Crecganford is my evening go-to for reconstructed PIE mythology.
This video concerns the phylogenetic branching of flood myths in deep history. I'm more interested in the secondary branch spreading from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. I commented asking if he could give his opinion of the Black Sea Deluge hypotheses and how this catastrophe became a basis for PIE myth.
In some ways, the PIE flood myth may point to a real event that repackaged an older Paleolithic myth. For example, in the United States many families have a "three brother myth", whereby the immigrant progenitor to a particular family, say McFarland, came to the US as one of three brothers. There was a real event, but whose lost details are able to ride in the wagon of a relatable narrative of deeper antiquity.
Crecganford's view (I believe) is that the modern Near Eastern flood myths are borrowings of one originating in the PIE urheimat. I think locationally that may be true, but it may be complicated by the possibility that parts of the northern Black Sea were home to the water-hugging Impresso Peoples, ultimately originating from the Levant (although not a linear or simple migration), prior to the flood/or salinization tipping point. Given the patrilocality of hunter-gatherers in this forest-steppe region, there may be a situation in which female exogamy was occurring between two peoples before the territory of one became uninhabitable.
It should be interesting to note that in the Bible, it is the Ararat Mountains in which the Ark finally rests. In other words, in the southeast of the Black Sea. So of course, it would be reasonable to assume that the Black Sea is a focus area of the Near Eastern tale, just as it might be for the PIE one. And remember, this is 40,000 square miles of farms, settlements, deltas, estuaries and hunting lands; not real estate on the moon. This was probably home to specific peoples of a specific archaeological tradition, one originating secondarily in the Levant, one which is now mostly under water.
Aside from its physical expansion, why should the PIE urheimat be central to this secondary expansion? I believe it is because the PIE urheimat bordered an area with the greatest losses in terms of land area. Again, if we look at the Biblical version, it may be that the landing in Ararat Mountains is emblematic of a locational and protagonist shift in the narrative. From one location to the next scene.
 |
| Secondary motif originating in green |
The most reliable efforts to trace the Biblical flood myth trace it to Sumeria where there was a historically attested flood in Mesopotamia. The timing of a Black Sea deluge isn't very good relative to the formative period of Indo-European cultures.
ReplyDeleteCrecganford mentions Berzkin's Database of mythology which has this secondary collection of motifs starting in the green area above. And of course there are different theories regarding the reconnection with the sea, but it seems that the at least a 100 foot difference between the bodies of water ending approximately 5600 to 5300 BC, which is a few hundred years preceeding the Khvalysk and Stredny Stog Cultures. But of course there are different ideas on exactly how deep PIE is; IMO it's close.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the video, Bellbeakerblogger. I have watched it twice and have some criticisms about your blog article (not about the video itself, which seems OK). In contrast to your representation of the video, the video does not mention any Proto-Indo-European or even Pontic-Caspian steppe origin of the biblical flood myth, and moreover, nowhere in the video the Proto-Indo-Europeans or the Pontic-Caspian steppe are even mentioned. Crecganford does not connect the biblical flood myth to Proto-Indo-European mythology or any other steppe mythology in the video, he does not mention where the biblical flood myth comes from in fact. The map from the video that you have shared is just an exemplary myth distribution map, not about flood myths and their distribution and Crecganford states this clearly in the video. I agree with Andrew that the biblical flood myth probably has Sumerian origin.
ReplyDeleteA side note: Ararat is the Hebrew word for Urartu and in the Bible the place of the Ararat Mountains within the Urartu lands is not specified, but the earliest historical references (including early Christian) that clearly specify where they are located place them in the southern Urartu lands and specifically Mount Judi is named in them as the mountain where Noah's Ark came to rest, Mount Judi is in what is now southeastern Turkey, so well removed from the Black Sea.
Thanks for pointing out that he doesn't explicitly say this in this particular video. I watched several of his back to back so let me find the video where his view is more clear. Also, I realize that this video is primarily focused on Paleolithic origns, not the origins of the Eurasian motifs.
DeleteThanks for that info. I have only watched this video (thanks to you) and would be even more grateful to you if you give link to the video where he mentions the origins of the biblical and Sumerian/Akkadian flood myths.
DeleteKeep in mind that this expanded Near East region is what we might call a scrabled egg. It appears there are proto-Semitic loan words and possibly more in PIE, but also potentionally early IE influence in Northern Mespotamia much earlier than expected.
DeleteAt least in the case of a creation myth, linked in the comment below, I'm not sure they were 'developed' by the PIE's themselves, as their own ancestry and geography may have been influenced by others as well.
By the way, the place of origin of the Sumerian (and Akkadian) flood myth is not mentioned in the video either.
ReplyDeleteOk, so in the link below he discusses IE sources for Sumerian and Babylonian creation motifs. The video is actually quite long and you can skip the IE creation myth and go directly to 12:44 where he begins with the Babylonian myth, Enuma Elish.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/xKPMeIojJVk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKPMeIojJVk
Thank you for the link. I was quite busy lately and just watched it. It still does not deal with the origins of the Near Eastern flood myths and their origins. The video just deals with the Near Eastern and Indo-European creation myths and their origins. Crecganford has some interesting points in the video, especially with regard to the Sumero-Akkadian and Egyptian roots of the Jewish creation myth(s), but I am not convinced by his theory of Indo-European origin of at least some of the Near Eastern creation myths. Maybe Proto-Indo-Europeans or early Indo-Europeans had some Near Eastern influences, however indirectly, in their myths, that seems more plausible to me.
Delete