World Families Forums - beaker people

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 10, 2014, 08:31:54 PM
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 people
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: beaker people  (Read 13870 times)
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2009, 09:41:31 AM »


I don´t know the article you mention about anthropomorphic statues (I haven´t found it in the list of articles you kindly sent to me),

I have now uploaded it to the mini-library and emailed you with the access link. Let me know if there is a problem.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 04, 2009, 11:10:09 AM »

Thanks, Jean.  I really appreciate your work in collecting and sharing the information.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #27 on: November 04, 2009, 12:00:35 PM »

It's a real pleasure Mike to share with interested people. I have weeded out the mini-library and uploaded 8 new papers in total today. But back to the thread ...
Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #28 on: November 04, 2009, 12:12:00 PM »

Jean
I have digested the article by Harrison and Heyd, and I don´t quite understand where did you get the idea of Yamnaya migrating to Iberia. I quote some relevant ideas I found in the article
 From 4500 BC people of steppe origin from the
western Pontic area were entering familiar environments
and settling in the plains of the lower Danube
and the central Carpathian basin

 That is it, no migration into Western Europe, much less Iberia. In fact, talking about Los Millares, they write
However, from 2900–2800 BC the population in
some regions of southern Spain and Portugal suddenly
migrates from villages and hamlets into a few enormous
settlements that Spanish archaeologists call
macro-villages, like Los Millares, Valencina de la Concepción,
Marroquíes Bajos, and Perdigões.. Central Portugal also develops
its own culture from 2800 BC, in the form of large
fortified settlements, such as Leceia, Vila Nova de São
Pedro and Zambujal, again with associated megalithic
tombs and collective burials


In fact, they describe the effect of the Yamnaya migration on Western European populations as follows.
It is like squeezing a plastic bag of
water, which bulges out wherever it can within the
membrane; so, too, the demographic or economic
pressure upon one region was transmitted indirectly to
distant regions.

An indirect effect, not a direct migration. I can´t see where in the article is supported your idea that
 Groups appear to have broken away from that migration to filter into Balkan region between the Danube and the Adriatic. Some stayed there and became Ilyrians. Others seem to have moved into Northern Italy. Some stayed there to mine copper and become Ligurians. Others moved south into Central Italy to become Italic-speakers. Yet others seem to have prospected by sea for copper, finding it in Iberia. They stayed, set up fortified colonies at Zambujal and Los Millares, and eventually emerge into history as Celtiberians and other Iron Age peoples of Iberia.


Regarding the stelae, the article claims no connection with the Yamnaya culture, on the contrary, the Stelae type A are given as local Neolithic, and the type B as Bell Beaker.
.
The cultural affiliation of the type A and B stelae is
quite clear from the ornaments and weapons (Fig. 30).
The double-spirals and triangular ribbed daggers are
copper artifacts that belong to the Final Neolithic in
the Swiss Valais. This horizon, which until the 1990’s
was seen as part of the Saône-Rhône Culture
belongs in wider European terms to the
start of the Late Copper Age
The type B stelae belong to the early Bell Beaker horizon
.

The stelae were in fact, according to the article, destroyed  by Yamnaya or Yamnaya influnced people
 
In Sion, the early Beaker ideology from the
west was violently challenged, and replaced by an antagonistic
version of the same beliefs that came from
the east, ultimately from the Carpathian basin and
the middle Danube. The result was the obliteration of
the specifically western Beaker ideology, and the stelae,
which materialized it. No more were erected,
…There can be no mistaking
the intentionality of this destruction, nor its thoroughness;
not one stela was left undamaged

To sum up, according to Harrison and Heyd
1) The Yamnaya people migrated to the Hungarian plane and the Balkans, and stopped there. There are influnces and some items of the Yamnaya package in Western Europe, but that´s it, an indirect influence rather than a direct migration
2) Los Millares/Zambujal is a local development, again no migration from Yamnaya people or anyone else
3) The stelae are from late Neolithic (Type A) and Bell Beaker (Type B), not Yamnaya, on the contrary, they were destroyed by Yamnaya people or Yamnaya influenced people.

