Descendants of Lewis ap David of Cardiganshire, Wales

Evolution of the Indo-European Language

Research Note: I am not a linguist nor a geneticist nor even a mathematician. So, how can I even begin to approach a conversation on the origins and evolution of the Indo-European language? Pretty simple. I can read and write, add and subtract, and I have the faculty of reason.

Today, we speak English. It is evident from everyday speech that English evolved from German. Going back through English literature, most folks can read the works of Shakespeare who wrote in early Modern English which shows Romance influences. Some of us can read Chaucer who wrote in late Middle English with its Germanic words and spellings. And although you almost have to be an English language scholar, some folks can read Beowulf in the original Old English if they have an understanding of German.

So if everyone can trace English back to German, can anyone trace German back through the many changes to its mother tongue? And, can anyone trace Haplogroup R to show the evolution of the language spoken by R-DF27?

1. What to look for.

[When researching the Indo-European Language], the resulting phylogeny should completely and without contradiction be transformable into real geography, starting from a staging area (Urheimat), reconstructing the paths of migrations or expansion into the recent or oldest known seats. In fact, there are dozens, if not hundreds of views on Indo-European origin and subgrouping (cf. e.g. Day, 2001). So far, there have been only fragmentary visualizations 61. Languages should then be checked for borrowings in the neighbors encountered along these routes.

61. Thorough attempts on the Internet can be found under <www.hjholm.de>  or the URL <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages> 15 July 2015.

    Holm, J.J.G., "The New Arboretum of Indo-European Trees," no date <http://www.hjholm.de/Holm%20Arbo%20old.pdf> 15 July 2015.
    Holm, J.J.G., "The New Arboretum of Indo-European Trees," no date <http://independent.academia.edu/HFHolm> 16 February 2019.

Research Note: Urheimat is German for ancient home.

The task is to work backwards through the ages of man to find the ancient home of the Indo-European language.

We need to:
a. locate the ancient home (Urheimat) of the Indo-European language in time. (When)
b. locate the ancient home (Urheimat) of the Indo-European language in place. (Where)
c. reconstruct the migration paths of the Indo-European language.
d. place the results into a "real" geographical context.

2. Locating the ancient home (Urheimat) of the Indo-European language in time (When):

When researching migration history, we want to find when first and then where. The first task is to determine which historical period we want to look at, narrowing the range where possible.

Linguists and philologists have traced the English language to it's origin:
-to early German
-to a split with Baltic-Slav
-to an earlier split with Celt-Italic
-to the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language

Then, we need to go back to the root language, proto-Indo-European [PIE].

Dr. Hans J. Holm of the previous citation presents a detailed mathematical formula to determine when the branches of the Indo-European language split. Previous studies listed common words from the many branches of the Indo-European language. And, Holm used math--the arithmetic mean--to determine how closely the many languages agree with each other.

This chart was copied from "Indo-European Sub-grouping by SLRD2, Holm (2007)" <http://de.slideshare.net/HJJHolm/> 25 July 2015.

Holm determined the percentage distance from the root Indo-European language [PIE] and its individual daughter languages to the many subsequent splits. And, he created a chart to display his results. 

This chart was copied from "Indo-European Sub-grouping by SLRD2, Holm (2007)" <http://de.slideshare.net/HJJHolm/> 25 July 2015.

Holm places the oldest split of the Indo-European language where it splits into the Northwestern branch and the Southeastern branch at 1.00.

a. From German toward the root language:

1. Modern English is a derivative language of the German language family.

This chart was clipped from the original "Classification of Indo-European Languages" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_languages> 25 July 2015.

2. From Holm's calculations, we learn that proto-German split from the Northern branch of the Northwestern branch of the Indo-European language at marker .79 since the first split of the root language.

Research Note: I postulate that the first split of the root language happened 6,000 years ago c. 4,000 BCE. How can I make such an outlandish claim? It's simple Algebra.

Computation for Distance to the Split of
proto-German from the Northern branch

6000   PIE date So, the distance to the split of proto-German from the Northern branch was c. 2,740 BCE.
x .79   distance to split
4740   # years
-2000   years of CE
2740   BCE

3. The Northern branch split from the Northwestern branch of the Indo-European language at marker .88 since the first split of the Indo-European language.

Computation for Distance to the Split of
the Northern branch from the Northwestern branch

6000   PIE date So, the distance to the split of the Northern branch from the Northwestern branch was c. 3,280 BCE.
x .88   distance to split
5280   # years
-2000   years of CE
3280   BCE

4. We do not have to go back to the root language; as both the German language family and the Celtic language family are members of the Northwestern branch.

b. From Northwest Indo-European toward the language of the proto-Celts

1. The Northwest branch split from the Indo-European language at marker 1.00 c. 4,000 BCE.

2. The Celt-Italic branch split from the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language at marker .88 since the first split of the root language.

Computation for Distance to the Split of
the Celt-Italic branch from the Northwestern branch

6000   PIE date So, the distance to the split of the Celt-Italic branch from the Northwestern branch was c. 3,280 BCE.
x .88   distance to split
5280   # years
-2000   years of CE
3280   BCE

3. Proto-Celt split from the Celt-Italic branch at marker .73 since the first split of the root language.

Computation for Distance to the Split of
the proto-Celt branch from the Celt-Italic branch

6000   PIE date So, the distance to the split of proto-Celt from the Celt-Italic branch was c. 2,380 BCE.

This date is within 3% (2.96%) of the projected date (2250 BCE) from Eupedia's R1b migration map.

x .73   distance to split
4380   # years
-2000   years of CE
2380   BCE

And, the non-extant Gallaecian language split sometime later from proto-Celt.

Research Note: In this schema, Gaulish is classified as a derivative language of Continental Celt. And, Gallaecian is classified as a derivative language of Celtiberian.

This chart was clipped from the original "Classification of Indo-European Languages" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_languages> 25 July 2015.

4. Here, my research differs from the excellent classification chart above.

The relationship between Gaulish and the other Celtic languages is also subject to debate. Most scholars today agree that Celtiberian was the first to branch off from the remaining Celtic languages. Gaulish, situated in the centre of the Celtic language area, shares with the neighbouring Brythonic of Great Britain the change of the Indo-European labio-velar consonant /kw/ > /p/, whereas both Celtiberian in the south and Goidelic in Ireland retain /kw/. Taking this as the primary genealogical isogloss [linguistic boundary], some scholars see the Celtic languages to be divided into a "q-Celtic" and a "p-Celtic" group, in which the p-Celtic languages Gaulish and Brythonic form a common "Gallo-Brittonic" branch. Other scholars place more emphasis on shared innovations between Brythonic and Goidelic, and group these together as an Insular Celtic. Sims-Williams (2007) discusses a composite model, in which the Continental and Insular varieties are seen as part of a dialect continuum, with genealogical splits and areal [sp] innovations intersecting.

    "Gaulish Language" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaulish_language> 25 July 2015.

My argument is this:

-If two languages have more in common than they have differences, they are more closely related.
-The convergence of two languages from different roots can be measured by their commonality. Shared innovations are subsequent observations after the two languages have been classified as separate entities.
-Therefore, the two languages were different before they shared the new innovations which happened over an extended time.
-The divergence of two languages from the same root can be measured by their differences; not shared innovations.

If Continental p-Celt (Gaulish) and Insular Brythonic (Welsh) form a common Gallo-Brittonic branch, why wouldn't Continental q-Celt (Gallaecian) and Insular Goidelic (Gaelic) form a common Iberian-Gaelic branch? And from the Iberian-Gaelic branch, Gallaecian and Celtiberian would evolve in Spain, and Gaelic would evolve in Ireland:

-The Gaels are the forefathers of the Gallaecians/ Galicians of Northwest Spain.
-Ireland was settled by descendants of L21 (c. 2,100 BCE) who spread Brythonic throughout the British Isles.

Research Note: If the people of Celtic Iberia were called Gaels, what would you call the language they spoke? Gaelic, perhaps?

-The Gaels took the Gaelic language to Ireland (post 1,000 BCE). And, their descendants the Scoti took the Gaelic language to Scotland.
-This is why Welsh, which is derivative of Brythonic, is spoken in Wales, and Gaelic is spoken in Ireland and Scotland.

The names used in the [Goidelic] languages themselves (Gaeilge/Gaolainn/Gaelic in Irish, Gaelg/Gailck in Manx, and Gàidhlig in Scottish Gaelic) are derived from Old Irish Goídelc, which comes from Old Welsh Guoidel meaning "pirate, raider." The medieval mythology of the Lebor Gabála Érenn places its origin in an eponymous ancestor of the Gaels, and inventor of the language, Goídel Glas.

    "Goidelic Languages" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goidelic_languages> 25 July 2015.

-Gallaecian is not Celtiberian. Gallaecian split from proto-Celt (Lusitanian perhaps?) and was in Iberia long before the Celtiberians.

From the chart, the Gallaeci and the Lucitani were speaking a proto-Celt language older than Celtiberian.

    "Languages of Iberia" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Iberia> 26 July 2015.

The area now called Galicia was first inhabited by humans during the Middle Paleolithic period, and it takes its name from the Gallaeci, the Celtic peoples living north of the Douro river during the last millennium BC, in a region largely coincidental with that of the Iron Age Castro Culture.

    "Galicia (Spain)" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Spain)> 25 July 2015.

Celtiberian or Northeastern Hispano-Celtic is an extinct Indo-European language of the Celtic branch spoken by the Celtiberians in an area of the Iberian Peninsula lying between the headwaters of the Duero, Tajo, Júcar, Turia rivers and the Ebro river. This language is directly attested in nearly 200 inscriptions dated in the 2nd century BC and the 1st century BC, mainly in Celtiberian script, a direct adaptation of the Northeastern Iberian script, but also in the Latin alphabet.

    "Celtiberian Language" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtiberian_language> 25 July 2015.

proto-Celt

q-Celt/ Iberian-Gaelic

p-Celt/ Gallo-Brittonic

Gaelic

Brittonic

Gaulish

*Irish Gaelic *Breton (Brittany, France) Lepontic (Italy)
*Scottish Gaelic *Welsh Noric (Scandinavia)
*Manx (revised) *Cornish (revised) Galatian (Anatolia)
Gallaecian (Spain) Cumbric (lowland Scotland)  
Celtiberian (Spain) Pictish (highland Scotland)  
Research Notes:
-The names of the above languages are from the citation.
-The schema is my original work.
* Denotes living languages

    "Celtic Languages" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_languages> 25 July 2015.

3. Locating the ancient home (Urheimat) of the Indo-European language in place (Where):

Linguistically proved contacts between earliest stages of Indo-European and Uralian strongly suggest a homeland in the forest steppes north of the Black Sea ('Pontus', cf. e.g. Anthony 2007).

    "A Possible Homeland of the Indo-European Languages" <http://www.hjholm.de> 15 July 2015.

And,

Samara culture was a Neolithic culture of the late 6th and early 5th millennium BC at the Samara bend region of the middle Volga, discovered during archaeological excavations in 1973 near the village of Syezzheye in Russia. The valley of the Samara river contains sites from subsequent cultures as well, which are descriptively termed "Samara cultures" or "Samara valley cultures". Some of these sites are currently under excavation. "The Samara culture" as a proper name, however, is reserved for the early Eneolithic [early Bronze Age, c. 4,000 BCE] of the region. . .

These three cultures (the Samara, and successors the Khvalynsk and early Yamna) have roughly the same range. Marija Gimbutas was the first to regard it as the Urheimat (homeland) of the Proto-Indo-European language and to hypothesize that the Eneolithic culture of the region was in fact Proto-Indo-European. If this model is true, then the Samara culture becomes overwhelmingly important for Indo-European studies.

    "Samara Culture" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samara_culture> 16 July 2015.

From yDNA testing, the migratory path of DF27 has been proven. Previously, I queried, "Who lived north of the Black Sea in about 4,000 BCE?" And, yDNA proves that the descendants of Haplogroup R sojourned north of the Black Sea.

Modern linguists have placed the Proto-Indo-European homeland in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, a distinct geographic and archeological region extending from the Danube estuary to the Ural mountains to the east and North Caucasus to the south. The Neolithic, Eneolithic and early Bronze Age cultures in Pontic-Caspian steppe has been called the Kurgan culture (4200-2200 BCE) by Marija Gimbutas, due to the lasting practice of burying the deads under mounds ("kurgan") among the succession of cultures in that region. It is now known that kurgan-type burials only date from the 4th millenium BCE and almost certainly originated south of the Caucasus [along with P297 & P25]. The genetic diversity of R1b being greater around eastern Anatolia, it is hard to deny that R1b evolved there before entering the steppe world. . .

The first clearly Proto-Indo-European culture was Sredny Stog (4600-3900 BCE), when small kurgan burials begin to appear, with the distinctive posturing of the dead on the back with knees raised and oriented toward the northeast, which would be found in later steppe cultures as well. There is evidence of population blending from the variety of skull shapes. Towards the end of the 5th millennium, an elite starts to develop with cattle, horses and copper used as status symbols.

Another migration across the Caucasus happened shortly before 3700 BCE, when the Maykop culture, the world's first Bronze Age society, suddenly materialized in the north-west Caucasus, apparently out of nowhere. [They were the descendants of M269.] The origins of Maykop are still uncertain, but archeologists have linked it to contemporary Chalcolithic cultures in Assyria and western Iran. [Follow the migration of M343 in western Iran to P25 in the Tigris River Valley vicinity what would become Assyria.] Archeology also shows a clear diffusion of bronze working and kurgan-type burials from the Maykop culture to the Pontic Steppe, where the Yamna culture developed soon afterwards (from 3500 BCE). Kurgan (a.k.a. tumulus) burials would become a dominant feature of ancient Indo-European societies and were widely used by the Celts, Romans, Germanic tribes, and Scythians, among others.

The Yamna period (3500-2500 BCE) is the most important one in the creation of Indo-European culture and society. Middle Eastern R1b people had been living and blending to some extent with the local R1a foragers and herders for over a millennium, perhaps even two or three. The close cultural contact and interactions between R1a and R1b people all over the Pontic-Caspian Steppe resulted in the creation of a common vernacular, a new lingua franca, which linguists have called Proto-Indo-European (PIE). It is pointless to try to assign another region of origin to the PIE language. Linguistic similarities exist between PIE and Caucasian and Hurrian languages in the Middle East on the one hand, and Uralic languages in the Volga-Ural region on the other hand, which makes the Pontic Steppe the perfect intermediary region. . .

Iberia did not become a fully-fledged Bronze Age society until the 13th century BCE, when the Urnfield culture (1300-1200 BCE) expanded from Germany to Catalonia via southern France, then the ensuing Hallstatt culture (1200-750 BCE) spread throughout most of the peninsula (especially the western half). This period belongs to the wider Atlantic Bronze Age (1300-700 BCE), when Iberia was connected to the rest of Western Europe through a complex trade network.

It is hard to say when exactly DF27 entered Iberia. Considering its overwhelming presence in the peninsula and in south-west France, it is likely that DF27 arrived early, during the 1800 to 1300 BCE period, and perhaps even earlier, if R1b adventurers penetrated the Bell Beaker culture, as they appear to have done all over Western Europe from 2300 BCE to 1800 BCE. The Atlantic Bronze Age could correspond to the period when DF27 radiated more evenly around Iberia and ended up, following Atlantic trade routes, all the way to the British Isles, the Netherlands and western Norway (where M153 and SRY2728 make up about 1% of the population).

    "Haplogroup R1b" <http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml> 26 July 2015.

4. Reconstructing the migration path of the Indo-European language:

Using the same principles previously discussed, we can trace the migratory path of Haplogroup R and descendants from the Urheimat through its history and determine where our forefathers were when the next branch of the Indo-European language morphed into a new daughter language.

To follow the migration path, we need to know who, where, when and what happened.

a. M269, the descendants of R1b settled on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe north of the Black Sea during the Late Neolithic Period. Sometime before 4,000 BCE, PIE [the proto-Indo-European language] emerged due to interaction between the descendants R1b and R1a foragers and herders. This resulted in a new lingua Franca.

b. L23 migrated west then south to the Danube Valley during the Copper/ Eneolithic Age. In about 4,000 BCE, the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language split from PIE.

c. L51 migrated up the Danube Valley to the Hungarian Plain to the vicinity of the Austrian Alps at the beginning of the Bronze Age. In about 3,280 BCE, the Northern branch split from the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language.

d. Concurrently in about 3,280 BCE, the the Celt-Italic language split from the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language.

e. L11 settled in southern Germany vicinity Regensburg. In about 2,740 BCE, the proto-German language split from the Northern branch of the Indo-European language. Their descendants, U106, spread the new German language to the lands which would become Germany, the Jutland Peninsula and Scandinavia.

f. P312 migrated west to Gaul (France). In about 2,380 BCE, the proto-Celt language split from the Celt-Italic language.

g. Sometime after 2,380 BCE, DF27 migrated southwest to the Iberian Peninsula where Gaelic split from the proto-Celt language.

h. Concurrently, Brittonic split from the proto-Celt language to form Gallo-Brittonic. Gaulic stayed on the continent. In about 2,100 BCE, L21 took the Brittonic language to Britain and Ireland where L21 would become the dominant ethnicity and Brittonic would become the common language until the arrival of Gaelic and the Milesians.

i. Post 1,000 BCE, the Gaels of northwestern Spain invaded Ireland and took the Gaelic language with them. Later, Gaelic would migrate to the Isle of Man, Scotland, Britain, and Wales. Over time, Gaelic would become the dominant language in Ireland, the Isle of Man and Scotland.

5. Placing the results into a "real" geographical context:

Hans J. Holm's stated task was to place the evolution of the Indo-European language into geographical context. By using the results from the many previous works, we can trace the Indo-European language from the Urheimat up the Danube River into Western Europe. And from this central location, the derivative languages spread to the Atlantic Fringe of pre-historic Europe.

a. The emergence of the proto-Indo-European language.

Beginning in about 30,000 BCE and lasting for 20,000 plus years, the descendants of Haplogroups P and Q and R cohabited the Pontic-Caspian Steppes vic. Point PQR. During this extensive period, the many tribes would have shared a common language. And as the eons passed and the language morphed, the languages of the Steppe tribes would have shared common characteristics.

The first date fixed by Holm's calculations is the first split of the proto-Indo-European language about 6,000 years ago or c. 4,000 BCE. Working backwards, the proto-Indo-European language emerged on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe c. 5,000 BCE. This date coincides with the arrival of M269 on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe c. 4,900 BCE.

b. The first split: from one to two.

From Holms' calculations, we learn that the Indian language family has the highest percentage of agreements of the twelve languages listed. This fact indicates that the root Indo-European language went with the southeastern branch and its derivative languages to India. And, our northwest branch is their distant cousin. From this first fact, we can begin to map the migrations of the main branches of the Indo-European language.

1. Perhaps, some tribes of the proto-Indo-European group sat stationary on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. The majority of the tribes migrated west then south around the Black Sea to the Danube River Delta.

2. [Marker 1.0 c. 4,000 BCE] In the vicinity of the Danube River Delta, the proto-Indo-European group spit:
-The Northwest branch migrated west up the Danube River and the climb into Western Europe.
-The Southeast branch migrated south to the Bosporus Strait.

c. The second split: from two to four.

1. [Marker .88] [c. 3280 BCE] In the vicinity of the Hungarian Plain, the Northwest branch split:
-The Celt-Italic branch migrated up the Danube River into Western Europe.
-The Northern branch sat stationary.

2. [Marker .87] [c. 3220 BCE] In the vicinity of the Bosporus Strait, the Southeast branch split:
-The South-southeast branch (my term) migrated east across the Bosporus into the Anatolian Peninsula and Asia Minor.
-The Balkan branch sat stationary.

d. The third split: from four to nine.

1. [Marker .86] [c. 3160 BCE] Almost immediately, in the vicinity of the Bosporus Strait, the South-southeast branch split:
-The Iranian-Indian branch continued their migration east through the Anatolian Peninsula and Asia Minor en route to Persia.
-The Anatolian-Tocharian branch continued east, further into the Anatolian Peninsula.

2. [Marker .79] [c. 2740 BCE] In the vicinity of the Hungarian Plain, the Northern branch split:
-The German branch followed the Celt-Italic branch up the Danube River north of the Austrian Alps and into southern Germany.
-The Baltic-Slav branch sat stationary.

*[Marker .76] The Anatolian-Tocharian branch fits here chronologically.

3. [Marker .73] [c. 2380 BCE] In the vicinity of eastern Gaul, the Celt-Italic branch split:
-The Italic branch went south (up) the Rhein River Valley into the Hinterrhein (now Switzerland) and then over an Alpine pass then down to the Italian Peninsula and the Po River Valley.
-The Celtic branch continued west into Gaul.

4. [Marker .72] [c. 2330 BCE] Having sojourned in the vicinity of the Bosporus Strait, the Balkan branch split:
-Albanian went west to Albania.
-Greek went south to Greece.
-Armenian followed the Iranian-Indian
branch east across the Bosporus into the Anatolian Peninsula and Asia Minor en route to Armenia.

e. The fourth split: from nine to twelve.

1. Proto-German had arrived in southern Germany and began the migration to northern Germany and the Scandinavian Peninsula.

2. Proto-Celtic had arrived in Gaul and would later spit into q-Celt/ Goidelic/ Gaelic and p-Celt/ Brythonic/ Brittonic.

3. Italic had arrived on the Italian Peninsula and would later split into the Romance languages.

4. Albanian had arrived in the southwest Balkans.

5. Armenian had arrived in the Trans-Caucasus.

6. Greek had arrived in Greece.

7 - 8. [Marker .76] [c. 2560] Having migrated east to the Anatolian Peninsula, the Anatolian-Tocharian branch split:
-The Tocharian branch continued to migrate east through Persia to the Tarim Basin of far western China.
-The Anatolian branch had arrived on the Anatolian Peninsula.

9 - 10. [Marker .61] [c. 1660 BCE] Having sojourned in Persia, the Iranian-Indian branch split.
-The Indian branch migrated southeast to the Indian subcontinent.
-The Iranian branch had arrived in Persia.

11 - 12. [Marker .57] [c. 1420 BCE] Having sojourned in the vicinity of the Hungarian Plain, the Baltic-Slav branch split:
-The Baltic branch migrated north to the Baltic region.
-The Slavic branch had arrived in their homeland. To the south, the Yugo (Southern) Slavs would emerge. To the east, the eastern Slavs would emerge. To the north, the Czechs and the Poles would emerge.

6. Conclusions:

My contention is that the evolution of the Indo-European language parallels the migration of the descendants of Haplogroup R.

The Geography of the Evolution of the Indo-European Language

PIE: the Proto-Indo-European Language

Descendants of R1b [M343]

1. c. 5,000 BCE
PIE emerged as a result of R1b descendants intermingling with R1a foragers and herders, resulting in a new lingua Franca.
Who: M269
When: Late Neolithic Period
(6,500 to 4,500 BCE)
Where:
the Pontic-Caspian Steppe north of the Black Sea.
2. c. 4,000 BCE (marker 1.00)
The Northwest branch of the Indo-European language split from PIE.
Who: L23
When: Copper/ Eneolithic Age
(4,500 to 3,300 BCE)
Where: Migrated west to the Danube Valley.
3a. c. 3,280 BCE (marker .88)
The Northern branch split from the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language.
Who: L51
When: Bronze Age (3,300 to 1,200 BCE)
Where: The Danube Valley into the Hungarian Plain and the Austrian Alps.
3b. c. 3,280 BCE (marker .88)
The Celt-Italic branch split from the Northwest branch of the Indo-European language.
Who: L51
When: Bronze Age (3,300 to 1,200 BCE)
Where: The Danube Valley into the Hungarian Plain and the Austrian Alps.
4a. c. 2,740 BCE (marker .79)
The proto-German language split from the Northern branch of the Indo-European language.
Who: L11/ U106
When: Bronze Age (3,300 to 1,200 BCE)
Where: Southern Germany
4b. c. 2,380 BCE (marker .73)
The proto-Celt language split from the Celt-Italic language.
Who: P312
When: Bronze Age (3,300 to 1,200 BCE)
Where: Gaul (France)
5b. Post 2,380 BCE
Gaelic split from the proto-Celt language.
Who: DF27
When: Bronze Age (3,300 to 1,200 BCE)
Where: Gallaecia/ Asturias (Spain)
My Map of the Evolution of the Indo-European Language on Google Maps

Holm provides calculations back to the time when the Northwest and the Southeast branches split from the proto-Indo-European root language; but not the time when PIE emerged as the language of Haplogroup R.

Obviously, Holm's methodology depends on measuring agreements. And, having no contemporaneous language family to compare, Holm's methodology comes up short. This leaves an opening for others to discover root words from perhaps Uralic with which to start the entire process over from the beginning.
-Analysis of agreements between proto-Indo-European and the proto-Uralic languages.
-Applying the methodology to determine the first split of the Indo-Uralic language family.
-Comparing dates to determine the emergence date for whichever language is the root language of the Indo-European/ Uralic-Whatever language family.
-And, continuing the analysis of the parallel paths of Haplogroup R and the emergence of languages on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. Evidence from this investigation indicates that P297 took the Uralic language to the Ural Mtns. c. 8,800 BCE.

Caveat

This site is provided for reference only. Except where specifically cited, information contained is conjecture and should not be considered as fact.
Home Index About Me