Indo-European languages

{{Bronze}}
{{hatnote|"PIE" redirects here. It should not be confused with {{wpl|pies}} of the baking variety}}
[[File:Indo-European Language Family Branches in Eurasia.png|thumb|right|300px|
Present-day distribution of Indo-European languages in Eurasia, with major divisions:
{{legend|#00CCFE|Albanian}}
{{legend|#7F007F|Armenian}}
{{legend|#3d6098|Baltic (East)}}
{{legend|#007F00|Slavic}}
{{legend|#FEA600|Celtic (Brittonic and Goidelic languages)}}
{{legend|#D30000|Germanic (North and West)}}
{{legend|#FEDC55|Greek}}
{{legend|#00007F|Iranian (or Iranic)}}
{{legend|#751eb4|Indo-Aryan (or Indic)}}
{{legend|#587f00|Nuristani}}
{{legend|#967F12|Italic (Romance)}}
{{legend|#BEBEBE|Non-Indo-European languages}}
]]
{{langnav}}
The '''Indo-European languages''' are a widely distributed family of [[language]]s, all descended from a hypothetical and partially reconstructable ancestor, the '''Proto-Indo-European (PIE) language'''.<ref group=note>The Proto-Language is hypothetical as far as its reconstruction goes. To avoid misunderstanding, there was of course nothing hypothetical about the language the linguistic ancestors actually spoke. However, the various reconstructed parts of PIE were not necessarily valid at the same time. Nor can we be confident that all the features of their language can be recovered.</ref> Languages of this family, native to Eurasia, were spoken in historical times from [[Norway]], [[Portugal]] and [[Iceland]] to [[Maldives]], [[Bangladesh]] and {{wpl|Sri Lanka||.}} They have spread by [[colonialism]] to become the dominant languages of [[North America]], [[South America]] and [[Australia]], and are widely present in [[Africa]] as well.

Despite at first seeming like a boring etymological subject, in truth this topic has has always been extremely politicized, particularly in what the "Proto-Indo-Europeans" looked like, their social structure, and their homeland. 

Older, mostly abandoned, terms for the family include '''{{wpl|Japheth|Japhetic}}''', '''Indo-Germanic''',<ref name="q837"/>{{rp|2}} and '''[[Aryan]]'''.{{efn|Andrew Sihler's apt description:<ref name="q837">{{cite book | last=Sihler | first=Andrew L | title=New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin | publisher=Oxford University Press | publication-place=Oxford | date=1995 | isbn=978-0-19-537336-3 }}</ref>{{rp|2}} {{quotebox|The term Aryan is also used in the same sense, but more by historians and ethnologists than by linguists—though in fact the term is obsolete, having been contaminated by its association with [[Nazism|homicidal social theories]]. The term is encountered among linguists, though rarely these days, as an alternative designation for the Indo-Iranian branch of IE (4).}}}}

==Why this?==
Despite being what would at first seem a dry [[Etymology|etymological]] subject, the study of Indo-European languages has been repeatedly politicized, and would often be presented with the false pretense that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were light-skinned, had blonde hair and blue eyes ([[Aryan#No.2C_they_weren.27t_Nordic|In actuality, they never looked like that!]]). In the period after [[World War II]], several Indo-European scholars (such as [[Roger Pearson]], {{wpl|Jean Haudry}} and the influential {{sl|Trifunctional hypothesis|Georges Dumézil}})<ref name="arvidsson2006">{{Cite book |last=Arvidsson |first=Stefan |title=Aryan idols: Indo-European mythology as ideology and science |date=2006 |publisher=University of Chicago press |isbn=978-0-226-02860-6 |location=Chicago}}</ref>{{rp|2, 3, 241 ff., 306}} and writers influenced by Indo-European studies (e.g. {{wpl|Alain de Benoist}}) were accused of having sympathies for [[fascism]] or [[Nazism]]. It was alleged that their political beliefs may have influenced their studies.<ref name="arvidsson2006"/><ref>{{Cite book |last=Lincoln |first=Bruce |title=Theorizing myth: narrative, ideology, and scholarship |date=1999 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-48201-9 |location=Chicago}}</ref> {{wpl|Stefan Arvidsson}} speculated that the fact that many Indo-European scholars identify themselves as the descendants of the ancient Indo-Europeans may explain why the field of Indo-European studies has also been ideologically abused.<ref name="arvidsson2006"/>{{rp|3, 308, 320}} {{wpl|David Anthony}} remarked that the Indo-European linguistics and archaeology have been exploited to support openly ideological agendas for so long that a brief history of the issue quickly becomes entangled with the intellectual history of [[Europe]].<ref name="Anthony">{{Cite journal|last=Anthony |first=David W. |title=Nazi and eco-feminist prehistories: ideology and empiricism in Indo-European archaeology |date=1996-01-26 |work=Nationalism, Politics and the Practice of Archaeology |pages=82–96 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511558214.006 |access-date=2024-09-02 |publisher=Cambridge University Press}}</ref><ref group=note>Portions of this text are adapted from the [[Wikipedia]] article on {{wpl|Indo-European_studies|Indo-European studies}}.</ref>

==Their startling discovery==
A variety of writers had observed that languages such as [[Russian]] appeared to be related to [[Greek]] and [[Latin]]; {{wpl|Mikhail Lomonosov}} noted the similarities between Russian, Greek, Latin, and the [[Baltic]] ("Courlandic" or "Kurlandic") languages in his 1755 ''Russian Grammar'', inviting us to "[i]magine the depth of time when these languages separated! … [[Polish]] and Russian separated so long ago! Now think how long ago [this happened to] Kurlandic! Think when [this happened to] Latin, Greek, [[German]], and Russian! Oh, great antiquity!" But it was {{wpl|Sir William Jones}}, a British judge stationed in [[India]], who noticed the strong similarity between [[Sanskrit]] and Classical Greek:<ref name=Campbell/>{{rp|5}}

{{cquote|The Sanscrit{{sic}} language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists; there is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the [[Gothic]] and the [[Celtic]], though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanscrit{{sic}}; and the {{wpl|Old Persian|old Persian}} might be added to the same family.}}

