Steppe as secondary PIE

Once again this is not a really a strong and valide argument. Some 'common' words could also be 'loan' words. Everybody is using the word 'Sushi' . But that doesn't mean that Japanese and European share the same common roots.

"Sushi" is now a universal world. Everybody is now using it. From Africa to Georgia etc.

The same was with words like wheel and horse etc..

I for one think it is a very strong argument, because the words for 'horse' and 'wheel' are shifted according to the respective sound laws. If they were spread later, after (Late) PIE had already split up into the daughter branches, you would expect to see a clear sign of borrowing.
 
do you know the difference between chariots and carts ?

anyway, I'm not inclined to discuss all this in very detail
it is better to await the final publication
It’s all about the concept and conceptualization. When people know how to use carts it is not a big jump to use chariots. So, carts & chariots were invented at the same time. And we all know that Sumerians at least were familiar with carts. Sumerians predate any Steppe culture.
 
It’s all about the concept and conceptualization. When people know how to use carts it is not a big jump to use chariots. So, carts & chariots were invented at the same time. And we all know that Sumerians at least were familiar with carts. Sumerians predate any Steppe culture.

Mesopotamia, to my knowledge, didn't have wheels before the Uruk period. I might add that the Sumerian word for 'wheel', ḫu-bu-um, bears no relationship with the Indo-European words for wheel (*kwekwelos and *(H)rotheH)).
 
I for one think it is a very strong argument, because the words for 'horse' and 'wheel' are shifted according to the respective sound laws. If they were spread later, after (Late) PIE had already split up into the daughter branches, you would expect to see a clear sign of borrowing.
No, it is a very WEAK argument. It proves NOTHING. Only thin air. The only valid point is that it is a very ancient 'loan' word. It's not from yesterday or something. It is actually thousands of years old.

I'm sure that the universal word 'Sushi' will also continue to develop in all different languages in accordance to sound laws. I'm sure that people from al kind of places will change the word 'Sushi' in accordance to own sound laws overtime.


You can't prove a theory on 2 words. This is bull. You need much more than that. Once again those words are ancient loan words, like 'Sushi' is a modern common word of today.
 
you're confusing origin with destination
we all know IE were ousted from the Pontic steppe by Turkic and Hunnic tribes
and many migrated to Iran
Huh? I can't follow you. And BEFORE the Turks and Huns, Central Asia and South Central Asia was populated by native aboriginal Steppe people mixed with Iranians. We have got auDNA evidence for that. There is ancient Iranian DNA in ancient Central Asian samples. That's a fact!
 
Mesopotamia, to my knowledge, didn't have wheels before the Uruk period. I might add that the Sumerian word for 'wheel', ḫu-bu-um, bears no relationship with the Indo-European words for wheel (*kwekwelos and *(H)rotheH)).
I think that wheel was invented during the Neolithic times by the first farmers. That's how farmers migrated into Europe. They predate the 'Uruk' Sumerians by thousands of years.


" The wheel is believed to date to the Neolithic period (about 12,000 years ago) appearing at different stages in different civilizations. The earliest use was probably for turning pottery; Mesopotamian diagrams show that use as early as 3500 B.C.

A wheel with spokes first appeared on Sumarian chariots around 2000 B.C., and wheels seem to have developed in Europe by 1400 B.C. After about 400 B.C. Nubians used wheels to turn pottery and as water wheels. The earliest record of a wheelbarrow comes from China in the Three Kingdoms period (A.D. 184-280). "



http://www.farmcollector.com/equipment/invention-of-the-wheel-zmmz13augzbea
 
no, it isn't, the connection through the Caucasus is essential in the first map
Like migration from Iran into the Central Asia, SouthCentral Asia and Northern India.

Brother, you are in shock, that why you are in denial. Stop playing a fool. And stop playing games.


If you can't handle the truth and nothing but the truth look for a different hobby. Why do you like to get disappointed time after time? Do you like to be disappointed, time after time?


When are you Eurocentric people are going to acknowledge that you are all wrong big time?
 
The word κύκλος in Greek didn't mean 'wheel' but pretty much 'circle' and 'any circular body', including wheels (but also rings, trenchers, places of assembly, vaults of the sky, orbs, disks of the sun and moon, round shields, eye-balls, cheeks, wreaths, cycles of poems etc)
It's more reasonable to assume that the Greek word meant 'circle' originally.
 
The word κύκλος in Greek didn't mean 'wheel' but pretty much 'circle' and 'any circular body', including wheels (but also rings, trenchers, places of assembly, vaults of the sky, orbs, disks of the sun and moon, round shields, eye-balls, cheeks, wreaths, cycles of poems etc)
It's more reasonable to assume that the Greek word meant 'circle' originally.
Yeah, you might be right. But that doesn't even matter. It doesn't matter where a word originally is from. It is not necessary to share the common roots to use the same word. You can start using 'loan' words from different languages. And after you 'loaned' those words you CAN change it in accordance to own sound laws.

The word 'automobile' has FRENCH roots. It is not even a very old word. How old? maybe 150 years old? Kurds borrowed that recent French word and changed it in accordance to own sound laws into 'trombêl'. But It has still the French roots.

But that doesn't mean that Kurdish and French were the same languages 150 ago.


"automobile" in Georgian (Hurrian) is "saavtomobilo". Also changed in accordance to own specific sound laws. This doesn't mean that Georgian (Hurrian) and French (West IE) shared the same common roots 100 years ago.



I do really hope that you get the point..
 
Like migration from Iran into the Central Asia, SouthCentral Asia and Northern India.

Brother, you are in shock, that why you are in denial. Stop playing a fool. And stop playing games.


If you can't handle the truth and nothing but the truth look for a different hobby. Why do you like to get disappointed time after time? Do you like to be disappointed, time after time?


When are you Eurocentric people are going to acknowledge that you are all wrong big time?


there's no need to be rude

let's await publication

maybe then we'll get a glimpse of the truth

I'm done for now
 
there's no need to be rude

let's await publication

maybe then we'll get a glimpse of the truth

I'm done for now
I do already know the answer, because I do read ALL kind of sources from different perspectives and not just one way propaganda sources.

Wanna bet? I can miss ~3000 Euro. The winner takes it all.



PS. I'm sorry if I offended you.
 
No, it is a very WEAK argument. It proves NOTHING. Only thin air. The only valid point is that it is a very ancient 'loan' word. It's not from yesterday or something. It is actually thousands of years old.

I'm sure that the universal word 'Sushi' will also continue to develop in all different languages in accordance to sound laws. I'm sure that people from al kind of places will change the word 'Sushi' in accordance to own sound laws overtime.

You can't prove a theory on 2 words. This is bull. You need much more than that. Once again those words are ancient loan words, like 'Sushi' is a modern common word of today.

There's more than two words (two words for wheel, at that). You also have words for 'axle' and 'wagon'. Also, bear in mind that words cannot be subjected retroactively to past sound laws (because languages have no memories of past sound laws). When you look at the words for 'wheel' and 'horse', they are subject to the respective sound laws. The sound laws that occured from (Late) PIE to the daughter branches (for example when you have Greek "kyklos" and English "wheel" versus "chakra", the word obeys to the *l > *r merger in Indo-Iranic).

I think that wheel was invented during the Neolithic times by the first farmers. That's how farmers migrated into Europe. They predate the 'Uruk' Sumerians by thousands of years.

" The wheel is believed to date to the Neolithic period (about 12,000 years ago) appearing at different stages in different civilizations. The earliest use was probably for turning pottery; Mesopotamian diagrams show that use as early as 3500 B.C.

A wheel with spokes first appeared on Sumarian chariots around 2000 B.C., and wheels seem to have developed in Europe by 1400 B.C. After about 400 B.C. Nubians used wheels to turn pottery and as water wheels. The earliest record of a wheelbarrow comes from China in the Three Kingdoms period (A.D. 184-280). "

http://www.farmcollector.com/equipment/invention-of-the-wheel-zmmz13augzbea

I think they mean the start of the Neolithic by that date (12,000 YBP). I'm pretty sure that the Natufians didn't have wheels yet.

The word κύκλος in Greek didn't mean 'wheel' but pretty much 'circle' and 'any circular body', including wheels (but also rings, trenchers, places of assembly, vaults of the sky, orbs, disks of the sun and moon, round shields, eye-balls, cheeks, wreaths, cycles of poems etc)
It's more reasonable to assume that the Greek word meant 'circle' originally.

The word is etymologically related with the word for 'neck' in many branches of IE. Thus, *kwekwelos can be literally thought of as "that which turns", while *HroteH would mean "runner". Thus, it becomes very clear that the (Late) Indo-Europeans themselves invented the word, and that the term did not spread after the languages had separated into daughter branches.

For the whole matter in a digestable, relatively recent (2015) form, I suggest reading "The Indo-European Homeland from Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives" by David W. Anthony and Don Ringe, which, I'm pretty sure, we discussed here on Eupedia last year.
 
Saying that the word kuklos meant 'wheel' in Greek is misleading, because it didn't. It's like saying that it meant 'ring'. It meant circle and circular body.

The Sanskrit word was also used for many round or circular things that don't 'turn' necessarily.
 
Mesopotamia, to my knowledge, didn't have wheels before the Uruk period. I might add that the Sumerian word for 'wheel', ḫu-bu-um, bears no relationship with the Indo-European words for wheel (*kwekwelos and *(H)rotheH)).

Recent archeologic sides have provent that the wheel was pretty much invented in Neolithic times, as wagons need wheels and wagons have been found in some Neolithic sides in Europe as well West Asia. Angela will be able to tell you more about this.
 
I for one think it is a very strong argument, because the words for 'horse' and 'wheel' are shifted according to the respective sound laws. If they were spread later, after (Late) PIE had already split up into the daughter branches, you would expect to see a clear sign of borrowing.

I catched up a comment some user made on a blog and it had a quote of some famous scientist in it which I found quite funny and eye opening in taking linguistics too far (do not misunderstand me linguistics are pretty important part of it, but sometimes some linguists take it too far).

I quote, "from A Keith, via S Piggot. "taking the linguistic evidence too literally, one could conclude that the original IEs know butter but not milk, snow and feet but not rain and hands.. "
I guess the PIEs came from some bizarre alternate dimension via a matter transporter

The thing is many people have realized that you can't explain the Indo European expansion and language in a tree model, languages that should be more different from each other based on the Satem and Kentum division sometimes share more than to other languages in their respective group. the Indo European heritage is not linear it seems. But more like a Circle.
 
Like migration from Iran into the Central Asia, SouthCentral Asia and Northern India.

Brother, you are in shock, that why you are in denial. Stop playing a fool. And stop playing games.


If you can't handle the truth and nothing but the truth look for a different hobby. Why do you like to get disappointed time after time? Do you like to be disappointed, time after time?


When are you Eurocentric people are going to acknowledge that you are all wrong big time?

Enough with the name calling or this is going to go the way it always goes with you.

Let's also stay with the facts. The earliest spoked wheel chariot found is in Sintashta.
 
Recent archeologic sides have provent that the wheel was pretty much invented in Neolithic times, as wagons need wheels and wagons have been found in some Neolithic sides in Europe as well West Asia. Angela will be able to tell you more about this.

I'm aware of this. I was under the impression that the wheel was invented essentially independently around the same time frame, i.e. the Late(st) Neolithic in Central Europe, the Pontic-Caspian steppe and Mesopotamia. The fact that the Sumerian word for 'wheel' (also borrowed into Akkadian) bears no relationship with the Indo-European would be indicative of this.

I catched up a comment some user made on a blog and it had a quote of some famous scientist in it which I found quite funny and eye opening in taking linguistics too far (do not misunderstand me linguistics are pretty important part of it, but sometimes some linguists take it too far).

I quote, "from A Keith, via S Piggot. "taking the linguistic evidence too literally, one could conclude that the original IEs know butter but not milk, snow and feet but not rain and hands.. "
I guess the PIEs came from some bizarre alternate dimension via a matter transporter

Well, I won't disagree with that quote. :LOL:

I would like to note that if we follow what Papadimitriou wrote, why would the Indo-Europeans have a common word for 'circle' (but not wheel) that was derived from the root for 'to turn' (as in 'turning of the neck')?

The thing is many people have realized that you can't explain the Indo European expansion and language in a tree model, languages that should be more different from each other based on the Satem and Kentum division sometimes share more than to other languages in their respective group. the Indo European heritage is not linear it seems. But more like a Circle.

I don't mean to explain it (wholly) as a tree. The Centum/Satem split is a good example for that. However, it is very clear to me that if we are talking about ancient split between Proto-Anatolian and a "Late" Proto-Indo-European, then the Indo-Iranic languages are part of said "Late PIE". Even David W. Anthony admits this (remarking on terminology for 'wheel'): Anatolian shares only ‘thill,’ which might be used with a plow or sledge, so Anatolian might have separated before wheels were invented; that is consistent with other evidence for archaism in Anatolian.

In my opinion, this is a model that could account for an earlier PIE homeland in Anatolia, or the Caucasus, or even northern Iran if it pleases Goga (even though the evidence for that I find lacking). If Indo-Iranic split off from earlier Proto-Indo-European (just like Proto-Anatolian), we would expect it to be as divergent as the Anatolian languages. However, in reality the Indo-Iranic languages are much closer with Balto-Slavic than you would expect in Krause's model. Instead, we would expect archaisms similar to those we find in the Anatolian languages.

In my opinion, "late" PIE branches would be:
- Armenian
- Balto-Slavic
- Celtic
- Germanic
- Greek
- Italic
- Indo-Iranic
- Paleo-Balkan languages (including whatever language was the ancestor to Albanian)
- Tocharian

I might add that the Centum/Satem divergence is even later (in my opinion clearly postdates invention of the wheel and domestication of the horse).
 
Enough with the name calling or this is going to go the way it always goes with you.

Let's also stay with the facts. The earliest spoked wheel chariot found is in Sintashta.
Look. It is true that they found the oldest war chariots with ' spoked wheel ' in Central Asia. But it doesn't mean that it is originally from there.

