Domestication of the horse
Nordic Bronze Age
Painted Grey Ware
Northern Black Polished Ware
Peoples and societies
Religion and mythology
Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European
Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture
The Horse, the
Wheel and Language
Journal of Indo-European Studies
Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch
Indo-European Etymological Dictionary
Proto-Indo-European homeland (or Indo-European homeland) was the
prehistoric urheimat of the
Indo-European languages – the region
where their reconstructed common ancestor, the Proto-Indo-European
language (PIE), was originally spoken. From this region, its speakers
migrated and went on to form the proto-communities of the different
branches of the language family.
There is currently no scientific consensus on when or where PIE was
spoken, though the majority of Indo-European specialists support
the steppe hypothesis, which puts the PIE homeland in the
Pontic-Caspian steppe around 4,000 BC. A minority
support the Anatolian hypothesis, which puts it in
8,000 BC. A notable but unlikely third possibility,
mentioned by David Reich, is that a proto-Indo-European language
was first spoken by a population south of the Caucasus. Several other
explanations have been proposed, including the
Paleolithic Continuity Theory, and
Indigenous Aryans or
"Out of India" theory. These are not widely accepted, and some are
considered to be fringe theories.
The search for the homeland of the Indo-Europeans began in the late
18th century with the discovery of the Indo-European language
family. The methods used to establish the homeland have been drawn
from the disciplines of historical linguistics, archaeology, physical
anthropology and, more recently, human population genetics.
2 Theoretical considerations
2.1 Reconstructed vocabulary
2.2 Uralic, Caucasian and Semitic borrowings
2.3 Genesis of Indo-European languages
2.3.1 Phases of Proto-Indo-European
2.3.2 Dating the split-offs of the main branches
3 Steppe hypothesis
4 Anatolian hypothesis
4.3 Alignment with Steppe-theory
5 Armenian hypothesis
6 Other hypotheses
6.1 Baltic homeland
6.2 Palaeolithic Continuity Theory
6.3 Out of India theory
7 See also
11 External links
The Steppe theory and the
Anatolian hypothesis are "the two leading
competitors" for the Indo-European homeland. The steppe
hypothesis, a revised version of the "
Kurgan hypothesis", places the
PIE homeland in the Pontic steppe around 4000 BC. The majority of
Indo-European specialists support the steppe hypothesis, though
critical issues remain to be clarified.
Anatolian hypothesis places the pre-PIE homeland in Anatolia
around 8000 BC, and the homeland of Proto-Indo-European proper in
Balkans around 5000 BC. Although it has attracted substantive
attention and discussions, the datings it proposes are at odds with
the linguistic timeframe for Proto-Indo-European and with genetic
data which do not find evidence for Anatolian origins in the Indian
A notable, though unlikely, third possibility is the "Near Eastern
model", also known as the Armenian hypothesis. It was proposed by
Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, postulating connections between Indo-European
and Caucasian languages based on the disputed glottalic theory and
connected to archaeological findings by Grogoriev.
A number of other theories have been proposed, most of which have
little or no academic currency today:
Indigenous Aryans, which suggests a homeland in the Indian
subcontinent in the 6th millennium BC, which is favored by Hindu
6th millennium BC
6th millennium BC or later origin in Northern Europe, according to
Lothar Kilian's and, especially, Marek Zvelebil's models of a broader
homeland, which is favored by European and white
Paleolithic Continuity Theory, with an origin in the Upper Paleolithic
Nikolai Trubetzkoy's theory of
Sprachbund origin of Indo-European
Traditionally homelands of linguistic families are proposed based on
evidence from comparative linguistics coupled with evidence of
historical populations and migrations from archeology. Today, genetics
DNA samples is increasingly used in the study of ancient
Through comparative linguistics it is possible to reconstruct the
vocabulary found in the proto-language, and in this way achieve
knowledge of the cultural, technological and ecological context that
the speakers inhabited. Such a context can then be compared with
archeological evidence. This vocabulary includes, in the case of PIE:
pastoralism, including domesticated cattle, horses, and dogs
agriculture and cereal cultivation, including technology commonly
ascribed to late-
Neolithic farming communities, e.g., the plow
a climate with winter snow
transportation by or across water
the solid wheel used for wagons, but not yet chariots with spoked
Uralic, Caucasian and Semitic borrowings
Proto-Uralic and PIE share a core vocabulary, such as words for "name"
and "water", and similar-looking pronouns. This may be due to a common
ancestor, or to intensive borrowing, but both options suggest that
their homelands were located near each other. PIE also borrowed words
from Caucasian languages, especially Kartvelian, which suggests a
location close to the Caucasus.
Gramkelidze and Ivanov, using the now largely unsupported glottalic
theory of Indo-European phonology, also proposed Semitic borrowings
into Proto-Indo-European, suggesting a more southern homeland to
explain these borrowings. According to Mallory and Adams, some of
these borrowing may be too speculative or from a later date, but they
consider the proposed Semitic loans "bull" (taurus) and "wine" to be
more likely.[note 1]
Genesis of Indo-European languages
Phases of Proto-Indo-European
According to Anthony, the following terminology may be used:
Early PIE for "the last common ancestor of the Anatolian and
non-Anatolian IE branches";
Post-Anatolian PIE for "the last common ancestor of the non-Anatolian
PIE languages, including Tocharian";
Late PIE for "the common ancestor of all other IE branches".
Anatolian languages are the first Indo-European language family to
have split off from the main group. Due to the archaic elements
preserved in the Anatolian languages, they may be a "cousin" of
Proto-Indo-European, instead of a "daughter", but Anatolian is
generally regarded as an early offshoot of the Indo-European language
Indo-Hittite hypothesis postulates a common predecessor for both
Anatolian languages and the other indo-European languages, called
Indi-Hittite or Indo-Anatolian. Although it is obvious that PIE had
Indo-Hittite hypothesis is not widely accepted,
and there is little to suggest that it is possible to reconstruct a
Indo-Hittite stage that differs substantially from what is
already reconstructed for PIE.
Dating the split-offs of the main branches
Using a mathematical analysis borrowed from evolutionary biology, Don
Ringe and Tandy Warnow propose the following tree of Indo-European
Pre-Anatolian (before 3500 BC)
Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic (before 2500 BC)
Pre-Armenian and Pre-Greek (after 2500 BC)
Pre-Germanic and Pre-Balto-Slavic; proto-Germanic c. 500 BC
Proto-Indo-Iranian (2000 BC)
David Anthony, following the methodology of Ringe and
Warnow,[clarification needed] proposes the following sequence:
Pre-Anatolian (4200 BC)
Pre-Tocharian (3700 BC)
Pre-Germanic (3300 BC)
Pre-Italic and Pre-Celtic (3000 BC)
Pre-Armenian (2800 BC)
Pre-Balto-Slavic (2800 BC)
Pre-Greek (2500 BC)
Proto-Indo-Iranian (2200 BC); split between Iranian and Old Indic 1800
See also: Indo-European migrations
In the early 1980s, a mainstream consensus had emerged among
Indo-Europeanists in favour of the "
Kurgan hypothesis" (the Kurgan
hypothesis, after the kurgans, burial mounds, of the Eurasian steppes)
placing the Indo-European homeland in the
Pontic–Caspian steppe of
the Chalcolithic. This was not least due to the influence of
the Journal of Indo-European Studies, edited by J. P. Mallory, that
focused on the ideas of
Marija Gimbutas and offered some improvements.
Gimbutas had created a modern variation on the traditional invasion
theory in which the Indo-Europeans were a nomadic tribe in Eastern
Ukraine and Southern
Russia and expanded on horseback in several waves
during the 3rd millennium BC. Their expansion coincided with the
taming of the horse. Leaving archaeological signs of their presence
(see Corded Ware culture), they subjugated the peaceful European
Neolithic farmers of Gimbutas' Old Europe. As Gimbutas' beliefs
evolved, she put increasing emphasis on the patriarchal, patrilineal
nature of the invading culture, sharply contrasting it with the
supposedly egalitarian, if not matrilineal culture of the invaded, to
the point of formulating essentially a feminist archaeology. Her
interpretation of Indo-European culture found genetic support in
remains from the
Neolithic culture of Scandinavia, where
DNA from bone
Neolithic graves indicated that the megalith culture was
either matrilocal or matrilineal, as the people buried in the same
grave were related through the women. Likewise, there is a tradition
of remaining matrilineal traditions among the Picts.
Kurgan hypothesis seeks to identify the source of
the Indo-European language expansion as a succession of migrations
from the Pontic–Caspian steppe, originating in the area encompassed
Sredny Stog culture
Sredny Stog culture (c. 4500 BC). J. P. Mallory,
dating the migrations later, to c. 4000 BC, and putting less
insistence on their violent or quasi-military nature, essentially
modified Gimbutas' theory making it compatible with a less
gender-political narrative. David Anthony, focusing mostly on the
evidence for the domestication of horses and the presence of wheeled
vehicles, came to regard specifically the Yamna culture, which
Sredny Stog culture
Sredny Stog culture around 3500 BC, as the most likely
candidate for the Proto-Indo-European speech community.
Anthony describes the spread of cattle-raising from early farmers in
the Danube Valley into the Ukrainian steppes in the 6th–5th
millennium BC, forming a cultural border with the hunter-gatherers
whose languages may have included archaic PIE. Anthony notes that
domesticated cattle and sheep probably didn't enter the steppes from
the Transcaucasia, since the early farming communities there were not
widespread, and separated from the steppes by the glaciated
Caucasus. Subsequent cultures developed in this area which adopted
cattle, most notably the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture.
Parpola regards the Tripolye culture as the birthplace of wheeled
vehicles, and therefore as the homeland for Late PIE, assuming that
Early PIE was spoken by Skelya pastoralists (early Sredny Stog
culture) who took over the Tripolye culture at c. 4300–4000
BC. On its eastern border lay the
Sredny Stog culture
Sredny Stog culture (4400–3400
BC), whose origins are related to "people from the east, perhaps
from the Volga steppes". It plays a central role in Gimbutas'
Kurgan hypothesis, and coincides with the spread of early PIE
across the steppes and into the Danube valley (c. 4000 BC),
leading to the collapse of Old Europe. Hereafter the Maykop culture
suddenly arose, Tripolye towns grew strongly, and eastern steppe
people migrated to the Altai mountains, founding the Afanasevo culture
(3300 to 2500 BC).
The core element of the steppe hypothesis is the identification of the
proto-Indo-European culture as a nomadic pastoralist society that did
not practice intensive agriculture. This identification rests on the
fact that vocabulary related to cows, to horses and horsemanship, and
to wheeled vehicles can be reconstructed for all branches of the
family, whereas only a few agricultural vocabulary items are
reconstructable, suggesting a gradual adoption of agriculture through
contact with non-Indo-Europeans. When this evidence and reasoning is
accepted, the search for the Indo-European proto-culture has to
involve searching for the earliest introduction of domesticated horses
and wagons into Europe.
Responding to these arguments, proponents of the Anatolian hypothesis
Russell Gray and Quentin Atkinson have argued that the different
branches could have independently developed similar vocabulary based
on the same roots, creating the false appearance of shared inheritance
– or alternatively, that the words related to wheeled vehicle might
have been borrowed across Europe at a later date. Proponents of the
Steppe hypothesis have argued this to be highly unlikely, and to break
with the established principles for reasonable assumptions when
explaining linguistic comparative data.
Another source of evidence for the steppe hypothesis is the presence
of what appears to be many shared loanwords between Uralic languages
and proto-Indo-European, suggesting that these languages were spoken
in adjacent areas. This would have had to take place a good deal
further north than the Anatolian or Near Eastern scenarios would
allow. According to Kortlandt,
Indo-Uralic is the pre-PIE,
postulating that Indo-European and Uralic share a common ancestor.
According to Kortlandt, "Indo-European is a branch of Indo-Uralic
which was radically transformed under the influence of a North
Caucasian substratum when its speakers moved from the area north of
Caspian Sea to the area north of the Black Sea."[note 2][note
3] Anthony notes that the validity of such deep relationships cannot
be reliably demonstrated due to the time-depth involved, and also
notes that the similarities may be explained by borrowings from PIE
into proto-Uralic. Yet, Anthony also notes that the North
Caucasian communities "were southern participants in the steppe
See also: Origins of
Yamna culture and Yamna component in European
Three genetic studies in 2015 gave support to the
Kurgan theory of
Gimbutas regarding the Indo-European Urheimat. According to those
studies, haplogroups R1b and R1a, now the most common in Europe (R1a
is also common in South Asia) would have expanded from the Russian
steppes, along with the Indo European languages; they also detected an
autosomal component present in modern Europeans which was not present
Neolithic Europeans, which would have been introduced with paternal
lineages R1b and R1a, as well as Indo European Languages.
According to genetic studies, individuals from the Yamnaya culture
have a mix from eastern European hunter-gatherer and Caucasus
hunter-gatherer ancestry. Iran
Chalcolithic people with a
Caucasian hunter-gatherer component.[note 4][clarification
Many geneticists consider
Haplogroup R1a to be associated with the
origins and spread of the Indo-Europeans. R1a1 shows a
strong correlation with the distribution of the Indo-European
languages in Europe and south Asia, being most prevalent in Poland,
Russia, and Ukraine, and in central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and
India. Two specific subclades dominate, namely R1-Z282 in
Eastern-Europe and R1-Z93 in South Asia and South-Siberia.
According to Underhill et al. (2014), the initial diversification of
R1a took place in the vicinity of Iran, while Pamjav et al. (2012)
think that R1a diversified within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle
In 2015, a large-scale ancient
DNA study published in Nature found
evidence of a "massive migration" from the Pontic-Caspian steppe to
Central Europe that took place about 4,500 years ago. It found that
individuals from the Central European
Corded Ware culture
Corded Ware culture (3rd
millennium BC) were genetically closely related to individuals from
the Yamnaya culture. The authors concluded that their "results provide
support for the theory of a steppe origin of at least some of the
Indo-European languages of Europe." However, archaeologists
have argued that although such a migration might have taken place, it
does not necessarily explain either the distribution of archaeological
cultures or the spread of the Indo-European languages.
Main article: Anatolian hypothesis
See also: Indo-Hittite
Map showing the
Neolithic expansion from the seventh to fifth
The main competitor to the
Kurgan hypothesis is the Anatolian
hypothesis advanced by
Colin Renfrew in 1987. It couples the spread of
Indo-European languages to the hard fact of the neolithic spread
of farming from the Near East, stating that the Indo-European
languages began to spread peacefully into Europe from
Asia Minor from
around 7000 BC with the
Neolithic advance of farming (wave of
advance). The expansion of agriculture from the Middle East would have
diffused three language families: Indo-European toward Europe,
Dravidian toward Pakistan and India, and Afro-Asiatic toward Arabia
and North Africa.
According to Renfrew (2004), the spread of Indo-European proceeded in
the following steps:
Around 6500 BC: Pre-Proto-Indo-European, located in Anatolia, splits
into Anatolian and Archaic Proto-Indo-European, the language of those
Pre-Proto-Indo-European farmers who migrate to Europe in the initial
farming dispersal. Archaic Proto-
Indo-European languages occur in the
Balkans (Starčevo-Körös-Cris culture), in the Danube valley (Linear
Pottery culture), and possibly in the Bug-Dniestr area (Eastern Linear
Around 5000 BC: Archaic Proto-Indo-European splits into Northwestern
Indo-European (the ancestor of Italic, Celtic, and Germanic), located
in the Danube valley, Balkan Proto-Indo-European (corresponding to
Gimbutas' Old European culture), and Early Steppe Proto-Indo-European
(the ancestor of Tocharian).
Reacting to criticism, Renfrew revised his proposal to the effect of
taking a pronounced
Indo-Hittite position. Renfrew's revised views
Pre-Proto-Indo-European in 7th millennium BC Anatolia,
proposing as the homeland of Proto-Indo-European proper the Balkans
around 5000 BC, explicitly identified as the "Old European culture"
proposed by Marija Gimbutas. He thus still situates the original
source of the Indo-European language family in
Anatolia c. 7000 BC.
Reconstructions of a
Bronze Age PIE society based on vocabulary items
like "wheel" do not necessarily hold for the Anatolian branch, which
appears to have separated from PIE at an early stage, prior to the
invention of wheeled vehicles.
The main objection to this theory is that it requires an
unrealistically early date. According to linguistic analysis, the
Proto-Indo-European lexicon seems to include words for a range of
inventions and practices related to the Secondary Products Revolution,
which post-dates the early spread of farming. On lexico-cultural
dating, Proto-Indo-European cannot be earlier than 4000 BC.
The idea that farming was spread from
Anatolia in a single wave has
been revised. Instead it appears to have spread in several waves by
several routes, primarily from the Levant. The trail of plant
domesticates indicates an initial foray from the Levant by sea.
The overland route via
Anatolia seems to have been most significant in
spreading farming into south-east Europe.
Farming developed independently in the eastern fertile crescent.
Indo-European languages appear to be associated with the spread of
farming from the
Near East into North Africa and the
Caucasus. According to Lazaridis et al. (2016),
farming developed independently both in the Levant and in the eastern
Fertile Crescent. After this initial development, the two regions
Caucasus interacted, and the chalcolithic north-west Iranian
population appears to be a mixture of Iranian neolithic, Levant, and
Caucasus hunter-gatherers. According to Lazaridis et al. (2016),
"farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian
steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to
the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South
Asia". They further note that ANI "can be modelled as a mix of
ancestry related to both early farmers of western Iran and to people
Bronze Age Eurasian steppe", which makes it unlikely that
Indo-European languages in India are derived from Anatolia.
Mascarenhas et al. (2015) note that the expansion of Z93 from
Transcaucasia into South Asia is compatible with "the archeological
records of eastward expansion of West Asian populations in the 4th
millennium BC culminating in the socalled Kura-Araxes migrations in
the post-Uruk IV period".
Alignment with Steppe-theory
According to Alberto Piazza "[i]t is clear that, genetically speaking,
peoples of the
Kurgan steppe descended at least in part from people of
the Middle Eastern
Neolithic who immigrated there from Turkey."
According to Piazza and Cavalli-Sforza, the Yamna-culture may have
been derived from Middle Eastern
Neolithic farmers who migrated to the
Pontic steppe and developed pastoral nomadism.:
...if the expansions began at 9,500 years ago from
Anatolia and at
6,000 years ago from the Yamnaya culture region, then a 3,500-year
period elapsed during their migration to the Volga-Don region from
Anatolia, probably through the Balkans. There a completely new, mostly
pastoral culture developed under the stimulus of an environment
unfavorable to standard agriculture, but offering new attractive
possibilities. Our hypothesis is, therefore, that Indo-European
languages derived from a secondary expansion from the Yamnaya culture
region after the
Neolithic farmers, possibly coming from
settled there, developing pastoral nomadism.
Wells agrees with Cavalli-Sforza that there is "some genetic evidence
for migration from the Middle East":
... while we see substantial genetic and archaeological evidence for
an Indo-European migration originating in the southern Russian
steppes, there is little evidence for a similarly massive
Indo-European migration from the Middle East to Europe. One
possibility is that, as a much earlier migration (8,000 years old, as
opposed to 4,000), the genetic signals carried by
Indo-European-speaking farmers may simply have dispersed over the
years. There is clearly some genetic evidence for migration from the
Middle East, as Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues showed, but the
signal is not strong enough for us to trace the distribution of
Neolithic languages throughout the entirety of Indo-European-speaking
Main article: Armenian hypothesis
Gamkrelidze and Ivanov held that the urheimat was south of the
Caucasus, specifically, "within eastern Anatolia, the southern
Caucasus and northern Mesopotamia" in the fifth to fourth millennia
BC. Their proposal was based on a disputed theory of glottal
consonants in PIE. According to Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, PIE words for
material culture objects imply contact with more advanced peoples to
the south, the existence of Semitic loan-words in PIE, Kartvelian
(Georgian) borrowings from PIE, some contact with Sumerian, Elamite
and others. However given that the glottalic theory never caught on,
and there was little archeological support, the Gamkredlize and Ivanov
theory did not gain support until Renfrew's Anatolian theory revived
aspects of their proposal.
Gamkredilze and Ivanov proposed that the
Greeks moving west across
Anatolia to their present location, a northward movement of some IE
speakers that brought them into contact with the Finno-Ugric languages
and suggest that the
Kurgan area, or better "Black Sea and Volga
steppe", was a secondary homeland from which the western IE languages
A 2015 genetic study by Haak et al. (2015:137) argues that their
findings of gene flow of a population that shares traits with
Armenians into the Yamnaya pastoralist culture lends
support to the Armenian hypothesis, while Lazaridis et al. (2016)
state that "farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into
the Eurasian steppe."
In 2018, David Reich wrote that even if most or all Indo-European
languages were spread by the Yamnaya-people that "the most likely
location of the population that first spoke an Indo-European language
was south of the
Caucasus Mountains, perhaps in present-day Iran or
Armenia, because ancient
DNA from people who lived there matches what
we would expect for a source population both for the Yamnaya and for
Neolithic creolisation hypothesis and Salmon problem
Lothar Kilian and
Marek Zvelebil have proposed a
6th millennium BC
6th millennium BC or
later origin in Northern Europe. The Steppe theory is compatible
with the argument that the PIE homeland must have been larger,
because the "
Neolithic creolisation hypothesis" allows the
Pontic-Caspian region to have been part of PIE territory.
Palaeolithic Continuity Theory
Paleolithic Continuity Theory
Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm" is a hypothesis suggesting that
Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) can be traced back to the Upper
Paleolithic, several millennia earlier than the
Chalcolithic or at the
Neolithic estimates in other scenarios of Proto-Indo-European
origins. Its main proponents are Marcel Otte, Alexander Häusler,
and Mario Alinei.
The PCT posits that the advent of
Indo-European languages should be
linked to the arrival of Homo sapiens in Europe and Asia from Africa
in the Upper Paleolithic. Employing "lexical periodization",
Alinei arrives at a timeline deeper than even that of Colin Renfrew's
Anatolian hypothesis.[note 5]
Since 2004, an informal workgroup of scholars who support the
Paleolithic Continuity hypothesis has been held online. Apart from
Alinei himself, its leading members (referred to as "Scientific
Committee" in the website) are linguists
Xaverio Ballester (University
of Valencia) and
Francesco Benozzo (University of Bologna). Also
included are prehistorian
Marcel Otte (Université de Liège) and
Henry Harpending (University of Utah).
It is not listed by Mallory among the proposals for the origins of the
Indo-European languages that are widely discussed and considered
credible within academia.
Out of India theory
Indigenous Aryans and Indo-Aryan migrations
Indigenous Aryans theory, also known as the Out of India theory,
proposes an Indian origin for the Indo-European languages. The
languages of northern India and Pakistan, including
Hindi and the
historically and culturally significant liturgical language Sanskrit,
belong to the Indo-Aryan branch of the Indo-European language
family. The Steppe model, rhetorically presented as an "Aryan
invasion", has been opposed by Hindu revivalists and Hindu
nationalists, who argue that the Aryans were indigenous to
India, and some, such as Koenraad Elst and Shrikant
Talageri, have proposed that Proto-Indo-European itself originated
in northern India, either with or shortly before the Indus Valley
Civilisation. This "Out of India" theory is not regarded as
plausible in mainstream scholarship.
Bronze Age Europe
North European hypothesis
Old European culture
^ Anthony notes that those Semitic borrowings may also have occurred
through the advancement of Anatolian farmer cultures via the Danube
valley into the steppe zone.
^ Kortlandt (2010) refers to Kortlandt, Frederik. 2007b. C.C.
Uhlenbeck on Indo-European, Uralic and Caucasian.
^ The "
Sogdiana hypothesis" of
Johanna Nichols places the homeland in
the 4th or 5th millennium BC to the east of the Caspian Sea, in the
area of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana. According to Bernard Sergent
the lithic assemblage of the first
Kurgan culture in
Stog II), which originated from the Volga and South Urals, recalls
that of the Mesolithic-
Neolithic sites to the east of the Caspian sea,
Dam Dam Chesme II and the cave of Djebel. He places the roots of
Kurgan cradle of Indo-Europeans in a more southern
cradle, and adds that the Djebel material is related to a Paleolithic
material of Northwestern Iran, the Zarzian culture, dated
10,000–8,500 BC, and in the more ancient
Kebarian of the Near East.
He concludes that more than 10,000 years ago the Indo-Europeans were a
small people grammatically, phonetically and lexically close to
Hamitic populations of the Near East.
^ Lazaridis et al. (2016): "The spread of Near Eastern ancestry into
the Eurasian steppe was previously inferred without access to ancient
samples, by hypothesizing a population related to present-day
Armenians as a source." Lazaridis et al. (2016) refer to Haak et
^ Mario Alinei: "The sharp, and now at last admitted even by
traditionalists (Villar 1991) [Villar, Francisco (1991), Los
indoeuropeos y los orígines de Europa. Lenguaje y historia, Madrid,
Gredos] differentiation of farming terminology in the different IE
languages, while absolutely unexplainable in the context of Renfrew's
NDT, provides yet another fundamental proof that the differentiation
of IE languages goes back to remote prehistory."
^ a b c Mallory & Adams 2006.
^ Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015, p. 157-158.
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z Anthony 2007.
^ Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015, p. 1-16.
^ a b Anthony & Ringe 2015.
^ a b Haak et al. 2015.
^ Renfrew, Colin (1990).
Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of
Indo-European Origins. CUP Archive. ISBN 9780521386753.
^ a b Gray & Atkinson 2003.
^ Bouckaert et al. 2012.
^ a b Reich, David (2018). Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA
and the New Science of the Human Past. Knopf Doubleday Publishing
Group. p. 177.
^ Pereltsvaig & Lewis 2015, p. 19-38.
^ a b c d Mallory 2013.
^ a b Haak 2015.
^ a b c d e f Lazaridis 2016.
^ a b Zvelebil 1995.
^ a b c Watkins 2000.
^ Mallory 1996, p. 347.
^ "The Indo-Europeans knew snow in their homeland; the word sneigwh-
is nearly ubiquitous." "The American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth Edition. 2000". Archived from the original on
1 March 2009. Retrieved 2009-03-01. CS1 maint: BOT: original-url
status unknown (link)
^ a b Mallory & Adams 2006, p. 249.
^ a b Anthony & Ridge 2015.
^ Ringe 2006, p. 67.
^ Bojtar 1999, p. 57.
^ Mallory 1997.
^ a b Mallory 1989, p.185
^ Parpola 2015, p. 49.
^ a b c d e Anthony, D. W., & Ringe, D. (2015). The Indo-European
homeland from linguistic and archaeological perspectives. Annu. Rev.
Linguist., 1(1), 199–219.
^ a b Kortlandt 2010.
Johanna Nichols (1997), "The Epicenter of the Indo-European
Archaeology and Language I: Theoretical and
Methodological Orientations, ed. Roger Blench and Matthew Spriggs,
Johanna Nichols (1999), "The Eurasian Spread Zone and the
Archaeology and Language II: Correlating
archaeological and Linguistic Hypotheses, ed. Roger Blench and Matthew
Spriggs, London: Routledge
^ See Dzhebel, and V. A. Ranov and R. S. Davis (1979), Toward a New
Outline of the Soviet Central Asian Paleolithic
^ Bernard Sergent (1995), Les Indo-Européens – Histoire, langues,
^ Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European
languages in Europe, Haak et al., 2015
^ Population genomics of
Bronze Age Eurasia, Allentoft et al., 2015
^ Eight thousand years of natural selection in Europe, Mathieson et
^ Jones 2015.
^ a b c Lazaridis 2016, p. 8.
^ Zerjal 1999.
^ a b c Panjav 2012.
^ a b c Underhill 2015.
^ Underhill 2014.
^ Pamjav 2012.
^ Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (4 March 2015) Genetic study
revives debate on origin and expansion of
Indo-European languages in
Europe Science Daily, Retrieved 19 April 2015
^ Vander Linden, Marc (2016-08-03). "Population history in
third-millennium-BC Europe: assessing the contribution of genetics".
World Archaeology. 48 (5): 1–15.
^ Renfrew, Colin (2003). "Time Depth, Convergence Theory, and
Innovation in Proto-Indo-European: 'Old Europe' as a PIE Linguistic
Area". In Bammesberger, Alfred; Vennemann, Theo. Languages in
Prehistoric Europe. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter GmBH.
pp. 17–48. ISBN 978-3-82-531449-1.
^ Mallory & Adams 2006, p. 101-102.
^ R. Pinhasi, J. Fort and A. J. Ammerman, Tracing the origin and
spread of agriculture in Europe, PLoS Biology, 3, no. 12 (2005), e436.
^ F. Coward et al., The spread of
Neolithic plant economies from the
Near East to Northwest Europe: a phylogenetic analysis, Journal of
Archaeological Science, vol. 35, no. 1 (2008), pp. 42–56.
^ M. Özdogan, Archaeological evidence on the westward expansion of
farming communities from eastern
Anatolia to the Aegean and the
Balkans, Current Anthropology, vol. 52, no. S4 (2011), S415-S430.
^ a b Lazaridis et al. 2016.
^ Lazaridis 2016b.
^ Mascarenhas 2015, p. 9.
^ Cavalli-Sforza 2000.
^ Piazza and Cavalli-Sforza (2006)
^ Wells 2002.
^ T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov, Indo-European and the
Indo-Europeans, 1995, Chapters Eleven and Twelve
Proto-Indo-European homeland south of the
^ a b c d Alinei, Mario. The
Paleolithic Continuity Theory
Paleolithic Continuity Theory on
Indo-European Origins: An Introduction
^ continuitas.org, The PCP-workgroup
^ Mallory 1997, p. 106.
^ "Indo-Aryan languages". Retrieved 2016-07-06.
^ Fosse, Lars Martin (2005), "Aryan Past and Post-Colonial Present.
The polemics and politics of indigenous Aryanism", in Bryant, Edwin;
Patton, Laurie L., The Indo-Aryan Controversy. Evidence and inference
in Indian history, Routledge
^ a b Witzel, Michael (2005), "Indocentrism", in Bryant, Edwin;
Patton, Laurie L., The Indo-Aryan Controversy. Evidence and inference
in Indian history, Routledge
^ Elst, Koenraad (1999), Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate, New
Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, ISBN 81-86471-77-4
^ Elst, Koenraad (2005), "Linguistic Aspects of the Aryan Non-invasion
Theory", in Bryant, Edwin; Patton, Laurie L., THE INDO-ARYAN
CONTROVERSY. Evidence and inference in Indian history, Routledge
^ Talageri, Shrikant G. (2000). The Rigveda: a historical analysis.
New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. ISBN 81-7742-010-0.
^ a b Witzel, Michael (2006), "Rama's realm: Indocentric rewritings of
early South Asian History", in Fagan, Garrett, Archaeological
Fantasies: How pseudoarchaeology misrepresents the past and misleads
the public, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-30592-6
^ Shaffer, Jim (1984), "The Indo-Aryan Invasions: Cultural Myth and
Archaeological Reality", in Lukacs, J. R., In The Peoples of South
Asia, New York: Plenum Press, pp. 74–90
^ Bryant, Edwin (2001), The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture:
The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate, Oxford University Press,
Anthony, David W. (2007), The Horse, the
Wheel and Language: How
Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World,
Princeton University Press
Anthony, David; Ringe, Don (2015), "The Indo-European Homeland from
Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives", Annual Review of
Linguistics, 1: 199–219,
Atkinson, Quentin; Nicholls, Geoff; Welch, David; Gray, Russell
(2005). "From words to dates: water into wine, mathemagic or
phylogenetic inference?". Transactions of the Philological Society.
103 (2): 193–219. doi:10.1111/j.1467-968x.2005.00151.x.
Bojtar, Endre (1999), Foreword to the Past: A Cultural History of the
Baltic People, Central European University Press
Bouckaert, Remco; Lemey, Philippe; Dunn, Michael; Greenhill, Simon J.;
Alekseyenko, Alexander V.; Drummond, Alexei J.; Gray, Russell D.;
Suchard, Marc A.; Atkinson, Quentin D. (2012). "Mapping the Origins
and Expansion of the Indo-European Language Family". Science. 337
(6097): 957–960. doi:10.1126/science.1219669. PMC 4112997 .
Bomhard, Allen (2015), The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The
Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis
Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca (2000). Genes, peoples, and languages.
Farrar Straus & Giroux. ISBN 0-86547-529-6.
Gray, Russell D.; Atkinson, Quentin D. (2003). "Language-tree
divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European
origin". Nature. 426 (6965): 435–439. doi:10.1038/nature02029.
Haak, W.; Lazaridis, I.; Patterson, N.; Rohland, N.; Mallick, S.;
Llamas, B.; Brandt, G.; Nordenfelt, S.; Harney, E.; Stewardson, K.;
Fu, Q.; Mittnik, A.; Bánffy, E.; Economou, C.; Francken, M.;
Friederich, S.; Pena, R. G.; Hallgren, F.; Khartanovich, V.; Khokhlov,
A.; Kunst, M.; Kuznetsov, P.; Meller, H.; Mochalov, O.; Moiseyev, V.;
Nicklisch, N.; Pichler, S. L.; Risch, R.; Rojo Guerra, M. A.; et al.
(2015). "Massive migration from the steppe was a source for
Indo-European languages in Europe" (PDF). Nature. 522: 207–211.
PMC 5048219 . PMID 25731166.
Koerner, E.F.K., Linguistics and Ideology in the Study of
Kortlandt, Frederik (2010), An outline of proto-indo-european (working
Lazaridis (2016b), Supplementary Information. The genetic structure of
the world's first farmers
Mallory, J.P. (1989), In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language,
Archaeology, and Myth, London: Thames & Hudson
Mallory, J.P. (1996), Fagan, Brian M., ed., The Oxford Companion to
Archaeology, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-507618-4
Mallory, James P. (1997), "The homelands of the Indo-Europeans", in
Blench, Roger; Spriggs, Matthew,
Archaeology and Language, I:
Theoretical and Methodological Orientations, London: Routledge,
ISBN 0-415-11760-7 .
Mallory, J.P.; Adams, D.Q. (2006), The Oxford introduction to
Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European world (Repr. ed.),
Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press, ISBN 9780199287918
Mallory, J.P. (2013), "Twenty-first century clouds over Indo-European
homelands" (PDF), Journal of Language Relationship, 9
Mascarenhas, Desmond D.; Raina, Anupuma; Aston, Christopher E.;
Sanghera, Dharambir K. (2015), "Genetic and Cultural Reconstruction of
the Migration of an Ancient Lineage", BioMed Research International,
2015: 651415, doi:10.1155/2015/651415
Pamjav, Horolma; Fehér, Tibor; Németh, Endre; Pádár, Zsolt (2012),
"Brief communication: new Y-chromosome binary markers improve
phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1", American Journal of
Physical Anthropology, 149 (4): 611–615, doi:10.1002/ajpa.22167,
Parpola, Asko (2015), The Roots of Hinduism. The Early Aryans and the
Indus Civilisation, Oxford University Press
Pereltsvaig, Asya; Lewis, Martin W. (2015), "Searching for
Indo-European origins", The Indo-European Controversy, Cambridge
University Press, ISBN 9781107054530
Piazza, Alberto; Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi (2006). "Diffusion of genes and
languages in human evolution". Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on the Evolution of Language. pp. 255–266.
Poznik, G. D.; et al. (2016), "Punctuated bursts in human male
demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences",
Nature Genetics, 48: 593–599, doi:10.1038/ng.3559,
PMC 4884158 , PMID 27111036
Renfrew, Colin (1990).
Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of
Indo-European Origins. CUP Archive. ISBN 9780521386753.
Underhill, Peter A. (2015), "The phylogenetic and geographic structure
of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a", European Journal of Human Genetics,
23: 124–131, doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.50, PMC 4266736 ,
Calvert Watkins. "Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. The American
Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. 2000".
Archived from the original on 1 March 2009. Retrieved 25 April
Wells, Spencer; Read, Mark (2002). The journey of man: a genetic
odyssey. Princeton University Press.
Zvelebil (1995), "Indo-European origins and the agricultural
transition in Europe", Whither Archaeology?: papers in honour of
Stephanie Dutchen (2014), New Branch Added to European Family Tree.
Genetic analysis reveals Europeans descended from at least three
Richard Gray (2015), Modern Europeans descend from FOUR groups of
hunter-gatherers: New strand of
DNA discovered in the
Caucasus is the
'missing piece in the ancestry puzzle'
Dieneke's Anthropology Blog, West_Asian in the flesh (hunter-gatherers
from Georgia) (Jones et al. 2015)
For what they were... we are (2016),
Caucasus and Swiss
eurogenes.blogspot, The genetic structure of the world's first farmers
(Lazaridis et al. preprint)
For what they were... we are (2016) Ancient genomes from Neolithic
Centum and satem
Glossary of sound laws
Sievers' (Edgerton's converse)
Parts of speech
Nominals (nouns and adjectives)
Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (IEW)
Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben
Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben (LIV)
Lexikon der indogermanischen Partikeln und Pronominalstämme
Lexikon der indogermanischen Partikeln und Pronominalstämme (LIPP)
Nomina im Indogermanischen Lexikon
Nomina im Indogermanischen Lexikon (NIL)
Indo-European Etymological Dictionary (IEED)
Indo-European migrations & Proto-Indo-European
The king and the god
Encyclopedia of Indo-Euro