Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Ancient Black Sea Coastline Provides Evidence of Noah's Flood

  1. #1

    Question Ancient Black Sea Coastline Provides Evidence of Noah's Flood

    WASHINGTON — Scientists have discovered an ancient coastline 17 meters below the surface of the Black Sea, providing dramatic new evidence of a sudden, catastrophic flood around 7,500 years ago — the possible source of the Old Testament story of Noah. [/B]

    A team of deep-sea explorers this summer captured the first sonar images of a gentle berm and a sandbar submerged undisturbed for thousands of years on the sea floor. Now, using radiocarbon dating techniques, analysts have shown that the remains of freshwater mollusks subsequently dredged from the ancient beach date back 7,500 years and saltwater species began showing up 6,900 years ago.

    Explorer Robert Ballard, who led the team that collected the shells, said the findings indicate a flood occurred sometime during the 600-year gap. "What we wanted to do is prove to ourselves that it was the biblical flood," Ballard said.

    The findings offer independent verification of a theory advanced by Columbia University geologists William Ryan and Walter Pitman that the Black Sea was created when melting glaciers raised the sea level until the sea breached a natural dam at what is now the Bosporus, the strait that separates the Mediterranean Sea from the Black Sea.

    An apocalyptic deluge followed, inundating the freshwater lake below the dam, submerging thousands of square kilometers of dry land, flipping the ecosystem from fresh to salt water practically overnight, and probably killing thousands of people and billions of land and sea creatures, according to Ryan and Pitman.

    The two scientists described the catastrophe in their book "Noah's Flood," based on 30 years of research that began with coring samples showing the same abrupt transition from lake to sea that Ballard confirmed with his dredge. No one had ever actually seen the old shoreline, however, until Ballard's team captured sonar images of it in August.

    Ryan and Pitman also suggested that the flood may have triggered massive migrations to destinations as diverse as Egypt, western Europe and central Asia, an idea that has provoked some academic controversy. Scholars also question whether any natural disaster could be conclusively identified as the inspiration for the story of Noah's flood. "All modern critical Bible scholars regard the tale of Noah as legendary," said Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review. "There are other flood stories, but if you want to say the Black Sea flood is Noah's flood, who's to say no?"

    Shanks pointed out that biblical scholars date the writing of the Book of Genesis, from which the story of Noah is taken, at between 2,900 and 2,400 years ago, and a similar event is described in the Mesopotamian Gilgamesh legend, written about 3,600 years ago.
    But while Ryan and Pitman do not prove that the Black Sea flood directly inspired Gilgamesh or Noah, their theory argues persuasively that the event was probably horrific enough for scribes and minstrels to remember it for thousands of years.

    And regardless of the historical context, the science of the Black Sea flood stands undisputed. Ryan and Pitman dated the event at 7,600 years ago, and they fixed the likely depth of the ancient coastline almost exactly where Ballard found it. "It feels good " Pitman said of Ballard's findings, analyzed by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. Pitman noted that the new research took place on the Black Sea's southern shore near the Turkish port of Synope. The flood, the underwater coastline and the likelihood that ancient settlements lie on the submerged plain have added a new dimension to an already ambitious project.

    The region's main archaeological attraction has always been the Black Sea itself,. composed mostly of dense Mediterranean salt water that immediately plunged to the bottom of the freshwater lake when the Bosporus gave way 7,500 years ago. Ever since, the less dense water on top has acted as a 150-meter-deep lid on a 2,125-meter-deep oxygen-free abyss — a watery wilderness where scientists suspect there may be 7,500 years of shipwrecks preserved in almost pristine condition.

    Source: The Japan Times, November 19, 1999

  2. #2

    Post Re: Coincidence?

    The Earliest Bandkeramik

    By Maximilian O. Baldia

    The genesis of the first full-fledged farmers of Central Europe is sought in Transdanubia, western Hungary, and adjacent regions of the Danube Basin (Map, Map). This leads to the notion of a Danubian culture complex.[1] These Danubian farmers existed between about 5700/5500 – 5000 cal BC (Chronological Table).[2] They are known primarily by the German term “Linearbandkeramik” or “Linienbandkeramik” abbreviated (LBK). Literally translated this means Linear Band Ceramics or Linear Band Pottery (often incorrectly termed Linear Pottery). The name stems from the characteristic design of linear bands gracing the early pottery. The culture is now usually referred to simply as Bandkeramik. The Bandkeramik was first recognized by the German archaeologist F. Klopfleisch in 1884.

    The Bandkeramik’s origins are sought in Hungary, where there are two variants: the western or Transdanubian Bandkeramik in western Hungary and adjacent regions, and the eastern variant, found along the Tisza River and its tributaries in the Great Hungarian Plain (Aldföld) of eastern Hungary (Map). This Alföldi Vonaldíszes Kerámica (AVK) or Alföld Linear (Decorated) Pottery theoretically developed at the same time as the western Bandkeramik, here termed LBK. Ultimately, the LBK overtook the AVK, spreading agriculture mostly along the loess soil region[3] from the Seine Bay on the North Sea in France in the west to Ukraine, and from the south of the Hungarian border to the Odra (Oder) Delta close to the Baltic Sea in Poland.

    The general chronology of the the LBK is well established due to numerous C14 dates. Dates for the AVK are more limited and the widely reported Hungarian chronology would technically place it into the Later Bandkeramik. However, most of the regional Bandkeramik groups are defined through pottery styles (typologies). For example, up to twelve phases have been defined in the Czech Republic.[4] Others simply divide the culture into the Earliest, Early, and Later Bandkeramik. Even this classification is not fully congruent with available C14 dates. For this reason, I have divided the culture merely into the Early Bandkeramik (5700/5500 – 5400/5300 cal BC), and a Later Bandkeramik (5300 – 5000 cal BC) on theoretical.[5] The LBK and the AVK is discussed under the Earliest Bandkeramik as well as the later Later Bandkeramik. (In stead of Earliest Bandkeramik, the term Early Bandkeramik may be more appropriate, since I suspect that the beginning of the Bandkeramik is nor yet properly documented due to the archaeological techniques applied to its research.)

    The Bandkeramik farmers used domesticated plants, including emmer and einkorn wheat, barley (more in the east than in the west), peas, flax, and poppy. Millet and lentil are identified (Jochim 2000:186). According to Bogucki (1995a) cattle predominate, but sheep and goat were also kept. Very few pigs and wild animals appear in the archaeological record. However, in Hungary and Austria sheep (sheep/goat?) predominate in early sites.

    Most of the species were first domesticated in the Near East and are closely related to the origin of farming in Europe. However, there are interesting exceptions. Among them is broomcorn millet (Panicum miliaceum), which appears early in the southeastern Europe, and is already present the Körös culture [Starčevo -Körös-Criş (Starcevo-Koros-Cris)] of southeast Hungary. Yet, broomcorn millet was supposedly first domesticated in China or Central Asia, not the Near East.[6]

    The Farming Expansion Hiatus and the Origin of the Danubian Farmers

    The origin of the Danubinan farmers is closely tied to the beginning of farming in Europe. The Bandkeramik is believed to evolve from the Starčevo -Körös-Criş (Starcevo-Koros-Cris) and Vinča cultures, which brought farming to the northern edge of the Balkan Peninsula. It has long been argued that their farming originated in the Fertile Crescent, spreading into Europe via Greece and the Mediterranean coast. Peter Bogucki (1995a, 1997, 2000) views this spread as a kind of Diaspora, occurring between 8,000 and 5,000 years ago. He sees this phenomenon as two processes: “the migration and dispersal of farmers and the adoption of crops and livestock by indigenous foragers.” In keeping with the model of a Diaspora, the pottery technology and the agricultural economy are traditionally viewed as a package that arrived in the Balkans from the Near East.[7]

    In Hungary, it is stipulated that the expansion of the agricultural complex halted at the edge of the Starčevo -Körös-Criş (Starcevo-Koros-Cris) culture’s northern and western frontier in the Carpathian Basin[8] for up to a 1000 years. The northern frontier is thought to coincide with the limits of the Mediterranean climate zone, which covers parts of Hungary, as well as former Yugoslavia, Italy, southern France, and Spain. Beyond this area, not all Near Eastern cultigens may have grown readily. This is especially the case beyond the southeastern Carpathian Basin and the Alps. Yet, it is precisely the region, in which much of the LBK unfolded. Therefore, a hiatus in the expansion of agriculture into the supposedly wooded north and west has been proposed. To supplant the Mesolithic life ways in these areas, the combination of domesticates and perhaps the farming techniques themselves may have had to undergo changes. Perhaps these changes are reflected the LBK’s use of domesticated poppy, thought to be derived from the wild stands along the Mediterranean coast of Italy Southern France and Spain.[9] Similarly, the reported emphasis on cattle breeding over sheep and goats, and the likely considerable use of domesticated flax from the Near East, may have developed during the hiatus.

    Unfortunately, it is difficult to demonstrate a hiatus based on C14 dates, which do not always correlate with the pottery typology. Nonetheless, the first evidence of agriculturists in southeast Hungary must date to 6100 – 6000 cal BC, if not earlier[10] (see also The Origin of Agriculture, The Hungarian Mesolithic/Neolithic Transition, Starčevo-Körös-Criş [Starcevo-Koros-Cris]. This would mean a 300 to 500 year hiatus.

    In addition, new claims suggest that domesticates preceded the LBK in the west. For example, much has been made of a single domesticated flax seed (Lineum usitatissum), along with cereal pollen (Triticum sp.) from coring samples near Zürich, Switzerland (e.g. Price 2000), and certain weeds that are associated only flax fields. Claims of pollen for domesticated plants, predating the projected arrival of the LBK in the Middle Rhein (Rhine) River, could add weight to this still scanty evidence, but early evidence (e.g. Price at al. 2001).

    Similarly, the traditional notion that the pottery indicates a clear link with the Near East has come under scrutiny. Analysis of the earliest painted pottery from the Near East and Southeast Europe (e.g. Schubert 1999) indicates there is no direct link. Only the triangle motive of the Thessalian Sesklo ornamentation could be based in the Anatolian bull-motive. For this reason, it seems that pottery style, house architecture, and the economy, may best be considered separately.

    One is forced to conclude that in the areas crucial to the understanding of the spread of the first agricultural societies in Europe archaeological methods and theories are not always able to produce the kind of detailed information necessary to answer crucial questions (cf. Tringham 2000). Some of these difficulties were already apparent for Starčevo during the excavation of the type-site (Ehrich 1977). The process of Europe’s neolithization is still difficult to delineate although the expansion is still thought to occur via two broadly definable movements. The spread of agriculture and farming was a more complex process than initially thought by researchers, such as Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza (1971, 1973, 1984) and Renfrew (1987; cf. Price 2000a, Tringham 2000).

    The Mesolithic – Neolithic Transition

    The current literature is replete with speculation that the LBK and AVK are the result of some kind of interaction between an autochthonous Mesolithic population and the bearers of the agricultural economy.

    For eastern Hungary, the Mesolithic – Neolithic transition is seen as an acculturation between the foragers and Starčevo-Körös-Criş populations and nearby Mesolithic foragers.[11] It is argued that this led to the formation the AVK around 5330 cal BC[12], perhaps via the intermediate Körös-Szatmár group, which developed on the northern fringes of Körös.

    The LBK is suggested to develop from Late Starčevo -Körös-Criş roots and/or Serbian Vinča influences in Transdanubia (Hungarian: Dunántúl; literally: across the Danube) (Map 3, Map 4).[13] Here too the Hungarian archaeologist Eszter Banffy hypothesizes that Late Mesolithic forager groups controlled lithic resources on the northernmost limit of the late Starčevo culture. The interaction may have caused the formation of the oldest Transdanubian The stone tools from the oldest Austrian LBK site of Brunn am Gebirgefrom point in the same direction. The tools were mostly trapezoids flaked primarily from locally available radeolite.

    In other areas of Central Euope, such as the Czech Republic, contacts are still being investigated. In the Czech lowlands the Mesolithic sites are deflated and cannot provide stratigraphic evidence to resolve the question. However, the stratigraphy of caves in northern Bohemia is interpreted as suggesting a hiatus between Mesolithic and LBK (J. Svoboda, V. Cílek and L. Jarošova 1998; J. Svoboda, personal communication July 2000).

    Dating: The Early/Earliest LBK Pottery (ca. 5700/5500 – 5300 cal BC)

    The LBK has been divided into various regional phases, based on pottery typology. However, “even the approximate ordering of C14 dates into an Middle or Late Bandkeramik is hardly possible.”[14] Perhaps, the most interesting discrepancy is that most of the oldest dates come from Germany and pertain to the LBK, while the AVK of eastern Hungary is said to start around 5330 cal BC. Even the preferred LBK start date of 5500 cal BC in Germany[15] does not fully bridge this gap.

    It is maintained that the earliest LBK pottery occurs in Hungary around 5700 cal. BC (Price et al. 2001). Among the so called Earliest Bandkeramik sites is Brunn am Gebirgefrom Site II, on the outskirts of Vienna, Austria. The LBK pottery here is characterized primarily by roughly made ceramics tempered with organic material. This pottery has no linear band decoration. Instead, there are slightly projecting bumps. The material belongs to Tichý’s Phase I. Magnetic dating on a baking oven suggests a date of 5500±200 BC. The oldest Austrian radiocarbon dates for this period indicate that the Earliest LBK probably started not much earlier than 5500 cal BC., which is also the preferred dating in Germany. However, several of the earliest dates, especially from Germany, can be interpreted as starting between 5750-5650 cal BC.

    The Earliest LBK pottery from the Czech Republic is named after a burial at Marovský Plumlov, Moravia. The dates are reported to range from 5700-5500 cal BC (Podborský, et al. 1993:73). The style also occurs in Western Hungary, Bohemia, the upper Danube, the Neckar River, the State of Hesse and Central Germany. The Plumlov pottery gives rise to the Ackvy style developed in Moravia and adjacent regions and the Flomborn style in Germany. Among the oldest northern LBK is Eitzum Kr. Wolfenbüttel (e.g. Schwabedissen 1979:207), where three calibrated dates range from 5400-5250 B.C.

    In Netherland, on the east side of the Maas River, an LBK enclave seems to appear suddenly around 5250/5200 BC (Modderman 1964:11 Fig. 12, 1985:90 Fig. 29). Technically, this falls into the Later LBK. It lasted until 4900 BC (ibid. 1985:31-36), although an earlier end is possible. This LBK, near the Maas River, occupied an area that seems to have been settled by another population, which created Limburg Ware. The Limburg Group, which may have been familiar with agriculture, coexisted, interacted and supposedly outlasted the LBK (ibid. p. 117-118). It is now grouped with the somewhat enigmatic La Hoguette culture, which some, but not all archaeologists, assume to be older than the LBK.[16] This may point to a more complicated cultural development than the traditional Danubian Neolithization Model suggests (Baldia 1995, Gabriel 1977).

    The Later Bandkeramik evolved into regional groups, which often developed into cultures in their own right, but retaining much of the LBK, including the custom of building longhouses and clay-built ovens.

    Houses - The carriers of the LBK pottery built long-houses that cannot be derived from the house architecture of Southeastern Europe and the Near East (e.g. Lichter 1993). The houses were usually clustered in small groups. The walls between the widely spaced timbers were constructed in a wicker-like structure of branches covered with clay. This is often referred to as waddle and daub architecture. The houses show a division into three different (functional?) sections.

    Ovens - The cooking ovens were out side the houses. They were relatively standardized, elaborate dome-shaped constructions of loess,[17] dug into the side of a pit. They have been found in the Early LBK as well as the Later LBK and are reported from Austria and the Czech Republic, as exemplified at Vedrovice and Tĕšetice-Kyjovice. Moravia.

    Burials - LBK burials consist primarily of flexed interments, with skeletons resting most often on their left side in burial pits. Regular cemeteries have been excavated. In Bavaria they range in time from the earliest (early) to the latest LBK.[18] They include the sites of Aiterhofen-Ödmühle (159 inhumations, 69 cremations), Sengkofen (28 inhumations), Mangolding (13 inhumations) and Dillingen-Steinheim (27 inhumations). The greatest amount of grave goods is found in the earliest phase. Overall they occur in 48-63% of the graves. Men have grave goods more often than women and also received the greater share of the goods. They include food, weapons, tools, jewelry, and red ocher (?). Women only receive jewelry.

    Roughly 1/3 of the buried population are children.[19] The analysis of 250 child burials in Germany and adjacent countries indicates one year or younger children are rarely interred. Small children may have received a special, small bowl with wholes, to insure a solid grip. Most grave goods occur with 8 – 10 year olds, the least with children 12 – 14 years old. Children close to adulthood received especially “rich” furnishings.

    Graves and groups of graves are sometimes located in villages, such as Těšetice-Kyjovice, Czech Republic. In the German state of Baden-Württemberg 84 individuals were buried 82 instances in LBK settlement context (villages, pit systems, long ditches, grave pits and even in one house, as well as an enclosed site).[20] Most of the data come from the early and middle phases of the LBK. Results indicate that females predominate, especially among the child burials. In fact, there is a disproportionately large number of children, primarily of age 7-14. Neonates (newborn), infants, older mature and old individuals are found as rarely in the settlements as in cemeteries, suggesting that a significant portion of the population was not buried in the settlements or the cemeteries. In many cases grave goods are about ¼ as common as in cemeteries. However, disease and injury are similar to that of cemetery burials, with the exception of Cribra orbitalia (Orbital osteoporosis) due to metabolic or hereditary anemia. This could suggest that socially more important individuals were buried in cemeteries.

    Stone Tools - It is stipulated that the chipped stone tool technology of the LBK is derived from the autochthonous Mesolithic population, while the ground stone tool technology is undoubtedly a new introduction. The raw materials for stone tools indicates a wide ranging exchange system that probably shows different exchange networks in different regions (e.g. Heide 2001). Eszter Bánffy believes that rlelict groups of hunter-gatherers icontrolled the prehistoric flint mine at Szentgal, Northern Transdanubia (Northwest Hungary), supplying red radiolarite for chipped stone tools to late Starčevo and early LBK settlements, and hypothesizes that the this interaction may be the lead to LBK.

    Enclosures - Numerous enclosure are documented for the LBK. Some, such as the enclosure at Eisleben in Central Germany, reportedly occur near the beginning of the LBK.



    References and Credits

    Ammerman A. J. and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza
    1971 Measuring the rate of spread of early farming in Europe. Man, 6:674-688.
    1973 A population model for the diffusion of early farming in Europe. C. Renfrew (Ed.) The explanation of Culture Change. Duckworth Press, London, 1973:343-357.

    Baldia, M. O.
    1995 A Spatial Analysis of Megalithic Tombs. Vol. 1-2. Ph. D. Dissertation. Southern Methodist University.
    1997 Causewayed enclosures the oldest roads, the first wagon tracks, and the development of megalithic tombs in southern Scandinavia and Central Europe. (Includes brief discussion of a possible Bandkeramik road, leading through the Asparn-Schletz enclosure).
    2003 Breaking Unnatural Barriers: Comparative Archaeology, Climate, and Culture Change in Central and Northern Europe (6000 - 2000 BC). Paper presented in the Session “Comparative Archeology and Paleoclimatology: Sociocultural Responses to a Changing World” under the Theme “Past Human Environments in Modern Contexts” at the Fifth World Archaeology Congress, Monday, June 23, 2003, Washington DC, USA. (Publication in prep.)

    Bogucki, Peter
    1988 Forest Farmers and Stock Breeders: Early Agriculture and its Consequences in North-Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    1993 Animal traction and household economics in Neolithic Europe. Antiquity, 67:492-503.
    1995a How Agriculture Came to Central Europe
    1995b The Neolithic Mosaic on the North European Plain
    1996 Changing Neolithic Landscapes at Brzesc Kujawski, Poland.
    1997 The Neolithic Diaspora in Europe

    Ehrich, Robert W.
    1977 Starčevo Revisited. In V. Markotic (Ed.) 1977:59-67.

    Gabriel, Ingo
    1977 Die Limburger Gruppe. Andeutungen über Kulturimpulse am mitteleuropäischen Nordrand kontinentalneolithischer Gruppen. Offa, 33:43-60

    Heide, Birgit
    2001 Das ältere Neolithikum im westlichen Kraichgau. Internationale Archäologie 53. Verlag Marie Leidorf 1999. Rahden/Westf.

    Hertelendi, Ede, Nádor Kalicz, Pál Raczky, Ferenc Horváth, Mihály Veres, Éva Svingor, István Futó, and Lásló Bartosiewicz.
    1995 Re-evaluation of the Neolithic in Eastern Hungary Based on Calibrated Radiocarbon Dates. Radiocarbon 37/3, 1995:239-244.

    Höneisen, Markus
    1990 Die Ausbreitung frühster bäuerlicher Kultur in Europa. In Markus Höneisen (Ed.), Die Ersten Bauern 2: Einführung, Balkan, angrenzende Regionen der Schweiz. Schweizerisches Landesmuseum, Zürich, 1990:15-26.

    Kuper, R., J. Lüning, and P. Stehli
    1975 Bagger und Bandkeramiker: Steinzeitforschung im Rheinischen Braunkohlengebiet. Schriften des Rheinischen Museumamtes; Museen - Ausstellungen - Inventare Rheinischer Museen, Rheinisches Museumsamt, Bonn, 1975.

    Kuper, R., H. Löhr, J. Lüning, P. Stehli, A. Zimmermann
    1977 Der Badkeramische Siedlungsplatz Langweiler 9, Gemeinde Aldenhoven, Kreis Düren. Beiträge zur neolithischen Besiedlung der Aldenhovener Platte II. Rheinhessische Ausgrabungen, 18/1-3, Habelt, Bonn.

    Lichter, Clemens
    1993 Untersuchungen zu den Bauten des südosteuropäischen Neolithikums und Chalkolithikums. Internationale Archäologie 18. Verlag Marie Leidorf 1993. Rahden/Westf.

    Lenneis, E., Neugebauer-Maresch, Ch., und Ruttkay, E.
    1995 Jungsteinzeit im Osten Österreichs, Wissenschaftliche Schriftenreihe Niederösterreich, pp 224.

    Lenneis, E., Stadler, P., und Windl, H.
    1996 Neue 14C-Daten zum Frühneolithikum in Österreich, Préhistorie Européenne 8:97-116.

    Markotic, V. (Ed.)
    1977 Ancient Europe and the Mediterranean. Aris & Phillips, Warminster, England.

    Milisauskas, Sarunas
    1978 European Prehistory. Academic Press, New York.

    Modderman, Pieter J. R.
    1964 The neolithic burial vault at Stein. (sic) Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia I, 1964:3-16.
    1986 Die Bandkeramik im Graetheidegebiet, Niederländisch-Limburg. Berichte der Römisch- Germanischen Kommission, 66:1985:25-121.

    Nieszery, Norbert
    1995 Linearbandkeramische Gräberfelder in Bayern. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden/Westf.

    Otte M. and P. Noiret
    2001 Le Mésolithique du Bassin Pannonien et la formation du Rubané. L'Anthropologie 105, 2001:409-419.

    Orschiedt, Jörg
    1998 Bandkeramische Siedlungsbestattungen in Südwestdeutschland: Archäologische und anthropologische Befunde. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden/Westf.

    Podborský, Vladimír, et al.
    1993 Praveké Dejiny Moravy. Vlastiveda Moravská Zeme a Lid, Nová Rada 3. Muzejní a vlastivedna spolecnost, Brno.

    Price, T. Douglas
    2000 The introduction of farming in North Europe. In T. Douglas Price (Ed.) Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; New York. 2000:260-300.

    Price, T. Douglas (Ed.)
    2000 Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; New York.

    Price, Douglas T., R. Alexander Bentley, Jens Lüning, Detlef Gronenborn & Joachim Wahl
    2001 Prehistoric human migration in the Linearbandkeramik of Central Europe. Antiquity 75, 2001:593-603.

    Renfrew, C.
    1987/90 Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Sherratt, Andrew
    1997 Economy and society in prehistoric Europe: Changing perspectives. Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press, 1997.

    Schirnig, H. (Ed.)
    1979 Großstein Gräber in Niedersachsen. Lax, Hildesheim.

    Schubert, Holger
    1999 Die bemalte Keramik des Frühneolithikums in Südosteuropa, Italien und Westanatolien. Internationale Archäologie 47. Verlag Marie Leidorf 1999. Rahden/Westf.

    Schwabedissen, H.
    1979 Der Beginn des Neolithikums im nordewestlichen Deutschland. In H. Schirnig (Ed.), Großsteingräber in Niedersachsen. Lax, Hildesheim, 1979:203-222.

    Svoboda, J., V. Cílek, L. Jarošova
    1998 Zum Mesolithikum in den Sandsteingebieten Nordböhmens. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 25/3:357-372.

    Siemoneit, Beate
    1997 Das Kind in der Linienbandkeramik: Befunde aus Gräberfeldern und Siedlungen in Mitteleuropa.. Internationale Archäologie. Verlag Marie Leidorf 1998. Rahden/Westf., Germany.

    Stäuble, Harald
    1995 Radiocarbon Dates of the Earliest Neolithic in Central Europe. Radiocarbon 37/2:227-237.

    Weiner, Jürgen
    1995 Bogenstab- und Pfeilschaftfragmente aus dem altneolithischen Brunnen von Erklenz-Kückhoven. Ein Beitrag zur Bogenwaffe der Bandkeramik. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 25. 1995:355-372

    Windl, Helmut (Ed.)
    1996 Rätsel um Gewalt und Tod vor 7.000 Jahren: Eine Spurensicheurng. Ausstellung im Museum für Urgeschichte Asparn a. d. Zaya. Katalog des NÖ Landesmuseums, N.F. 393. Asparn a. d. Zaya. 1996:7-45.

    Zohary, Daniel and Maria Hopf
    1993/00 Domestication of plants in the Old World: The origin and spread of cultivated plants in West Asia, Europe, and the Nile Valley. Second Edition. Oxford University Press. New York.

  3. #3

    Post Re: Coincidence?

    I tallies with some prudence fairly satisfying with a hyposthesis which I hope to flesh out in some time from now.

    Extensive fieldwork by Riquet lead to conclusion that the Danubians are a completely different Europid branch which couldn't have emerged from the native European mesolithic stock.
    I think that it emphasize the peadomorphic, gracilized element which nowhere, not even among the so-called mediterranoids of West Europe and the Proto-Alpines, happens to be reciprocal.
    Nevertheless what emerged from this is that this type is completely alien to the other parts of Europe, but stillnot specifically a West Asian type, but predominantly distributed in the Balkan, the Pontic area, Caucasus and Hither Asia and as thereby the racial regional history should be re-drawn and interpreted in view of the human life zone model or regional continuity thesis which I have advocated for years.
    Genetic data and Lundman's squaring of Europ, assigning SE Europe in its own right within a specialized bio-regional framework seem to back my idea.
    The local typology should be explained by the variation and evolutive trend of certain geographically bounded clusters of local, specialized patterns of traits.
    Migrations seen in contect infer rather preservation of certain local features, only modified by the amount of frequency of another particular but related taxon.

    This viewpoint will of course upset a concept of an united mediterrenean heritage.
    In fact, this term has become obsolete, the descendants of the Natufians and Danubians, deserve to be re-named.

    Their biological habitat is a quasi-sub-continent, encompassing the places mentioned here above.
    Ukraine seem to be partial to this racial and cultural biotope of closely related people, all living in an expanse that has become the cradle of this Black Sea/East Mediterrenean racial family, whereby it doesn't even mater anymore if one should call them Asians or Europeans.
    The expanse allowed somehow to produce a new Europid, leptosome and gracilized form, a trendsetter maybe but heavily localized still in more advanced times.

Similar Threads

  1. A Black Sea Doggerland?
    By Oski in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Sunday, January 3rd, 2010, 02:37 PM
  2. Malema Threatens 'Black Flood' for Cape
    By Nachtengel in forum Southern Africa
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sunday, May 31st, 2009, 01:04 AM
  3. Ancient Sea Reptile Explains Long Neck
    By Johannes de León in forum Natural Sciences & Environment
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Friday, September 24th, 2004, 10:01 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts