Archeolinguistics

Archeolinguistics

Authors

  • Tamar Makharoblidze

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52340/lac.2021.627

Keywords:

Archeolinguistcs, Kura–Araxes culture, Migration of cultures

Abstract

Archeolinguistcs is a field of linguistic studies, which creates an ancient picture of the world. For instance: let’s talk about the ancient cultures such as Kura–Araxes (Kur–Araz). Archeological excavations in Georgia with the amazing findings of Kura–Araxes (Kur–Araz) Culture, that existed from about 4000 BC until about 2000 BC, and Shulaveri-Shomu Tepe Culture which preceded the Kura–Araxes Culture in this region or Colchian Culture 3000 BCE to 600 BCE, Trialeti Culture late 3rd and early 2nd millennium BC, Bedeni-Martkopi or Early Kurgan Culture  before 2550 BC, and many others. The excavations showed that Kura–Araxes Culture and Shulaveri-Shomu Tepe Culture are remarkably wealthy. The economy was based on farming and  livestock-raising (especially of cattle and sheep). They grew grain and orchard crops, and are known to have used implements to make flour. They raised cattle, sheep, goats, dogs, and in later phases, horses. They worked with copperarsenicsilvergoldtin, and bronze. These archeological cultures how a precocious metallurgical development, which strongly influenced surrounding regions.  Viticulture and wine-making were widely practiced in this area from the earliest times. The word ‘vine’ in many languages worldwide comes from Georgian (‘ghvino’).  The earliest evidence of domesticated grapes in the world has been found at Gadachrili Gora, near the village of Imiri, southeastern  of Georgia; carbon-dating points to the date of about 6000 BC. Grape pips dating back to the V-IVth millennia B.C. were found in Shulaveri; others dating back to the IVth millennium B.C. were found in 'Shulaveri area' in Georgia. Kura-Araxes and Shulaveri-Shomu cultures developed gradually through a synthesis of several cultural traditions, including the ancient cultures of the Caucasus and nearby territories.Following the archeological vectors we can research the linguistic lexical bases of the transported things and/or customs and traditions, following the archeological path and revealing the historical faces for the worlds reconstructing them with the well-known methods of historical-comparative linguistics, and creating the archeolinguistic dictionaries.   Of course the historical linguistics has already used its methods to reconstruct the words, but archeolinguistics will systemically follow the vectors viewing the wide lexicosemantic and cultural backgrounds, considering the artifacts as the units of the entire system. On the other hand, archeologists give the names to the things they find, but they never get any linguistic consultations or advices. ‘A cult item’ usually is named a thing with unknown functions - by the archeologists. The archeological vectors had been spread from this region to the south, west and north, transporting the cultural and household appliances. The migrated things had their names and functions. Of course the names migrated with these things as well. These migrated things have been adopted functionally and linguistically for the each case at the each location. The proposed theory states that linguistic vectors followed archeological ones. The challenge is to study these combined vectors, and the field can be called as ‘Archeological linguistics’ or ‘Archeolinguistcs’. Archeological linguistics will study the ancient linguistic picture of the world.  Actually this will be the interdisciplinary studies, which will request the high level professionals in history-archeology and linguistics. The ancient word-roots can be revealed and the full lingvoculutral portrait can be restored for the each region around the globe. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

• The early Trans-Caucasian culture, I.M. Diakonoff, 1984

• Edens, Christoper (Aug–Nov 1995). "Transcaucasia at the End of the Early Bronze Age". Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. The American Schools of Oriental Research. 299/300 (The Archaeology of Empire in Ancient Anatolia): 53, pp. 53–64 [56]. doi:10.2307/1357345. JSTOR 1357345.

• Rothman, Mitchell S. (2015). "Early Bronze Age migrants and ethnicity in the Middle Eastern mountain zone". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112 (30): 9190–9195. doi:10.1073/pnas.1502220112. PMC 4522795. PMID 26080417.

• Guram Mirtskhulava, Guram Chikovani, PHASE OF TRANSITION TO THE KURA-ARAXES CULTURE IN EASTERN GEORGIA. Problems of Early Metal Age Archaeology of Caucasus and Anatolia. Proceedings of International Conference. Tbilisi, 2014

• Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology – Page 246 by Barbara Ann Kipfer

• Frangipane, Marcella (2015). "Different types of multiethnic societies and different patterns of development and change in the prehistoric Near East". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112 (30): 9182–9189. doi:10.1073/pnas.1419883112. PMC 4522825. PMID 26015583.

• Geoffrey D. Summers, The Early Trans-Caucasian Culture in Iran: Perspectives and problems.Paléorient 2014 Volume 40 Numéro 2 pp. 155-168

• David W. Anthony, The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press, 2010 ISBN 1400831105p298

• Nana Rusishvili, The grapevine Culture in Georgia on Basis of Palaeobotanical Data.Archived 2016-03-04 at the Wayback Machine "Mteny" Association, 2010

• Peter Boisseau, How wine-making spread through the ancient world: U of T archaeologist. June 17, 2015 – news.utoronto.ca

• Batiuk, Stephen D. (2013). "The fruits of migration: Understanding the 'longue dureé' and the socio-economic relations of the Early Transcaucasian Culture". Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 32 (4): 449–477. doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2013.08.002.

• Antonio Sagona. Rethinking the Kura-Araxes Genesis. (2014). pp. 26.

• Philip L. Kohl.The Making of Bronze Age Eurasia. pp. 74, 82.

• D. T. Potts (2012). A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. p. 677. ISBN 978-1-4443-6077-6.

• T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov (March 1990). "The Early History of Indo-European Languages". Scientific American. Vol. 262 no. 3. pp. 110–116. Archived from the original on 2014-01-06.

• Thomas V. Gamkrelidze and Vjaceslav V. Ivanov (1995). Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. A Reconstruction and Historical Analysis of a Proto-Language and Proto-Culture. Part I: The Text. Part II: Bibliography, Indexes. In: Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs [TiLSM], 80. Translated by: Nichols Johanna, Preface by: Roman Jakobson. De Gruyter Mouton. 1995 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110815030

• Renfrew, Colin (2003). "Time Depth, Convergence Theory, and Innovation in Proto-Indo-European". Languages in Prehistoric Europe. ISBN 978-3-8253-1449-1.

• Gray, Russell D.; Atkinson, Quentin D. (2003). "Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin" (PDF). Nature. 426 (6965): 435–9. doi:10.1038/nature02029. PMID 14647380. S2CID 42340. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2011-05-20. Retrieved 2010-07-09.

• David Anthony. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. (2007) pp. 98

• Stephen Batiuk, Mitchell Rothman, Early Transcaucasian Cultures and Their Neighbors. University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania: Expedition, 2007

• Mascarenhas, Desmond D.; Raina, Anupuma; Aston, Christopher E.; Sanghera, Dharambir K. (2015), "Genetic and Cultural Reconstruction of the Migration of an Ancient Lineage", BioMed Research International, 2015: 1–16, doi:10.1155/2015/651415, PMC 4605215, PMID 26491681

• James P. Mallory, "Kuro-Araxes Culture", Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture, Fitzroy Dearborn, 1997.

• Pamjav (2012), "Brief communication: New Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1", American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 149 (4): 611–615, doi:10.1002/ajpa.22167, PMID 23115110

• Underhill, Peter A.; et al. (2015), "The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a", European Journal of Human Genetics, 23 (1): 124–131, doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.50, PMC 4266736, PMID 24667786

• Rothman, Mitchell S. (2015). "Early Bronze Age migrants and ethnicity in the Middle Eastern mountain zone". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112 (30): 9190–9195. doi:10.1073/pnas.1502220112. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 4522795. PMID 26080417.

• Giorgi L. Kavtaradze, The Chronology of the Caucasus During the Early Metal Age: Observations from Central Transcaucasus 2004. (alternative site)

• Kura-Arax Pottery – Karnut I (2900-2500 BC) The Kura-Arax Pottery Technology Database (KAPTech)

• The Beginnings of Metallurgy – includes extensive discussion of Kura-Araxes metalworking

• Toby Wilkinson (2009), Pathways and highways: routes in Bronze Age Eurasia, ArchAtlas, Version 4.1 – Accessed: 9 November 2015

• Dieneke's Anthropology Blog (2013), Origin of Early Transcaucasian Culture (aka Kura-Araxes culture)

• Problems of Early Metal Age Archaeology of Caucasus and Anatolia. Proceedings of International Conference; November 19–23, 2014, Georgia; edited by G. Narimanishvili. Tbilisi, 2014 305 pages ISBN 9789941071348

• The spatial organization of craft production at the Kura-Araxes settlement of Köhne Shahar in northwestern Iran: A zooarchaeological approach - PLOS ONE March 4, 2020 - Siavash Samei and Karim Alizadeh

• კიკვიძე ი., მიწათმოქმედება და სამიწათმოქმედო კულტი ძველ საქართველოში, თბ., 1976;

• საქართველოს ისტორიის ნარკვევები, ტ. 1, თბ., 1970;

• ჩუბინიშვილი ტ., ამირანის გორა. მასალები მესხეთ-ჯავახეთის უძველესი ისტორიისათვის, თბ., 1963;

• ჯავახიშვილი ა., ღლონტი ლ., ურბნისი, ტ. 1, თბ., 1962;

• ჯაფარიძე ო., ქართველი ტომების ისტორიისათვის ლითონის წარმოების ადრეულ საფეხურზე, თბ., 1961;

• ჯაფარიძე ო , ქართველ ტომთა ეთნიკური ისტორიის საკითხებისათვის, თბ., 1976;

Downloads

Published

2021-11-16

How to Cite

Tamar Makharoblidze. (2021). Archeolinguistics. Language and Culture, (25), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.52340/lac.2021.627

Issue

Section

LINGUISTIC
Loading...