Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "우라르투" in Korean language version.
In 1828, a French scholar, J. St Martin, [...] began to grope towards an explanation by connecting [Urartian cuneiform inscriptions] with the garbled legends preserved by an Armenian chronicler, Moses of Khorene (Moses Khorenatsi), probably of the eighth century A.D., according to whom the region was invaded from Assyria by a great army under its queen Semiramis who built a wondrous fortified city, citadel, and palaces at Van itself beside the lake. [...] It is clear that by the time of Moses of Khorene all other memory of this kingdom [Kingdom of Urartu], once the deadly rival of Assyria itself, had been forgotten and remained so, except for these popular legends.
The story [of the legend of Hayk] retains a few remote memories from tribal times, and reflects the struggles between Urartu-Ararat and Assyro-Babylonia from the ninth to the seventh centuries B.C. The tale had evolved through the ages, and by the time Movses Khorenatsi heard it and put it into writing, it had already acquired a coherent structure and literary style.
The real heirs of the Urartians, however, were neither the Scythians nor Medes but the Armenians.
However, the most easily identifiable ancestors of the later Armenian nation are the Urartians.
Armenian presence in their historical seats should then be sought at some time before c 600 BC; ... Armenian phonology, for instance, appears to have been greatly affected by Urartian, which may suggest a long period of bilingualism.
In 1828, a French scholar, J. St Martin, [...] began to grope towards an explanation by connecting [Urartian cuneiform inscriptions] with the garbled legends preserved by an Armenian chronicler, Moses of Khorene (Moses Khorenatsi), probably of the eighth century A.D., according to whom the region was invaded from Assyria by a great army under its queen Semiramis who built a wondrous fortified city, citadel, and palaces at Van itself beside the lake. [...] It is clear that by the time of Moses of Khorene all other memory of this kingdom [Kingdom of Urartu], once the deadly rival of Assyria itself, had been forgotten and remained so, except for these popular legends.
The story [of the legend of Hayk] retains a few remote memories from tribal times, and reflects the struggles between Urartu-Ararat and Assyro-Babylonia from the ninth to the seventh centuries B.C. The tale had evolved through the ages, and by the time Movses Khorenatsi heard it and put it into writing, it had already acquired a coherent structure and literary style.
However, the most easily identifiable ancestors of the later Armenian nation are the Urartians.
Après citation des passages pertinents, analyse des toponymes et une nouvelle lecture de la Chronique de Nabonide II 16, dont le nom géographique clef doit être lu « Urartu », il reste : Cyrus le Grand a « marché vers Urartu et vaincu son roi ». Urartu n'a donc pas été détruit par les Mèdes à la fin du VIIe s. mais a continué à exister comme entité politique jusqu'au milieu du VIe s. La Chronique de Nabonide (II 16) montre bien que la conquête de Cyrus le Grand mit fin à ce royaume.
To shed light on the maternal genetic history of the region, we analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years and combined this dataset with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians. We also included previously published data of seven neighboring populations (n = 482). Coalescence-based analyses suggest that the population size in this region rapidly increased after the Last Glacial Maximum ca. 18 kya. We find that the lowest genetic distance in this dataset is between modern Armenians and the ancient individuals, as also reflected in both network analyses and discriminant analysis of principal components.
[...]
A total of 19 archaeological sites are represented, covering large parts of Armenia as well as Artsakh (Figure 1), and estimated to be between 300–7800 years old based on contextual dating of artifacts. This time span is accompanied by at least seven well-defined cultural transitions: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Kura-Araxes, Trialeti-Vanadzor 2, Lchashen-Metsamor, Urartian and Armenian Classical/Medieval (Figure 1).
Even for now, however, it seems difficult to deny that the Armenians had contact, at an early date, with a Hurro-Urartian people.
To shed light on the maternal genetic history of the region, we analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years and combined this dataset with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians. We also included previously published data of seven neighboring populations (n = 482). Coalescence-based analyses suggest that the population size in this region rapidly increased after the Last Glacial Maximum ca. 18 kya. We find that the lowest genetic distance in this dataset is between modern Armenians and the ancient individuals, as also reflected in both network analyses and discriminant analysis of principal components.
[...]
A total of 19 archaeological sites are represented, covering large parts of Armenia as well as Artsakh (Figure 1), and estimated to be between 300–7800 years old based on contextual dating of artifacts. This time span is accompanied by at least seven well-defined cultural transitions: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Kura-Araxes, Trialeti-Vanadzor 2, Lchashen-Metsamor, Urartian and Armenian Classical/Medieval (Figure 1).
Even for now, however, it seems difficult to deny that the Armenians had contact, at an early date, with a Hurro-Urartian people.
To shed light on the maternal genetic history of the region, we analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years and combined this dataset with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians. We also included previously published data of seven neighboring populations (n = 482). Coalescence-based analyses suggest that the population size in this region rapidly increased after the Last Glacial Maximum ca. 18 kya. We find that the lowest genetic distance in this dataset is between modern Armenians and the ancient individuals, as also reflected in both network analyses and discriminant analysis of principal components.
[...]
A total of 19 archaeological sites are represented, covering large parts of Armenia as well as Artsakh (Figure 1), and estimated to be between 300–7800 years old based on contextual dating of artifacts. This time span is accompanied by at least seven well-defined cultural transitions: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Kura-Araxes, Trialeti-Vanadzor 2, Lchashen-Metsamor, Urartian and Armenian Classical/Medieval (Figure 1).
To shed light on the maternal genetic history of the region, we analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years and combined this dataset with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians. We also included previously published data of seven neighboring populations (n = 482). Coalescence-based analyses suggest that the population size in this region rapidly increased after the Last Glacial Maximum ca. 18 kya. We find that the lowest genetic distance in this dataset is between modern Armenians and the ancient individuals, as also reflected in both network analyses and discriminant analysis of principal components.
[...]
A total of 19 archaeological sites are represented, covering large parts of Armenia as well as Artsakh (Figure 1), and estimated to be between 300–7800 years old based on contextual dating of artifacts. This time span is accompanied by at least seven well-defined cultural transitions: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Kura-Araxes, Trialeti-Vanadzor 2, Lchashen-Metsamor, Urartian and Armenian Classical/Medieval (Figure 1).
Après citation des passages pertinents, analyse des toponymes et une nouvelle lecture de la Chronique de Nabonide II 16, dont le nom géographique clef doit être lu « Urartu », il reste : Cyrus le Grand a « marché vers Urartu et vaincu son roi ». Urartu n'a donc pas été détruit par les Mèdes à la fin du VIIe s. mais a continué à exister comme entité politique jusqu'au milieu du VIe s. La Chronique de Nabonide (II 16) montre bien que la conquête de Cyrus le Grand mit fin à ce royaume.
In 1828, a French scholar, J. St Martin, [...] began to grope towards an explanation by connecting [Urartian cuneiform inscriptions] with the garbled legends preserved by an Armenian chronicler, Moses of Khorene (Moses Khorenatsi), probably of the eighth century A.D., according to whom the region was invaded from Assyria by a great army under its queen Semiramis who built a wondrous fortified city, citadel, and palaces at Van itself beside the lake. [...] It is clear that by the time of Moses of Khorene all other memory of this kingdom [Kingdom of Urartu], once the deadly rival of Assyria itself, had been forgotten and remained so, except for these popular legends.
The story [of the legend of Hayk] retains a few remote memories from tribal times, and reflects the struggles between Urartu-Ararat and Assyro-Babylonia from the ninth to the seventh centuries B.C. The tale had evolved through the ages, and by the time Movses Khorenatsi heard it and put it into writing, it had already acquired a coherent structure and literary style.
What had for some time attracted the attention of scholars, and had led the Iranianist Saint-Martin of the Académie des Inscription in Paris to send the young Schulz to explore these sites [in Van], was to be found written in chapter 16 of Khorenatsi's work.
Armenian presence in their historical seats should then be sought at some time before c 600 BC; ... Armenian phonology, for instance, appears to have been greatly affected by Urartian, which may suggest a long period of bilingualism.
In 1828, a French scholar, J. St Martin, [...] began to grope towards an explanation by connecting [Urartian cuneiform inscriptions] with the garbled legends preserved by an Armenian chronicler, Moses of Khorene (Moses Khorenatsi), probably of the eighth century A.D., according to whom the region was invaded from Assyria by a great army under its queen Semiramis who built a wondrous fortified city, citadel, and palaces at Van itself beside the lake. [...] It is clear that by the time of Moses of Khorene all other memory of this kingdom [Kingdom of Urartu], once the deadly rival of Assyria itself, had been forgotten and remained so, except for these popular legends.
The story [of the legend of Hayk] retains a few remote memories from tribal times, and reflects the struggles between Urartu-Ararat and Assyro-Babylonia from the ninth to the seventh centuries B.C. The tale had evolved through the ages, and by the time Movses Khorenatsi heard it and put it into writing, it had already acquired a coherent structure and literary style.
What had for some time attracted the attention of scholars, and had led the Iranianist Saint-Martin of the Académie des Inscription in Paris to send the young Schulz to explore these sites [in Van], was to be found written in chapter 16 of Khorenatsi's work.
