From: Rick McCallister
Message: 54146
Date: 2008-02-26
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco____________________________________________________________________________________
> Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister
> <gabaroo6958@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It's definitely an odd situation. I realize they
> once
> > > used the term "Hieroglyphic Hittite" but I
> thought the
> > > term died out long, long ago. The idea that it's
> > > possibly an Iranian among the Urartians makes
> sense
> > > --although the Armenians claim they are the
> heirs to
> > > the Urartians. It's something that does need to
> be
> > > followed up, though.
> >
> >
> > The idea that Schythians lived among the Urartians
> in eastern
> > Kurdistan in the 7th centuty BC is perfectly
> acceptable -- there was
> > plenty of Scythians and Cimmerians throughout the
> Near East during
> > that century. What is not accepted in Harmatta's
> hypothesis is that
> > the Saqqez inscription (Lake Urmia area)
> represents a written
> > document encoding an ancient Scythian language,
> for which there are
> > no other known parallels in the ANE. Prof.
> Alemany's critique I have
> > reproduced in my earlier post is based on the fact
> that no other
> > scholar has taken the hieroglyphic-like symbols
> engraved in that
> > inscriprion as language-encoding signs --
> therefore, how could the
> > inscription have encoded an Iranian language?
> >
> > If Harmatta's hypothesis were true, that would be
> revolutionary:
> > this would be the first written inscription in a
> Scythian language
> > so far discovered west of Central Asia!
> >
>
> Oh! Asir! Vanir! Interesting! (Now all hell breaks
> loose)
>
>
> Torsten
>
>
>