I think you misunderstand my chronology. I
proposed several dates for _selected_ events in the huge family-tree of IE,
focussing on the lineage leading down to Indo-Aryan, since that had been your
request. If I date "Proto-non-Anatolian IE" to 6500 BP, this doesn't mean that I
regard Hittite as exceptionally old or exceptionally archaic. As a known and
recorded language it is more or less contemporaneous with Mycenaean Greek,
and probably with the earliest Indo-Iranian languages, just as Peter pointed
out. As a matter of fact, my chronology implies that most of the other IE
branches must have existed in the second millennium BC. The early date of the
Anatolian/non-Anatolian split only reflects my opinion that the Anatolian branch
is more distantly related to the other branches of the family than they are
related to one another. It does _not_ mean that Hittite must be more similar to
PIE than any other language. All languages spoken at the same time are equally
"old".
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Why is PIE more centum than satem?
Is the suggested overlap consistent with the non-overlapping
chronology suggested by Piotr?
> 7600 BP --- PIE
> 6500 BP
--- non-Anatolian IE
> 5000 BP --- Proto-Satem
> 4600 BP ---
Proto-Indo-Iranian
> 4000 BP --- Proto-Indo-Aryan
> 3700-3200 BP ---
Rigvedic Indo-Aryan
> 3200-2500 BP --- late Old Indo-Aryan
>
2500-900 BP --- Middle Indo-Aryan