Re: [TIED] Re: Semitish influence on IE

John quips:

>Firstly there are no African elements in Natufian

Excuse me?? How then did this culture develop on its own?! You may not
believe in time travel but do you believe in aliens?

John further snorts:

>Secondly I don't believe in time travel

Must I tongue-lash you about quantum mechanics? Without time travel, you
can't understand the temporal relationship between positrons and electrons.
The only time travel mystery here is how antiquated notions of the cosmos
can still exist among the living.

John, some more:

>It is only controversial because it disagrees with what Christian
>theologians and biblical scholars claim.

Then it would appear that only Christian theologians and biblical scholars
are intrigued by this work.

>Belbasi culture is too early to have been significantly [irrelevant
>points... blah, blah, blah]
>There are Natufian elements in the Beldibi culture. So I'll grant
>you that point.

Good. Therefore, as I was saying, there is a cultural movement northwards
from Syria and Palestine at around 8000 BCE which may be easily attributable
to language spread and particularly a spread of Semitish, just in time for
influencing IE.

>Beldibi was fairly tightly confined into the Cilician
>region and there is no trace of it further to the west.

Wrong. There is southern influence all throughout the Cilician region at
this time - in Hacilar, Beldibi and Belbasi. Eventually, the culture was
influenced by the Anatolian mainland, explaining why "there is no trace of
it further to the west". Agriculture and pottery already were picked up by
the Semitish from the Hattic by this stage.

>It could equally be the Nostratic languages spreading into Anatolia
>from Syria and Palestine.

Since a Semitish language, being related to Semitic, would qualify as a
Nostratic language (via AfroAsiatic), I'll take that as an agreement.

>Possible, except that the aceramic that is found in the Balkans seems
>to have come from NW Anatolia (the Troad) and across into Nea
>Nicomedia in Macedonia. There is no connection between Nea Nicomedia
>and SE Anatolia. There was a clear cultural divide between SW and NW
>Antolia that lasted into late Hittite times, Glen.

Hate to burst your bubble but... Assuming that Hittite qualifies as an
IndoEuropean language on your planet and that you agree, like the whopping
majority do, that the IndoEuropean Anatolians entered through NW Anatolia
well after 6000 BCE but before "late Hittite times", then your unchanging
cultural divide would appear to say nothing about language spread at all - a
self-contradiction on your part. Consider yourself moot-ified.

>Your scenario only makes sense, Glen if the Natufians spoke Semitic.

Not exactly. Certainly by 6000 BCE, the region that was once Natufian had to
have been Semitic. And thus, we seem to return back to Bomhard's proposal
(Natufian => AfroAsiatic c.10,900-8,500 BCE) in potential contradiction to
your Saharan hypothesis.

>They developed their culture in situ from the Earlier Kebaran
>(18,000->10,500)

You mean: 12,330 to 10,610 BCE?

>"African polytheism" so early is hard to demonstrate.

Perhaps. Luckily, it's simply an entertaining side-point about the ultimate
origins of Semitic mythology and nothing that I need get deeply into right
now.

>It was not just the Semitish who did so Glen. It seems to have been
>a key factor of the first Caucasian speaking farmers.

Of course, but as we've already discussed ad nauseum, there are no
demonstratable Caucasic loans to be found in IE. Until we find 'em, that
leaves the obvious Semitish avenue which we will continue down on.

>Catal Huyuk is a classic site, showing clear connections between the
> >iconography here and the goddess images of the upper Paleolithic
>(Gravetians) which stretched from Spain to the trans Ural region.

The wide spread of the Goddess religion can be associated with the
VascoCaucasic language spread which split very early into Vasconic (Basque)
and Caucasic (Hattic, NEC, HurroUrartian). I'm beginning to suspect that
Linear A (Minoan) might be VascoCaucasic too but let's not hold our breath
on that one :) As far as I know, Catal Huyuk doesn't show a clear "blend" of
mythologies but rather shows the typical undifferentiated characteristics of
the Goddess religion.

>There is also the underlying myth in Semitic of the Goddess as the
>watery depths. She was the serpentine Tehom in Hebrew, Tiamat in
>Akkadian.

Yes. It's always either the bird (sky) or the serpent (waters) that creates
the world in these myths.

>The idea of the world as made from the body of a slain divinity also >shows
>up in Norse mythology (Ymir), who was cognate with the Iranian >Jamashah
>and the Hindu Yama.

I have to question this. Sure you aren't confusing things here? In this
particular case you're refering to the Twins that fight each other and one
of them becoming the originator of _mankind_ (not the universe) as in the
story of Cain and Abel, Romulus and Remus & Castor and Pollux. Tiamat
however is related to a clear pattern of creation of the _universe_ (not
mankind) with the opening theme of a bird (Nyx) or serpent (Tiamat) that
starts the process.

>Tehom also shows up as the Greek Oceanus and as the Norse Midgard >Serpent,
>who holds the world together, so these myths travelled a long >way.

To Eastern Asia and beyond.

In fact, more food for thought about IndoEuropean/Semitic myth: The story of
the Flood is in fact a story about _Re-Creation_ since we find a bird flying
over the waters (sent by Noah/Utnapishtim, in this case searching for land).
It can be seen as a metaphor for the Mother Goddess creating the universe
yet again. I just figured that out and I feel proud enough to share. There
are other parallels too.

>Eurafrican Glen? I think you are dreaming here.

It's your dream, not mine. A blend of European and African myth is a reality
just as there is a blend of genetics, culture and language between the two
continents. Wakey-wakey, now.

>Hadad as a thunder god is relatively late.

True. West Semitic. I'm sure it is influenced by earlier forms though (Baal,
maybe?) The similarities are too great to ignore.

>[Ishtar] is very early, but her association with the Semitic Innana >seems
>to have occurred principally during the reign of Sargon of >Akkad, and his
>daughter Enheduanna.

This says nothing. *`ATtaru is certainly early and what does Innana have to
do with anything?

>>[...] original Goddess religion with a smattering of African voodoo >>for
>>good measure.
>
>African voodoo? Glen, please! Voodoo as a religion was the product
>of the Slave centuries [...]

Obviously. I was taking some liberty with the English language here,
casually mentioning voodoo in connection with African mythology. Afterall,
voodoo is still based very much based on the beliefs of Africa - not
something that slaves just made up to pass the time away! Why, one may even
call it a Eurafrican religion, n'est pas?

- gLeN

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com