Talk:Beaker culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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 () 29 June 2005 16:36 (UTC)


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.

Pots and/or people

Recent DNA studies of burials in Great Britain come down fairly certainly on the side of migration. See Mike Pitts, "Was Beaker Invasion Greatest of All?" British Archaeology July/August 2017: 6, for a summary of research.

This is not my field, so I hesitate to write it up. I'm sure there is other recent DNA work on the topic that I don't know of. Would one of the original authors of this excellent article be prepared to take this on and bring the discussion up to date? KC 15:27, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Nature ( has a sensationalist (and over-simplified) discussion that includes references to even-more-recent DNA studies and commentary on their meaning and use (in general and with respect to migration in Europe in specific). Kdammers (talk) 05:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
There seem to be some inconsistencies in the paper. Haak et al. showed that Modern Britons have around one third Yamnaya/steppe ancestry - and roughly a third each of Early Neolithic and Western Hunter-gatherer ancestry. The paper in question is suggesting a 90% replacement of the pre-Bronze Age British population by the, ultimately steppe-derived, 'Beaker People'. What happened in the intervening time? Did the genetics of the earlier populations mount a remarkable come-back? I suspect that there is a massive element of extrapolation going on here. If the investigators were looking only at burials with Beaker grave-goods then they were 'cherry-picking', in which case they are really only saying that 90% of British burials containing Beaker identifiers, were of ultimate Steppe ancestry, which is something far away from 90% of the contemporary (Chalcolithic-Early Bronze Age) British population. I am perplexed. Urselius (talk) 11:04, 1 October 2018 (UTC)


1. If and as long as, "Radiocarbon dating seems to support that the earliest "Maritime" Bell Beaker design style is encountered in Iberia, specifically in the vibrant copper-using communities of the Tagus estuary in Portugal around 2800–2700 BC and spread from there to many parts of western Europe.[3][13]" the Iberian finds are the absolute oldest ones, I see no logic in postulating any other locations of origin.

2. If and because the source "An overview of all available sources from southern Germany concluded that Bell Beaker was a new and independent culture in that area, contemporary with the Corded Ware culture.[14][15]" is limited to southern Germany, it does not justify the conclusion written here. HJJHolm (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest to be bold and edit the article yourself. These articles do not have many watchers or receive much attention. Hrodvarsson (talk) 12:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
The problem is that a beaker doesn't make a culture. The culture is only named after this type of beaker, it isn't equivalent to them. The existence of early examples of this beaker type does not translate to early presence of the Bell Beaker culture. The delineation of archaeological cultures is best left to experts looking at the whole picture, and attributed to such experts with respect to the full context of the argument being made.
People get too hung up on such "characteristics", e.g. our "Iron Age" articles are completely obsessed with the earliest evidence for iron metallurgy -- while, of course, the Iron Age is only named for iron metallurgy, it isn't completely equivalent to the presence of such.
If people in Neolithic Portugal happened to make bell-shaped beakers, this doesn't make them "Beaker people" as long as they do not also have the characteristic fibulae, bronze daggers, etc. It makes them, at best, one of several possible predecessor cultures.
--dab (𒁳) 08:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Map differs from text

Regrettably, the bad map ignores the Jutland Beakers described in the text, and thus mistakenly could support the false "gap" mentioned in Olalde et al. (2018).2003:DD:F14:6264:4DF7:91EF:EFFE:63F4 (talk) 16:48, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Again, this map is the worst available in the net. I have not the knowledge of handling the conditions of wiki to replace it, however, anybody with this knowledge could easily find better maps, which must include the northern and eastern extensions of the bell beaker culture, e.g., in google pictures.2003:DD:F15:C5F1:EDAF:31B3:B978:22F2 (talk) 09:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

The map is based on

RJ Harrison, The Beaker Folk. Copper Age archaeology in Western Europe. Ancient Peoples and Places 97, London 1980.

It represents 1970s knowledge, so it is perfectly possible that it is outdated. Your first step in "replacing" it would be to cite a specific source for an improved map. --dab (𒁳) 08:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Talk:Beaker culture"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA