GREEK PREHISTORY AND IE (EVIDENCE?)

[Miguel Carrasquer Vidal]

Stanley Friesen <sarima at friesen.net> wrote:

>At 12:55 AM 2/5/00 +0100, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
>>That's not at all what Renfrew says.  He's saying that "a
>>massive amount of archaeological evidence associated with
>>fundamental technological-economic transformation requires a
>>linguistic change", as it were.  Which is true.  The Neolithic
>>Revolution was the second most important such event in European
>>history (the most important was the introduction of language --as
>>we know it-- itself in the Upper Paleolithic, 50-40,000 BP).

>I think that date is rather too late.  That is more likely the date at
>which language was introduced into Europe.

That's why I said "in European history".

>How much earlier language was
>invented is unclear, but it could be as long ago as 200,000 years ago, with
>the first appearance of anatomically modern humans in Africa.

>The Upper Paleolithic (or its equivalent) begins earlier,and more
>gradually, outside of Europe.

True.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv at wxs.nl