Kurgan culture. Kurgan hypothesis

KURGAN HYPOTHESIS. INDO-EUROPEANS

The Kurgan hypothesis was proposed by Marija Gimbutas in 1956 to combine archaeological and linguistic data to locate the ancestral home of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) native speakers. The hypothesis is the most popular regarding the origin of PIE.

The alternative Anatolian and Balkan hypothesis of V. A. Safronov has supporters mainly on the territory of the former USSR and does not correlate with archaeological and linguistic chronologies. The Kurgan hypothesis is based on the views expressed at the end of the 19th century by Viktor Gen and Otto Schrader.

The hypothesis had a significant impact on the study of Indo-European peoples. Those scholars who follow the Gimbutas hypothesis identify the barrows and the Yamnaya culture with the early Proto-Indo-European peoples that existed in the Black Sea steppes and southeastern Europe from the 5th to the 3rd millennium BC. e.

The Kurgan hypothesis of the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans implies the gradual spread of the "Kurgan culture", which eventually embraced all the Black Sea steppes. Subsequent expansion beyond the steppe zone led to the emergence of mixed cultures such as the Globular Amphora culture in the west, the nomadic Indo-Iranian cultures in the east, and the migration of the Proto-Greeks to the Balkans around 2500 BC. e. The domestication of the horse and the later use of carts made the Kurgan culture mobile and extended it to the entire region of the "pit culture". In the Kurgan hypothesis, it is believed that all the Black Sea steppes were the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans and throughout the region they spoke late dialects of the Proto-Indo-European language. The area on the Volga marked on the map as Urheimat marks the location of the earliest traces of horse breeding (Samara culture, but see Sredne Stog culture), and possibly belongs to the core of early Proto-Indo-Europeans or Proto-Proto-Indo-Europeans in the 5th millennium BC. e.

Gimbutas version.

Map of Indo-European migrations from about 4000 to 1000 BC. e. in accordance with the mound model. Anatolian migration (marked with a broken line) could have taken place through the Caucasus or the Balkans. The purple area denotes the supposed ancestral home (Samara culture, Srednestog culture). The red area means the area inhabited by the Indo-European peoples by 2500 BC. e., and orange - by 1000 BC. e.
Gimbutas' initial assumption identifies four stages in the development of the kurgan culture and three waves of expansion.

Kurgan I, Dnieper/Volga region, first half of the 4th millennium BC e. Obviously descended from the cultures of the Volga basin, subgroups included the Samara culture and the Seroglazovo culture.
Mound II-III, second half of the 4th millennium BC. e .. Includes the Sredne Stog culture in the Sea of \u200b\u200bAzov and the Maikop culture in the North Caucasus. Stone circles, early two-wheeled carts, anthropomorphic stone stelae or idols.
Kurgan IV or Yamnaya culture, first half of the 3rd millennium BC. e., covers the entire steppe region from the Ural River to Romania.
Wave I, preceding the Kurgan I stage, expansion from the Volga to the Dnieper, which led to the coexistence of the Kurgan I culture and the Cukuteni culture (Trypillian culture). Reflections of this migration spread to the Balkans and along the Danube to the Vinca and Lengyel cultures in Hungary.
II wave, middle of the IV millennium BC. e., which began in the Maikop culture and later gave rise to kurganized mixed cultures in northern Europe around 3000 BC. e. (Globular Amphora culture, Baden culture, and certainly Corded Ware culture). According to Gimbutas, this was the first appearance of Indo-European languages in western and northern Europe.
III wave, 3000-2800 BC e., the spread of the Yamnaya culture beyond the steppe, with the appearance of characteristic graves in the territory of modern Romania, Bulgaria and eastern Hungary.

Kortlandt's version.
Indo-European isoglosses: regions of distribution of the languages of the centum group (blue) and satem (red), endings *-tt-> -ss-, *-tt-> -st- and m-
Frederick Kortlandt proposed a revision of the kurgan hypothesis. He raised the main objection that can be raised against Gimbutas' scheme (eg 1985: 198), namely that it is based on archaeological evidence and does not seek linguistic interpretations. Based on linguistic data and trying to put their pieces into a common whole, he got the following picture: the Indo-Europeans, who remained after migrations to the west, east and south (as described by J. Mallory) became the ancestors of the Balto-Slavs, while the carriers of other satemized languages can be identified with the Yamnaya culture, and Western Indo-Europeans with the Corded Ware culture. Modern genetic research contradicts this construction of Cortland, since it is the representatives of the satem group that are descendants of the Corded Ware culture. Returning to the Balts and Slavs, their ancestors can be identified with the Middle Dnieper culture. Then, following Mallory (pp197f) and implying the birthplace of this culture in the south, in the Middle Stog, the Yamnaya and late Trypillian culture, he suggested that these events corresponded with the development of the language of the satem group, which invaded the sphere of influence of the Western Indo-Europeans.
According to Frederik Kortlandt, there is a general tendency to date proto-languages earlier than supported by linguistic evidence. However, if the Indo-Hittites and Indo-Europeans can be correlated with the beginning and end of the Sredny Stog culture, then, he objects, the linguistic data for the entire Indo-European language family do not take us beyond the secondary ancestral home (according to Gimbutas), and cultures such as the Khvalynian the middle Volga and Maikop in the northern Caucasus cannot be identified with the Indo-Europeans. Any suggestion that goes beyond the Sredny Stog culture must begin with the possible similarity of the Indo-European family of languages with other language families. Considering the typological similarity of the Proto-Indo-European language with the northwestern Caucasian languages, and implying that this similarity may be due to local factors, Frederick Kortlandt considers the Indo-European family to be a branch of the Ural-Altaic, transformed by the influence of the Caucasian substratum. This view is consistent with archaeological data and places the early ancestors of the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language north of the Caspian Sea in the seventh millennium BC. e. (cf. Mallory 1989: 192f.), which is consistent with Gimbutas' theory.

Genetics
Haplogroup R1a1 is found in central and western Asia, in India and in the Slavic, Baltic and Estonian populations of Eastern Europe, but is practically not present in most countries of Western Europe. However, 23.6% of Norwegians, 18.4% of Swedes, 16.5% of Danes, 11% of the Saami have this genetic marker.
Genetic studies of 26 remains of representatives of the kurgan culture revealed that they have the haplogroup R1a1-M17, and also had fair skin and eye color.

1. Review of the kurgan hypothesis.

2. Distribution of wagons.

3. Map of Indo-European migrations from approximately 4000 to 1000 BC. e. in accordance with the mound model. Anatolian migration (marked with a broken line) could have taken place through the Caucasus or the Balkans. The purple area denotes the supposed ancestral home (Samara culture, Srednestog culture). The red area means the area inhabited by the Indo-European peoples by 2500 BC. e., and orange - by 1000 BC. e.

4. Indo-European isoglosses: regions of distribution of the languages of the centum group (blue color) and satem (red color), endings *-tt-> -ss-, *-tt-> -st- and m-

KURGAN HYPOTHESIS. INDO-EUROPEANS The Kurgan hypothesis was proposed by Marija Gimbutas in 1956 to combine archaeological and linguistic data to locate the ancestral home of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) native speakers. The hypothesis is the most popular regarding the origin of PIE. The alternative Anatolian and Balkan hypothesis of V. A. Safronov has supporters mainly on the territory of the former USSR and does not correlate with archaeological and linguistic chronologies. The Kurgan hypothesis is based on the views expressed at the end of the 19th century by Viktor Gen and Otto Schrader. The hypothesis had a significant impact on the study of Indo-European peoples. Those scholars who follow the Gimbutas hypothesis identify the barrows and the Yamnaya culture with the early Proto-Indo-European peoples that existed in the Black Sea steppes and southeastern Europe from the 5th to the 3rd millennium BC. e. The Kurgan hypothesis of the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans implies the gradual spread of the "Kurgan culture", which eventually embraced all the Black Sea steppes. Subsequent expansion beyond the steppe zone led to the emergence of mixed cultures such as the Globular Amphora culture in the west, the nomadic Indo-Iranian cultures in the east, and the migration of the Proto-Greeks to the Balkans around 2500 BC. e. The domestication of the horse and the later use of carts made the Kurgan culture mobile and extended it to the entire region of the "pit culture". In the Kurgan hypothesis, it is believed that all the Black Sea steppes were the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans and throughout the region they spoke late dialects of the Proto-Indo-European language. The area on the Volga marked on the map as Urheimat marks the location of the earliest traces of horse breeding (Samara culture, but see Sredne Stog culture), and possibly belongs to the core of early Proto-Indo-Europeans or Proto-Proto-Indo-Europeans in the 5th millennium BC. e. Gimbutas version. Map of Indo-European migrations from about 4000 to 1000 BC. e. in accordance with the mound model. Anatolian migration (marked with a broken line) could have taken place through the Caucasus or the Balkans. The purple area denotes the supposed ancestral home (Samara culture, Srednestog culture). The red area means the area inhabited by the Indo-European peoples by 2500 BC. e., and orange - by 1000 BC. e. Gimbutas' initial assumption identifies four stages in the development of the kurgan culture and three waves of expansion. Kurgan I, Dnieper/Volga region, first half of the 4th millennium BC e. Obviously descended from the cultures of the Volga basin, subgroups included the Samara culture and the Seroglazovo culture. Mound II-III, second half of the 4th millennium BC. e .. Includes the Sredne Stog culture in the Sea of \u200b\u200bAzov and the Maikop culture in the North Caucasus. Stone circles, early two-wheeled carts, anthropomorphic stone stelae or idols. Kurgan IV or Yamnaya culture, first half of the 3rd millennium BC. e., covers the entire steppe region from the Ural River to Romania. Wave I, preceding the Kurgan I stage, expansion from the Volga to the Dnieper, which led to the coexistence of the Kurgan I culture and the Cukuteni culture (Trypillian culture). Reflections of this migration spread to the Balkans and along the Danube to the Vinca and Lengyel cultures in Hungary. II wave, middle of the IV millennium BC. e., which began in the Maikop culture and later gave rise to kurganized mixed cultures in northern Europe around 3000 BC. e. (Globular Amphora culture, Baden culture, and certainly Corded Ware culture). According to Gimbutas, this was the first appearance of Indo-European languages in western and northern Europe. III wave, 3000-2800 BC e., the spread of the Yamnaya culture beyond the steppe, with the appearance of characteristic graves in the territory of modern Romania, Bulgaria and eastern Hungary. Kortlandt's version. Indo-European isoglosses: distribution regions of the Centum (blue) and Satem (red) languages, endings *-tt- > -ss-, *-tt- > -st- and m- Frederick Kortlandt proposed a revision of the Kurgan hypothesis. He raised the main objection that can be raised against Gimbutas' scheme (eg 1985: 198), namely that it is based on archaeological evidence and does not seek linguistic interpretations. Based on linguistic data and trying to put their pieces into a common whole, he got the following picture: the Indo-Europeans, who remained after migrations to the west, east and south (as described by J. Mallory) became the ancestors of the Balto-Slavs, while the carriers of other satemized languages can be identified with the Yamnaya culture, and Western Indo-Europeans with the Corded Ware culture. Modern genetic research contradicts this construction of Cortland, since it is the representatives of the satem group that are descendants of the Corded Ware culture. Returning to the Balts and Slavs, their ancestors can be identified with the Middle Dnieper culture. Then, following Mallory (pp197f) and implying the birthplace of this culture in the south, in the Middle Stog, the Yamnaya and late Trypillian culture, he suggested that these events corresponded with the development of the language of the satem group, which invaded the sphere of influence of the Western Indo-Europeans. According to Frederik Kortlandt, there is a general tendency to date proto-languages earlier than supported by linguistic evidence. However, if the Indo-Hittites and Indo-Europeans can be correlated with the beginning and end of the Sredny Stog culture, then, he objects, the linguistic data for the entire Indo-European language family do not take us beyond the secondary ancestral home (according to Gimbutas), and cultures such as the Khvalynian the middle Volga and Maikop in the northern Caucasus cannot be identified with the Indo-Europeans. Any suggestion that goes beyond the Sredny Stog culture must begin with the possible similarity of the Indo-European family of languages with other language families. Considering the typological similarity of the Proto-Indo-European language with the northwestern Caucasian languages, and implying that this similarity may be due to local factors, Frederick Kortlandt considers the Indo-European family to be a branch of the Ural-Altaic, transformed by the influence of the Caucasian substratum. This view is consistent with archaeological data and places the early ancestors of the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language north of the Caspian Sea in the seventh millennium BC. e. (cf. Mallory 1989: 192f.), which is consistent with Gimbutas' theory. Genetics Haplogroup R1a1 is found in central and western Asia, in India and in Slavic, Baltic and Estonian populations of Eastern Europe, but is practically not present in most countries of Western Europe. However, 23.6% of Norwegians, 18.4% of Swedes, 16.5% of Danes, 11% of the Saami have this genetic marker. Genetic studies of 26 remains of representatives of the kurgan culture revealed that they have the haplogroup R1a1-M17, and also had fair skin and eye color.

Plan:

1 Overview
2 Stages of distribution
3 Timeline
4 Genetics
5 Criticism

Introduction

Overview of the kurgan hypothesis.

Kurgan hypothesis was proposed by Marija Gimbutas in 1956 to combine archaeological and linguistic data to locate the ancestral home of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) native speakers. The hypothesis is the most popular regarding the origin of PIE. The alternative Anatolian hypothesis finds little popularity in comparison. The Balkan hypothesis of V. A. Safronov has supporters mainly in the territory of the former USSR.

The Kurgan hypothesis is based on the views expressed at the end of the 19th century by Victor Gen and Otto Schrader.

The hypothesis had a significant impact on the study of Indo-European peoples. Those scholars who follow the Gimbutas hypothesis identify mounds and pit culture with the early Proto-Indo-European peoples that existed in the Black Sea steppes and southeastern Europe from the 5th to the 3rd millennium BC. e.

1. Overview

Distribution of wagons.

Kurgan hypothesis the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans implies the gradual spread of the "Kurgan culture", which eventually embraced all the Black Sea steppes. Subsequent expansion beyond the steppe zone led to the emergence of mixed cultures such as the Globular Amphora culture in the west, the nomadic Indo-Iranian cultures in the east, and the migration of the Proto-Greeks to the Balkans around 2500 BC. e. The domestication of the horse and the later use of carts made the Kurgan culture mobile and extended it to the entire region of the "pit culture". In the Kurgan hypothesis, it is believed that all the Black Sea steppes were the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans and throughout the region they spoke late dialects of the Proto-Indo-European language. Region on the Volga, marked on the map as ?Urheimat indicates the location of the earliest traces of horse breeding (Samara culture, but see Sredne Stog culture), and possibly refers to the core of the early Proto-Indo-Europeans or Proto-Proto-Indo-Europeans in the 5th millennium BC. uh..

2. Stages of dissemination

Gimbutas' initial assumption identifies four stages in the development of the kurgan culture and three waves of expansion.

Kurgan I, Dnieper/Volga region, first half of the 4th millennium BC e. Obviously descended from the cultures of the Volga basin, subgroups included the Samara culture and the Seroglazovo culture.
Kurgan II-III, second half of the 4th millennium BC. e .. Includes the Sredny Stog culture in the Azov region and Maikop culture in the North Caucasus. Stone circles, early two-wheeled carts, anthropomorphic stone stelae or idols.
Kurgan IV or pit culture, first half of the III millennium BC. e., covers the entire steppe region from the Ural River to Romania.

I wave, preceding the stage Kurgan I, expansion from the Volga to the Dnieper, which led to the coexistence of culture Kurgan I and Cucuteni culture (Trypillian culture). Reflections of this migration spread to the Balkans and along the Danube to the Vinca and Lengyel cultures in Hungary.
II wave, middle of the IV millennium BC. e., which began in the Maikop culture and later gave rise to mounded mixed cultures in northern Europe around 3000 B.C. e. (Globular Amphora culture, Baden culture and, of course, the Corded Ware culture). According to Gimbutas, this was the first appearance of Indo-European languages in western and northern Europe.
III wave, 3000-2800 BC e., the spread of the Yamnaya culture beyond the steppe, with the appearance of characteristic graves in the territory of modern Romania, Bulgaria and eastern Hungary.

Frederick Kortlandt proposed a revision of the kurgan hypothesis. He raised the main objection that can be raised against Gimbutas' scheme (eg 1985: 198), namely that it is based on archaeological evidence and does not seek linguistic interpretations. Based on linguistic data and trying to put their pieces into a common whole, he got the following picture: the Indo-Europeans, who remained after migrations to the west, east and south (as described by J. Mallory) became the ancestors of the Balto-Slavs, while the carriers of other satemized languages can be identified with pit culture, and Western Indo-Europeans with Corded Ware culture. Returning to the Balts and Slavs, their ancestors can be identified with Middle Dnieper culture. Then, following Mallory (pp197f) and implying the homeland of this culture in the south, in Sredny Stog, pit and late Trypillia culture, he suggested the correspondence of these events with the development of the language of the group satem, who invaded the sphere of influence of the Western Indo-Europeans.

According to Frederik Kortlandt, there is a general tendency to date proto-languages earlier than supported by linguistic evidence. However, if the Indo-Hittites and Indo-Europeans can be correlated with the beginning and end of the Middle Stog culture, then, he argues, the linguistic data for the entire Indo-European language family does not lead us beyond secondary ancestral home(according to Gimbutas), and cultures such as Khvalynskaya on the middle Volga and Maikop in the northern Caucasus cannot be identified with the Indo-Europeans. Any suggestion that goes beyond the Sredny Stog culture must begin with the possible similarity of the Indo-European family of languages with other language families. Considering the typological similarity of the Proto-Indo-European language with the northwestern Caucasian languages, and implying that this similarity may be due to local factors, Frederick Kortlandt considers the Indo-European family to be a branch of the Ural-Altaic, transformed by the influence of the Caucasian substratum. This view is consistent with archaeological data and places the early ancestors of the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language north of the Caspian Sea in the seventh millennium BC. e. (cf. Mallory 1989: 192f.), which is consistent with Gimbutas' theory.

3. Chronology

4500-4000: Early PIE. Cultures of the Middle Stog, Dnieper-Donets and Samara, domestication of the horse ( I wave).
4000-3500: Pit-pit culture, barrow prototypes, and Maikop culture in the northern Caucasus. Indo-Hittite models postulate a separation of the Proto-Anatolians before this time.
3500-3000: Average PIE. The Yamnaya culture, as its pinnacle, represents the classical reconstructed Proto-Indo-European society, with stone idols, early two-wheeled carts, predominant pastoralism, but also with permanent settlements and fortifications along the rivers, subsisting on crop production and fishing. The contact of the pit burial culture with the cultures of late Neolithic Europe led to the emergence of "kurganized" cultures of globular amphora and Baden ( II wave). The Maikop culture is the earliest known site of the beginning of the Bronze Age, and bronze weapons and artifacts appear in the area of the Yamnaya culture. Presumably early satemization.
3000-2500: Late PIE. The Yamnaya culture spreads throughout the Black Sea steppe ( III wave). The Corded Ware culture spreads from the Rhine to the Volga, which corresponds to the late stage of the Indo-European community, during which the entire “Kurganized” region broke up into independent languages and cultures, which, however, remained in contact, ensuring the spread of technology and early intergroup borrowings, excluding Anatolian and Tocharian branch that have been isolated from those processes. The emergence of the centum-satem isogloss presumably interrupted them, but the phonetic tendencies of sitemization remained active.
2500-2000: Conversion of local dialects to proto-languages completed. Proto-Greek was spoken in the Balkans, and Proto-Indo-Iranian was spoken in the Andronovo culture north of the Caspian. The Bronze Age reached Central Europe with the bell beaker culture, probably composed of various centum dialects. The Tarim mummies probably belong to the Proto-Tocharian culture.
2000-1500: Catacomb culture north of the Black Sea. The chariot was invented, which led to the split and rapid spread of the Iranians and Indo-Aryans from the Bactrian-Margian archaeological complex to Central Asia, northern India, Iran and eastern Anatolia. The Proto-Anatolians split into Hittites and Luvs. The Proto-Proto-Celts of the Unetice culture had developed metalworking.
1500-1000: The Northern Bronze Age distinguished Proto-Proto-Germans, and (Proto-)Proto-Celts. In Central Europe, the urn-field cultures and the Hallstatt culture arose, beginning the Iron Age. Migration of Proto-Italians to the Italian Peninsula (Stela Bagnolo). The composition of the hymns of the Rigveda and the rise of the Vedic civilization in the Punjab region. Mycenaean civilization - the beginning of the Greek Dark Age.
1000 BC -500 BC: Celtic languages spread across central and western Europe. Proto-Germans. Homer and the Beginning of Classical Antiquity. Vedic civilization gives rise to the Mahajanapadas. Zarathustra creates Gata, the rise of the Achaemenid empire that succeeded Elam and Babylon. Division of Proto-Italic into Osco-Umbrian languages and Latino-Faliscan languages. Development of the Greek and Old Italic alphabets. In southern Europe, various Paleo-Balkan languages are spoken, which have supplanted the autochthonous Mediterranean languages. Anatolian languages are dying out.

4. Genetics

Distribution of R1a (lilac) and R1b (red)

The distribution frequency of R1a1a, also known as R-M17 and R-M198, is adapted from Underhill et al (2009).

The specific haplogroup R1a1 is determined by the M17 mutation (SNP marker) of the Y chromosome (see nomenclature in ) associated with the kurgan culture. Haplogroup R1a1 is found in central and western Asia, in India and in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe, but is not very common in some countries of Western Europe (for example, in France, or some parts of Britain) (see). However, 23.6% of Norwegians, 18.4% of Swedes, 16.5% of Danes, 11% of the Saami have this genetic marker ().

Ornella Semino et al. (see ) identified the closely related but distinct haplotype R1b (Eu18 in their terminology - see nomenclature correspondence in ) as having originated from the Iberian Peninsula after the last ice age (20,000 to 13,000 years ago) , with R1a1 (he has Eu19) associated with mound expansion. In Western Europe, R1b predominates, especially in the Basque Country, while R1a1 predominates in Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, and is also observed in Pakistan, India, and Central Asia.

There is an alternative study that the population of India received "limited" gene flow from outside during the Holocene and R1a1 comes from South and West Asia.

Another marker that closely corresponds to "mound" migrations is the distribution of the B blood group allele, mapped by Cavalli-Sforza. The distribution of the B blood allele in Europe coincides with the proposed Kurgan culture map, and with the distribution of the haplogroup R1a1 (YDNA).

5. Criticism

According to this hypothesis, the reconstructed linguistic evidence confirms that the Indo-Europeans were riders who used thrusting weapons, could easily cross large spaces and did so in central Europe in the fifth to fourth millennium BC. e. At the technological and cultural level, the Kurgan peoples were at the level of shepherding. Having considered this equation, Renfrew established that equipped warriors appeared in Europe only at the turn of the second-first millennium BC. e., which could not happen if the kurgan hypothesis is correct and the Indo-Europeans appeared there 3,000 years earlier. On a linguistic basis, the hypothesis was seriously attacked by Catherine Krell (1998), who found a large discrepancy between the terms found in the reconstructed Indo-European language and the cultural level established by the mound excavations. For example, Krell established that the Indo-Europeans had agriculture, while the Kurgan peoples were only shepherds. There were others, such as Mallory and Schmitt, who also criticized the Gimbutas hypothesis.

Notes

Mallory (1989:185). “The Kurgan solution is attractive and has been accepted by many archaeologists and linguists, in part or total. It is the solution one encounters in the Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Grand Dictionnaire Encyclopedique Larousse.»
Strazny (2000:163). "The single most popular proposal is the Pontic stepspes (see the Kurgan hypothesis)..."
Diary GP - Mallory. Indo-European phenomenon. part 3 - gpr63.livejournal.com/406055.html
Frederik Kortlandt-The spread of the Indo-Europeans, 2002 - www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art111e.pdf
J.P. Mallory, In search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, archeology and myth. London: Thames and Hudson, 1989.
The Homeland of Indo-European Languages and Culture - Some Thoughts] by Prof. B.B.Lal (Director General (Retd.), Archaeological Survey of India, - www.geocities.com/ifihhome/articles/bbl001.html

Literature

Dexter, A.R. and Jones-Bley, K. (eds). 1997. The Kurgan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe: Selected Articles From 1952 to 1993. Institute for the Study of Man. Washingdon, DC. ISBN 0-941694-56-9.
Gray, R.D. and Atkinson, Q.D. 2003. Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature. 426:435-439
Mallory, J.P. and Adams, D.Q. 1997 (eds). 1997. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Fitzroy Dearborn division of Taylor & Francis, London. ISBN 1-884964-98-2.
Mallory, J.P. 1989. In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archeology and Myth. Thames & Hudson, London. ISBN 0-500-27616-1.
D. G. Zanotti, The Evidence for Kurgan Wave One As Reflected By the Distribution of "Old Europe" Gold Pendants, JIES 10 (1982), 223-234.

The Kurgan hypothesis of the ancestral home of the Proto-Indo-Europeans implies the gradual spread of the "Kurgan culture", which eventually embraced all the Black Sea steppes. Subsequent expansion beyond the steppe zone led to mixed cultures such as the Globular Amphora culture in the west, the nomadic Indo-Iranian cultures in the east, and the migration of the Proto-Greeks to the Balkans around 2500 BC. The domestication of the horse and the later use of carts made the kurgan culture was mobile and expanded it to the entire region of the “pit culture”. In the kurgan hypothesis, it is believed that all the Black Sea steppes were the ancestral home of PIE and that late dialects of the Proto-Indo-European language were spoken throughout the region. The area on the Volga marked on the map as ?Urheimat marks the location of the earliest traces of horse breeding (Samara culture, but see Sredne Stog culture), and possibly belongs to the core of early PIE or proto-PIE in the 5th millennium BC.

Are mounds a sign of Indo-European civilization?

Frederick Kortlandt proposed a revision of the kurgan hypothesis. He raised the main objection that can be raised against Gimbutas' scheme (eg, 1985: 198), namely that it comes from archaeological evidence and seeks linguistic interpretations. Based on linguistic data and trying to put their pieces together, he got the following picture: the territory of the Middle Stog culture in eastern Ukraine was named by him as the most suitable candidate for the role of the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans. The Indo-Europeans who remained after migrations to the west, east and south (as described by Mallory) became the ancestors of the Balto-Slavs, while speakers of other satemized languages can be identified with the Yamna culture, and Western Indo-Europeans with the Corded Ware culture. Returning to the Balts and Slavs, their ancestors can be identified with the Middle Dnieper culture. Then, following Mallory (pp197f) and implying the birthplace of this culture in the south, in the Middle Stog, the Yamnaya and late Trypillian culture, he suggested that these events corresponded with the development of the language of the satem group, which invaded the sphere of influence of the Western Indo-Europeans.
According to Frederik Kortlandt, there is a general tendency to date proto-languages earlier than supported by linguistic evidence. However, if the Indo-Hittites and Indo-Europeans can be correlated with the beginning and end of the Sredny Stog culture, then, he objects, the linguistic data for the entire Indo-European language family do not take us beyond the secondary ancestral home (according to Gimbutas), and cultures such as the Khvalynian the middle Volga and Maikop in the northern Caucasus cannot be identified with the Indo-Europeans. Any suggestion that goes beyond the Sredny Stog culture must begin with the possible similarity of the Indo-European family of languages with other language families. Considering the typological similarity of the Proto-Indo-European language with the northwestern Caucasian languages, and implying that this similarity may be due to local factors, Frederick Kortlandt considers the Indo-European family to be a branch of the Ural-Altaic, transformed by the influence of the Caucasian substratum. This view is consistent with archaeological data and places the early ancestors of Proto-Indo-European speakers north of the Caspian Sea in the seventh millennium BC. (cf. Mallory 1989: 192f.), which is consistent with Gimbutas' theory.