Netted Ware culture

Last updated
Netted Ware culture
Alternative namesTextile Ceramic culture
Geographical rangeFinland, northwestern Russia
Period Bronze Age
Dates1900 BCE – 500 BCE
Preceded by Volosovo culture, Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture

The Netted Ware culture (also called Textile Ceramic culture) was a Bronze Age culture in northeastern Europe that extended from Finland to the upper Volga region in Russia. [1] [2]

Contents

Origins

Netted Ware clay vessel from Ryazan Oblast. Vessel Textile ceramic GIM.jpg
Netted Ware clay vessel from Ryazan Oblast.

The Netted Ware culture emerged around 1900 BCE with the arrival of the Seima-Turbino phenomenon in the upper Volga region, replacing the earlier Fatyanovo–Balanovo and Volosovo cultures, and soon expanded to the west to Karelia and eastern and central Finland. [2] The Netted Ware culture did not reach southwestern Finland, the area of the Kiukainen culture and later the Nordic Bronze culture. [1] The subsistence of the Netted Ware culture was based on small-scale swidden agriculture and animal husbandry. [2] [3]

Hypothetical linguistic affiliation

The spread of the Netted Ware culture has been linked to the dispersal of early forms of the Finno-Volgaic languages, especially Finnic languages and Saami languages. [2] [3]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baltic languages</span> Balto-Slavic languages of the Indo-European language family

The Baltic languages are a branch of the Indo-European language family spoken natively by a population of about 4.5 million people mainly in areas extending east and southeast of the Baltic Sea in Northern Europe. Together with the Slavic languages, they form the Balto-Slavic branch of the Indo-European family.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Finno-Ugric languages</span> Disputed grouping of Uralic languages

Finno-Ugric or Finno-Ugrian (Fenno-Ugrian), is a traditional grouping of all languages in the Uralic language family except the Samoyedic languages. Its formerly commonly accepted status as a subfamily of Uralic is based on criteria formulated in the 19th century and is criticized by some contemporary linguists such as Tapani Salminen and Ante Aikio as inaccurate and misleading. The three most-spoken Uralic languages, Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian, are all included in Finno-Ugric, although linguistic roots common to both branches of the traditional Finno-Ugric language tree are distant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uralic languages</span> Language family of Europe and north Asia

The Uralic languages form a language family of 38 languages spoken natively by approximately 25 million people, predominantly in Europe and northern Asia. The Uralic languages with the most native speakers are Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian. Other significant languages with fewer speakers are Erzya, Moksha, Mari, Udmurt, Sami, Komi, and Vepsian, all of which are spoken in northern regions of Scandinavia and the Russian Federation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ural-Altaic languages</span> Former language family proposal

Ural-Altaic, Uralo-Altaic or Uraltaic is a linguistic convergence zone and former language-family proposal uniting the Uralic and the Altaic languages. It is generally now agreed that even the Altaic languages do not share a common descent: the similarities among Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic are better explained by diffusion and borrowing. Just as Altaic, internal structure of the Uralic family also has been debated since the family was first proposed. Doubts about the validity of most or all of the proposed higher-order Uralic branchings are becoming more common. The term continues to be used for the central Eurasian typological, grammatical and lexical convergence zone.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mari people</span> Finno-Ugric ethnic group

The Mari are a Finnic people, who have traditionally lived along the Volga and Kama rivers in Russia. Almost half of Maris today live in the Mari El republic, with significant populations in the Bashkortostan and Tatarstan republics. In the past, the Mari have also been known as the Cheremisa or the Cheremis people in Russian and the Çirmeş in Tatar.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indo-Uralic languages</span> Controversial hypothetical language family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic

Indo-Uralic is a controversial hypothetical language family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uralo-Siberian languages</span> Proposed language family including Uralic, Yukaghir, Eskimo–Aleut and possibly Nivkh

Uralo-Siberian is a hypothetical language family consisting of Uralic, Yukaghir, and Eskaleut. It was proposed in 1998 by Michael Fortescue, an expert in Eskaleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan, in his book Language Relations across Bering Strait. In 2011, Fortescue removed Chukotko-Kamchatkan from the proposal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ukonvasara</span>

Ukonvasara, or Ukonkirves, is the symbol and magical weapon of the Finnish thunder god Ukko, similar to Thor's Mjölnir. Ukonvasara means 'hammer of Ukko'; similarly, Ukonkirves means 'axe of Ukko'. It was said that Ukko created lightning with Ukonvasara.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Khvalynsk culture</span> Archaeological culture

