Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Fw: [cybalist] Re: Tyrrhenus (was Easter)

Expand Messages
  • M G
    ... From: John Croft To: Sent: lunedì, 01 maggio, 2000 6.12 Subject: Re: Fw: [cybalist] Re: Tyrrhenus (was Easter)
    Message 1 of 21 , May 3, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: John Croft <jdcroft@...>
      To: <cybalist@egroups.com>
      Sent: lunedì, 01 maggio, 2000 6.12
      Subject: Re: Fw: [cybalist] Re: Tyrrhenus (was Easter)

      > Spread of farming cultures 12,500BCE - 600CE
      > 8,500 - 4,000 BCE
      > Literate civilisations 600 BCE]
      > 4,000BCE - 600 CE
      > John

      Dear John,
      please correct the map of literate civilizations as to
      the Egipt as part of the Literate civilizations of the time.

      The color is correct on the other map (Spread of farming)

    • John Croft
      Hi folks - this is a long post I am afraid. Glen wrote in reply to my post that the Zarzian culture was the probable people who spoke the proto-Eurasiatic
      Message 2 of 21 , May 3, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi folks - this is a long post I am afraid.

        Glen wrote in reply to my post that the Zarzian culture was the
        probable people who spoke the "proto-Eurasiatic" language before it
        split up into its various elements

        > That's a completely unverifiable assumption. As Mark has pointed
        as well
        > as Mallory and many other educated authors, an Anatolian origin for
        IE is
        > looneytoons because of linguistic problems and others. I mean, if
        > so, we should expect early loanwords between IE and Anatolian
        languages, but
        > we don't. Just Semitic. You can continue to ignore Uralic-Yukaghir
        if you
        > like but it's your loss. If you accept the connection, there's
        simply no way
        > in hell that Uralic could come directly from Anatolia through the
        > nor the Caucasus.

        Glen, how then do you get mesolithic cultures, which appeared in
        Africa circa 30,000 years ago with the Aterian microlithic, and which
        you agreed many posts ago were the probable origin of Nostratic - to
        the Bering straits? Surely they would have had to travel through the
        middle east at some stage? And if in the Middle East, there are only
        three ways out

        1. West - through Anatolia and the Balkans
        2. North - through the Caucasas
        3. East - over the Oxus and Jaxartes

        Remember, what you have is people who used mesolithic microlithic
        technologies, they are people who shifted from the Big Game Hunting
        specialists of the Ice Age Steppes and Tundras, to the
        hunter-gatherers and fisher-folk", which spread from the middle east
        and out onto the Eurasian landmass from about 9,000 BCE to about
        BCE, moving from the south west to the north east. This movement
        appeared in southern Palestine from about 15,000 years BCE, and only
        arrived in Greenland 800 BCE.

        What I am arguing is that *all* language movements from at least
        20,000 BCE until the neolithic agricultural revolution have to take
        account of this cultural trend, as it is associated with the end of
        the Ice Age, and the general warming of Holocene climatic conditions.

        For instance you write
        > Think through this. If Uralic is connected to Yukaghir (way in the
        > then the center of the two is still further east than Uralic is
        to have
        > been. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's pretty
        impossible for
        > Uralic to have come from the west and almost certain that it came
        from the
        > east.

        Glen, this just doesn't add up. For instance, look at Austronesian
        languages. They are found from Easter Island to Madagascar, and from
        Formosa to New Zealand. On your "central origin" theory, for Uralic
        they should have started in Papua New Guiea and spread out from
        But we know that they probably started from Formosa if not southern
        China. Look at Bantu Languages - they stretch from the Camerouns to
        South Africa. On your "central origin" theory, they should have
        started in Katanga and spread from there. But we know that they
        probably started in the Camerouns and spread south and east from

        On *all* the archaeological evidence for the Uralic language
        proto-Uralic-Yukaghir probably developed from the mesolithic cultures
        in the forest belt straddling the Ural mountains, from the Murzak
        and Grebenki cultures which pioneered mesolithic lifestyles in this
        region in the period from 9,100 BCE to 5,500 BCE. These people
        developed the technologies that enabled cultures of
        exploiting Taiga and Tundra food sources, to survive. They invented
        ski's and kayaks. They spread into the Siberian area, moving north
        along the great rivers, into the Arctic circle, and along the
        Eurasian coastline. And as they spread they carried their
        proto-Yukaghir language with them.

        Later, further groups moved out of this region. They pionneered the
        Samoyed cultures, and, probably copying horse-riding techniques from
        early IE peoples of the steppes, they domesticated the reindeer, and
        as the Khanty and Mansi cultures, spread north along the great rivers
        and travelled west, into Northern Russia and Finland, introducing
        reindeer domestication amongst the Saami peoples by about 1,000 CE.

        The final part of the archaeology of Uralic peoples comes after the
        spread of IE. It seems that Battle-Axe cultures, derived from the IE
        people of the Pontic steppe, for a time ruled as an elite over a
        swathe of Uralic Speakers, to create the Fatyanova culture. This
        amalgamated IE-Uralic culture, eventually had its Uralic substrate
        predominate over its IE superstrate. These people spread north and
        west, carrying Finno-Ungaric languages to Finland and Estonia.

        Glen, I don't argue that Uralic languages were ever spoken in
        Anatolia. But it is clear that the Murzak-Koba and Grabenki cultures
        developed out of mesolithic hunter-gatherers-fisherfolk who travelled
        north from the Balkans into the forested regions that lay north of
        Eurasian steppe. It is quite probable on the evidence I feel that
        they spoke a language that was either "late-Eurasiatic" or
        "Proto-Boreal" on your schema. The place from where Boreal languages
        developed, and from where later Uralic languages were centred was the
        rivers and forests that straddle the Ural mountains.

        I hope you follow me so far.... Well we now have to get speakers of
        Nostratic from Southern Palestine from the earliest mesolithic
        culture (18,000 - 10,500 BCE), to the Franchi Cave in the Aegean
        (9,800-5,700 BCE), the earliest mesolithic culture of the Balkans.
        How do you suppose they got there if they did not travel through
        Anatolia sometime in the 9,000 year interval from 18,000 - 9,000 BCE?

        > So if Uralic is from the east, we already know that the connection
        > IE and Uralic is considered more likely than with any other
        > even if it is still unproven. Therefore, if Uralic-Yukaghir was
        > east, so too should IndoEuropean (or rather, IndoTyrrhenian) have
        been. We
        > also know of the connection with Altaic, which again, is
        historically and
        > pre-historically far to the east.

        The connection with Altaic that you speak of has two possible

        1. In the same location as the Ural Mountains as the Boreal. or
        2. From an earlier common origin in the Middle East.

        Given the fact that the Altaic languages are Nostratic (i.e.
        mesolithic) in origin, we now need to look at how mesolithic cultures
        (perhaps speaking proto-Altaic tongues) arrived in the region
        today by Altaic speakers.

        I'll take this slowly so you can follow the logic and don't
        misunderstand what I am saying.

        1. The area of Turkmenistan currently occupied by Altaics was
        not originally part of the Altaic language core. In pre-historic
        times it was IE - maybe Tocharian, then Indic, then Iranian (Saka).
        It became Altaic only with the collapse of the northern Chinese
        Hsuing-nu confederacy, and their expulsion into the Western Steppes
        the Juan Juan (Tungus) warriors. The Turkik Empire - which was
        divided early on into Western and Eastern Turks completed the process.

        2. Altaic languages show a feature that suggests that the further
        you go the more you find Nostratic like features modified and
        Thus if Japanese is an Altaic language (and not an Austronesian one),
        then it is furtherest from the proto-Altaic core. If Gilyak is one
        too shows a long separation, as does Korean. Manchu languages are
        closer to the proto-Alatic stem, but Mongol and Turkik seem even
        closer. Given the fact that, once again, mesolithic-microlithic
        hunter gatherers moved from west to east across this part of the
        woorld, it is not too difficult to suggest that Altaic began in the
        northwest of its current linguistic zone, and "broad-spectrum
        hunter-gatherers" moved eastwards. This is confirmed

        From where did this movement occur. Archaeologically it seems that
        the later Altaic language cultures (eg like the neolithic or
        epipaleolithic Karasuk of the Gobi region) originated from the
        valley in the period 5,500 - 3,500 BCE. This Keltiminar culture was
        probably of proto-Altaic speakers.

        When we look at Keltiminar culture it seems to have been an amalgam
        two elements.

        One - arriving late (from about 4,000 BCE and reinforced thereafter)
        came across the Eurasian steppe from the direction of the Black Sea.
        It may have been of IE, or it may have been of early Uralic speakers.
        Either way it influenced the later development of Keltiminar
        opening the Mongolian Karasuk culture to eventual Tocharian and
        Scythic cultural elements.

        The other - occurring early (from 5,500 - 4,000 BCE) came from the
        earlier Hissar culture which stretched from Transoxania to the Altai
        Mountains. It was these people, who in 6,000 BCE introduced
        mesoolithic cultuural elements into the late Upper Paleolithic
        cultures of this region (probably proto-Burushaski-Ket speakers).

