I do not understand how this article undermines the Kurgan Hypothesis. The modern horse enters the picture later according to those discoveries, but it is still within the right time frame and geographic location.
I think it's more that there's a more drastic/stricter version of the Kurgan hypothesis that sees Yamnaya migration + Horses + Indo-European language spread as all one packaged good, spreading in a rapid wave from the steppe.
Whereas this author is arguing that the horse part happened later.
We already know the cultural-linguistic spread was more complicated than Gimbutas' original theory. That's not really controversial.
Whereas this author is arguing that the horse part happened later.
We already know the cultural-linguistic spread was more complicated than Gimbutas' original theory. That's not really controversial.