Re: Glen's reconstructions Archaeology & Genetics

Glen regarding my

> >Keltiminar (5,500 - 3500) Yenisei River bend
> >
> >Keltiminar is the first appearance in this area of a mesolithic "wide
> >spectrum" adaptation, and it would seem fair given the chain of
> >interlocking mesolithic wide-spectrum hunter gatherer cultures that
> >stretch back to late Ice Age Africa - that this represents the spread
> >of Nostratic to Altaic anguage groups.

You wrote

> Keltiminar is definitely far too late for Steppe and is not worth

theorizing

> since IE would have already been developing at this time (Consult my
> linguistic map for further understanding).

I did not suggest Keltiminar for "Steppe" merely for proto-Altaic

>
> Bomhard has already offered a better solution. His "Eurasiatic" (my

Steppe)

> arrived in Central Asia "sometime before 9,000 BCE" where the climate

was

> far too dry to support any agriculture until no earlier than 8,000

BCE.

> Thus, Steppe speakers were no doubt mesolithic hunter-gatherers.

Bomhard

> explains that the _neolithic_ (pottery, agriculture, stock breeding)
> travelled northward into Central Asia by the _sixth_ millenium BCE.

Glen there were no mesolithic hunter-gatherers in Central Asia 9,000
BCE. At that time there were only late Upper Paleolithic cultures
present. The diffusion of Mesolithic grom the south goes as follows

10,500-9,000 Ali Tappah (Khazakhstan)
9000-5,000 Jeitun (Khoraisan-Tansoxania)
6000-4,000 Hissar (Altaic?)(from Transoxania to Issukul)
5,500-3,500 Keltiminar (Issukul to Yenisei Bend)

>
> ...so, I'm not sure what you're talking about with this "mesolithic
> wide-spectrum" stuff. I find 9000+ BCE to be too reasonable a date
> linguistically to ever support this Keltiminar idea. Sorry.

Read Kent Flannery on the "wide spectrum revolution". Wide spectrum
hunter gatherers (gathering a wide speectrum of local plants and
animals through sophisticated hunting-trapping-gathering) seem to have
begun in Africa 33,000 years BP with the Khargian culture of the
Eastern Shahara and the Aterian culture of the Western Sahara and North
Africa. These were the people who invented the Bow and Arrow. It
didn't leave Africa until the Kebaran (15,000 BCE, when in the Zarzian
(12,400-8,700) the dog was domesticated and added to the hunting
technology. Zarzian I would see as your proto-Steppe, but they were
found stretching from Transcaucasia to Khuzistan and from Central Iran
to Mesopotamia, and from there the various steppe mesolithic peoples
spread.

>
> >Grebenki (8,000 - 7,000) Steppe to Urals showing continuity of
>cultures
> >through Dnester - Bug and Dneiper-Donetz 7,000 - 5,500
>
> This sounds connected with the beginnings of IndoTyrrhenian and

Boreal.

>
> >Given this evidence Glen, we have a problem
> >
> >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
>
> _We_ have no problem. You are the sole owner of this problem. No one
> seriously claims that PIE and PU came directly out of Africa - It

would be

> like saying that English comes directly from the North Pontic-Caspian

on a

> special route of its own. If this is what you think, then you're

going to

> need to develop this crackilicious idea a little more before uttering

it in

> public.
>
> I'm now down on my knees... I beg of you. For the sake of my sanity

and

> others', stop proposing these ideas until you know some linguistic

facts.

> Read more about Nostratic theory. Pleeeease. You're killing me. Get
> acquainted with Bomhard's proposal.

Is this the same Allan R. Bomhard who proposes PIE came out of
Pre-Pharaonic Egypt??? Have a look at www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi53.
htm

To my

> >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).

Glen wrote

> This is not surprising and is a well known fact. It is confirmed by
> Nostratic linguistics. Again, my linguistic map shows the uniqueness

of

> Kartvelian vis-a-vis the rest of the Nostratic group and certainly

vis-a-vis

> the Steppe languages.

Actually I have since found a cultural link via Kobystan Zarzian
mesolithic north around the Eastern End of the Caspian to PIE area.

I asked

> >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?

Glen replied

> The languages, yes, not the genetics. And I will continue to maintain

this

> until others can get involved and dethrone my theory with some

linguistic

> thoughts. John, learn some stuff about EskimoAleut, please. The

genetics

> here are definitely not in line with the linguistic realities. Boreal

would

> have been partly carried further by trading contacts and thus goes

beyond

> genetic evidence. The people traveling across the Bering may very

well have

> been genetically more related to people now speaking Altaic

languages, but

> the EskimoAleut language is much closer to Uralic linguistically. I

don't

> understand why you can't acknowledge the fluidity of language areas

over

> time.

I certainly can but I need to know how it gets there. I am less
inclined to blame random "trade contacts" for a spread of language
unless there is a cultural cline that drives the spread of a language
(see the discussion on "demic drives")

> Your genetics and archaeology here are hazy and useless arguements

against

> the Boreal subgrouping. Linguistics is the necessary tool to unlock

this

> solely linguistic mystery.

So here we go again - linguistics in the absence of real people, with a
real culture, who speak a real language and who travel to meet, marry
and mingle. Glen, to your arguments about me needing to learn
linguistics, I can only plead perhaps you should equally learn a little
archaeology and genetics.

Fraternal feelings

John