New Chronology of the Pre-Christian Era of Western Civilization Based on David Rohl’s “The Lords of Avaris”

A Generally Accepted Fact and Its Developments

Today, it is widely accepted that Indo-European peoples originated from the tribes of the Armenian Highlands. However, the field of history continuously delves deeper into the past, constantly refining and specifying what we know.

In this respect, David Rohl’s book “The Lords of Avaris” (Exmo, 2011) stands out as one of the most remarkable works in recent years. The book boldly challenges established stereotypes in Western scholarship, embracing facts long known to Armenian researchers that are now being cautiously considered by Western historians.

Western history has its own biases and barriers, some of which we’ll discuss later. However, the process continues, and the truth remains incontrovertible despite the malicious joy of detractors and the ridicule of the ignorant.

Key Points from the Book

In this article, we offer a brief overview of the book, focusing on claims that intersect with ancient Armenian history. All quoted statements from the book are enclosed in quotation marks and cited with page numbers. Particularly, only statements from other sources will be explicitly cited.

Let’s start by discussing the propositions made in the book.

“Tribe speaking Indo-European dialects first appeared on the historical stage in Eastern Anatolia” (p. 42). Here, the origin of Indo-European peoples is clearly stated. But why is Eastern Anatolia specified?

As E. Danielyan [1] points out, “According to the latest research in comparative linguistics, genetic linguistics, archeology, anthropology, and historical geography, the Indo-European homeland included the Armenian Highlands (the cradle of the Armenian people), eastern Asia Minor, and Northern Mesopotamia.”

However, it is essential to note that the incorrect usage of the terms “Eastern Anatolia” and “South Caucasus” instead of the western and eastern parts of the Armenian Highlands distorts the toponymic terminology when identifying and classifying linguo-archaeological material.

In reality, the Caucasus, with all its parts (northern, southern, eastern, and western), is located to the north and east of the Armenian Highlands and the Kura River, whereas Anatolia, with all its components (northern, southern, eastern, and western), lies within Asia Minor, west of the Armenian Highlands.

Approaching contemporary studies based on archeological and Indo-European linguistic data from these scientific positions, one can argue that materials presented under the term “Anatolia” or “Anatolian” are falsified in Turkish and some foreign publications due to political interests. Instead of referring to the western part of the Armenian Highlands, which was annexed by Turkey, the fabricated term “Eastern Anatolia” is used. It is known that any foreign archeologist hinting at the name “Armenian Highlands” risks being barred by Turkish authorities from participating in excavations conducted in Western Armenia.”

D. Rohl is a prominent historian and archaeologist who has conducted excavations in Egypt, the Middle East, and Turkey on his own. In this book, he focuses on the history of the Hyksos and examines the period from 2000-800 BCE, introducing a New Chronology that brings the described events 200-300 years closer to the present.

Being a serious scholar, and adhering strictly to scientific facts, he has often been amazed that “legendary stories, which were repeatedly dismissed as fiction, subsequently found historical substantiation, confirmed by archaeological discoveries” (p.44).

Some of his conclusions contradict the theories of such scholars as T.V. Gamkrelidze and Vyach.Vs. Ivanov. According to their theory, the initial Indo-European divergence took place no later than the 5th-4th millennia BCE — a period when a common Indo-European linguistic system existed. Its disintegration began at the end of the 4th millennium BCE, and by the 3rd millennium BCE, the Greek-Armenian-Aryan dialectal unity had separated and disintegrated. However, according to D. Rohl’s research, this community still existed in the 8th century BCE, up to the era of Homer and Hesiod, from which the differentiation began.

D. Rohl pays most attention not so much to the Hyksos as to their significance for Western civilization. Here’s what he writes about them: “The reign of the Hyksos in Egypt is a period closely linked with the roots of Western civilization… The era of the Hyksos serves as the historical basis for Greek and Roman legends” (p.47). “After leaving Egypt, the Hyksos became the ancestors of Hesiod’s heroic age, celebrated in ancient legends of Greece and Rome” (p.88).

Where did the Hyksos come from, what language did they speak, and which culture generously nourished Western civilization?

“A group of Indo-European migrants arrived in Canaan in the early Bronze Age. Graves and ornaments indicate Anatolian origins. They came to power in the cities and grew rich through maritime trade. Their descendants occupied Egypt under the name of the Hyksos” (p.181). However, “The Hyksos did not speak the Egyptian language” (p.134).

