--- tgpedersen <
tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
>
> > > > I agree with Kortlandt and Shchukin: it is
> impossible to
> > > > identify a "Slavic" group as of your mentioned
> dates <72-58 BCE>.
>
> I would disagree. If we theoretically allow
> multi-ethnic and
> multi-lingual areas, we could identify
> (Proto-Proto-!) Slavs with the
> farmers in Zarubyntsi and Przeworsk,
****GK: Proto-proto etc.. Slavs cannot be shown to
have spoken a Slavic language, or to have been Slavs.
Add enough protos,and you're back to PIE and
substrates. This is meaningless gibberrish, and the
direct result of the utterly unscientific committment
to discover "historical" facts behind Snorri's
euhemerism. Since this is an ersatz-religious
committment there is really no point in discussing or
debating it. No matter how many times one demonstrates
the untenability of this or that point, the
committment will remain. Thousands of different
"explanations" will be invented if necessary. Endless
floggings of dead horses, of their bones, and of the
dust thereof will be enthusiastically pursued in
scenario after scenario, with the "committment" always
only a shout away. Mainstream positions will be
constantly negated (not on the basis of science, but
on that of the "committment"). We have now reached the
point where we can confidently state that 6th century
Slavic culture (when they emerge on the historical
arena)cannot in any meaningful sense be viewed as
having developed out of Przeworsk or Zarubintsi (or
Sarmatians or Scythians for that matter). Which
automatically cancels this latest "farmer" scenario of
yours.If you had paid attention to the quote from the
JHG 2007 article you would have seen that this is now
strongly confirmed by recent genetic studies.*****
later surviving
> in a band between
> Niemcza and Dniepr (this is the "Polish
> archaologists'" part),
****GK: This is no longer tenable.****
later
> reinforced with (Proto-) Slavs from Dniepr (the
> mainstream part).
>
> As for the Kortlandt quote, he is obviously
> accepting the mainstream
> view, which influences some of his temporal
> estimates.
****GK: An Odinist cannot accept "the mainstream
view". It would mean abandonment of the
committment...****
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