waves of mounted warriors from the steppes—is indeed a Phantasieprodukt, to
use Häusler’s term.
A revised Kurgan theory
Despite its considerable flaws, the Kurgan theory is alive and well. In his useful
textbook, Indo-European Language and Culture, Fortson writes that although
Gimbutas’ theory has its detractors, “it is fair to say that one or another version of
the kurgan theory is accepted by most archaeologists and Indo-Europeanists
today.”^14 The most influential version of the Kurgan theory, significantly revised
from Gimbutas’ original, has been formulated by David Anthony. At Hartwick
College, in Oneonta, New York, Anthony together with Dorcas Brown organized
and leads the Institute for Ancient Equestrian Studies. Anthony’s initiatives—in
carbon dating, in excavations, and in other matters—have considerably advanced
our understanding not only of the horse in the ancient world but also of the pre -
history of the Eurasian steppe. On the commencement of secure riding, however,
I am quite sure that he is mistaken. Beginning with his doctoral dissertation in 1985,
Anthony has in a score of publications advocated several revisions of Gimbutas’
narrative. In his The Horse the Wheel and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from
the Eurasian Steppes shaped the Modern World, published in 2007, Anthony
presented at length a demilitarized version of the Kurgan theory. Although on its
central thesis we are in plain disagreement, I find Anthony’s book lively,
imaginative and on many points very helpful. Especially valuable is his survey and
synthesis of what Soviet and Russian archaeologists have discovered about the
Neolithic and Bronze Age steppe. It will be obvious how much I am indebted to
his work, and I regret that this chapter must focus on what I find wrong with it.
Much is at stake, however, in Anthony’s central thesis: that in the fourth
millennium BChorseback riders from the steppes began bringing the Indo-
European languages to Europe. In one very important respect Anthony’s scenario
differs significantly from that put forward by Gimbutas: she had reckoned with
conquests, but Anthony reckons with a mostly peaceful movement, conceding that
until ca. 1000 BCriders had little or no role in combat.^15 Although his Chalcolithic
riders are not conquerors, their language spreads over much of central Europe
because they are successful at raiding flocks and herds, and because they have
the prestige of horsemen. In contrast, “the pre-Indo-European languages of Europe
were abandoned because they were linked to membership in social groups that
became stigmatized.”^16 Specifically, Anthony proposes that beginning about 3300
BC, very shortly after the invention of the wheeled vehicle, the Keltic, Italic and
Germanic subgroups of IE began to form, as “people of the Yamnaya horizon
moved in significant numbers into the lower Danubian valley and the Carpathian
Basin. This was a true ‘folk migration,’ a massive and sustained flow of outsiders
into a previously settled landscape.”^17
Anthony’s explanation of where, when and why PIE began to break up into the
several branches of Indo-European becomes more significant as linguists begin
to make use of it. Frederik Kortlandt, who has published extensively on phonology
The Kurgan theory and taming of horses 31