Anatolian hypothesis / Illyrians are not Indo-Europeans?

Atrahasis

Regular Member
Messages
16
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Ethnic group
Šokac
Y-DNA haplogroup
J2a1
The Anatolian hypothesis is, along with the Kurgan hypothesis, the most widespread hypothesis of Indo-European migration, undeservedly behind the Kurgan hypothesis, despite relatively new evidence and analyzes combining a model of lexicon evolution with individual languages with an explicit spatial dispersion model.

To recall, the Anatolian hypothesis offers two possibilities. The first possibility is proto Indo-European migration from Anatolia, and subsequent Indo-European, and the second possibility is the first proto Indo-European migration from Anatolia, and secondary migration of Indo-Europeans could occur from Anatolia but by a circular route around the Black Sea.

So, get to the point. Modern science considers the Thracians to be a combination of Indo-Europeans and Neolithic farmers. Therefore, I ask the question, why the same model could not be applied to the Proto-Illyrians? As we know, it has not been completely proven whether the Thracian or even the Illyrian language was Indo-European, since we know about the Illyrian language only from Greek records that adapted Illyrian pronunciations to their language. I believe that the Proto-Illyrian haplogroup could have been E1b1b V13. I have already written a post about it, but let's remember some things. Proto Illyrians could very easily come to the Balkans in migration independent of Indo-European migration.

I will quote Eupedia : "Furthermore, all the modern members of E-V13 descend from a common ancestor who lived approximately 5,500 years ago, and all of them also descend from a later common ancestor who carried the CTS5856 mutation. That ancestor would have lived about 4,100 years ago, during the Bronze Age. Almost immediately afterwards, CTS5856 split into six subclades, then branched off into even more subclades in the space of a few generations. In just a few centuries, that very minor E-V13 lineage had started an expansion process that would turn it into one of Europe's most widespread paternal lineages and reach far beyond the borders of Europe itself, also spreading to the eastern edge of the Mediterranean, the Caucasus, Kurdistan, Iran, and even Siberia.This data suggests that the fate of E-V13 was linked to the elite dominance of Bronze Age society. The geographic distribution of the six main branches show that E-V13 quickly spread to all parts of Europe, but was especially common in Central Europe. The only Bronze Age migration that could account for such a fast and far-reaching dispersal is that of the Proto-Indo-Europeans."

This would support the Anatolian hypothesis.On Eupedia also writes " The Indo-European migrations would certainly have brought some E-V13 early on, from circa 2500 BCE. But the history of the region is so complex that there might be many separate branches of E-V13 that each came with a different invasion".

No one can say with certainty that the Proto-Illyrians arrived in Indo-European migration. That is a fact.
To return to the Anatolian hypothesis that would support the possibility that the Proto-Illyrians were E1b1b. Unfortunately i still don't have enough posts to post pictures and links so i will quote. one of the arguments for the Kurgan hypothesis is that words like wheel, carriage, axle ... are found in the Indo-European language from the steppe area. We know for sure that the oldest representation of vehicles on wheels appears in the Halaf culture from 6500 to 5100 BC. According to most experts, the wheel was invented in the Mesopotamian civilization. Precursors of wheels, known as "tournettes" or "slow wheels", were known in the Middle East by the 5th millennium BCE. One of the earliest examples was discovered at Tepe Pardis, Iran, and dated to 5200–4700 BCE. Professor Renfrew explains "Much emphasis is traditionally placed by some Indo-Europeanists on just a few vocabulary terms, such as those for ‘horse’, ‘wheel’, chariot’, ‘cart’ etc. on the very reasonable grounds that these features make their appearance relatively late in the archaeological record. Since there are words for these things in the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language, that language cannot (they argue) have dispersed before the invention, for instance, of the wheel. But these linguists sometimes use this method of linguistic palaeontology in a rather cumbersome way. They sometimes fail to acknowledge that with the invention of a new concept (e.g. the wheel), the new noun that was invented for it in the by-then different early Indo-European languages was often derived from existing concepts (e.g. ‘to rotate’ for the Latin rota, and similarly for the reconstructed Indo-European *kweklos, related to the Greek kyklos, ‘circle’). Circles and rotation have been known to humans for tens of thousands of years and cannot be used to date Proto-Indo-European!"

I remind you once again, quote from Eupedia : "Today J2b1 is most common in the western Balkans (Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia) and Cyprus. It is also found in above 1% of the population in parts of southern Italy (Calabria, Apulia), the Peloponnese in Greece, Lebanon, Jordan, eastern Turkey, Armenia and Iran."

Another possibility is here. There is a possibility that the Proto-Thracians, the Proto-Illyrians and the Proto-Greeks arrived in migrations completely independent of Indo-European migrations. I remind you that the only connection of the Proto-Illyrians with the Indo-Europeans is the belief that the Proto-Illyrians spoke the Indo-European language, thus it is believed that the Proto-Illyrians were members of the J2b haplogroup. I must emphasize that the members of the haplogroup J2b were not the only speakers of Indo-European languages or proto-Indo-European languages. The migration of Indo-European languages did not stop after the great Indo-European wave of migration, so that the speakers of Indo-European languages were able to arrive in the Balkans in subsequent migration and create the Illyrian ethnogenesis.

Another possibility. The Anatolian languages, including Hittite, split off before 4000 BCE, and migrated into Anatolia at around 2000 BCE. Around 4000 BCE, the proto-Indo-European community split into Greek-Armenian-Indo-Iranians, Celto-Italo-Tocharians, and Balto-Slavo-Germanics. At around 3000–2500 BCE, Greek moved to the west, while the Indo-Aryans, the Celto-Italo-Tocharians and the Balto-Slavo-Germanics moved east, and then northwards along the eastern slope of the Caspian Sea. The Tocharians split from the Italo-Celtics before 2000 BCE and moved further east, while the Italo-Celtics and the Balto-Slavo-Germanics turned west again towards the northern slopes of the Black Sea. From there, they expanded further into Europe between around 2000 and 1000 BCE. According to this possibility, the Proto-Illyrians would be in the same scenario as the Proto-Greeks.

Conclusion. No one can say with certainty in which migration the Proto-Illyrians arrived in the Balkans. Apparently, the Proto-Illyrians could have been members of the haplogroup E1b1b, which could have come to the Balkans in an independent migration from Anatolia, perhaps influenced by the strengthening of the Hittite Empire, which coincided with the time of the Proto-Illyrian migration. P
roto-Illyrians could also be descendants of proto-Indo-Europeans.


 

This thread has been viewed 1603 times.

Back
Top