Re: [tied] Danubian homeland?

From: Joseph S Crary
Message: 9354
Date: 2001-09-11


Very good point

I just need to think this out

Although I think there may have been a strong remnant proto-Anatolian
and/or post-Anatolian element among the Kimmers of the southwestern
Ukrainian steppe. I believe it all depends on which side of the Indo-
Iranian tree Graeco-Armenic falls out. Could the Graeco-Armenic
populations be part of the Srubnaya Culture? Could they have passed
through the Kimmer people without caring them further west in the
process? Could the Indo-Aryan/Iranian block actually be two discrete
units? Its very clear that Graeco-Armenic populations have to be on
hand in the southern Balkans and Caucasus, waiting to droop into
their historic settings by the transition of MBA to LBA. This is a
drop dead condition, there is little possible argument here.

Still I'm not sure? This may suggest that the Srubnaya Culture was
linguistically heterogeneous, yet highly differentiated, with a
sizable post-Anatolian element with the Indo-Iranian dominated
Andronovo Culture as a follow on complex. This could work and may
explain the Kimmer as a late post-Anatolian complex, as well as
provide a reason for their subsequent seemingly unobtrusive passage
(in cultural terms) into the Lower Danube Basin and North German
Plain. It may also explain the introduction of a steppe-element into
late hallstatt and latene styles.

Actually, this may account for why some researchers have positioned,
as linguistic blocks, Balto-Slavic between Graeco-Armenic and Indo-
Iranian and Celto-Italic between Graeco-Armenic and Balto-Slavic.
Because Thracian languages are so mixed, I am not sure what side of
the fence they fall. Are they primarily Graeco-Armenic, Balto-Slavic,
or both? Any help?

Its very possible you're right?

JS Crary