The Khvalynsk culture was a Middle Copper Age ("Eneolithic") culture of the middle Volga region. It takes its name from Khvalynsk in Saratov Oblast. The Khvalynsk culture extended from the Samara Bend in the north to the North Caucasus in the south, from the Sea of Azov in the west to the Ural River in the east. It was preceded by the Early Eneolithic Samara culture, from which it came, and succeeded by the Late Eneolithic, Early Yamna culture, into which it developed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uralic–Yukaghir languages</span> Proposed language family

Uralic–Yukaghir, also known as Uralo-Yukaghir, is a proposed language family composed of Uralic and Yukaghir.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yaz culture</span> Early Iron Age culture of Margiana, Bactria and Sogdia

The Yaz culture was an early Iron Age culture of Margiana, Bactria and Sogdia. It emerges at the top of late Bronze Age sites (BMAC), sometimes as stone towers and sizeable houses associated with irrigation systems. Ceramics were mostly hand-made, but there was increasing use of wheel-thrown ware. There have been found bronze or iron arrowheads, also iron sickles or carpet knives among other artifacts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bug–Dniester culture</span> Archaeological culture

The Bug–Dniester culture was an archaeological culture that developed in and around the Central Black Earth Region of Moldavia and Ukraine, around the Dniester and Southern Bug rivers, during the Neolithic era.

The Botai culture is an archaeological culture (c. 3700–3100 BC) of prehistoric northern Central Asia. It was named after the settlement of Botai in today's northern Kazakhstan. The Botai culture has two other large sites: Krasnyi Yar, and Vasilkovka.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proto-Indo-European homeland</span> Prehistoric "Urheimat" of the Indo-European languages

The Proto-Indo-European homeland was the prehistoric linguistic homeland of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). From this region, its speakers migrated east and west, and went on to form the proto-communities of the different branches of the Indo-European language family.

Peter Schrijver is a Dutch linguist. He is a professor of Celtic languages at Utrecht University and a researcher of ancient Indo-European linguistics. He worked previously at Leiden University and the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eskimo–Uralic languages</span>

The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis posits that the Uralic and Eskimo–Aleut language families belong to a common macrofamily. It is not generally accepted by linguists because the similarities can also be merely areal features, common to unrelated language families. In 1818, the Danish linguist Rasmus Rask grouped together the languages of Greenlandic and Finnish. The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis was put forward by Knut Bergsland in 1959. A similar theory was suggested in 1998 by Michael Fortescue, an expert in Eskimo–Aleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan, in his book Language Relations across Bering Strait where he proposed the Uralo-Siberian theory, which, unlike the Eskimo-Uralic hypothesis includes the Yukaghir languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proto-Uralic homeland</span> Hypothesized location where the Proto-Uralic language originated

Various Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses on the origin of the Uralic languages and the location and period in which the Proto-Uralic language was spoken, have been advocated over the years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indo-European migrations</span> Migrations out of the Proto-Indo-European homeland

The Indo-European migrations were hypothesized migrations of Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) speakers, and subsequent migrations of people speaking derived Indo-European languages, which took place approx. 4000 to 1000 BCE, potentially explaining how these languages came to be spoken across a large area of Eurasia, from India and Iran, to Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paleo-European languages</span> (Mainly ancient) languages of Europe not included in Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic or Semitic.

The Paleo-European languages, or Old European languages, are the mostly unknown languages that were spoken in Europe prior to the spread of the Indo-European and Uralic families caused by the Bronze Age invasion from the Eurasian steppe of pastoralists whose descendant languages dominate the continent today. Today, the vast majority of European populations speak Indo-European languages, but until the Bronze Age, it was the opposite, with Paleo-European languages of non-Indo-European affiliation dominating the linguistic landscape of Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate</span> Category of words in some Uralic languages

Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate refers to substratum loanwords from unidentified non-Indo-European and non-Uralic languages that are found in various Finno-Ugric languages, most notably Sami. The presence of Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate in Sami languages was demonstrated by Ante Aikio. Janne Saarikivi points out that similar substrate words are present in Finnic languages as well, but in much smaller numbers.

References

  1. 1 2 Carpelan, Christian; Parpola, Asko (2001). "Emergence, contacts and dispersal of Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Uralic and Proto-Aryan in archaeological perspective". In Christian Carpelan; Asko Parpola; Petteri Koskikalli (eds.). Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguistic and archaeological considerations (PDF). Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 242. Helsinki: Société Finno Ougrienne. pp. 55–150. Retrieved 7 Dec 2022.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Parpola, Asko (2017). "Finnish vatsa – Sanskrit vatsá – and the formation of Indo-Iranian and Uralic languages". Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne. 96. doi:10.33340/susa.70229.
  3. 1 2 Nichols, Johanna (2021). "The Origin and Dispersal of Uralic: Distributional Typological View". Annual Review of Linguistics. 7 (1): 351–369. doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030405.