Print Page | Close Window

Origin of the Indo-Europeans

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Ancient Mediterranean and Europe
Forum Discription: Greece, Macedon, Rome and other cultures such as Celtic and Germanic tribes
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33877
Printed Date: 02-Jul-2020 at 14:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Origin of the Indo-Europeans
Posted By: TITAN_
Subject: Origin of the Indo-Europeans
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2013 at 17:56
We all know who the Indo-Europeans are.

Some of the oldest civilizations that made an impact on this planet's history were actually Indo-European people. (Northern) Indians, Iranians, Greeks, Romans, Celts, etc. etc. are all connected to an ancient homeland that gave birth to the Proto-IndoEuropean people and their language(s).

Where did it all begin?

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.

The most dominant theory is the one that the academic community accepts as valid, world-wide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans

Let me quote from the above link:

"The Proto-Indo-Europeans in this sense likely lived during the late https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic - 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic-Caspian_steppe - Pontic-Caspian steppe in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe - Eastern Europe . "


"By the late 3rd millennium BCE, offshoots of the Proto-Indo-Europeans had reached https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittites - Anatolia , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycenaean_Greece - the Aegean , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture - Western Europe , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna_culture - Central Asia and southern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afanasevo_culture - Siberia . "


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans#cite_ref-Mallory1997_1-0 - ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._P._Mallory - Mallory, J. P. ; Adams, Douglas Q. (1997). http://books.google.com/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA4 - Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture . Taylor & Francis. pp. 4–6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number - ISBN   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-884964-98-5 - 978-1-884964-98-5 . Retrieved 24 March 2012.



"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."


There have been a huge variety of ideas of the location of the first speakers of Proto-Indo-European, few of which have survived scrutiny by academic specialists in Indo-European studies sufficiently well to be included in modern academic debate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans#cite_note-11 - The three remaining contenders are summarized here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_hypothesis

None of them suggests that Iran  was the cradle of Indo-Europeans. Ouch




Caucasus and the region north of it is the actual home of the Indo-European people and languages. The Iranian family is only a small branch of it.






-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.



Replies:
Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2013 at 18:13
Let's see some scientific evidence that refutes any  revisionist attempt to re-write history.

But before we do that, let's shed some more light on the evolution of Indo-European cultures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Armeno-Aryan

"In the context of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis - Kurgan hypothesis , Greco-Aryan is also known as "Late PIE" or "Late Indo-European" (LIE), suggesting that Greco-Aryan forms a dialect group which corresponds to the latest stage of linguistic unity in the Indo-European homeland in the early part of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_millennium_BC - 3rd millennium BC . By 2500 BC, Proto-Greek and Proto-Indo-Iranian had separated, moving westward and eastward from the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic_Steppe - Pontic Steppe , respectively."

Martin Litchfield West, Indo-European poetry and myth (2007), p. 7.

Now let's see how the Indo-Europeans moved from South Russia towards Iran-India and Europe.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/R1a1a_distribution.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Kurgan_map.png

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/hans.platzer/spindo/iemigr.jpg


That explains why the river Vardar in Macedonia has a Thracian etymology, not an Iranian. The split between Indo-Europeans who moved to Iran/India and those who moved to Europe had happened before 2500-3000 BC.



-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 04:42
Instead of Wikipedia, you can look at some valid sources!
 
The University of North Carolina: http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/lecture_ancient_civ.htm - http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/lecture_ancient_civ.htm
 
 
Or books: http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/sciam2.htm - http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/sciam2.htm
 
Thomas V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov
The Early History of Indo-European Languages
 


-------------


Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 05:29
This issue is not a thing which  can be reduce a few theory or a signle truth. It is more complex than it


As you see, there are more theories than Armenian, Kurgan and Anatolia model. Even some of them show the origin of IE people in Europe and some of them support that origin land is in India



Indian theory doesn't have much supporter as Kurgan or Anatolian but it still exists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Urheimat_Theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Urheimat_Theory

European theory is anothor not much popular theory.  

According to Kurgan model, origin homeland is somewhere from north causcaus and east azov sea but the place is changable. It can be also west Blacksea in some models, but it is most well known.
Normal Kurgan Models and migration waves. Unsual origin lands are below, they are in more west

and Anatolia model. It gain a liitle bit advantages against Kurgan theory



Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 06:12
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Instead of Wikipedia, you can look at some valid sources!
 
The University of North Carolina: http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/lecture_ancient_civ.htm - http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/lecture_ancient_civ.htm
 
 
Or books: http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/sciam2.htm - http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/sciam2.htm
 
Thomas V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov
The Early History of Indo-European Languages
 



Wikipedia? What wikipedia?  My sources were cited in wikipedia only, it was not wikipedia that made any claim.

Serious universities all over the world support that only the academic consensus really matters.

And the academic consensus supports either Kurgan or Anatolian theories!

The second theory suggests that the homeland of Proto-Indoeuropeans was.... Turkey! That is very close to Greece. I guess you don't like this one either... Wink

The Kurgan hypothesis is the most dominant theory and suggests that... Indo-Aryans came from the Pontic Steppes, north of Caucasus.... That's a long way from Iran! In fact, the Pontic Greek dialect is probably the oldest attestation of Proto-Greek.


University lectures suggesting that Proto-IndoEuropeans came from Caucasus:

The talk presented here was originally delivered at Stanford University on December 13, 2012, sponsored by Stanford's Program in History and Philosophy of Science and Technology and co-sponsored by the Department of Linguistics.

