Indo-European languages traced back more than 8,000 years to Anatolia

This research is anthropologically interesting and could add insight into the development of societies.

www.sciencenews.org...

Indo-European languages range throughout Europe and South Asia and even into Iran, yet the roots of this widespread family of tongues have long been controversial. A new study adds support to the proposal that the language family expanded out of Anatolia — what’s now Turkey — between 8,000 and 9,500 years ago, as early farmers sought new land to cultivate.

A team led by psychologist Quentin Atkinson of the University of Auckland in New Zealand came to that conclusion by using a mathematical method to calculate the most likely starting point and pattern of geographic spread for a large set of Indo-European languages.

The new investigation, published in the Aug. 24 Science, rejects a decades-old idea that Kurgan warriors riding horses and driving chariots out of West Asia’s steppes 5,000 to 6,000 years ago triggered the rise of Indo-European speakers. “Our analysis finds decisive support for an Anatolian origin over a steppe origin of Indo-European languages,” Atkinson says.

reply to post by theabsolutetruth


I am adding this as a reply because then it can be deleted if required.

I posted this thread earlier today, there weren't duplicate threads but it was sent to the trash bin.

Then a few hours after mine, Slayer69 posted the same article, it wasn't trashed but he possibly felt bad when I mentioned it on his thread and removed the OP, then the thread was deleted.

I am reposting this to a) for the original purpose of sharing something from research
and b) to see if moderators are allowing it.

If there was a dupe thread it isn't visible in search or if any other reason, I would like a moderator to say, I couldn't see anything offensive in this article or my wording.

Is there something we aren't aware of about this particular topic?

Thank you for this thread.
Makes you wonder if they are making flutes and drawing on cave walls with wonderful creations 40,000 plus years ago,there had to be a yet undiscovered written language other that through a song and dance to carry on traditions and heritage.
I believe written language has been around alot longer,they wrote it down on items that didn't last long.
Took them a few thousand years to figure out that writing it in clay or stone lasted longer.

reply to post by theabsolutetruth


Interesting stuff. Thanks for posting.

reply to post by kdog1982


Thanks.

Yep there probably were many traditional ways of communicating that archaeology hasn't found yet. Interesting, especially all the parallels found in many cultures from generations about superstitions and various teachings about mythologies.

This makes sense to me, because it harmonizes with what we know about the invention of agriculture and its spread outward from the Fertile Crescent. Of course, probably no-one will ever be able to establish the facts for certain. It was all so long ago, long before the invention of writing... and the subject of the origins of language is one of the most controversial in academia.

Not just in academia either. Another name for Proto-Indo-European (the language being discussed here) is 'Aryan'.

Originally posted by Astyanax
This makes sense to me, because it harmonizes with what we know about the invention of agriculture and its spread outward from the Fertile Crescent. Of course, probably no-one will ever be able to establish the facts for certain. It was all so long ago, long before the invention of writing... and the subject of the origins of language is one of the most controversial in academia.

Not just in academia either. Another name for Proto-Indo-European (the language being discussed here) is 'Aryan'.

It does make sense. As well as word roots there are so many similarities in folk tales round the world that could have very ancient origins.

The fact that the term 'Aryan' was around way before Nazis, should be clear to people. The whole 'white apologist' thing is anathema to proper understanding of origins and people shouldn't see any interest in this field of research as racist, it simply isn't.

isn't the Anatolia area where real ancient 'cities' are hewed out of the rock...

there are plenty of known dwellings that could house hundreds or even a thousand people way back then


maybe even the first wife of Adam, a woman named Lilith came from the Anatolia underground city

Originally posted by St Udio
isn't the Anatolia area where real ancient 'cities' are hewed out of the rock...

there are plenty of known dwellings that could house hundreds or even a thousand people way back then


maybe even the first wife of Adam, a woman named Lilith came from the Anatolia underground city

edit on 24-8-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

There are such cities there

www.goreme.com...

The oldest mention of these in writing is from the 4th century BC

en.wikipedia.org...

There is evidence of advanced technology and civilizations in this area from around 7,500 BC.

www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

Ashikli Huyuk - Evidence of sophisticated technology dating to 7,500 BC.

Turkey has produced some exceptional and unique archaeological surprises that have forced us to reconsider the traditional view of prehistory in the middle east. For a long time, it was said that civilisation began in Egypt but the discovery of ancient Turkish cities and industrial complexes, combined with evidence of skills and technology, geometry and astronomy, are revealing a very different picture from that prescribed in most history books. Discoveries include: The earliest evidence of metallurgy in the world, dating at 7,200 BC. The use of 'Mud-bricks for structures at 6,500 BC. As well as this, the underground city at Derinkuyu which was connected to four other similar sites, creating a potential capacity of 100,000 people.

As for ''Lilith'', as far as appears, was a construct from the Babylonian Talmud as a 'night spirit'. Though there are plenty of ancient day / night, light / dark aspects of divinity and the archetypes that developed from these ideas. There is every possibility this idea stemmed from ancient cultures in this area.

It is also interesting that these ancient peoples in this area could have knowledge of and been the forebears of astronomy, from which a lot of ancient religions and traditions are based.

www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

Velikovsky suggested that the origin of prehistoric bull-veneration was related to the arrival of the planet Venus, which he believed was witnessed, and from whence came the apparent universal calendar change from 360 days to 365 days. The discovery of such obvious evidence of cattle-worship from before the time he predicted, is not in favour with this theory. Such an early date does tie in nicely with another theory however, as it accords nicely with the motions of the 'Platonic year'. There have been several serious suggestions that the understanding of prehistoric astronomy extended to the recognition of the 'precession of the equinoxes', which has a cycle lasting approximately 25,960 years, and is measured by the gradual rotation of the zodiacal constellations on the horizon at the equinoxes). The product of such observations was the division of the sky into twelve equal parts, each occupied by a constellation, and each being visible at the equinoxes for a period of approximately 2,160 years. Although Plato's name is attached to this theory, it is known from Sir N. Lockyer's research at temples such as Denderra in Egypt, that the procession of the equinoxes was a recorded phenomena from long before the Greeks. Just how far back is a question yet to be answered, although it is tempting to associate the prehistoric veneration of cattle with the 'age of Taurus', which occurred at the same time as the constellation of Taurus was the 'rising' constellation at the equinoxes. It has also been suggested in relation to this, that the Sphinx was a remnant of the 'age of Leo', and that Christianity is symbolic of the 'age of Pisces'.

reply to post by theabsolutetruth

The fact that the term 'Aryan' was around way before Nazis, should be clear to people. The whole 'white apologist' thing is anathema to proper understanding of origins and people shouldn't see any interest in this field of research as racist, it simply isn't.

I'm coming at it from a slightly different perspective, though the historical roots of the delusion are similar. What I'm talking about is Hindu and Buddhist bigots in India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and elsewhere who have completely swallowed the whole Aryan palaver and make all kinds of ridiculous pseudohistorical claims. A respected academic in my country has published books saying that the 'ancient aliens' who 'built the Pyramids' were actually flying-saucer-driving prehistoric-but-high-tech Aryan compatriots of ours.

These lunatics are hand in glove with the folk who believe the ancient Indians had flying machines and atom bombs, by the way.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by theabsolutetruth

 

The fact that the term 'Aryan' was around way before Nazis, should be clear to people. The whole 'white apologist' thing is anathema to proper understanding of origins and people shouldn't see any interest in this field of research as racist, it simply isn't.

I'm coming at it from a slightly different perspective, though the historical roots of the delusion are similar. What I'm talking about is Hindu and Buddhist bigots in India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and elsewhere who have completely swallowed the whole Aryan palaver and make all kinds of ridiculous pseudohistorical claims. A respected academic in my country has published books saying that the 'ancient aliens' who 'built the Pyramids' were actually flying-saucer-driving prehistoric-but-high-tech Aryan compatriots of ours.

These lunatics are hand in glove with the folk who believe the ancient Indians had flying machines and atom bombs, by the way.

edit on 24/8/12 by Astyanax because: of low-flying Aryans.

I am aware of that angle....I read 'Chariots of the Gods' as a teenager. Von Daniken does Blavatsky and the Book of Ezekiel....hmmm.

Hopefully there aren't any true believers of Von Danikens books.

I guess at least it educated me as to some things of ancient origins and inspired further research on many things.

Originally posted by Astyanax


Not just in academia either. Another name for Proto-Indo-European (the language being discussed here) is 'Aryan'.

Not in any reputable way, the Aryans were a small group of Persians, some Victorian era philologists decided to apply that to the whole language family, but it is not the correct term, just as germans called Indo-European "Indo-Germanic". Thus Aryan is a member of the IE language family.

Thats interesting because genetic testing of the Egyptian pharaonic bloodline has also linked them to Anatolia.

reply to post by LUXUS


Certainly is interesting.

There is more and more proof that the first civilizations are from this area, and obviously feasible that the same civilizations founded and developed Ancient Egypt.

I also think there is a lot of proof suggesting modern humanities origins are from the Middle East, even flour archaeology adds weight to these origi n theories.

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by LUXUS

 

Certainly is interesting.

There is more and more proof that the first civilizations are from this area, and obviously feasible that the same civilizations founded and developed Ancient Egypt.

I also think there is a lot of proof suggesting modern humanities origins are from the Middle East, even flour archaeology adds weight to these origi n theories.

The problem here is Proto Indo-European culture and Egyptian are not that similar, nor were the languages. That implies a significant time of separation.

Ok, so this is agrees that Mesopotamia is the oldest Indo-European languages.

8,000 years ago. Wouldn't that make it around 6,000 BC?

The oldest Sumerian writings are about 10,000 years old (around 8,000BC) years old

So Sumerian writings are still the oldest, but that is a dead language.

Turkish (Anatolia) may be the oldest Indo-European language still living today - if this is true.

reply to post by arpgme


Mesopotanian is not an Indo-European Language, but rather a semetic one.

reply to post by Noinden


Not all are. Sumerian is an isolate language for example.

Is Anatolia (Turkey) considered Mesopotanian or Indo-European (Iranian)?

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by Noinden

 

Not all are. Sumerian is an isolate language for example.

Is Anatolia (Turkey) considered Mesopotanian or Indo-European (Iranian)?

Anatolian I believe is IE. But you asked about mesopotanian. Slightly different things. Mesopotanian languag is semetic. en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Noinden


Ok. Now, I understand the confusion. Turkey is between Europe and Mesopotamia. It's next to Syria, Iraq, and Iran (Mesopotamian / Semitic) but also next to Greece,and Bulgaria (European).

Southern-Eastern Turkey is considered Mesopotamian but it is mostly in Europe (Eurasian).

Now that I think about it, it's common sense that Indo-European languages can be traced back to Anatolia (Turkey) considering the fact that the first recorded language was in Sumer (Mesopotamian) and they traveled from there.