Talk:Hayasa-Azzi

message: Dbachmann deleted some sourced info without any explanations. I searched for Hayasa's connection to the formation of Armenian people and added some text in a more neutral form than the Great Soviet Encyclopedia itself uses. Andranikpasha (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: While you may disagree with the interpretation of Armenian historians, you have no rights to remove it from the articles. Instead, if there is criticism of their opinion, bring it here. `'Míkka>t 16:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is precisely the point: The Armenian nation did not EXIST for it to have been around, what other marker of a nation is there but a language? One cannot decide to list among one's progenitors all those who lived on the same land, and certainly not those who preceeded them by centuries. We cannot provide evidence that there was any genetic exchange between the modern Armenians and anyone else, and frankly very little would suffice to claim the legacy of a civilisation extinct for centuries.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZanLJackson (talk • contribs) 15:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Armenian historians

message: I reverted an undiscussed content vandalism by Dab. Andranikpasha (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: read Wikipedia:Vandalism before you call people vandals. a cleanup of article layout isn't even a "content edit", let alone "vandalism". --dab (𒁳) 08:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism by Dab 

message: It is apparently true that this equation is found in the 1962 Great Soviet Encyclopedia. It is also clearly without merit, and hopefully would not appear in any encyclopedia, Soviet or not, pubished today. We can mention this as "interestng trivia", but it would probably be more at home in the Name of Armenia article.. --dab (𒁳) 18:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: lets not spend our time on your OR on modern encyclopedias read what the academic people wrote and stop POV-pushing:
http://books.google.com/books?q=hayasa+armenia&btnG=Search+Books Andranikpasha (talk) 17:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hayasa-Hayk'

message: Nevertheless, most  historians find it sound to theorize that after the Phrygian invasion of Hittites, Armeno-Phrygians would have settled in Hayasa-Azzi, and merged with the local people, who were possibly already spread within the western regions of Urartu.The Kingdom of Armenia, A History by Mack Chahin, 1987 (revised 2001), p.180-182.  After the fall of the latter, and the rise of the Kingdom of Armenia under the Artaxiad dynasty, Hayasan nobility (given they were truly Armenian) would have assumed control of the region and the people would have adopted their language to complete the amalgamation of proto-Armenians, giving birth to the nation of Armenia as we know it today.The Kingdom of Armenia, A History by Mack Chahin, 1987 (revised 2001), p.197. The Peoples of Ararat by Armen Asher & Teryl Minasian Asher, 2009, p.283-292. 
This is ALL irrelevant. There is no evidence linking the Armenians with Hayasa-Azzi, and despite the widespread treatment of Armenian history articles as a seamless continuation of the Kingdom of Urartu, there is no evidence to suggest this is the case either. Any conjecture made as to the possibility of population homogenisation of Armenians with Urartu, Phrygia or whoever else is invoked next is both redundant and anachronistic since Armenians (of the Hayk variety) are not known to exist as yet.  There is no justification for using Wikipedia articles as a medium for self-glorification via tenuous (to put it lightly) historical associations. And honestly, this sort of historical revisionism might be expected from a comparatively younger nation, but surely Armenia is confident in its nationhood by now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZanLJackson (talk • contribs) 15:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted irrelevant and fanciful conjecture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Hayasa-Azzi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://slovari.yandex.ru/dict/bse/article/00004/37200.htm?text=%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B0
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is a decent article - but since it has to do with Armenians - who have some unfriendly neighbors - I already knew what the comments would be like and what the angry schoolboy wing of Russian and Turkish nationalism might be saying.  
The Caucasus are their favorite targets for hate speech and attempts to negate, distort, or cause doubt in casual readers ... those are polite.  When you really get them going they would (I think) shock Adolf Hitler.  
Since both empires have histories of wiping out indigenous cultures - and unlike Americans they aren't taught to feel they were wrong for doing that - and because they feel their cultural supremacy has been covered up some huge conspiracy - they'll say things like they're saying here.  They come from countries where censorship and lies are considered means to an end, and the internet has made it easy for them to claim to be informed, when the truth is they haven't done their homework.
Hayasa-Azzi is relevant to the history of Armenia for the same reasons the Xionghu are relevant to the Huns.  Bronze Age record keeping was not all it could be, and the documents surrounding the fall of the Hittites to a multi-ethnic coalition likely related to Armenians, Circassians, Georgians, and a pre-Slavic Balkan tribe ... from around the time of the Trojan War and described by the Hittites as it happened ... and using the actual ethnic names these people still use ... and right by where they still live ... 
Well it's not a fringe theory to relate Hayasa to Armenia.  Whether or not it's the source of the name "Hayastan" and whether they spoke Armenian is not provable but that Armenian was spoken in Urarat ... even if not by the ruling class ... is pretty certain.  It's possible that the Cimmerians brought in the IE language or maybe the Phrygians.  It's possible only the ruling class spoke Urartian and Armenian was spoken there all along.  
The claim that "Hayasa" was a Semitic name is as baseless as claiming the Hyksos were Armenian or the Mushki were from Moscow.  "Hayasa" (which may have been pronounced with a Ch or Kh in Hittite) deserves to mentioned to any history of Armenia.  "Azzi" means the Anatolian Amazons (as in "Amazzi" or "women of Azzi") all we can say is: this people presumably included females.  ("Amazona" means women of the forest of moon in Circassian and matches long vowels of the original Greek).  As for the Kashka their name means "men" in Georgian and their later service as mercenaries in Egypt would give sense to the claim they came from Egypt ... though some of them also claimed to be from Thessaly.  I'd say they probably came from somewhere near Georgia.
Claims that Armenia (the nation) is unattested (and therefore the "did not exist") before the Persians named it are neither true nor do they mean anything.  Urarat and Armenia are both exonyms.  The dates of their inscription aren't the dates they appeared out of thin air.  
Claims that Armenian script is unattested before the 408 AD alphabet have to ignore claims from the beginning of the millennium that Armenians were one of the few nations to have their own script.  Literacy was probably higher than average and the Armenians very early on were admired for their culture, their business skills, their diplomacy, their architecture, and their courage in battle.  For the Persians they were a model minority and their literature shows how well-informed they were.  We'd know much less about history without them.
The Urartian inscriptions - on the other hand - are frankly rather paltry in vocabulary and content.  They are all royal inscriptions done in degenerate Hurrian or Luwian cuneiform.  It's not surprising their empire was almost completely forgotten until recently.  There are bilinguals in Assyrian which are most interesting (if you like that maniacal Assyrian style).  A few roots resemble the NE Caucasian languages but overall they don't - culturally or in language.
Genetically Armenians have been about the same since 1200 BC - the same time Mitanni fell, and Hayasa-Azzi and the Mushki and Kashka destroyed the Hittites ... and when the Assyrians began campaigning north.  Armenian at that point would've lacked the layers of Iranian loan words but as a final bit of evidence note how much of Urartian history was received into Armenian folklore - handed down for millennia after the Hittite and Urartian languages were forgotten. 2601:1C2:F00:AACF:5849:7571:AB2C:60B5 (talk) 07:57, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Wall of text; read the conclusion first. "Genetically Armenians have been about the same since 1200 BC" gave me enough reason to dismiss the entire thing immediately. Kentronhayastan (talk) 06:23, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: OP wa clearly mentioning this study from a peer reviewed scientific journal:
https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2015206 Preservedmoose (talk) 03:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hayasa and Armenia 

message: I copied some of the text from this article into the Tudhaliya III article. It was quite relevant. Y-barton (talk) 17:41, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some text copied 

message: I am removing the reference to Mallory and Adams because p. 205 of their book (which is what's referenced) talks about the "vocabulary of youth," "the concept of family or household," and "two words associated with friendship." I took the time to look it up because I was sure Mallory and Adams wouldn't have been foolish enough to posit a connexion with PIE *h2ayos (which can NEVER yield Armenian h- in Anlaut...). Please please stop doing stuff like this whoever does this. This is effectively vandalism and sullying the name of (relatively) good linguists. I will check the other reference because I'd be shocked if it indeed had anything to do with what's written in that poorly thought out section that seems to be written by someone without a clue as to how historical and reconstructive linguistics work.
Okay, so apparently Martirosyan (2009:383-5 s.v. Hay) subscribes to this theory, so maybe that should be added as a reference instead of Mallory and Adams, but he also states: 
"The theory on the relation betweeň Hay-k‘ and Hai̯aša- (N. Martirosyan 1972: 164-166 < 1921-22; Roth 1927: 743; Jahukyan 1961: 386-389, see also references above; for a comprehensive bibliographical survey, see A. Petrosyan 2006: 118-119) has been met with hypercriticism. I admit that there is no physical linguistic evidence in favour of the presence of an Armenian population of Hai̯ aša-, but there is no reason to exclude it either, since nothing from the language(s) of Hai̯ aša- has come down to us apart from some onomastic and toponymic evidence..." (Martirosyan loc.cit.; emphasis my own)
Martirosyan also believes that PIE *h2/3V > Arm h- / #_, but it must be stated that this is a minority view. See Martirosyan (ibid pp. 713-4 §2.1.16.2 with references).
Vindafarna (talk) 18:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing reference to Mallory and Adams text in the Hayasa and Armenians section because it doesn't exist