Original home

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Under original home is the process by linguistic undeveloped or archaeological methods likely area where a certain, usually likewise undeveloped proto-language , that is the common archetype of a family of languages , was spoken. In a broader sense, the original home is understood to be the area of ​​origin of historically documented or still existing peoples or ethnic groups.

Origin and use of the term Urheimat

The term Urheimat is used today as a foreign German word in English. The term came up in the 19th century in the discussion about the origin of the speakers of the reconstructed Indo-European original language , which one tried to narrow down with linguistic and archaeological arguments. The question took up the ancient and medieval notion of an Origo gentis . Since one can develop linguistic preforms on different levels, there are also chronologically successive “primordial homes”. Today, however, linguistics is of the opinion that language communities are rarely homogeneous and often did not have a common ethnic or national identity.

While the term “Urheimat” is rarely used in the scientific context in German-speaking countries, the term is now also used in English scientific literature to address the question of the areas of origin of non-Indo-European peoples or language groups.

Indo-European original home

As for any natural language, the reconstructed Ur-Indo-European a language community is to be assumed, which at the time of its development lived in a certain geographical area, which is generally referred to as the original home .

Neither time nor space are known and therefore the subject of much speculation.

Of the many original home hypotheses, only the following two have recently been discussed intensively:

  • The steppe or kurgan hypothesis , which was systematized after a lot of preliminary work, especially by the archaeologist Marija Gimbutas and is now mainly worked on and represented by the American archaeologist David W. Anthony.

A. Häusler, on the other hand, as a representative of the so-called anti - migrationists, rejects an original home with subsequent migrations in general and advocates the thesis of a gradual growing together.

Many of the reasons that were widespread 50 years ago can still be found in school books, but have long been out of date. Well-known examples are the beech and salmon arguments . The reconstructed Indo-European word * bʰāg-ó-s has so many different meanings today that the original meaning cannot be deduced . It is similar with the reconstructed stem * lak̑-so-s (cf.)

With the glottal (Armenian) hypothesis of 1995 and its revision in 2010, Gamqrelidze and Ivanov locate the Indo-European original home south of the Caucasus. Recent research supports this hypothesis in part.

Indo-Iranian original home

Within Eastern Indo-European, the Iranian and Indo-Aryan languages ​​( Sanskrit ) form a clearly distinguishable unit. Speakers of the Proto-Indo-Iranian language are generally considered to be the bearers of the culture of the Andronovo horizon of the late third and early second millennium BC. Chr.

Baltic original home

A common Baltic-Slavic intermediate level is still being discussed in Indo-European studies. Jürgen Udolph located the original Slavic home in the north-eastern Carpathian region with the help of the nomenclature of waters .

Germanic original home

In the case of the forerunners of the Germanic tribes, it is disputed to what extent they developed in northern Germany and southern Scandinavia or a little south of them, for example in today's Lower Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. The latter is z. B. justified by Jürgen Udolph with his interpretation of place and water names.

Celtic original home

The Celtic original home is mostly assumed in the core area of ​​the La Tène and the Hallstatt culture that preceded it. The center of the Hallstatt culture (approx. 750 to 475 BC) was the area of ​​western Austria and Bavaria, the core area of ​​the La Tène culture was the northwestern area in parts of today's Baden-Württemberg and Switzerland. Since the Celtic ethnicity and (proto) language presumably older and the Hallstatt culture continuously emerged from the Urnfield culture , its starting area is also considered a possible Celtic original home. This starting area, however, covers large parts of southern Central Europe. Within this area, the linguists Jürgen Udolph and, more recently, Peter Busse, based on the names of bodies of water, assume the western Alps and the (upper) Rhone valley as the starting point for the (proto-) Celtic language.

Original Italian home

An original home of the Italian languages ​​outside of Italy is unknown. Since the relationships between the West Indo-European languages ​​in Indo-European studies are seen to differing degrees depending on the author, conclusions from this must be viewed with great caution. Euler / Badenheuer see a special closeness to the Celtic and Germanic, and then suspect an original home in Bohemia . Archaeological finds, on the other hand, point to the Baden culture in the Carpathian arch as a Celto-Italic original home, which radiated strongly on both sides of the Alps, which may have led to the development of the Celtic languages ​​in the north and the Italian languages ​​in the south.

Finno-Ugric peoples or language groups

Determining the original home of Proto-Urals is a difficult task because of the age of this proto-language . The different classification theories correspond closely with hypotheses about the spread of the respective linguistic subgroup from an assumed original home to its current geographical area. It is generally assumed that the source area of ​​the Finno-Ugric languages ​​is located in the central or southern Ural region with a center west of the mountain range. Apparently the ancestors of today's Samoyed were the first to separate and move eastwards. This separation took place at least 6000, if not 7000 years ago, which can be concluded from the relatively small number (approx. 150) total-Ural word equations . The splitting of Samoyed into today's languages ​​probably only began about 2000 years ago.