It was, in fact, [[racism|quite startling]] for white Britons to discover that brown "[[heathen|heathens]]" were speaking a language closely akin to {{wpl|Ancient Greek||.}} British attitudes towards India and its culture during the colonial period tended towards two extremes. {{wpl|Indophilia}} was manifest in orientalist art, architecture, and painting; {{wpl|Johann Wolfgang von Goethe}} and {{wpl|Ralph Waldo Emerson}} were both familiar with the {{wpl|Bhagavad Gita||.}} There was also {{wpl|Indophobia||,}} associated with [[evangelical Christianity]]; {{wpl|Thomas Babington Macaulay}} dismissed Sanskrit literature as:

{{cquote|…medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier — [[Astronomy]], which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school — [[History]], abounding with kings thirty feet high reigns thirty thousand years long — and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter".<ref name=AaBI>{{Cite book |last=Trautmann |first=Thomas |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520205468.001.0001 |title=Aryans and British India |date=1997-03-31 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-20546-8}}</ref>{{rp|112}}<ref group=note>Come on. You [[Streisand effect|know you want to read]] about those thirty-foot kings, and what it's like to sail over the sea of butter. (The seafood must be to die for.)</ref>}}

As another example of such condescension, William Jones, in the famous speech in which he proposed the genetic relatedness of the Indo-European languages, also said,

{{cquote|Their sources of wealth are still abundant even after so many revolutions and conquests; in their manufactures of cotton they still surpass all the world; and their features have, most probably, remained unaltered since the time of {{wpl|Dionysus|Dionysius{{sic}}}}; nor can we reasonably doubt, how degenerate and abased so ever the [[Hindu|Hindus]] may now appear, that in some early age they were splendid in art and arms, happy in government, wise in legislation, and eminent in various knowledge.}}

Thus, with such ideas, [[evangelical Christians]] are hardly in a position to criticize.

==Subfamilies==
===Major===
*Albanian - A language primarily spoken in [[Albania]], intuitively enough, with significant minorities in other Southern European countries. It possesses some similarities to Greek and has many [[Turkish]] loanwords due to Albania being part of Turkey or Greece in various points of its history.
*Anatolian - Now extinct, this was the language family of the Hittite people. Hittite is the oldest attested Indo-European language and lacks some grammatical features more common in its cousins.
*Armenian - An independent branch of the IE languages, which is spoken in [[Armenia]] in two primary dialects and has significant minorities in [[Lebanon]], [[Russia]], [[Georgia]], [[Iran]], and [[Turkey]]. It has been proposed that it is related closely enough to Greek that they should be placed together in the {{wpl|Graeco-Armenian}} family, but this theory is currently not widely accepted.
*Balto-Slavic - The surviving Baltic languages are now Latvian and Lithuanian, the latter of which is notable for its extreme conservatism in the language. Slavic languages are much larger and include Russian, Ukrainian, Polish, Belarusian, Czech, Serbo-Croatian (Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, etc.), and many others.
*Celtic - Once the largest spoken language family in Europe. On the continent it was first displaced by Latin from the Romans and later in the [[British Isles]] various dialects of English from the Germanics. Notable examples include Breton, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, and Cornish.
*Germanic - This is the family that includes the West Germanic languages {{wpl|West Germanic Languages}} English, German, Dutch, Afrikaans, and the {{wpl|Nordic languages|Nordic}} which are the primary languages of Scandinavia as well as Iceland. They include Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic and a few obscure ones; except for [[Finnish]], which is a Uralic language). There is also an extinct {{wpl|East Germanic}} grouping, which includes {{wpl|Gothic language}} as well as a few others that are mostly unattested. {{wpl|Germanic languages}} are distinct because of {{wpl|Grimm's Law}} which explains certain sound changes making them distinct from other Indo-European languages. Additionally, they may have a substrate of an unknown language which displaced some more traditional Indo-European words in Proto-Germanic.
*Hellenic - The language family to which Greek belongs to. It also includes a few smaller and more obscure languages, most of which are extinct.
*Indo-Iranian - Sometimes simply known as [[Aryan]] (also includes Nuristani), many of the languages of [[India]] (broadly {{wpl|Indian subcontinent}} vis-à-vis {{wpl|South Asia}}) and [[Iran]] (broadly including [[Azerbaijan]], [[Kurdistan]], [[Tajikistan]], northwestern [[Afghanistan]], southern [[Uzbekistan]] and [[Turkmenistan]]). [[Sanskrit]], {{wpl|Prakrit}}, [[Persian]], {{wpl|Avestan language|Avestan}}, and its descendants are part of this group.  
*Italic - A group of languages native to pre-Roman [[Italy]] including various extinct languages and [[Latin]], the language of [[Rome]]. This category also includes modern languages such as Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, and Catalan, all of which descend from the common {{wpl|Vulgar Latin}} dialect which later gave rise to these languages, referred to as the {{wpl|Romance Languages}}.
*Tocharian/Tokharian - A now-extinct language family spoken by the Tocharians/Tokharians in what is now [[Xinjiang]]/{{wpl|Uyghuristan}}/{{wpl|East Turkestan}} (present-day northwestern [[China]]).

===Obscure===
There are some small, little-known, and extinct families in Indo-European as well. Many of these are known exclusively from small, short texts or personal/place names.
*Illyrian — A fairly unknown now-extinct ancient language family spoken in the [[Balkans]].<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|405-6}}<ref name="t773">{{cite book | last=Katicic | first=Radoslav | title=Ancient Languages of the Balkans, Part 1: | publisher=DE GRUYTER | date=1976-12-31 | isbn=978-3-11-119733-3 | doi=10.1515/9783111568874}} Has been speculated to be an ancestor of Albanian.</ref>{{rp|166}}
*Lusitanian — A language formerly spoken in ancient Iberia.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|408-9}}
*Liburnian — A language that may be part of the Illyrian family or a member of the Italic family by way of Venetic.<ref name="t773"/>{{rp|179-80, 183}}
*Messapian — A language which used to be spoken in Southeastern [[Italy]], with records dating from the 6th to 1st century BCE. Possibly related to Illyrian.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|407-8}}
*Paeonian — Another [[Balkans|Balkan]] language with few records of its existence. It has been variously argued to be its own branch or a member of the Hellenic, Thracian, or Illyrian branches.<ref name="t773"/>{{rp|116-20}}
*Phrygian — A relatively more attested language. Either in a supergrouping with Hellenic or an independent branch.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|401-4}}
*Sicel — A language spoken in Sicily. Possibly not a member of the Italic languages, an independent language, or non-Indo-European.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|269}}
*Dacian - An extinct language spoken in Thrace, the region that now comprises Bulgaria and the European part of Turkey.
*Thracian — An extinct language spoken around the Thrace region of Europe and extending as far as Anatolia and [[Romania]]. Possibly related to Indo-Iranian.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|404}}

