Could R1b have moved from the Black Sea to Portugal to found the Beaker Culture ?

[Taranis]

And aslong as I'm making an ars of myself,lol, with this pronunciacion hypothesis, here is some more. I don't know Basque and not much Spanish either, so I can judge these languages by sounds and melody only. When I heard Basque for first time I though they were speaking Spanish. I can easily distinguish Portuguese from Spanish though they are very related, but I have problem doing the same with Basque and Spanish, though they are completely unrelated. Why is that?
I think Celtic in large scale was imposed on non Celtic speaking Iberians, Aquitanians, who took vocabulary and grammar, but retain their native pronunciation. Pronunciation is still similar to original Iberian language therefore to Basque too.

Well, one problem really is that the situation as it was just before the Romans conquered the Iberian penninsula is pretty unclear, in particular for the west. For instance, we know of the Lusitanians in the west of Iberia, who did not (in my opinion, anyways) speak a Celtic language, and many place names in otherwise "nominally" Celtic areas in the West of Iberia sport names that are compatible with Lusitanian, but not with Celtic. My opinion is that the Celts may indeed have not been the first Indo-European inhabitants of Iberia.

 

[LeBrok]

Widespread bilingualism and cultural homogeneity, in my opinion.

Definitely some influence, I can't deny. I've never heard an old villager speaking Basque, so I can't say more on this subject.
Talking about similar situation, can you tell me why Scottish are still rolling there r's even when speaking in English.

You might be familiar with Spanish speaking by locals in Mexico in some secluded villages (in certain funny way), where public education and mass-media were introduced relatively recently. This is more what I'm talking about.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

Well, one problem really is that the situation as it was just before the Romans conquered the Iberian penninsula is pretty unclear, in particular for the west. For instance, we know of the Lusitanians in the west of Iberia, who did not (in my opinion, anyways) speak a Celtic language, and many place names in otherwise "nominally" Celtic areas in the West of Iberia sport names that are compatible with Lusitanian, but not with Celtic. My opinion is that the Celts may indeed have not been the first Indo-European inhabitants of Iberia.

What would you think of the possibility of Tartessian being an IE but non-Celtic language (like Lusitanian)? I say this because in the Late Bronze Age, Southwest Iberia participated fully in the Atlantic metallurgical complex, and not only that, but also these stone slabs have been found, which in my opinion have motifs that are possibly IE:

 

[Asturrulumbo]

Definitely some influence, I can't deny. I've never heard an old villager speaking Basque, so I can't say more on this subject.
Talking about similar situation, can you tell me why Scottish are still rolling there r's even when speaking in English.

You might be familiar with Spanish speaking by locals in Mexico in some secluded villages (in certain funny way), where public education and mass-media were introduced relatively recently. This is more what I'm talking about.

In Mexico, there certainly are different accents spoken by the indigenous communities around the country, especially as for many it is their second language. However, in the case of Basque I believe it's different, as Spanish has been around (at least in the urban areas) for a very long time, and even when speaking Spanish Basques don't have a particular accent.

 

[Taranis]

What would you think of the possibility of Tartessian being an IE but non-Celtic language (like Lusitanian)? I say this because in the Late Bronze Age, Southwest Iberia participated fully in the Atlantic metallurgical complex, and not only that, but also these stone slabs have been found, which in my opinion have motifs that are possibly IE:

Well, first off, these are great images. :cool-v: The problem is that the language is pretty much undeciphered as of now, but it doesn't look Indo-European in the slighest. There was a review of Koch's work earlier this year (by a fellow named Zeidler, from the university of Trier), and he pointed out that the Tartessian writing system was hardly suitable for writing an Indo-European language at all. What's absolutely possible, is that there are Indo-European (Celtic or otherwise) names inside a non-Indo-European matrix, but I don't think the language itself was Indo-European.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

Well, first off, these are great images. :cool-v: The problem is that the language is pretty much undeciphered as of now, but it doesn't look Indo-European in the slighest. There was a review of Koch's work earlier this year (by a fellow named Zeidler, from the university of Trier), and he pointed out that the Tartessian writing system was hardly suitable for writing an Indo-European language at all. What's absolutely possible, is that there are Indo-European (Celtic or otherwise) names inside a non-Indo-European matrix, but I don't think the language itself was Indo-European.

They certainly are, many more can be found here:
http://www.estelasdecoradas.co.cc/estelas_ext/paginas/catalogo_estelas.htm
The linguistic aspect certainly is a complicated one. What could be is Tartessian originating later in the Iron Age, and/or the stelae being "Proto-Lusitanian" perhaps?

 

[LeBrok]

In Mexico, there certainly are different accents spoken by the indigenous communities around the country, especially as for many it is their second language.

Exactly my point, and if you heard them speak their original language you would find many similarities, for example, how they pronounce spanish world with accents and sounds of their original language. There are rarely enough conquerors living mixed with indigenous population to teach their language correctly. Without schools and TV it took decades if not centuries for the language of conquerors to become main language for populations. In mean time being a second language it was always twisted, simplified and used with local accent and pronunciation. After few generations even grandchildren of conquerors will speak same "broke" language thinking it is a proper way, because most population speaks this way.

I'm not saying the language won't evolve by itself, or will not get influence by others. In today's modern world it might happen faster than in secluded villages way back. However, what you're saying is that Basque language got bigger influence from Spanish than Portuguese did, although prtuguese and spanish came from same source about 3 thousand years ago. Secondly, I speak second language too, and it's obvious to me that second language is influenced more by first one, and not vice versa. The biggest influence of first language is not in vocabulary or grammar, but in pronunciation, accent and melody of a sentence. If my kids didn't go to english schools and didn't match english tv, and I was the main source of english, they would be speaking english with polish accent and sound pronunciation.

The best example of my point is how English is spoken in India.

 

[Wilhelm]

In Mexico, there certainly are different accents spoken by the indigenous communities around the country, especially as for many it is their second language. However, in the case of Basque I believe it's different, as Spanish has been around (at least in the urban areas) for a very long time, and even when speaking Spanish Basques don't have a particular accent.

That's wrong. Basques do have their own accent, when they speak spanish you can immediately tell if he is basque, they have a sort of "thick" accent, very characteristic of basques, any spaniard knows what im talking about.

 

[Knovas]

Yes, they have their own accent, almost all regions in Spain have peculiarities in regards of this. It is told that the most neutral zone is Valladolid and surrounds, where it is believed to speak the most correct Castilian.

 

[Segia2]

And aslong as I'm making an ars of myself,lol, with this pronunciacion hypothesis, here is some more. I don't know Basque and not much Spanish either, so I can judge these languages by sounds and melody only. When I heard Basque for first time I though they were speaking Spanish. I can easily distinguish Portuguese from Spanish though they are very related, but I have problem doing the same with Basque and Spanish, though they are completely unrelated. Why is that?
I think Celtic in large scale was imposed on non Celtic speaking Iberians, Aquitanians, who took vocabulary and grammar, but retain their native pronunciation. Pronunciation is still similar to original Iberian language therefore to Basque too.

Spanish suffered a phonetic evolution during the Renaissance era, adopting certain traits attributed by some scholars to basque language (partial lost of "f", no distinction between "b" and "v" (betacism), shift from "j" to "kh", five vowels system...The reasons? Mmm, repopulation, high influx of basque clergy and civil workers (the most literated people and best knowing of spanish language, despite not being in most cases their natural language!!!!)

We have to take into account that castilian was born in a zone next -and in some cases overlapping- to basque speakers. However, the presence of basque speakers in Spain is not a datable fact. By using toponymic resources we can conclude that basque language expanded -from Aquitania and the western Pyrennes- during the late roman empire and middle ages over a territory wich showed a clear previous IE affinity (celtic and non-celtic)

Pff, the puzzle is desperating...

 

[Taranis]

We have to take into account that castilian was born in a zone next -and in some cases overlapping- to basque speakers. However, the presence of basque speakers in Spain is not a datable fact. By using toponymic resources we can conclude that basque language expanded -from Aquitania and the western Pyrennes- during the late roman empire and middle ages over a territory wich showed a clear previous IE affinity (celtic and non-celtic)

Indeed. In Antiquity, the language are of Basque lay more eastward and northward than today, with only the eastern half of the modern-day Basque country being actually Basque, whereas in the north the influence extended approximately to the Garonne (from where they were bordered by the Gauls), and in the east maybe as far as the central Pyrenees (where they were bordered by the Iberians). The western part of the modern-day Basque country was definitely Indo-European, possibly Celtic (the place names are somewhat ambiguous).

Pff, the puzzle is desperating...

What is even more puzzling here is a fact that was first observed by the late vascologist Larry Trask, who pointed out the general rarity of Celtic loanwords into Basque (he lists approximately a dozen words, some of which are even disputed). Given how the Basques were, with exception of the east, seemingly surrounded by Indo-Europeans, and possibly in contact with them for many centuries, it seems remarkably unliekly that there are so very few Celtic loanwords. This also stands quite in contrast to the fact that the amount of loanwords Basque has borrowed from Latin and from the Romance languages is substantial.

