Re: Indo-European family tree (was Re: Celtic and Afro-Asiatic?)

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:54:43 +0200, =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg?= Rhiemeier
<joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:

>> I wouldn't think that the Celtic immigrants to Britain had even the
>> primitive state systems of the Anglo-Saxons, but I suppose the
>> imposition of a prestigious warrior aristocracy (which the Celts by all
>> accounts had) could have the same effect.
>>
>> But this happening *consistently* over most of Europe seems to be a tad
>> much to explain by the IEans simply being more aggressive. One'd be
>> inclined to think it would require some more concrete advantage; some
>> more efficient social organization, perhaps.
>
>Probably that.  Not a unified empire, but clearly a prestigious,
>aggressive and well-organized warrior aristocracy.
This is just pure speculation, but I wonder if the old Roman distinction
between patricians and plebeians originated from IEan-speaking invaders
imposing upon Italy's autochthonous peoples.  One piece of evidence in
favor of this, I think, is that the patrician title was inherited; thus, no
new patrician families could ever be formed.  Furthermore, under the oldest
Roman law, intermarriage and trade between patricians and plebeians were
forbidden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrician).  Indeed, the oldest
Roman law did not seem to concern plebeians at all
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_culture#Aspects_of_the_Roman_culture).

IIRC, similar states of affairs existed for Mycenean/Homeric Greece and
Vedic India.  Perhaps, then, evidence for Indo-European "invasions" can be
found in the cultural traditions of the IE-affected areas.

- Rob