The Finno-Ugric group was by far the larger from the start. The first splits in this group go back to at least the 3rd millennium BC. BC back. As mentioned, the order of the splits and thus the course of the expansion of the Finno-Ugric languages ​​has been (again) disputed since around 1970. Since Donner in 1879, it was generally assumed that the Ugric was the first group to separate from the Finno-Ugric, leaving the Finno-Permian unit as the remainder. The more recent results (Sammallahti 1984 and 1998, Viitso 1996), on the other hand, see the Sami-Finnish group as a peripheral unit, which first appeared in the 3rd millennium BC. Moved away from the Finno-Ugric core. It was followed by Mordovian and Mari (around 2000 BC) and finally Permian in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. The core remained the languages ​​from which Ugric developed. Probably as early as 1000 BC One can set the separation of the Hungarian from the Obugrischen languages . The Hungarians (self-designation: Magyars) moved westward together with Turkish tribes since 500 AD and reached and conquered the sparsely populated Carpathian Basin in 895 AD (The name Hungarian comes from Chuvash or Bolgar-Turkic from on-ogur = ten Ogur tribes .)

See also


  • Wolfram Euler, Konrad Badenheuer: Language and Origin of the Germanic Peoples - Outline of Proto-Germanic Before the First Sound Shift , London / Hamburg 2009, ISBN 978-3-9812110-1-6 .
  • James P. Mallory : In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archeology, and Myth. (The Search for the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archeology, and Myth ). Thames & Hudson, London 1989.
  • James P. Mallory: The homelands of the Indo-Europeans . In: Roger Blench, Matthew Spriggs (eds.): Archeology and Language , Volume I: Theoretical and Methodological Orientations , London 1997.
  • Jürgen Udolph: onenological studies on the Germanic problem (Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde; Vol. 9). DeGruyter, Berlin 1994, ISBN 3-11-014138-8 .
  • Jürgen Udolph: Studies on Slavic water names and water names. A contribution to the question of the original home of the Slavs . Winter, Heidelberg 1979, ISBN 3-533-02818-6 .
  • Sven Lagerbring : İsveççenin Türkçe ile Benzerlikleri / Relationship between the Swedish language and the Turkic languages. 1st edition. İstanbul 2008, ISBN 978-975-343-524-6 . (Turkish)
  • Jansson, Prof. Sven BF: Runes in Sweden. translated by Peter Foote, Gidlunds, Värnamo, Sweden 1987. (English edition of Runinskrifter i Sverige, AWE / Gebers 1963). The photographs of the stone monuments in Sweden (Appendix A) are provided in Prof. Jansson's book. The inscriptions are clearly legible in these photographs.
  • Buyuk Larousse, Interpress-Milliyet, Istanbul, Turkiye 1993: The Turkish edition of Grand Dictionnaire Encyclopedique. Larousse (GDEL), Paris, France. The Gokturk alphabet used in this article is taken from the encyclopedia's entry Gokturkce on page 4678, vol. 9. (Appendices B and C).
  • Ergin, Muharrem: Orhun Abideleri; Bogazici Yayinlari, Istanbul, Turkiye 1988. More specific information on the Gokturks and their inscription is accessible in Prof. Ergin's concise book. antalyaonline.net
  • KA Akischew: Kurgan Issyk: Iskusstvo sakow Kazakhstan. (Искусство саков Казахстана), Moscow 1978.
  • Tamas Gamqrelidse, Vyacheslav Vsedolowitsch Iwanow: Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. vol. I-II, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1995, ISBN 3-11-009646-3 .
  • CW Ceram: Enge Schlucht and Schwarzer Berg , Rowohlt, Reinbek near Hamburg 1966, ISBN 3-499-16627-5 .

Web links

Wiktionary: Urheimat  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. Wolfram Euler , Konrad Badenheuer: Language and Origin of the Germanic Peoples - Outline of Proto-Germanic before the first sound shift . London / Hamburg 2009, ISBN 978-3-9812110-1-6 , pp. 43-50.
  2. ^ A. Richard Diebold jr .: Contributions to the IE salmon problem . In: Current Progress in Historical Linguistics, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Historical Linguistics . Amsterdam 1976, ISBN 0-7204-0533-5 , pp. 341-387 (= North-Holland Linguistic Series 31)
  3. Gamkrelidse: In Defense of Ejectives for Proto-Indo-European (A Response to the Critique of the Glottalic Theory) . Ed .: BULLETIN OF THE GEORGIAN NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 2010 ( org.ge [PDF]).
  4. redakce Slovo a slovesnost, ÚJČ AV ČR, vvi - slovo@ujc.cas.cz: Slovo a slovesnost - The glottalic model of Proto-Indo-European consonantism: re-igniting the dialog. Retrieved January 23, 2018 .
  5. Udolph, Jürgen: Studies on Slavic water names and water names: a contribution to the question of the original home of the Slavs. Vol. 17. Winter, 1979.
  6. Source: P. Busse: Hydronymy and Urheimat: A new approach to localizing the original home of the Celts ? In: Helmut Birkhan (Ed.): Celtic incursions on the Danube . Publishing house of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 2005.
  7. cf. Wolfram Euler 2009, pp. 24-27.
  8. ^ David W. Anthony: The Horse, the Wheel, and Language. How Bronze-Age Riders from the Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press, Princeton et al. a. 2007, p. 367.