Only One Human Language and the Scythians
Our research on Only One Human Language (see my three volumes on this topic Amazon.com) has been based upon analysis of four major languages and groups of languages: Indo-European, Burushaski (a ‘Sino-Caucasian’ language), Japanese, and some Australian aboriginal language. But the result, i.e. 214 syllables divided into eleven categories (of subject-object relations) perhaps neglected a significant early language, namely Scythian. Some Scythian, i.e. Saca, language has been discussed under the research on Kashmiri language in volume I.
A known present-day Scythian language is Alan-Ossetian and we shall present here our research on Ossetian theological and other terms and see how they fit into our scheme of Only One Human Language. Our two sources are in the writings of Arthur Byhan (1936) and Georges Dumézil (1983).(1)
Byhan has provided the names of Ossetian divinities and Georges Dumézil has presented mainly ancient Greek as well as modern Russian names of Ossetian ancestors, heroes and clans. Byhan has provide about 30 and Dumézil about 60 terms for our study, so it can represent a good sample of the divine and human aspects of what we can find about ancient Scythian culture. Dumézil’s terms are mainly those to be found in the writings of Herodotus the ancient Greek historian (born 484 B.P.E.) as well as modern Russian interpreters of Ossetian culture, and Byhan’s material is based on research on modern Ossetian culture as part of his interest in the peoples of the Caucasus.
We note that the presumed original home of the group of Scythians called Alans or Ossetians was around the Arax River s.w, of Baku in Azerbaijan. these ‘Scythians’ moved to north of the Caucasus mountain region and spread out easterly (eventually their Scythian cousins travelling in the course of history into the Sub-Continent, the Indus valley and South Asia) and westwards, reaching Crimea and Kiev). Those trading with the Vikings (‘Varangians’) at Kiev were called ‘Rus’ which could be a mixed Alan-Slavic population according to Prof. Georges Vernadsky of Yale University.
The Scythians are especially known for the discovered tombs of their rulers and the golden objects found therein. Moreover, some of the Alans (a tribe of the Scythians surviving into more recent times, and living north of the Caucasus) were allied with the Huns who invaded Europe from the east in the 4th century (P.E.). These Alan warriors eventually turned against the Huns and joined the Roman side and some were enrolled in the Roman army occupying Britain and protecting its Welsh and Scottish frontiers, In northern Yorkshire, for example, at Pickhill where there was a Roman fort to protect the Swale river route to York, certain residents (Raper family) have the same DNA (Haplogroup ‘G’) as many inhabitants of Southern Ossetia in the country of Georgia in the Caucasus today. The Roman military leaders provided the town of Orleans as a home for these Alan / Ossetians but many traveled even further, entering North Africa from Spain together with the Visigoths.
The Kazakhs claim that the English myth of ‘King Arthur and his Round Table’ concerns a Roman general called Arturus and an Alan / Ossetian soldier called Lancelot (‘Alan + Celot’ or ‘Alan + Osset’), and that the story of Lancelot and ‘excalibur’ (sword imbedded in a stone) is similar to a Scythian myth (from West Kazakhstan) about a hero accomplishing the same feat.
It is said that some of these Scythians’ accepted Christianity at about the same period as the Armenians (4th century) and the Azerbaijan government has cared for some of the ‘Alan / Ossetian’ ancient church structures. As Byhan has pointed out, within the especially women-oriented divinities, names of deities are a mixture of ancient tradition names of saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
In general, the Ossetian language is considered as a branch of ‘Indo-Iranian’ but it is never claimed that the Scythians were Iranians. The Ossetian language has also been compared to that of the Kurds (Byhan).
Here we shall present the two lists of our ‘214 syllables in eleven categories of subject-object relations’ to see how Scythian terminology fits the schema.
Begin with vowel:
Opposing Er, Ig, Op
Mildly Opposing Ag
Loving Am, Em, Af, Ip, Ez, Iz, Eu, Iu, Oi ,Ui, Uo, Oqu
Mildly Loving Eh, Uh Ao, Ou
Controlling Im, Um, At, Et, Ot, As, Uk, Al, El, Il,, Ol, An, En, In, Un, Ab, Eb, Ib, Ed, Id, Ih, Uz
Explaining If
Quizzical Om, Is, Od, Oh, Az, Oz, Ei
Muse-Music Or, On, Og, Ug, Ao, Ou, Uqu
Describing It, Ir, Os, Ek, Ok, Eb, Uf, Ep, Eo, Io, Ia, Oe, Aqu, Equ, Iqu
Expressing Ar, Ek, Ob, Eg, Ah, Ap, Ai, Ie, Oa
Remembering Et, Ur, Ae
Begin with consonant:
Opposing: kl, no, ne, ni
Mildly opposing: fre, go, gi, ja, pa, pl, sw, vu, vl, za, zl
Loving: chu, do, di, fa, zha, zhi, kh, ji, li, ma, nu, ro, so, ta, vo, vi
Mildly loving: bo, bi, bl, cha, cho, gu,gh, zhu, ku, lo, re, so, sy, te, tw, wo, wi, zu
Explaining: ba, br, che, da, du, de, dw, fe, ga, ghe, ka, le, na, pl, sa, wu
Controlling: bu, chi, dr, fi, ko, ki, me, pu, sl, sr, tr, wr
Quizzical: be, fo, mo, qua, ru
Muse / Music: fu, ja, mu, su, yo
Describing: fl, ga, ge, gr, gl, kr, lo, lu, li, mi, no, pa, po, pl, pr, pi, rta, se, sl, to, tu, ti, ve, vr, wa, wu, we, wr, ya, yu, ye, zu
Expressing: ri, yi, zo
Remembering: he, hi, hu, ki, ko, pe, wo, wu
We have established this list and in three volumes of studies in the series Only One Human Language (Amazon.com). We have compared our model / scheme with all world languages in three volumes. All present-day terms or words, we believe, are derived from these syllables (phonemes) which we call the Only One Human Language which was perhaps developed in East Africa with the advent of homo sapiens (150,000 years ago).
Now in the present study our scheme seems also to be applicable to the Alan / Ossetian terminology and thus to Scythian language. We shall see below that the phonemes and their meanings (in the list above) are equivalent to the general meaning of the term. In other words, we deal with Ferinand de Saussure’s linguistic problematic.
The eleven categories as noted above can be further characterized as follows:
loving and mildly loving; a positive relation between the subject and the object, including various subordinate elements such as sexual relations, ‘evaluation’, ‘understanding’ etc. Opposing and mildly opposing: a negative relation between subject and object, including as subordinate elements discrimination or racism; Controlling: usually refers to objects to be managed such as populations of humans, animals, plants etc.; Describing or Explaining: this is self-explanatory and understandably takes up a large share of the syllables i.e. words used when the subject is describing or explaining. Music / Muse: terms used by homo sapiens when some poetic-related object or music strikes the ear or mentality; Quizzical: relates to objects which are variable or unstable in the mind of the subject; Expressing: refers to objects which elicit expression which is high in intensity or meaning; Remembering: the phonemes imply what was past and now is present.
No other type of category has been discovered than the above. Even when the ‘object’ is interior, i.e. within oneself, the same categories seem to be implied.
Terminology from Arthur Byhan:
dzouar – sanctuaries for religion: sha, ji (loving); ui, uo (loving); er (expressing)
dzouaregade – forest sanctuaries: (above) + ga (explaining); de (explaining)
Khoutsau - high god; Kh, ui, uo (loving); te (loving); sa (explaining)
Barastur – judge of the dead: ba, br (explaining); sr, tr (controlling)
amoun – road from paradise to hell; im, um (controlling); en, in (controlling)
kodalurgonn - heavenly smith: kh, ou (loving); da, le (explaining); go (mildly opposing: no, ne (opposing)
makhamat – a nature spirit: ma, kh (loving) ; am (loving); at (controlling)
khemetaun - ‘son of moon’: kh, am (loving); im, um (controlling); en, in, un (controlling)
boudourisad – protector of fields: bu, dr (controlling); iz (loving); ed (controlling); khoualerdar – house god: kh, uo (loving); al, el, dr (controlling)
Talvari – god of cattle: tu (describing); al, el (controlling); tr, wr (controlling)
Efsali - lord of animals: af (loving); fi, sl, al, el (controlling)
Toutyr – lord of wolves: tu (describing); tr (controlling)
Doubutur – protector of water and fish: du (describing; bu, tr (controlling)
Rounibara – god of health: ru, ni (opposing); an, en, in (controlling); br explaining
Saureg-gronar – god of robbers: sw, ig, ag (opposing); go, ni, er (opposing)(loving)
safa - ancestors’ spirits: su (music / muse); fa (loving)
fazzbadenu - protector of grand family: fa, zu, de, do, nu (loving); ba (explaining)
dzenété – paradise: di, zhi (loving); en, in, et, ot (controlling) ; ti (describing)
zindone - hell : zi (describing) : ne (opposing); da, de (explaining); ne (opposing)
vsvar – flesh of dragon ‘Rouimon’: vu, sw (mildly opposing); vr (describing)
‘Rouimon’ – ru, mo (quizzical)
nivondov – animal for sacrifice: ni (opposing); vu (mildly opposing); ne (opposing) - de, du, dw (explaining)
tehiri – cake : te (mildly loving); hi (remembering); re (mildly loving)
kouft - harvest: kh, ui, uo (loving); fa, ta (loving)
ghiniata – spirit of house: gh (mildly loving); in (controlling): ia (describing), ta (loving)
koumal (millet): kh, uo, ma (loving); al, il, el (controlling)
Terminology from Georges Dumézil
Targitaos – first man: ta (loving); re, gu, gh (mildly loving); us, uz (controlling)
Lipoxais – child of first man: li (loving); po (describing); kh (loving); ai (expressing); iz, ez (loving)
Arpoxais – child of first man; ap (expressing); po (describing; kh (loving);ai (expressing); iz, ez (loving) :
Kolaxais – child of first man; ko (controlling; lo, lu (describing)
Audiatai – descendants of Lipoxais; ed, id (controlling); ai (expressing)
Kathieroi / traspies – descendants of Arpoxais; kh (loving) ; at (controlling) eh, uh (mildly loving); ro (loving); tr (controlling); ez, iz (loving); pu, si (describing)
Paralatai – descendants of Kolaxais: pa (describing; re (mildly loving); lo (mildly loving); ta (loving)
Skolotoi (all three sets of descendants): sy (mildly loving); ko (controlling); lo (mildly loving); tw (mildly loving)
Hylaia (a region) The historic personage Heracles went there and married a woman-serpent person: he, he, hu , ae (remembering); lo, lu, li (describing)
Agathyrses – first child of Zeus and woman-serpent person; ag, go (mildly opposing); sr, tr, uz (controlling)
Gelonos – second child of Zeus and woman-serpent person: go, gi (mildly opposing); lo (describing); no (opposing)
Skythes - third and favorite child of Zeus and woman-serpent person; so, kh, te (loving)
ekhidna - the woman-serpent: eg, ek, kh, ie (expressing); id (controlling); na (explaining)
palos – child of Zeus and ekhidna; pl, os (describing)
napé – child of Zeus and ekhidna; na (explaining); pa, po, pi (describing)
bor-aspes – many horses: bo, re (mildly loving); ap (controlling); ez, iz (loving)
bana-taspos – victorious horses: ba, na (explaining); ta (loving); pa, po (describing); oz, az (quizzical)
danu - water, river; da (explaining); nu (loving)
sawa – black: sa (explaining); wa (describing)
bisalte – marginal Scythians: bi (mildly loving); sa (explaining); te (mildly loving)
oefsoe - jument (female horse); uf, oe (describing); se, si (describing)
oertoe – a ‘hero’: ot (controlling); oe (describing)
Nartoe – a ‘hero’: na (explaining); rta (describing)
zond – intelligence: zo (expressing); na, da, du (explaining)
oexsar – bravery, warlike value: aqu, equ (describing); sr (controlling); ar (expressing)
fos – pastoral richness: fo (quizzical); os (describing)
tyn - tissue of gold: tu (describing): na (explaining)
purti – golden ball: pr, ti (describing)
kar – glory: kh (loving); ar (expressing)
qusyn - (to) hear: oqu (loving); sy (mildly loving); na (explaining)
os-Bagatyr – hero: os (describing); ba (explaining); ga (explaining); tr (controlling)
Sidaemon - hero, first son, with many descendants: sy (mildly loving); da, ma, nu (loving)
Tsaeraezon – second son of os-Bogatyr: sr, tr (controlling); es, is (loving); en, in, on (controlling)
Uusaegon – third son, glory: ku, sy, go (mildly loving); na, no (describing)
Aeguz – fourth son, warrior: ag, ig (opposing); uz (controlling)
Tsaexil – last son : ti, se (describing); ki, el. il (controlling)
Toxacris – a Scythian doctor in Athens – tu, kr (describing); ez, iz (loving)
Boratae – e.g. grey ass of Boratae, erotic symbol: bo, ra (mildly loving); ta (loving); ai (expressing)
Aexaertaeglatae – three heros whose enemies are the Boratae (see oexsar, Boratae above): ta (loving); gh. le (explaining); ta (loving); ai (expressing)
Xamuts - first hero of Aexaer: kh, am (loving); at, et, ot (controlling)
Sozryko (Soslan) - next hero: so (loving); zu, re (mildly loving); ko (controlling)
Uryzmaeg - third hero: ui, iz (loving); me (controlling); gha, ge (explaining)
aefsati - spirit of hunted wild animals; if (explaining); se, ti (describing)
xur-at xuron - spirit of the fire of the sun: hu, ur, et (remembering); on, en (controlling)
qaewy zaed - angel for marriages etc.: kh, ui (loving); zo (expressing), ed, id (controlling)
alarda – smallpox: al (controlling); ar (expressing); da, de (explaining)
ustti kuvd – autumn festival: uz (controlling); ti (describing); ko, wu (remembering)
Tabiti – a Scythian god (Histia for Greeks): ta, bi (loving); ti (describing)
Papaios - Zeus of Greeks: pa (mildly opposing); ai (expressing); uz (controlling) az, oz (quizzical)
apia, api – earth: ap, yi, ie (expressing)
Goitosuros - Apollo of Greeks: gu, gh, eh, uh(mildly loving); ot, et (controlling); sr (controlling); os (describing)
Artompasa - Aphrodite of Greeks: ar (expressing); rta (describing) ; um (controlling); pa, se (describing)
Thagimasadas, Thanimasadas – Poseidon of Greeks: ta (loving); ghi (mildly loving); ni, ne (opposing); ma (loving), sa, da (describing)
zaed – spirits, genius: zo (expressing); ed, id (controlling)
dzuar – sanctuaries: zh (loving); ar, zo, ri (expressing)
Soslan – Heracles of Greeks: so (loving); sl, se, an, en (controlling)
Batrazd - Mars of Latins: he who held a sword as god of war: ba (explaining) at tr (controlling); az (quizzical); de (explaining)
fyd – putrid: fi, id, ed (controlling)
fudgaend - robbery and adultery, aspects of ‘fyd’: ghe (explaining): ne (opposing) ud, id (controlling)
faeldisyn – to consecrate: fu (muse/music); ol, el, ed, id, iz, in (controlling)
kus-argavst – ear cut off: ku, sy (mildly loving); ig, ag, er (opposing); ga , wu (explaining); se, ti (describing)
I have looked over the two lists of 214 syllables in eleven categories to see which category fits best the phonemes of the word as I pronounce it in my mind and in my speech. The surprise is that I find that the phonemes of the word I am considering fit into the categories I expect and not into some other category having nothing to do with the word as it is expressed. This has been the case with words in all studied languages, and therefore one supposes that these phonemes were the human proto-phonemes i.e. what earliest homo sapiens used when- as subject – he/she was faced with a particular object. Then they enunciated a sound appropriate, they believed, to the meaning of that object for them.
In the Scythian gods described by Professor Byhan (genies and protectors) all have loving or mildly loving phonemes and, in most cases, also a ‘controlling’ phoneme, which fits a beloved genie who manages our earthly life. Some exceptions also have phonemes which creditably follow our scheme of 11 categories e.g. forest sanctuaries have ‘explaining’ syllables; the ‘heavenly smith’ has ‘opposing’, and the god of robbers has 3 or 4 ‘opposing’ phenomes.
On the other hand, dzenété (paradise) and zindone (hell) have ambivalent phonemes combing loving and opposing cf. zha + ne (loving and opposing) and, for zindone za + do (mildly opposing and loving) which is appropriate for such terms.
The same ambiguity is to be seen in ‘flesh of the dragon Rouimon called vsvar’: flesh of dragon: vu, su (mildly opposing) and vr (describing). Rouimon has phonemes which appear to be in the quizzical category (ru + mo). The animal for sacrifice nivondov seems to be predominately in the opposing category.
Finally, for Byhan’s list: five objects seem beloved; tehiri (cake); koualerdar (god of harvest); kouft (harvest), ghiniata (spirit of house) and koumal (millet) and this seems appropriate. It appears, thus, that terms of Scythian deities and genies in Byhan’s list as well as some common objects appear to fit well into our system.
The terms introduced by Georges Dumézil concern mainly the ancestors and heroes of the Ossetians / Alans (last representatives of the Scythians), and the relation between these and the Greek classical writers, mainly Herodatus. As with the gods and genies of Prof. Byhan, the heroes of Dumèzil contain phonemes of ‘loving, mildly loving and controlling’. But the phonemes given to three children of Zeus and the woman-serpent (his wife), apparently have appropriate syllables. The eldest, Agathyrsos, includes opposing and controlling, and the youngest (Skythos i.e. Scythians) who is obviously the preferred member, has only ‘loving’ syllables attached to its pronunciation. Moreover, the mother of the three i.e. ekhidna (snake), has the loving and controlling of the preferred gods etc. but also some syllables of ‘expressing’ which seem appropriate for such as progenitor personality.
After these, Dumézil tells various stories about these heroes and their lives and here, again, the phonemes /syllables related to them appear to be following our categories without fail. Certain cases may be noted: zond (intelligence) includes the zo of ‘expressing’, the other elements being ‘explaining’. Oexsar (bravery) includes the obvious ag (opposing) plus sr (controlling) and fos (pastoral richness) includes a ‘quizzical’ fo and a describing phoneme. Kar (glory) understandably contains a kh (loving) and an ar of an expressing nature.
Then we come again to Dumézil’s list of Ossetian heroes descended from Os-Bagatyr the progenitor, and each descendant has a particular character. Sidaemon, who has many descendants, and who is the most popular, has all its phonemes in the ’loving’ category. Tsaeraezon has one loving and several controlling as well as the ‘zon’ (expressing). Qusaegon who represents ‘glory’ includes a ‘mildly loving’ hu + sy + go series of phonemes which seem appropriate vis à vis our classifications and their meanings according to our thesis. Aeguz, the warrior tribe, has the rare ‘opposing’ phoneme plus the controlling one, which is appropriate for a warrior combatting the opposition. Tsaexil, as one of the hero tribes, has the usual ‘controlling’ phonemes.
Three heroes of the Aexertaegkatae descent follow. As a term it includes the ae of the ‘remembering’ category appropriate for ancient heroes. Xaemyts, Sozryho and Uryzmaeg - the descendants - all have the typical ‘loving’ and ‘controlling’ phonemes in pronouncing their names.
One very interesting chapter in Dumézil’s description of the Scythians is his chapter on feminine religion and beliefs practiced apart from the men. And here, as with Byhan’s description of deities, the spirit of God (Xutsawy dzuar) and angel of the tribe (Qaewy zaed) both have the typical ‘loving-mildly loving’ and ‘controlling’ syllables. Alarda (smallpox) seems to include controlling, expressing and opposing syllables whereas Ustyti kuvd (autumn feast) has several ‘remembering’ syllables (ko + et+ wu).
The next list of Scythian gods as compared to Greek ones by Herodatus includes all of whom have ‘controlling’ phonemes, but some of these gods, being more popular than others, have quite distinctive phonemes attached as well. Tabiti (goddess of the hearth as Greek Histia or Roman Vesta) is beloved whereas Papaios (Zeus) is ‘mildly opposed’ yet controlling. Goitosuros (Oitosuros) (Apollo) has the usual ‘loving’,‘controlling’ and describing’ syllables whereas Artimpasa (Aphrodite) as well as controlling, has ‘expressing’ phonemes. Thagimasadas (Poseidon) was obviously a beloved god for the Scythians.
Finishing with the terms presented by Georges Dumézil we have zaed (genies) with their expressing and controlling phonemes and dzuar (sanctuary) with ‘loving’ and ‘expressing’. The protector of women (Mère Mayram) has only loving phonemes with one controlling.
Soslan, a ‘Heracles-Hercules-like’ hero, has the usual loving and controlling syllables in pronunciation whereas Batrazd (Ares-Mars) the god of war seems completely ‘controlling’.
Finally, there is a Dumézil article on punishments for robbery and adultery among the Ossetians. Dumézil introduces the word faeldisyn – to ‘consecrate’ which shows elements of the ‘muse / music’ category (fu) and many controlling syllables (od+ed+id+el+iz+in) and the word kus-argavst (‘cut off the ear’) has the og and ug of muse/music and the gu+se+tu of explaining and describing.
It is quite surprising that our list of 214 syllables divided into eleven categories seems to be relevant for all this still-remaining Scythian terminology. Perhaps some of the earliest human language survived intact in the Araks river area of today’s Azerbaijan (i.e. an early area of the Ossetians). It was the early homo sapiens who crossed what is now Arabia coming out from East Africa, but some of these peoples may have ended up unable to cross the Caucasus mountain chain and remained there holding a proto-human language intact. Other early homo sapiens moved east of the Caspian Sea, migrating into Central Asia and across the expanse of Asia on the one hand to Tibet and China, and on the other to Japan and the Bering Straits (path to the Americas) whereas still others moved into the Sub-Continent and S.E. Asia and ended in Australia.
In such a case the Araks river people (i.e. the Sythians) might speak the same proto-language as the Australian aboriginal or some Amazonian indigenous people such as the Yanonami - whose terminology vis à vis its phonemes and their significance was the same as the Australian as I have shown in my books.
The Scythians were not considered Iranians although the Ossetian language was an ‘Iranian’ type. Strangely enough Araks river is quite near the Iranian town of Bablos which may be a traditional ‘Babel’ where supposedly the languages of mankind were separated into many streams after the building of the ‘tower of Babel’.
Moreover, the existence of the ‘almasty’ (kaptor) type of human being in the Caucasus may illustrate a geographical ‘end-point’ to which human beings going ‘out of Africa’ may have reached in primitive times. Also, the quasi-human yeti of Ladakh or Tibet also might illustrate a similar end-point of human migration in ancient times. ‘Hairy’ Ainu of Japan has kept the same set of syllables in its terminology as Australian aboriginals or Yanonami in the Amazon according to our research. (cf. for almasty: al+el+il (controlling); am+em+ez+iz+do+di (loving)); te+tw (mildly loving). Ainu: ai+oi+ui+nu (loving); Yeti: et+ae (remembering)). Of course, besides the evident existence of the Ainu, the other creatures have not as yet received universal credibility. My inclusion of them, however, is to illustrate that ‘pockets’ of humans existed in the past at certain geographical places and that at these places original human terminology may have been preserved intact. Besides we have learned from some researchers that the DNA of Australian aboriginal people and some Amazonian indigenous persons is the same, indicating very early common origins. (2)
Applying my scheme of 214 syllables / phonemes in eleven categories to a Scythian language such as Ossetian / Alan may appear to some people as an unscientific attempt to justify my theory by any means - of ‘fitting’ my proto-syllables to Scythian terms without proof - but this criticism, if true, could not be true for the large variety of languages I have scanned previously and the results of which were published in my books in the series Only One Human Language (Amazon.com). In these volumes I have shown how terms in all languages seem to conform to my thesis. The only explanation I have for this is that the system is quasi-correct and really represents homo sapiens language development at its very earliest stages.
Only One Human Language – summary of contents of three volumes (2016-2019)
Vol. I Only One Human Language; the unique language of homo sapiens. IVER Publications 2016, 393 pp.
II. Aboriginal languages in the South Seas and Australian aboriginals – includes Nalik, Lau, Australian aboriginal
III. Proto-syllables from Indo-European, Burushaski, Japanese and Australian Aboriginal (origin of thesis of 214 original syllables / phonemes in eleven categories of subject-object relations, pp. 348-372). How the theory of a coherent system of proto-syllables of homo sapiens applies to the names of early Egyptian deities.
Vol. 2. Asia-Amerindia Language Comparisons. Only One Human Language. IVER Publications 2018, 411 pp.
Vol 3. The Speech of Early Homo Sapiens. Only One Human Language, IVER Publications 2019, 344 pp.
Footnotes
(1) Arthur Byhan, La Civilisation Caucasienne. Paris : Payot 1936, pp.202-223 ; Georges Dumézil, La Courtisane et les seigneurs colorés et autres essais. Esquisses de mythologie (Bibliothèque des Sciences Humaines) Paris : Gallimard 1983, (Esquisses 32-41 : Ultra Ponticos Fluctus, pp. 77-155 (Ossetians /Alans))
(2) David Reich, Who We Are and How we Got Here. Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past. New York: Pantheon Books 2018, pp. 180-1
Our research on Only One Human Language (see my three volumes on this topic Amazon.com) has been based upon analysis of four major languages and groups of languages: Indo-European, Burushaski (a ‘Sino-Caucasian’ language), Japanese, and some Australian aboriginal language. But the result, i.e. 214 syllables divided into eleven categories (of subject-object relations) perhaps neglected a significant early language, namely Scythian. Some Scythian, i.e. Saca, language has been discussed under the research on Kashmiri language in volume I.
A known present-day Scythian language is Alan-Ossetian and we shall present here our research on Ossetian theological and other terms and see how they fit into our scheme of Only One Human Language. Our two sources are in the writings of Arthur Byhan (1936) and Georges Dumézil (1983).(1)
Byhan has provided the names of Ossetian divinities and Georges Dumézil has presented mainly ancient Greek as well as modern Russian names of Ossetian ancestors, heroes and clans. Byhan has provide about 30 and Dumézil about 60 terms for our study, so it can represent a good sample of the divine and human aspects of what we can find about ancient Scythian culture. Dumézil’s terms are mainly those to be found in the writings of Herodotus the ancient Greek historian (born 484 B.P.E.) as well as modern Russian interpreters of Ossetian culture, and Byhan’s material is based on research on modern Ossetian culture as part of his interest in the peoples of the Caucasus.
We note that the presumed original home of the group of Scythians called Alans or Ossetians was around the Arax River s.w, of Baku in Azerbaijan. these ‘Scythians’ moved to north of the Caucasus mountain region and spread out easterly (eventually their Scythian cousins travelling in the course of history into the Sub-Continent, the Indus valley and South Asia) and westwards, reaching Crimea and Kiev). Those trading with the Vikings (‘Varangians’) at Kiev were called ‘Rus’ which could be a mixed Alan-Slavic population according to Prof. Georges Vernadsky of Yale University.
The Scythians are especially known for the discovered tombs of their rulers and the golden objects found therein. Moreover, some of the Alans (a tribe of the Scythians surviving into more recent times, and living north of the Caucasus) were allied with the Huns who invaded Europe from the east in the 4th century (P.E.). These Alan warriors eventually turned against the Huns and joined the Roman side and some were enrolled in the Roman army occupying Britain and protecting its Welsh and Scottish frontiers, In northern Yorkshire, for example, at Pickhill where there was a Roman fort to protect the Swale river route to York, certain residents (Raper family) have the same DNA (Haplogroup ‘G’) as many inhabitants of Southern Ossetia in the country of Georgia in the Caucasus today. The Roman military leaders provided the town of Orleans as a home for these Alan / Ossetians but many traveled even further, entering North Africa from Spain together with the Visigoths.
The Kazakhs claim that the English myth of ‘King Arthur and his Round Table’ concerns a Roman general called Arturus and an Alan / Ossetian soldier called Lancelot (‘Alan + Celot’ or ‘Alan + Osset’), and that the story of Lancelot and ‘excalibur’ (sword imbedded in a stone) is similar to a Scythian myth (from West Kazakhstan) about a hero accomplishing the same feat.
It is said that some of these Scythians’ accepted Christianity at about the same period as the Armenians (4th century) and the Azerbaijan government has cared for some of the ‘Alan / Ossetian’ ancient church structures. As Byhan has pointed out, within the especially women-oriented divinities, names of deities are a mixture of ancient tradition names of saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
In general, the Ossetian language is considered as a branch of ‘Indo-Iranian’ but it is never claimed that the Scythians were Iranians. The Ossetian language has also been compared to that of the Kurds (Byhan).
Here we shall present the two lists of our ‘214 syllables in eleven categories of subject-object relations’ to see how Scythian terminology fits the schema.
Begin with vowel:
Opposing Er, Ig, Op
Mildly Opposing Ag
Loving Am, Em, Af, Ip, Ez, Iz, Eu, Iu, Oi ,Ui, Uo, Oqu
Mildly Loving Eh, Uh Ao, Ou
Controlling Im, Um, At, Et, Ot, As, Uk, Al, El, Il,, Ol, An, En, In, Un, Ab, Eb, Ib, Ed, Id, Ih, Uz
Explaining If
Quizzical Om, Is, Od, Oh, Az, Oz, Ei
Muse-Music Or, On, Og, Ug, Ao, Ou, Uqu
Describing It, Ir, Os, Ek, Ok, Eb, Uf, Ep, Eo, Io, Ia, Oe, Aqu, Equ, Iqu
Expressing Ar, Ek, Ob, Eg, Ah, Ap, Ai, Ie, Oa
Remembering Et, Ur, Ae
Begin with consonant:
Opposing: kl, no, ne, ni
Mildly opposing: fre, go, gi, ja, pa, pl, sw, vu, vl, za, zl
Loving: chu, do, di, fa, zha, zhi, kh, ji, li, ma, nu, ro, so, ta, vo, vi
Mildly loving: bo, bi, bl, cha, cho, gu,gh, zhu, ku, lo, re, so, sy, te, tw, wo, wi, zu
Explaining: ba, br, che, da, du, de, dw, fe, ga, ghe, ka, le, na, pl, sa, wu
Controlling: bu, chi, dr, fi, ko, ki, me, pu, sl, sr, tr, wr
Quizzical: be, fo, mo, qua, ru
Muse / Music: fu, ja, mu, su, yo
Describing: fl, ga, ge, gr, gl, kr, lo, lu, li, mi, no, pa, po, pl, pr, pi, rta, se, sl, to, tu, ti, ve, vr, wa, wu, we, wr, ya, yu, ye, zu
Expressing: ri, yi, zo
Remembering: he, hi, hu, ki, ko, pe, wo, wu
We have established this list and in three volumes of studies in the series Only One Human Language (Amazon.com). We have compared our model / scheme with all world languages in three volumes. All present-day terms or words, we believe, are derived from these syllables (phonemes) which we call the Only One Human Language which was perhaps developed in East Africa with the advent of homo sapiens (150,000 years ago).
Now in the present study our scheme seems also to be applicable to the Alan / Ossetian terminology and thus to Scythian language. We shall see below that the phonemes and their meanings (in the list above) are equivalent to the general meaning of the term. In other words, we deal with Ferinand de Saussure’s linguistic problematic.
The eleven categories as noted above can be further characterized as follows:
loving and mildly loving; a positive relation between the subject and the object, including various subordinate elements such as sexual relations, ‘evaluation’, ‘understanding’ etc. Opposing and mildly opposing: a negative relation between subject and object, including as subordinate elements discrimination or racism; Controlling: usually refers to objects to be managed such as populations of humans, animals, plants etc.; Describing or Explaining: this is self-explanatory and understandably takes up a large share of the syllables i.e. words used when the subject is describing or explaining. Music / Muse: terms used by homo sapiens when some poetic-related object or music strikes the ear or mentality; Quizzical: relates to objects which are variable or unstable in the mind of the subject; Expressing: refers to objects which elicit expression which is high in intensity or meaning; Remembering: the phonemes imply what was past and now is present.
No other type of category has been discovered than the above. Even when the ‘object’ is interior, i.e. within oneself, the same categories seem to be implied.
Terminology from Arthur Byhan:
dzouar – sanctuaries for religion: sha, ji (loving); ui, uo (loving); er (expressing)
dzouaregade – forest sanctuaries: (above) + ga (explaining); de (explaining)
Khoutsau - high god; Kh, ui, uo (loving); te (loving); sa (explaining)
Barastur – judge of the dead: ba, br (explaining); sr, tr (controlling)
amoun – road from paradise to hell; im, um (controlling); en, in (controlling)
kodalurgonn - heavenly smith: kh, ou (loving); da, le (explaining); go (mildly opposing: no, ne (opposing)
makhamat – a nature spirit: ma, kh (loving) ; am (loving); at (controlling)
khemetaun - ‘son of moon’: kh, am (loving); im, um (controlling); en, in, un (controlling)
boudourisad – protector of fields: bu, dr (controlling); iz (loving); ed (controlling); khoualerdar – house god: kh, uo (loving); al, el, dr (controlling)
Talvari – god of cattle: tu (describing); al, el (controlling); tr, wr (controlling)
Efsali - lord of animals: af (loving); fi, sl, al, el (controlling)
Toutyr – lord of wolves: tu (describing); tr (controlling)
Doubutur – protector of water and fish: du (describing; bu, tr (controlling)
Rounibara – god of health: ru, ni (opposing); an, en, in (controlling); br explaining
Saureg-gronar – god of robbers: sw, ig, ag (opposing); go, ni, er (opposing)(loving)
safa - ancestors’ spirits: su (music / muse); fa (loving)
fazzbadenu - protector of grand family: fa, zu, de, do, nu (loving); ba (explaining)
dzenété – paradise: di, zhi (loving); en, in, et, ot (controlling) ; ti (describing)
zindone - hell : zi (describing) : ne (opposing); da, de (explaining); ne (opposing)
vsvar – flesh of dragon ‘Rouimon’: vu, sw (mildly opposing); vr (describing)
‘Rouimon’ – ru, mo (quizzical)
nivondov – animal for sacrifice: ni (opposing); vu (mildly opposing); ne (opposing) - de, du, dw (explaining)
tehiri – cake : te (mildly loving); hi (remembering); re (mildly loving)
kouft - harvest: kh, ui, uo (loving); fa, ta (loving)
ghiniata – spirit of house: gh (mildly loving); in (controlling): ia (describing), ta (loving)
koumal (millet): kh, uo, ma (loving); al, il, el (controlling)
Terminology from Georges Dumézil
Targitaos – first man: ta (loving); re, gu, gh (mildly loving); us, uz (controlling)
Lipoxais – child of first man: li (loving); po (describing); kh (loving); ai (expressing); iz, ez (loving)
Arpoxais – child of first man; ap (expressing); po (describing; kh (loving);ai (expressing); iz, ez (loving) :
Kolaxais – child of first man; ko (controlling; lo, lu (describing)
Audiatai – descendants of Lipoxais; ed, id (controlling); ai (expressing)
Kathieroi / traspies – descendants of Arpoxais; kh (loving) ; at (controlling) eh, uh (mildly loving); ro (loving); tr (controlling); ez, iz (loving); pu, si (describing)
Paralatai – descendants of Kolaxais: pa (describing; re (mildly loving); lo (mildly loving); ta (loving)
Skolotoi (all three sets of descendants): sy (mildly loving); ko (controlling); lo (mildly loving); tw (mildly loving)
Hylaia (a region) The historic personage Heracles went there and married a woman-serpent person: he, he, hu , ae (remembering); lo, lu, li (describing)
Agathyrses – first child of Zeus and woman-serpent person; ag, go (mildly opposing); sr, tr, uz (controlling)
Gelonos – second child of Zeus and woman-serpent person: go, gi (mildly opposing); lo (describing); no (opposing)
Skythes - third and favorite child of Zeus and woman-serpent person; so, kh, te (loving)
ekhidna - the woman-serpent: eg, ek, kh, ie (expressing); id (controlling); na (explaining)
palos – child of Zeus and ekhidna; pl, os (describing)
napé – child of Zeus and ekhidna; na (explaining); pa, po, pi (describing)
bor-aspes – many horses: bo, re (mildly loving); ap (controlling); ez, iz (loving)
bana-taspos – victorious horses: ba, na (explaining); ta (loving); pa, po (describing); oz, az (quizzical)
danu - water, river; da (explaining); nu (loving)
sawa – black: sa (explaining); wa (describing)
bisalte – marginal Scythians: bi (mildly loving); sa (explaining); te (mildly loving)
oefsoe - jument (female horse); uf, oe (describing); se, si (describing)
oertoe – a ‘hero’: ot (controlling); oe (describing)
Nartoe – a ‘hero’: na (explaining); rta (describing)
zond – intelligence: zo (expressing); na, da, du (explaining)
oexsar – bravery, warlike value: aqu, equ (describing); sr (controlling); ar (expressing)
fos – pastoral richness: fo (quizzical); os (describing)
tyn - tissue of gold: tu (describing): na (explaining)
purti – golden ball: pr, ti (describing)
kar – glory: kh (loving); ar (expressing)
qusyn - (to) hear: oqu (loving); sy (mildly loving); na (explaining)
os-Bagatyr – hero: os (describing); ba (explaining); ga (explaining); tr (controlling)
Sidaemon - hero, first son, with many descendants: sy (mildly loving); da, ma, nu (loving)
Tsaeraezon – second son of os-Bogatyr: sr, tr (controlling); es, is (loving); en, in, on (controlling)
Uusaegon – third son, glory: ku, sy, go (mildly loving); na, no (describing)
Aeguz – fourth son, warrior: ag, ig (opposing); uz (controlling)
Tsaexil – last son : ti, se (describing); ki, el. il (controlling)
Toxacris – a Scythian doctor in Athens – tu, kr (describing); ez, iz (loving)
Boratae – e.g. grey ass of Boratae, erotic symbol: bo, ra (mildly loving); ta (loving); ai (expressing)
Aexaertaeglatae – three heros whose enemies are the Boratae (see oexsar, Boratae above): ta (loving); gh. le (explaining); ta (loving); ai (expressing)
Xamuts - first hero of Aexaer: kh, am (loving); at, et, ot (controlling)
Sozryko (Soslan) - next hero: so (loving); zu, re (mildly loving); ko (controlling)
Uryzmaeg - third hero: ui, iz (loving); me (controlling); gha, ge (explaining)
aefsati - spirit of hunted wild animals; if (explaining); se, ti (describing)
xur-at xuron - spirit of the fire of the sun: hu, ur, et (remembering); on, en (controlling)
qaewy zaed - angel for marriages etc.: kh, ui (loving); zo (expressing), ed, id (controlling)
alarda – smallpox: al (controlling); ar (expressing); da, de (explaining)
ustti kuvd – autumn festival: uz (controlling); ti (describing); ko, wu (remembering)
Tabiti – a Scythian god (Histia for Greeks): ta, bi (loving); ti (describing)
Papaios - Zeus of Greeks: pa (mildly opposing); ai (expressing); uz (controlling) az, oz (quizzical)
apia, api – earth: ap, yi, ie (expressing)
Goitosuros - Apollo of Greeks: gu, gh, eh, uh(mildly loving); ot, et (controlling); sr (controlling); os (describing)
Artompasa - Aphrodite of Greeks: ar (expressing); rta (describing) ; um (controlling); pa, se (describing)
Thagimasadas, Thanimasadas – Poseidon of Greeks: ta (loving); ghi (mildly loving); ni, ne (opposing); ma (loving), sa, da (describing)
zaed – spirits, genius: zo (expressing); ed, id (controlling)
dzuar – sanctuaries: zh (loving); ar, zo, ri (expressing)
Soslan – Heracles of Greeks: so (loving); sl, se, an, en (controlling)
Batrazd - Mars of Latins: he who held a sword as god of war: ba (explaining) at tr (controlling); az (quizzical); de (explaining)
fyd – putrid: fi, id, ed (controlling)
fudgaend - robbery and adultery, aspects of ‘fyd’: ghe (explaining): ne (opposing) ud, id (controlling)
faeldisyn – to consecrate: fu (muse/music); ol, el, ed, id, iz, in (controlling)
kus-argavst – ear cut off: ku, sy (mildly loving); ig, ag, er (opposing); ga , wu (explaining); se, ti (describing)
I have looked over the two lists of 214 syllables in eleven categories to see which category fits best the phonemes of the word as I pronounce it in my mind and in my speech. The surprise is that I find that the phonemes of the word I am considering fit into the categories I expect and not into some other category having nothing to do with the word as it is expressed. This has been the case with words in all studied languages, and therefore one supposes that these phonemes were the human proto-phonemes i.e. what earliest homo sapiens used when- as subject – he/she was faced with a particular object. Then they enunciated a sound appropriate, they believed, to the meaning of that object for them.
In the Scythian gods described by Professor Byhan (genies and protectors) all have loving or mildly loving phonemes and, in most cases, also a ‘controlling’ phoneme, which fits a beloved genie who manages our earthly life. Some exceptions also have phonemes which creditably follow our scheme of 11 categories e.g. forest sanctuaries have ‘explaining’ syllables; the ‘heavenly smith’ has ‘opposing’, and the god of robbers has 3 or 4 ‘opposing’ phenomes.
On the other hand, dzenété (paradise) and zindone (hell) have ambivalent phonemes combing loving and opposing cf. zha + ne (loving and opposing) and, for zindone za + do (mildly opposing and loving) which is appropriate for such terms.
The same ambiguity is to be seen in ‘flesh of the dragon Rouimon called vsvar’: flesh of dragon: vu, su (mildly opposing) and vr (describing). Rouimon has phonemes which appear to be in the quizzical category (ru + mo). The animal for sacrifice nivondov seems to be predominately in the opposing category.
Finally, for Byhan’s list: five objects seem beloved; tehiri (cake); koualerdar (god of harvest); kouft (harvest), ghiniata (spirit of house) and koumal (millet) and this seems appropriate. It appears, thus, that terms of Scythian deities and genies in Byhan’s list as well as some common objects appear to fit well into our system.
The terms introduced by Georges Dumézil concern mainly the ancestors and heroes of the Ossetians / Alans (last representatives of the Scythians), and the relation between these and the Greek classical writers, mainly Herodatus. As with the gods and genies of Prof. Byhan, the heroes of Dumèzil contain phonemes of ‘loving, mildly loving and controlling’. But the phonemes given to three children of Zeus and the woman-serpent (his wife), apparently have appropriate syllables. The eldest, Agathyrsos, includes opposing and controlling, and the youngest (Skythos i.e. Scythians) who is obviously the preferred member, has only ‘loving’ syllables attached to its pronunciation. Moreover, the mother of the three i.e. ekhidna (snake), has the loving and controlling of the preferred gods etc. but also some syllables of ‘expressing’ which seem appropriate for such as progenitor personality.
After these, Dumézil tells various stories about these heroes and their lives and here, again, the phonemes /syllables related to them appear to be following our categories without fail. Certain cases may be noted: zond (intelligence) includes the zo of ‘expressing’, the other elements being ‘explaining’. Oexsar (bravery) includes the obvious ag (opposing) plus sr (controlling) and fos (pastoral richness) includes a ‘quizzical’ fo and a describing phoneme. Kar (glory) understandably contains a kh (loving) and an ar of an expressing nature.
Then we come again to Dumézil’s list of Ossetian heroes descended from Os-Bagatyr the progenitor, and each descendant has a particular character. Sidaemon, who has many descendants, and who is the most popular, has all its phonemes in the ’loving’ category. Tsaeraezon has one loving and several controlling as well as the ‘zon’ (expressing). Qusaegon who represents ‘glory’ includes a ‘mildly loving’ hu + sy + go series of phonemes which seem appropriate vis à vis our classifications and their meanings according to our thesis. Aeguz, the warrior tribe, has the rare ‘opposing’ phoneme plus the controlling one, which is appropriate for a warrior combatting the opposition. Tsaexil, as one of the hero tribes, has the usual ‘controlling’ phonemes.
Three heroes of the Aexertaegkatae descent follow. As a term it includes the ae of the ‘remembering’ category appropriate for ancient heroes. Xaemyts, Sozryho and Uryzmaeg - the descendants - all have the typical ‘loving’ and ‘controlling’ phonemes in pronouncing their names.
One very interesting chapter in Dumézil’s description of the Scythians is his chapter on feminine religion and beliefs practiced apart from the men. And here, as with Byhan’s description of deities, the spirit of God (Xutsawy dzuar) and angel of the tribe (Qaewy zaed) both have the typical ‘loving-mildly loving’ and ‘controlling’ syllables. Alarda (smallpox) seems to include controlling, expressing and opposing syllables whereas Ustyti kuvd (autumn feast) has several ‘remembering’ syllables (ko + et+ wu).
The next list of Scythian gods as compared to Greek ones by Herodatus includes all of whom have ‘controlling’ phonemes, but some of these gods, being more popular than others, have quite distinctive phonemes attached as well. Tabiti (goddess of the hearth as Greek Histia or Roman Vesta) is beloved whereas Papaios (Zeus) is ‘mildly opposed’ yet controlling. Goitosuros (Oitosuros) (Apollo) has the usual ‘loving’,‘controlling’ and describing’ syllables whereas Artimpasa (Aphrodite) as well as controlling, has ‘expressing’ phonemes. Thagimasadas (Poseidon) was obviously a beloved god for the Scythians.
Finishing with the terms presented by Georges Dumézil we have zaed (genies) with their expressing and controlling phonemes and dzuar (sanctuary) with ‘loving’ and ‘expressing’. The protector of women (Mère Mayram) has only loving phonemes with one controlling.
Soslan, a ‘Heracles-Hercules-like’ hero, has the usual loving and controlling syllables in pronunciation whereas Batrazd (Ares-Mars) the god of war seems completely ‘controlling’.
