Tuesday, January 31, 2023

Below is the link about this finding.

 Below is the link about this finding.

The link with Karin ( ancient name of Erzurum) is the most likely version, but a possible link with Kars can't be ruled out also. The reason of this is that Kars is the plural form of Kar. While in Urartian Kar would give something like Karni or Karini.
Alternatively both Kars and Karin stem from the same root.
Karin is mentioned in Strabo's texts as Carenitis.

Wednesday, January 25, 2023

Samples from Nevali Chori. (Wang 2023)

 Samples from Nevali Chori. (Wang 2023)

Nevali Çori is a site close to Portasar (Gobekle tepe)
NEV030 is Iron Age
NEV020 and NEV021 are Roman Empire
NEV009 is Neolithic PPNB 3 layer
BAJ022 is from South Levant Neolithic
030 seems to be close to Urfa Armenians, although it's not granted that he is related to Armenians.
PS I didn't added Cayonu in my list, but it seems they are the closest to NEV009

All reactions:

Tuesday, January 24, 2023

We have overlooked one remarkable toponym in Sevan basin.

We have overlooked one remarkable toponym in Sevan basin. It is the Uskia in Urartian texts. Uškia [(A LAND)] (GN)

It is mentioned only once, in a context of campaign toward lake Sevan basin. Some believe Uskia was close to modern Sotk and might be related to Armenian word oski (ոսկի, modern voski ) meaning gold. That is quite plausible given the proximity of Sotk gold mine which was exploited since 2th millennium BC. Although the origin of word oski (gold) in Armenian is uncertain it's quite likely that it was used as a toponym in Iron Age.
Notice the word for gold in Hurrian is known and it's very different. While the Urartian word is unknown because they used the Sumerian ideogram GUSKIN for gold. How they were pronouncing that ideogram is unknown. It's more likely that it was related to the Hurrian word, which would mean that Armenian word for gold is not a loanword from HU languages.
PS the two words for gold attested in Hurrian dialects are the hiyari and aaraxi. The first can be related to Sanskrit hiranya-m meaning gold.

Sunday, January 22, 2023

A new large paper about ancient Greece

 A new large paper about ancient Greece. It confirms what was already known from previous papers.

After the Neolithic period Greece had two migrations.
+ The first around 4000-3500bc from East, from Anatolia. Y DNA found from those periods are more specific to regions further East than Anatolia, close to historic Armenia.
This Eastern shift was uneven. It is well represented in Crete where Minoan civilization flourished.
+ The second migration occured in Middle Bronze Age from North. Around 2300BC. You can see a strong shift on the PCA. Especially in sites like Logkas and Theopetra. In LBA and IA the Mycenaean and Classic Greek genetic profile formed with some Steppe ancestry.
PS. It's remarkable that J1-P58 was found in Minoan Crete civilization. Which is another strong argument that this branch which is popular in Arabian peninsula today had initially a more northern origin. Somewhere in Northern Mesopotamia.
All reactions:

Sunday, January 15, 2023

New Neolithic samples from Mentesh-tepe in Azerbaijan are on the road.

 New Neolithic samples from Mentesh-tepe in Azerbaijan are on the road. The paper is not published yet.

Their Y dna is J2b2b relatively close to those found in Hajji Firuz Chl in Iran.
This is a yet another indirect evidence that J2b2 moved from South Caucasus to Steppe. And with Yamna people reached western Balkans where it expanded in Bronze Age.
We have already one sample from Mentesh-tepe.
Genome-wide data for 3 neolithic individuals from Mentesh-Tepe, Azerbaidjan
The South Caucasus is at the outskirt of the Fertile Crescent, one the main centers of Neolithization. Despite this localization, Neolithic developed here only at the beginning of the 6 th millennium, and its origins remains unclear. Here we present genomic data for three new individuals from Mentesh Tepe in Azerbaijan dating back to the beginning of the Shomu-Shulaveri culture. Mentesh Tepe Neolithic population is the product of a recent gene-flow between Anatolian farmer-related population, and Caucasus/Iranian population, demonstrating that population admixture was at the core of the development of agriculture in the South-Caucasus. During the Bronze Age, new gene flows between Pontic Steppe populations and Mentesh Tepe related groups contributed to the make-up of Kura-Araxes and modern Caucasian populations. Genetic analyzes of the Mentesh Tepe Shomu-Shulaveri inhabitants also provide evidence that the two juveniles buried embracing each other were brothers.

Friday, January 13, 2023

A tree of all modern world languages computed by a program.

 A tree of all modern world languages computed by a program. Distance is calculated based on word lists and phonology.

The remarkable result is the that IE, Uralic, Altaic and Afro-Asiatic ( which contains the Semitic ) form a clade. Notice the Kartvelian is also part of this clade. Another interesting result is that languages are in general grouped by geography. Although there are anomalous results like Basque with Papuans. Or North Caucasian languages with Siberian-Amerindian groups.
At first glance this can support the Nostratic theory but there can be other reasons of such grouping. Like intense horizontal contacts between geographically close languages. For instance there is no doubt that IE tribes had intense contacts with proto Altaic tribes in East Eurasia. The same could be true for the Uralic.
In general from genetic point of view I don't see much support for Nostratic theory. But it seems that there is some rational why linguists still discuss it.
Լուսանկարի նկարագրությունը հասանելի չէ:
All reactions:

Tuesday, January 10, 2023

Given that we discuss most of the time the deep past, some users of our group can probably wonder how this affect their personal Armenian identity

 Given that we discuss most of the time the deep past, some users of our group can probably wonder how this affect their personal Armenian identity.

My own opinion is that modern self identification can't in no way be compared to ancient ways of self identifications. So many things changed in the last centuries.
For instance. Nations became more secular. Religions is losing its influence.
Many people know multiple languages.
States had a such institution as citizenship. Some people manage to be citizens of more than one country. Mass media and internet permits people to be connected to a life of a distant group which was impossible in the past.
All this combined means that any person who feels attached to Armenia and Armenians in one or another way can feel itself Armenian even without knowing well the Armenian language. And the inverse is also true. A person can be of pure Armenian origin but he cares so little about Armenia that he don't want others to identify him as Armenian.
In sum it's not current status of person that matters for Armenian identity. But the directionality of his movement. Do he move more and more deeper into Armenian identity or he/she moves away from it. That is what matters not the current position.
PS. Some scholars tried to address this subject. The one well known is Armen Ayvazyan's lectures about "Who is Armenian?". Other people can place different accents. Some will give more importance to Armenian Church. So it's a complicated matter where there is hard to find a consensus. I just opened this thread to discuss it.
Politics will not be tolerated as usual.

Thursday, January 5, 2023

I realized that we didn't discussed much the Proto Indo European homeland theory proposed by Lazaridis and Reich

 I realized that we didn't discussed much the Proto Indo European homeland theory proposed by Lazaridis and Reich. Well their proposal is quite simple.

They propose the PIE homeland in West Asia. More specifically in historic Armenia and around. From there two branches splits. One moves to west, which become the Anatolian branch. Hittite and Luwian are the daughter languages of this branch. While the another branch moves to North and creates in Steppe various pastoralistic cultures. The most prominent of them are the Yamna and CWC. Sometimes later 4500 years ago a group of Yamna people returns back to Armenia reintroducing a new branch of IE language which will become the Armenian. This theory explains why Armenian has common linguistic features with Greek and Indo-Iranian. But less with Hittite. See the picture at right.
PS Lazaridis use the term Indo-Anatolian. It's the same as Indo-European except that in this case the emphasis is made on Anatolian branch which according to them has different origin.

All reactions: