the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the editors of The Journal of

Interdisciplinary History

Indo-European and Indo-Europeans by George Cardona; Henry M. Hoenigswald; Alfred Senn

Review by: Jay H. Jasanoff
The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Summer, 1974), pp. 139-145
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/202775 .
Accessed: 07/05/2013 08:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The MIT Press and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the editors of The Journal of
Interdisciplinary History are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal
of Interdisciplinary History.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reviews

andIndo-Europeans.
Indo-European Edited by George Cardona, Henry
M. Hoenigswald, and Alfred Senn (Philadelphia,The University of
Pennsylvania Press, I970) 432 pp. $35.oo

The study of prehistory can be approached in two ways. Human

societies of any period leave tangible remains,whether in the form of
stone axes or Stonehenge;the interpretationof suchremainsis primarily
the concern of archeologistsand anthropologists.On the other hand,
the orderly transmissionof culture from one generation to another
often gives rise to another and no less important kind of residue-the
survival in historical societies of features which may reflect a much
earlierand no longer directly accessibleperiod. In practice,such infor-
mation is difficultto use, but in the caseof at leastone humaninstitution
-language-the processesgoverning historicalchange are sufficiently
well understoodto permit a fair degree of precisionin drawing infer-
ences about the past.It was the highly structuredand stablecharacterof
human speech which led, shortly before I800, to the recognition that
certainlanguagesare geneticallyrelated,preservingboth specificitems
of vocabularyand idiosyncraticgrammaticalfeaturesof their common
parent. On the basisof this crucialobservationthe great philologistsof
the nineteenth century developed the comparative method-a set of
techniquesfor reconstructingan unrecordedlanguagefrom its attested
descendants.Some of the earliestfindings of the new science of com-
parative linguisticswere among its most impressive: the necessity of
assumingan Indo-Europeanparentlanguageto account for the resem-
blancesbetween Sanskritand the older languagesof Europemeant the
necessityof assumingan Indo-EuropeanUrvolkto speakit; and as the
structureand vocabularyof the Indo-Europeanproto-languagegradu-
ally emerged from the shadows, so, too, did some of the grosser
features of the religion, society, and material culture of the people
whom it served. Linguistic evidence has since been used to elucidate
the prehistoryof many non-Indo-European-speakingpeoples as well,
especiallyin the WesternHemisphere;but in view of the comparatively
detailedstateof our knowledge of Indo-Europeanlinguisticsand of the
archeology of western Eurasia,Indo-Europeanstudiesstill remainsthe
area in which the techniques of "linguistic paleontology" can most
readily be controlled, and, hence, most profitably applied.

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
140 | JAY H. JASANOFF

The volume underreview containsthe bulk of the paperspre-

sented at the third Indo-EuropeanConference,held I966 at the
University of Pennsylvania.The theme of the conferencewas "Indo-
European and Indo-Europeans";participantsincluded linguists and
archeologistswith interestsextending to almost every aspect of Indo-
Europeanstudies about which anything substantiveis known. Their
twenty-two articlesmake this a very diversifiedcollection, which for
purposesof review it will be best to discussby subject matter. Three
papers deal with Indo-Europeandialectology, a subject of potential
interest to non-linguistsinasmuchas it can shed valuable light on the
ancient movements and contacts of peoples for whom early historical
records are lacking. In "Germanic and Regional Indo-European
(Lexicographyand Culture)," Edgar Polome examines the dialectal
affinitiesof Germanic and quite properly rejects much of the lexical
material cited by earlier scholars as evidence of an especially close
relationshipbetween Germanicand Balto-Slavic. George Lane'sarticle
"Tocharian:Indo-Europeanand Non-Indo-EuropeanRelationships"
tentatively follows Emile Benveniste in placing the original home of
the Tocharians near that of the Armenians and Thraco-Phrygians;
particularlyinterestingare his remarkson the Indo-European'salmon'
word *lakso-,which has in the past enjoyed a thoroughly undeserved
prominence in speculationsabout the location of the Indo-European
homeland. "Italic and Celtic Superlativesand the Dialects of Indo-
European,"by Warren Cowgill, is a major study in support of the
Italo-Celtic hypothesis, which holds that the Italic languages (Latin,
Oscan, and Umbrian) and the Celtic languages together make up a
single branchof the Indo-Europeanfamily in much the same way that
IndicandIranianor Baltic and SlavicconstituteIndo-IranianandBalto-
Slavic branches. Partly in reply to an earlier discussion by Calvert
Watkins, Cowgill arguescarefullyand persuasivelythat the superlative
suffix *-ismmo-is a sharedinnovation of Italic and Celtic; however, he
doesnot succeedin proving thatthe relationshipbetween the two groups
is qualitativelydifferentfrom that between, say, Greek and Armenian,
which also sharedialectalinnovations.On the other hand, it is virtually
certain that speakersof Italic and Celtic lived in close contact for an
extended period; moreover, one need not accept the strong version of
the Italo-Celtic hypothesis to find attractiveCowgill's suggestion that
this contact was maintaineduntil a Germanicmigration separatedthe
two peoples severalcenturiesbefore the Italic tribesmoved south.
Two much lesssatisfyingcontributionsare devoted to an examina-

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
REVIEWS 141

tion of prehistoriccontactsbetweenIndo-European and non-Indo-

European peoples.AntonioTovar'sarticle,"TheBasqueLanguageand
the Indo-European Spreadto the West," acceptsthe familiar(and
doubtlesscorrect)view thattheBasquewordsfor 'silver'and'lead'are
in some way relatedto the namesof these metalsin severalIndo-
EuropeanandSemiticlanguages.Quiteunconvincing,however,is his
attemptto show thatthesewordswere diffusedover partsof Europe
andthe NearEastfroman Iberiansourcelanguageakinto Basque;in
the caseof 'silver'in particular,it seemsmuch likelierthata Semitic
form relatedto Akkadiansarpu(froma root meaning'refine,purify')
liesat the sourceof Basquezil(h)ar,zidar,etc. AlthoughTovaris con-
tent to explainsimilaritiesbetween Basqueand Indo-European by
diffusion,IsidoreDyen'spaper("Background 'Noise'or 'Evidence'in
Comparative TheCaseof theAustronesian-Indo-European
Linguistics:
Hypothesis")appearsseriouslyto considerthe possibilitythat the
Indo-Europeanand Austronesian(Malay, Tagalog, etc.) families are
genetically related. It is difficult to find anything of value in Dyen's
comparisons, which are confined almost entirely to isolated lexical
items; evidence of this kind is notoriously inconclusive at best, and, in
the present case, the resemblances that emerge are neither numerous
nor striking.
No fewer than twelve studies are more or less explicitly concerned
with the application of linguistic data to problems of cultural recon-
struction, and of these, about half deal with the etymology and function
of specific vocabulary items. Winfred P. Lehmann's article, "Linguistic
Structure and Diacritic Evidence on Proto-Culture," begins with a set
of cautious methodological remarks that could well have prefaced the
entire collection; unfortunately, there follows an etymology for the
name of the Hittite senate (pankus) which is entirely unconvincing. Also
dubious is the etymology suggested for Armenian ter('lord') by Werner
Winter in "Some Widespread Indo-European Titles," but Winter's
discussion of Indo-European kingship and forms related to Latin rex
is interesting and useful. Emile Benveniste's paper, "Les valeurs econo-
miques dans le vocabulaire indo-europeen," is devoted to a study of
words derived from Indo-European *peku, a term which etymological
dictionaries traditionally but wrongly gloss as 'cattle.' With the same
masterful clarity and precision that distinguish nearly all of his work,
Benveniste shows that the only meaning of *peku reconstructable for
Proto-Indo-European is 'movable wealth,' and that the semantic
specialization seen in Latin pecu or German Vieh merely reflects the

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
142 j JAY H. JASANOFF

centralrolewhichcattleplayedin the economiclife of the earlyIndo-

Europeanpeoples.The methodologicallesson-that reconstruction is
justifiedonly when the of innovation
possibility parallel is excluded-is
one whichmanycomparativists havenot yet fully assimilated.
Threepapersarespecificallyconcernedwith Indo-European legal
vocabulary and usage. Otto Springer's contribution, "Inscriptional
Evidenceof EarlyNorth GermanicLegalTerminology,"proposesan
attractiverestorationof four badly damagedrunes on the famous
Eggjum stone (A.D. 700); if correct, as seems probable, the new reading
establishesthe existenceof a technicalterm of'outlaw' in the Scandina-
vian vocabularyof an archaicperiod. In "Celtic Suretyship,a Fossilized
Indo-EuropeanInstitution?"D. A. Binchy surveys the early Irishlaw
of suretiesand makes a plausibleattempt to derive the system found
there, which distinguishesthree varieties of surety, from an Indo-
European prototype. The most far-reaching investigation of Indo-
European legal usage, however, is contained in Calvert Watkins'
"Studiesin Indo-EuropeanLegal Language,Institutions,and Mythol-
ogy." In four penetratingand largely independentessays,Watkins first
establishesthe etymology of Latinusurpaneas *usu-rupare ('breakiusus')
and shows how the classicalmeaning 'use'evolved secondarily;he then
proceedsto a contextualcomparisonof Latinsarcireand Hittite sarnikzi
('makesrestitution')and demonstratesthe Indo-Europeanorigin of the
institution known as noxality, attested independently among several
Indo-European-speaking peoples.' The thirdstudy, a comparativeanal-
ysis of the Roman law of theft, notes the archaic characterof such
customs as the "juridical outcry" (English "hue and cry") which
follows the discoveryof a nocturnaltheft. Watkins persuasivelyargues
that this and related provisions of the Law of the Twelve Tables are
Indo-Europeansurvivals.The finalessayis more speculativein approach
and suggests the possibilityof an Indo-Europeangod of exchange and
reciprocity, representedby the Greek Hermes and the Vedic Piisan.
Several papers deal with comparative mythology, and partly
becauseof the very nature of their subject,they fail to reach resultsas
definitive as those of the groupjust discussed.C. Scott Littleton'scon-
tribution, "Is the 'Kingship in Heaven' Theme Indo-European?"
answersthe questionput by its title in the negative: The author, after

I In Roman law, noxality or a noxal action is one in which a master is allowed to make
restitution for an injury committed by his son, slave, or animal, or to surrender the son,
slave, or animal to the offended party.

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
REVIEWS | 143

considering material from a number of European and Near Eastern

traditions,findsno compelling reasonto rejectthe traditionalview that
the Greek theogony related by Hesiod is of Mesopotamian origin.
Donald J. Ward's study, "An Indo-EuropeanMythological Theme in
GermanicTradition,"developsthe view thataniIndo-European"divine
twins" myth is preservedin the Middle High GermanKudrunepic and
in various modern folk tales, both within and without Germanic;
unfortunately,both culturaldiffusionand pure chance remainpossible
sourcesfor the resemblanceswhich Ward takes as proof of common
origin. "Some MythologicalReflectionson Ildo-EuropeanMedicine,"
by Jaan Puhvel, containsan interestingattempt to revise Benveniste's
theory of three modes of Indo-Europeanhealing, correspondingto the
threeclassesof Indo-Europeansociety as analyzedby GeorgesDumezil.
Puhvel distinguishestwo varietiesof priestlyor "firstfunction"healing,
associatedrespectivelywith the Vedic gods Mitra and Aryamanon the
one hand, and Varunaon the other.
Standing somewhat isolated are two highly original studies con-
tributed by Paul Friedrichand Jerzy Kurylowicz. Friedrich's"Proto-
Indo-EuropeanTrees,"sinceexpandedinto anindependentmonograph,
is devoted to an examinationof the form and meaning of twenty-seven
tentatively reconstructedlate and regional Indo-Europeantree names,
referringto eighteendistinctive"arborealunits."Friedrichtriesto show
that twelve of these units (roughly, genera),along with their recon-
structednames, formed part of an Indo-Europeanarborealtaxonomy
"duringthe last millenniumor so" of the period of community. As far
as the names themselves are concerned, this result is probably too
optimistic:Even some of the most widely attesteddesignationscannot
be reconstructed exactly, and the absence of any assuredly Indo-
Europeantree names in Hittite is both curiousand disquieting.Kury-
lowicz' article,"The QuantitativeMeter of Indo-European,"represents
the volume's only foray into comparativemetrics.Taking sharpissue
with the traditionalview that the quantitativemetrical system of the
classicallanguagesis an Indo-Europeansurvival, Kurylowicz suggests
that Indo-Europeanversificationwas basedon the position of the word
accent, and that the inherited system is essentiallypreserved, not in
Greek and Vedic, but in Germanicand Avestan. The weaknessof this
view lies in the fact that Greek and Vedic, as the two Indo-European
languagesthatpreservethe characterand position of the inheritedword
accent most faithfully, should a priorihave been the languages least
likely to lose an ancient accent-basedmetrical system. In order to