===Relationships within the Indo-European family===
{{More sources}}
[[File:IndoEuropeanLanguageFamilyRelationsChart.jpg|right|350px|Phylogenetic tree of the Indo-European languages.]]
It is an interesting fact that the Germanic languages on the one hand and the Balto-Slavic languages on the other are believed to be more closely related to one another than either group is to anything else.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Chang |first=Will |last2=Cathcart |first2=Chundra |last3=Hall |first3=David |last4=Garrett |first4=Andrew |date=2015 |title=Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0005 |journal=Language |volume=91 |issue=1 |pages=194–244 |doi=10.1353/lan.2015.0005 |issn=1535-0665}}</ref> The reasons for this are of course technical details in the inflection of those language groups, but the [[Adolf Hitler|Austrian Corporal with the mustache]] seems to have been unaware of this. Yet, he mentioned languages as parts of "race". That notion — of associating language with the nebulous concept of race — is of course pure drivel, but still, somebody should have pointed this out to him. By the way, this relatedness should put the final nail in the coffin of the obsolete {{wpl|Centum and satem languages|centum-satem division}}. Germanic languages are centum, and Balto-Slavic languages are satem. The centum-satem division is named for the Latin word for 100 (''centum'') and the same word in the {{wpl|Avestan language}} (as 𐬯𐬀𐬙𐬆𐬨 ''satəm'') which for a long time was believed to mirror an ancient division or at the least [[dialect continuum]] in the early history of Indo-European languages. However, the discovery of the {{wpl|Tocharian languages}} (now extinct) that were spoken in the wrong place and time and with the wrong word for 100 for the division to make any sense put a huge dent in that idea and it is now very near-dead.

A non-exhaustive list of proposed internal connections between various Indo-European families includes: 
*Greeco-Phrygian<ref>{{cite book |last1=Ligorio |first1=Orsat |last2=Lubotsky |first2=Alexander |year=2018 |chapter=Phrygian |editor1=Jared Klein |editor2=Brian Joseph |editor3=Matthias Fritz |title=Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics |location=Berlin, Boston |publisher=De Gruyter Mouton |pages=1816–1831 |series=HSK 41.3 |doi=10.1515/9783110542431-022 |hdl=1887/63481 |isbn=9783110542431 |s2cid=242082908 |chapter-url=https://www.academia.edu/36922557}}</ref>{{rp|1817}}
*Greeco-Armenian
*Greeco-Indo-Iranian. (This and the above two can be combined in some form.) <ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|181, 338, 403}}
*Germano-Balto-Slavic. Similarities between them are considered "areal" features, due to being in close contact, rather than truly shared innovations.<ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|364}}
*Every Language family other than Anatolian a "true" Indo-European language with Anatolian being a sister family in a broader "Indo-Hittite" or "Indo-Anatolian" family.<ref name=Fortson>{{Cite book |last=Fortson |first=Benjamin W. |title=Indo-European language and culture: an introduction |date=2004 |publisher=Blackwell Pub |isbn=978-1-4051-0315-2}}</ref>{{rp|155}}
*Every Language family other than Tocharian/Tokharian (and Anatolian, which split off early) is more closely related to each other than to Tocharian <ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|352}}
*Italo-Celtic <ref name=Fortson/>{{rp|247}}

==The two branches of the Aryan myth==
{{cquote|One unfortunate [[archaeological]] data set has been forced to yield two diametrically opposed interpretations in the service of two ideological movements, one heinous (the Nazis) and one innocent (eco-feminism). Oddly, both interpretations share the same theoretical and logical form; it is only a politically motivated reversal of the "good" and the "bad" that separates them. Neither interpretation can be empirically justified.|||David Anthony<ref name="Anthony"/>}}

The Indo-European languages are one of [[history|history's]] success stories. As such, their origin and the reasons for their spread have given rise to [[bullshit|speculation]] of varying quality. Notoriously, this included the virulent and plain evil [[ideology]] of [[Nazi Germany]], whose [[Holocaust|monstrous]] [[genocide]] tainted the name "[[Aryan]]", which were (and still are) one of the names the speakers of the ancient language(s) knew themselves by. An idea arose — a fairly plausible one, actually — that since their languages spread so far, the speakers of this language must have been mighty conquerors; the territorial spread of the languages is a relic of their prehistoric [[empire]]. The myth of the Aryan conqueror, the [[white supremacy|master race]], has sprouted two branches, one of which is mostly dead: that one's [[Nazism]]. It has 19<sup>th</sup> century roots; initial discoveries about Indo-European languages were made in a context of [[nationalist|nationalistic]] [[Romanticism]], where literary figures like {{wpl|J. G. Herder}} developed loopy theories about how languages somehow embody the [[soul|souls]] of people.<ref name="Anthony"/> Ironically, {{wpl|Yiddish}} (the language of many of the [[Holocaust|Jews that the Nazis exterminated]]), is a Germanic language (with elements taken from [[Hebrew]], {{wpl|Aramaic languages|Aramaic}} and Slavic languages) that demonstrates significant cultural assimilation of [[Jews]] into the German world at one time, but linguistic relatedness that allowed Jews to live well in Germany before 1933 obviously created no solidarity based upon language. 

The living branch involves [[feminism|feminist]] [[pseudohistory]], and great gobs of fascinating [[woo]], mostly about the [[utopia|utopian]] grandeur of an alleged age when [[matriarchy|women ruled]]: and the [[pagan survivals|underground survival]] of [[Goddess movement|Goddess worshipers]] beneath the boot of a tyrannical [[patriarchy]]. This flourishing branch also takes clues from [[Margaret Murray|Margaret Murray's]] pseudohistorical books on [[witchcraft]], alleged to be surviving [[pagan|pagans]] persecuted by [[Christians]]. The themes of patriarchal conquerors, matriarchy, and underground pagan or Goddess worship could be relocated by [[fantasy]] novelists to settings from Mycenaean [[Greece]] (Mary Renault, ''The King Must Die''), [[King Arthur|Arthurian]] [[Britain]] (Marion Zimmer Bradley, ''The Mists of Avalon''), 17<sup>th</sup> century Britain (John Buchan, ''Witch Wood''), 20<sup>th</sup> century Britain (Robin Hardy, dir., ''The Wicker Man''), 20<sup>th</sup> century America (Thomas Tryon, ''Harvest Home''), and a [[apocalypse|post-apocalyptic]] future ([[Robert Graves]], ''Seven Days In New Crete''). Once you accept the idea of a [[conspiracy theory|secret, underground tradition]] of pagan or Goddess worship, none of these scenarios is historically implausible.

===The surviving branch: eco-feminist pseudohistory===
[[File:Amazone Staatliche Antikensammlungen 2342.jpg|thumb|right|On this Greek vase, ca. 420 BCE, an Amazon is depicted in Scythian costume.]]
Early accounts of the Indo-Europeans make the frequently seen but unreliable assumption that language is co-extensive with [[race]]. Myths of Aryan conquerors are founded on a belief that it was some kind of superiority that enabled Indo-European speakers to replace previous cultures, rather than attracting them by the merits of their [[culture]]. This superiority might be [[scientific racism|innate and racial]], or, much more likely, it depended on their superior military technology such as chariots and cavalry units.

Was it some prowess or the [[war]]-like virtue of the [[Aryan|Aryans]], attested in that form in [[India]] (as ''ā́rya'' आर्य), in the Greek superlative (as ''áristoi'' ἄριστοι), the ''best'' people, (i.e. [[aristocracy|aristocrats]]);<ref group=note>Isn't it convenient that they called themselves the "best" people?</ref> also in the names of the countries [[Iran]] ({{wpl|New Persian||:}} اِیرَان, romanized as ''Īrān''; {{wpl|Middle Persian}}: 𐭠𐭩𐭥𐭠𐭭, romanized as ''Ērān''; {{wpl|Old Persian|||:}} 𐎠𐎼𐎡𐎹, romanized as ''Ariyaʰ''; {{wpl|Avestan||:}} 𐬀𐬌𐬭𐬌𐬌𐬀, romanized as ''a<sup>i</sup>riia''), and more dubiously, [[Ireland]] (''Éire''){{efn|The more commonly accepted etymology that holds that ''Éire'' derives from *''pih-wer-'', the "fat" or "fertile" country; compare Greek Πιερία (romanized as ''Pīeríā''). Initial *''p-'' is routinely lost in Celtic; cf. English ''father'', Latin ''pater'', Irish ''athair''.<ref name="m&a"/>{{rp|261}}}} that spread their language across five continents? It's suggested that they were the first to master horseback riding, wagons, and chariots as military technologies. They spread their language everywhere through prowess and technology. There is a feminist counter-narrative here, from [[Robert Graves]], [[Marija Gimbutas]], and many others: that the Aryans were barbaric, cruel conquerors who put the [[utopia|utopian]] civilization of the Goddess to the torch, and imposed a cruel [[patriarchy]]. In [[Riane Eisler]]'s ''[[The Chalice and the Blade]]'', Aryan conquests are also seen as auguring the imposition of male domination over what once was a peaceful feminist utopia.<ref name="Lewis">{{Cite book |last=Pereltsvaig |first=Asya |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107294332 |title=The Indo-European Controversy |last2=Lewis |first2=Martin W. |date=2015-04-30 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-107-29433-2}} Portions of the text from the book were adapted from Geocurrents: [https://www.geocurrents.info/blog/category/indo-european-origins/ Indo-European Origins] ''Geocurrents''</ref>{{rp|33}}

The French philologist {{wpl|Georges Dumézil||,}} who supported the [[far-right]] {{wpl|Action Française movement||,}} argued that the PIE peoples had a rigid social structure organised into [[caste|castes]], but this was a good thing because it prefigured a modern [[fascist]] society.<ref name=piereligion/>

===="Old Europe" was no utopia====
In fact, at least some of the cultures some scholars believe represent pre-Indo-European populations were quite warlike; the late {{wpl|Cucuteni-Trypillian culture|Cucuteni}} and {{wpl|Cernavodă culture|Cernavodă cultures}} built large settlements with fortress-like stockade cities in their later period, and grave remains indicate a highly stratified society. High-status graves contained anti-personnel weapons like porphyry maces.<ref name="Anthony"></ref>{{rp|94-5}}<ref group=note>Unlike an axe or even a blade, a mace has only one use: cracking skulls.</ref> The archeological record shows large, concentrated {{wpl|hill fort}} settlements built along a circular plan, with palisades or stockades.

The {{wpl|Cucuteni}} apparently practiced metal smithing in these settlements, mostly in {{wpl|arsenical bronze|arsenical bronze|;}} the health consequences of this technology suggest that it was practiced mostly by [[slavery|slaves]] or low-status individuals in these compounds. Indeed, in {{wpl|Cucuteni-Tripyllian}} (''Tripolye'') settlements, burials of infants and children are sometimes found beneath the floors of buildings, suggesting that they may have been put there as [[human sacrifice|human sacrifices]].<ref name="Anthony"/>{{rp|94-5}}

====Female status among the Kurgan people====
By contrast, in the {{wpl|Kurgan}} graves we find female skeletons given warrior burials with bronze weapons and wheeled vehicles as grave goods; one-sixth of such high-status graves belonged to women—not exactly equality, but more than can be said for most of the ancient world.<ref name="hw&l">{{Cite book |last=Anthony |first=David W. |title=The horse, the wheel, and language: how bronze-age riders from the Eurasian steppes shaped the modern world |date=2007 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-05887-0}}</ref>Goddess figures and female warriors were also associated with the later population of the Indo-European homeland and are depicted in {{wpl|Scythian art||.}} Ancient Greek legends make the area north and east of the {{wpl|Black Sea||,}} the {{wpl|Colchis}} of antiquity, one of the locations of the legendary Amazons.<ref name="Lewis"/>{{rp|34}}<ref>[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140923-amazon-greek-vase-translations-science/ Amazon Warriors' Names Revealed Amid "Gibberish" on Ancient Greek Vases], ''[[National Geographic]]''.</ref>

Old Europe was not a feminist utopia. Women could hold high social status in the Kurgan cultural areas, but no comparable finds have been made for pre-IE cultures. In fact, it's likelier that the Indo-Europeans were [[horse]] breeders and traders as well as warriors, who established a trade network that stretched from the Balkans to east of the Black Sea. Their mobility and wealth, as much as their military prowess, persuaded people to adopt their language as a second language over a wide area. These folks had horses, chariots, and money. They got around. They were the sort of people your children would run away from the farm to join.

Any wars fought were local and minor. More importantly, the culture they displaced was no utopia.

==Proto-Indo-European and its speakers==
===Homeland===
{{cquote|The Indo-European homeland is like the {{wpl|Lost Dutchman's Gold Mine|Lost Dutchman's Mine,}} a legend of the American West, discovered almost everywhere but confirmed nowhere. Anyone who claims to know its ''real'' location is thought to just be a little odd{{---}}[[Nazi|or worse]]. Indo-European homelands have been identified in [[India]], [[Pakistan]], the {{wpl|Himalayas}}, the {{wpl|Altaic Mountains}}, [[Kazakhstan]], [[Russia]], [[Ukraine]], {{wpl|Balkans|the Balkans,}} [[Turkey]], [[Armenia]], the {{wpl|North Caucasus}}, [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]], [[Germany]], [[Scandinavia]], the North Pole, and (of course) [[Atlantis]].|||David Anthony<ref name="hw&l"/>{{rp|83}}}}
[[File:Map Corded Ware culture-en.svg|thumb|right|Location of Yamna and Corded Ware cultures]]
If you admire these guys, you [[Nationalist pseudohistory|might want to claim your own country as their homeland]]. There are a variety of [[nationalism|nationalistic]] claims; [[Nazi Germany]] notoriously claimed to be the Aryan homeland. Strains of [[Hindu nationalism]], especially the proponents of [[Hindutva]] assert that the [[Sanskrit]] language is indigenous to India.

The overwhelming current scholarly consensus places the Indo-European homeland in the area of the Black Sea; a minority say [[Turkey|Anatolia]] but most say that the steppes of Eastern Europe are the Indo-European homeland.<ref>[http://ukrainianweek.com/History/88577 The Cradle of Indo-Europeans] Zalizniak Leonid ''Ukranian week'' 5 september 2013 </ref> A 2015 survey, combining genetic and linguistic data, concluded that the steppe hypothesis was the most likely, and that Indo-European dialects were spoken by the {{wpl|Yamna culture|Yamnaya}} and {{wpl|Corded Ware culture|}}.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Haak |first=Wolfgang |title=Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe |date=2015-02-10 |url=https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/013433v1 |access-date=2024-09-03 |language=en |doi=10.1101/013433 |last2=Lazaridis |first2=Iosif |last3=Patterson |first3=Nick |last4=Rohland |first4=Nadin |last5=Mallick |first5=Swapan |last6=Llamas |first6=Bastien |last7=Brandt |first7=Guido |last8=Nordenfelt |first8=Susanne |last9=Harney |first9=Eadaoin|journal=Nature}}</ref> More recent genetic and archaeological studies have linked by the {{wpl|Corded Ware culture}} and the {{wpl|Afanasievo culture}} of [[Siberia]] to a Yamna origin.<ref>Bruce Bower [https://www.sciencenews.org/article/how-asian-nomadic-herders-built-new-bronze-age-cultures How Asian nomadic herders built new Bronze Age cultures: In wagons and on horses, Yamnaya pastoralists left their genetic mark from Ireland to China]  (12:00 noon, November 15, 2017) ''Science News''.</ref>

Of course, the biggest problem with all localization attempts is that ceramic shards speak no language and material culture and language don't have to correlate (both [[American]] and [[Japanese]] people play with similar-looking [[Nintendo]] gadgets, yet the two languages are entirely unrelated). On the other hand, genetic studies are — if anything — only partially useful. Genetics and language can correlate but they don't have to. Large-scale migrations are attested in the historical record and they sometimes caused either the native language and culture of an area to disappear (e.g. the conquest of the [[Americas]] for the most part) or migrant's language and culture to largely disappear (e.g. the age of migrations in the 5<sup>th</sup> century that left almost no trace of Germanic language or culture in {{wpl|Gaul||,}} {{wpl|Hispania||,}} or [[Italy]]). In neither case is there a clear-cut genetic picture, as evidenced by the myriad (real or fake) descendants of [[Pocahontas]] and the very un-Spanish name {{wpl|Rodriguez}} (son of {{wpl|Roderic||).}}

====Questionable homeland arguments====
*Salmon argument. The existence of a word for {{wpl|Atlantic salmon}} in Proto-Indo-European reconstructed as *''loḱs-'' found in the Balto-Slavic and Germanic language families means that the homeland was in the Baltic. This argument is questionable because Germanic and Balto-Slavic may have had close ties to one another and the word may not have referred to the Atlantic salmon but to the related {{wpl|brown trout||.}}<ref name="m&a"/>{{rp|146-147}}
*Beech argument. The existence of a word for beech reconstructed as *''b<sup>h</sup>eh<sub>2</sub>gos'' found in Greek, Celtic, Italic, Albanian, and Germanic was used as an argument for a homeland west of a line stretching from {{wpl|Kaliningrad}} (the disconnected part of [[Russia]]) to {{wpl|Odessa}} (the part just below [[Moldova]]), because that is where the {{wpl|Common beech|Common beech's}} range ends. However, descendants of the word are not found in Indo-Iranian, Tocharian/Tokharian, or Anatolian, the descendants mean "oak" in Greek and Albanian, and there are also closely related species of Beech in [[Crimea]], the {{wpl|Caucasus}} and Anatolia.<ref group=note>Table based on Mallory and Adams 2006. Note the irregularities in the Albanian and Russian descendants
 
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Language
!Word
!Meaning
|-
|Ancient Greek
|phēgós
|Oak
|-
|Latin
|fāgus
|Beech
|-
|Proto-Germanic, (Old English)
|*bōkaz (bōc), *bōkijō (bēċe)
|Beech
|-
|Gaulish
|bāgos
|Possibly beech
|-
|Albanian
|bung
|{{wpl|Durmast oak}}
|-
|Russian
|buz
|{{wpl|Elder tree|elder}}
|-
|PIE
|b<sup>h</sup>eh<sub>2</sub>ǵos
|Beech
|}
</ref><ref name="m&a"/>{{rp|161, 170-171}}

===When was PIE spoken?===
The actual time when PIE was spoken is debated, but a tentative guess puts it at no earlier than 4,000 BCE. A minority position states that it was spoken 8,000 BCE, a position which overlaps with people who say the PIE homeland was Anatolia. A fringe position states that it was spoken as early as the Paleolithic in something called "Paleolithic continuity theory" or, more [[Dunning-Kruger effect|bombastically]], "Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm".<ref>[http://www.continuitas.org/workgroup.html "The Paleolithic Continuity Paradigm - The PCP Workgroup".] ''www.continuitas.org''</ref>{{efn|Paleolithic continuity theory (PlC) was created by semantician (somebody who studies semantics, i.e meaning) {{wpl|Mario Alinei}}, who also believed that Etruscan was an early form of Hungarian.<ref>[http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_etruscan.pdf Etruscan: An Archaic Form of Hungarian] Mario Alinei 2003</ref> }}

===Proto-Indo-European religion===
Researchers can apply the comparative method to religious vocabulary in an attempt to piece together commonalities of [[religion]] across the different groups who have spoken Indo-European languages. This may possibly give an insight into any putative common ancestor(s) of the major European religious traditions: [[Roman]], Germanic (including Norse), [[Greek]], [[Sanskrit]] ([[Hindu]]) and (more speculatively) [[Slavic religion| Slavic]].

A word for "god" occurs in many languages: ''{{wpl|Deva (Hinduism)|dēva}}'' ([[Sanskrit]]: देव), ''deus'' (Latin), ''duw'' (Welsh).<ref name=west/>{{rp|167-168}} {{wpl|Émile Benveniste}} claimed there are no PIE words for "religion", "[[cult]]", "priest", {{efn|Proposals for a relationship between the Hindu ''{{wpl|Brahman}}'' ([[Sanskrit]]: ब्रह्मन्) and the Latin ''flamen'' are controversial <ref name=west/>{{rp|419}}}} or anything similar, though there are common roots with the meaning "holy/sacred" and "[[pray]]". This seems to indicate a religion of some sort but that PIE culture was not so developed that people occupied specialized religious offices full-time.

Specific gods, goddesses, and religious themes include (asterisks denote reconstructions):
* A common chief god, in PIE ''*Dyēus Ph<sub>2</sub>tēr'', giving Latin ''Jupiter'', Greek ''Zeús'' or ''Días'' (in Greek script: Ζεύς or Δίας respectively), Sanskrit ''{{wpl|Dyauspitr|Dyáuṣpitŕ̥}}'' or ''Dyáus'' (in {{wpl|Devanagari}} script: द्यौष्पितृ or द्यौस् respectively), Germanic ''{{wpl|Týr}}'' (Old English: ''Tiw''), and Illyrian ''Dei-pátrous''.<ref name=west>M. L. West (2007) ''Indo-European Poetry and myth'' ISBN 978-0-19-928075-9.</ref>{{rp|166-173}}
* ''*Perkwunos'', "the Striker", present as Sanskrit ''{{wpl|Parjanya|Parjánya}}'' (in Devanagari script: पर्जन्य), Prussian ''Perkuns'', Lithuanian ''Perkūnas'', Latvian ''Pērkons'', Slavic ''Perun'', and Norse ''Fjörgyn''. This is etymologically unrelated to, but mythologically similar to, Germanic ''[[Thor]]'' and Celtic ''Sucellus''.<ref name=west/>{{rp|133, 137, 234, 239-243, 245, 254, 259}}
* ''*H<sub>2</sub>eus(os)'', goddess of dawn: Greek ''Eos'', [[Latin]] ''[[Aurora]]'', [[Hinduism|Vedic]] ''{{wpl|Uṣas|Uṣás}}'' (Sanskrit: उषस्). A Germanic ''Ostara'' or ''[[Easter|Eostre]]'' is sparsely attested.<ref name=west/>{{rp|217-218, 227}}
* ''*Deh<sub>2</sub>nu'', a river goddess, probably connected with the Dnieper, Dniester, Don, and Danube, and various goddesses: Sanskrit ''{{wpl|Danu (Hinduism)|Danu}}'' (in Devanagari: दनु), Irish ''Danu'', Welsh ''Don''.
* Divine twin ancestors of humanity, possibly ''{{wpl|*Manu and *Yemo||,}}'' present as Sanskrit ''{{wpl|Manu (Hinduism)|Mánu}}'' and ''{{wpl|Yama|Yáma}}'' respectively (in Devanagari: मनु and यम respectively), both presented as the sons of the solar deity {{wpl|Surya|Vivasvat}} (in Devanagari: विवस्वत्). The Greco-Roman stories of {{wpl|Apollo and Artemis||,}} {{wpl|Castor and Pollux||,}} or {{wpl|Romulus and Remus}} could derive from this tradition.<ref name=west/>{{rp|356-359}}
* A kind of veneration of horses (likely domesticated, but not for riding by the PIE culture) as sacred - often depicted as a set of twin brothers. The Hindu ''{{wpl|Ashvins|Aśvin}}'' (Sanskrit: अश्विन्) continues this tradition, as do {{wpl|Hengist and Horsa}} ('Stallion' and 'Mare'), the legendary Anglo-Saxon conquerors of Britain.<ref name="m&a">{{Cite book |last=Mallory |first=J. P. |title=The Oxford introduction to Proto-Indo-Euxropean and the Proto-Indo-European world |last2=Adams |first2=Douglas Q. |date=2007 |publisher=Oxford Univ. Press |isbn=978-0-19-929668-2}}</ref>{{rp|432}}
* A conflict between a god or hero and a water-based [[dragon]] or giant [[sea serpent]]. Tarhunt vs. Illuyanka from Hittite myths, Perseus vs. Cetus or Heracles vs. the Hydra from Greek Mythology, Sigurd vs. Fafnir or the dragon that {{wpl|Beowulf}} slew.<ref name=west/>{{rp|255-259}} The trope appears to have continued into the Christian era - as in the story of St. George vs. the Dragon. Although the hero always wins sometimes the hero is killed at the end of the battle such as [[Thor|Thor's]] fate versus {{wpl|Jörmungandr}} during [[Ragnarok|Ragnarök]]. 
*An [[evil]] or malicious [[deity]] who is forcibly bound by entrails. These include Fenrir, [[Loki]], {{wpl|Ahriman}} from [[Zoroastrianism]], or {{wpl|Prometheus||.}}{{efn|Prometheus may not have been evil but he did disobey a direct order from Zeus.}}

It is claimed that the {{wpl|Kalash people}} of [[Pakistan]] practice a continuation of this ancient religion.<ref>[[File:ArchiveDrawerIcon.svg|15px|<span style=red>Archived</span>]]<noinclude>[https://web.archive.org/web/20160315125351/http://modrodnovery.com/2016/01/24/reel-rdnovery-indo-european-pagans-of-pakistan/ Reel Rdnovery: The Indo-European Pagans Of Pakistan], Modrodnovery.com</ref> There have been attempts to [[Polytheistic reconstructionism|reconstruct]] [[Greco-Roman religion|Greek, Roman]] and Slavic religious practices, with Zeus, Jupiter, Dyáus, and the Slavic chief god Perun<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199754670.001.0001/acref-9780199754670 |title=The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature |date=2006-01-01 |publisher=Continuum |isbn=978-0-19-975467-0 |edition=1 |language=en |doi=10.1093/acref/9780199754670.001.0001|section=Slavic Religion|editor=Bron Taylor|author=Adrian Ivakhiv}}</ref> all becoming objects of worship. However, there have been fewer attempts to revive PIE religion: in part, this is because people know even less about PIE practices than those of Greeks or even of Slavs. Despite this, Ukrainian Neo-Pagans have used ideas about the PIE religion.<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199754670.001.0001/acref-9780199754670 |title=The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature |date=2006-01-01 |publisher=Continuum |isbn=978-0-19-975467-0 |edition=1 |language=en |doi=10.1093/acref/9780199754670.001.0001|section=Neo-paganism in Ukraine|editor=Bron Taylor|author=Adrian Ivakhiv}}</ref> There have been attempts to reconstruct PIE rituals, with one website suggesting that offerings of dairy foods would be a good starting point.<ref name=piereligion>[https://web.archive.org/web/20211105125944/http://piereligion.org/pierintro.html Introduction to PIE Religion] ''piereligion.org''
{{quotebox|The most typical food offered at a {{wpl|Pūjā}} (Sanskrit: पूजा), and one which is distinctly Indo-European, is a dairy product: milk, butter, ghee and yoghurt in [[India]]; milk, cheesecake and similar products in [[Greece]] and [[Rome]] (olive oil is often substituted); and cheese and butter in northern Europe.}}</ref> As with everything else about PIE society, knowledge of PIE religion is very limited and one may regard any claims of PIE prayers or rituals with deep skepticism.

===Trifunctional hypothesis===
The trifunctional hypothesis is the idea that the Proto-Indo-European social structure was divided into three parts, each with a specific role or "function": Government and religion; Military; food and welfare.{{efn|Dumézil claimed that it was impossible to truly define the third function.<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|233}}.}}<ref name="m037">{{cite book | last=Belier | first=Wouter W. | title=Decayed Gods | publisher=BRILL | publication-place=Leiden ; New York | date=1991 | isbn=978-90-04-09487-1}} Dumézil citations can be found in this book</ref>{{rp|10}} This structure then left traces in the mythology of various Indo-European groups. The hypothesis was created by linguist Georges Dumézil in the late 1920s and developed throughout his life. 

Dumézil based his hypothesis on the supposed agreement of the mythologies of various Indo-European groups, particularly Vedic, Zoroastrian, Roman, and, with some modification, Norse, and Celtic.<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|144-5}} According to Dumézil, tripartite structures are not found natively in non-Indo-European societies and cultures.<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|56}} Originally, the trifunctional hypothesis proposed that Proto-Indo-European society was literally tripartite, before the hypothesis developed into an observation that "We often find a tripartite structure in Indo-European traditions."<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|230}} Also, at varying points through his career, Dumézil described goddesses as part of the third function specifically (through fertility), as somehow representing "all" the functions simultaneously, or as part of both the first and third.<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|217-27}} 

The hypothesis has been criticized for being unverifiable (anything can be seen as "a trace" of the original tripartite system)<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|229-32}}, unfalsifiable (any apparent tripartite structure in other societies is the result of Indo-European influence)<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|232-3}}, imprecise (Are the three functions social realities or just an "ideology"? How aware of this system were the Proto-Indo-Europeans? What does the third function actually do? Are goddesses part of it specifically or part of all functions?)<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|233-7}}, and inconsistent.<ref name="m037"/>{{rp|233-7}} Dumézil himself has been accused of harboring fascist sympathies that may have influenced his research.<ref name="arvidsson2006"/>{{rp|2}} He has also been accused of studying a "platonic ideal" that merely reflects what Dumézil wanted to see rather than any real prehistoric society or religion.<ref name="arvidsson2006"/>{{rp|243}}

==Proposed external relations==
A vein of rich speculation seeks to relate Indo-European to other reconstructed protolanguages. Historical linguistics is founded on a principle called the [[comparative method]]. A relationship between two languages cannot be established only by discovering words that seem to resemble each other; they must be shown to derive from a common ancestor. There must be a consistent set of sound changes from a (partially) reconstructable protolanguage. Historical linguistics does not simply seek to demonstrate the possibility that two languages might be related; it means to show specifically how and arrange languages cladistically on a family tree.

Some of the many attempts to connect Indo-European to other families include:
*{{wpl|Indo-Uralic||,}} combining the {{wpl|Uralic languages|Uralic family,}} which includes [[Finnish]], [[Estonia]]n, the [[Sámi]] languages, [[Hungarian]], and a bunch of others mostly spoken in western [[Siberia]] and around the [[Urals]], with Indo-European.<ref name=kolligan/>{{rp|2281-3}} A much crazier theory connects Indo-European to "Uralo-Siberian" which is Uralic combined with the {{wpl|Yukaghir}} and {{wpl|Eskimo-Aleut}} language families.<ref name=Campbell/>{{rp|409}}
*{{wpl|Nostratic||,}} combining Indo-European with: {{wpl|Afroasiatic||,}} {{wpl|Kartvelian languages|Kartvelian}} ([[Georgia (country)|Georgian]] and a few close relatives), the dubious {{wpl|Altaic languages|Altaic language family}} (which includes {{wpl|Mongolic languages|Mongolic,}} {{wpl|Turkic languages|Turkic,}} and {{wpl|Tungusic languages|Tungusic,}} as "macro-Altaic". Some versions include {{wpl|Japonic languages|Japonic}} and {{wpl|Koreanic languages|Koreanic}} as "micro-Altaic"), {{wpl|Dravidian languages|Dravidian,}} {{wpl|Ainu languages|Ainu,}} and {{wpl|Uralic languages|Uralic.}}<ref name=Campbell>{{Cite book |last=Campbell |first=Lyle |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/263493207 |title=Language classification: history and method |date=2008 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |others=William John Poser |isbn=978-0-511-41450-3 |location=Cambridge, UK}}</ref>{{rp|243}} There is a wide variety of languages and language families included or excluded in Nostratic, so it may not make sense to speak of it as a coherent hypothesis, but those are the language families most commonly included. Some versions of Nostratic also include different reconstructions of Proto-Indo-European and thus different cognates. The version of Allan Bomhard, for example, subscribes to something called {{wpl|Glottalic theory}} where traditionally reconstructed ''b'', ''d'', ''g'' are instead ''p' '', ''t' '', ''k' ''.<ref name=Campbell/>{{rp|244}}
*{{wpl|Eurasiatic||,}} which includes Uralic, {{wpl|Yukaghir languages|Yukaghir,}} Koreanic-Japonic-Ainu, {{wpl|Nivkh languages|Nivkh,}} the {{wpl|Chukotko-Kamchatkan}} languages, and {{wpl|Eskimo-Aleut||.}}<ref name=Campbell/>{{rp|264}}
*{{wpl|Borean||,}} which includes the Nostratic family mentioned above, and the proposed {{wpl|Dene-Caucasian}} and {{wpl|Austric}} families, both of which, incidentally, are controversial.<ref>{{wpa|Borean}}</ref>
*{{wpl|Indo-Semitic languages|Indo-Semitic,}} which makes it so that Indo-European is a subfamily of {{wpl|Afro-Asiatic}} by making IE related to the {{wpl|Semitic languages}}. Most modern linguists believe the similarities between the two languages are due to massive borrowings, especially from [[Arabic language|Arabic]] and [[Hebrew]], amongst others.<ref name=kolligan>{{cite book |last=Kölligan |first=Daniel |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110542431-046 |title=Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics |date= |work= |publisher=De Gruyter |year=2018 |isbn=9783110542431 |editor-last=Klein |editor-first=Jared |publication-date= |pages=2280–2292 |chapter=More remote relationships of Proto-Indo-European |editor-last2=Joseph |editor-first2=Brian}}</ref>{{rp|2283-4}}

While some languages change faster than others, as you move further into the past it becomes more likely that family resemblances drift further; eventually, you reach a point where further relationships are no longer recoverable. This is why bulk comparison of vocabulary and invitations to see resemblances are, without more elaborate explanations, one of the signature features of [[pseudolinguistics]]. Additionally, when linguists say that some languages are not related to others, they simply mean that they cannot be demonstrated to be related. For all we know, human language might have evolved only once, but because of the length of time of evolution involved, evidence of relationship has simply vanished. To take an example, there have been claims that {{wpl|Elamite languages}} are related to the {{wpl|Dravidian languages||.}} It has proved impossible to demonstrate that, and there are very few people who are qualified to form an opinion.

==See also==
*[[Latin]]
*[[Sanskrit]]
*[[English]]
*[[Hebrew]]
*[[Esperanto]]
*[[Horse]]: The spread of the domestic horse across Eurasia correlates with the spread of the Indo-European languages

==Further reading==
*{{cite book | author=Baldi, Philip| title=An Introduction to the Indo-European Languages | publisher=Southern Illinois University Press | year=1983}}
*{{cite book | author=Meier-Brügger, Michael |title=Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft | publisher=Walter de Gruyter | year=2000}}
*{{cite book | author=Szemerényi, Oswald J. L.|title=Intrduction to Indo-European Linguistics | publisher=Oxford University Press | year=1999}}

==External links==
*Martin W. Lewis, [http://www.geocurrents.info/indo-european-origins/vexatious-history-indo-european-studies-part The Vexatious History of Indo-European Studies], part 1. (GeoCurrents, 2013); [http://www.geocurrents.info/indo-european-origins/vexatious-history-indo-european-studies-part-ii part 2].
:*Martin W. Lewis's [http://web.archive.org/web/20131123132340/http://www.geocurrents.info/indo-european-origins/martin-lewis-lecture-indo-european-origins-free-trial-gnn lecture] on Indo-European origins.

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

[[Category:Ancient history]]
[[Category:Languages]]
[[Category:Nationalism]]
[[Category:Archaeology]]

Categories: Ancient history, Languages, Nationalism, Archaeology