 

[Wilhelm]

Well, there's the question, we do not really know this about Basque. What we do know is this:

- The Basques today are ~80% R1b.

There is ~90% of R1b in Basques. The 80% is in Catalans and the Pyrenees.

 

[LeBrok]

Spanish suffered a phonetic evolution during the Renaissance era, adopting certain traits attributed by some scholars to basque language (partial lost of "f", no distinction between "b" and "v" (betacism), shift from "j" to "kh", five vowels system...The reasons? Mmm, repopulation, high influx of basque clergy and civil workers (the most literated people and best knowing of spanish language, despite not being in most cases their natural language!!!!)


Pff, the puzzle is desperating...

Yes it is, but if it wasn't we wouldn't have all this fun here, hehe.

I don't think few clergy and civil workers can make a difference how language sounds. It might be the case that records of spoken language in spain are misleading. What I mean is that most records, from the past, of spoken language are from big cities where. This is the language of educated elite, which in spain case, was influenced a lot by germanic speaking tribes invading in middle ages. Mind that way back 90% people lived in villages. But the records how spanish was pronounced there are not existant.
Previous differences in f, v,b, j, might be of germanic way to speak spanish.
Consider a scenario that after renaissance there was faster city growth mostly caused by influx of villagers. If this is a fast process you will see quick shift how the spanish sounds, getting more similarities with village version, which was probably closer to Basque pronunciation.

You can compare it to Latin (educated elite) versus Vulgar Latin for the villagers and the rest. The question is how come the elite and priests couldn't teach plebs the proper Latin? In this case one thing is obvious that few, even educated people, cannot change the way a language is pronounced by many. And we are talking about the ongoing process for few hundred years. That's why I don't see how few Basque intellectualists could change spanish language. It is more of a case of official spanish version in cities were influenced more by latin and germanic. Possibly arab invasion helped "cleaning" elite speaking version of spanish?

Here is a nice explanation about loss of sounds. What happens if english is imposed on Italians or French speakers? The sound H is dropped immediately, especially at the beginning of a word.
The sound shifts, the sound laws need big events to happen. People don't drop sounds or change them just because. Usually the big event is when two different languages are imposed on population, after invasion or migration for example. Make native Italians, Chinese, Indians, etc speak english and you will immediately see their local sound laws in action.

 

[Mikewww]

... Mallory & Mair (2000), p. 236 :
"Because craniometry can produce results which make no sense at all (e.g. the close relationship between Neolithic populations in Ukraine and Portugal) and therefore lack any historical meaning, any putative genetic relationship must be consistent with geographical plausibility and have the support of other evidence.".

Good catch.

.....But what if R1b people did move to Southwest Iberia first, be it by crossing all Europe without stopping until they reached that corner of the Atlantic coast, or else by boat from the Black Sea ?
.....
Naturally, this doesn't prevent another continental migration of R1b-L11 to have taken place from the Balkans to Central Europe (Unetice, Tumulus, Urnfield, Hallstatt, La Tène group), which would have brought R1b-S28 (U152). Yet another migration, perhaps straight from the steppes, would have brought R1b-S21 (U106) to North Germany and Scandinavia.

This is quite a quandry.

Busby et al presented a key piece of their evidence as portraying L11's STR diversity has geographically indiscernible across Europe. My interpretation of this is the expansion(s) was rapid. The craniometric similarities between the Ukraine and Portugal support this possibility.

R1b-L11 appears relatively youthful in Europe and still hasn't be found in European Neolithic aDNA.

The difficult is in trying to align R1b-L11's phylogenetic trail, which is M269>L23 L23>L51 L51>L11 L11>P312 L11>U106 P312>U152 and P312>L21. L11 and its downstream large subclades seems to have expanded in very rapid succession, but we know for sure that that there was only one father-son transmission where the L11 mutation occurred from an L51+ L11- father. This means this happened at only single location in all of Eurasia or wherever. The same can be said for L11>P312 and L11>U106, etc. yet the geographic distributions are vastly different between U106, U152 and L21. Z196 and P312* are scattered across a wide area.

By 1300 BCE Central and Western Europe was divided between two major cultures: the Atlantic Bronze Age and the Urnfield Culture.

I've asked a N.Ireland archeoligist (who is L21/S145) about the Atlantic Bronze Age as I've never heard it described as a "culture". He suggested it is best to think of it as trade zone rather than a single culture. The best I draw out of the conversation is that the Atlantic coastal regions might be thought of as a "frontier." Given that, I'm not sure if the differentiation between the coastal regions and Urnfield are as a clear as a map might portray.

Just thinking out loud, but the Bell Beaker folks were a maritime bunch and that most would say are enigmatic. Another enigmatic bunch was whom the Egyptians called the Sea Peoples. Aren't some of those people thought to be from Lycia, the SW coast of modern Turkey?

I still can't figure out how the L11>U106 occurred to get that many men into NE Europe... must be the "river" version. If so, then L51>L11 did not happen in Western or Central Europe. They seemed to have a spread long way pretty quick.. maybe they were better at water transport than we can imagine.

 

[Asturrulumbo]

That's wrong. Basques do have their own accent, when they speak spanish you can immediately tell if he is basque, they have a sort of "thick" accent, very characteristic of basques, any spaniard knows what im talking about.

Really? I have a Basque friend and one from Barcelona, and i hear them exactly the same... Then again, maybe you develop a more expert ear for the different accents on the place one lives.

 

[razyn]

They seemed to have a spread long way pretty quick.. maybe they were better at water transport than we can imagine.

Has anybody played with the notion of Bronze Age (or Chalcolithic) ice transport? I haven't tried comparing climatology with the putative era of the fast R1b expansion. But if a northern route was involved (Volga, Vistula, portage over Jutland, etc.), the river routes may have been ice highways. Seems to me I've seen something about moving Stonehenge components on a frozen Avon? Maybe not. Anyway, the long river and lake systems of Sweden were used for heavy haulage in fairly recent times. Sleds when it was ice, boats when it thawed. Boats on sleds (for ice, or muddy portages), sometimes.

 

[Taranis]

I've asked a N.Ireland archeoligist (who is L21/S145) about the Atlantic Bronze Age as I've never heard it described as a "culture". He suggested it is best to think of it as trade zone rather than a single culture. The best I draw out of the conversation is that the Atlantic coastal regions might be thought of as a "frontier." Given that, I'm not sure if the differentiation between the coastal regions and Urnfield are as a clear as a map might portray.

This is a very good point! I think this also makes an important point about the problems of ethnic ascription of the cultures in the region.

Just thinking out loud, but the Bell Beaker folks were a maritime bunch and that most would say are enigmatic. Another enigmatic bunch was whom the Egyptians called the Sea Peoples. Aren't some of those people thought to be from Lycia, the SW coast of modern Turkey?

There's approximately 1300 years between Beaker-Bell and the appearance of the Sea Peoples in the eastern Mediterranean. Of course it's tempting to speculative if there was a connection, but it's pretty unlikely for obvious reasons. Unless you take Sardinia into consideration and assume that the Sherdana, one of the Sea People ethnicities, indeed came from Sardinia. But, that's too much speculation for my taste.

 

[zanipolo]

I really do not understand why people deny the 100 Bell Beaker graves found in soutern france between the Rhone river and the alps

 

[Knovas]

Really? I have a Basque friend and one from Barcelona, and i hear them exactly the same... Then again, maybe you develop a more expert ear for the different accents on the place one lives.

I can assure you that, specially Andalusians, Catalans, Basques, Asturians and Galicians are no way difficult to distinguish for us. However, people from the Castillas can easily cause confusion, since they are much neutral. And of course, there are other's in the middle who deviate, as for example: Murcians towards Andalusians, Cantabrians towards Asturians and Basques (depending on the zone), etc., etc. There are many factors to consider, but the first cases are very clear.

 

[Christiaan]

Indeed it could be one of several routes of R1b into Western Europe. One swept from the Black sea across the Mediterranean->Atlanticcoast->Northsea->, The other split into two branches when they arrived Karpatian mountain ridge one north, the other west along the Danube.

An interesting thing I noticed is that the Chalcolithicum/copper age in Europe started much earlier than everyone thought this far. In Serbia they have dated a copper axe to ~ 5,500 BC. This makes it contemporary with early/middle neolithic cultures in the north. If this is true,at least even earlier late neolithic cultures like TRB and others are about to be totally reviewed because of these new insights. In the early copper age producing a surplus of copper was probably not that easy. So copper maintained a very scarce good for along time and therefore preventing it to become more common throughout Europe.

I can't post url's yet, so add the http 3w's yourself.

welt.de/kultur/history/article11194556/Vor-7500-Jahren-endete-die-Steinzeit-in-Serbien.html

conservativetimes.org/?p=6875

presstv.ir/detail/151553.html

One implication could be that the late neolithic cultures with their megalithic monuments, were probably already influenced by copper age cultures. So when the bell-beakers folks spread into Europe they used well established exchange-routes/networks. The older overlapping distribution of megalithic monuments are proof for that.