Re: Colchians, circumcision and hypergamy (was Vanir)

--- In cybalist@..., jdcroft@... wrote:

> Torsten wrote
> > Good hunting! Please post them on cybalist when you find them. In
> > the meanwhile I will continue to believe with Herodotus, that the
> > Egyptians and the Colchideans (and the Sea Peoples!) were the

only

> > circumcisers (and sister-humpers!) in the area.
>
> Sea Peoples and Kholkoi were both Anatolian peoples. Sharden lived
> in Sardis and later Sardinia. How much of Anatolia do you believe
> were circumcising?
>

And the D-n-n lived on the Don?

Nice try. I still stick with Herodotus. But perhaps I should explain:
living in an archipelago myself I know there is difference between
Sea Peoples and Landlubbers. The former need only a town on a shore
to be in business. And what traits they borrow, they borrow from
overseas; cf. the relationship of the English with their former
colonies vs. the states on the continent of Europe. So if the Sea
Peoples circumcised, they might have transferred the idea to Colchis,
but they wouldn't themselves take up much space in Anatolia.
Even in Denmark, fishing villages have different layouts from other
villages, more narrow passages etc, and there is some distrust
between them and inland villages.

> > BTW I believe circumcision was exported southwards; and now I

read

> > that the Chad languages were much closer to Egyptian than many
> > other languages?
>
> Egyptian, Chadic, Berber, Cushitic and Semitic are all Afro-Asiatic
> languages. Of this two that we know of practice circumcision
> (Egyptians and Semites).

Yes, I know. I should have written that I read that among the AA
languages, people have become aware that the Chad languages etc.

>
> Peoples of the Sea are unlikely to have been culturally related to
> these. I feel circumcision was independently discovered by both
> peoples as a form of male initiation (and possible birth control!)
> This is certainly the case with Aboriginal circumcision in
> Australia.

That it was discovered independently? How does one go about proving
that?

>
> Regards
>
> John

Torsten