Finally, there is a Dumézil article on punishments for robbery and adultery among the Ossetians. Dumézil introduces the word faeldisyn – to ‘consecrate’ which shows elements of the ‘muse / music’ category (fu) and many controlling syllables (od+ed+id+el+iz+in) and the word kus-argavst (‘cut off the ear’) has the og and ug of muse/music and the gu+se+tu of explaining and describing.
It is quite surprising that our list of 214 syllables divided into eleven categories seems to be relevant for all this still-remaining Scythian terminology. Perhaps some of the earliest human language survived intact in the Araks river area of today’s Azerbaijan (i.e. an early area of the Ossetians). It was the early homo sapiens who crossed what is now Arabia coming out from East Africa, but some of these peoples may have ended up unable to cross the Caucasus mountain chain and remained there holding a proto-human language intact. Other early homo sapiens moved east of the Caspian Sea, migrating into Central Asia and across the expanse of Asia on the one hand to Tibet and China, and on the other to Japan and the Bering Straits (path to the Americas) whereas still others moved into the Sub-Continent and S.E. Asia and ended in Australia.
In such a case the Araks river people (i.e. the Sythians) might speak the same proto-language as the Australian aboriginal or some Amazonian indigenous people such as the Yanonami - whose terminology vis à vis its phonemes and their significance was the same as the Australian as I have shown in my books.
The Scythians were not considered Iranians although the Ossetian language was an ‘Iranian’ type. Strangely enough Araks river is quite near the Iranian town of Bablos which may be a traditional ‘Babel’ where supposedly the languages of mankind were separated into many streams after the building of the ‘tower of Babel’.
Moreover, the existence of the ‘almasty’ (kaptor) type of human being in the Caucasus may illustrate a geographical ‘end-point’ to which human beings going ‘out of Africa’ may have reached in primitive times. Also, the quasi-human yeti of Ladakh or Tibet also might illustrate a similar end-point of human migration in ancient times. ‘Hairy’ Ainu of Japan has kept the same set of syllables in its terminology as Australian aboriginals or Yanonami in the Amazon according to our research. (cf. for almasty: al+el+il (controlling); am+em+ez+iz+do+di (loving)); te+tw (mildly loving). Ainu: ai+oi+ui+nu (loving); Yeti: et+ae (remembering)). Of course, besides the evident existence of the Ainu, the other creatures have not as yet received universal credibility. My inclusion of them, however, is to illustrate that ‘pockets’ of humans existed in the past at certain geographical places and that at these places original human terminology may have been preserved intact. Besides we have learned from some researchers that the DNA of Australian aboriginal people and some Amazonian indigenous persons is the same, indicating very early common origins. (2)
Applying my scheme of 214 syllables / phonemes in eleven categories to a Scythian language such as Ossetian / Alan may appear to some people as an unscientific attempt to justify my theory by any means - of ‘fitting’ my proto-syllables to Scythian terms without proof - but this criticism, if true, could not be true for the large variety of languages I have scanned previously and the results of which were published in my books in the series Only One Human Language (Amazon.com). In these volumes I have shown how terms in all languages seem to conform to my thesis. The only explanation I have for this is that the system is quasi-correct and really represents homo sapiens language development at its very earliest stages.
Only One Human Language – summary of contents of three volumes (2016-2019)
Vol. I Only One Human Language; the unique language of homo sapiens. IVER Publications 2016, 393 pp.
- Kashmir-Malay language parallels
II. Aboriginal languages in the South Seas and Australian aboriginals – includes Nalik, Lau, Australian aboriginal
III. Proto-syllables from Indo-European, Burushaski, Japanese and Australian Aboriginal (origin of thesis of 214 original syllables / phonemes in eleven categories of subject-object relations, pp. 348-372). How the theory of a coherent system of proto-syllables of homo sapiens applies to the names of early Egyptian deities.
Vol. 2. Asia-Amerindia Language Comparisons. Only One Human Language. IVER Publications 2018, 411 pp.
- Uto-Aztecan, Algonquian, Cherokee-Iroquois, Caddo, Catawba-Sioux, Mosain, Tsimshian and Washoe, Amerindians of Mexico-Guatemala, Miskito and Cuna, Arawak, Carib and Warrau, Yanonami and Waika, Quechua, Aymara, Inca, Mapuche, Toba and Chorote, Campa, Machigenka, Panoan, Tupian, Tucuna, Waura, Trumai and Urubu (Kaapor). These Amerindian languages in their terminology for deities, nature and family life are compared with Siberian terminology such as from Saami, Yukaghir, Samoyed, Khanti-Mansi, Chukchee, Koryak, Itelmen, Evenki, Nivkh as well as among themselves and with Californian Esselen / Chumash (very old) and Yanonami (appears as the oldest).
- Application of the theory of 214 original syllables / phonemes in eleven categories to Sumerian gods, Etruscan gods, Hebrew terminology, Iranian religious terms, Ainu terms, Saami terms, Esselen / Chumash terms, Campa and Waika (Amazon) terminology
- How Mandarin Chinese terms conform to our schema of Only One Human Language (pp. 306-347); Bibliography pp. 353-392. Vocabularies and Word lists of Asian and Amerindian peoples included in the bibliography. Eurasian section (Sumerians etc. 395-399); References to all the languages included in the volume. References divided between Asia, Amerindian, and Eurasian (pp. 399-407).
Vol 3. The Speech of Early Homo Sapiens. Only One Human Language, IVER Publications 2019, 344 pp.
- Background to Research; Proto-Syllables in Proto-Bantu; Detailed Analysis of the Proto-Syllables; Subject-Object Relations within Syllables; Swahili and Proto-Syllables; Zulu and Proto-Syllables; Kabyle and Proto-Syllables; Names of Egyptian Deities and Proto-Syllables; Aramaic and Hebrew Language and Proto-Syllables; Names of early Greek deities and Proto-Syllables; Arabic and Proto-Syllables.
- Conclusion (pp 301-331); History of the Research; A new Version of the 214 proto-syllables; Analysis of the Eleven categories of the subject-object relations in general; Gender and Language; The thesis in the context of Linguistics in general; General implications of the findings- some uses of the research; Specific conclusions related to vol. III and Africa
- Bibliography; Footnotes, Index.
Footnotes
(1) Arthur Byhan, La Civilisation Caucasienne. Paris : Payot 1936, pp.202-223 ; Georges Dumézil, La Courtisane et les seigneurs colorés et autres essais. Esquisses de mythologie (Bibliothèque des Sciences Humaines) Paris : Gallimard 1983, (Esquisses 32-41 : Ultra Ponticos Fluctus, pp. 77-155 (Ossetians /Alans))
(2) David Reich, Who We Are and How we Got Here. Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past. New York: Pantheon Books 2018, pp. 180-1
