Re: [tied] Re-evaluating Dereivka and Yamna

--- lsroute66@... wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., george knysh <gknysh@...>
> wrote:
> > *****GK: Could you direct me to a source
> describing
> > what exactly was done in the matter of this
> redating?
> > I'd appreciate this very much.
>
> "Anthony and Brown (2000) Eneolithic horse
> exploitation in the
> Eurasian steppes, ANTIQUITY 74, 75-86 has the new
> C14 dates from it.
> The original dates given for it was 3300 BC. The
> new lab dates on it
> put it up around the 1st century BC.

*****GK: Thanks. I'll look it up.******

>
> > But apart from this,
> > we know that: (1)Dereivka is definitely a "horse"
> > settlement in terms of the animal bone remains [of
> > 3232 bone parts and splinters discovered there
> about
> > 74% are of the horse (Telegin, p. 133)]*****
>
> If this is suppose to refer to neolithic Dereivka,
> these numbers are
> in conflict with Zwelbil's report in "Europe's First
> Farmers", ed by
> T. Douglas Price, (Cambridge UP 2000).
>
> Zwelbil mentions an enclosure that might be evidence
> of horse-breeding
> but nothing more. The domesticates that start
> appearing with ceramic
> agriculture soon seem to make up most of the bones
> that were found in
> that period.

*****GK: Telegin and his crews were extremely thorough
in their investigation of Dereivka over nearly a
decade. I don't understand Zwelbil's comment. What is
his source? Dereivka actually stands out among other
Serednyj Stih sites with respect to the preponderance
of horse bones. Only Molyukhiv Buhor (at 59%) is
comparable. Other sites are at less than 50%.*****

>
> Ste
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com