[TUBE]4jHsy4xeuoQ[/TUBE]


-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 07:59
Originally posted by TITAN_

There have been a huge variety of ideas of the location of the first speakers of Proto-Indo-European, few of which have survived scrutiny by academic specialists in Indo-European studies sufficiently well to be included in modern academic debate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans#cite_note-11 - The three remaining contenders are summarized here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_hypothesis

None of them suggests that Iran  was the cradle of Indo-Europeans. Ouch
 
It even doesn't matter that those are closest lands to Iran than other Indo-European countries, the important point is that not only Iranian-speaking people, such as Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, ... have the longest history in those regions but some Iranian peoples, such as Kurds, Ossetians and Tats still live there.


-------------


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 08:43
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by TITAN_

There have been a huge variety of ideas of the location of the first speakers of Proto-Indo-European, few of which have survived scrutiny by academic specialists in Indo-European studies sufficiently well to be included in modern academic debate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans#cite_note-11 - The three remaining contenders are summarized here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_hypothesis

None of them suggests that Iran  was the cradle of Indo-Europeans. Ouch
 
It even doesn't matter that those are closest lands to Iran than other Indo-European countries, the important point is that not only Iranian-speaking people, such as Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, ... have the longest history in those regions but some Iranian peoples, such as Kurds, Ossetians and Tats still live there.




Huh? What is closer to what? The Anatolian theory places the cradle of PIE next to Greece. In fact, Anatolia is the home of Greece's earliest schools of thought (Thales etc.). Iran is far away from Turkey. You have to cross Iraq first. Clap

The Armenian theory is weak and receives little support. Ouch

The dominant theory places the cradle of PIE people, north of Caucasus! That is South Russia, Eastern Ukraine, not Iran Confused What are you talking about?

Regarding the last sentences: There were no Iranian speaking people back then. Iranian languages did not exist back then. It was the PIE language shared by many different ethnicities which split and then formed Sanskrit, Persian, Greek etc.

The PIE split happened in prehistory, when writing scripts of PIE languages did not exist. Hittite is the oldest attested IE language and even that didn't leave us any record prior to 1600-1700 BC.
Greek was attested 2 centuries later.

Kurds, Ossetians etc. were ethnic groups attested much much later and are of mixed origin, not Iranians in general. Unless you believe in "pure blood" and ethnically clean people, you can't call them Iranians when those people have actually mixed with Turkic and other tribes.....

Scythians and Sarmatians did not derive from Iran. They derive from PIE tribes that lived in Caucasus and the Pontic Steppes. They became Iranians after the split, they did not pre-exist...as an ethnic/linguistic/cultural group.


"The Scythians first appeared in the historical record in the 8th century BC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-Szemer.C3.A9nyi-14 - [14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus - Herodotus reported three contradictory versions as to the origins of the Scythians, but placed greatest faith in this version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-15 - [15]

There is also another different story, now to be related, in which I am more inclined to put faith than in any other. It is that the wandering Scythians once dwelt in Asia, and there warred with the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massagetae - Massagetae , but with ill success; they therefore quitted their homes, crossed the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Araxes - Araxes , and entered the land of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#History - Cimmeria ."


There is a huge gap between the 8th century BC and.... the 28th century BC, when Scythians had merely started to become a group that left Caucasus.

"Modern interpretation of historical, archaeological and anthropological evidence has proposed two broad hypotheses. The first, formerly more espoused view by Soviet-era researchers, roughly followed Herodotus' (third) account, stating that the Scythians were an Iranian group who arrived from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_Asia - Inner Asia , i.e. from the area of Turkestan and western Siberia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-Szemer.C3.A9nyi-14 - [14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-Sulimirski-19 - [19] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-20 - [20]

An alternative view explains the origin of the Scythian cultural complex to have emerged from local groups of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srubna_culture - "Timber Grave" (or Srubna) culture (although this is also associated with the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimmerians - Cimmerians ). This second theory is supported by anthropological evidence which has found that Scythian skulls are similar to preceding findings from the Timber Grave culture, and distinct from those of the Central Asian Sacae. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians#cite_note-21 - [21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ScythianGroups.png">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ScythianGroups.png">
Scythian and related archaeological groups in circum- Pontic region, c. 7th to 3rd centuries BC

Others have further stressed that "Scythian" was a very broad term used by both ancient and modern scholars to describe a whole host of otherwise unrelated peoples sharing only certain similarities in lifestyle (nomadism), cultural practices and language. The 1st millennium BC ushered a period of unprecedented cultural and economic connectivity amongst disparate and wide-ranging communities. A mobile, broadly similar lifestyle would have facilitated contacts amongst disparate ethnic groupings along the expansive Eurasian steppe from the Danube to Manchuria, leading to many cultural similarities. From the viewpoint of Greek and Persian ancient observers, they were all lumped together under the etic category "Scythians".



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians

Therefore Scythians were not limited to Iranian people but also to other nomards of Central Asia.








-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 10:16
Originally posted by TITAN_

Huh? What is closer to what? The Anatolian theory places the cradle of PIE next to Greece. In fact, Anatolia is the home of Greece's earliest schools of thought (Thales etc.). Iran is far away from Turkey. You have to cross Iraq first. Clap
 
I think you should look at a map, Turkey's second largest border is with Iran, it is almost two times longer than Turkey's border with Iraq and three times longer than Turkey's border with Greece.
 
Originally posted by TITAN_

The Armenian theory is weak and receives little support. Ouch 
 
This is just your own opinion, that is in fact the best researched theory. 
 
Originally posted by TITAN_

The dominant theory places the cradle of PIE people, north of Caucasus! That is South Russia, Eastern Ukraine, not Iran Confused What are you talking about?
 
For thousands of years it was the original land of Iranian peoples, such as Scythians and Sarmatians and now Ossetians and Tats, this is an undeniable fact.

Originally posted by TITAN_

Regarding the last sentences: There were no Iranian speaking people back then. Iranian languages did not exist back then. It was the PIE language shared by many different ethnicities which split and then formed Sanskrit, Persian, Greek etc.

The PIE split happened in prehistory, when writing scripts of PIE languages did not exist. Hittite is the oldest attested IE language and even that didn't leave us any record prior to 1600-1700 BC.
Greek was attested 2 centuries later.
 
It is important to know Iranians always lived in the regions where are believed to be the original land of Indo-European culture, so we should research in the Iranian culture to find more info about proto-Indo-European culture, Hittites don't exist anymore but Iranian Kurds already live in the same land.


-------------


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 10:51
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by TITAN_

Huh? What is closer to what? The Anatolian theory places the cradle of PIE next to Greece. In fact, Anatolia is the home of Greece's earliest schools of thought (Thales etc.). Iran is far away from Turkey. You have to cross Iraq first. Clap
 
I think you should look at a map, Turkey's second largest border is with Iran, it is almost two times longer than Turkey's border with Iraq and three times longer than Turkey's border with Greece.
 


I am sorry Sir. Central Turkey is closer to the Aegean (Greece included Western Turkey, in case you didn't know) than it is to Iran.


Originally posted by TITAN_

The Armenian theory is weak and receives little support. Ouch 
 
This is just your own opinion, that is in fact the best researched theory.


Not at all. No scholar has the right to ignore the international academic consensus just to satisfy nationalistic and supremacy instincts. The Armenian theory is supported by Pan-Iranists mostly. The rest of the international adademia suggests that the right theory is the Krugan.


 
Originally posted by TITAN_

The dominant theory places the cradle of PIE people, north of Caucasus! That is South Russia, Eastern Ukraine, not Iran Confused What are you talking about?
 
For thousands of years it was the original land of Iranian peoples, such as Scythians and Sarmatians and now Ossetians and Tats, this is an undeniable fact.


For thousands of years it was the homeland of Proto-IndoEuropeans who then migrated to other areas, after the split. Scythians and Sarmatians descended from them and only comprised a small part of them. Northern Tats and Ossetians are the products of interbreeding with Turks, Arabs and myriads other tribes that have passed by. By no means they are direct descendants of the PIE. Therefore, those who still live in the cradle of the PIE are no more "original" than other peoples.
Moreover, those Scynthians were not one ethnic group but rather a number of nomadic tribes and not all of them were PIE in the first place.


Originally posted by TITAN_

Regarding the last sentences: There were no Iranian speaking people back then. Iranian languages did not exist back then. It was the PIE language shared by many different ethnicities which split and then formed Sanskrit, Persian, Greek etc.

The PIE split happened in prehistory, when writing scripts of PIE languages did not exist. Hittite is the oldest attested IE language and even that didn't leave us any record prior to 1600-1700 BC.
Greek was attested 2 centuries later.
 
It is important to know Iranians always lived in the regions where are believed to be the original land of Indo-European culture, so we should research in the Iranian culture to find more info about proto-Indo-European culture, Hittites don't exist anymore but Iranian Kurds already live in the same land.




Not at all. That makes no sense whatsoever, in any academic context. First off, the Iranian people and language are only a tiny bit of IE and ultimately PIE culture. If you are really looking to reconstruct the PIE language (let alone cultures) you are going to have to study, analyze and understand all descendants of this big branch. Don't forget that the oldest attested surviving language of the PIE group is Greek, since 1400-1500 BC tablets have been actually read and classified as archaic Greek, which together with Pontic Greek are direct descandants of Proto-Hellenic, the closest you can get to PIE roots.





As you can see for yourself, Proto-Celtic, is not attested excepts fragments. The Italic branch was not attested before the Latin alphabet was introduced back in 700-600 BC (7 centuries after Greek Linear B) while the other languages are either dead, or they appeared later or they were attested after 300 BC (Sanskrit). Bits and pieces that gave birth to Sanskrit have been found but by no means say much about the earlier form of Sanskrit.

So what's left? Persian and Avestan.....





-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 11:19
The oldest attestation of Old Persian is almost one millenium younger than ancient Greek.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behistun_Inscription
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Persian_cuneiform

"Scholars today mostly agree that the Old Persian script was invented by about 525 BC to provide monument inscriptions for the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid - Achaemenid king http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_I_of_Persia - Darius I , to be used at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behistun - Behistun ." That is 250 years after the Greek alphabet and 900+ years after Greek Linear B.

If you go further back in history you will find  the Akkadians (Afro-asiatic Semitic language, totally irrelevant to PIE) and of course the Elamite language and people.....

I shall focus on the Elamites.

Although Proto-Elamite script dates back to as early as 3000 BC and it originates in Iran, it has nothing to do with Iranian (Aryan, Indo-European) culture.... It's neither Semitic, nor Indo-European. Therefore the Elamites did not come from the PIE cradle of Caucasus or even Turkey.







-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2013 at 19:46
Not sure about the IE homeland, but the Iranian homeland was Central Asia region of Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex in what is modern day Turkmenistan.  This is based on Automosal DNA of modern day west iranians that shows that, there is a significantly high DNA that connects West Iranians with Central Asia/Central South Asia which is not found among other Middle-Easteners.  West Iranian also have higher R1a1a(z93+) that is found high in Central Asia.

This image actually shows how the Iranian migration happend and genetic has showen it to be true.




Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2013 at 12:26
The map above also supports the Kurgan theory: The PIE homeland was far from Iran, north of Mt. Caucasus, in the Pontic Steppes.


-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2013 at 12:29

I believe the earliest known Indo-European people were neither Iranians nor Greeks but the Germanic people, these Germanic people lived in the west of Iran from the fourth millennium bc, one of them named Guti/Goth conquered Sumer and formed and empire in the third millennium bc, from the second millennium bc Iranian-speaking people from the east and Greeks from the west (look at this thread: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 ) invaded to Iran and forced the Germanic people to migrate to the northern lands through the Caucasus.



