Mesopotamia’s Civilization Originated in Armenia - August, 2010

Mesopotamia’s Civilization Originated in Armenia


Unique discoveries revealed as a result of excavations at Shengavit (4000-3000 B.C.) confirm that Armenia is the motherland of metallurgy, jeweler’s art, wine-making and horse breeding. A group of archaeologists studying the ancient city concluded that 4000-3000 B.C. Armenia was a highly developed state with exclusive culture. The excavations are carried out by an Armenian-American archaeological expedition. Director of the Scientific and Research Institute of Historical and Cultural Heritage of the RA Ministry of Culture Simonyan said that for example, the glass beads discovered at the territory of Shengavit are of a higher quality than the Egypt samples.

“Meanwhile, the amount of revealed horse bones at the territory has exceeded all expectations of the researchers. With respect to this, German paleozoologist Hans Peter Wertman stated that he has not observed such a quantity of horses in the entire Ancient East. A great number of stone tools have been found in workrooms. While the discovered evidences of copper production prove that a systematized iron production was established in Armenia,” said Simonyan, adding that many surprises are still awaiting us.

For his part, Mitchell S. Rothman, a Professor of Anthropology and Archaeology and founder of the Anthropology Department at Widener University in Chester, Pennsylvania, said that all the discoveries prove that around 6,000 years ago the culture of Shengavit has spread over the ancient world. “All that was known in Mesopotamia came from Armenia. Armenia is the absent fragment in the entire mosaics of the ancient world’s civilizations construction. Shengavit has supplemented the lacking chains, that we had been facing while studying the ancient culture of Mesopotamia,” concluded Rothman.


Միջագետքի քաղաքակրթությունն իր սկիզբն առնում է Հայաստանից
grave
Շենգավիթի պեղումների ժամանակ հայտնաբերված եզակի գտածոները հաստատում են, որ Հայաստանը մետաղագործության, ոսկերչության, գինեգործության ու ձիաբուծության հայրենիքն է: Ամեն ինչ ապացուցում է, որ մ.թ.ա 4-3 հազար տարի առաջ Հայաստանը զարգացած պետություն է եղել, բացառիկ մշակույթի կրող: Նման եզրակացության է հանգել այդ հինավուրց բնակատեղին ուսումնասիրող հնագետների խումբը: Պեղումներն անց է կացնում հայ-ամերիկյան հնագիտական գիտարշավը:

«Օրինակ, Շենգավիթի տարածքում հայտնաբերված ապակյա ուլունքներն իրենց որակով գերազանցում են Եգիտոսում հայտնաբերվածները: Իսկ այդ տարածքում հայտնաբերված ձիերի ոսկորների քանակը գերազանցել է հետազոտողների բոլոր ակնկալիքները: Այդ առնչությամբ, գերմանացի հնեակենդանաբան Հանս Պիտեր Ուերթմանը հայտարարել է, որ այդ քանակությամբ ձիերի ոսկորներ նա չի տեսել ողջ Հին Արևելքում: Արհեստանոցներում հայտնաբերվել են մեծ քանակությամբ քարե գործիքներ: Իսկ պղնձագործության հետքերը թույլ են տալիս դատել այն մասին, որ Հայաստանում կանոնավոր բրոնզի արտադրություն կար»,- հուլիսի 2-ին տեղի ունեցած մամլո ասուլիսում հայտարարել է ՀՀ մշակույթի նախարարությանն առընթեր պատմամշակութային ժառանգության գիտահետազոտական կենտրոնի տնօրեն, Հակոբ Սիմոնյանը: «Դա միայն սկիզբն է: Մեզ դեռևս բազում անակնկալներ են սպասում»,-հավելել է նա:

