spread of R1b
if it occurred during the Chalcolithic, what about the Bell beaker culture? west to east (non-indo-european) and existing in a region were most of the R1b carriers are today as well as a spread to Central Europe. It wasnt until the proper Bronze age that cultures from the Black sea area are clearly detected on the Baltic coast and in the Danubian region Tumulus-Urnfield cultures, and burial sites containing quantities of swords and daggers of an invading people.
We have an ancient Beaker sample that tested R1b. Unfortunately, we don't know what kind of R1b it was, so our analysis is drastically hampered. IIRC they testing nothing but U106.
I've generally envisioned Beaker culture as not spreading R1b west-to-east, as Beaker pottery did as a whole, but rather I've envisioned Beaker culture as a catalyst for an initial wave of R1b westward, which later expanded to near its modern percentages in the Bronze Age. That seems to fit the data best to me. Otherwise, it's difficult to explain the total lack of R1b in the early Neolithic, but the appearance of it in the Chalcolithic, despite the west-to-east spread of Beaker culture.
Basque Bust
There is either something fundamentally wrong with a people that have a paternal (Indo-European) lineage of over 80% yet have/share no Indo-European linguistic affiliations or culture; OR there is something fundamentally wrong with this theory.
Why is that? I2a-Din was once non-IE, yet it is dominant in certain modern IE populations, like Bosnians. Is there something fundamentally wrong with the Bosnians? I don't get why you don't think the opposite could have happened in a given case, in which R1b could have gone IE to non-IE. Especially because the Basques are a people who don't have locally ancient Y lineages outside of their I2a1a, and who are local full-genome outliers.
I'm not saying for certain that R1b in Basques descends from ancient IE speakers, but I'm still not seeing why we should rule it out.
(1847) ... (1841) ... (190) ... (1826) ... (98 AD) ... (1901)...
Ancient writers did not have any extensive knowledge about Britain, so Tacitus and the modern British scholars are all of the Documented history of Iberians in Britain.
Do you have any more recent scholarship that doesn't rely on ancient people observing that they looked similar to one another? Even nowadays, Monmouthshire is perhaps the darkest complexioned place in Britain, but genetic tests show no important similarity to Iberians. Stronger evidence would be genetic evidence, or linguistic evidence, or archaeological evidence, but none of those converge to show that the Aquitani or the Silures are branches of the Iberians AFAIK.
I could believe that the Aquitani and the Iberians were closely linked in some way, perhaps as branches of a common ancestor at some point. There may be evidence yet to find. The Silures, not so much... I have trouble imagining them as anything but coming from the same stock as the Ordovices, Demetae, Cornovii, etc.
There is however a vague passage in Caesar's war book.
Julius Caesar - De bello Gallico (50 BC)
"the interior of Britain was inhabited by those who were immemorially natives of the island, but the maritime parts by the Belgae."
So, the natives were not Gallic (Belgae) and since they were immemorially natives,prob. akin to the Silures Iberians.
The Belgae were Gallic peoples who came to southern Britain shortly before the time of Caesar. The natives were the rest of the tribes in Britain (Dumnonii, Catuvellauni, Iceni, Silures...). Rather than showing that the other tribes were "akin to the
Silures Iberians," this quote rather seems to indicate that the non-Belgae, like the Silures, were akin to each other and
not of foreign stock, including Iberian.
How in the world would you fit the distribution of Gaelic into your theories, or the position of the Brythonic languages as intermediate between Gaelic and Gaulish? Yikes. It becomes much more difficult if you assume a huge swath of Iberians who were not supplanted until the Belgae.
There are also endless quotes about the Irish Picts being Iberian.
Guh... from who?