-------------


Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2013 at 13:58
Can I remind members that the use of red writing is reserved for moderators and admin. Thank you in advance for your continued cooperation.

-------------
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.


Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 21-Jul-2013 at 22:12
Distance between Tahran and Ankara : 2095km
Distance between Athens and Ankara : 1544km (google maps)

and we have border with both two countries Big smile

Originally posted by TITAN_

 


Yes, I have seen this but, these maps are different they say that greek and persian are close. Is it something come from same origin or it is because of historical conquests 

 

as you gave the link before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Armeno-Aryan), is it true? and if yes why greek is not under the Satem group? What about Luwian and Pelasgian and Pro-Greek languages? Are they close?  

and Cyrus, if Armenian model is true, isn't someone who cross to Europe from Anatolia? and -you 
don't like it LOLbut from wiki:"The Armenian hypothesis of the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_language - Proto-Indo-European   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urheimat - Homeland , based on the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glottalic_theory - Glottalic theory  suggests that the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_language - Proto-Indo-European language  was spoken during the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC - 4th millennium BC  in the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Highland - Armenian Highland ."  (or do you think it is older than this?what about people who already lived in around 4000BC, in Euope. What kind of languages were they speaking? Languages which belong a extinct language family? maybe not extinct, Basque language can be its last member, can it? What is your opinion?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A difference between Kurgan And Anatolian model: according to anatolian model, indo-european immigration happened early than Kurgan model


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2013 at 04:23
Posted: Today at 05:12 By Ollios
"Yes, I have seen this but, these maps are different they say that greek and persian are close. Is it something come from same origin or it is because of historical conquests 


as you gave the link before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Armeno-Aryan), is it true? and if yes why greek is not under the Satem group? What about Luwian and Pelasgian and Pro-Greek languages? Are they close?  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A difference between Kurgan And Anatolian model: according to anatolian model, indo-european immigration happened early than Kurgan model"

[/QUOTE]

Well, Greek and Persian are not really close and military conquests definitely played a significant role. The ancient Greeks wouldn't call them "barbarians" if they could understand a single thing from what they were saying....

The Graeco-Armeno-Aryan is a hypothetical branch, so I don't know if it is true or not.

Both Kurgan and Anatolian models support my opinion regarding the role of Iran in the expansion of PIE culture, and that's what really matters.


-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2013 at 04:33
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I believe the earliest known Indo-European people were neither Iranians nor Greeks but the Germanic people, these Germanic people lived in the west of Iran from the fourth millennium bc, one of them named Guti/Goth conquered Sumer and formed and empire in the third millennium bc, from the second millennium bc Iranian-speaking people from the east and Greeks from the west (look at this thread: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 ) invaded to Iran and forced the Germanic people to migrate to the northern lands through the Caucasus.



To be honest, I have never heard this before. 4th millenium BC? According to the dominant models, by that time, the PIE had already split to various groups, so there were already Proto-Celts, Proto-Greeks, Proto-Iranians, Proto-Germanics, Proto-Slavs etc. etc.  Guti = Goth? Hmmm, I don't know about that. Also, there is no historical record that back in the second millennium BC (1999-1000 BC), Iranians and Greeks invaded Iran and threw out those... Germanic people.

Historically, Germanic people were first recorded by ancient..... Graeco-Romans.


-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: yomud
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2013 at 01:04
Originally posted by Ince

Not sure about the IE homeland, but the Iranian homeland was Central Asia region of Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex in what is modern day Turkmenistan.  This is based on Automosal DNA of modern day west iranians that shows that, there is a significantly high DNA that connects West Iranians with Central Asia/Central South Asia which is not found among other Middle-Easteners.  West Iranian also have higher R1a1a(z93+) that is found high in Central Asia.

This image actually shows how the Iranian migration happend and genetic has showen it to be true.


sry but i can not see your pic could you please put it again here or give link to your website modern turkmens actually are not native turkmens of turkmenistan modern turkmen came to turkmenistan after mongol conquest the native ones wipe out exiled or absorb to new turkmen tribes

and about the dna in this forum there was a guy which believe all turkmens are mongol he we wrong u told us b4 the turkmens have more persian blood than persians i think your wrong too you turkmenistan is center of world it's normal to see people have different gene i can show u asian looking turkmen i can show u iranic turkmen i can show u blond turkmen we colored eye i can show u black turkmen  so no one can talk about genetic  and turkmens DON'T have genetic identity


-------------
yomud are free people


Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2013 at 02:10
A new theory: Caspian Sea Model (it is like a little east version of Armenian model)

"As far as the Proto-Indo-European origins are concerned, the present representaion shows that the initial migration focus of the IE expansion must be located in the Caspian Sea region – most likely, in the area of present day Dagestan, Azerbaijan or the Province of Gilan in northern Iran."

Possible PIE timeline:
7000 BC Anatolia, farming
6000 BC settling down around the western coast of the Black Sea
5000 BC elevation of the Black Sea level
4500 BC pushed to northern Pontic steppes
4200 BC domestication of the horse in the Sredny Stog culture
4000 BC emergence of the Yamna culture
3600 BC early influence on the early Maykop culture
3500 BC arrival in Dagestan and Azerbaijan 
3400 BC separation of Proto-Anatolian (Proto-Hittite)
3400 BC early expansion of PIEs into Europe (Globular Amphora, Baden, Corded Ware) begins 
3300 BC the Yamna at its peak
3200 BC interaction of Proto-Anatolian with the Kura-Araxen culture
3100 BC satemization of the southern branch
3000 BC first use of wheeled carts by IEs 
2900 BC elevation of the Caspian sea level
2900 BC expansion of classic IE dialects begins
2800 BC expansion of the Yamna culture beyond the steppes begins
http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/indo_european_origins_and_geography.html - http://indo-european-migrations.scienceontheweb.net/indo_european_origins_and_geography.html

I think it is combination of all models.
*Everything began in Anatolia - Anatolian Model
*People go to west Balcksea as European origin theory
*Then PIE go to Pontic Steppe
*They create Yamna Culture which is also give in Kurgan model
*Then people start to go south firstly Maykop culture then Azerbaijan-Gilan region....


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2013 at 06:03
About Armenian theory, there are some important things, one of them as you read from my above post is "Contact with Semitic languages in Mesopotamia and with Kartvelian languages in the Caucasus led to the adoption of many fereign words."

For example about body parts:

Proto-Semitic *auyn (Arabic ayn & Akkadian yno) and Proto-Germanic *augon/auyon (English eye & Gothic augo)
Proto-Semitic *hanakik (Arabic unak & Aramaic uneka) and Proto-Germanic *hnekkon (English neck & Old Norse hnakkr)
Proto-Semitic *auzn (Arabic auzon & Akkadian uznu) and Proto-Germanic *auzon (English ear & Gothic auso)

-------------


Posted By: Arthur-Robin
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2013 at 12:27

(P)IE must come from either Japheth, Ham or Shem. I haven't been able to figure out which one yet. But the pre-/Greek seems to come from Javan.



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2013 at 15:41

There are some interesting words which show there were some cultural relations between Germanic, Semitic, North Caucasian and Hurro-Urartian languages in the late third millennium BC.

One of these words is "burg" which means "tower", the original word seems to be "burgana" which was used by the Hurro-Urartians in the north Mesopotamia and Anatolia, but this word was borrowed into some old languages in the region from the late third millennium BC, like Proto-North Caucasian http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?root=config&morpho=0&basename=%5Cdata%5Ccauc%5Ccaucet&first=1&off=&text_proto=bo%CC%86rG&method_proto=substring&ic_proto=on&text_meaning=&method_meaning=substring&ic_meaning=on&text_nakh=&method_nakh=substring&ic_nakh=on&text_aand=&method_aand=substring&ic_aand=on&text_cez=&method_cez=substring&ic_cez=on&text_lak=&method_lak=substring&ic_lak=on&text_darg=&method_darg=substring&ic_darg=on&text_lezg=&method_lezg=substring&ic_lezg=on&text_khin=&method_khin=substring&ic_khin=on&text_abad=&method_abad=substring&ic_abad=on&text_comment=&method_comment=substring&ic_comment=on&text_any=&method_any=substring&sort=proto&ic_any=on - *bŏrGwV̄ , Proto-Germanic: http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/germet&text_number=++1843&root=config - *burg-z, *burgia-n and in some Semitic languages, such as Aramaean burgin, Syriac burga and Arabic Burj.



-------------


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2013 at 13:51
Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

In conclusion, at this time, nobody really knows where the Greater Aryan zone (Urheimat) was, but as far as the homeland Aryans in the restricted sense (Irano-Afghans) or Aryana there is more certainty.  I don't think its fair to say they weren't the beginning of anything.  Zarathushtra was an Aryan and he was the most influential figure who ever lived because he was responsible for the primary religious heritage of the West having contributed to the core belief system of the Abrahamic people.

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  

I was however surprised to hear such a confident identification of the Gutians.  I've heard that they were related to the Goths before, but I didn't know this was certain.  I've also come across links to Tocharian and the Jats.


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2013 at 13:53
Sorry Greater Aryan zone should really correspond to the Indo-European zone, and Urhiemat would designate the PIE homeland. 


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2013 at 14:12
Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....




-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2013 at 17:57
Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....



Mycenean Greek was spoken way earlier than 2000?  You could say the same thing about Avestan or Sanskrit.  The earliest date for the Avesta is 1700 BCE, was it spoken before then, probably as early as BMAC (2300-1700 BCE) culture which shows all the elements of typical Zoroastrianism: Fire Temples, Haoama Ritual, Exhumation.  

And just because Modern Greek words may be exact cognates of Myceneaen doesn't mean they descended from Myceneaen.  To the best of my knowledge Epic Greek (Ionic) words are the oldest, but few mixed in with Attic which developed into Koine.  Then there is Spartan.  Both Koine lives on in Ktharevusa and Demoitic.  Spartan lives on in Tsakonian and Greciano.  What descendent of Mycenean are you referring too?
 




Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2013 at 07:10
Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....



Mycenean Greek was spoken way earlier than 2000?  You could say the same thing about Avestan or Sanskrit.  The earliest date for the Avesta is 1700 BCE, was it spoken before then, probably as early as BMAC (2300-1700 BCE) culture which shows all the elements of typical Zoroastrianism: Fire Temples, Haoama Ritual, Exhumation.  

And just because Modern Greek words may be exact cognates of Myceneaen doesn't mean they descended from Myceneaen.  To the best of my knowledge Epic Greek (Ionic) words are the oldest, but few mixed in with Attic which developed into Koine.  Then there is Spartan.  Both Koine lives on in Ktharevusa and Demoitic.  Spartan lives on in Tsakonian and Greciano.  What descendent of Mycenean are you referring too?



First off, the Sanskrit language was not attested as a language before 300 BC, because neither Brahmi script was used to write Sanskrit words, nor the language was attested as a whole. You only find some words similar to Sanskrit words in earlier scripts, not the actual Sanskrit language. Those 1700 BC texts are NOT sanskrit texts. The same applies to old Persian which was only written down since  Cyrus' era (6th century BC).

Second, it is 100000000% verified that Mycenaean archaic Greek gave birth to Classical Greek and consequently to modern Greek, because words like Ares (Mars), rapti (tailor) etc. sound the same in  modern Greek and have the exact same meaning. So it is impossible to assume that something else has happened. This is crystal clear. The archaic Greek language evolved over the last 3500-4000 years without interruption, whatsoever.

The only major transformation was that of the alphabet. The original Greek Linear B script (1400-1100 BC) was replaced by the alphabet that is still in use today.




-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2013 at 17:20
Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....



Mycenean Greek was spoken way earlier than 2000?  You could say the same thing about Avestan or Sanskrit.  The earliest date for the Avesta is 1700 BCE, was it spoken before then, probably as early as BMAC (2300-1700 BCE) culture which shows all the elements of typical Zoroastrianism: Fire Temples, Haoama Ritual, Exhumation.  

And just because Modern Greek words may be exact cognates of Myceneaen doesn't mean they descended from Myceneaen.  To the best of my knowledge Epic Greek (Ionic) words are the oldest, but few mixed in with Attic which developed into Koine.  Then there is Spartan.  Both Koine lives on in Ktharevusa and Demoitic.  Spartan lives on in Tsakonian and Greciano.  What descendent of Mycenean are you referring too?



First off, the Sanskrit language was not attested as a language before 300 BC, because neither Brahmi script was used to write Sanskrit words, nor the language was attested as a whole. You only find some words similar to Sanskrit words in earlier scripts, not the actual Sanskrit language. Those 1700 BC texts are NOT sanskrit texts. The same applies to old Persian which was only written down since  Cyrus' era (6th century BC).

Second, it is 100000000% verified that Mycenaean archaic Greek gave birth to Classical Greek and consequently to modern Greek, because words like Ares (Mars), rapti (tailor) etc. sound the same in  modern Greek and have the exact same meaning. So it is impossible to assume that something else has happened. This is crystal clear. The archaic Greek language evolved over the last 3500-4000 years without interruption, whatsoever.

The only major transformation was that of the alphabet. The original Greek Linear B script (1400-1100 BC) was replaced by the alphabet that is still in use today.



Your rundown of the linguistic facts appears to be a little naive.  Sanskrit is believed to have been attested as early as Avestan.  Neither Sanskrit or Avestan were fixed in writing until much later in the history.  But you have to understand that just because Mycenean was fixed on tablets doesn't tell us much.  You can't carbon date a tablet.  Linguists use the same  extra-linguistic and paelolinguistic and archeological methodology to determine the dates of all these languages.  

As far as Mycenean developing into Classical Greek you're going to have to show me some sources before I buy that.  I see no evidence of that anywhere.  Like I said just because words are cognate to Mycenaean in Modern Greek doesn't mean that they developed from Mycenaean.  Chances are they developed from Ionian, Attic, or Spartan.   


Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2013 at 17:49
It is unlikely that you're going to find anything to do with Mycenaean developing into classical Greek in a written form, and for a very good reason. Classical Greek, in the written form developed from Phoenician. The reason is that with the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization their writing vanished, to be replaced a few hundred years later with a Phoenician representation of the language existing there at the time. 

-------------
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2013 at 18:48
Originally posted by TheAlaniDragonRising

It is unlikely that you're going to find anything to do with Mycenaean developing into classical Greek in a written form, and for a very good reason. Classical Greek, in the written form developed from Phoenician. The reason is that with the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization their writing vanished, to be replaced a few hundred years later with a Phoenician representation of the language existing there at the time. 

Are you agreeing with Titan?


Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2013 at 07:41
Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....



Mycenean Greek was spoken way earlier than 2000?  You could say the same thing about Avestan or Sanskrit.  The earliest date for the Avesta is 1700 BCE, was it spoken before then, probably as early as BMAC (2300-1700 BCE) culture which shows all the elements of typical Zoroastrianism: Fire Temples, Haoama Ritual, Exhumation.  

And just because Modern Greek words may be exact cognates of Myceneaen doesn't mean they descended from Myceneaen.  To the best of my knowledge Epic Greek (Ionic) words are the oldest, but few mixed in with Attic which developed into Koine.  Then there is Spartan.  Both Koine lives on in Ktharevusa and Demoitic.  Spartan lives on in Tsakonian and Greciano.  What descendent of Mycenean are you referring too?



First off, the Sanskrit language was not attested as a language before 300 BC, because neither Brahmi script was used to write Sanskrit words, nor the language was attested as a whole. You only find some words similar to Sanskrit words in earlier scripts, not the actual Sanskrit language. Those 1700 BC texts are NOT sanskrit texts. The same applies to old Persian which was only written down since  Cyrus' era (6th century BC).

Second, it is 100000000% verified that Mycenaean archaic Greek gave birth to Classical Greek and consequently to modern Greek, because words like Ares (Mars), rapti (tailor) etc. sound the same in  modern Greek and have the exact same meaning. So it is impossible to assume that something else has happened. This is crystal clear. The archaic Greek language evolved over the last 3500-4000 years without interruption, whatsoever.

The only major transformation was that of the alphabet. The original Greek Linear B script (1400-1100 BC) was replaced by the alphabet that is still in use today.



Your rundown of the linguistic facts appears to be a little naive.  Sanskrit is believed to have been attested as early as Avestan.  Neither Sanskrit or Avestan were fixed in writing until much later in the history.  But you have to understand that just because Mycenean was fixed on tablets doesn't tell us much.  You can't carbon date a tablet.  Linguists use the same  extra-linguistic and paelolinguistic and archeological methodology to determine the dates of all these languages.  

As far as Mycenean developing into Classical Greek you're going to have to show me some sources before I buy that.  I see no evidence of that anywhere.  Like I said just because words are cognate to Mycenaean in Modern Greek doesn't mean that they developed from Mycenaean.  Chances are they developed from Ionian, Attic, or Spartan.   




Clay tablets can be dated, actually. The earliest Linear B Greek tablets date back to 1350-1450 BC, according to respected universities and professors in Greece and elsewhere. Texts in Sanskrit date back to 300 BC (Ashoka's edicts is the best example).

Again, Spartan, Attic and Ionian Greek were only attested when the Greek alphabet was formed, back in 800 BC. That is 500 years after Linear B! We cannot speculate without written evidence, like you suggest. Mycenae, according to current archaeological evidence, was the oldest city in Greece to have a proper big palace and it was a city/kingdom/state with proper infrastructure, since 1600 BC. Sparta and Athens were still villages back then. They didn't even use Linear B to write down official documents. So, we simply don't know what kind of vocabulary they used.


-------------
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2013 at 09:34
Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

Originally posted by mojobadshah

Originally posted by TITAN_

What really happened was that the so-called Aryan zone (Greater Iran) was only one stop of a long journey, not the beginning of anything at all.
 

Mycenaean Greek is not as old as the language of the Indo-Aryan Mittani is it?  Nevertheless, I'd like to point out that as ancient as Mycenaean Greek may be it died out a long time ago.  It doesn't live on in any of the Greek languages spoken today.  Old Persian lives on in New Persian and Pashto shows Avestan reflexes.  




Incorrect statements:

Mycanean Greek was attested in 1400-1450 BC for the first time, but it was spoken way earlier than that, probably since 2000 BC. That is archaic Greek and did not die out at all. Thousands of words still exist today. Some of them did not even change at all. They sound exactly like modern Greek, 3500 years later....



Mycenean Greek was spoken way earlier than 2000?  You could say the same thing about Avestan or Sanskrit.  The earliest date for the Avesta is 1700 BCE, was it spoken before then, probably as early as BMAC (2300-1700 BCE) culture which shows all the elements of typical Zoroastrianism: Fire Temples, Haoama Ritual, Exhumation.  

And just because Modern Greek words may be exact cognates of Myceneaen doesn't mean they descended from Myceneaen.  To the best of my knowledge Epic Greek (Ionic) words are the oldest, but few mixed in with Attic which developed into Koine.  Then there is Spartan.  Both Koine lives on in Ktharevusa and Demoitic.  Spartan lives on in Tsakonian and Greciano.  What descendent of Mycenean are you referring too?



First off, the Sanskrit language was not attested as a language before 300 BC, because neither Brahmi script was used to write Sanskrit words, nor the language was attested as a whole. You only find some words similar to Sanskrit words in earlier scripts, not the actual Sanskrit language. Those 1700 BC texts are NOT sanskrit texts. The same applies to old Persian which was only written down since  Cyrus' era (6th century BC).

Second, it is 100000000% verified that Mycenaean archaic Greek gave birth to Classical Greek and consequently to modern Greek, because words like Ares (Mars), rapti (tailor) etc. sound the same in  modern Greek and have the exact same meaning. So it is impossible to assume that something else has happened. This is crystal clear. The archaic Greek language evolved over the last 3500-4000 years without interruption, whatsoever.

The only major transformation was that of the alphabet. The original Greek Linear B script (1400-1100 BC) was replaced by the alphabet that is still in use today.



Your rundown of the linguistic facts appears to be a little naive.  Sanskrit is believed to have been attested as early as Avestan.  Neither Sanskrit or Avestan were fixed in writing until much later in the history.  But you have to understand that just because Mycenean was fixed on tablets doesn't tell us much.  You can't carbon date a tablet.  Linguists use the same  extra-linguistic and paelolinguistic and archeological methodology to determine the dates of all these languages.  

As far as Mycenean developing into Classical Greek you're going to have to show me some sources before I buy that.  I see no evidence of that anywhere.  Like I said just because words are cognate to Mycenaean in Modern Greek doesn't mean that they developed from Mycenaean.  Chances are they developed from Ionian, Attic, or Spartan.   




Clay tablets can be dated, actually. The earliest Linear B Greek tablets date back to 1350-1450 BC, according to respected universities and professors in Greece and elsewhere. Texts in Sanskrit date back to 300 BC (Ashoka's edicts is the best example).

Again, Spartan, Attic and Ionian Greek were only attested when the Greek alphabet was formed, back in 800 BC. That is 500 years after Linear B! We cannot speculate without written evidence, like you suggest. Mycenae, according to current archaeological evidence, was the oldest city in Greece to have a proper big palace and it was a city/kingdom/state with proper infrastructure, since 1600 BC. Sparta and Athens were still villages back then. They didn't even use Linear B to write down official documents. So, we simply don't know what kind of vocabulary they used.

That's interesting, but that's not enough evidence to prove that Mycenaean developed into Classical Greek.  It could have been developed by languages that were just never attested.  How do these Greek professors date the tablets?  Carbon dating only works with organic material.  In any case I probably should mention that Iranian loanwords are attested in Mycenaean.  Actually according to the legend Myceneae was founded by Perseus, and he was the father of the Persians.  


Posted By: chicagogeorge
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 12:19
Mycenaean Greek did survive in many classical Greek dialects.


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/1fy4.png/">

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us - ImageShack.us

http://books.google.com/books?id=oa42E3DP3icC&pg=PA198&dq=Mycenaean+language+Arcado+Cypriot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HsdaUrKxGci4yAHaloDoDw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Mycenaean%20language%20Arcado%20Cypriot&f=true - http://books.google.com/books?id=oa42E3DP3icC&pg=PA198&dq=Mycenaean+language+Arcado+Cypriot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HsdaUrKxGci4yAHaloDoDw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Mycenaean%20language%20Arcado%20Cypriot&f=true


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 12:34
Originally posted by chicagogeorge

Mycenaean Greek did survive in many classical Greek dialects.


http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/1fy4.png/">

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us - ImageShack.us

http://books.google.com/books?id=oa42E3DP3icC&pg=PA198&dq=Mycenaean+language+Arcado+Cypriot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HsdaUrKxGci4yAHaloDoDw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Mycenaean%20language%20Arcado%20Cypriot&f=true - http://books.google.com/books?id=oa42E3DP3icC&pg=PA198&dq=Mycenaean+language+Arcado+Cypriot&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HsdaUrKxGci4yAHaloDoDw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Mycenaean%20language%20Arcado%20Cypriot&f=true

This doesn't look to me like its saying Mycenaean lives on in Classic Greek dialects.  All I see is that it is related to East Greek dialect called Arcado-Cypriot, and Attic-Ionic.  


Posted By: chicagogeorge
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 13:41
What does "lives on" even mean? I'm not sure what you are actually claiming? What position do you think Mycenaean had in the development of the Greek language?

Over periods of hundreds of years, languages evolve and branch out




Here is the development of the Hellenic (Greek) language. 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/443/y7p.gif/">

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us - ImageShack.us


Posted By: mojobadshah
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 14:27
Originally posted by chicagogeorge

What does "lives on" even mean? I'm not sure what you are actually claiming? What position do you think Mycenaean had in the development of the Greek language?

Over periods of hundreds of years, languages evolve and branch out




Here is the development of the Hellenic (Greek) language. 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/443/y7p.gif/">

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us - ImageShack.us

Well this map says something different than the article you posted.  The article you posted grouped Mycenean, Arcado-Cyprian, and Attic-Ionic in one eastern Greek group of dialects, and essentially that they are sisters.  But this map divides the Arcado-Cyprian and Attic-Ionic up and makes Arcado-Cyprian the descendant of Myceneaean.  First time I've seen that.  


Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 14:46
It is so a lower case.It reminds me about betting lists in betting house.Myth of Indo-Europeans was
written as prediction,what could have happened after 2000-3000 years maybe?!?


Posted By: PakistaniShield
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 17:26
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I believe the earliest known Indo-European people were neither Iranians nor Greeks but the Germanic people, these Germanic people lived in the west of Iran from the fourth millennium bc, one of them named Guti/Goth conquered Sumer and formed and empire in the third millennium bc, from the second millennium bc Iranian-speaking people from the east and Greeks from the west (look at this thread: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24888 ) invaded to Iran and forced the Germanic people to migrate to the northern lands through the Caucasus.



The earliest known IE peoples are now extinct. The Germanics closest proximity to Asia was somewhere in the northern Causes region from where they moved to Scandinavia.


-------------
http://pakhub.info">


Posted By: PakistaniShield
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 17:29
There is also an out of India theory pushed by some nationalists. The theory states that Indo-Europeans migrated out of northern  India . It's a popular theory in India, but rejected worldwide.


-------------
http://pakhub.info">


Posted By: chicagogeorge
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 20:13
Originally posted by mojobadshah

 
Well this map says something different than the article you posted.  The article you posted grouped Mycenean, Arcado-Cyprian, and Attic-Ionic in one eastern Greek group of dialects, and essentially that they are sisters.  But this map divides the Arcado-Cyprian and Attic-Ionic up and makes Arcado-Cyprian the descendant of Myceneaean.  First time I've seen that.  


Attic-Ionic developed on the southern mainland western Asia Minor prior to the Dorian migrations. It stems for the same proto southern Greek dialect that  Arcado Cypriot was from. 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/819/7q29.png/">

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us - ImageShack.us


http://books.google.com/books?id=-aFtPdh6-2QC&pg=PA221&dq=East+Greek+dialect+Ionic+and+Mycenaean&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YTZbUpnxC-66yAHKo4D4Ag&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=East%20Greek%20&f=false - http://books.google.com/books?id=-aFtPdh6-2QC&pg=PA221&dq=East+Greek+dialect+Ionic+and+Mycenaean&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YTZbUpnxC-66yAHKo4D4Ag&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=East%20Greek%20&f=false





Indo-European Languages Originated in Anatolia, Research Suggests

Aug. 23, 2012 — The Indo-European languages belong to one of the widest spread language families of the world. For the last two millenia, many of these languages have been written, and their history is relatively clear. But controversy remains about the time and place of the origins of the family. A large international team, including MPI researcher Michael Dunn, reports the results of an innovative Bayesian phylogeographic analysis of Indo-European linguistic and spatial data


The majority view in historical linguistics is that the homeland of Indo-European is located in the Pontic steppes (present day Ukraine) around 6,000 years ago. The evidence for this comes from linguistic paleontology: in particular, certain words to do with the technology of wheeled vehicles are arguably present across all the branches of the Indo-European family; and archaeology tells us that wheeled vehicles arose no earlier than this date. The minority view links the origins of Indo-European with the spread of farming from Anatolia 8,000 to 9,500 years ago.

Lexicons combined with dispersal of speakers

The minority view is decisively supported by the present analysis in this week's Science. This analysis combines a model of the evolution of the lexicons of individual languages with an explicit spatial model of the dispersal of the speakers of those languages. Known events in the past (the date of attestation dead languages, as well as events which can be fixed from archaeology or the historical record) are used to calibrate the inferred family tree against time.

Importance of phylogenetic trees

The lexical data used in this analysis come from the Indo-European Lexical Cognacy Database (IELex). This database has been developed in MPI's Evolutionary Processes in Language and Culture group, and provides a large, high-quality collection of language data suitable for phylogenetic analysis. Beyond the intrinsic interest of uncovering the history of language families and their speakers, phylogenetic trees are crucially important for understanding evolution and diversity in many human sciences, from syntax and semantics to social structure.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120823175406.htm - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120823175406.htm


another interesting read on this discovery

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/science/indo-european-languages-originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/science/indo-european-languages-originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0




Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 13-Nov-2013 at 05:55
"White gypsie boy"=Indo-European is popular novel in Macedonia,"Fyrom-ian"'s land.Big smile
[TUBE]GpbJlo925Pw[/TUBE]



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com