Look at this quote from Wikpedia
So Nordic bronze age culture proto Germanic and Unetice proto Italo Celtic they say descend from Bell Beaker. The Nordic bronze age one is the most convincing that Germanic and Italo Celtic languages are connected besides Y DNA. I think we need to understand that Bell Beaker culture is totally connected with Germanic Italo Celtic languages and introduction and spread of R1b1a2a1 L51 in west Europe. I don't think Bell Beaker was always Germanic Italo celtic i think they were conquered by Germanic Italo Celts. Both Unetice and Nordic bronze age culture had Kurgens huge signs of being INdo European. But i dont know about Atlantic bronze age. It could be an non Germanic Italo Celtic offshoot of far western Bell BEaker while eastern Bell Beaker became Germanic Italo Celtic.
In response to your previous post: I do not believe the Bell Beakers or R1b entered/expanded into Europe in the Neolithic. They, like the contemporaneous Corded Ware, entered Europe with the collapse of the Neolithic, accompanied by a massive population reduction of the natives, which happened on its own and without the help of any axe wielding invaders.
A new explanation is required to explain Indo-Europeanization/Migration in Western Europe is because the epic failure of the Kurgan hypothesis to explain the early and total distribution of Indo-European peoples, cultures and languages. The near total absence of R1a in Western Europe, excluding Northern Scotland, does not explain P-312's unscathed, clean passage across land from the East to the West and it can not account for any IE ruling caste in Western Europe. A growing number of very early IE cultures continue to break to the surface in the Chalcolithic. Anatolian presents a problem for Kurgan that some still try to unsuccessfully squeeze into the PIE timeframe. Same witht the location and origin of Kurgans themselves. If proto-Euphratean is true, Kurgan is dead and done.
On the other hand, every continuity theory has so absolutely been destroyed time and time again without exception. These theorists just simple move the goal posts at every failure. They have no credibility, in my opinion.
I 'hypothesize' that Bell Beaker was one population in a system of maritime R1b trading networks that had settlements on the coasts of the Black Sea, Western Balkans, Northwest Italy, Southwestern Spain, Upper Egypt/Red Sea Coast, Dilmun, Meghreb, Mespotamia, etc. This is the best explanation for the various founding events. *The presence of R1b in Central Africa was most likely an African trading outpost that became isolated from its connections to the White Nile and the Western Bank of the Red Sea.
*The presence of R1b is Bashkirostan may be the remnant of a Lapiz Lazulli mining settlement.
*The presence of R1b in the Tarim Basin may have also been 'originally' an early east-west trading/transport outpost.
This network of sea lanes and shipping weight stations was built at least in the Chalcolithic and was maintained by later R1b influenced races such as the later Phoenicians and the later Greeks, etc, etc.
Early Bell Beaker folk are so absolutely Europeanesque in their habits, social patterns, burials and apparent genetics.
The European-looking, strongly built, paternalistic, saxe wielding, single-grave, flex position, milk producing, cattle-herding, maritime, riverine, beer-drinking, Bell Beakers are Indo-European. It is painfully obvious. Twilight zone obvious.
I can only believe that those of you who deny this are either looking looking through the prism of a defunct continuity theory or a bleeding Kurgan hypothesis.
