Re: Glen's reconstructions Archaeology & Genetics

Regarding my post to Glen

> 1. The route taken by PIE/PU speakers north from Africa seems to have
> been via a chain of mesolithic cultures through Anatolia, the Balkans
> and hence the Pontic Steppes and Urals
>
> 2. The route taken by Proto-Altaic speakers north from Africa seems to
> have been via another chain of mesolithic cultures in the Zagros,
> Trans-Caspian, Transoxus to the Yenesei Basin and points north and

east.

>
> The Caucasas seem to have been a culture barrier, there is not much
> connection between the Zarzian derived Kobystan of the Araxes mouth

and

> the steppe Mesolithic cultures northwards (i.e. proto-Kartvellian).

It seems that Zarzian may have been the proto-Steppe and Proto-Eurasian
after all. I found a website that critically examined the "Aryan
Invasion of India" hypothesis, and critiqued the view that the
Indo-European Urheimat was Northern India.... way of beam perhaps, but
it suggested that there were connections via Kobystan Zarzian to the
Steppes north of the Caucasas, so this gives a later connection than
Kebaran.

> By the way, these two alternative Out of Africa routes accords well
> with the genetic evidence too...
>
> So how do we get Boreal cultures to Chukotia and Kamchatka? Are you
> saying that Inuit (Eskimo) of Greenland is closer to PIE due to its
> connection within Boreal, than are the Altaic languages, Glen? That

is

> what your family tree implies. If so, let me know and I'll go hunting
> out the archaeology and genetics of this reconstruction to see if it
> holds sense.

Perhaps the Boreal connection can be made to work with a movement north
to the arctic and spreading east and west from there. Difficult but
just possible.

Regards again

John