Laura Spinney

Exactly. That's 1400 BC. There are older inscriptions in Indo-European language. The oldest of all are Hittite, and they date to about 2000 BCE. But these languages are older than that. And so they were spoken for thousands of years before they were written down. So how do we get at that period prior to 2000 BCE?

How do we understand what they sounded like, who was speaking them, and what the differences were between them before that? That's where archaeology and genetics come in. And obviously, it's a more indirect exercise because we don't have symbols expressing the sounds that they made. It's a far more complicated job to get at them. It doesn't mean we can't say anything about them.

How do we understand what they sounded like, who was speaking them, and what the differences were between them before that? That's where archaeology and genetics come in. And obviously, it's a more indirect exercise because we don't have symbols expressing the sounds that they made. It's a far more complicated job to get at them. It doesn't mean we can't say anything about them.

How do we understand what they sounded like, who was speaking them, and what the differences were between them before that? That's where archaeology and genetics come in. And obviously, it's a more indirect exercise because we don't have symbols expressing the sounds that they made. It's a far more complicated job to get at them. It doesn't mean we can't say anything about them.

And in fact, we can say fascinating things about them. So the basic point here to understand, I suppose, is that people speak about the things that matter to them. So what that means, among other things, is that the vocabulary that linguists can reconstruct for these languages will be, in some sense, a reflection of their world. So they'll have more words.

And in fact, we can say fascinating things about them. So the basic point here to understand, I suppose, is that people speak about the things that matter to them. So what that means, among other things, is that the vocabulary that linguists can reconstruct for these languages will be, in some sense, a reflection of their world. So they'll have more words.

And in fact, we can say fascinating things about them. So the basic point here to understand, I suppose, is that people speak about the things that matter to them. So what that means, among other things, is that the vocabulary that linguists can reconstruct for these languages will be, in some sense, a reflection of their world. So they'll have more words.

If they're herders, they're going to have more words for the sorts of animals that they herd, for dairying, for... Horses, cows, sheep. Exactly. Words related to a mobile lifestyle. Whereas if they're farmers, they're going to have more words related to crops and fields and the sorts of tools that farmers use, right? So that's the basic, that's the simple way in which we can tell things.

If they're herders, they're going to have more words for the sorts of animals that they herd, for dairying, for... Horses, cows, sheep. Exactly. Words related to a mobile lifestyle. Whereas if they're farmers, they're going to have more words related to crops and fields and the sorts of tools that farmers use, right? So that's the basic, that's the simple way in which we can tell things.

If they're herders, they're going to have more words for the sorts of animals that they herd, for dairying, for... Horses, cows, sheep. Exactly. Words related to a mobile lifestyle. Whereas if they're farmers, they're going to have more words related to crops and fields and the sorts of tools that farmers use, right? So that's the basic, that's the simple way in which we can tell things.

So about who they were and how they lived. So archaeologists can also tell that kind of thing about those people, obviously. They can date things using radiocarbon dating. So they can say, let's say 5,000 years ago, there was a culture on the steppe north of the Black Sea who were mobile pastoralists. They kept sheep and goats. They may have ridden horses and they also had dogs.

So about who they were and how they lived. So archaeologists can also tell that kind of thing about those people, obviously. They can date things using radiocarbon dating. So they can say, let's say 5,000 years ago, there was a culture on the steppe north of the Black Sea who were mobile pastoralists. They kept sheep and goats. They may have ridden horses and they also had dogs.

So about who they were and how they lived. So archaeologists can also tell that kind of thing about those people, obviously. They can date things using radiocarbon dating. So they can say, let's say 5,000 years ago, there was a culture on the steppe north of the Black Sea who were mobile pastoralists. They kept sheep and goats. They may have ridden horses and they also had dogs.

And then if you look at a vocabulary of a language that may have been spoken about that time, but anyway, predates writing, and you can make some cross references with the culture that the archaeologists have described. The genetics comes in for essentially for a hundred or more years of the exercise of trying to understand the Indo-European languages.

And then if you look at a vocabulary of a language that may have been spoken about that time, but anyway, predates writing, and you can make some cross references with the culture that the archaeologists have described. The genetics comes in for essentially for a hundred or more years of the exercise of trying to understand the Indo-European languages.

And then if you look at a vocabulary of a language that may have been spoken about that time, but anyway, predates writing, and you can make some cross references with the culture that the archaeologists have described. The genetics comes in for essentially for a hundred or more years of the exercise of trying to understand the Indo-European languages.

It was linguists and archaeologists alone trying to reconstruct this picture. In the last 10 years, actually a bit longer, but essentially in the last 10 years, geneticists have come along and injected a whole new dimension to it and essentially rewritten the story. Because what they've allowed us to do, especially with ancient DNA, is to track prehistoric people through space.

It was linguists and archaeologists alone trying to reconstruct this picture. In the last 10 years, actually a bit longer, but essentially in the last 10 years, geneticists have come along and injected a whole new dimension to it and essentially rewritten the story. Because what they've allowed us to do, especially with ancient DNA, is to track prehistoric people through space.

It was linguists and archaeologists alone trying to reconstruct this picture. In the last 10 years, actually a bit longer, but essentially in the last 10 years, geneticists have come along and injected a whole new dimension to it and essentially rewritten the story. Because what they've allowed us to do, especially with ancient DNA, is to track prehistoric people through space.

So we can now see where they've moved. And we can see the links literally in the form of people between archaeological cultures. So we can see where people travel to. And when people move, we know they carry their languages. So it's another piece of evidence in the puzzle, if you like. People don't always keep their languages when they move.