From: Dennis Poulter
Message: 2616
Date: 2000-06-06
----- Original Message -----
From: John Croft <jdcroft@...>
To: <cybalist@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 06 June, 2000 12:55 AM
Subject: [TIED] Re: AfroAsiatic
>
> I have a concern. The AA discussion is important to PIE only as
> regards Glens' Semitish (and my difficulty with accepting that they
> were Semites). It is of peripheral interest otherwise, and I feel
> that we should continue this discussion elsewhere, if that is what
> others on the list feel. Lets return to a more central PIE
> discussion
> here.
>
Yes I agree, John. That last post was going to be really my last word on the
African side. The real question is - is there a basis for Semitic/Semitish
farmers in Europe/Anatolia/Caucasus/Pontic?
As for your connections between cultural/technical spread and
people/language movements, my only argument is that you make too close a
connection. We're looking at things here in a large perspective, whereas
cultural/linguistic assimilation can take place in the space of a couple of
generations. My argument is that if a nomadic and assumedly technically less
advanced people come into contact with a more settled and more advanced
technology, it's quite likely that within two or three generations all the
signs will show a seamless sequence of culture/technology associated with
the location in question, but the linguistic or ethnic make-up may have
changed.
Archaeology is still in its infancy and many areas are still to be explored,
and new findings are appearing all the time which force a reconsideration of
accepted scenarios. So it is premature to make any categorical statements
and the case of how apparently ancient Semitic words were adopted into
Indo-Tyrrhenian and Kartvelian has still to be answered.
Thanks again for all the excellent information, and forcing me to research
my own position.
Cheers
Dennis
I'm thinking here of the Arab conquests of the 7th century, which spread the
language far and wide, but in its early days, essentially left the local
cultures intact. Meanwhile the conquerors, abandoning their nomadic
lifestyle, adopted and adapted themselves to the sedentary cultures they
found, either Byzantine or Persian. Eventually of course, a new synthesised
culture arose, but which physically (buildings, art, weaponry etc.) owed
nothing to pre-Islamic Arabia, but everything to Hellenistic Greece and
Persia.