Piotr wrote out his archaeological reconstruction (attached). There
is much to recommend it.
Certainly there was neolithicisation of pre-existing mesolithic
peoples in the gap between Starcevo and LP (or LBK Danubian 1 - its
usual designation). Unfortunately for your thesis Piotr, it is
generally assumed there was another "Neolithicisation" of
pre-existing
mesolithic peoples between Tripolye and Srendny Stog cultures (the
former derived from the Dug-Dneistr/Don-Donetz culture). Getting IE
into the Steppe here seems to be the biggest problem (not
insurmountable but a problem).
One advantage - it would suggest that the Anatolian derived Starcevo
Neolithic is Tyrrhenian (and that Tyrrhenians came out of Anatolia)
and that Glen's Semitish (if they exist) had less distance to travel.
Thanks
John
> Marc, John, Mark and all,
> If one accepts a Central European homeland, an important question
arises: what is the origin of Greek and the Pontic branches
(Indo-Iranian, Thracian, Getic, Armenian)? Max Baldia seems to
believe
that the Funnel Beaker people (I'll be using the transparent
abbreviation "FB" rather than "TRB") can be fully identified with the
IEs; but if so, we must assume that their Pontic contemporaries (most
importantly the Pit Grave and Tripolye cultures) were non-IE, and
that
the IEisation of the north Pontic area took place not earlier than
the
CW (Corded Ware/Battle Axe) period. It's true that artifacts with CW
characteristics are found as far east as the Aral Sea, but what the
archaeological record suggests is the existence of well-functioning
trade routes rather than 'demic expansion' as Cavalli-Sforza would
put
it. If the Indo-Iranians are not CW migrants from Central Europe, who
the heck are they?
>
> The most interesting alternative is that IE-speakers were the
dominant element in *both* the FB and the steppe cultures. In other
words, the pastoralist 'Kurgan' people and the sedentary 'Old
Europeans' were linguistically related. The detailed scenario would
be
like this:
>
> 5500-5300 BC. Groups of PIE-speaking LP (Linear Pottery) farmers
migrate from the Middle Danube Valley into Central Europe and
establish a network of settlements along the loess belt of the N
European Plain (from the Rhein to the Vistula). The linguistic
ancestors of the Anatolians stay behind. Perhaps they form the
eastern
branch of the Danubian LP, or merge with the Vinca culture more to
the
south (which might also be associated with the Proto-Tyrrhenians).
>
> 5300-4500 BC. LP settlers slowly colonise new cultivable areas,
expanding both NW and E. They reach the Netherlands at the western
end; in the east they penetrate Ukraine along the Dniester Valley and
arrive on the Black Sea. By 4500 BC there are already considerable
cultural and dialectal differences between the two ends of the LP
belt. The eastward expansion of farming peters out as it reaches the
steppe, but adaptation to a seminomadic way of life with emphasis on
pastoralism enables some of the eastern IEs to venture into the
steppe
lands. They assimilate trans-Caucasian cultural influences that have
already reached the Lower Dnieper (Srednij Stog), and produce the Pit
Grave cultures.
>
> The easternmost avant-garde reaches the Volga-Ural region and then
enters Central Asia, producing a chain of closely related cultures in
Kazakhstan and the Upper Yenisey Valley. They can be tentatively
identified with the archaic linguistic lineage leading on to
Proto-Tocharian. The more sedentary cultures emerging close to the
Dniester estuary (Tripolye, possibly also Cucuteni and allied)
gravitate towards Moldova and the Romanian coast. Ancestors of the
Balto-Slavs occupy the forest zone on the Middle Dnieper
(Dnieper-Donetz?), absorbing the local Mesolithic cultures. They live
in some kind of cultural and economic symbiosis with the pastoralists
of the steppe and remain linguistically close to them. At a later
date
the Satem palatalisation spreads in that area but doesn't reach the
eastern (Proto-Tocharian) and southwestern (Proto-Greek/Phrygian)
fringes of east Indoeuropia. Still later, the Proto-Balto-Slavs and
the Proto-Indo-Iranians remain close enough to share the Ruki
innovation to the exclusion of the minor Satemic groups of the NW
Pontic area (ancestors of the Thracians, Armenians, Albanians etc.).
>
> 4500-3200 BC. The Mesolithic populations of S Scandinavia, Denmark
and N Germany have already borrowed some elements of their Neolithic
neighbours' culture (e.g. pottery). More advanced farming methods
allow the western IEs to expand to non-loess soils. Eventually their
colonisation reaches the North Sea/Baltic region and the relatively
dense non-IE substrate is assimilated linguistically (its traces can
be seen in Germanic). The FB (Funnel Beaker) culture, combining
Danubian (Lengyel) elements, megalithic and northern pre-Neolithic
traditions (Ertebølle, etc.) with local LP transformations
(Michelsberg), expands all over the Plain, attracting also the
Proto-Balto-Slavic farmers in the east into its sphere of influence
(shared Northern vocabulary). Wheeled vehicles appear during that
period, and the domestication of the horse in the steppe cultures
stimulates further brilliant inventions in vehicular transport. These
innovations and the associated vocabulary spread like bushfire among
the IEs. The eastern IE cultures of the Srednij Stog/Pit Grave
tradition undergo their own transformations (evolving into the
Catacomb, Poltavka and Andronovo cultures) and occasionally attempt
to
penetrate Pannonia and the W Pontic coastal area.
>
> The long career of the FB culture terminates in a sudden
socioeconomic collapse ca. 3200 (caused chiefly by the anthropogenic
deforestation and denudation of the settled areas, aggravated by the
Sub-Boreal climatic reversal). The population decreases and shifts
economically towards cattle and sheep pastoralism (as already
pioneered by the Globular Amphora culture well before the crisis).
Incursions of steppe element are possible at that time especially in
the eastern part of the Plain.
>
> 3200-2000 BC. As a new equilibrium emerges, the CW (Corded
Ware/Battle Axe) cultures establish themselves all over North and
Central Europe, developing distinctive regional variants and
expanding
where possible. Bell Beaker influence in the west and various local
transformations, accelerated by the advent of Bronze Age
technologies,
give rise to distinct groups that will in due time diversify
linguistically into the Celts, Italo-Veneti, Illyrians, Germani, and
Balto-Slavs (plus a number of minor branches that became extinct in
prehistoric or early historical times). By 2000 BC the Proto-Iranian
nomads establish their dominance in the steppe, forcing many other
groups to move and causing a series of great circum-Pontic migrations
involving also their distant Proto-Anatolian cousins and the latter's
Proto-Tyrrhenian neighbours. As new IE groups move into the
Carpathian
region and the Balkan lands, Anatolians refugees enter Asia Minor
(presumably in two waves at least). Some Proto-Indic tribes cross the
Caucasus into the Iranian Plateau ... But the rest is documented
history.
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Croft
> To: cybalist@egroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 6:26 AM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Gimbutas.
>
>
> Marc wrote
>
> > Piotr: As for Corded Ware, its origin is certainly more
complex
> than in Childe's and Gimbutas's theories: some steppe influence,
but
> also continuous development at old TRB sites. There may be a
grain
of
> truth in the élite-dominance scenario, but in most cases an
> élite
> outnumbered by the locals doesn't manage to change their language.
> >
> > Marc: Do you think so? IMO the upper class can & does impose
their
> language, at least after several generations. This is what we saw
in
> Gallia (Latin replaced Celtic up to the Rhine, later the invading
> Germanic tribes replaced Latin in N & E Gallia up to line that
> connects the capitals of the bishoprics). Brussels 100 years ago
was
> Dutch-speaking except for the palace & government (the
bourgeoisie,
> as
> in all cities in N-Belgium, spoke both, but wrote in French), now
> it's
> mostly French-speaking, although in other N-Belgian cities the
> French-speaking upper class has disappeared. Only in England the
> Normans did not impose their language, but they were a very small
> minority. In France, French replaces all other dialects &
languages.
> In Germany, Low-German is disappearing. In the Netherlands,
Frysian
> has almost disappeared. In Great Brittain, Welsh is disappearing.
The
> best example is perhaps that even Ireland speaks English.
>
> Elite dominance superimposing an adstratum is in fact quite
common.
> Sumerians did it in southern Iraq over Proto-Eurphratean.
> Indo-European Greeks managed the same in the Aegean over
Pelasgians
> and Eteo-Cretians. Anatolian speaking Neshites (Hittites) and
> Luwians
> managed it over Khattic speakers, as did the later Turks managed
to
> do
> it over Greeks and Galicians in Anatolia again.
>
>
> > The question is language replacement, and just how and when it
can
> occur. There are two basic patterns.
> >
> > 1. With elite dominance, the usual pattern is for the elite
> language
> to be replaced by that of the common folk. Only rarely does it
> replace
> the autochthonous language.
> >
> > 2. With migrations/invasions, the original language may
persist;
it
> may replace other languages, or co-exist for a very long time
indeed.
> >
> > The dominance of Latin, and its replacement of Gallic is a case
of
> #2. Latin was indeed the elite language, but the Gauls were a
> conquered people ruled by a Latin-speaking elite for close to 500
> years. Latin was the chancery language of an empire. Something
> similar
> happened in Iberia; Vasconic did survive in its mountain fastness.
> >
> > In Ireland, English has been the elite language, the chancery
> language for as long as English has been the elite language of
> England. Irish has persisted, but is indeed threatened. In North
> Wales, Welsh is flourishing, so I'm told, and seems completely
> unthreatened, notwithstanding English dominance for a longer
period
> than Ireland has suffered it.
> >
> > The big problem with the Gimbutas model is explaining how an
> IE-speaking Kurgan culture imposed its language throughout
northern
> Europe. It's easier to see the Steppe-derived intruders losing
their
> language. But for this to be true, you have to say IE moved from
the
> west and/or north and imposed itself onto elements of the steppe
--
> elements that became Indo-Iranian etc.
>
> Steppe derived invaders may have lost their language in the case
of
> Fatyanova culture, spreading throughout the Finno-Ugric realm.
>
> It is partly a case of the relevant numerical numbers. In
Northern
> Europe, neolithic farming was more recent and the activity was
more
> marginal (hunting was still practiced). The invaded population
> densities would have been lower whcih with a higher number of
> incursive "steppe" elements, and their continued reinforcement
> (Kurgan
> Waves II and III - associated with climatic reversals) IE
elements
> would eventually predominate. We don't need a "one king hit"
theory
> here.
>
> Regards
>
> John