Re: Near Eastern origin of European cattle.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
>
> > > All the sources you mention are characteristically vague on

what

> > > defines a location as a center of domestication. The practical
> > > definition seems to be that for each race of cows, within its

area

> > > they have picked the place with the earliest archaeologically
> > > documented transition to farming as the center of

domestication

> > > for that race. And as I said, much of NEAsia is under-

investigated

> > > archaeologically. Therefore, Anatolia might have to give up

the

> > > prize one day.
> > >
>
> > That said, it is still *always* going to be either Anatolia or

South

> > Asia in the Indo-European world, as far deciding the issue of PIE
> > origin is concerned.
>
>
> Of course not. If an archaeological site with transition to
> stock-breeding earlier than that of the Anatolian ones is found
> somewhere on the Steppes between the Ukraine and China, that site
> automatically becomes the new assumed origin of domestication of

Bos

> Taurus. And on the origin of cereals, none of your sources seem to

be

> aware that the European and East Asian varieties of millet are
> identical. Obvious that didn't come out of Anatolia.
> Torsten

To interject myself here, looking at the cultural IE context, since
IE people did not divinize cattle (unlike Middle Easterners,
Egyptians, and South Asians), but quite clearly knew about them at
the PIE state, looking towards Anatolia as the site for introduction
of domestic cattle into Europe is not improbable.

Mark