PDA

View Full Version : Ancient genomes indicate population replacement in Early Neolithic Britain



Yetos
19-04-19, 23:27
the last 2 days we have a lot of blog publications in Greece

Mainly Due to That,

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0871-9 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0871-9)

''we detect no resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry at any time during the Neolithic in Britain. Genetic affinities with Iberian Neolithic individuals indicate that British Neolithic people were mostly descended from Aegean farmers who followed the Mediterranean route of dispersal.''

That started a lot of publications, in Blogs and magazines
mainly by Pr Tsikritzis

it seems that Stonehedge were build by them, and were Callendars, time estimation monuments
and are build according THE MINOAN MOON MONTH,

the work of Ι. Velsing (2017) and the publications of Tsikritzis (2011)
and the new article of Nature journal 15/4/2019) I Link above

seems to be combined in the Palaikastro disk
and also Minoans maybe spoke IE
(you understand what this might bring if proved correct)

so after the Journal article, the Velsing work, now Tsikritzis reopens his works on the Minoan callendar, the Minoan year and moon month,
Notice the Bellow

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2lnvrYCIFis/XLoORspGDSI/AAAAAAAC5Kc/tqDV9pmIwnYez6Eds9KnMYYWT4kDZiAfQCLcBGAs/s640/%25CE%2595%25CE%25BB%25CE%25BB%25CE%25B7%25CE%25BD %25CE%25B9%25CE%25BA%25CE%25AE%2B%25CE%25B7%2B%25C E%25BF%25CE%25BD%25CE%25BF%25CE%25BC%25CE%25B1%25C F%2583%25CE%25AF%25CE%25B1%2B%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF% 25CF%2585%2B%25CE%25A3%25CF%2584%25CF%258C%25CE%25 BF%25CF%2585%25CE%25BD%25CF%2587%25CE%25B5%25CE%25 BD%25CF%2584%25CE%25B6.png


the difference among Stonehdge and Palaikastro Disk is just a few grades in the axis of inner circle, and one more 'hole' (57-58 in inner is the difference,)
all other are just the same, 3 circles, 3 axis and one vertical, and 59 holes outer, moon month =29.5 days average is typical

it Seems Early Minoans still manage to surprise us all

It is known the Κασσιτεριδες Νησοι (British Islands) and especially Cornwall, were visited by Minoans before the rest of all Medittereneans,
it is known that Minoan Κρατερωμα was the best at his era, while was proto invented at 4000 BC around at Messopotamia.

yet First κρατερωμα (tin Bronze, had tin tin from minor Asia, which estimations say that finish around same time)

we speak about tin mearchant from Cornwall to Aegean around 1500 BC
But the late genetical and archaiological (if we consider such the Palaikastro disk)
Seems that Early Aegeans and possibly Minoans inhabit Britain BEFORE 1900 BC

Besides Pr Tsikritzis also identified Linear A at Stonehedges, as many Blogs say

YET for I am still precautious on the above, cause I find no link or photo of his work in blogs,
and probably could be proved a spam in future,Anyway until now we had Minoan connection to Britain around 1500 BC
today possibly we have before 1900 BC at least, (could be older)
yet the 'blue stones' are estimated around 1900 BC by Velsing

Neolithic people and Minoan people still surprise us,
Could Neolithic Britain spoke like early Cretan or Aegean population?besides if the blogs are correct the stonehedge were called in Linear A as sto-na
or the Minoan Callendar was called sto-na
we might be in more surprises soon,
Yet I am still not a believer to that of Linear A claim
Until I see more work and publications to that,

bicicleur
20-04-19, 18:24
the Aegean farmers are the Carded Ware people, who were in Corfu 8.4 ka and landed in eastern Iberia 7.6 ka, mainly G2a
farmers arrived in tbe British Isles ca 6.1 ka, they were I2a with EEF

Minoans arrived in the Aegean 5.2 ka, and they were J2
I don't see the connection

furthermore the British neolithic farmers made some earthen walls (henges) in Stonehenge, but they didn't put the stones
the stones were erected by the early Bell Beakers in the British Isles, 4.5 ka

Duarte
20-04-19, 21:05
The history of human settlements in the British Isles is very interesting.


Stonehenge: DNA reveals origin of builders


By Paul Rincon
Science editor, BBC News website
16 April 2019
https://i.imgur.com/6kHu1za.jpg

The ancestors of the people who built Stonehenge travelled west across the Mediterranean before reaching Britain, a study has shown.
Researchers compared DNA extracted from Neolithic human remains found across Britain with that of people alive at the same time in Europe.
The Neolithic inhabitants were descended from populations originating in Anatolia (modern Turkey) that moved to Iberia before heading north.
They reached Britain in about 4,000BC.
Details have been published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0871-9)
The migration to Britain was just one part of a general, massive expansion of people out of Anatolia in 6,000BC that introduced farming to Europe.
Before that, Europe was populated by small, travelling groups which hunted animals and gathered wild plants and shellfish.
One group of early farmers followed the river Danube up into Central Europe, but another group travelled west across the Mediterranean.
DNA reveals that Neolithic Britons were largely descended from groups who took the Mediterranean route, either hugging the coast or hopping from island-to-island on boats. Some British groups had a minor amount of ancestry from groups that followed the Danube route.

https://i.imgur.com/It3cVvd.jpg


When the researchers analysed the DNA of early British farmers, they found they most closely resembled Neolithic people from Iberia (modern Spain and Portugal). These Iberian farmers were descended from people who had journeyed across the Mediterranean.
From Iberia, or somewhere close, the Mediterranean farmers travelled north through France. They might have entered Britain from the west, through Wales or south-west England. Indeed, radiocarbon dates suggest that Neolithic people arrived marginally earlier in the west, but this remains a topic for future work.
In addition to farming, the Neolithic migrants to Britain appear to have introduced the tradition of building monuments using large stones known as megaliths. Stonehenge in Wiltshire was part of this tradition.
Although Britain was inhabited by groups of "western hunter-gatherers" when the farmers arrived in about 4,000BC, DNA shows that the two groups did not mix very much at all.
The British hunter-gatherers were almost completely replaced by the Neolithic farmers, apart from one group in western Scotland, where the Neolithic inhabitants had elevated local ancestry. This could have come down to the farmer groups simply having greater numbers.
"We don't find any detectable evidence at all for the local British western hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Neolithic farmers after they arrive," said co-author Dr Tom Booth, a specialist in ancient DNA from the Natural History Museum in London.
"That doesn't mean they don't mix at all, it just means that maybe their population sizes were too small to have left any kind of genetic legacy."
Co-author Professor Mark Thomas, from UCL, said he also favoured "a numbers game explanation".

https://i.imgur.com/P115bdL.jpg


Professor Thomas said the Neolithic farmers had probably had to adapt their practices to different climatic conditions as they moved across Europe. But by the time they reached Britain they were already "tooled up" and well-prepared for growing crops in a north-west European climate.
The study also analysed DNA from these British hunter-gatherers. One of the skeletons analysed was that of Cheddar Man, whose skeletal remains have been dated to 7,100BC.
He was the subject of a reconstruction unveiled at the Natural History Museum last year. DNA suggests that, like most other European hunter-gatherers of the time, he had dark skin combined with blue eyes.
Genetic analysis shows that the Neolithic farmers, by contrast, were paler-skinned with brown eyes and black or dark-brown hair.
Towards the end of the Neolithic, in about 2,450BC, the descendants of the first farmers were themselves almost entirely replaced when a new population - called the Bell Beaker people - migrated from mainland Europe. So Britain saw two extreme genetic shifts in the space of a few thousand years.
Prof Thomas said that this later event happened after the Neolithic population had been in decline for some time, both in Britain and across Europe. He cautioned against simplistic explanations invoking conflict, and said the shifts ultimately came down to "economic" factors, about which lifestyles were best suited to exploit the landscape.
Dr Booth explained: "It's difficult to see whether the two [genetic shifts] could have anything in common - they're two very different kinds of change. There's speculation that they're to some extent population collapses. But the reasons suggested for those two collapses are different, so it could just be coincidence."

