Proto-Indo-Europeans
The Proto-Indo-Europeans are a hypothetical prehistoric ethnolinguistic group of Eurasia who spoke Proto-Indo-European (PIE), the reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo-European language family.
Knowledge of them comes chiefly from that linguistic reconstruction, along with material evidence from
By the early second millennium BC, descendants of the Proto-Indo-Europeans had reached far and wide across Eurasia, including Anatolia (Hittites), the Aegean (the linguistic ancestors of Mycenaean Greece), the north of Europe (Corded Ware culture), the edges of Central Asia (Yamnaya culture), and southern Siberia (Afanasievo culture).[2]
Part of a series on |
Indo-European topics |
---|
Definition
In the words of philologist
While 'Proto-Indo-Europeans' is used in scholarship to designate the group of speakers associated with the reconstructed proto-language and culture, the term 'Indo-Europeans' may refer to any historical people that speak an Indo-European language.[4]
Culture
Using linguistic reconstruction from old Indo-European languages such as Latin and Sanskrit, hypothetical features of the Proto-Indo-European language are deduced. Assuming that these linguistic features reflect culture and environment of the Proto-Indo-Europeans, the following cultural and environmental traits are widely proposed:
- pastoralism, including domesticated cattle, horses, and dogs[5]
- agriculture and cereal cultivation, including technology commonly ascribed to late-neolithic farming communities, e.g., the plow[6]
- transportation by or across water[5]
- the solid wheel,[7][5] used for wagons, but not yet chariots with spoked wheels[8]
- worship of a
- oral
- a patrilineal kinship-system based upon relationships between men[note 2]
A 2016 phylogenetic analysis of Indo-European folktales posits that one folktale, The Smith and the Devil, can be reconstructed to the Proto-Indo-European period. This story, found in contemporary Indo-European folktales from Scandinavia to India, describes a blacksmith who offers his soul to a malevolent being (commonly a devil in modern versions of the tale) in exchange for the ability to weld any kind of materials together. The blacksmith then uses his new ability to stick the devil to an immovable object (often a tree), thus avoiding his end of the bargain. According to the authors, the reconstruction of this folktale to PIE implies that the Proto-Indo-Europeans had metallurgy, which in turn "suggests a plausible context for the cultural evolution of a tale about a cunning smith who attains a superhuman level of mastery over his craft".[12]
History of research
Researchers have made many attempts to identify particular prehistoric cultures with the Proto-Indo-European-speaking peoples, but all of such theories remain speculative.
The scholars of the 1800s who first tackled the question of the Indo-Europeans' original homeland (also called
In the early 1900s, the question became associated with the expansion of a supposed "
A series of major advances occurred in the 1970s due to the convergence of several factors. First, the radiocarbon dating method (invented in 1949) had become sufficiently inexpensive to be applied on a mass scale. Through dendrochronology (tree-ring dating), pre-historians could calibrate radiocarbon dates to a much higher degree of accuracy. And finally, before the 1970s, parts of eastern Europe and central Asia had been off-limits to Western scholars, while non-Western archaeologists did not have access to publication in Western peer-reviewed journals. The pioneering work of Marija Gimbutas, assisted by Colin Renfrew, at least partly addressed this problem by organizing expeditions and arranging for more academic collaboration between Western and non-Western scholars.
The
In regard to terminology, in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the term Aryan was used to refer to the Proto-Indo-Europeans and their descendants. However, Aryan more properly applies to the Indo-Iranians, the Indo-European branch that settled parts of the Middle East and South Asia, as only Indic and Iranian languages explicitly affirm the term as a self-designation referring to the entirety of their people, whereas the same Proto-Indo-European root (*aryo-) is the basis for Greek and Germanic word forms which seem only to denote the ruling elite of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) society. In fact, the most accessible evidence available confirms only the existence of a common, but vague, socio-cultural designation of "nobility" associated with PIE society, such that Greek socio-cultural lexicon and Germanic proper names derived from this root remain insufficient to determine whether the concept was limited to the designation of an exclusive, socio-political elite, or whether it could possibly have been applied in the most inclusive sense to an inherent and ancestral "noble" quality which allegedly characterized all ethnic members of PIE society. Only the latter could have served as a true and universal self-designation for the Proto-Indo-European people.[17][18]
By the early 1900s, the term "aryan" had come to be widely used in a racial sense, in which it referred to a hypothesized white, blond, and blue-eyed superior race. The dictator Adolf Hitler called this race the "master race" (Herrenrasse), and, in its name, led massive pogroms in Europe. Subsequently, the term Aryan as a general term for Indo-Europeans has been largely abandoned by scholars (though the term Indo-Aryan is still used to refer to the branch that settled in Southern Asia).[19]
Urheimat hypotheses
According to some archaeologists, PIE speakers cannot be assumed to have been a single, identifiable people or tribe, but were a group of loosely-related populations that were ancestral to the later, still partially prehistoric, Bronze Age Indo-Europeans. This is believed especially by those archaeologists who posit an original homeland of vast extent and immense time depth. However, this belief is not shared by most linguists, because proto-languages, like all languages before modern transport and communication, occupied small geographical areas over a limited time span, and were spoken by a set of close-knit communities– a tribe in the broad sense.[20]
Researchers have put forward a great variety of proposed locations for the first speakers of Proto-Indo-European. Few of these hypotheses have survived scrutiny by academic specialists in Indo-European studies sufficiently well to be included in modern academic debate.[21]
Pontic-Caspian steppe hypothesis
The Kurgan (or Steppe) hypothesis was first formulated by
Armenian highland hypothesis
The
Anatolian hypothesis
The
Another argument, made by proponents of the steppe
Following the publication of several studies on ancient DNA in 2015, Colin Renfrew subsequently acknowledged the important role of migrations of populations speaking one or several Indo-European languages from the Pontic–Caspian steppe towards Northwestern Europe, noting that the DNA evidence from ancient skeletons "had completely rejuvenated Maria Gimbutas' kurgan hypothesis."[28][29]
Genetics
This section possibly contains original research. (March 2011) |
Archaeogenetics has allowed the use of genetic analysis to trace migration patterns.
Kurgan/Steppe hypothesis
The Kurgan hypothesis or steppe theory is the most widely accepted proposal to identify the Proto-Indo-European homeland from which the Indo-European languages spread out throughout Europe and parts of Asia. It postulates that the people of a Kurgan culture in the Pontic steppe north of the Black Sea were the most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). The term is derived from the Russian kurgan (курга́н), meaning tumulus or burial mound.[30][citation needed]
R1b and R1a
According to three autosomal DNA studies, haplogroups R1b and R1a, now the most common in Europe (R1a is also very common in South Asia) would have expanded from the Pontic steppes, along with the Indo-European languages; they also detected an autosomal component present in modern Europeans which was not present in Neolithic Europeans, which would have been introduced with paternal lineages R1b and R1a, as well as Indo-European languages.[31][32][33] Studies which analysed ancient human remains in Ireland and Portugal suggest that R1b was introduced in these places along with autosomal DNA from the Pontic steppes.[34][35]
R1a and R1a1a
The
A large, 2014 study by Underhill et al., using 16,244 individuals from over 126 populations from across Eurasia, concluded there was compelling evidence, that R1a-M420 originated in the vicinity of Iran.[36] The mutations that characterize haplogroup R1a occurred ~10,000 years BP. Its defining mutation (M17) occurred about 10,000 to 14,000 years ago.[36] Pamjav et al. (2012) believe that R1a originated and initially diversified either within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle East and Caucasus region.[37]
Ornella Semino et al. propose a postglacial (
Yamnaya culture
According to Jones et al. (2015) and
Each of those two populations contributed about half the Yamnaya DNA.[33][web 1] According to co-author Dr. Andrea Manica of the University of Cambridge:The question of where the Yamnaya come from has been something of a mystery up to now [...] we can now answer that, as we've found that their genetic make-up is a mix of Eastern European hunter-gatherers and a population from this pocket of Caucasus hunter-gatherers who weathered much of the last Ice Age in apparent isolation.[web 1]
All
Based on these findings and by equating the people of the Yamnaya culture with the Proto-Indo-Europeans,
Eastern European hunter-gatherers
According to
Near East population
The Near East population were most likely hunter-gatherers from the Caucasus (CHG)[39] c.q. Iran Chalcolithic related people with a major CHG-component.[41]
Jones et al. (2015) analyzed genomes from males from western
According to Lazaridis et al. (2016), "a population related to the people of the Iran Chalcolithic contributed ~43% of the ancestry of early Bronze Age populations of the steppe."[41] According to Lazaridis et al. (2016), these Iranian Chalcolithic people were a mixture of "the Neolithic people of western Iran, the Levant, and Caucasus Hunter Gatherers."[41][note 4] Lazaridis et al. (2016) also note that farming spread at two places in the Near East, namely the Levant and Iran, from where it spread, Iranian people spreading to the steppe and south Asia.[42]
Northern and Central Europe
Haak et al. (2015) studied DNA from 94 skeletons from Europe and Russia aged between 3,000 and 8,000 years old.[43] They concluded that about 4,500 years ago there was a major influx into Europe of Yamnaya culture people originating from the Pontic–Caspian steppe north of the Black Sea and that the DNA of copper-age Europeans matched that of the Yamnaya.[44][31]
The four Corded Ware people could trace an astonishing three-quarters of their ancestry to the Yamnaya, according to the paper. That suggests a massive migration of Yamnaya people from their steppe homeland into Eastern Europe about 4500 years ago when the Corded Ware culture began, perhaps carrying an early form of Indo-European language.
Bronze Age Greeks
A 2017
Anatolian hypothesis
Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Alberto Piazza argue that Renfrew and Gimbutas reinforce rather than contradict each other. Cavalli-Sforza (2000) states that "It is clear that, genetically speaking, peoples of the Kurgan steppe descended at least in part from people of the Middle Eastern Neolithic who immigrated there from Turkey." Piazza & Cavalli-Sforza (2006) state that:
if the expansions began at 9,500 years ago from Anatolia and at 6,000 years ago from the
Don region from Anatolia, probably through the Balkans. There a completely new, mostly pastoral culture developed under the stimulus of an environment unfavourable to standard agriculture, but offering new attractive possibilities. Our hypothesis is, therefore, that Indo-European languages derived from a secondary expansion from the Yamnaya cultureregion after the Neolithic farmers, possibly coming from Anatolia and settled there, developing pastoral nomadism.
About his old teacher Cavalli-Sforza's proposal, Wells (2002:[page needed]) states that "there is nothing to contradict this model, although the genetic patterns do not provide clear support either", and instead argues that the evidence is much stronger for Gimbutas' model:
While we see substantial genetic and archaeological evidence for an Indo-European migration originating in the southern Russian steppes, there is little evidence for a similarly massive Indo-European migration from the Middle East to Europe. One possibility is that, as a much earlier migration (8,000 years old, as opposed to 4,000), the genetic signals carried by Indo-European-speaking farmers may simply have dispersed over the years. There is clearly some genetic evidence for migration from the Middle East, as Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues showed, but the signal is not strong enough for us to trace the distribution of Neolithic languages throughout the entirety of Indo-European-speaking Europe.
Iranian/Armenian hypothesis
David Reich (2018), noting the presence of some Indo-European languages (such as Hittite) in parts of ancient Anatolia, argues that "the most likely location of the population that first spoke an Indo-European language was south of the Caucasus Mountains, perhaps in present-day Iran or Armenia, because ancient DNA from people who lived there matches what we would expect for a source population both for the Yamnaya and for ancient Anatolians." Yet, Reich also notes that "...the evidence here is circumstantial as no ancient DNA from the Hittites themselves has yet been published."[49] Kristian Kristiansen, in an interview with Der Spiegel in May 2018, stated that the Yamnaya culture may have had a predecessor at the Caucasus, where "proto-proto-Indo-European" was spoken.[50]
Recent DNA-research has led to renewed suggestions of a Caucasian homeland for the 'proto-Indo-Europeans'.
Wang et al. (2018) note that the Caucasus served as a corridor for gene flow between the steppe and cultures south of the Caucasus during the Eneolithic and the Bronze Age, stating that this "opens up the possibility of a homeland of PIE south of the Caucasus." However, Wang et al. also comment that the most recent genetic evidence supports an expansion of proto-Indo-Europeans through the steppe, noting: "but the latest ancient DNA results from South Asia also lend weight to a spread of Indo-European languages "via the steppe belt. The spread of some or all of the proto-Indo-European branches would have been possible via the North Caucasus and Pontic region and from there, along with pastoralist expansions, to the heart of Europe. This scenario finds support from the well attested and now widely documented '
David W. Anthony in a 2019 analysis, criticizes the "southern" or "Armenian" hypothesis (addressing Reich, Kristiansen, and Wang). Among his reasons being: that the Yamnaya lack evidence of genetic influence from the Bronze Age or late neolithic Caucasus (deriving instead from an earlier mixture of Eastern European hunter-gatherers and Caucasus hunter-gatherers) and have paternal lineages that seem to derive from the hunter-gatherers of the Eastern European Steppe rather than the Caucasus, as well as a scarcity in the Yamnaya of the Anatolian Farmer admixture that had become common and substantial in the Caucasus around 5,000 BC. Anthony instead suggests a genetic and linguistic origin of proto-Indo-Europeans (the Yamnaya) in the Eastern European steppe north of the Caucasus, from a mixture of these two groups (EHG and CHG). He suggests that the roots of Proto-Indo-European ("archaic" or proto-proto-Indo-European) were in the steppe rather than the south and that PIE formed mainly from a base of languages spoken by Eastern European hunter-gathers with some influences from languages of Caucasus hunter-gatherers.[57][40]
See also
- Archaeogenetics
- Indo-Aryan migration
- Comparative linguistics
- Historical linguistics
- Paleolithic continuity theory
- Old European culture
- Proto-Indo-European language
- Proto-Indo-European religion
- Proto-Indo-European society
- Gravettian
- Sintashta culture
Notes
- Dyauṣ pitar, and Luvian Tatis Tiwaz)."[5]
- ^ Watkins: "A large number of kinship terms have been reconstructed. They are agreed in pointing to a society that was patriarchal, patrilocal (the bride leaving her household to join that of her husband’s family), and patrilineal (descent reckoned by the male line). “Father” and “head of the household” are one: pǝter-, with his spouse, the māter-."[5]
- ^ See:
- Mallory: "The Kurgan solution is attractive and has been accepted by many archaeologists and linguists, in part or total. It is the solution one encounters in the Encyclopædia Britannica and the Grand Dictionnaire Encyclopédique Larousse."[24]
- Strazny: "The single most popular proposal is the Pontic steppes (see the Kurgan hypothesis)..."[25]
- ^ See also:
* eurogenes.blogspot, The genetic structure of the world's first farmers (Lazaridis et al. preprint)
* anthrogenica.com, Lazaridis et al: The genetic structure of the world's first farmers (pre-print)
References
- )
- ISBN 978-1-884964-98-5. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ISBN 978-0-19-928075-9.
- ISBN 978-0-19-517072-6
- ^ a b c d e Watkins 2000.
- ^ ISBN 0-19-507618-4, p 347 – J.P. Mallory
- ISBN 978-615-5766-30-5
- ISBN 0-19-929668-5, p. 249
- ISBN 9780940262119.
- ISBN 978-0-19-802471-2.
- ISBN 978-90-272-1185-9.
- PMID 26909191.
- ^ Gilroy, Paul. "Against Race," Harvard UP, 2000. Mish, Frederic C., Editor in Chief Webster's Tenth New Collegiate Dictionary Springfield, Massachusetts, U.S.A.:1994--Merriam-Webster See original definition (definition #1) of "Aryan" in English—Page 66
- PMID 19888303.
- PMID 16415161.
- ^ a b Anthony & Ringe 2015.
- ^ Thapar 1996.
- ^ Thapar 2019.
- ISBN 9781316299111.
- ^ Aikio, Ante (2012). "An essay on Saami ethnolinguistic prehistory" (PDF). Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne (266, A Linguistic Map of Prehistoric Northern Europe). Helsinki, Finland: Finno-Ugrian Society: 93f., 98. Retrieved 31 July 2017.
- ^ Mallory 1991, p. [page needed].
- ISBN 978-0-521-38675-3.
- ISSN 0302-5160.
- ^ Mallory 1989, p. 185.
- ^ Strazny 2000, p. 163.
- ^ T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov (March 1990) "The Early History of Indo-European Languages", Scientific American.
- ^ I.M. Diakonoff (1984) The Prehistory of the Armenian People.
- ^ Renfrew, Colin (2017) "Marija Redivia : DNA and Indo-European origins" (The Oriental Institute lecture series : Marija Gimbutas memorial lecture, Chicago. November 8, 2017, see timestamp 11:14).
- S2CID 171874630.
- ^ "kurgan". en.wiktionary.org. 24 November 2020. Retrieved 2 March 2021.
- ^ a b c d e f Haak et al. 2015.
- ^ S2CID 4399103.
- ^ S2CID 7866359.
- PMID 26712024.
- PMID 28749934.
- ^ PMID 24667786.
- ^ Pamjav 2012.
- PMID 11073453. Archived from the original(PDF) on 25 November 2003. Retrieved 25 November 2003.
- ^ a b Jones 2015.
- ^ a b Anthony, D.W. (Spring–Summer 2019). "Archaeology, Genetics, and Language in the Steppes: A Comment on Bomhard". Journal of Indo-European Studies. 47 (1 & 2): 1–23.
- ^ a b c Lazaridis 2016, p. 8.
- ^ Lazaridis 2016.
- PMID 25700495.
- S2CID 184180681.
- PMID 28783727.
- ^ Ann Gibbons (2 August 2017). "The Greeks really do have near-mythical origins, ancient DNA reveals". Science Magazine.
- ^ Megan Gannon (3 August 2017). "More than Myth: Ancient DNA Reveals Roots of 1st Greek Civilizations". Live Science.
- ^ Wells 2002, p. [page needed].
- ^ Reich 2018, p. 120.
- ^ a b Grolle 2018, p. 108.
- ^ Reich 2018, p. 177.
- ^ Damgaard 2018.
- ^ Wang 2018.
- ^ Kroonen, Barjamovic & Peyrot 2018, p. 7.
- ^ Kroonen, Barjamovic & Peyrot 2018, p. 9.
- ^ Wang 2018, p. 15.
- ISBN 9789004416192
Sources
- Printed sources
- Anthony, David W.; Ringe, Don (January 2015). "The Indo-European Homeland from Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives". Annual Review of Linguistics. 1 (1): 199–219. ISSN 2333-9683.
- PMID 9223254.
- Haak, Wolfgang; Lazaridis, Iosif; Patterson, Nick; Rohland, Nadin; Mallick, Swapan; Llamas, Bastien; Brandt, Guido; Nordenfelt, Susanne; Harney, Eadaoin; Stewardson, Kristin; Fu, Qiaomei; Mittnik, Alissa; Bánffy, Eszter; Economou, Christos; Francken, Michael; Friederich, Susanne; Pena, Rafael Garrido; Hallgren, Fredrik; Khartanovich, Valery; Khokhlov, Aleksandr; Kunst, Michael; Kuznetsov, Pavel; Meller, Harald; Mochalov, Oleg; Moiseyev, Vayacheslav; Nicklisch, Nicole; Pichler, Sandra L.; Risch, Roberto; Rojo Guerra, Manuel A.; Roth, Christina (2015). "Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe". Nature. 522 (7555): 207–211. PMID 25731166.
- Jones, Eppie R. (2015). "Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians". PMID 26567969.
- Lazaridis, Iosif (2016), "The genetic structure of the world's first farmers", bioRxiv 10.1101/059311
- ISBN 978-0-500-27616-7.
- Mallory, J. P. (1991). In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology, and Myth. London: Thames & Hudson.
- Piazza, Alberto; Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi (15 April 2006). "Diffusion of Genes and Languages in Human Evolution". In Cangelosi, Angelo; Smith, Andrew D. M.; Smith, Kenny (eds.). The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Evolution of Language (EVOLANG6). Rome: World Scientific. pp. 255–266. Archived from the original on 10 September 2007. Retrieved 8 August 2007.
- Pamjav (December 2012), "Brief communication: New Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1", American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 149 (4): 611–615, PMID 23115110
- Reich, David (2018). Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
- Strazny, Philipp (Ed). (2000), Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (1 ed.), Routledge, ISBN 978-1-57958-218-0
- Thapar, Romila (1996), "The Theory of Aryan Race and India: History and Politics", Social Scientist, 24 (1/3): 3–29, JSTOR 3520116
- Thapar, Romila (2019), "Multiple Theories about the 'Aryan'", Which of Us Are Aryans?, ALEPH
- Watkins, Calvert (2000), "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans", The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.), Houghton Mifflin Company, archived from the original on 1 March 2009
- ISBN 9780691115320.
- Web-sources
Further reading
- Anthony, David W. (2007). ISBN 978-0-691-05887-0.
- Kozintsev, Alexander. "Proto-Indo-Europeans: The prologue." Journal of Indo-European Studies 47.3-4 (2019): 1-88.
- Atkinson, Q. D.; Nicholls, G.; Welch, D.; Gray, R. D. (2005). "From Words to Dates: Water into wine, mathemagic or phylogenetic inference?". Transactions of the Philological Society. 103 (2): 193–219. .
- Gray, Russell D.; Atkinson, Quentin D. (2003). "Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin" (PDF). Nature. 426 (6965): 435–439. S2CID 42340. Archived from the original(PDF) on 30 August 2017. Retrieved 12 May 2020.
- Heyd, Volker (2017). "Kossinna's smile". Antiquity. 91 (356): 348–359. S2CID 164376362.
- Holm, Hans J. (2007). "The new Arboretum of Indo-European 'Trees'. Can new Algorithms Reveal the Phylogeny and even Prehistory of IE?" Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 14–2:167–214.
- Lazaridis, Iosif (2014). "Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans". PMID 25230663.
- ISBN 0-224-02495-7
- Sykes, Brian. (2001) The Seven Daughters of Eve. London: Corgi Books.
- Watkins, Calvert. (1995) How to Kill a Dragon: Aspects of Indo-European Poetics. New York: Oxford University Press.
- "Early contacts between Indo-European and Uralic speakers (4000 BC – 1000AD)" (PDF). University of Helsinki, Suomenlinna, Finland.
External links
- Media related to Proto-Indo-Europeans at Wikimedia Commons
- Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture (1997)
- Indo-European Roots Index at the Wayback Machine (archived 22 January 2009) from The American Heritage Dictionary
- Kurgan culture
- Beckwith, Christopher I. (2013). "The Actual Achievements of Early Indo-Europeans, in Accurate Historical Context (2013)". Beckwith, Christopher I. 4. University of California. S2CID 131553744.
- Genetics