Black Sea deluge theory & the Indo-European homeland

[Maciamo]

Following the warming up of the climate after the end of the last Ice Age, the enormous ice caps covering northern Europe and Siberia started to melt. The land bridge between Britain and continental Europe was flooded by the English Channel around 6500 BCE.

In northern Europe the excess of fresh water was evacuated through the Baltic Sea and North Sea into the Atlantic Ocean. However, water had nowhere to go in North America and Russia, and great lakes were formed. Those of interest to us are the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea.

It was hypothesised that the Caspian Sea eventually overflew and spilled its content into the Black Sea through the depression north of the Caucasus, causing the Black Sea level to rise dramatically, until it finally spilled over the Bosphorus and the Aegean Sea.

According to the initiator of the Black Sea deluge theory, William Ryan and Walter Pitman, the deluge occurred circa 5600 BCE, i.e. during the Neolithic period for the peoples living in that region.

Giosan et al. disagree, saying that the deluge would have taken place around 7400 BCE.

What if they were both wrong and the water level rose around 4000 BCE, at the time the Indo-Europeans started leaving the Black Sea shores and invade Europe ? Have a look at my migration maps and try to imagine what it would have been like. Big-scale migrations are often caused by disasters. Imagine your are a nomadic herder from the Pontic steppe, and rising sea levels start flooding your homeland. To the north is the cold forest-steppe, but to the west are the rich, fertile lands of the Danube basin and steppes similar to those of your homeland. Where would you go ?

[LeBrok]

It might have been a different story. From what I heard 5000 years ago the climate was warmer and the steppes were more moist. This and beginning of agriculture might have produced abundance of people around Caspian and Black Sea steppes. This rise of population created vibrant and strong economically cultures that overpopulated the land and encourage mass migration and conquests in all directions, also towards Europe.

Similar events most likely caused other migration and invasions. Aryan push south 4000 years ago when the warm and most period in central Asia was over, and semi desert conditions settled in. Or Tatars in medieval warm period overpopulated and started conquering neighbours in great numbers. Or mas migration of nations in 500s that coincided with cooling and drying steppes and pushed many tribes from central Asia to Europe.

Generally speaking, more or less water in Caspian or Black Seas shouldn't be a factor of great migrations. But climatic change covering areas of continents should be taken under greater consideration.

[barbarian]

in those times there were massive agriculture culture only in mezopotimia. in steppes, stockbreeding was the main output which prvide them considerably wild insticts compared to peaceful agriculture cultures.

[Aristander]

I had always thought that the rising sea level in the Mediterranean Sea broke through the Bosporus and flooded back into the Black Sea. Before 5500 B.C. the Black Sea was a fresh water lake. They have been able to date the age of the "Great Flood" by dating the age of fresh water mussels found on timbers embedded in the sea floor many kilometers in from the current shoreline.

[LeBrok]

That's right, I heard this theory couple of times already. It makes sense and archeology proves this true too.

[LeBrok]

in those times there were massive agriculture culture only in mezopotimia. in steppes, stockbreeding was the main output which prvide them considerably wild insticts compared to peaceful agriculture cultures.

Yep, that's true, they probably enjoyed only very little of agriculture. Couple of lousy and half wild cereals probably. Regardless, moist climate made vast quantities to grass for extensive herding.

[keyoghettson]

intresting theory...

[Regulus]

I have also read that the Black sea was a fresh water lake until around the sixth century BCE. The belief was that the Bosporus held back rising seas levels like a dam until maybe the wall gave in, possibly as a result of an earthquake. Estimates ranged up to a mile per day difference along the shoreline as the sea level rose. That is a lot of water. It may very well have provided impetus for those who lived in that area to move and move quickly.

[LeBrok]

Are you sure it was 600 BCE and not 6 000 BCE?

[Regulus]

aaaahhhh! Correction, six thousand years ago BCE! That's what I get for logging on while at work!

Sorry all and thanks for the heads-up. Let us go with sixth MILLENIUM BCE.
I had in mind that the six thousand years ago or so may have fit in with at least some of the movements of those peoples. Six hundred would not work at all.

[crudshoveller]

The bursting through of the sea into the Black Sea, if that's what happened, like the bursting through of the sea into the Mediterranean itself (at the neck of Gibraltar), can only be envisioned as happening suddenly rather than as over time surely. This means that any forewarning permitting the movement by men and animals out of the area soon to be inundated would have been unlikely.
If we are looking for lost 'seed civilizations' in a particular area that no longer exists as it did and therefore cannot be easily investigated archaeologically, and on unevidenced assumption, we are willfully disregarding all the other potential sites of early civilization that ARE still accessible to investigation. The 'Lost Homeland' is an enticing concept though.
Regarding the sunken lands of the Persian Gulf - this redrawing of coastline looks like having been a much more gradual change, and the lost land a potentially more likely area of early human habitation anyway - perhaps the earlier homeland of the Sumerians, maybe even the mysterious inhabitants of Catal Huyuk (since pathological evidence in some of the human remains found suggest a former habitation in a low lying marshy area very different from Catal Huyuk).

[Maciamo]

The bursting through of the sea into the Black Sea, if that's what happened, like the bursting through of the sea into the Mediterranean itself (at the neck of Gibraltar), can only be envisioned as happening suddenly rather than as over time surely. This means that any forewarning permitting the movement by men and animals out of the area soon to be inundated would have been unlikely.
If we are looking for lost 'seed civilizations' in a particular area that no longer exists as it did and therefore cannot be easily investigated archaeologically, and on unevidenced assumption, we are willfully disregarding all the other potential sites of early civilization that ARE still accessible to investigation. The 'Lost Homeland' is an enticing concept though.
Regarding the sunken lands of the Persian Gulf - this redrawing of coastline looks like having been a much more gradual change, and the lost land a potentially more likely area of early human habitation anyway - perhaps the earlier homeland of the Sumerians, maybe even the mysterious inhabitants of Catal Huyuk (since pathological evidence in some of the human remains found suggest a former habitation in a low lying marshy area very different from Catal Huyuk).

If there are places worth investigating for a possible "lost Indo-European homeland", I would search in the coastal areas under the Black Sea, especially in the Sea of Azov, as well as the region north of the Caucasus, between the North Caspian and the Sea of Azov.

If there really was a deluge around the late Neolithic or early Bronze Age, it would have been caused by the glaciers in the southern Urals region melting, resulting in the Caspian Sea overflowing into the Black Sea via the Kuma–Manych Depression or through the Volga-Don basin (assuming that the overflowing Volga would be diverted into the Don near Volgograd, or even that the two rivers flew differently at the time).

It would consequently be plausible that early settlements or even towns/cities along the Volga and/or Don rivers were submerged by the deluge and now lie under a layer of sediments (or at the bottom of one of the numerous artificial reservoirs in the region).

[spongetaro]

I've just seen a program on discovery chanel about the black sea deluge and they said that the first farmers in Europe were like Turkish refugees.

[iapetoc]

I had always thought that the rising sea level in the Mediterranean Sea broke through the Bosporus and flooded back into the Black Sea. Before 5500 B.C. the Black Sea was a fresh water lake. They have been able to date the age of the "Great Flood" by dating the age of fresh water mussels found on timbers embedded in the sea floor many kilometers in from the current shoreline.

yes I heard that also, and from there people moved to messopotamia cause minor asia was Arid that time.

in fact many theories are based upon that,

the cataclysm is considered the break down of propontis


I know that in the bottom of the Euxeinos after a matter of slat mud exist a sweat water mud from Volga, that is natural the mud being from north since most of rivers are from there exept Danube but the lack of salt proves that, also the luck from Alpen minerals proves that Danube is a later river than Volga,

[Ramses II]

I read that migration events are usually due to shift in climate.

[LeBrok]

I read that migration events are usually due to shift in climate.

Climatic changes affect food production, so your statement has logic in it.
In times of plenty, in certain regions, we see population growth, therefore strength with bigger armies and growth of dominant empire in this region.
In times of cold and dry weather, the poverty pushed tribes to migrate in search of better lands. It also might cause empires to collapse.

If we can extrapolate recent mini ice age and today's and medieval warm periods farther back. If we assume that they come in about 1000 years cycles, then around year 0, we can expect that, warm period helped Roman Empire to flourish.
500 years later in colder part of the cycle, we have collapse of Roman Empire and a big migration period.
At year 1000, the warm period, we have Europe coming out of dark ages, consolidation of strong countries, and new nations in eastern europe too. And if not for Black Death we would have Renaissance in Europe by 13 hundreds not 15.
Last Ice age was between 16 and 19 hundreds, at this time we don't see great changes. Except French revolution caused by cold and draughts, the rest of Europe is in hands of established empires with lack of appetite for big wars, so they survived. There collapse is caused by devastation of WWI then anything else. On other hand, european economy was quite stagnant in little ice age, and it started really booming in 19 hundreds in phase with new warm period.