As I said, I am rather surprised because I don´t find any support for your ideas in the article, rather quite the opposite. You know I admire the work you have been developing in your site and the DNA forums, but this particular arguments of you I find they lack a firm base.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2009, 12:19:42 PM »

I already stressed the differences between Bell Beakers and the Zambujal/Los Millares culture.
However the archaeologists working on Zambujal have stressed the continuity between the foundation of Zambujal and the Bell Beaker pottery. The latter appears to stem from the former.

Now I am always suspicious of claims for continuity, because we have had decades of archaeologists claiming continuity in the face of ample evidence to the contrary. There has been a nationalistic trend to claim that just about anything of any importance was home-grown. So I look at these claims with a jaundiced eye. Add to that the ingrained conviction that Bell Beaker ware was introduced everywhere by Bell Beaker Folk, whom I expected to have arrived from the European steppe, and you can  imagine with what incredulity I read the reports on Zambujal and the review of radiocarbon dates for Bell Beaker. But I was convinced.

We have to deal with the evidence we find. That may require putting aside preconceptions. I dropped the idea that the Beaker Folk had conveniently developed Bell Beaker ware just before they decided to migrate, thus providing archaeologists with a clear line of migration.

If we understand that a branch of a branch of the Yamnaya migrated and only later developed the characteristic Bell Beaker pottery, the fashion for which then spread among their kinsfolk, as they spread all over, the jigsaw pieces fit.


 
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #30 on: November 04, 2009, 12:28:10 PM »

I have digested the article by Harrison and Heyd, and I don´t quite understand where did you get the idea of Yamnaya migrating to Iberia.

I'm using my intelligence to put together the most recent evidence from archaeology, linguistics and population genetics.

Harrison and Heyd are working within the familiar framework of not-really-migration. They don't press the case for physical migration,  any more than Mallory or Anthony do.  What they do is lay out the archaeological evidence that bridges the gap between Yamnaya and its offshoot cultures, such as Bell Beaker.

If there was a published book or paper that said exactly what I say in my online article,  then I wouldn't have bothered to write it. I would just refer people to that publication.  I don't write simply to play echo.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 12:30:43 PM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #31 on: November 04, 2009, 12:51:59 PM »


In Sion, the early Beaker ideology from the west was violently challenged, and replaced by an antagonistic version of the same beliefs that came from the east, ultimately from the Carpathian basin and the middle Danube.
To sum up, according to Harrison and Heyd
 The stelae are from late Neolithic (Type A) and Bell Beaker (Type B), not Yamnaya, on the contrary, they were destroyed by Yamnaya people or Yamnaya influenced people.

You have misunderstood a crucial part of their analysis. H & H grasped that the Yamnaya influence first arrived at Sion in the late Neolithic. Bell Beaker (which they very definitely see as a cultural offshoot of Yamnaya) arrived next, but without any  discontinuity. The abrupt discontinuity came later and it was political, not cultural. The Beaker influence from the SW (southern France, Iberia) was overthrown by the rising power of the Beaker people from the east, who had been moving up the Danube and settled  north of the Alps, bringing Sion within their grasp.  
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 12:52:26 PM by Jean M » Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #32 on: November 04, 2009, 01:11:14 PM »



You have misunderstood a crucial part of their analysis. H & H grasped that the Yamnaya influence first arrived at Sion in the late Neolithic. Bell Beaker (which they very definitely see as a cultural offshoot of Yamnaya) arrived next, but without any  discontinuity.
Could you please quote where in the article are those crucial parts? I can´tt find them
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #33 on: November 04, 2009, 01:27:20 PM »

You just quoted part of their brilliant analysis of the discontinuity at Sion, the takeover by people of the same culture, but from a different direction. They specifically say in the part you quoted "an antagonistic version of the same beliefs".  

It is a massive article. There is a lot to take in. They discuss the specific case - Sion - in detail, before embarking on the general context. It is in the later part of the article that they discuss the Yamnaya package.  

They carefully avoid going beyond the evidence at Sion. They can only point to a general  direction linking Sion with related sites. So they simply talk of the initial line of contact being from Sion to the SW, then the abrupt arrival of the new influence from the east. Then the contact from the SW returns later.

I was putting this into its wider context - the two strands of Bell Beaker, one SW and the other radiating from the Danube and moving down the Rhine.  These different zones have  long been recognised.

« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 01:37:50 PM by Jean M » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2009, 02:33:44 PM »

..... I was putting this into its wider context - the two strands of Bell Beaker, one SW and the other radiating from the Danube and moving down the Rhine.....
I would love to have more deep clade testing, more testing in general, along on the Danube.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #35 on: November 04, 2009, 09:00:02 PM »

I must say I do hope that the origins of R1b1b2 in western Europe is not down to beaker culture.  Its just such a controversial and hotly debated subject and I do not think the evidence has an open-shut feel.  Whatever the real truth it would be a lot simpler if it did correlate in the main with early Neolithic spread with its major sharp changes across much of Europe.   However, it is still troubling that it has a pattern of being strongest today where farming arrived latest.     
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #36 on: November 04, 2009, 10:36:24 PM »

Take comfort Alan. Nobody is going to blame you, however it turns out.

Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 04, 2009, 11:14:10 PM »

I must say I do hope that the origins of R1b1b2 in western Europe is not down to beaker culture.  Its just such a controversial and hotly debated subject and I do not think the evidence has an open-shut feel.  Whatever the real truth it would be a lot simpler if it did correlate in the main with early Neolithic spread with its major sharp changes across much of Europe.   However, it is still troubling that it has a pattern of being strongest today where farming arrived latest.      
I don't think any of this whole thing looks "open-shut" in any fashion.  Heck, we still have perhaps the most noted population geneticist on TV today placing R1b another 25 thousand years earlier in Europe.

I've read quite a bit about the Neolithic expansions because they are supposed to have been "the" major population impact, but the patterns don't fit very well and the timing just seems too early.  A tell-tale sign may be the population declines in parts of Old "farming" Europe.

Sometimes the truth is a surprise.  Although, the most surprising thing, I think is the "bushiness" of R1b1b2.  It exploded quite quickly.

Between LBK & Impressed Ware Neolithic expansion and the Beaker folks is there any other candidate?  How about after the Beaker folks?   .... Could it be Halstatt, with a secondary "pooling" west?
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 11:15:51 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #38 on: November 05, 2009, 01:57:04 AM »

I've been making a list of current research projects on aspects of migration. It is starting to look as though academics are  competing to climb onto the migration bandwagon while there is still room on there. Ancient DNA and isotope studies are prominent features. 

I just discovered that the European Commission has funded Forging Identities: The mobility of culture in Bronze Age Europe. A network of universities, museums and research institutions will explore intercultural interaction in Bronze Age Europe – an epoch with new patterns of social identification, specialised production, complex polities and wide-reaching networks across Europe.

Quote
The combination of archaeology with other scientific frontier approaches – notably palaeo-genetics, isotope analysis, biochemistry and geochemistry – is the methodological core point of the project, which will also incorporate new theoretical perspectives on mobility and receptivity and use front-line IT.
Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #39 on: November 05, 2009, 11:03:35 AM »

Since we are in an speculative mode, I would throw my own speculations,I caution not supported by modern archaeologists for the most part, about Bell Beakers
1) Around 3200 BC migrants from Cyprus/Sirya (where there were already tholoi built in the V millenium) arrived to Los Millares. They built there the largest city then in Western Europe, protected by three succesive walls and reinforced by defensive towers. They were looking for copper.
2) Around 2800 they expand by sea to the atlantic coast of Portugal, where they build several new cities equally well protected.
3) 2700-2400 Local people in modern Portugal learn metal working techniques from the Los Millares/Zambujal people. It is a period of cooling climate that favours pastoralism over agriculture. In this circunstances, a new culture is born, a pastoralist, warriorlike, metal working people. The innovations expand quickly through Wstern Europe , may that be by trade, elite exhange, or pastolist seminomadic populations, or a mix of all them.
4) 2400 Bell Beakers arrive to Central Europe, where they meet Corded Ware/Yamnaya people. There they pick the all important Horse and the IE language associated to it.
3) 2400-1800 A new identity is created with all those elements, including the development of Proto-Italo-Celtic family, in Central Europe, and then starts to move back West and South.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #40 on: November 05, 2009, 11:18:44 AM »

As it is not easy to get the gist of the important, but massive and complex, Harrison and Heyd article, here's a quick guide. Sorry to take a while to produce it.

The Yamnaya migration

H&H stick with what they know on this. There is ample evidence for the Yamnaya mass migration up the Danube c. 3000 BC. This has long been accepted. It is non-controversial. They lay out the story on pp. 196+. What has always been a problem is making the archaeological link from there to the cultures such as Corded Ware and Bell Beaker that spread the major innovations of metal-working and horse-riding, the plough and the wagon, that we see in the Yamnaya Culture, further out across Europe.

The range of Yamnaya influence

So the importance of H&H's article is the presentation of the "Yamnaya package" of objects and characteristics on pp. 196 ff. They build up this package by examples from areas non-controversially Yamnaya. Then they show how far some of these items spread.

In this discussion they do not claim mass migration. They remain within the cultural diffusion framework that Harrison himself formed for Bell Beaker. [This does not mean that migration didn't happen! The changes can be interpreted in various ways. I chose to use DNA and linguistic evidence to paint a different picture from the same basic data.]

Crucial items in the Yamnaya package found at Sion

On the bottom of p. 201 and the top of p. 203,  H&H mention the anthropomorphic stelae all over northern Italy and in the Alpine valleys, including the ones at Sion The stelae are one item in the Yamnaya package (see p. 197 last paragraph.) The earliest examples are north of the Black Sea in the Crimea and areas adjacent.

Sion as an example of the transition from Yamnaya to Bell-Beaker

H&H treat the cemetery at Sion as the continuous burial place of what they assume to be a local, settled farming community. It starts in the final Neolithic. It had Yamnaya stelae (pre-Beaker and post-Beaker). On p. 191 H&H say (last paragraph column 1 and top column 2) that the community was already connected to the process of transformation that affects all Europe from 2900 BC. The cemetery layout indicates sun-worship, which H&H see as an item in the Bell Beaker "package" (p. 205, item 5). The stelae with their depictions of weapons are part of the "warrior self-consciousness", which they see as another component of BB culture  (p. 205, item 3).  

The origins of Bell Beaker

On p. 203, col. 2, H&H discuss the origins of Bell Beaker. They accept the early date of BB in Portugal, though pointing out that Portugal does not have the classic Beaker package, but a "proto-package", which they feel developed into the full-blown Bell Beaker Culture as it was transmitted to other areas.

So what H&H have done is link Yamnaya to Bell Beaker, via one site explored in detail. They frame this in terms of different phases of the transformation of Europe in the 3rd Millenium. They do not describe a migration from the Danube across  Italy and on to France and Iberia, as I do. That is all my own work.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2009, 03:36:11 PM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #41 on: November 05, 2009, 12:08:41 PM »

@ IALEM

Well we are agreed on the copper prospecting!

As you know, H&H dismiss the idea of Near Eastern influence at this date in Iberia. I wouldn't be quite so dismissive, but I suspect the reality was rather more complex than has hitherto been envisaged.

There has been speculation about Minoans founding Los Millares. But it looks as though the Minoans had not even arrived on Crete c.3000 BC. Tholoi appear in Iberia before those in Greece. Tholoi do appear earlier in Neolithic Iraq, Syria and Turkey, though not used as tombs, and later in Cyprus (famous for its copper).

The missing link, I suspect, is the Maikop Culture. That grew rich on trading contacts with Mesopotamia. It seems to have had outposts at the walled town of Aliemek Tepesi (Azerbaijan), and Se Girdan (Iran) and Arslantepe (Turkey). Some political upheaval in Mesopotamia c. 3100 BC brought an end to the Maikop Culture. Arslantepe was attacked and burned, Se Girdan abandoned. This is the point at which some elements at least of the Maikop people appear to have thrown in their lot with the Yamnaya Culture, bringing to it an early form of bronze-working.

Perhaps I should weave this strand of thought into my article.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2009, 12:12:29 PM by Jean M » Logged
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2009, 04:18:05 AM »

We also agree IE language in Western Europe is linked to Yamnaya
« Last Edit: November 06, 2009, 04:31:24 AM by IALEM » Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #43 on: November 06, 2009, 08:52:52 AM »

I have not had the chance to read the Harrison and Heyd paper yet, so thanks for the handy summary, Jean.

You mentioned migration versus cultural diffusion. Regarding the "Bell Beaker People" of the long barrows in Britain versus the "Beaker Folk" of the round barrows: The latter are thought to have come from the Rhineland, although some argue for a mostly indigenous element among them. Anyway, they differ physically and culturally from the Bell Beaker People, who are often described, especially in older works, as "Iberians".

It seems we are talking about different sets of people: "Bell Beaker" "Iberians" versus "Beaker Folk" from the Rhineland.

So, did Bell Beaker Iberians move out to Central Europe to be transmogrified into "Beaker Folk", or did elements of beaker culture (like the making of the beakers themselves) travel out into Central Europe without the Iberians or without more than just a few of them?

These questions are important, since what we are doing here is searching for our fathers, so to speak.

If P312 or L21 is to be associated with some kind of beaker culture, we need to know with which one and where that one came from.

Were the longheaded, gracile "Iberians" of the long barrows our y-dna ancestors, or were the roundheaded, bulkier "Beaker Folk" of the round barrows our y-dna ancestors (I'm speaking as a person of British Isles ancestry here)? Did our y-dna come up from Iberia or from the Rhineland (ultimately via the Danube Valley)?
Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #44 on: November 06, 2009, 01:40:20 PM »

Regarding the "Bell Beaker People" of the long barrows in Britain versus the "Beaker Folk" of the round barrows: The latter are thought to have come from the Rhineland, although some argue for a mostly indigenous element among them. Anyway, they differ physically and culturally from the Bell Beaker People, who are often described, especially in older works, as "Iberians".

This seems to be a confusion, arising perhaps from different terminology or interpretation in different works over the years. The long barrows in Britain are dated to the Neolithic. The round barrows are associated with the Bell Beaker people, also known as the Beaker Folk.

I wouldn't worry about the speculations in older works about the geographical origins of the Bell Beaker people. Ideas have shifted around quite a bit, and people currently just seem mostly confused. The Amesbury Archer found in 2002 is the first Bell Beaker Culture person in the British Isles to have isotope studies done on him. They appear to indicate  an origin near the Alps. But much more work along these lines is going on.

  
« Last Edit: November 06, 2009, 01:41:29 PM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #45 on: November 06, 2009, 02:08:48 PM »

Were the longheaded, gracile "Iberians" of the long barrows our y-dna ancestors, or were the roundheaded, bulkier "Beaker Folk" of the round barrows our y-dna ancestors (I'm speaking as a person of British Isles ancestry here)?

The long-headed, gracile people of the Neolithic brought farming from the Near East. As far as anyone can work out, they carried mainly Y-DNA J and E subclades. See
http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/peoplingeurope.shtml#farmers

The round-headed, bulkier, Bell Beaker people of the round barrows carried, as far as I can work out,  mainly Y-DNA  R1b, possibly with a bit of G.

However life is never nice and simple. As I explain in the latest version of Peopling of Europe: Bell Beaker to Celts and Italics, the Yamnaya Proto-Italo-Celtic group who migrated up the Danube Valley seem to have split into two.

1) What I'm calling the mother group carried on up the Danube to Hungary, the Czech Republic and Austria. Some of these carried on down the Rhine into France, the Low Countries and the British Isles. In the Continental area of their spread they eventually developed the well-known Celtic cultures of the Iron Age

2) What I'm now calling the Stelae People split off to settle in the area that became Illyria and move through it to the Adriatic, across to North Italy and by sea to found Copper Age colonies in southern France and Iberia.

Both groups 1 and 2 used Bell Beaker ware, which seems to have spread through the network from Portugal. So they are all considered Bell Beaker people (until they become Celts and Italics and Illyrians and Ligurians and so on).  
 
But different subclades arose in the groups 1 and 2. P312 seems to have flowed both ways. It certainly looks as though L21 arose in group 1 - the mother group, though I know some people feel that not enough testing has yet been done for it in Iberia.  
« Last Edit: November 06, 2009, 03:48:14 PM by Jean M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #46 on: November 06, 2009, 02:14:29 PM »

We also agree IE language in Western Europe is linked to Yamnaya.

I have now modified the Peopling of Europe to take on board your entirely justified criticism that I was not explaining the apparent link between the Near East and Copper Age Iberia. I flesh out the thought I threw out above.

I now have a blog at DNA Forums, where you can voice your criticisms!
http://dna-forums.com/index.php?/blog/2-distant-past/

 
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #47 on: November 06, 2009, 08:48:50 PM »

This seems to be a confusion, arising perhaps from different terminology or interpretation in different works over the years. The long barrows in Britain are dated to the Neolithic. The round barrows are associated with the Bell Beaker people, also known as the Beaker Folk.

I wouldn't worry about the speculations in older works about the geographical origins of the Bell Beaker people. Ideas have shifted around quite a bit, and people currently just seem mostly confused. The Amesbury Archer found in 2002 is the first Bell Beaker Culture person in the British Isles to have isotope studies done on him. They appear to indicate  an origin near the Alps. But much more work along these lines is going on.

There is certainly some confusion on my part, because I understood there was  bell beaker type pottery in some of the long barrows.

I also understood that the Bell Beaker people of Iberia were of a different physical type from the Beaker Folk. Is that not the case?
« Last Edit: November 06, 2009, 08:50:02 PM by rms2 » Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #48 on: November 06, 2009, 09:55:48 PM »

There is certainly some confusion on my part, because I understood there was  bell beaker type pottery in some of the long barrows.

There might be, if a long barrow was re-used for a later burial, but as I understand it the change in burial style coincides with the Bell Beaker "package" in Britain. See Wikipedia: Beaker Culture

Quote
I also understood that the Bell Beaker people of Iberia were of a different physical type from the Beaker Folk. Is that not the case?

Bell Beaker people = Beaker Folk. Honestly. Truly. Cross my heart and hope to die. These are just common names used for the people who are known by the distinctive beakers they made in an inverted bell-shape. Physical type in Iberia I wouldn't know about. That's a different question. 

There is a good video on the Beaker People here, from Australian television I think, with  contributions from Prof. Andrew Sherratt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PbziD8M-lw

Part 2 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoLxdhOukDI&feature=related





Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 07, 2009, 02:55:56 AM »

 .............
There is a good video on the Beaker People here, from Australian television I think, with  contributions from Prof. Andrew Sherratt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PbziD8M-lw
Part 2 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoLxdhOukDI&feature=related
I like the part of the video where the narrator says their most powerful weapon was an idea - they had a chief, and they did what chief said.

I wish my boys would get that part.  I'll keep pounding it in.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2009, 02:56:24 AM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7 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 0.162 seconds with 19 queries.