Cultural Continuity in Ancient Eurasia 29/08/2007

12:58:00
Hypothesis
• Shared feartures of languages across Europe and western asia
indicate divergence from a shared common language, which is
identified as the speech of waves of invaders on horseback
emanating from the Caucasus ca. 5,000 BCE
Main Evidence: linguistics
• Synchronic (at a given time) and diachronic aspects (through time)
o Ex: modern Spanish and Italian share similar vocab, syntax
(synchronic)
 these “Romance” languages descend from Latin
(diachronic)
• vocabulary
o universals (numbers, animals, etc.)
o social terms (kindship, gov’t, etc)
• grammar
o case structure of ancient Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, German, etc
• predictable sound change
o ex: Latin centum, Shanskrit satem, “hundred”; major early
divergence
 Greek phero, Latin fero, English “bear”: f <> b
• Beware false positives
o Ex: Greek and native American “breath”, pneo – pniw)
• Control
o Non-IE languages (“hundred” Turkish yuz, Arabic maah)
o
other evidence
 • physical characteristics, DNA analysis
• social institutions
o sacred kingship
o significance of horsemanship
• material culture

timeline: IE migrations
• follow in wake of Neolithic technology, encounter established NE &
Egypt cultures
• c5000
o begin emanating from homeland in Caucasus speaking proto-
IE language
 technological advantage
 horsemanship, chariot
• c4000
o divergence of Celtic, Greek, Italic, Slavo-Germanic families
• c3000
o divergence of Greek, indic-iranian
• c2000
o divergence of Greek and Macedonian, Iranian and Indic,
Slavic and Germanic when proto-Greek, Latin speakers
thought to reach Greece and Italy
o
Indo-European Cultures (IE)
• Europe:
 o Greece, Rome
o Germanic/Celtic tribes
• Asia:
o Persia, Hittites, India, Tocharian (china)
Non indo-European cultures
• NE-Asia
o Summer, akkadia, Babylon, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Turks,
Society
• Horse and chariots
o Thought to give military superiority to invading Indo-
Europeans
• Tripartite social structure
o King, priest, farmer
• Family structure
o Conservation of kinship terms
Religion
• Assumption
o Shared etymologies reflect underlying similarities across IE
cultures
• Sky god
o Greek Zeus, roman Jupiter, indic dyaus, Hittitite d-sius
• Horse sacrifice
o Parallels in ancient Iran, India, Greece
 • Sacred poetry
o Meter (rhythmic structure of poetry)
 Hexameter verse (?)
 Ex: metrically equivalent formulas meaning
“imperishable fame”
o Themes:
 cattle raid
o Genres:
 praise and blame poetry, hymns, epics (specific meters)
Conclusion:
• Greek and Roman Religion – parallel offshoots of “original” Indo
European religion

Problems with Indo European Hypothesis

baggage:
• myth of White Guys with Breads on Horses
• racism and imperialism
o British empire, early 20th century Germany
• Romantic assumptions
o “japhetism” after the son of Noah
 single group spreads IE culture
o “great men”
 history as biography
questionable methods, assumptions and conclusions
• generalities
o tripartite structure in early Japanese society
o NE/Egyptian parallels
• Archaeology
o Little material evidence of underlying cultural unity among IE
linguistic groups
• Failure to account for recent research
o Ex:
 Biology
 DNA analysis of horse suggest multiple points of
domestication
 Anthropology
 Linguistic groups in Sierra Leone DON’T all share
material culture
An alternate explanation for language distributions: Language
Farming Theory
“homeland” = Fertile Crescent (earliest domestication of crops)
• Neolithic tech emerges gradually from large, shifting area of
successful farmers
Spread of language groups related to spread of Neolithic technologies
• Peasant farming techniques displace Mesolithic lifestyles gradually
• Short migrations; probably not a violent process
Result: variety of outcomes
• Adoption of language without unifying ethnic, cultural basis
• Displacement and/or fusion and/or isolation of linguistic groups
 • Mosaic of related and unrelated linguistic groups
o Isolated non-IE in Europe: Etruscans (Italy), Basques (Spain)
The indo European hypothesis: conclusions
Greek and Roman religion may be “cognate” cultures
• Could explain: similar languages, rituals, gods
• Romans readiness to adopt Greek cults and myths
On the other hand…
• Pre-historic Greek and Italian peoples intermingle for generations
• Both influenced by non-IE cultures (Minoans, Etruscans)
• Both derive Neolithic (and BA, IA) technology from Fertile Crescent
(indirectly)
Significance of the shared features of ancient reek and roman religions
• Similarities reflect shared worldview (EIA farmers and traders)
• Each helps to explain the other (Greek and Latin writers;
comparative analysis)
• Syncretic nature of religious systems: Greek and roman rites trace
back to
o Hunter culture (sacrifice, burial)
o Neolithic revolutions (sacrifice, dying/reviving god, harvest
offerings)
o Contact with neighboring cultures (trade, itinerant craftsmen,
warriors)
29/08/2007 12:58:00
29/08/2007 12:58:00