Even if we discount the margin of error for such age estimates, you still have to consider that it takes a time for a marker to disperse itself and become common in a population.

Also, as I said, if you take a look at the distribution of the older markers, such as this... (L11x)

...you will notice the general rarity/absence in Western Europe. That should tell you something.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

Sorry, you are again making completely false assumption here. You're also clearly contradicting yourself because earlier you said 7000 BC (9000 years before present), and the dates I gave are all younger than 9000 YBP. Even if we discount the margin of error for such age estimates, you still have to consider that it takes a time for a marker to disperse itself and become common in a population.

Also, as I said, if you take a look at the distribution of the older markers, such as this... (L11x)

...you will notice the general rarity/absence in Western Europe. That should tell you something.

That map is extremely interesting, the only map I had seen of L11* thus far is this one, and as you can see it is painfully small:
. Where did you get the one you are showing from?

 

[Taranis]

That map is extremely interesting, the only map I had seen of L11* thus far is this one, and as you can see it is painfully small:
View attachment 5284. Where did you get the one you are showing from?

Sorry, I should have been more precise, the map actually shows not L11*, but M269xL11, and Spongetario uploaded it in the Iberian place names thread, and as far as I know he has taken it from the Busby paper. I agree however that it is very interesting.

 

[julia90]

I ve found this on wikipedia

physical anthropology of Bell Beaker people

Historical craniometric studies found that the Beaker people appeared to be of a different physical type than those earlier populations in the same geographic areas. They were described as tall, heavy boned and brachycephalic. The early studies on the Beakers which were based on the analysis of their skeletal remains, were craniometric. This apparent evidence of migration was in line with archaeological discoveries linking Beaker culture to new farming techniques, mortuary practices, copper-working skills, and other cultural innovations. However such evidence from skeletal remains was brushed aside as a new movement developed in archaeology from the 1960s which stressed cultural continuity. Anti-migrationist authors either paid little attention to skeletal evidence or argued that differences could be explained by environmental and cultural influences. Margaret Cox and Simon Mays sum up the position: "Although it can hardly be said that craniometric data provide an unequivocal answer to the problem of the Beaker folk, the balance of the evidence would at present seem to favour a migration hypothesis."[14]
Non-metrical research concerning the Beaker people in Britain also cautiously pointed in the direction of immigration.[7] Subsequent studies, such as one concerning the Carpathian Basin,[15] and a non-metrical analysis of skeletons in central-southern Germany,[16] have also identified marked typological differences with the pre-Beaker inhabitants.
Jocelyne Desideri examined the teeth in skeletons from Bell Beaker sites in Northern Spain, Southern France, Switzerland, the Czech Republic and Hungary for her thesis. Looking at inherited dental traits, she found that only in Northern Spain and the Czech Republic were there demonstrable genetic links between immediately previous populations and Bell Beaker populations. Elsewhere there was a genetic discontinuity.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

Sorry, I should have been more precise, the map actually shows not L11*, but M269xL11, and Spongetario uploaded it in the Iberian place names thread, and as far as I know he has taken it from the Busby paper. I agree however that it is very interesting.

Oh, then apparently I had seen it, but with a different perception
If it's , then it's still extremely insightful: In my opinion it supports my suspicions that there was a migration to Europe from Anatolia at around 6000 BC that brought M269xL11 to Europe.

 

[Maciamo]

Bell Beaker is not IE. It descended from the non-IE Funnelbeaker culture of old Europe. Malmstrom et al. 2009 extracted ancient DNA from three individuals dated to the non-IE Funnelbeaker culture in Sweden and found mtDNA haplogroups H, J, and T.

I agree that the Funnelbeaker and Bell Beaker cultures are related, and both descended from the Megalithic cultures. However I doubt that the beaker culture spread with any substantial migration of people. It was probably more just a vast trade and cultural (religious ?) network related to the megaliths that diffused the artefacts.

 

[Sile]

Beaker People are from south east france which was Ligurian tribes , they went to Iberia, to Rjone valley through Alsace into Germany and beyond, went through all of Northern Italy and also sailed to Sardinia. They where I2a1
They lost there I2a1 over time to R1b

Check internet for - Bell Beaker Ligurians

http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/46Delfino.pdf

There's more , ............

 

[spongetaro]

Beaker People are from south east france which was Ligurian tribes , they went to Iberia, to Rjone valley through Alsace into Germany and beyond, went through all of Northern Italy and also sailed to Sardinia. They where I2a1
They lost there I2a1 over time to R1b

Check internet for - Bell Beaker Ligurians

http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/46Delfino.pdf

There's more , ............

Thanks for the link. The Bell Beaker-Ligurians connection is interesting as Ligurian is an attested IE language.

 

[Goga]

Oh, then apparently I had seen it, but with a different perception
If it's , then it's still extremely insightful: In my opinion it supports my suspicions that there was a migration to Europe from Anatolia at around 6000 BC that brought M269xL11 to Europe.

No it was happened before the agricultural revolution in West Asia. If R1b folks migrated after 11000 BCE from Southern Caucasus into Western Europe they would be the Neolithic farmers who introduced farming in Europe. But that's not the case. R1b folks who migrated into Europe didn't bring farming with them.

So it was even before the agricultural revolution took place in West Asia!

 

[Goga]

Beaker People are from south east france which was Ligurian tribes , they went to Iberia, to Rjone valley through Alsace into Germany and beyond, went through all of Northern Italy and also sailed to Sardinia. They where I2a1
They lost there I2a1 over time to R1b

Check internet for - Bell Beaker Ligurians

http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/46Delfino.pdf

There's more , ............

Very interesting view of point. I'll think about that!

 

[Asturrulumbo]

No it was happened before the agricultural revolution in West Asia. If R1b folks migrated after 11000 BCE from Southern Caucasus into Western Europe they would be the Neolithic farmers who introduced farming in Europe. But that's not the case. R1b folks who migrated into Europe didn't bring farming with them.

So it was even before the agricultural revolution took place in West Asia!

No, I don't mean they brought farming with them, by 6000 BC there was already farming in Southeast Europe. I am not talking about the first Neolithic cultures of Europe (Karanovo, Sesklo, Starcevo), but rather about the Dudeşti culture of southeast Romania, with clear links to Anatolia.

 

[spongetaro]

I agree that the Funnelbeaker and Bell Beaker cultures are related, and both descended from the Megalithic cultures. However I doubt that the beaker culture spread with any substantial migration of people. It was probably more just a vast trade and cultural (religious ?) network related to the megaliths that diffused the artefacts.

No real link with previous culture have been established by the Archeologist community so far.
The archeological data only tells us that the first Bell Beakers artifacts are found in Portugal.

 

[Taranis]

No real link with previous culture have been established by the Archeologist community so far.
The archeological data only tells us that the first Bell Beakers artifacts are found in Portugal.

Yes, and hence the idea that Beaker-Bell was originally a native phenomenon in Portugal is rather tempting: these Portuguese sites are simply too ancient too far in the west to be genuinely Indo-European. I mean, yes, I am aware of the stelae people hypothesis, but I personally find it far from convincing due to the fact that no stelae have been found anywhere along the proposed route, notably not in eastern Iberia.

I would argue that whatever language the original Beaker-Bell people spoke, but I would argue that this language is the source of the metal/metal-workings terms in Basque.

 

[spongetaro]

I mean, yes, I am aware of the stelae people hypothesis, but I personally find it far from convincing due to the fact that no stelae have been found anywhere along the proposed route, notably not in eastern Iberia.

The main argument against the stelae people hypothesis is that the late neolithic site of Treilles also had those stelae but Treilles people were found to be G2a and I2a

 

[Taranis]

The main argument against the stelae people hypothesis is that the late neolithic site of Treilles also had those stelae but the Treilles people were found to be G2a and I2a

This is a very good point indeed.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

The main argument against the stelae people hypothesis is that the late neolithic site of Treilles also had those stelae but Treilles people were found to be G2a and I2a

Indeed. The stelae made by the Beaker folk are in my opinion more related to the indigenous megalithic traditions than the Steppe stelae.

 

[Taranis]

Hmm... there is something I wonder about, where I would like to play the ball into the camp of the IE proponents in this context: assuming Beaker-Bell was indeed Indo-European, how do we explain the non-IE metal terms in Basque, as well as the relative scarcity of loans: although Basque has a substantial amount of loanwords, the vast bulk of these are Romance or Latin, and only a small number is Celtic (compare Trask). How can we reconcile this with the idea that Indo-Europeans may have arrived in Iberia as early as the early 3rd millennium BC?

 

[sparkey]

Hmm... there is something I wonder about, where I would like to play the ball into the camp of the IE proponents in this context: assuming Beaker-Bell was indeed Indo-European, how do we explain the non-IE metal terms in Basque, as well as the relative scarcity of loans: although Basque has a substantial amount of loanwords, the vast bulk of these are Romance or Latin, and only a small number is Celtic (compare Trask). How can we reconcile this with the idea that Indo-Europeans may have arrived in Iberia as early as the early 3rd millennium BC?

I would think that if Beaker Culture a whole=R1b-S116 spread, as the "IE proponents" would likely argue, that would be pretty good evidence that the Basque language is tied to R1b-S116 rather than to I2a1a. Then Basque would have unique words for metals because its speakers brought metals. There's nothing preventing R1b-S116 migrations from having both IE and non-IE subgroups. That's one solution, although I don't think I favor it at the moment.