Bell Beakers, Gimbutas and R1b

[Piquerobi]

What is your opinion on Gimbutas' take?

Since the oldest R1b found in Europe so far has been found at a Bell Beaker site, in Kromsdorf, East Germany, I guess it would be interesting to see what Gimbutas had to say about the Bell Beakers:

The Bell Beaker complex, an offshoot of the Vucedol bloc (more precisely of the Zok-Mako group in Hungary) continued Kurgan charateristics. The Bell Beaker of the second half of the 3rd millenium BC were vagabondic horse riders and archers in much the same way as their uncles and cousins, the Corded people of northern Europe and Catacomb-grave people of the North Pontic region. Their spread over central and western Europe to the British Isles and Spain as well as the Mediterranean islands terminates the period of expansion and destruction.

In western Hungary and nothwestern Yugoslavia, the Vucedol complex was followed by the Samogyvar-Vinkovci complex, the predecessor of the Bell Beaker people. Furthermore, the exodus of the horse-riding Bell Beaker people in the middle of the 3rd millenium, or soon thereafter, from the territories of the Vucedol complex, may not be unconnected with the constant threat from the east. They carried to the west Kurgan traditions in armament, social structure, and religion. The fact of paramount importance of Bell Beaker mobility is the presence of the horse. Seven Bell Beaker sites at Budapest in Hungary have shown that the horse was the foremost species of the domestic fauna.

The spread of the already Indo-Europeanized central European population (the Corded Ware culture) to the northwest and northeast, as well as of the Bell Beaker people to the west, is hardly explainable without some insight into the role played by this element from the east.

The Proto-Indo Europeans were able to expand to the west, to the east, and to the south primarily because of the horse. Renfrew has also failed to stress the enormous importance of the horse and horseback riding in his treatment of the Bell Beaker phenomenon.

From "The Kurgan culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe"

[Piquerobi]

This is what David W Anthony, leading IE expert, said on the contemporary classic "The Horse, the Wheel and Language":

Bell Beaker sites of Cespel around Budapest, west of the Yamnaya settlement region, are dated about 2800-2600 BCE. They could have been a bridge between Yamnaya on their east and Austria/Southern Germany to their west, through which Yamnaya dialects spread from Hungary into Austria and Bavaria, where they later developed into Proto-Celtic.

Beel Beaker decorated cup styles, domestic pot types, and grave and dagger types from the middle Danube were adopted about 2600 BCE in Moravia and Southern Germany. This material network could have been the bridge through which pre-Celtic dialects spread into Germany.

Interestingly both Italic and Celtic speaking populations are mainly R1b carriers, with basically no R1a.

[Christina]

[QUOTE=
Interestingly both Italic and Celtic speaking populations are mainly R1b carriers, with basically no R1a.[/QUOTE]

Actually this is inaccurate. There is much R1b in the Northwest of Italy. Relatively little in the South and Central portions.

Northwest Italy was the province of the Ligurians, who spoke an IE language that was neither Celtic nor Italic. Ancient writers considered them the aborigines of Italy.

The parts of Italy where R1b is much less frequent start south of Tuscany, and include Rome, and the relatively untouched, remote, relictual populations of old Samnite Country. This is the strongest bastion of Italic. Oscan used to have more speakers than Latin. The Oscan language stretched from the outskirts of Rome to southernmost Calabria, and even on Sicily with the Mamertine populations.

The parts of Italy where R1b is frequent are the places that were so Celtic they were once considered a part of Gaul.

R1b may have a Celtic correlation, but not Italic.

[rms2]

Actually this is inaccurate. There is much R1b in the Northwest of Italy. Relatively little in the South and Central portions.

Northwest Italy was the province of the Ligurians, who spoke an IE language that was neither Celtic nor Italic. Ancient writers considered them the aborigines of Italy.

The parts of Italy where R1b is much less frequent start south of Tuscany, and include Rome, and the relatively untouched, remote, relictual populations of old Samnite Country. This is the strongest bastion of Italic. Oscan used to have more speakers than Latin. The Oscan language stretched from the outskirts of Rome to southernmost Calabria, and even on Sicily with the Mamertine populations.

The parts of Italy where R1b is frequent are the places that were so Celtic they were once considered a part of Gaul.

R1b may have a Celtic correlation, but not Italic.

I suspect you are underselling the frequency of R1b throughout Italy.

I don't have access to my copy of Busby et al's spreadsheet right now (it's on my old computer), but I don't think its stats are far off those from this table from Eupedia, which shows substantial frequencies of R1b from one end of Italy to the other.

[ADW_1981]

I suspect you are underselling the frequency of R1b throughout Italy.

I don't have access to my copy of Busby et al's spreadsheet right now (it's on my old computer), but I don't think its stats are far off those from this table from Eupedia, which shows substantial frequencies of R1b from one end of Italy to the other.

He is definitely. There are more recent, and better Italy specific datasets which have some northern regions near the Alps, in particular NW Italy at 60%. There is no way that it can all be Celtic. Sicily is one of the southern regions which has been heavily tested a few times. The 30-35% R1b number is roughly the range I've seen on at least two occasions. It's possible SE Italy is a little lower than that, but I don't recall the figures, or if the sample size was substantial.

[alan]

He is definitely. There are more recent, and better Italy specific datasets which have some northern regions near the Alps, in particular NW Italy at 60%. There is no way that it can all be Celtic. Sicily is one of the southern regions which has been heavily tested a few times. The 30-35% R1b number is roughly the range I've seen on at least two occasions. It's possible SE Italy is a little lower than that, but I don't recall the figures, or if the sample size was substantial.

I think she is underplaying R1b in Italy somewhat. However, if you limited the region by region counts to just P312 (in view of Celto-Italic being claimed to be linked to this lineages not Z2103) I think it is fair to say that some parts of Italy do have very low counts. However, I suspect in some areas in the south that the P312 count could have been significantly reduced by domination by a sequence of Mediterranean empires from other places low in R1b.

Besides, noone said that there are no areas where IE wasnt taken up by large non-R1 populations and there may have even been non-R1 clans integrated in long before the language reached its historic destination. There are even people on the steppe spotted in ancient DNA who could have founded IE speaking clans before dispersal into other areas.

[vettor]

I suspect you are underselling the frequency of R1b throughout Italy.

I don't have access to my copy of Busby et al's spreadsheet right now (it's on my old computer), but I don't think its stats are far off those from this table from Eupedia, which shows substantial frequencies of R1b from one end of Italy to the other.

well southern germany and northern Italy have nearly the same percentage of R1b, both had Gallic people from early iron age , the logical scenario would be R1b was more Gallic than Italic


Also, one should know that the bavarians of southern Germany only became germans after the fall of the Roman empire and also Austria formed in 998AD via bavarian people. Austrian language is a bavarian dialect

[rms2]

well southern germany and northern Italy have nearly the same percentage of R1b, both had Gallic people from early iron age , the logical scenario would be R1b was more Gallic than Italic


. . .

Well, not necessarily. R1b-P312 Italics probably just encountered bigger numbers of non-R1b people the farther south they pushed down the Italian peninsula. Unless they were willing to wipe out all the non-R1b males, and apparently they weren't, naturally when they hit more populated areas their impact was less than it was in less heavily populated places.

[Arch]

Seems like a forced assertion with no actual evidence to support his hypotheses. We have no idea what language Bell Beakers have spoken, none whatsoever; all mere speculation. No evidence or any proof that IE arose out the steppes either, it is just more speculation. We can't even get the geographic origins of R1b correct with all the data obtained so far - inconclusive. Better off subscribing to Clyde Winters' theories with just as much of lacking irrefutable data as recent scientific efforts. The dispersion points of IE in the recent journal maps are laughable, I guess languages or the people who speak them have no ability to disperse in multiple directions except in the ones wanted by the researchers.

Arch

[rms2]

Seems like a forced assertion with no actual evidence to support his hypotheses. We have no idea what language Bell Beakers have spoken, none whatsoever; all mere speculation. No evidence or any proof that IE arose out the steppes either, it is just more speculation. We can't even get the geographic origins of R1b correct with all the data obtained so far - inconclusive. Better off subscribing to Clyde Winters' theories with just as much of lacking irrefutable data as recent scientific efforts. The dispersion points of IE in the recent journal maps are laughable, I guess languages or the people who speak them have no ability to disperse in multiple directions except in the ones wanted by the researchers.

Arch

Gimbutas was a woman. Have you actually read any of her books, Mallory's books, or Anthony's book?

Really, to repeat all the actual evidence for you would be a tremendous job. You need to read it for yourself.