        Their culture too was derived from the Jeitan culture of the Iranian
        Oases (9,000 BCE to 5,000 BCE), which was in turn a successor of the
        M'lefatian and Ali Tappah 10,500-9,000 BCE. The M'lefatian
        seems to have been a local derivative of - surprise surprise - our
        Zarzian people (12,400-8,700 BCE) who pioneered the mesolithic
        cultural assemblage, and introduced the bow and arrow and the
        domesticated dog to the people living to the north and east (arriving
        with the Eskimo's husky in Greenland circa 800 BCE!)

        So accepting that proto-Altaic developed in the Mesolithic cultures
        from about 5,500 BCE, by what route did the proto-Altaic languages
        travel from proto-Nostratic in Africa? There are only two

        1. Via the Middle East-Iran-Turkmesistan to the Altai and regions
        north and east from 18,000 to 5,500 BCE

        2. Some other route (eg Caucasas or Balkans).

        There is no other way.

        Personally I like number 1. I am prepared to accept number 2. But
        there are different consequences to these.

        1. If number 1 is the real alternative - the Urheimat of
        proto-Uralo-Altaic must have been Zarzian culture (12,400 - 8,700
        BCE). Keltiminar could have been proto-Altaic from 5,500 BCE.

        2. If number 2 is the real alternative - the Urheimat of
        proto-Uralo-Altaic would have been the Grebenki culture of the Urals
        (7,000 - 5,500 BCE) and Keltiminar would probably have originally
        spoken a different language that was abandonned about 4,000 BCE.

        So when you say

        > When in connection with Eskimo-Aleut (way,
        > WAY to the east) and Gilyak (east, imagine that), your hypothesis
        > against the known ancient positions of all these languages which
        > have centred somewhere around the eastern steppe area, far far away
        > Anatolia.

        Of course.... I have never argued that these languages started in
        Anatolia. It is you who acuse me of saying this Glen.... What I
        been saying is, if these languahes are Nostratic (?) and the house is
        still out on that one, then the pproto-languages from which they
        developed eventually *would have had to come out of the middle east,
        and would have had to travel either over the Anatolian-Balkan Bridge,
        the Caucasas bridge or over the Tran-oxus bridge. Take your pick,
        show me what eviidence you are using*

        > And Mallory, of course, gives a warning about connecting
        > closely with linguistics. I wish you had books where you come from
        so you
        > could read this source.

        I don't connect archaeology too closely at all. But if you tell me
        that PIE began splitting up about 5,500 BCE from the area of the
        Pontic steppes, then I look at the Srendny-Stog and Yamuna cultures
        that were in that region at that time. I then look at evidence of
        that culture developed and where did the people of that culture
        ultimately come from. This may - perhaps - if confirmed by genetic
        and linguistic confirmatory evidence - show us where people moved.
        And as people move, in first instance, they tend to take their
        language with them.

        > John:
        > >I don't see why you see a north-> south movement 7000 BCE. This
        > >not appear in the archaeology at all.
        > That's right, but... as you can see above, I distinctly said
        "_AFTER_ 7000
        > BCE".

        How far after. 1,500 years (i.e. 5,500 BCE?) or 2,500 years (4,500
        BCE?) When talking that late later, to say AFTER 7000 BCE is the
        as saying BEFORE 1999 CE when talking of the cruxification of Christ!

        > >No I don't ignore Uralic-Yukaghir. Nor Chichki-Camchatkan, nor
        > >Eskimo Aleut.
        > It's "Chuckchi-Kamchatkan". (...shaking head...) And you ARE aware
        > eastern these languages are, yes?

        Sorry regarding spelling - it was after midnight here and II
        my C & K. Yes I am fully aware of how far east they are. But are
        aware that all their cultural elements came from far to the west of
        their current ranges?

        I wrote
        > >Gilyak I don't take into account.... true - but all evidence I
        > >have seen suggests that Gilyak is an isolate, unrelated to any
        > >neighbouring linguistic group. They may be a Dene Caucasian Upper
        > >Paleolithic survival as far as I know. I haven't seen any tree
        > >incorporaes them in any place.

        Glen replied
        > Bomhard does but unfortunately doesn't include terms into his
        > listings. I assume this is because of the difficulty in finding
        resources on
        > this language which is as elusive as Nama.
        > The pronouns at least are evidently in common with Nostratic
        languages, not
        > other DeneCaucasian groups. I'm going by memory but I think it was
        > in the Enc.Britt. about Gilyak /b-val/ "my mountain" and /c-fal/
        > mountain" which clearly shows a Steppe pronominal pattern (*m-,
        > would seem to suggest particularly close connections with Altaic
        (*b-, *s-).
        > What's more interesting is that Altaic implies a *t > *c > *s sound
        > and Gilyak would appear to demonstrate the intermediary phoneme.
        > set is definitely in contrast to SinoDene languages (*n@/s@, *ng@).
        The only
        > realistic solution is that Gilyak is part of the Steppe subgroup of
        > Nostratic and perhaps closely related to Altaic. I can see no other
        > source.

        This seems to be indicative. But I still would need to see more
        before seeing these as possible chance or random coincidences.

        Glen wrote
        > Um, how is there a direct link between the mesolithic of the Urals
        and that
        > of Anatolia occuring this early?? Certainly a link can be made with
        > Northern Pontic and Anatolia at this stage of the game but the
        NPontic is
        > far from the Urals.

        There is a link between the Uralian mesolithic and the earlier
        Anatolian mesolithic via the intermediaries of the Ukrainian
        Murzak-Koba, the Balkan Franchi cave and the Anatolian (13,000-10,000
        BCE) Belbasi(Cilicia) and the (10,000-8,500 BCE) Beldibi cultures.
        each case these were the first mesolithic microlithic cultures in
        their respective areas.

        > John:
        > >Not at all. Elamo-Dravidian developed from the mesolithic southern
        > >and south eastern Zarzian, prior to the development of Northern
        > >Zarzian into proto-Eurasian.
        > Yes, it came from the west but again you ignore all linguistics to
        arrive at
        > your conclusions... ABOUT LINGUISTICS. Why can't you see the irony
        here? You
        > don't know what proto-Eurasian is.

        Glen, my Linguistics is weak, very weak. I know it. But my
        archaeology and my genetics is equally very strong, very strong. I
        prepared to be guided linguistically by people who know far better
        than me. But I am not interested in just a linguistic history of
        Indo-European and the other languages we are talking about.
        Linguistic evidence is only part of the story of human origins -
        genetics and culture provide other parts to the picture, and from
        to time, may even cast light on the shaodows of proto-linguistic

        > Neolithic Balkans at 6000 BCE? Excuse me. Elaborate. Is agriculture
        a neolithic thing?

        The first Pottery cultures (LBK, Starcevo etc) appeared in the
        5,500 BCE. Pre-pottery Neolithic (agriculture) began in Macedonia in
        Nea Nicomedia 6,000-5,500 BCE). Macedonia is Balkans I believe.

        > The positions on my map of the languages aren't meant to be
        > super-exact-exact. I can move the IE a little to the east if you
        like but
        > the overall relative positions would remain the same, regardless.
        well, I
        > recall the Bug-Dniester culture (is that the name?) that was
        > influenced by the cultures to the west so it may be kind of hard to
        > where IE lies and where Semitic lies anyway.
        > IE isn't moving over top of the Semitic by the way. Semitic is
        > on the area. What may have happened subsequently, I surmise, is
        > Hattic was taking over the previous Semitic areas of western
        > Tyrrhenian may have began spreading out and overtaking Semitic
        in the
        > Balkans (which would explain what seems to be a larger amount of
        > loans like Etruscan /s'ar/ "ten" in place of IT *t:ekem -> Etruscan
        > */tachn/). There is certainly no spread of IE into the Balkans yet
        at this
        > time, I agree.


        Regarding Semitic.

        Linguistic analysis of the Semitic family breaks it up into 4 groups,
        1. Northern Peripheral Group (Akkadian) which appeared in Mesopotamia
        circa 3,100 BCE.

        2. Northern Central Group (Canaanite) which appeared to have
        in the early Bronze Age 3300-3000 Early Canaanite period.

        3. Southern Central Group (Arabic, Sabian etc) which is probably the
        last of the four languages to develop.

        4. Southern Peripheral Group (eg Ethiopic Geez etc).

        Linguistic methods, which attempt to measure degrees of differences
        between related languages by comparing a list of basic vocabulary
        items, indicate that the first group to separate from the Common
        Semitic ancestral language was Akkadian (Northern Peripheral group,
        3300 BC) and the second was the Southern Peripheral group (second
        of 3rd millennium BC). The Northern Central group had contacts for
        a long time with the Southern Central languages, and linguistic
        division within the North Central group is dated at the beginning or
        middle of the 2nd millennium BC.

        Now this would mean that prior to 3,300 BCE we are talking of
        Proto-Semitic languages. And we are suggesting that the Urheimat of
        Semitic is somewhere netween the Northern Central and the Southern
        Central Zone.

        Now I suggest we look at cultures in this region. The dominant
        culture in this region from 4300-3300 BCE was the Chalcolithic
        Ghassulian Culture. On our linguistic evidence this culture was
        proto-Semitic. It is confined to Southern Palestine. The northern
        cultures that exited at this period, Halafian, Hassuna, Samara and
        Ubaid (as earlier posts on this list (eg. the discussion on tholoi
        etc) suggest did not speak Semitic languages, even hypothetical
        proto-Semitic ones. It would seem that they spoke Hattic or
        Hurro-Urartian languages.

        Stephen Bourke, the most recent archaeologist to examine this culture

        - this very early development of an economically diverse, complex
        urban society at Teleilat Ghassul may be explained by a unique
        combination of landform (gently sloping plains allowing irrigation),
        mineral resources (salt), and early domestic crops (especially
        - He believes the evidence from Ghassul indicates that a number of
        different regions were developing similar trajectories towards
        civilization, but that some (e.g. the southern Levant and Nubia) had
        this process cut short, probably through environmental collapse.
        However, in Egypt the process continued and strengthened, eventually
        flowering into the majesty of the
        Old Kingdom.
        - The latest evidence from the sanctuary area refutes the
        long-standing hypothesis that the sanctuary was an addition to the
        site towards the end of its occupational history. There is also
        evidence that the sanctuary area may have remained in use after the
        rest of the settlement was abandoned around 4000 B.C.

        Yes, Ghassulian culture developed out of the people who came out of
        Africa at the hiatus at the end of the early Neolithic (8500-4300
        "New Stone Age"--Yarmukian Culture (which saw the emergence of
        and agriculture in Palestine). As an Afro-Asiatic language, here we
        have proto-Semitic people coming into southern Palestine circa 5,000
        BCE, learning farming and herding from the non-Semitic Yarmukan
        (who got their crops from the very Hattic or Hurro-Urartian mentioned
        above), and who, by developing nomadic pastoralism in the dry spell
        associated with the collapse of the Yarmukan period, managed to
        establish themselves into the North Central Zone from which
        proto-Semitic was to spread.

        What language did the Yarmukan people speak, if it was not Semitic?
        Archaeological evidence and physical anthropology show us that the
        Yarmukan culture developed sequentially out of Natufian. And
        developed out of Kebaran - the culture which I have suggested was the
        language that carried the non-Afro-Asiatic Nostratic languages out of
        Africa and into the Middle East.

        From this we can conclude.

        Proto-Semites learned their agriculture about 5,000 - 4,300BCE from a
        non-Semitic people (our substrate). These non-Semitics were related
        to, and possibly learned their agriculture from others living in the
        region of south eastern Anatolia to north western Iran. These people
        were the substrate language for agricultural terms, for seasonal
        calenders, concepts probably of number, counting and livestock
        throughout the Middle East, and by extension, into the Balkans, Iran,
        and across the Caucasas. Thus when I say

        > >Replace Semitic with the neolithic substratum who taught the
        > >to the south all that they knew about argiculture (and much else
        > >besides) and it could make sense.

        (and you reply)
        > Replace a known language with a made-up substrate language? I don't
        > so. That's bluntly cracked. Prove the existence of this language
        > through linguistic means and I will reconsider.

        Glen, I am not strong linguistically, but when Semitic linguists tell
        me that proto-Semitic fragmented only 3,300 BCE, and Semitic
        from Afro-Asiatic at the earliest in Africa only 4,700-5,000 BCE, to
        get Semites from Northeast Africa from 5,000 BCE to influence
        Proto-Indo-Europeans on the Pontic steppe by 5,500 BCE - sorry Glen,
        it just does not add up. The Semites by 5,500 BCE (at the time of
        your wonderful map) were confined to the Ghassulian cultures of
        southern Palestine. Linguistically, culturally and physically, they
        had not yet moved north into Northern Syria, let alone across the
        south coast of Anatolia and into the Balkans....

        But there were cultures which did move from this region. But they
        moved much earlier - from 8,500 - 6,000 BCE, and they did not speak
        Semitic. They spoke the language from which Semitic got many of the
        terms that separated them from the other Afro-Asiatic languages that
        stayed in Africa. No mythical sub-stratum at all here Glen.

        Hope this clears up your misunderstanding at long last.


      • John Croft
        Re ... civilizations as to ... Done John
        Message 3 of 21 , May 3, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          > > Spread of farming cultures 12,500BCE - 600CE
          > > 8,500 - 4,000 BCE
          > > Literate civilisations 600 BCE]
          > > 4,000BCE - 600 CE
          > >
          > > John
          > Dear John,
          > please correct the map of literate
          as to
          > show
          > the Egipt as part of the Literate civilizations of the time.
          > The color is correct on the other map (Spread of farming)


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.