True or False: Urartu is proto-Armenia? - Historum

**Zeno** · May 28th, 2012, 01:44 PM

Urartians didn't speak an Indo European language, Armenians do. Armenians do consider Urartu to be their ancient forebearers. Language isn't everything, after all. What does the forum think?

**okamido** · May 28th, 2012, 01:49 PM

Would that be similar to citizens of modern day Sparta stating that they are descended from those wily Dorians, or me saying that I am Ohlone Indian because I was born in San Francisco?

Yaunâ · May 28th, 2012, 01:58 PM

As much as we consider Pelasgians (pre-Greeks) as our forebearers. Indo-Europeans are a linguistic and not a genetic group after all. Proto-Armenians and proto-Greeks moved southwards/eastwards from the Balkans, neither Urartians or Pelasgians are considered proto-Armenians and proto-Greeks respectively.

**Zeno** · May 28th, 2012, 02:25 PM

So why do Armenians (like to?) believe they stem from Urartu?Apart from the link to a distant past in generally the same region.

**Midas** · May 28th, 2012, 08:51 PM

Urartu are not proto-Armenians as Minoans are not proto-Greeks. However, lets not fool ourselves, modern Armenians (and the Azeris) are genetically very close to the Urartu. When the kingdom of the Urartu fell, the Armenian kingdom was established in less than a century. The idea that the Urartu vanished or annihilated has no basis or evidence. Since DNA entered our lives, we know very well that in those distant times, the invaders in most cases were not enough to erase previous populations.

Armenian is an Indo-European language. Proto-Armenians were living originally in the Balkans along with the proto-Greeks and proto-Phrygians. With their move to Biainili (land of Bia/Urartu) they assimilated both Luwians and Urarteans. This is evident, because just like Greek, Armenian has a huge substratum where Urartean or Urartean like words are to be found.

The point is yes, Armenians have Urartean ancestors, but Urarteans were Urarteans and had nothing to do with Armenian identity(unless this is documented in early Armenian history). I choose false to the fact that proto-Armenians are not Urartu, but some Indo-European Balkanians.

The oposite might have happened as well, that is to say that Urartu assimilated the newcomers and kept their identity as Urartu/Nairi. As long as it was documented, we would say that modern day Urartu have Armenian roots and we would trace a high frequency of E3b haplogroup in their genes.

**Midas** · May 28th, 2012, 09:07 PM

Lets not fool ourselves, in linguistics there are serious discussions of Urartean substratum in Armenian.

http://www.science.org.ge/2-2/Grepin.pdf

New data on the Hurro-Urartean substratum in Armenian

Darth Roach · May 29th, 2012, 03:49 AM

Quote:

When the kingdom of the Urartu fell, the Armenian kingdom was established in less than a century

I was under the impression it was a satrapy, not a kingdom.

**Zeno** · May 29th, 2012, 06:50 AM

Thanks Midas. You're such a blessing to this forum.

I glossed over the first pdf. Haven't read it thoroughly. I asked my Armenian friend about it today and he said - apart from the notion being a little ridiculous, because of the irrelevance of glorious pasts compared to today's situation - that in the Urartean surviving texts they refer to themselves (?) as hayasa, which is awfully similar sounding to the Armenian endonym Hay (Hayastan).

**Midas** · May 29th, 2012, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Roach

I was under the impression it was a satrapy, not a kingdom.

Why do you have such an impression? No they were a Kingdom in form of confederations, with their centre in Van.

**Midas** · May 29th, 2012, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeno

Thanks Midas. You're such a blessing to this forum.

You're welcome Zeno!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeno

I glossed over the first pdf. Haven't read it thoroughly. I asked my Armenian friend about it today and he said - apart from the notion being a little ridiculous, because of the irrelevance of glorious pasts compared to today's situation - that in the Urartean surviving texts they refer to themselves (?) as hayasa, which is awfully similar sounding to the Armenian endonym Hay (Hayastan).

Yes, there's a suspicion about that. So far though we can only speak safe about 6th century B.C and after. Generally, I do believe that Armenians have ancestry from the Urartu, it is just that Urartu were not proto-Armenians, but pre-Armenians who were incorporated in the Armenian nation. That is the only reason why my answer was no to the original question.