Those Sintashta chariots were dated ca 1700 - 1500 BC.

https://books.google.nl/books?id=aS...=onepage&q=war chariots sintashta age&f=false

Those were YOUNGER than the Anatolian spoked wheel war chariot !

And the oldest chariots that have been found are actually in Georgia. In Kurgans of Southern Caucasus, although as far as I know those oldest chariots they found didn't have ' spoked wheel ' .

Chariot_Burial_Discovery_1.jpg


http://www.livescience.com/46513-ancient-chariot-burial-discovered.html



I think about 4000 years ago the ' spoked wheels ' were the new technology of the ancients. That would mean that Yamnaya folks that invaded the Europe had chariots with ' solid wheels '. Late second PIE culture of Yamnaya was also not familiar with ' spoked wheels ' . Chariots of Yamnaya were identical to Chariots of Kurgans in Southern Caucasus (Georgia) and Mesopotamia. Yamnaya culture predate Sintashta culture at least by 1000 years. I mean there is a time frame of more than 1000 years between Yamnaya and Sintashta. They had at least 1000 of years of time to invent ' spoked wheels ' . This could be everywhere! That means that ' spoked wheels ' were either invented in Central Asia or on the Iranian Plateau (BMAC) or even the Yamnaya Horizon. The point is that EAST Iranian BMAC predate Sintashta by hundreds of years. I think that new technology came from the Iranian Plateau, because around the same time when earliest spoked wheel chariot that has been found in Sintashta was almost of the same age as Hittites war chariots. Hittites were NOT Iranian or even Indo-Iranian people, but they were Anatolian people. The techniques that Sintashta folks used were heavily influenced by the older BMAC culture.
 
However, in reality the Indo-Iranic languages are much closer with Balto-Slavic than you would expect in Krause's model. Instead, we would expect archaisms similar to those we find in the Anatolian languages.
No, wrong again.

Balto-Slavic and Iranian have similarities because they are neighbors of each other. Iranian is MUCH, MUCH older than Balto-Slavic.

map1.jpg




The biggest difference between Indo-Iranian ( Iranic/Aryan and Indic) and Balto-Slavic is that Indo-Iranian languages were ergative languages. Both ancient Iranic and ancient Indic had ERGATIVITY construction in their grammar.



Indo-European language tree.

2011_MCCtree_width_Cognate_Rate.jpg



http://language.cs.auckland.ac.nz/what-we-did/
 
Look. It is true that they found the oldest war chariots with ' spoked wheel ' in Central Asia. But it doesn't mean that it is originally from there.

Those Sintashta chariots were dated ca 1700 - 1500 BC.

https://books.google.nl/books?id=aS...=onepage&q=war chariots sintashta age&f=false

Those were YOUNGER than the Anatolian spoked wheel war chariot !

And the oldest chariots that have been found are actually in Georgia. In Kurgans of Southern Caucasus, although as far as I know those oldest chariots they found didn't have ' spoked wheel ' .

Chariot_Burial_Discovery_1.jpg


http://www.livescience.com/46513-ancient-chariot-burial-discovered.html



I think about 4000 years ago the ' spoked wheels ' were the new technology of the ancients. That would mean that Yamnaya folks that invaded the Europe had chariots with ' solid wheels '. Late second PIE culture of Yamnaya was also not familiar with ' spoked wheels ' . Chariots of Yamnaya were identical to Chariots of Kurgans in Southern Caucasus (Georgia) and Mesopotamia. Yamnaya culture predate Sintashta culture at least by 1000 years. I mean there is a time frame of more than 1000 years between Yamnaya and Sintashta. They had at least 1000 of years of time to invent ' spoked wheels ' . This could be everywhere! That means that ' spoked wheels ' were either invented in Central Asia or on the Iranian Plateau (BMAC) or even the Yamnaya Horizon. The point is that EAST Iranian BMAC predate Sintashta by hundreds of years. I think that new technology came from the Iranian Plateau, because around the same time when earliest spoked wheel chariot that has been found in Sintashta was almost of the same age as Hittites war chariots. Hittites were NOT Iranian or even Indo-Iranian people, but they were Anatolian people. The techniques that Sintashta folks used were heavily influenced by the older BMAC culture.

afaik Hitites didn't use chariots untill they were introduced by the Mittani in this area ca 1500 BC

Assyrians, Hitites and Egyptian copied it from Mittani

there is a textbook for charriot horsetraining translated from Mittani into Hitite, but some words were in Indic language as no Mittani nor Hitite words existed for it

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

a war charriot was pulled by horses especially trained for warfare situations
and afaik had spoked wheels

why is this finding in Georgia a charriot and not a cart? it is not clear from the text
and even so, it still slightly postdates Sintashta
 

This thread has been viewed 40355 times.

Back
Top