Thus, contrary to the prevailing version that claims culture came to Greece and the Roman world from Egypt, we see that D. Rohl points to entirely different origins of European culture. “The very first Pharaohs were originally from Mesopotamia” (p.199). “A particular type of burial was characteristic of this group. A long pit dug in the earth and lined with stone blocks. This type of grave is distributed over a wide arc from the Euphrates, Syria, Palestine, to Transjordan and the Dead Sea. This is the same type of burial as the Hyksos” (p.181).

In the early stages of their migration from the Armenian Highlands, the Hyksos settled in the lands of Palestine, and as D. Rohl points out, “Rephaim and Anakim—Hurrian names and tribes appear in 2100 BC in the Levant” (p. 179). “They were skilled in metalworking” (p. 180), in other words, they brought with them the culture of metal processing.

“The Hyksos were closely linked with the Phoenicians” (p. 128), if not to say more, that they themselves were the famous Phoenicians. “Remnants of the Hyksos maintained their presence in Palestine” (p. 150) and later.

“A large group of Hurrian Hyksos who settled in Jerusalem were the biblical Jebusites” (p. 153) – the Essenes. For example, “The ruler of the Jebusites, Aruvana from Jerusalem” (p. 153). We know that it was among the Essenes that the ideas of Christianity initially emerged or were inherited from their ancestors.

But migrants from the Highlands settled not only in Palestine but also in several islands in the Mediterranean Sea. “Clans of Indo-European seafarers populated Cyprus and Crete; then they moved to Egypt and ruled there under the name of Hyksos; and then after expulsion, they appear in Palestine under the name of Peleshet—Philistines, sea peoples” (p. 187). “The king of the Philistines—Abimelech” (p. 183).

So, they returned again and stayed in Palestine, fearing the rising Assyrian power, which they would have to cross to get back to their native Highlands. “After leaving Egypt, these Shemau from late Bronze Age Philistia become the Seranim—rulers of the 5 cities—Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron” (p. 192). “The inhabitants of Jerusalem—Solimites by Manetho, i.e., Solimi—from Anatolia. They are from Anakim and Rephaim” (p. 370).

The departure of the Hyksos from Egypt is attested by many authors. However, D. Rohl believes there was no expulsion. “There was no mass exodus from Egypt. These were the same people who had lived here before” (p. 69). But at the same time, it is known that “The Great Hyksos Dynasty—the 15th dynasty—was expelled from Egypt by Pharaoh Ahmose, the founder of the 18th dynasty in 1181 BC” (p. 47).

Is there a contradiction in these facts?

D. Rohl insists that this was merely a typical, often-repeated dynastic split in the history of the Hyksos. “Queen Ah-hotep, the mother of Ahmose, the conqueror of the Hyksos, was a Pelasgian princess.”

The Greek legend of Io and Telegon raises the intriguing possibility that Ah-Hotep was also the mother of the Hyksos king Apophis. In that case, Ahmose and Apophis would have been half-brothers fighting for control over the Nile Delta in what was essentially an intra-dynastic struggle among the ruling elites of the country (p. 216). Stories of such intra-dynastic struggles for power are very common in ancient history.

Just mentioning the history of the Parthian Empire or the history of the Byzantine Empire reveals typical features of such internal divisions. And the other pharaohs were also related to the Hyksos.

“The dynasty of Ramses II originates from Avaris” (p.125). “Ramses I has Hyksos origin” (p.125). Even the “God Set is also from Avaris.” “Seti I, the father of Ramses II, celebrated the 400-year jubilee of Set’s coronation as the ruler of Avaris” (p.126). “Ramses II ascended to the throne in 943 B.C. The first year of Tutankhamun’s reign was 1007 B.C.” (p.126), and the “Temple of Set was founded in Avaris in 1385 B.C.” (p.127).

Later, Armais-Danai, who founded the tribe of Danites and the city of Adana, was also expelled from Egypt by his brother. If it’s true, as Aeschylus says in the drama “The Suppliants,” that Egypt had 50 sons, he would not have needed a rival brother when he had to divide power among 50 sons.

“A stone vase with the cartouche of Apophis was found in a Phoenician burial in Spain. Likely, this vessel was a relic of a family related to the Hyksos, who migrated to the West in the 8th century B.C.” (p.217). Likely, this is how the Basques, a people who have preserved the connection with the toponyms of the Armenian Highlands in their language, were formed.

The proximity of Hyksos culture and several known civilizations, such as the Atlantic, Minoan, Spartan, Ancient Greek, etc., is confirmed by the facts provided by D. Rohl. “Minoan frescoes were discovered in the palace of the Hyksos. There, labyrinthine patterns and paintings of bulls and bull-leaping were also found” (p.230). But it’s known that the very first labyrinthine shape was found on the Armenian Highlands and is a repeated image of the swastika. “On the frescoes from Avaris, bull-leaping and fights between humans and bulls are depicted. All this is on a labyrinthine background” (p.196). “The word labyrinth comes from the Minoan labrys, denoting a double-edged ax in Aegean sacred rituals” (p.197). Such bullfighting did not exist in Egypt. “Bull-leaping is the amusement of the local nobility” (p.339). “This tradition originated in Anatolia” (p.339).

Minoan culture had a tragic end. D. Rohl describes it thus: “Not far from the island of Crete is the island of Thera. On this island is the settlement of Akrotiri, which faces Crete. It was destroyed by an earthquake and subsequent volcanic eruption” (p.257). “1210 – 1181 B.C. – Akrotiri is destroyed by a volcanic eruption. Between 1020-1100 B.C., the city is abandoned. Mycenaean Greeks overthrew the native Minoan rulers of central Crete” (p.259). “The military power of the Minoan thalassocracy was destroyed by the eruption.”

“Palaces and cities were under the protection of the fleet and had no fortress walls. Ten years later, the Mycenaeans prepared ships, invaded, and devastated the remnants of Minoan cities” (p. 262).

“The Minoans belonged to the Atlantic culture, which oppressed the Athenian Greeks and fought against them” (p. 260). “Thus, in the legend of Atlantis, memories of the disappearance of Minoan civilization have been preserved” (p. 262).

“But what is the relationship between the Minoans and the migrants from the Armenian Highlands? Who are these Mycenaean ‘Greeks’ and are they Greeks at all? And can the Atlantic civilization be linked to the Armenian one? D. Rol mentions the history of the island of Akrotiri in this regard.

“On the island of Akrotiri, a Hurrian king ruled” (p. 270). “A fresco from Akrotiri depicts the journey of the fleet from the island of Thera to the Levant, the conclusion of a peace treaty with the local Aryan or Hurrian ruler, and then the stay of these warriors—Shemau in Avaris among the Hyksos. Then they return to their homeland in the Aegean Islands” (p. 277).

“They are warmly welcomed by their relatives on Calliste in Akrotiri, about 80 years before the last eruption” (p. 278). And here’s a key fact we will discuss in detail. “The palanquin (of the leader – E.G.) is decorated with symbols indicating the title h/k – ruler of mountainous countries, worn by the Hyksos who ruled Egypt” (p. 279).

“It is precisely from the combination of these two letters that the term ‘Hyksos’ was born. As D. Rol says, in connection with another case, ‘For the first time in the history of Egyptian archaeology, a monumental hieroglyphic text included the title h/k – Kasut (literally “ruler of mountainous countries,” but usually translated as “ruler of foreign lands”) from which the term Manetho’s Hyksos originates'” (p. 233).

“We are familiar with Manetho’s writings through the adaptations of Josephus Flavius. Let’s examine the history of interpreting these two letters in more detail. First of all, we note that one of the explanations given by Flavius himself is that the ending ‘sos’ is inherent to the Greek language, in which Flavius wrote, and indicates the plural. In the singular, names have the ending ‘os.’

“Here is what Josephus Flavius himself says about this: ‘In the Scripture, all names have been adapted for the convenience of the readers to the Greek style, to make it easier [to pronounce them]. For us, however, this kind of naming seems unsuitable, so both the forms and endings of words remain unchanged: for example, Noah (Noeós) is called [by us] Noe, and this form is used throughout our work'[3].

“In another list of Manetho’s history, Josephus Flavius finds another explanation for the name Hyksos. ‘In another copy, I found that the sound “I (ay – E.G.) ik” does not mean kings, but, on the contrary, indicates that the shepherds were captives, because on the other hand, Gik and Gak [pronounced with heavy breathing] directly mean “captives” in Egyptian. This explanation seems more plausible and consistent with ancient history'[4].”

The mention of the sound “I” (ai) is only present in the book by I. Flavius, published in 1895 and reprinted in 2000. Trying to verify the accuracy of the sound, we found that in Internet versions and even in the recently released comprehensive anthology “History of the Ancient East” edited by V.I. Kuzishchin (IDV, Moscow, 2002), approved as a textbook for historians, the sound “ai” is not mentioned. Was this done deliberately, or is it simply the negligence of the publishers?

Knowing how biased Russian publishers are towards mentioning anything Armenian, and even in Byzantine history, which is steeped in the Armenian spirit, they try not to mention Armenians, we took this “omission” as another, unknown in what sequence, distortion—shame on the publishers and editors from St. Petersburg University. We decided to seek the truth in other publications.

Only by referring to the ancient Greek text of Flavius, a copy from the original published in 1955 in Germany—Flavii Iosephi, Opera V, Apud Weidmannos, vol.V.Contra Apionem Libri, Berlin, Germany – 1955, p.14-15,—we confirmed the accuracy of the pre-Soviet translation, untouched by “fuzzy” chauvinism. Diacritical marks above letters in ancient Greek indicated the diphthong “ai”. In modern Greek, they are not used.

By the way, similar distortions are inherent not only in Soviet science but also in Western science in general when it comes to Armenian history. For example, D. Roll says, “Egyptologists always substitute the letter ‘e’ where there may be a vowel in the word.

It has become a tradition to voice vowel symbols, such as omega—w as the letter ‘u’ (u). For example, the word ‘house’ is voiced by Egyptologists as ‘hut,’ although in many cases this letter sounds like ‘a.’ For example, Avaris sounds like ‘Havare’ (p. 500).

According to I. Flavius, Avaris, “according to ancient religious legend, was called” Hut-Uart, i.e., “house of uarts.” But if you replace the letter ‘u’ with ‘a,’ as Roll corrects, there is no Urartu at all. There is Ararat, and the exact name of Avaris is the house of Ararts.

Let’s now try to determine what the Hyksos were actually called. We return to their self-designation “Hik” or “Hak,” which, as Manetho and Flavius indicate, is pronounced with aspiration and most likely should have sounded like “Hik” or “Hak.” Since there is no letter “h” in the Russian language, everywhere it sounds in other languages, in Russian it is indicated through “kh” or “g.”

Egyptian hieroglyphs contained two types of signs—ideograms and phonograms. Ideograms described the object and specific concepts. Words were composed only of consonants. Phonograms, on the other hand, indicated how the word should sound, i.e., which vowels should be inserted between the consonants.

However, since sounds were usually not recorded in hieroglyphic texts, later researchers adopted the practice of inserting the sound “i” between consonants for ease of reading, where there was no corresponding phonogram.

Therefore, Josephus Flavius could only record the word “h’k” (in Latin writing), as indicated in the footnote to his text in “History of the Ancient East, Moscow, 2002, p.54”. Being forced to seek the pronunciation of this word, as mentioned earlier, he reports that “In another copy I found that the sound is ‘I (I – Latin – E.G.) ik,’ that is, the sound is ‘ai ik.'”

By combining this phonogram with the consonants, we get the word “Haik,” pronounced with “heavy aspiration.” Recall that the ancient Greek text directly points to the sound “h-ai-k” as the self-designation of the Hyksos.

More precisely, Haikh (the combination kh introduced here as an exception indicates the aspirated k—q, by means of which the plural form of nouns is created in ancient Armenian).

Haikh means both “Armenians” and “Armenia” and is derived from the name “hai” (Armenian). The name Haik itself also comes from the name “hai.” In the Latin alphabet, this word is “Hyke.” But Haik is the ancestor of the Armenians and their self-designation—Haikh, the people of Haik. There are no other claimants to this name in history.

Let’s now consider the main theme of D. Rohl, the roots and origins of Western civilization, who and what peoples founded it? It is known that European peoples attribute their origin to the Pelasgians. Who are the Pelasgians? Here is how D. Rohl answers.

“The Pelasgians are the great ancestors of Western civilization, ‘divine.’ Their exploits and family relationships laid the foundation for the legends of the Greeks of a later era. It was they who, coming from Eastern Anatolia, founded the dynasty of the great Hyksos in Avaris” (p. 328).

“All ancient Greek rulers, regardless of their dynastic names, were of Pelasgian origin until the arrival of the Pelopids, who also came from Anatolia” (p. 327). “The ancient name of Greece is Pelasgiotis, or the land of the Pelasgians” (p. 329).

From the Armenian Highlands also originate the “continental Pelasgians, who also colonized Central Crete and were traditionally identified with the ancestors of the Philistines (Peleset), who first settled in Cilicia and then moved to Canaan along with other Sea Peoples” (p. 328).

“The biblical Caphtorim should also be considered legendary Pelasgians. They were the last rulers of the dynasty of the great Hyksos in Egypt” (p. 330).

“Known as the Rephaim, Anakim, and Caphtorim in the Bible, and as the Hyksos in Egyptian tradition, they stayed in this region for at least 300 years. Then they were driven out of Egypt by the native Egyptians (whose rulers themselves were partly Pelasgians through dynastic marriages) and returned to the Aegean Sea.”

Other relatives of theirs remained in southern Canaan – the Bible calls them Philistines and Jebusites, and their Aryan allies in the north became rulers of late Bronze Age Mitanni” (p. 331).

As D. Rohl himself points out, the first pharaohs from the Armenian Highlands appeared in Egypt around 4000 years BCE. Therefore, by “indigenous Egyptians,” we should understand earlier waves of migrants. On the other hand, the unquestionable Armenian-Hurrian origin of the state of Mitanni only confirms the ethnic unity of Armenians and Hyksos.

“They, the ‘Rulers of Mountain Lands,’ were the ruling aristocracy among the Amalekites” (p. 598). “They originate from the homeland of Indo-European tribes and their Hurrian allies” (p. 598). “The Avvim with their Amalekite infantry crossed the Egyptian border near Gaza and reached Memphis.

They were also under pressure from the arrival in eastern Canaan of former Israelite slaves, aiming to conquer the promised land for their tribal confederation” (p. 598).

“When the Israelites under the command of Joshua began to plunder fortified cities built by the Anakim, the latter were forced to retreat west, leaving the ‘land of hills to the invaders'” (p. 599).

It is known that European culture is a descendant of the cultures of Ancient Greece and Rome. We are used to speaking about ancient Greek philosophy, sculpture, art. But is there any contribution from the Greeks themselves? And who actually created all these masterpieces of world culture, including ancient philosophy?

From those times, we know about the Minoan civilization, Mycenaean Greece, Sparta, the Achaeans, Dorians, Danaans, etc. From D. Rohl’s book, it turns out that they are all descendants of migrants, or tribes of Hyksos from the Armenian Highlands, and even ancient Greek myths are nothing more than adaptations of the exploits of these migrants.

Let’s examine these claims in more detail.

“The Minoans were just part of a much larger family of Indo-European peoples, who lived from Hyksos Avaris to Pelasgian Argos and Anatolian Arzawa and from Hattusa to Canaanite Ugarit and Alalakh” (p. 339). “Many residents of Alalakh had Hurrian names during the Hyksos era, and the Hurrians were closely associated with Aryan elites of the middle and late Bronze Age” (p. 340).

“In Indo-European legends, it is said that Europa, the daughter of Agenor from Tyre, sailed from Phoenicia to Crete, where she gave birth to Minos the elder. This was a marital union between the Pelasgian ruler of Tyre (Agenor, descendant of the Hyksos pharaoh Apophis) and the Pelasgian ruler of Knossos (Asterius, son of Tektamus)” (p. 327).

“Europa was abducted from Phoenicia by Taurus (Toros), the admiral of the Cretan fleet” (p. 327). “The island of Crete was named by Keret, a hero of Ugaritic legend” (p. 340). “Minos’s maternal uncle, Cadmus, brought writing to Greece” (p. 328).

Here one can correlate this fact with the Armenian chronicle and find out that Hayk had an heir (grandson) named Kadmos (or Cadmus in the Greek version), who actually introduced literacy to the Greeks—i.e., to the peoples who were still illiterate at the time.

And after this, they began to be called “literate,” which in Armenian sounds like “Gretsi” (Greeks). Therefore, the aborigines of these territories, having received literacy from the Hayks, started to be called Greeks. By the way, in terms of timing, these events coincide in both the Armenian chronology by Khorenatsi and the Greek one (approximately 1900-2000 BCE).

“Consequently, the ancient Greeks who invaded Crete and occupied Knossos were Pelasgians, fully consistent with the claims of Diodorus Siculus” (p. 327). “Pelop was the father of Atreus, who ruled in Mycenae” (p.326). “According to Herodotus, the inhabitants of the Peloponnese were descendants of the Pelasgians” (p.350). “Herodotus reports that these ancient Pelasgians did not speak Greek” (p.349).

Therefore, Mycenaean Greece was founded by newcomers from the Armenian Highlands. Interestingly, the authentic name Mycenae is “Mukan,” which is very similar to the name of the steppe in ancient Armenian Paytakaran, at the eastern end of Artsakh-Karabakh.

So who are the Danaans, the gifts of whom should be feared?

D. Rohl reports that “The Danaans come from the Pelasgians—Palestinians. Danaus arrived from Egypt and declared that all Pelasgians should be called Danaans” (p.327). “The Danaans are named in honor of the legendary Danaus—ruler of the Hyksos, who fled from Egypt” (p.351).

“Armais, also known as Danaus, ruled Egypt for 5 years. After that, he was expelled from Egypt, sailed away from his brother Egyptus, arrived in Greece, and started to rule” (p.366). “In the genealogy of a later tradition, Danaus is called a relative of the Phoenician King Agenor, father of Cadmus” (p.367). According to Khorenatsi, the father of Cadmus is Aramaneak.

“Danaus made a voyage from Egypt to Argolis 8 years after the arrival of Cadmus in the Greek Thebes. Danaus was the last foreign ruler of Avaris after the departure of Cadmus” (p.369).

“In Aeschylus’ drama ‘The Suppliants,’ the flight of Danaus and his family from Egypt to Argolis is described, where he founded a new royal dynasty of Danaids. He was a descendant of Danae in the fourth generation, and Danae, in turn, was the mother of Perseus, who founded the royal abode in Mycenae, known to every Greek.

Perseus was the ancestor of Hercules and Eurystheus in the third generation. After the death of Eurystheus, Atreus, the son of Pelop, ascended to the throne, who was the father of Agamemnon and Menelaus” (p.365). From this moment on, the inhabitants of Hellas began to call themselves Danaans.

Summing up, D. Rol states: “Greece itself was called Pelasgia (Palestine)—Hiksos—migrants from Anatolia, Lydia, to the north of Izmir-Smyrna” (p. 501). “The Pelasgians from Ionia originally lived in the Peloponnese, Mycenae. Greeks considered the Pelasgians to be the forefathers of the civilization of Hellas” (p. 502). “Firstly there, in Mycenae, Perseus founded a dynasty, then he was overthrown, and then the overthrown Heraclids came” (p. 502).

“The Pelasgians spoke the Luwian language of Cilicia. They occupied Miletus—the birthplace of Greek philosophy” (p. 502). Here it can be noted that in the Armenian version of the history of ancient peoples, both Hittite and Luwian languages are dialects of the ancient Armenian language.

“Spartan kings were direct descendants of the Pelasgian sons of Heraclids. The militaristic character of the Spartan state originated directly from the martial culture and worldview of the age of heroes” (p. 482). And so on.

“Spartans are Dorians. Where are the origins of the militant spirit of the Spartans? The collapse of the Achaean kingdom as a result of the return of the Heraclids, expelled three generations earlier, after the unsuccessful first invasion of Hyllus, the son of Hercules” (p. 458).

“Brutal hero Hercules, a man of small intellect but strong and prone to thoughtless violence, was a vassal ruler of Tiryns. He embarked on a pirate expedition, which ended in the plundering of Troy during the reign of Laomedon, father of Priam” (p. 459).

“Before that, Hyllus tried to capture his father’s throne in the Peloponnese in 890 BC and take revenge on the Pelopids, who ruled in Mycenae” (p. 459). “There was a battle between the Dorians and Hyllus, involving a single warrior on each side. And the Heraclids retreated from the Mycenaean kingdom to Boeotia, northern Greece” (p. 460).

Let’s make a small insertion about Boeotia from an English-language encyclopedia.

Boeotia (Boeotia, Viotia) was a central part of ancient Greece. Today it is a prefecture of modern Greece. As the encyclopedia points out, the oldest city in Greece was located there and was named Graia (Graia, Γραία), from which, according to the encyclopedia, the word ‘Greece’ is derived.

The Armenian word “graget” means literate or knowing literacy—’gra,’ i.e., knowing—’gitun,’ literacy—’gra.’

Information about this ancient city can be found in Homer, Pausanias, Thucydides, etc. Another important city of Boeotia is Thebes, which was connected with the Egyptian Thebes. Thebes was the birthplace of the legendary hero Hercules. Among the distinguished people of Boeotia are figures like Pindar, Hesiod, Epaminondas, Pelopidas, and Plutarch.

In Greek mythology, Boeotia plays a prominent role. Among the two major centers of legendary tales, one is Thebes, with its Cadmean population serving as a military stronghold, and the other is the Minoans, famed for their enterprising commercial cities.

As the encyclopedia indicates, local populations were absorbed by these migrants, and from then on, the Boeotians are represented as a homogeneous nation. It is possible that the ease of assimilation was due to the fact that the local people could have been migrants of an earlier wave. Interestingly, the Boeotians are primarily known as creators of geometric-type pottery, which existed in the Armenian Highlands thousands of years before.

In the Peloponnesian Wars, the Boeotians fervently fought against Athens.

Let’s take a closer look at what Greece, or Achaea—a province on the northern coast of the Peloponnese—was called. In Hittite (or Ancient Armenian?), it is “Aḫḫiyawa,” but “ša” is a Hittite ending, and “a” is a prothetic letter meaning “belonging to.” What remains is “Ḫiya,” which is the self-designation of the Armenians. By adding the letter “a,” we get that this is the land or domain of the Armenians. Similarly, Adana is the city of Dana, or the Danaans.

“From Hittite chronicles, it is clear that the history of Adana dates back to before the second millennium and was named in honor of the Danaans” (p. 487). There is a speech by the King of Cilicia Azativattis, the son of Avarqus, the king of Adana, where he praises the god Buru” (p. 490).

“Mopsus was the ruler of Danaan warriors who tried to invade Egypt in the 8th year of Pharaoh Ramses III’s rule in 855 BCE” (p. 493). The Kings of Adana are his descendants. “Azativattis belonged to the Danaans and to the dynasty of Mopsus” (p. 527).

Now, let’s consider who founded Roman civilization, according to D. Roll?

“The Etruscan civilization arose in Western Anatolia. Its founders sailed from Arzawa 10 years before the start of the Trojan War” (p. 554). “Taruisha, Tursa, Tursenoi; the Anatolian ending ‘enos’ means ‘a man from Tursa,’ or if you substitute ‘u’ with ‘a,’ a man from Tarsa, Toros, Northwestern Anatolia.”

“They sailed to the West and became the Etruscans, the founders of Roman civilization. They were called To-ro-ya” (p. 503). “Taruia—people from Arzawa” (p. 504). “Herodotus believed that the Etruscans were from Lydia—Arzawa, Cilicia” (p. 548).

Arzawa or Arçava, according to the Armenian version of ancient history, is a well-known ancient Armenian state.

The Etruscans also appear in Sicily as Sicels, and in Sardinia. “Sardinia – Beth Shardana, Sea Peoples warriors from Anatolia who invaded Egypt” (p. 548). “First, they went to Smyrna, where they built ships and sailed to Italy” (p. 549). “The invasion of the Sea Peoples took place in 856 BCE, in the 8th year of the reign of Ramesses III” (p. 183).

After this, it is not surprising that the patricians of ancient Rome had the family name – Gaius, and it even entered into the greeting of Western peoples. This greeting so accurately reproduces the self-name of the Armenians – ‘hay’ – that Armenians first arriving in the United States took it as a question-statement: are you Armenian?

“Julius Caesar and later rulers of Rome traced their genealogy to the heroes of the Trojan War” (p. 573). “The dynasties and other kings trace back to the age of heroes” (p. 473). For example, “King Pyrrhus II, who ruled in Epirus at the end of the 4th century, a second cousin of Alexander the Great, called himself a descendant of Achilles in the 20th generation” (p.473).

Summing up our review of D. Rohl’s book, we conclude this part with his own words. “After being expelled from Egypt, a part of the family of the great Hyksos dispersed widely through the territories of their trading empire” (p.370).

“From this family come Agenor from Tyre, Cadmus from Thebes, Danaus from Argos, Minos from Knossos, and Perseus from Mycenae” (p.370). “The Hyksos dynasty kings, who ruled in Memphis and Avaris, were one of the last elements of the great migration of Northerners into the Fertile Crescent region, which began at the end of the Early Bronze Age (around 2100 BCE) and ended in the last phase of the Middle Bronze Age (around 1200 BCE). These ‘great Hyksos’ kings had Hurrian and Indo-European origins” (p.349).

NH (New Chronology) is an adjustment to traditional chronology made by D. Rohl himself, which is 200-300 years ‘younger’ than traditional. By the way, according to New Chronology, “Rome was founded not in 753 BCE but in 650 BCE” (p. 593).

Now let’s turn to a very interesting fact that led German-Jewish philosopher K. Jaspers to introduce the concept of the “Axial Age.” Noticing the simultaneous emergence of great people in different and distant civilizations, Jaspers concluded that there was some mystical axial time that conditioned this simultaneity. For example, the appearance of Pythagoras in the West and Buddha in the East.

Zoroaster and Confucius are inexplicable if considered as isolated civilizations. But if we introduce the Armenian factor – the existence of a large intermediate zone stretching from West to East and the extensive migration always demonstrated by the Armenians – then this simultaneity gains its logical explanation.

For example, in the Achaemenid Empire, which stretched all the way to the borders of China, the Armenians were the most active element, disseminating current ideas and knowledge along all trajectories. Not coincidentally, Plato, in his work “The Republic,” traces the origins of deep religious-philosophical teachings specifically from the Armenian environment.

Thus, the Axial Age is explained by the fact that at that time intertwined forces of a single origin were at work. Through the Armenian Highlands, connections ran between Egypt, Greece, Italy, Central Asia, and China.

Famous works by Homer and Hesiod celebrate heroes of the past, the bygone “age of heroes.” Homer’s Iliad describes the Trojan War. “The Trojan War began a year after the fall of the Hittite Empire and during the civil war in Egypt. The war lasted 10 years, from 874 to 864 BC” (p. 318).

“The famous invasion of the Sea Peoples is dated to 856 BC” (p. 328). “Sagas about the Trojan War were developed by many generations of Ionian bards from 800 to 680 BC, until Homer finally immortalized them in his monumental compositions” (p. 449).

“Homer belongs to the generation that migrated to Ionia from mainland Greece as a result of the Doric invasion. In Greek, Homer means captive or hostage” (p. 447). By the way, Armenians call the Greeks — Ionians — ‘Hun.’

“In Hesiod’s ‘Theogony,’ the myth of the creation of the world shows strong influences from the Hittite, Urartian (Araratian — E.G.), and Hurrian epic ‘About Kumarbi'” (p. 449). It’s much easier to assume that Homer and Hesiod themselves were carriers of Araratian legends and epics rather than to think that these were conveyed to them by some intermediaries.

Next begins the classical era of ancient Greek philosophers from the Milesian and Ionian schools, and migrants from the Armenian Highlands finally dissolve into the expanse of Western civilization. The first wave of globalization in human history has ended, creating this civilization.

“Great people — both heroes and villains — are the driving force that leads human civilization, and sometimes pulls it back” (p. 597). With this phrase, D. Rohl concludes his outstanding book.

Ernest Grigoryan – Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Academician of RAEN

  • [1] Magazine “21st Century,” Yerevan, Noravank, No. 3 (19), 2011, p. 106.
  • [2] See Josephus Flavius. “On the Antiquity of the Jewish People,” St. Petersburg, 1895, p. 78.
  • [3] Josephus Flavius. “On the Antiquity of the Jewish People,” St. Petersburg, 1895, p. 18.
  • [4] Josephus Flavius. “On the Antiquity of the Jewish People,” St. Petersburg, 1895, p. 19.
  • [5] Josephus Flavius. “On the Antiquity of the Jewish People,” St. Petersburg, 1895, p. 19.

Also read Ernest Grigoryan: Are Armenians a Biblical People?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *