Does genetics prove Iran/Armenia is the original land of Indo-Europeans?

Thanks! Could be, although there's also the theory that the Anatolians came directly from the east. I guess this doesn't necessarily negate that.

Except there is no architectural evidence for such a migration at that time: Caucasus -> Syria. There is for a much shorter one: Bulgaria (Ezero) -> Troy I (related pottery).
 
Urartians and Mannaeans occupied Armenia and northwest of Iran just in the first centuries of the 1st millennium BC, I believe even this period the majority of inhabitants were IE speaking people, in the 2nd millennium BC we see not only Anatolian and Hellenic culture in this region but also many elements of Indo-Aryan culture in Mitanni, Slavic culture in Kassite, Germanic culture in Guti, Celtic culture in Cadusii, ...

Citations please.
 
Urartians and Mannaeans occupied Armenia and northwest of Iran just in the first centuries of the 1st millennium BC, I believe even this period the majority of inhabitants were IE speaking people, in the 2nd millennium BC we see not only Anatolian and Hellenic culture in this region but also many elements of Indo-Aryan culture in Mitanni, Slavic culture in Kassite, Germanic culture in Guti, Celtic culture in Cadusii, ...

According to Enclopaedia Iranica, the Cadusii were Iranian. The Kassites seem to have spoken a Hurrio-Urartian language (Kassite may have been its own language within the Hurrio-Urartian family) although some have also suggested a potential Indo-Iranian superstratum (much like the case with the Mitanni). I am unconvinced by the supposed Slavic similarities in Kassite deities' names. I think it is possible that the Gutians were Indo-European (this could potentially explain some of the potentially Indo-European words in Sumerian) but the only known Indo-European language I've seen them compared to somewhat convincingly is Tocharian.

I think that there were both Indo-European-speaking peoples and non-Indo European-speaking peoples in the region, much like now. As for the Urartians, I think that they were one (or some) of the Nairi tribes, maybe who originally came from northern Iraq, as suggested by Paul Zimansky (which would explain their holy site, Musasir/Ardini being located near Rawanduz). Perhaps they were fleeing Akkadian persecution and ended up near Lake Van. Regardless, I think that this would have happened some centuries before the establishment of the Kingdom of Van/Urartu. This could a) explain Urartu's apparent long contact with Armenian, prior to the formation of Urartu and b) some of the Urartian kings having Indo-European names (Arame, Argisti, Menuas, Erimena, perhaps more) and some of their gods having Indo-European origins (Siuni, Artinis, Arubani/Bagmastu, Selardi, Theispas, possibly Khaldi--loans from Anatolian, Armenian, Indo-Iranian, and maybe Greeks).

As for the Mannaeans, they seem to have had both Hurrian/Kassite and Iranian elements. I also wouldn't be surprised if there was an Armenian presence, at least in the north, as Biblically Mannea (Minni) was associated with Armenia.

Regardless, neither Mannae nor Urartu were ethnically homogenous kingdoms (if you could even call them kingdoms--they were more confederacies).
 
Except there is no architectural evidence for such a migration at that time: Caucasus -> Syria. There is for a much shorter one: Bulgaria (Ezero) -> Troy I (related pottery).

Wasn't Kura-Araxes pottery found in central Turkey (Malatya area) and northern Syria though, dated between 3000-2800 BCE? This could be from either Proto-Hurrio-Urartians or from Anatolian Indo-Euros coming from the South Caucasus and settling in northern Mesopotamia/southern Anatolia, depending on what language(s) the Kura-Araxes peoples spoke, of course.

Or maybe the Indo-Euros pushed the Kura-Araxes (proto-Hurrio-Urartians?) southwest? This could explain a) possible connections between proto-Hurrio-Urartian and proto-NE Caucasian languages and b) early contact between Indo-European speakers and Hurrio-Urartian-speakers. In this scenario, neither Hurrians nor Urartians were individual cultures yet, so they would have time to evolve into Hurrians and Urartians in the Urkesh and Musasir areas, respectively.
 
tyuiopman said:
According to Enclopaedia Iranica, the Cadusii were Iranian.

Of course they adopted an Iranian culture, like several other people in Iran, as Pliny has also mentioned, Cadusii is the Greek name of these people, they called themselves Gaeli (modern Gilaki), we still see many elements of Celtic culture in modern Gilaki culture, some of them are really unbelievable, for example we see they still celebrate some ancient Celtic festivals with almost the same names and in the same ways.

tyuiopman said:
The Kassites seem to have spoken a Hurrio-Urartian language (Kassite may have been its own language within the Hurrio-Urartian family) although some have also suggested a potential Indo-Iranian superstratum (much like the case with the Mitanni). I am unconvinced by the supposed Slavic similarities in Kassite deities' names.

They were certinaly not a Hurrio-Urartian people, some sceintists believe they were pre-Indo-European people, Iranian geneticists, like Dr. Maziar Ashrafian Bonab, have found the oldest sample of R1a-M17 in Tepe Sialk of Kashan (4,000 BC): https://ganj-old.irandoc.ac.ir/articles/515891 Kashan is the original land of Kashu (Kassites), in the Iranian mythology Kashvad (Kashub) was father of Gudarz (Gutar/Guti), another major Indo-Eruopean people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashvad

Ernst Herzfeld and some other Iranologists believe ancient Caspians (Greek Kaspioi) who lived in the Caspian steppe were the same Kassites (Kashubs) who migrated to this region, it is possible that they also migrated to Kashubia (Poland) where R1a has the highest frequency. (Iran > Yamnaya > Corded Ware)
 
Of course they adopted an Iranian culture, like several other people in Iran, as Pliny has also mentioned, Cadusii is the Greek name of these people, they called themselves Gaeli (modern Gilaki), we still see many elements of Celtic culture in modern Gilaki culture, some of them are really unbelievable, for example we see they still celebrate some ancient Celtic festivals with almost the same names and in the same ways.

Several other Indo-European speaking peoples (and non-IE) have very similar festivities, I don't see how this connects Celtic culture to the Gilaki people. It should also be noted that the Old Irish form of Gael, Goidel for the inhabitants of Ireland is a borrowed word from Old Welsh Guoidel. What are you saying about the Gaeli (Gilaki)? Are you implying there is a common cultural connection based off of a term used by Pliny and that of the Goidelic speaking peoples of the British Isles?



They were certinaly not a Hurrio-Urartian people, some sceintists believe they were pre-Indo-European people, Iranian geneticists, like Dr. Maziar Ashrafian Bonab, have found the oldest sample of R1a-M17 in Tepe Sialk of Kashan (4,000 BC): https://ganj-old.irandoc.ac.ir/articles/515891 Kashan is the original land of Kashu (Kassites), in the Iranian mythology Kashvad (Kashub) was father of Gudarz (Gutar/Guti), another major Indo-Eruopean people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashvad

Ernst Herzfeld and some other Iranologists believe ancient Caspians (Greek Kaspioi) who lived in the Caspian steppe were the same Kassites (Kashubs) who migrated to this region, it is possible that they also migrated to Kashubia (Poland) where R1a has the highest frequency. (Iran > Yamnaya > Corded Ware)

Yet, we've not seen any real information on this Tepe Sialk R-M17, how can anyone incorporate it into further ancient DNA papers if the data isn't available? Bolded part: am I right in understanding this as you connecting the Gutians to the Gotar of Gotland? We're going to need evidence/citations.

Where does Herzfeld make this connection? The Kassites spoke a language isolate AFAIK, how they get linked in as related or ancestral to Slavic-speaking Kashubians from Pomerania does not make any sense.
 
Of course they adopted an Iranian culture, like several other people in Iran, as Pliny has also mentioned, Cadusii is the Greek name of these people, they called themselves Gaeli (modern Gilaki), we still see many elements of Celtic culture in modern Gilaki culture, some of them are really unbelievable, for example we see they still celebrate some ancient Celtic festivals with almost the same names and in the same ways.

But one of the big issues with your theory is that you still seem to be supporting a Yamnaya origin for most Indo-European languages (which is the mainstream theory--for good reason) but at the same are suggesting that not only Armenians and Iranians were present in the South Caucasus in pre-history, but also Greeks, Germanics, Celts, and Slavs. The presence of all these peoples so early on in history is incompatible with the Yamnaya theory as it suggests that these languages were already defined cultures by the EBA, if not before, which either a) suggests that multiple genetically similar but linguistically individualized peoples migrated north to Yamnaya and b) that these various peoples (Germanics, Celtics, Slavics) went two directions upon leaving the Pontic Steppes. Some would have to go west into Europe to establish the European languages/cultures we are familiar with, and some would have to go south and...disappear? Get absorbed into Hurrio-Urartian/Armenian/Iranian/Semitic peoples?

I don't know much about the Gilaks, although I know that they speak an Iranian language and are pretty genetically similar to South Caucasians. If the Gilaks=Cadusii, I think them having some Celtic origins is possible because there were Celts that invaded modern Turkey, where they established Galatia in the 3rd century BCE. Perhaps some of these Celts moved eastward and mixed with the Cadusii?


They were certinaly not a Hurrio-Urartian people, some sceintists believe they were pre-Indo-European people, Iranian geneticists, like Dr. Maziar Ashrafian Bonab, have found the oldest sample of R1a-M17 in Tepe Sialk of Kashan (4,000 BC): https://ganj-old.irandoc.ac.ir/articles/515891 Kashan is the original land of Kashu (Kassites), in the Iranian mythology Kashvad (Kashub) was father of Gudarz (Gutar/Guti), another major Indo-Eruopean people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashvad

Ernst Herzfeld and some other Iranologists believe ancient Caspians (Greek Kaspioi) who lived in the Caspian steppe were the same Kassites (Kashubs) who migrated to this region, it is possible that they also migrated to Kashubia (Poland) where R1a has the highest frequency. (Iran > Yamnaya > Corded Ware)

How can you be certain that the Kassites were not a Hurrio-Urartian people? As spruithean said, they are officially a linguistic-isolate, although as I previously said, there is a fairly popular theory, based on their names, that they may have been a Hurrian-like people. They also may have had an Indo-Aryan element--perhaps a ruling class--at some point.

You cannot say that the Gutians were "another major Indo-European people"--we do not have enough surviving examples of either the Kassites' or Gutians' languages to know that. Officially they are language isolates. There has been suggestion that a) the Gutians may have been related to the Tocharians, in some capacity, based on some of their names and b) that the Kassites may have had an Indo-Aryan element, based on their names, but as I said, we simply do not have enough information to know who they really were, let alone be "certain".

The Gutians being Indo-Europeans though could explain the supposed Indo-European substratum in Sumerian (Whittaker's Euphratic Theory). It could also explain at least some of the early Indo-European contacts with Semitic.

As for the Kassites, if Kura-Araxes culture were the proto-Hurrio-Urartians, or if the Hurrio-Urartians came from Mesopotamia originally (Urkesh in northern Syria being the religious center for the Hurrians, Musasir in northern Iraq being the religious center for Urartians) it seems very possible that the Kassites spoke a language from the Hurrio-Urartian family.
 
Where does Herzfeld make this connection? The Kassites spoke a language isolate AFAIK, how they get linked in as related or ancestral to Slavic-speaking Kashubians from Pomerania does not make any sense.

Because somebody went through Wikipedia and made some outlandish claims. The least far-fetched one is Kassite Buriash/Ubriash being connected to Slavic Buria, a storm god. But the meaning of Buriash/Ubriash, according to this page, is unknown.

The connections get significantly more outlandish. Another Slavic storm god, Perun, is somehow tied to Ishkur. Kassite Shimalia (apparently meaning "bird on high perch") is connected to the Slavic word for winter, "zima". The Kassite Shipak ("crescent moon") is connected to Slavic siepak (slaughterer).

I don't know if these Slavic gods (like Perun, Buria, Shimalia) were really gods worshipped by ancient Slavic peoples as I don't really know much about Slavic history. But I think Buriash, if it even is connected to the Slavic god Burias, could have arrived through an intermediary rather than the Kassites and Slavs being directly connected (i.e. the Kassites being Slavs or vice versa).

If Ubriash/Buriash is connected to the Greek Borias, I wonder if it's possible that it was a borrowing from Kassite>Greek>Slavic or Kassite>(Hittite? Luwian? Urartian?)>Greek>Slavic. If there is a legitimate connection, I think this like the most possible explanation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassite_deities
 
I'm interested to know why some people say Kassite is a Hurro-Urartian language, we know about just a few Kassite words in Akkadian texts, for example one of them is janzi "king", it can be compared to both proto-Germanic kuningaz and proto-Slavic knęzi "prince", we see some normal Indo-European sound changes like j>g>k and zh>g>z. Sanskrit jenya "noble, genuine" has the same origin.
 
I'm interested to know why some people say Kassite is a Hurro-Urartian language, we know about just a few Kassite words in Akkadian texts, for example one of them is janzi "king", it can be compared to both proto-Germanic kuningaz and proto-Slavic knęzi "prince", we see some normal Indo-European sound changes like j>g>k and zh>g>z. Sanskrit jenya "noble, genuine" has the same origin.

Well janzi seems more like like jenya than than it does the Slavic or Germanic words, to me anyway. Again, it's believed that the Kassites either were in contact with Indo-Europeans or had an IE ruling class or sorts, likely an Indo-Iranian group (much like the Mitanni may have). If the Gutians were Indo-European, the Kassites were likely in contact with them as well, and also possibly Anatolians and maybe Armenians and Greeks. There's no reason why these Indo-European names/words had to be from Slavic or Germanic--there are plenty of other languages that they could be from that make more sense.

Anyway, Anauld Fournet found a lot of similarities between the Kassite language and the Hurrio-Urartian languages. He even went so far as to assert that Kassite, Chaldean (Kadsim), Kaska, and maybe Hatti and Kartvelian all derive from or are related to Khaldi. I don't know how I feel about some of those, but Khaldi made his first appearance as an Akkadian god and not a Urartian one, so maybe there is something to Fournet's theory, at least to an extent. Nevertheless, he also claimed that the Kassites likely came from the greater Anatolia region. If Kura-Araxes were the proto-Hurro-Urartians, and if the Kassite language (minus the Indo-European/Semitic/Elamite loanwords) belonged to the Hurro-Urartian language family, this all makes a lot of sense.

This will explain Kassite's linking to Hurro-Urartian:

https://bulgari-istoria-2010.com/booksBG/A_Fournet_Kassite.pdf
 
What I said is correct, maybe one day people will realise how important it is that Anatolian lacks all these words for wheels, wagons and the like
 
What I said is correct, maybe one day people will realise how important it is that Anatolian lacks all these words for wheels, wagons and the like

It's subjectively correct. To you it is correct. Your theory seems to be like Cyrus' (where all Indo-European groups were living in Iran, fully distinct) but flipped. The thing is, Corded Ware, which began some centuries after Yamnaya, had the same South Caucasus ancestry that Yamnaya did. Isn't this suggestive of Yamnaya moving westward?

Hurkis was "wheel" in Hittite. There seem to have been different words for wagon, some which may have been borrowings. Regardless, to my understanding, the lack of a *kʷel-rooted word for wheel in Hittite is a bit crux of the Indo-Hittite/PPIE theory. But again, there is no (surviving) *kʷel word for "wheel" in Armenian either.
 
tyuiopman said:
Well janzi seems more like like jenya than than it does the Slavic or Germanic words, to me anyway. Again, it's believed that the Kassites either were in contact with Indo-Europeans or had an IE ruling class or sorts, likely an Indo-Iranian group (much like the Mitanni may have). If the Gutians were Indo-European, the Kassites were likely in contact with them as well, and also possibly Anatolians and maybe Armenians and Greeks. There's no reason why these Indo-European names/words had to be from Slavic or Germanic--there are plenty of other languages that they could be from that make more sense.
Anyway, Anauld Fournet found a lot of similarities between the Kassite language and the Hurrio-Urartian languages. He even went so far as to assert that Kassite, Chaldean (Kadsim), Kaska, and maybe Hatti and Kartvelian all derive from or are related to Khaldi. I don't know how I feel about some of those, but Khaldi made his first appearance as an Akkadian god and not a Urartian one, so maybe there is something to Fournet's theory, at least to an extent. Nevertheless, he also claimed that the Kassites likely came from the greater Anatolia region. If Kura-Araxes were the proto-Hurro-Urartians, and if the Kassite language (minus the Indo-European/Semitic/Elamite loanwords) belonged to the Hurro-Urartian language family, this all makes a lot of sense.
This will explain Kassite's linking to Hurro-Urartian:
https://bulgari-istoria-2010.com/booksBG/A_Fournet_Kassite.pdf

We read in your source: "There is good reason for supposing that Kassites were once neighbors of some Indo-European peoples or that they may even have included an Indo-European component."

It is important to know that they are talking about Kassite kingdom/empire not Kassite people/land in the central Iran, the land of Gutians was in the east of Kassite empire, not in the west.

4n76_kassitemap.jpg


For example Rustamid empire in the northwest of Africa is also called a Persian kingdom/empire but just the first kings of this empire had Persian names and we see a few elements of Persian culture in this region, the same thing can be said about Ilkhanid empire in Iran, ...

About the word janzi "king, head of family/clan", it is clear that proto-Indo-European voiced palatal stop (ǵ/ɟ) is closer to /j/ than /g/, for example proto-IE ǵ?nh₁os "kin, clan, race" was pronounced as ɟenos, not genos, compare to Sanskrit janas "race, clan". I think the original proto-IE word for king was ǵ?nǵʰǝ. (ǵʰ sounds like zh)
 
An interesting point about the relation between the names of Kaśyapa, Caspians, Kashubs, ... and Kassites (Kashu):

Encyclopedia of Religions, page 420:

ad65_tort.jpg


Babylonian kudurru of the late Kassite period found near Baghdad:

t2v8_kudurru.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashyapa#cite_note-snedden22-26

"Kaśyapa, alternatively kacchapa, means "turtle" in Sanskrit. According to Michael Witzel, it is related to Avestan kasiiapa, Sogdian ky?ph, New Persian ka?af, ka?(a)p which mean "tortoise", after which Kashaf Rūd or a river in Turkmenistan and Khorasan is named. Tokarian A kāccap ("turtle", "tortoise")."

Kashmir, the northern Himalayan region of the Indian subcontinent got its name from Kashyapa Rishi. The name Kashmir, states Christopher Snedden, may be a shortened form of "Kashyapa Mir" or the "lake of the sage Kashyapa", or alternatively derived from "Kashyapa Meru" or the sacred mountains of Kashyapa.

In ancient texts of Greece, linked to the expedition of Alexander the Great, this land has been called "Kasperia", possibly a contraction of "Kasyapamira". The word "Kaspapyros" appears in Greek geographer Hekataois text, and as "Kaspatyros" in Herodotus who states that Skylax the Karyandian began in Kaspatyros to trace the path of Indus river from the mountains to where it drained in the sea. Kaspatyros may be same as Kaspa-pyrus or Kasyapa-pur (city of Kashyapa) in other texts.
 
We read in your source: "There is good reason for supposing that Kassites were once neighbors of some Indo-European peoples or that they may even have included an Indo-European component."

It is important to know that they are talking about Kassite kingdom/empire not Kassite people/land in the central Iran, the land of Gutians was in the east of Kassite empire, not in the west.

4n76_kassitemap.jpg


For example Rustamid empire in the northwest of Africa is also called a Persian kingdom/empire but just the first kings of this empire had Persian names and we see a few elements of Persian culture in this region, the same thing can be said about Ilkhanid empire in Iran, ...

Yes. Regarding contact with, or population of, Indo-Europeans--that's exactly what I said. And those Indo-Europeans were likely Indo-Iranian, but the Kassites (either as a people or as an empire) could additionally have had contact with Anatolians, Armenians, and Greeks. They also could have, earlier, had contact with the Gutians. Both the Gutians and the Kassites are believed to have come from the Zagros Mountains or, in the case of the Kassites, possibly modern-Turkey. They could have come in the southern Armenian Highlands or northern Mesopotamia and Gutian could also potentially have accounted for IE elements in Kassite (if the Gutians were indeed IE, that is).

The point is, there seems to be an agreement that the Kassites (the original tribe that spoke the Kassite language) were not Indo-European but spoke a language isolate or maybe were Hurro-Urartians of some sort. But as I said (and as that article says) they came into contact with Indo-Europeans and may have absorbed some Indo-Europeans, which definitely seems likely as their empire expanded, just as Indo-Europeans absorbed non-Indo-European peoples.

Why does it matter whether the Gutians were to the east or the west of the Kassites? I didn't specify the direction, but it seems to be that there is geographic overlap between Kassite Babylonian Empire and Gutian Sumeria, but the Kassite Babylonian Empire was 500+ years after Gutian Sumeria.

About the word janzi "king, head of family/clan", it is clear that proto-Indo-European voiced palatal stop (ǵ/ɟ) is closer to /j/ than /g/, for example proto-IE ǵ�nh₁os "kin, clan, race" was pronounced as ɟenos, not genos, compare to Sanskrit janas "race, clan". I think the original proto-IE word for king was ǵ�nǵʰǝ. (ǵʰ sounds like zh)

Look, I agree, I think it's a compelling theory that janzi is an Indo-European root. But I still see no reason why we should assume that is from Slavic and not from some other language, like an Indo-Iranian language or Gutian (if they were Indo-Euros).

Off topic, but jan/joon (soul, dear) come from this same root, by the way?
 
Could I ask ... I have read several times about the satemisation of IE, but is it possible that IE was originally satem, and that a branch of it became centumised? Also, which other languages have centum or satem features?
 
Yes. Regarding contact with, or population of, Indo-Europeans--that's exactly what I said. And those Indo-Europeans were likely Indo-Iranian, but the Kassites (either as a people or as an empire) could additionally have had contact with Anatolians, Armenians, and Greeks. They also could have, earlier, had contact with the Gutians. Both the Gutians and the Kassites are believed to have come from the Zagros Mountains or, in the case of the Kassites, possibly modern-Turkey. They could have come in the southern Armenian Highlands or northern Mesopotamia and Gutian could also potentially have accounted for IE elements in Kassite (if the Gutians were indeed IE, that is).

The point is, there seems to be an agreement that the Kassites (the original tribe that spoke the Kassite language) were not Indo-European but spoke a language isolate or maybe were Hurro-Urartians of some sort. But as I said (and as that article says) they came into contact with Indo-Europeans and may have absorbed some Indo-Europeans, which definitely seems likely as their empire expanded, just as Indo-Europeans absorbed non-Indo-European peoples.

Why does it matter whether the Gutians were to the east or the west of the Kassites? I didn't specify the direction, but it seems to be that there is geographic overlap between Kassite Babylonian Empire and Gutian Sumeria, but the Kassite Babylonian Empire was 500+ years after Gutian Sumeria.



Look, I agree, I think it's a compelling theory that janzi is an Indo-European root. But I still see no reason why we should assume that is from Slavic and not from some other language, like an Indo-Iranian language or Gutian (if they were Indo-Euros).

Off topic, but jan/joon (soul, dear) come from this same root, by the way?

It is certainly important to know where Kassites originally lived, it is generally believed that they lived in the Central Iran where cities of Kashan, Qazvin (Kasvin), Kashmar, ... were named after them, I don't see any evidence about the existence of a Hurro-Urartian culture in this region, but if they lived in the west of Gutian lands, they could be originally a Hurro-Urartian people, in this case they seem to almost the same as Mitanni.
Persian Jan is cognate with Armenian anjn, the Persian word has a prefix but Armenian one has a suffix, they don't relate to the Indo-European word for race/kin.
 
Could I ask ... I have read several times about the satemisation of IE, but is it possible that IE was originally satem, and that a branch of it became centumised? Also, which other languages have centum or satem features?

The problem is labiovelars, they didn't exist in the satem languages, for example Satem /g/ couldn't be changed to /b/ in Greek. Of course they exist in the Western Iranian phenologies, like Luri and Kurdish: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_phonology It is actually one of the main reasons that I believe Indo-European originated in this land because almost all IE sounds exist there.
 
It is certainly important to know where Kassites originally lived, it is generally believed that they lived in the Central Iran where cities of Kashan, Qazvin (Kasvin), Kashmar, ... were named after them, I don't see any evidence about the existence of a Hurro-Urartian culture in this region, but if they lived in the west of Gutian lands, they could be originally a Hurro-Urartian people, in this case they seem to almost the same as Mitanni.
Persian Jan is cognate with Armenian anjn, the Persian word has a prefix but Armenian one has a suffix, they don't relate to the Indo-European word for race/kin.

No, it's not generally believed that the Kassites came from central Iran, at least as far as the scholarship I have read. It's speculated that they either came from northern Mesopotamia or Eastern Turkey, according to Fournet, or the Zagros region on the border of Iraq and Iran (obviously these theories are not mutually exclusive as these regions border the Zagros, as I'm certain you know). As for Hurro-Urartians in central Iran, the Mannaeans seem to have been a mix of Hurrians, Iranians, and possibly Armenians and possibly Kassites. If you're basing all this on -kash names, Mannaean Zikirti corresponded with modern Kesharvarz/Kasharvar.

If proto-Hurro-Urartian was spoken in Kura-Araxes (which, again, could explain some of the apparent linguistic affinities between proto-Hurro-Urartian and proto-NE Caucasian, as well as high percentage of the J2 y-haplogroup in the South Caucasus), a Hurro-Urartian presence south of Lake Urmia seems even more likely as Kura-Araxes spread well into Iran. Perhaps what happened was, as the Kura-Araxes people spread outward toward Anatolia, Mesopotamia, the Levant, and Iran, they began to develop their own regional dialects and customs. These divisions were heightened when invaders (Proto-Anatolians? Gutians?) pushed them further south, east, and west, and cut them off from each other. The ones in northern Syria became Hurrians, the ones in northern Iraq became Urartians, the ones in SE Turkey or NW Iran became Kassites. Just to be clear: I don't think that anybody thinks that the Kassites were Hurrians, but rather that they were related to Hurrians, just like the Urartians.

But yes, you're right, a good analogy for the Kassites could be the Mitanni: a Hurrian people with an Indo-Iranian or Indic ruling class, or maybe even the Mannaeans: a Hurro-Urartian people with contacts to (and possibly populations of) Indo-Europeans (Iranians, maybe Armenians, maybe Indics).

I've never heard that word anjn, but an is a actually a prefix meaning "without." I believe this case also exists in Indo-Iranian languages, but I'm not sure. Regardless, the root of Armenian anjn would be jn. Armenians use jan (soul, dear) but this is commonly classified as an Iranian borrowing.
 
The problem is labiovelars, they didn't exist in the satem languages, for example Satem /g/ couldn't be changed to /b/ in Greek. Of course they exist in the Western Iranian phenologies, like Luri and Kurdish: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_phonology It is actually one of the main reasons that I believe Indo-European originated in this land because almost all IE sounds exist there.

Yep, and this is the reason that a linguist or anthropologist (I can't remember who) proposed making Armenian an international Lingua Franca or language of the UN. This is also a crux of the Armenian Theory. I think that the only sound (besides clicks and things like that) that doesn't exist in Armenian, as far as I know, is th (as in the). I think there used to be a w sound (as in way) but this disappeared in almost all modern dialects. F didn't originally exist in Armenian but it does now.
 

This thread has been viewed 96934 times.

Back
Top