Re: [tied] Re: Uralic and PIE/Danube

--- lsroute66@... wrote:

> 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.

*****GK: My information differs from yours. While
"Danubian" influence on B/D becomes progressively more
noticeable up to its eventual absorption into
Trypilia, "the very concept of pottery" arrived not
from Cris=Koros but from the East, (most of the very
earliest "pots" having clear analogies to the cultures
of the Crimea, Azov, and Caspian sea areas.) Only a
tiny fraction can be linked to the south, Thessaly
specifically. The influence of cris=Koros only
intensifies at the beginning of the middle phase of
B/D.*****

>
> <<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.

*****GK: I'll get back to you on this in a few days,
as soon as our charged out University library copy of
Price gets to me. We'll see if Z& L are more accurate
than Dolukhanov. Judging by your report I doubt it,
but will suspend judgement for a bit. Do they say
anything about Kukrek and subsequent eastern impulses?
If not, they're not reliable.******

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.

*****GK: That sounds right.*****

> 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.

*****GK: My map seems more precise. LBK is about 100
km. and B/D 80 km. away from the nearest D/D "as the
crow flies".*****

Both D-D and B-N seem to

> have remained quite
> mesolithic, and in no way truly pastoral, before the
> arrival of
> Tripolye.

*****GK: That also sounds right.******

>
> 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.

*****GK: That is arguable but possible,. In any event
this was long after "the very concept of pottery"
arrived to D/D. At the earliest phase, the Azov area
of D/D was culturally more advanced than the Dnipro
and West area, which indicates where the original
"impulse" was coming from (the Caucasus).****

>
> 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.

*****GK: I agree that this is what happened with B/D.
But D/D was primarily absorbed by Serednyj Stih. As I
have already pointed out, the latter was more than
quite apparently far too powerful for the Trypilian
farmers to infiltrate and assimilate. Despite their
numbers, the Trypilians were "stuck" on the right bank
of the Dnipro for hundreds of years, and their
evolution was towards "proto-cities" there with
increasing concentration of population rather than
spread towards the territories of the east despite the
latter's attractiveness for agricultural production.
This type of relationship obviously does not argue for
the spread of the Trypilian language eastward. If
anything, it is the Trypilians who became the objects
of cultural and linguistic assimilation by the
Serednyj Stih peoples in the final phase of Trypilia
(Usatov, Horodsk and Kasper variants of Later
Trypilia, with intensification of animal husbandry and
massive adoption of corded ware ceramics).******

> Regards, Steve Long
>
>

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