Re: Uralic and PIE/Danube

I wrote:
Once again, the origins of the initial northern use of ceramics about
5000BC cannot really be assigned to any point but the Danube.

--- In cybalist@..., george knysh <gknysh@...> replied:
<<I take it that you are speaking in general
terms only, i.e. that the "impulse" which eventually
reached the north originated on "the Danube".

I mean, yes, the very concept of pottery. Not specific pots. The
concept, of course, has to come first.

<<In realterms though, what probably happened, if we are to
believe the archaeological evidence is that the first
"hunters/gatherers" to be influenced by LBK east of
the Carpathians and on contemporary Ukrainian
territory were the people of the Bog-Dnister culture.

Well, once again I have to question your version of "the
archaeological evidence." And what the "real terms" are.

In fact, Bog-Dniester's (or Dnister's) "first contact" appears to be
with Cris-Koros and many of the features in the first ceramics found
at B-D sites can be traced directly and without much interpretation
to Cris-Koros. See See Zvelebil & Lillie in Europe's First Farmers,
ed, T.D. Price (2000), pp 72-75. In REAL terms, Cris-Koros's
influence extended both east and north of the Carpathians. But as
Zvelebil points out, Bog-Dniester never fully transitioned to the
neolithic until it became in effect one of the constituent parts of
Tripolye. E.g., the few domestic animals appear to have been imported.
Meantime, a map on page 73 of the Zvelebil article shows LBK
settlements less than 200km from Dnieper-Donetz sites, both well
north of Bog-Dniester. Both D-D and B-N seem to have remained quite
mesolithic, and in no way truly pastoral, before the arrival of
Tripolye.

In real terms, Bog-Dniester was not much of an "impulse" in terms of
impacting eastern cultures aside from minor matters, such as certain
later peculiar pottery solutions. It appears that the last and major
transition to the neolithic for Dnieper-Donetz came from Tripolye.

In terms of language, this says nothing final or unquestionable. But
it certainly leaves open the possibility that these mesolithic
Ukrainian cultures eventually adopted or already shared a common
language with the neolithic carriers. A common language would make
the transfer of such radical and complex technology a lot easier,
even if at first it mean bi-lingualism.
Regards, Steve Long