This paper deals with two recent initiatives within diachronic linguistics, where earlier seminal work by Academician Prof. Tamaz Gamkrelidze and his colleagues (Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1984, Gamkrelidze, Ivanov and Winter 1995) have been of fundamental importance: the database project Diachronic Atlas of Comparative Linguistics (DiACL) and the Mouton Atlas of Languages and Cultures (Carling, 2019). The scope of the DiACL database and the Mouton Atlas is languages and cultures in Eurasia, with a focus on the Indo-European languages and cultures. DiACL covers data from 500 languages (in Eurasia, South America, Austronesia) and the Mouton Atlas deals with almost 200 languages (all in Eurasia). Both the DiACL database and the Mouton Atlas have been developed at the Centre for Languages and Literature at Lund University with Dr. Gerd Carling as principal investigator and project leader. The DiACL database and the Atlas include a substantial amount of material from the languages of the Caucasus. Apart from Kartvelian, Nakho-Dagestanian and Northwest Caucasian data, Turkic (Azerbaijani, Balkar-Karachai), Armenian and Iranian (Ossetic, Tat, Talysh) materials have been included. The empirical data in this part of the DiACL database and the Atlas rely primarily on a close cooperation with specialists at academic centres in the Caucasus, in particular with professors Merab Chukhua, Teimuraz Gvantseladze, Madzhid Khallilov and Acherdan Abregov (all contributors cannot be mentioned here, but are credited in the publications). Work on the Caucasian data has been coordinated by myself and Revaz Tchantouria at the Section for Caucasus Studies at Malmö University (Sweden) together with visiting researchers Elnur Aliyev, Maka Tetradze and Tamuna Lomadze during the years 2013-2018. The current work is a study spanning grammatical, lexical and cultural data, and “follows in the footsteps of a much older tradition: historical-comparative handbooks on the aspects and consequences of language reconstruction” (2019, 1), referring to (Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1984) and a few other publications. However, a marked difference in approaches between such earlier studies and the current work is the reliance on quantitative methods and computerized statistical analyses of DiACL and the Mouton Atlas. For instance, the grammatical and typological information is analyzed in terms of absence versus presence of distinct grammatical features. GIS-technique (Geographic Information Systems) is widely used throughout the database and the atlas to represent and visualize spatio-geographic patterning of grammatical and typological as well as lexical data. Approaching the question of Eurasian prehistory, Carling (2019, 180) supports the position that “[t]he unrelatedness of Eurasian isolates such as Basque, Caucasian families, Etruscan, Sumerian, or Hattian, provide a strong argument in favor of a high diversity predating the large, migrating families, i.e. Indo-European, Uralic and Turkic.” She notes that previous (substrate) linguistic material potentially could occur in the data and that “[w]e are also attracted by the theory of ancient convergence areas (Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1984), where lexemes and concepts may have been distributed, borrowed, and migrated over language boundaries in prehistory.” (Carling 2019, 180). Literature Carling, Gerd (ed.). 2019. The Mouton Atlas of Languages and Cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DiACL. Diachronic Atlas of Comparative Linguistics. 2013-2019. https://diacl.ht.lu.se/ Gamkrelidze, Tamaz V. and Vjačeslav V., Ivanov. 1984. Indoevropejskij jazyk i indoevropejcy: rekonstrukcija i istoriko-tipologičeskij analiz prajazyka i protokultury. Tbilisi: Izd. Tbilisskogo Univ. Gamkrelidze, Tamaz, Vjačeslav Ivanov and Werner Winter. 1995. Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: a reconstruction and historical analysis of a proto-language and proto-culture. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and monographs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.