Tripolye as IE

george knysh <gknysh@...:

> *****GK: My information differs from yours. While
> "Danubian" influence on B/D becomes progressively more
> noticeable up to its eventual absorption into
> Trypilia, "the very concept of pottery" arrived not
> from Cris=Koros but from the East, (most of the very
> earliest "pots" having clear analogies to the cultures
> of the Crimea, Azov, and Caspian sea areas.) Only a
> tiny fraction can be linked to the south, Thessaly
> specifically. The influence of cris=Koros only
> intensifies at the beginning of the middle phase of
> B/D.*****

Yes, indeed this is different information. And it would certainly be
good to have the source of such information. My first reaction is
that the Caspian (Jeitsun?) is a little late for such a claim (see
Harris & Gosden, The beginnings of agriculture in Western Central
Asia, in "The Origins and Spread of Agriculture and Pastoralism in
Eurasia", ed. D. R. Harris (Smithsonian 1996).) But any better
information you have a source for is welcome.

> *****GK: I'll get back to you on this in a few days,
> as soon as our charged out University library copy of
> Price gets to me. We'll see if Z& L are more accurate
> than Dolukhanov. Judging by your report I doubt it,
> but will suspend judgement for a bit. Do they say
> anything about Kukrek and subsequent eastern impulses?
> If not, they're not reliable.******

Yes, well, it's sort of you versus Zvebelil, Dolukhanov, et al. isn't
it? BTW, I don't understand what Kukrek has to do with pottery.

I wrote:

> Meantime, a map on page 73 of the Zvelebil article shows LBK
> settlements less than 200km from Dnieper-Donetz
> sites, both well north of Bog-Dniester.

george knysh <gknysh@...> replied:

> *****GK: My map seems more precise. LBK is about 100
> km. and B/D 80 km. away from the nearest D/D "as the
> crow flies".*****

Yes, well, perhaps you might want to get to Zvelebil on that.

george knysh <gknysh@...:

> *****GK: That is arguable but possible,. In any event
> this was long after "the very concept of pottery"
> arrived to D/D. At the earliest phase, the Azov area
> of D/D was culturally more advanced than the Dnipro
> and West area, which indicates where the original
> "impulse" was coming from (the Caucasus).****

And again the question would be what evidence you have of this
impulse. And BTW did it originate in Anatolia - where there was
pottery and agriculture? Perhaps the preIE's were executing a pincer
move?

george knysh <gknysh@...> replied:

> *****GK: I agree that this is what happened with B/D.
> But D/D was primarily absorbed by Serednyj Stih. As I
> have already pointed out, the latter was more than
> quite apparently far too powerful for the Trypilian
> farmers to infiltrate and assimilate.

Or too undesirable? Once again this absorption thing. In the models
of neolithization you'll find in the Rowe book, you'll see some
alternatives to this "Drive to the East" theory that may be useful.
I myself would guess, with good evidence, that the so-called Steppes
cultures became very dependent on Tripolye markets and were won over
with much more attractive solutions for survival and living than they
had as foragers (including perhaps beer, as Andrew Sherratt
suggests.)
However, the Tripolyean solutions -- like all neolithic solutions --
needed to be adapted to local needs. Bogucki theorizes that
LBK-types
were already converting to pastoralism and there's evidence that
fringes of Tripolye (old B-Ders) were doing the same with the
salinization of Danubian soil. This would have been the form of
Tripolyean that Sredny and Donetz picked up - in the form of
domesticates, pottery, metals, building techniques and a conversion
to
food production. And possibly even the wheel.

Like I said, if this was a contest with foragers who wanted to keep
living in holes, gathering beechnuts and wearing bark, Tripolye won.

george knysh <gknysh@...> replied:
Despite their

> numbers, the Trypilians were "stuck" on the right bank
> of the Dnipro for hundreds of years,... and their
> evolution was towards "proto-cities" there with
> increasing concentration of population rather than
> spread towards the territories of the east...

There are lots of good reasons for cities when you have the ability
to produce the way Tripolye did. Whoever came up this idea lacks a
basic understanding of market economies. The population density of
Europe at the time makes this idea even more ridiculous.

> This type of relationship obviously does not argue for
> the spread of the Trypilian language eastward.

Even if I conceded your scenario, you may not be right. Rome fell,
but a good chunk of Europe still speaks Romance.

> the Trypilians who became the objects
> of cultural and linguistic assimilation by the
> Serednyj Stih peoples in the final phase of Trypilia
> with... massive adoption of corded ware ceramics).******

Well, pretty pottery will do that every time.
Regards,Steve Long