Proto: How One Ancient Language Went Global, with Laura Spinney
46:03 Share

This episode is sponsored by Indeed. You never think about hiring until it's urgent, right? In the last few months, we've grown as an organisation, and with more traction and projects comes both excitement and the need to grow our team. Hiring can feel like a full-time job, but not with Indeed. In no time, you'll find qualified candidates who understand your vision.

Because when you're building something great, you don't just need help, you need the right help right now. So when it comes to hiring, Indeed is all you need. Stop struggling to get your job posts seen on other job sites. Indeed's Sponsored Jobs helps you stand out and hire fast. With Sponsored Jobs, your post jumps to the top of the page for your relevant candidates so you can reach the people you want faster.

And it makes a huge difference. According to Indeed data, sponsored jobs posted directly on Indeed have 45% more applications than non-sponsored jobs.

When we recently used Indeed for a job vacancy, the response was incredible. With such a high level of potential candidates, it was so much easier to hire fast and hire well. Plus, with Indeed's sponsored jobs, there are no monthly subscriptions, no long-term contracts, and you only pay four results. How fast is Indeed? In the minute I've been talking to you, 23 hires were made on Indeed, according to Indeed data worldwide.

There's no need to wait any longer. Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed. And listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at indeed.com slash intelligence squared.

Just go to indeed.com slash intelligence squared and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. That's indeed.com slash intelligence squared. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring Indeed is all you need. Spring is in full bloom at the Home Depot. So what are you working on? If you're digging into your garden, come into the Home Depot's garden center where we can help you pick out the best plants for your space.

Then make sure you give your plants the proper soil and support they need to thrive. Like Miracle-Gro 25-quart potting mix on special buy, two bags for only $15. It's formulated to help your plants grow and keep them fed for up to six months. Shop spring savings happening now at The Home Depot. Welcome to Intelligence Squared, where great minds meet.

I'm producer Mia Cirenti. What if a single ancient language lay at the root of nearly half of the world's spoken tongues? In today's episode, acclaimed science writer and journalist Laura Spinney joins us to discuss her new book, " How One Ancient Language Went Global."

In Proto, Spinney takes us deep into the mystery of Proto-Indo-European, a prehistoric language that no one alive has heard, yet whose echoes can be found in words spoken from Ireland to India. Joining Spinney in discussion is global historian Caroline Dodds-Pennec, to retrace the paths of nomads, monks, warriors and kings across the Eurasian steppe, the Caucasus, the Silk Roads and beyond. Let's join Caroline now with more.

Welcome to Intelligence Squared. I'm Caroline Dodds-Pennec. I've had a chance to read Proto, which is a really fascinating, hugely sweeping book.

covers an awful lot of time and space. And it's about the journey of this language, Proto Indo-European, that you say shaped a lot of our world today and a lot of the languages that we are familiar with. What is it that first drew you to that subject? Well, Indo-European languages are, as you say, the

They are the largest language family in the world. They're spoken as a first language by nearly half of humanity. There are 400 of them roughly spoken today, languages and dialects, and they include things like English, Spanish, Hindi, Russian, and many, many others.

And so question number one is why so successful? Why spoken by so many of us? That's always fascinated me. But then the story of those languages has really been rewritten, overhauled in the last sort of decade or so with the advent of a new science in the form of ancient DNA genetics, paleogenetics.

which has essentially, and we can go into this if you're interested, because it is a large part of the story, but it essentially allows us to trace prehistoric migrants. And the beginning of the story of these languages is in prehistory, that is before the beginning of written records. So we have to have other ways of getting a look.

what was happening in the world when those people were speaking these tongues. We are definitely going to come back to paleogenetics because as you say is a huge part of why this story is changing now and why we're able to understand more about the language. But I wonder given that it is such a huge topic as you've mentioned half of the world speaks a related language, the book covers 5,000 years, countries from Ireland to India to Greece, how do you even set about researching a topic as big as that?

Well, you talk to a lot of linguists, historical linguists to be precise, and archaeologists and geneticists. And you try to understand what's happening in terms of reconstructing the languages that we're interested in, the prehistoric languages from their living descendants.

And then it's a question of trying to piece together the story. It's really, I think what I tell in this book is really a detective story because the central goal is something really quite, I mean, if I put it this way, you'll understand how difficult it is. We're trying to reconstruct a language that has been dead for thousands of years and was never written down. And we're

And we're trying to understand who spoke that language, where they were, and how come it spread from where they were to the rest of the world and to the huge numbers of people who spoke those languages today.

But if you think about the fact that, just for a tiny bit of background, Homo sapiens, our species, has been around for 300,000 years. The current thinking is that we've been speaking all that time. That would be the consensus on the history of language. So I'm talking about the last 10,000 years of that. That's roughly the period in which these languages arose.

And writing is about 5,000 years old. So roughly half the story of these languages that I'm concerned with predates writing. So we only begin to see them about halfway through their story.

And that's why we need other sciences, including archaeology and genetics, to try and help us piece together that story. And maybe you could tell us a little bit more about the language itself before we get into that, how we reconstruct it. Because I think probably quite a few people have heard of Indo-European languages, but proto-Indo-European is maybe a bit more of an unfamiliar concept. Can you give us a little bit more of a sense of what that language is and how we can access it, how linguists do access it?

Absolutely. So proto meaning first or parental, if you like, the parent language. Indo-European because the members of the family are spoken or were originally spoken even in the ancient world from the Indian subcontinent first.

to Europe, so the sort of first realization that there was this family of language that had existed. The realization came about slowly. People realized that there were links between the Italic languages, the offspring of Latin, the Celtic languages, the Germanic languages, and then they realized even more extraordinarily that there were links between Latin and Sanskrit and Greek and Sanskrit. So gradually,

kind of awareness of the extent of this family and the geographical range over which this family of languages was spoken extended. Hence the name Indo-European, because it's spoken as I write in the book from the Himalaya to the Scottish Isles. As you say, you describe Proto-Indo-European as emerging kind of between Europe and Asia around the end of the last ice age, I think. And I wonder, what do we know about the people that first spoke it, the origins of this great spread of languages?

Well, first of all, perhaps I should say that...

Because how could we possibly know where these languages came about when they weren't written down? So the way we get at that answer is by looking, if you like, at the very first written traces of these languages. So the oldest sort of texts of any substantial length in an Indo-European language are in Sanskrit, the Rig Veda, the very first Indian and Hindu scripture, religious text.

and Greek texts. They date to about 1400 BC, so about 3,400 years ago. But there are older Indo-European texts, and those are Hittite. They're in a language that was spoken in what is now Turkey and that went extinct more than 3,000 years ago.

But we have written traces of those languages. Those are very much the oldest written traces, but we can already see from those that these languages are related. And because linguists know that all languages evolve and that it takes time for them to evolve and therefore to diverge, their deduction is that those languages diverge from a common ancestor to

at least several thousand years before those first written traces. Okay. So, um,

First of all, linguists can begin to reconstruct that ancestral language by comparing the descendants. And since words and the descendants are related, and since languages evolve according to various known rules because of the mechanics of the vocal tract and the sounds that we can make, they can track that divergence backwards and backwards.

begin to know some things about what that ancestral language sounded like and the words that it contained. Then they can begin to think, what does that language tell us about the world in which it was spoken? Because, for example, the vocabulary that we all use reflects to some extent our culture, the world that we inhabit. We speak about things that are important to us. So you can actually amazingly glean some things about the world in which that language was spoken from the reconstructions. And then...

since we're talking about prehistory, since we're talking about a time before written records, you go and talk to the archaeologists and you say, do you know of any people living at that time whose world fits with the one reflected in this language? And that's why I talk about a detective story. It's a cross-referencing. It's a sort of, what can you tell us about a people who might have spoken this language? Where does it fit? Whose world does this best reflect?

And through this very indirect exercise and very interdisciplinary exercise, the archaeologists and the linguists who were working together long before the geneticists came in have traced these people to the vicinity of the Black Sea. So right at the border, if you like, of Europe and Asia, right in the middle of the Eurasian landmass. And

I can tell you about those people. We think that they were nomadic. We think that they were very, very mobile. We think that they were pastoralists, herders. And all of this is to some extent reflected in their language, but we also have archaeological traces of people like that who live at roughly the right time, who are inventing this lifestyle in the Eurasian steppe about 5,000 years ago or a little before, and who from there we can then trace with the help of geneticists

in a massive diaspora, them and their descendants going to the four corners of the Eurasian landmass and at least to begin with carrying their languages with them. And this culture that is so influential is the Yamnaya. Have I got that right? Is that how you say it? Yes. The Yamnaya. The Yamnaya, which means pit grave in Russian. And that's to do with these enormous grave sites that are so associated with them. Is that right? Yes.

Exactly. Burial mounds or kurgans, as they're known in the Russian word. The kurgans. And so this is what you've kind of been starting to outline is what I think is known as the step hypothesis. Is that right? And this is one of the leading theories on the origins of proto-Indo-European, as you explained, because, of course, in any field like this, where there are so many uncertainties, so many pieces of evidence, there are always going to be competing theories.

ideas, computing theories, aren't there? Could you explain a little bit more about that step hypothesis and why it's the idea that is so widely accepted? Why is it the one that seems the most compelling?

Yes. I suppose coming into this 21st century, there were two main theories of where the Indo-European languages originated and how they spread around the world that were sort of still on the table. Other ones had kind of fallen by the wayside. The first is the steppe hypothesis, which is that these people, the Yamnaya and their descendants came from the steppe west into Europe.

east into Asia and carried their languages with them and sort of imposed the Indo-European languages over the area where we first see them when writing comes in.

The alternative theory was the one known as the Anatolian hypothesis, and that essentially pulls the origins of the Indo-European languages several thousand years earlier and places them in Anatolia, modern Turkey, at the time of the Neolithic revolution, that is the invention of farming. So the idea is that it was the farmers of Anatolia and the Fertile Crescent who spoke the proto-Indo-European language.

And when they become numerous, because farming can support larger populations than hunter-gathering, they then spread out to find more land and they carry their languages with them and they go west into Europe and east into Asia. And that would have been starting from about 8,000 years ago. So much earlier than the 5,000 year starting point that the step hypothesis postulates.

Both of them seemed plausible and both of them had strengths and weaknesses. Both were still on the table until basically the ancient DNA revolution happened in the last sort of 20 years or so. And

tipped the balance of probabilities strongly in favor of the step hypothesis. So that's very much the one that is favored now. The other hasn't died completely and may never in this very uncertain story. But the step hypothesis is very much the leader now for where the parent of all living Indo-European languages comes from. There is an earlier stage of the story which complicates matters, but maybe we won't go into that now.

I think it's probably complicated enough for a short podcast. But you've mentioned paleogenetics a couple of times. And one of the really important, fascinating things about the book is its interdisciplinary approach. And as you say, language, culture, genetics, they don't map exactly onto each other, but they are often interrelated. So you've mentioned the kind of linguistic origins. Could you tell us a bit

more about how genetic and archaeological discoveries have deepened our understanding of the origins of Proto-Indo-European? Yeah. So there is one sort of very important idea that hovers behind all of this, which is that in prehistory, before states, before writing,

the main or a major, if not the main motor of language change is migration. That is people move. Sometimes they move very long distances. They carry their languages with them, at least to begin with. Because the original set of dialects of a language is separated by this process. And because the traveling dialects become in come in contact with new ones,

these effects cause the original languages to spin away from each other and to change and to become hybrids and to evolve as languages always do. So that idea that migration is the main motor here is key to what I'm going to say next, which is that then if you can follow those prehistoric people through space,

with the idea that they also carry their languages with them, then you can begin to trace the diaspora of languages that were never written down. And there's some evidence to think that that's a reasonable way to proceed because we know that

from other stories that where the splits in family trees, if you like, if the way that languages have evolved and split from each other over time, very often maps quite closely onto what is known about prehistoric migration routes. So it's not an idea without foundation. And we're using that as the guiding principle in this story. And there's been a real transformation, hasn't there, in what's possible with those paleogenetics in recent years, right?

What is it that has so kind of transformed our ability to understand? Could you say a little bit more about that?

Yes. So up until about 20 years ago, the study of genetics had already been applied to the study of prehistory. But the way that it was done was that people were looking at the genetics of modern populations and then, if you like, extrapolating back to see what kind of mixings and movements had happened in the past to bring about that change.

modern composition. What's happened in the last 20 years that's been so revolutionary and transformational is that the scientists have worked out how to extract ancient DNA from ancient bones and to read it.

