World Families Forums - Beaker Folk Finds: Skulls, Reconstructions, Artifacts, etc.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 23, 2014, 01:47:14 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  Beaker Folk Finds: Skulls, Reconstructions, Artifacts, etc.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Beaker Folk Finds: Skulls, Reconstructions, Artifacts, etc.  (Read 8426 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #125 on: July 03, 2012, 07:45:09 AM »

Quoting from Wiki re the Vucedol culture:

"Marija Gimbutas characterized the Bell Beaker culture complex as an amalgam of Vucedol and Yamna culture traditions formed after the incursion of the Yamna people into the milieu of the Vučedol culture, which evolved in the course of the three or four centuries after 3000/2900 BC."

Is anyone reading this familiar with evidence of a Vucedol culture connection to the Bell Beaker folk?


That was an excellent post and worthy of some comment, but it was missed because of the last couple of off-topic posts.

Like I said before, I have heard of the Vučedol culture, but I don't know that much about it.

Perhaps someone else would care to comment. Jean M? Alan?
Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #126 on: July 03, 2012, 08:11:10 AM »

I hadn't actually read Gimbutas when I came to a similar conclusion.

Remember my route 1 from the Carpathian Basin? It struck me that the easiest route for the Stelae People to get from the Danube corridor/Carpathian Basin to northern Italy would be via the Vučedol Culture. The geography would encourage a route that way.

The Vučedol Culture appears to have been the result of  groups of IE speakers branching off into the Balkans from the Danube corridor c. 3000 BC, and appears to be the origin of the Illyrian branch of IE languages.

There are no stelae actually in Vučedol that I know of, but they appear at both ends of that route. People returning along that route could have brought the BB elements that later appear there in the Cetina Culture.



« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 08:15:16 AM by Jean M » Logged
Jarman
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #127 on: July 06, 2012, 12:42:10 PM »

The Vučedol Culture appears to have been the result of  groups of IE speakers branching off into the Balkans from the Danube corridor c. 3000 BC, and appears to be the origin of the Illyrian branch of IE languages.

There are no stelae actually in Vučedol that I know of, but they appear at both ends of that route. People returning along that route could have brought the BB elements that later appear there in the Cetina Culture.

The Wiki representation of Gimbutas seems opposite of your conclusion:

"Marija Gimbutas characterized the Bell Beaker culture complex as an amalgam of Vucedol and Yamna culture traditions formed after the incursion of the Yamna people into the milieu of the Vučedol culture, which evolved in the course of the three or four centuries after 3000/2900 BC."

I read the above as saying the Beaker elements were FROM the Vucedol (and Yamna); whereas I think you are saying the Beakers contributed TO the Vucedol (and Cetina). The suttle differences in wording seem to point out very opposite positions.  Have you any thoughts about this?
Logged
MHammers
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #128 on: July 06, 2012, 01:11:11 PM »

Vucedol is usually associated, at least partially, with late Baden culture.  I can't remember the study, but Vucedol people built fortifications on their side of the Danube...possibly as a defense against incoming pastoralists from the Hungarian plain.  Maybe the archery package was more emphasized as a defensive weapon in this period and proto-Beaker grew out of this interaction. 

However, if late Baden/Vucedol were seperate from the Yamnaya, it seems less likely they would have adopted a form of proto-Italo-Celtic.  Unless, the Balkan people had developed it after the first Suvorovo incursions in 4200.
Logged

Ydna: R1b-Z253**


Mtdna: T

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #129 on: July 06, 2012, 02:04:29 PM »

I read the above as saying the Beaker elements were FROM the Vucedol (and Yamna); whereas I think you are saying the Beakers contributed TO the Vucedol (and Cetina). The subtle differences in wording seem to point out very opposite positions.  Have you any thoughts about this?

The wording is tricky, because archaeologists only label "Bell Beaker" those sites which actually include pottery in a bell shape with the characteristic decoration of BB. There are no such pots in the early  Vučedol. That is why it is called Vučedol and not Bell Beaker.

My position is that the origin of the Bell Beaker people is earlier, before those pots appear. So we have what I call Stelae People breaking off from the Yamnaya people moving up the Danube (think of them as a branch of Yamnaya) and moving through the Vučedol culture to get to northern Italy and on from there to Iberia. Once this route was established, people moved both ways along it. Picture a trade route and people going home to family, or looking for a marriage partner from home, etc. Eventually what archaeologists recognise as Bell Beaker items are found along that route.
Logged
MHammers
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #130 on: July 06, 2012, 03:56:52 PM »

I read the above as saying the Beaker elements were FROM the Vucedol (and Yamna); whereas I think you are saying the Beakers contributed TO the Vucedol (and Cetina). The subtle differences in wording seem to point out very opposite positions.  Have you any thoughts about this?

The wording is tricky, because archaeologists only label "Bell Beaker" those sites which actually include pottery in a bell shape with the characteristic decoration of BB. There are no such pots in the early  Vučedol. That is why it is called Vučedol and not Bell Beaker.

My position is that the origin of the Bell Beaker people is earlier, before those pots appear. So we have what I call Stelae People breaking off from the Yamnaya people moving up the Danube (think of them as a branch of Yamnaya) and moving through the Vučedol culture to get to northern Italy and on from there to Iberia. Once this route was established, people moved both ways along it. Picture a trade route and people going home to family, or looking for a marriage partner from home, etc. Eventually what archaeologists recognise as Bell Beaker items are found along that route.


Doesn't the beaker, as a ceramic vessel, originate in the steppe before moving through Corded-Ware, Yamnaya, and eventually Bell Beaker?
Logged

Ydna: R1b-Z253**


Mtdna: T

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #131 on: July 06, 2012, 05:25:43 PM »

Quote
Doesn't the beaker, as a ceramic vessel, originate in the steppe

Ceramic vessels that could be used to hold liquid to be drunk (i.e. of a size that could be used for such a purpose and suitably burnished or otherwise finished to be reasonably waterproof)  go back quite a way. People have to drink, though they may have used containers made of other materials (wood, horn, stone, ostrich eggs etc) before ceramic ones could be made that were not porous.    

I can't say off the top of my head where the first have been found. There are burnished wares from Tell Sabi Abya in Syria 7000-6700 BC, but only sherds have been found, so it's hard to say whether any of these vessels were the right size. I just fiddled around with a ruler and some images and can't make up my mind.  

If you have a copy of Anthony 2007, it is full of images of pottery. There is a nice little beaker on page 278, fig 12.6 which would be ideal. It is bell-shaped, comfortable to the hand, and I make it about 8cm across. It is fine, painted ware.  It is from a Tripolye C1 settlement at Chapaevka.

The idea of a drinking vessel did not travel from Corded Ware to Bell Beaker. There are such vessels in Copper Age Portugal that precede Bell Beaker, known as copos (cups) to the local archaeologists. Trying to find the exact line of influences that produced BB is liable to lead you a merry dance. Bell beakers were decorated with a white paste made of bone rubbed into the incisions. There is a similar type of decoration on pots from the route up the Danube. 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2012, 05:46:53 PM by Jean M » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #132 on: July 07, 2012, 08:16:47 PM »

Jean  I had a read of that Corded Ware dating paper.  Interesting ideas on a shorter chronology for Corded Ware (maybe 2700-2400BC) similar to the Swiss Lakes with Corded Ware quickly declining when bell beaker appeared.  Very non-conclusive article but that is the reality.  It would be fascinating to know if the corded ware - bell beaker groups actually didnt overlap in time much with each other.  It would put a different light on what at present looks like beaker groups scattered in pockets through corded ware area in central Europe. Maybe the idea that the two groups were spread through the same areas but kept distinct is wrong and that one may have replaced the other in many areas.  That kind of chronology would make beaker pottery perhaps slightly older than Corded Ware with Corded Ware only coming into existence around the time beaker was arriving in southern France and Italy.  Not sure what to make of that but its a lot to chew over. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.132 seconds with 19 queries.