Իր հերթին մարդաբանության բաժնի ղեկավար, Փենսիլվանիայի համալսարանի դասախոս Միշել Ռոտմանը հայտարարեց, որ ամեն ինչ վկայում է այն մասին, որ մոտավորապես մ.թ.ա 3-րդ հազարամյակում Շենգավիթի մշակույթը տարածվեց հին աշխարհով մեկ: «Այն ամենն, ինչ կարողանում էին անել Միջագետքում, դուրս է եկել Հայաստանից: Հայաստանն է հին աշխարհի քաղաքակրթությունների խճանկարի բացակայող տարրը: Շենգավիթը լրացրեց այն բոլոր թերի օղակները, որոնց մենք բախվում ենք Միջագետքի հին մշակույթն ուսումնասիրելիս»,-հավելել է Ռոտմանը:

Աղբյուր: http://www.panarmenian.net/arm/society/news/50844

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Before others are able and willing to read and understand history of Armenia, Armenians themselves have to be educated on their own history and how far they go back. A given Armenian history book, including history books throughout the world, do not in specific shape or form, elaborate on how ancient Armenian heritage is. Armenians have to break the restriction of Christianity, because its Christianity itself that sets the limits on Armenian history. Armenians have to relieve themselves from ignorance that Christianity creates, and revert back to the god of AR. As far as Armenians are concerned, their history goes back as far as 9000 BC, which predates Greek and Egyptian history, and in turn, nullifies their ancient stance. Thus, Armenians need to understand that they are much older than they think. Therefore, the world has to wait until the Armenians learn about themselves first.

Kafir Harby said...

Hello
I love your blog !!
By the way, can somebody TRANSLATE the video about the Kavkaz Plan into ENGLISH? this message needs to be spread in the West !!
thanks,
Kafir Harby

Anonymous said...

The Arabian historians deserving of the name...Ibn Khaldun, for example...distinguish three successive populations in the peninsula. They divide these primitive, secondary and tertiary Arabs into three divisions called Ariba, Motareba, and Mostareba...The Ariba were the first and most ancient inhabitants of Arabia. They consisted of two great nations, the Adites(Kushites), sprung from Ham, and the Amalika of the race of Aram, descendants of Shem...”

Armenians started out building civilization in the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa. We are the Amalekites. Christianity has played an important role in our history. We are Oriental Orthodox, the oldest church in the world along with Ethiopians and Oriental Orthodoxy rejects certain councils that other western churches abide by. To be clear, Armenians and Ethiopians are the oldest civilizations on earth but we werent always in the Caucus region! We are NOT whites! History books refer to us as Afro/Arabs. I believe the lighter skin in some armenians is a result of mixing with other races in the northern regions over time. However certain Armenians STILL RETAIN the old afro/arab look. Modern Armenians have forgotten much of their culture.

Arevordi said...

Yes, Armenians are amongst the world's oldest civilizations, if not - the - oldest. Yes, the Armenian national church and the Ethiopian national church are in communion. However, the rest of your claims are wild theories without any factual basis.

Regarding Armenian skin tones: It's actually the other way around.

Armenians are natives of Historic Armenia/Armenian-Highlands Anatolia/Asia Minor. Genetically, Armenians are White. Culturally, Armenians are Aryans who have also assimilated Caucasus cultures. Having said that, Armenians have also absorbed some cultural attributes and psychical traits from neighboring peoples to Armenia's south.

Anonymous said...

SORRY FOR THE LONG QUOTES BUT TO GET THE POINT ACROSS I HAVE TO POST THEM. my claims however are not wild speculation etc they are backed up by facts. Here are just a small portion of the evidence I have

In an article about the Armenian Genocide at the hands of Ottoman-Donmeh Jews, the Hatzvi Newspaper apathetically states, “’A slight grimace on their lips, a short heartfelt sigh, and nothing more. The Armenians are not Jews, and according to folk tradition the Armenians are nothing more than Amaleks! Amaleks? We would give them help? To whom? To Amaleks? Heaven forbid!’Hatzvi Newspaper May 1909-[Quoted in English translation in Y. Auron, Zionism and the Armenian Genocide: The Banality of Indifference, Transaction Publishers, London, (2002), p. 126.]


“Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a ‘Black’ cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans.”

(Passarino et al. 1998)


“A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations.”

(Toomas Kivisild et al.) Human Biology 75.2 (2003) 293-300


"The Arabian historians deserving of the name...Ibn Khaldun, for example...distinguish three successive populations in the peninsula. They divide these primitive, secondary and tertiary Arabs into three divisions called Ariba, Motareba, and Mostareba...The Ariba were the first and most ancient inhabitants of Arabia. They consisted of two great nations, the Adites(Kushites), sprung from Ham, and the Amalika of the race of Aram, descendants of Shem...”

Medes and Persians, Phoenicians, and Arabians by François Lenormant, Elisabeth Chevallier

Arevordi said...

Your entire argument/claim is merely based on a vague biblical term used by Jews. Incidentally, Jews applied the term Amalek to many nations, not just Armenians.

Armenians are the natives/aboriginals of the Armenian Highlands/Asia Minor/Anatolia. The Armenian Highlands is the cradle of human civilization. Many thousands of years ago Proto-Armenians (i.e. tribes that lived within the Armenian Highlands in prehistoric times) brought the civilization of the plateau to the rest of the world.

Throughout the years various genetic studies have been performed on Armenians. All of these tests/studies reveal that Armenians are Caucasians.

I have nothing against Ethiopians. In fact, they may be the only normal nationality in Africa. And I wouldn't be surprised if their nation was also originated my proto-Armenians of the ancient world.

Let's please end this conversation.

Anonymous said...

My entire argument isnt based on a jewish definition. if you took the time to actually read what i wrote i said ""The Arabian historians deserving of the name...Ibn Khaldun, for example..." and i even cited a DNA study from the American Journal of Human Genetics, i have even more but i didnt want to over load.And you as a website moderator/creator should welcome any discussion about anything to do with Armenians as long as its respectful otherwise whats the point of having a comment section?

And you are correct about them coming from us because as the lineage goes, Amalek(armenians) was the father of Ad(Kushites/ethiopians).But as far as all of human civilization that would have to come from Africa. It is proven that the entire human race comes from the Khoi-san and the Pygmies

"Stylianos Zaoutzes was a high Byzantine official of Armenian origin...Zaoutzes was known among Byzantines as "the Ethiopian"

Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.

(Scacchi et al. 2003)

Anonymous said...

the amalekites are the main enemy of all jews of all time, they cant see the jewish messiah without killing all amalekites so how does that become a "vague biblical term"? It is a central theme of their religion. and jews are not the only people that identified the Armenians as amalekites. Byzantines and Arabs also called us Amalekites.

Arevordi said...

I certainly welcome discussion if it's done in a respectful and serious manner. But by calling Armenians "Afro/Arabs" please don't expect me to take you too seriously.

But, if you still want to start a serious discussion on the topic of Armenian genetics, please begin referencing serious information/data regarding Armenian phenotype. There is a lot in existence, but I am not going to waste my time finding them. You made the unorthodox claim, you back it up. The fragments you posted from those two genetic studies does not prove anything. If anything, it proves that Norwegians are also Afros.

Incidentally, I don't subscribe to the out-of-Africa theory. As with all studies, genetic studies are notorious for being manipulated and/or misinterpreted. More often than not, look at the funding source and you will find the motivation behind it all.

We don't yet know much about human origins. The out-of-Africa theory is a modern Globalist construct used for the most part to destroy European nationalism and to undermine western civilization. The long-term intent is to turn the entire human race into an easily manageable hybrid.

Regarding Amalek, I agree with you at face-value. I more-or-less know what the term has meant to Jews. I also agree that some orthodox/religious Jews continue to look at Armenians as Amalek. But not knowing the actual genesis of the term within Jewish historiography (in other words, how the term took root in Hebrew society), its simply foolish to base your idea of Armenians merely on who or what the Jews claim Amaleks were.

Frankly, I'm tired of people using biblical references to prove such points.

Moreover, it's a bit far-fetch to simply assume that the governmental apparatus of Zionist state bases national policy purely on biblical tales. I wouldn't be surprised if a vast majority of Jews today haven't even heard the name Amalek.

Besides which, it is well known that Armenians are decedents of Japeth, not Shem. Doesn't that then blow your Amalek theory out of the water?

By the way, some nations called Germans - Huns. Are Germans Huns? Could all this be cultural/societal?

Simply put, you are placing too much emphasis on Amalek.

Anyway, stop trying to pass-off Armenians as Afro/Arabs. It makes you look either suspicious or stupid. There is plenty of research information about the racial makeup/phenotype of Armenians. Please look it up.

Armenians are Caucasians with some Semitic and Central Asian admixtures. Culturally, ancient Armenians were Aryans and they had also adopted influences coming from the Caucasus. Armenians are the aboriginals of the Armenian Highlands of Asia Minor.

The region in question is the cradle of human civilization. Many of Europe's most ancient civilizations as well as Persian and Indian civilizations origination within the Armenian Highlands. Moreover, there is strong evidence that even ancient Hebrews were decedents of the region.

PS: I wouldn't be surprised if Ethiopians were discovered to be one of the lost tribes of Armenians. Nevertheless, Armenians had close contacts with Ethiopia at least as far back as two thousand years ago...

Anonymous said...

you wanted serious references so here they are.

If the Amalekites ruled in Southern Arabia and Northern Africa then it is completely logical to call them Afro-Arabs(Afro meaning from Africa and Arab meaning...well..arab)You have put up a wall in your head arent really reading what im saying. You claim im putting too much emphasis on Amalek but that doesnt make any sense. If this tribe actually existed why wouldnt I use the name? How have all other cultures been named? Through some sort of ancient text. We have to use ancient tribe names that we left behind to piece together our past. Modern day Palestine, for example, comes from Philistine, a name in the bible so why would you accept one and not the other? Also, Noahs ark is said to have landed on Ararat. Where do you think this ark came from and who do you think the passengers were? The south maybe?

If the Amalekites were a tribe only known to jews then other cultures would not mention it, it would only be seen in the bible. However even non-chrstians and non-jews still have the same story. The arabs have their own legends of the tribe:

“The traditions of the Arabians regarding this race are confused and conflicting, yet certainly are not to be summarily rejected as destitute of any claim to historic credibility ; and with all their entanglement they speak strongly for the ancient and. far-extended power of the people in question, and also more doubtfully for their Shemitic affinities. In these traditions, Amlak or Amlik, the father of the Amalekites, is represented sometimes as the son of Laud (i. e., Lud), the son of Shem ; sometimes as the son of Aram, the son of Laud ; while sometimes also he is spoken of as a son of Ham. They belong, with the Adites, Thamudites, and others, to the primitive races of Arabia. They are said to have been expelled from Babylonia by the Assyrian conquerors, and driven westward. into Arabia and Syria, to have built and reigned in Aleppo, to haveconquered and for some centuries retained possession of Egypt, and to be the ancestors of the Berbers in North Africa (see Abulfeda, Hist. Ante-Isl., pp. 16, 178 ; Macoudi, op. cit., vol. iii., p. 106 ; C. dePerceval, Mist. des Arabes, vol. i., p. 13) ; Knobel, Volkertafel, p. 198 ; • Movers, Phoitizier, 2ter Th., Bd. ii., p. 422).”

Anonymous said...

"Sir Richard F. Burton, a British explorer who gained notoriety in the 19th century revealed this fact in his book Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah and Mecca, “A tribe called Aulad Sam bin Nuh (the children of Shem), or Amalikah and Amalik, from their ancestor Amlak bin Arfakhshad bin Sam bin Nuh, was inspired with a knowledge of the Arabic tongue: it settled at Al Madinah [Medina], and was the first to cultivate the ground and to plant palm trees. In course of time these people extended over the whole tract between the seas of Al-Hijaz (the Gulf of Aqbah) and Al-Oman, (North-Western part of the Indian Ocean), and they became the progenitors of the Jababirah (tyrants or "giants") of Syria, as well as the farinah(pharaohs) of Egypt....The last king of the Amalik, "Arkam bin al-Arkam," was, according to most authors, slain by an army of the children of Israel sent by Moses after the Exodus, with orders thoroughly to purge Meccah and al-Madinah of their Infidel inhabitants."(Vol. I, p. 343)

The Amalekites have also been called Meluhha peoples and the Hyksos, also Amu. So having established the fact that there ARE other references to Amalek other than jewish sources, it is safe to say that there was a tribe that existed in that region and its not just biblical tales.

"When in late 15th century R. Obadiah of Bertinoro,a native of Umbria who emigrated to Jerusalem,described the city's [Christian] sects in a letter to his father, he listed "the Latins, Greeks, Jacobites, Amalekites,Abyssinians(Ethiopians)."-Reckless Rites by Elliot Horowitz

As you probably already know, the old city of Jerusalem still has an Armenian quarter and has had one for very long and in the description above there is no "Armenian" listed, only "Amalekites".

Anonymous said...

The Byzantine Empire was not a Jewish Empire, it was Chrstian and Armenians were also called Amalek there too.


The book Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints' Lives in English Translation By Alice-Mary Talbot speaks about Byzantine Emperor Leo V the Armenian who ruled from 813 AD to 820 AD until his assassination by one of his top generals, Michael the Amorian. When describing Emperor Leo the book claims, “He is called Amalekite, meaning Arab, because of his apparent approval of Islamic prohibition of the depiction of sacred images.”

“Armenia is also sometimes called Amalek in some sources, and Jews often referred to Armenians as Amalekites. This is the Byzantine term for the Armenians. It was adopted by the Jews from the Josippon chronicle (tenth century, ch. 64). According to Josippon, Amalek was conquered by Benjaminite noblemen under Saul (ibid., 26), and Benjaminites are already assumed to be the founders of Armenian Jewry in the time of the Judges (Judg. 19–21). Benjaminite origins are claimed by sectarian Kurds. The idea that Khazaria was originally Amalek helped to support the assumption that the Khazar Jews were descended from Simeon (I Chron. 4:42–43; Eldad ha-Dani, ed. by A. Epstein (1891), 52; cf. Ḥisdai ibn Shaprut, Iggeret)"

The book the Curse of Ham:Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam also describes how Stylianos Zaoutzes was written about in an ancient Byzantine writing as an "Ethiopian" and called him "Kushi" meaning dark skinned. Some claim that the word comes from the Kushite empire which preceded Ethiopian Civilization.

Just because Armenians are known to some as coming from Japheth doesnt mean its true. There are just as many that claim we descend from Shem or Ham. And why is there the constant connection between Armenians and Ethiopians?

Norwegians cant be considered the same because 1.they arent oriental orthodox and 2. they dont have a rich history of being associated in the region of Ethiopia or the middle east 3. they havent been historically linked to a tribe which is said to have originated with the Ethiopians. Their DNA must have mixed through interbreeding.
You claim i dont know how the use of Amalek came to be in Jewish history but i in fact do. The amalekites attacked the Israelites as they were leaving Egypt and killed many weak stragglers. Jehovah then commanded the Israelites to engage in a genocide and destroy every amalekite. Incidentally the Ottoman Turks who were in charge were all Donmeh Crypto Jews based out of Salonika, Greece.

Anonymous said...

Im not saying all Jews know about Amalek, only the very well read ones that are strong adherents to the religion. And it is a central theme in the relgion, they cannot be delivered to the Jewish Messiah and have Palestine until all Amalekites are dead. There is even a prayer its called the Kaddish in the book Sefer Ha-Pardes by Jedaiah ben Abraham Bedersi.

Im not saying that present day Armenians are the exact Amalekites of the past, we are the main descendants and we for sure mixed with Aryans, Persians, Turks and Arabs but we started off as a dark race in the beginning. Aryans are also said to be albino Indians from India, one of the reasons Hitler may have been using a Hindu Swastika on his quest for the Aryans.

And "many of Europe's most ancient civilizations" dont even come close to the age of other african and arab cities which go even farther back.

As far as genetics goes...your personal paranoia of skewed genetics results due to a bias of the scientists isnt a very valid or convincing argument against the studies. Here are some more studies however that prove my point:

“Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a ‘Black’ cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans.”

(Passarino et al. 1998)

Anonymous said...

“On the basis of historical, linguistic, and genetic data, it has been suggested that the Ethiopian population has been strongly affected by Caucasoid migrations since Neolithic times. On the basis of autosomal polymorphic loci, it has been estimated that 60% of the Ethiopian gene pool has an African origin, whereas ~40% is of Caucasoid derivation…. Our Ethiopian sample also lacks the sY81-G allele, which was associated with 86% and 69% of Senegalese and mixed-African YAP+ chromosomes, respectively. This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited … Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females.*“

(Poloni et al. 1997)


Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0-L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, compared with a minor share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the introduction of maternal lineages into the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations.

(Toomas Kivisild et al.) Human Biology 75.2 (2003) 293-300

Anonymous said...

“Non sub-Saharan African samples are all grouped together…with…the Ethiopian Amharic sample [on the Y-chromosome]. Ethiopians are not statistically differentiated from the Egyptian and Tunisian samples, in agreement with their linguistic affiliation with the Afro-Asiatic family.”

The occurrence of E*5 212 and E*5 204 alleles in two populations of the Mediterranean basin (Turkey and Italy) but not in West Africans can be explained by taking into account that the Ethiopian gene pool was estimated to be >40% of Caucasoid derivation (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994). In addition, more recent phylogenetic analysis based on classical protein polymorphism (Tartaglia et al. 1996) and Y-chromosome sequence variation (Underhill et al. 2000) showed that Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.

(Scacchi et al. 2003)

Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages. This finding, consistent with classic genetic-marker studies (Cavalli-Sforza 1997) and previous mtDNA results, is also in agreement with a similarly high proportion of western Asian Y chromosomes in Ethiopians (Passarino et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2002), which supports the view (Richards et al. 2003) that the observed admixture between sub-Saharan African and, most probably, western Asian ancestors of the Ethiopian populations applies to their gene pool in general.

(Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)

Anonymous said...

East African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians [5]. The existence of such intermediate groups should not, however, overshadow the fact that the greatest genetic structure that exists in the human population occurs at the racial level.

Most recently, Wilson et al. [2] studied 354 individuals from 8 populations deriving from Africa (Bantus, Afro-Caribbeans and Ethiopians), Europe/Mideast (Norwegians, Ashkenazi Jews and Armenians), Asia (Chinese) and Pacific Islands (Papua New Guineans). Their study was based on cluster analysis using 39 microsatellite loci. Consistent with previous studies, they obtained evidence of four clusters representing the major continental(racial) divisions described above as African, Caucasian, Asian, and Pacific Islander. The one population in their analysis that was seemingly not clearly classified on continental grounds was the Ethiopians, who clustered more into the Caucasian group. But it is known that African populations with close contact with Middle East populations, including Ethiopians and North Africans, have had significant admixture from Middle Eastern (Caucasian) groups, and are thus more closely related to Caucasians [14].

Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease
Neil Risch,1,2 Esteban Burchard,3 Elad Ziv,3 and Hua Tang4


And this isnt even all the evidence of historical associations with Ethiopians and other cultures calling us Amalekites.

Arevordi said...

Again, you are making the wild assumption that Armenians have originated from the biblical "Amalekites. Again, you do not know the circumstances under which the term came to be applied to Armenians by Jews. Again, you fail to understand that the term Amalek was used by Jews to describe Armenians only around the middle ages. Again, you fail to understand that the term simply means - enemy - for observant Jews. If I'm not mistaken, Germans and Canaanites, as well as Khazars have been known as Amalekites by Jews. What's more, Byzantium (aka Eastern Roman Empire) had a very substantial Jewish population. Jews probably outnumbered Armenians in the empire by a wide margin. Therefore, it shouldn't surprise you if some of their crap penetrated Byzantine society. Finally, there is a lot of Caucasian/white genetic strains found throughout Africa and Arabia. Caucasians have been the most prolific race on earth. It's utterly silly (bordering on stupid) to take Middle Eastern looking Armenians and a vague term Jews have labeled Armenians and simply theorize that Armenians are Africans. I suggest you stop your Africa fetish and begin studying genetic tests performed on Armenians. Armenians are Caucasians. In language you may appreciate more, Armenians are the decedents of Japeth. Let's please end this discussion.

Anonymous said...

Even if the term was more applied in the middle ages, does that make it wrong? Why would we have this large association with Ethiopians if we didnt have common origins. In other words, if this Amalek theory was the ONLY thing I was using to make this distinction i would understand but we share religions, genetic and even alphabetical similarities. Have you ever seen the Ge'ez alphabet? Or the Amharic? Please look it up and notice the complete similarity to Armenian script. They look like they came from the same origin. We have been trusted in their empire with being kings and queens emissaries and were the only ones allowed in the country during times of isolationist policies. European people literally had to dress up like Armenians to be able to get into Ethiopia. Go look at Ethiopian script if you have time my friend. I like discussion about my culture :)

Anonymous said...

Also, you claim that Armenians are Caucasians. Im not denying this. But as an adherent to the out of Africa theory, so called "caucusoid features originated in Africa. But if you want to make the distinction then check out these quotes from Ethiopian emperors claiming they are Caucasian, which fits into what I'm saying!

"I am not a Negro at all; I am a Caucasian' the Emperor Menelik told the West Indian pan-Africanist Benito Sylvian who had come to Addis Ababa to solicit the Emperor's leadership in a society for the 'Amelioration of the Negro race.' Haile Sellassie confirmed that view in a declaration to Chief H. O. Davis, a well known Nigerian nationalist, stating that the Ethiopians did not regard themselves as Africans, but as 'a mixed Hamito-Semitic people"
See John H. Spencer, Ethiopia at Bay (1984), p. 306.

"When Haile Selasie, the emperor of Ethiopia, was interviewed by the Nigerian
Daily times about Ethiopian racial identity in the 1930s, he said, "That
Ethiopians were not, and did not regard themselves as negros [sic], as they
were a Hamito-Semitic people"

Fighting Against the Injustice of the State and Globalization By Asafa Jalata, p.96

Armenians and Ethiopians are both Caucasians. Add the insanely close history we both have, and the fact that other cultures have linked us together and it would be crazy not to think something of this.

Anonymous said...

How mature of you to end the conversation on that note. you must be very sophisticated. By the way, wtf is an Anglophile armenian and what does that have to do with our history? You have this desire to sanitize anything african out of our culture, perhaps any culture on earth and instead replace it with a "clean" european lineage. youre living in a dream

swingdancer said...

BS... If you believe the bible.. The Amalekites were ALL killed except the leader who was captured and then later smitten with the sword!

Armenians are NOT the Amalekites!

Avram Cohen said...

To the poster saying Armenians are Amalekites your postings are BS, sorry.. That is propaganda by the Jews and also they considered many other peoples Amalekites, the Nazis, Palestine, Turks and many more! On another note I have read that the Zionist Islamic Jews of Turkey at the time of the Armenians massacres who were the young Turks also held that belief and that is one of the reasons they had no problem butchering 2 million Christian people!

Anonymous said...

Can we please cut the anti semtic bull Crap , stop blaming the jews . for the Armenian Genocide . Armeians are not Amalakites . Amalakeites referd by Rabis are those who want to destroy the Jews and Jewish race. if Armenian were Amalakeites , then we would not have devout jews Around the world helping the Armenian Cause to name a few, Raphael lemkin , professor Tatz , Yair Auron .. Get over this hatred of the jews because our Genocide is not being recognised by their Government , if we want recognition we can have it tomorrow we are just to proud to help each other . Mek hayastan Ankakh Hayastan .