Angela
20-04-19, 21:22
the Aegean farmers are the Carded Ware people, who were in Corfu 8.4 ka and landed in eastern Iberia 7.6 ka, mainly G2a
farmers arrived in tbe British Isles ca 6.1 ka, they were I2a with EEF

Minoans arrived in the Aegean 5.2 ka, and they were J2
I don't see the connection

furthermore the British neolithic farmers made some earthen walls (henges) in Stonehenge, but they didn't put the stones
the stones were erected by the early Bell Beakers in the British Isles, 4.5 ka

The connection is that the J2 people, who brought Iran Neo to the Minoans, were the minority ancestry. They replaced most of the y, but most of the ancestry remained the Neolithic ancestry.

As for Stonehenge, I've seen you make this claim before, but it's by no means clear that's the case.

"Radiocarbon dating (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating) suggests that the first bluestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) were raised between 2400 and 2200 BC,[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-news.bbc.co.uk-2) although they may have been at the site as early as 3000 BC.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Guardian-3)[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Independent-4)[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-BBC_News-5)"

"A recent excavation has suggested that the Aubrey Holes may have originally been used to erect a bluestone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) circle.[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-26) If this were the case, it would advance the earliest known stone structure at the monument by some 500 years. A small outer bank beyond the ditch could also date to this period."

"Archaeological excavation has indicated that around 2600 BC, the builders abandoned timber in favour of stone and dug two concentric arrays of holes (the Q and R Holes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_and_R_Holes)) in the centre of the site. These stone sockets are only partly known (hence on present evidence are sometimes described as forming 'crescents'); however, they could be the remains of a double ring. Again, there is little firm dating evidence for this phase. The holes held up to 80 standing stones (shown blue on the plan), only 43 of which can be traced today. It is generally accepted that the bluestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) (some of which are made of dolerite (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolerite), an igneous rock), were transported by the builders from the Preseli Hills (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preseli_Hills), 150 miles (240 km) away in modern-day Pembrokeshire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembrokeshire) in Wales. Another theory is that they were brought much nearer to the site as glacial erratics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_erratics) by the Irish Sea Glacier (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Sea_Glacier)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-29) although there is no evidence of glacial deposition within southern central England.[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Antiquity-30) A 2019 publication announced that evidence of Megalithic quarrying had been found at quarries in Wales identified as a source of Stonehenge's bluestone, indicating that the bluestone was quarried by human agency and not transported by glacial action.[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-31)"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge

I doubt the newcomers were involved until at least Stonehenge 3 1, and probably not until Stonehenge 3 II, when there seems to be an indication that pillars were re-erected.

bicicleur
20-04-19, 23:01
The connection is that the J2 people, who brought Iran Neo to the Minoans, were the minority ancestry. They replaced most of the y, but most of the ancestry remained the Neolithic ancestry.
As for Stonehenge, I've seen you make this claim before, but it's by no means clear that's the case.
"Radiocarbon dating (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating) suggests that the first bluestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) were raised between 2400 and 2200 BC,[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-news.bbc.co.uk-2) although they may have been at the site as early as 3000 BC.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Guardian-3)[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Independent-4)[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-BBC_News-5)"

"A recent excavation has suggested that the Aubrey Holes may have originally been used to erect a bluestone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) circle.[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-26) If this were the case, it would advance the earliest known stone structure at the monument by some 500 years. A small outer bank beyond the ditch could also date to this period."
"Archaeological excavation has indicated that around 2600 BC, the builders abandoned timber in favour of stone and dug two concentric arrays of holes (the Q and R Holes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_and_R_Holes)) in the centre of the site. These stone sockets are only partly known (hence on present evidence are sometimes described as forming 'crescents'); however, they could be the remains of a double ring. Again, there is little firm dating evidence for this phase. The holes held up to 80 standing stones (shown blue on the plan), only 43 of which can be traced today. It is generally accepted that the bluestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone) (some of which are made of dolerite (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolerite), an igneous rock), were transported by the builders from the Preseli Hills (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preseli_Hills), 150 miles (240 km) away in modern-day Pembrokeshire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembrokeshire) in Wales. Another theory is that they were brought much nearer to the site as glacial erratics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_erratics) by the Irish Sea Glacier (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Sea_Glacier)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-29) although there is no evidence of glacial deposition within southern central England.[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-Antiquity-30) A 2019 publication announced that evidence of Megalithic quarrying had been found at quarries in Wales identified as a source of Stonehenge's bluestone, indicating that the bluestone was quarried by human agency and not transported by glacial action.[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#cite_note-31)"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge
I doubt the newcomers were involved until at least Stonehenge 3 1, and probably not until Stonehenge 3 II, when there seems to be an indication that pillars were re-erected.

even if the neolithic farmers erected some bluestones before, the final layout of the bluestones was made by the early British Bell Beakers
Stonehenge remained in use after the arrival of Bell Beaker people and Bell Beaker people were even burried there

Professor Geoffrey Wainwright, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and Timothy Darvill, of Bournemouth University, have suggested that Stonehenge was a place of healing—the primeval equivalent of Lourdes.[42] They argue that this accounts for the high number of burials in the area and for the evidence of trauma deformity in some of the graves. However, they do concede that the site was probably multifunctional and used for ancestor worship as well.[43] Isotope analysis indicates that some of the buried individuals were from other regions. A teenage boy buried approximately 1550 BC was raised near the Mediterranean Sea; a metal worker from 2300 BC dubbed the "Amesbury Archer" grew up near the alpine foothills of Germany; and the "Boscombe Bowmen" probably arrived from Wales or Brittany, France.[44]

so, I don't see a connection with a disk in Minoan Pailaikastro
what kind of disk is this? is there some link to more info?

as for the Minoans they were J2, not the original G2a, and they had 75 % EEF, probably because they took farmers wives, allthoug it is not clear whether this happened in Anatolia or in the Aegean
they arrived in the Helladic period (the same period Troy was founded) and brought bronze technology with them
before their arrival the farmers could hardly survive on the Aegean Islands, they were very few
these people brought a whole new way of life to the Aegean resulting in a big population growth and substantial longer life expectancy

Yetos
21-04-19, 00:19
the Aegean farmers are the Carded Ware people, who were in Corfu 8.4 ka and landed in eastern Iberia 7.6 ka, mainly G2a
farmers arrived in tbe British Isles ca 6.1 ka, they were I2a with EEF

Minoans arrived in the Aegean 5.2 ka, and they were J2
I don't see the connection

furthermore the British neolithic farmers made some earthen walls (henges) in Stonehenge, but they didn't put the stones
the stones were erected by the early Bell Beakers in the British Isles, 4.5 ka

The BlueStones were put around 2000
so the myth of Stonehead of unknown origin
dating tenths thousands is over

Yetos
21-04-19, 00:23
even if the neolithic farmers erected some bluestones before, the final layout of the bluestones was made by the early British Bell Beakers
Stonehenge remained in use after the arrival of Bell Beaker people and Bell Beaker people were even burried there

Professor Geoffrey Wainwright, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and Timothy Darvill, of Bournemouth University, have suggested that Stonehenge was a place of healing—the primeval equivalent of Lourdes.[42] They argue that this accounts for the high number of burials in the area and for the evidence of trauma deformity in some of the graves. However, they do concede that the site was probably multifunctional and used for ancestor worship as well.[43] Isotope analysis indicates that some of the buried individuals were from other regions. A teenage boy buried approximately 1550 BC was raised near the Mediterranean Sea; a metal worker from 2300 BC dubbed the "Amesbury Archer" grew up near the alpine foothills of Germany; and the "Boscombe Bowmen" probably arrived from Wales or Brittany, France.[44]

so, I don't see a connection with a disk in Minoan Pailaikastro
what kind of disk is this? is there some link to more info?

as for the Minoans they were J2, not the original G2a, and they had 75 % EEF, probably because they took farmers wives, allthoug it is not clear whether this happened in Anatolia or in the Aegean
they arrived in the Helladic period (the same period Troy was founded) and brought bronze technology with them
before their arrival the farmers could hardly survive on the Aegean Islands, they were very few
these people brought a whole new way of life to the Aegean resulting in a big population growth and substantial longer life expectancy

Is this enough?

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2lnvrYCIFis/XLoORspGDSI/AAAAAAAC5Kc/tqDV9pmIwnYez6Eds9KnMYYWT4kDZiAfQCLcBGAs/s640/%25CE%2595%25CE%25BB%25CE%25BB%25CE%25B7%25CE%25BD %25CE%25B9%25CE%25BA%25CE%25AE%2B%25CE%25B7%2B%25C E%25BF%25CE%25BD%25CE%25BF%25CE%25BC%25CE%25B1%25C F%2583%25CE%25AF%25CE%25B1%2B%25CF%2584%25CE%25BF% 25CF%2585%2B%25CE%25A3%25CF%2584%25CF%258C%25CE%25 BF%25CF%2585%25CE%25BD%25CF%2587%25CE%25B5%25CE%25 BD%25CF%2584%25CE%25B6.png


The Palaikastro Disk is the Early Creatan Diary Calendar
It is and evolution and based to a Summerian

The Disk and Stonehedge are just the same,
with just a difference in a hole or a mark in an inner circle,

The BlueStones are about 2400 to 1900 BC
1900 BC is also the Palaikastro Disk


https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Efstratios_Theodosiou/publication/258804596/figure/fig4/AS:[email protected]/h-The-analog-calculator-of-the-Palaikastro-die-with-the-eclipses-of-the-years-2010-to.png

That is the Palaikastro Disk


Now read this
... The circular temple he mentions has been identified with the famous Stonehenge by some researchers (Squire, 2003; Brodgman, 2005, pp. 163-173; Tsikritsis, et al., 2013). According to the ancient lore, Hercules, Theseus and even Perseus visited the place (Rendel Harris, 1925). ...


From here
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/h-The-analog-calculator-of-the-Palaikastro-die-with-the-eclipses-of-the-years-2010-to_fig4_258804596



The Palaikstro Disk and Stonehedge are almost the same
Both around 2500 BC to 1800 BC Era of the BlueStones.

Notice the Disk
and now Notice the Stonehadge from Above with the calculations.

http://www.unmuseum.org/stonediag.JPG


A 3D reconstruction of a stonehdge

http://www.stone-circles.org.uk/stone/3d/stonehenge/000_023.jpg



If you want the Calculations of Tsikritzis
I Have them in Greek,
the difference is a mistake almost not to be considered,
for example 365 days + 6 Hours or 365 days + 6 hours +3 min

The aboves are fact
what is Fogy-not certified is the mention that a searcher indetifies the syllabes Sto-na in Linear A,
if that is true then we might start thinking that early Creatans language is not as we consider it.

we wanted or Not,
Bluestone and Palaikastro Disk is the same

not by me
The bluestones at Stonehenge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge) were placed there during the third phase of construction at Stonehenge around 2300 BC



BTW
lately a lot of search is done about the Axes
https://itsallgreek.co.uk/image/cache/data/Minoan%20pots/Minoan%20bronzes%20etc/MM-012a-1-bronze-twin-labrys-800x600.jpg

They seem to a part mechanism, a tool to read the Disk and more,
It was a kind of a calculator, and not a war axe, neither a wood cut axe, neither a God's Symbol,



@Bicicleur
I hope this link can help you,
Most i found are in Greek
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/c-The-Palaikastro-plate-and-a-copy-of-it-as-it-was-photographed-at-the-Heraklion_fig1_258804596
https://www.academia.edu/35464665/The_Minoan_Eclipse_Calculator_and_the_Minoan_Cosmo logy_Model (https://www.academia.edu/35464665/The_Minoan_Eclipse_Calculator_and_the_Minoan_Cosmo logy_Model)


BTW
The Cycladic Aegean Civilization of Grotta is older than 3200 BC

http://media.getty.edu/museum/images/web/enlarge/01524301.jpg


http://www.getty.edu/museum/media/images/web/enlarge/01524501.jpg

Angela
21-04-19, 02:12
even if the neolithic farmers erected some bluestones before, the final layout of the bluestones was made by the early British Bell Beakers
Stonehenge remained in use after the arrival of Bell Beaker people and Bell Beaker people were even burried there

Professor Geoffrey Wainwright, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and Timothy Darvill, of Bournemouth University, have suggested that Stonehenge was a place of healing—the primeval equivalent of Lourdes.[42] They argue that this accounts for the high number of burials in the area and for the evidence of trauma deformity in some of the graves. However, they do concede that the site was probably multifunctional and used for ancestor worship as well.[43] Isotope analysis indicates that some of the buried individuals were from other regions. A teenage boy buried approximately 1550 BC was raised near the Mediterranean Sea; a metal worker from 2300 BC dubbed the "Amesbury Archer" grew up near the alpine foothills of Germany; and the "Boscombe Bowmen" probably arrived from Wales or Brittany, France.[44]

so, I don't see a connection with a disk in Minoan Pailaikastro
what kind of disk is this? is there some link to more info?

as for the Minoans they were J2, not the original G2a, and they had 75 % EEF, probably because they took farmers wives, allthoug it is not clear whether this happened in Anatolia or in the Aegean
they arrived in the Helladic period (the same period Troy was founded) and brought bronze technology with them
before their arrival the farmers could hardly survive on the Aegean Islands, they were very few
these people brought a whole new way of life to the Aegean resulting in a big population growth and substantial longer life expectancy

So what? It was their idea, their design, their knowledge which aligned it with the stars, their people buried under the posts making it holy. The "Beaker" people just continued it, after probably first tearing it down.

I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish. Why try to make it a Beaker or Celtic "thing" when it wasn't? This is as old as Gobekli Tepe. It has nothing to do with Beaker people. This is a reconstruction of the stone circles at Gobekli Tepe.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b6/03/b4/b603b4eaab459b1502f52140198b5d97.jpg

As for the Minoan Pailaikastro read Yetos' post.

Nor do I concur that the Anatolian farmers on Crete were some sort of primitive group, low in numbers, who contributed nothing to Cretan civilization, which seems to be what you're implying. Should they have been grateful to be invaded and have their men wiped out because they brought bronze? Should the people of the British Neolithic have felt the same way?

Yetos
21-04-19, 02:41
@Bicycleur

The Epipalaiolithic places in Aegean is mainly the Sesklo Dimini
They were G2 and probably I have them as ancestry,
The Kleitos G2 as indicator Does not exclude your G2 certain origin of Neolithic Britain settlers,
but this G2 is also in Hungary, around same time,

Now the other far old Aegean Civilization,
which we consider it far old is the Glotta-Pelos Cycladic
they were Neolithic, but they were great seafaring,
the found them in Varna necropolis and far more
The Grotta Pelos is about 3300 BC
and is called Cycladic civilization,

Cycladic and Minoan had a strange co-existance, as we see at Thera Island
Now as for poverty, merchant malls never get starved,
in fact we see many multi-candella pot, which means the had enough oil or fat to light their nights, since wood might be rare and precious at Aegean islands.

Maybe Minoans were J2,
but Sesklo-Dimini and Kleitos was G2 (as in Hungary?)
and we do not know about Cycladic people, any suggestion?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grotta-Pelos_culture


Cycladic could also called as children of the obsidian sea-merchants.
habitation marks are about 8000 BC
at very early they went to islands to mine, then they left to merchandise it,
before 4000 BC they settle permanent where water existed,
at 3300 BC they have their own culture,

G2ian
21-04-19, 05:28
Yaay another point for team G2a! :)

bicicleur
21-04-19, 12:42
So what? It was their idea, their design, their knowledge which aligned it with the stars, their people buried under the posts making it holy. The "Beaker" people just continued it, after probably first tearing it down.

I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish. Why try to make it a Beaker or Celtic "thing" when it wasn't? This is as old as Gobekli Tepe. It has nothing to do with Beaker people. This is a reconstruction of the stone circles at Gobekli Tepe.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b6/03/b4/b603b4eaab459b1502f52140198b5d97.jpg

As for the Minoan Pailaikastro read Yetos' post.

Nor do I concur that the Anatolian farmers on Crete were some sort of primitive group, low in numbers, who contributed nothing to Cretan civilization, which seems to be what you're implying. Should they have been grateful to be invaded and have their men wiped out because they brought bronze? Should the people of the British Neolithic have felt the same way?

Gobekli Tepe has been excavated partially, but afaik the alignments to the stars and winter or summer solstice are not confirmed.
Nor that they were farmers as was asumed from the start, but now it doesn't look like it.
Many similar constructions were erected in the area at that period with T shaped pilars.

Megalithic graves were indeed algined to winter or summer solstice, and that was befor BB people arrived.
No indication of destructions when BB people arrived, on the contrary for Stonehenge.

And check the Aegean neolithic before the Heladic period.
These farmers on the islands barely survived.
It was a big contrast to the Heladic period.

Pygmalion
21-04-19, 13:03
even if the neolithic farmers erected some bluestones before, the final layout of the bluestones was made by the early British Bell Beakers
Stonehenge remained in use after the arrival of Bell Beaker people and Bell Beaker people were even burried there

Professor Geoffrey Wainwright, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and Timothy Darvill, of Bournemouth University, have suggested that Stonehenge was a place of healing—the primeval equivalent of Lourdes.[42] They argue that this accounts for the high number of burials in the area and for the evidence of trauma deformity in some of the graves. However, they do concede that the site was probably multifunctional and used for ancestor worship as well.[43] Isotope analysis indicates that some of the buried individuals were from other regions. A teenage boy buried approximately 1550 BC was raised near the Mediterranean Sea; a metal worker from 2300 BC dubbed the "Amesbury Archer" grew up near the alpine foothills of Germany; and the "Boscombe Bowmen" probably arrived from Wales or Brittany, France.[44]

so, I don't see a connection with a disk in Minoan Pailaikastro
what kind of disk is this? is there some link to more info?

as for the Minoans they were J2, not the original G2a, and they had 75 % EEF, probably because they took farmers wives, allthoug it is not clear whether this happened in Anatolia or in the Aegean
they arrived in the Helladic period (the same period Troy was founded) and brought bronze technology with them
before their arrival the farmers could hardly survive on the Aegean Islands, they were very few
these people brought a whole new way of life to the Aegean resulting in a big population growth and substantial longer life expectancy



About Knossos: In the Early Neolithic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Neolithic), 6,000–5,000 BC, a village of 200–600 persons occupied most of the area of the palace and the slopes to the north and west. They lived in one- or two-room square houses of mud-brick walls set on socles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socle_(architecture)) of stone, either field stone or recycled stone artifacts. The inner walls were lined with mud-plaster. The roofs were flat, composed of mud over branches. The residents dug hearths at various locations in the center of the main room. This village had an unusual feature: one house under the West Court contained eight rooms and covered 50 m2 (540 sq ft). The walls were at right angles. The door was centered. Large stones were used for support under points of greater stress. The fact that distinct sleeping cubicles for individuals was not the custom suggests storage units of some sort.
The settlement of the Middle Neolithic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Neolithic), 5,000–4,000 BC, housed 500–1000 people in more substantial and presumably more family-private homes. Construction was the same, except the windows and doors were timbered, a fixed, raised hearth occupied the center of the main room, and pilasters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilaster) and other raised features (cabinets, beds) occupied the perimeter. Under the palace was the Great House, a 100 m2 (1,100 sq ft) area stone house divided into five rooms with meter-thick walls suggesting a second story was present. The presence of the house, which is unlikely to have been a private residence like the others, suggests a communal or public use; i.e., it may have been the predecessor of a palace. In the Late (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Neolithic) or Final Neolithic (two different but overlapping classification systems), 4,000–3,000 BC, the population increased dramatically.



So you're wrong, they didn't have any problem living in the Aegean and already built large settlements with complex features and already had a very well established trading network, just like the Western Neolithic Mediterraneans had as proven among many things by the distrubution of obsidian artifacts and other materials that were traded over for thousands of miles. There's no evidence migrations from the East brought civilization to Crete all of a sudden as if some superior civilization invaded Crete importing civilization, it seems like a gradual process that was accelerated thanks to the trade going on between Crete, Egypt and the Levant.
The reason why the Minoan civilization flourished is the location of Crete, placed between East and West, and one or two days away from Ancient Egypt by ship. The Aegean sea facilitates the development of nautical technology because of its morphology which makes sea travel a necessity for its inhabitants.
The acculturation phenomenon you postuled for the Minoans might apply to the Greek colonization of Italy for example, where colonists founded several planned cities in a short period of time, bringing a completely different way of life. What happened to Crete and the Aegean was constant gene flow from the East due to the location of the Aegean which faces Anatolia to the East.

Angela
21-04-19, 14:42
Only some scholars believe that the construction at Gobekli Tepi.

" If indeed the site was built by hunter-gatherers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer) as some researchers believe then it would mean that the ability to erect monumental complexes was within the capacities of these sorts of groups, which would overturn previous assumptions. Some researchers believe that the construction of Göbekli Tepe may have contributed to the later development of urban civilization, or, as excavator Klaus Schmidt put it, "First came the temple, then the city.""

Regardless, the people who built it were essentially the same people genetically as the Neolithic farmers who succeeded them in the same area, and the traditions were passed on through the centuries. We see echoes in the Megalithic tombs the farmers built in Europe, and eventually at Stonehedge. This is all indisputable.

We may not have proof positive that it was the newcomers who tore down the pillars at Stonehedge, but we can be absolutely certain that it was they who destroyed the way of life and culture which had given birth to it and sustained it. The pillars were indeed down.

I don't deny they eventually adapted it as a sacred place. However, Stonehenge did not stem from "Beaker" culture. As I said above, the "idea", the ritual significance, the design, the bluestone pillars, the alignment with the stars, is something that was done by the Neolithic farmers of Britain.

Sorry, but the Beakers were johnny come latelies, and whatever culture they had they borrowed from farming communities, as is true of all the steppe groups. Well, other than the horse and perhaps wheeled carts, although the last is not even sure.

bicicleur
21-04-19, 18:44
About Knossos: In the Early Neolithic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Neolithic), 6,000–5,000 BC, a village of 200–600 persons occupied most of the area of the palace and the slopes to the north and west. They lived in one- or two-room square houses of mud-brick walls set on socles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socle_(architecture)) of stone, either field stone or recycled stone artifacts. The inner walls were lined with mud-plaster. The roofs were flat, composed of mud over branches. The residents dug hearths at various locations in the center of the main room. This village had an unusual feature: one house under the West Court contained eight rooms and covered 50 m2 (540 sq ft). The walls were at right angles. The door was centered. Large stones were used for support under points of greater stress. The fact that distinct sleeping cubicles for individuals was not the custom suggests storage units of some sort.
The settlement of the Middle Neolithic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Neolithic), 5,000–4,000 BC, housed 500–1000 people in more substantial and presumably more family-private homes. Construction was the same, except the windows and doors were timbered, a fixed, raised hearth occupied the center of the main room, and pilasters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilaster) and other raised features (cabinets, beds) occupied the perimeter. Under the palace was the Great House, a 100 m2 (1,100 sq ft) area stone house divided into five rooms with meter-thick walls suggesting a second story was present. The presence of the house, which is unlikely to have been a private residence like the others, suggests a communal or public use; i.e., it may have been the predecessor of a palace. In the Late (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Neolithic) or Final Neolithic (two different but overlapping classification systems), 4,000–3,000 BC, the population increased dramatically.



So you're wrong, they didn't have any problem living in the Aegean and already built large settlements with complex features and already had a very well established trading network, just like the Western Neolithic Mediterraneans had as proven among many things by the distrubution of obsidian artifacts and other materials that were traded over for thousands of miles. There's no evidence migrations from the East brought civilization to Crete all of a sudden as if some superior civilization invaded Crete importing civilization, it seems like a gradual process that was accelerated thanks to the trade going on between Crete, Egypt and the Levant.
The reason why the Minoan civilization flourished is the location of Crete, placed between East and West, and one or two days away from Ancient Egypt by ship. The Aegean sea facilitates the development of nautical technology because of its morphology which makes sea travel a necessity for its inhabitants.
The acculturation phenomenon you postuled for the Minoans might apply to the Greek colonization of Italy for example, where colonists founded several planned cities in a short period of time, bringing a completely different way of life. What happened to Crete and the Aegean was constant gene flow from the East due to the location of the Aegean which faces Anatolia to the East.



the Heladic period began in the Cycladic islands, where farmers barely survived before people from Anatolia arrived
that was ca 5.2 ka
those new people initiated a trading network in the Aegean

the same in the Troas area, it was practically uninhabited when new people arrived and founded Kumtepe
Kumtepe preceded Troy

bicicleur
21-04-19, 18:57
Only some scholars believe that the construction at Gobekli Tepi.
" If indeed the site was built by hunter-gatherers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer) as some researchers believe then it would mean that the ability to erect monumental complexes was within the capacities of these sorts of groups, which would overturn previous assumptions. Some researchers believe that the construction of Göbekli Tepe may have contributed to the later development of urban civilization, or, as excavator Klaus Schmidt put it, "First came the temple, then the city.""
Regardless, the people who built it were essentially the same people genetically as the Neolithic farmers who succeeded them in the same area, and the traditions were passed on through the centuries. We see echoes in the Megalithic tombs the farmers built in Europe, and eventually at Stonehedge. This is all indisputable.
We may not have proof positive that it was the newcomers who tore down the pillars at Stonehedge, but we can be absolutely certain that it was they who destroyed the way of life and culture which had given birth to it and sustained it. The pillars were indeed down.
I don't deny they eventually adapted it as a sacred place. However, Stonehenge did not stem from "Beaker" culture. As I said above, the "idea", the ritual significance, the design, the bluestone pillars, the alignment with the stars, is something that was done by the Neolithic farmers of Britain.
Sorry, but the Beakers were johnny come latelies, and whatever culture they had they borrowed from farming communities, as is true of all the steppe groups. Well, other than the horse and perhaps wheeled carts, although the last is not even sure.

Gobkli Tepe was built 80 km east of the Upper Euphrates and in an area where wild einkorn was found.
Immeadiately this was seen as proof of being built by early farmers.
But this speculation is not confirmed by any proof to confirm this.
It seems that some people think only the early farmers were capable of such things.
What a prejudice!

As for Stonehenge, it was a sacred site for the neolithic farmers, of course, I told this all along.
But it was not destroyed by BB people, on the contrary, they extended and maintained the site for millenia.
As a matter of facts, the remnants that are still visible today are built by BB people.

And I still don't see any connection between the constructions of megalithic West-European farmers and Gobekli Tepe or Minoan constructions.
They didnt build any megaliths between Anotolia and the Atlantic before megalithic constructions emerged.
The first megalithic constructions were built in areas that were neither carded ware, nor LBK, there were no traces of agriculture.
The Y-DNA points in the direction of HG mixing with farmers daughters.
The Anatolian farmers came to Europe without oxens or ploughs.
I wouldn't be surprised if these were invented by the European megalithic farmers.
I wonder how else they could have made these constructions.
Of course this is all speculation, I admit that.
Appearantly Gobekli Tepe could be erected without oxens.
Your guess is as good as mine.
I wish you were less demeaning about BB folks and less certain of all the acomplishments made by the 8.5 ka Anatolian farmers.
They were also a product of their time and place, and they were also HG who learned about farming and herding and dairy production from others before their lands became less fertile and lush.

Pygmalion
21-04-19, 19:12
the Heladic period began in the Cycladic islands, where farmers barely survived before people from Anatolia arrived
that was ca 5.2 ka
those new people initiated a trading network in the Aegean

the same in the Troas area, it was practically uninhabited when new people arrived and founded Kumtepe
Kumtepe preceded Troy
There was already a trade network in the Aegean, nearly all the obsidian the Neolithic farmers in the Aegean used came from one spot: the island of Melos.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Agathe_Reingruber/publication/273356054/figure/fig10/AS:[email protected]/Distribution-of-obsidian-from-the-island-of-Melos-in-the-Neolithic.png

And there were already substantial settlements, such as Knossos which housed more than 1000 people in the fifth millennium BC and which was made up of large enough houses and even a small palace like structure.

bicicleur
21-04-19, 19:20
There was already a trade network in the Aegean, nearly all the obsidian the Neolithic farmers in the Aegean used came from one spot: the island of Melos.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Agathe_Reingruber/publication/273356054/figure/fig10/AS:[email protected]/Distribution-of-obsidian-from-the-island-of-Melos-in-the-Neolithic.png
And there were already substantial settlements, such as Knossos which housed more than 1000 people in the fifth millennium BC and which was made up of large enough houses and even a small palace like structure.
yes, HG already came to collect obsidian from Melos since 15 ka
but since when was Melos permanently settled?
neither HG nor early farmers could survive and make a decent living on these small islands in the Aegean
the Heladic newcomers did and florished

Pygmalion
21-04-19, 19:23
The Anatolian farmers came to Europe without oxens or ploughs.
I wouldn't be surprised if these were invented by the European megalithic farmers.

Oxen were already used by Neolithic farmers in Europe, including the Mediterranean islands, since the sixth millennium bc, and we know that their genome originated in the Near East.

berun
21-04-19, 19:43
BB people used to have sacred henges directed to solstices or Syrius, but the other henges aren't so spectacular as the British. This one is linked to Pyrenean local type of BB pots:
https://sortidesambgracia.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/cromlec-mas-baletaiii.jpg
by the way if languages that could be linked to BB aren't IE, their religious practices don't remind me anything IE.

markod
21-04-19, 20:33
BB people used to have sacred henges directed to solstices or Syrius, but the other henges aren't so spectacular as the British. This one is linked to Pyrenean local type of BB pots.

by the way if languages that could be linked to BB aren't IE, their religious practices don't remind me anything IE.

Was it ever confirmed that the henges have anything to do with solstices? I read that similar cultic structures already existed in Lepenski Vir.

Agreed that this doesn't resemble Indo-European religion.

Yetos
21-04-19, 23:22
yes, HG already came to collect obsidian from Melos since 15 ka
but since when was Melos permanently settled?
neither HG nor early farmers could survive and make a decent living on these small islands in the Aegean
the Heladic newcomers did and florished

the Cyclades marks of habitation is about 9000 BC but no mark of Dwelling
the Cyclades Osidian partially dwelling is about 6-5000 BC
they went, they gather, they leave to merchandise,
After 5000 BC we have permanent dwelling,
in aslands with fresh water,
The Cycladic civilization is the first in Europe organised fully urban
before Minoan,
what I did not found is their Genes,
But I am certain they were closer to Sesklo,

As for feeding and hunger?
I doupt,
They maybe get thirsty, but not food,
onlυ το eat urchins, is enough,

bicicleur
21-04-19, 23:26
Oxen were already used by Neolithic farmers in Europe, including the Mediterranean islands, since the sixth millennium bc, and we know that their genome originated in the Near East.

could you be more specific about the when and where?

bicicleur
21-04-19, 23:39
the Cyclades marks of habitation is about 9000 BC but no mark of Dwelling
the Cyclades Osidian partially dwelling is about 6-5000 BC
they went, they gather, they leave to merchandise,
After 5000 BC we have permanent dwelling,
in aslands with fresh water,
The Cycladic civilization is the first in Europe organised fully urban
before Minoan,
what I did not found is their Genes,
But I am certain they were closer to Sesklo,
As for feeding and hunger?
I doupt,
They maybe get thirsty, but not food,
onlυ το eat urchins, is enough,
first permanent settlements in the Cyclades were 5th mill. BC, that is correct
but population and life expectancy started to grow during Heladic period
later, when larger ships were built, Crete came in to dominate the trade in the Aegean

when do you think J2 arrived in the Aegean?
and the Sesklo people were they G2a?

the majority of Minoans and Myceneans seem to have been J2, as were the bronze age Levantines

Yetos
21-04-19, 23:44
ok

I am posting 2 videos I found in yiutube

Bicicleur it is obvious, same results from so many searchers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k9Piwbg6Q4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZBJv1ICn-g

What Tsikritzis found with comparison with Palaikastro Disk
That Stonedge could also predict the Eclipse of moon, either part, either full,

So the theory that Stonehedge were build upon a mathematical system that could measure the Sun and moon seasons months and year is obvious,
but today we know that could also predict eclipse of moon etc
and the same Geometrical Mathematical model used also in Aegean, in a flat disk,

@berun

I also see 2 circles in your photo,
could one measure the moon, and the other the sun?
has anybody search it?


I Think measuring the stonehedge behavour, in a computer 3d model,
we found their abillities,

BTW
Notice in one of the video,
that a stone was scratch by humans to give correct results through time,
THEY SCRATCH A HUGE ROCK, to have accuracy on Equinox.

I do not think is a coinsidence, so stohedges to have such abilities in a so early 'counting' society
rather they build them such.

They could measure both and Solar and Moon year and months
and predict eclipses for a period of time.

and not only,
did you watch the water channels and deposit outside?
could that be a good irrigation system?
which gather the water, and spread it, according the era?

If that is so
Then it is obvious that they were by Farmers, who knew irrigation !!!!

IF STONEHDGE WERE HEALING PLACES
THEN WHY THERE IS WATER DEPOSITS AND CHANNELS OUTSIDE?

https://www.reader.gr/sites/default/files/styles/reader_l/public/stonehenge-6_0.jpg?itok=gdysGqhJ


IT IS SIMPLE.

STONEHEDGES COULD ONLY MEASURE SUN AND MOON, COULD NOT PREDICT ECLIPSES
BUT THEY WERE ALSO A COMPUTING SYSTEM FOR IRRIGATION.
THEY WHEN TO GATHER THE WATER FROM FIELDS, AND WHEN TO LEAD WATER TO FIELDS

https://www.arup.com/-/media/arup/images/projects/a/a303-stonehenge/2000x1125-final-2pt-copyright-a303--highways-england-hero-2.jpg?h=1125&la=en&w=2000&hash=C51E7DCC9AA96B6BC338E014FA95385A6403416E


IRRIGATION SYSTEMS COULD NOT BE BUILD BY HUNTERS GATHERERES,
ONLY BY SPECIALIZED FARMING SOICIETIES

bicicleur
21-04-19, 23:48
Was it ever confirmed that the henges have anything to do with solstices? I read that similar cultic structures already existed in Lepenski Vir.

Agreed that this doesn't resemble Indo-European religion.

the spectacular passage grave of Newgrange, Ireland seems to be oriented to solstices
but first henges and megaliths seem to have been simply landmarks

Yetos
22-04-19, 00:23
Notice the bellow

https://stonehengenews.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/stonehenge-avenue.jpg?w=270&h=446

The stona is connected with irrigation water channels, which pass infront, and around it,
I think stona work as a programed computing system to irrigate the land is obvious, the stona is the algorythm when to open and when to close water.
they dry the land for the era they want, and they flourish water the era they want,
and they knew when to do it, by measuring the sun and moon callendar using the hedge circles,

No am not an archaiologist,
I simply have a diploma in architecture and civil enginnering, and a master in Hydraulics and enviroment techiques,
for me it is ovious that they knew open flux irrigation system, milleniums before Bernouli publish his equations and Dubois measure the loses


what I can not understand is why they use 3 channels
while in the Palaikastro disk
they have 4

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Efstratios_Theodosiou/publication/258804596/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/c-The-Palaikastro-plate-and-a-copy-of-it-as-it-was-photographed-at-the-Heraklion.png

Pygmalion
22-04-19, 01:18
could you be more specific about the when and where?



In many regions, in Italy for example oxen were present since the Early Neolithic:

South and Central Italy: Oxen are attested in numerous sites since the time of the Impressed ware culture, so since the Seventh-Sixth Millennium bc

Ripa Bianca (Ancona): "...Among the other tools, all chipped from local flint, are abrupt retouch truncations, straight awls, retouched blades and a few geometrics among which are some trapezes obtained with the microburin technique. Sickle blades with oblique “sickle gloss” are also recorded. Among the other stone materials are obsidian bladelets, greenstone axes and adzes, lower and upper querns. Particularly abundant is the bone industry that includes long points, perforators, spatulae (sometimes obtained from red deer antler), one handle and one “knife” obtained from cattle/deer rib. Three radiocarbon dates have been obtained from charcoal. They are: 6265±85 BP (R-599), 6210±75 BP (R-598A), and 6140±70 BP (R-598) (ALESSIO et al., 1970: 602). This indicates that the site flourished during the last two-three centuries of the seventh millennium BP. he meat diet of the inhabitants was basically supplied by caprines that represent the 64% of the bones. Pig was far less important and cattle represented only 6% of the total assemblage. Hunting activities seem to be quite irrelevant, indicated by a very small amount of deer bones. Of interest is the recovery of a few charred, wild apple"

"The best data come from the Apulian and central Italian Adriatic sites. In examining the faunal remains from seven Impressed Ware sites of Apulia, BÖKÖNYI (1991: 32) points out the predominance of domestic species - mainly sheep and goats, followed by cattle and pig. A rather different situation is known from the Marche in eastcentral Italy. The bone remains come from the two settlements of Maddalena di Muccia and Ripabianca di Monterado, which show quite a different location and chronology. The fauna from Maddalena di Muccia an open-air site located in the hilly countryside of the interior, is composed of pig (50%), red deer (25%), caprines (15%) and cattle (8%)"

Rendina Di Melfi (Basilicata), since the sixth millennium bc: "The archaeozoological analysis of the large faunal assemblage collected in the Early Neolithic site of Rendina di Melfi (6th -mid 5th mill. BC) has been supported by the DNA analysis of sheep (Ovis aries) and cattle (Bos taurus/primigenius) "



Liguria: Arende Candide (4900-4700 bc)


Sardinia: Oxen are attested in numerous sites such as Filiestru cave or Su Coloru since the Early Neolithic and dated to the late sixth Millennium bc. By the Middle Neolithic, so by the first half of the fifth millennium bc, bull bones are predominant over sheep bones in some sites, such as Su Coluru where cattle bones amount to the 53%: "...While sheep and pigs have a similar percentage in two phases with a numerical predominance of the first compared to the latter, cattle, already represented in a good percentage in the Early Neolithic (20%), show a significant increase in the Middle Neolithicwhere the number of fragments (53%)"

berun
22-04-19, 08:27
Was it ever confirmed that the henges have anything to do with solstices? I read that similar cultic structures already existed in Lepenski Vir.

Agreed that this doesn't resemble Indo-European religion.

Mas Baleta is arranged as the first new year light will beat the central menhir (21 or 22 december as for BB).

halfalp
22-04-19, 17:45
I think the sole mistake to take about Stonehenge between the Neolithic / Bell Beaker transition, is that ; the newcomers didn't know the purpose or what Stonehenge was about. Sort of Barbarians who would destroyed the previous structure without reasoning, but history proves us that a lot of newcomers in a certain area could embrace local new ideas. Such as Germans becoming Christians, or Turks and Mongols becoming Muslims or Buddhists.

Problably that Bell Beakers learned from locals in the early BB period what it was about, and perpetuated it for ever, at least until Christianity. Even Roman-era Celts could still perpetuate this without us knowing it apart of clear archeological proofs.

halfalp
22-04-19, 17:50
I would also be cautious to the ability of modern scientists to project modern knowledges into prehistoric or ancient artifacts. Those geometric calculus in the video posted by Yetos only reflect the researcher projection and not what ancient humans did or may did believe. Exactly the same things exists about Egyptians Pyramids, Nazca Symbols... That should be pretty obvious btw. Everything will be an harsh coincidence if you try hard enough.

markod
22-04-19, 18:00
I would also be cautious to the ability of modern scientists to project modern knowledges into prehistoric or ancient artifacts. Those geometric calculus in the video posted by Yetos only reflect the researcher projection and not what ancient humans did or may did believe. Exactly the same things exists about Egyptians Pyramids, Nazca Symbols... That should be pretty obvious btw. Everything will be an harsh coincidence if you try hard enough.

Out of 36 randomly aligned buildings 1 will be at roughly the right angle to support the existence of solar cults :grin:

Brutus
22-04-19, 18:18
Wasn't this already clear by the overwhelming majority of R-M269 (67%) in Britain while the paleolithic lineage I occurred at a much lower frequency (approx. 23%)?

halfalp
22-04-19, 19:19
Wasn't this already clear by the overwhelming majority of R-M269 (67%) in Britain while the paleolithic lineage I occurred at a much lower frequency (approx. 23%)?

That's not so simple because R1b is still a paleolithic european lineage too, we might even found mesolithic britain surprises one day. We obviously have deduced before 2018 that british Bell Beakers would turned out R1b, but in science there is no place for deduction i guess.

halfalp
22-04-19, 19:22
Out of 36 randomly aligned buildings 1 will be at roughly the right angle to support the existence of solar cults :grin:

Yeah, i dont doubt Neolithic peoples were very in advance in some scientific realities.

But that's like some modern scientific that makes universal links between ancient constructions and certain parrallels and latitudes... If you want your coincidence, you will found it. Gobleki Tepe, Stonehenge, Sintashta... Every prehistoric structured structure that scientific founds needs to have a special and monumental symbolic. But who really knows about those?

bicicleur
22-04-19, 22:44
Yeah, i dont doubt Neolithic peoples were very in advance in some scientific realities.
But that's like some modern scientific that makes universal links between ancient constructions and certain parrallels and latitudes... If you want your coincidence, you will found it. Gobleki Tepe, Stonehenge, Sintashta... Every prehistoric structured structure that scientific founds needs to have a special and monumental symbolic. But who really knows about those?
indeed ..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabta_Playa
Religious ties to ancient Egypt
By the 6th millennium BCE, evidence of a prehistoric religion or cult appears, with a number of sacrificed cattle buried in stone-roofed chambers lined with clay.[2] It has been suggested that the associated cattle cult indicated in Nabta Playa marks an early evolution of Ancient Egypt's Hathor cult. For example, Hathor was worshipped as a nighttime protector in desert regions (see Serabit el-Khadim). To directly quote professors Wendorf and Schild:[2]
... there are many aspects of political and ceremonial life in prehistoric Egypt and the Old Kingdom that reflects a strong impact from Saharan cattle pastoralists ...
Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of what Wendorf described as perhaps "the oldest known sculpture in Egypt.[2]
Astronomical observation
Nabta Playa "calendar circle", reconstructed at Aswan Nubia museum
By the 5th millennium BCE these peoples had fashioned what may be among the world's earliest known archeoastronomical devices (roughly contemporary to the Goseck circle in Germany and the Mnajdra megalithic temple complex in Malta). These include alignments of stones that may have indicated the rising of certain stars and a "calendar circle" that indicates the approximate direction of summer solstice sunrise.[6] "Calendar circle" may be a misnomer as the spaces between the pairs of stones in the gates are a bit too wide, and the distances between the gates are too short for accurate calendar measurements."[4] An inventory of Egyptian archaeoastronomical sites for the UNESCO World Heritage Convention evaluated Nabta Playa as having "hypothetical solar and stellar alignments."[7]
Claims for early alignments and star maps
Astrophysicist Thomas G. Brophy suggests the hypothesis that the southerly line of three stones inside the Calendar Circle represented the three stars of Orion’s Belt and the other three stones inside the calendar circle represented the shoulders and head stars of Orion as they appeared in the sky. These correspondences were for two dates – circa 4800 BCE and at precessional opposition – representing how the sky "moves" long term. Brophy proposes that the circle was constructed and used circa the later date, and the dual date representation was a conceptual representation of the motion of the sky over a precession cycle.
Near the Calendar Circle, which is made of smaller stones, there are alignments of large megalithic stones. The southerly lines of these megaliths, Brophy shows, aligned to the same stars as represented in the Calendar Circle, all at the same epoch, circa 6270 BCE. The Calendar Circle correlation with Orion's belt occurred between 6400 BCE and 4900 BCE, matching the radio-carbon dating of campfires around the circle.[3]
Recent research
A 2007 article by a team of University of Colorado archaeoastronomers and archaeologists (three members had been involved in the original discovery of the site and its astronomical alignment)[8] has responded to the work of Brophy and Rosen, in particular their claims for an alignment with Sirius in 6088 and other alignments which they dated to 6270, saying that these dates were about 1,500 years earlier than the estimated dates. The Sirius alignment in question was originally proposed by Wendorf and Malville,[4] for one of the most prominent alignments of megaliths labelled the "C-line", which they said aligned to the rising of Sirius circa 4820 BCE. Brophy and Rosen showed in 2005 that megalith orientations and star positions reported by Wendorf and Malville were in error, noting that "Given these corrected data, we see that Sirius actually aligned with the C-line circa 6000 BCE. We estimate that 6088 BCE Sirius had a declination of -36.51 degrees, for a rising azimuth exactly on the C-line average".[3] Malville acknowledged the corrections made by Brophy and Rosen, but concluded the C-line of megaliths "may not represent an original set of aligned stele; we refrain from interpreting that alignment."[9]
They also criticised suggestions made by Brophy in his book The Origin Map that there was a representation of the Milky Way as it was in 17,500 BCE and maps of Orion at 16,500 BCE, saying "These extremely early dates as well as the proposition that the nomads had contact with extraterrestrial life are inconsistent with the archaeological record. Inference in archaeoastronomy must always be guided and informed by archaeology, especially when substantial field work has been performed in the region.[9]
They propose that the area was first used as what they call a 'regional ceremonial centre' around 6100 BCE to 5600 BCE with people coming from various locations to gather on the dunes surrounding the playa where there is archaeological evidence for gatherings which involved large numbers of cattle bones, as cattle were normally only killed on important occasions. Around 5500 BCE a new, more organised group began to use the site, burying cattle in clay-lined chambers and building other tumuli. Around 4800 BCE a stone circle was constructed, with narrow slabs approximately aligned with the summer solstice, near the beginning of the rainy season.
More complex structures followed during a megalith period the researchers dated to between about 4500 BCE to 3600 BCE. Using their original measurements and measurements by satellite and GPS measurements by Brophy and Rosen they confirmed possible alignments with Sirius, Arcturus, Alpha Centauri and the Belt of Orion. They suggest that there are three pieces of evidence suggesting astronomical observations by the herdsmen using the site, which may have functioned as a necropolis. "The repetitive orientation of megaliths, stele, human burials and cattle burials reveals a very early symbolic connection to the north." Secondly, there is the orientation of the cromlech mentioned above. The third piece of evidence is the fifth millennium alignments of stele to bright stars.[9]
They conclude their report by writing that "The symbolism embedded in the archaeological record of Nabta Playa in the Fifth Millennium BCE is very basic, focussed on issues of major practical importance to the nomads: cattle, water, death, earth, sun and stars."[9]
10951

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10951

Yetos
23-04-19, 01:07
Geometry is more more simple than today maths, and algebra,

Neolithic people make the easiest think, from a center they notice and place marks, in equal range,
and then you have the circle, the most simple geometric design,

Later at Magna Grecia Italy, at Syracuses Archimedes designed the rolling center circle,
the Antikythera mechanism, which gives a shape simmilar to eclipse,

much later the Arabs advance maths to Algebra,

After the crusades all these went to West Europe, and they advance the high maths we know today,
Including the Ellipse.

then after 1940's we had the computers, and new maths of aproximety were designed. (finite element maths)

but God always designs (areas and shapes, Goemetrise if can say such), Θεος αει γεωμετρει,

and the question is why to count the time?
what was the need?

It is simple,
time is money,
and in case of stonehedge, means production of farming, irrigation.

berun
23-04-19, 07:31
some casual happenings

https://www.gnomonica.cat/index.php/gnomonica/dossiers-novella/14-noticies/241-equinocci-als-dolmens-d-antequera-malaga

http://blogs.descobrir.cat/pedresvistes/2014/01/07/el-solstici-dhivern-al-dolmen-de-llanera-el-newgrange-catala/

jose luis
07-02-20, 20:15
More on this subject:
https://portlandpress.com/biochemist/article/42/1/30/221979

Angela
07-02-20, 20:51
Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Jose, but to say I'm not impressed by this archaeologist's reasoning is a vast understatement.

His "proof" for doubting there was a whole scale migration which "replaced" the prior Neolithic inhabitants is that a good deal of the "Neolithic" culture which preceded the Beakers was retained.

He doesn't seem to have delved deeply enough into the material to have read that it's unlikely that they just killed all the men outright in the very beginning. All you would need to do for the prior y lines to disappear is to kill some of the men and enslave the rest, removing or severely limiting their ability to reproduce. Then the women would be divided among the invaders. The fact that they brought some of their own women with them has never stopped this kind of behavior before.

It's the last gasp of archaeologists who spent the decades since the second world war denying invasion and replacement because they had seen the horrors of it and didn't want it to be true of the past/and or didn't want to make it seem "normal".

That such a minor piece was picked up by and referenced in the "Communist State of Portland" is not at all a surprise. They don't want to raise any alarms about the possible effects of mass migration when they are advocating that the U.S. throw open its borders.

MOESAN
08-02-20, 19:31
Always the same :
supporters of « totalitarist » thesis : black or white.
- Were the first BB’s the same as the northern Rhinan BB’s come in the Isles ?
Not by force, but we can be sure that BB’s pots appeared in Britain along with new people, proved photypically and genetically -
- Is the « BB’s genetic signature » supposed to be still dominant in Britain the result of ONLY the first well identified BB’s incursions ?
I ‘m not sure : I suppose that other people with a rather close auDNA and Y haplo’s, the Celts of more than a wave, colonized (rather than « invaded ») the Isles at IA, even possibly before at BA - or in this very case, N-W IE speaking pops very close to later Celts - just with a bit more Western Neolithic auDNA, picked on their way to Britain and not by force a result of ancient Britain Neolithic people, spite I’m almost sure some pre-BB’s Britain Neolithic auDNA has been passed too. ATW the difference between all these Neolithic (+litlle WHG) inputs were tiny, making it difficult to distinguish acutely between them.
So, no complete disparition of ancient Britain Neolithic people (they were discarded for a lot of them and pushed in harsh lands, otherwise surely a lot of their females taken by BB’s males), and no reduction of today British people to a BB’s story without important other moves.
What I see is that bias is still common enough among scientists in Human Sciences, spite they are less visible and less strong than among certain persons of the fora and blog community...
It seems that the old « pots, no men » theory has still its supporters !


* We could suppose that the first I-E speakers waves contained less West-Neolithic auDNA than the subsequent ones.


I don’t know if Davidski has made PCA or other things about his diverse BB’s and his supposed Celts or Celts proxi’s ??? It could say us something, could it not ? Or I forgot.

bicicleur
09-02-20, 14:57
Always the same :
supporters of « totalitarist » thesis : black or white.
- Were the first BB’s the same as the northern Rhinan BB’s come in the Isles ?
Not by force, but we can be sure that BB’s pots appeared in Britain along with new people, proved photypically and genetically -
- Is the « BB’s genetic signature » supposed to be still dominant in Britain the result of ONLY the first well identified BB’s incursions ?
I ‘m not sure : I suppose that other people with a rather close auDNA and Y haplo’s, the Celts of more than a wave, colonized (rather than « invaded ») the Isles at IA, even possibly before at BA - or in this very case, N-W IE speaking pops very close to later Celts - just with a bit more Western Neolithic auDNA, picked on their way to Britain and not by force a result of ancient Britain Neolithic people, spite I’m almost sure some pre-BB’s Britain Neolithic auDNA has been passed too. ATW the difference between all these Neolithic (+litlle WHG) inputs were tiny, making it difficult to distinguish acutely between them.
So, no complete disparition of ancient Britain Neolithic people (they were discarded for a lot of them and pushed in harsh lands, otherwise surely a lot of their females taken by BB’s males), and no reduction of today British people to a BB’s story without important other moves.
What I see is that bias is still common enough among scientists in Human Sciences, spite they are less visible and less strong than among certain persons of the fora and blog community...
It seems that the old « pots, no men » theory has still its supporters !


* We could suppose that the first I-E speakers waves contained less West-Neolithic auDNA than the subsequent ones.


I don’t know if Davidski has made PCA or other things about his diverse BB’s and his supposed Celts or Celts proxi’s ??? It could say us something, could it not ? Or I forgot.

the first BB arrived ca 4,5 ka
we know of later IA Hallstatt and Belgian Gauls also entered the British Isles
but the Y-DNA of the first arrivals ca 4.5 ka has been identified as R1b-L21 which was just born at that time
and the Irish still have 80 % of this same R1b-L21
for Hallstatt and Gauls, we'd rather expect R1b-U152

MOESAN
20-02-20, 19:16
the first BB arrived ca 4,5 ka
we know of later IA Hallstatt and Belgian Gauls also entered the British Isles
but the Y-DNA of the first arrivals ca 4.5 ka has been identified as R1b-L21 which was just born at that time
and the Irish still have 80 % of this same R1b-L21
for Hallstatt and Gauls, we'd rather expect R1b-U152

I don't disagree.
BB's on the continent had already Y-R1b-U152 if I don't mistake. We can be almost sure that R1b-L21, BB's themselves and surely close enough cousins (on the male lineages), had kept their claws on the N-W Gaul. All of them have formed kind of a continuum since BB(s ages, I think. The Celtic language is IMO a local (E-France, Alps) evolution (specialisation) of a W-IE language already present at BA and even already among northern BB's. Celts had the strong side at some time and their new version of language was passed to precedent people of same stock for a big part.
I imagnine Celtization of the Isles was for a part an acculturation, plus partial colonisation, both processes intermingled in diverse proportions according to places. but R1b L21 is to be studied in depth because I think lot of NW FRance (even in Brittany for a part) L21 are not come from the Isles but are the remnant of the L21 stayed on the continent.
some tribes names of Ireland seem Gauls or Belgae names, or at least Brittonic and not Gaelic names.