How many scholars for another flop!
The Round Table to honor Nikolai Yaklovevich Merpert has become his epitaph being he passed away meanwhile, but the book published for this maintains all its interest being it concerned "to re-evaluate the location of the Indo-European homeland in space and time".
1) at thirty years from the Gamkrelidze-Ivanov hypotesis of the link between Indo-European and Kartvelian, then of an Asian origin of our languages, the same Gamkrelidze must admit:
“The main difficulty in interpreting the results of his investigations is connected to the problem of a possible common Nostratic origin both of Proto-Indo-European and of Proto-Kartvelian. If these two linguistic families were originally cognate, then some part of the correspondences found by Klimov and other scholars might be traced back to the early period of Proto-Nostratic (more than 10 000 years ago)”.
“In our book, published in 1984, we suggested some common terms shared by these languages, explaining them as possible traces of later Indo-European (probably Indo-Iranian) migrations through the Caucasus”.
We have always supported that the Indo-Europeans found there were of the satem group and not all Indo-Europeans, and that satem group is an innovation as to the most ancient centum one, and they carried haplogroup R1a and not R1b.
2) About the link of the “Euphratic” with Sumerian, we have an interesting theory:
“It seems that now there are several possible answers to the question. The great specialist on Iranian, W. B. Henning, who had worked for many years on the problem of the name of Tocharians, suggested in a posthumous article that their early ancestors were Gutians who had invaded Mesopotamia in ca. 2350—2200 BC. In an article written after we had already published our book, we have developed Henning’s idea (based mainly on the etymological links of Near Eastern Guti and Tukri and Central Asian names of corresponding Indo-European Kuchean and Tocharian ethnic groups), also paying attention to the possible explanation of some names of Gutian kings preserved in Sumerian texts”.
Then Tocharians were probably Gutians and passed Southward Caucasus to reach Central Asia, they were a centum language and probably they weren’t above all R-M73, but, who knows, perhaps the ancestor R-L23 etc.
3) hear! hear!
“The spread of Near Eastern innovations in Europe roughly coincides with the split of Proto-Indo-European (possibly in the early 5th mil. BC), but some elements of the new technology and economy might have penetrated it much earlier (partly through the farmers close to the Tyrrhenian population as represented 5300 years ago by the genome of the Tyrolean Iceman)”.
Again the theory of the Etruscans come from Asia Minor! And what to say about the fact that G-L91 is above all Italian, that G2a (see Boattini et al. 2013) is old in Italy at least 15,000 years etc etc?
How many (great) scholars for a (great) flop!