Re: [tied] Baltic-Slavic disintegration

--- Alexander Stolbov <astolbov@...> wrote:

> George Knysh wrote:
> GK: To possess elements (more or less
> significant)
> > of the Celtic La Tene culture. There were indeed
> such
> > in the Zarubynets'ka c. (perhaps this is when the
> > toponym "Kobryn" arose in the western area
> thereof).
> > But there is no problem here. After all the
> > indubitably Slavic Kyiv culture (ca. 200-500 AD)
> is a
> > direct offshoot of the Zarubynets'ka c.
>
>
> (AS) Sorry, George, I can't agree here.
> Yes, one finds the Kyiv culture on the place where
> earlier the Zarub. sites
> were. However this does not mean that the former is
> an offshoot of the
> latter. Just because the Kyiv culture is much more
> primitive and less
> sophisticated than the Zarub. one.
> I explain this situation as following.
> Before coming the latenized tribes from the West (it
> is traced
> archaeologically), this area was occupied by
> Milograd culture - a typical
> Early Iron Age forest culture. A part of Milograd
> people was involved in
> assimilation processes, accepted the culture of
> newcomers and became the
> substrate of the Zarub. culture. Another part of the
> Milograd population
> kept on living according to old traditions. After
> the Zarub. people went
> away the territory of Middle Dnieper remained under
> command of aborigines
> whose culture didn't changed considerably during the
> period of western
> occupation. Thus one can consider the Kyiv culture
> as an offshoot of the
> Milograd culture.

*****GK: Your view is not shared by the leading
archaeologists of the Zarubynetska c. (even if they
strongly disagree among each other as to the ethnic
nature of this culture). The fact is that the
Zarubynetska c. is a totally new reality, created by
the fusion of various "incoming" and various "local"
elements. There are three main areas to consider:
Polissia, Middle Dnipro, Upper Dnieper. In each case
we have a slightly different "mixture", depending on
the combining elements. But the fact remains that,
despite local variations, the Zarubynetska culture is
one and the same everywhere. There are no settlements
where previous cultures continue to exist
indefinitely. So your view that a part of the "local"
(Milograd) population was unaffected by Zar. has no
basis. Nor does it have any basis as to the other
"local" elements of the mixture (Pidhirtsi, Scythian,
Late Pomorian). In no case do we find coexistence of
"Pidhirtsi" and "Zarubynetska", "Scythian" and
"Zarubynetska" or "Late Pomorian" and "Zarubynetska".
There was indeed some outmigration by part of the
Zarubynetska population, prompted by or in the wake of
Sarmatian pressure. But the population that left and
that which remained was in both cases "Zarubynetska"
as to culture. Everyone is agreed that the Kyiv
culture is more "primitive" than the Zarubynetska.
Whatever the reasons for this (changed historical
circumstances) mainstream archaeology continues to see
Zarubynetska as "the genetic foundation" of the Kyiv
c.******

>
> Alexander
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus