Page 11 of 485 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 4848

Thread: Bell Beakers, Gimbutas and R1b

  1. #101
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by rms2 View Post
    I think the main take-aways from this discussion are that 1) R1b came into Europe from the East, probably during the Copper Age at the earliest, and 2) its connection to Beaker is enigmatic, since Beaker apparently first arose at the opposite end of Europe.

    The mechanics of R1b's entry into Beaker is the chief problem, which will only be resolved by means of ancient y-dna.

    I wish the folks getting ancient y-dna would hurry up.
    That is pretty well nail on head. There are a number of possibilities but none have a scorched earth trail or a simple clearcut wave that screams out the answer. That is why beaker has no consensus in the overall understanding of how it worked.

    If there was one thing I think we can say about beaker is that it established an unexpected phenomenon of interlinking vast areas and apparently spreading and mixing genes from all over Europe together into a modern blend. So, as well as the metals, from a genetic point of view it was clearly also a marriage network of some sort. My best guess is that beakers travelled in small family groups and when they arrived in a destination they married their daughters or sisters to the local chiefs and in return married into their daughters etc.

    That would create a system where a lot of mixing would happen. That way you could have families who have their beaker characteristics because they were originally beaker male lines and you could have families who have gotten beaker characteristics because they are locals who have married a beaker woman. If beaker and its exotica were sufficiently attractive then marrying a woman who could make the pots and perhaps the fancy clothes may have been an attractive prospect and indeed the only way of obtaining these things at a time when pots and clothes were home crafts and probably not bought and sold.

    In fact, we probably need to remember that a market society, even for metalwork, probably didnt exist in the way we think today and all sorts of mechanism like tribute, dowries, marriage, fosterage, clientship, ritual deposition etc were involved in the distribution of metals so compared to a modern market economy there would have been a far greater need for a human element in the movement of high status goods, while home crafts like pottery, clothing etc also would likely have spread with actual women.

    Even as late as Early Christian Ireland the evidence for actual markets is very slight and there are many legal records indicating that goods were distributed in elaborate obligation exchanges of annual tribute from under-kings, clientship, dowries etc. There was a system where gifts were given and other required tribute was returned. I think its called the book of rights. I will see if I can find a copy of it online.
    Last edited by alan; 12-13-2014 at 03:08 PM.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Gray Fox (12-13-2014),  Hando (12-25-2014),  rms2 (12-13-2014)

  3. #102
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Here it is - the two way system of gift and obligation/tribute among the hierachy of Irish kings. It is schematic and idealised but it gives an idea of the sort of system that happened on a slightly less glorified scale in pre-Norman Ireland

    http://www.maryjones.us/ctexts/cert.html

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  5. #103
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,051
    Sex
    Location
    Central United States
    Ethnicity
    Celtic, Goidelic
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF13>FGC5494>FGC5496
    mtDNA (M)
    H11a2a>C12014T

    United States of America Netherlands Isle of Man Scotland Poland Northern Ireland
    So the Copper Age time frame from 3500 to 2300 BC and the R1b-L11 block of 7 would have covered 3427 to P312's age of around 2524 bc. Now assuming Alan's comments stating 'home crafts like pottery, clothing etc also would likely have spread with actual women.', would we see "MtDNA Hot spots" such as western subclades found in central or eastern parts of Europe do to this movement?

    MJost
    148326, FGC-0FW1R, YSID6 & YF3272 R-DF13>FGC5494>*7448>*5496>*5521>*5511>*5539>*5538>* 5508>*5524
     
    Watterson USA GD1/67 & GD3/111, *5508+. GD1ís fatherís sister-23andme pred. 3rd Cous w/ 0.91% DNA shared-3 seg. Largest on Chr1 w/non-Euro admix affirms my NPE paternal Watterson line via aDNA & YDNA. A 2nd pred. 4th cous has same DKA b. 1840's Georgia and MDKA d 1703 IOM. 3rd Cousin FtDNA FF is from the Watterson Ala. *5538+ b. IOM w/ GD6/67 & GD8/111 -SGD3. FGC5539+ a Scot-Ross GD13/111 -SGD8

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to MJost For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  7. #104
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by MJost View Post
    So the Copper Age time frame from 3500 to 2300 BC and the R1b-L11 block of 7 would have covered 3427 to P312's age of around 2524 bc. Now assuming Alan's comments stating 'home crafts like pottery, clothing etc also would likely have spread with actual women.', would we see "MtDNA Hot spots" such as western subclades found in central or eastern parts of Europe do to this movement?

    MJost
    There is all that H which appeared in beaker in central Europe - think it was a study of Germany.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  9. #105
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    It may seem strange to us in modern western societies but access to woman and marriage in traditional societies -even today in many middle eastern cultures-requires a certain amount of wealth and many people cannot get married because they dont have the wealth. Access to marriage partners may have been a major driving force for people with access to prestige goods and skills in a societies where trading was probably not done in the way we think today. Prestige goods, skills and the right connections may have been the only card mobile people with no automatic rights to local lands had when they moved into new territories.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  11. #106
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H


  12. #107
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    This is an interesting article on early Irish marriage customs although its fair to say that copper age one's wouldnt have been identitical and indeed travelling beaker people probably had to use some form of mobile wealth to gain a bride

    http://www.ucc.ie/celt/marriage_ei.html

    This part suggests a pan-Celtic normal marriage form:

    The general opinion is that lŠnamnas comthinchuir was the normal kind of marriage between persons of property in the seventh and eighth centuries. But how old was that institution? Caesar’s brief account of marriage amongst the Gauls appears to refer to two important characteristics which are present in the Irish type: men match the herds which their wives bring as dowries by contributing an equal amount from their own property, and an account is kept of the profits of these conjoint resources (suggesting that each reserved ultimate ownership of what was contributed to the marital fund).[17] If this type of marriage is a common Celtic institution, we may have here a hint as to the meaning of comthinchor ‘common contribution’ that the wife brought a dowry (dos) in herds and that the husband matched that dowry with a payment to his wife of an equal amount from his own resources (donatio ex marito).[18] One need not, of course, assume that such dowries were always in cattle: we have seen that women could acquire real estate and other kinds of property and the glossators, whatever the value of their opinions on this point, note that land could form part of their marital contribution The equality of husband and wife is matched elsewhere and scholars have argued that the Indo-European peoples had always known a variety of marriage which left the wife her husband’s equal partner—and one could compare the Roman marriage without manus and the Germanic marriage in which the husband did not acquire his wife’s mundium.[19]
    Last edited by alan; 12-13-2014 at 04:34 PM.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  14. #108
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,051
    Sex
    Location
    Central United States
    Ethnicity
    Celtic, Goidelic
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF13>FGC5494>FGC5496
    mtDNA (M)
    H11a2a>C12014T

    United States of America Netherlands Isle of Man Scotland Poland Northern Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by alan View Post
    There is all that H which appeared in beaker in central Europe - think it was a study of Germany.
    Thx. But if its this paper, it didn't find much. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4039305/

    MJost
    148326, FGC-0FW1R, YSID6 & YF3272 R-DF13>FGC5494>*7448>*5496>*5521>*5511>*5539>*5538>* 5508>*5524
     
    Watterson USA GD1/67 & GD3/111, *5508+. GD1ís fatherís sister-23andme pred. 3rd Cous w/ 0.91% DNA shared-3 seg. Largest on Chr1 w/non-Euro admix affirms my NPE paternal Watterson line via aDNA & YDNA. A 2nd pred. 4th cous has same DKA b. 1840's Georgia and MDKA d 1703 IOM. 3rd Cousin FtDNA FF is from the Watterson Ala. *5538+ b. IOM w/ GD6/67 & GD8/111 -SGD3. FGC5539+ a Scot-Ross GD13/111 -SGD8

  15. #109
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,026
    Sex
    Omitted
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a2a1

    Quote Originally Posted by MJost View Post
    So the Copper Age time frame from 3500 to 2300 BC and the R1b-L11 block of 7 would have covered 3427 to P312's age of around 2524 bc. Now assuming Alan's comments stating 'home crafts like pottery, clothing etc also would likely have spread with actual women.', would we see "MtDNA Hot spots" such as western subclades found in central or eastern parts of Europe do to this movement?
    The mtDNA mutation rate is slow (estimated to be about 1 mutation in 3600 years) so it's difficult to use mtDNA to do fine scale population analysis. Haplogroup H was probably widely distributed among diverse Neolithic communities, so we would need full sequence results from a very large number of ancient remains to link specific populations to specific subclades of H.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to GailT For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

  17. #110
    Registered Users
    Posts
    8,798
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    This is extracted from a paper that gives a good summary of exchange in early Ireland and probably is the biggest instituation whereby high status portable items moved about in early Ireland


    The purpose of exchange in early Ireland was not the mere swapping of goods. Most of the exchange happened to create bonds between individuals. As Charles Doherty points out: ‘Men were bound to each other in a variety of relationships, the outward expression of which was reciprocal agreements by which goods and
    services circulated according to the relative status of the parties involved’ (Doherty 1980, 67). In his study on exchange Marcel Mauss describes the mechanism of giftgiving: by giving, one shows oneself as generous, and thus as deserving of respect, by receiving the gift, one shows respect to the giver, and by returning the gift one demonstrates that one's honour is equivalent to that of the original giver. By giving, receiving and returning gifts a moral bond between the persons exchanging gifts is created. The process of gift giving strengthens co-operation, competitiveness, and antagonism (1969).

    Exchange was thus a means of creating and upholding bonds. In giving a gift to someone a person stated his superiority, while the acceptance of a gift demonstrated submission. This was the way over-kings tied subject kingdoms under their rule, and lords contracted clients. The subject people and clients reciprocated by paying tribute or renders, which consummated the alliance
    (Doherty 1980, 73). The functioning and unity of an early Irish tķath was based on a web of reciprocal personal relationships, where the king ‘held the heads of the...
    Last edited by alan; 12-13-2014 at 04:52 PM.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:

     Hando (12-25-2014)

Page 11 of 485 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Recommend a book to understand Bell Beakers etc.
    By DillonResearcher in forum R1b-U152
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-04-2018, 02:59 AM
  2. R1b Bell Beakers, Autosomal and Maternal DNA
    By R.Rocca in forum R1b General
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-17-2015, 11:37 PM
  3. Conference of Jan Turek about Bell Beakers
    By Bernard in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-30-2013, 02:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •