Re: Catchup voting results

> Alexander: First farmers appeared at the territory north of the

Sahara

> in the 6th mill.BC.
> What a superfamily did they belong to? We can answer confidently - to
> the
> Nostratic one (or theoretically to the second hypotetical Near East
> superfamily,
> however I don't think so) because they had barley and wheat + sheep

and

> goats,
> not millet + cattle.

Specifically probably to the Afro-Asiatic branch. Some have suggested
that this family started in Africa (Ethiopian region) subsequently
spreading to the Middle East. Certainly if we base the original site
of language where the oldest features are found and where linguistic
diversity is greatest - it should be Ethiopia.

> Gerry: I don't think all linguists will agree with you that the first
> farmers belonged to the Nostratic family. Piotr, can you help me out
> with this? And why are you saying they are Nostratic? Because they

had

> barley and wheat + sheep and goats? So folks with barley and wheat +
> sheep and goats speak Nostratic? Alexander, this is no different from
> saying that what a person eats determines the language he speaks.

And

> I thought we had concluded that this statement was absurd. But

perhaps

> we hadn't.

I am proposing that it began out of an exitinct family which I call
Japethic. Whether that is Nostratic or part of some other grouping, I
don't know.

John

>
> Alexander: Egyptians belong to the Nostratic superfamily

(Afroasiatic

> family), but they
> were far not the very first group there.
>
> Gerry: So what you're saying is that the Egyptians weren't the first
> people to live in Egypt? Then which group are you selecting to have
> superceded the Egyptians? BTW, don't let the present day Egyptians

know

> what you're saying. With their strong sense of nationalism, they'll
> certainly disagree (and right they should).

There is much discussion over this. Farming it has been suggested
(Apart from the abortive Hulwan industry around Fayyum) with the Tasian
and Badariran cultures seem to have shown aun unbroken succession down
to the Nilotic Sudanese (Dinka and others) of today. Amratian culture
shows clear Asiatic afinity and it has been suggested that it is linked
with the Libu (Libyans). Gerzian (Naqada III) has been linked with a
"Dynastic Race" which had close Mesopotamian affinities, and has been
suggested to have been the originator of the "Semetic" features in what
was otherwise a "Hamitic" language. Now that both are part of
Afro-Asiatic changes things somewhat and makes the newer features less
obtrusive.

> Alexander: I see, here Child used the term "civilization" in the

sense

> "state, class
> society". No need to mention here farming, or mastery of fire, or
> artificial
> tools - the presence of such things is implied, they had appeared at
> earlier
> stages.
>
> Gerry here: Not really. Farming, fire, and artificial tools aren't
> simply implied. What Childe means is that folks with farming and or
> fire don't possess a civilization. One needs more than those basics

to

> have the term "civilization" placed on their group. And the basics

(10)

> are the ones I listed for you.
>
> Alexander: On the other hand I think that people passed the Neolithic
> revolution are almost
> as civilized as we are. The difference is not essential in comparison
> with the
> difference between Mesolitic and Neolithic societies. (It's my private
> opinion)
>
> Gerry: Would you possibly entertain the idea that the folks who went
> through the Neolithic revolution were perhaps more civilized than we
> are? Or more civilized than some of us are? Or do you think that all
> of us in 1999 share the same degree of civilization? I know that
> certain groups in Africa are less civilized than groups in New York

City

> (even though those groups in Africa would strongly disagree and the
> groups in NYC wouldn't like the comparison being made). Class has
> always existed and even though some countries (Russia and China for
> example) have tried to eliminate it, it continues to perk up again and
> again. Class rebounds and reappears; always has and always will.

Not necessarily so. Australian Aboriginal cultures are classless. So
were the Ituri Pigmies and the !Kung Bushmen. And the New Guinean
Highlanders. Class stratification seems to occur wherever human groups
exceed the carrying capacity of the natureal environment and it becomes
advantageous to one group to confiscate the work of a more powerless
group. This becomes institutionalised, and social stratifications get
born.

<snip>
Gerry wrote

> So, as I've stated before,
> although democracy has its many problems, it's the best political

system

> available to us at this time.

So you think you have a democracy do you? Given the record I'd say you
have a plutocracy. You have not had a non millionaire US President in
50 years! The US is not democratic despite some of the trappings (and
the massage of an election every 4 years). Where the only real choice
is behind one rich alliance and another rich alliance - it is really a
choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledumber!

Regards

John