Indo-European migrations

From Dharmapedia Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Indo-European migrations were the migrations of Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) speakers, as proposed by contemporary scholarship, and the subsequent migrations of people speaking further developed Indo-European languages, which explains why the Indo-European languages are spoken in a large area from India and Iran to Europe.

While there can be no direct evidence of prehistoric languages, both the existence of Proto-Indo-European and the dispersal of its daughter dialects through wide-ranging migrations are inferred through a synthesis of data from linguistics, archaeology, anthropology and genetics. Comparative linguistics describes the similarities between various languages and the linguistic laws at play in the changes in those languages (see Indo-European studies). Archaeological data traces the spread of cultures presumed to be created by speakers of Proto-Indo-European in several stages: from the hypothesized locations of the Proto-Indo-European homeland, into their later locations Western Europe, Central, South and Eastern Asia by migrations and by language shift through élite-recruitment as described by anthropological research.[1][2] Recent genetic research has increasingly contributed to understanding of the relations between various prehistoric cultures.

According to the widely held Kurgan hypothesis, c.q. renewed Steppe hypothesis, the oldest branch were the Anatolian languages (Hittite language and Luwian language) which split from the earliest proto-Indo-European speech community (archaic PIE), which itself developed at the Volga basin. The second-oldest branch, the Tocharian languages, were spoken in the Tarim Basin (present-day western China), and split-off from early PIE, which was spoken at the eastern Pontic steppe. The bulk of the Indo-European languages developed from late PIE, which was spoken at the Yamnaya horizon, and other related cultures in the Pontic–Caspian steppe, around 4000 BCE.

Proto-Celtic and Proto-Italic probably developed in and spread from Central Europe into Western Europe after Yamnaya migrations into the Danube Valley,[3][4] while Proto-Germanic and Proto-Balto-Slavic may have developed east of the Carpathian mountains, in present-day Ukraine,[5] moving north and spreading with the Corded Ware culture in Middle Europe (third millennium BCE).[6][7][web 1][8][web 2][web 3] Alternatively, a European branch of Indo-European dialects, termed "North-west Indo-European" and associated with the Beaker culture, may have been ancestral to not only Celtic and Italic, but also to Germanic and Balto-Slavic.[9]

The Indo-Iranian language and culture probably emerged within the Sintashta culture (circa 2100–1800 BCE), at the eastern border of the Yamnaya horizon and the Corded Ware culture, growing into the Andronovo culture[10][11][1][12][13][14] (ca. 1900[15]–800 BCE) which two first phases are Fedorovo Andronovo culture (ca. 1900–1400 BCE)[15] and Alakul Andronovo culture (ca. 1800–1500 BCE).[16] Indo-Aryans moved into the Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex (ca. 2400–1600 BCE) and spread to the Levant (Mitanni), northern India (Vedic people, ca. 1500 BCE), and China (Wusun).[2] The Iranian languages spread throughout the steppes with the Scyths and into Ancient Iran with the Medes, Parthians and Persians from ca. 800 BCE.[2]

A number of alternative theories have been proposed. Renfrew's Anatolian hypothesis suggests a much earlier date for the Indo-European languages, proposing an origin in Anatolia and an initial spread with the earliest farmers who migrated to Europe. It has been the only serious alternative for the steppe-theory, but suffers from a lack of explanatory power. The Anatolian hypothesis also led to some support for the Armenian hypothesis, which proposes that the urheimat of the Indo-European language was south of the Caucasus. While the Armenian hypothesis has been criticized on archeological and chronological grounds, recent genetic research has led to a renewed interest. The Paleolithic Continuity Theory suggests paleolithic origins, but has received very little interest in mainstream scholarship. The Out of India theory is a fringe theory propagated by Indian nationalists, which has no support in scholarship.


Classification of Indo-European languages.
Red: Extinct languages. White: Categories or unattested proto-languages.
Left half: Centum languages. Right half: Satem languages.

On the other hand, there is conclusive archaeological evidence for the arrival of the European branches (the Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic branches) into Europe from the east, for the arrival of the Hittites (the Anatolian branch) into Turkey (Anatolia) from the northeast, for the arrival of the Greeks and Albanians (the Greek and Albanian branches) into Greece from the east (across the Aegean Sea), and for the arrival of the Tocharians (the Tocharian branch) into the Qinjiang province of China from Central Asia to its south. [The arrival of the Iranian branch into Iran from the east is recorded in Babylonian texts. The Armenian language (the Armenian branch) is also clearly an intruder into Armenia, as evident from the evidence of the place names in Armenia]. It is only the theoretically postulated arrival of the Indo-Aryan branch (as represented by its oldest form, Vedic) into northwestern India from further northwest which is absolutely unsupported by any archaeological evidence.[1] [archive]

As per the accepted linguistic consensus, the first two IE dialects to move out from the Homeland (wherever that Homeland is to be situated) were the speakers of the proto-Anatolian (proto-Hittite) and the proto-Tocharian dialect in that order. Then the speakers of the five European ancestral dialects, proto-Italic, proto-Celtic, proto-Germanic, proto-Baltic and proto-Slavic. The five dialects to remain in the Homeland for a period after that, and to develop many new linguistic features in common, were the speakers of the proto-Albanian, proto-Greek, proto-Armenian, proto-Iranian and proto-Indo-Aryan dialects. There is no consensus about the exact order of migration of these last five dialects, but the logical implication of this should be that the Homeland was located in the historical area of one of these five branches, which continued to remain in the Homeland after the migration of the other four. All the twelve dialects, however, remained in contiguous areas inside and just outside the Homeland in various degrees of contact with each other till around 3000 BCE, after which they started decisively breaking away from each other and moving (in the course of time) into their earliest known historical habitats. [2] [archive]

As per the established linguistic analysis, seven branches had migrated from the Homeland (wherever it was located) in the following order: Hittite (Anatolian), Tocharian, Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic. Finally only five branches were left in the Homeland: “After the dispersals of the early PIE dialects […] there were still those who remained […] Among them were the ancestors of the Greeks and Indo-Iranians […] also shared by Armenian; all these languages it seems, existed in an area of mutual interaction.” (WINN 1995:323-324). The five branches which share many linguistic features missing in the earlier seven are Albanian (not mentioned in the above quote), Greek, Armenian, Iranian and Indo-Aryan.

However, the data in the Rigveda regarding the dāśarājña battle and the expansionary activities of Sudās (Book 7), shows this area to be in the Punjab. Sudās, the Vedic (Indo-Aryan/Pūru) king enters the Punjab area from the east and fights this historical battle against a coalition of ten tribes (nine Anu tribes, and one tribe of the remnant Druhyu in the area), and later these tribes start migrating westwards.

The Anu tribes (or the epithets used for them) named in the battle hymns are: VII.18.5 Śimyu. VII.18.6 Bhṛgu. VII.18.7 Paktha, Bhalāna, Alina, Śiva, Viṣāṇin. VII.83.1 Parśu/Parśava, Pṛthu/Pārthava, Dāsa. (Another Anu tribe in the Puranas and later tradition is the Madra).

These tribal names are primarily found only in two hymns, VII.18 and VII.83, of the Rigveda, which refer to the Anu tribes who fought against Sudās in the dāśarājña battle or "the Battle of the Ten Kings". But see where these same tribal names are found in later historical times (after their exodus westwards referred to in VII.5.3 and VII.6.3). Incredibly, they are found dotted over an almost continuous geographical belt, covering the five last branches (which, according to the linguistic analysis, remained in the Homeland before the last stage of migrations), and covering the entire sweep of areas extending westwards from the Punjab (the battleground of the dāśarājña battle) right up to southern and eastern Europe:

Afghanistan: (Avestan) Proto-Iranian: Sairima (Śimyu), Dahi (Dāsa). NE Afghanistan: Proto-Iranian: Nuristani/Piśācin (Viṣāṇin). Pakhtoonistan (NW Pakistan), South Afghanistan: Iranian: Pakhtoon/Pashtu (Paktha). Baluchistan (SW Pakistan), SE Iran: Iranian: Bolan/Baluchi (Bhalāna). NE Iran: Iranian: Parthian/Parthava (Pṛthu/Pārthava). SW Iran: Iranian: Parsua/Persian (Parśu/Parśava). NW Iran: Iranian: Madai/Mede (Madra). Uzbekistan: Iranian: Khiva/Khwarezmian (Śiva). W. Turkmenistan: Iranian: Dahae (Dāsa). Ukraine, S, Russia: Iranian: Alan (Alina), Sarmatian (Śimyu). Turkey: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Phryge/Phrygian (Bhṛgu). Romania, Bulgaria: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Dacian (Dāsa). Greece: Greek: Hellene (Alina). Albania: Albanian: Sirmio (Śimyu). [3] [archive]

Linguistics: relations between languages[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Indo-European languages[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Indo-European branches map.svg
A map showing the approximate present-day distribution of the Indo-European branches within their homelands of Europe and Asia. The following legend is given in the chronological order of the earliest surviving written attestations of each branch:
  Non-Indo-European languages
Dotted and striped areas indicate where multilingualism is common (more visible upon full enlargement of the map).

The similarities between various European languages, Sanskrit, and Persian, were first noted by Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn. A century later, they were also discovered and described by Sir William Jones in his Third Anniversary Discourse to the Asiatic Society in 1786, after learning Sanskrit in India, concluding that all these languages originated from the same source.[17][web 4] From his initial intuitions developed the establishment of the Indo-European language family, which consists of several hundred related languages and dialects. There are about 439 languages and dialects, according to the 2009 Ethnologue estimate, about half of these (221) belonging to the Indo-Aryan subbranch originating in South Asia.[web 5] The Indo-European family includes most of the major current languages of Europe, the Iranian plateau, the northern half of the Indian Subcontinent, Sri Lanka and was also spoken in parts of ancient Anatolia. With written attestations appearing since the Bronze Age in the form of the Anatolian languages and Mycenaean Greek, the Indo-European family is significant to the field of historical linguistics as possessing the second-longest recorded history, after the Afroasiatic family.

Indo-European languages are spoken by almost 3 billion native speakers,[web 6] the largest number by far for any recognised language family. Of the 20 languages with the largest numbers of native speakers according to Ethnologue, twelve are Indo-European: Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, German, Punjabi, Marathi, French, Urdu, Italian, accounting for over 1.7 billion native speakers.[web 7]

Development of the Indo-European languages[edit]

Proto-Indo-European language[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The (late) Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) is the linguistic reconstruction of a common ancestor of the Indo-European languages, as spoken by the Proto-Indo-Europeans after the split-off of Anatolian and Tocharian. PIE was the first proposed proto-language to be widely accepted by linguists. Far more work has gone into reconstructing it than any other proto-language and it is by far the most well-understood of all proto-languages of its age. During the 19th century, the vast majority of linguistic work was devoted to reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European or its daughter proto-languages such as Proto-Germanic, and most of the current techniques of historical linguistics (e. g. the comparative method and the method of internal reconstruction) were developed as a result.

Scholars estimate that PIE may have been spoken as a single language (before divergence began) around 3500 BCE, though estimates by different authorities can vary by more than a millennium. The most popular hypothesis for the origin and spread of the language is the Kurgan hypothesis, which postulates an origin in the Pontic–Caspian steppe of Eastern Europe.

The existence of PIE was first postulated in the 18th century by Sir William Jones, who observed the similarities between Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, and Latin. By the early 20th century, well-defined descriptions of PIE had been developed that are still accepted today (with some refinements). The largest developments of the 20th century have been the discovery of Anatolian and Tocharian languages and the acceptance of the laryngeal theory. The Anatolian languages have also spurred a major re-evaluation of theories concerning the development of various shared Indo-European language features and the extent to which these features were present in PIE itself.

PIE is thought to have had a complex system of morphology that included inflections (suffixing of roots, as in who, whom, whose), and ablaut (vowel alterations, as in sing, sang, sung). Nouns used a sophisticated system of declension and verbs used a similarly sophisticated system of conjugation.

File:Early Indo-European river names.jpg
Area of distribution of the earliest Indo-European river names.[18]

Relationships to other language families, including the Uralic languages, have been proposed but remain controversial. There is no written evidence of Proto-Indo-European, so all knowledge of the language is derived by reconstruction from later languages using linguistic techniques such as the comparative method and the method of internal reconstruction.

The Indo-Hittite hypothesis postulates a common predecessor for both the Anatolian languages and the other Indo-European languages, called Indo-Hittite or Indo-Anatolian.[1] Although PIE had predecessors,[19] the Indo-Hittite hypothesis is not widely accepted, and there is little to suggest that it is possible to reconstruct a proto-Indo-Hittite stage that differs substantially from what is already reconstructed for PIE.[20]

Frederik Kortlandt postulates a shared common ancestor of Indo-European and Uralic, Indo-Uralic, as a possible pre-PIE.[21] According to Kortlandt, "Indo-European is a branch of Indo-Uralic which was radically transformed under the influence of a North Caucasian substratum when its speakers moved from the area north of the Caspian Sea to the area north of the Black Sea."[21][subnote 1]

Uralic, Caucasian and Semitic borrowings[edit]

Proto-Finno-Ugric and PIE have a lexicon in common, generally related to trade, such as words for "price" and "draw, lead". Similarly, "sell" and "wash" were borrowed in Proto-Ugric. Although some have proposed a common ancestor (the hypothetical Nostratic macrofamily), this is generally regarded as the result of intensive borrowing, which suggests that their homelands were located near each other. Proto-Indo-European also exhibits lexical loans to or from Caucasian languages, particularly Proto-Northwest Caucasian and Proto-Kartvelian, which suggests a location close to the Caucasus.[19][22]

Gramkelidze and Ivanov, using the now largely unsupported glottalic theory of Indo-European phonology, also proposed Semitic borrowings into Proto-Indo-European, suggesting a more southern homeland to explain these borrowings. According to Mallory and Adams, some of these borrowings may be too speculative or from a later date, but they consider the proposed Semitic loans *táwros 'bull' and *wéyh₁on- 'wine; vine' to be more likely.[23] Anthony notes that those Semitic borrowings may also have occurred through the advancement of Anatolian farmer cultures via the Danube valley into the steppe zone.[1]

Phases of Proto-Indo-European[edit]

According to Anthony, the following terminology may be used:[1]

  • Archaic PIE for "the last common ancestor of the Anatolian and non-Anatolian IE branches";
  • Early, core, or Post-Anatolian, PIE for "the last common ancestor of the non-Anatolian PIE languages, including Tocharian";
  • Late PIE for "the common ancestor of all other IE branches".

The Anatolian languages are the first Indo-European language family to have split off from the main group. Due to the archaic elements preserved in the now extinct Anatolian languages, they may be a "cousin" of Proto-Indo-European, instead of a "daughter", but Anatolian is generally regarded as an early offshoot of the Indo-European language group.[1]

Genesis of Indo-European languages[edit]

Using a mathematical analysis borrowed from evolutionary biology, Don Ringe and Tandy Warnow propose the following evolutionary tree of Indo-European branches:[24]

David Anthony, following the methodology of Ringe and Warnow, proposes the following sequence:[27]

  • Pre-Anatolian (4200 BCE)
  • Pre-Tocharian (3700 BCE)
  • Pre-Germanic (3300 BCE)
  • Pre-Celtic and Pre-Italic (3000 BCE)
  • Pre-Armenian (2800 BCE)
  • Pre-Balto-Slavic (2800 BCE)
  • Pre-Greek (2500 BCE)
  • Proto-Indo-Iranian (2200 BCE); split between Iranian and Old Indic 1800 BCE

Ringe and Warnow's methodology may be outdated, and not accurately reflect the development of the IE languages.[citation needed]

Archaeology: migrations from the steppe Urheimat[edit]

File:Early Yamna.jpg
Location of early Yamnaya culture

Archaeological research has unearthed a broad range of historical cultures which can be related to the spread of the Indo-European languages. Various steppe-cultures show strong similarities with the Yamna-horizon at the Pontic steppe, while the time-range of several Asian cultures also coincides with the proposed trajectory and time-range of the Indo-European migrations.[28][1]

According to the widely accepted Kurgan hypothesis or Steppe theory, the Indo-European language and culture spread in several stages from the Proto-Indo-European Urheimat in the Eurasian Pontic steppes into Western Europe, Central and South Asia, through folk migrations and so-called elite recruitment.[1][2] This process started with the introduction of cattle at the Eurasian steppes around 5200 BCE, and the mobilisation of the steppe herder cultures with the introduction of wheeled wagons and horse-back riding, which led to a new kind of culture. Between 4,500 and 2,500 BCE, this "horizon", which includes several distinctive cultures, spread out over the Pontic steppes, and outside into Europe and Asia.[1] Both Asko Parpola and David Anthony regard the Khvalynsk culture as the culture that established the roots of Early Proto-Indo-European around 4500 BCE in the lower and middle Volga.[29][30]

Early migrations at ca. 4200 BCE brought steppe herders into the lower Danube valley, either causing or taking advantage of the collapse of Old Europe.[31] According to Anthony, the Anatolian branch,[32][33] to which the Hittites belong,[34] probably arrived in Anatolia from the Danube valley.[35][36][web 8] Alternatively, David Reich has mentioned that the possibility exists that archaic PIE originated in the Caucasus, from where archaic PIE speaking people migrated into Anatolia.[37][38][39]

Migrations eastward from the Repin culture founded the Afanasevo culture[1][40] which developed into the Tocharians.[41] The Tarim mummies may represent a migration of Tocharian speakers from the Afanasevo culture into the Tarim Basin.[42] Migrations southward may have founded the Maykop culture,[43] but the Maykop origins could also have been in the Caucasus.[44][web 9]

The western Indo-European languages (Germanic, Celtic, Italic) probably spread into Europe from the Balkan-Danubian complex, a set of cultures in Southeastern Europe.[3] At ca. 3000 BCE a migration of Proto-Indo-European speakers from the Yamna-culture took place toward the west, along the Danube river,[4] Slavic and Baltic developed a little later at the middle Dniepr (present-day Ukraine),[5] moving north toward the Baltic coast.[45] The Corded Ware culture in Middle Europe (third millennium BCE),[web 1] which materialized with a massive migration from the Eurasian steppes to Central Europe,[8][web 2][web 3] probably played a central role in the spread of the pre-Germanic and pre-Balto-Slavic dialects.[6][7]

The eastern part of the Yamnaya horizon and the Corded Ware culture contributed to the Sintashta culture (c. 2100–1800 BCE), where the Indo-Iranian language and culture emerged, and where the chariot was invented.[1] The Indo-Iranian language and culture was further developed in the Andronovo culture (c. 1800–800 BCE), and influenced by the Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex (c. 2400–1600 BCE). The Indo-Aryans split off around 1800–1600 BCE from the Iranians,[46] whereafter Indo-Aryan groups moved to the Levant (Mitanni), northern India (Vedic people, c. 1500 BCE), and China (Wusun).[2] The Iranian languages spread throughout the steppes with the Scyths and into Iran with the Medes, Parthians and Persians from ca. 800 BCE.[2]

Anthropology: Elite recruitment and language shift[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

According to Marija Gimbutas, the process of "Indo-Europeanization" of Europe was essentially a cultural, not a physical transformation.[47] It is understood as a migration of Yamnaya people to Europe, as military victors, successfully imposing a new administrative system, language and religion upon the indigenous groups, referred to by Gimbutas as Old Europeans.[48][note 2] The Yamnaya people's social organization, especially a patrilinear and patriarchal structure, greatly facilitated their effectiveness in war.[49] According to Gimbutas, the social structure of Old Europe "contrasted with the Indo-European Kurgans who were mobile and non-egalitarian" with a hierarchically organised tripartite social structure; the IE were warlike, lived in smaller villages at times, and had an ideology that centered on the virile male, reflected also in their pantheon. In contrast, the indigenous groups of Old Europe had neither a warrior class nor horses.[50][note 3]

Indo-European languages probably spread through language shifts.[51][52] Small groups can change a larger cultural area,[53][1] and elite male dominance by small groups may have led to a language shift in northern India.[54][55][56]

According to Guus Kroonen, Indo-Europeans encountered existing populations that spoke dissimilar, unrelated languages when they migrated to Europe from Yamnaya steppes.[57] Relatively little is known about the Pre-Indo-European linguistic landscape of Europe, except for Basque, as the Indo-Europeanization of Europe caused a largely unrecorded, massive linguistic extinction event, most likely through language-shift.[57] Guus Kroonen's study reveals that PIE speech contains a clear Neolithic signature emanating from the Aegean language family and thus patterns with the prehistoric migration of Europe's first farming populations.[58]

According to Edgar Polomé, 30% of non-Indo-European substratum found in modern German derives from non-Indo-European-speakers of Funnelbeaker Culture indigenous to southern Scandinavia.[59] When Yamnaya Indo-European speakers came into contact with the indigenous peoples during the third millennium BCE, they came to dominate the local populations yet parts of the indigenous lexicon persisted in the formation of Proto-Germanic, thus lending to the Germanic languages the status of Indo-Europeanized languages.[60] According again to Marija Gimbutas, Corded Ware cultures migration to Scandinavia "synthesized" with the Funnelbeaker culture, giving birth to the Proto-Germanic language.[47]

David Anthony, in his "revised Steppe hypothesis"[61] notes that the spread of the Indo-European languages probably did not happen through "chain-type folk migrations", but by the introduction of these languages by ritual and political elites, which were emulated by large groups of people,[62][note 4] a process which he calls "elite recruitment".[64]

According to Parpola, local elites joined "small but powerful groups" of Indo-European speaking migrants.[51] These migrants had an attractive social system and good weapons, and luxury goods which marked their status and power. Joining these groups was attractive for local leaders, since it strengthened their position, and gave them additional advantages.[65] These new members were further incorporated by matrimonial alliances.[66][52]

According to Joseph Salmons, language shift is facilitated by "dislocation" of language communities, in which the elite is taken over.[67] According to Salmons, this change is facilitated by "systematic changes in community structure", in which a local community becomes incorporated in a larger social structure.[67][note 5]

Genetic relations between historical populations[edit]

Since the 2000s genetical studies are assuming a prominent role in the research on Indo-European migrations. Whole-genome studies reveal relations between various cultures and the time-range in which those relations were established. Research by Haak et al. (2015) showed that ~75% of the Corded Ware ancestry came from Yamna-related populations,[8] while Allentoft et al. (2015) shows that the Sintashta culture is genetically related to the Corded Ware culture.[70]

Ecological studies: widespread drought, urban collapse, and pastoral migrations[edit]

Climate change and drought may have triggered both the initial dispersal of Indo-European speakers, and the migration of Indo-Europeans from the steppes in south central Asia and India.

Around 4200–4100 BCE a climate change occurred, manifesting in colder winters in Europe.[71] Steppe herders, archaic Proto-Indo-European speakers, spread into the lower Danube valley about 4200–4000 BCE, either causing or taking advantage of the collapse of Old Europe.[31]

The Yamnaya horizon was an adaptation to a climate change which occurred between 3500 and 3000 BCE, in which the steppes became drier and cooler. Herds needed to be moved frequently to feed them sufficiently, and the use of wagons and horse riding made this possible, leading to "a new, more mobile form of pastoralism".[72]

In the second millennium BCE widespread aridization led to water shortages and ecological changes in both the Eurasian steppes and south Asia.[web 12][73] At the steppes, humidization led to a change of vegetation, triggering "higher mobility and transition to the nomadic cattle breeding".[73][note 6][note 7] Water shortage also had a strong impact in south Asia, "causing the collapse of sedentary urban cultures in south central Asia, Afghanistan, Iran, and India, and triggering large-scale migrations".[web 12]

Origins of the Indo-Europeans[edit]

File:Indo-European steppe homeland map.svg
The Proto-Indo-European homeland according to the Kurgan hypothesis (dark green) and the present-day distribution of Indo-European languages in Eurasia (light green)
File:Kurgan map.png
The development of the Kurgan culture according to Marija Gimbutas' Kurgan hypothesis

Urheimat (original homeland)[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Proto-Indo-European Urheimat hypotheses are tentative identifications of the Urheimat, or primary homeland, of the hypothetical Proto-Indo-European language. Such identifications attempt to be consistent with the glottochronology of the language tree and with the archaeology of those places and times. Identifications are made on the basis of how well, if at all, the projected migration routes and times of migration fit the distribution of Indo-European languages, and how closely the sociological model of the original society reconstructed from Proto-Indo-European lexical items fits the archaeological profile. All hypotheses assume a significant period (at least 1500–2000 years) between the time of the Proto-Indo-European language and the earliest attested texts, at Kültepe, c. 19th century BCE.

The Kurgan hypothesis and the "revised steppe theory"[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Since the early 1980s[74] the mainstream consensus among Indo-Europeanists favors Marija Gimbutas' "Kurgan hypothesis",[75][76][13][19] c.q. David Anthony's "Revised Steppe theory", derived from Gimbutas' pioneering work,[1] placing the Indo-European homeland in the Pontic steppe, more specifically, between the Dniepr (Ukraine) and the Ural river (Russia), of the Chalcolithic period (4th to 5th millennia BCE),[75] where various related cultures developed.[75][1]

The Pontic steppe is a large area of grasslands in far Eastern Europe, located north of the Black Sea, Caucasus Mountains and Caspian Sea and including parts of eastern Ukraine, southern Russia and northwest Kazakhstan. This is the time and place of the earliest domestication of the horse, which according to this hypothesis was the work of early Indo-Europeans, allowing them to expand outwards and assimilate or conquer many other cultures.[1]

The Kurgan hypothesis (also theory or model) argues that the people of an archaeological "Kurgan culture" (a term grouping the Yamnaya or Pit Grave culture and its predecessors) in the Pontic steppe were the most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language. The term is derived from kurgan (Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found.), a Turkic loanword in Russian for a tumulus or burial mound. An origin at the Pontic-Caspian steppes is the most widely accepted scenario of Indo-European origins.[77][78][13][19][note 8]

Marija Gimbutas formulated her Kurgan hypothesis in the 1950s, grouping together a number of related cultures at the Pontic steppes. She defined the "Kurgan culture" as composed of four successive periods, with the earliest (Kurgan I) including the Samara and Seroglazovo cultures of the Dnieper/Volga region in the Copper Age (early 4th millennium BCE). The bearers of these cultures were nomadic pastoralists, who, according to the model, by the early 3rd millennium expanded throughout the Pontic-Caspian steppe and into Eastern Europe.[79]

Gimbutas' grouping is nowadays considered to have been too broad. According to Anthony, it is better to speak of the Yamnaya culture or of a "Yamnaya horizon", which included several related cultures, as the defining Proto-Indo-European culture at the Pontic steppe.[1] David Anthony has incorporated recent developments in his "revised steppe theory", which also supports a steppe origin of the Indo-European languages.[1][80] Anthony emphasizes the Yamnaya culture (3300–2500 BCE),[1] located on the middle Don and Volga, as the origin of the Indo-European dispersal,[1][80] but regards Khvalynsk archaeological culture since around 4500 BC as the oldest phase of Proto-Indo-European in the lower and middle Volga, a culture that kept domesticated sheep, goats, cattle and maybe horses.[30] Recent research by Haak et al. (2015) confirms the migration of Yamnaya-people into western Europe, forming the Corded Ware culture.[8]

A more recent analysis by Anthony (2019) also suggests a genetic origin of proto-Indo-Europeans (of the Yamnaya culture) in the Eastern European steppe north of the Caucasus, deriving from a mixture of Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHGs) and hunter-gatherers from the Caucasus. Anthony additionally suggests that the proto-Indo-European language formed mainly from a base of languages spoken by Eastern European hunter-gathers with influences from languages of northern Caucasus hunter-gatherers, in addition to a possible later influence from the language of the Maikop culture to the south (which is hypothesized to have belonged to the North Caucasian family) in the later neolithic or bronze age involving little genetic impact.[81]

Anatolian hypothesis[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The primary competitor is the Anatolian hypothesis advanced by Colin Renfrew,[76][19] which states that the Indo-European languages began to spread peacefully into Europe from Asia Minor (modern Turkey) from around 7000 BCE with the Neolithic advance of farming by demic diffusion (wave of advance).[75] Accordingly, most of the inhabitants of Neolithic Europe would have spoken Indo-European languages, and later migrations would at best have replaced these Indo-European varieties with other Indo-European varieties.[82] The main strength of the farming hypothesis lies in its linking of the spread of Indo-European languages with an archaeologically known event (the spread of farming) that is often assumed as involving significant population shifts.

Alberto Piazza and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza have tried in the 2000s to align the Anatolian hypothesis with the Steppe theory. According to Alberto Piazza, writing in 2000, "[i]t 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."[83] According to Piazza and Cavalli-Sforza (2006), the Yamna-culture may have been derived from Middle Eastern Neolithic farmers who migrated to the Pontic steppe and developed pastoral nomadism.[84][note 9] Wells agrees with Cavalli-Sforza that there is "some genetic evidence for migration from the Middle East."[85][note 10] Nevertheless, the Anatolian hypothesis has been rejected, since it is incompatible with the growing data on the genetic history of the Yamnaya-people.[19]

Armenian hypothesis[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Another theory which has drawn considerable, and renewed, attention is the Armenian plateau hypothesis of Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, who have argued that the urheimat was south of the Caucasus, specifically, "within eastern Anatolia, the southern Caucasus and northern Mesopotamia" in the fifth to fourth millennia BCE.[86][75][76][19] Their proposal was based on a disputed theory of glottal consonants in PIE. According to Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, PIE words for material culture objects imply contact with more advanced peoples to the south, the existence of Semitic loan-words in PIE, Kartvelian (Georgian) borrowings from PIE, some contact with Sumerian, Elamite and others. However, given that the glottalic theory never caught on and there was little archaeological support, the Gamkrelidze and Ivanov theory did not gain support until Renfrew's Anatolian theory revived aspects of their proposal.[19]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value). The Proto-Indo-Europeans were the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE), a reconstructed prehistoric language of Eurasia. Knowledge of them comes chiefly from the linguistic reconstruction, along with material evidence from archaeology and archaeogenetics.

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 ancestral to the later, still partially prehistoric, Bronze Age Indo-Europeans. This view is held especially by those archaeologists who posit an original homeland of vast extent and immense time depth. However, this view is not shared by linguists, as proto-languages generally occupy small geographical areas over a very limited time span, and are generally spoken by close-knit communities such as a single small tribe.[87]

The Proto-Indo-Europeans were likely to have lived during the late Neolithic, or roughly the 4th millennium BCE. Mainstream scholarship places them in the forest-steppe zone immediately to the north of the western end of the Pontic–Caspian steppe in Eastern Europe. Some archaeologists would extend the time depth of PIE to the middle Neolithic (5500 to 4500 BCE) or even the early Neolithic (7500 to 5500 BCE), and suggest alternative Proto-Indo-European Urheimats.

By the late third millennium BCE, offshoots of the Proto-Indo-Europeans had reached Anatolia (Hittites), the Aegean (Mycenaean Greece), Western Europe, and southern Siberia (Afanasevo culture).[88]

Origins of Proto-Indo-Europeans[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The proto-Indo-Europeans, i. e. the Yamnaya people and the related cultures, seem to have been a mix from eastern European hunter-gatherers; and people related to the near east,[89] i. e. Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG)[90] i. e. Iran Chalcolithic people with a Caucasian hunter-gatherer component.[91] Where this CHG-component came from is unknown; the mix of EHG and CHG may result from "an existing natural genetic gradient running from EHG far to the north to CHG/Iran in the south," or it may be explained as "the result of Iranian/CHG-related ancestry reaching the steppe zone independently and prior to a stream of AF [Anatolian Farmer] ancestry."[92][note 12]

While the consensus is that early and late PIE languages originated on the Pontic steppes, the location of the origin of archaic PIE has become the focus of renewed attention, due to the question where the CHG-component came from, and if they were the carriers of archaic PIE.[37] The CHG-component may result from "an existing natural genetic gradient running from EHG far to the north to CHG/Iran in the south,"[94] or it may have reached the steppes with people who migrated northwards into the steppes between 5,000 and 3,000 BCE,[33][81] but different possibilities exist regarding the genesis of archaic PIE.[37][81][21][95]

According to Anthony (2019), responding to Bomhard (2019),[note 13][note 14] archaic PIE languages originated in the Eastern European steppe, as a mixture of both early Eastern European hunter-gatherer languages from the steppe (EHG), and early Caucasian languages from Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) from northwestern Iran or Azerbaijan, who migrated to the steppes via the western Caspian coast.[37][81]

Alternatively, the possibility exists that archaic PIE originated in the Caucasus, from where archaic PIE speaking people migrated into Anatolia, where the Anatolian languages developed, while at the steppes archaic PIE developed into early and late PIE.[37][38][39][96]

Archaic Proto-Indo-European[edit]

Pre-Yamnaya steppe cultures[edit]

File:Ukraine rivers.png
Ukrainian rivers

According to Anthony, the development of the Proto-Indo-European cultures started with the introduction of cattle at the Pontic-Caspian steppes.[97] Until ca. 5200–5000 BCE the Pontic-Caspian steppes were populated by hunter-gatherers.[98] According to Anthony, the first cattle herders arrived from the Danube Valley at ca. 5800–5700 BCE, descendants from the first European farmers.[99] They formed the Criş culture (5800–5300 BCE), creating a cultural frontier at the Prut-Dniestr watershed.[100] The adjacent Bug–Dniester culture (6300–5500 BCE) was a local culture, from where cattle breeding spread to the steppe peoples.[101] The Dniepr Rapids area was the next part of the Pontic-Caspian steppes to shift to cattle-herding. It was the densely populated area of the Pontic-Caspian steppes at the time, and had been inhabited by various hunter-gatherer populations since the end of the Ice Age. From ca.5800–5200 it was inhabited by the first phase of the Dnieper-Donets culture, a hunter-gatherer culture contemporaneous with the Bug-Dniestr culture.[102]

At ca. 5200–5000 BCE the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture (6000–3500 BCE), presumed to be non-Indo-European speaking, appears east of the Carpathian mountains, [103] moving the cultural frontier to the Southern Bug valley,[104] while the foragers at the Dniepr Rapids shifted to cattle herding, marking the shift to Dniepr-Donets II (5200/5000 – 4400/4200 BCE).[105] The Dniepr-Donets culture kept cattle not only for ritual sacrifices, but also for their daily diet.[106] The Khvalynsk culture (4700–3800 BCE),[106] located at the middle Volga, which was connected with the Danube Valley by trade networks,[107] also had cattle and sheep, but they were "more important in ritual sacrifices than in the diet".[108] The Samara culture (early 5th millennium BCE),[note 15] north of the Khvalynsk culture, interacted with the Khvalynsk culture,[109] while the archaeological findings seem related to those of the Dniepr-Donets II Culture.[109]

The Sredny Stog culture (4400–3300 BCE)[110] appears at the same location as the Dniepr-Donets culture, but shows influences from people who came from the Volga river region.[111]

Origins of archaic PIE[edit]

Caucasus origins[edit]

Some recent DNA-research has led to renewed suggestions of a Caucasian homeland for archaic or 'proto-proto-Indo-European'.[8][95][112][113]

Suggestions and proposals[edit]

Haak et al. (2015) state that "the Armenian plateau hypothesis gains in plausibility" given the Near Eastern ancestry in Yamnaya, but also state that "the question of what languages were spoken" by the ancestral steppe hunter-gatherers and the southern ancestors "remains open."[114][note 16]

According to Damgaard et al. (2018), between 5,000 and 3,000 BCE, during the Copper Age, there was "extensive population contact between the Caucasus and the steppe,"[33] The typical steppe ancestry probably developed during this time.[33] Damgaard et al. (2018) notice that they "cannot at this point reject a scenario in which the introduction of the Anatolian IE languages into Anatolia was coupled with the CHG-derived admixture before 3700 BCE," but also state that "this is contrary to the standard view that PIE arose in the steppe north of the Caucasus and that CHG ancestry is also associated with several non-IE-speaking groups, historical and current."[33]

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.[113] I 2020 he argued that the Maykop-culture may have been the bearer op pre-PIE.[96]

David Reich has repeatedly suggested the possibility of a Caucasian origin of archaic PIE,[115][39] but does not exclude the possibility of a steppe origin of the Anatolian languages.[116][note 17] According to Reich, between 5,000 and 3,000 BCE the CHG-carriers, people related to Armenians and Iranians, migrated from the south to the steppes and encountered local Eastern European hunter-gatherers (EHG peoples).[117]

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 acknowledge that the latest genetic evidence supports an origin of proto-Indo-Europeans in the steppe.[118][note 18]


Anthony (2019) criticizes the Southern/Caucasian origin proposals of Reich and Kristiansen, and rejects the possibility that the Bronze Age Maykop people of the Caucasus were a southern source of language and genetics of Indo-European. He instead argues that proto-Indo European formed mainly from the languages of Eastern European hunter-gatherers with influences from those of Caucasus hunter-gatherers. According to Anthony, referring to Wang et al. (2018),[note 19] the Maykop-culture had little genetic impact on the Yamnaya, whose paternal lineages were found to differ from those found in Maykop remains, but were instead related to those of earlier Eastern European hunter-gatherers. Also, the Maykop (and other contemporary Caucasus samples), along with CHG from this date, had significant Anatolian Farmer ancestry "which had spread into the Caucasus from the west after about 5000 BC", while the Yamnaya had a lower percentage which does not fit with a Maykop origin. Partly for these reasons, Anthony concludes that Bronze Age Caucasus groups such as the Maykop "played only a minor role, if any, in the formation of Yamnaya ancestry." According to Anthony, this, the roots of Proto-Indo-European (archaic or proto-proto-Indo-European) were mainly in the steppe rather than the south. Anthony considers it likely that the Maykop spoke a Northern Caucasian language not ancestral to Indo-European.[119]

Steppe origins with south Caspian CHG-influences[edit]

According to Anthony (2019), responding to Bomhard's Caucacusian substrate hypothesis which proposes a “north-Caspian Indo-Uralic” Urheimat,[120][note 13] a relation to Uralic is unlikely and can not be reliable proven. According to Anthony, the similarities between Uralic and Indo-European can be explained by early borrowings and influence. He suggests that the archaic proto-Indo-European language formed in the Volga Basin (in the Eastern European Steppe). It developed from a base of languages spoken by Eastern European hunter-gathers at the Volga steppe plains, with some influences from languages of northern Caucasus hunter-gatherers who migrated from the Caucasus to the lower Volga. Additionally, there is possible later influence, involving little genetic impact, in the later neolithic or bronze age from the language of the Maikop culture to the south, which is hypothesized to have belonged to the North Caucasian family.[81] According to Anthony, hunting-fishing camps from the lower Volga, dated 6200–4500 BCE, could be the remains of people who contributed the CHG-component, similar to the Hotu cave, migrating from northwestern Iran or Azerbaijan via the western Caspian coast. They mixed with EHG-people from the northern Volga steppes, forming the Khvalynsk culture, which "might represent the oldest phase of PIE.".[81][note 14] The resulting culture contributed to the Sredny Stog culture,[111] a predecessor of the Yamnaya culture.

Early migrations: Balkan and Anatolia (5th–4th millennium BCE)[edit]

Europe: migration into the Danube Valley (4200 BCE)[edit]

Pre-Yamnaya steppe herders, archaic Proto-Indo-European speakers, spread into the lower Danube valley about 4200–4000 BCE, either causing or taking advantage of the collapse of Old Europe.[31] According to Anthony, their languages "probably included archaic Proto-Indo-European dialects of the kind partly preserved later in Anatolian."[130] Damgaard et al. (2018) note that "[a]mong comparative linguists, a Balkan route for the introduction of Anatolian IE is generally considered more likely than a passage through the Caucasus, due, for example, to greater Anatolian IE presence and language diversity in the west."[33]

Anatolia: Archaic Proto-Indo-European (Hittites; 4500–3500 BCE)[edit]

File:Map Hittite rule en.svg
The Hittite Empire at its greatest extent under Suppiluliuma I (c. 1350–1322 BCE) and Mursili II (c. 1321–1295 BCE)
File:Anatolian 03.png
Anatolian languages attested in the mid-first millennium BCE
File:Luwian Language de.svg
Area where the second millennium BCE Luwian language was spoken

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Anatolians were a group of distinct Indo-European peoples who spoke the Anatolian languages and shared a common culture.[131][132][133][134][135] The Anatolians' earliest linguistic and historical attestation are as names mentioned in Assyrian mercantile texts from 19th-century BCE Kanesh.[131]

The Anatolian languages were a branch of the larger Indo-European language family. The archaeological discovery of the archives of the Hittites and the classification of the Hittite language to a separate Anatolian branch of the Indo-European languages caused a sensation among historians, forcing a re-evaluation of Near Eastern history and Indo-European linguistics.[135]


Although the Hittites are first attested in the 2nd millennium BCE,[34] the Anatolian branch seems to have separated at a very early stage from Proto-Indo-European, or may have developed from an older Pre-Proto-Indo-European ancestor.[136] If it separated from Proto-Indo-European, it likely did so between 4500–3500 BCE.[137]

Considering a steppe origin for archaic PIE, together with the Tocharians the Anatolians constituted the first known wave of Indo-European emigrants out of the Eurasian steppe.[138] Although they had wagons, they probably migrated before Indo-Europeans had learned to use chariots for war.[138] It is likely that their arrival was one of gradual settlement and not as an invading army.[131]

In accordance with the Kurgan hypothesis, J. P. Mallory notes in Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture that it is likely that the Anatolians reached the Near East from the north, either via the Balkans or the Caucasus in the 3rd millennium BCE.[135] According to Anthony, descendants of archaic Proto-Indo-European steppe herders, who moved into the lower Danube valley about 4200–4000 BCE, later moved into Anatolia, at an unknown time, but maybe as early as 3,000 BCE.[139] According to Parpola, the appearance of Indo-European speakers from Europe into Anatolia, and the appearance of Hittite, is related to later migrations of Proto-Indo-European speakers from the Yamna-culture into the Danube Valley at ca. 2800 BCE,[36][4] which is in line with the "customary" assumption that the Anatolian Indo-European language was introduced into Anatolia somewhere in the third millennium BCE.[web 8]

Mathieson et al. note the absence of "large amounts" of steppe-ancestry in the Balkan peninsula and Anatolia, which may indicate that archaic PIE originated in the Caucasus or Iran, but also state that "it remains possible that Indo-European languages were spread through southeastern Europe into Anatolia without large-scale population movement or admixture."[116]

Damgaard et al. (2018), found "no correlation between genetic ancestry and exclusive ethnic or political identities among the populations of Bronze Age Central Anatolia, as has previously been hypothesized."[33] According to them, the Hittites lacked steppe-ancestry, arguing that "the Anatolian clade of IE languages did not derive from a large-scale Copper Age/Early Bronze Age population movement from the steppe," contrary Anthony's proposal of a large-scale migration via the Balkan as proposed in 2007.[33] According to them, the first IE-speakers may have reached Anatolia "by way of commercial contacts and small-scale movement during the Bronze Age."[33] They further state that their findings are "consistent with historical models of cultural hybridity and 'middle ground' in a multicultural and multilingual but genetically homogeneous Bronze Age Anatolia," as proposed by other researchers.[33]

According to Kroonen et al. (2018), in the linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. (2018), aDNA studies in Anatolia "show no indication of a large-scale intrusion of a steppe population", but do "fit the recently developed consensus among linguists and historians that the speakers of the Anatolian languages established themselves in Anatolia by gradual infiltration and cultural assimilation."[140] They further note that this lends support to the Indo-Hittite hypothesis, according to which both proto-Anatolian and proto-Indo-European split-off from a common mother language "no later than the 4th millennium BCE."[141]

Hittite civilisation[edit]

The Hittites, who established an extensive empire in the Middle East in the 2nd millennium BCE, are by far the best known members of the Anatolian group. The history of the Hittite civilization is known mostly from cuneiform texts found in the area of their kingdom, and from diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in various archives in Egypt and the Middle East. Despite the use of Hatti for their core territory, the Hittites should be distinguished from the Hattians, an earlier people who inhabited the same region (until the beginning of the 2nd millennium). The Hittite military made successful use of chariots. Although belonging to the Bronze Age, they were the forerunners of the Iron Age, developing the manufacture of iron artifacts from as early as the 14th century, when letters to foreign rulers reveal the latter's demand for iron goods. The Hittite empire reached its height during the mid-14th century under Suppiluliuma I, when it encompassed an area that included most of Asia Minor as well as parts of the northern Levant and Upper Mesopotamia. After 1180 BCE, amid the Bronze Age Collapse in the Levant associated with the sudden arrival of the Sea Peoples, the kingdom disintegrated into several independent "Neo-Hittite" city-states, some of which survived until as late as the 8th century BCE. The lands of the Anatolian peoples were successively invaded by a number of peoples and empires at high frequency: the Phrygians, Bithynians, the Medes, the Persians, the Greeks, the Galatian Celts, Romans and the Oghuz Turks. Many of these invaders settled in Anatolia, in some cases causing the extinction of the Anatolian languages. By the Middle Ages, all the Anatolian languages (and the cultures accompanying them) were extinct, although there may be lingering influences on the modern inhabitants of Anatolia, most notably Armenians.

Northern Caucasus: The Maykop culture (3700–3000 BCE)[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Maykop culture-en.svg
Geographic extent of the Maykop culture

The Maykop culture, c. 3700–3000 BCE,[142] was a major Bronze Age archaeological culture in the Western Caucasus region of Southern Russia. It extends along the area from the Taman Peninsula at the Kerch Strait to near the modern border of Dagestan and southwards to the Kura River. The culture takes its name from a royal burial found in Maykop kurgan in the Kuban River valley.

According to Mallory and Adams, migrations southward founded the Maykop culture (c. 3500–2500 BCE).[43] Yet, according to Mariya Ivanova the Maykop origins were on the Iranian Plateau,[44] while kurgans from the beginning of the 4th millennium at Soyuqbulaq in Azerbaijan, which belong to the Leyla-Tepe culture, show parallels with the Maykop kurgans. According to Museyibli, "the Leylatepe Culture tribes migrated to the north in the mid-fourth millennium and played an important part in the rise of the Maikop Culture of the North Caucasus."[web 9] This model was confirmed by a genetic study published in 2018, which attributed the origin of Maykop individuals to a migration of Eneolithic farmers from western Georgia towards the north side of the Caucasus.[143] It has been suggested that the Maykop people spoke a North Caucasian, rather than an Indo-European, language.[81][144]

Early Proto-Indo-European[edit]

Repin culture (c. 3950–3300 BC) and Afanasevo culture (3500–2500 BCE)[edit]

File:Afanasevo provisional.png
The geographic extent of the Afanasevo culture

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Afanasievo culture (3300 to 2500 BCE) is the earliest Eneolithic archaeological culture found until now in south Siberia, occupying the Minusinsk Basin, Altay and Eastern Kazakhstan. It originated with a migration of people from the pre-Yamnaya Repin culture, at the Don river,[145] and is related to the Tocharians.[146]

Radiocarbon gives dates as early as 3705 BCE on wooden tools and 2874 BCE on human remains for the Afanasievo culture.[web 14] The earliest of these dates has now been rejected, giving a date of around 3300 BCE for the start of the culture.[147]

The Tocharians[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

These movements of both Tocharians and Iranians into East Central Asia were not a mere footnote in the history o China but... were part of a much wider picture involving the very foundations of the world's oldest surviving civilization."[148]
J. P. Mallory & Victor H. Mair

The Tocharians, or "Tokharians" (/təˈkɛəriənz/ or /təˈkɑːriənz/) were inhabitants of medieval oasis city-states on the northern edge of the Tarim Basin (modern Xinjiang, China). Their Tocharian languages (a branch of the Indo-European family) are known from manuscripts from the 6th to 8th centuries CE, after which they were supplanted by the Turkic languages of the Uyghur tribes. These people were called "Tocharian" by late 19th-century scholars who identified them with the Tókharoi described by ancient Greek sources as inhabiting Bactria. Although this identification is now generally considered mistaken, the name has become customary.

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The political history of the Indo-Europeans of Inner Asia from the 2nd century B.C. to the 5th century A.D. is indeed a glorious period. It is their movement which brought China into contact with the Western world as well as with India. These Indo-Europeans held the key to world trade for a long period... In the process of their own transformation, these Indo-Europeans influenced the world around them more than any other people before the rise of Islam."[149]
A. K. Narain

The Tocharians are thought to have developed from the Afanasevo culture of Siberia (c. 3500–2500 BCE).[146] It is believed that the Tarim mummies, dated from 1800 BCE, represent a migration of Tocharian speakers from the Afanasevo culture in the Tarim Basin in the early 2nd millennium BCE.[42] The Indo-European eastward expansion in the 2nd millennium BCE had a significant influence on Chinese culture,[150] introducing the chariot,[151] horse burials,[152][153] the domesticated horse,[150][154] iron technology,[150][155] and wheeled vehicles,[156][157][158][159] fighting styles, head-and-hoof rituals, art motifs and myths.[153] By the end of the 2nd millennium BCE, the dominant people as far east as the Altai Mountains southward to the northern outlets of the Tibetan Plateau were anthropologically Caucasian, with the northern part speaking Iranian Scythian languages and the southern parts Tocharian languages, having Mongoloid populations as their northeastern neighbors.[160][161] These two groups were in competition with each other until the latter overcame the former.[161] The turning point occurred around the 5th to 4th centuries BCE with a gradual Mongolization of Siberia, while Eastern Central Asia (East Turkistan) remained Caucasian and Indo-European-speaking until well into the 1st millennium CE.[162]

The Yuezhi[edit]

File:Yuezhi Empire.jpg
Approximate extent of the Yuezhi Empire, as described in the History of Civilizations of Central Asia by UNESCO[163]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value). The Sinologist Edwin G. Pulleyblank has suggested that the Yuezhi, the Wusun the Dayuan, the Kangju and the people of Yanqi, could have been Tocharian-speaking.[164] Of these the Yuezhi are generally held to have been Tocharians.[165] The Yuezhi were originally settled in the arid grasslands of the eastern Tarim Basin area, in what is today Xinjiang and western Gansu, in China.

At the peak of their power in the 3rd century BC, the Yuezhi are believed to have dominated the areas north of the Qilian Mountains (including the Tarim Basin and Dzungaria), the Altai region,[166] the greater part of Mongolia, and the upper waters of the Yellow River.[167][168][169] This territory has been referred to as the Yuezhi Empire.[170] Their eastern neighbors were the Donghu.[168] While the Yuezhi were pressuring the Xiongnu from the west, the Donghu were doing the same from the east.[168] A large number of peoples, including the Wusun, the states of the Tarim Basin, and possibly the Qiang,[169] were under the control of the Yuezhi.[168] They were considered the predominant power in Central Asia.[169] Evidence from Chinese records indicate the peoples of Central Asia as far west as the Parthian Empire were under the sway of the Yuezhi.[169] This means that the territory of the Yuezhi Empire roughly corresponded to that of the later Turkic Khaganate.[169] The Pazyryk burials of the Ukok Plateau coincide with the apex of power of the Yuezhi, and the burials have therefore been attributed to them, which means that the Altai region was part of the Yuezhi Empire.[166]

File:Yuezhi migrations.jpg
The migrations of the Yuezhi through Central Asia, from around 176 BCE to 30 CE

After the Yuezhi were defeated by the Xiongnu, in the 2nd century BCE, a small group, known as the Little Yuezhi, fled to the south, later spawning the Jie people who dominated the Later Zhao until their complete extermination by Ran Min in the Wei–Jie war. The majority of the Yuezhi however migrated west to the Ili Valley, where they displaced the Sakas (Scythians). Driven from the Ili Valley shortly afterwards by the Wusun, the Yuezhi migrated to Sogdia and then Bactria, where they are often identified with the Tókharoi (Τοχάριοι) and Asioi of Classical sources. They then expanded into northern South Asia, where one branch of the Yuezhi founded the Kushan Empire. The Kushan empire stretched from Turfan in the Tarim Basin to Pataliputra on the Gangetic plain at its greatest extent, and played an important role in the development of the Silk Road and the transmission of Buddhism to China. Tocharian languages continued to be spoken in the city-states of the Tarim Basin, only becoming extinct in the Middle Ages.

Late Proto-Indo-European[edit]

Late PIE is related to the Yamnaya culture and expansion, from which all IE-languages except the Anatolian languages and Tocharian descend.


The Don-Volga region, from which originated the Yamnaya horizon.
File:Ямная культура.jpg

The Khvalynsk culture (4700–3800 BCE)[106] (middle Volga) and the Don-based Repin culture (ca.3950–3300 BCE)[145] preceded the Yamnaya culture (3300–2500 BCE),[171] which originated in the Don-Volga area.[171] Late pottery from these two cultures can barely be distinguished from early Yamnaya pottery.[172]

The Yamnaya horizon was an adaptation to a climate change which occurred between 3500 and 3000 BCE, in which the steppes became drier and cooler. Herds needed to be moved frequently to feed them sufficiently, and the use of wagons and horse-back riding made this possible, leading to "a new, more mobile form of pastoralism".[72] It was accompanied by new social rules and institutions, to regulate the local migrations in the steppes, creating a new social awareness of a distinct culture, and of "cultural Others" who did not participate in these new institutions.[171]

The Yamnaya horizon (a.k.a. Pit Grave culture) spreads quickly across the Pontic-Caspian steppes between ca. 3400 and 3200 BCE.[173] According to Anthony, "the spread of the Yamnaya horizon was the material expression of the spread of late Proto-Indo-European across the Pontic-Caspian steppes."[174] Anthony further notes that "the Yamnaya horizon is the visible archaeological expression of a social adjustment to high mobility – the invention of the political infrastructure to manage larger herds from mobile homes based in the steppes."[175] The Yamnaya horizon represents the classical reconstructed Proto-Indo-European society with stone idols, predominantly practising animal husbandry in permanent settlements protected by hillforts, subsisting on agriculture, and fishing along rivers. According to Gimbutas, contact of the Yamnaya horizon with late Neolithic Europe cultures results in the "kurganized" Globular Amphora and Baden cultures.[176] Anthony excludes the Globular Amphora culture.[1]

The Maykop culture (3700–3000) emerges somewhat earlier in the northern Caucasus. Although considered by Gimbutas as an outgrowth of the steppe cultures, it is related to the development of Mesopotamia, and Anthony does not consider it to be a Proto-Indo-European culture.[1] The Maykop culture shows the earliest evidence of the beginning Bronze Age, and bronze weapons and artifacts are introduced to the Yamnaya horizon.

Between 3100 and 2600 BCE the Yamnaya people spread into the Danube Valley as far as Hungary.[177] This migration probably gave rise to Proto-Celtic[178] and Pre-Italic.[178] Pre-Germanic dialects may have developed between the Dniestr (west Ukraine) and the Vistula (Poland) at c. 3100–2800 BCE, and spread with the Corded Ware culture.[179] Slavic and Baltic developed at the middle Dniepr (present-day Ukraine)[5] at c. 2800 BCE, also spreading with the Corded Ware horizon.[45]


In the northern Don-Volga area the Yamnaya horizon was followed by the Poltavka culture (2700–2100 BCE), while the Sintashta culture (2100–1800) extended the Indo-European culture zone east of the Ural mountains, giving rise to Proto-Indo-Iranian and the subsequent spread of the Indo-Iranian languages toward India and the Iranian plateau.[1]


Decline of neolithic populations[edit]

Between ca. 4000 and 3000 BCE, neolithic populations in western Europe declined, probably due to the plague and other viral hemorrhagic fevers. This decline was followed by the migrations of Indo-European populations into western Europe, transforming the genetic make-up of the western populations.[180][note 20]

Three autosomal genetic studies in 2015 gave support to the Kurgan hypothesis of Gimbutas regarding the proto-Indo-European homeland. According to those studies, haplogroups R1b and R1a expanded from the West Eurasian Steppe, 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.[181][70][182]

Origins of the European IE languages[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Mallory notes that the Italic, Celtic and Germanic languages are closely related, which accords with their historic distribution. The Germanic languages are also related to the Baltic and Slavic languages, which in turn share similarities with the Indo-Iranic languages.[183] The Greek, Armenian and Indo-Iranian languages are also related, which suggests "a chain of central Indo-European dialects stretching from the Balkans across the Black sea to the east Caspian".[183] And the Celtic, Italic, Anatolian and Tocharian languages preserve archaisms which are preserved only in those languages.[183] According to David Anthony, pre-Germanic split off earliest (3300 BCE), followed by pre-Italic and pre-Celtic (3000 BCE), pre-Armenian (2800 BCE), pre-Balto-Slavic (2800 BCE) and pre-Greek (2500 BCE).[27]

The Balkan-Danubian complex and the Dniestr and Dniepr rivers[edit]

File:European IE-migrations.jpeg
IE migrations north and south of the Carpatian mountains, and the subsequent development of Celtic, Germanic, and Balto-Slavic, according to Anthony (2007)
Course of the Danube, marked in red

The Balkan-Danubian complex is a set of cultures in Southeast Europe from which the western Indo-European languages probably spread into western Europe from c. 3500 BCE.[3] According to Anthony, Pre-Italic, Pre-Celtic and Pre-Germanic may have split off here from Proto-Indo-European.[184]

The Usatovo culture, postulated as the origin of the pre-Germanic branch,[185] developed in south-eastern Central Europe at around 3300–3200 BCE at the Dniestr river.[186] Although closely related to the Tripolye culture, it is contemporary with the Yamnaya culture, and resembles it in significant ways.[187] According to Anthony, it may have originated with "steppe clans related to the Yamnaya horizon who were able to impose a patron-client relationship on Tripolye farming villages".[188]

According to Anthony, the Pre-Germanic dialects may have developed in this culture between the Dniestr (west Ukraine) and the Vistula (Poland) at c. 3100–2800 BCE, and spread with the Corded Ware culture.[179]

Between 3100 and 2800/2600 BCE, when the Yamnaya horizon spread fast across the Pontic Steppe, a real folk migration of Proto-Indo-European speakers from the Yamna-culture took place into the Danube Valley,[4] moving along Usatovo territory toward specific destinations, reaching as far as Hungary,[189] where as many as 3,000 kurgans may have been raised.[190] Bell Beaker sites at Budapest, dated c. 2800–2600 BCE, may have aided in spreading Yamnaya dialects into Austria and southern Germany at their west, where Proto-Celtic may have developed.[178] Pre-Italic may have developed in Hungary, and spread toward Italy via the Urnfield culture and Villanovan culture.[178] According to Anthony, Slavic and Baltic developed at the middle Dniepr (present-day Ukraine)[5] at c. 2800 BCE, spreading north from there.[45]

According to Parpola, this migration into the Danube Valley is related to the appearance of Indo-European speakers from Europe into Anatolia, and the appearance of Hittite.[36]

The Balkan languages (Thracian, Dacian, Illyrian) may have developed among the early Indo-European populations of southeastern Europe. In the early Middle Ages their territory was occupied by migrating Slavic people, and by east Asian steppe peoples.

Corded Ware culture (3000–2400 BCE)[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:TRB culture map.png
Extent of the Funnelbeaker culture (Trichterbecherkultur, TRB) c. 4300–2800 BCE
File:Map Corded Ware culture-en.svg
Approximate extent of the Corded Ware horizon with adjacent third-millennium cultures (Baden culture and Globular Amphora culture; after EIEC)

The Corded Ware culture in Middle Europe (c. 3200[191] or 2,900[web 1]–2450 or 2350 cal.[web 1][191] BCE) is hypothesized to have played an essential role in the origin and spread of the Indo-European languages in Europe during the Copper and Bronze Ages.[6][7] David Anthony states that "Childe (1953:133-38) and Gimbutas (1963) speculated that migrants from the steppe Yamnaya horizon (3300–2600 BCE) might have been the creators of the Corded Ware culture and carried IE languages into Europe from the steppes."[192] According to Gimbutas, the Corded Ware culture was preceded by the Globular Amphora culture (3400–2800 BCE), which she also regarded to be an Indo-European culture. The Globular Amphora culture stretched from central Europe to the Baltic sea, and emerged from the Funnelbeaker culture.[193]

According to Mallory, the Corded Ware culture may be postulated as "the common prehistoric ancestor of the later Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, and possibly some of the Indo-European languages of Italy". Yet, Mallory also notes that the Corded Ware can not account for Greek, Illyrian, Thracian and East Italic, which may be derived from Southeast Europe.[194] According to Anthony, the Corded Ware horizon may have introduced Germanic, Baltic and Slavic into northern Europe.[178]

The Corded Ware spread across northern Europe after 3000 BCE, with an "initial rapid spread" between 2900 and 2700 BCE.[178] Around 2400 BCE the people of the Corded Ware replaced their predecessors and expanded to Danubian and northern areas of western Germany. A related branch invaded Denmark and southern Sweden. In places a continuity between Funnelbeaker and Corded Ware can be demonstrated, whereas in other areas Corded Ware heralds a new culture and physical type.[75] According to Cunliffe, most of the expansion was clearly intrusive.[195] Yet, according to Furholt, the Corded Ware culture was an indigenous development,[192] connecting local developments into a larger network.[196]

Recent research by Haak et al. found that four late Corded Ware people (2500–2300 BCE) buried at Esperstadt, Germany, were genetically very close to the Yamna-people, suggesting that a massive migration took place from the Eurasian steppes to Central Europe.[8][web 2][web 3][197] Haak et al. (2015) note that German Corded Ware "trace ~75% of their ancestry to the Yamna,"[198] envisioning a migration of both males and females from the Yamnaya horizon through western Ukraine and Poland into Germany.[199] Allentoft et al. (2015) envision a migration from the Yamnaya horizon towards northern Europe, both via Central Europe and the territory of present-day Russia, toward the Baltic area and the eastern periphery of the Corded Ware culture.[200] In supplementary information to Haak et al. (2015) Anthony, together with Lazaridis, Haak, Patterson, and Reich, notes that the mass migration of Yamnaya people to northern Europe shows that "the languages could have been introduced simply by strength of numbers: via major migration in which both sexes participated."[201][note 21]

Anthony (2017) relates these close genetical similarities, and the development of the Corded Ware culture, to the early third century Yamna-migrations into the Danube-valley, stating that "[t]he migration stream that created these intrusive cemeteries now can be seen to have continued from eastern Hungary across the Carpatians into southern Poland, where the earliest material traits of the Corded ware horizon appeared."[196][note 22]

Volker Heyd has cautioned to be careful with drawing too strong conclusions from those genetic similarities between Corded Ware and Yamna, noting the small number of samples; the late dates of the Esperstadt graves, which could also have undergone Bell Beaker admixture; the presence of Yamna-ancestry in western Europe before the Danube-expansion; and the risks of extrapolating "the results from a handful of individual burials to whole ethnically interpreted populations."[202] Heyd confirms the close connection between Corded Ware and Yamna, but also states that "neither a one-to-one translation from Yamnaya to CWC, nor even the 75:25 ratio as claimed (Haak et al. 2015:211) fits the archaeological record."[202]

Beaker culture (2900–1800 BCE)[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Bellbeaker map europe.jpg
Extent of the Beaker-culture
File:Beaker culture diffusion.svg
Generalised distribution and movements of Bell-Beaker cultures[203]

The Bell Beaker-culture (c. 2900–1800 BCE[204][205]) may have spread proto-Celtic.[206] More recently Mallory has suggested that the Beaker culture was associated with a European branch of Indo-European dialects, termed "North-west Indo-European", ancestral to not only Celtic but equally Italic, Germanic and Balto-Slavic.[9][note 23]

The initial moves from the Tagus estuary, Portugal were maritime. A southern move led to the Mediterranean where 'enclaves' were established in southwestern Spain and southern France around the Golfe du Lion and into the Po valley in Italy, probably via ancient western Alpine trade routes used to distribute jadeite axes. A northern move incorporated the southern coast of Armorica. The enclave established in southern Brittany was linked closely to the riverine and landward route, via the Loire, and across the Gâtinais valley to the Seine valley, and thence to the lower Rhine. This was a long-established route reflected in early stone axe distributions and it was via this network that Maritime Bell Beakers first reached the Lower Rhine in about 2600 BCE.[205][207]

Balkan languages[edit]

Thracian and Dacian[edit]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Dacia 82 BC.png
Dacia during the reign of Burebista

The Thracian language was the Indo-European language spoken in Southeast Europe by the Thracians, the northern neighbors of the Greeks. Some authors group Thracian and Dacian into a southern Baltic linguistic family.[208] The Thracians inhabited a large area in southeastern Europe,[209] including parts of the ancient provinces of Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions of the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extended over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug and including Panonia in the west.[210]

The origins of the Thracians remain obscure, in the absence of written historical records. Evidence of proto-Thracians in the prehistoric period depends on artifacts of material culture. Leo Klejn identifies proto-Thracians with the multi-cordoned ware culture that was pushed away from Ukraine by the advancing timber grave culture. It is generally proposed that a proto-Thracian people developed from a mixture of indigenous peoples and Indo-Europeans from the time of Proto-Indo-European expansion in the Early Bronze Age[211] when the latter, around 1500 BCE, mixed with indigenous peoples.[212] We speak of proto-Thracians from which during the Iron Age[213] (about 1000 BCE) Dacians and Thracians begin developing.


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Dacia around 60-44 BC during Burebista, including campaigns - French.png
Map of Dacia, 1st century BCE

The Dacians (/ˈdʃənz/; Latin: Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found., Ancient Greek: Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found.[214]) were an Indo-European people, part of or related to the Thracians. Dacians were the ancient inhabitants of Dacia, located in the area in and around the Carpathian Mountains and west of the Black Sea. This area includes the present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as parts of Ukraine,[215] Eastern Serbia, Northern Bulgaria, Slovakia,[216] Hungary and Southern Poland.[215]

The Dacians spoke the Dacian language, believed to have been closely related to Thracian, but were somewhat culturally influenced by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BCE.[web 15] The Dacians and Getae were always considered as Thracians by the ancients (Dio Cassius, Trogus Pompeius, Appian, Strabo and Pliny the Elder), and were both said to speak the same Thracian language.[217][218]

Evidence of proto-Thracians or proto-Dacians in the prehistoric period depends on the remains of material culture. It is generally proposed that a proto-Dacian or proto-Thracian people developed from a mixture of indigenous peoples and Indo-Europeans from the time of Proto-Indo-European expansion in the Early Bronze Age (3,300–3,000 BCE)[211] when the latter, around 1500 BCE, conquered the indigenous peoples.[212] The indigenous people were Danubian farmers, and the invading people of the 3rd millennium BCE were Kurgan warrior-herders from the Ukrainian and Russian steppes.[219]

Indo-Europeanization was complete by the beginning of the Bronze Age. The people of that time are best described as proto-Thracians, which later developed in the Iron Age into Danubian-Carpathian Geto-Dacians as well as Thracians of the eastern Balkan Peninsula.[220]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Illyrians Ethnogenesis Theories (English).jpg
Ethnogenesis of the Illyrians
File:Illyrian colonies in Italy 550 BCE.jpg
Illyrian colonisation of Italy, 9th century BCE[221]

The Illyrians (Ancient Greek: Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found., Illyrioi; Latin: Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found. or Illyri) were a group of Indo-European tribes in antiquity, who inhabited part of the western Balkans and the southeastern coasts of the Italian peninsula (Messapia).[222] The territory the Illyrians inhabited came to be known as Illyria to Greek and Roman authors, who identified a territory that corresponds to the Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Montenegro, part of Serbia and most of Albania, between the Adriatic Sea in the west, the Drava river in the north, the Morava river in the east and the mouth of the Aoos river in the south.[223] The first account of Illyrian peoples comes from the Periplus of Pseudo-Scylax, an ancient Greek text of the middle of the 4th century BCE that describes coastal passages in the Mediterranean.[224]

These tribes, or at least a number of tribes considered "Illyrians proper", of which only small fragments are attested enough to classify as branches of Indo-European;[225] were probably extinct by the 2nd century CE.[226]

The name "Illyrians", as applied by the ancient Greeks to their northern neighbors, may have referred to a broad, ill-defined group of peoples, and it is today unclear to what extent they were linguistically and culturally homogeneous. The Illyrian tribes never collectively regarded themselves as 'Illyrians', and it is unlikely that they used any collective nomenclature for themselves.[227] The name Illyrians seems to be the name applied to a specific Illyrian tribe, which was the first to come in contact with the ancient Greeks during the Bronze Age,[228] causing the name Illyrians to be applied to all people of similar language and customs.[229]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Albanian (Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found. Template:IPA-sq or Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Lang/ISO 639 synonyms' not found. Template:IPA-sq, meaning Albanian language) is an Indo-European language spoken by approximately 7.4 million people, primarily in Albania, Kosovo, the Republic of Macedonia and Greece, but also in other areas of the Balkans in which there is an Albanian population, including Montenegro and Serbia (Presevo Valley). Centuries-old communities speaking Albanian-based dialects can be found scattered in Greece, southern Italy,[230] Sicily, and Ukraine.[231] As a result of a modern diaspora, there are also Albanian speakers elsewhere in those countries and in other parts of the world, including Scandinavia, Switzerland, Germany, Austria and Hungary, United Kingdom, Turkey, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Singapore, Brazil, Canada, and the United States.

The earliest written document that mentions the Albanian language is a late 13th-century crime report from Dubrovnik. The first audio recording of the Albanian language was made by Norbert Jokl on 4 April 1914 in Vienna.[232]


The Italian and Celtic langages are thought to be closely related.


File:Latin Europe.png
Romance languages in Europe

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Italic languages are a subfamily of the Indo-European language family originally spoken by Italic peoples. They include the Romance languages derived from Latin (Italian, Sardinian, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, French, Romanian, Occitan, etc.); a number of extinct languages of the Italian Peninsula, including Umbrian, Oscan, Faliscan, South Picene; and Latin itself. At present, Latin and its daughter Romance languages are the only surviving languages of the Italic language family.

The most widely accepted theory suggests that Latins and other proto-Italic tribes first entered in Italy with the late Bronze Age Proto-Villanovan culture, then part of the central European Urnfield culture system.[233][234] In particular various authors, like Marija Gimbutas, had noted important similarities between Proto-Villanova, the South-German Urnfield culture of Bavaria-Upper Austria[235] and Middle-Danube Urnfield culture.[235][236][237] According to David W. Anthony, proto-Latins originated in today's eastern Hungary, kurganized around 3100 BCE by the Yamnaya culture,[238] while Kristian Kristiansen associated the Proto-Villanovans with the Velatice-Baierdorf culture of Moravia and Austria.[239]

Today the Romance languages, which comprise all languages that descended from Latin, are spoken by more than 800 million native speakers worldwide, mainly in the Americas, Europe, and Africa. Romance languages are either official, co-official, or significantly used in 72 countries around the globe.[240][241][242][243][244]


File:Celts in Europe.png
Diachronic distribution of Celtic peoples:
  core Hallstatt territory, by the 6th century BCE
  maximal Celtic expansion, by 275 BCE
  Lusitanian area of Iberia where Celtic presence is uncertain
  the six Celtic nations which retained significant numbers of Celtic speakers into the Early Modern period
  areas where Celtic languages remain widely spoken today

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Celts (/ˈkɛlts/, occasionally /ˈsɛlts/, see pronunciation of Celtic) or Kelts were an ethnolinguistic group of tribal societies in Iron Age and Medieval Europe who spoke Celtic languages and had a similar culture,[245] although the relationship between the ethnic, linguistic and cultural elements remains uncertain and controversial.

The earliest archaeological culture that may justifiably be considered Proto-Celtic is the Late Bronze Age Urnfield culture of Central Europe, which flourished from around 1200 BCE.[246] Their fully Celtic[246] descendants in central Europe were the people of the Iron Age Hallstatt culture (c. 800–450 BCE) named for the rich grave finds in Hallstatt, Austria.[247] By the later La Tène period (c. 450 BCE up to the Roman conquest), this Celtic culture had expanded by diffusion or migration to the British Isles (Insular Celts), France and The Low Countries (Gauls), Bohemia, Poland and much of Central Europe, the Iberian Peninsula (Celtiberians, Celtici and Gallaeci) and Italy (Golaseccans, Lepontii, Ligures and Cisalpine Gauls)[248] and, following the Gallic invasion of the Balkans in 279 BCE, as far east as central Anatolia (Galatians).[249]

The Celtic languages (usually pronounced /ˈkɛltɪk/ but sometimes /ˈsɛltɪk/)[250] are descended from Proto-Celtic, or "Common Celtic"; a branch of the greater Indo-European language family. The term "Celtic" was first used to describe this language group by Edward Lhuyd in 1707.[251]

Modern Celtic languages are mostly spoken on the northwestern edge of Europe, notably in Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Cornwall, and the Isle of Man, and can be found spoken on Cape Breton Island. There are also a substantial number of Welsh speakers in the Patagonia area of Argentina. Some people speak Celtic languages in the other Celtic diaspora areas of the United States,[252] Canada, Australia,[253] and New Zealand.[254] In all these areas, the Celtic languages are now only spoken by minorities though there are continuing efforts at revitalization. Welsh is the only Celtic language not classified as "endangered" by UNESCO.

During the 1st millennium BCE, they were spoken across much of Europe, in the Iberian Peninsula, from the Atlantic and North Sea coastlines, up to the Rhine valley and down the Danube valley to the Black Sea, the northern Balkan Peninsula and in central Asia Minor. The spread to Cape Breton and Patagonia occurred in modern times. Celtic languages, particularly Irish, were spoken in Australia before federation in 1901 and are still used there to some extent.[255]

Armenian, Greek and Phrygian[edit]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Armenian language was first put into writing in 406 or 407AD when a priest known as Mesrop developed an Armenian alphabet.

There are three views amongst scholars about how speakers of Armenian came to be in what is now Armenia. One is that they came with Phrygians from the west, or with the Mitanni from the east, and took over from the non-Indo-European speaking Urartians, who were previously dominant in this area. Another view is that the Armenian people came to speak an Indo-European language after originally speaking a Caucasian language. The third view is that the ancestor of the Armenian language was already spoken in the area during the time when it was politically dominated first by the Hittites, and later by the Urartians.[256]

A minority view also suggests that the Indo-European homeland may have been located in the Armenian Highland.[257]

Hellenic Greek[edit]

File:Proto Greek Area reconstruction.png
A reconstruction of the third-millennium BCE "Proto-Greek area", according to Bulgarian linguist Vladimir Georgiev.[258]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Hellenic is the branch of the Indo-European language family that includes the different varieties of Greek.[259] In traditional classifications, Hellenic consists of Greek alone,[260][261] but some linguists group Greek together with various ancient languages thought to have been closely related or distinguish varieties of Greek that are distinct enough to be considered separate languages.[262][263]

The Proto-Greeks, who spoke the predecessor of the Mycenaean language, are mostly placed in the Early Helladic period in Greece (early 3rd millennium BCE; circa 3200 BCE) towards the end of the Neolithic in Southern Europe.[264][265] In the late Neolithic, speakers of this dialect, which would become Proto-Greek, migrated from their homeland northeast of the Black Sea to the Balkans and into the Greek peninsula. The evolution of Proto-Greek could be considered within the context of an early Paleo-Balkan sprachbund that makes it difficult to delineate exact boundaries between individual languages.[266] The characteristically Greek representation of word-initial laryngeals by prothetic vowels is shared, for one, by the Armenian language, which also seems to share some other phonological and morphological peculiarities of Greek; this has led some linguists to propose a hypothetically closer relationship between Greek and Armenian, although evidence remains scant.[267]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Map Anatolia ancient regions-en.svg
Location of Phrygia in Anatolia

The Phrygians (gr. Φρύγες, Phrúges or Phrýges) were an ancient Indo-European people, who established their kingdom with a capital eventually at Gordium. It is presently unknown whether the Phrygians were actively involved in the collapse of the Hittite capital Hattusa or whether they simply moved into the vacuum left by the collapse of Hittite hegemony after the Late Bronze Age collapse.

The Phrygian language /ˈfrɪiən/ was the language spoken by the Phrygians in Asia Minor during Classical Antiquity (ca. 8th century BCE to 5th century CE). Phrygian is considered by some linguists to have been closely related to Greek.[268][269] The similarity of some Phrygian words to Greek ones was observed by Plato in his Cratylus (410a). However, Eric P. Hamp suggests that Phrygian was related to Italo-Celtic in a hypothetical "Northwest Indo-European" group.[270]

According to Herodotus, the Phrygians were initially dwelling in the southern Balkans under the name of Bryges (Briges), changing it to Phruges after their final migration to Anatolia, via the Hellespont. Though the migration theory is still defended by many modern historians, most archaeologists have abandoned the migration hypothesis regarding the origin of the Phrygians due to a lack substantial archaeological evidence, with the migration theory resting only on the accounts of Herodotus and Xanthus.[271]

From tribal and village beginnings, the state of Phrygia arose in the eighth century BCE with its capital at Gordium. During this period, the Phrygians extended eastward and encroached upon the kingdom of Urartu, the descendants of the Hurrians, a former rival of the Hittites. Meanwhile, the Phrygian Kingdom was overwhelmed by Cimmerian invaders around 690 BCE, then briefly conquered by its neighbour Lydia, before it passed successively into the Persian Empire of Cyrus the Great and the empire of Alexander and his successors, was taken by the Attalids of Pergamon, and eventually became part of the Roman Empire. The last mention of the Phrygian language in literature dates to the fifth century CE and it was likely extinct by the seventh century.[272]


File:Nordic Bronze Age.png
Map of the Nordic Bronze Age culture, a possible place of ethnogenesis of the Germanic peoples, c. 1200 BCE

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Germanic peoples (also called Teutonic, Suebian or Gothic in older literature)[273] were an Indo-European ethno-linguistic group of Northern European origin, identified by their use of the Germanic languages which diversified out of Proto-Germanic starting during the Pre-Roman Iron Age.[web 16]

Pre-Germanic may have been related to the Slavo-Baltic and Indo-Iranian languages, but reoriented towards the Italo-Celtic languages.[web 17] The Germanic peoples are believed to have emerged about 1800 BC through the superimposition of the Corded Ware culture upon the Funnelbeaker culture on the North European Plain, which developed into the Nordic Bronze Age.[274] By the early 1st millennium BC, Proto-Germanic is believed to have been spoken in Denmark, southern Sweden and Northern Germany. Over time this area was expanded to include southern Norway and a strip of land on the North European plain stretching from Flanders to the Vistula. Around 28% of the Germanic vocabulary is of non-Indo-European origin.[275]

By the 3rd century BC, the Pre-Roman Iron Age arose among the Germanic peoples, who were at the time expanding southwards at the expense of the Celts and Illyrians.[276] During the subsequent centuries, migrating Germanic peoples reached the banks of the Rhine and the Danube along the Roman border, and also expanded into the territories of Iranian peoples north of the Black Sea.[277]

In the late 4th century, the Huns invaded the Germanic territories from the east, forcing many Germanic tribes to migrate into the Western Roman Empire.[278] During the Viking Age, which began in the 8th century, the North Germanic peoples of Scandinavia migrated throughout Europe, establishing settlements as far as North America. The migrations of the Germanic peoples in the 1st millennium were a formative element in the distribution of peoples in modern Europe.[274]


File:Balto-Slavic lng.png
Area of Balto-Slavic dialectic continuum (purple) with proposed material cultures correlating to speakers Balto-Slavic in Bronze Age (white). Red dots indicate archaic Slavic hydronyms.

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Balto-Slavic language group traditionally comprises the Baltic and Slavic languages, belonging to the Indo-European family of languages. Baltic and Slavic languages share several linguistic traits not found in any other Indo-European branch, which points to a period of common development. Most Indo-Europeanists classify Baltic and Slavic languages into a single branch, even though some details of the nature of their relationship remain in dispute[note 24] in some circles, usually due to political controversies.[279] Some linguists, however, have recently suggested that Balto-Slavic should be split into three equidistant nodes: Eastern Baltic, Western Baltic and Slavic.[note 25][note 26]

A Proto-Balto-Slavic language is reconstructable by the comparative method, descending from Proto-Indo-European by means of well-defined sound laws, and out of which modern Slavic and Baltic languages descended. One particularly innovative dialect separated from the Balto-Slavic dialect continuum and became ancestral to the Proto-Slavic language, from which all Slavic languages descended.[280]

File:East europe 3-4cc.png
Eastern Europe in 3rd–4th century CE with archaeological cultures identified as Baltic-speaking in purple. Their area extended from the Baltic Sea to modern Moscow.


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Baltic river names.jpg
Map of the area of distribution of Baltic hydronyms. This area is considered the urheimat of the Balts.

The Balts or Baltic peoples (Template:Lang-lt, Template:Lang-lv) are an Indo-European ethno-linguistic group who speak the Baltic languages, a branch of the Indo-European language family, which was originally spoken by tribes living in the area east of the Jutland peninsula in the west and west of Moscow and the Oka and Volga rivers basins in the east. One of the features of Baltic languages is the number of conservative or archaic features retained.[281] Among the Baltic peoples are modern Lithuanians, Latvians (including Latgalians) – all Eastern Balts – as well as the Old Prussians, Yotvingians and Galindians – the Western Balts – whose people also survived, but their languages and cultures are now extinct, and are now being assimilated into the Eastern Baltic community.[vague]


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Slavic peoples 6th century historical map.jpg
Slavic peoples in 6th century

The Slavs are an Indo-European ethno-linguistic group living in Central Europe, Eastern Europe, Southeast Europe, North Asia and Central Asia, who speak the Indo-European Slavic languages, and share, to varying degrees, certain cultural traits and historical backgrounds. From the early 6th century they spread to inhabit most of Central and Eastern Europe and Southeast Europe. Slavic groups also ventured as far as Scandinavia, constituting elements amongst the Vikings;[282][note 27] whilst at the other geographic extreme, Slavic mercenaries fighting for the Byzantines and Arabs settled Asia Minor and even as far as Syria.[283] Later, East Slavs (specifically, Russians and Ukrainians) colonized Siberia[284] and Central Asia.[285] Every Slavic ethnicity has emigrated to other parts of the world.[286][287] Over half of Europe's territory is inhabited by Slavic-speaking communities.[288]

Modern nations and ethnic groups called by the ethnonym Slavs are considerably diverse both genetically and culturally, and relations between them – even within the individual ethnic groups themselves – are varied, ranging from a sense of connection to mutual feelings of hostility.[289]

Present-day Slavic people are classified into East Slavic (chiefly Belarusians, Russians and Ukrainians), West Slavic (chiefly Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Wends and Sorbs), and South Slavic (chiefly Bosniaks, Bulgarians, Croats, Goranis, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Serbs and Slovenes).[290] For a more comprehensive list, see the ethnocultural subdivisions.

Indo-Iranian migrations[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Indo-Iranian origins.png
Archaeological cultures associated with the Indo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan migration: The Andronovo culture is regarded as the origin of the Indo-Iranians, who later interacted with the BMAC, from which they borrowed part of their distinctive religious beliefs. The Yaz culture is also associated with Indo-Iranian migrations. The Gandhara grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures are associated with Indo-Aryan migrations (according to EIEC).

Indo-Iranian peoples are a grouping of ethnic groups consisting of the Indo-Aryan, Iranian, Dardic and Nuristani peoples; that is, speakers of Indo-Iranian languages, a major branch of the Indo-European language family.

The Proto-Indo-Iranians are commonly identified with the Sintashta culture and the subsequent Andronovo culture within the broader Andronovo horizon, and their homeland with an area of the Eurasian steppe that borders the Ural River on the west, the Tian Shan on the east.

The Indo-Iranians interacted with the Bactria-Margiana Culture, also called "Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex". Proto-Indo-Iranian arose due to this influence.[291] The Indo-Iranians also borrowed their distinctive religious beliefs and practices from this culture.[291]

The Indo-Iranian migrations took place in two waves.[292][293] The first wave consisted of the Indo-Aryan migration into the Levant, founding the Mittani kingdom, and a migration south-eastward of the Vedic people, over the Hindu Kush into northern India.[2] The Indo-Aryans split-off around 1800–1600 BCE from the Iranians,[46] where-after they were defeated and split into two groups by the Iranians,[294] who dominated the Central Eurasian steppe zone[295] and "chased [the Indo-Aryans] to the extremities of Central Eurasia".[295] One group were the Indo-Aryans who founded the Mitanni kingdom in northern Syria;[296] (c. 1500–1300 BCE) the other group were the Vedic people.[297] Christopher I. Beckwith suggests that the Wusun, an Indo-European Caucasian people of Inner Asia in antiquity, were also of Indo-Aryan origin.[298]

The second wave is interpreted as the Iranian wave,[299] and took place in the third stage of the Indo-European migrations[2] from 800 BCE onwards.

Sintashta-Petrovka and Andronovo culture[edit]

Sintashta-Petrovka culture[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:From Corded Ware to Sintashta.jpg
According to Allentoft (2015), the Sintashta culture probably derived from the Corded Ware Culture.

The Sintashta culture, also known as the Sintashta-Petrovka culture[300] or Sintashta-Arkaim culture,[301] is a Bronze Age archaeological culture of the northern Eurasian steppe on the borders of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, dated to the period 2100–1800 BCE.[1] It is probably the archaeological manifestation of the Indo-Iranian language group.[302]

The Sintashta culture emerged from the interaction of two antecedent cultures. Its immediate predecessor in the Ural-Tobol steppe was the Poltavka culture, an offshoot of the cattle-herding Yamnaya horizon that moved east into the region between 2800 and 2600 BCE. Several Sintashta towns were built over older Poltavka settlements or close to Poltavka cemeteries, and Poltavka motifs are common on Sintashta pottery. Sintashta material culture also shows the influence of the late Abashevo culture, a collection of Corded Ware settlements in the forest steppe zone north of the Sintashta region that were also predominantly pastoralist.[303] Allentoft et al. (2015) also found close autosomal genetic relationship between peoples of Corded Ware culture and Sintashta culture.[70]

The earliest known chariots have been found in Sintashta burials, and the culture is considered a strong candidate for the origin of the technology, which spread throughout the Old World and played an important role in ancient warfare.[304] Sintashta settlements are also remarkable for the intensity of copper mining and bronze metallurgy carried out there, which is unusual for a steppe culture.[305]

Because of the difficulty of identifying the remains of Sintashta sites beneath those of later settlements, the culture was only recently distinguished from the Andronovo culture.[301] It is now recognised as a separate entity forming part of the 'Andronovo horizon'.[300]

Andronovo culture[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Andronovo culture.png
Map of the approximate maximal extent of the Andronovo culture. The formative Sintashta-Petrovka culture is shown in darker red. The location of the earliest spoke-wheeled chariot finds is indicated in purple. Adjacent and overlapping cultures (Afanasevo culture, Srubna culture, BMAC) are shown in green.

The Andronovo culture is a collection of similar local Bronze Age Indo-Iranian cultures that flourished c. 1800–900 BCE in western Siberia and the west Asiatic steppe.[306] It is probably better termed an archaeological complex or archaeological horizon. The name derives from the village of Andronovo (Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#coordinates" was not found.), where in 1914, several graves were discovered, with skeletons in crouched positions, buried with richly decorated pottery. The older Sintashta culture (2100–1800), formerly included within the Andronovo culture, is now considered separately, but regarded as its predecessor, and accepted as part of the wider Andronovo horizon. At least four sub-cultures of the Andronovo horizon have been distinguished, during which the culture expands towards the south and the east:

The geographical extent of the culture is vast and difficult to delineate exactly. On its western fringes, it overlaps with the approximately contemporaneous, but distinct, Srubna culture in the Volga-Ural interfluvial. To the east, it reaches into the Minusinsk depression, with some sites as far west as the southern Ural Mountains,[309] overlapping with the area of the earlier Afanasevo culture.[310] Additional sites are scattered as far south as the Koppet Dag (Turkmenistan), the Pamir (Tajikistan) and the Tian Shan (Kyrgyzstan). The northern boundary vaguely corresponds to the beginning of the Taiga.[309] In the Volga basin, interaction with the Srubna culture was the most intense and prolonged, and Federovo style pottery is found as far west as Volgograd.

Most researchers associate the Andronovo horizon with early Indo-Iranian languages, though it may have overlapped the early Uralic-speaking area at its northern fringe. According to Narasimhan et al. (2018), the expansion of the Andronovo culture towards the BMAC took place via the Inner Asia Mountain Corridor.[14]

Bactria-Margiana Culture[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The extent of the BMAC (after EIEC)

The Bactria-Margiana Culture, also called "Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex" (BMAC), was a non-Indo-European culture which influenced the Indo-European groups of the second stage of the Indo-European migrations.[291] It was centered in what is nowadays northwestern Afghanistan and southern Turkmenistan,[291] and had an elaborate trade-network reachings as far as the Indus civilisation, the Iranian plateau, and the Persian Gulf.[311] Finds within BMAC sites include an Elamite-type cylinder seal and a Harappan seal stamped with an elephant and Indus script found at Gonur-depe.[312]

Proto-Indo-Iranian arose due to this BMAC-influence.[291] The Indo-Iranians also borrowed their distinctive religious beliefs and practices from this culture.[291] According to Anthony, the Old Indic religion probably emerged among Indo-European immigrants in the contact zone between the Zeravshan River (present-day Uzbekistan) and (present-day) Iran.[313] It was "a syncretic mixture of old Central Asian and new Indo-European elements",[313] which borrowed "distinctive religious beliefs and practices"[291] from the Bactria–Margiana Culture.[291] At least 383 non-Indo-European words were borrowed from this culture, including the god Indra and the ritual drink Soma.[314]

Indo-Aryan migrations[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Syria: Mitanni[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Near East 1400 BCE.png
Map of the Near East, c. 1400 BCE, showing the Kingdom of Mitanni at its greatest extent

Mitanni (Hittite cuneiform KURURUMi-ta-an-ni), also Mittani (Mi-it-ta-ni) or Hanigalbat (Assyrian Hanigalbat, Khanigalbat cuneiform Ḫa-ni-gal-bat) or Naharin in ancient Egyptian texts was a Hurrian (non-Indo-European)-speaking state in northern Syria and south-east Anatolia from c. 1500–1300 BCE. Founded by an Indo-Aryan ruling class governing a predominantly Hurrian population, Mitanni came to be a regional power after the Hittite destruction of Amorite[315] Babylon and a series of ineffectual Assyrian kings created a power vacuum in Mesopotamia.

At the beginning of its history, Mitanni's major rival was Egypt under the Thutmosids. However, with the ascent of the Hittite empire, Mitanni and Egypt made an alliance to protect their mutual interests from the threat of Hittite domination. At the height of its power, during the 14th century BCE, Mitanni had outposts centered around its capital, Washukanni, whose location has been determined by archaeologists to be on the headwaters of the Khabur River. Eventually, Mitanni succumbed to Hittite and later Assyrian attacks, and was reduced to the status of a province of the Middle Assyrian Empire.

Their sphere of influence is shown in Hurrian place names, personal names and the spread through Syria and the Levant of a distinct pottery type.

India: Vedic culture[edit]

File:South Asian Language Families.jpg
Language families in the Indian subcontinent

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The Indo-Aryan peoples started to migrate into northwestern India around 1500 BCE, as a slow diffusion during the Late Harappan period, establishing the Vedic religion during the Vedic period (c. 1500–500 BCE).

The research on the Indo-Aryan migrations began with the study of the Rig Veda in the mid-19th century by Max Muller, and gradually evolved from a theory of a large scale invasion of a racially and technologically superior people to being a slow diffusion of small numbers of nomadic people that had a disproportionate societal impact on a large urban population. Contemporary claims of Indo-Aryan migrations are drawn from linguistic,[316] archaeological, literary and cultural sources.

During the early part of the Vedic period, the Indo-Aryans settled into northern India, bringing with them their specific religious traditions. The associated culture[note 28] was initially a tribal, pastoral society centred in the northwestern parts of the Indian subcontinent; it spread after 1200 BCE to the Ganges Plain, as it was shaped by increasing settled agriculture, a hierarchy of four social classes, and the emergence of monarchical, state-level polities.[318][319]

The end of the Vedic period witnessed the rise of large, urbanized states as well as of shramana movements (including Jainism and Buddhism) which challenged the Vedic orthodoxy.[320] Around the beginning of the Common Era, the Vedic tradition formed one of the main constituents of the so-called "Hindu synthesis"[321]

Inner Asia: Wusun[edit]

The Tarim Basin, 2008
File:Wu-sun Lage.png
Wusun and their neighbours during the late 2nd century BCE, take note that the Yancai did not change their name to Alans until the 1st century.

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

According to Christopher I. Beckwith the Wusun, an Indo-European Caucasian people of Inner Asia in antiquity, were also of Indo-Aryan origin.[322] From the Chinese term Wusun, Beckwith reconstructs the Old Chinese *âswin, which he compares to the Old Indic aśvin "the horsemen", the name of the Rigvedic twin equestrian gods.[322] Beckwith suggests that the Wusun were an eastern remnant of the Indo-Aryans, who had been suddenly pushed to the extremities of the Eurasian Steppe by the Iranian peoples in the 2nd millennium BCE.[323]

The Wusun are first mentioned by Chinese sources as vassals in the Tarim Basin of the Yuezhi,[324] another Indo-European Caucasian people of possible Tocharian stock.[42][325] Around 175 BCE, the Yuezhi were utterly defeated by the Xiongnu, also former vassals of the Yuezhi.[325][326] The Yuezhi subsequently attacked the Wusun and killed their king (Kunmo Chinese: 昆彌 or Kunmi Chinese: 昆莫) Nandoumi (Chinese: 難兜靡), capturing the Ili Valley from the Saka (Scythians) shortly afterwards.[326] In return the Wusun settled in the former territories of the Yuezhi as vassals of the Xiongnu.[326][327]

The son of Nandoumi was adopted by the Xiongnu king and made leader of the Wusun.[327] Around 130 BCE he attacked and utterly defeated the Yuezhi, settling the Wusun in the Ili Valley.[327]

After the Yuezhi were defeated by the Xiongnu, in the 2nd century BCE, a small group, known as the Little Yuezhi, fled to the south, while the majority migrated west to the Ili Valley, where they displaced the Sakas (Scythians). Driven from the Ili Valley shortly afterwards by the Wusun, the Yuezhi migrated to Sogdia and then Bactria, where they are often identified with the Tokhárioi (Τοχάριοι) and Asioi of Classical sources. They then expanded into northern South Asia, where one branch of the Yuezhi founded the Kushan Empire. The Kushan empire stretched from Turfan in the Tarim Basin to Pataliputra on the Gangetic plain at its greatest extent, and played an important role in the development of the Silk Road and the transmission of Buddhism to China.

Soon after 130 BCE the Wusun became independent of the Xiongnu, becoming trusted vassals of the Han Dynasty and powerful force in the region for centuries.[327] With the emerging steppe federations of the Rouran, the Wusun migrated into the Pamir Mountains in the 5th century CE.[326] They are last mentioned in 938 when a Wusun chieftain paid tribute to the Liao dynasty.[326]

Mesopotamia – Kassites[edit]

The Kassite language was not Indo-European. However, the appearance of the Kassites in Mesopotamia in the 18th century BCE has been connected to the contemporary Indo-European expansion into the region at the time.[328][329][330]

The Kassites gained control of Babylonia after the Hittite sack of the city in 1595 BCE (i.e. 1531 BCE per the short chronology), and established a dynasty based in Dur-Kurigalzu.[331][332][333] The Kassites were members of a small military aristocracy but were efficient rulers and not locally unpopular.[331] The horse, which the Kassites worshipped, first came into use in Babylonia at this time.[331] The Kassites were polytheistic, and the name of some 30 gods are known.[333]

The Kassite language has not been classified.[333] Genetic relations of the Kassite language are unclear, although it is generally agreed that it was not Semitic; relation with Elamite is doubtful. Relationship with or membership in the Hurro-Urartian family has been suggested,[334] being possibly related to it,[334] based on a number of words. However, several Kassite leaders bore Indo-European names,[335] and the Kassites worshipped several Indo-Aryan gods,[336][337] suggesting that the Kassites were under significant Indo-European influence.[336][337] The reign of the Kassites laid the essential groundwork for the development of subsequent Babylonian culture.[333]


Iranian plateau[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

File:Scythia-Parthia 100 BC.png
Distribution of Iranian peoples in 100 BCE: shown is Sarmatia, Scythia, Bactria and the Parthian Empire.

The Iranian peoples[note 29] (also known as Iranic peoples) are an Indo-European ethno-linguistic group that comprise the speakers of Iranian languages.[338] Their historical areas of settlement were on the Iranian plateau (mainly Iran, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan) and certain neighbouring areas of Asia (such as parts of the Caucasus, Eastern Turkey, Northeast Syria, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Bahrain, Oman, northern Iraq, Northwestern and Western Pakistan) reflecting changing geopolitical range of the Persian empires and the Iranian history.[339][340]

The Medes, Parthians and Persians begin to appear on the western Iranian plateau from c. 800 BCE, after which they remained under Assyrian rule for several centuries, as it was with the rest of the peoples in the Near East. The Achaemenids replaced Median rule from 559 BCE. Around the first millennium CE, the Kambojas, the Pashtuns and the Baloch began to settle on the eastern edge of the Iranian plateau, on the mountainous frontier of northwestern and western Pakistan, displacing the earlier Indo-Aryans from the area.

Their current distribution spreads across the Iranian plateau, and stretches from the Caucasus in the north to the Persian Gulf in the south, and from the Indus River in the east to eastern Turkey in the west – a region that is sometimes called the "Iranian cultural continent", or Greater Iran by some scholars, and represents the extent of the Iranian languages and significant influence of the Iranian peoples, through the geopolitical reach of the Iranian empire.[341]

The Iranians comprise the present day Persians, Lurs, Ossetians, Kurds, Pashtuns, Balochs, Tajiks and their sub-groups of the historic Medes, Massagetaes, Sarmatians, Scythians, Parthians, Alans, Bactrians, Soghdians and other people of Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Iranian plateau. Another possible group are the Cimmerians who are mostly supposed to have been related to either Iranian or Thracian speaking groups, or at least to have been ruled by an Iranian elite.


Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

Territories (full line) and expansion (dotted line) of the Indo-Scythians Kingdom at its greatest extent

The first Iranians to reach the Black Sea may have been the Cimmerians in the 8th century BCE, although their linguistic affiliation is uncertain. They were followed by the Scythians, who would dominate the area, at their height, from the Carpathian Mountains in the west, to the eastern-most fringes of Central Asia in the east, including the Indo-Scythian Kingdom in India. For most of their existence, they were based in what is modern-day Ukraine and southern European Russia.

Sarmatian tribes, of whom the best known are the Roxolani (Rhoxolani), Iazyges (Jazyges) and the Alani (Alans), followed the Scythians westwards into Europe in the late centuries BCE and the 1st and 2nd centuries of the Common Era (The Age of Migrations). The populous Sarmatian tribe of the Massagetae, dwelling near the Caspian Sea, were known to the early rulers of Persia in the Achaemenid Period. In the east, the Saka occupied several areas in Xinjiang, from Khotan to Tumshuq.

Decline in central Asia[edit]

In Central Asia, the Turkic languages have marginalized Iranian languages as a result of the Turkic expansion of the early centuries CE. In Eastern Europe, Slavic and Germanic peoples assimilated and absorbed the native Iranian languages (Scythian and Sarmatian) of the region. Extant major Iranian languages are Persian, Pashto, Kurdish, and Balochi, besides numerous smaller ones.

Alternative hypotheses[edit]

Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The "Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm" is a hypothesis suggesting that the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) can be traced back to the Upper Paleolithic, several millennia earlier than the Chalcolithic or at the most Neolithic estimates in other scenarios of Proto-Indo-European origins. Its main proponents are Marcel Otte, Alexander Häusler, and Mario Alinei.

The PCT posits that the advent of Indo-European languages should be linked to the arrival of Homo sapiens in Europe and Asia from Africa in the Upper Paleolithic.[web 18] Employing "lexical periodization", Alinei arrives at a timeline deeper than even that of Colin Renfrew's Anatolian hypothesis.[note 30][web 18]

Since 2004, an informal workgroup of scholars who support the Paleolithic Continuity hypothesis has been held online.[web 19] Apart from Alinei himself, its leading members (referred to as "Scientific Committee" in the website) are linguists Xaverio Ballester (University of Valencia) and Francesco Benozzo (University of Bologna). Also included are prehistorian Marcel Otte (Université de Liège) and anthropologist Henry Harpending (University of Utah).[web 18]

It is not listed by Mallory among the proposals for the origins of the Indo-European languages that are widely discussed and considered credible within academia.[342]

Indian origins[edit]

Lua error in Module:Hatnote_list at line 44: attempt to call field 'formatPages' (a nil value).

The notion of "indigenous Aryans" posits that speakers of Indo-Aryan languages are "indigenous" to the Indian subcontinent. Scholars like Jim G. Shaffer and B. B. Lal note the absence of archaeological remains of an Aryan "conquest", and the high degree of physical continuity between Harappan and Post-Harappan society.[343] They support the controversial[343] hypothesis that the Indo-Aryan civilization was not introduced by Aryan migrations, but originated in pre-Vedic India.[343]

In recent years, the concept of "indigenous Aryans" has been increasingly conflated with an "Out of India" origin of the Indo-European language family. This contrasts with the model of Indo-Aryan migration which posits that Indo-Aryan tribes migrated to India from Central Asia. Some furthermore claim that all Indo-European languages originated in India.[note 31] These claims remain problematic.[clarification needed][note 32]

See also[edit]


<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. 1.0 1.1 David Anthony: "Germanic shows a mixture of archaic and derived traits that make its place uncertain; it could have branched off at about the same time as the root of Italic and Celtic [but] it also shared many traits with Pre-Baltic and Pre-Slavic."[25] Proto-Germanic dates from c. 500 BCE.[26]
  2. According to Gimbutas, these indigenous groups existed for nearly three millennia (c. 6500–3500 BCE, during the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Copper ages), consisting notably of the Narva, Funnelbeaker, Linear Pottery, Cardium pottery, Vinča, early Helladic, Minoan cultures etc. As a "truncation" of these cultures Gimbutas perceived (1) the "abrupt absences" of certain traditions of urbanism, pottery and visual arts as well as in "symbols and script" as well as (2) the "equally abrupt appearance of thrusting weapons and horses infiltrating the Danubian Valley and other major grasslands of the Balkans and Central Europe", initiating "a dramatic shift in the prehistory of Europe, a change in social structure and in residence patterns, in art and in religion" which was to be "a decisive factor in the formation of Europe's last 5,000 years."
  3. Old Europeans were sedentary-horticulturalist, living in "large agglomerations" – probably part of theocratic monarchies presided over by a queen-priestess – and had an ideology which "focused on the eternal aspects of birth, death, and regeneration, symbolized by the feminine principle, a mother creatrix"; they buried their dead in communal megalith graves and were generally peaceful.
  4. David Anthony (1995): "Language shift can be understood best as a social strategy through which individuals and groups compete for positions of prestige, power, and domestic security […] What is important, then, is not just dominance, but vertical social mobility and a linkage between language and access to positions of prestige and power […] A relatively small immigrant elite population can encourage widespread language shift among numerically dominant indigenes in a non-state or pre-state context if the elite employs a specific combination of encouragements and punishments. Ethnohistorical cases […] demonstrate that small elite groups have successfully imposed their languages in non-state situations."[63]
  5. Note the dislocation of the Indus Valley Civilisation prior to the start of the Indo-Aryan migrations into northern India, and the onset of Sanskritisation with the rise of the Kuru kingdom, as described by Michael Witzel.[68] The "Ancestral North Indians" and "Ancestral South Indians"[web 10][web 11] mixed between 4,200 to 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE – 100 CE), where after a shift to endogamy took place.[69]
  6. Demkina et al. (2017): "In the second millennium BC, humidization of the climate led to the divergence of the soil cover with secondary formation of the complexes of chestnut soils and solonetzes. This paleoecological crisis had a significant effect on the economy of the tribes in the Late Catacomb and Post-Catacomb time stipulating their higher mobility and transition to the nomadic cattle breeding."[73]
  7. See also Eurogenes Blogspot, The crisis [archive].
  8. 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."[77]
    Strazny: "The single most popular proposal is the Pontic steppes (see the Kurgan hypothesis) […]"[78]
  9. Piazza and Cavalli-Sforza: "...if the expansions began at 9,500 years ago from Anatolia and at 6,000 years ago from the Yamnaya culture region, then a 3,500-year period elapsed during their migration to the Volga-Don region from Anatolia, probably through the Balkans. There a completely new, mostly pastoral culture developed under the stimulus of an environment unfavorable to standard agriculture, but offering new attractive possibilities. Our hypothesis is, therefore, that Indo-European languages derived from a secondary expansion from the Yamnaya culture region after the Neolithic farmers, possibly coming from Anatolia and settled there, developing pastoral nomadism.[84]
  10. Wells: "... 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."[85]
  11. Jones et al. (2016) further note that "Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) belong to a distinct ancient clade that split from western hunter-gatherers ~45 kya, shortly after the expansion of anatomically modern humans into Europe and from the ancestors of Neolithic farmers ~25 kya, around the Last Glacial Maximum."[90]
  12. According to Haak et al. (2015), "the Yamnaya steppe herders of this time were descended not only from the preceding eastern European hunter-gatherers, but from a population of Near Eastern ancestry."[89] According to Jones et al. (2016), Caucasus hunter-gatherers "genomes significantly contributed to the Yamnaya steppe herders who migrated into Europe ~3,000 BCE, supporting a formative Caucasus influence on this important Early Bronze age culture. CHG left their imprint on modern populations from the Caucasus and also central and south Asia possibly marking the arrival of Indo-Aryan languages."[90][note 11] 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."[91] These Iranian Chacolithic people were a mixture of "the Neolithic people of western Iran, the Levant, and Caucasus Hunter Gatherers".[91] Lazaridis et al. (2016), referring to Haak et al. (2015): "The spread of Near Eastern ancestry into the Eurasian steppe was previously inferred without access to ancient samples, by hypothesizing a population related to present-day Armenians as a source."[91]
    Eurogenes Blog: "Lazaridis et al. show that Early to Middle Bronze Age steppe groups, including Yamnaya, tagged by them as Steppe EMBA, are best modeled with formal statistics as a mixture of Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHG) and Chalcolithic farmers from western Iran. The mixture ratios are 56.8/43.2, respectively. However, they add that a model of Steppe EMBA as a three-way mixture between EHG, the Chalcolithic farmers and Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers (CHG) is also a good fit and plausible."[93]
    See also:
  13. 13.0 13.1 Allan R. Bomhard has elaborated Kortlandt's ideas.[web 13][120] According to Allan R. Bomhard, "Proto-Indo-European is the result of the imposition of a Eurasiatic language – to use Greenberg's term – on a population speaking one or more primordial Northwest Caucasian languages."[web 13][subnote 2]

    Anthony states that the validity of such deep relationships cannot be reliably demonstrated due to the time-depth involved, and also notes that the similarities may be explained by borrowings from PIE into proto-Uralic.[19] Yet, Anthony also notes that the North Caucasian communities "were southern participants in the steppe world".[1]
  14. 14.0 14.1 Soviet and post-Soviet Russian archaeologists have proposed an East Caspian influence, via the eastern Caspian areas, on the formation of the Don-Volga cultures.[122] See also Ancient DNA Era (11th January 2019), How did CHG get into Steppe_EMBA ? Part 2 : The Pottery Neolithic[123]

    The "Sogdiana hypothesis" of Johanna Nichols places the homeland in the fourth or fifth millennium BCE to the east of the Caspian Sea, in the area of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana.[124][125] From there, PIE spread north to the steppes, and south-west towards Anatolia.[126] Nichols eventually rejected her theory, finding it incompatible with the linguistic and archaeological data.[126]

    Following Nichols' initial proposal, Kozintsev has argued for an Indo-Uralic homeland east of the Caspian Sea.[127] From this homeland, Indo-Uralic PIE-speakers migrated south-west, and splitted in the southern Caucasus, forming the Anatolian and steppe languages at their respective locations.[127]

    Bernard Sergent has elaborated on the idea of east Caspian influences on the formation of the Volga culture, arguing for a PIE homeland in the east Caspian territory, from where it migrated north. Sergent notes that the lithic assemblage of the first Kurgan culture in Ukraine (Sredni Stog II), which originated from the Volga and South Urals, recalls that of the Mesolithic-Neolithic sites to the east of the Caspian sea, Dam Dam Chesme II and the cave of Djebel.[128][129]
    Yet, Sergent places the earliest roots of Gimbutas' Kurgan cradle of Indo-Europeans in an even more southern cradle, and adds that the Djebel material is related to a Paleolithic material of Northwestern Iran, the Zarzian culture, dated 10,000–8,500 BCE, and in the more ancient Kebarian of the Near East. He concludes that more than 10,000 years ago the Indo-Europeans were a small people grammatically, phonetically and lexically close to Semitic-Hamitic populations of the Near East.[128]
  15. There are several datings available:
    • Gimbutas dated it to 5000 BCE.
    • According to V.A.Dergachev (2007), О скипетрах, о лошадях, о войне: Этюды в защиту миграционной концепции М. Гимбутас, <templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css" />ISBN 5-98187-173-3, dates Samara culture at cal. C-14 5200–4500 BCE, with possible continuatation into first half of 5th millennium, while the Khvalynsk culture is dated at ca. 4600–3900 BCE. These data are based on synchronisation, not radicarbon dating or dendrochronology of Samara culture sites itself.
    • Mallory and Adams, Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture, gives the bare date "fifth millennium BC", while the Khvalynsk culture, its reported successor, is dated at 4900–3500 BCE.
  16. According to Haak et al. (2015), "both south-north and north-south genetic influence across the Caucasus is plausible."[114]
  17. Noting the absence in the Anatolian languages of the "full wagon and wheel vocabulary" found in all present-day IE-languages, and the absence of steppe-ancestry in Anatolian DNA from this time, Reich states that "this suggests to me 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,"[39] and the possibility of a steppe origin of the Anatolian languages also cannot be excluded.[116]
  18. Wang et al. (2018): "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 'steppe ancestry' in European populations, the postulate of increasingly patrilinear societies in the wake of these expansions (exemplified by R1a/R1b), as attested in the latest study on the Bell Beaker phenomenon."[118]
  19. See also Bruce Bower (February 8, 2019), DNA reveals early mating between Asian herders and European farmers [archive], ScienceNews.
  20. See also:
    * Spread of Y. pestis, earlier than previously thought, may have caused Neolithic decline [archive]
    * Europe's ancient proto-cities may have been ravaged by the plague [archive]
    * Of Plagues and Prehistory [archive]
  21. They further note:
    • "[…] the main argument in favor of the Anatolian hypothesis (that major language change requires major migration) can now also be applied to the Steppe hypothesis."[201]
    • "[…] our results level the playing field between the two leading hypotheses [the Steppe hypotheses and the Anatolian hypothesis] of Indo-European origins, as we now know that both the Early Neolithic and the Late Neolithic were associated with major migrations."[201]
  22. Yet, a major problem with this proposal is that those Yamna-migrants were R1b-carriers, which also appears in the Bell-Beaker people, while the Corded Ware people seem to have been R1a-carriers, which has not been found among Yamna-people. See:
  23. See also (2017), Heyd, Mallory, and Prescott were right about Bell Beakers [archive].
  24. "Balto-Slavic languages" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 10 December 2012. Those scholars who accept the Balto-Slavic hypothesis attribute the large number of close similarities in the vocabulary, grammar, and sound systems of the Baltic and Slavic languages to development from a common ancestral language after the breakup of Proto-Indo-European. Those scholars who reject the hypothesis believe that the similarities are the result of parallel development and of mutual influence during a long period of contact.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  25. Kortlandt, Frederik (2009), Baltica & Balto-Slavica, p. 5, Though Prussian is undoubtedly closer to the East Baltic languages than to Slavic, the characteristic features of the Baltic languages seem to be either retentions or results of parallel development and cultural interaction. Thus I assume that Balto-Slavic split into three identifiable branches, each of which followed its own course of development.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  26. Derksen, Rick (2008), Etymological Dictionary of the Slavic Inherited Lexicon, p. 20, "I am not convinced that it is justified to reconstruct a Proto-Baltic stage. The term Proto-Baltic is used for convenience's sake.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  27. The origin of Rus. O Pritsak; 1981; pp 14, 27–28. Pritsak argues that the eastern Vikings – the Rus – were a social group of seafaring nomads which consisted of not only Scandinavians, but also Frisians, Balts, Slavs and Finns.
  28. Archaeological cultures identified with phases of Vedic culture include the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture, the Gandhara Grave culture, the Black and red ware culture and the Painted Grey Ware culture.[317]
  29. R.N Frye, "IRAN v. PEOPLE OF IRAN" in Encyclopedia Iranica. "In the following discussion of 'Iranian peoples', the term 'Iranian' may be understood in two ways. It is, first of all, a linguistic classification, intended to designate any society which inherited or adopted, and transmitted, an Iranian language. The set of Iranian-speaking peoples is thus considered a kind of unity, in spite of their distinct lineage identities plus all the factors which may have further differentiated any one group's sense of self."
  30. Mario Alinei (with reference to Francisco Villar, Los indoeuropeos y los orígines de Europa. Lenguaje y historia, Gredos, Madrid 1991): "The sharp, and now at last admitted even by traditionalists (Villar 1991) differentiation of farming terminology in the different IE languages, while absolutely unexplainable in the context of Renfrew's NDT, provides yet another fundamental proof that the differentiation of IE languages goes back to remote prehistory."
  31. Bryant: "It must be stated immediately that there is an unavoidable corollary of an Indigenist position. If the Indo-Aryan languages did not come from outside South Asia, this necessarily entails that India was the original homeland of all the other Indo-European languages."[344]
  32. Bryant: "There is at least a series of archaeological cultures that can be traced approaching the Indian subcontinent, even if discontinuous, which does not seem to be the case for any hypothetical east-to-west emigration."[345]

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. Kortlandt (2010) refers to Kortlandt, Frederik. 2007b. C. C. Uhlenbeck on Indo-European, Uralic and Caucasian.
  2. See also The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis.[121]


<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 Anthony 2007.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Beckwith 2009.
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Mallory 1999, pp. 108 f..
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Anthony 2007, pp. 345, 361–367.
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Anthony 2007, pp. 368, 380.
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 Mallory 1999, pp. 108, 244–250.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Anthony 2007, p. 360.
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 Haak 2015.
  9. 9.0 9.1 James P. Mallory (2013). "The Indo-Europeanization of Atlantic Europe" [archive]. In J. T. Koch; B. Cunliffe (eds.). Celtic From the West 2: Rethinking the Bronze Age and the Arrival of Indo–European in Atlantic Europe. Oxford: Oxbow Books. pp. 17–40.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  10. Witzel 1998.
  11. Witzel 2003.
  12. Kuzmina 2007.
  13. 13.0 13.1 13.2 Parpola 2015.
  14. 14.0 14.1 Narasimhan et al. 2018.
  15. 15.0 15.1 15.2 Parpola, Asko, (2017). "Finnish vatsa – Sanskrit vatsá – and the formation of Indo-Iranian and Uralic languages", in _Journal de la Societé Finno-Ougrienne 96, 2017_ , p. 250.
  16. 16.0 16.1 Parpola, Asko, (2017). "Finnish vatsa – Sanskrit vatsá – and the formation of Indo-Iranian and Uralic languages", in _Journal de la Societé Finno-Ougrienne 96, 2017_ , p. 249.
  17. Anthony 2007, p. 7.
  18. Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 294.
  19. 19.0 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.7 19.8 Anthony & Ringe 2015.
  20. Melchert, H. Craig (2012). "The Position of Anatolian" [archive] (PDF). p. 7.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  21. 21.0 21.1 21.2 Kortlandt 2010.
  22. Bomhard 2019, p. 2.
  23. Mallory & Adams 2006, p. 249.
  24. 24.0 24.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 56–58.
  25. Anthony 2007, p. 57.
  26. Ringe 2006, p. 67.
  27. 27.0 27.1 Anthony 2007, p. 100.
  28. Mallory 1999.
  29. Parpola, Asko, 2017. "Finnish vatsa – Sanskrit vatsha – and the formation of Indo-Iranian and Uralic languages", in SUSA/JSFOu 96, 2017, p. 246.
  30. 30.0 30.1 Anthony 2019, p. 13.
  31. 31.0 31.1 31.2 Anthony 2007, p. 133.
  32. Anthony 2007, p. 43.
  33. 33.0 33.1 33.2 33.3 33.4 33.5 33.6 33.7 33.8 33.9 Damgaard 2018.
  34. 34.0 34.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 43–46.
  35. Anthony 2007, p. 262.
  36. 36.0 36.1 36.2 Parpola 2015, pp. 37–38.
  37. 37.0 37.1 37.2 37.3 37.4 Serangeli 2020, p. 4-5.
  38. 38.0 38.1 Mathieson 2018, p. line 363-382.
  39. 39.0 39.1 39.2 39.3 Reich 2018, p. 120.
  40. Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 4.
  41. Anthony 2007, pp. 101, 264–265.
  42. 42.0 42.1 42.2 Loewe & Shaughnessy 1999, pp. 83–88.
  43. 43.0 43.1 Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 372.
  44. 44.0 44.1 Ivanova 2012.
  45. 45.0 45.1 45.2 Anthony 2007, p. 101.
  46. 46.0 46.1 Anthony 2007, p. 408.
  47. 47.0 47.1 Gimbutas 1997.
  48. Gimbutas 1997, p. 240.
  49. Gimbutas 1997, p. 361.
  50. Gimbutas 1997, pp. 241, 316.
  51. 51.0 51.1 Parpola 2015, p. 67.
  52. 52.0 52.1 Mallory 2002.
  53. Witzel 2003, p. 347.
  54. Basu et al. 2003, p. 2287.
  55. Anthony 2007, pp. 117–118.
  56. Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015, pp. 208–215.
  57. 57.0 57.1 Kroonen 2015.
  58. Kroonen, Guus (2015), Pre-Indo-European speech carrying a Neolithic signature emanating from the Aegean [archive] (PDF), p. 10<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  59. Karlene 1996.
  60. Jones-Bley, Karlene (1996). The Indo-Europeanization of northern Europe: papers presented at the international conference held at the University of Vilnius, Vilnius, Lithuania [archive]. Institute for the Study of Man. p. 171. ISBN 9780941694568.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  61. Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015, p. 205.
  62. Anthony 2007, p. 117.
  63. Witzel 2003, p. 27.
  64. Anthony 2007, p. 118.
  65. Parpola 2015, pp. 67–68.
  66. Parpola 2015, p. 68.
  67. 67.0 67.1 Salmons 2015, p. 118.
  68. Witzel 1995.
  69. Moorjani, P.; Thangaraj, K.; Patterson, N.; et al. (2013). "Genetic evidence for recent population mixture in India" [archive]. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 93 (3): 422–38. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.07.006 [archive]. PMC 3769933 [archive]. PMID 23932107 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  70. 70.0 70.1 70.2 Allentoft et al. 2015.
  71. Anthony 2007, p. 227.
  72. 72.0 72.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 300, 336.
  73. 73.0 73.1 73.2 Demkina 2017.
  74. Bojtár 1999, p. 57.
  75. 75.0 75.1 75.2 75.3 75.4 75.5 Mallory & Adams 1997.
  76. 76.0 76.1 76.2 Mallory 2013.
  77. 77.0 77.1 Mallory 1989, p. 185.
  78. 78.0 78.1 Strazny 2000, p. 163.
  79. Gimbutas (1985) page 190.
  80. 80.0 80.1 Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015.
  81. 81.0 81.1 81.2 81.3 81.4 81.5 81.6 Anthony 2019.
  82. Renfrew 1990.
  83. Cavalli-Sforza 2000.
  84. 84.0 84.1 Piazza and Cavalli-Sforza (2006)
  85. 85.0 85.1 Wells & Read 2002.
  86. Gamkrelidze, Thomas V.; Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. (1995), Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: A Reconstruction and Historical Analysis of a Proto-Language and Proto-Culture [archive], Moutin de Gruyter, pp. Chapters Eleven and Twelve, p.791 ff, ISBN 9783110815030<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  87. Aikio, Ante (2012). "An essay on Saami ethnolinguistic prehistory" [archive] (PDF). Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne. Helsinki, Finland: Finno-Ugrian Society (266, A Linguistic Map of Prehistoric Northern Europe): 93f., 98. Retrieved 31 July 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  88. Mallory & Adams 1997, 4 and 6 (Afanasevo), 13 and 16 (Anatolia), 243 (Greece), 127–128 (Corded Ware), and 653 (Yamna).
  89. 89.0 89.1 Haak 2015, p. 3.
  90. 90.0 90.1 90.2 Jones 2016.
  91. 91.0 91.1 91.2 91.3 Lazaridis et al 2016, p. 8.
  92. Wang 2019, p. 9.
  93. Eurogenes.blogspot, The genetic structure of the world's first farmers (Lazaridis et al. preprint) [archive]
  94. Wang, 2019 & p.9.
  95. 95.0 95.1 Reich 2018, p. 120, 177.
  96. 96.0 96.1 Kristiansen 2020.
  97. Anthony 2007, p. 132.
  98. Anthony 2007, p. 135.
  99. Anthony 2007, p. 138.
  100. Anthony 2007, pp. 132, 145.
  101. Anthony 2007, pp. 145, 147.
  102. Anthony 2007, pp. 155–157.
  103. Anthony 2007, p. 164.
  104. Anthony 2007, p. 173.
  105. Anthony 2007, p. 175.
  106. 106.0 106.1 106.2 Anthony 2007, p. 182.
  107. Anthony 2007, pp. 185, 190.
  108. Anthony 2007, p. 186.
  109. 109.0 109.1 Anthony 2007, p. 189.
  110. Anthony 2007, p. 244.
  111. 111.0 111.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 244–245.
  112. Wang 2018.
  113. 113.0 113.1 Grolle 2018, p. 108.
  114. 114.0 114.1 Haak 2015, p. 137.
  115. Matyhieson 2017, p. line 363-382.
  116. 116.0 116.1 116.2 Mathieson 2018, p. line 380-382.
  117. Reich 2018, p. 109-110.
  118. 118.0 118.1 Wang 2018, p. 15.
  119. Anthony, David (2020), "Ancient DNA, Mating Networks, and the Anatolian Split", in Serangeli, Matilde; Olander, Thomas (eds.), Dispersals and Diversification: Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives on the Early Stages of Indo-European [archive], BRILL, pp. 31–42, ISBN 9789004416192<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  120. 120.0 120.1 Bomhard 2019.
  121. The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis [archive]
  122. Vybornov 2016, p. 164.
  123. Ancient DNA Era (11th January 2019), How did CHG get into Steppe_EMBA ? Part 2 : The Pottery Neolithic [archive]
  124. Nichols 1997.
  125. Nichols 1999.
  126. 126.0 126.1 Kozintsev 2019, p. 337.
  127. 127.0 127.1 Kozintsev 2019.
  128. 128.0 128.1 Bernard Sergent (1995), Les Indo-Européens – Histoire, langues, mythes
  129. See Dzhebel [archive], and V. A. Ranov and R. S. Davis (1979), Toward a New Outline of the Soviet Central Asian Paleolithic [archive]
  130. Anthony 2007, p. 229.
  131. 131.0 131.1 131.2 Beckwith 2009, p. 37
  132. Fortson, IV 2011, p. 48
  133. Fortson, IV 2011, p. 170
  134. Hock & Joseph 1996, pp. 520–521
  135. 135.0 135.1 135.2 Mallory & Adams 1997, pp. 12–16
  136. Anthony 2007, pp. 47–48.
  137. Anthony 2007, p. 48.
  138. 138.0 138.1 Beckwith 2009, p. 32
  139. Anthony 2007, pp. 133, 262.
  140. Kroonen, Barjamovic & Peyrot 2018, p. 7.
  141. Kroonen, Barjamovic & Peyrot 2018, p. 9.
  142. Ivanova, Mariya (2007). "The Chronology of the "Maikop Culture" in the North Caucasus: Changing Perspectives". Armenian Journal of Near Eastern Studies. II: 7–39.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  143. Wang, Chuan-Chao; Reinhold, Sabine; Kalmykov, Alexey; et al. (2018-05-16). "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus". bioRxiv: 322347. doi:10.1101/322347 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  144. Wang, Chuan-Chao; Reinhold, Sabine; Kalmykov, Alexey; Wissgott, Antje; Brandt, Guido; Jeong, Choongwon; Cheronet, Olivia; Ferry, Matthew; Harney, Eadaoin; Keating, Denise; Mallick, Swapan (2018-05-16). "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus" [archive]. bioRxiv: 322347. doi:10.1101/322347 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  145. 145.0 145.1 Anthony 2007, p. 275.
  146. 146.0 146.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 264–265.
  147. D.W. Anthony, Two IE phylogenies, three PIE migrations, and four kinds of steppe pastoralism, The Journal of Language Relationship, vol. 9 (2013), pp. 1–21
  148. Mallory & Mair 2008, p. 318.
  149. Narain 1990, p. 176.
  150. 150.0 150.1 150.2 Beckwith 2009, pp. 43–48
  151. China: History: The Shang Dynasty: The Chariot. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  152. "The Steppe: Horsepowered warfare" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 30 December 2014.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  153. 153.0 153.1 Krech & Steinicke 2011, p. 100
  154. Beckwith 2009, p. 396.. "domesticated horses were introduced to the western pre-Chinese area by the Indo-Europeans."
  155. "China: The advent of bronze casting". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Stylistic evidence, such as the sharp angles, flat bottoms, and strap handles of certain Qijia clay pots (in Gansu; c. 2250–1900 BCE), has led some scholars to posit an early sheet- or wrought-metal tradition possibly introduced from the west by migrating Indo-European peoples...<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  156. Beckwith 2009, p. 44 "It is now accepted that the chariot is an intrusive cultural artifact that entered Shang China from the north or northwest without any wheeled-vehicle precursors."
  157. Beckwith 2009, p. 401 "The Chinese did not have wheeled vehicles before this period. They adopted the chariot from the foreigners who brought the fully formed artifact with them from the northwest."
  158. Beckwith 2009, p. 400.. "no earlier wheeled vehicles of any kind have ever been found in China proper."
  159. Beckwith 2009, p. 402.. "The wheel was introduced to China as a part of the chariot..."
  160. Beckwith 2009, pp. 59, 70–1. The dominant people in the western part of it, from the Altai of western Mongolia south through the Kroraina area around the Lop Nor to the Ch'i-lien Mountains, the northern outliers of the Tibetan Plateau, were Caucasoid in race; those in the northern region seem to have spoken North Iranian "Saka" languages or dialects, while those in the Kroraina area spoke Tokharian languages or dialects.
  161. 161.0 161.1 "Stone Age: Central Asia and Siberia" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 15 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  162. Beckwith 2009, p. 59.
  163. Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, pp. 166-171.
  164. Pulleyblank 1966, pp. 9–39
  165. Mallory 1989, pp. 59–60
  166. 166.0 166.1 Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, p. 171.
  167. Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, p. 166.
  168. 168.0 168.1 168.2 168.3 Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, p. 168.
  169. 169.0 169.1 169.2 169.3 169.4 Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, p. 170.
  170. Enoki, Koshelenko & Haidary 1994, p. 169.
  171. 171.0 171.1 171.2 Anthony 2007, p. 300.
  172. Anthony 2007, pp. 274–277, 317–320.
  173. Anthony 2007, p. 321.
  174. Anthony 2007, pp. 301–302.
  175. Anthony 2007, p. 303.
  176. Mallory, J. P.; Adams, Douglas Q. (1997). Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture [archive]. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781884964985.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  177. Anthony 2007, pp. 345, 361–362, 367.
  178. 178.0 178.1 178.2 178.3 178.4 178.5 Anthony 2007, p. 367.
  179. 179.0 179.1 Anthony 2007, pp. 360, 368.
  180. Rascovan, N; Sjögren, KG; Kristiansen, K (2019). "Emergence and Spread of Basal Lineages of Yersinia pestis during the Neolithic Decline". Cell. 176 (1): 295–305.e10. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.005 [archive]. PMID 30528431 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  181. Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe, Haak et al, 2015 [archive]
  182. Eight thousand years of natural selection in Europe, Mathieson et al, 2015 [archive]
  183. 183.0 183.1 183.2 Mallory 1999, p. 155.
  184. Anthony 2007, p. 344.
  185. Anthony 2007, pp. 360–368.
  186. Anthony 2007, p. 349.
  187. Anthony 2007, p. 359.
  188. Anthony 2007, pp. 359–360.
  189. Anthony 2007, pp. 361–362, 367.
  190. Anthony 2007, p. 362.
  191. 191.0 191.1 Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 127.
  192. 192.0 192.1 Anthony 2017, p. 54.
  193. Mallory 1999, p. 250.
  194. Mallory 1999, p. 108.
  195. Cunliffe, Barry (1994). The Oxford Illustrated Prehistory of Europe. Oxford University Press. pp. 250–254.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  196. 196.0 196.1 Anthony 2017, p. 58.
  197. Anthony 2017, p. 54 f..
  198. Haak 2015, p. 1.
  199. Haak 2015, p. 11, figure 4c.
  200. Allentoft et al. 2015, p. 108, topright map.
  201. 201.0 201.1 201.2 Lazaridis et al. 2015, p. 136.
  202. 202.0 202.1 Heyd 2017, p. 350.
  203. Piggot 1965, p. 101.
  204. Bradley 2007, p. 144.
  205. 205.0 205.1 Barry Cunliffe (2010). "Celticization from the West: The Contribution of Archaeology" [archive]. In J. T. Koch; B. Cunliffe (eds.). Celtic from the West. Oxford: Oxbow Books. pp. 27–31.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  206. Martínez, Maria Pilar Prieto; Salanova, Laure (2015). The Bell Beaker Transition in Europe: Mobility and local evolution during the 3rd millennium BC [archive]. Oxford: Oxbow Books. p. 5. ISBN 9781782979302.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  207. Johannes Müller, Martin Hinz and Markus Ullrich, "Bell Beakers – chronology, innovation and memory: a multivariate approach", chapter 6 in The Bell Beaker Transition in Europe: Mobility and local evolution during the 3rd millennium BC, eds. Maria Pilar Prieto Martinez and Laure Salanova (2015).
  208. Mayer, Harvey E. (Antanas Klimas ed.). "Dacian and Thracian as Southern Baltoidic Lituanus" [archive]. Lithuanian Quarterly Journal of Arts and Sciences. 38 (2 – Summer 1992). ISSN 0024-5089 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  209. Christopher Webber, Angus McBride (2001). The Thracians, 700 BC–AD 46. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-329-3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  210. The catalogue of Kimbell Art Museum's 1998 exhibition Ancient Gold: The Wealth of the Thracians indicates a historical extent of Thracian settlement including most of the Ukraine, all of Hungary and parts of Slovakia. (Kimbell Art – Exhibitions [archive] Archived [archive] 2007-08-26 at the Wayback Machine.)
  211. 211.0 211.1 Hoddinott, p. 27.
  212. 212.0 212.1 Casson, p. 3.
  213. John Boardman, I.E.S. Edwards, E. Sollberger, and N.G.L. Hammond. The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume 3, Part 1: The Prehistory of the Balkans, the Middle East and the Aegean World, Tenth to Eighth Centuries BC. Cambridge University Press, 1982, p. 53. "Yet we cannot identify the Thracians at that remote period, because we do not know for certain whether the Thracian and Illyrian tribes had separated by then. It is safer to speak of Proto-Thracians from whom there developed in the Iron Age..."
  214. Dionysius Periegetes, Graece et Latine, Volume 1 [archive], Libraria Weidannia, 1828, p. 145.
  215. 215.0 215.1 Nandris 1976, p. 731.
  216. Husovská 1998, p. 187.
  217. Treptow 1996, p. 10.
  218. Ellis 1861, p. 70.
  219. Mountain 1998, p. 58.
  220. Dumitrescu et al. 1982, p. 53.
  221. Maggiulli, Sull'origine dei Messapi, 1934; D'Andria, Messapi e Peuceti, 1988; I Messapi, Taranto 1991
  222. Frazee 1997, p. 89: "The Balkan peninsula had three groups of Indo-Europeans prior to 2000 BCE. Those on the west were the Illyrians; those on the east were the Thracians; and advancing down the southern part of the Balkans, the Greeks."
  223. Wilkes 1995, pp. 6, 92; Boardman & Hammond 1982, p. 261
  224. Wilkes 1995, p. 94.
  225. Eastern Michigan University Linguist List: The Illyrian Language [archive]: "An ancient language of the Balkans. Based upon geographical proximity, this is traditionally seen as the ancestor of Modern Albanian. It is more likely, however, that Thracian is Modern Albanian's ancestor, since both Albanian and Thracian belong to the satem group of Indo-European, while Illyrian belonged to the centum group. 2nd half of 1st Millennium BC – 1st half of 1st Millennium AD."
  226. Fol 2002, p. 225: "Romanisation was total and complete by the end of the 4th century A.D. In the case of the Illyrian elements a Romance intermediary is inevitable as long as Illyrian was probably extinct in the 2nd century A.D."
  227. Roisman & Worthington 2010, p. 280: "The Illyrians certainly never collectively called themselves Illyrians, and it is unlikely that they had any collective name for themselves."
  228. Boardman 1982, p. 629.
  229. Wilkes 1995, p. 92.
  230. "Albanians" [archive]. World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. Minority Rights Group International. Archived from the original [archive] on 2012-01-21. Retrieved 2012-01-02.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  231. "The Albanian Language | Robert Elsie" [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  232. Robert Elsie (2010). Historical Dictionary of Albania [archive]. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 216. ISBN 978-0-8108-6188-6. Retrieved 30 September 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  233. Cornell (1995) 44.
  234. Encyclopædia Britannica, s. v. "Latium".
  235. 235.0 235.1 M.Gimbutas – Bronze Age Cultures in Central and Eastern Europe pp. 339–345
  236. John M. Coles, The Bronze Age in Europe: An Introduction to the Prehistory of Europe C. 2000–700 BC, p. 422.
  237. Massimo Pallottino, Etruscologia, p. 40.
  238. David W. Anthony, The Horse, the Wheel, and Language, pp. 344, 367.
  239. K. Kristiansen, Europe Before History, p. 388.
  240. "Language Acquisition in the Romance Speaking World: Peru – Departamento de Educación" [archive]. 2014-08-29. Retrieved 2016-05-14.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  241. Fäcke, Christiane (2014-08-25). Manual of Language Acquisition [archive]. De Gruyter. ISBN 9783110302257.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  242. Weber, Jean Jacques (2009). Multilingualism, Education and Change [archive]. Peter Lang. ISBN 9783631572856.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  243. Beretta, Claudio (2003). I nomi dei fiumi, dei monti, dei siti: strutture linguistiche preistoriche – Claudio Beretta – Google Libros [archive]. ISBN 9788820330989. Retrieved 2016-05-14.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  244. Lopez Guerra, J. L.; Rivin, E.; Guedea, F.; Ortiz, M. J. (2015-09-28). "Radiation oncology in Latin speaking countries: A link between Europe and Latin America" [archive]. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 19 (4): 227–9. doi:10.1016/j.rpor.2013.06.004 [archive]. PMC 4104016 [archive]. PMID 25061515 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  245. Koch, John (2005). Celtic Culture: a historical encyclopedia [archive]. Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio. pp. xx. ISBN 978-1-85109-440-0. Retrieved 9 June 2010.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  246. 246.0 246.1 Chadwick, Nora; Corcoran, J. X. W. P. (1970). The Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 28–33.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  247. Cunliffe, Barry (1997). The Ancient Celts. Penguin Books. pp. 39–67.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  248. John T. Koch (2010). "Paradigm Shift? Interpreting Tartessian as Celtic" [archive]. In J. T. Koch; B. Cunliffe (eds.). Celtic from the West. Oxford: Oxbow Books. p. 193.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles> See especially map 9.3 The Ancient Celtic Languages c. 440/430 BCE (third map in online text (PDF) [archive]).
  249. John T. Koch (2010). "Paradigm Shift? Interpreting Tartessian as Celtic" [archive]. In J. T. Koch; B. Cunliffe (eds.). Celtic from the West. Oxford: Oxbow Books. p. 193.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles> See especially map 9.2 Celtic expansion from Hallstatt/La Tene central Europe (second map in online text (PDF) [archive]).
  250. "American Heritage Dictionary. Celtic: kel-tik, sel" [archive]. Retrieved 19 August 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  251. Cunliffe, Barry W. 2003. The Celts: a very short introduction. pg.48
  252. "Language by State – Scottish Gaelic" [archive] Archived [archive] 2012-01-11 at the Wayback Machine. on Modern Language Association website. Retrieved 27 December 2007
  253. "Languages Spoken At Home" [archive] Archived [archive] March 25, 2009, at the Wayback Machine. from Australian Government Office of Multicultural Interests website. Retrieved 27 December 2007
  254. Languages Spoken:Total Responses [archive] from Statistics New Zealand website. Retrieved 5 August 2008
  255. G. Leitner, Australia's Many Voices: Australian English—The National Language, 2004, pg. 74
  256. Krause & Slocum. "Classical Armenian Online- Romanized -Introduction" [archive]. Linguistics Research Center. University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved 4 May 2019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  257. Thomas Gamkrelidze and Vyacheslav Ivanov, The Early History of Indo-European Languages, March 1990, p. 110.
  258. Georgiev 1981, p. 156: "The Proto-Greek region included Epirus, approximately up to Αὐλών in the north including Paravaia, Tymphaia, Athamania, Dolopia, Amphilochia, and Acarnania), west and north Thessaly (Hestiaiotis, Perrhaibia, Tripolis, and Pieria), i.e. more or less the territory of contemporary northwestern Greece)."
  259. In other contexts, "Hellenic" and "Greek" are generally synonyms.
  260. Browning (1983), Medieval and Modern Greek, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  261. Joseph, Brian D. and Irene Philippaki-Warburton (1987): Modern Greek. London: Routledge, p. 1.
  262. B. Joseph (2001): "Ancient Greek". In: J. Garry et al. (eds.) Facts about the World's Major Languages: An Encyclopedia of the World's Major Languages, Past and Present. (Online Paper [archive])
  263. Dalby, David. The Linguasphere Register of the World's Languages and Speech Communities (1999/2000, Linguasphere Press), pp. 449f.
  264. Georgiev 1981, p. 192: "Late Neolithic Period: in northwestern Greece the Proto-Greek language had already been formed: this is the original home of the Greeks.")
  265. Coleman 2000, pp. 101–153.
  266. Renfrew 2003, p. 35: "Greek The fragmentation of the Balkan Proto-Indo-European Sprachbund of phase II around 3000 BC led gradually in the succeeding centuries to the much clearer definition of the languages of the constituent sub-regions."
  267. Clackson 1995.
  268. Brixhe, Cl. "Le Phrygien". In Fr. Bader (ed.), Langues indo-européennes, pp. 165–178, Paris: CNRS Editions.
  269. Woodard, Roger D. The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press, 2008, <templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css" />ISBN 0-521-68496-X, p. 72. "Unquestionably, however, Phrygian is most closely linked with Greek."
  270. Hamp, Eric P. (August 2013). "The Expansion of the Indo-European Languages: An Indo-Europeanist's Evolving View" [archive] (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers. 239: 8,10. Retrieved 25 July 2014.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  271. Drews, Robert (1995). The end of the Bronze Age: changes in warfare and the catastrophe ca. 1200 B.C. [archive] Princeton University Press. p. 65. ISBN 9780691025919.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  272. Swain, Simon; Adams, J. Maxwell; Janse, Mark (2002). Bilingualism in ancient society: language contact and the written word. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. pp. 246–266. ISBN 978-0-199-24506-2.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  273. Waldman, Carl; Mason, Catherine (2006). Encyclopedia of European Peoples [archive]. Infobase Publishing. p. 296. ISBN 978-1-4381-2918-1. Retrieved May 25, 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  274. 274.0 274.1 Aubin, Hermann. "History of Europe: Greeks, Romans, and Barbarians" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved September 17, 2019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  275. Mallory & Adams 1997, pp. 218–223.
  276. "Germanic peoples" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved September 20, 2019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  277. Petit, Paul; MacMullen, Ramsay. "Ancient Rome: The Barbarian Invasions" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved September 20, 2019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  278. Heather, Peter. "Germany: History" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved September 20, 2019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  279. Fortson, IV 2011, p. 414.
  280. Young (2006)
  281. Bojtár 1999, p. 18.
  282. Guests in the House; cultural transmission between Slavs and Scandinavians. Mats Roslund. 2008
  283. Peter Somogyi. New Remarks on the flow of Byzantine coins in wallachia and Avaria.. In : The Other Europe in the Middle Ages: Avars, Bulgars, Khazars and Cumans; 2008
  284. Fiona Hill, Russia — Coming In From the Cold? [archive], The Globalist, 23 February 2004 Archived [archive] April 24, 2013, at the Wayback Machine.
  285. Robert Greenall, Russians left behind in Central Asia [archive], BBC News, 23 November 2005
  286. Terry Kirby, 750,000 and rising: how Polish workers have built a home in Britain [archive], The Independent, 11 February 2006.
  287. Poles in the United States [archive], Catholic Encyclopedia
  288. Barford, P. M. 2001. The Early Slavs. Culture and Society in Early Medieval Europe. Cornell University Press. 2001. <templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css" />ISBN 0-8014-3977-9, p. 1
  289. Bideleux, Robert. 1998. History of Eastern Europe: Crisis and Change. Routledge.
  290. "Slav (people)" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. 18 September 2006. Retrieved 18 August 2010.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  291. 291.0 291.1 291.2 291.3 291.4 291.5 291.6 291.7 Beckwith 2009, p. 32.
  292. Burrow 1973.
  293. Parpola 1998.
  294. Beckwith 2009, p. 33 note 20, p. 35.
  295. 295.0 295.1 Beckwith 2009, p. 33.
  296. Anthony 2007, p. 454.
  297. Beckwith 2009, p. 33 note 20.
  298. Beckwith 2009, pp. 376–7.
  299. Malory 1989, pp. 42–43.
  300. 300.0 300.1 Koryakova 1998b.
  301. 301.0 301.1 Koryakova 1998a.
  302. Anthony 2007, pp. 390 (fig. 15.9), 405–411.
  303. Anthony 2007, pp. 385–388.
  304. Kuznetsov 2006.
  305. Hanks & Linduff 2009.
  306. Mallory & Adams 1997, pp. 20–21.
  307. Anthony 2007, p. 448.
  308. Diakonoff 1995, p. 473.
  309. 309.0 309.1 Okladnikov, A. P. (1994), "Inner Asia at the dawn of history", The Cambridge history of early Inner Asia, Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press, p. 83, ISBN 978-0-521-24304-9<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  310. Mallory 1989:62
  311. C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, "Archaeology and Language: The Indo-Iranians", Current Anthropology, vol. 43, no. 1 (Feb. 2002)
  312. Kohl 2007, pp. 196–199.
  313. 313.0 313.1 Anthony 2007, p. 462.
  314. Anthony 2007, pp. 454 f..
  315. Trevor Bryce (2005). The Kingdom of the Hittites. Oxford University Press. p. 98.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  316. Bryant 2001.
  317. Witzel 1989.
  318. Witzel 1995, pp. 3–5.
  319. Samuel 2010, pp. 49–52.
  320. Flood 1996, p. 82.
  321. Hiltebeitel 2002.
  322. 322.0 322.1 Beckwith 2009, pp. 376–377.
  323. Beckwith 2009, pp. 29–38.
  324. Beckwith 2009, pp. 84–85.
  325. 325.0 325.1 Beckwith 2009, pp. 380–383
  326. 326.0 326.1 326.2 326.3 326.4 "Chinese History – Wusun 烏孫" [archive]. Chinaknowledge. Retrieved 1 January 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  327. 327.0 327.1 327.2 327.3 Beckwith 2009, pp. 6–7
  328. Hollar 2011, pp. 62–63.
  329. Lloyd, Seton H.F. "Iranian art and architecture: Median period" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 14 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  330. Harmatta 1992, p. 561
  331. 331.0 331.1 331.2 "Kassite" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 14 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  332. "Anatolia: The Old Hittite Kingdom" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 14 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  333. 333.0 333.1 333.2 333.3 "History of Mesopotamia: The Kassites in Babylonia" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 14 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  334. 334.0 334.1 Schneider, Thomas (2003). "Kassitisch und Hurro-Urartäisch. Ein Diskussionsbeitrag zu möglichen lexikalischen Isoglossen" [archive]. Altorientalische Forschungen (in German) (30): 372–381.CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  335. "India: From c. 1500 to c. 500 BCE". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Mesopotamia witnessed the arrival about 1760 BCE of the Kassites, who introduced the horse and the chariot and bore Indo-European names<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  336. 336.0 336.1 Drews 1994, p. 58
  337. 337.0 337.1 Zadok, Ran (2013). "Kassites" [archive]. Encyclopedia Iranica. Retrieved 14 February 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  338. Harmatta 1992, p. 357
  339. Skjærvø, Prods Oktor (15 December 2006). "Iran vi. Iranian languages and scripts" [archive]. Encyclopedia Iranica. Retrieved 1 May 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  340. Ronald Eric Emmerick. "Iranian languages" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 6 Feb 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  341. Frye, Richard Nelson, Greater Iran, <templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css" />ISBN 1-56859-177-2 p.xi: "... Iran means all lands and people where Iranian languages were and are spoken, and where in the past, multi-faceted Iranian cultures existed. ..."
  342. Mallory, James P. (1997). "The homelands of the Indo-Europeans". In Blench, Roger; Spriggs, Matthew (eds.). Archaeology and Language. I: Theoretical and Methodological Orientations. London: Routledge. p. 106.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  343. 343.0 343.1 343.2 Stanley A. Wolpert. "The appearance of Indo-Aryan speakers" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  344. Bryant 2001, p. 6.
  345. Bryant 2001, p. 236.


Printed sources

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Baldia, Maximilian O. (2006). "The Corded Ware/Single Grave Culture" [archive]. Archived from the original [archive] on 2002-01-31.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 "A massive migration from the steppe brought Indo-European languages to Europe" [archive]. Max Planck Gesellschaft.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Ewen Callaway (12 February 2015). "European languages linked to migration from the east. Large ancient-DNA study uncovers population that moved westwards 4,500 years ago" [archive]. Nature. doi:10.1038/nature.2015.16919 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  4. Jonathan Slocum, What is Historical Linguistics? What are 'Indo-European' Languages?, The University of Texas at Austin [archive] Archived [archive] 2007-10-30 at the Wayback Machine.
  5. "Ethnologue report for Indo-European" [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  6. "Ethnologue list of language families" [archive]. Retrieved 2010-08-07.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  7. "Ethnologue list of languages by number of speakers" [archive]. Retrieved 2010-08-07.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  8. 8.0 8.1 "Anatolian languages" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 1 May 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  9. 9.0 9.1 Najaf Museyibli (2008). "Excavations of Soyugbulaq Kurgans" [archive] (PDF). Baku: Azerbaijan Republic National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  10. Reich et al. 2009, Reconstructing Indian Population History [archive].
  11. Mait Metspalu; et al. (9 December 2011). "Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia" [archive]. American Journal of Human Genetics. 89 (6): 731–44. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.11.010 [archive]. PMC 3234374 [archive]. PMID 22152676 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  12. 12.0 12.1 Rajesh Kochhar (2017), "The Aryan chromosome" [archive], The Indian Express.
  13. 13.0 13.1 Allan Bomhard, The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis (revised November 2016) [archive]. Paper presented at "The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European: the Indo-Hittite and Indo-Uralic Hypotheses", a 2015 workshop at the Leiden University Centre for Linguistics, Leiden, The Netherlands, 9—11 July 2015.
  14. Svyatko, Svetlana V.; Mallory, James P.; Murphy, Eileen M.; et al. (2009). "New Radiocarbon Dates and a Review of the Chronology of Prehistoric Populations from the Minusinsk Basin, Southern Siberia, Russia" [archive]. Radiocarbon. 51 (1–2009). pp. 243–73, appendix I p. 266. doi:10.1017/S0033822200033798 [archive].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  15. "Dacia" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 1 May 2016.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  16. "Germanic Peoples" [archive]. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 25 January 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  17. John Koch (2018), Formation of the Indo-European Branches in the light of the Archaeogenetic Revolution [archive]
  18. 18.0 18.1 18.2 Alinei, Mario; Benozzo, Francesco (December 2016). "The Paleolithic Continuity Theory on Indo-European Origins – An Introduction in progress" [archive]. The Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  19. "The PCP-workgroup" [archive]. The Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Further reading[edit]




  • Parpola, Asko (2015), The Roots of Hinduism. The Early Aryans and the Indus Civilization, Oxford University Press<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  • Kuz'mina, Elena E. (2007), The Origin of the Indo-Iranians, BRILL<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>


Journal articles

Genetics (R1a)

Genetics (Europe)

Genetics (India)

Genetecis and arcaeology

Genetics and language

Linguistics and archaeology

External links[edit]

Overview of steppe-theory
Genetics and archaeology
Alternative theories
Animated maps
Research centers [archive]