And for a long time, it was thought that that wouldn't be possible. Contamination was a major problem. Also the fact that ancient DNA, I mean, DNA degrades over time. So often ancient DNA is in a pretty lamentable state and unreadable. But in fact, that has worked to some extent to our advantage in the sense that ancient DNA has a very distinctive profile because of the time that it's been around. And so that...

profile allowed the geneticists to separate it out from modern DNA and solve the problem of contamination and that begin to understand, begin to read those ancient DNA profiles and therefore track people through space. If you think about it, you can now find, you can now excavate

burial mound or burial in one place, a burial mound in another, and you can begin to ask if those people are related. If so, how closely related? Did they share diseases? What did they look like? You can start to, you basically open up a whole world of information that wasn't accessible to us before. It's really fascinating, isn't it, how that archaeology and the genetics are kind of over

overlaying with each other and people have tried to speculate based on that overlaying of the archaeology and genetics that Indo-European languages are associated with particular social structures that that mobility you're talking about brings particular ideas like patriarchy or hierarchy. Do we detect that connection between culture and language? Do you think that the language influences the culture in that way? Yes.

In a way, this is one of the areas where the archaeology and the language, the historical linguists dovetail, if you like. I'll give you an example. So one thing we know about the Yamnaya and their descendant cultures is that they were patrilocal, patriarchal. Patrilocal meaning that women moved into their husbands' homes and families and families

patriarchal in the sense that men rule the hierarchies. And the language, for example, the Greek constructed language has many words for a woman's in-laws, but none for a man's in-laws, which you would expect in a patrilocal society because she moves to live with her husband and his family.

So in these sorts of ways, you can start to piece together that, yes, this was the language spoken by a patrilocal people, a patriarchal people, and also by a very mobile people. For example, they had words for wealth, but they had many words for theft, for retribution, for blood price. And we know that nomadic peoples tend to be

more violent. Ethnographers give us that kind of information from the modern world than more sedentary peoples because their wealth is mobile. So these are all ways in which the archaeology and the linguists come together to give us clues about who they were, who might have spoken that language.

You mentioned mobility a few times and the tensions between that mobile people, the Yamnaya people and their descendants, these settled farming communities. You mentioned earlier as well this idea of the Yamnaya imposing their language. Is this a story of war and of people bringing languages and forcing them onto other cultures? What's happening here? That's a really...

Important question, because it's also at the crux of these two rival theories of how the Indo-European languages originated and spread. So one of the sort of inherent problems that you might think about with the step hypothesis is that 5,000 years ago, the farmers had already come into Europe. And there were, we estimate, about 7 million of them.

Okay, so if the Yamnaya come to Europe at that time, how on earth did they impose their language on 7 million farmers to produce the heavily Indo-European dominated linguistic landscape that we see today in Europe?

It's a problem because we're talking about a time when wheeled transport is pretty new. They probably did have wagons, but that's all they had. Maybe there were tens of thousands of them at a maximum at the peak of their migration into Europe, but tens of thousands versus...

7 million, you know, it's a difficult calculation. And that's the main reason why the archaeologist Colin Renfrew, who died recently, and who was the sort of main progenitor of the Anatolian theory, said that it was unlikely to have happened that way. It was much more likely that it was the farmers themselves who brought the Indo-European languages into Europe 8,000 years ago, i.e. much earlier, and when Europe was much less populated.

So that is at the crux of this question. But then the ancient DNA showed us pretty much exactly 10 years ago, there were two major papers in Nature that showed this very clearly, that there was a major influx of steppe ancestry to Europe 5,000 years ago. So somehow they managed to impose themselves both genetically and presumably, given the Indo-European domination of Europe,

And the fact that the relationship between those languages suggests that they have been spoken in Europe for at least that length of time did stem from that step, invasion. Now, invasion is a loaded word. When those papers came out in 2015, the spin put on them, if you like, in the press, because they did get a lot of press attention, was very much that these were violent people who came in, who imposed violence,

their genes and their language. So they raped and murdered and that's how their languages took hold. The thinking has changed very much since then. And the picture has become very much more complicated. There may have been some violence. There surely was some violence.

but it looks to have been mainly social mechanisms that allowed them to impose their languages. So, for example, because these were people who were nomadic pastoralists, they moved a lot, they were often separated from each other over long spaces and long periods of times. They had a kind of suite of social conventions that kept them together, that maintained their identity and that allowed them to function socially.

And among those are fosterers. They fostered children. They...

probably had a rather fluid system of marriage where a man might have more than one wife. They were very strong on hospitality. So if you moved, you expected to be received in your host's place and vice versa. Hospitality was assumed to be reciprocal. So all these kinds of social conventions which meant that they could stay together, maintain their identity over space and time,

and enabled them to move into a new place, to adapt to a new place, and to bring others into their world and into their linguistic sphere as well, if you like. So it wasn't as violent as we think it was, probably. There may have been external factors as well. For example, we now know that plague...

was present in Europe in the late Neolithic, so at the time that people came into Europe. They may even have brought it. It may not have looked like plague as plague looked in the Middle Ages.

But that's an open question. It may not have been quite as lethal, but it probably did a great deal of damage. It probably killed a significant proportion of the farmers who were in Europe at that time and who were already living in relatively dense settlements. So the plague had spread. So it may be that the plague did some of the work for the invaders, for them, in terms of clearing the landscape before them as they advanced.

You chose to hit play on this podcast today. Smart choice. Progressive loves to help people make smart choices. That's why they offer a tool called AutoQuote Explorer that allows you to compare your progressive car insurance quote with rates from other companies. So you save time on the research and can enjoy savings when you choose the best rate for you. Give it a try after this episode at Progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Not available in all states or situations. Prices vary based on how you buy.

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop. With Mint, you can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments, but that's weird. Okay, one judgment.

Anyway, give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch.

This message comes from Greenlight. Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely, and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores, automate allowance, and keep an eye on your kids' spending with real-time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk-free at greenlight.com slash Spotify.

You know that feeling when someone shows up for you just when you need it most? That's what Uber is all about. Not just a ride or dinner at your door. It's how Uber helps you show up for the moments that matter. Because showing up can turn a tough day around or make a good one even better. Whatever it is, big or small, Uber is on the way. So you can be on yours. Uber, on our way.

Eczema isn't always obvious, but it's real. And so is the relief from EBCLSS.

After an initial dosing phase of 16 weeks, about 4 in 10 people taking EBCLS achieved itch relief and clear or almost clear skin. And most of those people maintained skin that's still more clear at one year with monthly dosing. EBCLS, Lebrechizumab LBKZ, a 250 milligram per 2 milliliter injection, is a prescription medicine used to treat adults and children 12 years of age and older who weigh at least 88 pounds or 40 kilograms with moderate to severe eczema. Also called atopic dermatitis that is not well controlled with

prescription therapies used on the skin or topicals or who cannot use topical therapies. Ebglus can be used with or without topical corticosteroids. Don't use if you're allergic to Ebglus. Allergic reactions can occur that can be severe. Eye problems can occur. Tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems. You should not receive a live vaccine when treated with Ebglus. Before starting Ebglus, tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. Searching for real relief? Ask your doctor about Ebglus and visit ebglus.lily.com or call 1-800-LILY-RX or 1-800-545-5979.

It's almost impossible, isn't it, to tell exactly what happens in these interactions because you occasionally have archaeological sites that show violence in one place or plague in another place. But that large pattern is really, really difficult to track, isn't it? Which is why these genetics have been so important in giving a structure to that bigger picture, I suppose. And one of the big structures, and we've talked about it a few times, is mobility. And you mentioned the introduction of wheeled vehicles.

And I was very struck by how sometime between 4000, 3500 BC wheeled vehicles appeared in the steppe. And it's so transformative that it appears simultaneously east and west and south of the Black Sea and archaeologists just can't work out where it came from. How important are those kind of innovations in shaping the movement of people and languages?

Hugely, hugely. I think, so as far as we can see, or as far as the archaeologists can tell, that invention, who, as you say, we don't know who was responsible for it, but it emerged in the context of what was already an international trade network centered on the Black Sea. So,

So people were already trading in metals, in copper, in bronze, in amber, in coral. They were trading in all kinds of things, probably in human beings as well. And once you've got a means of transport, everything changes. Everything becomes bigger and faster and you can go further. And so...

It basically intensifies all the connections. And this has an impact in language because you can go further. You take your dialects further. More of you can travel. Larger journeys become invisible. And that's what we see from the invention of the wagon, from the domestication of the horse. You start to see people moving these very long journeys, sometimes long.

individual people, otherwise peoples over generations, generations of incremental migration. And the very strong likelihood is that they were carrying their dialects and their languages with them.

So, what we see is Indo-European languages spreading especially after transport, wheeled transport is from India to Ireland, enormous disparate cultures and societies across a huge amount of Europe, Asia and kind of neighboring regions and through a mix of trade and conquest and migration.

Then what we end up with is a world in which Proto-Indo-European is spread across these very disparate cultures. You call it, I think, the thread that connects disparate cultures. Everything from Dante's Inferno to the Rig Vida. And there are some incredibly surprising connections there between different language traditions. Could you tell us maybe some of the more surprising linguistic links that you found between these ancient traditions?

Yeah. I mean, first of all, I suppose this is one of the points of wonder that was my entry to this story, which is if you think about a Victorian Britain or European, realizing that Sanskrit and Latin words look and sound like each other, it must have been a quite extraordinary sort of shock to think,

how on earth could you know I mean okay in Victorian times people have more than a than a heavy old wagon rumbling along but but they they didn't move nearly as much as we do today and and

To a Victorian in Britain, India was an immensely distant place, even if they were already colonizing it, but it was a long way away. So these were extraordinary thoughts and they still are to some extent. I mean, the example that I open my introduction with is that of the most powerful God in the ancient Indian pantheon, who was called Dyaupita, literally means, we would say Father Sky, but it literally means Sky Father. And

And in ancient Greek, the same name becomes transformed into Zeus Pater, or Zeus for short, Zeus. In Latin, it becomes Jupiter, Jupiter. The first word, Jupiter,

And Diao in Sanskrit is transformed in Old Norse to become Tyr, who's a god of weather and war. And in Old English, Tu. So all of these names and all of the sort of the divinities themselves to whom they refer are linked mythologically in terms of the stories that are told about them.

So these are the kinds of connections that we're talking about that struck people even long before the Victorian times and that they have been attempting to explain and that we now have a new suite of tools to help us explain. But they didn't.

clearly could not have been coincidental. There is, so it's been a very long time that there has been awareness that there is a link between East and West that needs explaining. We may never explain it fully, but we're getting closer, we are closer than we have been in a very long time. And that...

link that was so surprising to the Victorians, it also had importance in it for identity, for political reasons. There's a kind of currency to some of these stories, isn't there? How does that muddy the waters of the claims that are made? Okay, so I suppose I have to start this answer by saying that language is inherently political.

Even the definition of language, I mean, there's an expression that most people will have heard, which is that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy. And it's often said, and there's a very great deal of truth in it, because languages are not defined neatly. Just to give an example, southern and northern Germans don't understand each other, but they all speak German, whereas Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish are Germanic.

and yet those people can very often understand each other. So these definitions are to some extent arbitrary, not entirely, there are rules, but they're

and political. And so for as long as people have been curious and tried to understand the Indo-European problem, they've also politicized it. And sometimes they've done it with very damaging effects. So there was a nationalist movement in archaeology starting in the late 19th century, which spilled into the 20th century, which wanted to claim

the homeland of these languages was in Central Europe and that, you know, this was associated with the Aryan concept, whereas Aryan, in fact, is a word that comes up first in all ancient Indian and Persian texts.

and refers to those peoples. So there's always been this distortion going on and it's still happening today. People have taken this story when it suits them to justify their political agendas. It has always happened. It will always happen. But I think that the best sort of...

response to that is to keep researching, to be as scientific as possible about trying to find answers to what is a genuine problem. And that's quite hard at the moment in some areas you mention in your book because of the invasion of Ukraine and so many of the sites now are even being destroyed, aren't they, which is depriving us of the ability to do that paleogenetic research. It's a really difficult region for you to be researching, I imagine. It's a huge irony that, you know, I mean, I've

As far as we can tell, as far as the archaeologists and the geneticists can tell, the sort of cradle of pro-Eutero-European in the sense of where those people, the Yamnaya, lived when they were first speaking these languages is essentially in that piece of the world that is being contested by the Ukrainians and the Russians or that was invaded by the Russians a few years ago and that the Ukrainians are defending between those two countries. And, you know, there's even a linguistic difference

dimension to the war, not that anybody really thinks that it's about language, but when Vladimir Putin wrote his public essay a few years ago explaining, as he saw it, the history of the region, one of his points was that, you know, that Russian was the

was a language and Ukrainian was a sort of dialect of it. And, you know, that the sort of Russian culture was dominant and the others were splinters. So it's another example of how the story has been bashed out of shape in order to support certain agendas. And no doubt that will continue. But it's a huge irony of the current state of affairs.

Yeah, and language is always political, aren't they? As you said, language is political, history is always political, and they can be used in different ways. And this is not a story that's finished with globalization. Indo-European languages continue to spread in some ways, but are they continuing to grow? Or do we see a shift now in linguistic power? What's the future for Proto-Indo-European or I guess for Indo-European?

I mean, I think this is so fascinating because if you think about it, so the current understanding, to put it in a nutshell, about how the Indo-European languages arrived in Europe, though of course they went east as well, is that it was associated with a migration. Now, that migration may have involved violence, it may have involved plague, but it was multifaceted and very complicated and it involved social mechanisms and decisions made by the

host populations in Europe as well as those coming in. So it was a very complicated picture. And that obviously has relevance for our modern world, especially as the climate crisis intensifies and people start to move in greater numbers. What will be the linguistic impact of that? I think that's a fascinating question, and it's not one we've really thought about. I mean, we have talked about the demographic, the economic, the cultural impact of migration, but not the linguistic ones.

And I think it's obviously a hot potato. It's obviously a sensitive subject, but which of these is not? And the point is that languages are devastated still. That, I suppose, is one of the overriding messages that comes out of my book. They never will stand still. And when languages stand still, they die. So...

It is a constantly moving, very dynamic picture, and it's likely to become even more so in the decades and centuries ahead of us. And with social media and migration, as you say, we're seeing the emergence of new blended languages. And then some people will say, oh, that's just a dialect or it's just a variant. But it's interesting to wonder which of these dialects are going to rise and become the next dominant.

Absolutely. And I mean, linguists today will tell you that that's very hard to predict. But I wonder if AI, you know, for all its risks and benefits, double edged sword and so on, I think that AI is going to transform this task. It might actually help us begin to see the kinds of challenges

of language change and help us to predict, at least in a general way, what might happen in the future, which is a fascinating and exciting prospect. But I also wanted to say that, you know, the...

idea that we have in many European countries, and not only, also the states and many of the former colonies of our European countries, if you like, is that to be monolingual, like we officially are, is a sort of somehow the right or natural state of humanity. Not at all. For the vast majority of our history and prehistory, we were multilingual. And it's only from sort of

the last few centuries, the modern period that we have had this notion of a single official language in one country. That's all part of the sort of nation state concept of we are one homogeneous people, which was always more of an aspiration than a reality. And what's so fascinating, I find, is that we're now in a way, the statistics would suggest reverting to type, because it's actually quite difficult to get this data, but some linguists have been doing it. And if you look at

both the countries in Western Europe, America, and some other countries as well, they are gradually becoming more multilingual again. So we still have an official dominant language in each place, but the ground truth, if you like, is that people are speaking at least two and often more languages in those countries.

And in many parts of the world, that's the norm, not the exception. That is the norm. Where I particularly study, there are more than 60 official languages. And that actually demonstrates the dominance of a few because there used to be hundreds. But it's still a very large number that are spoken. Just before we wrap up, I wonder, is there...

anything exciting on the horizon, I guess, for the study of Proto-Indo-European? Is your book going to be the story of where we are now or are there shifts, is there work going on that you think might change this picture in the near future? I think, it's a very good question, I think this story will never be settled entirely. There will always be new work shining on it.

But I think that it would be fair to say that the main lines are in place now. I'm not sure that anything will change in a major, major way. But what we're doing now is filling out the all-important detail, trying to understand the mechanisms. What was it about...

moving from one place to another that enabled them to impose their languages or not? Why is it that when the Mongols came to Ukraine, they did not impose their language, but when the Indo-Europeans came earlier, they did. Why is it that, uh, you know, the Romans were able to impose Latin over so much of continental Europe, but never managed it in, uh, um,

I mean, we can have an argument about whether the Normans sometime later managed to impose a Romance language, but the consensus amongst linguists is that English essentially remains a Germanic language that got a huge sort of infusion of Norman terms and grammar and phonology at that point.

So, you know, there are all these wonderful, there's a wonderful variety of possible outcomes. And we're going to begin to understand why there is that variety. That's

As a cultural historian, that's the bit that really gramps me. They're kind of trying to understand the people in all that big picture. Laura, thank you so much for a fascinating conversation. That was Laura Spinney, who is the author of Proto, How One Ancient Language Went Global, which is available now online or at a bookshop near you, I'm sure. I've been Caroline Dodds-Pennock. You've been listening to Intelligence Squared. Thank you so much for joining us.

Thanks for listening to Intelligence Squared. This episode was produced by myself, Mia Cirenti, and it was edited by Mark Roberts.