Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Indo-European Origins

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Rava View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 166
  Quote Rava Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Indo-European Origins
    Posted: 27-Aug-2005 at 16:06
South Russia Steppes were in the middle!
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2005 at 16:13
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

My good thread was ruined! 

We eastern Indo-Europeans have a longer history than you westerners, so it is impossible that we have come from Europe!



Westerners have a longer written history than Africa (well, minus Egypt, but the humans didn't come from there anyway), does that mean we didn't come from Africa originally?

I'm not claiming the IE people came from Europe - I don't believe that - just that that is not an argument to completely rely on.


Edited by Styrbiorn
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2005 at 01:01
I am of the opinion that the original IEs were from Central Asia and not from Eastern Europe but others use a diferent archaeological chronology and argue the opposite. I'm unable to say which one is the correct so far.

My line of thought would be IEs originally east of the Volga (before 3500 BCE), mixing in the Don basin with European natives (that had domesticated the horse) to form the western branch of IEs, quickly expanding in Central and Northern Europe and parts of the Balcans.

Eastern IEs would expand more or less as Afghanan posted. In fact proto-Scythians and proto-Cymmerians were surely invading Eastern Europe intermitently in earlier dates than those mentioned but never seem to consolidate their domain (possibly because they remained as steppary semi-nomadic warriors and never settled).

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2005 at 18:20

I received these references through email regarding the Anatolian/Caucasian/North Iranian Theory.


Luigo Luca cavalli-Sforza (2000). Genes, Peoples and Languages. New York: North Point Press.

The Indo-European languages stem from north-western Persia and eastern Anatolia as well. This was first addressed by:

Gamkrelidze, Thomas V., & Ivanov, V.V. (1990). The early history of Indo-European languages. Scientific American, March, 110-116.

You may find the recent paper of interest as well:

Language-tree divergence times support Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature, 425, 435-438.

Back to Top
Komnenos View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
  Quote Komnenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2005 at 18:37
One should at least mention at this point that there is such a thing as the "Palaeolithic Continuity Theory".

This theory, championed by the Italian linguist Mario Alinei, has a very different approach.
It equals the arrival of IE people with the arrival of homo sapiens in Europe and Asia from Africa in the Palaeolithic age long before the 10th Millennium BC. It states that the development of different IE languages took place over a very long time period and was the result of cultural and social fragmentation of the Proto IE. It completely denies any large scale immigration into Europe after 10000BC and therefore presumes a continuous resident indigenous population from the Palaeolithic age onwards without being replaced by any invasions.
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2005 at 19:05
That sounds like something I may be partial too - I have always suspected that the diffussion of the IEs millenia into prehistory.
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2005 at 04:25
Originally posted by Komnenos

One should at least mention at this point that there is such a thing as the "Palaeolithic Continuity Theory".

This theory, championed by the Italian linguist Mario Alinei, has a very different approach.
It equals the arrival of IE people with the arrival of homo sapiens in Europe and Asia from Africa in the Palaeolithic age long before the 10th Millennium BC. It states that the development of different IE languages took place over a very long time period and was the result of cultural and social fragmentation of the Proto IE. It completely denies any large scale immigration into Europe after 10000BC and therefore presumes a continuous resident indigenous population from the Palaeolithic age onwards without being replaced by any invasions.




While (apart of Neolithic aportation) it can well be said the modern Europeans are largely descendants of those that dwelt here in the Paleolithic, it doesn't seem to be any logic to attribute IE languages to them at all. The most logical thing to deduce is that Basque is descendant of whatever languages were spoken by Magdalenians in Western and Central Europe, and that, very likely too, Caucasic languages are descendants of those spoken by Eastern Gravetians in Eastern Europe, Anatolia and the Zagros.

IE, even with the most extreme chronologies didn't start branching before 10,000 BCE, but Paleolithic Europeans of that time had been "branching" for 20 or 30 milennia more. The chronologies don't fit however you look at them.

We must remember always that invasion or migration doesn't mean replacement of populations (this is extremely rare in history and all valid examples are too modern: North America, Australia...). While the migration of Neolithic farmers into lands of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers (in time-spans of milennia!) can be aduced to explain some genetic/population substitution (but also admixture), the invasion of metal age nomads over metal age farmers can't be the explanation of any important population change. Whatever the details of the proccess, it's sure that the farmers would survive and eventually (maybe) become assimilated by the invading superstrate. This can be seen in many historical processes: from German, Arab and Magyar invasions in Upper Medieval times to the colonization of agrarian/civilized Latin America in Modern times. In many of these cases the socio-politically strong invaded cultures were not even assimilated by the invaders

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.