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
144 | JAY H. JASANOFF

explain the rise of quantitative meter in these languages, Kurylowicz

must assume a series of developments which, although ingenious and
typologically thinkable, remain only distant possibilities.
William F. Wyatt's contribution, "The Indo-Europeanization of
Greece," is transitional to a group of five studies, the main focus of
which is archeological. Wyatt makes the correct observation that most
Greek vocabulary items relating to the horse and chariot are of Indo-
European origin; he argues from this fact that the Greeks could not
have entered their future homeland without bringing horses and
chariots with them, or at least finding them already in use. Since the
earliest chariot remains date from about I6oo B.C. (grave circle A at
Mycenae), he is reluctant to place the arrival of Indo-Europeans
significantly earlier than this date. However, I600 B.C. does not accord
well with other archeological evidence (I900 B.C. is still the "standard"
opinion), and Wyatt is correct to emphasize the provisional and
incomplete nature of his result.
Arguments bearing on the same question, and tending to put the
date as far back as 2300 B.C., are advanced in what is in some respects
the most ambitious paper in the entire collection, Marija Gimbutas'
"Proto-Indo-European Culture: The Kurgan Culture during the Fifth,
Fourth, and Third Millennia B.C." It is Gimbutas' contention that the
Proto-Indo-Europeans can be identified with the bearers of the Kurgan
(Russian for 'barrow') Culture, which flourished in the Pontic and
Volga steppes during the fifth and fourth millennia B.C., and which
expanded during and after this period to most of Europe, Anatolia, and
Iran. Much of her exposition is devoted to a discussion of the social and
economic life of the Kurgan people, about whom nothing is known
which contradicts the view that they were Indo-European speakers. The
crucial question is whether the resemblances between the early steppe
culture and later complexes such as the Corded Ware-Battle Axe and
Gray Ware cultures are, in fact, so striking and unambiguous as to
necessitate the assumption of a Kurgan "expansion" in any strict sense
of the term. Gimbutas has answered this question in the affirmative in
numerous publications; her views, however, have not met with
universal acceptance.
Two further papers in the volume appear to support the Kurgan
theory: Homer L. Thomas, in "Dating the Indo-European Dispersal in
Europe," studies the spread of early Indo-European cultures in Europe
and arrives at a chronology which is generally in good accord with that
set forth by Gimbutas; Bernard Wailes, in "The Origins of Settled

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
REVIEWS 1| 45

Farming in Temperate Europe," offers evidence to show that the

Corded Ware groups in Europewere practicingsettledagricultureat a
date early enough to account for the existence of a Proto-Indo-
European word for 'plow.' Ward H. Goodenough's paper, "The
Diffusion of Pastoralism and Indo-European Origins," recognizes a
close connection between the steppe and Corded Ware cultures, but
arguesfor a EuropeanUrheimat with a secondarydiffusionto the steppes
furthereast; Goodenough considersthe Kurganpeople to be an early
subgroup of Indo-Europeansratherthan the parent stock. Robert W.
Ehrich's copiously documented sketch of the Iron Age cultures of
southeasternEurope ("Some Indo-European-speakingGroups of the
Middle Danube and the Balkans: Their Boundaries as Related to
Cultural Geography through Time") deals with a much later period
and, although of no directrelevanceto the "Indo-Europeanproblem,"
it castswelcome light on the vanishedIndo-Europeanpeoples who in
classicaland pre-classicalantiquitylived on the fringes of the Hellenic
world.
As is probably inevitable in a volume of this kind, not all of the
contributions to Indo-EuropeanandIndo-Europeansare equally definitive;
what is not inevitable,but likewise true, is that most of them are good
and several are distinguished.Taken as a whole, the book gives an
excellent overview of Indo-Europeanstudiesin their interdisciplinary
aspect, and anyone interested in observing the uses and limits of
linguistic evidence in historicalreconstructionwill find it well worth
reading.
Jay H. Jasanoff
HarvardUniversity

Progressin Historical Geography.Edited by Alan R. H. Baker (Newton

Abbot, Eng., David and Charles, 1972) 311 pp. /4.20

This book is a collection of reviews by a number of historicalgeog-

raphers covering nine different areas: France (Xavier de Planhol);
Germany, Austria, and Switzerland(Helmut Jager); Scandinavia(S.
Helmfrid); Britain (Alan R. H. Baker); U.S.S.R. (R. A. French);
North America(AndrewH. Clark);Australiaand New Zealand(R. L.
Heathcote and M. McCaskill);Latin America (D. J. Robinson); and

This content downloaded from 147.96.14.15 on Tue, 7 May 2013 08:15:49 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions