Talk:Bell Beaker culture

Finds in Britain

it's ok to have stuff on prehistoric Britain, no problem. As for the beaker culture, it does appear that the most finds by far are from Britain (we need a map), so Britain will have to be given some precedence on this article too. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 16:36 (UTC)

Vandalism

I removed several sections of vandalism, although hilarious and satirical in nature, that do not contribute to this article related to defameing one David John Decoskey.

Papac et al 2021

Here's the full quote: "Unresolved questions concern the genetic and geographic origins of CW and Bell Beaker (BB) individuals, their relationship to one another and to Yamnaya individuals, as well as the origin of Early Bronze Age (EBA) Únětice individuals. Although it has been proposed that CW formed from a male-biased westward migration of genetically Yamnaya-like people (23, 41–44), no overlap in Y-chromosomal lineages (with the exception of a few nondiagnostic I2) has been found between the predominantly R1a-carrying CW and mainly R1b-Z2103–carrying Yamnaya males. Steppe ancestry is also present in BB individuals (5); however, they predominantly carry R1b-P312, a Y-lineage not yet found among CW or Yamnaya males. Therefore, despite their sharing of steppe ancestry (3, 4) and substantial chronological overlap (45), it is currently not possible to directly link Yamnaya, CW, and BB groups as paternal genealogical sources for one another, particularly noteworthy in light of steppe ancestry’s suggested male-driven spread (23, 41–43) and the proposed patrilocal/patriarchal social kinship systems of these three societies (46–48)." Citation no. 5 is Olalde et al 2019, where they tested Bell Beaker individuals from many different areas in Europe. Papac is referring to all Bell Beaker groups, and he even explicitly says so ("not possible to link Yamnaya, CW, and BB groups"). There's no mention of "only Bohemia". Thus I request the correction of the text in this article citing Papac et al 2021, as it is misinforming. 2A02:85F:F817:9AEA:F51A:968B:EFA3:FABF (talk) 02:39, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

“The earliest Bell Beaker individuals occupy a similar position in PCA as Corded Ware individuals, suggesting a degree of genetic continuity. … We observe a closer phylogenetic relationship between the Y chromosome lineages found in early Corded Ware and Bell Beaker than in either late Corded Ware or Yamnaya and Bell Beaker. R1b-L151 is the most common Y-lineage among early Corded Ware males (6 of 11, 55%) and one branch ancestral to R1b-P312, the dominant Y-lineage in Bell Beaker."

- Papac et al. 2021 Ario1234 (talk) 14:25, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Luka Papac archaeogenetic thesis

The author of Papac et al 2021 has published his thesis which can be found under the title "Tracking population history, social structure and intergroup exchange in Neolithic to Bronze Age Europe using ancient human and virus genomes". In it he mentions how Bell Beaker lineages and CWC male lineages (y-DNA) are completely non-overlapping even in times where these groups were living in the same area. Worth a read for anyone interested in Bronze Age dynamics 2A02:85F:F89A:3C6B:50EF:8F29:D9A4:7F63 (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Helpful pdf link 😁  Tewdar  15:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Renewed emphasis on migration- questions

The first paragraph asserts that there was a shift of interpretation. The second paragraph asserts that DNA work is ALSO evidence for the migration theory. The problem with that is that the first paragraph, whilst describing details of migration does not give any evidence for this. Apart from DNA what IS the new evidence that makes them feel this is about migration ?

• Secondly, I know this is not the place for general talk on the subject, but I don't know where else I would throw out this thought- We say that 90% of the genes had changed to Beaker People in the British Isles, that is HUGE. Would be suggest that that involved disease ?

IceDragon64 (talk) 01:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)