Re: Near Eastern origin of European cattle.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@...> wrote:

>
> --- 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.
>
> I agree witht the above except for the word "automatically."

That was fast.

> The new site will also have to be earlier than zebu (bos indicus).

Of course it won't. The determination of the domestication site of Bos
Taurus is irrelevant to the domestication of Bos Indicus.

> There is no reason to assume that *kwou (?)

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/47115

> means bos taurus

Why not?

> just as there is no reason to assume *ekwos means caballus linn.

Why not?

> > 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.
>
> Please check the map on page 7 taken from Jared Diamond (who
> incidently believes in the IE conquest theory).
>
> http://nchs.ucla.edu/NH100-preview.pdf
>
> He has forgotten neolithic Mehargarh in Pakistan. The two dots in
> China are too far off from Central Asian steppes.

Too far off for what?

> If millet was indeed domesticated there it could have as easily gone
> up north through South Asia.

If by 'domesticated' you mean "grown for the first time" that sentence
makes no sense. And if you don't it's gibberish.

>https://listhost.uchicago.edu/pipermail/ane/2005-December/021309.html
>
>
>
> "Based upon the present day distribution of the wild progenitors of
> sorghum and pearl millet in Africa, it has been proposed that their
> domestication occurred within a forest-savanna sub-Saharan band
> north of the equator, from the Atlantic to the Indian Oceans."
>
>
> "The second is Ehret's
> linguistics claim of a sorghum domestication centre in the vicinity
> of Lake Chad c. 4 000 B.C. Thirdly, dates as early as 4 000 B.C.
> have been claimed for the presence of durra in India, implicating an
> intercontinental movement of domesticated sorghum from Africa."


> Obvious that didn't come out of Anatolia.

And therefore...?


Torsten